Pasadena City Council
July 15, 2024

from adjacent groundwater basins, bedrock areas, and the San Gabriel Mountains, artificial recharge, and percolation of water from septic tanks.

The proposed Project would be provided water service from PWP, which manages the use of groundwater in accordance with its allocations. The Project does not involve installation of any groundwater wells and would not otherwise directly withdraw any groundwater. In addition, there are no aquifer conditions or recharge features at the Project site or in the surrounding area that could be affected by excavation or development of the Project. As a result, impacts would be less than significant.

Finding of Significance: The impact would be less than significant, and no mitigation measures are necessary.
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? The Project site is relatively flat with little to no slope, and no streams, rivers, or other drainage features.

The Project site is primarily developed with impervious surfaces (structures and paved areas) with some pervious areas of turf and other landscaping.

Soils would be exposed during construction-related activities (e.g., grading and excavation for the Project two-story dealership and service center building, car wash, and EV battery storage building) which would have the potential to result in temporary changes to drainage and for erosion of exposed soils to occur.

As discussed under Issue X(a) above, construction activities must comply with the MS4 General Permit, which requires the development of a SWPPP that includes BMPs to control or eliminate constructionrelated pollutants in the runoff, including sediment that could result in siltation. Implementation of the erosion control BMPs would reduce construction-related soil erosion and siltation associated with construction activities. Impacts during construction would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.

During operation, the Project site would be covered with impervious surface areas and landscaping, with no exposed soils, similar to existing conditions. As mentioned, the Project would be constructed according to an approved grading and drainage plan to allow for proper drainage and maintain the existing drainage pattern. Thus, the drainage pattern would not substantially change, and no substantial erosion or siltation off-site would occur. Additionally, in compliance with the MS4 permit, the proposed Project would retain storm flows on-site either via infiltration or storage and treatment. Compliance with the MS4 permit and LID ordinance would ensure that the proposed Project would not result in significant erosion or siltation impacts from changes to drainage patterns. The proposed Project would not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site. The impact during operation would be less than significant and no mitigation is required.

Finding of Significance: The impact would be less than significant, and no mitigation measures are necessary.

Rusnak Porsche Dealership Project _______________ Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration

(ii) Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or offsite?
According to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) flood insurance rate map (FIRM) Panel 06037C1400F, the proposed Project is located within FEMA Zone X, which identifies areas of minimal flood hazard. As discussed under Issue X(c[i]) above, the proposed Project grading and drainage would be designed to maintain existing drainage patterns. Further, in compliance with the MS4 permit requirements, a new on-site storm drain system would be installed at the Project site that would capture and route runoff into a stormwater retention basin at the Project site. Since the proposed Project would not involve alteration of a discernible watercourse and post-development runoff discharge rates would be required to not exceed pre-development rates, the proposed Project would not have the potential to alter drainage patterns or increase runoff that would result in flooding. Therefore, the proposed Project would not substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site and impacts would be less than significant.

Finding of Significance: The impact would be less than significant, and no mitigation measures are necessary.
(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?
As discussed above in Issue X(c[ii]), implementation of the proposed Project would result in a similar though slightly increased area of impermeable surface compared with existing conditions. As mentioned, the Project would be constructed according to an approved grading and drainage plan to allow for proper drainage and maintain the existing drainage pattern. Thus, no substantial increase in the amount of runoff from the Project site is anticipated.

Construction would require water, as necessary, to control fugitive dust. Fugitive dust emissions at the construction site would be controlled by water trucks equipped with spray nozzles. Construction water needs would generate minimal quantities of discharge water, which would drain into existing storm drains located within or adjacent to the project site. BMPs would be identified in the SWPPP developed for the proposed Project to control runoff from the project sites during construction. As discussed under Issue X (a) above, a new on-site storm drain system would be installed to capture and route runoff. Therefore, the proposed Project would not create runoff that would exceed the capacity of the storm drain system and would not provide a substantial additional source of polluted runoff. As a result, impacts would be less than significant.

Finding of Significance: The impact would be less than significant, and no mitigation is necessary. (iv) Impede or redirect flood flows?
As discussed above in Issue X(c[ii]), the proposed Project would largely consist of impervious surfaces and would be required to retain storm flows on site. Further, provided in FEMA’s FIRM Panel 06037C1400F, the proposed Project is located in an area of minimal flood hazard (Zone X). Therefore, the Project site is not expected to be subjected to flood flows, and would not impede or redirect flood flows compared to existing conditions. A less than significant impact is anticipated from the construction and operation of the proposed Project and no mitigation is required.

Rusnak Porsche Dealership Project _______________ Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration

Finding of Significance: The impact would be less than significant, and no mitigation measures are necessary.
d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation? According to the California Geological Survey Los Angeles County Tsunami Inundation Maps, the Project site is not located within a tsunami inundation area.3 There are no bodies of water located on or near the Project site; therefore, inundation caused by a seiche would not occur. Thus, there would be no impact.

Finding of Significance: There would be no impact and no mitigation measures are necessary. e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan?
The Project is designed to be consistent with the Los Angeles MS4 NPDES General Permit, Municipal Code/LA County LID Standards, and Pasadena Municipal Code standards for water quality control, for both construction and site improvements. As mentioned above, the PWP’s 2020 UWMP states that the current water supply consists of approximately 40 percent groundwater and 60 percent imported water. The groundwater supply that serves Pasadena is extracted from the Raymond Basin. PWP published the Water System and Resources Plan (PWP 2020), which establishes steps that PWP is taking to ensure both water quality control and the sustainability of the Raymond Basin. Replenishment of the Basin occurs through natural infiltration and percolation of rainfall and surface water, percolation of applied water from irrigation and other return flows, subsurface inflow from adjacent groundwater basins, bedrock areas, and the San Gabriel Mountains, artificial recharge, and percolation of water from septic tanks.

DWR prioritizes groundwater basins based on attributes specified in Water Code section 10933, which include: population; rate of population growth; number of public supply wells; total number of wells; total irrigated acreage; degree to which persons overlying the basin rely on groundwater as their primary source of water; documented impacts on the groundwater within the basin, including overdraft, subsidence, saline intrusion, and other water quality degradation; and any other information determined to be relevant by DWR, including adverse impacts on local habitat and local streamflows. Basins identified as high- or medium-priority are required to prepare and submit a groundwater sustainability plan. DWR categorizes Raymond Basin as a Very Low Priority Basin (DWR 2020); therefore no groundwater sustainability plan is in place for Raymond Basin.

Because the Project would not affect any of the regional groundwater management measures noted above, and because it would not involve the use, disposal, or storage of hazardous chemicals that could impact groundwater quality, the proposed Project would have a less than significant impact.

Finding of Significance: The impact would be less than significant, and no mitigation measures are necessary.
3 California Geological Survey. 2009. Tsunami Hazard Area Map. Available at https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/informationwarehouse/ts_evacuation/?extent=- 13249590.3641%2C3986280.7635%2C13132183.0887%2C4038410.8168%2C102100&utm_source=cgs+active&utm_content=losangeles Rusnak Porsche Dealership Project _______________ Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration

XI. LAND USE AND PLANNING
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
XI. LAND USE AND PLANNING: Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established community?



b) Cause a significant environmental impact due to
a conflict with any land use plan, policy or
regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding
or mitigating an environmental effect?





DISCUSSION:
a) Physically divide an established community?
North of Nina Street, the Project site is currently occupied by a commercial building, a one- to two-car garage structure, surface parking, and a vacant lot. South of Nina Street, the site is occupied by a commercial building and surface parking that is currently in use by the automotive dealership to the east of the Project site. The proposed Project would demolish the existing structures and develop an automotive dealership consisting of showrooms, offices, a service area, and parts storage, a separate car wash building, and an EV battery storage building. The proposed Project would be located within the existing lot boundaries. The Project site is bordered by an existing automotive dealership to the east; commercial uses to the north; commercial uses to the south across Colorado Boulevard with residential uses farther south; and commercial, motel, restaurant, and residential uses to the west with the two nearest residences to the west being non-conforming uses. As such, the Project would be consistent with surrounding land uses and would not physically divide an established community. In addition, the proposed vacation of Nina Street through the site would not divide an established community. Nina Street currently terminates on the site and does not provide a connection through the site. Therefore, no related impact would occur.

Finding of Significance: No impact would occur, and no mitigation measures are necessary. 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? Consistency with General Plan Land Use
Goals and policies in the City of Pasadena General Plan Land Use Element are intended to “provide for community conservation and strategic growth, preserving existing neighborhoods and targeting new development to infill areas that are vacant or underutilized, and are scaled and designed to complement existing uses.” The Land Use Element focuses on maintaining the quality of life of Pasadena’s residents with decreased automobile trips, increased walkability, improve connectivity, and development of cohesive and vigorous districts and places. Policy 1.2 of the Land Use Element targets growth and new construction in infill areas and away from Pasadena’s residential neighborhoods and open spaces by redeveloping underutilized commercial and industrial properties. The Project would be consistent with these provisions by developing an auto dealership building and car wash building within a predominantly Rusnak Porsche Dealership Project _______________ Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration

commercial area and on an underutilized site currently holding a surface parking for the adjacent Audi dealership, commercial building, one- to two-car garage structure, and vacant lot. The Project would improve the sidewalks and landscaping to provide a pedestrian-accessible environment, especially along Colorado Boulevard, a major corridor of the City. As such, the Project would also comply with Policy 5.1, which considers the improvement of sidewalks and pedestrian paths by incorporating street trees and landscaping. Goal 8 and its supporting policies provide for the preservation and enhancement of Pasadena’s cultural and historic buildings, landscapes, streets and districts as valued assets and important representations of its past and a source of community identity, and social, ecological, and economic vitality. The Project would not significantly impact the City’s cultural and historic buildings, as detailed in Section V. The Project would enhance the vicinity with a redeveloped site and increased landscaping and provide economic vitality with the new dealership and service center.

The northern portion of the Project site is designated as R&D Flex Space, and the southern portion of the Project site is designated as Low Mixed Use. R&D Flex Space is permitted up to 1.25 FAR and is characterized by a wide range of industrial uses such as light manufacturing, research and development, creative office and incubator industries, and limited ancillary commercial and office uses. Low Mixed Use is permitted up to 1.0 FAR and 0–32 dwelling units per acre, and sites shall be primarily commercial. As the Project would propose a 0.35 FAR (66,852 SF of building area within the 192,331 SF Project site area) with an automobile dealership building, car wash building, and EV battery storage building, the Project would comply with the General Plan land use designations for the site.

Consistency with Specific Plans and Zoning
The northern portion of the Project site is zoned as EPSP-d1-IG (East Pasadena Specific Plan, Subarea d1 [East Foothill Industrial District], General Industrial). The southern portion of the Project site is zoned as ECSP-CG-6 (East Colorado Specific Plan, General Commercial) within the Chihuahuita sub-area. The Project applicant is seeking Conditional Use Permits for both major construction and vehicle sales use, two Minor Variances for setbacks along North Sunnyslope Avenue and East Colorado Boulevard, and a Street Vacation.

The East Pasadena Specific Plan encourages the East Foothill Industrial District’s continued use as an industrial district with moderate amounts of additional office and commercial development. In addition, for general industrial zones, the district would permit and/or conditionally permit vehicle services related to washing/detailing, repair, and sales. As the Project’s car wash building and a portion of the automobile dealership building would be located within the East Pasadena Specific Plan area, the Project would be consistent with the provisions with approval of the discretionary requests. In addition, the East Pasadena Specific Plan recommends landscaping along Walnut Street for aesthetic purposes and to partially screen parked cars from view. As such, the Project’s proposed commercial uses and provision of on-site trees, trees in the rights-of-way and shrubbery to surround the on-site surface parking would be consistent with the related East Pasadena Specific Plan recommendations. In accordance with the East Pasadena Specific Plan, the Project would also improve the pedestrian environment along Walnut Street by developing a pedestrian scale frontage where none currently exists within the northeastern portion of the Project site.

As provided in Table 2.1 of the East Pasadena Specific Plan, the 2914 E. Walnut Street/96 N. Sunnyslope Avenue structure within the Project site is not eligible for separate listing or designation under an existing local ordinance but is eligible for special consideration in local planning. The structure was assessed in the Project’s cultural and historic resources evaluation (Appendix C), which concluded that the structure lacks Rusnak Porsche Dealership Project _______________ Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration

significance under the California Register and as a Pasadena Landmark, and is not considered a historical resource. As a result, the Project and the proposed demolition of the structure would not conflict with the East Pasadena Specific Plan.

The East Colorado Specific Plan encourages primary land uses anchoring the eastern entrance of the City on Colorado Boulevard to include membership retail, discount, department stores and auto dealers. The overall purpose of the East Colorado Specific Plan is to break up long stretches of strip commercial with residential uses and cluster commercial uses into nodes identified by the Specific Plan. Specifically, for the Chihuahuita sub-area in which the Project site is located and large automobile dealerships are present, the district would permit and/or conditionally permit vehicle services related to sales, leasing, and service stations. As a portion of the proposed automobile dealership building would be located within the East Colorado Specific Plan area, the Project would be consistent with the provisions with approval of the discretionary requests.

The East Colorado Specific Plan also states that streets within the Chihuahuita sub-area should include additional trees and landscaping as well as street furnishings and enhanced pedestrian crosswalks, with care given to street tree selection to allow maximum visibility to adjacent storefronts, auto dealers, and retail space in this area as well as the entire corridor. Unless otherwise specified by the City, street trees along Sunnyslope Avenue within the Chihuahuita sub-area should include London Plane trees (Plantanus acerfolia) and American Linden trees (Tilla americana). Final decisions on trees species will be subject to approval from the Urban Forestry and Engineering Division of the City’s Department of Public Works. The East Colorado Specific Plan also recognizes that as automobile dealerships and larger retailers line the Chihuahuita street frontage, it is critical that these businesses have easy access from the street and parking in the front. Furthermore, to enhance the pedestrian experience and maintain a continuous street frontage for retail, parking lots should be screened with a landscaped wall or a landscaped buffer. While the Project would not provide the specified trees and would instead provide African sumac (Rhus lancea), Australian willow (Geijera parviflora), and magnolia trees, the Project would seek approval by the Urban Forestry and Engineering Division in accordance with the East Colorado Specific Plan.

The East Colorado Specific Plan identifies the intersection at East Colorado Boulevard and Sunnyslope Avenue as a key intersection and key pedestrian node due to its high visibility and substantial vehicular and pedestrian interaction. The Project would provide access, parking, sidewalks, and landscaped buffers along the perimeter of the site facing the East Colorado Boulevard and Sunnyslope Avenue to create a pedestrian-friendly environment, which would be consistent with the guidelines of the East Colorado Specific Plan.

Therefore, with approval of the Project, the applicant’s request for Conditional Use Permits for both major construction and car sales, the Project would not conflict with the provisions of the East Pasadena Specific Plan and East Colorado Specific Plan adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect.

City Trees and Tree Protection Ordinance (Pasadena Municipal Code Chapter 8.52) In recognition of the significant aesthetic, environmental, and economic benefits to the community provided by trees, and to increase the tree canopy in Pasadena, the City Council adopted measures to protect public trees, landmark trees, native trees, and specimen trees in certain areas of the City. The Project site currently includes 48 existing trees located within the Project site interior and along East Colorado Boulevard, North Sunnyslope Avenue, East Walnut Street, and Nina Street. Of these, 24 trees Rusnak Porsche Dealership Project _______________ Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration

are located within the private property area and are proposed for removal, and consist of sawleaf zelkova (Zelkova serrata), fan palm hybrid (Washington hybrid), Chinese elm (Ulmus parvfolia), Mexican fan palm (Washingtonia robusta), tree-of-heaven (Ailanthus altissima), evergreen pear (Pyrus kawakamii), southern magnolia (Magnolia grandiflora), and shamel ash (Fraxinus uhdei). None of the on-site trees meet the criteria for protection under the City Trees and Tree Protection Ordinance (Chapter 8.52). The remaining 25 trees are public street trees located along East Colorado Boulevard, North Sunnyslope Avenue, and East Walnut Street, and include: Chinese pistache (Pistacio chinensis), Chinese elm (Ulmus parvfolia), carob (Ceratonia siliqua), Mexican fan palm tree (Washingtonia palm), and paperbark (Melaleuca quinquenervia). The applicant proposes removal of four of the public street trees, consisting of two along East Colorado Boulevard, one along North Sunnyslope Avenue, and one along East Walnut Street. While none of the public street trees proposed for removal are considered mature or landmark, the applicant would be required to obtain a tree permit from the City for the removal of the trees in the private property area, and the City Manager’s approval to remove the four public street trees to ensure compliance with the City Trees and Tree Protection Ordinance, Chapter 8.52.

The tree permit would also include review of the applicant’s selection of proposed tree planting per the Project landscaping plan, and would be conducted in compliance with the City Trees and Tree Protection Ordinance and with necessary approvals by the Urban Forestry and Engineering Division.

Southern California Association of Governments Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy
The core vision of the SCAG 2020-2045 RTP/SCS is to build upon and expand land use and transportation strategies established over several planning cycles to increase mobility options and achieve a more sustainable growth pattern in Southern California. The strategies also outline how the region can achieve California’s GHG emission reduction goals and federal Clean Air Act requirements. The Project would develop an automobile dealership and car wash uses in a High Quality Transit Area (HQTA) and would provide approximately 31 new jobs in a location that is easily accessible via public transportation and other alternate modes of transportation, which is consistent with the RTP/SCS focus on job growth in HQTAs. 4 The Project would support the reduction of single-occupancy vehicle ridership and GHG emissions by providing bicycle parking, electric vehicle charging stations, and low emission vehicle parking spaces. While the proposed Project would not advance the housing-related goals of the RTP/SCS, it would not conflict with such goals. By providing job growth in an identified transit-oriented development area, the proposed Project would be consistent with a primary focus of the RTP/SCS. As a result, impacts relating to conflicts with the RTP/SCS would be less than significant.

With the approval of Conditional Use Permits for both major construction and vehicle sales use, two Minor Variances for setbacks along North Sunnyslope Avenue and East Colorado Boulevard, and a Street Vacation, the Project would comply with the applicable regulations for planning and zoning designations.

Therefore, the proposed Project would not conflict with applicable land use plans, policies, or regulations adopted for the purpose of avoiding an environmental effect. 4 A HQTA is generally defined as a walkable transit village or corridor, consistent with the adopted RTP/SCS, and is within one half-mile of a well-serviced transit stop or a transit corridor with 15-minute or less service frequency during peak commute hours.

Rusnak Porsche Dealership Project _______________ Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration

Finding of Significance: The impact would be less than significant, and no mitigation measures are necessary.

XII. MINERAL RESOURCES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
XII. MINERAL RESOURCES: Would the project:
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known
mineral resource that would be of value to the
region and the residents of the state?




b) Result in the loss of availability of a locallyimportant mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan
or other land use plan?




DISCUSSION:
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?
According to the Pasadena General Plan EIR, no active mining operations exist within the City.5 Two areas in Pasadena may contain mineral resources, Eaton Wash, which was formerly mined for sand and gravel, and Devils Gate Reservoir, which was formerly mined for cement concrete aggregate. The Project is not located near these areas. In addition, the Project site is not located within an area known to contain mineral deposits. Neither the Project site nor surrounding areas are utilized for mineral production.

Implementation of the proposed Project would not result in the loss of an available known mineral resource with value to the region. As such, no mineral resource impacts would occur.

Finding of Significance: No impact would occur and no mitigation measures are necessary. 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? See Issue XI(a) above. As stated above, there are no active mines in the City. Furthermore, the City does not identify mineral resource recovery sites in the City’s General Plan. The Project site is not an available site for mineral extraction. The proposed Project would not result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan.

Finding of Significance: No impact would occur, and no mitigation measures are necessary. 5 City of Pasadena. 2015. Pasadena General Plan EIR.

Rusnak Porsche Dealership Project _______________ Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration

XIII. NOISE
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
XIII. NOISE Would the project result in
a) Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent
increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable
standards of other agencies?




b) Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or
groundborne noise levels?



c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a
plan has not been adopted, within 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?





NOISE FUNDAMENTALS
Sound is mechanical energy transmitted by pressure waves in a compressible medium such as air and is characterized by both its amplitude and frequency (or pitch). The human ear does not hear all frequencies equally. In particular, the ear de-emphasizes low and very high frequencies. To better approximate the sensitivity of human hearing, the A-weighted decibel scale (dBA) has been developed. On this scale, the human range of hearing extends from approximately three dBA to around 140 dBA.

Noise is generally defined as unwanted or excessive sound, which can vary in intensity by over one million times within the range of human hearing; therefore, a logarithmic scale, known as the decibel scale (dB), is used to quantify sound intensity. Noise can be generated by a number of sources, including mobile sources such as automobiles, trucks, and airplanes, and stationary sources such as construction sites, machinery, and industrial operations. Noise generated by mobile sources typically attenuates (is reduced) at a rate between three dBA and 4.5 dBA per doubling of distance. The rate depends on the ground surface and the number or type of objects between the noise source and the receiver. Hard and flat surfaces, such as concrete or asphalt, have an attenuation rate of three dBA per doubling of distance. Soft surfaces, such as uneven or vegetated terrain, have an attenuation rate of about 4.5 dBA per doubling of distance. Noise generated by stationary sources typically attenuates at a rate between 6 dBA and about 7.5 dBA per doubling of distance.

There are a number of metrics used to characterize community noise exposure, which fluctuate constantly over time. One such metric, the equivalent sound level (Leq), represents a constant sound that, over the specified period, has the same sound energy as the time-varying sound. Noise exposure over a longer period of time is often evaluated based on the Day-Night Sound Level (Ldn). This is a measure of 24-hour noise levels that incorporates a 10-dBA penalty for sounds occurring between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m.

The penalty is intended to reflect the increased human sensitivity to noises occurring during nighttime hours, particularly at times when people are sleeping and there are lower ambient noise conditions.

Rusnak Porsche Dealership Project _______________ Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration

Typical Ldn noise levels for light and medium density residential areas range from 55 dBA to 65 dBA.

Similarly, Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) is a measure of 24-hour noise levels that incorporates a 5-dBA penalty for sounds occurring between 7:00 p.m. and 10:00 p.m. and a 10-dBA penalty for sounds occurring between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. to account for noise sensitivity in the evening and nighttime, respectively.

REGULATORY FRAMEWORK
State of California
The State Office of Planning and Research Noise Element Guidelines include recommended exterior and interior noise level standards for local jurisdictions to identify and prevent the creation of incompatible land uses due to noise. The Noise Element Guidelines contain a land use compatibility table that describes the compatibility of various land uses with a range of environmental noise levels in terms of CNEL.

City of Pasadena
General Plan Noise Element
Table XIII-1, City of Pasadena Land Use Compatibility Matrix, presents the City’s Community Noise and Land Use Compatibility matrix and presents the land use compatibility chart for community noise adopted by the City through its General Plan Noise Element6. This table provides urban planners with a tool to gauge the compatibility of new land uses relative to existing and future exterior noise exposure levels.

This table identifies clearly acceptable, normally acceptable, conditionally acceptable, and normally unacceptable exterior noise exposure levels for various land uses. A clearly acceptable designation assumes that buildings of standard construction would suffice. A conditionally acceptable designation means that new construction or development should be undertaken only after a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements for each land use is made and needed noise insulation features are incorporated into the design to reduce noise to normally acceptable levels. By comparison, a normally acceptable designation indicates that standard construction can likely occur with no special noise reduction requirements.
6 City of Pasadena, City of Pasadena General Plan Noise Element, December 2002, https://www.cityofpasadena.net/wpcontent/uploads/sites/30/Pasadena-Noise-Element-Policy.pdf, accessed April 6, 2022.

Rusnak Porsche Dealership Project _______________ Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration

TABLE XIII-1. CITY OF PASADENA LAND USE COMPATIBILITY MATRIX Land Use Category
Community Noise Exposure (Ldn or CNEL, dBA)
Clearly
Acceptable
Normally
Acceptable
Conditionally
Acceptable
Normally
Unacceptable
Residential – Low Density Single Family, Duplex,
Mobile Homes 50 – 60 55 – 70 70 – 75 75 – 85
Residential – Multiple Family and Mixed
Commercial/Residential Use 50 – 65 60 – 70 70 – 75 70 – 85 Transient Lodging – Motels, Hotels 50 – 65 60 – 70 70 – 80 80 – 85 Schools, Libraries, Churches, Hospitals, Nursing
Homes 50 – 65 60 – 70 70 – 80 80 – 85
Auditoriums, Concert Halls, Amphitheaters NA 50 – 70 65 – 85 NA Sports Arenas, Outdoor Spectator Sports NA 50 – 75 70 – 85 NA Playgrounds, Neighborhood Parks 50 – 70 NA 67.5 – 75 72.5 – 85 Golf Courses, Riding Stables, Water Recreation,
Cemeteries 50 – 75 NA 70 – 80 80 – 85
Office Buildings, Business Commercial and
Professional 50 – 70 67.5 – 77.5 75 – 85 NA
Industrial, Manufacturing, Utilities, Agriculture 50 – 75 70 – 80 80 – 85 NA Ldn = Day-Night Sound Level; CNEL = community noise equivalent level; dBA = A-weighted decibel scale; NA = not applicable Source: City of Pasadena, City of Pasadena General Plan Noise Element, Figure 1: Guidelines for Noise Compatible Land Use, December 2002.

The General Plan Noise Element also outlines the objectives and policies for noise control within the City.

The following objectives and policies are applicable to the Project:

Objective 2: The City will work to reduce the effects of traffic-generated noise from major roadways on residential and other sensitive land uses.

Policy 2a: The City will encourage noise-compatible land uses along major roadways.

Policy 2b: The City will encourage site planning and traffic control measures that minimize the effects of traffic noise in residential zones.

Policy 2c: The City will encourage the use of alternative transportation modes as stipulated in the Mobility Element (walking, bicycling, transit use, electric vehicles) to minimize traffic noise in the City.

Policy 2d: The City will work with local and regional transit agencies and businesses to provide transportation services that reduce traffic and associated noise as stipulated in the Mobility Element.

Objective 6: The City will minimize noise spillovers from commercial and industrial operations into adjacent residential neighborhoods and other sensitive uses, while maximizing the Land Use Element’s objectives to encourage mixed-use development in the Central District and other Specific Plan areas as well as to promote economic vitality.

Policy 6a: The City will encourage automobile and truck access to industrial and commercial properties abutting residential zones to be located at the maximum practical distance from residential zones.

Rusnak Porsche Dealership Project _______________ Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration

Policy 6b: The City will limit the use of motorized landscaping equipment, parking lot sweepers, and other high-noise equipment on commercial properties if their activity will result in noise that adversely affects residential zones.

Policy 6c: The City will encourage limitations on the hours of truck delivers to industrial and commercial properties abutting residential zones unless there is no feasible alternative or there are substantial transportation benefits of scheduling deliveries at another hour.

Objective 7: The City will minimize the effects of nuisance noise on sensitive land uses as defined in Figure 1 [Table XIII-1] to the degree feasible.

Policy 7b: The City will encourage limitations on construction activities adjacent to sensitive noise receptors as defined in Figure 1 [Table XIII-1].

Policy 7c: The City will encourage construction and landscaping activities that employ techniques to minimize noise.

Policy 7d: The City will enforce noise level restrictions contained in the City of Pasadena Noise Regulations (Chapter 9.36 of the Municipal Code), except during federal, State, or local emergencies (such as power generators required for energy emergencies).

Municipal Code Noise Ordinance
The City of Pasadena regulates stationary source noise in Municipal Code Chapter 9.367. Noise regulations are based on the increment of noise that a source generates above the ambient background noise level.

9.36.040 - Ambient noise level.

A. When "ambient noise level" is referred to in this chapter, it means the actual measured ambient noise level.

B. Any sound level measurement made pursuant to the provisions of this chapter shall be measured with a sound level meter using the A weighting.

1.Where the sound alleged to be offending is of a type or character set forth below, the following values shall be added to the sound level measurement of the offending noise:
a. Except for noise emanating from any electrical transformer or gas metering and pressure control equipment existing and installed prior to the effective date of the ordinance codified herein, any steady audible tone: + 5; b. Repeated impulsive noise: + 5;
c. Noise occurring more than 5 but less than 15 minutes per hour: - 5; d. Noise occurring more than 1 but less than 5 minutes per hour: - 10; 7 City of Pasadena, Code of Ordinances: Chapter 9.36, Noise Restrictions, March 17, 2022.

Rusnak Porsche Dealership Project _______________ Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration

e. Noise occurring less than 1 minute per hour: -20.

