COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS
Council Member Karina Macias Council
Member Graciela Ortiz
Vice Mayor Marilyn Sanabria
Mayor Eduardo "Eddie" Martinez
ADJOURNMENT
The City of Huntington Park City Council will adjourn to a Regular Meeting on Tuesday, August 16, 2022 at_6:00 P.M.
I, Eduardo Sarmiento, hereby certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing agenda was posted at City of Huntington Park City Hall and made available at www.hpca.gov not less than 72 hours prior to the meeting. Dated this 28th day of July 2022.
��
Eduardo Sarmiento, City Clerk
CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA
August 2, 2022 Page 8 of 7
Item 9
CITY OF HUNTINGTON PARK
Community Development Department
City Council Agenda Report
August 2, 2022
Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
City of Huntington Park
6550 Miles Avenue
Huntington Park, CA 90255
Dear Mayor and Members of the City Council:
APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION: 3100 FLORENCE AVENUE:
NEW CAR WASH PLANNING COMMISSION CASE NO. 2020-04 CUP DP IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT CITY COUNCIL:
1. Following a public hearing and public testimony, adopt the attached resolution to deny Case No. 2020-04 with the findings therein.
BACKGROUND
On May 18, 2022, the Planning Commission, following a public hearing, denied the above-referenced application. The findings that the Planning Commission made to deny the project are contained in the attached PC Resolution No. 2020-04. The attorney for the property owner is appealing the Planning Commission decision to the City Council.
The appellant submitted exhibits with the appeal application, attached.
ANALYSIS
The Planning Commission discussed several issues in reference to its decision to deny the application. Staff recommends that the City Council uphold the Planning Commission’s decision to deny the proposed car wash project because a new car wash could lead to an oversaturation of car wash services in the City and impact the surrounding residential neighborhood.
Nearby Car Wash Services
In their deliberation, members of the Planning Commission noted that there are “too many” car washes in the vicinity of the project, the approval of which would lead to an oversaturation of car wash services in the City. The proposed car wash would be the only self-serve “express” car wash (self-serve tunnel) in Huntington Park and within approximately 1-1/4 miles of the site, as noted in the following table:
APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION: 3100 FLORENCE AVENUE— NEW CAR WASH / PLANNING COMMISSION CASE NO. 2020-04 CUP DP August 2, 2022
Address Name Type Site Size
3100 Florence HP Proposed Car Wash Self-serve tunnel 38,198 sf 2974 Florence HP Bien Coin Car Wash Self-serve stalls: 4 10,680 sf 3356 Florence HP Reye’s Car Wash & Detail Center Full-serve stalls: 1 5,906 sf 3003 Gage HP Crystal Car Wash Full-serve tunnel 18,202 sf 2730 Slauson HP NCM Car Wash Full-serve tunnel 15,806 sf 7201 Santa Fe WP Santa Fe Hand Car Wash Full-serve stalls 12,248 sf 2556 Cudahy WP Cosala Car Wash Full-serve stalls 17,361 sf There are more car washes between 1-1/4 miles and 2 miles of the site. The closest “express” car washes (self-serve tunnel) are at 4100 Firestone Boulevard in South Gate (approximately 1.5 miles away) and 7700 Atlantic Avenue in Cudahy (approximately 1.6 miles away).
Express car washes are characterized by low base price, free vacuums, 6-minute wash cycle, and maximum automation (“Defining the Express Exterior Carwash,” Brian Bath, carwash.com, October 11, 2010). This type of car wash will save the customer time compared to the extended wait times typical of a full-service car wash. Because vacuuming and final detail work is done by the customer after the wash, express car washes are offered at a lower price than a comparable full-service car wash.
Although there are several car washes in the vicinity of the site, two within two miles of the site currently offer an express self-service. The proposed car wash will be the largest (by site size) in the area. The proposed car wash will likely saturate the local market of car wash services in the short term and cause some of the nearby smaller car washes to eventually close and be replaced by other commercial uses.
Noise
In their deliberation, members of the Planning Commission noted that the car wash would introduce a new source of noise to the neighborhood with the concern that it would be adverse to the public interest of the residents on properties adjacent to the project site.
With the proposed construction of a 10-foot wall, the noise level in the noisiest residential yard at human ear level would be 54 dBA, compared to the existing measured average background noise level that ranges from 57.4 to 60.6 dBA during potential business hours at that location.
Air Quality
In their deliberation, members of the Planning Commission noted that the car wash will introduce a new source of air pollution to the neighborhood. The Initial Study prepared for the project concluded that with the required construction-phase air quality mitigation measures, the project would have a less-than-significant effect on air quality.
Furthermore, the localized emissions from idling vehicles will have a less-than-significant impact on the neighborhood because they are well below the SCAQMD localized thresholds for criteria pollutants, as discussed in the Initial Study. Finally, construction of a new car wash is expected to reduce idling and wait times for car washes throughout the community, resulting in an overall reduction of idling and wait times.
APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION: 3100 FLORENCE AVENUE— NEW CAR WASH / PLANNING COMMISSION CASE NO. 2020-04 CUP DP August 2, 2022
Water Use
In their deliberation, members of the Planning Commission noted that the car wash will use a large volume of water. The Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County estimated that the car wash would increase the wastewater generation of the site by 11,073 gallons per day (see attachment). The applicant provided a written estimate that the car wash would demand up to 10,051 gallons per day of water and generate up to 9,051 gallons per day of wastewater (see attachment). The applicant also calculated that 60% of the water used by the car wash equipment will have been recycled on-site.
Alternative Use of Site
In their deliberation, members of the Planning Commission noted that the car wash will provide only 3 jobs per shift (fewer jobs than other commercial uses) and less in tax revenue than other commercial uses. The project will increase the taxable assessed value of the property, as the proposed improvements ($2,000,000 estimated construction cost) will replace a demolished office building ($250,000 approximate value). The annual revenue (excluding sales tax) from vending machine sales is expected by the applicant to be $106,000, $1,060 which is received by the City of Huntington Park. Continuance of the existing 11,718 square foot medical office building as the current use will not increase the assessed value of the property or generate sales tax but will provide local employment at the site.
Alternative Car Wash Location
In their deliberation, members of the Planning Commission speculated that there may be a better location for the proposed car wash. Staff is not aware of an alternative location that would meet the applicant’s needs for site size, commercial zoning, and adequate street access.
No Public Opposition
Prior to the May 18 Planning Commission public hearing, Planning staff visited thirteen properties on Walnut Street closest to the south property line of the site and the church and left information regarding the May 18 Planning Commission hearing, meeting agenda, and Planning Manager contact information. The applicant also independently contacted residents on southerly adjacent properties and reported that residents expressed a concern regarding homeless encampments on the site.
In light of the public outreach efforts by staff, nobody submitted communication or attended either of the April 20 or May 18 Planning Commission meetings in opposition to the project.
APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION: 3100 FLORENCE AVENUE— NEW CAR WASH / PLANNING COMMISSION CASE NO. 2020-04 CUP DP August 2, 2022
CONCLUSION
Staff recommends that the City Council deny the project as the proposed car wash because a new car wash could lead to an oversaturation of car wash services in the City and negatively impact the residential neighborhood.
Respectfully submitted,
RICARDO REYES
City Manager
STEVE FORSTER
Interim Community Development Director
ATTACHMENT(S)
A. City Council Resolution to Deny Application
B. Alternative City Council Resolution to Approve Application C. Documentation of expected wastewater generation: Applicant-provided calculation and Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts comment letter D. Appeal application with Appellant-provided exhibits (includes all materials provided to the Planning Commission May 18, 2022)
1 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
26 27
28 CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2022-26
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
HUNTINGTON PARK, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DENYING A
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND DEVELOPMENT PERMIT IN
CONNECTION WITH REAL PROPERTY AT 3100 FLORENCE
AVENUE, HUNTINGTON PARK, CALIFORNIA.
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held in the City Hall, 6550 Miles Avenue, Huntington Park, California on Tuesday, August 2, 2022 at 6:00 p.m., pursuant to the notice published and posted as required by law in accordance with the provisions of the Huntington Park Municipal Code (HPMC), upon an application from Salazar Law, APC, to appeal the May 18, 2022 Planning Commission decision to deny Case No. 2020-04, an application by Leedco Engineers, Inc., requesting approval of a Conditional Use Permit and Development Permit to allow construction and operation of a new automated drive-thru car wash with self-serve vacuum stalls and vending machines at 3100 Florence Avenue; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the request and has found that all of the required findings for approval of a Conditional Use Permit and Development Permit including Design Review findings can be made as required by the Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the environmental impact information relative to the proposed request; and
WHEREAS, all persons appearing for or against the approval of the Conditional Use Permit and Development Permit were given the opportunity to be heard in connection with said matter; and
WHEREAS, all written comments received prior to the hearing, and responses to such comments, were reviewed by the City Council; and
WHEREAS, the City Council is required to announce its findings and recommendations.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON PARK DOES FIND, DETERMINE, RECOMMEND AND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1: Based on the evidence in the Initial Study prepared for the project, the 2 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
26 27
28 City Council finds that the project, as proposed, will have a less-than-significant impact on the environment with the incorporation of mitigation measures and adopts a Mitigated Negative Declaration.
SECTION 2: The City Council hereby makes all of the following required findings for a Conditional Use Permit in connection with Case No. 2020-04:
1. The proposed use is conditionally permitted within, and would not impair the integrity and character of, the subject zoning district and complies with all of the applicable provisions of this Code.
Finding: The proposed drive-thru car wash with vending machines is conditionally permitted within the subject zoning district. The subject zoning district is Commercial General (CG) and the proposed project will not impair the integrity and character of the zoning district as it will comply with all of the applicable provisions of the Huntington Park Municipal Code.
2. The proposed use is consistent with the General Plan.
Finding: The proposed car wash is consistent with the General Plan, specifically, the proposed use is consistent with Goal 1.0; Policy 1.2 of the Land Use Element of the General Plan by encouraging community-oriented retail development. The project is responding to the local need for an inexpensive car wash with a high degree of self-service (self-serve vacuum stalls) which is not provided elsewhere nearby. This project will redevelop an underutilized commercially-zoned site with a viable commercial retail service.
3. The approval of the Conditional Use Permit for the proposed use is in compliance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City’s Guidelines.
Finding: The approval of this project includes the adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration in compliance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City’s Guidelines.
4. The design, location, size and operating characteristics of the proposed use 3 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
26 27
28 are compatible with the existing and planned future land uses within the general area in which the proposed use is to be located and will not create significant noise, traffic or other conditions or situations that may be objectionable or detrimental to other permitted uses operating nearby or adverse to the public interest, health, safety, convenience or welfare of the City.
Finding: The proposed car wash is adjacent to a major arterial street on a site of 38,198 square feet. The traffic study prepared for the project concluded that the car wash would have adequate on-site space for queuing and would not have a significant impact on traffic or public safety. The noise study prepared for the project concluded that with the incorporation of mitigation measures, the car wash would not have a significant noise impact on the community. The design, location, size, and operating characteristics of the proposed car wash is not expected to be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare of the City.
The proposed project will be harmonious and compatible with the existing commercial uses presently located within the vicinity and zoning district.
Additionally, the site has adequate vehicle circulation and access.
5. The subject site is physically suitable for the type and density/intensity of use being proposed.
Finding: The proposed car wash is adjacent to a major arterial street on a site of 38,198 square feet. The proposed 4,969 square foot car wash building and associated development will comply with all development standards and adequate ingress and egress will exist on the site.
6. There are adequate provisions for public access, water, sanitation and public utilities and services to ensure that the proposed use would not be detrimental to public health, safety and general welfare.
Finding: Vehicular and pedestrian access to the site would be provided from Florence Avenue. The proposed car wash has an unusually large demand for 4 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
26 27
28 water supply and sanitation service compared to most other commercial services; however, the Initial Study prepared for the project concluded that adequate infrastructure exists to serve the proposed water and wastewater demand. The project will not require changes to existing public utilities. Given that the surrounding area is already completely developed with public access, water, sanitation, and other public utilities, the proposed project would not affect these infrastructures or require any types of modifications. In addition, the proposed project would not impede the accessibility to public access, water, sanitation, or other public utilities and services.
SECTION 3. The City Council hereby makes all of the following required findings for a Development Permit in connection with Case No. 2020-04:
1. The proposed development is one permitted within the subject zoning district and complies with all of the applicable provisions of this Code, including prescribed development/site standards.
Finding: The proposed drive-thru car wash with vending machines is conditionally permitted within the subject zoning district. The subject zoning district is Commercial General (CG) and the proposed project will not impair the integrity and character of the zoning district as it will comply with all of the applicable provisions of the Huntington Park Municipal Code, including prescribed development standards.
2. The proposed development is consistent with the General Plan.
Finding: The proposed car wash is consistent with the General Plan, specifically, the proposed use is consistent with Goal 1.0; Policy 1.2 of the Land Use Element of the General Plan by encouraging community-oriented retail development. The project is responding to the local need for an inexpensive car wash with a high degree of self-service (self-serve vacuum stalls) which is not provided elsewhere nearby. This project will redevelop an underutilized commercially-zoned site with a viable commercial retail service.
5 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
26 27
28 3. The proposed development would be harmonious and compatible with existing and planned future developments within the zoning district and general area, as well as with the land uses presently on the subject property.
Finding: The proposed development adequately meets all City standards and design guidelines. Staff can make all Design Review findings for the project as it has undergone Design Review with staff and as conditioned, is harmonious and compatible with existing and planned future developments within the zoning district and general area.
4. The approval of the Development Permit for the proposed project is in compliance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City’s Guidelines.
Finding: The approval of this project includes the adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration in compliance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City’s Guidelines.
5. The subject site is physically suitable for the type and density/intensity of use being proposed.
Finding: The proposed car wash is adjacent to a major arterial street on a site of 38,198 square feet. The proposed 4,969 square foot car wash building and associated development will comply with all development standards and adequate ingress and egress will exist on the site.
6. There are adequate provisions for public access, water, sanitation and public utilities and services to ensure that the proposed development would not be detrimental to public health, safety and general welfare.
Finding: Vehicular and pedestrian access to the site would be provided from Florence Avenue. The proposed car wash has an unusually large demand for water supply and sanitation service compared to most other commercial services; however, the Initial Study prepared for the project concluded that adequate 6 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
26 27
28 infrastructure exists to serve the proposed water and wastewater demand. The project will not require changes to existing public utilities. Given that the surrounding area is already completely developed with public access, water, sanitation, and other public utilities, the proposed project would not affect these infrastructures or require any types of modifications. In addition, the proposed project would not impede the accessibility to public access, water, sanitation, or other public utilities and services.
7. The design, location, size and operating characteristics of the proposed development would not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare of the City.
Finding: The proposed car wash is adjacent to a major arterial street on a site of 38,198 square feet. The traffic study prepared for the project concluded that the car wash would have adequate on-site space for queuing and would not have a significant impact on traffic or public safety. The noise study prepared for the project concluded that with the incorporation of mitigation measures, the car wash would not have a significant noise impact on the community. The design, location, size, and operating characteristics of the proposed car wash is not expected to be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare of the City.
The proposed project will be harmonious and compatible with the existing commercial uses presently located within the vicinity and zoning district.
Additionally, the site has adequate vehicle circulation and access.
SECTION 4: The City Council hereby approves Case No. 2020-04 subject to the following conditions:
1. The property owner, applicant, and each successor in interest shall indemnify, protect, hold harmless and defend the City and any agency or instrumentality thereof, its officers, employees and agents from all claims, actions, or proceedings against the City to attack, set aside, void, annul, or seek damages arising out of an approval of the City, or any agency or commission thereof, concerning this project. City shall promptly notify both the property owner and Applicant of any claim, action, or proceeding to which this condition is applicable. The City shall cooperate in the defense of the action, while reserving its right to act as it deems to be in the best interest of the City and the public. The property 7 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
26 27
28 owner and Applicant shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City for all costs and fees incurred in additional investigation or study, or for supplementing or revising any document, including, without limitation, environmental documents. If the City’s legal counsel is required to enforce any condition of approval, the Applicant shall pay for all costs of enforcement, including legal fees.
2. Except as set forth in conditions herein, all-inclusive, and subject to department corrections and conditions, the property shall be developed and operated substantially in conformance with the description contained in the staff report, environmental assessment, and attached plans and materials.
3. The proposed development/use shall comply with all applicable City, County, State and Federal codes, laws, rules, and regulations, including but not limited to Health, Building and Safety, Fire, Zoning, and Business License, including environmental mitigation measures, and including the applicable requirements described in the attached Building & Safety Division Conditions of Approval and Public Works Department Conditions of Approval.
4. The second sheet of building plans shall include a copy of the Planning entitlement decision with conditions of approval, attachments to the decision with applicable requirements, and mitigation monitoring and reporting program as applicable. This information shall be incorporated into the plans prior to the first submittal for plan check.
5. The use shall be conducted, and the property be maintained, in a clean, neat, quiet, and orderly manner at all times and comply with the property maintenance standards as set forth in Section 9-3.103.18 and Title 8, Chapter 9 of the Huntington Park Municipal Code.
Required maintenance includes, but is not limited to, the following:
a. Replace/repair canopies to ensure good condition and color b. Provide routine trash/litter removal
c. Keep landscape areas free and clear of overgrown vegetation and weeds d. Empty trash cans routinely to prevent overflow problems e. Keep trash enclosure free and clear of any trash/litter
6. The use shall be conducted, and the property be maintained, in a manner that promotes public safety and reduces vagrancy. Required actions include the following:
a. Maintain sufficient lighting on the property, including behind the building b. Secure trash enclosure
c. Maintain No Trespassing and No Loitering signage around property d. File a No Trespassing Form with the Police Department and maintain a current No Trespassing Form with the Police Department
7. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the applicant shall:
a. Install No Trespassing and No Loitering signage around property b. File a No Trespassing Form with the Police Department
8. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, clear untinted acid-etch graffiti film shall be installed to all glass that is adjacent to the parking lot. 8 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
26 27
28 9. The business shall be operated consistent with the Business Operational Plan dated May 2, 2022, except as modified by conditions of approval herein.
10.Vehicle repair and maintenance, including, but not limited to engine repair, body repair, tire and suspension repair, shall be prohibited, with the exception of minor repair to make the vehicle operable.
11.The business shall be operated in compliance with the City of Huntington Park Noise Ordinance.
12.Any existing and/or future graffiti, as defined by Huntington Park Municipal Code Section 5-27.02(d), shall be diligently removed within a reasonable time period.
13.No payphones shall be allowed on the site.
14.Vending machines shall be limited to the approved location within the building.
15.All proposed signage shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Division under a separate permit. All proposed signage shall comply with the requirements of the Huntington Park Municipal Code and/or Master Sign Program of the subject site.
16.Prior to the issuance of permits for signage, the freestanding pole sign shall be revised to specify opaque face backgrounds with illumination confined to the letters and symbols.
17.All proposed mechanical equipment and appurtenances, including satellite dishes, gutters etc., whether located on the rooftop, ground level or anywhere on the property shall be completely shielded/enclosed so as not to be visible from any public street and/or adjacent properties. Such shielding/enclosure of facilities shall be of compatible design related to the building structure for which such facilities are intended to serve and shall be installed prior to final inspection.
18.This entitlement shall be subject to review for compliance with conditions of the issuance at such intervals as the Planning Commission shall deem appropriate.
19.The violation of any of the conditions of this entitlement may result in a citation(s) and/or the revocation of the entitlement.
20.This entitlement may be subject to additional conditions after its original issuance. Such conditions shall be imposed by the Planning Commission as deemed appropriate to address problems of land use compatibility, operations, aesthetics, security, noise, safety, crime control, or to promote the general welfare of the City.
21.Per applicable provisions in the HPMC, this entitlement shall expire in the event it is not exercised within one (1) year from the date of approval, unless an extension has been granted by the Planning Commission.
22.Per HPMC 9-2.1113, upon a change of ownership of the site, business, service, use or structure subject to the permit, the new owner/operator shall file for and receive approval 9 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
26 27
28 of a Certificate of Compliance and agree, in application writing, to all applicable conditions and operating standards prior to reuse/reopening under the new ownership.
23.The Director of Community Development is authorized to approve minor modifications to the approved preliminary plans or any of the conditions if such modifications shall achieve substantially the same results, as would strict compliance with said plans and conditions.
24.The applicant shall provide publicly visible art or pay art fees in accordance with the HPMC Title 9, Chapter 3, Article 17, prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy. Art fee shall be paid to the City prior to issuance of the building permit.
25.All requirements as deemed necessary by utility companies shall be complied with.
26.All requirements as deemed necessary by the Los Angeles County Fire Department shall be complied with.
27.Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the site shall be merged to a single property through a lot line adjustment, lot merger, parcel map, or “hold-as-one” covenant, form to be approved by the City prior to execution and recording.
28.Prior to the issuance of permits, plans shall be revised to reflect the following:
a. Include canopy above vending machine opening to call attention to and shelter the opening
b. Windows: consistency with specifications of all grids to include exterior muntins, untinted glass, no frosting at ground level windows
c. Additional details of the building and paystation canopies to ensure internal consistency of the design
29.Prior to the issuance of a building permit, product descriptions/shop drawings of proposed windows shall be submitted for staff review and approval.
30.The City Council makes the following recommendations for optional changes:
a. Include motion sensors on exterior lighting for the option to turn down or off when motion is not present.
b. Eliminate the designation/marking of employee parking to allow the owner operational flexibility.
31.Final landscape and irrigation plans shall be wet signed and stamped by a landscape architect registered to practice in the State of California and submitted for Planning review and approval prior to the installation of landscaping. The landscape architect shall certify the following statement on the plans with their signature: “I certify that these landscape and irrigation plans are consistent with all provisions of the Huntington Park Municipal Code regarding type and quantity of plant materials and irrigation systems, including those provisions contained in Articles 4 and 8 of Chapter 3 of the Zoning Code and includes a complete landscape documentation package per HPMC 9-3.407 for projects with 2,500 square feet or more of new or replacement landscaped area.” 10 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
26 27
28 32.Hours of operation shall be no earlier than 7:00 a.m. and no later than 9:00 p.m., 7 days per week. The car wash shall not accept new vehicles in the car wash queue after 8:00 p.m.
33.Any order speakers shall be certified by an acoustical engineer to not exceed 60 decibels at the residential property line, per HPMC requirements.
34.The paystation kiosk design shall be submitted for staff review and approval (for potential menu board signage and noise level) prior to the issuance of permits and installation.
35.The car wash shall maintain the noise insulation horseshoe or equivalent sound attenuation device to reduce the drying system noise from the car wash exit.
36.The applicant and property owner shall agree in writing to these conditions of approval.
SECTION 5: The Mayor shall certify to the adoption of this resolution and a copy thereof shall be filed with the City Clerk.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 2nd day of August, 2022, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
HUNTINGTON PARK CITY COUNCIL
Graciela Ortiz, Mayor
11 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
26 27
28 ATTEST:
Eduardo Sarmiento, City Clerk
1 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
26 27
28 RESOLUTION NO. 2022-26
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
HUNTINGTON PARK, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND DEVELOPMENT PERMIT IN
CONNECTION WITH REAL PROPERTY AT 3100 FLORENCE
AVENUE, HUNTINGTON PARK, CALIFORNIA.
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held in the City Hall, 6550 Miles Avenue, Huntington Park, California on Tuesday, August 2, 2022 at 6:00 p.m., pursuant to the notice published and posted as required by law in accordance with the provisions of the Huntington Park Municipal Code (HPMC), upon an application from Salazar Law, APC, to appeal the May 18, 2022 Planning Commission decision to deny Case No. 2020-04, an application by Leedco Engineers, Inc., requesting approval of a Conditional Use Permit and Development Permit to allow construction and operation of a new automated drive-thru car wash with self-serve vacuum stalls and vending machines at 3100 Florence Avenue; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the request and has found that all of the required findings for approval of a Conditional Use Permit and Development Permit including Design Review findings can be made as required by the Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the environmental impact information relative to the proposed request; and
WHEREAS, all persons appearing for or against the approval of the Conditional Use Permit and Development Permit were given the opportunity to be heard in connection with said matter; and
WHEREAS, all written comments received prior to the hearing, and responses to such comments, were reviewed by the City Council; and
WHEREAS, the City Council is required to announce its findings and recommendations.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON PARK DOES FIND, DETERMINE, RECOMMEND AND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Based on the evidence in the Initial Study prepared for the project, the 2 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
26 27
28 City Council finds that the project, as proposed, will have a less-than-significant impact on the environment with the incorporation of mitigation measures and adopts a Mitigated Negative Declaration.
SECTION 2. The City Council hereby makes all of the following required findings for a Conditional Use Permit in connection with Case No. 2020-04:
1. The proposed use is conditionally permitted within, and would not impair the integrity and character of, the subject zoning district and complies with all of the applicable provisions of this Code.
Finding: The proposed drive-thru car wash with vending machines is conditionally permitted within the subject zoning district. The subject zoning district is Commercial General (CG) and the proposed project will not impair the integrity and character of the zoning district as it will comply with all of the applicable provisions of the Huntington Park Municipal Code.
2. The proposed use is consistent with the General Plan.
Finding: The proposed car wash is consistent with the General Plan, specifically, the proposed use is consistent with Goal 1.0; Policy 1.2 of the Land Use Element of the General Plan by encouraging community-oriented retail development. The project is responding to the local need for an inexpensive car wash with a high degree of self-service (self-serve vacuum stalls) which is not provided elsewhere nearby. This project will redevelop an underutilized commercially-zoned site with a viable commercial retail service.
3. The approval of the Conditional Use Permit for the proposed use is in compliance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City’s Guidelines.
Finding: The approval of this project includes the adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration in compliance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City’s Guidelines.
4. The design, location, size and operating characteristics of the proposed use 3 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
26 27
28 are compatible with the existing and planned future land uses within the general area in which the proposed use is to be located and will not create significant noise, traffic or other conditions or situations that may be objectionable or detrimental to other permitted uses operating nearby or adverse to the public interest, health, safety, convenience or welfare of the City.
Finding: The proposed car wash is adjacent to a major arterial street on a site of 38,198 square feet. The traffic study prepared for the project concluded that the car wash would have adequate on-site space for queuing and would not have a significant impact on traffic or public safety. The noise study prepared for the project concluded that with the incorporation of mitigation measures, the car wash would not have a significant noise impact on the community. The design, location, size, and operating characteristics of the proposed car wash is not expected to be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare of the City.
The proposed project will be harmonious and compatible with the existing commercial uses presently located within the vicinity and zoning district.
Additionally, the site has adequate vehicle circulation and access.
5. The subject site is physically suitable for the type and density/intensity of use being proposed.
Finding: The proposed car wash is adjacent to a major arterial street on a site of 38,198 square feet. The proposed 4,969 square foot car wash building and associated development will comply with all development standards and adequate ingress and egress will exist on the site.
6. There are adequate provisions for public access, water, sanitation and public utilities and services to ensure that the proposed use would not be detrimental to public health, safety and general welfare.
Finding: Vehicular and pedestrian access to the site would be provided from Florence Avenue. The proposed car wash has an unusually large demand for 4 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
26 27
28 water supply and sanitation service compared to most other commercial services; however, the Initial Study prepared for the project concluded that adequate infrastructure exists to serve the proposed water and wastewater demand. The project will not require changes to existing public utilities. Given that the surrounding area is already completely developed with public access, water, sanitation, and other public utilities, the proposed project would not affect these infrastructures or require any types of modifications. In addition, the proposed project would not impede the accessibility to public access, water, sanitation, or other public utilities and services.
SECTION 3. The City Council hereby makes all of the following required findings for a Development Permit in connection with Case No. 2020-04:
1. The proposed development is one permitted within the subject zoning district and complies with all of the applicable provisions of this Code, including prescribed development/site standards.
Finding: The proposed drive-thru car wash with vending machines is conditionally permitted within the subject zoning district. The subject zoning district is Commercial General (CG) and the proposed project will not impair the integrity and character of the zoning district as it will comply with all of the applicable provisions of the Huntington Park Municipal Code, including prescribed development standards.
2. The proposed development is consistent with the General Plan.
Finding: The proposed car wash is consistent with the General Plan, specifically, the proposed use is consistent with Goal 1.0; Policy 1.2 of the Land Use Element of the General Plan by encouraging community-oriented retail development. The project is responding to the local need for an inexpensive car wash with a high degree of self-service (self-serve vacuum stalls) which is not provided elsewhere nearby. This project will redevelop an underutilized commercially-zoned site with a viable commercial retail service.
5 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
26 27
28 3. The proposed development would be harmonious and compatible with existing and planned future developments within the zoning district and general area, as well as with the land uses presently on the subject property.
Finding: The proposed development adequately meets all City standards and design guidelines. Staff can make all Design Review findings for the project as it has undergone Design Review with staff and as conditioned, is harmonious and compatible with existing and planned future developments within the zoning district and general area.
4. The approval of the Development Permit for the proposed project is in compliance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City’s Guidelines.
Finding: The approval of this project includes the adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration in compliance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City’s Guidelines.
5. The subject site is physically suitable for the type and density/intensity of use being proposed.
Finding: The proposed car wash is adjacent to a major arterial street on a site of 38,198 square feet. The proposed 4,969 square foot car wash building and associated development will comply with all development standards and adequate ingress and egress will exist on the site.
6. There are adequate provisions for public access, water, sanitation and public utilities and services to ensure that the proposed development would not be detrimental to public health, safety and general welfare.
Finding: Vehicular and pedestrian access to the site would be provided from Florence Avenue. The proposed car wash has an unusually large demand for water supply and sanitation service compared to most other commercial services; however, the Initial Study prepared for the project concluded that adequate 6 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
26 27
28 infrastructure exists to serve the proposed water and wastewater demand. The project will not require changes to existing public utilities. Given that the surrounding area is already completely developed with public access, water, sanitation, and other public utilities, the proposed project would not affect these infrastructures or require any types of modifications. In addition, the proposed project would not impede the accessibility to public access, water, sanitation, or other public utilities and services.
7. The design, location, size and operating characteristics of the proposed development would not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare of the City.
Finding: The proposed car wash is adjacent to a major arterial street on a site of 38,198 square feet. The traffic study prepared for the project concluded that the car wash would have adequate on-site space for queuing and would not have a significant impact on traffic or public safety. The noise study prepared for the project concluded that with the incorporation of mitigation measures, the car wash would not have a significant noise impact on the community. The design, location, size, and operating characteristics of the proposed car wash is not expected to be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare of the City.
The proposed project will be harmonious and compatible with the existing commercial uses presently located within the vicinity and zoning district.
Additionally, the site has adequate vehicle circulation and access.
SECTION 4. The City Council hereby approves Case No. 2020-04 subject to the following conditions:
1. The property owner, applicant, and each successor in interest shall indemnify, protect, hold harmless and defend the City and any agency or instrumentality thereof, its officers, employees and agents from all claims, actions, or proceedings against the City to attack, set aside, void, annul, or seek damages arising out of an approval of the City, or any agency or commission thereof, concerning this project. City shall promptly notify both the property owner and Applicant of any claim, action, or proceeding to which this condition is applicable. The City shall cooperate in the defense of the action, while reserving its right to act as it deems to be in the best interest of the City and the public. The property 7 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
26 27
28 owner and Applicant shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City for all costs and fees incurred in additional investigation or study, or for supplementing or revising any document, including, without limitation, environmental documents. If the City’s legal counsel is required to enforce any condition of approval, the Applicant shall pay for all costs of enforcement, including legal fees.
2. Except as set forth in conditions herein, all-inclusive, and subject to department corrections and conditions, the property shall be developed and operated substantially in conformance with the description contained in the staff report, environmental assessment, and attached plans and materials.
3. The proposed development/use shall comply with all applicable City, County, State and Federal codes, laws, rules, and regulations, including but not limited to Health, Building and Safety, Fire, Zoning, and Business License, including environmental mitigation measures, and including the applicable requirements described in the attached Building & Safety Division Conditions of Approval and Public Works Department Conditions of Approval.
4. The second sheet of building plans shall include a copy of the Planning entitlement decision with conditions of approval, attachments to the decision with applicable requirements, and mitigation monitoring and reporting program as applicable. This information shall be incorporated into the plans prior to the first submittal for plan check.
5. The use shall be conducted, and the property be maintained, in a clean, neat, quiet, and orderly manner at all times and comply with the property maintenance standards as set forth in Section 9-3.103.18 and Title 8, Chapter 9 of the Huntington Park Municipal Code.
Required maintenance includes, but is not limited to, the following:
a. Replace/repair canopies to ensure good condition and color b. Provide routine trash/litter removal
c. Keep landscape areas free and clear of overgrown vegetation and weeds d. Empty trash cans routinely to prevent overflow problems e. Keep trash enclosure free and clear of any trash/litter
6. The use shall be conducted, and the property be maintained, in a manner that promotes public safety and reduces vagrancy. Required actions include the following:
a. Maintain sufficient lighting on the property, including behind the building b. Secure trash enclosure
c. Maintain No Trespassing and No Loitering signage around property d. File a No Trespassing Form with the Police Department and maintain a current No Trespassing Form with the Police Department
7. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the applicant shall:
a. Install No Trespassing and No Loitering signage around property b. File a No Trespassing Form with the Police Department
8. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, clear untinted acid-etch graffiti film shall be installed to all glass that is adjacent to the parking lot. 8 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
26 27
28 9. The business shall be operated consistent with the Business Operational Plan dated May 2, 2022, except as modified by conditions of approval herein.
10.Vehicle repair and maintenance, including, but not limited to engine repair, body repair, tire and suspension repair, shall be prohibited, with the exception of minor repair to make the vehicle operable.
11. The business shall be operated in compliance with the City of Huntington Park Noise Ordinance.
12. Any existing and/or future graffiti, as defined by Huntington Park Municipal Code Section 5-27.02(d), shall be diligently removed within a reasonable time period.
13. No payphones shall be allowed on the site.
14.Vending machines shall be limited to the approved location within the building.
15.All proposed signage shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Division under a separate permit. All proposed signage shall comply with the requirements of the Huntington Park Municipal Code and/or Master Sign Program of the subject site.
16.Prior to the issuance of permits for signage, the freestanding pole sign shall be revised to specify opaque face backgrounds with illumination confined to the letters and symbols.
17. All proposed mechanical equipment and appurtenances, including satellite dishes, gutters etc., whether located on the rooftop, ground level or anywhere on the property shall be completely shielded/enclosed so as not to be visible from any public street and/or adjacent properties. Such shielding/enclosure of facilities shall be of compatible design related to the building structure for which such facilities are intended to serve and shall be installed prior to final inspection.
18. This entitlement shall be subject to review for compliance with conditions of the issuance at such intervals as the Planning Commission shall deem appropriate.
19. The violation of any of the conditions of this entitlement may result in a citation(s) and/or the revocation of the entitlement.
20. This entitlement may be subject to additional conditions after its original issuance. Such conditions shall be imposed by the Planning Commission as deemed appropriate to address problems of land use compatibility, operations, aesthetics, security, noise, safety, crime control, or to promote the general welfare of the City.
21.Per applicable provisions in the HPMC, this entitlement shall expire in the event it is not exercised within one (1) year from the date of approval, unless an extension has been granted by the Planning Commission.
22.Per HPMC 9-2.1113, upon a change of ownership of the site, business, service, use or structure subject to the permit, the new owner/operator shall file for and receive approval 9 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
26 27
28 of a Certificate of Compliance and agree, in application writing, to all applicable conditions and operating standards prior to reuse/reopening under the new ownership.
23.The Director of Community Development is authorized to approve minor modifications to the approved preliminary plans or any of the conditions if such modifications shall achieve substantially the same results, as would strict compliance with said plans and conditions.
24.The applicant shall provide publicly visible art or pay art fees in accordance with the HPMC Title 9, Chapter 3, Article 17, prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy. Art fee shall be paid to the City prior to issuance of the building permit.
25.All requirements as deemed necessary by utility companies shall be complied with.
26.All requirements as deemed necessary by the Los Angeles County Fire Department shall be complied with.
27.Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the site shall be merged to a single property through a lot line adjustment, lot merger, parcel map, or “hold-as-one” covenant, form to be approved by the City prior to execution and recording.
28.Prior to the issuance of permits, plans shall be revised to reflect the following:
a. Include canopy above vending machine opening to call attention to and shelter the opening
b. Windows: consistency with specifications of all grids to include exterior muntins, untinted glass, no frosting at ground level windows
c. Additional details of the building and paystation canopies to ensure internal consistency of the design
29.Prior to the issuance of a building permit, product descriptions/shop drawings of proposed windows shall be submitted for staff review and approval.
30.The City Council makes the following recommendations for optional changes:
a. Include motion sensors on exterior lighting for the option to turn down or off when motion is not present.
b. Eliminate the designation/marking of employee parking to allow the owner operational flexibility.
31.Final landscape and irrigation plans shall be wet signed and stamped by a landscape architect registered to practice in the State of California and submitted for Planning review and approval prior to the installation of landscaping. The landscape architect shall certify the following statement on the plans with their signature: “I certify that these landscape and irrigation plans are consistent with all provisions of the Huntington Park Municipal Code regarding type and quantity of plant materials and irrigation systems, including those provisions contained in Articles 4 and 8 of Chapter 3 of the Zoning Code and includes a complete landscape documentation package per HPMC 9-3.407 for projects with 2,500 square feet or more of new or replacement landscaped area.” 10 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
26 27
28 32.Hours of operation shall be no earlier than 7:00 a.m. and no later than 9:00 p.m., 7 days per week. The car wash shall not accept new vehicles in the car wash queue after 8:00 p.m.
33.Any order speakers shall be certified by an acoustical engineer to not exceed 60 decibels at the residential property line, per HPMC requirements.
34.The paystation kiosk design shall be submitted for staff review and approval (for potential menu board signage and noise level) prior to the issuance of permits and installation.
35.The car wash shall maintain the noise insulation horseshoe or equivalent sound attenuation device to reduce the drying system noise from the car wash exit.
36.The applicant and property owner shall agree in writing to these conditions of approval.
SECTION 5. The Mayor shall certify to the adoption of this resolution and a copy thereof shall be filed with the City Clerk.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 2nd day of August, 2022, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
Eduardo Martinez, Mayor
ATTEST:
Eduardo Sarmiento, City Clerk
1 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
26 27
28 PC RESOLUTION NO. 2020-04
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON PARK, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, TO DENY CASE NO. 2020-04, A CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT AND DEVELOPMENT PERMIT, IN CONNECTION WITH REAL PROPERTY AT 3100 FLORENCE AVENUE, HUNTINGTON PARK, CALIFORNIA.
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held in the City Hall, 6550 Miles Avenue, Huntington Park, California on Wednesday, May 18, 2022 at 6:30 p.m., continued from the public hearing on Wednesday, April 20, 2022 at 6:30 p.m., pursuant to the notice published and posted as required by law in accordance with the provisions of the Huntington Park Municipal Code (HPMC), upon an application from Leedco Engineers, Inc., requesting approval of a Conditional Use Permit and Development Permit to allow construction and operation of a new automated drive-thru car wash with self-serve vacuum stalls and vending machines at 3100 Florence Avenue; and WHEREAS, the Planning Division has reviewed the request and has found that not all of the required findings for approval of a Conditional Use Permit and Development Permit can be made as required by the Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has considered the environmental impact information relative to the proposed request; and
WHEREAS, all persons appearing for or against the approval of the Conditional Use Permit and Development Permit were given the opportunity to be heard in connection with said matter; and
WHEREAS, all written comments received prior to the hearing, and responses to such comments, were reviewed by the Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission is required to announce its findings and recommendations.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
HUNTINGTON PARK DOES FIND, DETERMINE, RECOMMEND AND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1: The Planning Commission cannot make the following required findings DocuSign Envelope ID: F5709534-E3E2-45E0-8CB5-98248AEF78B2 2 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
26 27
28 to approve a Conditional Use Permit in connection with Case No. 2020-04:
1. The design, location, size and operating characteristics of the proposed use are compatible with the existing and planned future land uses within the general area in which the proposed use is to be located and will not create significant noise, traffic or other conditions or situations that may be objectionable or detrimental to other permitted uses operating nearby or adverse to the public interest, health, safety, convenience or welfare of the City.
Finding: The proposed car wash is not compatible with existing land uses in the general area in that there are several existing car washes in the City and surrounding area, including at these addresses within Huntington Park: 2974 E.
Florence Avenue, 3360 E. Florence Avenue, 3003 E. Gage Avenue, 2730 Slauson Avenue, and these addresses outside of Huntington Park: 2556 Cudahy St., and 7201 Santa Fe Avenue, and that the additional car wash will lead to an oversaturation of car wash services in the City. The car wash will introduce a new source of noise to the neighborhood that may be adverse to the public interest of the residents on properties adjacent to the project site. The car wash will introduce a new source of air pollution to the neighborhood that may be adverse to the public health within the neighborhood. The car wash will use a large volume of water (11,073 gallons per day increase in wastewater estimated by the Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County), which may impede State water conservation goals, adverse to the public interest. The car wash is adverse to the public welfare of the City in that it generates only 3 jobs per shift and no sales tax revenue (except for sales of car care products from vending machines) and will prevent the location of an alternative commercial use that may generate retail sales taxes and more employment at the site.
SECTION 2: The Planning Commission cannot make the following required findings to approve a Development Permit in connection with Case No. 2020-04:
DocuSign Envelope ID: F5709534-E3E2-45E0-8CB5-98248AEF78B2 3 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
26 27
28 1. The proposed development would be harmonious and compatible with existing and planned future developments within the zoning district and general area, as well as with the land uses presently on the subject property.
Finding: The proposed car wash is not compatible with existing land uses in the general area in that there are several existing car washes in the City and surrounding area, including at these addresses within Huntington Park: 2974 E.
Florence Avenue, 3360 E. Florence Avenue, 3003 E. Gage Avenue, 2730 Slauson Avenue, and these addresses outside of Huntington Park: 2556 Cudahy St., and 7201 Santa Fe Avenue, and that the additional car wash will lead to an oversaturation of car wash services in the City. The car wash will introduce a new source of noise to the neighborhood that may be adverse to the public interest of the residents on properties adjacent to the project site.
2. The design, location, size and operating characteristics of the proposed development would not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare of the City.
Finding: The car wash will introduce a new source of air pollution to the neighborhood that may be adverse to the public health within the neighborhood.
The car wash will use a large volume of water (11,073 gallons per day increase in wastewater estimated by the Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County), which may impede State water conservation goals, adverse to the public interest. The car wash is adverse to the public welfare of the City in that it generates only 3 jobs per shift and no sales tax revenue (except for sales of car care products from vending machines) and will prevent the location of an alternative commercial use that may generate retail sales taxes and more employment at the site.
SECTION 3: The Planning Commission hereby denies Case No. 2020-04.
SECTION 4: This resolution shall not become effective until the 16th day following the date of decision rendered by the Planning Commission, unless prior to the effective DocuSign Envelope ID: F5709534-E3E2-45E0-8CB5-98248AEF78B2 4 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
26 27
28 date it is appealed to the City Council. The decision of the Planning Commission shall be stayed until final determination of the appeal has been made by the City Council.
SECTION 5: The Secretary of the Planning Commission shall certify to the adoption of this resolution and a copy thereof shall be filed with the City Clerk.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 18th day of May, 2022, by the following vote:
AYES: Barba-Ochoa, Montes, Sanabria
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT: Carvajal, Nuno
HUNTINGTON PARK PLANNING COMMISSION
Jonathan Sanabria, Chair
ATTEST:
Steve Forster, Secretary
DocuSign Envelope ID: F5709534-E3E2-45E0-8CB5-98248AEF78B2
CITY OF HUNTINGTON PARK
PLANNING DIVISION AGENDA REPORT
DATE: MAY 18, 2022
TO: CHAIRPERSON AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: STEVE FORSTER, INTERIM DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BY: JASON WASMUND, CONTRACT ASSOCIATE PLANNER
SUBJECT: 3100 FLORENCE AVENUE: NEW CAR WASH
PLANNING COMMISSION CASE NO. 2020-04 CUP DP
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Planning Commission, following a public hearing, adopt the attached resolution approving Case No. 2020-04 with the findings and conditions of approval therein.
BACKGROUND:
The 38,198 square foot (0.876 acre) site contains two existing Assessor’s parcels identified by the 3100 Florence Avenue address: APN 6212-001-060 and APN 6212-001-061. The site is developed with an existing approximately 11,718 square foot two-story office building built in 1980 (per LA County Assessor) and a related parking lot with access from Florence Avenue. The office building is in a deteriorated condition.
The site is zoned Commercial General (CG) and is designated General Commercial in the General Plan. The site is bounded by Florence Avenue to the north (with commercial, religious, and residential use beyond), commercial properties to the east and west, and residential properties to the south.
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT
CASE NO. 2020-04 / 3100 Florence Ave.
May 18, 2022
REQUEST/PROPOSED PROJECT:
Leedco Engineers, Inc., on behalf of the property owner, Moogun Investment, LLC, submitted an application for a Conditional Use Permit and Development Permit to develop and operate a new automated drive-thru car wash at 3100 Florence Avenue.
Proposed Work
The following development work is proposed:
• Demolish the existing 11,718 square foot office building and remove all of the existing site improvements including all parking lot paving, trash enclosure, equipment cabinets, parking lot planters, all existing property line walls, and all existing vegetation including trees.
• Construct a 4,969 square foot car wash building with related development including o Four vacuum canopies totaling 3,963 square feet and one 192 square foot paystation canopy
o 192 square foot vacuum pump enclosure and other utility structures o 34 parking space parking area including drive aisles, queuing and exit lanes o Stormwater infiltration system
o Wastewater clarifier system and associated water recycling system o Property line walls and freestanding pole sign
o Approximately 7,498 square feet of landscaped area
• Construct the following improvements in the public right-of-way:
o Remove existing driveway at west end of site
o Widen existing driveway at Mission Place intersection o Install new right-turn-exit-only driveway near east end of site o Remove street tree and relocate existing tree well to accommodate new driveway
o Install new fire hydrant
Proposed Business Operation
The proposed automated drive-thru car wash will be operated by the project owner, Moogun Investment, LLC. The owner has developed similar car washes in Los Angeles, as described in their business operational plan (see exhibit). The proposed automated car wash will require three employees to operate and the applicant proposes to operate the car wash from 7:00 am through 9:00 pm, 7 days per week. Customers will pay at an entrance kiosk, then drive into the car wash tunnel guided by an employee, remain in the car while the conveyor take the car through the tunnel, and after exiting the tunnel, drive to a vacuum station to vacuum the car themselves. Customers will have access to car care products provided by a vending machine located in an alcove within the car wash building.
Community-Oriented Retail Development
The applicant’s objective is to provide an automated car wash service to Huntington Park and the surrounding communities. This car wash is responding to the local need for an inexpensive car wash with a high degree of self-service (self-serve vacuum stalls) which is not provided elsewhere nearby. This project will redevelop an underutilized commerciallyzoned site with a viable commercial retail service.
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT
CASE NO. 2020-04 / 3100 Florence Ave.
May 18, 2022
ANALYSIS:
Pursuant to the Huntington Park Municipal Code (HPMC) section 9-4.202, car washes are allowed provided a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) has been granted by the Planning Commission. In addition, HPMC 9-4.203.2.G requires approval of a Conditional Use Permit for a drive-thru establishment, and HPMC 9-4.203.2.R requires approval of a Minor Conditional Use Permit for vending machines. The Planning Commission will review the drive-thru car wash with vending machines as a single conditional use permit. HPMC 9-
2.1003 requires approval of a Development Permit for a new commercial building. As the review authority for the project, the Planning Commission will review the Development Permit for the project.
Project Design
The applicant is proposing an Art Deco design combined with elements of Streamline Moderne, which draws on the City’s rich tradition in these styles. Featuring a tower element with curved corners (curves not apparent in the elevations), this design is a significant improvement over the applicant’s previous submittals. Following the April 20 Planning Commission meeting, during which the design of the car wash was discussed, the applicant further refined the design based on the comments received, including the following:
• Revised the front wall height to 3 feet to meet development standards • Eliminated wheelstops in favor of a 4” curb
• Simplified the elevations for a cleaner appearance that is more consistent with the Art Deco and Streamline Moderne design languages chosen for the project • Revised the colors to simplify the background colors to a single color (a light cream), eliminated the blue accent color, and revised the red to a matte finish to complement the building
• Revised the plans to specify clear windows with exterior mullions/muntins, and upgraded all windows to aluminum construction
• Revised the light pole bases to be consistent with the site design, and vertically oriented the building light fixtures
• Revised the building canopies to specify curved corners and a soffit for consistency with the Streamline Moderne architectural language
• Revised the paystation canopy to be more consistent with the project design • Provided additional details of the fin decorations
• Specified a more compatible bronze color for the vacuum canopy shade cloth • Specified an integral concrete color (Manufacturer: Curber Corner, Color: Adobe) for durability of the stamped concrete driveways
Signage
A freestanding pole sign, with architectural details consistent with the project, is proposed for the site. Staff recommends a condition of approval to specify an opaque sign face with illuminated letters to provide a high-quality image. Two vertical signs projecting from the curved corners of the tower element of the building are also proposed. As the Zoning Code allows only one projecting sign, the applicant will need to apply for staff review and approval
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT
CASE NO. 2020-04 / 3100 Florence Ave.
May 18, 2022
of a Sign Program to install two projecting signs. All signs will require a subsequent review by Planning staff prior to issuance of sign permits.
Landscaping
Approximately 20% of the site will be landscaped area which is a significant improvement in landscaped area over the existing site condition. The landscape planting plan includes a well-developed combination of trees, shrubs, ground cover, and climbing vines. Twenty-six 24-inch box trees are proposed to be planted on-stie, which meets the minimum requirements. The transformer is proposed to be covered with artificial ivy to screen it from view of the queuing vehicles. (L-1 and A-10 Det. 6).
Environmental Review
Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), staff has prepared an Initial Study of the project which concluded that the project will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment, with the implementation of required mitigation measures during the development and operation of the project. The mitigation measures addressing the areas of Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Noise, Tribal Cultural Resources, and Mandatory Findings of Significance are included in the Mitigation Monitoring Program.
The Mitigation Monitoring Program is p. 151-157 of the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration document package in the attached exhibits. The applicant has agreed to the mitigation measures.
The proposed Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration underwent the required statewide and local review period which concluded on May 12. As of staff report writing, a comment was received from the Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts offering corrections of minor factual errors but none requiring substantial changes to mitigation measures. The attached draft resolution for approval of the project includes language adopting the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration as part of the decision to approve the project.
Circulation and Off-Street Parking
According to the Traffic Impact Analysis submitted for the project, the proposed car wash is expected to generate 944 daily trips, which is roughly equivalent to 465 daily customers. The existing medical office building, when fully occupied, would generate 383 daily trips. The traffic study analyzed the impact of these additional vehicle trips on three nearby intersections. These intersections, 1) Mountain View Ave. at Florence Ave., 2) Mission Pl. at Florence Ave., and 3) State St. at Florence Ave., as reported on p. 40 of the traffic study, would continue to operate at Levels of Service ranging from A to C. A Level of Service (measure of congestion) of D or better is considered acceptable in the City of Huntington Park. The traffic study concluded that the project would maintain acceptable levels of service and not result in any operational deficiencies.
The traffic study also includes a queuing analysis of the proposed car wash based on a survey of three similar car wash businesses in Southern California. The analysis estimated the typical peak queuing length to be approximately 18 vehicles during peak periods based on the highest 85th percentile queue length. The site plan includes a queuing storage capacity of 12 vehicles (without interfering with vacuum stations). On the Tuesday studied,
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT
CASE NO. 2020-04 / 3100 Florence Ave.
May 18, 2022
the 85th percentile queue length exceeded 12 vehicles only once, prior to closing. On the Saturday studied, the 85th percentile queue length exceeded 12 vehicles for most of the period between 1:30pm and 4:45pm. The average queue between the three studied car wash businesses never exceeded 12 vehicles. Because the proposed site plan includes an overflow capacity of approximately 7 vehicles before extending into the street, the traffic study concludes that “the overall drive-through storage capacity for the project site is forecast to be adequate to accommodate the peak queue.”
The proposed project will retain the existing signalized driveway at the south leg of Mission Place, and the project will provide a new stop-controlled right-turn-exit-only driveway on Florence Avenue east of Mission Place. A previous version of the plan raised safety concerns, notably the potential for conflicts between the left turn movements in and out of the neighboring shopping center driveway and left turn movements in and out of the proposed easterly driveway. The most recent plans propose a right-turn-exit-only driveway with signage and right-turn-only access control “pork chop” which resolves those safety concerns.
The applicant has been unable to eliminate the second driveway as they reported that the Los Angeles County Fire Department requires the second driveway access to the property.
Based on the square footage of the car wash building, a total of 30 parking spaces are required for the proposed project. The applicant is proposing a total of 34 spaces, two of which will be ADA (American with Disability Act) compliant, and one designated for motorcycles. The project will exceed the minimum required number of off-street parking spaces by 4. Three spaces are designated as employee parking; however, staff recommends that employee parking is not marked on the site to allow the owner maximum flexibility in operating the car wash to meet customer and employee needs.
Noise
The Noise Impact Analysis for the project concluded that operational noise generated by the project would be a less than significant environmental impact, provided that the car wash operation is prohibited between the hours of 10:00 pm and 7:00 am. The applicant is proposing to operate the car wash from 7:00 am through 9:00 pm. Construction noise and vibration would be a less than significant environmental impact with the implementation of standard construction noise mitigation measures (see p. 151-157 of the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration attachment).
The Noise Impact Analysis for the project includes an analysis of federal, state, and local noise regulations, measurements of baseline ambient noise levels around the site, noise modeling of project-generated noise sources, and analysis of the noise model results.
Project noise sources included in the model and analysis include construction equipment, project-generated trips, carwash drying equipment (the loudest operational source), the vacuum sources and vacuum hoses from each of the vacuum stations, and heating ventilation air conditioning equipment, estimated to be two 5-ton Carrier units on rooftop locations. The noise model assumes the construction of a 6.5-foot height concrete wall at the south property line.
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT
CASE NO. 2020-04 / 3100 Florence Ave.
May 18, 2022
Measurements of existing average background noise levels around the site, taken during an afternoon, include 60.6 dBA at the south property line of the site and 76.9 dBA at the front steps of St. Matthias Church. Noise measurements were also taken over a 24-hour period at the south property line of the site. Average noise levels were 61.8 dBA between 8-10 pm,
51.8 dBA between 2-3 am, and ranging between 57.4 dBA and 60.3 dBA during the daytime hours of 7am through 8pm.
The noise study provided peak hour operational noise generated by the project, as well as background noise. The following table, which assumes the construction of a 6.5-foot height wall at the south property line, provides data for two key receptor locations:
Receptor Location Existing
Background Noise
Car Wash Operational
Noise as Heard at Location
South property line of site 57.4 to 60.6 dBA 55 through 59 dBA St. Matthias Church front steps 76.9 dBA 55 dBA
Peak hour operation generates 55 dBA received at the front steps of St. Matthias Church, which is less than the existing average 76.9 dBA ambient background (traffic) noise during a typical afternoon, and generates 55 through 59 dBA received at the south property line of the site, compared to 57.4 dBA through 60.6 dBA average background noise levels. The loudest noise source is the car wash drying system inside the car wash tunnel exit. This system will generate 59 dBA received at the southeast corner of the site. For comparison, 55 dBA is equivalent to a business office, and conversational speech ranges from less than 60 dBA to 65 dBA.
To further reduce the noise received by the residences at the south side of the site, the applicant is proposing to construct an 8-foot height wall at the west 240 feet of the south property line, and a 10-foot height wall at the east 90 feet of the south property line nearest the drying system, which is taller than the 6.5-foot wall analyzed in the noise study. Staff contacted the noise study engineer who prepared the report. The engineer reported that the 8-foot wall would reduce the noise level to 56 dBA, and the 10-foot wall to 54 dBA, from a prior level of 59 dBA.
Staff is recommending the following conditions of approval to further reduce operational noise:
• Hours of operation shall be limited to 7:00 am through 9:00 pm as proposed by the applicant, and the car wash shall not accept new vehicles in the car wash queue after 8:00 pm, to ensure that business activities are completed by the 9:00 pm closure. • Any order speakers shall be certified by an acoustical engineer to not exceed 60 decibels at the residential property line, per HPMC requirements. The plans do not specify whether the paystations will include speakers.
Light & Glare
Project development and operation would entail installation of new structural lighting, security lighting, and parking lot lighting on the project site. All proposed lighting will be confined to illumination of the project site and consist of shielded light sources as described in the plans.
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT
CASE NO. 2020-04 / 3100 Florence Ave.
May 18, 2022
The submitted photometric plan shows a maximum intensity of approximately 16 foot-candles on the site, as it will need to be well-lighted at night, but the south property line adjacent to the residential back yards ranges from 0.1 to 0.5 foot-candles, and most of the other property lines are within a similar range. Furthermore, the proposed structures will be finished with non-reflective materials. Therefore, the resultant level of impact would be less than significant.
Additional Community Outreach
Planning staff visited thirteen properties on Walnut Street closest to the south property line of the site and the church and left information regarding the May 18 Planning Commission meeting, meeting agenda, and Planning Manager contact information. The applicant also independently contacted residents on southerly adjacent properties and reported that residents expressed a concern regarding homeless encampments on the site.
Findings and Conclusion
Based on the above analysis, staff has determined that with the recommended conditions of approval, the proposed project complies with the HPMC. With the recommended conditions of approval, all of the required findings in support of a Conditional Use Permit and Development Permit can be made as discussed in the attached resolution. Therefore, staff recommends approval of the request to allow the development of a new automated drive-thru car wash with vending machines at 3100 Florence Avenue.