2. Values of subsections (B)(1)(c), (B)(1)(d) and (B)(1)(e) of this section shall be added to the sound level measurements during daytime (6 a.m. to 11 p.m.) periods only.

9.36.050 – General noise sources.

Municipal Code Section 9.36.050 prohibits the generation of noise that exceeds the existing ambient noise at the property line of any property by more than 5 dBA, with adjustments made for steady audible tones, repeated impulsive noise, and noise occurring for limited time periods.

9.36.070 – Construction projects.

The City of Pasadena limits construction activities within a residential district or within 500 feet therefrom to the hours from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, and from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays. Performance of construction and repair work is prohibited on Sundays and holidays.

9.36.080 – Construction equipment.

Municipal Code Section 9.36.080 prohibits noise from operation of any powered construction equipment from exceeding 85 dBA at a distance of 100 feet from such equipment.

9.36.090 – Machinery, equipment, fans and air conditioning.

Section 9.36.090 prohibits machinery, equipment, and fans, and air conditioning units from generating noise that increases the ambient noise level by 5 dBA or more at the property line of the receiving property. Under the City’s Municipal Code, ambient is defined as the actual measured ambient noise level.

9.36.120 – Near schools, hospitals and churches.

It is unlawful for any person to create any noise on any street, sidewalk or public place adjacent to any school, institution of learning, or church while the same is in use or adjacent to any hospital, which noise unreasonably interferes with the workings of such institution or which disturbs or unduly annoys patients in the hospital, provided conspicuous signs are displayed in such streets, sidewalk or public place indicating the presence of a school, church or hospital.

EXISTING SETTING
Noise Sensitive Receptors
Noise-sensitive land uses are generally considered to include those uses where noise exposure could result in health-related risks to individuals, as well as places where quiet is an essential element of their intended purpose. Residential dwellings are of primary concern because of the potential for increased and prolonged exposure of individuals to both interior and exterior noise levels. Additional land uses such as parks, historic sites, cemeteries, and recreation areas are considered sensitive to increases in exterior noise levels. Schools, churches, hotels, libraries, and other places where low interior noise levels are essential are also considered noise-sensitive land uses.

The nearest sensitive receptors to the Project site are a hotel (Super 8 by Wyndham) located approximately 60 feet west, a residential building (single-family house) located approximately 125 feet west, and a church (Light of Love Mission Church) located approximately 720 feet southwest.

Rusnak Porsche Dealership Project _______________ Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration

Existing Stationary Noise Levels
Land uses in the Project area are mostly residential and commercial including an adjacent auto dealership.

The primary sources of stationary noise in the Project vicinity are urban-related activities (i.e., mechanical equipment, truck delivery, and parking areas). The noise associated with these sources may represent a single-event noise occurrence, short-term, or long-term/continuous noise.

Existing Roadway Noise Levels
The majority of the existing noise in the Project area is generated from traffic along surrounding roadways including Colorado Boulevard and East Walnut Street. Mobile source noise was modeled using the Federal Highway Administration’s Highway Noise Prediction Model (FHWA RD-77-108), which incorporates several roadway and site parameters. The model does not account for ambient noise levels. Noise projections are based on modeled vehicular traffic as derived from the 2915 East Colorado Porsche Transportation Impact Analysis Outside CEQA Evaluation Final Report (Transportation Impact Analysis), prepared by Iteris Incorporation (dated February 1, 2022); refer to Appendix F, Traffic Impact Assessment.

As shown in Table XIII-2, Existing Traffic Noise Levels, mobile noise sources in the vicinity of the Project site range from 48.8 dBA to 63.4 dBA at 100 feet from roadway centerline.

TABLE XIII-2. EXISTING TRAFFIC NOISE LEVEL
Roadway Segment
Existing Without Project Conditions
ADT
dBA @ 100
Feet from
Roadway
Centerline
Distance from Roadway
Centerline to: (Feet)
70 CNEL
Noise
Contour
65 CNEL
Noise
Contour
60 CNEL
Noise
Contour
North-South
San Gabriel Blvd north of Foothill Blvd 22,260 62.5 - 68 147 San Gabriel Blvd between Foothill Blvd & Walnut St 22,730 62.6 - 70 150 San Gabriel Blvd between Walnut St & Colorado Blvd 22,340 62.4 - 68 146 San Gabriel Blvd south of Colorado Blvd 24,100 60.3 - - 105 Sunnyslope Ave between Walnut St & Colorado Blvd 1,140 49.4 - - - Sunnyslope Ave south of Colorado Blvd 990 48.8 - - -
Sierra Madre Villa Ave north of I-210 WB Ramps 25,260 63.1 - 75 162 Sierra Madre Villa Ave between I-210 WB & EB Ramps 23,800 63.4 - 79 169 Sierra Madre Villa Ave between I-210 EB Ramps &
Colorado Blvd 21,910 62.6 - 69 150
Madre St south of Colorado Blvd 12,800 60.0 - 47 100
East-West
Foothill Blvd west of San Gabriel Blvd 17,010 61.3 - 57 123 Foothill Blvd east of San Gabriel Blvd 20,550 62.2 - 65 141 Walnut St west of San Gabriel Blvd 5,400 56.2 - - 56
Walnut St between San Gabriel Blvd & Sunnyslope Ave 4,700 55.6 - - 51 Walnut St east of Sunnyslope Ave 4,380 55.3 - - 49
Colorado Blvd west of San Gabriel Blvd 18,530 61.7 - 60 130 Colorado Blvd between San Gabriel Blvd & Sunnyslope Ave 17,960 61.6 - 59 127 Rusnak Porsche Dealership Project _______________ Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration

Roadway Segment
Existing Without Project Conditions
ADT
dBA @ 100
Feet from
Roadway
Centerline
Distance from Roadway
Centerline to: (Feet)
70 CNEL
Noise
Contour
65 CNEL
Noise
Contour
60 CNEL
Noise
Contour
Colorado Blvd between Sunnyslope Ave & Sierra Madre
Villa Ave 18,700 61.7 - 61 131
Colorado Blvd east of Sierra Madre Villa Ave 19,430 61.9 - 62 134 Notes: ADT = average daily trips; dBA = A-weighted decibels; CNEL = community noise equivalent level, - = Contour located within the roadway right of way.

Source: Based on traffic data from the 2915 East Colorado Porsche Transportation Impact Analysis Outside CEQA Evaluation Final Report, prepared by Iteris Incorporation, February 1, 2022.

Existing Ambient Noise Levels
In order to quantify existing ambient noise levels in the Project area, Michael Baker International conducted three short-term noise measurements in the Project vicinity on November 4, 2021. The 10- minute measurements were taken between 1:30 p.m. and 2:30 a.m. Short-term (Leq) measurements are considered representative of the noise levels throughout the day. The noise measurements were taken during “off-peak” (9:00 a.m. through 3:00 p.m.) traffic noise hours as this provides a more conservative baseline. During rush hour traffic, vehicle speeds and heavy truck volumes are often low. Free-flowing traffic conditions just before or after rush hour often yield higher noise levels.8 The average noise level
measured near the Project site is identified in Table XIII-3, Noise Measurement.

TABLE XIII-3. NOISE MEASUREMENT
Site No. Location
Leq
(dBA)
Lmin
(dBA)
Lmax
(dBA)
Peak
(dBA)
Start
Time
1 Intersection of North Daisy Avenue and East Colorado
Boulevard, In front of 2801 East Colorado Boulevard.

65.3 28.7 102.1 130.5 1:32
p.m.
2 Near Sunnyslope Avenue and Nina Street, in front of the gate at 2885 Nina Street 93.4 28.9 125 146.4 1:47 p.m.

Source: Michael Baker International, November 4, 2021.

Meteorological conditions were sunny, warm temperatures (77 degrees Fahrenheit), with moderate wind speeds (approximately 4 miles per hour). Measured noise levels ranged from 65.3 to 93.4 dBA Leq. The sources of peak noise are car honking nearby and traffic along roadway. Noise monitoring equipment used for the ambient noise survey consisted of a Brüel & Kjær Hand-held Analyzer Type 2250 equipped with a Type 4189 pre-polarized microphone. The monitoring equipment complies with applicable requirements of the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) for Type I (precision) sound level meters. Refer to Appendix E, Noise and Vibration Assessmentfor the results of the field measurement. 8 California Department of Transportation, Technical Noise Supplement to the Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol, September 2013.

Rusnak Porsche Dealership Project _______________ Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration

Discussion:
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? The Noise Element is a comprehensive program to limit the exposure of the community to excessive noise levels. The Noise Element establishes guidelines for controlling both construction and operational noise in the City. For operational noise standards, the City identifies noise-sensitive land uses and noise sources with the intent of separating them.

Construction Noise Impacts
Construction of the proposed Project would occur over approximately 19 months and would include demolition, grading, building construction, paving, and architectural coating phases. Groundborne noise and other types of construction-related noise impacts would typically occur during excavation activities of the grading phase. This phase of construction has the potential to create the highest levels of noise.

Typical noise levels generated by construction equipment are shown in Table XIII-4, Maximum Noise Levels Generated by Typical Construction Equipment. It should be noted that the noise levels identified in Table XIII-4 are maximum sound levels (Lmax), which are the highest individual sound occurring at an individual time period. Operating cycles for these types of construction equipment may involve one or two minutes of full power operation followed by three to four minutes at lower power settings. Other primary sources of acoustical disturbance would be due to random incidents, which would last less than one minute (such as placing down large pieces of equipment or the hydraulic movement of machinery lifts).

TABLE XIII-4. MAXIMUM NOISE LEVELS GENERATED BY TYPICAL CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT Type of Equipment
Acoustical Use
Factor1
Reference Lmax at 50
Feet (dBA)
Lmax at 60 Feet
(dBA)
Lmax at 100 Feet
(dBA)
Concrete Saw 20 90 76 72
Crane 16 81 76 72
Concrete Mixer Truck 40 79 77 73
Backhoe 40 78 88 84
Dozer 40 82 77 73
Excavator 40 81 80 76
Forklift 40 78 76 72
Paver 50 77 79 75
Roller 20 80 83 79
Tractor 40 84 77 73
Water Truck 40 80 75 71
Grader 40 85 78 74
General Industrial Equipment 50 85 82 78
Note: Lmax = maximum noise levels; dBA = A-weighted decibel Acoustical Use Factor (percent): Estimates the fraction of time each piece of construction equipment is operating at full power (i.e., its loudest condition) during a construction operation.

Source: Federal Highway Administration, Roadway Construction Noise Model (FHWA-HEP-05-054), January 2006.

The nearest sensitive receptor is a hotel (Super 8 by Wyndham) located approximately 60 feet west of the Project site. This sensitive receptor may be exposed to elevated noise levels during Project construction.

Rusnak Porsche Dealership Project _______________ Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration

However, the Project would adhere to the City’s Noise Ordinance governing hours of construction and noise levels generated by construction equipment (Municipal Code Chapters 9.36.070 and 9.36.080). In accordance with these regulations, construction activities would be limited to hours from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Monday through Friday and 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays for projects located within 500 feet of a residential area; construction activities are not allowed on Sundays or holidays. Municipal Code Section 9.36.080, Construction Equipment, prohibits operations of any powered construction equipment if the operation of such equipment emits noise in excess of 85 dBA within a radius of 100 feet. Due to geometric spreading, these noise levels would diminish with distance from the construction site at a rate of approximately 6 dBA per doubling of distance; refer to Table XIII-4.

As seen in Table XIII-4, the loudest piece of equipment would operate at a maximum noise level of 84 dBA at 100 feet from the source. Therefore, construction noise levels would not exceed the City’s Noise Ordinance threshold of 85 dBA at 100 feet. Compliance with the City’s Noise Ordinance would ensure the Project would be consistent with the City’s General Plan Noise Element Policy 7b through Policy 7d and the impact associated with construction noise would be considered less than significant.

Long-Term Operational Noise Impacts
Off-Site Mobile Noise
According to the Highway Traffic Noise Analysis and Abatement Policy and Guidance, a doubling of traffic volumes would result in a 3 dB increase in traffic noise levels, which is barely detectable by the human ear.9
Based on the Traffic Impact Analysis, the proposed Project would generate up to net 1,057 daily trips; refer to Appendix F.
10 As shown in Table XIII-5, Existing and Project Traffic Volumes, the Project’s trip generation would not double existing traffic volumes along Sunnyslope Avenue, Sierra Madre Villa Avenue, Madre Street, Walnut Street, Foothills Boulevard, Colorado Boulevard or San Gabriel Boulevard.

Therefore, the Project would not cause a perceptible increase in traffic noise along local roadways and impacts would be less than significant.

TABLE XIII-5. EXISTING AND PROJECT TRAFFIC VOLUMES
Segment
Existing
Daily Trips1
Project
Daily Trips
Doubling of
Traffic Volumes?
North-South
San Gabriel Blvd north of Foothill Blvd 22,260 641 No
San Gabriel Blvd between Foothill Blvd & Walnut St 22,730 897 No San Gabriel Blvd between Walnut St & Colorado Blvd 22,340 0 No San Gabriel Blvd south of Colorado Blvd 24,100 256 No
Sunnyslope Ave between Walnut St & Colorado Blvd 1,140 769 No Sunnyslope Ave south of Colorado Blvd 990 0 No
Sierra Madre Villa Ave north of I-210 WB Ramps 25,260 128 No Sierra Madre Villa Ave between I-210 WB & EB Ramps 23,800 320 No 9 U.S. Department of Transportation, Highway Traffic Noise Analysis and Abatement Policy and Guidance, updated August 24, 2017, https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environMent/noise/regulations_and_guidance/polguide/polguide02.cfm, accessed April 5, 2022.
10 Net trips mean the trips generated by the proposed Project over the existing condition.

Rusnak Porsche Dealership Project _______________ Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration

Sierra Madre Villa Ave between I-210 EB Ramps & Colorado Blvd 21,910 513 No Madre St south of Colorado Blvd 12,800 0 No
East-West
Foothill Blvd west of San Gabriel Blvd 17,010 256 No
Foothill Blvd east of San Gabriel Blvd 20,550 0 No
Walnut St west of San Gabriel Blvd 5,400 128 No
Walnut St between San Gabriel Blvd & Sunnyslope Ave 4,700 1,025 No Walnut St east of Sunnyslope Ave 4,380 1,025 No
Colorado Blvd west of San Gabriel Blvd 18,530 384 No
Colorado Blvd between San Gabriel Blvd & Sunnyslope Ave 17,960 641 No Colorado Blvd between Sunnyslope Ave & Sierra Madre Villa Ave 18,700 897 No Colorado Blvd east of Sierra Madre Villa Ave 19,430 384 No Notes:

1. Existing Daily Trips are expressed as average daily trips (ADT) along each segment.

Sources: Based on traffic data from the 2915 East Colorado Porsche Transportation Impact Analysis Outside CEQA Evaluation Final Report, prepared by Iteris Incorporation, February 1, 2022.

Stationary Noise
Stationary noise sources associated with the proposed Project would include mechanical equipment and parking activities. These noise sources are typically intermittent and short in duration and would be comparable to existing sources of noise experienced in the site vicinity. All stationary noise activities would be required to comply with the exterior and interior noise standards established in the Municipal Code, as well as the California Building Code requirements pertaining to noise attenuation.

Mechanical Equipment Noise
The Project would include heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) units located on the roof of the proposed two-story (36 feet in height) dealership building. HVAC systems can result in noise levels of approximately 66 dBA Leq at 3 feet from the source.11 The nearest sensitive receptor is located 60 feet to the west of the Project site. This would place the HVAC units approximately 36 feet up and 60 feet to the south of the nearest sensitive receptor. As such, the HVAC unit could be located as close as 70 feet from the nearest sensitive receptor.12 Therefore, noise levels from the HVAC units could reach approximately 39 dBA at the property line of the nearest sensitive receptor to the west and would not exceed the City’s “normally acceptable” exterior noise compatibility standard for residential uses and hotels (70 dBA CNEL).

In addition, the proposed exhaust vent fan would not generate noise levels in excess of 5 dBA over existing ambient noise level (65.3 dBA Leq; refer to Table XIII-3) in compliance with Section 9.36.090, Machinery, Equipment, Fans, and Air Conditioning, of the City’s Noise Ordinance. Thus, the proposed Project would not result in significant noise impacts to nearby sensitive receptors from stationary noise sources (i.e., HVAC units and exhaust vent fan). Additionally, all stationary noise levels from the proposed Project would 11 Elliott H. Berger, Rick Neitzel, and Cynthia A. Kladden, Noise Navigator Sound Level Database with Over 1700 Measurement Values, June 26, 2015.
12 The Pythagorean theorem allows individuals to calculate the actual distance between a suspended object and a starting point.

In this case, the starting point would be the closest sensitive receptor located approximately 36 feet to the north (side a) of the HVAC unit and the suspended object is the HVAC unit, located 60 feet up (side b). By plugging these values into the equation, we can calculate the hypotenuse (side c), or the distance between the HVAC unit and the sensitive receptor.

Rusnak Porsche Dealership Project _______________ Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration

comply with the City’s noise compatibility standard and Noise Ordinance. Impacts in this regard would be less than significant.

Parking Areas
Traffic associated with parking lots is typically not of sufficient volume to exceed community noise standards, which are based on a time-averaged scale such as the CNEL scale. However, the instantaneous maximum sound levels generated by a car door slamming, engine starting up, and car pass-bys may be an annoyance to adjacent noise-sensitive receptors. Estimates of the maximum noise levels associated with some parking lot activities are presented in Table XIII-6, Typical Noise Levels Generated by Parking Lots.

Conversations in parking areas may also be an annoyance to adjacent sensitive receptors. Sound levels of speech typically range from 33 dBA at 48 feet for normal speech to 50 dBA at 50 feet for very loud speech.

TABLE XIII-6. TYPICAL NOISE LEVELS GENERATED BY PARKING LOTS Noise Source Maximum Noise Levels at 50 Feet from Source Car door slamming 61 dBA Leq
Car starting 60 dBA Leq
Car idling 53 dBA Leq
Source: Kariel, H. G., Noise in Rural Recreational Environments, Canadian Acoustics 19(5), 3-10, 1991.

The Project would provide 342 parking spaces within the Project site. As shown in Table XIII-6, parking lot noise levels could range between 53 dBA and 61 dBA at 50 feet. Since the parking noise levels would be instantaneous compared to the land use compatibility noise standards in the CNEL scale, which are averaged over time, actual noise levels over time resulting from parking lot activities would be far lower.

Further, parking lot noise currently occurs in the Project vicinity under existing conditions. Therefore, the proposed parking lot would not result in substantially greater noise levels than currently exist at the Project site, and the noise associated with on-site parking activities is not anticipated to exceed the City’s noise standards during operation. Impacts in this regard would be less than significant.

Finding of Significance: The impact would be less than significant, and no mitigation measures are necessary.
b) Would the project expose persons to or generate excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise?
Construction Vibration Impacts
Project construction can generate varying degrees of groundborne vibration, depending on the construction procedure and the construction equipment used. Operation of some heavy-duty construction equipment generates vibrations that spread through the ground and diminish in amplitude with distance from the source. The effect on buildings located in the vicinity of the construction site often varies depending on soil type, ground strata, and construction characteristics of the receiver building(s).

The results from vibration can range from no perceptible effects at the lowest vibration levels, to low rumbling sounds and perceptible vibration at moderate levels, to slight damage at the highest levels.

Groundborne vibrations from construction activities rarely reach levels that damage structures.

The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) has published standard vibration velocities for construction equipment operations. The types of construction vibration impact include human annoyance and building Rusnak Porsche Dealership Project _______________ Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration

damage. Human annoyance occurs when construction vibration rises significantly above the threshold of human perception for extended periods of time. Building damage can be cosmetic or structural. For most residential structures that are non-engineered timber and masonry buildings, the FTA architectural damage criterion for continuous vibrations is 0.2 in/sec. Typical vibration produced by construction equipment is illustrated in Table XIII-7, Typical Vibration Levels for Construction Equipment.

TABLE XIII-7. TYPICAL VIBRATION LEVELS FOR CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT Equipment
Approximate peak particle velocity at 25 feet
(inches/second)1
Approximate peak particle velocity at 17 feet
(inches/second)1
Large bulldozer 0.089 0.1587
Loaded trucks 0.076 0.1355
Small bulldozer 0.003 0.0054
Jackhammer 0.035 0.0624
Notes:

1. Calculated using the following formula:

PPV equip = PPVref x (25/D)1.5
where: PPV (equip) = the peak particle velocity in in/sec of the equipment adjusted for the distance PPV (ref) = the reference vibration level in in/sec from Table 7-4 of the FTA Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual.

D = the distance from the equipment to the receiver
Source: Federal Transit Administration, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual, Table 7-4 Vibration Source Levels for Construction Equipment, September 2018.

Groundborne vibration decreases rapidly with distance. As indicated in Table XIII-7, based on the FTA data, vibration velocities from typical heavy construction equipment operations that would be used during construction range from 0.003 to 0.21 inch/second PPV at 25 feet from the source of activity. The nearest structure is located approximately 17 feet to the east of the Project site. As shown in Table XIII-7, the vibration velocities at the nearest structure ranges from 0.0054 to 0.1587 inch/second PPV. As such, Project construction would not exceed the 0.2 inch/second PPV significance threshold and result in significant vibration impacts to the nearest structure. Less than significant impact would occur in this regard.

Operational Vibration Impacts
Operation of the Project would not include or require equipment, facilities, or activities that would result in perceptible groundborne vibration. According to the FTA, it is unusual for vibration from sources such as buses and trucks to be perceptible, even in locations close to major roads. As such, it can be reasonably inferred that Project operations would not create perceptible vibration impacts to the nearest sensitive receptors. A less than significant impact would occur in this regard.

Finding of Significance: The impact would be less than significant, and no mitigation measures are necessary.
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?
The nearest public use airport to the Project site is the San Gabriel Valley Airport (previously known as El Monte Airport) which lies approximately five miles to the southeast of the Project site. This airport is open Rusnak Porsche Dealership Project _______________ Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration

to the public for use and owned and operated by the County of Los Angeles.13 According to the Airport Influence Area of El Monte Airport, the Project site is not located within the San Gabriel Valley Airport CNEL contours. Additionally, the Project site is not in the vicinity of a private airstrip. Therefore, no impact related to airport land use compatibility would occur.

Finding of Significance: No impact would occur and no mitigation measures are necessary.

XIV. POPULATION AND HOUSING
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
XIV. POPULATION AND HOUSING -- Would the project:
a) Induce substantial unplanned population
growth in an area, either directly (for example,
by proposing new homes and businesses) or
indirectly (for example, through extension of
roads or other infrastructure)?




b) Displace substantial numbers of existing
people or housing, necessitating the
construction of replacement housing
elsewhere?




DISCUSSION:
a) Would the project induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (e.g., by proposing new homes and business) or indirectly (e.g., through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
The proposed Project would involve the demolition of the existing commercial buildings and construction of a dealership building and a car wash building. No residential uses would be demolished or constructed as part of the Project. As such, the Project would not directly generate a new residential population that would contribute to population growth in the vicinity or City.

With regard to employment during construction, there is not anticipated to be any substantial population growth in the Project area as a result of construction job opportunities created by the proposed Project.

The work required to construct the proposed Project is expected to be supplied by the substantial construction workforce that exists within the region and would not require additional facilities to house construction workers. During Project operation, the new commercial uses on-site are estimated to generate 31 employees, as identified in the Project Transportation Impact Analysis (Appendix F). While some new employees may be anticipated to relocate to the Project vicinity, the City would have a sufficient existing employment base to occupy the new employment opportunities generated by the Project. Therefore, the proposed Project would not substantially induce population growth due to the increase in on-site employees. Furthermore, the Project site is located in a developed urban area with an 13 Los Angeles County Airport Land Use Commission, Los Angeles County Airport Land Use Plan, December 1, 2004, http://planning.lacounty.gov/assets/upl/data/pd_alup.pdf, accessed February 3, 2022.

Rusnak Porsche Dealership Project _______________ Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration

established roadway network and in-place infrastructure, and the Project development would not require extending or improving infrastructure.

Therefore, the Project would not induce substantial population growth either directly or indirectly, and impacts would be less than significant.

Finding of Significance: The impact would be less than significant, and no mitigation measures are necessary.
b) Would the project displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
The proposed Project would involve the demolition of the existing commercial buildings. As no residential uses currently exist on the Project site, the Project would not result in the displacement of any persons or housing necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. Therefore, the Project would not result in impacts related to displacement of people or housing.

Finding of Significance: No impacts would occur, and no mitigation measures are necessary.

XV. PUBLIC SERVICES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
XV. PUBLIC SERVICES
a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services:
i) Fire protection?



ii) Police protection?



iii) Schools?



iv) Parks?



v) Other public facilities?



DISCUSSION:
a. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities or a need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the public services:
(i) Fire Protection
Fire protection services are currently provided to the Project site by the Pasadena Fire Department (PFD).

The nearest fire stations to the proposed Project site are State 37, located at 3430 E. Foothill Boulevard, approximately 0.57 miles from the Project site; Station 32, located at 2424 E. Villa Street, approximately Rusnak Porsche Dealership Project _______________ Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration

0.69 miles from the Project site; and Station 34, located at 1360 E. Del Mar Boulevard, approximately 1.84 miles from the Project site.14
The proposed Project would result in increased square footage of commercial uses and an increase in the number of employees on the Project site as compared with current conditions. However, the Project would not result in new uses that could not be served by existing PFD equipment and personnel.

Additionally, the Project designs would be required to comply with all current applicable city and state codes and ordinances related to fire safety. This includes the inclusion of safety and security features, such as fire sprinklers, alarm systems, and provision of adequate access for emergency vehicles. As such, the Project is not anticipated to affect fire protection demands to the extent that new or physically altered fire facilities would be required. Impacts on fire protection services are anticipated to be less than significant.

Finding of Significance: The impact would be less than significant, and no mitigation measures are necessary.
(ii) Police Protection
Police protection services are provided to the Project site by the Pasadena Police Department (PPD). The PPD is currently divided into five services areas for police protection (West, Northwest, Central, East, and Midtown); the proposed Project is located within the East (Community Service Area 4) service area.

Starting in June 2022, the City of Pasadena is reconfiguring the Community Service Areas and the Project will be located in the South (Community Service Area 3).15 According to the crime statistics published by the PPD, there were a total 3,885 citywide service calls in 2020, with approximately 575 (15 percent) occurring in the East service area.16 (City of Pasadena Police Department 2020). The most prevalent offense in the East (Community Service 4) service area is theft, with 34 offenses or approximately 57 percent of all offenses (60 offenses) reported in this service area in May 2022 (City of Pasadena Police Department 2022). The nearest police station to the proposed Project site is located at 207 Garfield Avenue, approximately 3 miles from the Project site.

The proposed Project would increase the number of employees on the Project site through the construction of a new automotive dealership. Because the Project site has existing uses such as a commercial building, garage structure, and surface parking and there is an automotive dealership adjacent to the Project site, the Project would not create a unique land use that would result in new or expanded sources of crime. Therefore, the proposed Project would not require the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities or a need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for police services and impacts to police services would be less than significant. 14 Pasadena Fire Department. Pasadena Fire Stations. Available at https://www.cityofpasadena.net/fire/stations. 15 ColoradoBoulevard.net. November 11, 2021. “Pasadena Reconfigures Police Community Service Areas and Hires New Officers.” Available at https://www.coloradoboulevard.net/pasadena-reconfigures-police-community-service-areas-andhires-new-officers/ 16 Pasadena Police Department. 2021. Preliminary – Monthly Statistical Report – December 2020.

Rusnak Porsche Dealership Project _______________ Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration

Finding of Significance: The impact would be less than significant, and no mitigation measures are necessary.
(iii) Schools
The proposed Project is located entirely within the City, which is served by the Pasadena Unified School District (PUSD). The PUSD includes students starting at prekindergarten through twelfth grade. According to the most recent PUSD attendance boundary map, the Project site is served by several schools, including Willard Elementary School, 301 Madre Street, approximately 0.5 miles southeast of the Project site; McKinley School, 325 S. Oak Knoll Avenue, approximately 2.6 miles west; and Pasadena High School, 2925 E. Sierra Madre Boulevard approximately 1.0 mile north.17 The proposed Project would develop an automotive dealership building and would result in the increase of total number of employees by approximately 31 on the Project site as compared with current conditions. While most future employees are expected to commute, rather than relocate, based on a conservative assumption that 5 percent or 2 of the future employees would move to Pasadena, these future employees may have children who would attend school in the PUSD. Willard Elementary has a school capacity of 804, but currently has 592 students (AA 2016; IES 2021a). McKinley School has a school capacity of 1,792, but currently has 944 students (AA 2016; IES 2021b). Pasadena High School has a school capacity of 2,745, but currently has 1,858 students (AA 2016; 2021c). While there could be an increased demand for school facilities associated with the proposed Project, the proposed Project is consistent with the City’s General Plan and the schools most likely to experience an increase in enrollment have more than sufficient capacity. Furthermore, a fee is collected by the City's Building Official for PUSD on each residential unit that is constructed as per California Government Code Section 65996. This fee is intended to constitute full and complete mitigation for potential impacts to schools caused by development. For these reasons, the proposed Project would not require the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities or a need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios for schools and impacts to schools would be less than significant.