EXHIBITS:
A: PC Resolution No. 2020-04
B: Building & Safety Division Conditions of Approval
C: Public Works Department Conditions of Approval
D: Business Operational Plan
E: Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
F: Transportation Impact Analysis
G: Noise Impact Analysis
H: Site Photographs
I: Project Plans received May 11, 2022
1 | P a g e
CITY OF HUNTINGTON PARK
FLORENCE CAR WASH PROJECT
Initial Study
Prepared by:
City of Huntington Park
6550 Miles Avenue
Huntington Park, CA 90255
Contact:
Steve Forster
Director of Community Development
APRIL 2022
2 | P a g e
INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Project Title: Florence Car Wash
Project Location: The Project site occupies approximately 0.876 acres within two Assessor’s parcels in the southerly portion of the City of Huntington Park. The addresses/Assessor Parcel Numbers of the Project site are as follows:
• 3100 Florence Avenue, Huntington Park, CA 90255
• APNs 6212-001-060 and 6212-001-061
The City of Huntington Park is bordered to the north by the cities of Vernon and Maywood, to the south by the City of South Gate and unincorporated Los Angeles, to the east by the cities of Cudahy, Bell, and Maywood; and, to the west by the City of Los Angeles and unincorporated Los Angeles County. A regional map with the City identified is provided as Exhibit 1. A map of the City is provided as Exhibit 2. The Project site is shown in Exhibit 3. 3 | P a g e
EXHIBIT 1
REGIONAL MAP
Source: Huntington Park’s General Plan
4 | P a g e
EXHIBIT 2
CITY OF HUNTINGTON PARK
Source: Huntington Park General Plan
5 | P a g e
EXHIBIT 3
PROJECT SITE LOCATION
Source: Google
6 | P a g e
EXHIBIT 4
PROJECT SITE PLAN
7 | P a g e
Project Description
LeedcoEngineers, Inc., on behalf of the property owner, Moogun Investment, LLC, submitted an application for a Conditional Use Permit and Development Permit to develop and operate a new automated drive-thru car wash, including vending machines, at 3100 Florence Avenue.
The following development work is proposed:
• Demolish the existing 11,718 square foot office building and remove all of the existing site improvements including all parking lot paving, trash enclosure, equipment cabinets, parking lot planters, all existing property line walls, and all existing vegetation including trees. • Construct a 4,969 square foot car wash building with related development including o Four vacuum canopies totaling 3,963 square feet and one 192 square foot paystation canopy
o 192 square foot vacuum pump enclosure and other utility structures o 34 parking space parking area including drive aisles, queuing and exit lanes o Stormwater infiltration system
o Wastewater clarifier system and associated water recycling system o Property line walls and freestanding pole sign
o Approximately 7,498 square feet of landscaped area
• Construct the following improvements in the public right-of-way:
o Remove existing driveway at west end of site
o Widen existing driveway at Mission Place intersection o Install new right-turn-exit-only driveway near east end of site o Remove street tree and relocate existing tree well to accommodate new driveway o Install new fire hydrant
Project development is anticipated to begin in March 2023, and operational by 2024.
The site is zoned General Commercial (CG) and is designated General Commercial in the General Plan.
The site is bounded by Florence Avenue to the north (with commercial, religious, and residential use beyond), commercial properties to the east and west, and residential properties to the south.
The Project Site Plan is depicted in Exhibit 4 (on previous page). 8 | P a g e
Project Applicant: Leedco Engineers, Inc.
Property Owner: Moogun Investment, LLC
Contact Person: Steve Forster
Director of Community Development
City of Huntington Park
6550 Miles Avenue
Huntington Park, California 90255
(323) 584-6318
This Initial Study has been prepared to identify and assess anticipated environmental impacts of the Project described above. The document incorporates information relevant to the analyses contained in the City of Huntington Park General Plan, Huntington Park General Plan Environmental Impact Report, Project-related technical studies, and the Project Application/Plans (Project Plans) noted in the Sources Section of this document to address in detail the effects or impacts associated with Project development (demolition; grading; construction; painting; finishing) and operation. The Initial Study is a public document used by the decision-making lead agency to determine whether a project may have a significant effect on the environment. If the lead agency finds substantial evidence that any aspect of the project, either individually or cumulatively, may have a significant effect on the environment, regardless of whether the overall effect of the project is adverse or beneficial, the lead agency is required to prepare an Environmental Impact Report. If the lead agency finds no substantial evidence the project or any of its aspects may cause a significant effect on the environment, a Negative Declaration shall be prepared. If the lead agency recognizes the Project may have a significant impact on the environment, but that by incorporating specific mitigation measures to which the Project proponent has agreed in advance the impact will be reduced to a less than significant effect, a Mitigated Negative Declaration shall be prepared. In reviewing site-specific information provided for the Project, the City of Huntington Park has analyzed potential environmental impacts created by this project and a Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared pursuant to the provisions of CEQA.
Existing Site Conditions
The site is developed with an existing approximately 11,718 square foot two-story office building built in 1980 (per LA County Assessor) and a related parking lot with access from Florence Avenue. The office building is in a deteriorated condition. The site is bounded by Florence Avenue to the north (with commercial, religious, and residential use beyond), commercial properties to the east and west, and residential properties to the south.
Project Objectives
The Project Objectives are as follows:
• To provide an automated car wash service to Huntington Park and the surrounding communities. This car wash is responding to the local need for an inexpensive car wash with a high degree of self-service (self-serve vacuum stalls) which is not provided elsewhere nearby.
9 | P a g e
• To redevelop a deteriorated commercially-zoned site with a viable commercial retail service.
• To develop the Project in a way that will enhance the quality of life in Huntington Park.
Project Approvals
Project development would require the City’s prior discretionary approval of a Conditional Use Permit and Development Permit, as well as demolition permit, grading permit, encroachment permit, and building permit. Project operation would require Certificates of Occupancy for each building granted by the City of Huntington Park.
Regulatory Setting
State
The State of California has created a set of legislation, executive orders, policies and programs intended to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. California can draw on substantial scientific research conducted by experts at various state universities and research institutions. More than a decade of concerted research has demonstrated to scientists that early signs of climate change already are evident in California – demonstrated in increased average temperatures, changes in temperature extremes, reduced Sierra Nevada snowpack, sea level rise, and ecological shifts.
Many of such changes are accelerating. Generally, research indicates California should expect overall hotter and drier conditions, increased average temperatures, rising sea-levels, and increasing intensity of extreme weather events such as heatwaves, wildfires, droughts and floods.
The California Climate Action Team and the Air Resources Board have developed several reports to achieve the Governor’s greenhouse gas targets. Reliance on achieving the targets is based on voluntary actions of California businesses, local governments and community groups, and on State incentive and regulatory programs. These include the Climate Action Team’s 2010 “Report to Governor Schwarzenegger and the Legislature,” the Air Resource Board’s 2007 “Expanded list of Early Action Measures to Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions in California,” and the Air Resources Board’s “First Update to the Climate Change Scoping Plan: Building on the Framework Pursuant to AB 32, the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006.” The reports identify strategies to reduce California’s emissions to levels proposed in Executive Order S-3-05 and Assembly Bill 32 that are applicable to the proposed project. The Scoping Plan adopted in 2008 and updated in 2014 is the most recent document.
Regional
Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) Connect SoCal (Proposed Final) Connect SoCal will serve as SCAG’s 2020-2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy. Its core vision is to build upon and expand land use and transportation strategies established over several previous planning cycles to increase mobility options and to achieve a more sustainable growth pattern in Southern California. Connect SoCal establishes a path toward a more mobile, sustainable and prosperous region by making key connections such as the following: between transportation networks; between planning strategies; and, between people whose collaboration can make plans a reality. Connect SoCal is developed with input from a wide range of stakeholders in Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino, Riverside, Ventura and Imperial counties.
10 | P a g e
After 2012, transportation system performance planning and monitoring became a Federal mandate. The 2015 FST Act further solidified this commitment to a national performance management and reporting system. SCAG has been using quantitative performance in its evaluations.
Connect SoCal includes new initiatives to close the gap to reach the State’s greenhouse gas emissions reduction goals at the intersection of land use, transportation and technology.
SCAG Regional Transportation Plan (RTP)
Federal law requires SCAG to prepare and update a long-range RTP that must include (among other things) the following:
• Identification of transportation facilities such as major roadways, transit, intermodal facilities and connectors that function as an integrated metropolitan system over at least a 20-year forecast period;
• A financial plan that demonstrates how the RTP can be implemented with “reasonably available” resources and additional financial approaches; • Strategies to improve existing facilities and relieve vehicular congestion and maximize safety and mobility of people and goods; and,
• Environmental mitigation activities.
Pursuant to the federal Clean Air Act, the SCAG RTP is required to meet all Federal transportation conformity requirements, including regional emissions analysis, financial constraint, timely implementation of transportation control measures, and interagency consultation and public involvement.
SCAG Regional Comprehensive Plan (RCP)
The SCAG Regional Comprehensive Plan is a regional advisory plan that addresses a number of important regional issues including housing, traffic, transportation, water, and air quality. The RCP serves as an advisory document for local jurisdictions and other governmental agencies in Southern California. The RCP is designed to promote resource conservation, economic vitality, and a high quality of life and, in so doing, identifies voluntary best practices to approach growth and infrastructure challenges in an integrated and comprehensive manner.
City of Huntington Park
City of Huntington Park General Plan
The City of Huntington Park General Plan serves as a long-range comprehensive plan that will regulate land uses and development in the City for the next 10-20 years. The General Plan is comprehensive because it addresses a wide range of municipal issues that range from the City’s physical development, provision of services, and identification of key issues that must be considered in future land use planning. The General Plan contains the following elements, all of which contain policies and programs to guide future development in Huntington Park. 11 | P a g e
Land Use and Community Development Element – The Land Use and Compatibility Element indicates general location and distribution of existing and permitted land uses in the City and considers issues pertaining to urban design and economic development.
Mobility and Circulation Element – The Mobility and Circulation Element indicates general location and extent of existing and proposed roadway improvements and provides standards for roadway design and Level of Service standards.
Resource Management Element – The Resource Management Element meets State-mandated requirements for conservation and open space elements by providing for the conservation, development and use of natural resources and addresses air quality, water quality, historic resources, parks and recreation.
Health and Safety Element – The Health and Safety Element provides for protection of the community from a variety of man-made and natural hazards, and addresses environmental hazards and noise.
Housing Element – The Housing Element evaluates existing and projected housing needs of the City and establishes policies and programs that will be effective in the preservation, improvement and development of housing that will accommodate Huntington Park’s future housing needs.
A listing of City of Huntington Park General Plan Policies relevant to Project development and an assessment of Project consistency with those Policies is contained at the end of this Initial Study.
City of Huntington Park Zoning Ordinance
The City Zoning Regulations are the primary implementation mechanism for the City General Plan Land Use Element and control development in the City by designating areas where specific land uses are allowed that are compatible with the Land Use Element. The City Zoning Regulations consist of two primary components - - the Zoning Ordinance and the Zoning Map. The Zoning Ordinance is comprised of detailed development standards, and includes lists of permitted and conditional uses and various development standards. The Huntington Park Zoning Map depicts the following zoning for the Project site: CG (Commercial General).
EXHIBIT 5: PROJECT NEIGHBORHOOD ZONING MAP
12 | P a g e
Initial Study Checklist
Project development would require the City’s prior discretionary approval of a Conditional Use Permit and Development Permit, as well as demolition permit, grading permit, encroachment permit, and building permit. Project operation would require Certificates of Occupancy for each building granted by the City of Huntington Park. In addition, City adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and approval by outside public agencies will be required.
As part of the City of Huntington Park discretionary permitting process for the Project, the City has determined an Initial Study shall be prepared to determine whether any impacts resulting from Project development and/or operation would be considered potentially significant. Where the Initial Study concludes there is no substantial evidence the project could have a significant effect on the environment, a Negative Declaration (or a Mitigated Negative Declaration) is required. If the Initial Study concludes there is substantial evidence the Project could have a significant effect on the environment, and Mitigation Measures either are unavailable or have not been agreed to by the Applicant, then an EIR is required.
The Initial Study Checklist recommended in the CEQA Guidelines is used to determine potential impacts of the Project on the physical environment. The Checklist provides a list of questions concerning a comprehensive array of environmental issue areas potentially affected by the Project. Explanations to answers are provided in a discussion for each section of questions, as follows:
• A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A “No Impact” answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the Project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on Project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the Project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a Projectspecific screening analysis). • All answers must consider the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as Project level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts.
• “Potentially Significant Impact” is appropriate if there is substantial evidence an effect is significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required.
• “Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated” applies where incorporation of Mitigation Measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the Mitigation Measures and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level • “Less Than Significant Impact” applies where the impact does not require mitigation or result in a substantial or potentially substantial change of any physical conditions within the area affected by the Project.
14 | P a g e
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
SECTION 1 – AESTHETICS
The discussion and analysis in this section is derived from information contained in the following: City of Huntington Park General Plan: City of Huntington Park Municipal Code; Blodgett Baylosis Environmental Planning, “Draft Environmental Impact Report: City of Huntington Park 2030 Comprehensive General Plan Update – Huntington Park, California” (October 12, 2017); and, the Project application/plans.
1.1 Setting
The site is developed with an existing approximately 11,718 square foot two-story office building built in 1980 (per LA County Assessor) and a related parking lot with access from Florence Avenue. The office building is in a deteriorated condition. The site is bounded by Florence Avenue to the north (with commercial, religious, and residential use beyond), commercial properties to the east and west, and residential properties to the south. (Reference Photographs 1 – 4).
Photo 1: View from the NEC of Florence Ave./Mission Pl. facing the existing site office building. 15 | P a g e
Photo 2: View from the project site facing east toward the adjacent shopping center.
Photo 3: View from the project site facing south toward the adjacent residential neighborhood. 16 | P a g e
Photo 4: View from the project site facing NW toward the Florence Ave./Mission Pl. intersection, St.
Mathias Catholic Church, and shopping center.
17 | P a g e
1.2 Aesthetics Impacts/Thresholds of Significance
Environmental Issue
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a
scenic vista? X
b) Substantially damage scenic
resources, including, but not limited to,
trees, rock outcroppings, and historic
buildings within a state scenic
highway?
X
c) Substantially degrade the existing
visual character or quality of the site
and its surroundings?
X
d) Create a new source of substantial
light or glare, which would adversely
affect day or nighttime views in the
area?
X
1.3 Discussion of CEQA Checklist Answers
a) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? NO IMPACT.
The City of Huntington Park has no significant scenic vistas in the Project area and no designated or proposed scenic routes. The project site is developed with an existing approximately 11,718 square foot two-story office building built in 1980 (per LA County Assessor) and a related parking lot with access from Florence Avenue. The office building is in a deteriorated condition. The site is bounded by Florence Avenue to the north (with commercial, religious, and residential use beyond), commercial properties to the east and west, and residential properties to the south. Project development will be comprised of the following:
• Demolish the existing 11,718 square foot office building and remove all of the existing site improvements including all parking lot paving, trash enclosure, equipment cabinets, parking lot planters, all existing property line walls, and all existing vegetation including trees. • Construct a 4,969 square foot car wash building with related development including o Four vacuum canopies totaling 3,963 square feet and one 192 square foot paystation canopy
o 192 square foot vacuum pump enclosure and other utility structures o 34 parking space parking area including drive aisles, queuing and exit lanes o Stormwater infiltration system
o Wastewater clarifier system and associated water recycling system o Property line walls and freestanding pole sign
18 | P a g e
o Approximately 7,498 square feet of landscaped area
• Construct the following improvements in the public right-of-way:
o Remove existing driveway at west end of site
o Widen existing driveway at Mission Place intersection o Install new right-turn-exit-only driveway near east end of site o Remove street tree and relocate existing tree well to accommodate new driveway o Install new fire hydrant
Project development will comply with all City-required development standards and undergo a design review by the Planning Commission as part of the Development Permit review process. The development of the project site with the proposed car wash will improve the aesthetic character of the site. No impact will result from Project development. b) Would the project substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? NO IMPACT.
The project site is developed with an existing approximately 11,718 square foot two-story office building built in 1980 (per LA County Assessor) and a related parking lot with access from Florence Avenue. The office building is in a deteriorated condition. No scenic resources exist on the Project site. Although some ornamental landscaping exists within the parking area and along the Florence Avenue perimeter of the Project site, the entire Project site does not contain any protected trees, historic buildings or rock outcroppings that would be considered scenic resources. No such resources are identified in the City General Plan. There are no scenic vistas or scenic resources on or near the Project site that Project development could adversely affect. Therefore, Project development and operation would not result in a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista and would not substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway. No impact would result from Project development or operation.
c) Would the project substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings?
LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT.
The project site is developed with an existing approximately 11,718 square foot two-story office building built in 1980 (per LA County Assessor) and a related parking lot with access from Florence Avenue. The office building is in a deteriorated condition. As indicated in the Project Plans elevations that follow, the Project buildings will provide a substantial positive upgrade to the aesthetics of the Project site. In addition, approximately 20% of the site will be landscaped with trees and vegetation as required by the Huntington Park Municipal Code, a substantial increase from existing landscape coverage. Reference the Photographs of the Project site depicted above and the Project Plan Exhibits that follow. 19 | P a g e
North Elevation
West Elevation
East Elevation
20 | P a g e
Project development would involve the following:
• Demolish the existing 11,718 square foot office building and remove all of the existing site improvements including all parking lot paving, trash enclosure, equipment cabinets, parking lot planters, all existing property line walls, and all existing vegetation including trees. • Construct a 4,969 square foot car wash building with related development including o Four vacuum canopies totaling 3,963 square feet and one 192 square foot paystation canopy
o 192 square foot vacuum pump enclosure and other utility structures o 34 parking space parking area including drive aisles, queuing and exit lanes o Stormwater infiltration system
o Wastewater clarifier system and associated water recycling system o Property line walls and freestanding pole sign
o Approximately 7,498 square feet of landscaped area
• Construct the following improvements in the public right-of-way:
o Remove existing driveway at west end of site
o Widen existing driveway at Mission Place intersection o Install new right-turn-exit-only driveway near east end of site o Remove street tree and relocate existing tree well to accommodate new driveway o Install new fire hydrant
The visual character of the Project site would be substantially improved because of the development of the car wash. A temporary change in visual character would result from the presence of construction equipment and material, some soil stockpiles, and construction vehicles. The visual character of Project development activities at the Project site would be temporary, short-term, and insubstantial. Project development will comply with all City-required development standards pertaining to site and perimeter landscaping.
The resulting level of impact from Project development and operation would be less than significant.
d) Would the project create a new source of substantial light or glare, which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT.
Project development and operation would entail installation of new structural lighting, security lighting, and parking lot lighting on the Project site. All Project lighting will be confined to illumination of the Project site and consist of shielded light sources as described in the Project plans. The submitted photometric plan shows a maximum intensity of approximately 16 foot-candles on the site, as it will need to be well-lighted at night, but the south property line adjacent to the residential back yards ranges from 0.1 to
0.5 foot-candles, and most of the other property lines are within a similar range.
Furthermore, the proposed structures will be finished with non-reflective materials.
Therefore, the resultant level of impact would be less than significant. 21 | P a g e
SECTION 2 – AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES
The discussion and analysis in this section is derived from information contained in the following: City of Huntington Park General Plan; City of Huntington Park Municipal Code; Blodgett Baylosis Environmental Planning, “Draft Environmental Impact Report: City of Huntington Park 2030 Comprehensive General Plan Update – Huntington Park, California” (October 12, 2017); California Department of Conservation Farmland Mapping Program; and, the Project plans.
2.1 Setting
The Project site is located within a completely urbanized area. The site is bounded by Florence Avenue to the north (with commercial, religious, and residential use beyond), commercial properties to the east and west, and residential properties to the south. No agricultural uses or forestry uses are located on the Project site or in the Project vicinity. The Project site is not zoned for agricultural uses.
2.2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources Impacts/Thresholds for Analysis In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects. Lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state’s inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project; and forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board. Would the project:
Environmental Issue
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique
Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide
Importance (Farmland), as shown on
the maps prepared pursuant to the
Farmland Mapping and Monitoring
Program of the California Resources
Agency, to non-agricultural use?
X
b) Conflict with existing zoning for
agricultural use, or a Williamson Act
contract?
X
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or
cause rezoning of, forest land (as
defined in Public Resources Code
section 12220(g), timberland (as
defined by Public Resources Code
Section 4526), or timberland zoned
X
22 | P a g e
Timberland Production (as defined by
Government Code section 51104(g))?
d) Result in the loss of forest land or
conversion of forest land to non-forest
use?
X
e) Involve other changes in the existing
environment which, due to their location
or nature, could result in conversion of
Farmland, to non-agricultural use or
conversion of forest land to non-forest
use?
X
2.3 Discussion of CEQA Checklist Answers
a-e) Would the project convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use?
Would the project conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract?
Would the project conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code Section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g))?
Would the project result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
Would the project involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
NO IMPACT.
No portions of the Project area or the Project vicinity contain agricultural resources or prime farmland, or are State-designated Farmland, subject to Williamson Act contractual provisions, or support forest land or forest resources. The Huntington Park General Plan Land Use Element does not designate any land within the City as Agricultural; the Project area is not zoned for Agricultural purposes. Project development thereby would not result in the loss of forest land or result in the conversion of farmland or conflict with any land zoned for forest land. No impact would result from Project development and operation. 23 | P a g e
SECTION 3 – AIR QUALITY
The discussion and analysis in this section is derived from information contained in the following: City of Huntington Park General Plan: City of Huntington Park Municipal Code; Blodgett Baylosis Environmental Planning, “Draft Environmental Impact Report: City of Huntington Park 2030 Comprehensive General Plan Update – Huntington Park, California” (October 12, 2017); and, the Project plans.
3.1 Setting
South Coast Air Basin (SCAB)
The Project site is located within the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB) under the jurisdiction of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). The SCAB is a 6,745 square mile sub-region of the SCAQMD and includes portions of Los Angeles, Riverside and San Bernardino Counties, and all of Orange County. The larger SCAQMD district boundary includes 10,743 square miles. The SCAB is bounded by the Pacific Ocean to the west and the San Gabriel, San Bernardino and San Jacinto Mountains to the north and east. The Los Angeles County portion of the Mojave Desert Air Basin is bounded by the San Gabriel Mountains to the south and west, the Los Angeles/Kern County border to the north, and the Los Angeles/San Bernardino County border to the east.
The SCAQMD was created by the 1977 Lewis-Presley Air Quality Management Act, which merged four county air pollution control bodies into one regional district. Under the Act, the SCAQMD is responsible for bringing air quality in areas under its jurisdiction into conformity with Federal and State air quality standards.
California State law requires SCAQMD to prepare a plan for air quality improvement for pollutants for which SCAB is in “nonattainment.” SCAQMD has adopted an Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) that provides for attainment of State and federal air quality standards and updates the AQMP every three years. Each iteration of the AQMP has a 20- year horizon.
Regional Climate
Regional climate has a substantial influence on air quality in the SCAB. The temperature, wind, humidity, precipitation and amount of sunshine influence air quality. Average annual temperatures throughout the SCAB vary from the low-to-middle 60s (degrees Fahrenheit).
Although the climate of the SCAB can be characterized as semi-arid, the air near the land surface is quite moist on most days due to the presence of a marine layer. Humidity restricts visibility in the SCAB, and the conversion of sulfur dioxide to sulfates is heightened in air with high relative humidity. The marine layer provides an environment for that conversion process, especially during the spring and summer months. Annual average relative humidity within the SCAB is 71 percent along the coast and 59 percent inland. More than 90 percent of the SCAB’s rainfall occurs from November through April. Annual average rainfall varies from approximately nine inches in Riverside to fourteen inches in downtown Los Angeles.
The importance of wind to air pollution is considerable. Direction and speed of wind determines the horizontal dispersion and transport of air pollutants. Suring late autumn to early spring rainy season, the SCAB is subjected to wind flows associated with traveling storms moving through the region from the northwest. This period also brings several periods 24 | P a g e
of strong, dry offshore winds, locally termed “Santa Anas” each year. During the dry season, which coincides with the months of maximum photochemical smog concentrations, the wind flow is bimodal, typified by a daytime onshore sea breeze and a nighttime offshore drainage wind.
In the SCAB, there are two distinct temperature inversion structures that control vertical mixing of air pollution. During summer, warm high-pressure descending (subsiding) air is undercut by a shallow layer of cool marine air. The boundary between these two layers of air is a persistent marine subsidence/inversion. This boundary prevents vertical mixing that effectively acts as an impervious lid to pollutants over the entire SCAB.
A second inversion-type forms in conjunction with the drainage of cool air off the surrounding mountains at night followed by the seaward drift of this pool of cool air. The top of this layer forms a sharp boundary with the warmer air aloft and creates nocturnal radiation inversions.
These inversions occur primarily in winter and typically are only a few hundred feet above mean sea level. These inversions effectively trap pollutants such as Oxides of Nitrogen (NOx) and Carbon Monoxide (CO) from vehicles, as the pool of cool air drafts seaward. Winter therefore is a period of high levels of primary pollutants along the coastline.
Criteria Pollutants/Health Effects of Air Pollutants
The proposed project site lies within the air basin managed by the SCAQMD. National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) have been established for the following criteria pollutants: carbon monoxide (CO), ozone, sulfur dioxide (SO2), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), inhalable particulate matter (PM10), fine particulate matter (PM2.5), and lead (Pb). The CAAQS also set standards for sulfates, hydrogen sulfide, and visibility.
Both the state and federal government have been empowered by the Clean Air Act to regulate emissions of airborne pollutants. The federal agency responsible is the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), while the state agency responsible is the California EPA (CalEPA).
At the local level, air pollutants are regulated by both multi-county and county-level Air Pollution Control Districts (APCDs). There are 15 air basins across California. The Project site is located in the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD).
Federal and state standards have been established for six criteria pollutants, including ozone (O3), carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), sulfur dioxide (SO2), particulates less than 10 and 2.5 microns in diameter (PM10 and PM2.5), and lead (Pb). California air quality standards are identical to or stricter than federal standards for all criteria pollutants.
Assembly Bill (AB) 1493, requiring the development and adoption of regulations to achieve “the maximum feasible reduction of greenhouse gases” emitted by noncommercial passenger vehicles, light-duty trucks, and other vehicles used primarily for personal transportation in the state was signed into law in September 2002.
AB 32, the “California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006,” requires the State’s global warming emissions to be reduced to 1990 levels by 2020 (essentially a 25% reduction below 2005 emission levels – the same requirement as under S-3-05), and the adoption of rules and regulations to achieve the maximum technologically feasible and cost-effective GHG emissions reductions.
25 | P a g e
Senate Bill (SB) 375 requires the inclusion of sustainable communities’ strategies (SCS) in regional transportation plans (RTPs) for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions. The bill requires ARB to set regional targets for the purpose of reducing greenhouse gas emissions from passenger vehicles, for 2020 and 2035.
Carbon Monoxide (CO)
Carbon Monoxide (CO) is a colorless, odorless gas produced by the incomplete combustion of carbon-containing fuels such as gasoline or wood. CO concentrations tend to be highest during winter morning, when little to no wind and surface-based inversions trap the pollutant at ground levels. Motor vehicles operating at slow speeds are the primary source of CO in the SCAB. Thereby, the highest ambient CO concentrations generally are found near congested transportation corridors and intersections.
Individuals with a deficient blood supply to the heart are the most susceptible to adverse effects of CO exposure. Observed effects include earlier onset of chest pain with exercise, and electrocardiograph changes indicative of decreased oxygen supply to the heart. Inhaled CO has no direct toxic effect on the lungs but exerts its effect on tissues by interfering with oxygen transport and competing with oxygen to combine with hemoglobin present in the blood to form carboxyhemoglobin. Hence, conditions with an increased demand for oxygen supply can be adversely affected by exposure to CO. Individuals most at risk include fetuses, patients with diseases involving heart and blood vessels, and patients with chronic hypoxemia (oxygen deficiency) as seen at high altitudes. Recent studies have found increased risks for adverse birth outcomes with exposure to elevated CO levels, including pre-term births and heart abnormalities.
Sulfur Dioxide (SO2)
Sulfur Dioxide is a colorless, extremely irritating gas or liquid. It enters the atmosphere as a pollutant primarily as a result of burning high sulfur-content fuel oils and coal and from chemical processes occurring at chemical plants and refineries. When SO2 oxidizes in the atmosphere, it forms sulfates (SO4). Collectively, these pollutants are referred to as sulfur oxides (SOx).
A few minutes of exposure to low levels of Sulfur Dioxide can result in airway constriction in some asthmatics, all of whom are sensitive to its effects. In asthmatics, increase in resistance to air flow, as well as reduction in breathing capacity leading to severe breathing difficulties, are observed after acute exposure to Sulfur Dioxide. In contrast, healthy individuals do not exhibit similar acute responses even after exposure to higher concentrations of Sulfur Dioxide.
Some population-based studies indicate mortality and morbidity effects associated with fine particles show a similar association with ambient Sulfur Dioxide levels. In these studies, efforts to separate effects of Sulfur Dioxide from those of fine particles have not been successful. It is not clear whether the two pollutants act synergistically or one pollutant alone is the predominant factor.
Nitrogen Oxides (Oxides of Nitrogen, or NOx)
Nitrogen oxides consist of nitric oxide (NO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2) and nitrous oxide (N2O) and are formed when nitrogen (N2) combines with oxygen (O2). Their lifespan in the atmosphere ranges from one to seven days for nitric oxide and nitrogen dioxide, to 170 years for nitrous oxide. Nitrogen oxides typically are created during combustion processes and are 26 | P a g e
major contributors to smog formation and acid deposition. Nitrogen Dioxide is a criteria air pollutant and may result in numerous adverse health effects. Of the seven types of nitrogen oxide compounds, Nitrogen Dioxide, a yellowish-brown gas, is the most abundant in the atmosphere. As ambient concentrations of Nitrogen Dioxide are related to traffic density, commuters in heavy traffic may be exposed to higher concentrations of Nitrogen Dioxide than those indicated by regional monitoring stations.
Population-based studies suggest an increase in acute respiratory illness including infections and respiratory symptoms in children (not infants) is associated with long-term exposure to Nitrogen Dioxide at levels found in homes with gas stoves (which are higher than ambient levels found in Southern California). Increase in resistance to air flow and airway contraction is observed after short-term exposure to Nitrogen Dioxide in healthy subjects. Larger decreases in lung functions are observed in individuals with asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (e.g., chronic bronchitis, emphysema) than in healthy individuals, indicating a greater susceptibility of these sub-groups.
Ozone (O3)
Ozone is a highly reactive and unstable colorless and odorless gas formed when volatile organic compounds (VOC) and Nitrogen Oxides (which both are byproducts of internal combustion engine exhaust) undergo slow photochemical reactions in the presence of sunlight. Ozone concentrations generally are highest during summer months when direct sunlight, light wind and warm temperature conditions are favorable to formation of this pollutant.
Individuals exercising outdoors, children, and people with preexisting lung disease are considered to be the most susceptible sub-groups for Ozone effects. Short-term exposure (lasting for a few hours) to ozone at levels typically observed in Southern California can result in breathing pattern changes, reduction of breathing capacity, increased susceptibility to infections, inflammation of the lung tissue, and some immunological changes. Elevated ozone levels are associated with increased school absences, with increases in daily hospital admission rates, and mortality. An increased risk for asthma has been found in children who participate in multiple outdoor sports and live in communities with high ozone levels. Animal studies suggest exposure to a combination of pollutants that includes ozone may be more toxic than exposure to ozone alone. Although lung volume and resistance changes observed after a single exposure diminish with repeated exposures, biochemical and cellular changes appear to persist, which can lead to subsequent lung structural changes.
Particulate Matter less than 10 microns in diameter (PM10) This pollutant is a major air pollutant consisting of tiny solid or liquid particles of soot, dust, smoke, fumes and aerosols. Particulate matter pollution is a major cause of reduced visibility caused by the scattering of light and consequently a significant reduction in air clarity. The size of the particles of this criteria pollutant allows the particles to easily enter the lungs where they may be deposited, resulting in adverse health effects.
Particulate Matter less than 2.5 microns in diameter (PM2.5) These particles comprising this criteria pollutant are formed in the atmosphere from primary gaseous emissions that include sulfates formed from Sulfur Dioxide release from power plants and industrial facilities and nitrates that are formed from Nitrogen Oxides release from power 27 | P a g e
plants, automobiles and other types of combustion sources. The chemical composition of fine particles highly depends on location, time of year, and weather conditions.
A consistent correlation between elevated ambient fine Particulate Matter (PM10 and PM2.5) levels and an increase in mortality rates, respiratory infections, number and severity of asthma attacks and the number of hospital admissions has been observed in different parts of the United States and various areas around the world. In recent years, some studies have reported an association between long-term exposure to air pollution dominated by fine particles and increased mortality, reduction in lifespan, and an increased mortality from lung cancer. Daily fluctuations in PM2.5 concentration levels also have been related to hospital admissions for acute respiratory conditions in children, to school and kindergarten absences, to a decrease in respiratory lung volumes in normal children, and to increased medication use in children and adults with asthma. Recent studies show lung function growth in children is reduced with long-term exposure to Particulate Matter. The elderly with pre-existing respiratory or cardiovascular disease and children appear to be more susceptible to effects of high levels of PM10 and PM2.5.
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC)
Volatile Organic Compounds are hydrocarbon compounds (any compound containing various combinations of hydrogen and carbon atoms) that exist in the ambient air. Volatile Organic Compounds contribute to the formation of smog through atmospheric photochemical reactions and/or may be toxic. Compounds of carbon (also known as organic compounds) have different levels of reactivity; that is, they do not react at the same speed or do not form ozone to the same extent when exposed to photochemical processes. These Compounds often have an odor. Some examples include gasoline, alcohol, and solvents used in paints.
Exceptions to the Volatile Organic Compounds designation include the following: Carbon Monoxide; Carbon Dioxide; Carbonic Acid; Metallic Carbides or Carbonates; and, Ammonium Carbonate. Volatile Organic Compounds are a criteria pollutant because they are a precursor to Ozone. The SCAQMD uses the terms VOC and ROG interchangeably.
Reactive Organic Gases (ROG)
Reactive Organic Gases are precursors in forming Ozone and consist of compounds containing methane, ethane, propane, butane, and longer chain hydrocarbons that typically are the result of some type of combustion or decomposition process. Smog is formed when Reactive Organic Gases and Nitrogen Oxides react in the presence of sunlight. Reactive Organic Gases are a precursor to Ozone.
Lead (Pb)
Lead is a heavy metal that is highly persistent in the environment. In the past, the primary source of lead in the air was emissions from vehicles burning leaded gasoline. As a result of removal of lead from gasoline, there have been no violations at any of the SCAQMD regular air monitoring stations since 1982. Major sources of lead emissions are ore and metals processing, particularly lead smelters, and piston-engine aircraft operating on leaded aviation gasoline. Other stationary sources include waste incinerators, utilities, and lead-acid battery manufacturers.
Fetuses, infants and children are more sensitive than others to adverse effects of Lead exposure. Exposure to low levels of Lead can adversely affect development and function of 28 | P a g e
the central nervous system, leading to learning disorders, distractibility, inability to follow simple commands, and lower intelligence quotient. In adults, increased Lead levels are associated with increased blood pressure. Lead poisoning can cause anemia, lethargy, seizures, and death although it appears there are no direct effects of Lead on the respiratory system. Lead can be stored in the bone from early age environmental exposure and elevated blood Lead levels can occur due to breakdown of bone tissue during pregnancy, hyperthyroidism (increased secretion of hormones from the thyroid gland) and osteoporosis (breakdown of bony tissue). Fetuses and breast-fed babies can be exposed to higher levels of Lead because of previous environmental Lead exposure of their mothers.
Odors
The science of odor as a health concern is still new. Offensive odors can potentially affect human health in several ways. Odorant compounds can irritate the eye, nose and throat, which can reduce respiratory volume. Also, studies have shown the Volatile Organic Compounds that cause odors can stimulate sensory nerves to cause neurochemical changes that might influence health by compromising the immune system. Furthermore, unpleasant odors can trigger memories or attitudes linked to unpleasant odors, causing cognitive and emotional effects such as stress.
Existing Air Quality
Existing air quality is measured at established SCAQMD air quality monitoring stations.
Monitored air quality is evaluated in the context of ambient air quality standards, which are the levels of air quality considered safe, with an adequate margin of safety, to protect the public health and welfare. Determination of whether a region’s air quality is healthful or unhealthful is determined by comparing contaminant levels in ambient air samples to State and Federal standards.
Air quality in a region is considered to be in attainment by the State if the measured ambient air pollutant levels for Ozone, Carbon Monoxide (except 8-hour Lake Tahoe), Sulfur Dioxide 1-Hour and 24-Hour), Nitrogen Dioxide, PM10 and PM2.5 are not to be exceeded. All others are not to be equaled or exceeded.
Regional Air Quality
The United States Environmental Protection Agency has established national ambient air quality standards for six of the most common air pollutants: Carbon Monoxide; Lead; Ozone; Particulate Matter – 10 Microns or less; Particulate Matter – 2.5 Microns or less; Nitrogen Dioxide; and, Sulfur Dioxide, all of which are criteria pollutants. The SCAQMD monitors levels of various criteria pollutants at 37 permanent monitoring stations and 5 single-pollutant source Lead air monitoring sites throughout the air district. In 2017, Federal and State ambient air quality standards were exceeded on one or more days for Ozone, PM10 and PM2.5 at most monitoring locations. No areas of the SCAB exceeded Federal or State standards for Nitrogen Dioxide, Sulfur Dioxide, Carbon Monoxide, Sulfates or Lead.
According to the “Ambient and Emission Trends of Toxic Air Contaminants in California” journal article prepared for the California Air Resources Board, between 1990 and 2012 ambient concentration and emission trends for the seven toxic air contaminants responsible for most of known cancer risk associated with airborne exposure in California have declined significantly. The toxic air contaminants include those derived from mobile sources (diesel 29 | P a g e
particulate matter, benzene and 1,3-butadiene), from stationary sources (perchloroethylene and hexavalent chromium), and from photochemical reactions of emitted volatile organic compounds (formaldehyde and acetaldehyde). Decline in ambient concentration and emission trends of these toxic air contaminants are a result of various regulations the California Air Resources Board has implemented to address cancer risk.
3.2 Air Quality Impacts/Thresholds for Analysis
Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management district or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project:
Environmental Issue
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation
of the applicable air quality plan? X
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?
X
c) Expose sensitive receptors to
substantial pollutant concentrations? X
d) Result in other emissions (such as those
leading to odors) adversely affecting a
substantial number of people?
X
The South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) has established quantitative thresholds for short-term (construction) emissions and long-term (operational) emissions for the following criteria pollutants: Ozone; Carbon Monoxide; Nitrogen Dioxide; Sulfur Dioxide; and Particulate Matters 10 and 2.5.
Projects in the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB) that generate construction-related (Project development) emissions that exceed any of the following emissions thresholds are considered to be significant under CEQA:
• 75 pounds per day of Reactive Organic Compounds;
• 100 pounds per day of Nitrogen Dioxide;
• 550 pounds per day of Carbon Monoxide;
• 150 pounds per day of PM10;
• 55 pounds per day of PM2.5; and,
• 150 pounds per day of Sulfur Oxides.
A project would have a significant effect on Air Quality if any of the following operational emissions thresholds for criteria pollutants are exceeded:
30 | P a g e
• 55 pounds per day of Reactive Organic Compounds;
• 55 pounds per day of Nitrogen Dioxide;
• 550 pounds per day of Carbon Monoxide;
• 150 pounds per day of PM10;
• 55 pounds per day of PM2.5; or,
• 150 pounds per day of Sulfur Oxides.
3.3 Discussion of CEQA Checklist Answers
a) Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan?
LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT WITH MITIGATION INCORPORATED.
The Project site is located within the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB) - - an area that includes more than 6,600 square miles within Los Angeles, non-desert portions of Los Angeles County, Riverside County, and San Bernardino County. SCAQMD’s Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) contains measures to improve regional air quality. The most recent AQMP was adopted in 2017 and was jointly prepared with the California Air Resources Board (CARB) and the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). The AQMP will assist SCAG to maintain focus on air quality impacts of major projects associated with goods movement, land use, energy efficiency, and other key components of growth. Key elements of the 2016 AQMP include enhancements to existing programs to meet the 24-hour PM2.5 Federal health standard and a proposed plan to reduce ground-level ozone. The primary criteria pollutants that remain non-attainment in the local area include PM2.5 and Ozone.
Specific criteria for determining project conformity with the AQMP is defined in Section 12.3 of the SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook. The Air Quality Handbook refers to the following criteria as a means to determine Project conformity with the AQMP. Consistency Criterion 1 refers to a proposed project’s potential for resulting in an increase in frequency or severity of an existing air quality violation or its potential for contributing to the continuation of an existing air quality violation. Consistency Criterion 2 refers to a proposed project’s potential for exceeding assumptions included in the AQMP or other regional growth projections relevant to AQMP implementation.
Emissions of pollutants such as fugitive dust that are generated during construction are generally highest near the construction site. Emissions from the construction phase of the project were estimated through the use of the CalEEMod Model (2020.4.0). It was assumed that heavy construction equipment would be operating at the site for eight hours per day, five days per week during project construction. In addition, it was assumed that, in accordance with the requirements of the SCAQMD Rule 403, fugitive dust controls would be utilized during construction, including watering of active sites a minimum of three times daily.
Tables 4.3.1 and 4.3.2 below provide summaries of the emission estimates for construction and operation of all proposed site improvements. These projected emissions assume standard measures are implemented to reduce emissions, as calculated with the CalEEMod Model, and are compared to the regional and localized significance thresholds. The localized significance thresholds are applicable only to on-site emissions and do not consider emissions occurring on roadways during travel to and from the site. 31 | P a g e
Table 4.3.1 below includes projected daily emissions for all steps of construction. These steps include: Demolition, Site Preparation, Grading, Building Construction, Paving, and Architectural Coatings. Note that projected emissions for all pollutants during construction are below both the SCAQMD’s Air Quality Significance Thresholds as well as the Localized Significance Thresholds, provided that mitigation is incorporated to reduce PM10 and PM2.5 to levels below the Localized Significance Thresholds. The Localized Significance Thresholds are specific to Huntington Park, located in Source Receptor Area [SRA] Zone 12, “South Central LA County,” as applied to a 1-acre project with receptors (residences) 25 meters or less from the project site boundary.
During construction, diesel-fired equipment will be operated and will result in the release of diesel particulate matter which is a listed carcinogen and toxic air contaminant in the State of California. The earthwork phase is the phase of construction in which the majority of dieselfired equipment will be used. Because this duration is very short it is expected that the release of diesel will not have a negative impact to surrounding receptors.
Construction of the project would be short-term and temporary. Thus, the emissions associated with construction would not result in a significant impact on the ambient air quality, provided that mitigation is incorporated. Because emissions are less than the significance levels with mitigation, they would not conflict or obstruct the implementation of the AQMP or applicable portions of the SIP.
Construction of the project would be short-term and temporary, therefore a cumulative increase in the surrounding emissions associated with the area would not result in a significant impact on the ambient air quality. In addition, because emissions are less than the significance levels with the incorporation of mitigation measures, they do not expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations.
Based on the above project analyst of the construction phase, the project construction phase will not conflict or obstruct the implementation of the AQMP or applicable portions of the SIP.
Impacts would be less than significant, provided that the following mitigation measures are incorporated into the project:
MITIIGATION MEASURE MM-AQ-1: All unpaved demolition, and construction areas shall be watered three times a day during excavation, grading and construction, and temporary dust covers shall be used to reduce dust emissions and meet South Coast Air Quality Management District Rule 403. Soil stabilizers also shall be used to control on-site fugitive dust. Water could reduce fugitive dust by as much as 60 percent.
MITIIGATION MEASURE MM-AQ-2: All materials transported off-site shall either be sufficiently watered or securely covered to prevent excessive amounts of dust and spillage on adjacent streets during transport.
MITIIGATION MEASURE MM-AQ-3: All clearing, earthmoving, or excavation activities shall be discontinued during periods of high winds (i.e. greater than 15 miles per hour) to prevent excessive amounts of fugitive dust.
MITIIGATION MEASURE MM-AQ-4: Contractors shall adhere to all pertinent South Coast Air Quality Management District protocols regarding grading, site preparation, and construction activities.
32 | P a g e
Table 4.3.1
Estimated Construction Emissions
Estimated Construction Emissions (Mitigated)
Construction Phase
Total Daily Maximum Pollutant Emissions (lbs/day)
NOx SOx CO ROG (VOC) PM10 PM2.5
Demolition 7.3276 0.0162 8.0507 0.7682 0.9993 0.4528
Site Preparation 6.9464 0.0102 4.1491 0.5978 0.5204 0.2742 Grading 13.1977 0.0192 6.5066 1.1420 2.8128 1.5444
Building
Construction
7.3523 0.0138 7.7020 0.7406 0.5482 0.3923
Building
Construction
6.6766 0.0137 7.5997 0.6789 0.4948 0.3431
Paving 5.5466 0.0130 7.6486 0.6718 0.4666 0.3010
Architectural
Coating
1.3077 3.1700e0031.8809 70.6504 0.0933 0.0769
Peak Daily 13.1977 0.0192 8.0507 70.6504 2.8128 1.5444
SCAQMD
Thresholds 100 150 550 75 150 55
Localized
Significance
Thresholds
46 231 4 3
Significant
Emissions? No
No No No No No
The main operational impacts associated with the project would be impacts associated with traffic.
Minor impacts would be associated with energy use and area sources.
To address whether the project would result in emissions that would violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or proposed air quality violation, the emissions associated with project-generated traffic and area sources were compared with the SCAQMD’s quantitative significance criteria. Default trip generation rates in the CalEEMod Model were used as the CalEEMod trip generation rate is very close to the rate used by the Traffic Impact Analysis.
The CalEEMod Model contains emission factors from the EMFAC2017 model, which is the latest version of the Caltrans emission factor model for on-road traffic. Project-related traffic was assumed to be comprised of a mixture of vehicles in accordance with the CalEEMod Model default outputs for traffic. This assumption includes light duty autos and light duty trucks (i.e., small trucks, SUVs, and vans) as well as medium- and heavy-duty vehicles that may be traveling to the facility to make deliveries. Emission factors representing the default vehicle mix were used. Emissions associated with area sources (energy use and landscaping activities) were estimated using the default assumptions in the CalEEMod Model.
Table 4.3.2 below presents the results of the CalEEMod emission calculations in lbs/day for operations, as an annual average considering the Project’s design features, along with a comparison with the SCAQMD Air Quality Significance Thresholds for Operations. 33 | P a g e
Table 4.3.2
Estimated Operational Emissions
Estimated Operational Emissions
Source
Pollutant Emissions (lbs/day)
NOx SOx CO
ROG
(VOC) PM10 PM2.5
Area Sources 4.0000e005
0.0000 3.8700e0030.8493 1.0000e0051.0000e005
Energy Sources 0.1833 1.1000e003
0.1540 0.0202 0.0139 0.0139
Mobile Sources 1.5460 0.0249 13.1308 1.8186 2.5629 0.6956 Peak Daily 1.7293 0.0260 13.2887 2.6880 2.5768 0.7095
SCAQMD Thresholds 55 150 550 55 150 55
Significant? No No No No No No
Based on the estimates of the emissions associated with project operations, the emissions are below the significance criteria. In addition, because the emissions are less than the significance levels, they would not conflict or obstruct the implementation of the AQMP or applicable portions of the SIP. It should be noted that the emissions from vehicles are projected to decrease with time due to phase-out of older, more polluting vehicles and increasingly stringent emissions standards.
Projects involving traffic impacts may result in the formation of locally high concentrations of CO, known as CO “hot spots.” It is not anticipated that the project would have a significant impact on traffic in the area, and no intersections would degrade to unacceptable levels. The intersections in the project area would therefore operate at an acceptable LOS and would not experience CO “hot spots” because traffic congestion would not result. This has been confirmed in the traffic study for this project and development.
Drive-through businesses will produce localized emissions from idling vehicles. The 2008 EPA study, “Idling Vehicle Emissions for Passenger Cars, Light-Duty Trucks, and Heavy-Duty Trucks,” provided hourly emissions estimates for VOC (ROG), CO, and NOX. The study noted that emissions of particulates by light-duty vehicles are negligible. Assuming a heavy usage on a Saturday (11 vehicle average queue for 13 hours using the busiest comparable car wash studied in the Traffic Impact Analysis for the project), assuming 100% queuing time spent idling, and assuming a mix of 50% light duty passenger vehicles and 50% light duty trucks (pickups, minivans, SUVs), the project operation would produce on-site emissions from idling vehicles as noted in Table 4.3.3 (below). Emissions from idling vehicles do not exceed the localized thresholds, therefore the emissions from idling vehicles will be less than significant.
Table 4.3.3: Estimated Operational Emissions- Idling Vehicles Source
Pollutant Emissions (lbs/day)
NOx SOx CO
ROG
(VOC) PM10 PM2.5
Idling Vehicles 2.39 0.03 22.69 1.06 Negligible Negligible SCAQMD Localized
Thresholds 46 150 231 55 1 1
Significant? No No No No No No
34 | P a g e
In reviewing the Project data, location, and area a cumulative increase in the surrounding emissions associated with the area would not result in a significant impact on the ambient air quality. In addition, because emissions are less than the significance levels, they do not expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations.
Based on the above Project analysis of the operational phase, the Project will not conflict or obstruct the implementation of the AQMP or applicable portions of the SIP. Impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.
b) Would the project result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard?
LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT WITH MITIGATION INCORPORATED.
Pursuant to the Sierra Club v. Friant Ranch Supreme Court Ruling (Case No. S219783, December 24, 2018), which found on page 6 of the ruling that EIRs need to “makes a reasonable effort to substantively connect a project’s air quality impacts to likely health consequences.” Also, on page 24 of the ruling it states “The Court of Appeal identified several ways in which the EIR could have framed the analysis so as to adequately inform the public and decision makers of possible adverse health effects. The County could have, for example, identified the Project’s impact on the days of nonattainment per year.” The Air Basin has been designated by EPA for the national standards as a non-attainment area for O3, PM2.5, and partial non-attainment for lead. In addition, PM10 has been designated by the State as nonattainment. It should be noted that VOC and NOx are O3 precursors, as such they have been considered as non-attainment pollutants. According to the Final 2016 Air Quality Management Plan, prepared by SCAQMD, March 2017, in 2016 the total emissions of: VOC was 500 tons per year; NOx was 522 tons per year; SOx was 18 tons per year; and PM2.5 was 66 tons per year.
As shown above, although the Project could increase criteria pollutant emissions in the South Coast Air Basin, the Tables above show these to be nominal increases in the Basin-wide criteria pollutant emissions. As such, no increases in days of non-attainment are anticipated to occur from operation of the proposed project. Further, operation of the Project is not anticipated to result in a quantitative increase in premature deaths, asthma in children, days children will miss school, asthma-related emergency room visits, or an increase in acute bronchitis among children due to the criteria pollutants created by the Project.
Most construction impacts related to air quality are short-term in duration and therefore will not result in long-term adverse conditions. Construction Conformity construction activities will not last for more than 5 years at any one general location. Thereby, construction-related emissions do not need to be included in regional and Project-level conformity analysis, according to California regulations (40 CFR 93.123 C (5)). Contractors will be required to adhere to the following Standard Conditions, which will further reduce construction related emissions particularly in relation to fugitive dust. Mitigation Measures MM-AQ-1 through MMAQ-4 above will reduce this impact to a less than significant level. 35 | P a g e
c) Would the project expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?
LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT WITH MITIGATION INCORPORATED.
According to the SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook (Appendix 9, as amended 2017), sensitive receptors are land uses and/or activities that are especially sensitive to poor air quality and typically include homes, schools, playgrounds, hospitals, convalescent homes, and other facilities where children or the elderly may congregate. These population groups generally are more sensitive to poor air quality. The most significant receptors are the residences adjacent to the southern boundary of the project site. Additional sensitive receptors include St. Matthias Catholic School approximately 200 feet northwest of the project site, other nearby residences, Hope Elementary School about ¼ mile southeast of the project site, and Lucille Roybal-Allard Elementary School about ¼ mile northeast of the project site.
Based on the analysis in the sections above, Project development could result in a potentially significant short-term impact related to exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. Mitigation Measures MM-AQ-1 through MM-AQ-4 above will reduce this impact to a less than significant level.
d) Would the project result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people?
LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT WITH MITIGATION INCORPORATED.
According to the SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook (Appendix 9, as amended 2017), sensitive receptors are land uses and/or activities that are especially sensitive to poor air quality and typically include homes, schools, playgrounds, hospitals, convalescent homes, and other facilities where children or the elderly may congregate. These population groups generally are more sensitive to poor air quality. The most significant receptors are residents of homes on properties adjacent to the southern boundary of the project site. Construction activities would be of relatively short duration and would be confined to the project site itself.
Therefore, project development would result in a potentially significant short-term impact related to exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. Mitigation Measures MM-AQ-1 through MM-AQ-4 above will reduce this impact to a less than significant level.
36 | P a g e
SECTION 4 – BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
The discussion and analysis in this section is derived from information contained in the following: City of Huntington Park General Plan: City of Huntington Park Municipal Code; Blodgett Baylosis Environmental Planning, “Draft Environmental Impact Report: City of Huntington Park 2030 Comprehensive General Plan Update – Huntington Park, California” (October 12, 2017); and, the Project plans.
4.1 Setting
The site is developed with an existing approximately 11,718 square foot two-story office building built in 1980 (per LA County Assessor) and a related parking lot with access from Florence Avenue. The office building is in a deteriorated condition. The site is bounded by Florence Avenue to the north (with commercial, religious, and residential use beyond), commercial properties to the east and west, and residential properties to the south.
The only vegetation within the Project site consists of small shrubs and parking lot/periphery trees. The 0.876-acre Project site is bordered by fully developed commercial and residential properties and Florence Avenue.
Existing Regulations
Federal Endangered Species Act – The United States Congress passed the Federal Endangered Species Act (FESA) in 1973 to protect those species that are endangered or threatened with extinction. The FESA prohibits the taking of endangered or threatened wildlife species. A “take” is defined as harassing, harming (including significantly modifying or degrading habitat), pursuing, hunting, trapping, capturing, or collecting wildlife species, or any attempt to engage in such conduct.
United States Army Corps of Engineers, Section 404 – The Section 404 Guidelines prohibit issuance of wetland permits for projects that would jeopardize the existence of threatened or endangered wildlife or plant species. The United States Army Corps of Engineers must consult with the United States Fish and Wildlife Service and National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration when threatened or endangered species may be affected by a proposed project to determine whether issuance of Section 404 permit would jeopardize the species.
Migratory Bird Treaty Act – Raptors, migratory birds and other avian species are protected by a number of State and Federal laws. The Federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act prohibits possessing or trading of migratory birds except in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Secretary of the Interior.
California Endangered Species Act – The State of California enacted the California Endangered Species Act (CESA) in 1984. The CESA is similar to the FESA but pertains to State-listed endangered and threatened species. CESA directs agencies to consult with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife on projects or actions that could affect listed species and directs the California Department of Fish and Wildlife to determine whether jeopardy would occur, and allows the Agency to identify “reasonable and prudent alternatives” to the project consistent with conserving the species.
City of Huntington Park Municipal Code – Title 7, Chapter – Street Trees, Title 7 (Public Works) Chapter 5 – Street Trees of the City of Huntington Park Municipal Code serves as the City’s “Tree Ordinance” – The Ordinance was established with the intent on aiding 37 | P a g e
in the improvement and beautification of the City’s commercial and business areas, most notably Pacific Boulevard. The Ordinance also provides protection for trees located in the public right-of-way.
4.2 Impacts/Thresholds for Analysis
Environmental Issue
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Have a substantial adverse effect,
either directly or through habitat
modifications, on any species
identified as a candidate, sensitive,
or special status species in local or
regional plans, policies or
regulations, or by the California
Department of Fish and Game or
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
X
b) Have a substantial adverse effect
on any riparian habitat or other
sensitive natural community
identified in local or regional plans,
policies or regulations or by the
California Department of Fish and
Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service?
X
c) Have a substantial adverse effect
on federally protected wetlands
(including, but not limited to, marsh,
vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through
direct removal, filling, hydrological
interruption, or other means?
X
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?
X
e) Conflict with any local policies or
ordinances protecting biological
resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance?
X
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?
X
38 | P a g e
4.3 Discussion of CEQA Checklist Answers
a) b) and d)
Would the Project have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? Would the Project have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies or regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? Would the Project interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT WITH MITIGATIOIN INCORPORATED.
Project development will result in the removal of several mature trees on the project site, and the removal of a mature street tree to construct a new driveway. Due to the tree removals, the California State Department of Fish and Wildlife will likely determine that the project has the potential to affect fish and wildlife, or their habitat, based on their review of similar projects in Huntington Park. As a result, the following Mitigation Measures are recommended to reduce any potentially significant impact to a less than significant level.
Mitigation Measure MM-BIO-1 – A pre-construction nesting bird survey should be conducted by a qualified biologist no more than seven (7) days prior to vegetation removal or construction activities during the nesting season.
Mitigation Measure MM-BIO-2 – If an active nest is found, all active bird nests shall be flagged in all directions, and an appropriate avoidance buffer will be established around the nest by a qualified biologist in consultation with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife.
This buffer shall not be disturbed by construction activities until the nest becomes inactive, the young have fledged, the young are no longer being fed by the parents, the young have left the area, and the young are no longer expected to be impacted by the project as determined through additional monitoring by a qualified biologist.
Mitigation Measure MM-BIO-3 – If, during the nesting season, 10 days have passed since an area has been surveyed, and construction work has not been continuous in that area, then construction work shall not take place in that area until a new nesting bird survey has been performed.