Finding of Significance: The impact would be less than significant, and no mitigation measures are necessary.
(iv) Parks
As the Project does not involve residential development or other effects to increase housing growth, and the Project, with a conservatively assumed additional 2 employees who would relocate to Pasadena, would not significantly increase demands for park facilities, the Project would not affect the City’s parkland to population ratio. The City of Pasadena Green Space, Recreation, and Parks Element (City of Pasadena 2007) identifies that the City’s parks system consists of approximately 338 acres of land designated as parks and approximately 502 acres of land designated as open space. Additionally, Desiderio Neighborhood Park, a new 3.8-acre park, has subsequently been opened. For these reasons, the proposed Project would not require the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities or a need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant 17 Pasadena Unified School District. 2021. Our Schools PUSD School Guide.

Rusnak Porsche Dealership Project _______________ Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration

environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios for parks and impacts to parks would be less than significant.

Finding of Significance: The impact would be less than significant, and no mitigation measures are necessary.
(v) Other Public Facilities
The Pasadena Public Library has ten locations throughout the City. The closest branch, located at 140 South Altadena Drive, is 0.46 miles southwest of the Project site (City of Pasadena n.d.). As stated above, the Project would not involve residential development or significant growth-inducing effects that have the potential to increase the demand for other public services, such as libraries and community centers, to the extent where new or physically altered facilities would be required. For these reasons, the proposed Project would not result in any significant impacts on other public facilities.

Finding of Significance: The impact would be less than significant, and no mitigation measures are necessary.

XVI. RECREATION
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
XVI. RECREATION
a) Would the project increase the use of existing
neighborhood and regional parks or other
recreational facilities such that substantial
physical deterioration of the facility would
occur or be accelerated?




b) Does the project include recreational facilities
or require the construction or expansion of
recreational facilities which might have an
adverse physical effect on the environment?




DISCUSSION:
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?
The existing Project site does not provide recreational use. The nearest recreational facility is the Eaton Blanche Park, approximately 1,800 feet southeast of the Project site, located at 3100 East Del Mar Boulevard.18 As stated above, construction of the automotive dealership would not involve residential development, nor would the Project result in significant population growth, as discussed in Section XIV; thus, it would not generate a direct demand on recreational facilities. The proposed Project would not 18 City of Pasadena. “Eaton-Blanche Park.” Available at https://www.cityofpasadena.net/parks-and-rec/parks/eaton-blanchepark/.

Rusnak Porsche Dealership Project _______________ Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration

significantly 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; therefore, impacts would be less than significant.

Finding of Significance: The impact would be less than significant, and no mitigation measures are necessary.
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities that might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? As stated above, the Project is not anticipated to substantially increase the demand on municipal parks and recreation facilities in the City, thus requiring construction or expansion of recreational facilities. The proposed Project does not involve, and would not require, the construction or expansion of off-site recreational facilities that might have an adverse physical effect on the environment; therefore, impacts would be less than significant.

Finding of Significance: The impact would be less than significant, and no mitigation measures are necessary.

XVII. TRANSPORTATION
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
XVII. TRANSPORTATION: Would the project:
a) Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy
addressing the circulation system, including transit,
roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities?




b) Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with
CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision
(b)?




c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric
design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous
intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm
equipment)?




d) Result in inadequate emergency access?



DISCUSSION:

The Pasadena Department of Transportation (DOT) reviews a proposed project’s transportation impacts by estimating incremental changes in Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) per capita and Vehicle Trips (VT) per capita; assessing proximity and quality of the bicycle and transit networks; and evaluating pedestrian accessibility. The DOT prepared a CEQA Evaluation Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA) for the proposed Project on December 27, 2021. The following sections summarize and incorporate by reference the information provided in the CEQA Evaluation TIA, which is included as Appendix F of this document.

Rusnak Porsche Dealership Project _______________ Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration

a) Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities?
City of Pasadena General Plan – Mobility Element, 2015
The Mobility Element guides the continuing development of the transportation system to support planned growth (City of Pasadena 2015c). Development within the City changes the use of the City’s transportation systems, including demand for local and regional roadways. The purpose of the Mobility Element is to provide measures that support implementation of the mobility-related Guiding Principle of the General Plan: Pasadena will be a city where people can circulate without cars. In addition, the Mobility Element addresses state requirements designed to evaluate the transportation needs of the community within the context of the region and to present a comprehensive plan to meet those needs. The vision relies upon an integrated and multimodal transportation system that provides choices and accessibility for everyone living and working in the City. Key strategies to achieve this include promoting public transit services, parking strategies, bicycle facilities, car-sharing programs and pedestrian components that are well coordinated and connected with a larger regional transportation system. The Mobility Element also provides three objectives with supportive policies:
 Objective 1: Enhance livability
 Objective 2: Encourage walking, biking, transit, and other alternatives to motor vehicles  Objective 3: Create a supportive climate for economic viability As detailed below in Issue XVII(b), the CEQA Evaluation TIA prepared for the Project evaluated transportation impacts based on per capita length, number of trips, proximity to bicycle and transit, and pedestrian accessibility, and concluded that the Project would not result in significant impacts based on such metrics. Since the metrics used in the CEQA Evaluation TIA reflect the objectives of the General Plan Mobility Element, the proposed Project would not conflict with the General Plan Mobility Element.

Accordingly, Project impacts related to the General Plan Mobility Element would be less than significant.

City of Pasadena, Short Range Transit Plan
The Pasadena DOT updated the Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP) in 2019 (City of Pasadena 2019). The SRTP guides five years of programming of transit service development and investments that support the policy goals for Pasadena Transit and Pasadena Dial-A-Ride.
19 The SRTP includes a series of recommendations
for Pasadena Transit service, including adding six buses to Pasadena Transit service, retaining additional weekend service on Pasadena Transit Route 31 (the route closest to the Project site), continuing to provide service on Sundays, and other recommended adjustments to service routes and hours. The proposed Project would not interfere or prevent the implementation of any of the SRTP recommendations, and would not conflict with the SRTP; therefore, impacts on the STRP would be less than significant. 19 Pasadena Transit is the City’s fixed-route bus service which provides six routes that travel throughout Pasadena, including service to the six Gold Line stations, commercial corridors, major business and employment areas, schools and colleges, parks, medical facilities, and dense residential areas. Pasadena Dial-A-Ride is a demand-response paratransit service for seniors and individuals with disabilities who are residents of Pasadena, San Marino, Altadena, and other adjacent unincorporated areas within the service area.

Rusnak Porsche Dealership Project _______________ Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration

City of Pasadena Municipal Code
Pasadena Municipal Code Section 10.64.020 requires certain development projects, including nonresidential projects that exceed 75,000 square feet, to incorporate a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Program Plan. Subject to conformance with program requirements approved by the City DOT, TDM Program Plans must be reviewed and approved by the Director of DOT prior to the issuance of a building permit and reviewed and approved annually. The TDM Program Plan would consist of measures influencing vehicle ridership, and information on monitoring, commitments, and enforcement.

In addition, the TDM Program Plan may include private vanpool operation, transit and vanpool fare subsidies, paid parking for employees, provision of subscription bus service, alternative work hours, capital improvements for transit services, reduction of parking fees for carpools and vanpools, bikeway linkages to established bicycle routes, or provision of an on-site employee transportation coordinator. As such, the proposed Project would prepare and request approval of a TDM Program Plan in accordance with the requirements. Furthermore, as detailed below in Issues XVII(c) and XVII(d), the Project would ensure that driveways and circulation would be designed in accordance with safety and engineering code requirements. In addition, during construction, the Project would coordinate construction traffic activities with DOT, as needed, to ensure that emergency access for the Pasadena Fire and Police Departments will be maintained. Therefore, the proposed Project would not conflict with Pasadena Municipal Code requirements related to the circulation system, and impacts would be less than significant.

Finding of Significance: The impact would be less than significant, and no mitigation measures are necessary.
b) Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b)?
On September 27, 2013, Governor Jerry Brown signed SB 743 into law. SB 743 required the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research to identify new criteria for evaluating transportation impacts under CEQA.

Pursuant to SB 743, CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b) was adopted in 2018 and establishes VMT as the primary metric for evaluating a project’s environmental impacts on the transportation system.

In accordance with the Mobility Element of the City’s General Plan and SB 743, the Pasadena DOT developed a set of performance measures and CEQA thresholds used to evaluate transportation impacts from new development. These performance measures and CEQA thresholds are contained in the Transportation Impact Analysis Current Practice & Guidelines (TIA Guidelines) (City of Pasadena 2015d).

The TIA Guidelines’ mobility performance measures assess the quality of walking, biking, transit, and vehicular travel in the City. Vehicular and multimodal performance measures are employed to evaluate system performance in reviewing new development projects. These include:
 Vehicle Miles Traveled per Capita
 Vehicle Trips per Capita
 Proximity and Quality of the Bicycle Network
 Proximity and Quality of the Transit Network
 Pedestrian Accessibility
Rusnak Porsche Dealership Project _______________ Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration

These performance measures align with the sustainability goals of the General Plan by evaluating the “efficiency” of projects by analyzing the per capita length and number of trips associated with changes in land use. As such, these measures assist in determining how to balance travel modes as well as understand the mobility needs of the community.

Using these guidelines, Pasadena DOT prepared a CEQA Evaluation TIA for the proposed Project on December 27, 2021, to analyze potential transportation related impacts of the proposed Project. The methods and findings of the TIA are described below.

VMT Per Capita
The VMT per Capita measure sums the miles traveled for trips within the City travel demand forecasting (TDF) model, which is based on the SCAG regional model. The VMT total considers 100 percent of the mileage of trips that begin and end within the City and 50 percent of the distance traveled for trips with one end outside of the City. The City’s VMT is then divided by the City’s total service population, which is defined as the population plus the number of jobs.

VT Per Capita
VT per Capita is a measure of motor VT associated with the City. The measure sums the trips with origins and destinations within the City as generated by the trip-based City Travel Demand Model. The regional VT is calculated by adding the VT associated with trips generated and attracted within City boundaries, and 50 percent of the VT associated with trips that either begin or end in the City but have one trip end outside of the City. The City’s VT is then divided by the City’s total service population.

Proximity and Quality of Bicycle Network
The Proximity and Quality of Bicycle Network provides a measure of the percent of the City’s service population within 0.25 miles of bicycle facilities. The bicycle facility types are aggregated into three hierarchy levels, obtained from the City’s (Draft) Bicycle Transportation Plan categories as shown in the following table:

TABLE XVII-1. BICYCLE FACILITIES HIERARCHY
Level Description Facilities Included
1 Advanced Facilities
Bike Paths
Multipurpose Paths
Cycle Tracks/Protected Bike Lanes
2 Dedicated Facilities
Buffered Bike Lanes
Bike Lanes
Bike Boulevards
3 Basic Facilities
Bike Routes
Enhanced Bike Routes
Emphasized Bikeways
For each bicycle facility level, a 0.25-mile network distance buffer is calculated, and the total service population within the buffer is identified.

Proximity and Quality of Transit Network
The Proximity and Quality of Transit Network provides a measure of the percent of the City’s service population within 0.25 miles of each of three transit facility types, as defined in Table XVII-2.

Rusnak Porsche Dealership Project _______________ Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration

TABLE XVII-2. TRANSIT FACILITIES HIERARCHY
Level Facilities Included
1 Includes all Gold (L) Line stops as well as corridors with transit service, whether it be a single route or multiple routes combined, with headways of five minutes or less during the peak periods. 2 Includes corridors with transit headways of between six and 15 minutes in peak periods. 3 Includes corridors with transit headways of 16 minutes or more at peak periods.

For each facility level, a 0.25-mile network distance buffer is calculated, and the total service population within the buffer is identified.

The City can improve the measures of Transit Proximity and Quality by reducing headways on existing transit routes, by expanding transit routes to cover new areas, and by encouraging residential and commercial development to occur in areas with an already high-quality transit service.

Pedestrian Accessibility Score
The Proximity and Quality of Pedestrian Environment score provides a measure of the average walkability in the Transportation Analysis Zone (TAZ) surrounding Pasadena residents, based on a Pedestrian Accessibility metric. The pedestrian proximity metric is a simple count of the number of land use types accessible to a Pasadena resident or employee in a given TAZ within a 5-minute walk. The ten categories of land uses are:
 Retail
 Personal Services
 Restaurant
 Entertainment
 Office (including private sector and government offices)  Medical (including medical office and hospital uses)
 Culture (including churches, religious and other cultural uses)  Park and Open Space
 School (including elementary and high schools)
 College
Table XVII-3 summarizes the City’s Metrics for determining CEQA Thresholds:

Rusnak Porsche Dealership Project _______________ Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration

TABLE XVII-3. CITY OF PASADENA CEQA THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE Metric Description Impact Threshold

1. VMT Per Capita
Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) in the City of
Pasadena per service population (population +
jobs)
An increase over existing Citywide VMT per
Capita of 22.6

2. VT Per Capita Vehicle Trips (VT) in the City of Pasadena per service population (population + jobs)
An increase over existing Citywide VT per
Capita of 2.8

3. Proximity and
Quality of Bicycle
Network
Percent of service population (population + jobs)
within 0.25 miles of bicycle facility types
Any decrease in existing citywide 31.7% of
service population (population + jobs) within

0.25 miles of Level 1 & 2 bike facilities

4. Proximity and
Quality of Transit
Network
Percent of service population (population + jobs)
located within 0.25 miles of transit facility types
Any decrease in existing citywide 66.6% of
service population (population + jobs) within

0.25 miles of Level 1 & 2 transit facilities

5. Pedestrian
Accessibility
The Pedestrian Accessibility Score uses the mix
of destinations, and a network-based walkshed
to evaluate walkability
Any decrease in the Citywide Pedestrian
Accessibility Score
Proposed projects are analyzed using the City’s calibrated TDF model, which is built on SCAG’s regional model. The City’s TDF model uses TransCAD software to simulate traffic levels and travel patterns for the City of Pasadena. The program consists of input files that summarize the City’s land uses, street network, travel characteristics, and other key factors. Using these data, the model performs a series of calculations to determine the number of trips generated, the beginning and ending location of each trip, and the route taken by the trip. To be deemed accurate for project transportation impact on the transportation system, a model must be calibrated to a year in which actual land use data and traffic volumes are available and well documented. The Pasadena TDF has been calibrated to 2013 base year conditions using actual traffic counts, Census data, and land use data compiled by City staff with land uses’ associated population and job increase estimates.

Projects with proposed land uses that are consistent with the General Plan and complementary to their surrounding land uses are expected to reduce the trip length associated with adjacent land uses, and/or increase the service population access to pedestrians, bicycles, and transit facilities if the project is within

0.25 miles of those facilities.

Table XVII-4 summarizes the following analyses of the proposed Project’s impacts on the transportation system using the calibrated TDF model. The results are based on the Project’s vehicular and non-vehicular trip making characteristics, trip length, interaction with other surrounding/citywide land uses, and the City’s transportation network.

TABLE XVII-4. TRANSPORTATION PERFORMANCE METRICS SUMMARY Transportation Performance Metrics
Significant Impact
Cap (existing)
Incremental Change
(existing + project)
Significant
Impact?
VMT per Capita >22.6 –26.0 No
VT per Capita >2.8 –4.0 No
Proximity and Quality of Bicycle Network <31.7% 31.7 No Proximity and Quality of Transit Network <66.6% 66.7 No Pedestrian Accessibility <3.88 3.88 No
Rusnak Porsche Dealership Project _______________ Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration

As shown in Table XVII-4, the CEQA Evaluation TIA found that the proposed Project would not exceed any of the CEQA thresholds outlined in the City’s guidelines. Impacts to VMT per capita, VT per capita, and the City’s bicycle, transit, and pedestrian networks would not be significant.

Therefore, the proposed Project would not conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b), and impacts would be less than significant.

Finding of Significance: The impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation measures are necessary.
c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? The Project proposes the development of an automotive dealership and a car wash within an urbanized area. The proposed uses would be compatible with the existing surrounding uses, which include another automotive dealership immediately to the east, commercials uses to the south and north, and mixed uses to the west. The existing streets surrounding the Project site are configured in a traditional street grid and do not include potentially hazardous geometric features. As described above, the Project would vacate the dead-end section of Nina Street and remove all existing driveways except for one located along North Sunnyslope Avenue south of Nina Street. The Project would include one new driveway along Walnut Street and another along Colorado Boulevard. Within the site, a proposed ramp would allow vehicles to access the second level of the automotive dealership building. The design of the proposed driveways would be subject to the safety and engineering requirements of the City of Pasadena Municipal Code with regard to safe design sight distances, width and size, and the need for vehicle exit alerts. In addition, the internal vehicular circulation routes and parking would be designed in compliance with the City of Pasadena Municipal Code to ensure safe design. Furthermore, the vacation of Nina Street would not result in a geometric design feature such as sharp curves or a dangerous intersection as the Project site at buildout would be rectangular and configured as part of the traditional street grid. Therefore, the proposed Project would not substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature or incompatible uses, and no impacts would occur.

Finding of Significance: No impacts would occur, and no mitigation measures are necessary. d) Would the project result in inadequate emergency access? A potentially significant impact would occur if a project resulted in inadequate emergency access. During construction, the Project would coordinate construction traffic activities with Pasadena DOT, as needed, to ensure that emergency access for the Pasadena Fire and Police Departments will be maintained. During operation of the Project, site evacuation plans and procedures, emergency access ingress and egress points, and fire lanes would be provided to the satisfaction of the Pasadena Fire and Police Departments.

Ingress and egress would also comply with all building, fire, and safety codes with final plans subject to review and approval by the City’s Public Works and Transportation departments, the Building Division, and the Fire Department. No permanent lane closures or obstructions that could impede emergency response to or from the Project site from surrounding streets would occur with the proposed Project.

Therefore, the proposed Project’s impacts related to emergency access would be less than significant.

Finding of Significance: The impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation measures are necessary.

Rusnak Porsche Dealership Project _______________ Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration

XVIII. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
XVIII. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES:
a) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code §21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American Tribe, and that is:
i) Listed or eligible for listing in the
California Register of Historical
Resources, or in a local register of
historical resources as defined in Public
Resources Code §5020.1(k), or




ii) A resource determined by the lead
agency, in its discretion and supported by
substantial evidence, to be significant
pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision
(c) of Public Resources Code §5024.1. In
applying the criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code
§5024.1, the lead agency shall consider
the significance of the resource to a
California Native American tribe?



BACKGROUND
As described in the Project cultural and historic evaluation (Appendix C), the Project area is within the boundaries of Gabrielino Indians’ territory. The name “Gabrielino” was given by the Spanish to the Indians that lived within the boundaries of the Mission San Gabriel Arcángel. Generally, their territory included all the Los Angeles Basin, parts of the Santa Ana and Santa Monica Mountains, along the coast from Aliso Creek in the south to Topanga Canyon in the north, and San Clemente, San Nicolas, and Santa Catalina Islands. The Gabrielino lived in autonomous villages often connected by trails, utilizing drainages such as the Los Angeles and San Gabriel Rivers. Each village had access to hunting, collecting, and fishing areas.

The nearest water source is located approximately 0.12 miles east of the Project area.

DISCUSSION:
a)i) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code §21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American Tribe, and that is 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 §5020.1(k)? Michael Baker submitted a request to the SCCIC on January 10, 2022. Based on the record searches and consultation with Native American tribes culturally affiliated with the Project area (see below analysis Rusnak Porsche Dealership Project _______________ Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration

under Issue (a)ii), there are no known tribal cultural resources, as defined in Public Resources Code Section 21074, on the Project site or immediate vicinity. There would be no impact related to documented tribal cultural resources, and no mitigation would be required.

Finding of Significance: The Project would result in no impact, and no mitigation measures are necessary. a)ii) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code §21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American Tribe, and that is a resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code §5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code §5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.

Pursuant to AB 52, a lead agency is required to consult with a California Native American tribe that is traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area of the proposed Project if the tribe requested to the lead agency, in writing, to be informed by the lead agency of proposed projects in that geographic area. Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080.3.1(d), on November 18, 2021, two tribes (Gabrielino Tongva Tribe and Gabrielino Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation [Kizh Nation]) who have requested to be informed of proposed projects by City of Pasadena, were sent AB 52 formal notification of the proposed Project. The Kizh Nation accepted the request for consultation and on January 21, 2022, the City participated in the consultation via phone conference with the Kizh Nation, represented by Chairman Andrew Salas and Mr. Matthew Teutimez. In a follow-up email dated January 28, 2022, the Kizh Nation transmitted documents, information, and their recommended mitigation measures regarding the potential sensitivity of cultural resources related to the Kizh Nation, and requested that the documents and information remain confidential. The email requested that the City provide written notification stating whether and to what extent the proposed mitigation would be included for the Project so that the parties may conclude consultation, or if the requested mitigation is not agreeable so that the consultation may continue. The City reviewed and considered the information provided and mitigation required by the Kizh Nation, and accepted the provided mitigation measures.

While no tribal cultural resources have been identified on the Project site, there is the potential that previously unknown tribal cultural resources could be uncovered during construction, which may result in a significant impact to a tribal cultural resource. Therefore, with implementation of Mitigation Measures MM TCR-1, MM TCR-2, and MM TCR-3 for Native American monitoring, unanticipated human remains, and procedures for burials and funerary remains, impacts would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures
The following mitigation measures shall be implemented to address the potential for the proposed Project to significantly impact tribal cultural resources.

MM TCR-1: Retain a Native American Monitor Prior to Commencement of Ground-Disturbing Activities.

A. The Project applicant/lead agency shall retain a Native American Monitor from or approved by the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation. The monitor shall be retained prior to the commencement of any “ground-disturbing activity” for the subject Project at all Project locations (i.e., both on-site and any off-site locations that Rusnak Porsche Dealership Project _______________ Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration

are included in the Project description/definition and/or required in connection with the Project, such as public improvement work). “Ground-disturbing activity” shall include, but is not limited to, demolition, pavement removal, potholing, auguring, grubbing, tree removal, boring, grading, excavation, drilling, and trenching.

B. A copy of the executed monitoring agreement shall be submitted to the lead agency prior to the earlier of the commencement of any ground-disturbing activity, or the issuance of any permit necessary to commence a ground-disturbing activity.

C. The monitor will complete daily monitoring logs that will describe the relevant grounddisturbing activities, the type of construction activities performed, locations of grounddisturbing activities, soil types, cultural-related materials, and any other facts, conditions, materials, or discoveries of significance to the Tribe. Monitor logs will identify and describe any discovered resources including but not limited to Native American cultural and historical artifacts, remains, places of significance, etc., (collectively, tribal cultural resources, or “TCR”), as well as any discovered Native American (ancestral) human remains and burial goods. Copies of monitor logs will be provided to the Project applicant/lead agency upon written request to the Tribe.

D. On-site tribal monitoring shall conclude upon the latter of the following (1) written confirmation to the Kizh from a designated point of contact for the Project applicant/lead agency that all ground-disturbing activities and phases that may involve ground-disturbing activities on the Project site or in connection with the Project are complete; or (2) a determination and written notification by the Kizh to the Project applicant/lead agency that no future, planned construction activity and/or development/construction phase at the Project site possesses the potential to impact Kizh TCRs.

MM TCR-2: Unanticipated Discovery of Human Remains and Associated Funerary Objects A. Native American human remains are defined in Public Resources Code 5097.98 (d)(1) as an inhumation or cremation, and in any state of decomposition or skeletal completeness. Funerary objects, called associated grave goods in Public Resources Code Section 5097.98, are also to be treated according to this statute.

B. If Native American human remains and/or grave goods are discovered or recognized on the Project site, then all construction activities shall immediately cease. Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 dictates that any discoveries of human skeletal material shall be immediately reported to the County coroner and all ground-disturbing activities shall immediately halt and shall remain halted until the coroner has determined the nature of the remains. If the coroner recognizes the human remains to be those of a Native American or has reason to believe they are Native American, he or she shall contact, by telephone within 24 hours, the Native American Heritage Commission, and Public Resources Code Section 5097.98 shall be followed.

C. Human remains and grave/burial goods shall be treated alike per California Public Resources Code Section 5097.98(d)(1) and (2).

Rusnak Porsche Dealership Project _______________ Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration

D. Construction activities may resume in other parts of the Project site at a minimum of 200 feet away from discovered human remains and/or burial goods, if the Kizh determines in its sole discretion that resuming construction activities at that distance is acceptable and provides the Project manager express consent of that determination (along with any other mitigation measures the Kizh monitor and/or archaeologist deems necessary). (CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5[f])
E. Preservation in place (i.e., avoidance) is the preferred manner of treatment for discovered human remains and/or burial goods. Any historic archaeological material that is not Native American in origin (non-TCR) shall be curated at a public, nonprofit 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.

F. Any discovery of human remains/burial goods shall be kept confidential to prevent further disturbance.

TCR-3: Procedures for Burials and Funerary Remains:

A. As the most likely descendant (“MLD”), the Koo-nas-gna Burial Policy shall be implemented. To the Tribe, the term “human remains” encompasses more than human bones. In ancient as well as historic times, tribal traditions included, but were not limited to, the preparation of the soil for burial, the burial of funerary objects with the deceased, and the ceremonial burning of human remains.

B. If the discovery of human remains includes four or more burials, the discovery location shall be treated as a cemetery and a separate treatment plan shall be created.

C. The prepared soil and cremation soils are to be treated in the same manner as bone fragments that remain intact. Associated funerary objects are objects that, as part of the death rite or ceremony of a culture, are reasonably believed to have been placed with individual human remains either at the time of death or later; other items made exclusively for burial purposes or to contain human remains can also be considered as associated funerary objects. Cremations will either be removed in bulk or by means as necessary to ensure complete recovery of all sacred materials.

D. In the case where discovered human remains cannot be fully documented and recovered on the same day, the remains will be covered with muslin cloth and a steel plate that can be moved by heavy equipment placed over the excavation opening to protect the remains. If this type of steel plate is not available, a 24-hour guard should be posted outside of working hours. The Tribe will make every effort to recommend diverting the Project and keeping the remains in situ and protected. If the Project cannot be diverted, it may be determined that burials will be removed.

E. In the event preservation in place is not possible despite good faith efforts by the Project applicant/developer and/or landowner, before ground-disturbing activities may resume on the Project site, the landowner shall arrange a designated site location Rusnak Porsche Dealership Project _______________ Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration

within the footprint of the Project for the respectful reburial of the human remains and/or ceremonial objects.

F. Each occurrence of human remains and associated funerary objects will be stored using opaque cloth bags. All human remains, funerary objects, sacred objects and objects of cultural patrimony will be removed to a secure container on-site if possible.

These items should be retained and reburied within six months of recovery. The site of reburial/repatriation shall be on the Project site but at a location agreed upon between the Tribe and the landowner at a site to be protected in perpetuity. There shall be no publicity regarding any cultural materials recovered.

G. Upon discovery of any TCRs, all construction activities in the immediate vicinity of the discovery shall cease (i.e., not less than the surrounding 50 feet) and shall not resume until the discovered TCR has been fully assessed by the Kizh monitor and/or Kizh archaeologist. The Kizh will recover and retain all discovered TCRs in the form and/or manner the Tribe deems appropriate, in the Tribe’s sole discretion, and for any purpose the Tribe deems appropriate, including for educational, cultural and/or historic purposes.

Rusnak Porsche Dealership Project _______________ Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration

XIX. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
XIX. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS: Would the project
a) Require or result in the relocation or construction
of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment
or stormwater drainage, electric power, natural
gas, or telecommunications facilities, the
construction or relocation of which could cause
significant environmental effects?




b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve
the project and reasonably foreseeable future
development during normal, dry and multiple dry
years??




c) 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?




d) Generate solid waste in excess of State or local
standards, or in excess of the capacity of local
infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment
of solid waste reduction goals?




e) Comply with federal, state, and local management
and reduction statutes and regulations related to
solid waste?