Mitigation Measure MM-BIO-4 – If active nests are observed adjacent to the project and an avoidance buffer has been established, it is recommended that a biological monitor be present on site to monitor nesting behaviors in order to assess if the nest buffer is appropriate. If the birds show any sign of stress, the buffer will be increased and work should be conducted 39 | P a g e
elsewhere until fledging occurs. If necessary, the size of the buffer area may be reduced if the biologist in consultation with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife determines that the construction activity would not be likely to have adverse effects on the particular species in question.
c) e) and f)
Would the Project have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?
Would the Project conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? Would the Project conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
NO IMPACT.
The 0.876-acre Project site is approximately 95% covered with impervious surfaces for the existing buildings, parking lot, and drainage features. The Project will improve the hydrology of the site by increasing the landscaped area from approximately 5% to approximately 20% of the site, and by installing a stormwater infiltration system. The Project site is fully developed with deteriorated buildings and associated infrastructure. The area surrounding the Project is fully developed with commercial and residential uses. Any Project site trees and Florence Avenue street trees are subject to vehicle emissions from traffic along Florence Avenue.
These trees also are subject to high levels of noise from vehicles proceeding along Florence Avenue. As a result, these trees are very unlikely to support nesting for special status birds.
The Project site is not an identified link in any wildlife corridor. There is no potential for Project development and operation to interfere with movement of fish or to impede use of a native wildlife nursery site. The Project site does not contain any potential jurisdictional waters.
The City has not adopted a relevant Habitat Conservation Plan or Natural Community Conservation Plan, and no approved local, regional or State habitat conservation plan applies to the Project site. Street trees will be preserved according to City requirements. Individual trees on private property are not protected.
40 | P a g e
SECTION 5 – CULTURAL RESOURCES
The discussion and analysis in this section is derived from information contained in the following: City of Huntington Park General Plan: City of Huntington Park Municipal Code; Blodgett Baylosis Environmental Planning, “Draft Environmental Impact Report: City of Huntington Park 2030 Comprehensive General Plan Update – Huntington Park, California” (October 12, 2017); Tribal Consultation with Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians-Kizh Nation (March 29, 2022); and, the Project plans.
5.1 Setting
Historic Setting – California
Juan Cabrillo was the first European to sail along the California coast in 1542. Between 1769 and 1822, the Spanish had colonized California and established missions, presidios and pueblos. Mexico won its independence from Spain in 1821 and worked to lessen the wealth and power of the missions. Mexico passed the Secularization Act in 1833, which gave mission lands to the Mexican governor and downgraded the missions’ status to that of parish churches. The governor then redistributed the former mission lands, in the form of grants, to private owners. By 1868, there were more than 500 Ranchos in California, all but approximately 30 of which resulted from land grants.
In 1850, California was granted statehood. Although the United States promised to honor the land grants, the process of defining rancho boundaries and proving legal ownership became time consuming and expensive. Legal debts led to bankruptcies and increased prices for beef, hide and tallow. This combined with flooding and drought to the detriment of the cattle industry. Ranchos were divided and sold inexpensively.
Historic Setting – City of Huntington Park
According to a records search at the Los Angeles County Museum of Natural History conducted for the City of Huntington Park General Plan Update Draft Environmental Impact Report (reference page 119), no paleontological resources have been found in the City of Huntington Park or the surrounding area. Therefore, the City of Huntington Park has a low sensitivity for paleontological resources and “…the potential for the discovery of paleontological resources is unlikely.”
The greater Los Angeles Basin previously was inhabited by the Gabrielino people, who have lived in this region for approximately 7,000 years. Approximately 5,000 Gabrielino people lived in villages throughout the Los Angeles Basin prior to Spanish contact. The villages typically were located near major rivers (e.g. Los Angeles River, Rio Hondo River, and San Gabriel River). Prior to Spanish and Russian entries into California in the 1700s, California Indian Tribes did not have pan-tribal names for themselves. When the Spanish invaded local Indian territory in 1771, they established their occupational headquarters at what is now called Whittier Narrows, 15 miles of what is not downtown Los Angeles. The first mission (San Gabriel Mission) was constructed there with Indian slave labor because it was well-watered by the San Gabriel River and because the area contained several prominent Tribal villages.
The Indian peoples there collectively called themselves “Kizh,” after the dome-shaped dwellings in which they lived. The Spanish called the Kizh peoples “Kicherenos.” 41 | P a g e
A new Mission complex was built in 1774, five miles north of the original complex, after the original mission compound was washed away. Once the new Mission was established, the Spanish eventually dropped the use of the term “Kichereno” and replaced it with “Gabrieleno” when referencing the Indian peoples of the area.
Scholars first recognized the Tribal name of Kizh in the 19th century, when approaching how to classify the Tribal language. Therefore, the academic community recognized “Kizh” as referring to the Tribal name and the Tribal language. However, by the mid-20th century scholars had replaced “Kizh” with “Gabrielino” as a standard term for the Tribal group. In 1994, the Gabrielinos were recognized by the State of California as the aboriginal tribe of the Los Angeles Basin “…after…the [incorrect] ‘Tongva’ name was unable to be confirmed and validated.”
The City of Huntington Park’s initial development began with the establishment of Rancho San Antonio in 1809 by Antonio Maria Lugo. The Lugo family owned approximately 29,000 acres where their ranch was located. This family retained ownership of the ranch throughout the 19th century. By the turn of the 20th century, the ranch dissolved and the land was distributed to various settlers and developers. Two of those developers, A. L. Burbank and E. V. Baker, subdivided a 100-acre portion of the former ranch. These two men were instrumental in laying the City’s foundation by granting railroad tycoon Henry Huntington rightof-way access through their subdivision along Randolph Street in the early 20th century. The City was renamed Huntington Park.
Little development occurred in Huntington Park prior to 1896. During that time, the Los Angeles River was not channelized and a few scattered single-family homes were located in the area. On September 1, 1906, the City of Huntington Park was incorporated with a population of 526. The City developed as a suburban community, providing a centralized location for workers employed in Los Angeles and the surrounding industrial cities of Vernon, Commerce, and South Gate. By the 1930s, the City’s land use and developed patterns were well established and a thriving downtown-centered along Pacific Avenue was testament to the area’s prosperity.
Regulatory Setting
The following regulations are considered to be standard conditions in that they are required regardless of whether an impact requires mitigation.
Historic Preservation Act – Federal regulations for cultural resources are governed largely by Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, which requires Federal agencies to consider effects of their undertakings on historic properties and affords the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation a reasonable opportunity to comment on such undertakings. The Council’s implementing regulations, Protection of Historic Properties, are found in 36 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 800. The goal of the Section 106 review process is to offer a measure of protection to sites determined eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. The criteria for determining National Register Eligibility are found in 36 CFR Part 60, Amendments to the Act (1986 and 1992) and subsequent revisions to the implementing regulations have strengthened provisions for Native American consultation and participation in the Section 106 review process. While Federal agencies must follow Federal regulations, most projects by private developers and landowners do not 42 | P a g e
require this level of compliance. Federal regulations only become operative in the private sector if a project requires a Federal permit or if it uses Federal money.
State Regulations – State historic preservation regulations include statutes and guidelines contained in the California Environmental Quality Act; Public Resources Code. A historical resource includes, but is not limited to, any object, building, structure, site, area, place, record, or manuscript that is historically or archaeologically significant. Section 15064.5 of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines specifies criteria for evaluating importance of cultural resources. Also, California law protects Native American burials, skeletal remains, and associated grave goods regardless of the antiquity and provides for sensitive treatment and disposition of those remains.
California Senate Bill 18 (Traditional Tribal Cultural Places Act – 2004) California State law provides for limited protection of Native American prehistoric, archaeological, cultural, spiritual and ceremonial places, such as the following: sanctified cemeteries; religious ceremonial sites, shrines; burial grounds; prehistoric ruins; archaeological sites; and, sacred sites.
California Senate Bill 18 (2005) placed new requirements on local governments for developments in or near a Traditional Tribal Cultural Place (TTCP). Local jurisdictions must provide opportunities for involvement of California Native American tribes in the land planning process to preserve traditional tribal cultural places. The Final Tribal Guidelines recommends the Native American Heritage Commission provide written information within 30 days to inform the Lead Agency if a proposed project is determined to be near a TTCP and another 90 days for tribes to respond to a local government if the tribes want to consult to determine whether the project would have an adverse impact on the TTCP. If the Native American Heritage Commission, the tribe(s) and interested parties agree upon mitigation measures necessary for the proposed project, the mitigation measures would be included in the project EIR. If the City and tribe agree adequate mitigation or preservation measures cannot be implemented, neither party is obligated to take action.
SB 18 also amended California Civil Code Section 815.3 to add California Native American tribes to the list of entities that can acquire and hold conservation easements to protect their cultural places.
California Assembly Bill 52
California Governor Brown signed Assembly Bill Number 52 on September 25, 2014.
California Assembly Bill 52 became effective on July 1, 2015. The legislation imposes new requirements for consultation regarding projects that may affect a tribal cultural resource, includes a broad definition of what may be considered to be a tribal cultural resource, and includes a list of recommended mitigation measures.
Assembly Bill 52 added Tribal Cultural Resources to categories of Cultural Resources in CEQA. “Tribal resources” are defined as either (1) sites, features, places cultural landscapes, sacred places and objects with cultural value to a California Native American tribe” that are included in the State register of historical resources or a local register of historical resources, or that are determined to be eligible for inclusion in the State register; or, (2) resources determined by the lead agency, in its discretion, to be significant based on the criteria for listing in the State register. Under this legislation, a project that may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource is defined as a project that may 43 | P a g e
have a significant effect on the environment. Where a project may have a significant impact on a tribal cultural resource, the lead agency’s environmental document must discuss the impact and whether feasible alternatives or mitigation measures could avoid or substantially lessen the impact.
Assembly Bill 52 further requires lead agencies to provide notice to tribes that are traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic are of a proposed project if they have requested notice of projects proposed within that area. If a tribe requests consultation within 30 days upon receipt of the notice, the lead agency must consult with the tribe. Consultation may include discussing type of environmental review necessary, significance of tribal cultural resources, and significance of project impacts on tribal cultural resources, and alternatives and mitigation measures recommended by the tribe. The parties must consult in good faith, and consultation is considered concluded when either the parties agree to measures to mitigate or avoid a significant effect on a tribal cultural resource (if such a significant effect exists) or when a party concludes mutual agreement cannot be attained.
The legislation also identifies Mitigation Measures that may be considered to avoid significant impacts if there is no agreement on appropriate mitigation. Recommended measures include the following:
• Preservation in place;
• Protecting the cultural character and integrity of the resource; • Protecting the traditional use of the resource;
• Protecting the confidentiality of the resource; and,
• Permanent conservation easements with culturally appropriate management criteria.
City of Huntington Park
City of Huntington Park General Plan
City of Huntington Park Historic Preservation Ordinance – The City of Huntington Park adopted a Historic Preservation Ordinance to preserve and protect historic assets in the City.
The City of Huntington Park included the following criteria to determine eligibility for the designation of historic resources.
• Historic Resource – A Historic Resource is a building, structure, site, object, landscape, sign, or contributing member to a Historic District that is significant in American history, architecture, engineering, archaeology, or culture, and is designated by the City according to the following criteria:
o Associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of the history of the City, Region, State, or Nation; o Associated with the lives of persons who are significant in the history of the City, Region, State, or Nation;
o Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a Historic Resource property type, period, architectural style, or method of construction, or that is a representation of the work of an architect, designer, engineer, or builder whose work is significant; or,
o Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history of the City, Region, State, or Nation.
44 | P a g e
• Historic Designation. A Historic Resource designation may include significant public or semi-public interior spaces and features. The criteria used to determine if an interior is significant include the following:
o Historically the space has been open to the public;
o The materials, finishes, and/or detailing are intact or later alterations are reversible;
o The plan, layout, and features of the space are illustrative of its historic function;
o Its form and features articulate a particular concept of design; or, o There is evidence of distinctive craftsmanship.
• Historic District. A Historic District is an area that is geographically defined as possessing a concentration of Historic Resources or a thematically related grouping of properties, which contribute to each other and is designated by the City according to the procedures set forth by the National Register of Historic Places Bulletin #21:
“Defining Boundaries for National Register Properties” and the following criteria:
o The grouping of properties are unified by planned or physical development or a significant and distinguishable entity of Citywide importance; and, o The components of the properties may lack individual distinction but are important as a collection representing one or more of a defined historic, cultural, development and/or architectural context(s).
The City has designated 14 individual historic properties, has designated one historic district with 15 contributing properties, and has identified several additional historic resources eligible for designation within Huntington Park, none of which are located on the Project site.
5.2 Thresholds for Analysis
Would the project:
Environmental Issue
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in
the significance of a historic resource as
defined in Section 15064.5?
X
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in
the significance of an archaeological
resource pursuant to Section 15064.5?
X
c) Disturb any human remains, including
those interred outside of formal
cemeteries?
X
45 | P a g e
5.3 Discussion of CEQA Checklist Answers
a) Would the Project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historic resource as defined in Section 15064.5? AND
b) Would the Project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5?
NO IMPACT.
Project development would involve the following.
• Demolish the existing 11,718 square foot office building and remove all of the existing site improvements including all parking lot paving, trash enclosure, equipment cabinets, parking lot planters, all existing property line walls, and all existing vegetation including trees. • Construct a 4,969 square foot car wash building with related development including o Four vacuum canopies totaling 3,963 square feet and one 192 square foot paystation canopy
o 192 square foot vacuum pump enclosure and other utility structures o 34 parking space parking area including drive aisles, queuing and exit lanes o Stormwater infiltration system
o Wastewater clarifier system and associated water recycling system o Property line walls and freestanding pole sign
o Approximately 7,498 square feet of landscaped area
• Construct the following improvements in the public right-of-way:
o Remove existing driveway at west end of site
o Widen existing driveway at Mission Place intersection o Install new right-turn-exit-only driveway near east end of site o Remove street tree and relocate existing tree well to accommodate new driveway o Install new fire hydrant
The totality of Project development will not impact historic resources or archaeological resources.
c) Would the Project disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries?
LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT WITH MITIGATION INCORPORATED.
There will be pavement removal, grading to prepare the site for the proposed development, as well as trenching, tree removal, and other ground-disturbing activities. The Consulting Tribe noted that the site is within a corridor with an increased potential for scattered burials.
Although the site has been filled with imported soil to develop the existing office building and parking lot, the Consulting Tribe noted the potential for certain types of imported fill to contain human remains, which would be assessed in the early stages of monitoring. Furthermore, ground-disturbing activities can potentially extend to the original soil of the site where remains can be discovered. Therefore, there is a potential for finding of human remains, and the following Mitigation Measure would ensure that any such discovery and related impact would be reduced to a less than significant level.
46 | P a g e
MM-TCR-1: Prior to the commencement of any ground disturbing activity at the project site, the project applicant shall retain a Native American Monitor approved by the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians-Kizh Nation – the tribe that consulted on this project pursuant to Assembly Bill A52 (the “Tribe” or the “Consulting Tribe”). The applicant shall provide proof that they have retained an approved Native American Monitor prior to the issuance of permits for grounddisturbing activities. The Tribal monitor will only be present on-site during the construction phases that involve ground-disturbing activities. Ground disturbing activities are defined by the Tribe as activities that may include, but are not limited to, pavement removal, potholing or auguring, grubbing, tree removals, boring, grading, excavation, drilling, and trenching, within the project area. The Tribal Monitor will complete daily monitoring logs that will provide descriptions of the day’s activities, including construction activities, locations, soil, and any cultural materials identified. The on-site monitoring shall end when all ground-disturbing activities on the Project Site are completed, or when the Tribal Representatives and Tribal Monitor have indicated that all upcoming ground-disturbing activities at the Project Site have little to no potential for impacting Tribal Cultural Resources. Upon discovery of any Tribal Cultural Resources, construction activities shall cease in the immediate vicinity of the find (not less than the surrounding 100 feet) until the find can be assessed. All Tribal Cultural Resources unearthed by project activities shall be evaluated by the qualified archaeologist and Tribal monitor approved by the Consulting Tribe. If the resources are Native American in origin, the Consulting Tribe will retain it/them in the form and/or manner the Tribe deems appropriate, for educational, cultural and/or historic purposes. If human remains and/or grave goods are discovered or recognized at the Project Site, all ground disturbance shall immediately cease, and the county coroner shall be notified per Public Resources Code Section 5097.98, and Health & Safety Code Section 7050.5. Human remains and grave/burial goods shall be treated alike per California Public Resources Code section 5097.98(d)(1) and (2). Work may continue on other parts of the Project Site while evaluation and, if necessary, mitigation takes place (CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5[f]). If a non-Native American resource is determined by the qualified archaeologist to constitute a “historical resource” or “unique archaeological resource,” time allotment and funding sufficient to allow for implementation of avoidance measures, or appropriate mitigation, must be available. The treatment plan established for the resources shall be in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(f) for historical resources and PRC Sections 21083.2(b) for unique archaeological resources. Preservation in place (i.e., avoidance) is the preferred manner of treatment. If preservation in place is not feasible, treatment may include implementation of archaeological data recovery excavations to remove the resource along with subsequent laboratory processing and analysis. Any historic archaeological material that is not Native American in origin shall be curated at a public, non-profit institution with a research interest in the materials, such as the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County or the Fowler Museum, if such an institution agrees to accept the material. If no institution accepts the archaeological material, it shall be offered to a local school or historical society in the area for educational purposes.
47 | P a g e
SECTION 6 – ENERGY
The discussion and analysis in this section is derived from information contained in the following:
City of Huntington Park General Plan: City of Huntington Park Municipal Code; Blodgett Baylosis Environmental Planning, “Draft Environmental Impact Report: City of Huntington Park 2030 Comprehensive General Plan Update – Huntington Park, California” (October 12, 2017); and, the Project plans.
6.1 Existing Setting
Federal and State agencies regulate energy use and consumption. The United States Department of Transportation, United States Department of Energy, and United States Environmental Protection Agency are three federal agencies that exercise great influence over energy policies and programs. The California Public Utilities Commission and the California Energy Commission are two State agencies that have authority over different aspects of energy.
The “U.S. Energy Information Administration, California State Profile and Energy Estimates, Quick Facts” presents a summary of, and context for, energy consumption and energy demands within the State. Excerpts follow.
• California was the fourth largest producer of crude oil among the 50 states in 2017 and, as of January 2018, third in oil refining capacity.
• California is the largest consumer of jet fuel among the 50 states and accounted for onefifth of the nation’s jet fuel consumption in 2016. • California’s total energy consumption is second highest in the nation, but in 2016 the State’s per capita energy consumption ranked 48th, due in part to its mild climate and its energy efficiency programs.
• In 2017, California ranked second in the nation in conventional hydroelectric generation and first as a producer of electricity from solar, geothermal, and biomass resources. • In 2017, solar PV and solar thermal installations provided approximately 16% of California’s net electricity generation.
Transportation for new developments is typically the largest consumer of fossil fuel energy.
However, the traffic impact analysis concluded that the proposed project site would not increase regional vehicle miles traveled (VMT) in that local-serving retail projects create a redistribution of travel, but not generally substantial VMT increases. Based upon that guidance, the energy analysis considers only stationary source energy impacts.
A very regulatory Framework has been developed to encourage or mandate energy conservation in residential and non-residential buildings. This process began in 1978 under Title 24, Part 6, of the California Code of Regulations (CCR). A large number of subsequent legislations were focused on vehicle efficiencies and cleaner power sources to reduce the generation of greenhouse gases (GHG) to combat climate change. Title 24 has similarly been periodically updated to reflect changing technologies and priorities. The most current Title 24 requirements are called CalGreen-2019 now as Part 11 of the CCR.
The current CalGreen Code is designed to achieve a number of objectives as follows:
• Establish the correct type of occupancy;
• Determine which agency has responsibility over the Project; 48 | P a g e
• Find the chapter in the code that covers this Project; • Evaluate the Matrix Adoption Tables of the code;
• Develop a checklist for all measures that will be incorporated into the Project; and, • Show all project design features on an Application Checklist referenced back to the Code.
Electricity
Southern California Edison (SCE) provides electricity to the Project vicinity. SCE provides electric power to more than 14 million persons in 15 counties and in 180 incorporated cities within a service area encompassing approximately 50,000 square miles. SCE derives electricity from varied energy resources including the following: 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 that include out-of-state suppliers.
Natural Gas
The California Public Utilities Commission (PUC) regulates natural gas utility service for approximately 10.8 million customers who receive natural gas from Pacific Gas and Electric, Southern California Gas, San Diego Gas & Electric, Southwest Gas, and several smaller natural gas utilities. The vast major of California’s natural gas customers are residential and small commercial customers. Electric generators, industrial uses and other non-residential and noncommercial customers accounted for approximately 68% of the natural gas delivered by California utilities in 2012. Most natural gas used in California originates from out-of-state natural gas basins. The PUC oversees utility purchases and transmission of natural gas to ensure reliable and affordable natural gas deliveries to existing and new consumers throughout California.
6.2 Thresholds of Significance
Environmental Issue
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Result in potentially significant
environmental impact due to
wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary
consumption of energy resources,
during project construction or
operation?
X
b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or
local plan for renewable energy or
energy efficiency?
X
Project-related impacts were derived from the SCAQMD CalEEMod computer model based upon the default input assumptions for an automobile care center land use. 49 | P a g e
6.3 Discussion of CEQA Checklist Answers
a) Would the Project result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation?
LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT.
Project development would involve the following.
• Demolish the existing 11,718 square foot office building and remove all of the existing site improvements including all parking lot paving, trash enclosure, equipment cabinets, parking lot planters, all existing property line walls, and all existing vegetation including trees. • Construct a 4,969 square foot car wash building with related development including o Four vacuum canopies totaling 3,963 square feet and one 192 square foot paystation canopy
o 192 square foot vacuum pump enclosure and other utility structures o 34 parking space parking area including drive aisles, queuing and exit lanes o Stormwater infiltration system
o Wastewater clarifier system and associated water recycling system o Property line walls and freestanding pole sign
o Approximately 7,498 square feet of landscaped area
• Construct the following improvements in the public right-of-way:
o Remove existing driveway at west end of site
o Widen existing driveway at Mission Place intersection o Install new right-turn-exit-only driveway near east end of site o Remove street tree and relocate existing tree well to accommodate new driveway o Install new fire hydrant
The project will consume approximately 412,680 KWH of electricity per year for all proposed onsite uses. The CalEEMod computer model was used to predict energy consumption for default land use assumptions as to their annual use, but some of the model inputs are a bit outdated so that calculations may be a bit over-conservative.
These estimates are based upon default consumption factors used in an earlier model before the latest passage of CalGreen. The following considerations will reduce the total energy budget according to Code:
On-site energy consumption
CalGreen has updated the minimum energy efficiency of all heating and air conditioning (HVAC) equipment efficiency used within the building shell for a reduction of perhaps 10 percent of the energy budget.
Water Consumption
CalGreen estimates that water consumption can be reduced by 20 percent through mandatory measures from existing conservation requirements, for uses of water other than the washing of vehicles. Recycling of water from the car wash tunnel will reduce water consumption by 60 percent based on the applicant’s calculation.
50 | P a g e
Solid Waste
Each ton of recycled solid waste produces a benefit of around 10 KWH from one ton of material when considering the benefit of not remanufacturing the material from scratch.
Lighting
Each bulb produces a major efficiency when converted from an LED to an incandescent light (9 watt versus 43 watts for the same lumens) such that the use of LEDs is recommended.
Construction
With limits on equipment idling and the benefits of adaptive reuse, energy use is presumed to be reduced by 10 percent from its default value.
It is not possible assign these reductions to specific categories because of the aggregated nature of the calculation, but a reduction of 10-15 percent from the default values appears reasonable.
As noted above, the Project development and Project operation impacts related to Energy would be less than significant, and furthermore, energy use would be reduced with the considerations above incorporated into mandatory code requirements and the standard conditions of approval from Building & Safety and the Public Works Department below:
o Outdoor lighting is required to meet the California Energy Code o The project shall comply with the City Ordinance governing construction debris recycling o The project will be required to provide Clean Air Vehicle parking spaces (including future EV Charging Stations) designated as “CLEAN AIR/VANPOOL/EV” for new commercial projects with 10 or more new vehicle parking spaces.
o Electric Vehicle Charging Space(s), including future EV Charging Stations, shall be provided for new commercial projects and shall be equipped with the necessary infrastructure for the future installation of EV charging equipment. Future EV charging spaces with the charging equipment not installed with this project are considered Clean Air Vehicle parking spaces.
b) Would the Project conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency?
LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT.
The following are among the most relevant State and local plans that govern energy conservation and renewable energy initiatives.
• California Energy Action Plan II – The California Energy Action Plan II is the State’s principal energy planning and policy document. This Plan identifies specific action areas to ensure that California’s energy is adequate, affordable, technologically advanced, and environmentally sound. The Plan adopts a loading order of preferred energy resources to meet the State needs and to reduce reliance on natural gas and other fossil fuels. 51 | P a g e
• Senate Bill 350 – Senate Bill 350 (October 2015) establishes a requirement for California to reduce use of petroleum in cars by 50 percent to generate half of its electricity from renewable resources, and to increase energy efficiency by 50 percent at new and existing buildings - - all by year 2030.
• California Code of Regulations (CCR) Title 24, Part 11 – This regulation is intended to reduce greenhouse gas emissions associated with energy consumption. Title 24 now requires that new buildings reduce water consumption, employ building commissioning to increase building system efficiencies, divert construction waste from landfills, and install low pollutant-emitting finish materials. The 2019 version of the standards became effective January 1, 2020.
Project development and Project operation would result in less than significant impacts associated with conflicts with energy plans and policies related to renewable energy or energy efficiency because the Project will be required to comply with CalGreen requirements. 52 | P a g e
SECTION 7 – GEOLOGY AND SOILS
The discussion and analysis in this section is derived from information contained in the following: City of Huntington Park General Plan: City of Huntington Park Municipal Code; Blodgett Baylosis Environmental Planning, “Draft Environmental Impact Report: City of Huntington Park 2030 Comprehensive General Plan Update – Huntington Park, California” (October 12, 2017); and, the Project plans.
7.1 Setting
Geologic Setting
The Project area lies within the Los Angeles Basin - - a sedimentary basin that includes the coastal plains of Los Angeles and Orange counties and out to Catalina Island. This region is bounded by the Santa Ana Mountains to the east, the Santa Monica Mountains to the north, and the San Joaquin Hills to the south. The area is part of the coastal section of the northernmost Peninsular Range Geomorphic Province and is characterized by elongated northwest-trending mountain ridges separated by sediment-floored valleys. The Project is mapped entirely as late Pleistocene to Holocene young alluvium (unit 2) deposited between 126,000 years ago and into historic times. These flood plain deposits consist of poorly sorted, permeable clays to sands. Deposits are poorly consolidated and may be capped by poorly to moderately developed soils. These sediments were deposited by streams and rivers on canyon floors and in flat flood plains of the area.
The Central Sub-basin of the Coastal Plain of the Los Angeles Groundwater Basin occupies a large portion of the southeastern part of the Coastal Plain of Los Angeles Groundwater Basin. This Sub-basin commonly is referred to as the “Central Basin” and is bounded to the north by a surface divide called the La Brea high, and to the northeast and east by emergent less permeable Tertiary rocks of the Elysian, Repetto, Merced and Puente Hills. The southeast boundary between Central Basin and Orange County Groundwater Basin generally follows Coyote Creek, which is a regional drainage province boundary. The southwest boundary is formed by the Newport Inglewood fault system and the associated folded rocks of the Newport Inglewood uplift. The Los Angeles and San Gabriel Rivers drain inland basins and pass across the surface of the Central Basin on the way to the Pacific Ocean. 53 | P a g e
EXHIBIT 6
SIGNIFICANT FAULTS IN THE LOS ANGELES REGION
Source: Huntington Park General Plan EIR
Many faults, folds and uplifted basement areas affect the water-bearing rocks in the Central Basin (Reference Exhibit 6). Most of these structures form minor restrictions to groundwater flow in the Sub-basin. The strongest effect on groundwater occurs along the southwest boundary to the Central Sub-basin. The faults and folds of the Newport-Inglewood uplift are partial barriers to movement of groundwater from the Central Basin to the West Coast Basin.
The La Brea high is a system of folded, uplifted and eroded Tertiary basement rocks. The Whittier Narrows is an eroded gap through the Merced and Puente Hills that provides both surface and subsurface inflow to the Central Basin. The Rio Hondo, Pico and Cemetery faults are northeast-trending faults that project into the gap and displace aquifers. The trend of these faults parallels the local groundwater flow and does not act as significant barriers to groundwater flow.
Earthquake severity is normally classified as to according to their magnitude or intensity.
Because the amount of destruction generally decreases with increasing distance away from the epicenter, earthquakes are assigned several intensities, but only one magnitude. The destructiveness of an earthquake at a particular location is commonly reported using the Richter scale (magnitude) or Mercalli scale (intensity).
The major faults in the Southern California region are the following:
● The Newport-Inglewood Fault Zone is located approximately nine miles west of the City of Huntington Park. The 1933 Long Beach Earthquake occurred on the Newport-Inglewood 54 | P a g e
fault. A maximum credible earthquake of Magnitude 6.8 on the Newport-Inglewood fault has the potential of generating horizontal peak ground accelerations of about 0.2 to 0.3 in the area. Ground-shaking could last approximately 22 seconds, with seismic Mercalli intensity values of VII to VIII. This type of earthquake would be particularly damaging to older low-rise structures located within the City.
● The Palos Verdes Hills Fault is located 20 miles to the southwest of the City. It is considered an active fault based on late Pleistocene and Holocene age displacements that have been interpreted along offshore segments of the fault in the San Pedro shelf. The Fault is considered to be capable of generating a maximum credible earthquake of Magnitude 7.0 that would cause seismic intensities in the IX to X range. The Palos Verdes Fault could result in greater damage to property in the City than that anticipated from an earthquake on the San Andreas Fault due to its proximity.
● The Sierra Madre Fault Zone is located approximately 15 miles northeast of the City at the base of the San Gabriel Mountains. The Fault Zone forms a prominent 50-mile long eastwest structural zone on the south side of the San Gabriel Mountains. The Sierra Madre Fault system was responsible for the uplift of the San Gabriel Mountains by faulting in response to tectonic compression. The maximum credible earthquake is the largest magnitude event that appears capable of occurring under the presently known tectonic framework. The maximum probable earthquake is the maximum earthquake likely to occur during a 100-year interval. ● The Whittier-Elsinore Fault Zone is located along the southern base of the Puente Hills approximately nine miles east of the City of Huntington Park. This northwest-trending Fault extends from the Whittier Narrows area continuing southeast across the Santa Ana River, past Lake Elsinore, into western Imperial County and then continuing on into Mexico. This Fault is expected to be capable of generating a Magnitude 6.6 earthquake. ● The Santa Monica-Malibu Coast Fault System is an east-west trending fault system located along the southern margin of the western Santa Monica Mountains and extending into Santa Monica Bay. The nearest Fault trace is located approximately 22 miles to the west of the Huntington Park. Although there has been very little seismic activity along this Fault system, the Malibu Coast Fault segment has been characterized as active based on displaced soils. This displacement was estimated to have occurred about five thousand years ago. ● The San Andreas Fault Zone is located approximately 37 miles to the north and northeast of the City of Huntington Park at its nearest point. This Fault zone extends from the Gulf of California and continues northward to the Cape Mendocino area and then northward along the ocean floor. The total length of the San Andreas Fault Zone is approximately 750 miles.
The length of the fault and its active seismic history indicates that it has a very high potential for large-scale movement in the near future (e.g. Magnitude 8.0). ● The San Jacinto Fault Zone, located approximately 44 miles to the northeast of the City of Huntington Park, is part of the San Andreas Fault System. The two Fault strands separate near the San Gabriel Mountains, where the San Jacinto Fault extends southeastward to form the southwestern boundary of the San Jacinto Mountains and the San Timoteo Badlands.
This Fault is thought capable of generating a maximum credible earthquake of magnitude 7.0.
Strong ground shaking from this earthquake would last about 25 seconds, with maximum intensity values in the VIII to IX range.
55 | P a g e
● The Elysian Park Blind Thrust Fault is exposed for approximately two miles at Elysian Park but is not exposed over the rest of its trace toward the east. (Blind thrust faults are low-angle or low-lying faults occurring generally 5 to 15 kilometers below the ground surface which have no surface manifestation.) The Elysian Blind Thrust is located approximately five miles from the City of Huntington Park at its nearest point. The Elysian Park Fault was the source of the magnitude 5.9 earthquake near Whittier in 1987. This Fault is thought to be capable of generating earthquakes of magnitude 7.2 to 7.6 and would result in intense ground-shaking in the entire Los Angeles basin.
● The Torrance-Wilmington Fault is a newly postulated, blind thrust fault and fold system located under the Palos Verdes Peninsula. Although this Fault system is not well defined, it is estimated that if one of the segments ruptures, an earthquake of Magnitude 5.0 to 7.5, would occur.
The following Table 7-1 summarizes the major faults within the Southern California region, their distance, and direction relative to the City of Huntington Park, the maximum credible earthquake postulated for each fault, and the maximum probable earthquake for Faults identified in Table 7-1.
Table 7-1
Major Faults
Fault Distance Maximum
Magnitude
Whittier 9 miles east 7
Santa Monica-Hollywood 10 miles northwest 7
Raymond Hill 10 miles northeast 6.5
Sierra Madre 15 miles northeast 6.5
San Fernando 25 miles northwest 6.5
Elysian Park 5 miles north 7.6
San Jacinto 44 miles northeast 7.5
Palos Verdes 20 miles southwest 7
San Andreas 37 miles northeast 8.25
Malibu Coast 22 miles west 7
Source: Los Angeles County Health and Safety Element, 1990 The four largest recent earthquakes that have caused major damage in the Los Angeles Basin include the 1933 Long Beach (Magnitude 6.3), 1971 San Fernando (Magnitude 6.4), the 1987 Whittier Narrows (Magnitude 5.9), and the 1994 Northridge (Magnitude 6.7) earthquakes. The 1933 Long Beach earthquake occurred on the southern segment of the Newport-Inglewood Fault, from Newport Beach to Signal Hill. The 1971 San Fernando earthquake occurred along the San Fernando segment of the Sierra Madre Fault zone. The Whittier Narrows earthquake occurred on the Elysian Thrust Fault in 1987. The most recent major earthquake, the Northridge earthquake, occurred on the Oakridge Fault in the San Fernando Valley in January 1994. 56 | P a g e
Liquefaction Risk
The Project site is located in an area that is at an elevated risk for liquefaction (reference Exhibit 7). According to the United States Geological Survey, liquefaction is the process by which watersaturated sediment temporarily loses strength and acts as a fluid. Liquefaction is the process by which ground soil loses strength due to an increase in water pressure following seismic activity.
Structures constructed on soils that liquefy may sink or topple over as the soil loses its bearing strength. A study of earthquake hazards by the United States Geological Survey (USGS) indicates a majority of the City has a moderate to high potential for liquefaction. Areas containing shallow groundwater within 30 feet or less of the ground surface are susceptible to liquefaction hazards during seismic shaking.
EXHIBIT 7
AREAS SUBJECT TO POTENTIAL LIQUEFACTION
Source: Huntington Park General Plan EIR
Landslides
The City of Huntington Park has a relatively flat topography, and hazards associated with slope instability, erosion, and landslides are considered unlikely. Because of the City’s level topography, there are no landslide hazards in the City or the surrounding area. 57 | P a g e
Lateral Spreading
Lateral spreading could be liquefaction-induced or the result of excess moisture within underlying soils. Liquefaction induced lateral spreading will not affect any future development within Huntington Park since all new development will be constructed with strict adherence to the most pertinent State and City building codes. The Tujunga-Soboba and Hanford soils are not prone to shrinking and swelling. Soils prone to shrinking and swelling become sticky when wet and expand according to the moisture content present at the time. Since underlying soils are not prone to shrinking and swelling, a possible influx of groundwater will not trigger lateral spreading.
Development located within the City is not likely to be affected by subsidence. Subsidence occurs via soil shrinkage and is triggered by a significant reduction in an underlying groundwater table, thus causing the earth on top to sink. The soils that underlie the City are not prone to shrinking and swelling, thus no impacts related to unstable soils and subsidence are expected.
Soil Resources
The topography of the Los Angeles basin is a result of long periods of deformation associated with faulting and uplift, deposition of river-borne sediments, and periodic changes in sea levels, and erosion. Prior to 1825 and between 1867 and 1868, the Los Angeles River flowed westerly from the Los Angeles Narrows (between the Elysian and Repetto Hills) through the Ballona gap.
Soils in the area are typical of sediments deposited in the broad alluvial plain on which Huntington Park and the surrounding communities are located. These alluvial materials and rocks are of recent age (15,000 years ago) and are unconsolidated and uncemented. Underneath the alluvium is the Lakewood Formation, which features stream type alluvium and floodplain finegrained sediments on the upper layer (consisting 40 to 80% of the deposits) and gravels and coarse sands with discontinuous lenses of sandy silt and clay in the lower layers. Beneath the Lakewood Formation is the San Pedro Formation, which consists of San Pedro sand, Timms Point silt, and Lomita silt approximately 1,050 feet thick. The Lakewood and San Pedro Formations are deposits of the Pleistocene age (one to three million years ago).
A generalized soils map for Los Angeles County prepared by the United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service identifies surface soils in Los Angeles County according to their characteristics and qualities (reference Exhibit 8). A soil association is defined by the predominant soil series in a group of soils. Each association has different properties and characteristics such as soil composition, surface texture, slope, arrangement, sequence of layers, or other characteristics. The General Soil Map for Los Angeles County indicates soils in the City of Huntington Park consist of the Hanford soil association and soils of the Tujunga-Soboba association. The Project site is located within the Hanford Soils Association. 58 | P a g e
EXHIBIT 8
GENERALIZED SOILS MAP FOR THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON PARK
Source: Huntington Park General Plan EIR
● The Tujunga-Soboba association consists of 60% Tujunga soils, 30% Soboba soils and 10% of unnamed sandy and cobbly materials in the beds of intermittent streams. This association is more than 60 inches deep, is excessively drained, and has rapid subsoil permeability. The Tujunga-Soboba association has a very low inherent fertility and is used extensively for residential development, but also is suitable for recreational and industrial uses. Tujunga soils are brownishgray or grayish-brown sand or loamy fine sand on the surface and have a stratified substratum.
These soils are slightly acid to mildly alkaline and water holding capacity is four to five inches for 60 inches of depth. Tujunga soils have slow runoff capability and a slight erosion hazard, although soils of the Tujunga Soboba Association have a moderate to high wind erosion risk. TujungaSoboba soils are not prone to shrinking and swelling because clay is not present in their composition. The Hanford association underlies the western section of the Central City. The Tujunga-Soboba association underlies the eastern section of the Central City and the Yolo association underlies the northern section of the Cheli Industrial area. The Tujunga-Soboba association and the Hanford association have low shrink-swell potential. All three associations have low corrosivity and slight excavation hazards (absence of rocks or water table within five feet of the surface). Both the Tujunga-Soboba and Hanford associations have slight septic tank limitations. The Yolo association has a moderate septic tank limitation due to its soils’ permeability. The Tujunga and Soboba soils association have severe soil pressure hazard, while the Hanford and Yolo associations have moderate capacity to withstand soil pressure from building foundations. Tujunga and Soboba soils are a good source of sand but not of gravel. ● The Hanford association consists of 85 percent Hanford soils, 10% Yolo soils and 5% Hesperia soils. Hanford soils are pale-brown coarse sandy loam on the surface with a light yellowish brown coarse sandy loam and gravelly loam coarse sand substratum. These soils are more than 60 59 | P a g e
inches deep, well drained, and slightly acidic to mildly alkaline. Hanford soils have moderately rapid subsoil permeability and moderate inherent fertility. Hanford soils are at a slight risk for erosion; however, the City is completely developed and underlying soils were disturbed in order to facilitate previous construction activities. The soils are not prone to shrinking and swelling because shrinking and swelling is influenced by the amount of clay present in underlying soils.
Clay is not present in the composition of Hanford soils. Moreover, Hanford soils are described as being used almost exclusively for residential and industrial development.
Regulatory Setting
State of California
California Geological Survey Seismic Hazard Zones Mapping Program – The Seismic Hazards Mapping Act of 1990 directs the California Geological Survey to delineate seismic hazard zone. The purpose of the Act is to reduce the threat to public health and safety and to minimize the loss of life and property by identifying and mitigating seismic hazards. The Act requires that site-specific geotechnical investigations be performed prior to the permitting of most urban development projects that are located within the designated hazard zones. The eastern twothirds of the City have been identified as being subject to a potential liquefaction risk.
Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone – The California Geological Survey identified a number of active faults in the State that may generate surface rupture. The Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone indicates those faults where site specific studies and mitigation may be required. The Zone is delineated on Unities States Geological Survey Quadrangles indicating location and extent of potential risk. The City of Huntington Park is not located within an Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone.
7.2 Thresholds of Significance
Would the project:
Environmental Issue
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Directly or indirectly cause potential
substantial adverse effects, including
the risk of loss, injury, or death
involving:
i. Rupture of a known earthquake
fault, as delineated on the most
recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake
Fault Zoning Map issued by the
State Geologist for the area or
based on other substantial evidence
of a known fault? Refer to Division
of Mines and Geology Special
Publication 42.
X
ii. Strong seismic ground shaking? X
60 | P a g e
iii. Seismic-related ground failure,
including liquefaction? X
iv. Landslides? X
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the
loss of topsoil? X
c) Be located in a geological 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?
X
d) Be located on expansive soil, as
defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform
Building Code (1994), creating
substantial risks to life or property?
X
e) Have soils incapable of adequately
supporting the use of septic tanks or
alternative waste water disposal
systems where sewers are not available
for the disposal of waste water?
X
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or
unique geologic feature?
X
7.3 Discussion of CEQA Checklist Answers
a) i) ii) iii) iv) Would the project directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42?
i) LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT:
The Project area is located in a seismically active portion of Southern California but is not located within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone or in a landslide zone. The Project site is flat and developed with a deteriorating office building, a parking lot, and ornamental landscaping. Although the Project site is not located in an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone, the Project site is located in proximity to the Newport Inglewood Fault, the Whittier-Elsinore Fault and the San Jacinto Fault. No significant geotechnical constraints have been identified and the Project is developable from a geotechnical standpoint utilizing most standard grading and building techniques. Impacts of earthquake fault rupture are considered less than significant because standard grading and construction techniques will be used to develop the site. It is anticipated Project development and operation will have a limited exposure of people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury or death involving rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo 61 | P a g e
Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the project area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault.
California Geological Survey Seismic Hazard Zones Mapping Program. The Seismic Hazards Mapping Act of 1990 directs the California Geological Survey (CGS) to delineate seismic hazard zones. The purpose of the act is to reduce the threat to public health and safety and to minimize the loss of life and property by identifying and mitigating seismic hazards. The act requires that site-specific geotechnical investigations be performed prior to the permitting of most urban development projects that are located within the designated hazard zones.
Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone. The CGS identified a number of active faults in the State that may generate surface rupture. The Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone (APSSZ) indicates those faults where site specific studies and mitigation may be required.
The APSSZ is delineated on United States Geological Survey (USGS) Quadrangles indicating the location and extent of potential risk. The City is not located within an APSSZ.
There are no active or potentially active earthquake faults known to traverse the City of Huntington Park, thus, no ground rupture hazards are expected in the City. The City is, however, located within a seismically active region and is subject to ground shaking hazards associated with earthquake events in the region. Seismicity, in the Los Angeles area historically has been defined by earthquake events along the Newport Inglewood, San Fernando, San Jacinto, and San Andreas faults. Other faults of concern in the area include the Whittier Fault, the Elysian Park Thrust, and the Santa Monica-Hollywood Fault. ii) Would the project directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: strong seismic ground shaking?
LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT.
The primary seismic hazard is ground shaking due to a large earthquake on any of major active regional faults. Accordingly, as with most locations within Southern California, there is potential that within the Project lifetime the Project site would experience strong ground shaking as a result of seismic activity originating from regional faults. Site seismicity is typical of much of Los Angeles County. California State Law requires structures to incorporate earthquake-reducing design standards in accordance with the latest California Building Code and appropriate seismic design criteria. Project development and operation compliance with this regulatory requirement would reduce potential impacts related to exposure of people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury or death involving strong seismic ground shaking to a less than significant level.
iii) Would the project directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction?
LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT.
62 | P a g e
The eastern two-thirds of the City, which contains the Project site, have been identified as being subject to a potential liquefaction risk.
California State Law requires structures to incorporate earthquake-reducing design standards in accordance with the latest California Building Code and appropriate seismic design criteria. The Project involves constructing an approximately 5,000 square foot car wash building and related improvements. Project development and operation compliance with this regulatory requirement would reduce potential impacts related to exposure of people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury or death involving strong seismic ground shaking to a less than significant level. iv) Would the project directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: landslides? NO IMPACT.
The Project site is bounded by Florence Avenue to the north (with commercial, religious, and residential use beyond), commercial properties to the east and west, and residential properties to the south. There are no hillsides or unstable soils on the Project site.
Therefore, Project development and operation will not expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury or death involving landslides will not result in impacts to landslides. No impact will result. b) Would the project result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? NO IMPACT.
The Project site is bounded by Florence Avenue to the north (with commercial, religious, and residential use beyond), commercial properties to the east and west, and residential properties to the south. There are no hillsides or unstable soils on the Project sites. There is no exposed topsoil on the Project site other than within introduced landscape areas.
However, Project development (demolition; grading; construction; painting; finishing) will utilize Best Management Practices in accordance with City requirements to eliminate the potential for any soil runoff and eliminate any potential for erosion. Therefore, Project development and operation will not result in substantial soil erosion or loss of topsoil. No impact will occur.
c) Would the project be located in a geological unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT.
The Project site is bounded by Florence Avenue to the north (with commercial, religious, and residential use beyond), commercial properties to the east and west, and residential properties to the south. There are no hillsides or unstable soils on the Project sites. The site is flat and does not contain any area of slope. No existing landslides are present on or adjacent to the Project site. However, the majority of Huntington Park is located in an area identified as having a potential for liquefaction. All new development that is part of the Project will be required to comply with all current State of California Building Code relevant provisions relating to fault rupture and liquefaction. Given requirements that must 63 | P a g e
be adhered to in Project design and development, the potential liquefaction impacts are considered to be less than significant.
d) Would the project be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT.
The Project site is located within the Hanford Soils Association, which is not prone to shrinking and swelling. Expansive soils expand or contract with an increase in moisture content. Adherence to CBC standards during Project development would ensure potential impacts related to Project site location on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), would not create substantial risks to life or property.
Therefore, the level of impact related to risks to life or property from expansive soils will remain less than significant.
e) Would the project have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water?
NO IMPACT.
No septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems are used. The Project will maintain lateral connections to City of Huntington Park sewer mainlines. Therefore, no impacts would occur as a result of Project development. f) Would the Project directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?
LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT.
According to a records search at the Los Angeles County Museum of Natural History conducted for the City of Huntington Park General Plan Update Draft Environmental Impact Report (reference page 119), no paleontological resources have been found in the City of Huntington Park or the surrounding area. Therefore, the City of Huntington Park has a low sensitivity for paleontological resources and “…the potential for the discovery of paleontological resources is unlikely.”
64 | P a g e
SECTION 8 – GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
The discussion and analysis in this section is derived from information contained in the following: City of Huntington Park General Plan: City of Huntington Park Municipal Code; and, the Project plans.
8.1 Setting
South Coast Air Basin
The Project site is located within the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB) within the jurisdiction of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). The SCAB is a 6,745 square mile sub-region of the SCAQMD and includes portions of Los Angeles, Riverside and San Bernardino Counties, and all of Orange County. The larger SCAQMD boundary includes 10,743 square miles. The SCAB is bounded by the Pacific Ocean to the west and the San Gabriel, San Bernardino and San Jacinto Mountains to the north and east.
The SCAQMD was created by the 1977 Lewis-Presley Air Quality Management Act, which merged four county air pollution control bodies into one regional district. Under the Act, the SCAQMD is responsible for bringing air quality in areas under its jurisdiction into conformity with Federal and State air quality standards.
Global Climate Change Setting/Defined
Global Climate Change (GCC) is defined as the change in average meteorological conditions on the earth with respect to temperature, precipitation and storms. Global temperatures are regulated by naturally occurring atmospheric gases such as Water Vapor, Carbon Dioxide (CO2), Nitrous Oxide (N2O), Methane (CH4), Hydrofluorocarbons, Perfluorocarbons, and Sulfur Hexafluoride - - gases that remain in the atmosphere from 10 years to more than 100 years. These gases allow solar radiation into the earth’s atmosphere, but prevent radioactive heat from escaping, thusly warming the earth’s atmosphere. GCC also can occur naturally as it had in the past with previous ice ages.
Gases that trap heat in the atmosphere often are referred to as “greenhouse gases.” These gases are released into the atmosphere by both natural and anthropogenic (human) activity.
Without the natural greenhouse gas effect, the earth’s average temperature would be approximately 61 degrees Fahrenheit cooler than current average temperature. The cumulative accumulation of these gases in the earth’s atmosphere is considered to be the cause for the observed increase in the earth’s temperature.
State of California
The State of California legislature has enacted a series of bills that constitute the most aggressive program to reduce greenhouse gas emissions of any state in the nation. Project development and operation would be required to comply with all mandates imposed by the State of California and the SCAQMD aimed at reduction of air quality emissions. The regulatory mandates that are applicable to the Project and that would assist in the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions are the following - -
Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (California State Assembly Bill 32) – AB 32 requires greenhouse gas emissions in California be reduced to 1990 levels by year 2020. 65 | P a g e
“GHG” as defined under this legislation include Carbon Dioxide, Methane, N2O, hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons, and sulfur hexafluoride. Since AB 32 was enacted, a seventh chemical – nitrogen trifluoride – has been added to the list of greenhouse gas emissions. The California Air Resources Board is the State agency charged with monitoring and regulating sources of greenhouse gases. Under an updated forecast, a 21.7 percent reduction from “business as usual” is required to achieve 1990 levels. The Air Resources Board has made substantial progress in achieving its goal of achieving 1990 emissions levels by 2020.
California Air Resources Board Scoping Plan – The California Air Resources Board Climate Change Scoping Plan (Scoping Plan) contains measures designed to reduce the State emissions to 1990 levels by the year 2020 to comply with AB 32. The Scoping Plan identifies recommended measures for multiple greenhouse gas emission sectors and associated emission reductions needed to achieve the year 2020 reduction target. Most measures target the transportation and electricity sectors. The Scoping Plan states the key elements of the strategy for achieving the 2020 greenhouse gas target include the following:
• Expanding and strengthening existing energy efficiency programs as well as building and appliance standards;
• Achieving a Statewide renewables energy mix of 33 percent; • Developing a California cap-and-trade program that links with other Western Climate Initiative partner programs to create a regional market system; • Establishing targets for transportation-related greenhouse gas emissions for regions throughout California and pursuing policies and incentives to achieve those targets; • Adopting and implementing measures pursuant to existing State laws and policies, including California’s clean car standards, goods movement measures, and the Low Carbon Fuel Standard; and,
• Creating targeted fees, including a public goods charge on water use, fees on high global warming potential gases, and a fee to fund the administrative costs of the State’s longterm commitment to AB 32 implementation.
The Air Resources Board approved the First Update to the Scoping Plan (Update) on May 22, 2014. The Update identifies the next steps for California’s climate change strategy. The Update shows how California continues on its path to meet the near-term 2020 greenhouse gas limit, but also sets a path toward long-term, deep greenhouse gas emission reductions.
The report establishes a broad framework for continued emissions reductions beyond 2020, on the path to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050.
2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan Update (November, 2017) The 2017 Scoping Plan Update identifies California’s post-2020 reduction strategy and reflects the 2030 target of a 340 percent reduction below 1990 levels, set by Executive Order B-30-15 and codified by Senate Bill 32. Key programs the proposed Second Update builds upon include the Cap-and-Trade Regulation, the Low Carbon Fuel Standard, and much cleaner cars, trucks and freight movement, utilizing cleaner, renewable energy, and strategies to reduce methane emissions from agricultural and other wastes. Major elements of the 2017 Scoping Plan framework include the following:
• Implementing and/or increasing the standards of the Mobile Source Strategy, which include increasing ZEV buses and trucks;
66 | P a g e
• Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS), with an increased stringency (18 percent by 2030); • Implementing Senate Bill 350, which expands the Renewables Portfolio Standard (RPS) to 50 percent RPS and doubles energy efficiency savings by 2030; • California Sustainable Freight Action Plan, which improves freight system efficiency, utilizes near-zero emissions technology and deployment of ZEV trucks; • Implementing the proposed Short-Lived Climate Pollutant Strategy (SLPS), which focuses on reducing methane and hydrofluorocarbon emissions by 40 percent and anthropogenic black carbon emissions by 50 percent by year 2030;
• Continued implementation of Senate Bill 375;
• Post-2020 Cap-and-Trade Program that includes declining caps; • 20 percent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions from refineries by 2030; and, • Development of a Natural and Working Lands Action Plan to secure California’s land base as a net carbon sink.
The 2017 Scoping Plan also identifies local governments as essential partners in achieving California’s long-term greenhouse gas reduction goals and identifies local actions to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
Cap-and-Trade Program
The Scoping Plan identifies a Cap-and-Trade Program as one of the key strategies for California to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions. Under cap-and-trade, an overall limit on greenhouse gas emissions from capped sectors is established and facilities subject to the cap will be able to trade permits to emit greenhouse gases within the overall limit. The Cap-andTrade Program provides a firm cap, ensuring that 2020 California Statewide emission limit will not be exceeded. As of January 1, 2015, the Cap-and-Trade Program covered approximately 85 percent of California’s greenhouse gas emissions. The Program covers greenhouse gas emissions associated with electricity consumed in California, whether generated in-State or imported. Thereby, greenhouse gas emissions associated with CEQA projects’ electricity usage are covered by the Program. The Cap-and-Trade Program also covers fuel suppliers (natural gas and propane fuel providers and transportation fuel providers) to address emissions from such fuels. This Program works with other direct regulatory measures and provides an economic incentive to reduce emissions.
Senate Bill 375 – The Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act of 2008 This Bill recognizes the transportation sector is the largest contributor of GHG emissions, accounting for more than 40 percent of total GHG emissions in California. Senate Bill 375 (SB 375) does the following: (1) requires metropolitan planning organizations to include sustainable community strategies in their regional transportation plans for reducing GHG emissions; (2) aligns planning for transportation and housing; and (3) creates specified incentives for implementation of the strategies. Concerning CEQA, SB 375 (as codified in Public Resources Code Section 21159.28) states that CEQA findings for certain projects are not required to reference, describe, or discuss growth inducing impacts or any project-specific or cumulative impacts from cars and light-duty truck trips generated by the project on global warming or the regional transportation network if the project:
1. Is in an area with an approved “Sustainable Communities Strategy” or an alternative planning strategy that the Air Resources Board accepts as achieving the GHG emission 67 | P a g e
reduction targets.
2. Is consistent with that strategy (in designation, density, building intensity, and applicable policies).
3. Incorporates mitigation measures required by an applicable prior environmental document.
Pavley Fuel Efficiency Standards (California State Assembly Bill 1493) This Assembly Bill (enacted on July 22, 2002) required the Air Resources Board to develop and adopt regulations that reduce greenhouse gases emitted by passenger vehicles and light duty trucks. The regulation will reduce greenhouse gases from new cars by 334 percent from 2016 levels by 2025. The rules will clean up gasoline and diesel-powered cars and deliver increasing numbers of zero-emission technologies such as full battery electric cars, newly emerging plug-in hybrid electric vehicles and hydrogen fuel cell cars. Also, adequate fueling infrastructure availability will be ensured for the increasing numbers of hydrogen fuel cell vehicles planned for deployment in California.
Senate Bill 100 – California Renewable Portfolio Standard Program: Emissions of Greenhouse Gases 2017-2018
Senate Bill 100 states in part as follows - -
“This bill would state that it is the policy of the state that eligible renewable energy resources and zero-carbon resources supply 100% of retail sales of electricity to California end-use customers and 100% of electricity procured to serve all state agencies by December 31, 2045.
The bill would require that the achievement of this policy for California not increase carbon emissions elsewhere in the western grid and that the achievement not allow resource shuffling. The bill would require the PUC and the Energy Commission, in consultation with the state board, to take steps to ensure that a transition to a zero-carbon electric system for the State of California does not cause or contribute to greenhouse gas emissions increases elsewhere in the western grid.”
Executive Order S-3-05
This Executive Order (signed January 18, 2007) announces the following GHG emissions reduction targets:
• By 2010, reduce GHG emissions to 2000 levels
• By 2020, reduce GHG emissions to 1990 levels
• By 2050, reduce GHG emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels The 2050 reduction goal represents what some scientists believe is necessary to reach levels that will stabilize the climate. The goals are not legally enforceable for local governments or the private sector because this is an Executive Order.
Executive Order S-01-07- Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) Effective January 18, 2007, the Order mandates a California Statewide goal shall be established to reduce carbon intensity of California’s transportation fuels by at least 10 percent by 2020. After legal challenges, a new LCFS regulation became effective on January 1, 2016. 68 | P a g e
Executive Order B-30-15
The Executive Order became effective on April 29, 2015 to establish a California GHG reduction target of 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030. This Order aligns California’s GHG reduction targets with those of leading international governments ahead of the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Paris in late 2015. This target was set to ensure California meets its target of reducing GHG emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050 and directed the Air Resources Board to update the Climate Change Scoping Plan to express the 2030 target in terms of million metric tons of CO2 equivalent (MMCO2e). The Order also requires the State Climate Adaptation Plan to be updated every three years and for California to continue its climate change research program among other provisions. This Order is not legally enforceable for local governments and the private sector.
California Regulations and Building Codes
California has adopted regulations to improve energy efficiency in new and remodeled buildings, which have kept California’s energy consumption relatively flat even with rapid population growth.
Title 20 Appliance Efficiency Standards
This standard regulates sale of appliances in California and includes standards for federally regulated appliances and non-federally regulated appliances (totaling 23 categories of appliances).
Title 24 Energy Efficiency Standards and California Green Building Standards These standards were initially adopted in 1978 to reduce energy consumption and are updated periodically to allow consideration and possible incorporation of new energy efficient technologies and methods. The 2019 version of Title 24 was adopted by the California Energy Commission (CEC) and became effective on January 1, 2020, and is applicable to the Project.
The 2019 Title 24 standards will require solar photovoltaic systems for new homes, establish requirements for newly constructed healthcare facilities, encourage demand responsive technologies for residential buildings, and update indoor and outdoor lighting for nonresidential buildings. It is anticipated that nonresidential buildings will use approximately 30 percent less energy due to lighting upgrades.
The California Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen) is a comprehensive and uniform regulatory code for all residential, commercial and school buildings that became effective on January 1, 2011. CALGreen is administered by the California Building Standards Commission and is updated regularly. The most recent update became effective January 1, 2020. Local jurisdictions are permitted to adopt more stringent requirements because State law provides methods for local enhancements. The Code also provides exemptions for areas not served by construction and demolition recycling infrastructure. CALGreen requires the following:
• Short-Term Bicycle Parking – If a commercial project is anticipated to generate visitor traffic, provide permanently anchored bicycle racks within 200 feet of the visitors’ entrance, readily visible to passersby, for 5 percent of visitor motorized parking capacity, with a minimum of one two-bike capacity rack.
• Long-Term Bicycle Parking – For new buildings with 10 or more tenant-occupants, provide secure bicycle parking for 5 percent of tenant-occupied motorized vehicle parking 69 | P a g e
capacity, with a minimum of one space.
• Designated Parking – Provide designated parking in commercial projects for any combination of low-emitting, fuel-efficient and carpools/and pool vehicles. • Recycling by Occupants – Provide readily accessible areas that serve the entire building and are identified for depositing, storage and collection of nonhazardous materials for recycling.
• Construction Waste – A minimum 65 percent diversion of construction and demolition waste from landfills, increasing voluntarily to 80 percent for new homes and commercial projects. All (100 percent) of trees, stumps, rocks and associated vegetation and soils resulting from land clearing shall be reused or recycled. • Wastewater Reduction – Each building shall reduce generation of wastewater by installation of water-conserving fixtures or using non-potable water systems. • Water Use Savings – Mandatory 20 percent reduction of non-residential indoor water use with voluntary goal standards for 30, 35, and 40 percent reductions. • Water Meters – Separate water meters for buildings in excess of 50,000 square feet or buildings projected to consume more than 1,000 gallons per day. • Irrigation Efficiency – Moisture-sensing irrigation systems for larger landscaped areas. • Materials Pollution Control – Low-pollutant emitting interior finish materials such as paints, carpet, vinyl flooring and particle board.
• Building Commissioning – Mandatory inspections of energy systems (i.e., heat furnace, air conditioner, mechanical equipment) for nonresidential buildings over 10,000 square feet to ensure all are working at their maximum capacity according to their design efficiencies.
Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance
This Ordinance was required by the Water Conservation Act (Assembly Bill 1881). Local agencies were required to adopt a local landscape ordinance at least as effective in conserving water as the Model Ordinance by January 1, 2010. Reductions in water use of 20 percent consistent with the 2020 mandate were expected upon compliance with the Ordinance. The California Water Commission approved a revised Ordinance on July 15, 2015 (effective December 15, 2015). The update required new development projects that include landscape areas of 500 or more square feet to implement the following:
• More efficient irrigation systems;
• Incentives for graywater usage;
• Improvements in on-site stormwater capture;
• Limitations on the portion of landscapes that can be planted with high water use plants; and,
• Required reports for local agencies.
Air Resources Board Refrigerant Management Program
This regulation was adopted in 2009 to reduce refrigerant GHG emissions from stationary sources through refrigerant leak detection and monitoring, leak repair, system retirement and retrofitting, reporting and recordkeeping, and proper refrigerant cylinder use, sale and disposal.
70 | P a g e
Tractor-Trailer Greenhouse Gas Regulation
Tractors and trailers subject to this regulation must either use Environmental Protection Agency SmartWay certified tractors and trailers or retrofit their existing fleet with SmartWay verified technologies. The regulation applies primarily to owners of 53-foot or longer box-type trailers, including both dry-van and refrigerated-van trailers, and owners of the heavy-duty tractors that pull them on California highways. These owners are responsible for replacing or retrofitting their affected vehicles with compliant aerodynamic technologies and low rolling resistance tires. Sleeper cab tractors model year 2011 and later must be SmartWay certified.
All other tractors must use SmartWay verified low rolling resistance tires. There also are requirements for trailers to have low rolling resistance tires and aerodynamic devices.
Phase I and 2 Heavy-Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Standards The Air Resources Board has adopted a new regulation for greenhouse gas emissions from heavy-duty trucks and engines sold in California. It establishes GHG emission limits on truck and engine manufacturers and harmonizes with the United States Environmental Protection Agency rule for new trucks and engines nationally. Existing heavy-duty vehicle regulations in California include engine criteria emission standards, tractor-trailer GHG requirements to implement SmartWay strategies, and in-use fleet retrofit requirements such as the Truck and Bus Regulation. The Air Resources Board staff has worked jointly with the United States Environmental Protection Agency and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration on the Phase 2 of federal greenhouse gas emission standards for medium- and heavy-duty vehicles. Phase 2 standards were built on improvements in engine and vehicle efficiency required by Phase 1 emission standards and represent a significant opportunity to achieve further GHG reductions for 2018 and later model year heavy-duty vehicles, including trailers.
Senate Bill 97 and CEQA Guidelines Update
The CEQA Amendments provide guidance to public agencies pertaining to analysis and mitigation of effects of GHG emissions in CEQA documents. The CEQA Amendments added climate change as a topic for analysis. CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.4 was added to assist agencies in determining significance of GHG emissions. This section allows agencies the discretion to determine whether a quantitative or qualitative analysis is best for a particular project. However, little guidance was offered about how to determine whether a project’s estimated GHG emissions were significant or cumulatively considerable.
CEQA Guidelines Sections 15126.4 and 15130 also were amended to address mitigation measures and cumulative impacts, respectively. GHG mitigation measures are referenced in general terms; no specific measures are promoted. The revision to the cumulative impact discussion requirement directs agencies to analyze GHG emissions in an EIR when a project’s incremental contribution of emissions may be cumulatively considerable but does not answer the question of when emissions are cumulatively considerable. Section 15183.5 permits programmatic GHG analysis and later project-specific tiering, as well as preparation of GHG Reduction Plans. According to Section 15183.5(b), compliance with such plans can support a determination that a project’s cumulative effect is not cumulatively considerable.
The CEQA Amendments also revised Appendix F of the CEQA Guidelines, which focuses on Energy Conservation. The sample environmental checklist in Appendix G was amended to include GHG questions. Subsequent CEQA Guidelines Amendments added Energy questions to the sample environmental checklist.
71 | P a g e
Regional
South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD)
The SCAQMD is the agency responsible for air quality planning and regulation in the South Coast Air Basin. The SCAQMD addresses impacts to climate change of projects subject to SCAQMD permit as a lead agency if they are the only agency having discretionary approval for the project and acts as a responsible agency when a land use agency must also approve discretionary permits for the project. SCAQMD only has authority over GHG emissions from development projects that include air quality permits. No stationary sources of emissions subject to SCAQMD permits are proposed as part of this project. Notwithstanding, if the Project requires a stationary permit, it would be subject to applicable SCAQMD regulations.
In 2008, SCAQMD formed a Working Group to identify GHG emissions thresholds for land use projects that could be used by local lead agencies in the South Coast Air Basin. The Working Group developed several different options that are contained in the SCAQMD Draft Guidance Document – Interim CEQA GHG Significance Threshold that could be applied by lead agencies. The Working Group has not provided additional guidance since release of the interim guidance in 2008. The SCAQMD Board has not approved the thresholds.
Greenhouse Gases
Water Vapor (H2O) – Water Vapor is the most abundant, important, and variable greenhouse gas in the earth’s atmosphere. Water vapor is not a pollutant; rather, in the atmosphere it maintains a climate necessary for life. Changes in the atmospheric concentration of water vapor are directly related to warming of the atmosphere rather than a direct result of industrialization. As the temperature of the atmosphere rises, more water is evaporated from ground storage (rivers, oceans, reservoirs, soil). There are no human health effects from water vapor itself. However, when some pollutants come in contact with water vapor, they can dissolve and the water vapor then can act as a pollutant-carrying agent. The primary source of water vapor is evaporation from oceans (approximately 85 percent). As a greenhouse gas, the higher concentration of water vapor is able to absorb more thermal indirect energy radiated from the Earth, thus further warming the atmosphere. When water vapor increases in the atmosphere, more of it eventually will also condense into clouds that are more able to reflect incoming solar radiation. This will allow less energy to reach the Earth’s surface and thereby affect surface temperatures. Other sources include evaporation from other water bodies, sublimation (change from solid to gas) from sea ice and snow, and transpiration from plant leaves.
Carbon Dioxide (CO2) – Carbon Dioxide is an odorless and colorless greenhouse gas.
Outdoor levels of Carbon Dioxide are not sufficiently high to result in negative health effects.
Carbon Dioxide is naturally removed from the air by photosynthesis, dissolution into ocean water, transfer to soils and ice caps, and chemical weathering of carbonate rocks. Carbon Dioxide is emitted from natural sources (e.g., decomposition of dead organic matter; respiration of bacteria, plants, animals and fungus; evaporation from oceans; volcanic outgassing) and from anthropogenic sources (e.g., burning of coal, oil, natural gas and wood).
Since the industrial revolution began in the mid-18th century, the type of human activity that increases greenhouse gas emissions has increased dramatically in scale and distribution.
Since the beginning of the industrial revolution, Carbon Dioxide concentrations have increased more than 30 percent and, left unchecked, are projected to increase to nearly 72 | P a g e
double the concentrations in the atmosphere at the dawn of the industrial revolution as a direct result of anthropogenic sources. The International Panel on Climate change (IPCC, Fifth Assessment Report, 2014) estimates that emissions of Carbon Dioxide from fossil fuel combustion and industrial processes contributed approximately 785 of the total greenhouse gas emissions increase from 1970 to 2010.
Methane (CH4) – Methane is a very effective absorber of radiation but has an atmospheric concentration less than Carbon Dioxide and its lifetime is 10-12 years. Exposure to high levels of methane can cause asphyxiation, loss of consciousness, headache and dizziness, nausea and vomiting, weakness, loss of coordination, and an increased breathing rate. Methane has natural and anthropogenic sources. It is released as part of biological processes in low oxygen environments, such as in swamplands or in rice production. Over the last 50 years, human activities such as growing rice, raising cattle, using natural gas, and coal mining have added to atmospheric concentration of methane. Other anthropocentric sources include fossil fuel combustion and biomass burning.
Nitrous Oxide (N2O) – Nitrous Oxide is also known as laughing gas and is a colorless greenhouse gas. Nitrous Oxide and cause dizziness, euphoria, and sometimes light hallucinations. It is considered harmless in small doses. However, in some cases heavy and extended use can cause Olney’s Lesions (brain damage). Nitrous Oxide concentrations began to increase at the beginning of the industrial revolution. It is produced by microbial processes in soil and water, including those reactions that occur in fertilizer containing nitrogen. Also, some industrial processes (e.g., fossil fuel fired power plants, nylon production, nitric acid production, vehicle emissions) contribute to its atmospheric load.
Chlorofluorocarbons (CFC) – Chlorofluorocarbons are gases formed synthetically by replacing all hydrogen atoms in Methane or Ethane (C2H6) with chlorine and/or fluorine atoms.
CFC are non-toxic, non-flammable, insoluble and chemically unreactive in the troposphere (the level of air at the earth’s surface). CFC are no longer being used and therefore it is not likely health effects would be experienced. However, in confined indoor locations, working with CFC-113 or other CFC is thought to result in death by cardiac arrhythmia (heart frequency too high or too low) or asphyxiation. Levels of major CFC now are remaining steady or declining. However, their long atmospheric lifetimes mean some CFC will remain in the atmosphere for more than 100 years.
Hydrofluorocarbons (HFC) – Hydrofluorocarbons are synthetic, man-made chemicals used as a substitute for CFC. They are one of three groups with the highest global warming potential. No health effects are known to result from exposure to HFC, which are manmade for applications such as automobile air conditioners and refrigerants.
Perfluorocarbons (PFC) – Perfluorocarbons have stable molecular structures and do not break down through chemical processes in the lower atmosphere. High-energy ultraviolet rays that occur about 60 kilometers above the surface of the earth are able to destroy the compounds. Thereby, PFC have very long lifetimes - - between 10,000 and 50,000 years.
No health effects are known to result from exposure to PFC. The two primary sources of PFC are primary aluminum production and semiconductor manufacture.
Sulfur Hexafluoride (SF6) – Sulfur Hexafluoride is an inorganic, odorless, colorless, non-toxic nonflammable gas that has the highest global warming potential of any gas evaluated. In high concentrations in confined areas, the gas presents the hazard of suffocation because it displaces the oxygen needed for breathing. Sulfur Hexafluoride is used for insulation in 73 | P a g e
electric power transmission and distribution equipment, in the magnesium industry, in semiconductor manufacturing, and as a tracer gas for leak detection.
Nitrogen Trifluoride (NF3) – Nitrogen Trifluoride is a colorless gas with a distinctly moldy odor used in industrial processes and is produced in the manufacture of semiconductors and Liquid Crystal Display panels, types of solar panels and chemical lasers. Long-term or repeated exposure may affect the liver and kidneys and may cause fluorosis.
Carbon Dioxide Equivalent (CO2e) is a term used for describing the difference greenhouse gases in a common unit. CO2e signifies the amount of CO2 that would have the equivalent global warming potential.
Greenhouse gases have different Global Warming Potential values. Global Warming Potential of a greenhouse gas indicates the amount of warming a gas causes over a given period of time and represents the potential of a gas to trap heat in the atmosphere. The Global Warming Potential (100-year time horizon) ranges from 1 for Carbon Dioxide to as much as 23,900 for Sulfur Hexafluoride.
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventories
Global
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change tracks worldwide anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions for industrialized and developing nations. As the following Table 8-1 indicates, the United States as a single country was the number two producer of greenhouse gas emissions in 2016. The primary greenhouse gas emitted by human activities in the United States was Carbon Dioxide, representing approximately 81.6 percent of total greenhouse gas emissions in the United States. Carbon dioxide from fossil fuel combustion, as the largest source of United States greenhouse gas emissions, accounted for approximately 93.5 percent of the Carbon Dioxide emissions.
Table 8-1
GHG Emissions, By Country
Emitting Countries GHG Emissions (Gg CO2e)
China 11,895,765
United States 6,511,302
European Union (28 member countries) 4,291,252
India 2,643,817
Russian Federation 2,100,850
Japan 1,304,568
TOTAL 28,747,554
State of California
The State of California requires CEQA documents to include an evaluation of Greenhouse Gas Emissions (GHG), or gases that trap heat in the atmosphere. GJHG are emitted by both natural processes and human activities. Accumulation of GHG in the atmosphere regulates the earth’s temperature. Without these natural GHG, the Earth’s surface would be about 61o F cooler (California, State of, OPR Technical Advisory – CEQA and Climate Change: Addressing Climate 74 | P a g e
Change through the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Review, June 19, 2008).
However, emissions from fossil fuel combustion have elevated the concentrations of GHG in the atmosphere to above natural levels. These man-made GHG will have the effect of warming atmospheric temperatures with the attendant impacts of changes in the global climate, increasing sea levels, and changing the worldwide biome.
California has slowed significantly the rate of growth of greenhouse gas emissions due to implementation of energy efficiency programs as well as adoption of strict emission controls but is still a substantial contributor to the United States emissions inventory total. The California Air Resources Board compiles greenhouse gas inventories for the State of California. Based upon the 2018 greenhouse gas inventory data for the 2000 to 2016 greenhouse emissions inventory, California emitted 429.4 MMTCO2e including emissions resulting from imported electrical power in 2015.
Effects of Climate Change in California
Public Health
Higher temperatures may increase frequency, duration and intensity of conditions conducive to air pollution formation. In addition, if global background Ozone levels increase as predicted in some scenarios, it may become impossible to meet local air quality standards. Air quality could be further compromised by increases in wildfires, which emit fine particulate matter than can travel long distances depending on wind conditions. The Climate Scenarios report indicates that large wildfires could become up to 55 percent more frequent if greenhouse gas emissions are not significantly reduced. In addition, under the higher warming range scenario there could be up to 100 more days per year with temperatures above 90 degrees Fahrenheit in Los Angeles and 95 degrees Fahrenheit in Sacramento by 2100. This is a large increase over historical patterns and approximately twice the increase projected if temperatures remain within or below the lower warming range. Rising temperatures could increase risk of death from dehydration, heat stroke/exhaustion, heart attack, stroke, and respiratory distress caused by extreme heat.
Water Resources
A vast network of man-made reservoirs and aqueducts captures and transports water throughout the State from northern California rivers and the Colorado River. The current distribution system relies on Sierra Nevada snowpack to supply water during the dry spring and summer months.
Rising temperatures, potentially compounded by decreases in precipitation, could severely reduce spring snowpack, increasing the risk of summer water shortages. The State’s water supplies also are at risk from rising sea levels. An influx of saltwater could degrade California’s estuaries, wetlands and groundwater aquifers. Saltwater intrusion caused by rising sea levels is a major threat to quality and reliability of water within the southern edge of the Sacramento/San Joaquin River Delta - - a major fresh water supply.
If temperatures continue to increase, more precipitation could fall as rain instead of snow, and the snow that does fall could melt earlier, thereby reducing the Sierra Nevada spring snowpack by as much as 70 to 90 percent. Under the lower warming range scenario, snowpack losses could be only half as large as those possible if temperatures were to rise to the higher warming range. It also could adversely affect winter tourism, particularly by shortening the ski and snowboarding season.
75 | P a g e
Agriculture
Increased temperatures could cause widespread changes to the agriculture industry reducing the quantity and quality of agricultural products Statewide. California farmers could face greater water demand for crops and a less reliable water supply as temperatures rise. Crop growth and development could change, as could intensity and frequency of pest and disease outbreaks.
Rising temperatures could aggravate Ozone pollution, which makes plants more susceptible to disease and pests and interferes with plant growth. Rising temperatures could worsen quantity and quality of yield for some of California’s agricultural products, including wine grapes, fruits and nuts. In addition, Global Climate Change could shift the ranges of existing invasive plants and weeds and alter competition patterns with native plants. Also, continued Global Climate Change could alter abundance and types of many pests, lengthen pest breeding seasons, and increase pathogen growth rates.
Forests and Landscapes
Global Climate Change has the potential to intensify the current threat to forests and landscapes by increasing risk of wildfire and altering distribution and character of natural vegetation. Since wildfire risk is determined by a combination of factors including precipitation, winds, temperature and landscape and vegetation conditions, future risks will not be uniform throughout the State.
Continued Global Climate Change has the potential to alter natural ecosystems and biological diversity within the State and could decrease the productivity of the State’s forests.
Rising Sea Levels
Rising sea levels, more intense coastal storms, and warmer water temperatures could increasingly threaten California’s coastal regions. Under the higher warming range scenario, sea level is anticipated to rise 22 to 35 inches by 2100. Elevations of this magnitude would inundate low-lying coastal areas with salt water, accelerate coastal erosion, threaten vital levees and inland water systems, and disrupt wetlands and natural habitats. Under the lower warming range scenario, sea level could rise 12 to 14 inches.
Human Health Effects
The potential health effects related directly to emissions of Carbon Dioxide, Methane and Nitrous Oxide as they relate to development projects are still being debated in the scientific community.
Their cumulative effects to global climate change have the potential to cause adverse effects to human health. Climate change will likely cause shifts in weather patterns, potentially resulting in devastating droughts and food shortages in some areas.
76 | P a g e
8.2 Thresholds of Significance
Would the project:
Environmental Issue
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions,
either directly or indirectly, that may
have a significant impact on the
environment?
X
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy
or regulation adopted for the purpose of
reducing the emissions of greenhouse
gases?
X
8.3 Discussion of CEQA Checklist Answers
a) Would the Project generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT.
The Project would generate an estimated total 74.4394 metric tons of CO2e emissions during construction. The SCAQMD recommends amortizing construction emissions over a period of 30 years to estimate the contribution of construction emissions to operational emissions over the project lifetime. Amortized over 30 years, the construction of the project will generate approximately 2.4813 metric tons of CO2e on an annualized basis.
Based on the results of the CalEEMod Model, the Project would generate a total of 584.4416 metric tons of CO2e emissions annually from operations. By adding the amortized construction emissions results with the operational annual CO2e emissions the Project will produce 586.9229 metric tons annually over a 30-year period. This cumulative level is below the SCAQMD’s recommended Tier 3 threshold of 3,000 metric tons of CO2e emissions for residential and commercial land uses. Therefore, the Project is not expected to have a significant cumulative impact on Greenhouse Gas Emissions. b) Would the Project conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT.
As indicated above, Project development will result in an incremental increase in Greenhouse Gas Emissions. The Project will not introduce any conflicts with adopted initiatives designed to control future Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Impacts related to conflicts with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing emissions of Greenhouse Gases are less than significant.
77 | P a g e
The following Table 8-2 identifies which California Air Resources Board Recommended Actions apply to the Project. Of the 39 identified measures, those that would be applicable to the Project would by primarily be those actions related to water conservation. Others included energy conservation for new signalization and lighting.
Table 8-2 – California Air Resources Board Recommended Actions ID# Sector Strategy Name Applicable
To Project?
Conflict
With
Project
T-1 Transportation Pavley I and II – Light-Duty Vehicle GHG Standards
No No
T-2 Transportation Low-Carbon Fuel Standard (Discrete
Early Action)
No No
T-3 Transportation Regional Transportation-Related GHG
Targets
No No
T-4 Transportation Vehicle Efficiency Measures No No
T-5 Transportation Ship Electrification at Ports (Discrete Early Action)
No No
T-6 Transportation Goods-Movement Efficiency Measures No No T-7 Transportation Heavy Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas
Reduction Measures
No No
T-8 Transportation Medium and Heavy-Duty Vehicle
Hybridization
No No
T-9 Transportation High Speed Rail No No
E-1 Energy Increased Utility Energy Efficiency
Programs More Stringent Standards
No No
E-2 Energy Increase Combined Heat and Power Use
by 30,000GWh
No No
E-3 Energy Renewable Portfolio Standard No No
E-4 Energy Million Solar Roofs No No
CR-1 Energy Energy Efficiency Yes No
CR-2 Energy Solar Water Heating No No
GB-1 Green Buildings Green Buildings No No
W-1 Water Water Use Efficiency Yes No
W-2 Water Water Recycling Yes No
W-3 Water Water System Energy Efficiency Yes No
W-4 Water Reuse Urban Runoff No No
W-5 Water Increase Renewable Energy Production No No
W-6 Water Public Goods Charge (Water) No No
I-1 Industry Energy efficiency and Co-benefits Audis
for Large Industrial Sources
No No
I-2 Industry Oil and Gas Extraction GHG Emission
Reduction
No No
I-3 Industry GHG Leak Reduction from Oil and Gas
Transmission
No No
I-4 Industry Refinery Flare Recovery Process
Improvements
No No
I-5 Industry Removal of Methane Exemption from
Existing Refinery Regulations
No No
RW-1 Recycling and
Waste
Landfill Methane Control (Discrete Early
Action)
No No
RW-2 Recycling and
Waste
Additional Reductions in Landfill
Methane – Capture Improvements
No No
RW-3 Recycling and
Waste
High Recycling/Zero Waste No No
F-1 Forestry Sustainable Forest Target No No
H-1 Global
Warming
Motor Vehicle Air Conditioning Systems
(Discrete Early Action)
No No
78 | P a g e
H-2 Global
Warming
SF6 Limits in Non-Utility and NonSemiconductor ManufacturingNo No H-3 Global
Warming
Reduction in Perfluorocarbons in
Semiconductor Manufacturing
No No
H-4 Global
Warming
Limit High GWP Use in Consumer
Products
No No
H-5 Global
Warming
High GWP Reductions from Mobile
Sources
No No
H-6 Global
Warming
High GWP Reductions from Stationary
Sources
No No
H-7 Global
Warming
Mitigation Fee on High GWP Gases No No
A-1 Agriculture Methane Capture at Large Dairies No No
As indicated previously, Project development will result in limited GHG emissions. However, emissions will not conflict with any applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing emissions of greenhouse gases. Impacts would be less than significant. 79 | P a g e
SECTION 9 – HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
The discussion and analysis in this section is derived from information contained in the following: City of Huntington Park General Plan: City of Huntington Park Municipal Code; Blodgett Baylosis Environmental Planning, “Draft Environmental Impact Report: City of Huntington Park 2030 Comprehensive General Plan Update – Huntington Park, California” (October 12, 2017); and, the Project plans.
9.1 Setting
The State of California defines a hazardous material as a substance that is toxic, ignitable or flammable, or reactive and/or corrosive. An extremely hazardous material is defined as a substance that shows high acute or chronic toxicity, carcinogenicity, bio-accumulative properties, and persistence in the environment, or is water-reactive (California Code of Regulations, Title 22).
The primary concern associated with release of a hazardous material relates to public health risks of exposure. Toxic gases are a primary concern because a gaseous toxic plume is more difficult to contain than a solid or liquid spill and a gas can impact a larger segment of the population in a shorter time span. Releases of hazardous materials also may occur during a natural disaster. Improperly-stored containers of hazardous substances may overturn or break, pipelines may rupture, and storage tanks may fail. Containers may explode when subjected to high temperatures, such as those accompanying by a fire. The hazard may be compounded if two or more chemicals that are reactive when combined come in contact as a result of a spill. The Uniform Fire Code includes criteria designed to minimize risk of an accident. These guidelines are to be followed when storing, using, or transporting hazardous materials, and include secondary containment of substances, segregation of chemicals to reduce reactivity during a release, sprinkler and alarm systems, monitoring, venting and auto shutoff equipment, and treatment requirements for toxic gas releases.
All businesses that handle hazardous materials are required by Federal, State and local agencies to submit a business plan to their local administering agency. Reportable quantities are 50 or more gallons of a liquid, 500 pounds or more or a solid, or 200 cubic feet or more of a gas at standard temperature and pressure. Quantities for acutely hazardous materials vary according to the substance. Every handler of hazardous material is required to submit a business plan and an inventory of hazardous substances and acutely hazardous materials to the Huntington Park Police Department the Los Angeles County Fire Department annually.
Hazardous material users and generators in Huntington Park include gasoline stations, auto repairs shops, printers and photo labs, clinics, dry cleaners, schools, fire stations, and a variety of other commercial and industrial land uses.
The City of Huntington Park Draft General Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report indicates that, according to the Envirofacts Database the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) currently is regulating 127 facilities in Huntington Park. The uses include the following: plating/manufacturing; foundries; pharmacies; auto repair shops; dry cleaners; copy and printing companies; light industrial; hardware stores; and, gasoline service stations.
The Environmental Protection Agency identifies these uses as being handlers and/or consumers of hazardous materials. Also, the California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) indicates through its Hazardous Waste and Substances Site list that there is one use currently undergoing State remedial action through the Site Cleanup Program. In addition, the State Water Resources Board GeoTracker database depicts additional sites 80 | P a g e
engaged in cleanup activities or that have completed remediation, and identifies other facilities presently undergoing DTSC regulation. The facilities include Leaking Underground Storage Tanks, military cleanup sites, permitted USTs, and active operations utilizing hazardous materials or generating hazardous waste.
Florence Avenue, which in part extends across the southern boundary of the Project site, is a major truck route that connects Huntington Park to Interstate-710 and Interstate-110 and thereby presents a potential for hazardous material accidents and spills during transport.
Additionally, railroad lines that serve the area occasionally transport hazardous materials.
The City of Huntington Park has no jurisdiction or control over transport of hazardous materials on freeways and railroads. The California Highway Patrol, together with Caltrans, is in charge of spills that may occur on local freeways.
Regulatory Setting
Several regulations are applicable to any new development that would be effective in reducing the potential risk of upset impacts. The following regulations are in effect.
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act – The California Department of Toxic Substance Control (DTSC) is authorized to implement the State Hazardous Waste Management Program for the Federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The EPA continues to regulate hazardous substances under the Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA).
Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act – CERCLA, commonly known as Superfund, was enacted by Congress in 1980. This law created a tax on the chemical and petroleum industries and provided broad Federal authority to respond directly to releases or threatened releases of hazardous substances that may endanger public health or the environment. CERCLA was amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA) in 1986.
State Regulations – The California Environmental Protection Agency (Cal-EPA) and the State Water Resources Control Board established rules concerning use of hazardous materials and management of hazardous waste. With the Cal-EPA, the DTSC has the primary regulatory responsibility, with delegation of enforcement to local jurisdictions that enter into agreements with the State agency for management of hazardous materials and generation, transport, and disposal of hazardous waste under the authority of Title I of the Hazardous Waste Control Law (HWCL).
Assembly Bill 387 and Senate Bill 162 – Assembly Bill 387 and Senate Bill 162 provide a comprehensive program to ensure hazardous material contamination issues are addressed adequately prior to school development. The program involves preparation of a Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment to determine whether a release of a hazardous material has occurred on-site in the past or if there may be a naturally occurring hazardous material present within a site.
81 | P a g e
9.2 Thresholds of Significance
Would the project:
Environmental Issue
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Create a significant hazard to the public
or the environment through the routine
transport, use, or disposal of hazardous
materials?
X
b) Create a significant hazard to the public
or the environment through reasonably
foreseeable upset and accident
conditions involving the release of
hazardous materials into the
environment?
X
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle
hazardous or acutely hazardous
materials, substances, or waste within
one-quarter mile of an existing or
proposed school?
X
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?
X
e) For a project located within an airport
land use plan or, where such a plan has
not been adopted, within two miles of a
public airport or public use airport,
would the project result in a safety
hazard for people residing or working in
the project area?
X
f) Impair implementation of or physically
interfere with an adopted emergency
response plan or emergency
evacuation plan?
X
g) Expose people or structures, either
directly or indirectly, to a significant risk
of loss, injury or death involving
wildland fires?
X
82 | P a g e
9.3 Discussion of CEQA Checklist Answers
a) Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT.
Chemicals used related to the Project would be limited to those used during development (demolition; grading/pavement removal; building construction; painting; finishing) and to those chemicals used for building maintenance. Any potential for accidental release of hazardous materials from Project development may be related to contaminated pavement that will be replaced during grading and related to building construction. However, Project development will comply with disposal requirements of such materials, as specified in the City of Huntington Park Municipal Code and any applicable requirements of the County of Los Angeles.
b) Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment?
LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT.
Project development would involve the following:
• Demolish the existing 11,718 square foot office building and remove all of the existing site improvements including all parking lot paving, trash enclosure, equipment cabinets, parking lot planters, all existing property line walls, and all existing vegetation including trees. • Construct a 4,969 square foot car wash building with related development including o Four vacuum canopies totaling 3,963 square feet and one 192 square foot paystation canopy
o 192 square foot vacuum pump enclosure and other utility structures o 34 parking space parking area including drive aisles, queuing and exit lanes o Stormwater infiltration system
o Wastewater clarifier system and associated water recycling system o Property line walls and freestanding pole sign
o Approximately 7,498 square feet of landscaped area
• Construct the following improvements in the public right-of-way:
o Remove existing driveway at west end of site
o Widen existing driveway at Mission Place intersection o Install new right-turn-exit-only driveway near east end of site o Remove street tree and relocate existing tree well to accommodate new driveway o Install new fire hydrant
Small amounts of hazardous materials may be used during Project development/construction, but compliance with City of Huntington Park requirements for use and storage of such commonly-used materials would not pose a significant hazard to the public or the environment. Thereby, resultant environmental impacts would be less than significant. Therefore, Project development and operation impacts related to creation of a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment would be less than significant.
83 | P a g e
c) Would the project emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?
LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT.
Hope Elementary School and Lucille Roybal-Allard Elementary Schools are approximately ¼ mile from the project site. St. Matthias Catholic School is approximately 200 feet from the project site on the opposite side of Florence Avenue. Small amounts of hazardous materials may be used or emitted during Project development/construction, but compliance with City of Huntington Park requirements for use and storage of such commonly-used materials would not pose a significant hazard to the public or the environment. The level of impact would be less than significant. d) Would the project be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? NO IMPACT.
The entire Project site is developed with a deteriorated commercial building and associated infrastructure. No hazardous materials sites occur within the Project site or are identified on the Cortese list of contaminated sites. Therefore, Project development and operation would not create a significant hazard to the pubic or the environment. No impact would result.
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? NO IMPACT.
The closest airports to the Project site are the San Gabriel Valley Airport, the Long Beach Airport, and Los Angeles International Airport which are, respectively, approximately 17 miles, 18 miles, and 19 miles from the Project site. The Project site is not located within an airport land use plan. Therefore, no impact would result. f) Would the project impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
NO IMPACT.
Project development would involve the following:
• Demolish the existing 11,718 square foot office building and remove all of the existing site improvements including all parking lot paving, trash enclosure, equipment cabinets, parking lot planters, all existing property line walls, and all existing vegetation including trees. • Construct a 4,969 square foot car wash building with related development including o Four vacuum canopies totaling 3,963 square feet and one 192 square foot paystation canopy
84 | P a g e
o 192 square foot vacuum pump enclosure and other utility structures o 34 parking space parking area including drive aisles, queuing and exit lanes o Stormwater infiltration system
o Wastewater clarifier system and associated water recycling system o Property line walls and freestanding pole sign
o Approximately 7,498 square feet of landscaped area
• Construct the following improvements in the public right-of-way:
o Remove existing driveway at west end of site
o Widen existing driveway at Mission Place intersection o Install new right-turn-exit-only driveway near east end of site o Remove street tree and relocate existing tree well to accommodate new driveway o Install new fire hydrant
The project will be required to comply with applicable Los Angeles County Fire Department requirements and public right-of-way improvements will be required to comply with the requirements of the City of Huntington Park Department of Public Works. Project development will have no resulting negative impact.
g) Would the project expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires? NO IMPACT.
The Project vicinity is thoroughly urbanized. The Project site is an entirely developed property. No wildland is present on, adjacent, or near the Project site. Therefore, there would be no impact from Project development or operation related to direct or indirect exposure of people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires.
85 | P a g e
SECTION 10 – HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
The discussion and analysis in this section is derived from information contained in the following: City of Huntington Park General Plan: City of Huntington Park Municipal Code; “Draft Environmental Impact Report: City of Huntington Park 2030 Comprehensive General Plan Update – Huntington Park, California” (October 12, 2017); and, the Project plans.
10.1 Setting
Basin Boundaries and Hydrology
The Project site is located in the coastal plain of the Los Angeles Groundwater Basin -Central Sub-Basin, an area that occupies a large portion of the southeastern part of the Coastal Plan of the Los Angeles Groundwater Basin. This sub-basin commonly is referred to as the “Central Basin” and is bounded on the north by a surface divide called the La Brea High and, on the northeast, and east by emergent less permeable Tertiary rocks of the Elysian, Repeto, Merced and Puente Hills. Its southeast boundary between the Central Basin and Orange County Groundwater Basin roughly follows Coyote Creek - a regional drainage province boundary. The southeast boundary is formed by the Newport Inglewood fault system and the associated folded rocks of the Newport Inglewood uplift. Total storage capacity of the Central Basin is 13,800,000-acre feet.
The Los Angeles and San Gabriel Rivers drain inland basins and pass across the surface of the Central Basin to the Pacific Ocean.
Average precipitation throughout the Sub-basin ranges from 11 to 13 inches.
Hydrogeologic Information
Water Bearing Formations
Throughout the Central Basin, groundwater occurs in Holocene and Pleistocene age sediments at relatively shallow depths. Historically, groundwater flow in the Central Basin has been from recharge areas in the northeast part of the sub basin toward the Pacific Ocean on the southwest. However, pumping has lowered the water in the Central Basin and water levels in some aquifers are about equal on both sides of the Newport-Inglewood uplift, decreasing subsurface outflow to the West Coast Sub Basin.
Groundwater enters the Central Basin through surface and subsurface flow and by direct percolation of precipitation, stream flow, and applied water. The groundwater replenishes the aquifers dominantly in the forebay areas where permeable sediments are exposed at ground surface. Percolation into the Los Angeles Forebay Area is restricted due to paving and development of the surface of the Forebay. Imported water purchased from Metropolitan Water District and recycled water from Whittier and San Jose Treatment Plants are used for artificial recharge in the Montebello Forebay at the Rio Hondo and San Gabriel River spreading grounds.
Water levels varied over a range of approximately 25 feet between 1961 and 1977, and have varied through a range of approximately 5-10 feet since 1996. Most water wells demonstrate levels in 1999 that are in the upper portion of their recent historical range. 86 | P a g e
Regulations Applicable to the Project
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Mapping Program
The Federal Emergency Management Agency oversees preparation of maps that indicate areas where there is a potential for inundation resulting from a 100-year flood and a 500-year flood. The maps serve as the basis for determining whether flood insurance is required for homeowners. The mapping program also serves an additional purpose in designating areas of the City where flood-related mitigation may be required.
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) The National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System is the system for granting and regulating permits related to point and non-point sources that discharge pollutants into waters of the United States. This System requires operators of regulated small municipal separate storm sewer systems to obtain a NPDES permit and develop a storm water management program that will prevent pollutants from being conveyed is storm water runoff into the storm sewer systems or from being dumped directly into storm drains.
Water Supplies and Water Quality
The City of Huntington Park is located within the central section of the Downey Plain. The City is underlain by the Central groundwater basin, which is bounded to the north by the Elysian and Repetto Hills, to the northeast by the Merced and Puente Hills, to the east by the Los Angeles County line, and to the southwest by the Newport-Inglewood Fault along the Rosecrans, Dominguez, Signal, and Bixby Ranch Hills.
Groundwater resources in the Central Basin consist of a body of shallow, unconfined and semi-perched water on the upper part of the alluvial deposits, the principal body of fresh groundwater within the Recent and Pleistocene deposits, and salt water under the freshwater resources. Water-bearing deposits are unconsolidated and semi-consolidated alluvial sediments that hold water and allow water to pass through. These are referred to as aquifers.
Non-water bearing deposits are consolidated rocks and ground layers that provide limited water and form boundaries between aquifers. The Huntington Park area is underlain by a geologic structure that consists of a topmost layer of deposition from approximately the past 15,000 years that consists of alluvium and the Gaspur Aquifer. Alluvium found on or near the surface of Huntington Park is up to 60 inches in thickness and contains poor quality water in small quantities. The Gaspur Aquifer consists of cobbles and pebbles from the San Gabriel Mountains. The Lakewood Formation contains the Exposition, Gage, and Gardena aquifers and aquicludes.
The Exposition Aquifer underlies the Gaspur Aquifer and merges with it between the Los Angeles and San Gabriel Rivers. This Aquifer is approximately 100 feet thick and consists of coarse gravel and clay, with fine deposits between sandy and gravelly beds.
The Gage Aquifer underlies the Exposition Aquifer and is approximately 10-160 feet thick.
This Aquifer consists of fine to medium sand with varying amounts of coarse yellow sand and gravel.
87 | P a g e
The Gardena Aquifer has coarser deposits that the Gage Aquifer, but these deposits are approximately the same age, thickness, and elevation. Both the Gage and Gardena Aquifers yield large amounts of water.
The San Pedro Formation contains the following five major aquifers interbedded with fine grained layers. These aquifers are the principal aquifers used for domestic water in the Los Aneles area.
• Hollydale Aquifer – The Hollydale Aquifer is a discontinuous aquifer located beneath the Gage-Gardena Aquifer. It consists of shallow marine deposits and is found between 250-500 feet below mean sea level south of the City of Huntington Park. This Aquifer does not yield large amounts of water.
• Jefferson Aquifer – The Jefferson Aquifer consists of sand with gravelly and clayey layers. It has approximately 30 feet thick with a base of 300 feet below mean sea level. This Aquifer is near the City of Huntington Park. Few wells tap into the Jefferson Aquifer.
• Lynwood Aquifer – The Lynwood Aquifer is approximately 50-1,000 feet thick and consists of yellow, brown and red coarse gravel, sand, silts and clay. This Aquifer contains significant groundwater resources, with yields that range from 200-2,100 gallons per minute.
• Silverado Aquifer – The Silverado Aquifer is approximately 500 feet thick and is found at a maximum depth of 1,200 feet below mean sea level. It consists of yellow to brown coarse to fine sands and gravel interbedded with yellow to brown silts and clays. This Aquifer is a major groundwater resource for the region, with a maximum yield of 4,700 gallons per minute.
• Sunnyside Aquifer – The Sunnyside Aquifer is a maximum approximate thickness of 300 feet and consists of coarse deposits of sand and gravel with interlayers of sandy clay and clay. It has a maximum yield of 1,500 gallons per minute.
Flooding
The City of Huntington Park is located approximately 14 miles from the Pacific Ocean. The City will not be exposed to the potential effects of a tsunami. There are no surface water bodies located in Huntington Park and thereby there is no risk of impact from a seiche (which occurs when two waves traveling in opposite directions collide, creating a larger standing wave.
The Federal Emergency Management Agency flood insurance map indicates the City of Huntington Park is located in Zone X. This flood zone has an annual probability of flooding of less than 0.2% and represents geographical areas outside the 500-year flood plain. Therefore, properties located in Zone X are not within a 100-year flood plain.
The City of Huntington Park is located within the inundation paths of the Hansen and Sepulveda Dams in the event of dam failure. The United States Army Corps of Engineers operates the Hansen and Sepulveda Dams, which were built largely for flood control purposes. Flood hazards associated with dam failure will affect most areas south of the dams. • Hansen Dam – The Hansen Dam is located on the northern edge of the San Fernando Valley, approximately four miles west of Sunland. The Hansen Dam inundation area includes lands along Tujunga Creek and several communities in the San Fernando Valley, the City of Los Angeles, cities in south central Los Angeles, and areas along the Los 88 | P a g e
Angeles and San Gabriel Rivers. The City of Huntington Park is located approximately 25 miles south of Hansen Dam, but Dam failure will impact the entire City of Huntington Park.
Flood waters will arrive 17 ¾ hours after Dam failure, with a maximum depth of one foot occurring approximately 21 hours after Dam failure.
• Sepulveda Dam – The Sepulveda Dam is located on the Los Angeles River, near the intersection of the Ventura and San Diego Freeways near the City of Van Nuys. The probable maximum flood from the Sepulveda Dam would be expected to last four days with a total water volume of 163,200-acre feet. The flood would impact areas along the Los Angeles River, and the cities of Los Angeles, Huntington Park, South Gate, Compton, Lynwood, Maywood, and Huntington Park Gardens. Flood waters would be anticipated to reach the City of Huntington Park approximately 10 hours after Dam failure and a maximum flood elevation of two feet would be expected approximately 12 hours after Dam failure.
10.2 Thresholds of Significance
Would the project:
Environmental Issue
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Violate any water quality standards or
waste discharge requirements or
otherwise substantially degrade surface
or ground water quality?
X
b) Substantially deplete groundwater
supplies or interfere substantially with
groundwater recharge such that the
project may impede sustainable
groundwater management of the
basin?
X
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage
pattern of the site or area, including
through the alteration of the course of a
stream or river or through the addition
of impervious surfaces, in a manner
which would:
(i) Result in substantial erosion or
siltation on- or off-site?
(ii) Substantially increase the rate
or amount of surface runoff in a
manner which would result in
flooding on- or off-site?
(iii) Create or contribute runoff
water which would exceed the
capacity of existing or planned
X
89 | P a g e
stormwater drainage systems or
provide substantial additional
sources of polluted runoff; or,
seismic-related ground failure,
including liquefaction?
(iv) Impede or redirect flood flows?
d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche
zones, risk release pollutants due to
project inundation?
X
e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation
of a water quality control plan or
sustainable groundwater management
plan?
X
10.3 Discussion of CEQA Checklist Answers
a) Would the project violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality? LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT.
Project development would involve the following:
• Demolish the existing 11,718 square foot office building and remove all of the existing site improvements including all parking lot paving, trash enclosure, equipment cabinets, parking lot planters, all existing property line walls, and all existing vegetation including trees. • Construct a 4,969 square foot car wash building with related development including o Four vacuum canopies totaling 3,963 square feet and one 192 square foot paystation canopy
o 192 square foot vacuum pump enclosure and other utility structures o 34 parking space parking area including drive aisles, queuing and exit lanes o Stormwater infiltration system
o Wastewater clarifier system and associated water recycling system o Property line walls and freestanding pole sign
o Approximately 7,498 square feet of landscaped area
• Construct the following improvements in the public right-of-way:
o Remove existing driveway at west end of site
o Widen existing driveway at Mission Place intersection o Install new right-turn-exit-only driveway near east end of site o Remove street tree and relocate existing tree well to accommodate new driveway o Install new fire hydrant
The Project and Project site are subject to Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board (LARWQCB) water quality regulations. The LARWQCB is authorized to implement a municipal stormwater permitting program as part of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) authority granted under the federal Clean Water Act. The City of Huntington Park is required to implement a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) that would minimize the incidence of construction-related pollutants entering the storm water system. Among the items required in a SWPPP are pollution prevention Best 90 | P a g e
Management Practices (BMP) to be implemented on a Project site. Compliance with these requirements would prevent violation of water quality standards and waste discharge requirements during Project construction activities. Project development would remedy some areas that are subject to possible violations by removing them and constructing a viable commercial development on the 0.876-acre Project site which includes a stormwater infiltration system. As a result, impacts associated with violation of any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements would be less than significant. b) Would the project substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin?
NO IMPACT.
The Project site is fully developed with a deteriorated commercial buildings with associated infrastructure. The project will increase the landscaped area from approximately 5% of the site to approximately 20% of the site, and the project incorporates a stormwater infiltration system. Project site currently is not contributing to groundwater. Project development of new impervious surfaces will reduce the area of impervious surfaces on the Project site. In addition, proposed landscaping design and stormwater infiltration system would enhance groundwater recharge with well-managed filtered runoff. Thereby, Project development will have no impact on groundwater supplies or groundwater recharge. c) Would the project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would:
(i) Result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? (ii) Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site?
(iii) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff; or, seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction?
(iv) Impede or redirect flood flows?
LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT.
Project development would involve the following:
• Demolish the existing 11,718 square foot office building and remove all of the existing site improvements including all parking lot paving, trash enclosure, equipment cabinets, parking lot planters, all existing property line walls, and all existing vegetation including trees. • Construct a 4,969 square foot car wash building with related development including o Four vacuum canopies totaling 3,963 square feet and one 192 square foot paystation canopy
o 192 square foot vacuum pump enclosure and other utility structures o 34 parking space parking area including drive aisles, queuing and exit lanes o Stormwater infiltration system
o Wastewater clarifier system and associated water recycling system o Property line walls and freestanding pole sign
91 | P a g e
o Approximately 7,498 square feet of landscaped area
• Construct the following improvements in the public right-of-way:
o Remove existing driveway at west end of site
o Widen existing driveway at Mission Place intersection o Install new right-turn-exit-only driveway near east end of site o Remove street tree and relocate existing tree well to accommodate new driveway o Install new fire hydrant
Project development will not result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site because the Project site will remain paved and built on with the exception of the landscaped areas that will be controlled and protected. Post-development pervious area on the 0.876-acre Project site will increase from approximately 5% to approximately 20% of the project site.
Project development and operation will not substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on-or off-site because there will be no increase in runoff from the existing condition.
Project development and operation will not create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff or seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction because there will be no increase in runoff from the existing condition.
Project development will not impede or redirect flood flows because no such flooding currently occurs on the fully-developed site, which will remain fully developed.
Therefore, the overall level of impact of Project development and operation will be less than significant.
d) Would the project in flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release pollutants due to project inundation?
LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT.
The City of Huntington Park is located within an inundation area for the Hansen and Sepulveda Dams. Therefore, Project development and operation would place the proposed improvements within a flood hazard area. Adherence to State of California and City of Huntington Park requirements would reduce the potential release of pollutants due to Project inundation to a less than significant level.
The City of Huntington Park is located approximately 14 miles inland from the Pacific Ocean.
Therefore, tsunamis pose no threat to the Project site. A seiche is an oscillation of water within a closed impoundment such as a lake or reservoir caused by seismic activity or landslide. No lakes or reservoirs are located in the City of Huntington Park. Therefore, Project development and operation will not be exposed to inundation by seiche, tsunami or mudflow.
In addition, the Project site is considered an “Area of Minimal Flood Hazard, Zone X.” Therefore, the resultant impact level would be less than significant. e) Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan?
NO IMPACT.
92 | P a g e
Project development would include construction of new impervious surfaces, but decrease the area of impervious surfaces and install a new stormwater infiltration system. Project development would result in short-term water quality impacts during construction activities.
However, Project compliance with mandatory Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board regulations, SWPPP Best Management Practices and with City building standard requirements as well as implementation of the required Project-specific Water Quality Management Plan would ensure all impacts regarding water quality would remain at a less than significant level. Project development and operation would not otherwise substantially degrade water quality and resultant impacts would be less than significant. 93 | P a g e
SECTION 11 – LAND USE AND PLANNING
The discussion and analysis in this section is derived from information contained in the following: City of Huntington Park General Plan 2030; City of Huntington Park Municipal Code; Blodgett Baylosis Environmental Planning, “Draft Environmental Impact Report: City of Huntington Park 2030 Comprehensive General Plan Update – Huntington Park, California” (October 12, 2017); and, the Project plans.
11.1 Setting
The City of Huntington Park is bordered to the north by the City of Commerce, to the south by the City of South Gate, to the east by the City of Downey, and to the west by the City of Bell and the City of Cudahy. Regional access to the City of Huntington Park is via the Long Beach Freeway (Interstate 710), which extends along the City’s western boundary in a north-to-south direction.
The City of Huntington Park contains a variety of land uses; however, the most prominent land use is residential. Extensive residential development of varying densities is located east of Seville Avenue and extending east to the City’s easternmost boundary, north to the City’s northernmost boundary, and south to the City’s southernmost boundary. Residential land uses also are located west of Pacific Avenue and extend as far west as Regent Street.
Commercial development is located along major roadways that traverse Huntington Park, including Slauson Avenue, Pacific Boulevard (Huntington Park’s central business district), Gage Avenue, Santa Fe Avenue, and Florence Avenue. Small pockets of commercial development are located along the frontages of many residential streets in the City. The City’s industrial areas are located within the northern and western portion of the City. Industrial land uses extend from the northern border of the City with the City of Vernon along Slauson Avenue and 52nd Street, and westerly to the City border with unincorporated Los Angeles County along Wilmington Avenue. Huntington Park’s primary industrial district generally is bounded by Santa Fe Avenue, Pacific Boulevard, the City of Vernon to the east, and Randolph Street to the south.
The Project site occupies approximately 0.876 acres within two Assessor’s parcels in the southerly portion of the City of Huntington Park. The addresses/Assessor Parcel Numbers of the Project site are as follows:
• 3100 Florence Avenue, Huntington Park, CA 90255
• APNs 6212-001-060 and 6212-001-061
94 | P a g e
EXHIBIT 9
GENERALIZED LAND USE MAP OF THE CITY
Source: Huntington Park General Plan
Regulatory Setting
City policies and regulations will be effective in ensuring any potential land use impacts would be less than significant in scope and scale. The regulations will be considered Standard Conditions in that they will be required regardless of whether an identified impact requires mitigation. The following are regulations that will serve as Standard Conditions pertaining to potential impacts related to Land Use and Planning.
City of Huntington Park General Plan
The City of Huntington Park General Plan Land Use Element indicates locations and extent of permitted land uses and development in the City. In addition, the Land Use Element identifies standards for development density and population intensity for each land use designation. The Project site has a General Commercial land use designation (reference Exhibit 9.
95 | P a g e
City of Huntington Park Zoning Ordinance
The Zoning Ordinance implements the General Plan land use policy. The Zoning Ordinance is required to be consistent with the City General Plan. The Zoning Ordinance is more detailed that the General Plan with respect to specific development standards and land use requirements. The Huntington Park Zoning Ordinance includes development regulations that govern permitted uses, yard areas, building heights, parking requirements, and other development aspects. The Project site has a zoning designation of CG – Commercial General.
Regional Comprehensive Plan
The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) prepared its Regional Comprehensive Plan (RCP) in 2008. The RCP is a major advisory plan that address regional issues such as housing, traffic/transportation, water, and air quality. The RCP serves as an advisory document to local agencies for their information, for their voluntary use in preparing local plans, and for their use in addressing local issues of regional significance. The RCP presents a vision of how Southern California can balance resource conservation, economic vitality, and quality of life. The RCP identifies voluntary best practices to approach growth and infrastructure issues in an integrated and comprehensive way and includes goals and outcomes to serve as measures of progress toward a more sustainable region.
11.2 Thresholds of Significance
Would the project:
Environmental Issue
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Physically divide an established
community? X
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?
X
11.3 Discussion of CEQA Checklist Answers
a) Would the project physically divide an established community? NO IMPACT.
The Project site is zoned CG-Commercial General. Project development would involve the following:
96 | P a g e
• Demolish the existing 11,718 square foot office building and remove all of the existing site improvements including all parking lot paving, trash enclosure, equipment cabinets, parking lot planters, all existing property line walls, and all existing vegetation including trees. • Construct a 4,969 square foot car wash building with related development including o Four vacuum canopies totaling 3,963 square feet and one 192 square foot paystation canopy
o 192 square foot vacuum pump enclosure and other utility structures o 34 parking space parking area including drive aisles, queuing and exit lanes o Stormwater infiltration system
o Wastewater clarifier system and associated water recycling system o Property line walls and freestanding pole sign
o Approximately 7,498 square feet of landscaped area
• Construct the following improvements in the public right-of-way:
o Remove existing driveway at west end of site
o Widen existing driveway at Mission Place intersection o Install new right-turn-exit-only driveway near east end of site o Remove street tree and relocate existing tree well to accommodate new driveway o Install new fire hydrant
The entire Project vicinity is urbanized and the 0.876-acre Project site is bordered by commercial and residential uses. The existing commercial nature of the Project vicinity will be continued and enhanced with Project development and operation. Therefore, no established community will be divided. No impact will result. b) Would the project cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?
NO IMPACT.
The project involves development of a commercial retail service, similar in land use to uses in the Project vicinity, and in compliance with the City of Huntington Park General Plan and Zoning Code designations for the Project site. Therefore, no impact would result from Project development or from Project operation.
97 | P a g e
SECTION 12 – MINERAL RESOURCES
The discussion and analysis in this section is derived from information contained in the following:
City of Huntington Park General Plan 2030; City of Huntington Park Municipal Code; Blodgett Baylosis Environmental Planning, “Draft Environmental Impact Report: City of Huntington Park 2030 Comprehensive General Plan Update – Huntington Park, California” (October 12, 2017); and, the Project plans.
12.1 Setting
According to SMARA study area maps prepared by the California Geological Survey, the City of Huntington Park is located within the larger San Gabriel Valley SMARA (identified as the Portland cement concrete grade aggregate). However, as indicated in the San Gabriel Valley P-C region MRZ-2 map, the City is not located in an area where there are significant aggregate resources present.
The City is not located in a Significant Mineral Aggregate Resource Area (SMARA) nor is it located in an area with active mineral extraction activities. A review of California Division of Oil, Gas, and Geothermal Resources well finder indicates that there is one abandoned well located within the City. The well was formerly owned by Occidental Petroleum Corporation and was located at the intersection of Benedict Way and Bissell Street. The well was abandoned on June 5, 1967. No other well extraction activities are located within City boundaries nor are there any significant mineral resources.
No mineral resources or mineral resource recovery sites are located on the Project site, which is not designated as a mineral resource recovery site in the City of Huntington Park General Plan.
12.2 Thresholds for Analysis
Would the project –
Environmental Issue
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Result in the loss of availability of a
known mineral resource that would
be of value to the region and the
residents of the state?
X
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?
X
98 | P a g e
12.3 Discussion of CEQA Checklist Answers
a) Would the project result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? NO IMPACT.
Mineral extraction activities do not occur on or along the Project site or on adjacent or nearby properties in the urbanized vicinity of the Project site. The Project site and surrounding areas are fully developed with urban uses and are not identified as sources of important mineral resources. As such, the potential for mineral resources to occur on site is absent. Furthermore, the Project site is not located within a mineral producing area as classified by the California Geologic Survey. Therefore, Project development and operation will not result in loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and residents of the State. No impact would result. b) Would the project result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan?
NO IMPACT.
Mineral extraction activities are not present on the Project site. The Project site and surrounding areas are fully developed with urban uses and are not identified as sources of important mineral resources. As such, the potential for mineral resources to occur onsite is absent. Furthermore, the Project site is not located within a mineral producing area as classified by the California Geologic Survey. No locally-important mineral resource recovery sites are located on or near the Project site or are identified in the City of Huntington Park General Plan. Therefore, Project development will not result in loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan. No impact would result. 99 | P a g e
SECTION 13 – NOISE
The discussion and analysis in this section is derived from information contained in the following: City of Huntington Park General Plan: City of Huntington Park Municipal Code; Blodgett Baylosis Environmental Planning, “Draft Environmental Impact Report: City of Huntington Park 2030 Comprehensive General Plan Update – Huntington Park, California” (October 12, 2017); ; Ganddini Group Inc., “Florence Avenue Car Wash Noise Impact Analysis, City of Huntington Park, California” (October 13 2021); and, the Project plans.