DISCUSSION:
a) Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or stormwater drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects? The proposed Project involves the construction and use of an automotive dealership with a service center, car wash building, and EV battery storage building totaling 65,360 square feet square feet, plus a surface parking lot on an existing 192,331 square foot (4.4 acre) developed property. The Project property has been developed with utilities and infrastructure, including potable water, sewer, electricity, natural gas, and telecommunications services, which currently serve the existing commercial building, garage, and parking uses. The Project, including the proposed service center and car wash, would increase the intensity of use at the site, which would be expected to result in an associated increased demand for potable water, sewer disposal, electricity, and telecommunications.

Water
As mentioned, potable water in the City is provided by PWP, which is owned and operated by the City.

PWP provides water service to an approximately 26-square-mile area that extends beyond the City Rusnak Porsche Dealership Project _______________ Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration

boundaries, encompassing the City of Pasadena and portions of Altadena, East Pasadena, and areas of unincorporated Los Angeles County. Over 15 percent of the total population served by PWP is located outside of the City (City of Pasadena 2020). PWP’s water supply consists of three main sources: local groundwater from the Raymond Basin, local surface water from the Arroyo Seco and Eaton Wash spread into the Raymond Basin, and imported water purchased from Metropolitan Water District. PWP supplies nearly 29,000 acre-feet per year (AFY) of potable water to customers each year, as of 2020, through over 500 miles of pipelines. The Project site is located in a developed and urbanized area, and is zoned General Industrial on its northern portion and General Commercial on its southern portion.

During the construction period, water is anticipated to be used for dust control during the initial earth disturbance and grading work, followed by water used for concrete mixing. The applicant has calculated that operation of the proposed Project would require an estimated total (i.e., gross) water demand of 2,624 gallons per day (gpd) for indoor and outdoor (i.e., landscaping) uses. The site is served with existing water infrastructure, including a water main on Sunnyslope Avenue that would supply water to the Project. PWP conducted a distribution system analysis in its Water Systems and Resources Plan (PWP 2020), which indicated that no current flow deficiencies have been identified in the Project area. PWP also modeled the distribution system capacity under future conditions, which considered projected land uses, future demands, and the system capacity, which similarly indicated no deficiencies in the distribution system. As a result, the Project impacts to the water facilities are expected to be less than significant.

Wastewater
Wastewater generated by the Project would be conveyed via City sewer lines to the Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County (LACSD) trunk sewers and water reclamation plants, primarily the San Jose Creek Water Reclamation Plant (SJCWRP), located at 1965 Workman Mill Road in Whittier. The SJCWRP currently provides primary, secondary, and tertiary treatment for a design capacity of 100 million gallons of wastewater per day (mgd) and currently processes an average flow of 63 mgd, serving approximately 1 million people. Wastewater that is not sent for reuse is conveyed to the Joint Water Pollution Control Plant, located at 24501 South Figueroa Street in Carson. This facility has the capacity to treat 400 mgd and currently processes an average of 261.1 mgd. Before discharge, the treated wastewater is disinfected with hypochlorite and sent to the Pacific Ocean through a network of outfalls. Both plants must comply with the current NPDES Permit, which regulates the plants’ discharges. The City of Pasadena has calculated the average daily flow at 2,520 gpd and indicated no concerns with the Project impacting the overall sewer system from the property. The Project may connect the sewer line from an existing sewer main along Sunnyslope Avenue, where the Project would install a sewer lateral. The proposed Project would be charged a sewer connection fee pursuant to Chapter 4.53 of the Pasadena Municipal Code. The ordinance provides for the sewer facility charge to ensure that new development within the City limits pays its estimated cost for capacity upgrades and ongoing operations and maintenance to the City sewer system.

With payment of connection fees, wastewater needs of the proposed Project could be met by existing infrastructure; the Project would not require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded wastewater facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects beyond those evaluated within this Initial Study. Impacts associated with wastewater infrastructure would be less than significant.

Rusnak Porsche Dealership Project _______________ Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration

Stormwater Drainage
As discussed in Section X, Hydrology and Water Quality, of this IS/MND, the proposed development of the site includes installation of a stormwater drainage system in accordance with the Project’s final grading and drainage plan, which would be adequate to accommodate Project runoff. No physical modifications to the existing municipal stormwater infrastructure in the Project vicinity would be required to handle the Project stormwater runoff. Further, short-term stormwater impacts, such as those resulting from construction activities and resulting sediment runoff from the Project site, would be regulated by the NPDES Construction General Permit, which requires identification of a variety of water quality control BMPs to be specified on construction plans and implemented throughout construction (see Section X).

Through compliance with existing, mandatory regulations regarding stormwater storage and treatment, potential water quality impacts during construction and operation would be avoided or reduced to less than significant levels and would avoid conflicts with water quality standards established by the LARWQCB. The environmental impacts of construction of the stormwater drainage infrastructure are evaluated throughout this Initial Study. The proposed Project is not anticipated to require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded stormwater drainage infrastructure, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects beyond those evaluated in this IS/MND.

Impacts associated with stormwater drainage infrastructure would be less than significant.

Electricity
Electricity for the proposed Project site is provided by PWP. Construction of the proposed Project would include on-site underground substructures that meet PWP design requirements. The proposed Project is not anticipated to require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded electricity infrastructure, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects beyond those evaluated in this IS/MND. Impacts associated with electricity infrastructure would be less than significant.

Natural Gas
The Southern California Gas Company (SoCalGas) would serve the proposed Project site. The Project is not anticipated to require substantial, if any, use of natural gas. There are no major upgrades to the delivery system that are anticipated as a result of this Project, because overall regional projections set forth by energy purveyors anticipate that energy demand will decline. As stated in the 2020 California Gas Report, prepared by the California Gas and Electric Utilities, natural gas usage by commercial uses in California is expected to decline at a rate of 1.7 percent per year from 2019 to 2035.20 This is because of more efficient power plants, statewide efforts to minimize GHG emissions through demand-side reductions, more efficient building standards incorporated into the California Title 24 building code, and CPUC-authorized energy efficiency programs. Given such a decline in natural gas demand, it is not anticipated that the proposed Project would require any more reconstruction or relocation of off-site natural gas infrastructure. Should SoCalGas determine that upgrades to existing natural gas infrastructure would be necessary, resulting from either the demand of the proposed Project or cumulative demand increases, such off-site upgrade projects would be undertaken by SoCalGas and would be subject to 20 California Gas and Electric Utilities. 2020. 2020 California Gas Report.

Rusnak Porsche Dealership Project _______________ Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration

environmental review pursuant to CEQA. Impacts associated with natural gas infrastructure would be less than significant.

Telecommunications
Telecommunication services are provided to the existing Project site by private companies. Upgrades to the existing telecommunication infrastructure on the Project site would involve connecting the proposed structures to existing telecommunications connections within the Project site and in adjacent streets.

Upgrades to existing telecommunication facilities and construction of new facilities to meet the demand of users are determined by telecommunication providers and are subject to its own environmental review.

Impacts associated with telecommunications infrastructure would be less than significant.

Finding of Significance: The impact would be less than significant, and no mitigation measures are necessary.
b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years?
Water service is provided to the Project site by PWP, which provides potable water to approximately 38,000 households and businesses in the City of Pasadena and surrounding communities. PWP’s current water supplies include local groundwater from the Raymond Basin and purchases of imported water.

According to the 2020 UWMP (PWP 2021), the City would be capable of providing adequate water supply to its service area under a normal supply and demand scenario, single dry-year supply and demand scenario, and multiple dry-year supply and demand scenario through 2040 (PWP 2021). The UWMP anticipates that, even during multiple dry-year scenarios, there would be additional water capacity of at least 4,783 AFY. The proposed Project would only require 2.9 AFY and would not exceed the supplies available to PWP. Additionally, the UWMP accounts for increased demand as growth occurs over time in the City.

As mentioned, in addition to groundwater, PWP also draws its water supply from local surface water the Arroyo Seco and Eaton Wash, and imported water purchased from the Metropolitan Water District (PWP 2020). PWP conducted a water supply reliability assessment to quantify long-term reliability of existing water supplies available to PWP through 2045 during normal, dry, and multiple dry years. The assessment model projected that between 2020 and 2045, PWP will meet its service area water demand approximately 91 percent of the time, and for the remaining 9 percent of the time, the projected water supply shortage will be approximately 1,000 to 1,500 AFY (PWP 2020). The modeled deficits occurred as a result of assumed shortages during extended droughts and/or disruptions to the imported water supply.

Additionally, the modeling scenario was run with an increased pumping capacity of 17,500 AFY (from the current capacity of 3,800 AFY). However, PWP also identifies that most agencies are able to manage supply shortages of 10 percent with temporary conservation measures. (PWP 2020) As described in Issue XIV(a), the proposed Project is consistent with anticipated growth in the General Plan. As such, adequate water resources would be available to serve the Project. Specifically, although the proposed Project would result in an increased demand on the City’s water supply, the City would have sufficient water supplies available to serve the Project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple-dry years.

Further, under Water Code Section 10912, the Project is not subject to a water supply assessment since the Project does not meet the criteria for a proposed shopping center or business establishment to Rusnak Porsche Dealership Project _______________ Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration

employ more than 1,000 persons or have more than 500,000 square feet of floor space. Chapter 13.10, Water Waste Prohibitions and Water Supply Shortage Plans, of the Pasadena Municipal Code discusses a number of policies and plans that establish a water conservation and supply shortage program that will further reduce water consumption within the City and its service area and minimize the effect and hardship of water shortage to the greatest possible extent. Policies established to assist in the event of a water supply shortage include limits on watering days; limits on filling ornamental lakes and ponds; and obligations to fix leaks, breaks, or malfunctions. While the proposed Project would result in an increase in water demand, the Project would be required to comply with Pasadena Municipal Code water conservation measures, which would further reduce water demand associated with the proposed Project.

With adequate water supply and the compliance with the City’s water conservation policies, impacts related to water supply would be less than significant.

Finding of Significance: The impact would be less than significant, and no mitigation measures are necessary.
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?
As described in Issue XIX(a), the City and LACSD would treat sanitary sewage generated by the proposed Project. The City’s sewer lines would convey wastewater to trunk lines managed by LACSD, which is responsible for treating the majority of local wastewater. The proposed Project site is located adjacent to multiple existing public sewer lines, including the sewer main along Sunnyslope Avenue that would be utilized for the proposed Project. Any sewer deficiencies would be addressed by the assessed sewer facility charge under Chapter 4.53 of the Pasadena Municipal Code. The ordinance provides for the sewer facility charge to ensure that new developments within the City limits pay estimated costs for capacity upgrades and ongoing operations and maintenance to the City sewer system. The sewer facility charge is based on the Taxes, Fees and Charges Schedule and is calculated and collected at the time of issuance of building permits.

As part of the entitlement review, the City of Pasadena has calculated the average daily flow at 2,520 gpd and indicated no concerns with the Project impacting the overall sewer system from the Project. The estimated wastewater generation is significantly less than the remaining capacity of the SJCWRP, as established in Issue XIX(a). Therefore, the wastewater facilities that would serve the Project would have adequate capacity to serve the Project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments. Therefore, impacts related to wastewater treatment would be less than significant.

Finding of Significance: The impact would be less than significant, and no mitigation measures are necessary.
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? The proposed Project would develop an automotive dealership. The solid waste generated by this Project would consist of typical waste from an automotive dealership. The solid waste would be collected by a private hauler approved by the City of Pasadena and transported to any of several landfills, including Scholl Canyon Landfill, the nearest landfill to the City, which is approximately 5.7 miles west of the Project Rusnak Porsche Dealership Project _______________ Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration

site.21 Scholl Landfill primarily accepts waste from Pasadena and Glendale. Other landfills in Los Angeles County that could accept waste from Pasadena include Sunshine Canyon City/County Landfill, El Sobrante Landfill, and Chiquita Canyon Sanitary Landfill. The City’s General Plan EIR determined that solid waste facilities accepting the vast majority of solid waste from Pasadena had a combined remaining capacity of approximately 158.3 million tons in 2015 and closure dates as late as 2045.22 Therefore, the existing solid waste infrastructure would be able to accommodate the solid waste generated by the proposed Project.

The proposed Project would not 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, and impacts would be less than significant.

Finding of Significance: The impact would be less than significant, and no mitigation measures are necessary.
e) Comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste?
As discussed in Issue XIX(d), the proposed Project would create solid waste that would be conveyed to several landfills, primarily Scholl Landfill, Sunshine Canyon City/County Landfill, El Sobrante Landfill, and Chiquita Canyon Sanitary Landfill. The proposed Project would result in a minor increase in solid waste as a result of the development of the automotive dealership. Specifically, the Project would result in an increase of approximately 1,014.7 lbs per day.23 Furthermore, as applicable, the Project would comply with SB 1018 (Chapter 39, Statutes of 2012), Mandatory Commercial Recycling, which requires a business that generates 4 cubic yards or more of commercial solid waste per week to arrange for recycling services.

The proposed Project would comply with state regulations, including AB 939 (Integrated Solid Waste Management Act of 1989), which requires the City to divert 50 percent of its waste from landfills by 2000.

In order to meet the requirements of AB 939, the City established a solid waste collection franchise as described in Pasadena Municipal Code Chapter 8.61. Each franchise, or jurisdiction, must meet a minimum recycling diversion rate of 75 percent on a monthly basis and an annual basis for construction and demolition debris and a minimum recycling diversion rate of 60 percent on a monthly and annual basis for other solid waste. The proposed Project would be required to comply with these requirements.

Because the proposed Project would comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste, impacts to solid waste would be less than significant.

Finding of Significance: The impact would be less than significant, and no mitigation measures are necessary.
21 City of Pasadena. 2015. General Plan EIR.
22 City of Pasadena. 2015. General Plan EIR.
23 California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery. nd. Estimated Solid Waste Generation Rates. Available at https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/wastecharacterization/general/rates Rusnak Porsche Dealership Project _______________ Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration

XX. WILDFIRE
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
XX. WILDFIRE: If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project
a) Would the project substantially impair an
adopted emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan??




b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other
factors, would the project exacerbate wildfire
risks, and thereby expose project occupants
to, pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or
the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?




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??




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?




DISCUSSION:
a) Would the project substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
The Project site is not located within or adjacent to a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (VHFHSZ), as designated by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection.24 The nearest VHFHSZ to the Project site are on the northern edges of the City of Pasadena, approximately 1.1 miles northeast of the Project site. The Project site is situated in a fully urbanized area with an urban street network, fully pressurized water system, and managed landscaping. As such, wildland fires would not occur on or near the Project site. Regardless, in the event of a disaster warranting evacuation, the emergency routes used would depend on a number of variables, including the type, scope, and location of the incident. It is the responsibility of emergency service and/or appropriate public officials to adequately assess the situation so that safe and efficient evacuation routes are selected. As the Project site is in a fully urbanized area with a major highway (I-210) within close proximity, the proposed Project would not substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan, and no impact would occur. 24 California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. Nd. FHSZ Viewer. Available at https://egis.fire.ca.gov/FHSZ/ Rusnak Porsche Dealership Project _______________ Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration

Finding of Significance: No impact would occur, and no mitigation measures are necessary. b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, would the project exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to, pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?)
As the Project site is not within or near a VHFHSZ, the proposed Project would not have the potential to expose Project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, or exacerbate wildfire risks. As such, the Project would result in no impact that would exacerbate wildfire risks and expose occupants to pollutants released from a wildfire.

Finding of Significance: No impact would occur, and no mitigation measures are necessary. 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? The proposed Project would not require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure in or near a state responsibility area or VHFHSZ that may exacerbate fire risk or result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment. As such, no impact would occur.

Finding of Significance: No impacts would occur, and no mitigation measures are necessary. 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?
The Project site is within a relatively flat, urbanized area that is adjacent to existing commercial structures.

The Project would not expose people or structures to significant risks in or near a state responsibility area or VHFHSZ, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes. As such, no impact would occur.

Finding of Significance: No impacts would occur, and no mitigation measures are necessary.

Rusnak Porsche Dealership Project _______________ Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration

XXI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
XXI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE: Would the project a) Does the project have the potential to
substantially degrade the quality of the
environment, substantially reduce the habitat of
a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife
population to drop below self-sustaining levels,
threaten to eliminate a plant or animal
community, substantially reduce the number or
restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant
or animal or eliminate important examples of
the major periods of California history or
prehistory?




b) Does the project have impacts that are
individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable"
means that the incremental effects of an action
are considerable when viewed in connection
with the effects of past projects, the effects of
other current projects, and the effects of
probable future actions)?




c) Does the project have environmental effects
which will cause substantial adverse effects on
human beings, either directly or indirectly?




DISCUSSION:
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? As discussed in Issue IV, Biological Resources, the Project site is currently and has been historically developed and does not contain natural habitat; accordingly, the proposed Project would not substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below selfsustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, or substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal. The proposed removal of existing trees has the potential to disturb nesting migratory birds; however, compliance with the requirements of local tree trimming and tree removal ordinances, as well as federal and state regulations related to the protection of migratory birds, including the MBTA, would ensure that the proposed Project would not degrade the quality of the environment or adversely affect biological resources, directly or indirectly. As discussed in Issue V, Cultural Resources, the Project site does not contain historic structures; as such the proposed Project would not have an adverse effect on historic buildings in the Project vicinity or eliminate important Rusnak Porsche Dealership Project _______________ Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration

examples of the major period of California history. However, the proposed earthwork during grading, trenching for utilities, and excavations for building foundations has the potential to disturb previously undiscovered archaeological resources. With implementation of Mitigation Measure MM CULT-1, impacts on cultural resources would be less than significant, and the proposed Project would not eliminate important examples of the major periods of California prehistory. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would result in less-than-significant impacts with mitigation incorporated.

Finding of Significance: Impacts would be less than significant with implementation of Mitigation Measure MM CULT-1.
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of an action are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future actions.)
The proposed Project would result in potentially significant Project-level impacts involving cultural resources, hazards and hazardous materials, and tribal cultural resources. However, in all cases, mitigation measures have been identified that would reduce these impacts to a less-than-significant level. As addressed throughout this IS/MND, the proposed Project would have no impact, a less-than-significant impact, or a less-than-significant impact with mitigation incorporated relative to all environmental impact areas. Cumulative impacts of several resource areas have already been addressed in several individual resource sections, including Issue III, Air Quality; Issue VIII, Greenhouse Gas Emissions; Issue XIII, Noise; and Issue XVII, Transportation. Based on CalEEMod modeling, the analysis determined that air quality and GHG emissions impacts resulting from construction and operation of the proposed Project would not have a significant Project-level or cumulative impact. Additionally, the traffic assessment conducted for the proposed Project considered cumulative increases in traffic and concluded that impacts would be less than significant. The noise analysis determined that Project increases in traffic would not result in a cumulative increase in traffic noise in the surrounding area or involve other increases in ambient noise levels that would have a significant impact.

Some resource areas (Issue II, Agricultural and Forestry Resources; Issue XII, Mineral Resources; and Issue XX, Wildfire) were determined to have no impacts and, thus, would not contribute to cumulative impacts related to these environmental topics. Other resource areas (Issue I, Aesthetics; Issue IV, Biological Resources; Issue VI, Energy; Issue VII, Geology and Soils; Issue X, Hydrology and Water Quality; Issue XI, Land Use and Planning; Issue XIV, Population and Housing; Issue XV, Public Services; Issue XVI, Recreation; and Issue XIX, Utilities and Services Systems) were determined to have a less-than-significant impact when compared to existing conditions. Many of these impacts are site-specific (e.g., aesthetics, geology and soils) or would adhere to regulatory requirements that would ensure that the proposed Project would not contribute to cumulative impacts (e.g., biological resources, hydrology and water quality). Others (e.g., land use and planning, population and housing, public services, recreation, and utilities and service systems) were determined to be consistent with the General Plan, which addresses impacts on a cumulative level. For these reasons, the proposed Project would not contribute to cumulative impacts related to these environmental topics. Other issue areas (Issue V, Cultural Resources; Issue IX, Hazards and Hazardous Materials; and Issue XVIII, Tribal Cultural Resources), which would have Project impacts that are less than significant with incorporation of mitigation, are by their nature site-specific, and impacts at one location do not add to impacts at other locations or create additive impacts.

Rusnak Porsche Dealership Project _______________ Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration

Further, all reasonably foreseeable future development in the City would be subject to the same land use and environmental regulations that have been described throughout this document and would be guided by the policies in the City’s General Plan and by the regulations in the Pasadena Municipal Code.

Therefore, compliance with applicable land use and environmental regulations would ensure that environmental effects associated with the proposed Project do not combine with effects from reasonably foreseeable future development in the City to cause cumulatively considerable significant impacts. With the incorporation of mitigation measures, the proposed Project would not result in a mandatory finding of significance due to a considerable contribution to any cumulative impacts.

Finding of Significance: Impacts would be less than significant with implementation of mitigation measures identified in this IS/MND.
c) Does the project have environmental effects that would cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
As discussed throughout Section 3 of this IS/MND, the proposed Project would not have significant adverse effects on the environment. Mitigation measures have been identified to reduce short-term construction impacts and long-term operational impacts to levels that are less than significant in the areas of cultural resources, hazardous materials, and tribal cultural resources. Mitigation measures identified under Issue IX, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, would reduce potential adverse effects to human beings by requiring safe and proper handling and abatement of hazardous and potentially hazardous materials, including soils. Implementation of mitigation measures and compliance with existing federal, state, and local regulations, along with standard design criteria, would ensure that the proposed Project would not directly or indirectly cause a substantial adverse effect on human beings.

Finding of Significance: Impacts would be less than significant with implementation of mitigation measures identified in this IS/MND.

Rusnak Porsche Dealership Project _______________ Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration

SECTION 4 ACRONYMS
AB ..................... Assembly Bill
ACBMs ............. asbestos-containing building materials AFY .................. acre-feet per year
APN .................. Assessor Parcel Number
AQMP .............. Air Quality Management Plan
Basin ................. South Coast Air Basin (also SCAB) BMPs ............... Best Management Practices
CAAQS ............. California Ambient Air Quality Standards CalEEMod ........ California Emissions Estimator Model
CAL FIRE ........... California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection CALGreen ........ California Green Building Standards Code CalOSHA ........... California Occupational Safety and Health Administration CAP ................... Climate Action Plan
CARB ................. California Air Resources Board
CBC ................... California Building Code
CEC ................... California Energy Commissions
CEQA ................ California Environmental Quality Act CHRIS ................ California Historical Resources Inventory System City ................... City of Pasadena
CFC ................... chlorofluorocarbon
CO ..................... carbon monoxide
CPUC ................ California Public Utilities Commission CUPA ................ Certified Unified Program Agency
Db ..................... decibels
dBA ................... A-weighted scale
DOT .................. Pasadena Department of Transportation DTSC ................ Department of Toxic Substances Control DWR ................ California Department of Water Resources EO ..................... Executive Order
EPA ................... United States Environmental Protection Agency Rusnak Porsche Dealership Project _______________ Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration

FAR ................... floor area ratio
FEMA ............... Federal Emergency Management Agency FHSZ ................. Fire Hazard Severity Zones
FIRM ................ flood insurance rate map
FTA ................... Federal Transit Administration
GHGs ............... greenhouse gases
gpd ................... gallons per day
HMBP ............... Hazardous Material Business Plan
I-210 ................. Interstate 210
IEPR ................. Integrated Energy Policy Report
IS/MND ............ Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration LACSD .............. Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts LARWQCB ......... Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board LBP.................... lead-based paint
Leq .................... sound energy level averaged over a specified time period LID ................... low impact development
LST .................... localized significance threshold mgd .................. million gallons per day
MS4 .................. Los Angeles County Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System MT ................... metric ton
MTCO2e .......... metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent NAAQS ............. National Ambient Air Quality Standards NO2 .................. nitrogen dioxide
NPDES .............. National Pollution Discharge Elimination System O3 ..................... Ozone
PFD .................. City of Pasadena Fire Department, Fire Prevention PM .................... particulate matter
PPV ................... peak particle velocity; in/sec = inches/second PUSD................. Pasadena Unified School District
PWP ................. Pasadena Water and Power
RECs ................. recognized environmental conditions Rusnak Porsche Dealership Project _______________ Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration

RTP/SCS ............ Regional Transportation/Sustainable Communities Strategy RWQCB ............ California Regional Water Quality Control Board SB ..................... Senate Bill
SCAB ................. South Coast Air Basin (also Basin) SCAG ................ Southern California Association of Governments SCAQMD ........... South Coast Air Quality Management District SCE.................... Southern California Edison
SO2 ................... sulfur dioxide
SoCalGas ........... Southern California Gas Company
SRTP ................. Short Range Transit Plan
SWPPP .............. Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan TAZ .................. Transportation Analysis Zone
TDF ................... travel demand forecasting model TDM .................. Transportation Demand Management TIA ................... Transportation Impact Assessment TPAs ................. Transit Priority Areas
μg/m3 ............... micrograms per cubic meter
USTs .................. underground storage tanks
UWMP ............. Urban Water Management Plan
VHFHSZ ............ Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones VMT ................. vehicle miles traveled
VOC .................. volatile organic compound
VT .................... Vehicle Trips
WRP .................. wastewater reclamation plant
Rusnak Porsche Dealership Project _______________ Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration

This page intentionally left blank
Rusnak Porsche Dealership Project _______________ Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration

SECTION 5 LIST OF PREPARERS AND CONTRIBUTORS

CITY OF PASADENA (LEAD AGENCY)
Luis Rocha, Planning Manager
Beilin Yu, Principal Planner
Jason Van Patten, Senior Planner

MICHAEL BAKER INTERNATIONAL
John Bellas, Project Director
Jennifer Wu, Project Manager
Frankie Tong, Senior Environmental Planner
Nathan Levy, Environmental Planner
Brent Schleck, Senior Environmental Planner
Michelle Van Meter, Architectural Historian
Kholood Abdo, Senior Archaeologist
Aisha Fike, Senior Architectural Historian
Margo Nayyar, Senior Cultural Resources Manager
Yiting Yuan, Environmental Associate
Eddie Torres, Principal Air Quality and Noise Specialist Rusnak Porsche Dealership Project _______________ Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration

SECTION 6 REFERENCES
AA (Architects of Achievement). 2016. A Report to Inform the Educational Master Plan for Pasadena Unified School District.

American Geosciences Institute. 2021. Interactive map of California earthquake hazard zones. Accessed January 6, 2021. https://www.americangeosciences.org/critical-issues/maps/interactive-mapcalifornia-earthquake-hazard-zones.

Berger, Elliott H., Rick Neitzel, and Cynthia A. Kladden. 2015. Noise Navigator Sound Level Database with Over 1700 Measurement Values. June 26, 2015.

CAL FIRE (California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection). 2011. Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones in LRA. Accessed October 26, 2021. https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/media/5836/pasadena.pdf. ———. 2021. California Fire Hazard Severity Zone Viewer. Accessed December 6, 2021. https://egis.fire.ca.gov/FHSZ/.

California Department of Conservation. 2000. Division of Mines and Geology, A General Location Guide for Ultramafic Rocks in California – Areas More Likely to Contain Naturally Occurring Asbestos Report. Accessed May 12, 2022. https://ww3.arb.ca.gov/toxics/asbestos/ofr_2000-019.pdf. ———. 2021a. Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program: California Important Farmland Finder.

Accessed October 26, 2021. https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/DLRP/CIFF/. ———. 2021b. EQ Zapp: California Earthquake Hazards Zone Application. Accessed January 4, 2021. https://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/geohazards/eq-zapp.

California Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2020. California Natural Diversity Database webpage.

Accessed January 5, 2021. https://wildlife.ca.gov/Data/CNDDB.

California Energy Commission. 2018. 2019 Building Energy Efficiency Standards Fact Sheet. ———. 2021a. Final 2021 Integrated Energy Policy Report Volume I Building Decarbonization. February 2022.
———. 2021b. 2021 Integrated Energy Policy Report. Accessed April 14, 2022. https://www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/reports/integrated-energy-policy-report/2021- integrated-energy-policy-report.
———. 2021c. Final 2021 Integrated Energy Policy Report Volume IV California Energy Demand Forecast, February 2022.
———. 2022. Electricity Consumption by County. Accessed April 26, 2022. http://www.ecdms.energy.ca.gov/.

California Gas and Electric Utilities. 2020. 2020 California Gas Report.

California Geological Survey. 2009. Tsunami Hazard Area Map. https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/informationwarehouse/ts_evacuation/?extent=- Rusnak Porsche Dealership Project _______________ Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration

13249590.3641%2C3986280.7635%2C13132183.0887%2C4038410.8168%2C102100&utm_source=cgs+active&utm_content=losangeles.

CalRecycle (California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery). 2022. Green Building Materials. Accessed April 21, 2022. https://www.calrecycle.ca.gov/greenbuilding/materials. ———. n.d. Estimated Solid Waste Generation Rates.
https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/wastecharacterization/general/rates.