13.1 Setting
The Florence Car Wash Project site is located within the southern portion of the City of Huntington Park. The site is bounded by Florence Avenue to the north (with commercial, religious, and residential use beyond), commercial properties to the east and west, and residential properties to the south.
Noise Fundamentals
Noise is defined as “unwanted sound.” Sound is mechanical energy transmitted by pressure waves through the air and is characterized by various parameters that include sound frequency, the speed of propagation, and the pressure level or energy content (amplitude).
Noise levels may be described using a number of methods designed to evaluate the “loudness” of a particular noise. The most commonly used unit for measuring level of sound is the decibel (dB). Zero on the decibel scale represents the lowest limit of sound that can be heard by humans. At the other extreme, the eardrum may rupture at 140 dB. The human ear can detect changes in sound levels greater than 3.0 dB under normal ambient conditions.
Exhibit 10 illustrates typical noise levels associated with common everyday activities.
Several factors are related to the level of community annoyance, including the following:
• Fear associated with noise producing activities;
• Socio-economic status and educational level;
• Perception that those affected are being unfairly treated; • Attitudes regarding the usefulness of the noise-producing activity; and, • Belief that the noise source can be controlled.
Approximately ten percent of the population has a very low tolerance for noise and will object to any noise not of their making. An additional twenty-five percent of the population will not complain even in very severe noise environments.
Leq is a time-averaged sound level; a single-number value that expresses the time-varying sound level for the specified period as though it were a constant sound level with the same total sound energy as the time-varying level. Its unit is the decibel. The most common averaging period for Leq is hourly.
In that community receptors are more sensitive to unwanted noise intrusion during more sensitive evening and nighttime hours, California State law requires that an artificial dBA increment be added to quiet time noise levels. The 24-hour noise descriptor with a specified evening and nocturnal penalty is named the Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL).
CNELs are a weighted average of hourly Leqs.
100 | P a g e
EXHIBIT 10
TYPICAL NOISE LEVELS
Source: Huntington Park General Plan Draft EIR, Exhibit 3-5 101 | P a g e
Changes of less than 3.0 dB are noticeable to some people under quiet conditions while changes of less than 1.0 dB are discernible only by few people under controlled, extremely quiet conditions. In general, an increase of between 3.0 dB and 5.0 dB in ambient noise level is considered to represent the threshold for human sensitivity. Noise levels also may be expressed as dBA where “A” weighting has been incorporated into the measurement metric to account for increased human sensitivity to noise. The A-weighted measurements correlate will with the perceived noise levels at lower frequencies.
Noise may be generated from a point source such as machinery, or from a line source such as a roadway segment containing moving vehicles. Because the area of the sound wave increases as the sound gets farther and farther from the source, less energy strikes any given point over the surface area of the wave. This phenomenon is known as “spreading loss.” Due to spreading loss, noise attenuates (decreases) with distance. Stationary, or point, noise subject to spreading loss experiences a 6.0 dBA reduction for every doubling of the distance beginning with the initial 50-foot distance. Noise emanating from travelling vehicles, also referred to as a line source, decreases by approximately 3.0 dBA 50 feet from a source over a hard, unobstructed surface such as asphalt, and by approximately 4.5 dBA over a soft surface, such as vegetation. For every doubling of distance thereafter, noise levels drop another 3.o dBA over a hard surface and 4.5 dBA over a soft surface.
Existing Noise Environment in Huntington Park
The major sources of noise in Huntington Park are vehicular traffic along arterial roadways and trains using the Alameda Corridor. Trains using the Atchison, Topeka, and Santa Fe, Union Pacific and Southern Pacific rail lines are secondary sources of noise.
Stationary noise sources in Huntington Park include industrial uses along Alameda Street and within the northern parts of the City north of Slauson Avenue and Randolph Street.
Residential uses may be exposed to operational noise if located in close proximity to the noise source(s). In addition, residential areas contribute to the ambient noise environment through gatherings and activities, operation of household equipment, and motor vehicle use. Schools in the City create noise from buses, students, school activities, bells, maintenance, and outdoor games.
Train Noise
Trains crate individual noise impacts that last several minutes during each pass. Noise levels from passing trains is dependent on the number of trains, speed, type of tracks, grade crossings, track curves, train horns, and type of trains. Trains using the Alameda Corridor and rail lines noted above generate noise effecting residential and other areas in the City.
Airport Noise
The City of Huntington Park is not located within the noise impact areas of nearby airports, such as Los Angeles International Airport, Long Beach Airport, and Compton Airport.
However, over-flights on approach to these airports are sources of minor noise to Huntington Park.
102 | P a g e
Noise Sensitive Land Uses
Noise sensitive uses include hospitals and convalescent homes, churches, libraries, schools, residences, and child care facilities. Noise sensitive land uses in Huntington Park (reference Exhibit 11) include schools, the library, parks, churches, Huntington Park Convalescent Hospital, and residential areas.
EXHIBIT 11
NOISE SENSITIVE RECEPTORS IN THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON PARK Source: Huntington Park General Plan EIR, Exhibit 3-6
103 | P a g e
Sensitive land uses that may be affected by project noise include the existing dwelling units located adjacent to the south of the project site and approximately 235 feet northeast of the project site, and St. Mathias Catholic Church and St. Mathias school, located as close as approximately 100 feet north of the project site.
Regulatory Setting
The following are existing regulations that would be applicable to projects within the City of Huntington Park.
• Environmental Protection Agency – The federal Noise Control Act of 1972 authorized the Environmental Protection Agency to publish descriptive data about effects of noise and to establish levels of sound “requisite to protect the public welfare with an adequate margin of safety.” These levels are divided into health (hearing loss levels) and welfare (annoyance levels) with an adequate margin of safety.
• Department of Housing and Urban Development – The Federal Department of Housing and Urban Development has adopted environmental criteria and standards for determining project acceptability and necessary mitigation measures to ensure projects assisted by that Department provide a suitable living environment. The standards include maximum levels of 65 dB for residential areas.
• California Vehicle Code – The California Vehicle Code establishes noise standards for areas not regulated by the Federal government. State standards regulate the following:
noise levels of motor vehicles and motorboats; noise impact boundaries around airports; freeway noise affecting classrooms; occupational noise control; and, noise insulation standards. The Code also establishes operational noise limits according to the type of vehicle and date of manufacture.
• California Administrative Code – The California Administrative Code, Title 24, Building Standards, Chapter 2.35, for sound transmission control standards, outlines noise insulation performance standards as a means to protect persons within new hotels, motels, apartment houses, and dwellings other than detached single-family dwellings.
The standards require an interior noise level of 45 dB CNEL or less for residential projects and require an acoustical analysis to demonstrate compliance with the standards for residential buildings or structures within the 60 dB CNEL contour of an airport, or vehicular or industrial noise source.
• Workplace Exposure – The California Occupational Noise Control Standards contained in the California Code of Regulations, Title 8, Industrial Relations, Chapter 4, outline permissible noise exposure at a workplace. Employees should not be exposed to noise levels of 90 dBA for more than eight hours in any workday.
State of California
The State of California has established guidelines for acceptable community noise levels that are based upon the CNEL rating scale to ensure that noise exposure is considered in any development. CNEL-based standards apply to noise sources whose noise generation is preempted from local control (such as from on-road vehicles, trains, airplanes, etc.) and are used to make land use decisions as to the suitability of a given site for its intended use. These CNELbased standards are typically articulated in the Noise Element of the City General Plan.
City of Huntington Park
104 | P a g e
The City of Huntington Park Noise General Plan Noise Element The City of Huntington Park Noise Element calls out CNEL-based standards based on the state standards, which are typical of most jurisdictions and were used as a guideline. The guidelines indicate that an exterior noise level of 70 dB CNEL is considered to be a “clearly compatible” noise level for siting commercial retail uses involving normal conventional construction, without any special noise insulation requirements. Exterior noise levels up to 80 dB CNEL are considered “normally compatible”, and construction should only occur after a noise analysis is made and needed noise attenuation features are included in the project design. These standards apply to any outdoor recreational areas such as an eating area. Both fast food restaurants that are part of the Project have small outdoor patios.
Huntington Park is pre-empted from regulating on-road traffic noise. However, when traffic noise exceeds the planning standard for an affected land use, CNEL-based standards are the accepted significance threshold for any CEQA environmental analysis.
City of Huntington Park Noise Standards
The City of Huntington Park Municipal Code [HPMC] 9-3.504 (Article 5) makes it unlawful for any person to make or cause any loud, unnecessary, and unusual noise that disturbs the peace or quiet of any neighborhood or which causes discomfort or annoyance to any reasonable person of normal sensitiveness residing in the area.
HPMC 9-3.506 exempts certain activities from the provisions of the noise ordinance (Article 5) including the following:
1. Noise sources associated with construction, repair, remodeling or grading of any real property, provided the activities do not take place between the hours of 7:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. on weekdays, including Saturdays, or at any time on Sundays or Federal holidays.
2. Noise sources associated with the maintenance of real property, provided the activities do not take place between 8:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. on weekdays, including Saturdays, or earlier than 9:00 a.m. on Sundays and Federal holidays.
HPMC 9-3.507 specifies requirements for certain activities within the City:
1. Radios, Television Sets and Similar Devices. Any noise level from the use or operation of any radio receiving set, musical instrument, phonograph, television set or other machine or device for the producing or reproducing of sound between 10:00 p.m. and 8:00 a.m., which exceeds the noise limit of sixty-five (65) dBA established by the General Plan at the property line shall be a violation of this chapter.
2. Loading and Unloading. No person shall cause the loading, unloading, opening, closing or other handling of boxes, crates, containers, building materials, garbage cans or similar objects between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. in a manner which would cause a noise disturbance to a residential area.
3. Vehicle Repairs and Testing. No person shall cause or permit the repairing, rebuilding, modifying or testing of any motor vehicle, motorcycle or motorboat in a manner as to cause a noise disturbance between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. within or adjacent to any residential area.
105 | P a g e
4. Parking and Landscape Areas. Parking and landscape area activities (i.e., mechanical sweeping, mechanical grass cutting and mechanical blowing) shall not impact residential uses. No parking area or landscape maintenance shall occur between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. which would cause a noise disturbance to a residential area.
13.2 Thresholds of Significance
Would the project result in:
Environmental Issue
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact
With
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Generation of a substantial
temporary or permanent increase in
ambient noise levels in the vicinity
of the project in excess of standards
established in the local general plan
or noise ordinance, or applicable
standards of other agencies
X
b) Generation of excessive
groundborne vibration or
groundborne noise levels
X
c) For a project located within the
vicinity of a private airstrip or an
airport land use plan or, where such
a plan has not been adopted, within
two miles of a public airport or public
use airport, would the project
expose people residing or working
in the project area to excessive
noise levels
X
13.3 Discussion of CEQA Checklist Answers
a) Would the project result in generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?
LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT WITH MITIGATION INCORPORATED.
The referenced noise impact analysis prepared for the project includes an analysis of federal, state, and local noise regulations, measurements of baseline ambient noise levels around the site, noise modeling of project-generated noise sources, and analysis of the noise model results.
Project noise sources included in the model and analysis include construction equipment, project- 106 | P a g e
generated trips, carwash drying equipment (the loudest operational source), the vacuum sources and vacuum hoses from each of the vacuum stations, and heating ventilation air conditioning equipment, estimated to be two 5-ton Carrier units on rooftop locations. The noise model assumes the construction of a 6-foot height concrete wall at the south property line.
Construction Impacts
Modeled unmitigated construction noise levels when combined with existing measured noise levels reached up to 67.7 dBA Leq at the nearest residential property line to the northwest, 80.1 dBA Leq at the nearest church/school property line to the northwest, 75.9 dBA Leq at the nearest commercial property line to the north, 69.1 dBA Leq at the nearest residential property line to the northeast, 75.6 dBA Leq at the nearest commercial property line to the east, 84.7 dBA Leq at the nearest residential property line to the south, and 80.9 dBA Leq at the nearest commercial property line to the west of the project site.
Construction noise sources are regulated within Section 9-3.506 of the City’s Municipal Code which prohibits construction activities between the hours of 7:00 PM and 7:00 AM on weekdays, including Saturdays, or at any time on Sundays or Federal holidays.
The City of Huntington Park has not adopted a numerical threshold that identifies what a substantial increase would be. For purposes of this analysis, the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment (2006) criteria will be used to establish significance thresholds. For residential uses, the daytime noise threshold is 80 dBA Leq averaged over an 8-hour period (Leq (8-hr); and the nighttime noise threshold is 70 dBA Leq (8-hr). For commercial uses, the daytime and nighttime noise threshold is 85 dBA Leq (8-hr). In compliance with the City’s Code, it is assumed that construction would not occur during the noise-sensitive nighttime hours.
Therefore, unmitigated project construction would be anticipated to exceed the FTA thresholds at the residential uses located to the south of the project site and mitigation is required. With incorporation of mufflers and/or enclosures or acoustical tents (as appropriate) that provide at least 10 dB of noise reduction, modeled mitigated construction noise levels when combined with existing measured noise levels would not be anticipated to exceed the FTA residential thresholds.
Further, with compliance with the City’s Code, it is assumed that construction would not occur during the noise-sensitive nighttime hours.
Therefore, with adherence to applicable Municipal Ordinances and incorporation of mitigation measures identified in Section 7 of this report, construction noise impacts would be less than significant.
Noise Impacts to Off-Site Receptors Due to Project Generated Trips The largest peak hour traffic volume associated with the proposed project would occur during the late afternoon/early evening and would generate approximately 134 vehicle trips. Assuming that the vehicle mix associated with the proposed project is 97 percent automobiles, 2 percent medium trucks and 1 percent heavy trucks, and a speed of 35 miles per hour, noise levels associated with peak hour project generated vehicle traffic would reach up to 47 dBA Leq at a distance of 50 feet.
The quietest measured hour in the project vicinity was 58.1 dBA Leq and occurred between 2:00 and 3:00 AM. The increase in ambient noise levels associated with project peak hour operation would not be readily noticeable over existing ambient noise levels. This impact would be less than significant. No mitigation is required.
107 | P a g e
Noise Impacts to Off-Site Receptors Due to On-Site Operational Noise The SoundPLAN noise model was utilized to estimate project peak hour operational noise at noise measurement locations and at adjacent properties in order to determine if it is likely to exceed the City’s noise thresholds at sensitive receptors. In summary, daytime (7:00 AM to 10:00 PM) operation of the proposed project would not violate City noise standards or result in substantial increases in measured ambient noise levels. Nighttime (10:00 PM and 7:00 AM) operation of the project would likely violate City noise standards at residential land uses located south of the project site and result in substantial increases in ambient noise levels. Implementation of a mitigation measure limiting project operational hours to 7:00 AM and 10:00 PM will reduce potential impacts to a level below significant.
Mitigation Measures
MM-N-1. During all project construction phases on-site, construction contractors shall equip all construction equipment, fixed or mobile, with either properly operating and maintained mufflers or enclosures/acoustical tents (as appropriate) that achieve at least 10 dB reduction from noise level specifications presented in Table 5 of the Noise Impact Analysis report for the project.
MM-N-2. The contractor shall place all stationary construction equipment so that emitted noise is directed away from the noise sensitive receptors nearest the project site.
MM-N-3. Equipment shall be shut off and not left to idle when not in use.
MM-N-4. The contractor shall locate equipment staging in areas that will create the greatest distance between construction-related noise/vibration sources and sensitive receptors nearest the project site during all project construction.
MM-N-5. Jackhammers, pneumatic equipment and all other portable stationary noise sources shall be shielded and noise shall be directed away from sensitive receptors.
MM-N-6. The project proponent shall mandate that the construction contractor prohibit the use of music or sound amplification on the project site during construction.
MM-N-7. The construction contractor shall limit haul truck deliveries to the same hours specified for construction equipment.
MM-N-8. Care should be used when using vibratory rollers and/or any other equivalent vibratory equipment within 19 feet of the eastern and western property lines and 16 feet of the southern property line and bulldozers within 12 feet of the eastern and western property lines and 7 feet of the southern property line where adjacent residential and commercial structures are located.
MM-N-9. Operation of the proposed car wash shall be limited to the hours between 7:00 AM and 10:00 PM.
b) Would the project result in generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?
LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT WITH MITIGATION INCORPORATED.
The referenced noise impact analysis prepared for the project includes an analysis of federal, state, and local noise regulations, measurements of baseline ambient noise levels around the 108 | P a g e
site, noise modeling of project-generated noise sources, and analysis of the noise model results.
Project noise sources included in the model and analysis include construction equipment, projectgenerated trips, carwash drying equipment (the loudest operational source), the vacuum sources and vacuum hoses from each of the vacuum stations, and heating ventilation air conditioning equipment, estimated to be two 5-ton Carrier units on rooftop locations. The noise model assumes the construction of a 6-foot height concrete wall at the south property line.
Groundborne Vibration Impacts
Use of either a vibratory roller or a bulldozer would clearly be highly annoying to nearby sensitive receptors. Annoyance is expected to be short-term, occurring only during site grading and preparation. Use of vibratory roller equipment within 19 feet of the eastern and western property lines and 16 feet of the southern property line and bulldozers within 12 feet of the eastern and western property lines and 7 feet of the southern property line where adjacent residential and commercial structures are located could result in architectural damage. Mitigation measures to reduce potential impacts to nearby structures have been provided. Therefore, with incorporation of mitigation, impacts associated with construction activities would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
MM-N-1. During all project construction phases on-site, construction contractors shall equip all construction equipment, fixed or mobile, with either properly operating and maintained mufflers or enclosures/acoustical tents (as appropriate) that achieve at least 10 dB reduction from noise level specifications presented in Table 5 of this report.
MM-N-2. The contractor shall place all stationary construction equipment so that emitted noise is directed away from the noise sensitive receptors nearest the project site.
MM-N-3. Equipment shall be shut off and not left to idle when not in use.
MM-N-4. The contractor shall locate equipment staging in areas that will create the greatest distance between construction-related noise/vibration sources and sensitive receptors nearest the project site during all project construction.
MM-N-5. Jackhammers, pneumatic equipment and all other portable stationary noise sources shall be shielded and noise shall be directed away from sensitive receptors.
MM-N-6. The project proponent shall mandate that the construction contractor prohibit the use of music or sound amplification on the project site during construction.
MM-N-7. The construction contractor shall limit haul truck deliveries to the same hours specified for construction equipment.
MM-N-8. Care should be used when using vibratory rollers and/or any other equivalent vibratory equipment within 19 feet of the eastern and western property lines and 16 feet of the southern property line and bulldozers within 12 feet of the eastern and western property lines and 7 feet of the southern property line where adjacent residential and commercial structures are located.
MM-N-9. Operation of the proposed car wash shall be limited to the hours between 7:00 AM and 10:00 PM.
109 | P a g e
c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
NO IMPACT.
The Project site is not located within two miles of a public use airport. Compton/Woodley Airport is approximately 6.8 miles to the southwest of the Project site. The Long Beach Airport is approximately 10.7 miles to the southeast. Los Angeles International Airport is located approximately fifteen miles west of the Project area. The Project site is not located within the Runway Protection Zones (RPZ) of any aforementioned airports. Therefore, the Project will not be exposed to excessive Noise levels generated by aircraft approaching or taking off from any nearby airports. Therefore, no impact is associated with Project development or operation. 110 | P a g e
SECTION 14 – POPULATION AND HOUSING
The discussion and analysis in this section is derived from information contained in the following: City of Huntington Park General Plan: City of Huntington Park Municipal Code; Blodgett Baylosis Environmental Planning, “Draft Environmental Impact Report: City of Huntington Park 2030 Comprehensive General Plan Update – Huntington Park, California” (October 12, 2017); and, the Project plans.
14.1 Setting
The Project site is fully developed with a deteriorated office building and associated infrastructure. The site is bounded by Florence Avenue to the north (with commercial, religious, and residential use beyond), commercial properties to the east and west, and residential properties to the south.
Demographic Setting
The City of Huntington Park occupies 3.03 square miles and in 2018 had a population of 59,473. The City web page indicates its current population as 61,348.
Regulatory Setting
2016-2040 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy The 2016-2040 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) is a long-range visioning plan that balances future mobility and housing needs with economic, environmental and public health goals. The stated goals of the RTP/SCS are the following:
• Align Plan investments and policies with improving regional economic development and competitiveness;
• Maximize mobility and accessibility for all people and goods in the region; • Ensure travel safety and reliability for all people and goods in the region; • Preserve and ensure a sustainable regional transportation system; • Maximize productivity of the transportation system;
• Protect the environment and health of our residents by improving air quality and encouraging active transportation (such as walking and bicycling); • Actively encourage and create incentives for energy efficiency, where possible; and, • Encourage land use and growth patterns that facilitate transit and active transportation.
RTP/SCS land use strategies for achieving its goals include the following:
• Reflect the Changing Population and Demands – Shifting to development of more smalllot, single-family and multi-family housing in line with current housing demand; • Focus New Growth around Transit – Focusing housing and employment growth in High Quality Transit Areas in support of Transit Oriented Development and active transportation infrastructure;
• Plan for Growth around Livable Corridors – Revitalizing commercial strips through integrated transportation and land use planning, resulting in increased economic activity and improved mobility options;
111 | P a g e
• Provide More Options for Short Trips – Pursue land use strategies, Complete Streets integration, and a set of State and local policies to encourage the use of alternative modes of transportation for short trips; and,
• Support Local Sustainability Planning – Support local planning practices that help lead to a reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, including Sustainable Planning & Design, Sustainable Zoning Codes, and Climate Action Plans.
City of Huntington Park General Plan Land Use Element
The City of Huntington Park General Plan Land Use Element indicates location and extent of permitted development. The primary purpose of the Land Use Element is to ensure each location for each proposed land use and development permitted within each land use category is compatible with the surrounding environment.
City of Huntington Park General Plan Housing Element
The City of Huntington Park General Plan Housing Element has programs and policies that enable the City to accommodate is regional fair-share of new housing for all levels of household income.
Also, the Housing Element includes programs designed to maintain and conserve existing housing in the City. The City of Huntington Park General Plan Housing Element is pending State certification.
14.2 Thresholds of Significance
Would the project:
Environmental Issue
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Induce substantial population
growth in an area, either directly (for
example, by proposing new homes
and businesses) or indirectly (for
example, through extension of
roads or other infrastructure)?
X
b) Displace substantial numbers of
existing housing, necessitating the
construction of replacement
housing elsewhere?
X
14.3 Discussion of CEQA Checklist Answers
a) Would the project induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
NO IMPACT.
112 | P a g e
The project involves the construction of a new car wash, no homes are proposed, and no extension of infrastructure is required. Project operation will provide employment opportunities for three employees, expected to be filled by residents of Huntington Park and nearby cities. Because the car wash is a local-serving business, it will not generate population growth. No impact will result.
b) Would the project displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
NO IMPACT.
The Project site is fully developed with a deteriorated office building and associated infrastructure. No housing will be displaced by the project. Therefore, no Impact will result.
113 | P a g e
SECTION 15 – PUBLIC SERVICES
The discussion and analysis in this section is derived from information contained in the following: City of Huntington Park General Plan: City of Huntington Park Municipal Code; Blodgett Baylosis Environmental Planning, “Draft Environmental Impact Report: City of Huntington Park 2030 Comprehensive General Plan Update – Huntington Park, California” (October 12, 2017); and, the Project plans.
15.1 Setting
The City of Huntington Park is located within the Greater Los Angeles Region.
Exhibit 13 below depicts schools, fire stations, the police station, libraries, and the City of Huntington Park Civic Center.
Fire Protection
The City of Huntington Park contracts with the Los Angeles County Fire Department (LACFD) for fire protection and emergency services. LACFD has a service area of more than 22,000 square mile. The 235 fire stations throughout Los Angeles County respond to approximately 200,000 calls per year. Fire stations are located in the City of Huntington Park and surrounding area to meet demand for fire protection in the area. The Los Angeles County Fire Department operates the following two fire stations in Huntington Park: Fire Station 164 at 6301 South Santa Fe Avenue services as the area battalion headquarters (Huntington Park is serviced by Los Angeles County Fire Department-Battalion 13); and, Fire Station 165, at 3255 Saturn Avenue. Response time County-wide is under five minutes.
Law Enforcement
The Huntington Park Police Department Law enforcement protection for the City of Huntington Park. The Department consists of 72 sworn personnel and 45 civilian employees, which equates to a per capita ratio of 0.82 officers for each 1,000 residents. In addition, the Department has 25 part-time employees. Average police response times were four minutes/23 seconds for emergency calls, 11 minutes/23 seconds for high priority calls, and 17 minutes/19 seconds for non-emergency calls. The City also operates a 22-ed Type I Jail that houses un-sentenced prisoners prior to their transfer to County facilities. Although there has been a decrease in number of reported crimes in the City, certain types of crimes - - gang activity and juvenile crime - - remain of concern.
Schools and Libraries
The Los Angeles Unified School District serves the City of Huntington Park by operating 24 schools (ten elementary schools; five middle schools; seven high schools; two preschools/early education centers) in the City. Huntington Park also is in the service area of East Los Angeles Community College.
The Huntington Park Library, a part of the County of Los Angeles Public Library system, is located at 6158 Miles Avenue. This library was established in 1913 and has been in its current location since 1970. The 33,482-square foot facility has a meeting room with a maximum capacity of 84 persons, a children’s area, teen space, 24-hour book drop, household battery 114 | P a g e
recycling site, American Indian resource center, in-person and telephone research assistance, photocopier, live homework assistance, homework center, family place, story time kits, and Learning Express Library for teens.
EXHIBIT 13
MAJOR PUBLIC FACILITIES IN THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON PARK
Source: Huntington Park General Plan
15.2 Thresholds of Significance
Would the project:
115 | P a g e
Environmental Issue
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Result in substantial adverse
physical impacts associated with
the provision of new or physically
altered governmental facilities,
need for new or physically altered
governmental facilities, the
construction of which could cause
significant environmental impacts,
in order to maintain acceptable
service ratios, response times or
other performance objectives for
any of the following public services:
i) Fire Protection? X
ii) Police Protection? X
iii) Schools? X
iv) Parks? X
v) Other public facilities? X
15.3 Discussion of CEQA Checklist Answers
a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the following public services:
Fire Protection – NO IMPACT
Police Protection – NO IMPACT
Schools – NO IMPACT
Parks – NO IMPACT
Other public facilities – NO IMPACT
Fire Protection – Project development and operation would not result in a need for new or expanded facilities. Fire protection and emergency service is provided to the existing developed site and to the surrounding urbanized vicinity and will continue to be provided after Project development. Project operation will not result in substantial adverse physical impacts to service ratios or response times and will not require or result in construction of new or physical fire protection/emergency service facilities. No impact would result.
Police Protection – Project development and operation would not demand additional police protection services that the Project site and Project vicinity do not already have. In addition, Project development and operation would not require or result in construction of new or physical police facilities. No impact would result.
116 | P a g e
Schools – Project operation will not generate any students in that the Project involves only improved commercial use of the Project site. Therefore, Project development and operation would not indirectly cause or contribute to a need to construct new or physically altered public school facilities. No impact would result.
Parks – Project operation will not result in any additional use of parks or recreation facilities.
Project development and Project operation will not generate any increase in population.
Thereby, Project development and operation will not result in a substantial physical deterioration of a recreation facility. No impact would result.
Other Public Facilities – The Project involves construction of a new car wash, with associated parking and landscaping. Project development and operation will not result in a demand for other public facilities such as libraries, community recreation centers, post offices, or animal shelters. Therefore, Project development and operation would not adversely affect other public facilities or require the construction of new or modified public facilities. No impact would result.
117 | P a g e
SECTION 16 – RECREATION
The discussion and analysis in this section is derived from information contained in the following: City of Huntington Park General Plan: City of Huntington Park Municipal Code; Blodgett Baylosis Environmental Planning, “Draft Environmental Impact Report: City of Huntington Park 2030 Comprehensive General Plan Update – Huntington Park, California” (October 12, 2017); and, the Project plans.
16.1 Setting
The City of Huntington Park is largely built out with residential, commercial and industrial uses supported by a system of roadways. According to the City of Huntington Park General Plan Land Use Element, there are more than 31 acres of parks and recreation facilities within the City. No parks are located adjacent to the 5.5-acre Project site.
Regulatory Setting
State of California
Quimby Act Requirements
The Quimby Act (Government Code Section 3.2.5) follows the National Recreation and Parks Association recommendation of five acres for every 1,000 residents. However, the Quimby Ordinance enables California cities with standards of three acres per 1,000 residents to assess new developments an impact fee for park development. The City population of 61,348 would generate a need for 306.74 acres of park land. Therefore, the City is more than 270 acres short of the Quimby Act stipulated park land.
City of Huntington Park General Plan
The City of Huntington Park General Plan Land Use Element describes the location and extent of parks and open space. The City of Huntington Park General Plan Resource Management Element includes an inventory of open space resources and indicates how those resources are to be used.
118 | P a g e
16.2 Thresholds of Significance
Would the project:
Environmental Issue
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
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?
X
b) Does the project include
recreational facilities or require the
construction or expansion of
recreational facilities which might
have an adverse physical effect on
the environment?
X
16.3 Discussion of CEQA Checklist Answers
a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?
NO IMPACT.
The Project involves construction of a new car wash with associated infrastructure and landscaping. Therefore, Project operation will not generate an increase of population. Project development and Project operation thereby will not result in any physical deterioration of a recreation facility. No impact will result.
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?
NO IMPACT.
Project development will be exclusively commercial in nature and will not include recreational facilities or require construction or expansion of recreational facilities. Thereby, no impact will result.
119 | P a g e
SECTION 17 – TRANSPORTATION
The discussion and analysis in this section is derived from information contained in the following: City of Huntington Park General Plan: City of Huntington Park Municipal Code; Blodgett Baylosis Environmental Planning, “Draft Environmental Impact Report: City of Huntington Park 2030 Comprehensive General Plan Update – Huntington Park, California” (October 12, 2017); Ganddini Group Inc., “3100 Florence Avenue Car Wash Project Traffic Impact Analysis,” (September 8, 2021); and, the Project plans.
17.1 Setting
The project site is located at 3100 Florence Avenue in the City of Huntington Park. The project site is located on the south side of Florence Avenue at the southern end of Mission Place between Mountain View Avenue and State Street. The project site is currently occupied with an 11,000 square foot medical office building, and it currently has a signalized full access driveway via the south leg of the intersection of Mission Place at Florence Avenue.
Florence Avenue in the City of Huntington Park is classified as a “Major Arterial,” which has as its primary function to provide regional, sub-regional, and intra-City travel service. It is comprised of four lanes (two lanes in each direction) and extends through the southerly part of Huntington Park. Florence Avenue also has a two-way left-turn lane that serves as a median, with left-turn pockets at major intersections. On-street parking is permitted on both sides of the street. Mission Place, which intersects Florence Avenue north of the Project site, is a Local Street.
The proposed project will retain the existing signalized driveway at the south leg of Mission Place, and the project will provide a new stop-controlled right-turn-exit-only driveway on Florence Avenue east of Mission Place. The proposed project is anticipated to be constructed and fully operational by year 2023.
City of Huntington Park Mobility and Circulation Element Project consistency analyses with City of Huntington Park Mobility and Circulation Element policies are contained in the General Plan Consistency section of this Initial Study.
Roadway Performance Standards
Performance criteria have been established to evaluate the ability of the circulation system to serve existing and projected traffic demands. Performance criteria serve as a means by which traffic volumes are compared to circulation infrastructure (roadway segments and intersections) and the adequacy of that infrastructure to accommodate existing or projected traffic volumes. The policy component of performance criteria is “Level of Service” (LOS); the technical component provides a more quantified measure. LOS is used to describe the operating condition of a roadway segment or intersection and contains a sliding scale (A through F), in which LOS A represents the optimal traffic condition and LOS F equates to significant congestion and an unacceptable condition. The City of Huntington Park has established LOS “D” as a target LOS standard and LOS “E” as a threshold standard. Not all intersections within Huntington Park achieve LOS D.
A more quantitative measure used to define an intersection’s LOS employs a ratio of the intersection’s design capacity (as measured in traffic volumes) and existing and/or projected traffic volumes. The quantitative measure is referred to as Volume-to-Capacity ratio (a 120 | P a g e
roadway’s traffic volumes to its design capacity. The technique used to assess operation of an intersection is termed “Intersection Capacity Utilization”; or, ICU. An ICU value usually is expressed as a percentage that represents that portion of the hour required to provide sufficient capacity to accommodate all intersection traffic if all approaches operate at capacity.
An intersection with an ICU/LOS greater than 0.91/E is considered to be operating at an unacceptable level of service. The following Table 17-1 indicates Level of Service Definitions and comparative ICUs.
Table 17-1
Level of Service Definitions
LOS ICU Range Description
A Less than 0.60 Free flowing traffic conditions; no congestion B 0.60 to less than
0.70 Generally free from congestion. All vehicles may clear signal in a single cycle
C 0.70 to less than
0.80 Light congestion with occasional back-ups at critical approaches
D 0.80 to less than
0.90 Congestion at critical approaches
E 0.90 to less than
1.00 Moderate to severe congestion during peak period
F 1.00 or greater Severe congestion
Beginning July 1, 2020, the Updated CEQA Guidelines states that “generally, vehicle miles traveled (VMT) is the most appropriate measure of transportation impacts.” VMT is defined as “the amount and distance of automobile travel attributable to a project.” “Automobile” refers to on-road passenger vehicles (specifically cars and light trucks). The California State Office of Planning and Research has clarified in its Technical Advisory and recent informational presentations that heavy-duty truck VMT is not required to be included in estimation of a Project VMT. Other relevant considerations may include effects of a project on transit and non-motorized modes of travel. Therefore, Section 15064.3 indicates that transportation impacts are now required to be based on VMT, and Level of Service (LOS) is no longer an impact metric under CEQA.
However, the new Section 15064.3(b) (Criteria for Analyzing Transportation Impacts) states that “if existing models or methods are not available to estimate the vehicle miles traveled for the particular project being considered, a lead agency may analyze the project’s vehicle miles traveled qualitatively. Such a qualitative analysis would evaluate factors such as the availability of transit, proximity to other destinations, etc. For many projects, a qualitative analysis may be appropriate.” Level of Service is commonly used as a qualitative description of intersection operations and is based on the design capacity of the intersection, compared to the volume of traffic using the intersection. The following Table 17-2 presents Levels of Service from the Highway Capacity Manual, 6th Edition.
121 | P a g e
Table 17-2
Levels of Service for Intersections
Level of Service Unsignalized Intersections
Control Delay
(seconds/vehicle)
Signalized Intersections
Control Delay
(seconds/vehicle)
A <10 <10
B >10 to <15 >10 to <20
C >15 to <25 >20 to <35
D >25 to <35 >35 to <55
E >35 to <50 >55 to <80
F >50 >80
Existing Traffic Conditions
The three study intersections, 1) Mountain View Ave. at Florence Ave., 2) Mission Pl. at Florence Ave., and 3) State St. at Florence Ave., as reported on p. 11 of the traffic study, are operating at Levels of Service ranging from A to C.
17.2 Thresholds of Significance
Would the project:
Environmental Issue
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Conflict with a program, plan,
ordinance or policy addressing the
circulation system, including transit,
roadway, bicycle and pedestrian
facilities?
X X
b) Conflict with or be inconsistent with
CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3,
subdivision (b)?
X
c) Substantially increase hazards due
to a geometric design feature (e.g.
sharp curves or dangerous
intersections) or incompatible uses
(e.g. farm equipment)?
X
d) Result in inadequate emergency
access? X
17.3 Discussion of CEQA Checklist Answers
a) Would the project conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities? 122 | P a g e
NO IMPACT.
Several bus routes serve the Project area with a stop adjacent to the project site and a stop across the street at the northeast corner of Florence Ave. and Mission Pl.
There are sidewalks along Florence Ave. and Mission Pl. in the Project vicinity. The Mission Pl./Florence Avenue intersection has pedestrian phasing and crosswalks along the north, east, and west legs of the intersection.
Florence Avenue is a Class III (unmarked on-street) bike route.
A Traffic Impact Analysis has been prepared that relates to Project operation. It concluded that the project would maintain acceptable levels of service and not result in any operational deficiencies.
Although maintenance crews occasionally will travel to the Project sites, those trips will be infrequent and result in an insignificant amount of traffic.
The project involves no significant change to the existing roadways, bicycle facilities, or pedestrian facilities, except for minor access improvements to serve the project. The existing bus stop will be maintained. Any temporary blockages of these facilities for construction will be reviewed through Public Works encroachment permits. Therefore, Project development and operation will not conflict with City of Huntington Park General Plan or other plan policies pertaining to transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities. In addition, Project development and operation will not conflict with any City of Huntington Park ordinance pertaining to the City circulation system. No impact will result. b) Would the project conflict with or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b)?
LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT.
Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis
Recommended Threshold for Retail Projects
Estimating the total change in VMT (i.e., the difference in total VMT in the area affected with and without the Project) is the best way to analyze the transportation impacts of a retail project because new retail development typically redistributes shopping trips rather than creates new trips.
The recommended VMT impact threshold for the Project, per the California State Office of Planning and Research, is “… a net increase in total VMT may indicate a significant transportation impact….”
Screening Criteria
The Office of Planning and Research Technical Advisory suggest agencies may screen out VMT impacts using project size, maps, transit availability, and provision of affordable housing.
Equivalent guidance is also provided by the Los Angeles County Public Works Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines.
123 | P a g e
• Screening Threshold for Small Projects (110 or fewer daily trips) – The Project generates more than 110 daily trips.
• Map Based Screening for Residential and Office Projects – The City of Huntington Park does not have VMT maps that can be used to identify areas with low VMT for projects and the Project does not propose residential or office use. • Presumption of Less Than Significant Impact for Affordable Residential Development – The Project does not propose residential development.
• Presumption of Less Than Significant Impact for Local Serving Retail – Generally, localserving retail less than 50,000 square feet in area can be assumed to cause a less than significant transportation impact. Therefore, the proposed car wash which is a localserving retail facility with less than 5,000 square feet of gross floor area would be screened out from further VMT analysis.
• Presumption of Less Than Significant Impact Near Transit Stations – CEQA Guideline Section 15064.3(b)(1) states that lead agencies generally should presume that certain projects (including residential, retail, and office projects as well as projects that are a mix of such uses) proposed within one-half mile of an existing major transit stop (i.e., a site containing an existing rail transit station, a ferry terminal served by either a bus or rail transit service, or the intersection of two or more major bus routes with a frequency of service interval of 15 minutes or less during the morning and afternoon peak commute periods) or an existing stop along a high quality transit corridor (i.e., a corridor with fixed route bus service with service intervals no longer than 15 minutes during peak commute hours) will have a less than significant impact on VMT. This presumption would apply if the Project:
o Has a Floor Area Ratio of less than 0.75;
o Includes more parking for use by residents, customers, or employees of the Project than required by the jurisdiction;
o Is inconsistent with the applicable Sustainable Communities Strategy (as determined by the lead agency with input from the Metropolitan Planning Organization); or,
o Replaces affordable residential units with a smaller number of moderate- or highincome residential units.
Metro has bus routes that operate along Florence Avenue; analysis of service intervals was not performed.
The VMT screening criteria stated above for local serving retail apply to the Project.
Therefore, a detailed VMT analysis is not required. A qualitative discussion of the Project location and site analysis to support the conclusion of less than significant VMT impact thereby is provided, as follows.
Location and Site Analysis
The City of Huntington Park is bordered by the cities of Vernon and Maywood to the north, the City of South Gate and unincorporated Los Angeles County to the south, the cities of Cudahy, Bell and Maywood to the east, and the City of Los Angeles and unincorporated Los Angeles County to the west. Huntington Park is predominantly residential, with low-density, medium-density and high-density residential areas spread throughout the City. Most of the City’s residential areas are located within two miles of the Project site, north of Florence Avenue, east of Maywood Avenue, and between State Street and west of the Alameda Rail Corridor. Commercial development in Huntington Park is located along major roadways 124 | P a g e
including Slauson Avenue, Pacific Boulevard, Gage Avenue, Santa Fe Avenue, and Florence Avenue. Smaller commercial development is located along frontages of some residential streets. The Project site is located within a General Commercial zone along Florence Avenue and the Project is consistent with uses allowed per the City Zoning Code.
A retail development such as that the Project proposes primarily would depend on customers who reside adjacent or near (within 5-15-minute drive or within 2-3-mile radius). In addition, the retail development also serves needs of customers who work near the Project but do not reside nearby. As indicated previously, the location of the Project would attract residents from the City and customers from nearby uses such as schools, warehouses/industrial development, and other commercial uses.
The anticipated establishment of a car wash would bring a local-serving retail service to the area. Within 2 miles of the Project site, there are approximately six existing car washes.
Therefore, the demand for the anticipated car wash is anticipated to originate from existing residents and customers of the City who generally are residing or working within a two-mile radius of the Project site.
It can be inferred that the trips that are currently destined to the existing car wash businesses near the Project site would be re-routed to the Project site’s anticipated car wash because new retail service development typically redistributes trips rather than creating new trips.
Therefore, according to the Traffic Impact Analysis prepared for the Project, “Therefore, it may be presumed that the … project has a less than significant impact to vehicle miles traveled (VMT) based on the Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines established by the County of Los Angeles Department of Public Works.” No Mitigation Measures are necessary because Project impacts to VMT would be less than significant.
c) Would the project substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g. sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g. farm equipment)?
LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT.
Project development includes the following:
• Demolish the existing 11,718 square foot office building and remove all of the existing site improvements including all parking lot paving, trash enclosure, equipment cabinets, parking lot planters, all existing property line walls, and all existing vegetation including trees. • Construct a 4,969 square foot car wash building with related development including o Four vacuum canopies totaling 3,963 square feet and one 192 square foot paystation canopy
o 192 square foot vacuum pump enclosure and other utility structures o 34 parking space parking area including drive aisles, queuing and exit lanes o Stormwater infiltration system
o Wastewater clarifier system and associated water recycling system o Property line walls and freestanding pole sign
o Approximately 7,498 square feet of landscaped area
• Construct the following improvements in the public right-of-way:
o Remove existing driveway at west end of site
125 | P a g e
o Widen existing driveway at Mission Place intersection o Install new right-turn-exit-only driveway near east end of site o Remove street tree and relocate existing tree well to accommodate new driveway o Install new fire hydrant
Project Access Analysis
The proposed project will retain the existing signalized driveway at the south leg of Mission Place, and the project will provide a new stop-controlled right-turn-exit-only driveway on Florence Avenue east of Mission Place. A previous version of the plan raised safety concerns, notably the potential for conflicts between the left turn movements in and out of the neighboring shopping center driveway and left turn movements in and out of the proposed easterly driveway. The most recent plans propose a right-turn-exit-only driveway with signage and right-turn-only access control “pork chop” which resolves those traffic concerns.
Project Queuing Analysis
The traffic study included a queuing analysis of the proposed car wash based on a survey of three similar car wash businesses in Southern California. The analysis estimated the typical peak queuing length to be approximately 18 vehicles during peak periods based on the highest 85th percentile queue length. The site plan includes a queuing storage capacity of 12 vehicles (without interfering with vacuum stations). On the Tuesday studied, the 85th percentile queue length exceeded 12 vehicles only once, prior to closing. On the Saturday studied, the 85th percentile queue length exceeded 12 vehicles for most of the period between 1:30pm and 4:45pm. The average queue between the three studied car wash businesses never exceeded 12 vehicles. Because the proposed site plan includes an overflow capacity of approximately 7 vehicles before extending into the street, the traffic study concludes that “the overall drive-through storage capacity for the project site is forecast to be adequate to accommodate the peak queue.” Therefore, the vehicle queuing design will not substantially increase hazards to the public.
d) Would the project result in inadequate emergency access? NO IMPACT.
Emergency access to the project site currently is available from Florence Avenue. The project will be required to meet the requirements of the Los Angeles County Fire Department prior to the issuance of development permits. Therefore, no negative impact to emergency access would result from Project development or Project operation. 126 | P a g e
SECTION 18 – TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
The discussion and analysis in this section is derived from information contained in the following: City of Huntington Park General Plan: City of Huntington Park Municipal Code; Blodgett Baylosis Environmental Planning, “Draft Environmental Impact Report: City of Huntington Park 2030 Comprehensive General Plan Update – Huntington Park, California” (October 12, 2017); Tribal Consultation with Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians-Kizh Nation (March 29, 2022); and, the Project plans.
18.1 Setting
Prehistoric Chronology
The following Table 18-1 illustrates cultural patterns and phases for the Project area.
Table 18-1
Cultural Patterns and Phases
Phase Dates
BP
Material Culture Other Traits
Topanga 1 8,500 to
5,000
Abundant manos and
metates; many core tools and
scrapers; few but large
points, charmstones, cogged
stones, early discoidals;
faunal remains rare
Shellfish and hunting
important; secondary burials
under metate cairns (some
with long bones only); some
extended inhumations; no
cremations
Topanga 2 5,000 to
3,500
Abundant but decreasing
manos and metates;
adoption of mortars and
pestles; smaller points,
cogged stones, late
discoidals; fewer scraper
planes and core tools; some
stone balls and charmstones
Shellfish important; addition
of acorns; reburial of long
bones only; addition of flexed
inhumations (some beneath
metate cairns); cremations
rare
Topanga 3 3,500 to
1,300
Abundant but decreasing
manos and metates;
increasing use of mortars and
pestles; wider variety of small
projectile points; stone-lined
ovens
Hunting and gathering
important; flexed
inhumations (some under
rock cairns); cremations rare;
possible subsistence focus
on yucca/agave
Angeles IV 1,300 to
800
Cottonwood arrow points for
arrow appear; Olivella
cupped beads and Mytilus
shell disks appear; some
imported pottery appears;
possible appearance of
ceramic pipes
Changes in settlement
pattern to fewer but larger
permanent villages; flexed
primary inhumations;
cremations uncommon
Angeles V 800 to 450 Artifact abundance and size
increases; steatite trade from
Development of mainland
dialect of Gabrielino;
settlement in open
127 | P a g e
islands increases; larger and
more elaborate effigies
grasslands; exploitation of
marine resources declined
and use of small seeds
increased; flexed primary
inhumations; cremations
uncommon
Angeles VI 450 to a50 Addition of locally made
pottery, metal needle-drilled
Olivella beads; addition of
Euroamerican material
culture (glass beads and
metal tools
Use of domesticated
animals; flexed primary
inhumations continue; some
cremations
The Angeles VI phase reflects the ethnographic mainland Gabrielino of the post-contact period (i.e., after A.D. 1542). One of the first changes in Gabrielino culture after contact was population loss due to disease, coupled with resulting social and political disruption. Angeles VI material culture is essentially Angeles V augmented by a number of Euroamerican tools and materials, including glass beads and metal tools such as knives and needles (used in bead manufacture). The frequency of Euroamerican material culture increased through time until it constituted the vast majority of materials used. Locally produced brown ware pottery appears along with metal needle-drilled Olivella disk beads.
The ethnographic mainland Gabrielino subsistence system was primarily based on terrestrial hunting and gathering, although nearshore fish and shell fish played important roles. Sea mammals, especially whales (likely from beached carcasses), were prized. Additionally, a number of European plant and animal domesticates were obtained and exploited.
Ethnographically, the mainland Gabrielino practices interment and some cremation.
The greater Los Angeles Basin previously was inhabited by the Gabrielino people, who have lived in this region for approximately 7,000 years. The Gabrielinos were semi-sedentary hunters and gatherers who spoke a language that is part of the Takic language family. Their territory encompassed an area stretching from Topanga Canyon in the northwest to the base of Mount Wilson in the north, to San Bernardino in the east, Aliso Creek in the southeast, and the Southern Channel Islands - - an area of more than 2,500 square miles. At European contact, the tribe consisted of more than 5,000 people living in various settlements throughout the area. The villages typically were located near major rivers (e.g. Los Angeles River, Rio Hondo River, and San Gabriel River). Some villages housed up to 150 people. In addition to permanent villages, the Gabrielino occupied temporary seasonal campsites used for a variety of activities such as hunting, fishing, and gathering plant resources.
The Gabrielino are considered to have been one of the wealthiest tribes and to have greatly influenced tribes with whom they traded. Houses were domed; circular structures were thatched with tule or similar materials. The best-known artifacts were made of steatite and were highly prized. Many common everyday items were decorated with inlaid shell or carvings that reflected an elaborately developed artisanship.
The primary food zones utilized were marine, woodland, and grassland. Plant foods were the greatest part of the traditional diet at contact. Acorns were the most important single food source. Villages were located near water sources necessary for leaching of acorns. Grass seeds were the next most abundant plant food used along with chia. Greens and fruits were eaten raw or cooked or sometimes dried for storage. Mushrooms and tree fungus were 128 | P a g e
delicacies. Various teas were made from flowers, fruits, stems and roots for medicinal cures as well as for beverages.
The principal game animals were deer, rabbit, jackrabbit, woodrat, mice, ground squirrels, antelope, quail, dove, ducks, and other birds. Most predators were avoided as food, as were tree squirrels and most reptiles. Trout and other fish were caught in streams; salmon were available they ran in larger creeks. Marine foods were extensively utilized. Sea mammals, fish and crustaceans were hunted and gathered from the shoreline and from the open ocean using reed and dugout canoes. Shellfish were the most common resource, including abalone, turbans, mussels, clams, scallops, bubble shells, and others.
Prior to Spanish and Russian entries into California in the 1700s, California Indian Tribes did not have pan-tribal names for themselves. When the Spanish invaded local Indian territory in 1771, they established their occupational headquarters at what is now called Whittier Narrows, 15 miles of what is not downtown Los Angeles. The first mission (San Gabriel Mission) was constructed there with Indian slave labor because it was well-watered by the San Gabriel River and because the area contained several prominent Tribal villages. The Indian peoples there collectively called themselves “Kizh,” after the dome-shaped dwellings in which they lived. The Spanish called the Kizh peoples “Kicherenos.” A new Mission complex was built in 1774, five miles north of the original complex, after the original mission compound was washed away. Once the new Mission was established, the Spanish eventually dropped the use of the term “Kichereno” and replaced it with “Gabrieleno” when referencing the Indian peoples of the area.
Scholars first recognized the Tribal name of Kizh in the 19th century, when approaching how to classify the Tribal language. Therefore, the academic community recognized “Kizh” as referring to the Tribal name and the Tribal language. However, by the mid-20th century scholars had replaced “Kizh” with “Gabrielino” as a standard term for the Tribal group. In 1994, the Gabrielinos were recognized by the State of California as the aboriginal tribe of the Los Angeles Basin “…after…the [incorrect] ‘Tongva’ name was unable to be confirmed and validated.”
18.2 Thresholds of Significance
Would the project:
Environmental Issue
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) 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
X
129 | P a g e
a California Native American tribe,
and that is;
1) 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
2) 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 Resources Code Section
5024.1, the lead agency shall
consider the significance of the
resource to a California Native
American tribe.
18.3 Discussion of CEQA Checklist Answers
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;
1) 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
2) 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 Resources Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.
LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT WITH MITIGATION INCORPORATION.
There will be pavement removal, grading to prepare the site for the proposed development, as well as trenching, tree removal, and other ground-disturbing activities. The Consulting Tribe noted that the site is within a corridor with an increased potential for scattered burials.
Although the site has been filled with imported soil to develop the existing office building and parking lot, the Consulting Tribe noted the potential for certain types of imported fill to contain human remains, which would be assessed in the early stages of monitoring. Furthermore, ground-disturbing activities can potentially extend to the original soil of the site where remains can be discovered. Therefore, there is a potential for finding of human remains, and the 130 | P a g e
following Mitigation Measure would ensure that any such discovery and related impact would be reduced to a less than significant level.
MM-TCR-1 – Prior to the commencement of any ground disturbing activity at the project site, the project applicant shall retain a Native American Monitor approved by the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians-Kizh Nation – the tribe that consulted on this project pursuant to Assembly Bill A52 (the “Tribe” or the “Consulting Tribe”). The applicant shall provide proof that they have retained an approved Native American Monitor prior to the issuance of permits for grounddisturbing activities. The Tribal monitor will only be present on-site during the construction phases that involve ground-disturbing activities. Ground disturbing activities are defined by the Tribe as activities that may include, but are not limited to, pavement removal, potholing or auguring, grubbing, tree removals, boring, grading, excavation, drilling, and trenching, within the project area. The Tribal Monitor will complete daily monitoring logs that will provide descriptions of the day’s activities, including construction activities, locations, soil, and any cultural materials identified. The on-site monitoring shall end when all ground-disturbing activities on the Project Site are completed, or when the Tribal Representatives and Tribal Monitor have indicated that all upcoming ground-disturbing activities at the Project Site have little to no potential for impacting Tribal Cultural Resources. Upon discovery of any Tribal Cultural Resources, construction activities shall cease in the immediate vicinity of the find (not less than the surrounding 100 feet) until the find can be assessed. All Tribal Cultural Resources unearthed by project activities shall be evaluated by the qualified archaeologist and Tribal monitor approved by the Consulting Tribe.
If the resources are Native American in origin, the Consulting Tribe will retain it/them in the form and/or manner the Tribe deems appropriate, for educational, cultural and/or historic purposes. If human remains and/or grave goods are discovered or recognized at the Project Site, all ground disturbance shall immediately cease, and the county coroner shall be notified per Public Resources Code Section 5097.98, and Health & Safety Code Section 7050.5. Human remains and grave/burial goods shall be treated alike per California Public Resources Code section 5097.98(d)(1) and (2). Work may continue on other parts of the Project Site while evaluation and, if necessary, mitigation takes place (CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5[f]). If a non-Native American resource is determined by the qualified archaeologist to constitute a “historical resource” or “unique archaeological resource,” time allotment and funding sufficient to allow for implementation of avoidance measures, or appropriate mitigation, must be available. The treatment plan established for the resources shall be in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(f) for historical resources and PRC Sections 21083.2(b) for unique archaeological resources. Preservation in place (i.e., avoidance) is the preferred manner of treatment. If preservation in place is not feasible, treatment may include implementation of archaeological data recovery excavations to remove the resource along with subsequent laboratory processing and analysis. Any historic archaeological material that is not Native American in origin shall be curated at a public, non-profit institution with a research interest in the materials, such as the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County or the Fowler Museum, if such an institution agrees to accept the material. If no institution accepts the archaeological material, it shall be offered to a local school or historical society in the area for educational purposes.
131 | P a g e
SECTION 19 – UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
The discussion and analysis in this section is derived from information contained in the following:
City of Huntington Park General Plan: City of Huntington Park Municipal Code; Blodgett Baylosis Environmental Planning, “Draft Environmental Impact Report: City of Huntington Park 2030 Comprehensive General Plan Update – Huntington Park, California” (October 12, 2017); and, the Project plans.
19.1 Setting
Wastewater Treatment
The City of Huntington Park Public Works Department maintains the City sewer system. Sewage generated by the City is conveyed to regional sewage treatment facilities maintained and operated by the Los Angeles County Sanitation District. Wastewater collected by the District is conveyed to the Joint Water Pollution Control Plant in the City of Carson, which provides primary and secondary treatment for approximately 280 million gallons daily and has a total permitted capacity of 400 million gallons daily.
Water Supply
Four water companies serve the City of Huntington Park. These companies, listed below, obtain their water supply from two sources - - groundwater from local wells and water supplied by the Metropolitan Water District.
• Maywood Mutual Water Company – The Maywood Mutual Water Company serves the northeastern portion of Huntington Park. Its service boundaries extend east to west from Maywood Avenue to the Huntington Park/Maywood border, and north to south from Slauson Avenue to Randolph Avenue. Approximately 70 percent of this Water Company’s customers reside in Huntington Park.
• Walnut Park Mutual Water Company – The Walnut Park Mutual Water Company serves the odd-numbered side of Walnut Street.
• Golden State Water Company – Huntington Park is located within the Central Basin West service area of the Golden State Water Company. This Company serves the western portion of Huntington Park. Its service boundaries extend from Slauson Avenue to the north to Florence Avenue to the south, and from the City’s western border with Florence-Graham to the west to Alameda Street to the east. • City of Huntington Park – Inframark is the contracted operator of the City of Huntington Park water utility system which includes multiple wells in the City. This service area covers the majority of the City.
Waste Collection and Disposal
United Pacific Waste provides residential and commercial waste management services to the City of Huntington Park. The Los Angeles County Sanitation District selected the Mesquite Regional Landfill in Imperial County as the new target destination for the County’s waste. The Mesquite Regional Landfill has a 100-year capacity at 8,000 tons per day. In addition, the Puente Hills Transfer Station/Materials Recovery Facility is able to accept 4,440 tons of solid waste per day.
Waste from Huntington Park also may be transferred to the Downey Area Recycling and Transfer 132 | P a g e
Facility, the South Gate Transfer Station, the Commerce Refuse-to-Energy Facility, and the Southeast Resource and recovery facility.
The California State Legislature determined that the amount of solid waste generated in California, together with diminished landfill space, created a need for local agencies to enact and implement aggressive integrated waste management programs, and thereby passed the California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 (Assembly Bill 939). This Act enabled the State to direct public agencies to divert 50 percent of all solid waste from disposal based on 1990 levels of generated solid waste, subject to adjustments for certain demographic and economic factors, through source reduction, recycling, and composting actions.
Storm Drainage Infrastructure
The Los Angeles River Channel is a 500-foot wide concrete channel designed to accommodate storm water runoff from the Los Angeles area. The River is located north and approximately 1.9 miles east of Huntington Park. The Los Angeles County Flood Control District owns the majority of storm drains in Huntington Park. The storm drains extend along major arterials and connect directly to the Los Angeles River.
Power Utilities and Communications
The Southern California Gas Company provides natural gas service to Huntington Park. Southern California Edison provides electricity to Huntington Park and maintains overhead and underground lines in Huntington Park to serve energy demands of local residents and businesses.
19.2 Thresholds of Significance
Would the project:
Environmental Issue
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Require or result in the relocation of
the construction of new or
expanded water, wastewater
treatment or stormwater drainage,
electric power, natural gas, or
telecommunication facilities, the
construction or relocation of which
could cause significant
environmental effects?
X
b) Have sufficient water supplies to
serve the project and reasonably
foreseeable future development
during normal, dry, and multiple dry
years?
X
c) Result in a determination by the
wastewater treatment provider
which serves or may serve the
X
133 | P a g e
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?
X
e) Comply with federal, state, and local
management and reduction statutes
and regulations related to solid
waste?
X
19.3 Discussion of CEQA Checklist Answers
a) Would the project require or result in the relocation of the construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or stormwater drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunication facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects?
LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT.
Project development will include construction of new catch basins. Any new locations will better serve storm water drainage from the Project improvements. The resultant flow rates will be less than the existing condition, as the project will include a stormwater infiltration system and less impervious surface than the existing condition. Furthermore, no new water, electric, natural gas, or wastewater facilities will be needed to serve the property, as the project will be able to connect to the existing sewer mains (an 18” Los Angeles County main or an 8” Huntington Park main). The project will generate up to 9,051 gallons of wastewater per day, or 3,303,615 gallons per year, less than the 6,000,000 gallon threshold at which the Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts may need to do an assessment. b) Would the project have sufficient water supplies to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry, and multiple dry years? LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT.
The proposed car wash equipment has been calculated by the applicant to use between 18,729 and 20,129 gallons per day, 60% of which will be recycled, resulting in a daily equipment demand of 7,488 to 8,051 gallons per day. Daily demand for irrigation and domestic use was estimated by the applicant to total 2,000 gallons per day. Total water demand would range up to 10,051 gallons per day.
The project site is within the City of Huntington Park water service area which is operated by Inframark, the City’s contracted water services operator. The applicant requested a will-serve determination and comments on their water services connection proposal for the proposed car wash from Inframark on October 12, 2020 and received a response from the City with comments on the specific water meter and connection requirements; the City expressed no 134 | P a g e
concern regarding the adequacy of the water supply. Thus, the resulting impact would be Less Than Significant.
c) Would the project result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments? LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT.
The City of Huntington Park Public Works Department maintains the City sewer system.
Sewage generated by the City is conveyed to regional sewage treatment facilities maintained and operated by the Los Angeles County Sanitation District. Wastewater collected by the District is conveyed to the Joint Water Pollution Control Plant in the City of Carson, which provides primary and secondary treatment for approximately 280 million gallons daily and has a total permitted capacity of 400 million gallons daily.
Project development activities will generate wastewater typically associated with grading and construction procedures. Furthermore, no new wastewater facilities will be needed to serve the property, as the project will be able to connect to the existing sewer mains (an 18” Los Angeles County main or an 8” Huntington Park main). The project will generate up to 9,051 gallons of wastewater per day, or 3,303,615 gallons per year, less than the 6 million gallon annual threshold at which the Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts may need to do an assessment. The 9,051 gallon daily wastewater generation is very small compared to the entire stream of wastewater handled by the Joint Water Pollution Control Plant in the City of Carson, which provides primary and secondary treatment for approximately 280 million gallons daily and has a total permitted capacity of 400 million gallons daily. d) Would the project generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals?
LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT.
The Project site is fully developed with a deteriorated office building and associated infrastructure. Project development (demolition; grading; construction; painting; finishing) would generate solid waste largely in the form of pavement disposal and construction waste.
Any landscaping removed during Project development will be replaced with new landscaping.
Composting of removed landscaping would occur in compliance with City of Huntington Park requirements. Project operational-generated waste will be recycled, per City and State requirements and thereby not exceed the capacity of local infrastructure or otherwise impair attainment of City of Huntington Park solid waste reduction goals. e) Would the project comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste?
LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT.
All Project development-generated solid waste will be disposed of by the contractor at an approved site. During Project development the contractor will be required to adhere to City of Huntington Park and County of Los Angeles ordinances pertaining to waste reduction and recycling. Project operation will be generating minimal waste associated with a car wash. 135 | P a g e
Therefore, Project development and operation level of impact related to compliance with Federal, State and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste will be Less Than Significant.
136 | P a g e
SECTION 20 – WILDFIRE
The discussion and analysis in this section is derived from information contained in the following: City of Huntington Park General Plan: City of Huntington Park Municipal Code; Blodgett Baylosis Environmental Planning, “Draft Environmental Impact Report: City of Huntington Park 2030 Comprehensive General Plan Update – Huntington Park, California” (October 12, 2017); Cal Fire Hazard Maps; and the Project Plans. 20-.1 Setting
The City of Huntington Park is completely developed with urban uses and is not in proximity to the nearest State-designated fire hazard zone, which is in Hacienda Hills and more than 8 miles from the Project area. The Project area is located within an urbanized area that CAL FIRE does not designate as a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone.
20.2 Thresholds of Significance
If located in or near State responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project:
Environmental Issue
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Substantially impair an adopted
emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan?
X
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?
X
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?
X
d) Expose people or structures to
significant risks, including
downslope or downstream flooding
or landslides, as a result of runoff,
post-fire slop instability, or drainage
changes?
X
137 | P a g e
20.3 Discussion of CEQA Checklist Answers
a) Would the project substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT.
Project development (demolition; grading; pavement removal; construction; painting; finishing) would occur mostly within the 0.876-acre Project site, with minor improvements to the adjacent public right-of-way. Any temporary closure of a roadway lane along Florence Avenue would necessitate traffic control measures. The City of Huntington Park will approve a schedule and plan for any temporary roadway lane closure to that vehicular traffic will continue to flow smoothly and so the safety of crews working adjacent to vehicular travel lanes would be ensured. The resultant level of impact would be less than significant.
b) Would the project 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? NO IMPACT.
The City of Huntington Park is completely developed with urban uses and is not in proximity to the nearest State-designated fire hazard zone, which is in Hacienda Hills and more than 8 miles from the Project site. The Project site is located within an urbanized area that CAL FIRE does not designate as a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone.
No wildland is present on, adjacent, or near the Project area. Therefore, there would be no impact from Project development or operation 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) Would the project require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment?
NO IMPACT.
Project development would involve the following.
• Demolish the existing 11,718 square foot office building and remove all of the existing site improvements including all parking lot paving, trash enclosure, equipment cabinets, parking lot planters, all existing property line walls, and all existing vegetation including trees. • Construct a 4,969 square foot car wash building with related development including o Four vacuum canopies totaling 3,963 square feet and one 192 square foot paystation canopy
o 192 square foot vacuum pump enclosure and other utility structures o 34 parking space parking area including drive aisles, queuing and exit lanes o Stormwater infiltration system
o Wastewater clarifier system and associated water recycling system 138 | P a g e
o Property line walls and freestanding pole sign
o Approximately 7,498 square feet of landscaped area
• Construct the following improvements in the public right-of-way:
o Remove existing driveway at west end of site
o Widen existing driveway at Mission Place intersection o Install new right-turn-exit-only driveway near east end of site o Remove street tree and relocate existing tree well to accommodate new driveway o Install new fire hydrant
Installation and maintenance of Project-related infrastructure will not result in an impact related to exacerbation of fire risk or result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment as the project is in a fully developed urban setting. No Impact would result. d) Would the project expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes?
NO IMPACT.
The City of Huntington Park is completely developed with urban uses and is not in proximity to the nearest State-designated fire hazard zone, which is in Hacienda Hills and more than 8 miles from the Project site. The Project site is located within an urbanized area that CAL FIRE does not designate as a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone. The Project site and neighborhood setting is entirely flat and fully developed with urban uses.
Therefore, Project development and operation 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 courses. No Impact would result. 139 | P a g e
MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
a) Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory?
LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT.
Findings of Fact. Project development would involve the following. • Demolish the existing 11,718 square foot office building and remove all of the existing site improvements including all parking lot paving, trash enclosure, equipment cabinets, parking lot planters, all existing property line walls, and all existing vegetation including trees. • Construct a 4,969 square foot car wash building with related development including o Four vacuum canopies totaling 3,963 square feet and one 192 square foot paystation canopy
o 192 square foot vacuum pump enclosure and other utility structures o 34 parking space parking area including drive aisles, queuing and exit lanes o Stormwater infiltration system
o Wastewater clarifier system and associated water recycling system o Property line walls and freestanding pole sign
o Approximately 7,498 square feet of landscaped area
• Construct the following improvements in the public right-of-way:
o Remove existing driveway at west end of site
o Widen existing driveway at Mission Place intersection o Install new right-turn-exit-only driveway near east end of site o Remove street tree and relocate existing tree well to accommodate new driveway o Install new fire hydrant
No impacts to candidate, sensitive, or special status species; impacts to riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community; or, interference with movement of any native resident or migratory wildlife species would occur as a result of Project development and Project operation. The potential for subsurface archaeological or paleontological finds or deposits is low. Any discovery of human remains or tribal cultural resources that may occur during Project development will be subject to the Mitigation Measure delineated in the Tribal Cultural Resources Section of this document. The resultant impact will be reduced to a less than significant level.
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)?
LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT.
Findings of Fact. Project development and operation has the potential to result in impacts in the following CEQA threshold subject areas: Air Quality; Cultural Resources; 140 | P a g e
Noise; and, Tribal Cultural Resources. All identified impacts would be less than significant with incorporation of specified Mitigation Measures. Mitigation Measures have been provided to reduce potential short-term Project development (grading; construction) emissions. In addition, short-term Project development-generated impacts pertaining to exposure of nearby residences and to sensitive uses within one-quarter mile of the Project site to air quality impacts and noise would be less than significant with adherence to stipulated Mitigation Measures. Noise impacts would be ensured to remain at a less than significant level with implementation of the stated Mitigation Measures. Lastly, any potential impacts to Cultural Resources/Tribal Cultural Resources resulting from Project development would be reduced to a less than significant impact with implementation of the specified Mitigation Measure.
Additional impacts identified would not be cumulatively considerable in that the Project vicinity is fully developed with commercial and residential uses. The resultant level of cumulative impact of Project development and operation would be less than significant. c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT WITH MITIGATION INCORPORATED.
Findings of Fact. Based on the analysis in this Initial Study and on the findings and conclusions within the technical studies performed for Project development and operation, Project development (demolition; site preparation; grading; construction; painting; finishing) would result in less than substantial short-term effects pertaining to Air Quality, Noise, and Transportation. However, implementation of stipulated Mitigation Measures would reduce the Air Quality and Noise impacts to a less than significant levels. The Project area, as is the South Coast Air Basin, is non-attainment in Ozone and Particulate levels. The Initial Study identifies Mitigation Measures that will reduce Project development impact related to Air Quality; Project operation will not contribute to nonattainment levels. 141 | P a g e
GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY ASSESSMENT
The following City of Huntington Park General Plan Policies are relevant to Project development and/or Project operation.
GENERAL PLAN POLICIES GENERAL PLAN
CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS
LAND USE AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ELEMENT
Policy 1 – The City of Huntington Park shall maintain and preserve those industrial and commercial areas of the City while preventing land use conflicts through comprehensive land use planning and environmental review.
Consistent. The Project site is
designated General
Commercial in the City of
Huntington Park General Plan
Land Use Element and is zoned
for commercial uses. Project
development and operation will
maintain the commercial
retail/dining use of the 5.5-acre
Project site.
Policy 6 – The City of Huntington Park shall require that new developments are properly designed so as to minimize
potential land use conflicts and environmental impacts.
Consistent. Project
development and operation will
not result in significant impacts
to the environment that cannot
be mitigated to a less than
significant level.
Policy 11 – The City of Huntington Park shall target certain businesses and industries that will benefit the local market.
Consistent. Project
development and operation will
provide a new and needed
commercial service not
provided elsewhere nearby to
the Huntington Park
community.
Policy 16 – The City of Huntington Park shall locate
distinctive public signage and landscaping for key entry points into the City and will require that signage on
commercial structures be compatible and integrated with the surrounding area.
Consistent. Proposed project
signage will be reviewed by the
Planning Commission and City
staff for compatibility prior to
project approval.
Policy 21 – The City of Huntington Park shall require that new development(s) pay their “Fair Share” for the provision of the necessary infrastructure and other support services that will be required to serve the development.
Conditionally Consistent.
The City of Huntington Park will
require developer payment of
Development Impact Fees on a
“Fair Share” basis as part of
approval of the Project
discretionary application.
Policy 23 – The City of Huntington Park shall require all new development, including commercial, industrial, and
Consistent. Automatic
sprinkler systems and other fire
142 | P a g e
residential development to install fire protection systems, including automatic sprinkler systems.
control systems will be required
as part of an approved Building
Permit and Certificates of
Occupancy for Project-related
buildings.
Policy 30 – The City of Huntington Park shall ensure that adequate water and sewer service is available as new
development occurs.
Consistent. Four water
companies, including the City,
serve the City of Huntington
Park. These companies obtain
their water supply from two
sources - - groundwater from
local wells and water supplied
by the Metropolitan Water
District. Adequate water supply
and sewer service is provided
the Project site. Water supply
and sewer service will continue
to be available for Project
development and operation.
Policy 31 – The City of Huntington Park shall continue to require the use of drought-resistant landscaping to reduce water use.
Conditionally Consistent.
New parking lot and perimeter
landscaping will be droughtresistant, as required by the City of Huntington Park.
Policy 33 – The City of Huntington Park shall work closely with the County of Los Angeles and other responsible
agencies so as to reduce solid waste generated in the City.
Conditionally Consistent.
Project development and
operation will comply with all
City of Huntington Park
requirements for recycling
construction-related and
operational waste.
Policy 36 – The City of Huntington Park shall encourage composting as an alternative to disposal for solid wastes.
Conditionally Consistent.
The Project will comply with all
City of Huntington Park
requirements related to
composting.
MOBILITY AND CIRCULATION ELEMENT
Policy 3 – The City of Huntington Park shall require the traffic impacts of major new developments include a traffic impact analysis to identify measures to mitigate the traffic impacts.
Consistent. A Traffic Impact
Analysis has been prepared
that relates to Project operation.
It concluded that the project
would maintain acceptable
levels of service and not result
in any operational deficiencies.
143 | P a g e
No mitigation of traffic impacts
will be necessary.
Policy 4 – As new development or redevelopment occurs,
the City of Huntington Park shall limit driveway access onto arterial streets, restrict travel through adjacent residential neighborhoods, and provide bus turnouts where appropriate along heavily traveled arterials.
Consistent. The existing
signalized driveway to the
intersection of Florence Avenue
and Mission Place will remain.
An existing westerly driveway
will be eliminated, and a
proposed easterly driveway will
be limited to right-turn-exit-only
to limit traffic conflicts. No
residential neighborhoods will
be affected as the site has no
access from residential
neighborhoods.
Policy 8 – The City of Huntington Park shall coordinate the development of [a] goods movement system that will reduce the impact of trucks on the local traffic and the street infrastructure.
Consistent. Florence Avenue
is a City-designated Truck
Route.
Policy 15 – The City of Huntington Park shall require new development to provide transit facilities, such as bus shelters and turn-outs, where deemed necessary.
Conditionally Consistent.
Existing bus shelters and turnouts along Florence Avenue will remain. Project development
and operation will not impact
bus shelters and turn-outs.
Policy 18 – The City of Huntington Park shall maintain
existing pedestrian facilities and require new development to provide pedestrian access to existing public walkways.
Consistent. Project
development will accommodate
direct pedestrian access from
the Florence Avenue public
sidewalk via a dedicated ADAaccessible path.
Policy 27 – The City of Huntington Park shall require all truck parking and queuing to occur outside of the public rights-ofways.
Consistent. Project truck
parking (loading space) and
queuing will occur on the
Project site.
Policy 28 – The City of Huntington Park shall allow for adequately sized truck loading areas which do not interfere with nearby traffic circulation.
Consistent. A Project truck
loading space is included on the
Project site which meets the
applicable development
standards.
RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ELEMENT
144 | P a g e
Policy 1 – The City of Huntington Park shall endorse regional and local air quality and transportation management plans in order to reduce air pollution emissions and vehicular trips.
Conditionally Consistent.
The Air Quality Analysis
contained in this document
indicates that the Project
development and operation will
not result in significant impacts
related to Air Quality with the
incorporation of required
mitigation measures. The
Traffic Impact Analysis
prepared for the Project
indicates Project impact related
to Vehicle Miles Traveled also
will be less than significant.
Policy 4 – The City of Huntington Park shall encourage the use of energy conservation devices in project design and construction to increase energy efficiency and decrease pollution emissions from energy production and use.
Consistent. Project
development will use energy
saving equipment during
construction and during
operation.
Policy 6 – The City of Huntington Park shall reduce water consumption by providing water conservation techniques
and by using reclaimed water, water-conserving appliances, and drought-resistant landscaping when feasible.
Conditionally Consistent.
Project development and
operation will include water
conservation techniques, waterconserving appliances, and drought-tolerant landscaping in
accordance with City of
Huntington Park requirements
placed on the Project Building
Permits and Certificates of
Occupancy.
Policy 8 – The City of Huntington Park shall implement a water conservation ordinance that includes the installation of xeriscape and water-conserving plumbing fixtures.
Conditionally Consistent.
Project development and
operation will include water
conservation techniques, waterconserving appliances, and drought-tolerant landscaping in
accordance with City of
Huntington Park requirements
placed on the Project Building
Permits and Certificates of
Occupancy.
Policy 12 – The City of Huntington Park shall promote the use of energy-efficient lighting throughout the City.
Conditionally Consistent.
Project development and
operation will include energyefficient lighting in accordance with City of Huntington Park
145 | P a g e
requirements placed on the
Project Building Permits and
Certificates of Occupancy.
Policy 14 – The City of Huntington Park shall comply with the requirements of AB-52 requiring consultation with local Native American tribes in the revision of new development proposals.
Consistent. The City notified
all four tribes in the area and
conducted a Tribal Consultation
with the Gabrieleno Band of
Mission Indians – Kizh Nation
representatives in accordance
with requirements of AB-52.
Policy 15 – The City of Huntington Park shall encourage the use of California native vegetation in the landscaping of larger developments.
Conditionally Consistent.
Project development will
include installation of California
native vegetation, as required
by the City of Huntington Park.
Policy 16 – The City of Huntington Park shall strive to maintain parkway landscaping throughout the City.
Consistent. All landscaping
within the Florence Avenue
parkway adjacent to the Project
site will be maintained or
replaced as a result of Project
development.
HEALTH AND SAFETY ELEMENT
Policy 2 – In areas with liquefaction potential, the City of Huntington Park shall require review of soils and geologic conditions, and if necessary, on-site borings, to determine liquefaction susceptibility of the proposed site.
Consistent. The 0.876-acre
Project site is fully developed as
an office building with
associated parking. The
eastern two-thirds of the City,
within which the Project site is
located, have been identified as
being subject to a potential
liquefaction risk. Project
development will be preceded
by a City review of soils and
geologic conditions prior to
issuance of a Building Permit to
determine susceptibility of
Project exposure to
liquefaction.
Policy 8 – The City of Huntington Park shall require local drainage-related improvements to be implemented as part of new development approvals.
Consistent. Project
development will not impact the
existing storm drain catch
basins along Florence Avenue.
The Project includes a
stormwater infiltration system
146 | P a g e
and reduces the amount of
impervious surface compared
to the existing condition,
therefore stormwater drainage
will be improved as a result of
the Project.
Policy 9 – The City of Huntington Park shall enforce building code requirements for new construction that ensure
provision of adequate fire protection.
Consistent. The Building
Permit to be issued for Project
development will include City
Building Code requirements
pertaining to ensuring adequate
fire protection that the Project
developer must implement.
Policy 13 – The City of Huntington Park shall locate new and existing land uses involved in production, storage,
transportation, handling, and/or disposal of hazardous
materials a safe distance from other land uses that may be sensitive to such activities.
Conditionally Consistent.
Project development and
operation may include some
use of hazardous materials.
Such materials will be stored,
transported, handled and
disposed in a manner in
compliance with State of
California, County of Los
Angeles, and City of Huntington
Park requirements. This will
ensure there will be no impact to
the residences adjacent to the
southern boundary of the
project site and other nearby
sensitive uses.
Policy 22 – The City of Huntington Park shall enforce City, State, and Federal noise standards, especially those for mufflers and modified exhaust systems.
Conditionally Consistent.
Machinery and vehicles used
during Project development and
trucks used during Project
operation will be required to
comply with City of Huntington
Park Standard Conditions
related to limited idling time. In
addition, mitigation measures
contained in this document limit
the noise impacts of
construction to a less than
significant level.
Policy 25 – The City of Huntington Park shall ensure
acceptable noise levels near schools, hospitals,
convalescent homes, and other noise-sensitive areas.
Conditionally Consistent.
Project construction equipment
and Project operation will
comply with City of Huntington
147 | P a g e
Park, State of California, and
Federal standards related to
noise reduction, particularly in
relation to residences adjacent
to the southern boundary of the
project site, as required by the
noise mitigation measures
contained in this document.
Policy 27 – The City of Huntington Park shall require noisereduction techniques in site planning, architectural design, and construction where noise reduction is necessary.
Conditionally Consistent.
The required implementation of
the noise mitigation measures
contained in this document will
ensure Project consistency with
this Policy.
Policy 31 – The City of Huntington Park shall reduce noise generated by building activities by requiring sound
attenuation devices on construction equipment.
Conditionally Consistent.
The required implementation of
the construction noise
mitigation measures contained
in this document will ensure
Project consistency with this
Policy.
148 | P a g e
REFERENCES
Blodgett Baylosis Environmental Planning, “Draft Environmental Impact Report: City of Huntington Park 2030 Comprehensive General Plan Update – Huntington Park, California” (October 12, 2017)
California Air Resources Board, “California’s 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan:
Strategy for Achieving California’s 2030 Greenhouse Gas Target,” (November, 2017) Castillo, Joe, “Tribal Name – An Independent Study by Joe Castillo, Historical Consultant and Researcher,” (October 2018)
City of Huntington Park, “2030 City of Huntington Park General Plan,” City of Huntington Park, “Bicycle Transportation Master Plan,” (February 3, 2014) City of Huntington Park, “City of Huntington Park Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan,” (October 15, 2004)
City of Huntington Park, “City of Huntington Park Planning and Zoning Code” Ganddini Group Inc., “Florence Avenue Car Wash Noise Impact Analysis, City of Huntington Park, California” (October 13 2021)
Ganddini Group Inc., “3100 Florence Avenue Car Wash Project Traffic Impact Analysis,” (September 8, 2021)
Project Plans
Southern California Association of Governments, “2016-2040 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy: A Plan for Mobility, Accessibility, Sustainability and a High Quality of Life,” Los Angeles, CA, (2016)
Southern California Association of Governments, “Profile of the City of Huntington Park,” (May, 2019)
Stickel, E. Gary, “Why the Original Indian Tribe of the Greater Los Angeles Area is Called Kizh, Not Tongva,” (April 6, 2016)
United States Environmental Protection Agency, “Idling Vehicle Emissions for Passenger Cars, Light-Duty Trucks, and Heavy-Duty Trucks,” (October 2008) 149 | P a g e
APPENDICES
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
NOTICE OF INTENT
TECHNICAL STUDIES
• Ganddini Group Inc., “Florence Avenue Car Wash Noise Impact Analysis, City of Huntington Park, California” (October 13 2021)
• Ganddini Group Inc., “3100 Florence Avenue Car Wash Project Traffic Impact Analysis,” (September 8, 2021)
150 | P a g e
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
PROJECT NAME: Florence Car Wash
APPLICANT: Leedco Engineers, Inc.
CITY AND COUNTY: Huntington Park, Los Angeles County.
DESCRIPTION:
Project Location: The Project site occupies approximately 0.876 acres within two Assessor’s parcels in the southerly portion of the City of Huntington Park. The addresses/Assessor Parcel Numbers of the Project site are as follows:
• 3100 Florence Avenue, APNs 6212-001-060 and 6212-001-061 Project Description: The Project involves a Conditional Use Permit and Development Permit application that would allow the applicant to develop and operate a new automated drive-thru car wash, including vending machines. Proposed development work includes the following:
• Demolish the existing 11,718 square foot office building and remove all of the existing site improvements including all parking lot paving, trash enclosure, equipment cabinets, parking lot planters, all existing property line walls, and all existing vegetation including trees. • Construct a 4,969 square foot car wash building with related development including o Four vacuum canopies totaling 3,963 square feet and one 192 square foot paystation canopy
o 192 square foot vacuum pump enclosure and other utility structures o 34 parking space parking area including drive aisles, queuing and exit lanes o Stormwater infiltration system
o Wastewater clarifier system and associated water recycling system o Property line walls and freestanding pole sign
o Approximately 7,498 square feet of landscaped area
• Construct the following improvements in the public right-of-way:
o Remove existing driveway at west end of site
o Widen existing driveway at Mission Place intersection o Install new right-turn-exit-only driveway near east end of site o Remove street tree and relocate existing tree well to accommodate new driveway o Install new fire hydrant
FINDINGS: The environmental analysis provided in this Initial Study indicates that the proposed project will not result in any unmitigable significant adverse impacts. For this reason, the City of Huntington Park has determined that a Mitigated Negative Declaration is the appropriate CEQA document for the Project.
151 | P a g e
MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM
MITIGATION # AND
REQUIREMENT
Responsible
Party
Monitor Monitoring
Timing
Monitoring
Action
Verification
AIR QUALITY
MITIIGATION MEASURE MMAQ-1: All unpaved demolition,
and construction areas shall be
watered three times a day during
excavation, grading and
construction, and temporary dust
covers shall be used to reduce
dust emissions and meet South
Coast Air Quality Management
District Rule 403. Soil stabilizers
also shall be used to control onsite fugitive dust. Water could reduce fugitive dust by as much as
60 percent.
Contractor City
Building &
Safety
Division
(on-site);
City Public
Works
Department
(for Public
Right-ofWay)
Ongoing
during Project
development
(demolition;
grading;
construction)
Written
verification to
Building
Official;
Director of
Public Works
City Building &
Safety Division;
City Public
Works
Department
MITIIGATION MEASURE MMAQ-2: All materials transported
off-site shall either be sufficiently
watered or securely covered to
prevent excessive amounts of
dust and spillage on adjacent
streets during transport.
Contractor City
Building &
Safety
Division
(on-site);
City Public
Works
Department
(for Public
Right-ofWay)
Ongoing
during Project
development
(demolition;
grading;
construction)
Written
verification to
Building
Official;
Director of
Public Works
City Building &
Safety Division;
City Public
Works
Department
MITIIGATION MEASURE MMAQ-3: All clearing, earthmoving, or excavation activities shall be
discontinued during periods of
high winds (i.e. greater than 15
miles per hour) to prevent
excessive amounts of fugitive
dust.
Contractor City
Building &
Safety
Division
(on-site);
City Public
Works
Department
(for Public
Right-ofWay)
Ongoing
during Project
development
(demolition;
grading;
construction)
Written
verification to
Building
Official;
Director of
Public Works
City Building &
Safety Division;
City Public
Works
Department
MITIIGATION MEASURE MMAQ-4: Contractors shall adhere to all pertinent South Coast Air
Quality Management District
protocols regarding grading, site
preparation, and construction
activities.
Contractor City
Building &
Safety
Division
(on-site);
City Public
Works
Department
(for Public
Right-ofWay)
Ongoing
during Project
development
(demolition;
grading;
construction)
Written
verification to
Building
Official;
Director of
Public Works
City Building &
Safety Division;
City Public
Works
Department
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Mitigation Measure MM-BIO-1 –
A pre-construction nesting bird
survey should be conducted by a
qualified biologist no more than
seven (7) days prior to vegetation
Contractor City
Building &
Safety
Division
(on-site);
City Public
Works
Prior to permit
issuance and
start of Project
development
(grading;
construction)
Written
verification to
Building
Official;
Director of
Public Works
City Building &
Safety Division;
City Public
Works
Department
152 | P a g e
MITIGATION # AND
REQUIREMENT
Responsible
Party
Monitor Monitoring
Timing
Monitoring
Action
Verification
removal or construction activities
during the nesting season.
Department
(for Public
Right-ofWay);
Biologist
Mitigation Measure MM-BIO-2 –
If an active nest is found, all active
bird nests shall be flagged in all
directions, and an appropriate
avoidance buffer will be
established around the nest by a
qualified biologist in consultation
with the California Department of
Fish and Wildlife. This buffer shall
not be disturbed by construction
activities until the nest becomes
inactive, the young have fledged,
the young are no longer being fed
by the parents, the young have left
the area, and the young are no
longer expected to be impacted by
the project as determined through
additional monitoring by a
qualified biologist.
Contractor City
Building &
Safety
Division
(on-site);
City Public
Works
Department
(for Public
Right-ofWay);
Biologist
Prior to permit
issuance and
start of Project
development
(grading;
construction)
Written
verification to
Building
Official;
Director of
Public Works
City Building &
Safety Division;
City Public
Works
Department
Mitigation Measure MM-BIO-3 –
If, during the nesting season, 10
days have passed since an area
has been surveyed, and
construction work has not been
continuous in that area, then
construction work shall not take
place in that area until a new
nesting bird survey has been
performed.
Contractor City
Building &
Safety
Division
(on-site);
City Public
Works
Department
(for Public
Right-ofWay);
Biologist
Prior to permit
issuance and
start of Project
development
(grading;
construction)
Written
verification to
Building
Official;
Director of
Public Works
City Building &
Safety Division;
City Public
Works
Department
Mitigation Measure MM-BIO-4 –
If active nests are observed
adjacent to the project and an
avoidance buffer has been
established, it is recommended
that a biological monitor be
present on site to monitor nesting
behaviors in order to assess if the
nest buffer is appropriate. If the
birds show any sign of stress, the
buffer will be increased and work
should be conducted elsewhere
until fledging occurs. If necessary,
Contractor City
Building &
Safety
Division
(on-site);
City Public
Works
Department
(for Public
Right-ofWay);
Biologist
Prior to permit
issuance and
start of Project
development
(grading;
construction)
Written
verification to
Building
Official;
Director of
Public Works
City Building &
Safety Division;
City Public
Works
Department
153 | P a g e
MITIGATION # AND
REQUIREMENT
Responsible
Party
Monitor Monitoring
Timing
Monitoring
Action
Verification
the size of the buffer area may be
reduced if the biologist in
consultation with the California
Department of Fish and Wildlife
determines that the construction
activity would not be likely to have
adverse effects on the particular
species in question.
CULTURAL RESOURCES INCLUDING TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
MM-TCR-1: Prior to the
commencement of any ground
disturbing activity at the project
site, the project applicant shall
retain a Native American Monitor
approved by the Gabrieleno Band
of Mission Indians-Kizh Nation –
the tribe that consulted on this
project pursuant to Assembly Bill
A52 (the “Tribe” or the “Consulting
Tribe”). The applicant shall
provide proof that they have
retained an approved Native
American Monitor prior to the
issuance of permits for grounddisturbing activities. The Tribal monitor will only be present on-site
during the construction phases
that involve ground-disturbing
activities. Ground disturbing
activities are defined by the Tribe
as activities that may include, but
are not limited to, pavement
removal, potholing or auguring,
grubbing, tree removals, boring,
grading, excavation, drilling, and
trenching, within the project area.
The Tribal Monitor will complete
daily monitoring logs that will
provide descriptions of the day’s
activities, including construction
activities, locations, soil, and any
cultural materials identified. The
on-site monitoring shall end when
all ground-disturbing activities on
the Project Site are completed, or
when the Tribal Representatives
and Tribal Monitor have indicated
that all upcoming groundContractor;
Project
Applicant;
Project
Developer
City Public
Works
Dept.; City
Planning
Dept.;
Grading
Contractor;
Tribal
Monitor
City
Director of
Community
Develop,
Prior to
Grading
Permit
issuance;
Ongoing
during Project
development
(grading;
construction)
Review and
Approval of
Grading
Plans; Tribal
Monitor
Observation of
Project
Development
Activities
City Director of
Community
Development;
Tribal Monitor
154 | P a g e
MITIGATION # AND
REQUIREMENT
Responsible
Party
Monitor Monitoring
Timing
Monitoring
Action
Verification
disturbing activities at the Project
Site have little to no potential for
impacting Tribal Cultural
Resources. Upon discovery of any
Tribal Cultural Resources,
construction activities shall cease
in the immediate vicinity of the find
(not less than the surrounding 100
feet) until the find can be
assessed. All Tribal Cultural
Resources unearthed by project
activities shall be evaluated by the
qualified archaeologist and Tribal
monitor approved by the
Consulting Tribe. If the resources
are Native American in origin, the
Consulting Tribe will retain it/them
in the form and/or manner the
Tribe deems appropriate, for
educational, cultural and/or
historic purposes. If human
remains and/or grave goods are
discovered or recognized at the
Project Site, all ground
disturbance shall immediately
cease, and the county coroner
shall be notified per Public
Resources Code Section 5097.98,
and Health & Safety Code Section
7050.5. Human remains and
grave/burial goods shall be
treated alike per California Public
Resources Code section
5097.98(d)(1) and (2). Work may
continue on other parts of the
Project Site while evaluation and,
if necessary, mitigation takes
place (CEQA Guidelines Section
15064.5[f]). If a non-Native
American resource is determined
by the qualified archaeologist to
constitute a “historical resource”
or “unique archaeological
resource,” time allotment and
funding sufficient to allow for
implementation of avoidance
measures, or appropriate
mitigation, must be available. The
155 | P a g e
MITIGATION # AND
REQUIREMENT
Responsible
Party
Monitor Monitoring
Timing
Monitoring
Action
Verification
treatment plan established for the
resources shall be in accordance
with CEQA Guidelines Section
15064.5(f) for historical resources
and PRC Sections 21083.2(b) for
unique archaeological resources.
Preservation in place (i.e.,
avoidance) is the preferred
manner of treatment. If
preservation in place is not
feasible, treatment may include
implementation of archaeological
data recovery excavations to
remove the resource along with
subsequent laboratory processing
and analysis. Any historic
archaeological material that is not
Native American in origin shall be
curated at a public, non-profit
institution with a research interest
in the materials, such as the
Natural History Museum of Los
Angeles County or the Fowler
Museum, if such an institution
agrees to accept the material. If no
institution accepts the
archaeological material, it shall be
offered to a local school or
historical society in the area for
educational purposes.
NOISE
MM-N-1. During all project
construction phases on-site,
construction contractors shall
equip all construction equipment,
fixed or mobile, with either
properly operating and maintained
mufflers or enclosures/acoustical
tents (as appropriate) that achieve
at least 10 dB reduction from noise
level specifications presented in
Table 5 of the Noise Impact
Analysis report for the project.
Contractor City
Building &
Safety
Division
(on-site);
City Public
Works
Department
(for Public
Right-ofWay);and
Contractor
Ongoing
during Project
development
(demolition;
grading;
construction)
Review and
approval of
public
improvement,
grading, and
building plans
notes
City Building &
Safety Division;
City Public
Works
Department
MM-N-2. The contractor shall
place all stationary construction
equipment so that emitted noise
is directed away from the noise
Contractor City
Building &
Safety
Division
(on-site);
City Public
Works
Ongoing
during Project
development
(demolition;
grading;
construction)
Review and
approval of
public
improvement,
grading, and
building plans
notes
City Building &
Safety Division;
City Public
Works
Department
156 | P a g e
MITIGATION # AND
REQUIREMENT
Responsible
Party
Monitor Monitoring
Timing
Monitoring
Action
Verification
sensitive receptors nearest the
project site.
Department
(for Public
Right-ofWay);and
Contractor
MM-N-3. Equipment shall be shut
off and not left to idle when not in
use.
Contractor City
Building &
Safety
Division
(on-site);
City Public
Works
Department
(for Public
Right-ofWay);and
Contractor
Ongoing
during Project
development
(demolition;
grading;
construction)
Review and
approval of
public
improvement,
grading, and
building plans
notes
City Building &
Safety Division;
City Public
Works
Department
MM-N-4. The contractor shall
locate equipment staging in areas
that will create the greatest
distance between constructionrelated noise/vibration sources and sensitive receptors nearest
the project site during all project
construction.
Contractor City
Building &
Safety
Division
(on-site);
City Public
Works
Department
(for Public
Right-ofWay);and
Contractor
Ongoing
during Project
development
(demolition;
grading;
construction)
Review and
approval of
public
improvement,
grading, and
building plans
notes
City Building &
Safety Division;
City Public
Works
Department
MM-N-5. Jackhammers,
pneumatic equipment and all
other portable stationary noise
sources shall be shielded and
noise shall be directed away from
sensitive receptors.
Contractor City
Building &
Safety
Division
(on-site);
City Public
Works
Department
(for Public
Right-ofWay);and
Contractor
Ongoing
during Project
development
(demolition;
grading;
construction)
Review and
approval of
public
improvement,
grading, and
building plans
notes
City Building &
Safety Division;
City Public
Works
Department
MM-N-6. The project proponent
shall mandate that the
construction contractor prohibit
the use of music or sound
amplification on the project site
during construction.
Contractor City
Building &
Safety
Division
(on-site);
City Public
Works
Department
(for Public
Right-ofWay);and
Contractor
Ongoing
during Project
development
(demolition;
grading;
construction)
Review and
approval of
public
improvement,
grading, and
building plans
notes
City Building &
Safety Division;
City Public
Works
Department
MM-N-7. The construction
contractor shall limit haul truck
deliveries to the same hours
specified for construction
equipment.
Contractor City
Building &
Safety
Division
(on-site);
City Public
Works
Department
(for Public
Right-ofWay);and
Contractor
Ongoing
during Project
development
(demolition;
grading;
construction)
Review and
approval of
public
improvement,
grading, and
building plans
notes
City Building &
Safety Division;
City Public
Works
Department
157 | P a g e
MITIGATION # AND
REQUIREMENT
Responsible
Party
Monitor Monitoring
Timing
Monitoring
Action
Verification
MM-N-8. Care should be used
when using vibratory rollers
and/or any other equivalent
vibratory equipment within 19 feet
of the eastern and western
property lines and 16 feet of the
southern property line and
bulldozers within 12 feet of the
eastern and western property
lines and 7 feet of the southern
property line where adjacent
residential and commercial
structures are located.
Contractor City
Building &
Safety
Division
(on-site);
City Public
Works
Department
(for Public
Right-ofWay);and
Contractor
Ongoing
during Project
development
(demolition;
grading;
construction)
Review and
approval of
public
improvement,
grading, and
building plans
notes
City Building &
Safety Division;
City Public
Works
Department
MM-N-9. Operation of the
proposed car wash shall be
limited to the hours between 7:00
AM and 10:00 PM.
Contractor City
Building &
Safety
Division
(on-site);
City Public
Works
Department
(for Public
Right-ofWay);and
Contractor
Ongoing
during Project
development
(demolition;
grading;
construction)
Review and
approval of
public
improvement,
grading, and
building plans
notes
City Building &
Safety Division;
City Public
Works
Department
158 | P a g e
NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT
A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
The City of Huntington Park has prepared an Initial Study for the following project in accordance with City and State of California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines.
Project Title: Florence Car Wash
Project Applicant: Leedco Engineers, Inc.
Project Location: The Project site occupies approximately 0.876 acres within two Assessor’s parcels in the southerly portion of the City of Huntington Park. The addresses/Assessor Parcel Numbers of the Project site are as follows:
• 3100 Florence Avenue, Huntington Park, CA 90255: APNs 6212-001-060 and 6212-001-061 Project Description: The Project involves a Conditional Use Permit and Development Permit application that would allow the applicant to develop and operate a new automated drive-thru car wash, including vending machines.
Proposed development work includes the following:
• Demolish the existing 11,718 square foot office building and remove all of the existing site improvements including all parking lot paving, trash enclosure, equipment cabinets, parking lot planters, all existing property line walls, and all existing vegetation including trees.
• Construct a 4,969 square foot car wash building with related development including o Four vacuum canopies totaling 3,963 square feet and one 192 square foot paystation canopy o 192 square foot vacuum pump enclosure and other utility structures o 34 parking space parking area including drive aisles, queuing and exit lanes o Stormwater infiltrationsystem
o Wastewater clarifier system and associated water recycling system o Property line walls and freestanding pole sign
o Approximately 7,498 square feet of landscaped area
• Construct the following improvements in the public right-of-way:
o Remove existing driveway at west end of site
o Widen existing driveway at Mission Place intersection o Install new right-turn-exit-only driveway near east end of site o Remove street tree and relocate existing tree well to accommodate new driveway o Install new fire hydrant
The City prepared an Initial Study to determine the Project’s impact(s) on the environment and found that the Project would not have any significant impacts on the environment. Therefore, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared.
A public hearing to review the project is scheduled before the Planning Commission on April 20, 2022 at 6:30 pm in the City Council Chamber, Huntington Park City Hall. An additional public hearing to consider the project and the Mitigated Negative Declaration is expected before the Planning Commission on May 18, 2022 at 6:30 pm in the City Council Chamber, Huntington Park City Hall.
Copies of the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration and related documents are on file and available for public review in the Huntington Park City Hall during the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. Monday through Thursday and the Huntington Park Public Library. This Notice will be posted at the following locations. • Los Angeles County Recorder’s Office
12400 Imperial Highway, Norwalk, CA 90650
• Huntington Park City Hall
6550 Miles Avenue, Huntington Park, CA 90255
• Huntington Park Public Library
159 | P a g e
6518 Miles Avenue, Huntington Park, CA 90255
• On- and Off-site at the project location
3100 Florence Avenue, Huntington Park, CA 90255
The starting date for the review period during which the Lead Agency will receive comments about the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration shall be April 12, 2022. The ending date for the review period shall be May 12, 2022, at which time all written comments about the Mitigated Negative Declaration must be received by the City. Persons wishing to review or obtain copies of the proposed Negative Declaration and Initial Study may contact Steve Forster, Interim Director of Community Development.
Steve Forster, Interim Director of Community Development 160 | P a g e
TECHNICAL STUDIES
Tra c Engineering Transporta on Planning Parking Noise & Vibra on Air Quality Global Climate Change Health Risk Assessment 1300 FLORENCE AVENUE
CAR WASH PROJECT
TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS
City of Huntington Park
September 8, 2021
<UNHIDDEN>
prepared by
Tom Huang, TE
Giancarlo Ganddini, TE, PTP
GANDDINI GROUP, INC.
550 Parkcenter Drive, Suite 202
Santa Ana, California 92705
714.795.3100 | www.ganddini.com 19278
3100 FLORENCE AVENUE
CAR WASH PROJECT
TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS
City of Huntington Park
September 8, 2021
3100 Florence Avenue Car Wash Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
i 19278
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................................... 1 Purpose and Objectives ................................................................................................................................................. 1 Project Description .......................................................................................................................................................... 1 Study Area ......................................................................................................................................................................... 1 Analysis Scenarios ........................................................................................................................................................... 2
2. METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................................................................... 6 Intersection Capacity Utilization Methodology ....................................................................................................... 6 Intersection Delay Methodology ................................................................................................................................. 6 Performance Standards .................................................................................................................................................. 7 Thresholds of Significance ............................................................................................................................................ 7
3. EXISTING CONDITIONS ...................................................................................................................................... 9 Existing Roadway System .............................................................................................................................................. 9 Pedestrian Facilities ......................................................................................................................................................... 9 Bicycle Routes .................................................................................................................................................................. 9 Transit Facilities ................................................................................................................................................................ 9 General Plan Context ..................................................................................................................................................... 9 Existing Traffic Volumes ................................................................................................................................................ 9 Existing Level of Service ............................................................................................................................................. 10
4. PROJECT TRIP FORECASTS ............................................................................................................................. 20 Project Description ....................................................................................................................................................... 20 Project Trip Generation .............................................................................................................................................. 20 Project Trip Distribution and Assignment .............................................................................................................. 21
5. FUTURE VOLUME FORECASTS ...................................................................................................................... 28 Cumulative Trips ........................................................................................................................................................... 28 Ambient Growth Rate ...................................................................................................................................... 28 Analysis Scenario Volume Forecasts ....................................................................................................................... 28 Existing Plus Project ......................................................................................................................................... 28 Opening Year (2023) Without Project ........................................................................................................ 28 Opening Year (2023) With Project............................................................................................................... 28
6. FUTURE OPERATIONAL ANALYSIS ............................................................................................................... 39 Existing Plus Project ..................................................................................................................................................... 39 Intersection Levels of Service ........................................................................................................................ 39 Operational Deficiency Evaluation ............................................................................................................... 39 Opening Year (2023) Without Project .................................................................................................................... 39 Intersection Levels of Service ........................................................................................................................ 39 Opening Year (2023) With Project .......................................................................................................................... 39 Intersection Levels of Service ........................................................................................................................ 39 Operational Deficiency Evaluation ............................................................................................................... 39
7. SITE ACCESS ......................................................................................................................................................... 43
8. PARKING ANALYSIS ........................................................................................................................................... 44 3100 Florence Avenue Car Wash Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
ii 19278
9. DRIVE-THROUGH LANE QUEUEING ANALYSIS........................................................................................ 46 Similar Car Wash Site Obervation and Counts ..................................................................................................... 46 Observed Queue Length ............................................................................................................................................ 46 Projected Queue Lane Requirement for the Proposed Project ....................................................................... 47
10. VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED (VMT) ASSESSMENT ..................................................................................... 52 Background .................................................................................................................................................................... 52 VMT Assessment .......................................................................................................................................................... 52
11. CONCLUSIONS .................................................................................................................................................... 53 Site Access ...................................................................................................................................................................... 53 General Recommendations ........................................................................................................................................ 53
APPENDICES
Appendix A Glossary
Appendix B Scoping Agreement
Appendix C Volume Count Worksheets
Appendix D Existing Volume Adjustment Factor Calculations Appendix E Level of Service Worksheets
Appendix F Similar Car Wash Facilities Survey Data
3100 Florence Avenue Car Wash Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
iii 19278
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Existing Levels of Service ................................................................................................................................ 11 Table 2. Project Trip Generation ................................................................................................................................... 22 Table 3. Annual Growth Rate Calculation .................................................................................................................. 29 Table 4. Existing Plus Project Intersection Level of Service and Significant Impact Evaluation ................... 40 Table 5. Opening Year (2023) Without Project Intersection Levels of Service................................................ 41 Table 6. Opening Year (2023) With Project Intersection Level of Service and Significant Impact Evaluation ............................................................................................................................................................ 42 Table 7. Parking Requirement Based on City of Huntington Park Municipal Code ........................................ 45 Table 8. Summary of Tuesday Queueing Length and Parking Demand Observation (July 10, 2018) .................................................................................................................................................................... 48 Table 9. Summary of Saturday Queueing Length and Parking Demand Observation (July 14, 2018) .................................................................................................................................................................... 49 3100 Florence Avenue Car Wash Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
iv 19278
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Regional Vicinity ................................................................................................................................................... 3 Figure 2. Project Location Map .......................................................................................................................................... 4 Figure 3. Site Plan .................................................................................................................................................................. 5 Figure 4. Existing Lane Geometry and Intersection Traffic Controls .................................................................... 12 Figure 5. Existing Pedestrian Facilities .......................................................................................................................... 13 Figure 6. City of Huntington Park Bikeway Master Plan ......................................................................................... 14 Figure 7. City of Huntington Park Transit Routes ...................................................................................................... 15 Figure 8. City of Huntington Park General Plan Circulation Element ................................................................... 16 Figure 9. Existing Average Daily Traffic Volumes ...................................................................................................... 17 Figure 10. Existing AM Peak Hour Intersection Turning Movement Volumes ..................................................... 18 Figure 11. Existing PM Peak Hour Intersection Turning Movement Volumes ..................................................... 19 Figure 12. Project Outbound Trip Distribution ............................................................................................................. 23 Figure 13. Project Inbound Trip Distribution ................................................................................................................. 24 Figure 14. Project Average Daily Traffic Volumes ....................................................................................................... 25 Figure 15. Project AM Peak Hour Intersection Turning Movement Volumes ...................................................... 26 Figure 16. Project PM Peak Hour Intersection Turning Movement Volumes ...................................................... 27 Figure 17. Existing Plus Project Average Daily Traffic Volumes ............................................................................... 30 Figure 18. Existing Plus Project AM Peak Hour Intersection Turning Movement Volumes ............................. 31 Figure 19. Existing Plus Project PM Peak Hour Intersection Turning Movement Volumes.............................. 32 Figure 20. Opening Year (2023) Without Project Average Daily Traffic Volumes .............................................. 33 Figure 21. Opening Year (2023) Without Project AM Peak Hour Intersection Turning Movement Volumes ............................................................................................................................................................... 34 Figure 22. Opening Year (2023) Without Project PM Peak Hour Intersection Turning Movement Volumes ............................................................................................................................................................... 35 Figure 23. Opening Year (2023) With Project Average Daily Traffic Volumes .................................................... 36 Figure 24. Opening Year (2023) With Project AM Peak Hour Intersection Turning Movement Volumes ............................................................................................................................................................... 37 Figure 25. Opening Year (2023) With Project PM Peak Hour Intersection Turning Movement Volumes ............................................................................................................................................................... 38 Figure 26. Tuesday Hourly Queue Length Observation ............................................................................................. 50 Figure 27. Saturday Hourly Queue Length Observation ............................................................................................ 51 Figure 28. Circulation Recommendations ....................................................................................................................... 54 3100 Florence Avenue Car Wash Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
ES-1 19278
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this Traffic Impact Analysis is to provide an assessment of traffic operations resulting from development of the proposed 3100 Florence Avenue Car Wash Project and to identify measures necessary to mitigate potentially operational deficiency, if any. This report analyzes traffic impacts for the anticipated project opening year in Year 2023.
Although this is a technical report, every effort has been made to write the report clearly and concisely. To assist the reader with technical terms related to transportation engineering, a glossary is provided in Appendix A.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The project site is located at 3100 Florence Avenue in the City of Huntington Park. The project site is located south side of Florence Avenue at the southern end of Mission Place between Mountain View Avenue and State Street. The project site is currently occupied with an 11,000 square foot medical office building, and it currently has a signalized full access driveway via the south leg of the intersection of Mission Place at Florence Avenue.
The proposed project involves construction of a 4,712 square foot car wash with a car wash tunnel. The proposed drive-through lane configuration provides queueing storage for three vehicles from the car wash tunnel entrance to the pay stations and barrier arm gates plus storage for another nine vehicles from the pay stations to the entrance of the car wash drive-through lane for a total storage of approximately 12 vehicles.
There will be a drying area with 29 parking stalls that are equipped with vacuum posts for vehicle interior cleaning and drying the vehicle exterior after the vehicles have traveled through the wash tunnel, two accessible parking stalls and two employee parking stalls for a total of 33 parking spaces. There will also be one motorcycle parking stall. The parking lot aisle for the drying area is available to serve as an overflow to accommodate seven additional queueing vehicles to enter the car wash drive-through lane.
The proposed project will retain the existing signalized driveway at the south leg of Mission Place, and the project will provide a new stop-controlled right-turn exit-only driveway on Florence Avenue east of Mission Place. The proposed project is anticipated to be constructed and fully operational by year 2023.
EXISTING TRAFFIC OPERATIONS
The study intersections currently operate within acceptable Levels of Service (D or better) during the peak hours for Existing traffic conditions (see Table 1).
PROJECT TRIPS
The proposed project is forecast to generate a total of approximately net 561 daily vehicle trips, including net 33 vehicle trips during the AM peak hour and net 96 vehicle trips during the PM peak hour.
FORECAST TRAFFIC OPERATIONS
Existing Plus Project Conditions: The study intersections are projected to operate within acceptable Levels of Service (D or better) during the peak hours for Existing Plus Project traffic conditions (see Table 4).
Opening Year (2023) Without Project: The study intersections are projected to operate within acceptable Levels of Service (D or better) during the peak hours for Opening Year (2023) Without Project traffic conditions (see Table 5).
3100 Florence Avenue Car Wash Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
ES-2 19278
Opening Year (2023) With Project: The study intersections are projected to operate within acceptable Levels of Service (D or better) during the peak hours for Opening Year (2023) With Project traffic conditions (see Table 6).
The proposed project is forecast to result in no operational deficiency at the study intersections for Opening Year (2023) With Project conditions. No additional off-site intersection mitigation is required.
PARKING
The proposed project requires 29 parking spaces based on City Municipal Code requirements. Since the proposed project provides a drying area with a total of 33 parking spaces (29 vacuum station stalls, two accessible parking stalls and two employee parking stalls), more than adequate parking supply is forecast to be provided with a surplus of four (4) parking spaces based on the City Municipal Code requirements
DRIVE-THROUGH LANE QUEUEING
The typical peak queueing length is estimated to be approximately 18 vehicles during peak periods based on the highest 85th-percentile queue length. Since the proposed project provides a vehicular queue storage capacity for approximately 12 vehicles with the parking lot aisle for the drying area is available to serve as an overflow to accommodate seven additional queueing vehicles for a total of 19 vehicles, the overall drivethrough storage capacity for the project site is forecast to be adequate to accommodate the peak queue.
VMT SCREENING
The 4,712 square foot automated car wash project contains less than 50,000 square feet of gross floor area of retail. The proposed car wash is also a local-serving facility. Therefore, it may be presumed that the retail portion of the project has a less than significant impact to vehicle miles traveled (VMT) based on the Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines established by the County of Los Angeles Department of Public Works.
3100 Florence Avenue Car Wash Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
1 19278
1. INTRODUCTION
This section describes the purpose of this traffic impact analysis, project location, proposed development, and study area. Figure 1 shows the regional vicinity map, Figure 2 shows the project location map, and Figure 3 illustrates the project site plan.
PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES
The purpose of this traffic impact analysis is to provide an assessment of traffic operations resulting from development of the proposed 3100 Florence Avenue Car Wash Project and to identify measures necessary to mitigate traffic operational deficiencies. This report analyzes traffic impacts for the anticipated project opening year in 2023.
Although this is a technical traffic impact analysis, every effort has been made to write the report clearly and concisely. To assist the reader with those terms unique to transportation engineering, a glossary of terms is provided in Appendix A.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The project site is located at 3100 Florence Avenue in the City of Huntington Park. The project site is located south side of Florence Avenue at the southern end of Mission Place between Mountain View Avenue and State Street. The project site is currently occupied with an 11,000 square foot medical office building, and it currently has a signalized full access driveway via the south leg of the intersection of Mission Place at Florence Avenue.
The proposed project involves construction of a 4,712 square foot car wash with a car wash tunnel. The proposed drive-through lane configuration provides queueing storage for three vehicles from the car wash tunnel entrance to the pay stations and barrier arm gates plus storage for another nine vehicles from the pay stations to the entrance of the car wash drive-through lane for a total storage of approximately 12 vehicles.
There will be a drying area with 29 parking stalls that are equipped with vacuum posts for vehicle interior cleaning and drying the vehicle exterior after the vehicles have traveled through the wash tunnel, two accessible parking stalls and two employee parking stalls for a total of 33 parking spaces. There will also be one motorcycle parking stall. The parking lot aisle for the drying area is available to serve as an overflow to accommodate seven additional queueing vehicles to enter the car wash tunnel entrance.
The proposed project will retain the existing signalized driveway at the south leg of Mission Place, and the project will provide a new stop-controlled right-turn exit-only driveway on Florence Avenue east of Mission Place. The proposed project is anticipated to be constructed and fully operational by year 2023.
STUDY AREA
Based on the study intersections identified in the scoping agreement (Appendix B), the study area consists of the following study intersections within the City of Huntington Park jurisdictions:
Study Intersections Jurisdiction
1 Mountain View Avenue Florence Avenue Huntington Park
2 Mission Place Florence Avenue Huntington Park
3 State Street Florence Avenue Huntington Park
4 Project East Driveway Florence Avenue Huntington Park 1 3100 Florence Avenue Car Wash Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
2 19278
The two off-site signalized intersections on Florence Avenue at Mountain View Avenue and State Street were selected as a study area intersection because these two intersections are the nearest signalized intersections located to the west and east of the project site, respectively. The signalized intersection of Mission Place and Florence Avenue is selected as a study area intersection because the south leg of the intersection will serve as the primary access for the project site which will be considered to be Project West Driveway. The new Project East Driveway is included as a study intersection because it is a new project access.
ANALYSIS SCENARIOS
The following scenarios are analyzed during typical weekday morning and evening peak hour conditions as identified on the scoping agreement (Appendix B):
Existing Conditions
Existing Plus Project Conditions
Opening Year (2023) Without Project Conditions
Opening Year (2023) With Project Conditions
2 Site
N
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Figure 1
Regional Vicinity
3100 Florence Avenue Car Wash Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
19278
3 Figure 2
Project Location Map
3100 Florence Avenue Car Wash Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
19278
N
Site
M
S
I
S
I
O
N
P
L
FLORENCE AVE
M
O
U
N
T
A
N
I VI
E
W
AVE
STATE ST
1 2
3 4
Study Intersection
Legend
## Project Driveway
4 Figure 3
Site Plan
3100 Florence Avenue Car Wash Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
19278
N
5 3100 Florence Avenue Car Wash Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
6 19278
2. METHODOLOGY
This section discusses the analysis methodologies used to assess transportation facility performance as adopted by the respective jurisdictional agencies.
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION METHODOLOGY
Analysis of signalized intersections within the City of Huntington Park is based on the Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) methodology. The ICU methodology compares the traffic volume using the intersection to the capacity of the intersection. The resulting volume-to-capacity ratio represents that portion of the total hourly capacity required to provide sufficient capacity to accommodate all intersection traffic if all approaches operate at capacity.
The volume-to-capacity ratio is then correlated to a performance measure known as Level of Service based on the following thresholds:
Level of Service Volume/Capacity Ratio
A ≤ 0.600
B 0.601 to 0.700
C 0.701 to 0.800
D 0.801 to 0.900
E 0.901 to 1.000
F > 1.000
Source: Transportation Research Board, Interim Materials on Highway Capacity, Transportation Research Circular No. 212, January 1980.