Caltrans (California Department of Transportation). 2013. Technical Noise Supplement to the Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol.
———. 2019. California State Scenic Highway System Map. Accessed January 6, 2020. https://www.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=2e921695c43643b1aaf7000dfcc199

83. CARB (California Air Resources Board). 2016. Ambient Air Quality Standards. ———. 2017. California Air Resources Board. 2017. Final 2016 Air Quality Management Plan. Accessed January 4, 2021. https://www.aqmd.gov/home/air-quality/clean-air-plans/air-quality-mgtplan/final-2016-aqmp. ———. 2019. Summaries of Historical Area Designations for State Standards. Accessed January 4, 2021. https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/state-and-federal-area-designations/state-areadesignations/summary-tables.

City of Pasadena. 2000. East Pasadena Specific Plan. Accessed October 22, 2021. https://www.cityofpasadena.net/planning/planning-division/community-planning/specificplans/east-pasadena/. ———. 2002a. General Plan Safety Element. https://ww5.cityofpasadena.net/planning/wpcontent/uploads/sites/56/2017/07/General-Plan-Safety-Element.pdf. ———. 2002b. General Plan Noise Element. Accessed April 6, 2022. https://www.cityofpasadena.net/wp-content/uploads/sites/30/Pasadena-Noise-ElementPolicy.pdf. ———. 2003. East Colorado Specific Plan. Accessed October 22, 2021. https://www.cityofpasadena.net/planning/wp-content/uploads/sites/30/East-Colorado-SpecificPlan.pdf?v=1635281591750. ———. 2007. General Plan Green Space, Recreation and Parks Element. https://www.cityofpasadena.net/wp-content/uploads/sites/30/Green-Space-Parks-andRecreation-Element-Adopted-November-2007.pdf. ———. 2012. Open Space and Conservation Element, Appendix 3, Open Space Inventory Summary.

Accessed October 26, 2021. https://www.cityofpasadena.net/wp-content/uploads/sites/30/OpenSpace-Final-Plan-Appendix-3-Open-Space-Inventory-Summary.pdf?v=1607464090546.

Rusnak Porsche Dealership Project _______________ Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration

———. 2014. General Plan Housing Element. Accessed January 4, 2021. https://www.cityofpasadena.net/planning/planning-division/community-planning/generalplan/#general-housing. ———. 2015a. General Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report. Accessed October 26, 2021. https://ww5.cityofpasadena.net/planning/wp-content/uploads/sites/56/2015/09/GeneralPlan_Draft-EIR_2015-01.pdf. ———. 2015b. General Plan Revised Final Environmental Impact Report. Accessed October 26, 2021. https://www.cityofpasadena.net/planning/wp-content/uploads/sites/30/Revised-Final-EIR-2015-

08.pdf?v=1638843692450.
———. 2015c. General Plan, Mobility Element. https://www.cityofpasadena.net/planning/planningdivision/community-planning/general-plan/. ———. 2015d. Transportation Impact Analysis Current Practice & Guidelines. https://www.cityofpasadena.net/transportation/complete-streets/transportation-impact-review/. ———. 2015e. General Plan Land Use Element. Accessed October 26, 2021. https://www.cityofpasadena.net/planning/wp-content/uploads/sites/30/Land-Use-Element-2016- 01-25.pdf?v=1638841616074.
———. 2018a. Community Service Area Map. Accessed January 4, 2021. https://www.cityofpasadena.net/wp-content/uploads/sites/28/Community-Service-Area-2- Northwest.pdf?v=1608543748759.
———. 2018b. Pasadena Climate Action Plan. Accessed April 14, 2022. https://www.cityofpasadena.net/planning/wp-content/uploads/sites/30/Final-Pasadena-ClimateAction-Plan_3.5.2018.pdf?v=1633630417212. ———. 2019. Short Range Transit Plan. https://www.cityofpasadena.net/pasadenatransit/news/pasadena-short-range-transit-plan/. ———. 2020. Final Water System and Resources Plan. December. Revised September 2021. ———. 2021. Urban Forestry. Pasadena Tree Ordinance, Protected Tree List. Available:
https://www.cityofpasadena.net/public-works/urbanforestry/#:~:text=Pasadena%20Tree%20Ordinance,- The%20City%20of&text=An%20ordinance%20amending%20the%20%E2%80%9CCity,and%20grow %20the%20urban%20forest. Accessed December 6, 2021.

City of Pasadena. n.d.-a. “Library Branches.” https://www.cityofpasadena.net/library/branches/. ———. n.d.-b. “Eaton-Blanche Park.” https://www.cityofpasadena.net/parks-and-rec/parks/eatonblanche-park/.

City of Pasadena Building and Safety Division. 2018. Best Management Practice. Accessed December 20, 2020. https://ww5.cityofpasadena.net/planning/wp-content/uploads/sites/56/2018/04/BestManagement-Practice.pdf.

Rusnak Porsche Dealership Project _______________ Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration

———. 2021. Low Impact Development webpage. Accessed January 11, 2021. https://www.cityofpasadena.net/planning/building-and-safety/low-impact-development.

City of Pasadena Fire Department. 2020. Fire Stations webpage. Accessed January 4, 2021. https://www.cityofpasadena.net/fire/stations/.

City of Pasadena Police Department. 2017. Policy 206 Emergency Operations Plan. Accessed December 16, 2020. https://ww5.cityofpasadena.net/police/wp-content/uploads/sites/57/2017/02/Policy206-Emergency-Operations-Plan.pdf. ———. 2020. Crime Statistics webpage. Accessed January 4, 2021. https://www.cityofpasadena.net/police/crime#2019-crime-stats. ———. 2021. Preliminary – Monthly Statistical Report – December 2020. ———. 2022. Preliminary Monthly Statistical Report: May 2022. June 2. ———. 2021. Patrol Divisions webpage. https://www.cityofpasadena.net/police/divisions-andsections/patrol-division/#community-service-areas. Accessed January 6, 2021.

ColoradoBoulevard.net. 2021. “Pasadena Reconfigures Police Community Service Areas and Hires New Officers.” November 11, 2021. https://www.coloradoboulevard.net/pasadena-reconfigurespolice-community-service-areas-and-hires-new-officers/ County of Los Angeles. 1995. El Monte Airport Master Plan Report. https://www.dpw.lacounty.gov/avi/airports/documents/SGV_MP.pdf. ———. 2004. Airport Land Use Commission, Los Angeles County Airport Land Use Plan, December 1, 2004, http://planning.lacounty.gov/assets/upl/data/pd_alup.pdf, accessed February 3, 2022. ———. 2010. Emergency Survival Guide. Accessed January 4, 2021. https://www.cityofpasadena.net/public-health/wpcontent/uploads/sites/32/Emergency_Survival_Guide.pdf?v=1608628092504.

County of Los Angeles Department of Public Works. 2008. City of Pasadena Disaster Route Map.

Accessed October 26, 2021. https://dpw.lacounty.gov/dsg/DisasterRoutes/map/Pasadena.pdf. ———. 2014. Low Impact Development Standards Manual. Accessed December 20, 2021. http://dpw.lacounty.gov/ldd/lib/fp/Hydrology/Low%20Impact%20Development%20Standards%2 0Manual.pdf.
———. 2021. Flood Zone Determination website. Accessed January 5, 2021. https://dpw.lacounty.gov/floodzone/.

County of Los Angeles Sanitation Districts. 2020a. Sanitation Districts’ Service Area webpage. Available:
https://www.lacsd.org/aboutus/gis/default.asp. Accessed January 4, 2021. ———. 2020b. Scholl Canyon Landfill Watershed Map. Accessed January 4, 2021. https://www.lacsd.org/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?blobid=2353.

Rusnak Porsche Dealership Project _______________ Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration

DTSC (California Department of Toxic Substances Control). 2020. Human Health Risk Assessment Note 3 – DTSC-Modified Screening Levels (DTSC-SLs). June. https://dtsc.ca.gov/human-health-risk-hero/. ———. 2022. EnviroStor. Accessed June 15, 2022.
https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/map/?myaddress=2914+East+Walnut+Street.

DWR (Department of Water Resources). 2020. SGMA Basin Prioritization Dashboard. Accessed June 24, 2020. https://gis.water.ca.gov/app/bp-dashboard/final/#.

EPA (US Environmental Protection Agency). 2020. EPA Green Book. Accessed January 4, 2021. https://www.epa.gov/green-book.
———. 2022a. Criteria Pollutants. Accessed May 12, 2022. https://www.epa.gov/criteria-air-pollutants. ———. 2022b. Carbon Monoxide Emissions. Accessed May 12, 2022. https://cfpub.epa.gov/roe/indicator_pdf.cfm?i=10.

FHWA (Federal Highway Administration). 2006. Roadway Construction Noise Model (FHWA-HEP-05- 054).
———. 2006. Traffic Noise Construction Noise Handbook, Section 9. August.

FTA (Federal Transit Administration). 2018. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual.

September.
———. 2002. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Table 12-2. May.

IES–National Center for Education Statistics. 2021a. “Search for Public Schools – Willard Elementary.” https://nces.ed.gov/ccd/schoolsearch/school_detail.asp?ID=062994004691. ———. 2021b. “Search for Public Schools – McKinley School.” https://nces.ed.gov/ccd/schoolsearch/school_detail.asp?Search=1&DistrictID=0629940&ID=0629 94010533.
———. 2021c. “Search for Public Schools – Pasadena High School.” https://nces.ed.gov/ccd/schoolsearch/school_detail.asp?Search=1&ID=062994004684.

Los Angeles County Economic Development Corporation. Institute for Applied Economics, Building the Future: Construction in Southern California: The Industry, Its Jobs and Its Economic Contribution.

September 2016. Accessed August 23, 2021. https://laedc.org/2016/12/05/laedc-report-socalconstruction-industry-forecast-market-update/.

NRCS (Natural Resources Conservation Service). 2022a. “2914 East Walnut Street, Pasadena, CA.” Webbased soil mapping interface. Accessed February 2022. https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/WebSoilSurvey.aspx. ———. 2022b. Web Soil Survey. Accessed January 6, 2022.
https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/main/soils/survey/.

Rusnak Porsche Dealership Project _______________ Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration

OEHHA (Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment) 2015. California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment. 2015. Air Toxics Hot Spots Program Guidance Manual for the Preparation of Health Risk Assessments. Accessed January 4, 2021. https://oehha.ca.gov/air/crnr/notice-adoption-air-toxics-hot-spots-program-guidance-manualpreparation-health-risk-0.

Pasadena Unified School District. 2020. School Attendance Boundaries. Accessed January 4, 2021. https://www.pusd.us/Page/211.
———. 2021. Our Schools PUSD School Guide.

PWP (Pasadena Water and Power). 2016. 2015 Urban Water Management Plan. Accessed June 21, 2022. https://ww5.cityofpasadena.net/water-and-power/wpcontent/uploads/sites/54/2017/08/2015_Final_UWMP.pdf. ———. 2020. Water System Resources Plan, Final Report. December. ———. 2021. 2020 Urban Water Management Plan (Final). June.

San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District. 2014. Application for Leave to File Brief of Amicus Curiae Brief of San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District in Support of Defendant and Respondent, County of Fresno and Real Party In Interest and Respondent, Friant Ranch, L.P. In the Supreme Court of California. Sierra Club, Revive the San Joaquin, and League of Women Voters of Fresno v. County of Fresno, 2014.

SCAG (Southern California Association of Governments). 2016. The 2016-2040 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy. April.
_____. 2020. The 2020-2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (Connect SoCal). Available: https://scag.ca.gov/read-plan-adopted-final-plan.

SCAQMD (South Coast Air Quality Management District). 1993. CEQA Air Quality Handbook. http://www.aqmd.gov/home/rules-compliance/ceqa/air-quality-analysis-handbook. ———. 2003. White Paper on Potential Control Strategies to Address Cumulative Impacts From Air Pollution. Accessed January 4, 2021. http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/defaultsource/Agendas/Environmental-Justice/cumulative-impacts-working-group/cumulative-impactswhite-paper.pdf. ______. 2008a. Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology. Accessed January 4, 2021. http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/ceqa/handbook/localized-significancethresholds/final-lst-methodology-document.pdf. ———. 2008b. Minutes for the GHG CEQA Significance Threshold Stakeholder Working Group Meeting #1. Accessed January 4, 2021. http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/defaultsource/ceqa/handbook/greenhouse-gases-(ghg)-ceqa-significance-thresholds/year-2008- 2009/ghg-meeting-1/ghg-meeting-1-minutes.pdf.
———. 2008c. Interim CEQA GHG Significance Threshold for Stationary Sources, Rules and Plans.

Accessed January 4, 2021. http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default- Rusnak Porsche Dealership Project _______________ Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration

source/ceqa/handbook/greenhouse-gases-(ghg)-ceqa-significancethresholds/ghgboardsynopsis.pdf. ———. 2008d. Draft Guidance Document – Interim CEQA Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Significance Threshold.

Accessed January 4, 2021. http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/defaultsource/ceqa/handbook/greenhouse-gases-(ghg)-ceqa-significancethresholds/ghgattachmente.pdf. ———. 2011. Fact Sheet for Applying CalEEMod to Localized Significance Thresholds. Accessed January 4, 2021. http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/ceqa/handbook/localized-significancethresholds/caleemod-guidance.pdf. ———. 2012. Air Quality Management Plan. https://www.aqmd.gov/home/air-quality/clean-airplans/air-quality-mgt-plan/final-2012-air-quality-management-plan. ———. 2014. Application of the South Coast Air Quality Management District for Leave to File Brief of Amicus Curiae in Support of Neither Party and Brief of Amicus Curiae. In the Supreme Court of California. Sierra Club, Revive the San Joaquin, and League of Women Voters of Fresno v. County of Fresno.
———. 2016. Air Quality Management Plan. http://www.aqmd.gov/home/air-quality/clean-airplans/air-quality-mgt-plan/final-2016-aqmp. ———. 2019. South Coast AQMD Air Quality Significance Thresholds. http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/ceqa/handbook/scaqmd-air-quality-significancethresholds.pdf.

United States Census Bureau. 2020. QuickFacts: Pasadena City. Accessed January 5, 2021. https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/pasadenacitycalifornia/PST045219.

US DOT (US Department of Transportation). 2017. Highway Traffic Noise Analysis and Abatement Policy and Guidance. Accessed April 5, 2022.
https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environMent/noise/regulations_and_guidance/polguide/polguide02.c fm.

US Geologic Survey. 2020. Earthquake Hazards Program: Alquist-Priolo Faults. Accessed January 4, 2021. https://earthquake.usgs.gov/education/geologicmaps/apfaults.php.

US Green Building Council. 2022. Green Building Costs and Savings. Accessed April 27, 2022. https://www.usgbc.org/articles/green-building-costs-and-savings.

Appendices

This page intentionally left blank

Appendix A:

Conceptual Plan Set

This page intentionally left blank

USE AREA RATIO REQUIRED PROVIDED
VEHICLE SALES 32,848 S.F. 1 SPACE FOR EA. 1,000 S.F. OF GFA 33 SPACES VEHICLE REPAIR 32,512 S.F. 4 SPACE FOR EA. 1,000 S.F. OF GFA 131 SPACES TOTAL REQUIRED PARKING SPACES 164 SPACES 164 SPACES
178 SPACES
342 SPACES

INVENTORY / DISPLAY

TOTAL PARKING

OFF-STREET PARKING TABULATION
PER § 17.46.120.C OF THE CITY OF PASADENA MUNICIPAL CODE

RATIO REQUIRED PROVIDED

ACCESSIBLE PARKING TABULATION
PER § 11B-208 AND TABLE 11B-208.2 OF THE 2019 CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE TYPE

STANDARD
VAN
6 SPACES FOR 151 TO 200 TOTAL PARKING SPACES
(BASED ON REQUIRED PARKING)
1 SPACE FOR EVERY 6 (OR FRACTION OF 6) ADA SPACES
6 SPACES 6 SPACES
1 SPACE 1 SPACE

RATIO REQUIRED PROVIDED

DESIGNATED PARKING TABULATION
PER § 5.106.5.2 AND TABLE 5.106.5.3.3 OF THE 2019 CALIFORNIA GREEN BUILDING STANDARDS CODE TYPE
DESIGNATED PARKING 16 SPACES FOR 151 TO 200 TOTAL PARKING SPACES 16 SPACES 16 SPACES EV CHARGING STATIONS (EVCS) 10 SPACES FOR 151 TO 200 TOTAL PARKING SPACES 10 SPACES 11 SPACES

RATIO REQUIRED PROVIDED

BICYCLE PARKING TABULATION
PER § 5.106.4 OF THE CALIFORNIA GREEN BUILDING STANDARDS CODE TYPE
LONG-TERM BICYCLE PARKING 5% OF TOTAL PARKING SPACES PROVIDED (MIN. 1 SPACE) 9 9 33 SPACES
131 SPACES
SHORT-TERM BICYCLE PARKING 5% OF TOTAL PARKING SPACES PROVIDED (MIN. 2 SPACES) 9 9 SERVICE SHOP 29,049 S.F.

PARTS STORAGE 3,165 S.F.

EV BATTERY STOR. 298 S.F.

GROSS FLOOR AREA DATA:

PROPOSED DEALERSHIP BUILDING AREA:
1ST FLOOR:

SHOWROOM & OFFICES

COVERED SERVICE DRIVE (NOT INCLUDED IN PROPOSED AREA)

SERVICE AREA

PARTS STORAGE
1ST FLOOR SUBTOTAL:
2ND FLOOR:

OFFICES

COVERED PARKING (NOT INCLUDED IN PROPOSED AREA)
2ND FLOOR SUBTOTAL:
3RD FLOOR:

ROOFTOP PARKING (NOT INCLUDED IN PROPOSED AREA)
VERTICAL CIRCULATION:

VEHICLE RAMP (NOT INCLUDED IN PROPOSED AREA)
TOTAL PROPOSED DEALERSHIP BUILDING AREA:

PROPOSED CARWASH BUILDING AREA:

PROPOSED CARWASH:

PROPOSED DETAIL BAYS:

TOTAL PROPOSED CARWASH BUILDING AREA:

TOTAL PROPOSED EV BATTERY STORAGE BUILDING AREA:

TOTAL EXISTING AUDI BUILDING AREA:

FLOOR AREA RATIO (PER CITY OF PASADENA MUNICIPAL CODE):

LOW MIXED USE - 1.0 MAX.

R & D FLEX SPACE - 1.25 MAX.

LOT SIZE: 192,331 SF = 4.415 ACRES
GROSS FLOOR AREA = 66,852 (60,230 + 4,832 + 298 + 1,660) / 192,331 = FAR 0.35 LOT COVERAGE:
1ST FLOOR DEALERSHIP + CARWASH + EV STORAGE + EXISTING BUILDING = 56,162 SF 56,162 SF / 192,331 SF = 0.29
LANDSCAPE PROVIDED: SEE LANDSCAPE PLAN
17,158 SF
6,348 SF
29,049 SF
3,165 SF
49,372 SF
10,858 SF
29,530 SF
10,858 SF
30,917 SF
3,804 SF
60,230 SF
3,330 SF
1,502 SF
4,832 SF
298 SF
1,660 SF
APN: 5748-036-001, -002, -003, -004, -005, -028, -029,
AND -032
BUILDING ADDRESS: 2965 E. COLORADO BLVD.

PASADENA, CA 91107
ZONING DESIGNATION: INDUSTRY GENERAL AND COMMERICAL
CENTER
SPECIFIC PLAN: EPSP-D1-IG, ECSP-CG-6
LAND USE DESIGNATION: LOW MIXED USE, R & D FLEX SPACE
ADJACENT PARCEL ZONING & LAND USE: NORTH: R & D FLEX SPACE, EPSP-D1-IG EAST: LOW MIXED USE, ECSP-CG-6
SOUTH: LOW MIXED USE, ECSP-CG-6
WEST: LOW MIXED USE, ECSP-CG-5-AD-2
PROPOSED LAND USE: CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW AUTOMOBILE
DEALERSHIP WITH AREAS FOR: SALES,

CUSTOMER LOUNGE, OFFICES, VEHICLE

SERVICE, PARTS STORAGE, CARWASH

WITH SITE AND LANDSCAPE

IMROVEMENTS
TOTAL GROSS AREA: 192,331 SF = 4.415 ACRES
TOTAL BUILDING AREA: 66,852 SF (INCLUDING CARWASH)
LOT COVERAGE: SQUARE FEET PERCENTAGE
BUILDING AREA: 56,162 SF 29%
FLOOR AREA RATIO: FAR 0.35
OCCUPANCY: B, S-1, & S-2
TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION: V-B
SPRINKLERED / FIRE ALARM: YES
NUMBER OF STORIES: 2
HEIGHT OF BUILDING: 43' - 6" (FROM SHOWROOM F.F.)
50' - 11" (FROM SITE LOWEST POINT)
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: SEE CIVIL
COPYRIGHTED DOCUMENT: THIS DRAWING AND THE BIM/CAD FILE FROM WHICH IT HAS BEEN GENERATED ARE PROVIDED AS AN INSTRUMENT OF SERVICE FOR THIS PROJECT. THESE DOCUMENTS ARE THE SOLE PROPERTY OF GOREE ARCHITECTS, INC. ANY USE OF THESE DOCUMENTS, DATA AND DESIGNS FOR PURPOSES OTHER THAN THOSE ASSOCIATED WITH THIS PROJECT WITHOUT THE EXPRESSED, WRITTEN PERMISSION OF GOREE WHITFIELD, INC. IS PROHIBITED. 24691 Del Prado Ave
Dana Point, CA 92629
949 -234 -1950
www.goreewhitfield.com

PROJECT NAME

PROJECT ADDRESS

OWNER INFORMATION

ISSUE DATE

GOREE PROJECT NUMBER

SHEET NUMBER

SHEET NAME

KEY PLAN

STAMP / SIGNATURE

CONSULTANTS

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

RUSNAK PORSCHE

PASADENA
2915 EAST COLORADO

BOULEVARD
PASADENA, CA 91107
A.000
04/01/2022
2019-0011

RUSNAK AUTO GROUP
267-337 W. COLORADO BLVD.

PASADENA, CA 91105
CONTACT: JOHN BEED
[email protected]
COVER
Commercial Development Resources (CDR)
695 Town Center Drive, Ste. 110, Costa Mesa, CA 92626
Principal: Aaron M. Albertson
E: [email protected], O: (949) 610.8997 x 704
ASLA Landscape Architecture
630 S. El Camino #B4, San Clemente, CA 92672
Designer: Aaron Sevilla
E: [email protected], P: (949) 444.9468

RUSNAK PORSCHE PASADENA
2915 EAST COLORADO BOULEVARD
PASADENA, CA 91107
CIVIL

LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT

NEW PORSCHE DEALERSHIP
© GOREE WHITFIELD 2021

AREA BREAKDOWN PROJECT INFORMATION PARKING ANALYSIS

DRAWING INDEX
CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW 3 STORY AUTO DEALERSHIP WITH AREA FOR SALES, PARTS STORAGE, AND VEHICLE SERVICE, CONSTRUCTION OF CARWASH / DETAIL BAYS. SCOPE OF WORK INCLUDES GRADING,

SITE WORK, PAVING, AND INSTALLATION OF A NEW RETAINING WALL, LIGHT STANDARDS AND LANDSCAPE UPGRADES.

VICINITY MAP
N
SITE
N . S U N N Y S L O P E A V E .

W A L N U T S T .

E . C O L O R A D O B L V D .

I - 2 1 0

SCOPE OF WORK
# SHEET NAME
ISSUE
DATE
REVISION #

REVISION
DATE

REVISION

DESCRIPTION

GENERAL
A.000 COVER 04/01/2022
CIVIL
1 OF 1 SITE SURVERY EXISTING CONDITIONS 04/01/2022
CG-01 CONCEPTUAL GRADING PLAN - NORTH 04/01/2022
CG-02 CONCEPTUAL GRADING PLAN - SOUTH 04/01/2022
CG-03 PROPOSED SITE PLAN 04/01/2022

ARCHITECTURAL
A.100 PROPOSED SITE PLAN 04/01/2022
A.101 PROPOSED CARWASH AND EV BATTERY

STORAGE
04/01/2022
A.102 PROPOSED SITE DETAILS 04/01/2022
A.110 PROPOSED OVERALL FLOOR PLANS 04/01/2022
A.111 PROPOSED OVERALL FLOOR PLANS 04/01/2022
A.130 PROPOSED FIRST FLOOR PLAN - AREA A 04/01/2022
A.131 PROPOSED FIRST FLOOR PLAN - AREA B 04/01/2022
A.132 PROPOSED SECOND FLOOR PLAN - AREA A 04/01/2022
A.133 PROPOSED SECOND FLOOR PLAN - AREA B 04/01/2022
A.134 PROPOSED ROOF DECK PLAN - AREA B 04/01/2022
A.200 PROPOSED EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 04/01/2022
A.201 PROPOSED EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 04/01/2022
A.202 PROPOSED EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 04/01/2022
A.210 PROPOSED BUILDING SECTIONS 04/01/2022
A.211 PROPOSED BUILDING SECTIONS 04/01/2022

LANDSCAPE
PLP-1 PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN 04/01/2022

ISSUE HISTORY
DATE: MARK: DESCRIPTION:
5748-036-028 2965 E COLORADO B0ULEVARD PASADENA PORSCHE 1 PASADENA, CA 91107 1 FW

FW FW FW FW FW FW FW FW FW FW FW FW
FW FW FW FW FW FW FW FW FW FW FW FW FW FW FW FW FW FW FW 710.75FF 710.00PAD 10.0' 20.0' 20.0' 10.0' 30.0' CAR WASH 710.50FF EXISTING AUDI DEALERSHIP

10.0' 29.8' 30.0' CUT AND PLUG EXISTING 4" PROPOSED DCDA AND FDC EAST WALNUT STREET 2.5%

1.3% PROP. BATTERY STORAGE BUILDING 709.93FF 709.18PAD 4.2% RIDGE 24.6'

2.5% 0.5% 2.8% 1.2% 1.5% 2.7%

0.5%

0.5% 0.5% 4.2% 709 710 710 710 709 706 707 708 710 710 710 711 711 711 MATCH (706.11FS) MATCH (705.96FS) MATCH (706.35FS) (712.20TC) (711.68FL) (711.51TC) (710.62FL) (711.88TC) (711.56FL) (713.00FS) (712.82FS) (711.75FS) EX. SS LINE EX. WATER LINE EX. WATER LINE

COLDMILL

AND RESURFACE PER
STD. DWG S-415

COLDMILL

AND RESURFACE PER
STD. DWG S-415 MATCH (711.69BOW) MATCH (711.54TC) (710.76FL) MATCH (711.06TC) (710.36FL) MATCH (711.21BOW) MATCH (712.29BOW) MATCH (712.30TC) (711.64FL) MATCH (712.13TC) (711.51FL) MATCH MATCH (712.41BOW) (711.69BOW) MATCH (712.33TC) (711.73FL) MATCH (712.84BOW) MATCH (712.42TC) (711.82FL) 710.75FF 710.73FS 710.75FF 710.73FS 710.75FF 710.73FS 710.75FF 710.73FS 710.75FF 710.73FS 710.73FS RAMP BOTT. 710.73FS RAMP BOTT. 717.55TF 709.55TC 709.05FS 710.13TC 709.63FS-FL 718.00TF 710.00TW 707.00FS 710.00TC 709.62FS 709.50FL 718.00TF 710.00TW 707.51FS 709.50TC 709.00TG 710.00TC 709.62FS 709.50FL 709.93FF 709.91FS710.05 TG 710.40 FS 710.50FF 710.48FS 710.50FF 710.48FS 710.50FF 710.48FS 710.50FF 710.48FS 710.50FF 710.48FS 710.50FF 710.48FS 710.50FF 710.48FS 710.50FF 710.48FS 710.39 FS-GB 717.50TF 709.50TW 708.26FS (711.47FS) 711.47LIP 711.35FL 712.08 FS-GB 721.20TF 715.20TW 712.20FS MATCH (711.76BOW) 711.00TC 710.50FS 720.81TF 714.81TW 712.31TC 711.81FS MATCH (712.21BOW) MATCH (712.00BOW) 710.75FF 710.73FS 710.68 FS-0"CF 710.75FF 710.73FS 713.20TC (712.70BOW) 720.50TF 714.50TW 711.50FG MATCH (712.50TC) (712.03FS) MATCH (712.75FS) 718.19TF 712.19TW 709.19TG 711.25TC 710.75FS 710.71TC 710.21FS 710.38TC 709.88FS 710.09TC 709.71FS 709.59FL 710.30TC 709.92FS 709.80FL 710.75FF 710.73FS 710.75FF 710.73FS 710.60 FS-GB 710.11TC 709.73FS 709.61FL 717.97TF 711.97TW 708.97TG 710.11TC 709.73FS 709.61FL 709.60TC 709.22FS 709.10FL 709.55TC 709.17FS 709.05FL 709.25TC PROP. SWING GATE PROP. 3' BENCH WALL WITH FENCE ON CENTER PROP. 3' BENCH WALL WITH FENCE ON CENTER PROP. 3' BENCH WALL WITH FENCE ON CENTER PROP. ONSITE FIRE WATER LINE FOR HYDRANTS/SPRINKLERS PROP. ONSITE FIRE WATER LINE FOR HYDRANTS/SPRINKLERS PROP. ONSITE FIRE WATER LINE FOR HYDRANTS/SPRINKLERS PROP. SLIDING SECURITY GATE PROP. SLIDING SECURITY GATE EXIST. FH EXIST. FH EXIST. FH 706.29 TG MATCH (706.48FS)

60.0' 12.0' 24.7'
NORTH SUNNYSLOPE AVENUE PORSCHE PASADENA 2915 EAST COLORADO BLVD. PASADENA, CA CONCEPTUAL GRADING PLAN - NORTH SEE SHEET CG-02 SEE SHEET CG-02 SEE SHEET CG-02 DESCRIPTION EXISTING CONCRETE CONCRETE PAVEMENT LANDSCAPING COLDMILL AND RESURFACE CONCRETE CURB CURB & GUTTER RETAINING WALL BUILDING WALL EASEMENT CENTERLINE PROPERTY LINE PROPOSED MATCH LINE SYMBOL EXISTING FINISHED SURFACE FINISHED GRADE FINISHED FLOOR INVERT OF PIPE TOP OF FOOTING BOTTOM OF FOOTING TOP OF CURB TOP OF GRATE TOP OF WALL FLOWLINE HIGH POINT TOP OF STEP BOTTOM OF WALL BUILDING STORM DRAIN SANITARY SEWER UTILITY PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT STANDARD PLANS FOR PUBLIC WORKS CONSTRUCTION DISPLAY ABBREVIATIONS EXFSFSFFINV TFBFTCTGTWFLHPTSBWBLDG SDSSSDRSD UTIL SPFPWC DISP

SS SS SS DW

FW FW FW FW FW FW FW FW FW

FW FW FW FW FW FW FW FW FW FW FW FW FW FW FW FW EVCS EVCS EVCS EVCS EVCS EVCS EVCS EVCS EVCS EVCS EVCS10.0' 17.9' 17.9' 10.0' 60.0' 710.75FF 710.00PAD

28.5' EXISTING AUDI DEALERSHIP 10.0' S.D. EASEMENT

24.8' 19.3' 3.20% CUT AND PLUG EXISTING 4" WATER MAIN AAND INSTALL 2" WATER METER SERVICE PROPOSED FIRE WATER CONNECTION TO EXISTING WATER MAIN CUT AND PLUG SEWER MAIN AND INSTALL SEWER LATERAL EXISTING SEWER MAIN TO BE REMOVED EXISTING WATER MAIN TO BE REMOVED 3.60%0.5% 8.28%

3.71%

NORTH SUNNYSLOPE AVENUE EAST COLORADO BOULEVARD

10.0' 8.0' 26.0' 2.8% 2.8%

7.4%

6.0% 3.5% PROP. STAIRWELL TO 2ND LEVEL

3.0%

3.0%

4.0% 1.5% 1.8%1.2% 1.5% 2.7%

0.5% 0.5% 1.5% RIDGE RIDGE1.0% 1.0% RIDGE

1.0% 1.0% 1.0%4.0% 4.0% 705706 707 708 707 708 709710 4.0% 709 708 710 710 709 709
706 710 710 MATCH (705.70FS) MATCH (705.70FS) (709.95TC) (709.35FL) (710.19TC) (709.63FL) (709.90TC) (709.20FL) (708.28TC) (707.61FL) (705.92TC) (705.36FL) (703.00FS) 702.94LIP 702.88FL (700.08TC) (699.48FL) (699.96TC) (699.30FL) (699.50TC) (698.80FL) (711.80FS) (710.62FS) (710.15FS) (708.00FS) (701.00FS) (700.36FS) (700.00FS) (706.28TC) (705.92FS) (703.61TC) (703.28FS) (702.09TC) (701.75FS) (703.07TC) (702.78FS) (705.47TC) (705.11FS) (700.73FS) (700.50FS) (700.07FS) (725.73TW) (723.48BW) (710.59TC) (709.66FL)

COLDMILL

AND RESURFACE PER
STD. DWG S-415

COLDMILL

AND RESURFACE PER
STD. DWG S-415 NEW DRIVEWAY S-403 PROPOSED ADA CURB RAMP PER S-414 AND ADA PEDESTRIAN EASEMENT NEW SIDEWALK C&G ACROSS NINA ST. 709.68FL 710.37FS 710.41FS 709.98FL 710.87FS 709.89FL (711.54FS) 703.85TC 703.35TG 703.66 FS-GB 704.76TC 704.26FS 709.65TC 709.15FS MATCH (709.00FS) 708.75TC 708.25FS-0"CF 713.16TF 707.16TW (704.40FS) 705.45TC-TW (704.78FS) 707.31TC 706.81FS 703.55TC (703.05FS) 714.31TF 708.31TW-TC (703.80FS) 707.91TC 707.41TG 712.92TF 706.92TW (703.71FS) 708.08TC 707.58FS 708.57TC 708.07FS-0"CF 713.92TF 707.92TW (704.53FS) 706.76 TG 708.81TC-TW 708.31FS-0"CF 708.69TC 708.19FS 706.31TC 705.81TG 709.54TC 709.16FS 709.04FL 708.23TC 707.73TG 707.00TC 706.50FS 710.10TC 709.60FS 709.40TC 708.90FS 708.82 FS-GB 708.39 FS-GB 708.82 FS-GB 710.30TC 709.80FS 710.10 FS-TC 709.60 FS-0"CF 710.75FF 710.73FS 710.75FF 710.73FS 710.50TC 710.00FS 708.52TC 708.02FS 710.00TC 709.50FS 710.00TC 709.50FS 710.75FF 710.73FS 710.75FF 710.73FS 710.08TC 710.40TC 709.58FS 709.90FS 710.00TC 709.50FS 717.50TF 709.50TW 706.35FS 710.75FF 710.73FS 710.75FF 710.73FS 710.75FF 710.73FS 710.75FF 710.65TC 710.73FS 710.15FS 710.60 FS-GB 710.22TC 709.72FS710.37TC 709.87FS 710.47TC 709.97FS 710.60 FS-GB 709.73FS 709.61FL 710.61TC 710.11FS 710.11TC 709.73FS 709.61FL 710.83 FS-GB711.23TC (710.73BOW) 711.32TC (710.82BOW) 709.60TC 709.10TG 710.78TC 710.28FS 710.91TC (710.41BOW) 710.71TC 710.21FS 710.10TC 709.60FS 710.10TC 709.60FS 709.32 FS-GB 710.25TC 709.75FS 711.15TC (710.65BOW) 710.96FS 710.46FG 709.90TC 709.40FS 710.64TC 710.14FS 710.64TC 710.14FS 710.64TC 710.14FS710.47TC 709.97FS 709.59TC 709.09FS 708.97FL 709.57TC 709.07FS 708.95FL 708.55 FS-HP 709.25TC 708.75TG PROP. ONSITE FIRE WATER LINE FOR HYDRANTS/SPRINKLERS PROP. ONSITE FIRE WATER LINE FOR HYDRANTS/SPRINKLERS PROP. ONSITE FIRE WATER LINE FOR HYDRANTS/SPRINKLERS PROP. FIRE SPRINKLER POC PROP. SLIDING SECURITY GATE EXIST. FH NINA STREET PORSCHE PASADENA 2915 EAST COLORADO BLVD. PASADENA, CA CONCEPTUAL GRADING PLAN - SOUTH SEE SHEET CG-01 SEE SHEET CG-01 SEE SHEET CG-01 26.7'

55.0' DESCRIPTION SYMBOL EXISTING FINISHED SURFACE FINISHED GRADE FINISHED FLOOR INVERT OF PIPE TOP OF FOOTING BOTTOM OF FOOTING TOP OF CURB TOP OF GRATE TOP OF WALL FLOWLINE HIGH POINT TOP OF STEP BOTTOM OF WALL BUILDING STORM DRAIN SANITARY SEWER UTILITY PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT STANDARD PLANS FOR PUBLIC WORKS CONSTRUCTION DISPLAY ABBREVIATIONS EXFSFSFFINV TFBFTCTGTWFLHPTSBWBLDG SDSSSDRSD UTIL SPFPWC DISP CONCEPTUAL GRADING PLAN - SOUTH DESCRIPTION EXISTING CONCRETE CONCRETE PAVEMENT LANDSCAPING COLDMILL AND RESURFACE CONCRETE CURB CURB & GUTTER RETAINING WALL BUILDING WALL EASEMENT CENTERLINE PROPERTY LINE PROP. MATCH LINE SYMBOL EXISTING FINISHED SURFACE FINISHED GRADE FINISHED FLOOR INVERT OF PIPE TOP OF FOOTING BOTTOM OF FOOTING TOP OF CURB TOP OF GRATE TOP OF WALL FLOWLINE HIGH POINT TOP OF STEP BOTTOM OF WALL BUILDING STORM DRAIN SANITARY SEWER UTILITY PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT STANDARD PLANS FOR PUBLIC WORKS CONSTRUCTION DISPLAY ABBREVIATIONS EXFSFSFFINV TFBFTCTGTWFLHPTSBWBLDG SDSSSDRSD UTIL SPFPWC DISP

37.0' 18.0'

EVCS EVCS

EVCS EVCS EVCS EVCS EVCS EVCS EVCS EVCS EVCS

NORTH SUNNYSLOPE AVENUE EAST WALNUT STREET EAST COLORADO BOULEVARD NORTH SUNNYSLOPE AVENUE 2915 E WALNUT ST. LOTS 13,14,15,23,24,25,26 APN: 5748-036-029 2929 NINA ST. LOT 8,9,10,11,12 APN: 5748-036-032 EXIST. AUDI DEALERSHIP
2965 E COLORADO BLVD.

APN: 5754-005-007
2965 E WALNUT ST.

LOTS 7,16,17,18,19,20,21,22
APN: 5748-036-028
2914 E WALNUT ST.

LOT 1
APN: 5748-036-001
2926 E WALNUT ST.

LOT 2
APN: 5748-036-002
2932 E WALNUT ST.

LOT 3
APN: 5748-036-003
2940 E WALNUT ST.

LOT 4
APN: 5748-036-004
2948 E WALNUT ST.

LOT 5 & 6
APN: 5748-036-005 NINA STREET NINA STREET PROP. TO BE VACATED NINA STREET PROP. TO BE VACATED PROP. PORSCHE SHOWROOM & SERVICE BUILDING PROP. PORSCHE SHOWROOM & SERVICE BUILDING PORSCHE PASADENA 2915 EAST COLORADO BLVD. PASADENA, CA DESCRIPTION SYMBOL EXISTING FINISHED SURFACE FINISHED GRADE FINISHED FLOOR INVERT OF PIPE TOP OF FOOTING BOTTOM OF FOOTING TOP OF CURB TOP OF GRATE TOP OF WALL FLOWLINE HIGH POINT TOP OF STEP BOTTOM OF WALL BUILDING STORM DRAIN SANITARY SEWER UTILITY PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT STANDARD PLANS FOR PUBLIC WORKS CONSTRUCTION DISPLAY ABBREVIATIONS EXFSFSFFINV TFBFTCTGTWFLHPTSBWBLDG SDSSSDRSD UTIL SPFPWC DISP SITE PLAN EXHIBIT DESCRIPTION EXISTING CONCRETE CONCRETE PAVEMENT LANDSCAPING COLDMILL AND RESURFACE CONCRETE CURB CURB & GUTTER RETAINING WALL BUILDING WALL EASEMENT CENTERLINE PROPERTY LINE SYMBOL EXISTING FINISHED SURFACE FINISHED GRADE FINISHED FLOOR INVERT OF PIPE TOP OF FOOTING BOTTOM OF FOOTING TOP OF CURB TOP OF GRATE TOP OF WALL FLOWLINE HIGH POINT TOP OF STEP BOTTOM OF WALL BUILDING STORM DRAIN SANITARY SEWER UTILITY PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT STANDARD PLANS FOR PUBLIC WORKS CONSTRUCTION DISPLAY ABBREVIATIONS EXFSFSFFINV TFBFTCTGTWFLHPTSBWBLDG SDSSSDRSD UTIL SPFPWC DISP LEGAL DESCRIPTION LOTS 7, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22 LEGAL DESCRIPTION LOT 1 LEGAL DESCRIPTION LOT 2 LEGAL DESCRIPTION LOT 3 LEGAL DESCRIPTION LOTS 4, 5, 6 LEGAL DESCRIPTION LOTS 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 LEGAL DESCRIPTION LOTS 13, 14, 15 AND 23, 24, 25, 26 EXISTING EASEMENTS/EXCEPTIONS THE FOLLOWING EASEMENTS, DESCRIBED IN PRELIMINARY REPORT ORDER NO. NHSC-5949354 (29), PREPARED BY FIRST AMERICAN TITLE COMPANY ON MAY 15, 2019, AFFECT THE SUBJECT PARCEL AND HAVE BEEN NUMBERED TO CORRESPOND WITH SAID PRELIMINARY REPORT. APN: 5748-036-001, 002, 003, 004, 005, 032 3. DOCUMENT FOR "COVENANT AND AGREEMENT TO PROVIDE PARKING" RECORDED AUGUST 11, 1989 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 89-12950 OF O.R. AFFECTS: PARCEL C LOCATION OF THE AGREEMENT CANNOT BE DETERMINED FROM THE RECORD. THE FOLLOWING EASEMENTS, DESCRIBED IN PRELIMINARY REPORT ORDER NO. NHSC-5949382 (29), PREPARED BY FIRST AMERICAN TITLE COMPANY ON MAY 16, 2019, AFFECT THE SUBJECT PARCEL AND HAVE BEEN NUMBERED TO CORRESPOND WITH SAID PRELIMINARY REPORT. APN: 5748-036-028, 029 AND 5754-005-007 3. AN EASEMENT FOR STREET WIDENING OF COLORADO STREET RECORDED APRIL 28, 1927 AS BOOK 6612, PAGE 280 OF O.R. 5. VACATION OF VARD ALLEY AND PORTION OF NINA STREET RECORDED JANUARY 19, 1968 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 2575 IN BOOK 3890, PAGE 703 OF O.R. AND BY QUITCLAIM DEED RECORDED MARCH 29, 1968 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 823 IN BOOK D-3954, PAGE 516 OF O.R. AND QUITCLAIM DEED RECORDED FEBRUARY 4, 1975 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 2063 OF O.R. 6. AN EASEMENT FOR STREET AND INCIDENTAL PURPOSES RECORDED MARCH 29, 1968 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 824 OF O.R. 8. AN EASEMENT FOR STORM DRAIN AND INCIDENTAL PURPOSES RECORDED AUGUST 5, 1974 IN INSTRUMENT NO. 2571 OF O.R. 12. SAME AS EXCEPTION 3 13. SAME AS EXCEPTION 6 14. AN EASEMENT FOR STREET AND INCIDENTAL PURPOSES RECORDED APRIL 1, 1968 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 3517 OF O.R.

C O FF E E M AK E R
SITE PLAN LEGEND:

PROPOSED BUILDING

PROPERTY LINE

SETBACKS

PROPOSED ADA PATH OF TRAVEL

PROPOSED ADA TRUNCATED DOMES

PROPOSED PAVING

PROPOSED ENHANCED PAVING

PROPOSED LANDSCAPE

FIRE LANE
GENERAL NOTE:
i. OUTDOOR PARKING AREEA LIGHTING SHALL NOT EXCEED 18 FEET

IN HEIGHT, UNLESS SPECIFICALLY APPROVED BY THE DESIGN

COMMISSION OR OTHER APPLICABLE REVIEW AUTHORITY, AND

EXCEPT WHEN LOCATED WITHIN CITY PARKS
ii. IN GENERAL, THE LIGHTING FIXTURES USED SHALL BE DESIGNATED

TO CONFINE EMITTED LIGHT TO THE PARKING AREA, AND THE LIGHT

SOURCE SHALL NOT BE VISIBLE FROM OUTSIDE THE AREA
iii. WHERE IMPORTANT ARCHITECTURAL CONSIDERATIONS INDICATE

THE DESIRABILITY OF FIXTURES WHICH EXPOSE THE LIGHT SOURCE

TO VIEW FROM BEYOND THE PARKING AREA, THE FIXTURES AND

LIGHTING SHALL BE SPECIFICALLY APPROVED BY THE DESIGN

COMMISSION OR OTHER APPLICABLE REVIEW AUTHORITY
iv. LOTS WITHIN NONRESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS. MAXIMUM

AVERAGE ILLUMINATION AT GROUND LEVEL SHALL NOT EXCEED

THREE-FOOT CANDLES WHEN TEH PARKING LOT IS LOCATED

WITHIN A NONRESIDENTAIL ZONING DISTRICT
2 A.102
1 A.102

PROPOSED

CARWASH &

DETAIL BAYS EV BATTERY

STORAGE

PROPOSED

DEALERSHIP

BUILDING

DISPLAY DISPLAY DISPLAY

DISPLAY
CUSTOMER (7)

INVENTORY

INVENTORY

INVENTORY
SERVICE CUSTOMER (24)
CUSTOMER (2)
4' - 1 1/8"
18' - 0" 24' - 0" 10' - 0" 17' - 0" 24' - 0"
10' - 0"
17' - 0" 24' - 0"
CLR.
25' - 6"
17' - 0" 26' - 9" 17' - 0"
8' - 6" 26' - 0" 18' - 0"
5' - 0" ADA
17' - 0" 24' - 0" 17' - 0"
EXT. FINISH
30' - 0"
24' - 6"
(N) DRIVEWAY
28' - 6" 10' - 7"
5' - 0"
78' - 0"
158' - 0"
(N) DRIVEWAY
26' - 0"
(N) DRIVEWAY
24' - 8"

RAMP UP

N O R T H S U N N Y S L O P E A V E N U E

E A S T C O L O R A D O B O U L E V A R D

E A S T W A L N U T S T R E E T

N I N A S T R E E T
4 0
4 0' -
0 " ' - 0"
5 5' -
0 "
4 5' -
0 "
30' - 0" 30' - 0"

EXISTING AUDI

DEALERSHIP
0° 36' 53"
589.00'
NE
89° 36' 08"
456.30'
N E
0° 36' 52"
275.40'
NE 0° 36' 52"
253.60'
NE
89° 36' 13"
456.31'
N E

EXISTING
AUDI
BLDG.
002
008
014
006
011 TYP.
003
004
011
013
005
013

SERVICE DRIVE
19 SPACES @ 8' - 6"
161' - 6"
8' - 6" 11' - 0"
5' - 0"
9' - 0"
5' - 0"
9' - 0"
5' - 0"
9' - 0"
8' - 0"
9' - 0" 25' - 6"
009 005
007
010
010
001

SHOWROOM SERVICE
BAYS
PARTS

STORAGE

SHIPPING &

RECEIVING
023 TYP.
001
002
008
016
015
017
012
015
018
018
018
006
1 0' -
0 "
17' - 0" 24' - 0" 15' - 9"
1 0' -
2 "
019 TYP.

LOADING
002
008
014
020
020
020
8 0' -
0 "
60' - 0"
1 00' -
0 "
010
009
A.101 1
A.101 6
021

INVENTORY
022
001
024
024
5 SPACES @ 8' - 6"
42' - 6"
F.F. @ 710.75"
2914 E. WALNUT ST.

LOT 1
APN: 5748-036-001
13 7.
70 '
276.57'

30.00' 30.00'
100.04'
N
00 °36
'53
"E
14 4.5
4'
N
00 °36
'53
"E
10 9.0
5'
2926 E. WALNUT ST.

LOT 2
APN: 5748-036-002
2932 E. WALNUT ST.

LOT 3
APN: 5748-036-003
2940 E. WALNUT ST.

LOT 4
APN: 5748-036-004
2948 E. WALNUT ST.

LOTS 5 & 6
APN: 5748-036-005
2929 NINA ST.

LOTS 8, 9, 10, 11, 12
APN: 5748-036-0032
2965 E. COLORADO BLVD.

APN: 5754-005-007
2915 E. COLORADO BLVD.

LOTS 13, 14, 15, 23, 24, 25, 26
APN: 5748-036-0029
2965 E. COLORADO BLVD.

LOTS 7, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22
APN: 5748-036-0028
176.53'
N89°36'22"E 276.57'
024 025
COPYRIGHTED DOCUMENT: THIS DRAWING AND THE BIM/CAD FILE FROM WHICH IT HAS BEEN GENERATED ARE PROVIDED AS AN INSTRUMENT OF SERVICE FOR THIS PROJECT. THESE DOCUMENTS ARE THE SOLE PROPERTY OF GOREE ARCHITECTS, INC. ANY USE OF THESE DOCUMENTS, DATA AND DESIGNS FOR PURPOSES OTHER THAN THOSE ASSOCIATED WITH THIS PROJECT WITHOUT THE EXPRESSED, WRITTEN PERMISSION OF GOREE WHITFIELD, INC. IS PROHIBITED. 24691 Del Prado Ave
Dana Point, CA 92629
949 -234 -1950
www.goreewhitfield.com

PROJECT NAME

PROJECT ADDRESS

OWNER INFORMATION

ISSUE DATE

GOREE PROJECT NUMBER

SHEET NUMBER

SHEET NAME

KEY PLAN

STAMP / SIGNATURE

CONSULTANTS

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

1. ALL OUTDOOR LIGHTING SHALL COMPLY WITH CITY STANDARDS AND WITH THE CALIFORNIA GREEN BUILDING STANDARDS CODE. ALL OUTDOOR LIGHTING

FIXTURES SHALL COMPLIMENT THE OVERALL PROJECT THEME AND SHALL BE

DIRECTED, ORIENTED, AND SHIELDED TO PREVENT LIGHT AND GLARE FROM

CASTING ONTO ADJACENT PROPERTIES

2. ALL BUILDING SIGNAGE WILL BE REVEIWED UNDER A SEPARATE SUBMITTAL. ALL

SIGNAGE SHALL BE LIT AND COMPLY WITH CITY STANDARDS

3. ALL CUSTOMER AND EMPLOYEE PARKING SAPCES ARE TO BE CLEARLY IDENTIFIED THROUGH THE USE OF SIGNAGE OR PAINT. DETAILS OF THE SPACES

AND/OR SIGNAGE SHALL BE INCLUDED ON THE CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS AND

WILL BE INSPECTED PRIOR TO THE CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY SITE WORK GENERAL NOTES:

RUSNAK PORSCHE

PASADENA
2915 EAST COLORADO

BOULEVARD
PASADENA, CA 91107
A.100
04/01/2022
2019-0011

RUSNAK AUTO GROUP
267-337 W. COLORADO BLVD.

PASADENA, CA 91105
CONTACT: JOHN BEED
[email protected]

PROPOSED SITE PLAN
Commercial Development Resources (CDR)
695 Town Center Drive, Ste. 110, Costa Mesa, CA 92626
Principal: Aaron M. Albertson
E: [email protected], O: (949) 610.8997 x 704
ASLA Landscape Architecture
630 S. El Camino #B4, San Clemente, CA 92672
Designer: Aaron Sevilla
E: [email protected], P: (949) 444.9468
CIVIL

LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT

NEW PORSCHE DEALERSHIP
© GOREE WHITFIELD 2021
N

PROPOSED SITE PLAN KEYNOTES
001 PROPERTY LINE
002 NEW DRIVEWAY APPROACH
003 PYLON BRAND SIGN BY SIGN VENDOR
004 DISPLAY PAD
005 LINE OF COVERED OVERHANG
006 LANDSCAPE AREA
007 ELECTRICAL TRANSFORMER
008 PROPOSED SWINGING GATE WITH KNOX BOX
009 PROPOSED SLIDE GATE WITH KNOX BOX
010 PROPOSED 8' - 0" HIGH FENCE
011 SITE LIGHTING @ MAX. 18' - 0" PER CITY STANDARD
012 BICYCLE PARKING
013 PROPOSED RETAINING WALL PER CIVIL
014 ENHANCED PAVING
015 EXISTING CHAIN LINK FENCE TO REMAIN
016 EXISTING CHAIN LINK SWING GATE TO REMAIN
017 EXISTING CHAIN LINK SLIDE GATE TO REMAIN
018 EXISTING DRIVEWAY TO REMAIN
019 10' X 20' LOADING ZONE
020 EASEMENT. SEE CIVIL
021 UNDERGROUND STORMWATER BMP. SEE CIVIL
022 PROPOSED DCDA LOCATION. SEE CIVIL
023 PROPOSED CATCH BASIN. SEE CIVIL
024 PROPOSED FIRE HYDRANT. SEE CIVIL
025 PORTION OF EXISTING AUDI BUILDING TO BE REMOVED

ISSUE HISTORY
DATE: MARK: DESCRIPTION:
1 1" = 30'-0"

PROPOSED SITE PLAN
71' - 4"
67' - 4"67' - 4"
71' - 4"

STORAGE
4 A.101 2
A.101
5 A.101
3 A.101

DETAIL BAYS

CARWASH

CARWASH

STORAGE

CARWASH
20' - 0"
EP-1 GL-1 EIFS-1
20' - 0"
EP-1 EP-1 GL-1 EIFS-1
20' - 0"
EP-1 GL-1 EP-1 EIFS-1 EIFS
-1
20' - 0"
17' - 0"
17' - 0" 7
A.101
10 A.101
9 A.101
8 A.101

EV BATTERY

STORAGE
EP-1 GL-1 EIFS-1
16' - 0"16' - 0"
EIFS-1 EIFS
-1
16' - 0"
EIFS-1
CP-1

ALUMINUM COMPOSITE METAL PANELS
COLOR: RAL 9006 WHITE ALUMINUM
FINISH: NON-REFLECTIVE
EXTERIOR FINISH LEGEND:

CP-2

PERFORATED METAL PANELS
COLOR: RAL 7021 BLACK GREY
FINISH: NON-REFLECTIVE
MP-1

TRAPEZIUM METAL PANEL SYSTEM
COLOR: RAL 7021 BLACK GREY
FINISH: NON-REFLECTIVE
EP-1

EXTERIOR PAINT
COLOR: MATCH RAL 7021 BLACK GREY
EIFS-1

EXTERIOR INSULATION FINISHING SYSTEM
PAINTED EP-1
SF-2

EXTERIOR STOREFRONT

FRONT LOADED BUTT-JOINTS
COLOR: LOW-E CLEAR GLASS
GL-1
GLASS
COLOR: LOW-E CLEAR GLASS
O-G

OBSCURE GLASS

DARK GRAY ANODIZED FRAME
COPYRIGHTED DOCUMENT: THIS DRAWING AND THE BIM/CAD FILE FROM WHICH IT HAS BEEN GENERATED ARE PROVIDED AS AN INSTRUMENT OF SERVICE FOR THIS PROJECT. THESE DOCUMENTS ARE THE SOLE PROPERTY OF GOREE ARCHITECTS, INC. ANY USE OF THESE DOCUMENTS, DATA AND DESIGNS FOR PURPOSES OTHER THAN THOSE ASSOCIATED WITH THIS PROJECT WITHOUT THE EXPRESSED, WRITTEN PERMISSION OF GOREE WHITFIELD, INC. IS PROHIBITED. 24691 Del Prado Ave
Dana Point, CA 92629
949 -234 -1950
www.goreewhitfield.com

PROJECT NAME

PROJECT ADDRESS

OWNER INFORMATION

ISSUE DATE

GOREE PROJECT NUMBER

SHEET NUMBER

SHEET NAME

KEY PLAN

STAMP / SIGNATURE

CONSULTANTS

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

RUSNAK PORSCHE

PASADENA
2915 EAST COLORADO

BOULEVARD
PASADENA, CA 91107
A.101
04/01/2022
2019-0011

RUSNAK AUTO GROUP
267-337 W. COLORADO BLVD.