Level of Service is used to qualitatively describe the performance of a roadway facility, ranging from Level of Service A (free-flow conditions) to Level of Service F (extreme congestion and system failure). ICU analysis was performed using the Vistro (Version 6.00-00) software.
Based on City of Huntington Park and County of Los Angeles guidelines1, the ICU analysis utilizes the following parameters: 1,600 vehicles per hour per lane for through and turn lanes, 2,880 vehicles per hour for dual leftturn lanes, and a total clearance adjustment of 10 percent (i.e., 0.10 added to critical Volume/Capacity).
If the paved lane width of a shared through/right turn lane is wide enough to permit a separate right turn, it is common practice for a right turn lane to be considered “de facto.” To function as a de facto right turn lane there must be sufficient width for right turning vehicles to travel outside the through lane. This analysis uses a minimum lane width of 19 feet from curb to lane stripe, but in most cases the lane was 20 feet or greater.
Additionally, a de facto right turn lane was only considered where on-street parking is prohibited near the intersection approach.
INTERSECTION DELAY METHODOLOGY
The technique used to assess the performance of unsignalized intersections within City of Huntington Park and the California Department of Transportation jurisdiction is known as the intersection delay methodology based on the procedures contained in the Highway Capacity Manual. The methodology compares the traffic volume using the intersection to the capacity of the intersection to calculate the delay associated with the
1 County of Los Angeles Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) Report Guidelines; December 2013. 6 3100 Florence Avenue Car Wash Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
7 19278
traffic control at the intersection. The intersection delay is then correlated to a performance measure known as Level of Service based on the following thresholds:
Level of Service
Intersection Control Delay (Seconds / Vehicle)
Signalized Intersection Unsignalized Intersection
A ≤ 10.0 ≤ 10.0
B > 10.0 to ≤ 20.0 > 10.0 to ≤ 15.0
C > 20.0 to ≤ 35.0 > 15.0 to ≤ 25.0
D > 35.0 to ≤ 55.0 > 25.0 to ≤ 35.0
E > 55.0 to ≤ 80.0 > 35.0 to ≤ 50.0
F > 80.0 > 50.0
Source: Transportation Research Board, Highway Capacity Manual (6th Edition).
Level of Service is used to qualitatively describe the performance of a roadway facility, ranging from Level of Service A (free-flow conditions) to Level of Service F (extreme congestion and system failure). Intersection delay analysis was performed using the Vistro (Version 6.00-00) software.
The Level of Service analysis for signalized intersections has been performed using optimized signal timing.
This analysis has included an assumed lost time of two seconds per phase. Traffic signal timing optimization has considered pedestrian safety and signal coordination requirements. Appropriate time for pedestrian crossings has also been considered in the signalized intersection analysis. The following formula has been used to calculate the pedestrian minimum times for all Highway Capacity Manual runs:
(Curb to curb distance) / (3.5 feet/second) + 7 seconds.
Saturation flow rates of 1,800 vehicles per hour of green for through and right turn lanes and 1,700 vehicles per lane for single left turn lanes, 1,600 vehicles per lane for dual left turn lanes, and 1,500 vehicles per lane for triple left turn lanes have been assumed for the capacity analysis.
The peak hour intersection turning movement volumes have been adjusted to peak 15 minute volumes for analysis purposes using the existing observed peak 15 minute to peak hour factors for all scenarios analyzed.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
City of Huntington Park / County of Los Angeles. Both the City of Huntington Park and County of Los Angeles have established Level of Service D as the minimum acceptable Level of Service.
California Department of Transportation. As stated in the Guide for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies (State of California, 2002), “California Department of Transportation endeavors to maintain a target LOS [Level of Service] at the transition between LOS “C” and LOS “D” on State highway facilities”. The California Department of Transportation acknowledges this may not always be feasible and recommends consultation with the California Department of Transportation to determine the appropriate target Level of Service. For consistency with local requirements, this analysis defines Level of Service D as the minimum acceptable Level of Service for State Highway facilities.
THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
For signalized study intersections, the City of Huntington Park General Plan requires that LOS D or better be maintained on Arterial Streets with certain exceptions. As such, intersections operating at LOS E or F will be 7 3100 Florence Avenue Car Wash Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
8 19278
considered deficient. A significant impact occurs at a signalized intersection if the addition of Project trips to an intersection that is currently operating at a deficient LOS (i.e., LOS E or F) causes the V/C to increase.
County of Los Angeles jurisdiction use the following table to determine significant impacts by project and identify feasible mitigation measures which would mitigate the project and/or other related projects’ significant impacts to a level of insignificance
Pre-Project Conditions Project Increase
LOS V/C in V/C
C 0.71 to 0.80 0.04 or more
D 0.81 to 0.90 0.02 or more
E/F 0.91 or more 0.01 or more
For purposes of determining operational deficiency of the proposed project at unsignalized intersections, the following criteria is provided:
The project would create an operational deficiency at an intersection if the addition of project-traffic would cause the intersection to operate from LOS D, or better in the baseline (pre-project) condition, to LOS E or F in the plus-project condition. A traffic signal warrant analysis shall be conducted to determine whether a traffic signal is warranted. If a traffic signal is warranted, the City may require the project applicant to pay its fair-share of fees to an applicable program (e.g., DIF, CIP, etc.) for the signalization of the intersection, when warranted.
If an intersection is operating at LOS E or F in the baseline (pre-project) condition, the project would create an operational deficiency at that intersection if it contributes 10 percent, or more, to the total traffic volume of the impacted peak hour(s). A traffic signal warrant analysis shall be conducted to determine whether a traffic signal is warranted. If a traffic signal is warranted, the City may require the project applicant to pay its fair-share of fees to an applicable program (e.g., DIF, CIP, etc.) for the signalization of the intersection, when warranted.
8 3100 Florence Avenue Car Wash Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
9 19278
3. EXISTING CONDITIONS
EXISTING ROADWAY SYSTEM
Figure 4 identifies the lane geometry and intersection traffic controls for Existing conditions based on a field survey of the study area. Regional access to the project area is provided by the Interstate 710 Freeway approximately 2.5 miles east of the project site, Interstate 105 Freeway approximately 3.2 miles south of the project site, Interstate 110 Freeway approximately 3.9 miles west of the project site, and also Interstate 10 Freeway, Interstate 5 and US-101 Freeway approximately 4.0 miles north of the project site. Key roadways providing local circulation include Florence Avenue, Mountain View Avenue and State Street.
PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES
Existing pedestrian facilities in the project vicinity are shown on Figure 5. As shown on Figure 5, pedestrian sidewalks are currently provided along the roadways adjacent to the project site.
BICYCLE ROUTES
The City of Huntington Park Bikeway Master Plan is depicted on Figure 6.
TRANSIT FACILITIES
Figure 7 shows the existing transit routes available in the project vicinity. As shown on Figure 7, bus runs along Hawthorne Boulevard, with bus stops located at 190th Street within 800 feet walking distance from the project site.
GENERAL PLAN CONTEXT
Figure 8 shows the City of Huntington Park General Plan Circulation Element roadway classifications map.
This figure shows the nature and extent of arterial and collector highways that are needed to adequately serve the ultimate development depicted by the Land Use Element of the General Plan.
EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES
Existing peak hour traffic conditions are based upon morning peak period and evening peak period intersection turning movement counts obtained in January 2021 during typical weekday conditions. The morning peak period was counted between 7:00 AM and 9:00 AM and the evening peak period was counted between 4:00 PM and 6:00 PM. The actual peak hour within the peak period is the four consecutive 15 minute periods with the highest total volume when all movements are added together. Thus, the weekday evening peak hour at one intersection may be 4:45 PM to 5:45 PM if those four consecutive 15 minute periods have the highest combined volume. Intersection turning movement count worksheets are provided in Appendix C.
Due to the COVID-19 lockdown, current 2021 traffic patterns may not be normalized for an extended period of time. Therefore, it is recommended that the pre-lockdown 2020 base traffic volumes at the study intersections be estimated using a seasonal factor estimated from a comparison of nearby freeway segment volumes between pre-lockdown February 2020 conditions and post-lockdown August 2020 conditions. As anticipated, the post-lockdown August 2020 summer volumes is lower than the pre-lockdown February 2020 volumes. New traffic conducted during January 2021 will be increased using the estimated seasonal factor to estimate the pre-lockdown February 2020 base volumes. Appendix D includes the seasonal factor calculations based on comparison of various I-710 Freeway segments near the study area. As shown in Appendix D, the seasonal factors to convert post-lockdown January 2021 counts to pre-lockdown February 2020 base 9 3100 Florence Avenue Car Wash Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
10 19278
volumes are 1.136 for AM peak hour and 1.029 for PM peak hour. To be more conservative, the highest of 3 values for each peak hour for the combined travel directions are selected as the seasonal factors.
Figure 9 shows the Existing average daily traffic volumes. The Existing average daily traffic volumes have been factored from peak hour intersection turning movement volumes using the following formula for each intersection leg:
Evening Peak Hour (Approach Volume + Exit Volume) x 122 = Leg Volume.
Figure 10 and Figure 11 show the Existing morning peak hour and evening peak hour intersection turning movement volumes.
EXISTING LEVEL OF SERVICE
The delay and Levels of Service for Existing traffic conditions have been calculated and are shown in Table 1.
Existing intersection Level of Service worksheets are provided in Appendix E.
As shown in Table 1, the study intersections currently operate within acceptable Levels of Service (D or better) during the peak hours for Existing traffic conditions.
2 Source: Approximate average evening peak hour K factor based on typical roadway traffic conditions. 10 V/C2
or
[Delay]3 LOS4
V/C2 or
[Delay]3 LOS4
1. Mountain View Ave at Florence Ave TS 0.547 A 0.641 B
2. Mission Pl at Florence Ave TS 0.386 A 0.447 A
3. State St at Florence Ave TS 0.602 B 0.754 C
Notes:
(1) AWS = All-Way Stop; CSS = Cross Street Stop
(3) Delay is shown in seconds/vehicle. Level of Service is based on average delay of the worst approach. (4) LOS = Level of Service
(2) V/C = Volume/Capacity
Table 1
Existing Intersection Levels of Service
ID Study Intersection
Traffic
Control1
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
3100 Florence Avenue Car Wash Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
19278
11 Figure 4
Existing Lane Geometry and Intersection Traffic Controls 3100 Florence Avenue Car Wash Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
19278
N
Site
M
S
I
S
I
O
N
P
L
FLORENCE AVE
M
O
U
N
T
A
N
I VI
E
W
AVE
STATE ST
1 2
3 4
1 Mountain View Ave (NS)/
Florence Ave (EW)
Mission Pl (NS)/
Florence Ave (EW)
3 State St (NS)/
Florence Ave (EW)
4 Project East Dwy (NS)/
Florence Ave (EW)
2 Traffic SignalStop Sign#-Lane Divided Roadway#-Lane Undivided RoadwayExisting Lane Legend
#D#U
STOP
4D
4D
4D
4D
4U
4U
2U
2U
2U
12 Figure 5
Existing Pedestrian Facilities
3100 Florence Avenue Car Wash Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
19278
N
Site
M
S
I
S
O
I N
P
L
FLORENCE AVE
Sidewalk
Legend
Cross Walk
B Bus Stop
B
B
13 Figure 6
City of Huntington Park Bikeway Master Plan
3100 Florence Avenue Car Wash Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
19278
N
Source: City of Huntington Park
Site
14 Figure 7
City of Huntington Park Transit Routes
3100 Florence Avenue Car Wash Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
19278
N
Source: City of Huntington Park
Site
15 Figure 8
City of Huntington Park General Plan Circulation Element 3100 Florence Avenue Car Wash Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
19278
N
Source: City of Huntington Park
Site
16 Figure 9
Existing Average Daily Traffic Volumes
3100 Florence Avenue Car Wash Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
19278
N
Site
M
S
I
S
I
O
N
P
L
FLORENCE AVE
M
O
U
N
T
A
N
I VI
E
W
AVE
STATE ST
Vehicles Per Day
Legend
##
8,400
5,400
3,100
15,000
17,400
26,800
25,600
23,600
26,600
17 Figure 10
Existing AM Peak Hour Intersection Turning Movement Volumes 3100 Florence Avenue Car Wash Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
19278
N
Site
M
S
I
S
I
O
N
P
L
FLORENCE AVE
M
O
U
N
T
A
N
I VI
E
W
AVE
STATE ST
1 2
3 4
Study Intersection
Legend
## Project Driveway
1 Mountain View Ave (NS)/
Florence Ave (EW)
109
101
83 27
59 26
32 477
51 4470214
2 Mission Pl (NS)/
Florence Ave (EW)
100
562
12 40
583
3 17242
3 State St (NS)/
Florence Ave (EW)
68 452
110
7 166
94 18
490
77 94670130
4 Project East Dwy (NS)/
Florence Ave (EW)
595 0
745
18 Figure 11
Existing PM Peak Hour Intersection Turning Movement Volumes 3100 Florence Avenue Car Wash Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
19278
N
Site
M
S
I
S
I
O
N
P
L
FLORENCE AVE
M
O
U
N
T
A
N
I VI
E
W
AVE
STATE ST
1 2
3 4
Study Intersection
Legend
## Project Driveway
1 Mountain View Ave (NS)/
Florence Ave (EW)
73 123
80 44
149
49 59
938197
7792030
2 Mission Pl (NS)/
Florence Ave (EW)
312
153 0
29 58
1018
0 190217
3 State St (NS)/
Florence Ave (EW)
99 304
137
16 598
171
44 837167
146805117
4 Project East Dwy (NS)/
Florence Ave (EW)
1046 0
920
19 3100 Florence Avenue Car Wash Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
20 19278
4. PROJECT TRIP FORECASTS
This section describes how project trip generation, trip distribution, and trip assignment forecasts were developed. The forecast project volumes are illustrated on figures contained in this section.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The project site is located at 3100 Florence Avenue in the City of Huntington Park. The project site is located south side of Florence Avenue at the southern end of Mission Place between Mountain View Avenue and State Street. The project site is currently occupied with an 11,000 square foot medical office building, and it currently has a signalized full access driveway via the south leg of the intersection of Mission Place at Florence Avenue. The proposed project involves construction of a 4,712 square foot car wash with a car wash tunnel.
The proposed drive-through lane configuration provides queueing storage for approximately 12 vehicles from the car wash tunnel entrance to the pay stations and barrier arm gates plus storage for another nine vehicles from the pay stations to the entrance of the car wash drive-through lane for a total storage of approximately 12 vehicles. There will be a drying area with 29 parking stalls that are equipped with vacuum posts for vehicle interior cleaning and drying the vehicle exterior after the vehicles have traveled through the wash tunnel, two accessible parking stalls and two employee parking stalls for a total of 33 parking spaces. There will also be one motorcycle parking stall. The parking lot aisle for the drying area is available to serve as an overflow to accommodate seven additional queueing vehicles to enter the car wash drive-through lane.
The proposed project will retain the existing signalized driveway at the south leg of Mission Place, and the project will provide a new stop-controlled right-turn exit-only driveway on Florence Avenue east of Mission Place. The proposed project is anticipated to be constructed and fully operational by year 2023.
PROJECT TRIP GENERATION
Table 2 shows the project trip generation based upon standard rates obtained from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition, 2017 and custom trip generation rates based on traffic survey at other similar car wash facilities. The custom trip generation rates for based on available historic survey counts conducted at two similar automatic car wash facilities at Matt’s Express Carwash in the City of Rialto on January 19, 2014 and at Matt’s Express Carwash in the City of Redlands on December 14, 2016. Appendix F shows the car wash facility count survey count sheets. The survey counts were conducted on a typical weekday over the entire hours of operations showing the “time of the day”. The morning (AM) and afternoon (PM) peak hour trip rates are derived from the highest one-hour within of the typical peak periods of adjacent street traffic between 7 and 9 AM in the morning and between 4 and 6 PM in the afternoon. Based on input from the operators of similar car wash facilities, the monthly activity levels are consistent between the summer season and other non-summer seasons. As shown in Table 2 in comparison to other available trip generation rates published by Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) and San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG), the customized trip rates based on the similar car wash facilities are more conservative than the published trip rates by ITE and SANDAG.
The project trip generation is determined by multiplying the proposed land use quantities by the trip generation rates and inbound/outbound percentages. As shown in Table 2, the proposed project is forecast to generate a total of approximately net 561 daily vehicle trips, including net 33 trips during the AM peak hour and net 96 trips during the PM peak hour.
20 3100 Florence Avenue Car Wash Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
21 19278
PROJECT TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND ASSIGNMENT
Figure 12 shows the forecast directional trip distribution patterns for the project generated trips. The project trip distribution patterns are based on review of existing volume data, surrounding land uses, designated truck routes, and the local and regional roadway facilities in the project vicinity.
Based on the identified project trip generation and distributions, project average daily traffic volumes have been calculated and shown on Figure 14. Project morning and evening peak hour intersection turning movement volumes expected from the project are depicted on Figure 15 and Figure 16, respectively. 21 No. Land Use Code1 Units2
In % Out % Total In % Out % Total
1 Medical-Dental Office Building ITE 720 TSF 78% 22% 2.78 28% 72% 3.46 34.80 2 Automated Car Wash Survey3 Site 55% 45% 64.00 50% 50% 134.00 944.00 3 Automated Car Wash ITE 948 CWT 50% 50% 77.50
4 Automatic Car Wash SANDAG Site 50% 50% 36.00 50% 50% 81.00 900.00 No. Land Use In Out Total In Out Total
Existing Land Use4
1 Medical-Dental Office Building 11.000 TSF 24 7 31 11 27 38 383 Proposed Project
2 Automated Car Wash 1 Site 35 29 64 67 67 134 944
+11 +22 +33 +56 +40 +96 +561
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG), Brief Guide of Vehicular Traffic Generation Rates for the San Diego Area, April 2002.
TSF = Thousand Square Feet; CWT = Car Wash Tunnel
Survey counts of the existing Matt's Express Carwash facility located in the City of Rialto and Matt's Express Carwash facility located in the City of Redlands (see Appendix A)
Trips Generated
Existing trip credit for existing building estimated based on approximate building size.
Quantity²
Project Net Trips
Project AM Peak PM Peak Weekday
Daily
Notes:
ITE = Institute of Transportation Engineers, Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition, 2017; XXX = Land Use Code Table 2
Project Trip Generation
Trip Generation Rates
Project AM Peak PM Peak Weekday
Daily
3100 Florence Avenue Car Wash Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
19278
22 Figure 12
Project Outbound Trip Distribution
3100 Florence Avenue Car Wash Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
19278
N
Site
M
S
I
S
I
O
N
P
L
FLORENCE AVE
M
O
U
N
T
A
N
I VI
E
W
AVE
STATE ST
Percent From Project
Legend
10%
65% 35%
5%
30%
10%
15%
5%
20%
65%
30%
15%
30%
23 Figure 13
Project Inbound Trip Distribution
3100 Florence Avenue Car Wash Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
19278
N
Site
M
S
I
S
I
O
N
P
L
FLORENCE AVE
M
O
U
N
T
A
N
I VI
E
W
AVE
STATE ST
100%
5%
40%
10%
15%
15%
10%
55%
30%
15%
Percent To Project
Legend
10%
24 Figure 14
Project Average Daily Traffic Volumes
3100 Florence Avenue Car Wash Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
19278
N
Site
M
S
I
S
I
O
N
P
L
FLORENCE AVE
M
O
U
N
T
A
N
I VI
E
W
AVE
STATE ST
Vehicles Per Day
Legend
##
56 56
84 84
84 196
337
169
28 25
Figure 15
Project AM Peak Hour Intersection Turning Movement Volumes 3100 Florence Avenue Car Wash Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
19278
N
Site
M
S
I
S
I
O
N
P
L
FLORENCE AVE
M
O
U
N
T
A
N
I VI
E
W
AVE
STATE ST
1 2
3 4
Study Intersection
Legend
## Project Driveway
1 Mountain View Ave (NS)/
Florence Ave (EW)
002
001
020
132
2 Mission Pl (NS)/
Florence Ave (EW)
618
010
004
600
3 State St (NS)/
Florence Ave (EW)
100
200
384
030
4 Project East Dwy (NS)/
Florence Ave (EW)
8 7
6 26
Figure 16
Project PM Peak Hour Intersection Turning Movement Volumes 3100 Florence Avenue Car Wash Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
19278
N
Site
M
S
I
S
I
O
N
P
L
FLORENCE AVE
M
O
U
N
T
A
N
I VI
E
W
AVE
STATE ST
1 2
3 4
Study Intersection
Legend
## Project Driveway
1 Mountain View Ave (NS)/
Florence Ave (EW)
008
006
080
264
2 Mission Pl (NS)/
Florence Ave (EW)
122
12 030
00 22
3100
3 State St (NS)/
Florence Ave (EW)
600
800
6 12
8 0170
4 Project East Dwy (NS)/
Florence Ave (EW)
1412
31 27
3100 Florence Avenue Car Wash Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
28 19278
5. FUTURE VOLUME FORECASTS
This section describes how future volume forecasts for each analysis scenario were developed. Forecast study area volumes are illustrated on figures contained in this section.
CUMULATIVE TRIPS
Ambient Growth Rate
To account for ambient growth on roadways, existing and current 2021 traffic volumes were increased by an annual growth rate of 1.4 percent (1.4%) per year over two years for Opening Year (2023) conditions. As shown in Table 3, an annual ambient growth rate of 1.4% is estimated based on the Los Angeles County Congestion Management Program (CMP) General Traffic Volume Growth Factors for 2015 and 2020 for the Regional Statistical Area of Downey (RSA21). The Opening Year 2023 will included a 1.4% annual growth for 2 years (total growth factor = 1.028) over the 2021 base volumes. The ambient growth rate was conservatively applied to all movements at the study intersections.
ANALYSIS SCENARIO VOLUME FORECASTS
Existing Plus Project
Existing Plus Project volume forecasts were derived by adding the project generated trips to Existing volumes.
Existing Plus Project average daily traffic volumes are shown on Figure 17. Existing Plus Project morning and evening peak hour intersection turning movement volumes are shown on Figure 18 and Figure 19.
Opening Year (2023) Without Project
To develop Opening Year (2023) Without Project volume forecasts, Existing volumes were combined with ambient growth. Opening Year (2023) Without Project average daily traffic volumes are shown on Figure 20.
Opening Year (2023) Without Project morning and evening peak hour intersection turning movement volumes are shown Figure 21 and Figure 22.
Opening Year (2023) With Project
Opening Year (2023) With Project volume forecasts were developed by adding project generated trips to the Opening Year (2023) Without Project forecast. Opening Year (2023) With Project average daily traffic volumes are shown on Figure 23. Opening Year (2023) With Project morning and evening peak hour intersection turning movement volumes are shown on Figure 24 and Figure 25. 28 Year
Growth
Factor1 Year
Growth
Factor1
Years of
Growth
Growth
Factor
Growth
Factor
Growth
Rate
21 Vernon 2015 1.073 2020 1.146 5 1.073 1.014 1.4%
(1)
Regional Statistical
Area (RSA)
Notes:
Los Angeles County Congestion Management Program (CMP) General Traffic Volume Growth Factors (Exhibit D-1) Table 3
Annual Growth Rate Calculation
Year 1 Year 2 Overall Growth Annual Growth
3100 Florence Avenue Car Wash Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
19278
29 Figure 17
Existing Plus Project Average Daily Traffic Volumes
3100 Florence Avenue Car Wash Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
19278
N
Site
M
S
I
S
I
O
N
P
L
FLORENCE AVE
M
O
U
N
T
A
N
I VI
E
W
AVE
STATE ST
Vehicles Per Day
Legend
##
8,500
5,500
3,100
15,100
17,500
26,900
25,800
23,900
26,800
30 Figure 18
Existing Plus Project
AM Peak Hour Intersection Turning Movement Volumes
3100 Florence Avenue Car Wash Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
19278
N
Site
M
S
I
S
I
O
N
P
L
FLORENCE AVE
M
O
U
N
T
A
N
I VI
E
W
AVE
STATE ST
1 2
3 4
Study Intersection
Legend
## Project Driveway
1 Mountain View Ave (NS)/
Florence Ave (EW)
109
101
85 27
59 27
32 479
51 4570516
2 Mission Pl (NS)/
Florence Ave (EW)
718
563
12 40
583
8 77242
3 State St (NS)/
Florence Ave (EW)
69 452
110
9 166
94 21
498
81 94673130
4 Project East Dwy (NS)/
Florence Ave (EW)
603 7
751
31 Figure 19
Existing Plus Project
PM Peak Hour Intersection Turning Movement Volumes
3100 Florence Avenue Car Wash Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
19278
N
Site
M
S
I
S
I
O
N
P
L
FLORENCE AVE
M
O
U
N
T
A
N
I VI
E
W
AVE
STATE ST
1 2
3 4
Study Intersection
Legend
## Project Driveway
1 Mountain View Ave (NS)/
Florence Ave (EW)
73 123
88 44
149
55 59
946197
7992634
2 Mission Pl (NS)/
Florence Ave (EW)
153
14 153 3
29 58
1018
22 3290217
3 State St (NS)/
Florence Ave (EW)
105
304
137
24 598
171
50 849175
146822117
4 Project East Dwy (NS)/
Florence Ave (EW)
141058
951
32 Figure 20
Opening Year (2023) Without Project Average Daily Traffic Volumes 3100 Florence Avenue Car Wash Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
19278
N
Site
M
S
I
S
I
O
N
P
L
FLORENCE AVE
M
O
U
N
T
A
N
I VI
E
W
AVE
STATE ST
Vehicles Per Day
Legend
##
8,600
5,600
3,200
15,400
17,900
27,600
26,300
24,300
27,300
33 Figure 21
Opening Year (2023) Without Project
AM Peak Hour Intersection Turning Movement Volumes
3100 Florence Avenue Car Wash Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
19278
N
Site
M
S
I
S
I
O
N
P
L
FLORENCE AVE
M
O
U
N
T
A
N
I VI
E
W
AVE
STATE ST
1 2
3 4
Study Intersection
Legend
## Project Driveway
1 Mountain View Ave (NS)/
Florence Ave (EW)
112
104
85 28
61 27
33 491
53 4572314
2 Mission Pl (NS)/
Florence Ave (EW)
100
582
12 41
600
3 17462
3 State St (NS)/
Florence Ave (EW)
70 466
113
7 171
97 19
505
79 97690134
4 Project East Dwy (NS)/
Florence Ave (EW)
613 0
767
34 Figure 22
Opening Year (2023) Without Project
PM Peak Hour Intersection Turning Movement Volumes
3100 Florence Avenue Car Wash Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
19278
N
Site
M
S
I
S
I
O
N
P
L
FLORENCE AVE
M
O
U
N
T
A
N
I VI
E
W
AVE
STATE ST
1 2
3 4
Study Intersection
Legend
## Project Driveway
1 Mountain View Ave (NS)/
Florence Ave (EW)
75 127
82 45
153
50 61
966203
7994831
2 Mission Pl (NS)/
Florence Ave (EW)
312
158 0
30 60
1049
0 192918
3 State St (NS)/
Florence Ave (EW)
102
313
141
16 616
176
45 862172
150829121
4 Project East Dwy (NS)/
Florence Ave (EW)
1077 0
948
35 Figure 23
Opening Year (2023) With Project Average Daily Traffic Volumes 3100 Florence Avenue Car Wash Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
19278
N
Site
M
S
I
S
I
O
N
P
L
FLORENCE AVE
M
O
U
N
T
A
N
I VI
E
W
AVE
STATE ST
Vehicles Per Day
Legend
##
8,700
5,700
3,200
15,500
18,000
27,700
26,500
24,600
27,500
36 Figure 24
Opening Year (2023) With Project
AM Peak Hour Intersection Turning Movement Volumes
3100 Florence Avenue Car Wash Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
19278
N
Site
M
S
I
S
I
O
N
P
L
FLORENCE AVE
M
O
U
N
T
A
N
I VI
E
W
AVE
STATE ST
1 2
3 4
Study Intersection
Legend
## Project Driveway
1 Mountain View Ave (NS)/
Florence Ave (EW)
112
104
87 28
61 28
33 493
53 4672616
2 Mission Pl (NS)/
Florence Ave (EW)
718
583
12 41
600
8 77462
3 State St (NS)/
Florence Ave (EW)
71 466
113
9 171
97 22
513
83 97693134
4 Project East Dwy (NS)/
Florence Ave (EW)
621 7
773
37 Figure 25
Opening Year (2023) With Project
PM Peak Hour Intersection Turning Movement Volumes
3100 Florence Avenue Car Wash Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
19278
N
Site
M
S
I
S
I
O
N
P
L
FLORENCE AVE
M
O
U
N
T
A
N
I VI
E
W
AVE
STATE ST
1 2
3 4
Study Intersection
Legend
## Project Driveway
1 Mountain View Ave (NS)/
Florence Ave (EW)
75 127
90 45
153
56 61
974203
8195435
2 Mission Pl (NS)/
Florence Ave (EW)
153
14 158 3
30 60
1049
22 3292918
3 State St (NS)/
Florence Ave (EW)
108
313
141
24 616
176
51 874180
150846121
4 Project East Dwy (NS)/
Florence Ave (EW)
141089
979
38 3100 Florence Avenue Car Wash Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
39 19278
6. FUTURE OPERATIONAL ANALYSIS
Detailed intersection Level of Service calculation worksheets for each of the following analysis scenarios are provided in Appendix E.
EXISTING PLUS PROJECT
Intersection Levels of Service
The delay and Levels of Service for Existing Plus Project conditions are shown in Table 4. As shown in Table 4, the study intersections are forecast to operate within acceptable Levels of Service (D or better) during the peak hours for Existing Plus Project traffic conditions.
Operational Deficiency Evaluation
Table 4 evaluates the project change at the study intersections for Existing Plus Project conditions. As shown in Table 4, the proposed project is forecast to result in no operational deficiency at the study intersections for Existing Plus Project conditions. No additional off-site intersection mitigation is required.
OPENING YEAR (2023) WITHOUT PROJECT
Intersection Levels of Service
The delay and Levels of Service for Opening Year (2023) Without Project conditions are shown in Table 5. As shown in Table 5, the study intersections are forecast to operate within acceptable Levels of Service (D or better) during the peak hours for Opening Year (2023) Without Project conditions.
OPENING YEAR (2023) WITH PROJECT
Intersection Levels of Service
The delay and Levels of Service for Opening Year (2023) With Project conditions are shown in Table 6. As shown in Table 6, the study intersections are projected to operate within acceptable Levels of Service (D or better) during the peak hours for Opening Year (2023) With Project conditions.
Operational Deficiency Evaluation
Table 6 evaluates the project change at the study intersections for Opening Year (2023) With Project conditions. As shown in Table 6, the proposed project is forecast to result in no operational deficiency at study intersections for Opening Year (2023) With Project conditions. No additional off-site intersection mitigation is required.
39 V/C2
or
[Delay]3 LOS4
V/C2 or
[Delay]3 LOS4
V/C2 or
[Delay]3 LOS4
V/C2 or
[Delay]3 LOS4
1. Mountain View Ave at Florence Ave TS 0.547 A 0.550 A +0.003 No 0.641 B 0.654 B +0.013 No
2. Mission Pl at Florence Ave TS 0.386 A 0.390 A +0.004 No 0.447 A 0.557 A +0.110 No
3. State St at Florence Ave TS 0.602 B 0.605 B +0.003 No 0.754 C 0.766 C +0.012 No
4. Project East Dwy at Florence Ave CSS [0.0] A [10.4] B +10.4 No [0.0] A [12.8] B +12.8 No (4) LOS = Level of Service Operational Deficiency?
Notes:
(1) AWS = All-Way Stop; CSS = Cross Street Stop
(3) Delay is shown in seconds/vehicle. Level of Service is based on average delay of the worst approach. (2) V/C = Volume/Capacity
Without
Project
With
Project
Project
Change Operational Deficiency?
Without
Project
With
Project
Project
Change
Table 4
Existing Plus Project Intersection Levels of Service and Operational Deficiency Evaluation ID Study Intersection
Traffic
Control1
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
3100 Florence Avenue Car Wash Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
19278
40 V/C2
or
[Delay]3 LOS4
V/C2 or
[Delay]3 LOS4
1. Mountain View Ave at Florence Ave TS 0.560 A 0.657 B
2. Mission Pl at Florence Ave TS 0.395 A 0.458 A
3. State St at Florence Ave TS 0.617 B 0.774 C
Table 5
Opening Year (2023) Without Project Intersection Levels of Service ID Study Intersection
Traffic
Control1
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Notes:
(1) AWS = All-Way Stop; CSS = Cross Street Stop
(2) V/C = Volume/Capacity
(3) Delay is shown in seconds/vehicle. Level of Service is based on average delay of the worst approach. (4) LOS = Level of Service
3100 Florence Avenue Car Wash Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
19278
41 V/C2
or
[Delay]3 LOS4
V/C2 or
[Delay]3 LOS4
V/C2 or
[Delay]3 LOS4
V/C2 or
[Delay]3 LOS4
1. Mountain View Ave at Florence Ave TS 0.560 A 0.563 A +0.003 No 0.657 B 0.670 B +0.013 No
2. Mission Pl at Florence Ave TS 0.395 A 0.399 A +0.004 No 0.458 A 0.571 A +0.113 No
3. State St at Florence Ave TS 0.617 B 0.620 B +0.003 No 0.774 C 0.786 C +0.012 No
4. Project East Dwy at Florence Ave CSS [0.0] A [10.4] B +10.4 No [0.0] A [13.0] B +13.0 No Table 6
Opening Year (2023) With Project Intersection Levels of Service and Operational Deficiency Evaluation ID Study Intersection
Traffic
Control1
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
(4) LOS = Level of Service
Without
Project
With
Project
Project
Change Operational Deficiency?
Without
Project
With
Project
Project
Change Operational Deficiency?
Notes:
(1) AWS = All-Way Stop; CSS = Cross Street Stop
(2) V/C = Volume/Capacity
(3) Delay is shown in seconds/vehicle. Level of Service is based on average delay of the worst approach. 3100 Florence Avenue Car Wash Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
19278
42 3100 Florence Avenue Car Wash Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
43 19278
7. SITE ACCESS
This analysis assumes the following improvements will be constructed by the project to provide project site access:
Project West Driveway at Florence Avenue (Mission Place at Florence Avenue) Retain existing signalized driveway at the intersection of Mission Place and Florence Avenue. Reconstruct the northbound approach to provide a total width of 26 feet with one all-way lane.
Project East Driveway at Florence Avenue
Install a northbound cross street stop-control.
Construct the northbound approach to consist of one right-turn exit-only lane. 43 3100 Florence Avenue Car Wash Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
44 19278
8. PARKING ANALYSIS
The parking requirement for the proposed automated car wash project is calculated based on the City of Huntington Park Municipal Parking Code. The City of Huntington Park Municipal Parking Code for automobile washing establishment is one parking space per 250 square feet of gross floor area plus 10 spaces for each wash lane or car wash tunnel.
The project will provide a drying area with 29 parking stalls that are equipped with vacuum posts for vehicle interior cleaning and drying the vehicle exterior after the vehicles have traveled through the wash tunnel, two accessible parking stall and two employee parking stalls for a total of 33 parking spaces. There will also be one motorcycle parking stall.
As shown in Table 7, the proposed project requires 29 parking spaces based on City Municipal Code requirements. Since the proposed project provides a drying area with a total of 33 parking spaces (29 vacuum station stalls, two accessible parking stalls and two employee parking stalls), more than adequate parking supply is forecast to be provided with a surplus of four (4) parking spaces based on the City Municipal Code requirements.
44 Component Quantity1 Units2
Parking
Spaces
Floor Area 4,712 SF 1.0 Space : 250 SF 19
Wash Lane / Car Wash Tunnel 1 CWT 10.0 Space : 1 CWT 10 29 33
+4
(1)
(2)
(3)
Total Parking
Table 7
Parking Requirement Based on City of Huntington Park Municipal Code Proposed Use
Parking Code
Requirement
Automobile Washing
City of Huntington Park Municipal Code, Section 9-3.804. One space for each 250 SF of floor area, plus 10 spaces for each wash lane.
Notes:
Available Parking Supply, including 29 vacumm stalls, 2 accessible parking stalls, 2 employee stalls and 1 motorcycle stall [See Figure 3] Parking Surplus (+) / Deficit (-) for the Proposed Project The total building area is 4,712 square feet including the car wash tunnel, employee break room, restroom and other facilities.
SF = Square Feet; CWT = Car Wash Tunnel
3100 Florence Avenue Car Wash Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
19278
45 3100 Florence Avenue Car Wash Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
46 19278
9. DRIVE-THROUGH LANE QUEUEING ANALYSIS
This queueing analysis estimates the drive-through lane queueing demand for the proposed project based on available historic observations at 3 existing similar car wash facilities.
The proposed drive-through lane configuration provides queueing storage for approximately three vehicles from the car wash tunnel entrance to the pay stations and barrier arm gates plus storage for another nine vehicles from the pay stations to the entrance of the car wash drive-through lane for a total storage of approximately 12 vehicles. There will be a drying area with 29 parking stalls that are equipped with vacuum posts for vehicle interior cleaning and drying the vehicle exterior after the vehicles have traveled through the wash tunnel, two accessible parking stalls and two employee parking stalls for a total of 33 parking spaces.
There will also be one motorcycle parking stall. The parking lot aisle for the drying area is available to serve as an overflow to accommodate seven additional queueing vehicles to enter the car wash drive-through lane.
The project is proposed to have one car wash tunnel that could accommodate approximately 5 vehicles through different stages of the car wash.
SIMILAR CAR WASH SITE OBERVATION AND COUNTS
These 3 similar car wash facilities were chosen as survey sites because they are comparable to the proposed project site in terms of site configuration, typical operations, and available amenities. Field observations of drive-through lane queues were previously conducted at the following 3 existing car wash facility locations:
1. Rapids Express Carwash – 2045 North Tustin Street, Orange CA (19 vacuum stalls).
2. Scrub Bot Express Car Wash – 1807 North Main Street, Santa Ana, CA (21 vacuum stalls).
3. Speedie Clean Express Car Wash – 2035 North Tustin Avenue, Santa Ana, CA (16 vacuum stalls).
The drive-through vehicular queues and number of parked vehicles were observed in 15-minute intervals from 7:00 AM to 8:00 PM during a typical weekday (Tuesday, July 10, 2018) and a typical Saturday (July 14, 2018). The observations were conducted using field surveys with technicians on-site.
OBSERVED QUEUE LENGTH
Table 8 and Table 9 summarize the results of the observed drive-through lane vehicular queue data collected at the 3 similar car wash facility locations during a typical Tuesday and a typical Saturday, respectively. The drive-through queue length summary in Table 8 and Table 9 present the observed average, 85th-percentile, and peak queue length.
As shown in Table 8, the peak activity at each similar car wash facility were observed to occur intermittently during the late morning time period that coincided with the beginning of a typical work day and the afternoon peak period that coincided with the end of a typical work day. The queueing length receded during less active times throughout the day. The peak queue length within each 15-minute interval were observed to be sustained for only a few minutes at a time.
As shown in Table 8, the Tuesday maximum peak vehicular queue length observed was 18 vehicles at the Rapids Express site, 3 vehicles at the Scrub Bots Express site, and 9 vehicles at the Speedie Clean Express site. The maximum hourly average queue for the Tuesday counts for the 3 survey sites is 7.0 vehicles during the evening peak period. The maximum hourly 85th-percentile queue is 13.2 vehicles during the evening peak period. Figure 26 shows graphical results of the Tuesday average queue, the 85th-percentile queue, and the peak queue for each time period throughout the day.
As shown in Table 9, the Saturday maximum peak vehicular queue length observed was 22 vehicles at the Rapids Express site, 5 vehicles at the Scrub Bots Express site, and 8 vehicles at the Speedie Clean Express 46 3100 Florence Avenue Car Wash Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
47 19278
site. The maximum hourly average queue for the Saturday counts for the 3 survey sites is 11.0 vehicles during the afternoon peak period. The maximum hourly 85th-percentile queue is 17.8 vehicles during the afternoon peak period. Figure 27 shows graphical results of the Saturday average queue, the 85th-percentile queue, and the peak queue for each time period throughout the day.
PROJECTED QUEUE LANE REQUIREMENT FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT Assuming the proposed project would experience queueing activity similar to the three survey sites, the typical peak queueing length is estimated to be approximately 18 vehicles during peak periods based on the highest 85th-percentile queue length. Since the proposed project provides a vehicular queue storage capacity for approximately 12 vehicles with the parking lot aisle for the drying area is available to serve as an overflow to accommodate seven additional queueing vehicles for a total of 19 vehicles, the overall drive-through storage capacity for the project site is forecast to be adequate to accommodate the peak queue. 47 Queue Parking Queue Parking Queue Parking
7:00 AM - 7:15 AM 2 3 0 1 1 2 2 3 1.0 2.0 1.7 2.7
7:15 AM - 7:30 AM 3 3 2 1 2 8 3 8 2.3 4.0 2.7 6.5
7:30 AM - 7:45 AM 0 5 1 3 4 5 4 5 1.7 4.3 3.1 5.0
7:45 AM - 8:00 AM 0 3 2 3 2 5 2 5 1.3 3.7 2.0 4.4
8:00 AM - 8:15 AM 1 4 1 7 2 3 2 7 1.3 4.7 1.7 6.1
8:15 AM - 8:30 AM 0 9 0 5 3 7 3 9 1.0 7.0 2.1 8.4
8:30 AM - 8:45 AM 1 5 0 6 4 11 4 11 1.7 7.3 3.1 9.5
8:45 AM - 9:00 AM 1 13 0 2 5 11 5 13 2.0 8.7 3.8 12.4
9:00 AM - 9:15 AM 3 12 1 4 8 10 8 12 4.0 8.7 6.5 11.4
9:15 AM - 9:30 AM 2 20 0 6 4 17 4 20 * 2.0 14.3 * 3.4 19.1 * 9:30 AM - 9:45 AM 0 11 1 3 4 11 4 11 1.7 8.3 3.1 11.0
9:45 AM - 10:00 AM 1 15 1 5 3 9 3 15 1.7 9.7 2.4 13.2
10:00 AM - 10:15 AM 0 19 0 4 4 11 4 19 1.3 11.3 2.8 16.6 10:15 AM - 10:30 AM 0 14 0 1 7 13 7 14 2.3 9.3 4.9 13.7 10:30 AM - 10:45 AM 1 15 1 5 5 14 5 15 2.3 11.3 3.8 14.7 10:45 AM - 11:00 AM 1 12 1 9 9 8 9 12 3.7 9.7 6.6 11.1
11:00 AM - 11:15 AM 1 11 0 9 5 9 5 11 2.0 9.7 3.8 10.4
11:15 AM - 11:30 AM 2 12 2 8 7 7 7 12 3.7 9.0 5.5 10.8
11:30 AM - 11:45 AM 0 14 1 4 5 13 5 14 2.0 10.3 3.8 13.7 11:45 AM - 12:00 PM 1 14 2 5 6 12 6 14 3.0 10.3 4.8 13.4 12:00 PM - 12:15 PM 1 11 1 7 8 14 8 14 3.3 10.7 5.9 13.1 12:15 PM - 12:30 PM 0 12 3 8 4 13 4 13 2.3 11.0 3.7 12.7 12:30 PM - 12:45 PM 2 10 0 8 4 13 4 13 2.0 10.3 3.4 12.1 12:45 PM - 1:00 PM 0 11 1 8 7 8 7 11 2.7 9.0 5.2 10.1
1:00 PM - 1:15 PM 2 10 3 9 4 8 4 10 3.0 9.0 3.7 9.7
1:15 PM - 1:30 PM 1 12 0 9 5 11 5 12 2.0 10.7 3.8 11.7
1:30 PM - 1:45 PM 5 14 1 8 1 15 5 15 2.3 12.3 3.8 14.7
1:45 PM - 2:00 PM 4 14 0 7 6 12 6 14 3.3 11.0 5.4 13.4
2:00 PM - 2:15 PM 6 17 1 7 1 13 6 17 2.7 12.3 4.5 15.8
2:15 PM - 2:30 PM 3 15 1 8 4 12 4 15 2.7 11.7 3.7 14.1
2:30 PM - 2:45 PM 5 16 0 10 1 17 5 17 2.0 14.3 * 3.8 16.7 2:45 PM - 3:00 PM 7 12 0 11 1 14 7 14 2.7 12.3 5.2 13.4 3:00 PM - 3:15 PM 3 16 0 9 2 6 3 16 1.7 10.3 2.7 13.9
3:15 PM - 3:30 PM 4 15 1 8 3 14 4 15 2.7 12.3 3.7 14.7
3:30 PM - 3:45 PM 2 19 1 7 1 17 2 19 1.3 14.3 * 1.7 18.4 3:45 PM - 4:00 PM 2 15 0 7 5 13 5 15 2.3 11.7 4.1 14.4
4:00 PM - 4:15 PM 3 15 0 1 7 7 7 15 3.3 7.7 5.8 12.6
4:15 PM - 4:30 PM 6 12 2 4 4 13 6 13 4.0 9.7 5.4 12.7
4:30 PM - 4:45 PM 5 13 1 4 1 11 5 13 2.3 9.3 3.8 12.4
4:45 PM - 5:00 PM 4 14 0 5 3 13 4 14 2.3 10.7 3.7 13.7
5:00 PM - 5:15 PM 6 9 0 3 3 10 6 10 3.0 7.3 5.1 9.7
5:15 PM - 5:30 PM 3 16 2 4 2 8 3 16 2.3 9.3 2.7 13.6
5:30 PM - 5:45 PM 6 14 0 7 4 8 6 14 3.3 9.7 5.4 12.2
5:45 PM - 6:00 PM 3 15 3 7 1 8 3 15 2.3 10.0 3.0 12.9
6:00 PM - 6:15 PM 5 17 0 13 2 13 5 17 2.3 14.3 * 4.1 15.8 6:15 PM - 6:30 PM 4 9 0 9 0 12 4 12 1.3 10.0 2.8 11.1
6:30 PM - 6:45 PM 5 11 1 9 5 9 5 11 3.7 9.7 5.0 10.4
6:45 PM - 7:00 PM 3 14 1 11 2 13 3 14 2.0 12.7 2.7 13.7 7:00 PM - 7:15 PM 1 17 0 11 0 8 1 17 0.3 12.0 0.7 15.2
7:15 PM - 7:30 PM 4 12 0 12 1 9 4 12 1.7 11.0 3.1 12.0
7:30 PM - 7:45 PM 1 14 0 12 1 12 1 14 0.7 12.7 1.0 13.4 7:45 PM - 8:00 PM 18 4 1 11 2 9 18 * 11 7.0 * 8.0 13.2 * 10.4 18 20 3 13 9 17
2.8 12.3 0.8 6.6 3.6 10.6
5.0 16.0 2.0 9.4 6.0 13.4
Hourly 85th
Percentile
Queue Parking
Summary of Tuesday Queuing Length and Parking Demand Observation (July 10, 2018) Table 8
Hourly
Average
Queue Parking
Hourly
Peak
Queue Parking
Site 85th Percentile
Time Period
Rapids
Express
Scrub Bot
Express
Speedie Clean
Express
Site Average
Site Peak
3100 Florence Avenue Car Wash Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
19278
48 Queue Parking Queue Parking Queue Parking
7:00 AM - 7:15 AM 2 7 0 6 3 5 3 7 1.7 6.0 2.7 6.7
7:15 AM - 7:30 AM 5 11 1 10 2 13 5 13 2.7 11.3 4.1 12.4 7:30 AM - 7:45 AM 3 12 0 12 3 11 3 12 2.0 11.7 3.0 12.0 7:45 AM - 8:00 AM 2 11 0 10 1 12 2 12 1.0 11.0 1.7 11.7 8:00 AM - 8:15 AM 5 15 2 8 0 10 5 15 2.3 11.0 4.1 13.5
8:15 AM - 8:30 AM 4 14 0 10 2 14 4 14 2.0 12.7 3.4 14.0 8:30 AM - 8:45 AM 6 15 0 10 6 15 6 15 4.0 13.3 6.0 15.0 8:45 AM - 9:00 AM 3 17 0 6 2 18 3 18 1.7 13.7 2.7 17.7
9:00 AM - 9:15 AM 6 18 1 10 1 13 6 18 2.7 13.7 4.5 16.5 9:15 AM - 9:30 AM 4 16 1 11 3 14 4 16 2.7 13.7 3.7 15.4 9:30 AM - 9:45 AM 4 17 1 10 0 14 4 17 1.7 13.7 3.1 16.1 9:45 AM - 10:00 AM 6 16 3 14 4 15 6 16 4.3 15.0 5.4 15.7 10:00 AM - 10:15 AM 5 14 3 21 3 19 5 21 * 3.7 18.0 * 4.4 20.4 * 10:15 AM - 10:30 AM 4 16 0 11 1 16 4 16 1.7 14.3 3.1 16.0 10:30 AM - 10:45 AM 5 18 1 12 4 19 5 19 3.3 16.3 4.7 18.7 10:45 AM - 11:00 AM 9 17 2 15 2 15 9 17 4.3 15.7 6.9 16.4 11:00 AM - 11:15 AM 9 18 4 15 4 16 9 18 5.7 16.3 7.5 17.4 11:15 AM - 11:30 AM 9 14 3 15 4 17 9 17 5.3 15.3 7.5 16.4 11:30 AM - 11:45 AM 11 15 5 18 7 21 11 21 * 7.7 18.0 * 9.8 20.1 11:45 AM - 12:00 PM 9 16 3 19 6 14 9 19 6.0 16.3 8.1 18.1 12:00 PM - 12:15 PM 14 17 1 20 4 15 14 20 6.3 17.3 11.0 19.1 12:15 PM - 12:30 PM 10 15 0 18 5 15 10 18 5.0 16.0 8.5 17.1 12:30 PM - 12:45 PM 6 16 1 9 6 21 6 21 * 4.3 15.3 6.0 19.5 12:45 PM - 1:00 PM 15 15 2 12 5 18 15 18 7.3 15.0 12.0 17.1 1:00 PM - 1:15 PM 14 18 5 13 6 19 14 19 8.3 16.7 11.6 18.7 1:15 PM - 1:30 PM 14 18 4 15 7 20 14 20 8.3 17.7 11.9 19.4 1:30 PM - 1:45 PM 22 4 3 16 8 21 22 * 21 * 11.0 * 13.7 17.8 * 19.5 1:45 PM - 2:00 PM 21 4 0 15 4 16 21 16 8.3 11.7 15.9 15.7 2:00 PM - 2:15 PM 19 7 2 13 0 20 19 20 7.0 13.3 13.9 17.9 2:15 PM - 2:30 PM 14 3 0 15 2 15 14 15 5.3 11.0 10.4 15.0 2:30 PM - 2:45 PM 17 5 0 14 4 13 17 14 7.0 10.7 13.1 13.7 2:45 PM - 3:00 PM 18 4 2 12 1 15 18 15 7.0 10.3 13.2 14.1 3:00 PM - 3:15 PM 18 2 1 14 5 21 18 21 * 8.0 12.3 14.1 18.9 3:15 PM - 3:30 PM 20 5 0 13 3 19 20 19 7.7 12.3 14.9 17.2 3:30 PM - 3:45 PM 17 3 0 13 3 16 17 16 6.7 10.7 12.8 15.1 3:45 PM - 4:00 PM 22 6 3 12 7 17 22 * 17 10.7 11.7 17.5 15.5 4:00 PM - 4:15 PM 19 2 2 12 0 14 19 14 7.0 9.3 13.9 13.4 4:15 PM - 4:30 PM 17 0 4 13 5 20 17 20 8.7 11.0 13.4 17.9 4:30 PM - 4:45 PM 18 1 1 16 3 15 18 16 7.3 10.7 13.5 15.7 4:45 PM - 5:00 PM 16 3 1 16 5 9 16 16 7.3 9.3 12.7 13.9 5:00 PM - 5:15 PM 13 2 2 12 2 11 13 12 5.7 8.3 9.7 11.7 5:15 PM - 5:30 PM 13 1 1 15 1 11 13 15 5.0 9.0 9.4 13.8 5:30 PM - 5:45 PM 12 0 0 13 1 15 12 15 4.3 9.3 8.7 14.4 5:45 PM - 6:00 PM 12 2 2 14 5 16 12 16 6.3 10.7 9.9 15.4 6:00 PM - 6:15 PM 10 0 3 13 3 19 10 19 5.3 10.7 7.9 17.2 6:15 PM - 6:30 PM 9 0 2 14 3 17 9 17 4.7 10.3 7.2 16.1
6:30 PM - 6:45 PM 9 0 3 13 2 11 9 13 4.7 8.0 7.2 12.4
6:45 PM - 7:00 PM 8 0 0 10 1 9 8 10 3.0 6.3 5.9 9.7
7:00 PM - 7:15 PM 7 0 0 12 1 7 7 12 2.7 6.3 5.2 10.5
7:15 PM - 7:30 PM 8 0 0 8 2 10 8 10 3.3 6.0 6.2 9.4
7:30 PM - 7:45 PM 6 0 1 8 4 11 6 11 3.7 6.3 5.4 10.1
7:45 PM - 8:00 PM 6 0 0 13 2 12 6 13 2.7 8.3 4.8 12.7
22 18 5 21 8 21
10.7 8.7 1.5 12.9 3.2 15.0
18.0 17.0 3.0 15.4 5.4 19.0
Site Average
Site 85th Percentile
Parking Queue Parking Queue Parking
Site Peak
Table 9
Summary of Saturday Queuing Length and Parking Demand Observation (July 14, 2018) Time Period
Rapids
Express
Scrub Bot
Express
Speedie Clean
Express
Hourly
Peak
Hourly
Average
Hourly 85th
Percentile
Queue
3100 Florence Avenue Car Wash Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
19278
49 Figure 26
0 2
4 6
8 10
12 14
16 18
20 7:00 AM 7:15 AM 7:30 AM 7:45 AM 8:00 AM 8:15 AM 8:30 AM 8:45 AM 9:00 AM 9:15 AM 9:30 AM 9:45 AM 10:00 AM 10:15 AM 10:30 AM 10:45 AM 11:00 AM 11:15 AM 11:30 AM 11:45 AM 12:00 PM 12:15 PM 12:30 PM 12:45 PM 1:00 PM 1:15 PM 1:30 PM 1:45 PM 2:00 PM 2:15 PM 2:30 PM 2:45 PM 3:00 PM 3:15 PM 3:30 PM 3:45 PM 4:00 PM 4:15 PM 4:30 PM 4:45 PM 5:00 PM 5:15 PM 5:30 PM 5:45 PM 6:00 PM 6:15 PM 6:30 PM 6:45 PM 7:00 PM 7:15 PM 7:30 PM 7:45 PM Number of Queuing Vehicles Time of the Day
Tuesday Hourly Queue Length Observation
Rapids
Express Queue
Scrub Bot
Express Queue
Speedie Clean
Express Queue
Hourly
Average Queue
Hourly 85th
Percentile Queue
3100 Florence Avenue Car Wash
Traffic Impact Analysis
19278
50 Figure 27
0 5
10 15
20 25 7:00 AM 7:15 AM 7:30 AM 7:45 AM 8:00 AM 8:15 AM 8:30 AM 8:45 AM 9:00 AM 9:15 AM 9:30 AM 9:45 AM 10:00 AM 10:15 AM 10:30 AM 10:45 AM 11:00 AM 11:15 AM 11:30 AM 11:45 AM 12:00 PM 12:15 PM 12:30 PM 12:45 PM 1:00 PM 1:15 PM 1:30 PM 1:45 PM 2:00 PM 2:15 PM 2:30 PM 2:45 PM 3:00 PM 3:15 PM 3:30 PM 3:45 PM 4:00 PM 4:15 PM 4:30 PM 4:45 PM 5:00 PM 5:15 PM 5:30 PM 5:45 PM 6:00 PM 6:15 PM 6:30 PM 6:45 PM 7:00 PM 7:15 PM 7:30 PM 7:45 PM Number of Queuing Vehicles Time of the Day
Saturday Hourly Queue Length Observation
Rapids
Express Queue
Scrub Bot
Express Queue
Speedie Clean
Express Queue
Hourly
Average Queue
Hourly 85th
Percentile Queue
3100 Florence Avenue Car Wash
Traffic Impact Analysis
19278
51 3100 Florence Avenue Car Wash Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
52 19278
10. VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED (VMT) ASSESSMENT
This sections presents the Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) assessment for the project.
BACKGROUND
California Senate Bill 743 (SB 743) directs the State Office of Planning and Research (OPR) to amend the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines for evaluating transportation impacts to provide alternatives to Level of Service that “promote the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, the development of multimodal transportation networks, and a diversity of land uses.” In December 2018, the California Natural Resources Agency certified and adopted the updated CEQA Guidelines package. The amended CEQA Guidelines, specifically Section 15064.3, recommend the use of Vehicle Miles Travelled (VMT) as the primary metric for the evaluation of transportation impacts associated with land use and transportation projects. In general terms, VMT quantifies the amount and distance of automobile travel attributable to a project or region.
Agencies may currently opt-in to applying the updated CEQA guidelines for VMT analysis and implementation is required State-wide by July 1, 2020.
VMT ASSESSMENT
The City of Huntington Park has not established VMT analysis procedures at this time; therefore, the projectrelated VMT impact has been assessed qualitatively based on the VMT screening guidance from the Los Angeles County Public Works Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines. The guidelines provides the following potential screening criteria for certain land development projects that may be presumed to result in a less than significant VMT impact:
Non-retail projects generating less than 110 trips per day. Local serving retail less than 50,000 square feet of gross floor area Projects near transit stations or major transit stop. Residential projects with a high percentage of affordable housing.
Presumption of Less Than Significant VMT Impact for Local Serving Retail The 4,712 square foot automated car wash project contains less than 50,000 square feet of gross floor area of retail. The proposed car wash is also a local-serving facility. Therefore, it may be presumed that the retail portion of the project has a less than significant impact to vehicle miles traveled (VMT) based on the Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines established by the County of Los Angeles Department of Public Works.
52 3100 Florence Avenue Car Wash Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
53 19278
11. CONCLUSIONS
SITE ACCESS
Project West Driveway at Florence Avenue (Mission Place at Florence Avenue) Retain existing signalized driveway at the intersection of Mission Place and Florence Avenue. Reconstruct the northbound approach to provide a total width of 26 feet with one all-way lane.
Project East Driveway at Florence Avenue
Install a northbound cross street stop-control.
Construct the northbound approach to consist of one right-turn exit-only lane.
GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS
Figure 28 summarizes the circulation recommendations for the proposed project.
All roadway design, traffic signing and striping, and traffic control improvements relating to the proposed project should be constructed in accordance with applicable engineering standards and to the satisfaction of the City of Huntington Park.
Site-adjacent roadways should be constructed or repaired at their ultimate half-section width, including landscaping and parkway improvements in conjunction with development, or as otherwise required by the City of Huntington Park.
On-site traffic signing and striping plans should be submitted for City of Huntington Park approval in conjunction with detailed construction plans for the project.
Off-street parking should be provided to meet City of Huntington Park Municipal Code requirements.
The final grading, landscaping, and street improvement plans should demonstrate that sight distance standards are met in accordance with applicable City of Huntington Park/California Department of Transportation sight distance standards.
As is the case for any roadway design, the City of Huntington Park should periodically review traffic operations in the vicinity of the project once the project is constructed to assure that the traffic operations are satisfactory.
53 Figure 28
Circulation Recommendations
3100 Florence Avenue Car Wash Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
19278
N
All roadway design, traffic signing and striping, and traffic control improvements relating to the proposed project should be constructed in accordance with applicable engineering standards and to the satisfaction of the City of Huntington Park.
Site-adjacent roadways should be constructed or repaired at their ultimate half-section width, including landscaping and parkway improvements in conjunction with development, or as otherwise required by the City of Huntington Park.
On-site traffic signing and striping plans should be submitted for City of Huntington Park approval in conjunction with detailed construction plans for the project.
Off-street parking should be provided to meet City of Huntington Park Municipal Code requirements.
The final grading, landscaping, and street improvement plans should demonstrate that sight distance standards are met in accordance with applicable City of Huntington Park/California Department of Transportation sight distance standards.
As is the case for any roadway design, the City of Huntington Park should periodically review traffic operations in the vicinity of the project once the project is constructed to assure that the traffic operations are satisfactory.
Stop Sign
Full Access Driveway
Right Turn Out Only Access Driveway
Legend
STOP
STOP STOP
54 3100 Florence Avenue Car Wash Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
19278
APPENDICES
Appendix A Glossary
Appendix B Scoping Agreement
Appendix C Volume Count Worksheets
Appendix D Existing Volume Adjustment Factor Calculations Appendix E Level of Service Worksheets
Appendix F Similar Car Wash Facilities Survey Data
Apx - 1
APPENDIX A
GLOSSARY
Apx - 2
GLOSSARY OF TERMS
ACRONYMS
AC Acres
ADT Average Daily Traffic
Caltrans California Department of Transportation
DU Dwelling Unit
ICU Intersection Capacity Utilization
LOS Level of Service
TSF Thousand Square Feet
V/C Volume/Capacity
VMT Vehicle Miles Traveled
TERMS
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: The average 24-hour volume for a stated period divided by the number of days in that period. For example, Annual Average Daily Traffic is the total volume during a year divided by 365 days.
BANDWIDTH: The number of seconds of green time available for through traffic in a signal progression.
BOTTLENECK: A point of constriction along a roadway that limits the amount of traffic that can proceed downstream from its location.
CAPACITY: The maximum number of vehicles that can be reasonably expected to pass over a given section of a lane or a roadway in a given time period.
CHANNELIZATION: The separation or regulation of conflicting traffic movements into definite paths of travel by the use of pavement markings, raised islands, or other suitable means to facilitate the safe and orderly movements of both vehicles and pedestrians.
CLEARANCE INTERVAL: Nearly same as yellow time. If there is an all red interval after the end of a yellow, then that is also added into the clearance interval.
CONTROL DELAY: The component of delay, typically expressed in seconds per vehicle, resulting from the type of traffic control at an intersection. Control delay is measured by comparison with the uncontrolled condition; it includes delay incurred by slowing down, stopping/waiting, and speeding up.
CORDON: An imaginary line around an area across which vehicles, persons, or other items are counted (in and out).
CORNER SIGHT DISTANCE: The minimum sight distance required by the driver of a vehicle to cross or enter the lanes of the major roadway without requiring approaching traffic travelling at a given speed to radically alter their speed or trajectory. Corner sight distance is measured from the driver’s eye at 42 inches above the pavement to an object height of 36 inches above the pavement in the center of the nearest approach lane.
CYCLE LENGTH: The time period in seconds required for a traffic signal to complete one full cycle of indications.
CUL-DE-SAC: A local street open at one end only and with special provisions for turning around.
Apx - 3
DAILY CAPACITY: A theoretical value representing the daily traffic volume that will typically result in a peak hour volume equal to the capacity of the roadway.
DELAY: The time consumed while traffic is impeded in its movement by some element over which it has no control, usually expressed in seconds per vehicle.
DEMAND RESPONSIVE SIGNAL: Same as traffic-actuated signal.
DENSITY: The number of vehicles occupying in a unit length of the through traffic lanes of a roadway at any given instant. Usually expressed in vehicles per mile.
DETECTOR: A device that responds to a physical stimulus and transmits a resulting impulse to the signal controller.
DESIGN SPEED: A speed selected for purposes of design. Features of a highway, such as curvature, superelevation, and sight distance (upon which the safe operation of vehicles is dependent) are correlated to design speed.
DIRECTIONAL SPLIT: The percent of traffic in the peak direction at any point in time.
DIVERSION: The rerouting of peak hour traffic to avoid congestion.
FORCED FLOW: Opposite of free flow.
FREE FLOW: Volumes are well below capacity. Vehicles can maneuver freely and travel is unimpeded by other traffic.
GAP: Time or distance between successive vehicles in a traffic stream, rear bumper to front bumper.
HEADWAY: Time or distance spacing between successive vehicles in a traffic stream, front bumper to front bumper.
INTERCONNECTED SIGNAL SYSTEM: A number of intersections that are connected to achieve signal progression.
LEVEL OF SERVICE: A qualitative measure of a number of factors, which include speed and travel time, traffic interruptions, freedom to maneuver, safety, driving comfort and convenience, and operating costs.
LOOP DETECTOR: A vehicle detector consisting of a loop of wire embedded in the roadway, energized by alternating current and producing an output circuit closure when passed over by a vehicle.
MINIMUM ACCEPTABLE GAP: Smallest time headway between successive vehicles in a traffic stream into which another vehicle is willing and able to cross or merge.
MULTI-MODAL: More than one mode; such as automobile, bus transit, rail rapid transit, and bicycle transportation modes.
OFFSET: The time interval in seconds between the beginning of green at one intersection and the beginning of green at an adjacent intersection.
PLATOON: A closely grouped component of traffic that is composed of several vehicles moving, or standing ready to move, with clear spaces ahead and behind.
Apx - 4
PASSENGER CAR EQUIVALENT (PCE): A metric used to assess the impact of larger vehicles, such as trucks, recreational vehicles, and buses, by converting the traffic volume of larger vehicles to an equivalent number of passenger cars.
PEAK HOUR: The 60 consecutive minutes with the highest number of vehicles.
PRETIMED SIGNAL: A type of traffic signal that directs traffic to stop and go on a predetermined time schedule without regard to traffic conditions. Also, fixed time signal.
PROGRESSION: A term used to describe the progressive movement of traffic through several signalized intersections.
QUEUE: The number of vehicles waiting at a service area such as a traffic signal, stop sign, or access gate.
QUEUE LENGTH: The length of vehicle queue, typically expressed in feet, waiting at a service area such as a traffic signal, stop sign, or access gate.
SCREEN-LINE: An imaginary line or physical feature across which all trips are counted, normally to verify the validity of mathematical traffic models.
SHARED/RECIPROCAL PARKING AGREEMENT: A written binding document executed between property owners to provide a designated number of off-street parking stalls within a designated area to be available for specified businesses or land uses.
SIGHT DISTANCE: The continuous length of roadway visible to a driver or roadway user.
SIGNAL CYCLE: The time period in seconds required for one complete sequence of signal indications.
SIGNAL PHASE: The part of the signal cycle allocated to one or more traffic movements.
STACKING DISTANCE: The length of area available behind a service area, such as a traffic signal or gate, for vehicle queueing to occur.
STARTING DELAY: The delay experienced in initiating the movement of queued traffic from a stop to an average running speed through an intersection.
STOPPING SIGHT DISTANCE: The minimum distance required by the driver of a vehicle on the major roadway travelling at a given speed to bring the vehicle to a stop after an object on the road becomes visible. Stopping sight distance is measured from the driver’s eye at 42 inches above the pavement to an object height of 6 inches above the pavement.
TRAFFIC-ACTUATED SIGNAL: A type of traffic signal that directs traffic to stop and go in accordance with the demands of traffic, as registered by the actuation of detectors.
TRIP: The movement of a person or vehicle from one location (origin) to another (destination). For example, from home to store to home is two trips, not one.
TRIP-END: One end of a trip at either the origin or destination (i.e., each trip has two trip-ends). A trip-end occurs when a person, object, or message is transferred to or from a vehicle.
TRIP GENERATION RATE: The quantity of trips produced and/or attracted by a specific land use stated in terms of units such as per dwelling, per acre, and per 1,000 square feet of floor space.
TRUCK: A vehicle having dual tires on one or more axles, or having more than two axles.
Apx - 5
TURNING RADIUS: The circular arc formed by the smallest turning path radius of the front outside tire of a vehicle, such as that performed by a U-turn maneuver. This is based on the length and width of the wheel base as well as the steering mechanism of the vehicle.
UNBALANCED FLOW: Heavier traffic flow in one direction than the other. On a daily basis, most facilities have balanced flow. During the peak hours, flow is seldom balanced in an urban area.
VEHICLE MILES OF TRAVEL: A measure of the amount of usage of a section of highway, obtained by multiplying the average daily traffic by length of facility in miles.
Apx - 6
APPENDIX B
SCOPING AGREEMENT
Apx - 7
SCOPING AGREEMENT FOR CITY OF HUNTINGTON PARK TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS This Memorandum of Understanding acknowledges the City of Huntington Park Traffic Impact Analysis requirements for the following project. The Traffic Impact Analysis will be completed in accordance with Los Angeles County TIA guidelines.
Project Name: 3100 Florence Avenue Car Wash Project
Project Address/Location: 3100 East Florence Avenue
Governmental Jurisdiction: City of Huntington Park
Project Description and Land Use:
4,712 square foot car wash with a car wash tunnel, including 29 vacuum stalls, 2 accessible parking stall, 2 employee stalls and 1 motorcycle stall. (See Figure 3) Consultant Developer
Name: Tom Huang Dennis Lee
Firm: GANDDINI GROUP, INC. LEEDCO ENGINEERS, INC
Address: 550 Parkcenter Drive, Suite 202 3380 Flair Drive, Suite 225 Santa Ana, CA 92705 El Monte, CA 91731
Telephone: 714-795-3100 x 102 626-234-2247
E-mail: [email protected] [email protected]
Trip Generation Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition, 2017; San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG); and customized trip rates based on similar car wash facilities (see Table 1)
Morning Evening
In Out In Out Daily
Existing 24 7 11 27 383
Proposed 35 29 67 67 944
Total +11 +22 +56 +40 +561
Project Full Occupancy Year: 2022
Internal Trip Capture Allowance No ( - Trip Discount)
Pass-By Trip Allowance No ( - Trip Discount)
Table 1 shows the custom trip generation rates based on available historic survey counts conducted at two similar automatic car wash facilities at Matt’s Express Carwash in the City of Rialto on January 19, 2014 and at Matt’s Express Carwash in the City of Redlands on December 14, 2016. Appendix A shows the car wash facility count survey count sheets. The survey counts were conducted on a typical weekday over the entire hours of operations showing the “time of the day”. The morning (AM) and afternoon (PM) peak hour trip rates are derived from the highest one-hour within of the typical peak periods of adjacent street traffic between 7 and 9 AM in the morning and between 4 and 6 PM in the afternoon. Based on input from the operators of similar car wash facilities, the monthly activity levels are consistent between the summer season and other non-summer seasons. As shown in Table 1 in comparison to other available trip generation rates published by Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) and San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG), the customized trip rates based on the similar car wash facilities are more conservative than the published trip rates by ITE and SANDAG.
Analysis Conditions:
1. Existing (2020)
2. Existing Plus Project
3. Opening Year (2023) Without Project
4. Opening Year (2023) With Project
Apx - 8
Yunus Rahi, PhD, PE, TE, City Engineer
04-15-2021
Apx - 9
No. Land Use Code1 Units2
In % Out % Total In % Out % Total
1 Medical-Dental Office Building ITE 720 TSF 78% 22% 2.78 28% 72% 3.46 34.80 2 Automated Car Wash Survey3 Site 55% 45% 64.00 50% 50% 134.00 944.00 3 Automated Car Wash ITE 948 CWT 50% 50% 77.50
4 Automatic Car Wash SANDAG Site 50% 50% 36.00 50% 50% 81.00 900.00 No. Land Use In Out Total In Out Total
Existing Land Use4
1 Medical-Dental Office Building 11.000 TSF 24 7 31 11 27 38 383 Proposed Project
2 Automated Car Wash 1 Site 35 29 64 67 67 134 944
+11 +22 +33 +56 +40 +96 +561
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
Project AM Peak PM Peak Weekday
Daily
Project AM Peak PM Peak Weekday
Daily
Notes:
ITE = Institute of Transportation Engineers, Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition, 2017; XXX = Land Use Code TSF = Thousand Square Feet; CWT = Car Wash Tunnel
Existing trip credit for existing building estimated based on approximate building size.
Table 1
Project Trip Generation
Trip Generation Rates
Project Net Trips
Trips Generated
Quantity²
San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG), Brief Guide of Vehicular Traffic Generation Rates for the San Diego Area, April 2002.
Survey counts of the existing Matt's Express Carwash facility located in the City of Rialto and Matt's Express Carwash facility located in the City of Redlands (see Appendix A)
3100 Florence Avenue Car Wash
Traffic Impact Analysis
19278
Apx - 10
Year
Growth
Factor1 Year
Growth
Factor1
Years of
Growth
Growth
Factor
Growth
Factor
Growth
Rate
21 Vernon 2015 1.073 2020 1.146 5 1.073 1.014 1.4%
(1)
Table 2
Annual Growth Rate Calculation
Year 1 Year 2
Los Angeles County Congestion Management Program (CMP) General Traffic Volume Growth Factors (Exhibit D-1) Regional Statistical
Area (RSA)
Notes:
Overall Growth Annual Growth
3100 Florence Avenue Car Wash
Traffic Impact Analysis
19278
Apx - 11
Component Quantity1 Units2
Parking
Spaces
Floor Area 4,712 SF 1.0 Space : 250 SF 19
Wash Lane / Car Wash Tunnel 1 CWT 10.0 Space : 1 CWT 10 29 33
+4
(1)
(2)
(3)
Total Parking
Table 3
Parking Requirement Based on City of Huntington Park Municipal Code Proposed Use
Parking Code
Requirement
Automobile Washing
City of Huntington Park Municipal Code, Section 9-3.804. One space for each 250 SF of floor area, plus 10 spaces for each wash lane.
Notes:
Available Parking Supply, including 29 vacumm stalls, 2 accessible parking stall, 2 employee stalls and 1 motorcycle stall [See Figure 3] Parking Surplus (+) / Deficit (-) for the Proposed Project The total building area is 4,712 square feet including the car wash tunnel, employee break room, restroom and other facilities.
SF = Square Feet; CWT = Car Wash Tunnel
3100 Florence Avenue Car Wash
Traffic Impact Analysis
19278
Apx - 12
Figure 1
Project Location Map
3100 Florence Avenue Car Wash
Scoping Agreement
19278
N
Site
M
S
I
S
I
O
N
P
L
FLORENCE AVE
M
O
U
N
T
A
N
I VI
E
W
AVE
STATE ST
1 2
3 4
Study Intersection
Legend
## Project Driveway
Apx - 13
Figure 2
Site Plan
3100 Florence Avenue Car Wash Project
Scoping Agreement
19278
N
Apx - 14
Figure 3
Project Outbound Trip Distribution
3100 Florence Avenue Car Wash
Scoping Agreements
19278
N
Site
M
S
I
S
I
O
N
P
L
FLORENCE AVE
M
O
U
N
T
A
N
I VI
E
W
AVE
STATE ST
Percent From Project
Legend
10%
65% 35%
5%
30%
10%
15%
5%
20%
65%
30%
15%
30%
Apx - 15
Figure 4
Project Inbound Trip Distribution
3100 Florence Avenue Car Wash
Scoping Agreement
19278
N
Site
M
S
I
S
I
O
N
P
L
FLORENCE AVE
M
O
U
N
T
A
N
I VI
E
W
AVE
STATE ST
100%
5%
40%
10%
15%
15%
10%
55%
30%
15%
Percent To Project
Legend
10%
Apx - 16
Appendix A
Similar Car Wash Facility Trip Generation Survey Data
Apx - 17
In Out Total In Out Total
Redlands 35 29 64 48 51 99 926
Rialto 29 29 58 67 67 134 944
Maximum 35 29 64 67 67 134 944
Location
Matt's Express Carwash Maximum Trip Generation Calculations Daily
Peak Hour
Morning Evening
Apx - 18
City of Redlands
Matt's Express Car Wash
SWC of Tennessee Street and Lugonia Avenue
24 Hour Driveway Counts
Entering Exiting Entering Exiting Entering Exiting
WB EB WB EB WB EB
0:00 0 0 0:00 0 0 0:00 0 0
0:15 0 0 0:15 0 0 0:15 0 0
0:30 0 0 0:30 0 0 0:30 0 0
0:45 0 0 0:45 0 0 0:45 0 0
1:00 0 0 1:00 0 0 1:00 0 0
1:15 0 0 1:15 0 0 1:15 0 0
1:30 0 0 1:30 0 0 1:30 0 0
1:45 0 0 1:45 0 0 1:45 0 0
2:00 0 0 2:00 0 0 2:00 0 0
2:15 0 0 2:15 0 0 2:15 0 0
2:30 0 0 2:30 0 0 2:30 0 0
2:45 0 0 2:45 0 0 2:45 0 0
3:00 0 0 3:00 0 0 3:00 0 0
3:15 0 0 3:15 0 0 3:15 0 0
3:30 0 0 3:30 0 0 3:30 0 0
3:45 0 0 3:45 0 0 3:45 0 0
4:00 0 0 4:00 0 0 4:00 0 0
4:15 0 0 4:15 0 0 4:15 0 0
4:30 0 0 4:30 0 0 4:30 0 0
4:45 0 0 4:45 1 0 4:45 1 0
5:00 0 0 5:00 0 1 5:00 0 1
5:15 0 0 5:15 0 0 5:15 0 0
5:30 1 0 5:30 0 0 5:30 1 0
5:45 0 0 5:45 1 1 5:45 1 1
6:00 0 0 6:00 0 0 6:00 0 0
6:15 0 0 6:15 0 0 6:15 0 0
6:30 1 0 6:30 0 0 6:30 1 0
6:45 0 0 6:45 0 0 6:45 0 0 In Out Total
7:00 1 1 7:00 2 2 7:00 3 3 4 3 7
7:15 0 0 7:15 0 0 7:15 0 0 9 3 12
7:30 0 0 7:30 0 0 7:30 0 0 16 9 25
7:45 0 0 7:45 1 0 7:45 1 0 28 20 48
8:00 0 1 8:00 8 2 8:00 8 3 35 29 64
8:15 0 2 8:15 7 4 8:15 7 6
8:30 0 2 8:30 12 9 8:30 12 11
8:45 0 1 8:45 8 8 8:45 8 9
9:00 0 2 9:00 3 7 9:00 3 9
9:15 0 2 9:15 13 4 9:15 13 6
9:30 0 3 9:30 9 9 9:30 9 12
9:45 0 5 9:45 11 8 9:45 11 13
10:00 0 6 10:00 11 5 10:00 11 11
10:15 0 1 10:15 5 7 10:15 5 8
10:30 0 4 10:30 17 8 10:30 17 12
10:45 0 1 10:45 12 14 10:45 12 15
11:00 1 3 11:00 6 5 11:00 7 8
11:15 0 1 11:15 10 8 11:15 10 9
11:30 0 4 11:30 9 2 11:30 9 6
11:45 2 2 11:45 9 10 11:45 11 12
12:00 0 1 12:00 9 11 12:00 9 12
12:15 2 2 12:15 28 17 12:15 30 19
12:30 2 6 12:30 10 9 12:30 12 15
12:45 0 3 12:45 22 8 12:45 22 11
13:00 0 3 13:00 17 22 13:00 17 25
13:15 0 5 13:15 14 11 13:15 14 16
13:30 0 6 13:30 15 12 13:30 15 18
13:45 0 0 13:45 14 14 13:45 14 14
14:00 0 3 14:00 11 4 14:00 11 7
14:15 1 3 14:15 18 14 14:15 19 17
14:30 0 5 14:30 18 13 14:30 18 18
14:45 0 2 14:45 13 15 14:45 13 17
15:00 0 1 15:00 9 9 15:00 9 10
15:15 0 1 15:15 14 10 15:15 14 11
15:30 0 1 15:30 7 9 15:30 7 10
15:45 0 2 15:45 8 8 15:45 8 10 In Out Total
16:00 1 3 16:00 11 7 16:00 12 10 48 51 99
16:15 0 2 16:15 15 9 16:15 15 11 45 44 89
16:30 0 2 16:30 13 10 16:30 13 12 33 41 74
16:45 0 5 16:45 8 13 16:45 8 18 27 35 62
17:00 0 1 17:00 9 2 17:00 9 3 21 20 41
17:15 0 1 17:15 3 7 17:15 3 8
17:30 0 0 17:30 7 6 17:30 7 6
17:45 0 2 17:45 2 1 17:45 2 3
18:00 0 4 18:00 0 1 18:00 0 5
18:15 0 1 18:15 0 0 18:15 0 1
18:30 1 1 18:30 0 0 18:30 1 1
18:45 0 0 18:45 0 0 18:45 0 0
19:00 0 0 19:00 0 0 19:00 0 0
19:15 0 0 19:15 0 0 19:15 0 0
19:30 0 0 19:30 0 0 19:30 0 0
19:45 0 0 19:45 0 0 19:45 0 0
20:00 0 0 20:00 0 0 20:00 0 0
20:15 0 0 20:15 0 0 20:15 0 0
20:30 0 0 20:30 0 0 20:30 0 0
20:45 0 0 20:45 0 0 20:45 0 0
21:00 0 0 21:00 0 0 21:00 0 0
21:15 0 0 21:15 0 0 21:15 0 0
21:30 0 0 21:30 0 0 21:30 0 0
21:45 0 0 21:45 0 0 21:45 0 0
22:00 0 0 22:00 0 0 22:00 0 0
22:15 0 0 22:15 0 0 22:15 0 0
22:30 0 0 22:30 0 0 22:30 0 0
22:45 0 0 22:45 0 0 22:45 0 0
23:00 0 0 23:00 0 0 23:00 0 0
23:15 0 0 23:15 0 0 23:15 0 0
23:30 0 0 23:30 0 0 23:30 0 0
23:45 0 0 23:45 0 0 23:45 0 0
13 107 450 356 463 463
Daily 926
In Out Total In Out Total
35 29 64 48 51 99 926
North Driveway South Driveway
TOTAL OF
BOTH DRIVEWAYS
Daily
Peak Hour
Morning Evening
Apx - 19
Day: City: Rialto
Date: Project #: 14 6015 001
NB SB EB WB
174 472 0 0
AM Period NB SB EB WB NB SB EB WB
00:00 0 0 0 6 16 22
00:15 0 0 0 7 13 20
00:30 0 0 0 4 15 19
00:45 0 0 0 7 24 12 56 19 80
01:00 0 0 0 2 8 10
01:15 0 0 0 1 12 13
01:30 0 0 0 3 9 12
01:45 0 0 0 3 9 8 37 11 46
02:00 0 0 0 6 12 18
02:15 0 0 0 4 10 14
02:30 0 0 0 4 10 14
02:45 0 0 0 7 21 11 43 18 64
03:00 0 0 0 4 12 16
03:15 0 0 0 5 9 14
03:30 0 0 0 6 12 18
03:45 0 0 0 5 20 8 41 13 61
04:00 0 0 0 3 18 21
04:15 0 0 0 3 13 16
04:30 0 0 0 6 23 29
04:45 0 0 0 2 14 13 67 15 81
05:00 0 0 0 0 14 14
05:15 0 0 0 6 11 17
05:30 0 0 0 2 7 9
05:45 0 0 0 4 12 12 44 16 56
06:00 0 0 0 5 6 11
06:15 0 0 0 1 9 10
06:30 0 0 0 4 6 10
06:45 0 0 0 0 10 3 24 3 34
07:00 0 0 0 0 0 0
07:15 0 5 5 0 0 0
07:30 0 1 1 0 0 0
07:45 3 3 7 13 10 16 0 0 0
08:00 0 9 9 0 0 0
08:15 3 8 11 0 0 0
08:30 3 5 8 0 0 0
08:45 3 9 7 29 10 38 0 0 0
09:00 1 6 7 0 0 0
09:15 1 6 7 0 0 0
09:30 3 9 12 0 0 0
09:45 4 9 9 30 13 39 0 0 0
10:00 4 8 12 0 0 0
10:15 4 11 15 0 0 0
10:30 5 9 14 0 0 0
10:45 3 16 12 40 15 56 0 0 0
11:00 8 13 21 0 0 0
11:15 7 14 21 0 0 0
11:30 5 8 13 0 0 0
11:45 7 27 13 48 20 75 0 0 0
TOTALS 64 160 224 110 312 422
SPLIT % 28.6% 71.4% 34.7% 26.1% 73.9% 65.3%
CARS IN CARS OUT
174 472
AM Peak Hour 11:00 11:45 11:45 12:00 16:00 16:00
AM Pk Volume 27 57 81 24 67 81
Pk Hr Factor 0.844 0.891 0.920 0.857 0.728 0.698
7 9 Volume 12 42 0 0 54 26 111 0 0 137
7 9 Peak Hour 07:45 07:45 07:45 16:00 16:00 16:00
7 9 Pk Volume 9 29 0 0 38 14 67 0 0 81
Pk Hr Factor 0.750 0.806 0.000 0.000 0.864 0.583 0.728 0.000 0.000 0.698 Inbound Outbound Total Inbound Outbound Total
29 29 58 67 67 134 944
VOLUME
Prepared by NDS/ATD
13:15
13:30
13:45
12:00
12:15
12:30
12:45
13:00
14:15
14:30
1/16/2014
14:45
15:00
DAILY TOTALS
PM Period
Thursday
17:30
17:45
15:15
15:30
15:45
16:00
16:15
16:30
14:00
18:30
18:45
19:00
19:15
16:45
17:00
17:15
Project Dwy e/o N Cactus Ave
21:30
21:45
22:00
Total
646
19:30
19:45
20:00
20:15
DAILY TOTALS
22:15
22:30
22:45
23:00
23:15
23:30
TOTAL
23:45
TOTALS
Total
646
DAILY TOTALS
21:00
21:15
20:30
SPLIT %
TOTAL
Pk Hr Factor
PM Peak Hour
PM Pk Volume
Pk Hr Factor
4 6 Volume
20:45
18:00
18:15
Peak Hour
Daily
Morning Morning
4 6 Peak Hour
4 6 Pk Volume
Apx - 20
Appendix B
Seasonal Factor Calculations
Apx - 21
Travel Peak
Freeway Segment Direction Hour
Mainline VDS 718147 - FLORENCE 2 I-710 N 6230 7:55:00 AM 6421 7:55:00 AM 6547 7:55:00 AM 6399 Mainline VDS 717986 - FIRESTONE 1 I-710 S 6269 7:55:00 AM 6360 8:10:00 AM 6308 7:55:00 AM 6312 Mainline VDS 774359 - NORTH OF MILLER WAY I-710 N 6323 8:05:00 AM 6551 8:00:00 AM 6585 8:00:00 AM 6486 Mainline VDS 774358 - NORTH OF MILLER WAY I-710 S 7807 8:00:00 AM 7831 8:10:00 AM 7834 7:55:00 AM 7824 Mainline VDS 776266 - FLORENCE 1 I-710 N 5809 7:55:00 AM 5907 7:55:00 AM 5968 7:55:00 AM 5895 Mainline VDS 776295 - FLORENCE 1 I-710 S 6397 7:55:00 AM 6468 8:00:00 AM 6291 7:55:00 AM 6385 Mainline VDS 718147 - FLORENCE 2 I-710 N 5985 5:50:00 PM 5853 5:25:00 PM 5935 5:50:00 PM 5924 Mainline VDS 717986 - FIRESTONE 1 I-710 S 6491 4:55:00 PM 6294 4:55:00 PM 6427 4:55:00 PM 6404 Mainline VDS 774359 - NORTH OF MILLER WAY I-710 N 8160 5:15:00 PM 8245 5:55:00 PM 8292 5:50:00 PM 8232 Mainline VDS 774358 - NORTH OF MILLER WAY I-710 S 7948 5:15:00 PM 7864 4:55:00 PM 7744 4:55:00 PM 7852 Mainline VDS 776266 - FLORENCE 1 I-710 N 5378 5:25:00 PM 5392 5:25:00 PM 5338 5:30:00 PM 5369 Mainline VDS 776295 - FLORENCE 1 I-710 S 6840 4:55:00 PM 6525 5:00:00 PM 6687 4:55:00 PM 6684 Travel Peak
Freeway Segment Direction Hour
Mainline VDS 718147 - FLORENCE 2 I-710 N 6303 8:10:00 AM 6227 8:00:00 AM 6153 8:05:00 AM 6228 Mainline VDS 717986 - FIRESTONE 1 I-710 S 5436 8:10:00 AM 5436 8:05:00 AM 5186 7:55:00 AM 5353 Mainline VDS 774359 - NORTH OF MILLER WAY I-710 N 7321 8:10:00 AM 7588 8:05:00 AM 7215 8:05:00 AM 7375 Mainline VDS 774358 - NORTH OF MILLER WAY I-710 S 6675 8:10:00 AM 6759 8:00:00 AM 6319 7:55:00 AM 6584 Mainline VDS 776266 - FLORENCE 1 I-710 N 5658 8:10:00 AM 5681 8:00:00 AM 5647 8:05:00 AM 5662 Mainline VDS 776295 - FLORENCE 1 I-710 S 5138 8:15:00 AM 5427 8:00:00 AM 4881 8:50:00 AM 5149 Mainline VDS 718147 - FLORENCE 2 I-710 N 5721 5:15:00 PM 5886 5:05:00 PM 5606 5:15:00 PM 5738 Mainline VDS 717986 - FIRESTONE 1 I-710 S 6167 6:00:00 PM 6299 5:30:00 PM 6248 5:15:00 PM 6238 Mainline VDS 774359 - NORTH OF MILLER WAY I-710 N 8343 5:35:00 PM 8468 5:55:00 PM 8361 5:00:00 PM 8391 Mainline VDS 774358 - NORTH OF MILLER WAY I-710 S 7484 6:00:00 PM 7826 5:30:00 PM 7674 5:20:00 PM 7661 Mainline VDS 776266 - FLORENCE 1 I-710 N 5107 5:20:00 PM 5207 5:05:00 PM 4984 5:15:00 PM 5099 Mainline VDS 776295 - FLORENCE 1 I-710 S 6475 6:00:00 PM 6736 5:45:00 PM 6753 5:25:00 PM 6655 Mainline VDS 718147 - FLORENCE 2 1.027
Mainline VDS 717986 - FIRESTONE 1 1.179
Mainline VDS 774359 - NORTH OF MILLER WAY 0.879
Mainline VDS 774358 - NORTH OF MILLER WAY 1.188
Mainline VDS 776266 - FLORENCE 1 1.041
Mainline VDS 776295 - FLORENCE 1 1.240
Mainline VDS 718147 - FLORENCE 2 1.032
Mainline VDS 717986 - FIRESTONE 1 1.027
Mainline VDS 774359 - NORTH OF MILLER WAY 0.981
Mainline VDS 774358 - NORTH OF MILLER WAY 1.025
Mainline VDS 776266 - FLORENCE 1 1.053
Mainline VDS 776295 - FLORENCE 1 1.004
I-710 Freeway
Roadway Segment
Tue Wed Thu
Tue Wed Thu
1.029
February 2020
Average
11,581
13,959
10,811
11,976
16,052
12,053
August 2020
Average
12,711
14,310
12,280
12,328
16,084
1.002 1.019
1.025
Peak
Hour
AM
PM
August to February
Seasonal Factor
1.098
1.025 1.086
1.136
2/4/2020 2/5/2020 2/6/2020
Caltrans PEM I-710 Mainline Count Comparisons
Table B
AM
PM
PM
PM
AM
AM
PM
PM
AM
AM
PM
AM
8/11/2020 8/12/2020 8/13/2020
13,100
13,488
12,117
13,261
11,754
3100 Florence Avenue Car Wash Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
19278
Apx - 22
Appendix C
Similar Car Wash Facility Parking and Queueing Survey Data Apx - 23
Queue Parking Queue Parking Queue Parking
7:00 AM - 7:15 AM 2 3 0 1 1 2 2 3 1.0 2.0 1.7 2.7
7:15 AM - 7:30 AM 3 3 2 1 2 8 3 8 2.3 4.0 2.7 6.5
7:30 AM - 7:45 AM 0 5 1 3 4 5 4 5 1.7 4.3 3.1 5.0
7:45 AM - 8:00 AM 0 3 2 3 2 5 2 5 1.3 3.7 2.0 4.4
8:00 AM - 8:15 AM 1 4 1 7 2 3 2 7 1.3 4.7 1.7 6.1
8:15 AM - 8:30 AM 0 9 0 5 3 7 3 9 1.0 7.0 2.1 8.4
8:30 AM - 8:45 AM 1 5 0 6 4 11 4 11 1.7 7.3 3.1 9.5
8:45 AM - 9:00 AM 1 13 0 2 5 11 5 13 2.0 8.7 3.8 12.4
9:00 AM - 9:15 AM 3 12 1 4 8 10 8 12 4.0 8.7 6.5 11.4
9:15 AM - 9:30 AM 2 20 0 6 4 17 4 20 * 2.0 14.3 * 3.4 19.1 * 9:30 AM - 9:45 AM 0 11 1 3 4 11 4 11 1.7 8.3 3.1 11.0
9:45 AM - 10:00 AM 1 15 1 5 3 9 3 15 1.7 9.7 2.4 13.2
10:00 AM - 10:15 AM 0 19 0 4 4 11 4 19 1.3 11.3 2.8 16.6 10:15 AM - 10:30 AM 0 14 0 1 7 13 7 14 2.3 9.3 4.9 13.7 10:30 AM - 10:45 AM 1 15 1 5 5 14 5 15 2.3 11.3 3.8 14.7 10:45 AM - 11:00 AM 1 12 1 9 9 8 9 12 3.7 9.7 6.6 11.1
11:00 AM - 11:15 AM 1 11 0 9 5 9 5 11 2.0 9.7 3.8 10.4
11:15 AM - 11:30 AM 2 12 2 8 7 7 7 12 3.7 9.0 5.5 10.8
11:30 AM - 11:45 AM 0 14 1 4 5 13 5 14 2.0 10.3 3.8 13.7 11:45 AM - 12:00 PM 1 14 2 5 6 12 6 14 3.0 10.3 4.8 13.4 12:00 PM - 12:15 PM 1 11 1 7 8 14 8 14 3.3 10.7 5.9 13.1 12:15 PM - 12:30 PM 0 12 3 8 4 13 4 13 2.3 11.0 3.7 12.7 12:30 PM - 12:45 PM 2 10 0 8 4 13 4 13 2.0 10.3 3.4 12.1 12:45 PM - 1:00 PM 0 11 1 8 7 8 7 11 2.7 9.0 5.2 10.1
1:00 PM - 1:15 PM 2 10 3 9 4 8 4 10 3.0 9.0 3.7 9.7
1:15 PM - 1:30 PM 1 12 0 9 5 11 5 12 2.0 10.7 3.8 11.7
1:30 PM - 1:45 PM 5 14 1 8 1 15 5 15 2.3 12.3 3.8 14.7
1:45 PM - 2:00 PM 4 14 0 7 6 12 6 14 3.3 11.0 5.4 13.4
2:00 PM - 2:15 PM 6 17 1 7 1 13 6 17 2.7 12.3 4.5 15.8
2:15 PM - 2:30 PM 3 15 1 8 4 12 4 15 2.7 11.7 3.7 14.1
2:30 PM - 2:45 PM 5 16 0 10 1 17 5 17 2.0 14.3 * 3.8 16.7 2:45 PM - 3:00 PM 7 12 0 11 1 14 7 14 2.7 12.3 5.2 13.4 3:00 PM - 3:15 PM 3 16 0 9 2 6 3 16 1.7 10.3 2.7 13.9
3:15 PM - 3:30 PM 4 15 1 8 3 14 4 15 2.7 12.3 3.7 14.7
3:30 PM - 3:45 PM 2 19 1 7 1 17 2 19 1.3 14.3 * 1.7 18.4 3:45 PM - 4:00 PM 2 15 0 7 5 13 5 15 2.3 11.7 4.1 14.4
4:00 PM - 4:15 PM 3 15 0 1 7 7 7 15 3.3 7.7 5.8 12.6
4:15 PM - 4:30 PM 6 12 2 4 4 13 6 13 4.0 9.7 5.4 12.7
4:30 PM - 4:45 PM 5 13 1 4 1 11 5 13 2.3 9.3 3.8 12.4
4:45 PM - 5:00 PM 4 14 0 5 3 13 4 14 2.3 10.7 3.7 13.7
5:00 PM - 5:15 PM 6 9 0 3 3 10 6 10 3.0 7.3 5.1 9.7
5:15 PM - 5:30 PM 3 16 2 4 2 8 3 16 2.3 9.3 2.7 13.6
5:30 PM - 5:45 PM 6 14 0 7 4 8 6 14 3.3 9.7 5.4 12.2
5:45 PM - 6:00 PM 3 15 3 7 1 8 3 15 2.3 10.0 3.0 12.9
6:00 PM - 6:15 PM 5 17 0 13 2 13 5 17 2.3 14.3 * 4.1 15.8 6:15 PM - 6:30 PM 4 9 0 9 0 12 4 12 1.3 10.0 2.8 11.1
6:30 PM - 6:45 PM 5 11 1 9 5 9 5 11 3.7 9.7 5.0 10.4
6:45 PM - 7:00 PM 3 14 1 11 2 13 3 14 2.0 12.7 2.7 13.7 7:00 PM - 7:15 PM 1 17 0 11 0 8 1 17 0.3 12.0 0.7 15.2
7:15 PM - 7:30 PM 4 12 0 12 1 9 4 12 1.7 11.0 3.1 12.0
7:30 PM - 7:45 PM 1 14 0 12 1 12 1 14 0.7 12.7 1.0 13.4 7:45 PM - 8:00 PM 18 4 1 11 2 9 18 * 11 7.0 * 8.0 13.2 * 10.4 18 20 3 13 9 17
2.8 12.3 0.8 6.6 3.6 10.6
Site 85th Percentile 5.0 16.0 2.0 9.4 6.0 13.4
Time Period
Rapids
Express
Scrub Bot
Express
Speedie Clean
Express
Site Average
Site Peak
Hourly 85th
Percentile
Queue Parking
Summary of Tuesday Queuing Length and Parking Demand Observation (July 10, 2018) Table 4
Hourly
Average
Queue Parking
Hourly
Peak
Queue Parking
3100 Florence Avenue Car Wash
Traffic Impact Analysis
19278
Apx - 24
APPENDIX C
VOLUME COUNT WORKSHEETS
Apx - 25
DATE: LOCATION: PROJECT #: SC
Tue, Jan 19, 21 NORTH & SOUTH: LOCATION #: 1
EAST & WEST: CONTROL: SIGNAL
NOTES: AM ▲
PM N
MD ◄ W E ►
OTHER S
OTHER ▼
NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND
NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL NB SB EB WB TTL LANES: 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 2 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 0
7:00 AM 22 15 18 7 6 4 8 92 10 12 134 3 331 0 0 1 0 1
7:15 AM 33 19 18 4 7 5 6 120 8 6 121 2 349 0 0 0 0 0
7:30 AM 30 21 17 4 8 9 5 94 6 9 159 4 366 0 0 0 0 0
7:45 AM 38 18 12 5 11 8 7 114 9 11 162 2 397 0 0 0 0 0
8:00 AM 18 32 17 8 11 5 7 96 16 8 150 2 370 0 0 1 0 1
8:15 AM 22 17 25 6 15 6 4 103 11 9 145 5 368 0 0 0 0 0
8:30 AM 18 22 19 4 15 5 10 107 9 11 161 3 384 0 0 0 0 0 8:45 AM 17 19 20 8 14 6 4 104 12 7 143 2 356 0 0 0 0 0
VOLUMES 198 163 146 46 87 48 51 830 81 73 1,175 23 2,921 0 0 2 0 2 APPROACH % 39% 32% 29% 25% 48% 27% 5% 86% 8% 6% 92% 2%
APP/DEPART 507 / 235 181 / 241 962 / 1,022 1,271 / 1,423 0
BEGIN PEAK HR
VOLUMES 96 89 73 23 52 24 28 420 45 39 618 12 1,519
APPROACH % 37% 34% 28% 23% 53% 24% 6% 85% 9% 6% 92% 2%
PEAK HR FACTOR 0.949 0.917 0.948 0.956 0.957
APP/DEPART 258 / 128 99 / 136 493 / 516 669 / 739 0
4:00 PM 10 28 26 9 33 7 17 264 41 19 238 7 699 0 0 0 0 0 4:15 PM 14 25 20 15 29 13 20 203 45 27 206 8 625 0 0 0 0 0 4:30 PM 16 31 20 12 32 8 16 251 44 21 253 9 713 0 0 0 0 0 4:45 PM 14 21 21 15 39 9 10 206 42 15 194 6 592 0 0 0 0 0 5:00 PM 23 32 18 7 35 10 18 250 63 14 235 6 711 0 0 0 0 0 5:15 PM 18 36 19 14 39 16 13 205 42 25 212 8 647 0 0 0 0 0 5:30 PM 20 31 25 11 30 10 7 208 52 16 238 5 653 0 0 0 0 0 5:45 PM 15 33 22 11 31 8 17 225 47 25 187 4 625 0 0 0 0 0 VOLUMES 130 237 171 94 268 81 118 1,812 376 162 1,763 53 5,265 0 0 0 0 0 APPROACH % 24% 44% 32% 21% 60% 18% 5% 79% 16% 8% 89% 3% APP/DEPART 538 / 408 443 / 806 2,306 / 2,077 1,978 / 1,974 0
BEGIN PEAK HR
VOLUMES 71 120 78 48 145 43 57 912 191 75 894 29 2,663
APPROACH % 26% 45% 29% 20% 61% 18% 5% 79% 16% 8% 90% 3% PEAK HR FACTOR 0.921 0.855 0.876 0.882 0.934
APP/DEPART 269 / 206 236 / 411 1,160 / 1,038 998 / 1,008 0 Mountain View
NORTH SIDE
Florence WEST SIDE EAST SIDE Florence
SOUTH SIDE
Mountain View
N SIDE S SIDE E SIDE W SIDE TOTAL N SIDE S SIDE E SIDE W SIDE TOTAL NS SS ES WS TOTAL 7:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
AM BEGIN PEAK HR 0 0 0 0 0
4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 AM PM AM
7:45 AM PM
4:30 PM
PEDESTRIAN + BIKE CROSSINGS
7:45 AM
PM BEGIN PEAK HR 4:30 PM
PEDESTRIAN CROSSINGS BICYCLE CROSSINGS
U-TURNS
Mountain View Mountain View Florence Florence
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS
PREPARED BY: AimTD LLC. tel: 714 253 7888 [email protected]
Huntington
Mountain View
Florence Add U-Turns to Left Turns
Apx - 26
DATE: LOCATION: PROJECT #: SC
Tue, Jan 19, 21 NORTH & SOUTH: LOCATION #: 2
EAST & WEST: CONTROL: SIGNAL
NOTES: AM ▲
PM N
MD ◄ W E ►
OTHER S
OTHER ▼
NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND
NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL NB SB EB WB TTL LANES: 0 1 0 0.5 0.5 1 1 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0
7:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 12 7 114 0 0 119 1 253 0 0 0 0 0
7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 13 10 130 0 0 127 0 280 0 0 1 0 1
7:30 AM 0 0 0 3 0 20 5 129 0 0 146 1 304 0 0 0 0 0
7:45 AM 1 0 0 2 0 16 9 107 0 0 175 0 310 0 0 0 0 0
8:00 AM 0 0 0 2 0 15 6 133 0 0 147 1 304 0 0 0 0 0
8:15 AM 0 0 0 1 1 10 10 117 0 0 153 0 292 0 0 0 0 0
8:30 AM 1 0 0 5 0 11 8 139 1 1 163 1 330 0 0 0 0 0
8:45 AM 0 0 0 3 1 13 11 124 2 0 174 0 328 0 0 0 0 0
VOLUMES 2 0 0 16 2 110 66 993 3 1 1,204 4 2,401 0 0 1 0 1 APPROACH % 100% 0% 0% 13% 2% 86% 6% 94% 0% 0% 100% 0%
APP/DEPART 2 / 69 128 / 6 1,062 / 1,009 1,209 / 1,317 0
BEGIN PEAK HR
VOLUMES 1 0 0 11 2 49 35 513 3 1 637 2 1,254
APPROACH % 100% 0% 0% 18% 3% 79% 6% 93% 1% 0% 100% 0%
PEAK HR FACTOR 0.250 0.912 0.931 0.920 0.950
APP/DEPART 1 / 37 62 / 6 551 / 524 640 / 687 0
4:00 PM 3 1 0 9 0 40 14 247 0 0 216 7 537 0 0 0 0 0
4:15 PM 0 0 0 8 0 34 15 246 0 0 226 6 535 0 0 0 0 0
4:30 PM 0 0 1 8 0 41 11 252 0 1 228 2 544 0 0 0 0 0
4:45 PM 0 0 1 3 0 34 16 244 0 0 207 2 507 0 0 0 0 0
5:00 PM 1 0 0 9 0 34 14 231 0 0 217 3 509 0 0 0 0 0
5:15 PM 0 0 1 3 0 30 12 243 2 1 227 6 525 0 0 0 1 1
5:30 PM 0 0 0 7 0 35 17 218 0 0 224 5 506 0 0 0 0 0
5:45 PM 0 1 0 9 0 39 19 240 0 1 191 5 505 0 0 0 1 1
VOLUMES 4 2 3 56 0 287 118 1,921 2 3 1,736 36 4,168 0 0 0 2 2 APPROACH % 44% 22% 33% 16% 0% 84% 6% 94% 0% 0% 98% 2%
APP/DEPART 9 / 156 343 / 3 2,041 / 1,982 1,775 / 2,027 0
BEGIN PEAK HR
VOLUMES 3 1 2 28 0 149 56 989 0 1 877 17 2,123
APPROACH % 50% 17% 33% 16% 0% 84% 5% 95% 0% 0% 98% 2%
PEAK HR FACTOR 0.375 0.903 0.993 0.964 0.976
APP/DEPART 6 / 74 177 / 1 1,045 / 1,019 895 / 1,029 0
Mission
NORTH SIDE
Florence WEST SIDE EAST SIDE Florence
SOUTH SIDE
Mission
N SIDE S SIDE E SIDE W SIDE TOTAL N SIDE S SIDE E SIDE W SIDE TOTAL NS SS ES WS TOTAL 7:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
AM BEGIN PEAK HR 0 0 0 0 0
4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 AM PM AM
8:00 AM PM
4:00 PM
PEDESTRIAN + BIKE CROSSINGS
8:00 AM
PM BEGIN PEAK HR 4:00 PM
PEDESTRIAN CROSSINGS BICYCLE CROSSINGS
U-TURNS
Mission Mission Florence Florence
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS
PREPARED BY: AimTD LLC. tel: 714 253 7888 [email protected]
Huntington
Mission
Florence Add U-Turns to Left Turns
Apx - 27
DATE: LOCATION: PROJECT #: SC
Tue, Jan 19, 21 NORTH & SOUTH: LOCATION #: 3
EAST & WEST: CONTROL: SIGNAL
NOTES: AM ▲
PM N
MD ◄ W E ►
OTHER S
OTHER ▼
NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND
NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL NB SB EB WB TTL LANES: 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0
7:00 AM 13 75 33 28 34 2 3 92 13 8 103 28 432 0 0 0 0 0 7:15 AM 11 86 27 26 40 1 3 121 14 10 121 31 491 0 0 0 1 1 7:30 AM 13 121 30 15 44 0 5 103 13 12 124 36 516 0 0 0 0 0 7:45 AM 15 108 24 19 43 0 3 105 14 19 162 35 547 0 0 0 0 0 8:00 AM 14 108 25 20 33 4 6 102 22 22 126 21 503 0 0 0 0 0 8:15 AM 8 99 23 18 29 0 5 106 17 17 158 33 513 0 0 0 0 0 8:30 AM 23 83 25 26 41 2 2 118 15 25 144 25 529 0 0 0 0 0 8:45 AM 17 75 22 18 42 1 7 107 21 20 157 22 509 0 0 0 0 0 VOLUMES 114 755 209 170 306 10 34 854 129 133 1,095 231 4,040 0 0 0 1 1 APPROACH % 11% 70% 19% 35% 63% 2% 3% 84% 13% 9% 75% 16% APP/DEPART 1,078 / 1,020 486 / 567 1,017 / 1,234 1,459 / 1,219 0
BEGIN PEAK HR
VOLUMES 60 398 97 83 146 6 16 431 68 83 590 114 2,092
APPROACH % 11% 72% 17% 35% 62% 3% 3% 84% 13% 11% 75% 14% PEAK HR FACTOR 0.944 0.851 0.954 0.911 0.956
APP/DEPART 555 / 528 235 / 297 515 / 611 787 / 656 0
4:00 PM 26 88 32 35 152 1 14 209 33 39 190 25 844 0 0 0 0 0 4:15 PM 22 71 31 38 140 5 8 211 37 40 213 28 844 0 0 0 0 0 4:30 PM 25 78 37 47 152 7 13 194 44 31 190 32 850 0 0 0 0 0 4:45 PM 23 58 33 46 137 3 8 199 48 32 189 29 805 0 0 0 0 0 5:00 PM 20 65 37 47 157 4 9 207 22 28 189 21 806 0 0 0 0 0 5:15 PM 18 73 33 46 144 2 5 214 30 30 219 25 839 0 0 0 0 0 5:30 PM 27 53 27 39 173 0 9 176 41 36 194 22 797 0 0 0 0 0 5:45 PM 24 52 24 45 154 1 11 187 42 28 180 24 772 0 0 0 0 0 VOLUMES 185 538 254 343 1,209 23 77 1,597 297 264 1,564 206 6,557 0 0 0 0 0 APPROACH % 19% 55% 26% 22% 77% 1% 4% 81% 15% 13% 77% 10% APP/DEPART 977 / 821 1,575 / 1,770 1,971 / 2,194 2,034 / 1,772 0
BEGIN PEAK HR
VOLUMES 96 295 133 166 581 16 43 813 162 142 782 114 3,343 APPROACH % 18% 56% 25% 22% 76% 2% 4% 80% 16% 14% 75% 11% PEAK HR FACTOR 0.897 0.926 0.994 0.923 0.983
APP/DEPART 524 / 452 763 / 885 1,018 / 1,112 1,038 / 894 0 State
NORTH SIDE
Florence WEST SIDE EAST SIDE Florence
SOUTH SIDE
State
N SIDE S SIDE E SIDE W SIDE TOTAL N SIDE S SIDE E SIDE W SIDE TOTAL NS SS ES WS TOTAL 7:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
AM BEGIN PEAK HR 0 0 0 0 0
4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 AM PM AM
7:45 AM PM
4:00 PM
PEDESTRIAN + BIKE CROSSINGS
7:45 AM
PM BEGIN PEAK HR 4:00 PM
PEDESTRIAN CROSSINGS BICYCLE CROSSINGS
U-TURNS
State State Florence Florence
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS
PREPARED BY: AimTD LLC. tel: 714 253 7888 [email protected]
Huntington
State
Florence Add U-Turns to Left Turns
Apx - 28
APPENDIX D
EXISTING VOLUME ADJUSTMENT FACTOR CALCULATIONS
Apx - 29
Travel Peak
Freeway Segment Direction Hour
Mainline VDS 718147 - FLORENCE 2 I-710 N 6230 7:55:00 AM 6421 7:55:00 AM 6547 7:55:00 AM 6399 Mainline VDS 717986 - FIRESTONE 1 I-710 S 6269 7:55:00 AM 6360 8:10:00 AM 6308 7:55:00 AM 6312 Mainline VDS 774359 - NORTH OF MILLER WAY I-710 N 6323 8:05:00 AM 6551 8:00:00 AM 6585 8:00:00 AM 6486 Mainline VDS 774358 - NORTH OF MILLER WAY I-710 S 7807 8:00:00 AM 7831 8:10:00 AM 7834 7:55:00 AM 7824 Mainline VDS 776266 - FLORENCE 1 I-710 N 5809 7:55:00 AM 5907 7:55:00 AM 5968 7:55:00 AM 5895 Mainline VDS 776295 - FLORENCE 1 I-710 S 6397 7:55:00 AM 6468 8:00:00 AM 6291 7:55:00 AM 6385 Mainline VDS 718147 - FLORENCE 2 I-710 N 5985 5:50:00 PM 5853 5:25:00 PM 5935 5:50:00 PM 5924 Mainline VDS 717986 - FIRESTONE 1 I-710 S 6491 4:55:00 PM 6294 4:55:00 PM 6427 4:55:00 PM 6404 Mainline VDS 774359 - NORTH OF MILLER WAY I-710 N 8160 5:15:00 PM 8245 5:55:00 PM 8292 5:50:00 PM 8232 Mainline VDS 774358 - NORTH OF MILLER WAY I-710 S 7948 5:15:00 PM 7864 4:55:00 PM 7744 4:55:00 PM 7852 Mainline VDS 776266 - FLORENCE 1 I-710 N 5378 5:25:00 PM 5392 5:25:00 PM 5338 5:30:00 PM 5369 Mainline VDS 776295 - FLORENCE 1 I-710 S 6840 4:55:00 PM 6525 5:00:00 PM 6687 4:55:00 PM 6684 Travel Peak
Freeway Segment Direction Hour
Mainline VDS 718147 - FLORENCE 2 I-710 N 6303 8:10:00 AM 6227 8:00:00 AM 6153 8:05:00 AM 6228 Mainline VDS 717986 - FIRESTONE 1 I-710 S 5436 8:10:00 AM 5436 8:05:00 AM 5186 7:55:00 AM 5353 Mainline VDS 774359 - NORTH OF MILLER WAY I-710 N 7321 8:10:00 AM 7588 8:05:00 AM 7215 8:05:00 AM 7375 Mainline VDS 774358 - NORTH OF MILLER WAY I-710 S 6675 8:10:00 AM 6759 8:00:00 AM 6319 7:55:00 AM 6584 Mainline VDS 776266 - FLORENCE 1 I-710 N 5658 8:10:00 AM 5681 8:00:00 AM 5647 8:05:00 AM 5662 Mainline VDS 776295 - FLORENCE 1 I-710 S 5138 8:15:00 AM 5427 8:00:00 AM 4881 8:50:00 AM 5149 Mainline VDS 718147 - FLORENCE 2 I-710 N 5721 5:15:00 PM 5886 5:05:00 PM 5606 5:15:00 PM 5738 Mainline VDS 717986 - FIRESTONE 1 I-710 S 6167 6:00:00 PM 6299 5:30:00 PM 6248 5:15:00 PM 6238 Mainline VDS 774359 - NORTH OF MILLER WAY I-710 N 8343 5:35:00 PM 8468 5:55:00 PM 8361 5:00:00 PM 8391 Mainline VDS 774358 - NORTH OF MILLER WAY I-710 S 7484 6:00:00 PM 7826 5:30:00 PM 7674 5:20:00 PM 7661 Mainline VDS 776266 - FLORENCE 1 I-710 N 5107 5:20:00 PM 5207 5:05:00 PM 4984 5:15:00 PM 5099 Mainline VDS 776295 - FLORENCE 1 I-710 S 6475 6:00:00 PM 6736 5:45:00 PM 6753 5:25:00 PM 6655 Mainline VDS 718147 - FLORENCE 2 1.027
Mainline VDS 717986 - FIRESTONE 1 1.179
Mainline VDS 774359 - NORTH OF MILLER WAY 0.879
Mainline VDS 774358 - NORTH OF MILLER WAY 1.188
Mainline VDS 776266 - FLORENCE 1 1.041
Mainline VDS 776295 - FLORENCE 1 1.240
Mainline VDS 718147 - FLORENCE 2 1.032
Mainline VDS 717986 - FIRESTONE 1 1.027
Mainline VDS 774359 - NORTH OF MILLER WAY 0.981
Mainline VDS 774358 - NORTH OF MILLER WAY 1.025
Mainline VDS 776266 - FLORENCE 1 1.053
Mainline VDS 776295 - FLORENCE 1 1.004
I-710 Freeway
Roadway Segment
Tue Wed Thu
Tue Wed Thu