PASADENA, CA 91105
CONTACT: JOHN BEED
[email protected]

PROPOSED CARWASH AND EV

BATTERY STORAGE
Commercial Development Resources (CDR)
695 Town Center Drive, Ste. 110, Costa Mesa, CA 92626
Principal: Aaron M. Albertson
E: [email protected], O: (949) 610.8997 x 704
ASLA Landscape Architecture
630 S. El Camino #B4, San Clemente, CA 92672
Designer: Aaron Sevilla
E: [email protected], P: (949) 444.9468
CIVIL

LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT

NEW PORSCHE DEALERSHIP
© GOREE WHITFIELD 2021
1 1/8" = 1'-0"
ENLARGED CARWASH PLAN 2 1/8" = 1'-0"

CARWASH ELEVATION - WEST
3 1/8" = 1'-0"

CARWASH ELEVATION - NORTH
4 1/8" = 1'-0"

CARWASH ELEVATION - EAST
5 1/8" = 1'-0"

CARWASH ELEVATION - SOUTH
N
6 1/8" = 1'-0"

EV BATTERY STORAGE
PLAN
N
7 1/8" = 1'-0"

EV BATTERY STORAGE

ELEVATION - WEST
8 1/8" = 1'-0"

EV BATTERY STORAGE

ELEVATION - NORTH
9 1/8" = 1'-0"

EV BATTERY STORAGE
ELEVATION - EAST 10 1/8" = 1'-0"

EV BATTERY STORAGE

ELEVATION - SOUTH

ISSUE HISTORY
DATE: MARK: DESCRIPTION:
8' - 0"
001
002
8' - 0"
001
004 003 002

TOP OF PAVING

ANCHOR BOLTS

BASE COVER TO

MATCH POLE

FACTORY INSTALLED WP
120V DUPLEX OUTLET

WHERE SHOWN ON

ELECTRICAL SITE PLAN

LIGHT STANDARD
PER STRUCTURAL 2' - 0"
18' - 0" MAX.

ACCESS HANDHOLD
i. OUTDOOR PARKING AREEA LIGHTING SHALL NOT EXCEED 18 FEET IN

HEIGHT, UNLESS SPECIFICALLY APPROVED BY THE DESIGN

COMMISSION OR OTHER APPLICABLE REVIEW AUTHORITY, AND

EXCEPT WHEN LOCATED WITHIN CITY PARKS
ii. IN GENERAL, THE LIGHTING FIXTURES USED SHALL BE DESIGNATED

TO CONFINE EMITTED LIGHT TO THE PARKING AREA, AND THE LIGHT

SOURCE SHALL NOT BE VISIBLE FROM OUTSIDE THE AREA
iii. WHERE IMPORTANT ARCHITECTURAL CONSIDERATIONS INDICATE

THE DESIRABILITY OF FIXTURES WHICH EXPOSE THE LIGHT SOURCE

TO VIEW FROM BEYOND THE PARKING AREA, THE FIXTURES AND

LIGHTING SHALL BE SPECIFICALLY APPROVED BY THE DESIGN

COMMISSION OR OTHER APPLICABLE REVIEW AUTHORITY
iv. LOTS WITHIN NONRESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS. MAXIMUM

AVERAGE ILLUMINATION AT GROUND LEVEL SHALL NOT EXCEED

THREE-FOOT CANDLES WHEN TEH PARKING LOT IS LOCATED

WITHIN A NONRESIDENTAIL ZONING DISTRICT
COPYRIGHTED DOCUMENT: THIS DRAWING AND THE BIM/CAD FILE FROM WHICH IT HAS BEEN GENERATED ARE PROVIDED AS AN INSTRUMENT OF SERVICE FOR THIS PROJECT. THESE DOCUMENTS ARE THE SOLE PROPERTY OF GOREE ARCHITECTS, INC. ANY USE OF THESE DOCUMENTS, DATA AND DESIGNS FOR PURPOSES OTHER THAN THOSE ASSOCIATED WITH THIS PROJECT WITHOUT THE EXPRESSED, WRITTEN PERMISSION OF GOREE WHITFIELD, INC. IS PROHIBITED. 24691 Del Prado Ave
Dana Point, CA 92629
949 -234 -1950
www.goreewhitfield.com

PROJECT NAME

PROJECT ADDRESS

OWNER INFORMATION

ISSUE DATE

GOREE PROJECT NUMBER

SHEET NUMBER

SHEET NAME

KEY PLAN

STAMP / SIGNATURE

CONSULTANTS

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

RUSNAK PORSCHE

PASADENA
2915 EAST COLORADO

BOULEVARD
PASADENA, CA 91107
A.102
04/01/2022
2019-0011

RUSNAK AUTO GROUP
267-337 W. COLORADO BLVD.

PASADENA, CA 91105
CONTACT: JOHN BEED
[email protected]

PROPOSED SITE DETAILS
Commercial Development Resources (CDR)
695 Town Center Drive, Ste. 110, Costa Mesa, CA 92626
Principal: Aaron M. Albertson
E: [email protected], O: (949) 610.8997 x 704
ASLA Landscape Architecture
630 S. El Camino #B4, San Clemente, CA 92672
Designer: Aaron Sevilla
E: [email protected], P: (949) 444.9468
CIVIL

LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT

NEW PORSCHE DEALERSHIP
© GOREE WHITFIELD 2021
1 1" = 10'-0"
FENCE ELEVATION - WEST (SUNNYSLOPE) 2 1" = 10'-0"

FENCE ELEVATION - NORTH (WALNUT)

SITE DETAILS KEYNOTES
001 BLOCK WALL PER CIVIL
002 WROUGHT IRON FENCE PAINTED BLACK
003 SWING GATE TO MATCH FENCE
004 EXISTING FENCE TO REMAIN
3 1/2" = 1'-0"

LIGHT POLE BASE

ISSUE HISTORY
DATE: MARK: DESCRIPTION:

UP
UP

CO F F E E M A K E R
DN
DN
UP
DN
DN
DN
UP

RAMP UP
3 A.202 3
A.201
3 A.200
4 A.200

SHOWROOM
PARTS

SERVICE
2 A.202
1 A.202
2 A.201
1 A.201

SERVICE DRIVE
387' - 11"
1' - 9"
1' - 0"
149' - 1"
1' - 7"

RAMP UP RAMP DN
(12)
22 REQUIRED PARKING
@ 8' - 6" X 18'
(1) (2) (2) (2) (2) (1) 3
A.202 3
A.201
3 A.200
4 A.200

SHOWROOM
BELOW
2ND LEVEL

PARKING
UPPER

DISPLAY

OFFICES
389' - 8"
1' - 0"
149' - 1"
1' - 7"

OPEN TO BELOW

OPEN TO BELOW

OPEN TO BELOW
B A
COPYRIGHTED DOCUMENT: THIS DRAWING AND THE BIM/CAD FILE FROM WHICH IT HAS BEEN GENERATED ARE PROVIDED AS AN INSTRUMENT OF SERVICE FOR THIS PROJECT. THESE DOCUMENTS ARE THE SOLE PROPERTY OF GOREE ARCHITECTS, INC. ANY USE OF THESE DOCUMENTS, DATA AND DESIGNS FOR PURPOSES OTHER THAN THOSE ASSOCIATED WITH THIS PROJECT WITHOUT THE EXPRESSED, WRITTEN PERMISSION OF GOREE WHITFIELD, INC. IS PROHIBITED. 24691 Del Prado Ave
Dana Point, CA 92629
949 -234 -1950
www.goreewhitfield.com

PROJECT NAME

PROJECT ADDRESS

OWNER INFORMATION

ISSUE DATE

GOREE PROJECT NUMBER

SHEET NUMBER

SHEET NAME

KEY PLAN

STAMP / SIGNATURE

CONSULTANTS

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

RUSNAK PORSCHE

PASADENA
2915 EAST COLORADO

BOULEVARD
PASADENA, CA 91107
A.110
04/01/2022
2019-0011

RUSNAK AUTO GROUP
267-337 W. COLORADO BLVD.

PASADENA, CA 91105
CONTACT: JOHN BEED
[email protected]

PROPOSED OVERALL FLOOR
PLANS
Commercial Development Resources (CDR)
695 Town Center Drive, Ste. 110, Costa Mesa, CA 92626
Principal: Aaron M. Albertson
E: [email protected], O: (949) 610.8997 x 704
ASLA Landscape Architecture
630 S. El Camino #B4, San Clemente, CA 92672
Designer: Aaron Sevilla
E: [email protected], P: (949) 444.9468
CIVIL

LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT

NEW PORSCHE DEALERSHIP
© GOREE WHITFIELD 2021
1 1/16" = 1'-0"

PROPOSED OVERALL FIRST FLOOR PLAN
2 1/16" = 1'-0"

PROPOSED OVERALL SECOND FLOOR PLAN
N N
MATCHLINESEE SHEET A.131SEE SHEET A.130
MATCHLINESEE SHEET A.133SEE SHEET A.132

ISSUE HISTORY
DATE: MARK: DESCRIPTION:

RAMP DN
STR-2
(19)

ROOF DECK
109 REQUIRED PARKING
@ 8' - 6" X 18'
(19)
(9)
(17)
(20)
(25)
3 A.202 3
A.201
3 A.200
4 A.200
389' - 8"
1' - 0"
149' - 1"
1' - 7"
B A
COPYRIGHTED DOCUMENT: THIS DRAWING AND THE BIM/CAD FILE FROM WHICH IT HAS BEEN GENERATED ARE PROVIDED AS AN INSTRUMENT OF SERVICE FOR THIS PROJECT. THESE DOCUMENTS ARE THE SOLE PROPERTY OF GOREE ARCHITECTS, INC. ANY USE OF THESE DOCUMENTS, DATA AND DESIGNS FOR PURPOSES OTHER THAN THOSE ASSOCIATED WITH THIS PROJECT WITHOUT THE EXPRESSED, WRITTEN PERMISSION OF GOREE WHITFIELD, INC. IS PROHIBITED. 24691 Del Prado Ave
Dana Point, CA 92629
949 -234 -1950
www.goreewhitfield.com

PROJECT NAME

PROJECT ADDRESS

OWNER INFORMATION

ISSUE DATE

GOREE PROJECT NUMBER

SHEET NUMBER

SHEET NAME

KEY PLAN

STAMP / SIGNATURE

CONSULTANTS

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

RUSNAK PORSCHE

PASADENA
2915 EAST COLORADO

BOULEVARD
PASADENA, CA 91107
A.111
04/01/2022
2019-0011

RUSNAK AUTO GROUP
267-337 W. COLORADO BLVD.

PASADENA, CA 91105
CONTACT: JOHN BEED
[email protected]

PROPOSED OVERALL FLOOR
PLANS
Commercial Development Resources (CDR)
695 Town Center Drive, Ste. 110, Costa Mesa, CA 92626
Principal: Aaron M. Albertson
E: [email protected], O: (949) 610.8997 x 704
ASLA Landscape Architecture
630 S. El Camino #B4, San Clemente, CA 92672
Designer: Aaron Sevilla
E: [email protected], P: (949) 444.9468
CIVIL

LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT

NEW PORSCHE DEALERSHIP
© GOREE WHITFIELD 2021
1 1/16" = 1'-0"

PROPOSED OVERALL ROOF DECK PLAN
N
MATCHLINESEE SHEET A.134

ISSUE HISTORY
DATE: MARK: DESCRIPTION:

UP
UP

COFFE E MAK ER
GGHH
11 22
33 44
55 66
77 XX
3 A.210
3 A.210

SHOWROOM
100

PORSCHEPLATZ
100B

WELCOME
MODULE
100A

BOUTIQUE
100C

HIGHLIGHT
MODULE
100D

E-PERFORMANCE
MODULE
100E
??
OWNERS

COLLECTION
MODULE
147
OWNERS

COLLECTION
MODULE
146

WOMENS RR
144

MENS RR
143
JAN.
145

FIRE RISER
142
ELEV. EQUIP.
141
ELEC.
140

TECH RR
139
STR-2

SALES SPACE
119

CUSTOMER
AREA
120

FITTING
LOUNGE
118
??

GENUINE PARTS
121

IT ROOM
122

SERVICE ADMIN
116

SERVICE ADMIN
115

MOBILITY
108

SERVICE
WRITER
110

SERVICE
WRITER
109

SERVICE
WRITER
111

SERVICE
WRITER
112

SERVICE
WRITER
113

SERVICE
WRITER
114
SERVICE MGR.
123
STOR.
124
PARTS MGR.
125
SALES
105
SALES
106
SALES
104
SALES
103

SALES MGR
101

SALES MGR
102

SERVICE DRIVE
107
STR-1
3 A.202 3
A.201
4 A.200
1 A.211 1
A.211
164' - 0"
5' - 2" 6' - 0" 24' - 0" 128' - 11"
12' - 0" 13' - 6" 12' - 0" 12' - 6" 12' - 0" 13' - 6" 12' - 0" 12' - 6" 12' - 0" 13' - 6" 1' - 11" 39' - 11" 108' - 9"
148' - 8"
28' - 4" 5' - 8" 12' - 2" 18' - 2" 1' - 6" 18' - 2" 80' - 0" 164' - 0"
B A
COPYRIGHTED DOCUMENT: THIS DRAWING AND THE BIM/CAD FILE FROM WHICH IT HAS BEEN GENERATED ARE PROVIDED AS AN INSTRUMENT OF SERVICE FOR THIS PROJECT. THESE DOCUMENTS ARE THE SOLE PROPERTY OF GOREE ARCHITECTS, INC. ANY USE OF THESE DOCUMENTS, DATA AND DESIGNS FOR PURPOSES OTHER THAN THOSE ASSOCIATED WITH THIS PROJECT WITHOUT THE EXPRESSED, WRITTEN PERMISSION OF GOREE WHITFIELD, INC. IS PROHIBITED. 24691 Del Prado Ave
Dana Point, CA 92629
949 -234 -1950
www.goreewhitfield.com

PROJECT NAME

PROJECT ADDRESS

OWNER INFORMATION

ISSUE DATE

GOREE PROJECT NUMBER

SHEET NUMBER

SHEET NAME

KEY PLAN

STAMP / SIGNATURE

CONSULTANTS

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

RUSNAK PORSCHE

PASADENA
2915 EAST COLORADO

BOULEVARD
PASADENA, CA 91107
A.130
04/01/2022
2019-0011

RUSNAK AUTO GROUP
267-337 W. COLORADO BLVD.

PASADENA, CA 91105
CONTACT: JOHN BEED
[email protected]

PROPOSED FIRST FLOOR PLAN
- AREA A
Commercial Development Resources (CDR)
695 Town Center Drive, Ste. 110, Costa Mesa, CA 92626
Principal: Aaron M. Albertson
E: [email protected], O: (949) 610.8997 x 704
ASLA Landscape Architecture
630 S. El Camino #B4, San Clemente, CA 92672
Designer: Aaron Sevilla
E: [email protected], P: (949) 444.9468
CIVIL

LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT

NEW PORSCHE DEALERSHIP
© GOREE WHITFIELD 2021
1 1/8" = 1'-0"

PROPOSED FIRST FLOOR PLAN - AREA A
N

ISSUE HISTORY
DATE: MARK: DESCRIPTION:

UP

CCDDEEFFGGHH
11 22
33 44
55 66
77 3
A.210
3 A.210
PARTS MGR.
125
STOR.
124

TECH COUNTER
127
PARTS

STORAGE
126

MACHINE AND

BATTERY ROOM
128

TIRE CHANGING
ROOM
129
TRASH
130

SERVICE BAYS
138

TECH BREAK

AND TRAINING
137

TECH RR
136

WOMEN'S TECH
135

MEN'S TECH
LOCKER
134

MEN'S TECH RR
133

OIL AND

COMPRESSORS
132

TOOLS AND

EQUIPMENT
131
123
4 (ALIGNMENT)
5 (ALIGNMENT)
6 (MISSION E) 7
89 10
11 (MISSION E) 12
13 14
15 16
17 19
18 (MISSION E)
20 21
22 23
24 25
31 32
33 34
36 35
37 26
38 27
39 28
40 29
41 30

RAMP UP
STR-3
3 A.202 3
A.201
3 A.200
2 A.211 2
A.211
26' - 2" 47' - 6" 72' - 0" 71' - 2" 6' - 10"
4' - 0" 19' - 6" 24' - 0" 26' - 3" 19' - 6" 26' - 3" 26' - 3" 19' - 6" 25' - 5" 223' - 8"
18' - 0" 26' - 0" 26' - 0" 26' - 0" 26' - 0" 26' - 8"
148' - 8"
26' - 2" 47' - 6" 72' - 0" 71' - 2" 6' - 10"
2' - 8" 22' - 0" 5' - 6" 19' - 6" 53' - 2" 19' - 6" 11' - 1" 9' - 6" 7' - 9" 9' - 6" 56' - 8" 6' - 10" 223' - 8"
B A
COPYRIGHTED DOCUMENT: THIS DRAWING AND THE BIM/CAD FILE FROM WHICH IT HAS BEEN GENERATED ARE PROVIDED AS AN INSTRUMENT OF SERVICE FOR THIS PROJECT. THESE DOCUMENTS ARE THE SOLE PROPERTY OF GOREE ARCHITECTS, INC. ANY USE OF THESE DOCUMENTS, DATA AND DESIGNS FOR PURPOSES OTHER THAN THOSE ASSOCIATED WITH THIS PROJECT WITHOUT THE EXPRESSED, WRITTEN PERMISSION OF GOREE WHITFIELD, INC. IS PROHIBITED. 24691 Del Prado Ave
Dana Point, CA 92629
949 -234 -1950
www.goreewhitfield.com

PROJECT NAME

PROJECT ADDRESS

OWNER INFORMATION

ISSUE DATE

GOREE PROJECT NUMBER

SHEET NUMBER

SHEET NAME

KEY PLAN

STAMP / SIGNATURE

CONSULTANTS

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

RUSNAK PORSCHE

PASADENA
2915 EAST COLORADO

BOULEVARD
PASADENA, CA 91107
A.131
04/01/2022
2019-0011

RUSNAK AUTO GROUP
267-337 W. COLORADO BLVD.

PASADENA, CA 91105
CONTACT: JOHN BEED
[email protected]

PROPOSED FIRST FLOOR PLAN
- AREA B
Commercial Development Resources (CDR)
695 Town Center Drive, Ste. 110, Costa Mesa, CA 92626
Principal: Aaron M. Albertson
E: [email protected], O: (949) 610.8997 x 704
ASLA Landscape Architecture
630 S. El Camino #B4, San Clemente, CA 92672
Designer: Aaron Sevilla
E: [email protected], P: (949) 444.9468
CIVIL

LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT

NEW PORSCHE DEALERSHIP
© GOREE WHITFIELD 2021
1 1/8" = 1'-0"

PROPOSED FIRST FLOOR PLAN - AREA B
N

ISSUE HISTORY
DATE: MARK: DESCRIPTION:

DN
DN
UP
DN
DN
UP
DN
GGHH
11 22
33 44
55 66
77 XX
3 A.210
3 A.210

UNUSED AREA
201

IT - SERVER
ROOM
202

CONFERENCE

MEETING

TRAINING
203
BDC
205

EMPLOYEE

BREAKROOM
209
STOR.
204
STOR.
208
CONF.
207
OWNERS
OFFICE
206

OWNER'S
TOILET
206B

OWNER'S

LAVATORY
206A
CLOS.
206C

F&I WAITING
217
ELEC.
210
MENS

RESTROOM
211
WOMENS

RESTROOM
213

JANITOR
212
STR-3

F&I OFFICE
214

F&I OFFICE
215

F&I OFFICE
216
STR-2

CPO OFFICE
218

UPPER DISPLAY
200
STR-1

RAMP DN
3 A.202 3
A.201
4 A.200
1 A.211 1
A.211
165' - 7"
149' - 8"
18' - 0" 26' - 0" 26' - 0" 26' - 0" 26' - 0" 26' - 8"
164' - 0"
37' - 8" 56' - 0" 70' - 4"

OPEN TO BELOW

OPEN TO BELOW

OPEN TO BELOW
B A
COPYRIGHTED DOCUMENT: THIS DRAWING AND THE BIM/CAD FILE FROM WHICH IT HAS BEEN GENERATED ARE PROVIDED AS AN INSTRUMENT OF SERVICE FOR THIS PROJECT. THESE DOCUMENTS ARE THE SOLE PROPERTY OF GOREE ARCHITECTS, INC. ANY USE OF THESE DOCUMENTS, DATA AND DESIGNS FOR PURPOSES OTHER THAN THOSE ASSOCIATED WITH THIS PROJECT WITHOUT THE EXPRESSED, WRITTEN PERMISSION OF GOREE WHITFIELD, INC. IS PROHIBITED. 24691 Del Prado Ave
Dana Point, CA 92629
949 -234 -1950
www.goreewhitfield.com

PROJECT NAME

PROJECT ADDRESS

OWNER INFORMATION

ISSUE DATE

GOREE PROJECT NUMBER

SHEET NUMBER

SHEET NAME

KEY PLAN

STAMP / SIGNATURE

CONSULTANTS

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

RUSNAK PORSCHE

PASADENA
2915 EAST COLORADO

BOULEVARD
PASADENA, CA 91107
A.132
04/01/2022
2019-0011

RUSNAK AUTO GROUP
267-337 W. COLORADO BLVD.

PASADENA, CA 91105
CONTACT: JOHN BEED
[email protected]

PROPOSED SECOND FLOOR

PLAN - AREA A
Commercial Development Resources (CDR)
695 Town Center Drive, Ste. 110, Costa Mesa, CA 92626
Principal: Aaron M. Albertson
E: [email protected], O: (949) 610.8997 x 704
ASLA Landscape Architecture
630 S. El Camino #B4, San Clemente, CA 92672
Designer: Aaron Sevilla
E: [email protected], P: (949) 444.9468
CIVIL

LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT

NEW PORSCHE DEALERSHIP
© GOREE WHITFIELD 2021
1 1/8" = 1'-0"

PROPOSED SECOND FLOOR PLAN - AREA A
N

ISSUE HISTORY
DATE: MARK: DESCRIPTION:

DN
UP
DN

CCDDEEFFGGHH
11 22
33 44
55 66
77 3
A.210
3 A.210
(12)
22 REQUIRED PARKING
@ 8' - 6" X 18'
(1) (2) (2) (2) (2) (1)

SECOND LEVEL

PARKING

RAMP UP

RAMP DN
3 A.202 3
A.201
3 A.200
2 A.211 2
A.211
6' - 10" 8' - 6" 6' - 7" 8' - 6" 8' - 6" 10' - 6" 8' - 6" 8' - 6" 7' - 6" 8' - 6" 8' - 6" 9' - 0" 8' - 6" 8' - 6" 10' - 5" 8' - 6" 11' - 7" 18' - 4"
12 STALLS @ 8' - 6"
102' - 0" 27' - 0"
18' - 0" 25' - 11" 18' - 0"
3' - 4" 21' - 4" 3' - 0" 44' - 6" 3' - 0" 69' - 0" 3' - 0" 68' - 2" 2' - 9" 6' - 4" 109' - 5" 30' - 2"
3' - 4" 21' - 4" 3' - 0" 44' - 6" 3' - 0" 69' - 0" 3' - 0" 68' - 2" 1' - 6"
26' - 2" 47' - 6" 72' - 0" 71' - 2" 6' - 10"
26' - 2" 47' - 6" 72' - 0" 71' - 2" 6' - 10"
223' - 8"
148' - 8"
B A
COPYRIGHTED DOCUMENT: THIS DRAWING AND THE BIM/CAD FILE FROM WHICH IT HAS BEEN GENERATED ARE PROVIDED AS AN INSTRUMENT OF SERVICE FOR THIS PROJECT. THESE DOCUMENTS ARE THE SOLE PROPERTY OF GOREE ARCHITECTS, INC. ANY USE OF THESE DOCUMENTS, DATA AND DESIGNS FOR PURPOSES OTHER THAN THOSE ASSOCIATED WITH THIS PROJECT WITHOUT THE EXPRESSED, WRITTEN PERMISSION OF GOREE WHITFIELD, INC. IS PROHIBITED. 24691 Del Prado Ave
Dana Point, CA 92629
949 -234 -1950
www.goreewhitfield.com

PROJECT NAME

PROJECT ADDRESS

OWNER INFORMATION

ISSUE DATE

GOREE PROJECT NUMBER

SHEET NUMBER

SHEET NAME

KEY PLAN

STAMP / SIGNATURE

CONSULTANTS

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

RUSNAK PORSCHE

PASADENA
2915 EAST COLORADO

BOULEVARD
PASADENA, CA 91107
A.133
04/01/2022
2019-0011

RUSNAK AUTO GROUP
267-337 W. COLORADO BLVD.

PASADENA, CA 91105
CONTACT: JOHN BEED
[email protected]

PROPOSED SECOND FLOOR

PLAN - AREA B
Commercial Development Resources (CDR)
695 Town Center Drive, Ste. 110, Costa Mesa, CA 92626
Principal: Aaron M. Albertson
E: [email protected], O: (949) 610.8997 x 704
ASLA Landscape Architecture
630 S. El Camino #B4, San Clemente, CA 92672
Designer: Aaron Sevilla
E: [email protected], P: (949) 444.9468
CIVIL

LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT

NEW PORSCHE DEALERSHIP
© GOREE WHITFIELD 2021
1 1/8" = 1'-0"

PROPOSED SECOND FLOOR PLAN - AREA B
N

ISSUE HISTORY
DATE: MARK: DESCRIPTION:

DN

CCDDEEFFGGHH
11 22
33 44
55 66
77 3
A.210
3 A.210
(19)

ROOF DECK
109 REQUIRED PARKING
@ 8' - 6" X 18'
(19)
(9)
(17)
(20)
(25)

ROOF DECK

RAMP DN
3 A.202 3
A.201
3 A.200
2 A.211 2
A.211
24' - 0"
35' - 8"
25' - 3"
17 STALLS @ 8' - 6"
144' - 6" 9' - 0" 5' - 0" 9' - 0" 5' - 2"
41' - 5"
20 STALLS @ 8' - 6"
153' - 0"
18' - 1" 18' - 0"
4' - 11"
25 STALLS @ 8' - 6"
212' - 6"
30' - 9" 18' - 0" 18' - 0" 18' - 0" 18' - 0" 18' - 0" 18' - 0" 18' - 0" 18' - 0" 18' - 0" 31' - 3"
19 STALLS @ 8' - 6"
161' - 6"
19 STALLS @ 8' - 6"
161' - 6"
18' - 0" 24' - 11" 8' - 6" 18' - 0" 18' - 0" 24' - 0" 18' - 0" 18' - 0" 2' - 9" 6' - 4"
148' - 8"
223' - 8"
223' - 8"
B A
COPYRIGHTED DOCUMENT: THIS DRAWING AND THE BIM/CAD FILE FROM WHICH IT HAS BEEN GENERATED ARE PROVIDED AS AN INSTRUMENT OF SERVICE FOR THIS PROJECT. THESE DOCUMENTS ARE THE SOLE PROPERTY OF GOREE ARCHITECTS, INC. ANY USE OF THESE DOCUMENTS, DATA AND DESIGNS FOR PURPOSES OTHER THAN THOSE ASSOCIATED WITH THIS PROJECT WITHOUT THE EXPRESSED, WRITTEN PERMISSION OF GOREE WHITFIELD, INC. IS PROHIBITED. 24691 Del Prado Ave
Dana Point, CA 92629
949 -234 -1950
www.goreewhitfield.com

PROJECT NAME

PROJECT ADDRESS

OWNER INFORMATION

ISSUE DATE

GOREE PROJECT NUMBER

SHEET NUMBER

SHEET NAME

KEY PLAN

STAMP / SIGNATURE

CONSULTANTS

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

RUSNAK PORSCHE

PASADENA
2915 EAST COLORADO

BOULEVARD
PASADENA, CA 91107
A.134
04/01/2022
2019-0011

RUSNAK AUTO GROUP
267-337 W. COLORADO BLVD.

PASADENA, CA 91105
CONTACT: JOHN BEED
[email protected]

PROPOSED ROOF DECK PLAN -
AREA B
Commercial Development Resources (CDR)
695 Town Center Drive, Ste. 110, Costa Mesa, CA 92626
Principal: Aaron M. Albertson
E: [email protected], O: (949) 610.8997 x 704
ASLA Landscape Architecture
630 S. El Camino #B4, San Clemente, CA 92672
Designer: Aaron Sevilla
E: [email protected], P: (949) 444.9468
CIVIL

LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT

NEW PORSCHE DEALERSHIP
© GOREE WHITFIELD 2021
1 1/8" = 1'-0"

PROPOSED ROOF DECK - AREA B
N

ISSUE HISTORY
DATE: MARK: DESCRIPTION:

LEVEL 1
0' - 0"
LEVEL 1
0' - 0"
T.O.P. SERVICE
35' - 6"
3 A.210
MP-1 EP-1 CP-2 MP--11
LEVEL 1
0' - 0"
LEVEL 1
0' - 0"
T.O.P. SHOWROOM
36' - 0"
3 A.210
MP-1 SF-2 CP-1 MP-1

OPEN SERVICE DRIVE
CP-1

ALUMINUM COMPOSITE METAL PANELS
COLOR: RAL 9006 WHITE ALUMINUM
FINISH: NON-REFLECTIVE
EXTERIOR FINISH LEGEND:

CP-2

PERFORATED METAL PANELS
COLOR: RAL 7021 BLACK GREY
FINISH: NON-REFLECTIVE
MP-1

TRAPEZIUM METAL PANEL SYSTEM
COLOR: RAL 7021 BLACK GREY
FINISH: NON-REFLECTIVE
EP-1

EXTERIOR PAINT
COLOR: MATCH RAL 7021 BLACK GREY
EIFS-1

EXTERIOR INSULATION FINISHING SYSTEM
PAINTED EP-1
SF-2

EXTERIOR STOREFRONT

FRONT LOADED BUTT-JOINTS
COLOR: LOW-E CLEAR GLASS
GL-1
GLASS
COLOR: LOW-E CLEAR GLASS
O-G

OBSCURE GLASS

DARK GRAY ANODIZED FRAME
COPYRIGHTED DOCUMENT: THIS DRAWING AND THE BIM/CAD FILE FROM WHICH IT HAS BEEN GENERATED ARE PROVIDED AS AN INSTRUMENT OF SERVICE FOR THIS PROJECT. THESE DOCUMENTS ARE THE SOLE PROPERTY OF GOREE ARCHITECTS, INC. ANY USE OF THESE DOCUMENTS, DATA AND DESIGNS FOR PURPOSES OTHER THAN THOSE ASSOCIATED WITH THIS PROJECT WITHOUT THE EXPRESSED, WRITTEN PERMISSION OF GOREE WHITFIELD, INC. IS PROHIBITED. 24691 Del Prado Ave
Dana Point, CA 92629
949 -234 -1950
www.goreewhitfield.com

PROJECT NAME

PROJECT ADDRESS

OWNER INFORMATION

ISSUE DATE

GOREE PROJECT NUMBER

SHEET NUMBER

SHEET NAME

KEY PLAN

STAMP / SIGNATURE

CONSULTANTS

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

RUSNAK PORSCHE

PASADENA
2915 EAST COLORADO

BOULEVARD
PASADENA, CA 91107
A.200
04/01/2022
2019-0011

RUSNAK AUTO GROUP
267-337 W. COLORADO BLVD.

PASADENA, CA 91105
CONTACT: JOHN BEED
[email protected]

PROPOSED EXTERIOR

ELEVATIONS
Commercial Development Resources (CDR)
695 Town Center Drive, Ste. 110, Costa Mesa, CA 92626
Principal: Aaron M. Albertson
E: [email protected], O: (949) 610.8997 x 704
ASLA Landscape Architecture
630 S. El Camino #B4, San Clemente, CA 92672
Designer: Aaron Sevilla
E: [email protected], P: (949) 444.9468
CIVIL

LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT

NEW PORSCHE DEALERSHIP
© GOREE WHITFIELD 2021
3 1/8" = 1'-0"

PROPOSED ELEVATION - NORTH
4 1/8" = 1'-0"

PROPOSED ELEVATION - SOUTH

ISSUE HISTORY
DATE: MARK: DESCRIPTION:

LEVEL 1
0' - 0"
T.O.P. SERVICE
35' - 6"
2 A.211
MP-1O-G EP-1 EP
-1 MP-1 EP-1
LEVEL 1
0' - 0"
LEVEL 1
0' - 0"
T.O.P. SERVICE
35' - 6"

FROM LOWEST GRADE OF SITE
50' - 11"
43' - 6"
LEVEL 1
0' - 0"
T.O.P. SHOWROOM
36' - 0"
1 A.211
MP-1 EP-1 MP-1 SF-2 CP-1 SF-2

DIMENSION FROM LOWEST GRADE OF SITE
50' - 11"
43' - 6"
CP-1

ALUMINUM COMPOSITE METAL PANELS
COLOR: RAL 9006 WHITE ALUMINUM
FINISH: NON-REFLECTIVE
EXTERIOR FINISH LEGEND:

CP-2

PERFORATED METAL PANELS
COLOR: RAL 7021 BLACK GREY
FINISH: NON-REFLECTIVE
MP-1

TRAPEZIUM METAL PANEL SYSTEM
COLOR: RAL 7021 BLACK GREY
FINISH: NON-REFLECTIVE
EP-1

EXTERIOR PAINT
COLOR: MATCH RAL 7021 BLACK GREY
EIFS-1

EXTERIOR INSULATION FINISHING SYSTEM
PAINTED EP-1
SF-2

EXTERIOR STOREFRONT

FRONT LOADED BUTT-JOINTS
COLOR: LOW-E CLEAR GLASS
GL-1
GLASS
COLOR: LOW-E CLEAR GLASS
O-G

OBSCURE GLASS

DARK GRAY ANODIZED FRAME
COPYRIGHTED DOCUMENT: THIS DRAWING AND THE BIM/CAD FILE FROM WHICH IT HAS BEEN GENERATED ARE PROVIDED AS AN INSTRUMENT OF SERVICE FOR THIS PROJECT. THESE DOCUMENTS ARE THE SOLE PROPERTY OF GOREE ARCHITECTS, INC. ANY USE OF THESE DOCUMENTS, DATA AND DESIGNS FOR PURPOSES OTHER THAN THOSE ASSOCIATED WITH THIS PROJECT WITHOUT THE EXPRESSED, WRITTEN PERMISSION OF GOREE WHITFIELD, INC. IS PROHIBITED. 24691 Del Prado Ave
Dana Point, CA 92629
949 -234 -1950
www.goreewhitfield.com

PROJECT NAME

PROJECT ADDRESS

OWNER INFORMATION

ISSUE DATE

GOREE PROJECT NUMBER

SHEET NUMBER

SHEET NAME

KEY PLAN

STAMP / SIGNATURE

CONSULTANTS

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

RUSNAK PORSCHE

PASADENA
2915 EAST COLORADO

BOULEVARD
PASADENA, CA 91107
A.201
04/01/2022
2019-0011

RUSNAK AUTO GROUP
267-337 W. COLORADO BLVD.

PASADENA, CA 91105
CONTACT: JOHN BEED
[email protected]

PROPOSED EXTERIOR

ELEVATIONS
Commercial Development Resources (CDR)
695 Town Center Drive, Ste. 110, Costa Mesa, CA 92626
Principal: Aaron M. Albertson
E: [email protected], O: (949) 610.8997 x 704
ASLA Landscape Architecture
630 S. El Camino #B4, San Clemente, CA 92672
Designer: Aaron Sevilla
E: [email protected], P: (949) 444.9468
CIVIL

LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT

NEW PORSCHE DEALERSHIP
© GOREE WHITFIELD 2021
1 1/8" = 1'-0"

PROPOSED ELEVATION - WEST AREA B
3 1/16" = 1'-0"
PROPOSED ELEVATION - WEST OVERALL 2 1/8" = 1'-0"

PROPOSED ELEVATION - WEST AREA A
MATCHLINESEE AREA B EL.SEE AREA A EL.

ISSUE HISTORY
DATE: MARK: DESCRIPTION:

LEVEL 1
0' - 0"
T.O.P. SHOWROOM
36' - 0"
1 A.211
CP-1 MP
-1 EP
-1 SF-2 MP-1 MP-1
LEVEL 1
0' - 0"
T.O.P. SERVICE
35' - 6"
2 A.211
CP-1 EP-1 MP-1 EP-1O-G
LEVEL 1
0' - 0"
LEVEL 1
0' - 0"
T.O.P. SHOWROOM
36' - 0"
T.O.P. SERVICE
35' - 6"
CP-1

ALUMINUM COMPOSITE METAL PANELS
COLOR: RAL 9006 WHITE ALUMINUM
FINISH: NON-REFLECTIVE
EXTERIOR FINISH LEGEND:

CP-2

PERFORATED METAL PANELS
COLOR: RAL 7021 BLACK GREY
FINISH: NON-REFLECTIVE
MP-1

TRAPEZIUM METAL PANEL SYSTEM
COLOR: RAL 7021 BLACK GREY
FINISH: NON-REFLECTIVE
EP-1

EXTERIOR PAINT
COLOR: MATCH RAL 7021 BLACK GREY
EIFS-1

EXTERIOR INSULATION FINISHING SYSTEM
PAINTED EP-1
SF-2

EXTERIOR STOREFRONT

FRONT LOADED BUTT-JOINTS
COLOR: LOW-E CLEAR GLASS
GL-1
GLASS
COLOR: LOW-E CLEAR GLASS
O-G

OBSCURE GLASS

DARK GRAY ANODIZED FRAME
COPYRIGHTED DOCUMENT: THIS DRAWING AND THE BIM/CAD FILE FROM WHICH IT HAS BEEN GENERATED ARE PROVIDED AS AN INSTRUMENT OF SERVICE FOR THIS PROJECT. THESE DOCUMENTS ARE THE SOLE PROPERTY OF GOREE ARCHITECTS, INC. ANY USE OF THESE DOCUMENTS, DATA AND DESIGNS FOR PURPOSES OTHER THAN THOSE ASSOCIATED WITH THIS PROJECT WITHOUT THE EXPRESSED, WRITTEN PERMISSION OF GOREE WHITFIELD, INC. IS PROHIBITED. 24691 Del Prado Ave
Dana Point, CA 92629
949 -234 -1950
www.goreewhitfield.com

PROJECT NAME

PROJECT ADDRESS

OWNER INFORMATION

ISSUE DATE

GOREE PROJECT NUMBER

SHEET NUMBER

SHEET NAME

KEY PLAN

STAMP / SIGNATURE

CONSULTANTS

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

RUSNAK PORSCHE

PASADENA
2915 EAST COLORADO

BOULEVARD
PASADENA, CA 91107
A.202
04/01/2022
2019-0011

RUSNAK AUTO GROUP
267-337 W. COLORADO BLVD.

PASADENA, CA 91105
CONTACT: JOHN BEED
[email protected]

PROPOSED EXTERIOR

ELEVATIONS
Commercial Development Resources (CDR)
695 Town Center Drive, Ste. 110, Costa Mesa, CA 92626
Principal: Aaron M. Albertson
E: [email protected], O: (949) 610.8997 x 704
ASLA Landscape Architecture
630 S. El Camino #B4, San Clemente, CA 92672
Designer: Aaron Sevilla
E: [email protected], P: (949) 444.9468
CIVIL

LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT

NEW PORSCHE DEALERSHIP
© GOREE WHITFIELD 2021
2 1/8" = 1'-0"

PROPOSED ELEVATION - EAST AREA A
1 1/8" = 1'-0"

PROPOSED ELEVATION - EAST AREA B
3 1/16" = 1'-0"

PROPOSED ELEVATION - EAST OVERALL
MATCHLINESEE AREA A EL.SEE AREA B EL.

ISSUE HISTORY
DATE: MARK: DESCRIPTION:

LEVEL 1
0' - 0"
LEVEL 1
0' - 0"
LEVEL 2
16' - 0"
T.O.P. SHOWROOM
36' - 0"
T.O.P. SERVICE
35' - 6"

ROOF DECK
31' - 6"
LEVEL 2 - SERVICE
17' - 6"

CDEFGHX

SERVICE BAYS
138

SECOND LEVEL

PARKING
219

ROOF DECK

F&I OFFICE
215

SHOWROOM
100
LEVEL 1
0' - 0"
LEVEL 1
0' - 0"
LEVEL 2
16' - 0"
T.O.P. SHOWROOM
36' - 0"

ROOF DECK
31' - 6"
LEVEL 2 - SERVICE
17' - 6"
GHX

F&I OFFICE
215

SHOWROOM
100
LEVEL 1
0' - 0"
LEVEL 1
0' - 0"
LEVEL 2
16' - 0"
T.O.P. SERVICE
35' - 6"

ROOF DECK
31' - 6"
LEVEL 2 - SERVICE
17' - 6"
CDEFGH

SERVICE BAYS
138

SECOND LEVEL

PARKING

ROOF DECK

MEN'S TECH
LOCKER
134

MEN'S TECH RR
133
9' - 0"9' - 0"
COPYRIGHTED DOCUMENT: THIS DRAWING AND THE BIM/CAD FILE FROM WHICH IT HAS BEEN GENERATED ARE PROVIDED AS AN INSTRUMENT OF SERVICE FOR THIS PROJECT. THESE DOCUMENTS ARE THE SOLE PROPERTY OF GOREE ARCHITECTS, INC. ANY USE OF THESE DOCUMENTS, DATA AND DESIGNS FOR PURPOSES OTHER THAN THOSE ASSOCIATED WITH THIS PROJECT WITHOUT THE EXPRESSED, WRITTEN PERMISSION OF GOREE WHITFIELD, INC. IS PROHIBITED. 24691 Del Prado Ave
Dana Point, CA 92629
949 -234 -1950
www.goreewhitfield.com

PROJECT NAME

PROJECT ADDRESS

OWNER INFORMATION

ISSUE DATE

GOREE PROJECT NUMBER

SHEET NUMBER

SHEET NAME

KEY PLAN

STAMP / SIGNATURE

CONSULTANTS

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

RUSNAK PORSCHE

PASADENA
2915 EAST COLORADO

BOULEVARD
PASADENA, CA 91107
A.210
04/01/2022
2019-0011

RUSNAK AUTO GROUP
267-337 W. COLORADO BLVD.

PASADENA, CA 91105
CONTACT: JOHN BEED
[email protected]

PROPOSED BUILDING

SECTIONS
Commercial Development Resources (CDR)
695 Town Center Drive, Ste. 110, Costa Mesa, CA 92626
Principal: Aaron M. Albertson
E: [email protected], O: (949) 610.8997 x 704
ASLA Landscape Architecture
630 S. El Camino #B4, San Clemente, CA 92672
Designer: Aaron Sevilla
E: [email protected], P: (949) 444.9468
CIVIL

LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT

NEW PORSCHE DEALERSHIP
© GOREE WHITFIELD 2021
3 1/16" = 1'-0"
BUILDING SECTION 1 - OVERALL 2 1/8" = 1'-0"
BUILDING SECTION 1 - AREA A
1 1/8" = 1'-0"
BUILDING SECTION 1 - AREA B
MATCHLINESEE AREA B EL.SEE AREA A EL.

ISSUE HISTORY
DATE: MARK: DESCRIPTION:

LEVEL 1
0' - 0"
LEVEL 1
0' - 0"
LEVEL 2
16' - 0"
T.O.P. SHOWROOM
36' - 0"
1234567

SHOWROOM
100

UPPER DISPLAY
200

SERVICE DRIVE
107
LEVEL 1
0' - 0"
LEVEL 1
0' - 0"
T.O.P. SERVICE
35' - 6"

ROOF DECK
31' - 6"
LEVEL 2 - SERVICE
17' - 6"
1234567

SERVICE BAYS
138

SECOND LEVEL

PARKING

ROOF DECK
COPYRIGHTED DOCUMENT: THIS DRAWING AND THE BIM/CAD FILE FROM WHICH IT HAS BEEN GENERATED ARE PROVIDED AS AN INSTRUMENT OF SERVICE FOR THIS PROJECT. THESE DOCUMENTS ARE THE SOLE PROPERTY OF GOREE ARCHITECTS, INC. ANY USE OF THESE DOCUMENTS, DATA AND DESIGNS FOR PURPOSES OTHER THAN THOSE ASSOCIATED WITH THIS PROJECT WITHOUT THE EXPRESSED, WRITTEN PERMISSION OF GOREE WHITFIELD, INC. IS PROHIBITED. 24691 Del Prado Ave
Dana Point, CA 92629
949 -234 -1950
www.goreewhitfield.com

PROJECT NAME

PROJECT ADDRESS

OWNER INFORMATION

ISSUE DATE

GOREE PROJECT NUMBER

SHEET NUMBER

SHEET NAME

KEY PLAN

STAMP / SIGNATURE

CONSULTANTS

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

RUSNAK PORSCHE

PASADENA
2915 EAST COLORADO

BOULEVARD
PASADENA, CA 91107
A.211
04/01/2022
2019-0011

RUSNAK AUTO GROUP
267-337 W. COLORADO BLVD.

PASADENA, CA 91105
CONTACT: JOHN BEED
[email protected]

PROPOSED BUILDING

SECTIONS
Commercial Development Resources (CDR)
695 Town Center Drive, Ste. 110, Costa Mesa, CA 92626
Principal: Aaron M. Albertson
E: [email protected], O: (949) 610.8997 x 704
ASLA Landscape Architecture
630 S. El Camino #B4, San Clemente, CA 92672
Designer: Aaron Sevilla
E: [email protected], P: (949) 444.9468
CIVIL

LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT

NEW PORSCHE DEALERSHIP
© GOREE WHITFIELD 2021
1 1/8" = 1'-0"
BUILDING SECTION 2 - SHOWROOM
2 1/8" = 1'-0"
BUILDING SECTION 3 - SERVICE SHOP

ISSUE HISTORY
DATE: MARK: DESCRIPTION:

PROPOSED CARWASH & DETAIL BAYS EV BATTERY STORAGE PROPOSED DEALERSHIP BUILDING DISPLAY DISPLAY

DISPLAY

DISPLAY
CUSTOMER (7)

INVENTORY
INVENTORY INVENTORY SERVICE CUSTOMER (24)
CUSTOMER (2)

RAMP UP N O R T H S U N N Y S L O P E A V E N U E

E A S T W A L N U T S T R E E T EXISTING AUDI DEALERSHIP 89° 36' 08"
456.30'
N E 0° 36' 52" 275.40'
N
E 0° 36' 52" 253.60'
N
E
89° 36' 13"
456.31'
N E EXISTING AUDI BLDG. SERVICE DRIVE SHOWROOM SERVICE BAYS PARTS STORAGE SHIPPING & RECEIVING LOADING PLAN VIEW 1"=20'-0" PROJECT SUMMARY: NEW PLANTING AREAS: ±11,480 SF MULCH NOTE: ALL PLANTING AREAS TO RECEIVE 3" OF DECORATIVE BARK MULCH (DARK BROWN COLOR). PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN PLP-1 FOCAL TREE VERTICAL ACCENT IRRIGATION NOTES AND REQUIREMENTS: THE PROJECT LANDSCAPE PLANTING AREAS SHALL RECEIVE THE FOLLOWING IRRIGATION SYSTEM: LOW PRECIPITATION SHRUB DRIP SYSTEM AUTOMATICALLY PROGRAMMED WITH AN ELECTRICAL CONTROLLER. SYSTEM COMPONENTS WILL INCLUDE A BRASS GATE VALVE (IN VALVE BOX) AT THE POINT OF CONNECTION, BACK FLOW DEVICE (PER LOCAL CODES), ELECTRICALLY OPERATED REMOTE CONTROL VALVES AND DRIP SYSTEM IN SHRUB BEDS, ALL SUPPLIED BY PVC SCHEDULE 40 MAINLINE AND LATERAL LINES SIZED ACCORDING TO HYDRAULIC CALCULATION. CIRCUITS SHALL BE DETERMINED BY SOLAR ORIENTATION AND PLANTING AREA. 100% COVERAGE SHALL BE ACHIEVED THROUGHOUT THE SYSTEM. SEPARATE VALVE INCLUDED FOR TREES 48" AND ABOVE. EXISTING STREET TREES TO REMAIN AND ARE NOT TO BE DISTURBED DURING ALL PHASES OF FUTURE CONSTRUCTION. PORSCHE PASADENA SYMBOL BOTANICAL NAME (COMMON NAME) BOX SIZE WUCOLS TRISTANIA CONFERTA (BRISBANE BOX) M QTY.
8 SYMBOL BOTANICAL NAME (COMMON NAME) TREE LEGEND SHRUB & GROUNDCOVER LEGEND INGRESS EGRESS ARBUTUS MARINA (STRAWBERRY TREE) LAGERSTROMIA INDICA (CRAPE MYRTLE) LAURUS NOBLIS (BAY LAUREL) MAGNOLIA SPECIES (MAGNOLIA) L 14 RHUS LANCEA (AFRICAN SUMAC) GEIJERA PARVIFLORA (AUSTRALIAN WILLOW) ULMUS PARVIFOLIA 'TRUE GREEN' (CHINESE ELM) PODOCARPUS GRACILIOR (FERN PINE)L - AS|LA 1"=20'-0" QUERCUS AGRIFOLIA (COAST LIVE OAK)L 2 48" BOX STANDARD 36" BOX COLUMNAR 48" BOX MIN. MULTI BRANCH CARISSA MACROCARPA 'GREEN CARPET' (NATAL PLUM) 5 GAL 3' 0.C.

M LANTANA MONTEVIDENSIS (TRAILING LANTANA) 5 GAL 3' 0.C.L RHAPHIOLEPIS INDICA 'BALLERINA' (INDIAN HAWTHORNE) 5 GAL 2' O.C.M TRACHELOSPERMUM JASMINOIDES (STAR JASMINE) 5 GAL 3' O.C.M AGAVE SPECIES (AGAVE) 5 GAL 3' 0.C.L ALOE SPECIES (ALOE) 5 GAL 3' 0.C.L DIANELLA REVOLUTA 'LITTLE REV' (FLAX LILY) 5 GAL 3' O.C.M HEMEROCALLIS SPECIES (DAYLILY) 5 GAL 2' O.C.M LANTANA MONTEVIDENSIS (TRAILING LANTANA) 5 GAL 3' 0.C.L AGAPANTHUS AFRICANUS (LILY OF THE NILE) 5 GAL 2' O.C.

M CALLISTEMON 'BETTER JOHN' (DWARF BOTTLE BRUSH) 5 GAL 4' O.C.M CARISSA MACROCARPA 'GREEN CARPET' (NATAL PLUM) 5 GAL 3' 0.C.M HEMEROCALLIS SPECIES (DAYLILY) 5 GAL 2' O.C.M PHORMIUM SPECIES (NEW ZEALAND FLAX) 5 GAL 2' O.C.

M 48" BOX
L 16 STANDARD PARKING LOT TREE SIZE/SPACING/WUCOLS ADA PATH OF TRAVEL CAD FILE DESIGNED DATE SCALE PORSCHE PASADENA 03/28/2022 PROJECT NAME: PORSCHE PASADENA NEW AUTO DEALERSHIP 2915 EAST COLORADO BLVD. PASADENA, CA 91362 REVISIONS: DATE DESCRIPTION SHEET DESCRIPTION: SHEET NUMBER:

THESE PLANS ARE PROPERTY OF AARON SEVILLA LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE INC. AND ARE NOT TO BE REPRODUCED, COPIED, OR USED FOR ANOTHER PROJECT WITHOUT THE PERMISSION OF AARON R. SEVILLA.

N
D
SC
C
l , L
R
N . v i
i c
A
A
APE
T
.

I
589
CE Signature
8 T
o
H
DE
E
S
T R
R
I
a r
E
o
G R
A S
. L
e
I A Date
R
F
C
A
L I FO
N
T S
ETA
O
Exp. 10/31/22
n
la IN COLLABORATION WITH: LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE AS LAO:949.375.8481 E:[email protected] W:ASLADESIGN.COM 630 S. EL CAMINO,#B4 SAN CLEMENTE, CA 92672 EGRESS

INGRESS INGRESS EGRESS

EAST WALNUT STREET
EAST COLORADO BLVD. EXISTING AUDI SHOWROOM/CAR STORAGE NOT A PART OF THESE DRAWINGS

ADA PATH OF TRAVEL

ADA PATH OF TRAVEL
ADA PATH OF TRAVEL VEHICLE DISPLAY 40' Scale: 1" = 20'
0 10' 20' MARCH 28TH, 2022 SYMBOL BOTANICAL NAME (COMMON NAME) SHRUB & GROUNDCOVER LEGEND SIZE/SPACING/WUCOLS PERIMETER TREE M -M DIETES VEGETA (FORTNIGHT LILY) 5 GAL 3' 0.C.

M LIGUSTRUM JAPONICA 'TEXANUM' (WAXLEAF PRIVET) 5 GAL 3' 0.C.M PITTOSPORUM 'VARIEGATA' (VARIEGATED MOCK ORANGE) 5 GAL 3' 0.C.M RHAPHIOLEPIS INDICA 'MAJESTIC BEAUTY' 5 GAL 3' O.C.M (INDIAN HAWTHORNE) M
-- ENHANCED PAVING AT VEHICULAR ENTRY (PAVERS, STAMPED CONCRETE). ENHANCED PAVING AT VEHICULAR ENTRY (PAVERS, STAMPED CONCRETE).

M -M EXISTING STREET TREES TO REMAIN AND ARE NOT TO BE DISTURBED DURING ALL PHASES OF FUTURE CONSTRUCTION. ENHANCED PAVING AT BUILDING ENTRANCE. FINAL MATERIAL TO BE DETERMINED.

Appendix B.1:

Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions
Calculations

This page intentionally left blank

Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project
Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter
Project Characteristics -
Land Use - Per site plan dated September 2021; total lot 3.55 acres, therefore lot acreage modified to match. All parking are counted towards enclosed parking lot spaces for conservative analysis.

Construction Phase - Per construction questionnaire
Trips and VMT - Per construction questionnaire, hual trucks would travel 50 miles for disposal during demolition and 60 miles for soil materials during grading.

Demolition -
Grading -
Architectural Coating -
Vehicle Trips - Net trip rate and trip districtution % based on traffic study dated Feb 2022.

Energy Use - Per operational questionniare, no natural gas would be used.

1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No Rail 55.51 1000sqft 1.27 55,508.00 0 Enclosed Parking with Elevator 379.00 Space 1.16 151,600.00 0 Automobile Care Center 48.92 1000sqft 1.12 48,922.00 0

1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization
Climate Zone
Urban
12 Wind Speed (m/s) 2.2 Precipitation Freq (Days) 33

1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data

1.0 Project Characteristics
Utility Company Pasadena Water and Power
Operational Year 2024
CO2 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
872.98 CH4 Intensity 0.033
(lb/MWhr)
N2O Intensity 0.004
(lb/MWhr)
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 30 Date: 4/26/2022 4:43 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied Construction Off-road Equipment Mitigation - Per SCAQMD Rule 403 Area Mitigation - Per operational questionnaire, all landscape equipment would be electric.

Energy Mitigation - Per operational questionnaire, high efficiency lighting would be installed Water Mitigation - Per operational questionnaire, low-flow water fixtures and water-efficient irrigation systems would be installed.

Waste Mitigation - Per AB 341
Stationary Sources - Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps - Per operational questionnaire, an emergency generator would be installed.

Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value
tblConstDustMitigation WaterUnpavedRoadMoistureContent 0 12 tblConstDustMitigation WaterUnpavedRoadVehicleSpeed 0 15 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 18.00 44.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 230.00 352.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 20.00 28.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 8.00 22.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 18.00 22.00
tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 10/17/2023 4/9/2024
tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 8/28/2023 3/7/2024
tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 9/28/2022 10/10/2022
tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 10/10/2022 11/1/2022
tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 9/21/2023 3/8/2024
tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 9/22/2023 2/8/2024
tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 10/11/2022 11/2/2022 tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 9/29/2022 10/3/2022 tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 8/29/2023 2/8/2024
tblEnergyUse NT24NG 0.03 0.00
tblEnergyUse NT24NG 4.45 0.00
tblEnergyUse T24NG 0.83 0.00
tblEnergyUse T24NG 13.51 0.00
tblGrading MaterialImported 0.00 4,611.00
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 2 of 30 Date: 4/26/2022 4:43 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

2.0 Emissions Summary
tblLandUse LotAcreage 3.41 1.16
tblStationaryGeneratorsPumpsEF CH4_EF 0.07 0.07
tblStationaryGeneratorsPumpsEF ROG_EF 2.2480e-003 2.2477e-003 tblStationaryGeneratorsPumpsUse HorsePowerValue 0.00 335.00 tblStationaryGeneratorsPumpsUse HoursPerYear 0.00 24.00 tblStationaryGeneratorsPumpsUse NumberOfEquipment 0.00 1.00 tblTripsAndVMT HaulingTripLength 20.00 50.00
tblTripsAndVMT HaulingTripLength 20.00 60.00
tblVehicleTrips PB_TP 28.00 10.00
tblVehicleTrips PR_TP 21.00 39.00
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 1.74 0.00
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 23.72 10.12
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 1.74 0.00
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 11.88 10.12
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 1.74 0.00
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 23.72 10.12
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 3 of 30 Date: 4/26/2022 4:43 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

2.1 Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission)
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year lb/day lb/day
2022 5.1736 66.2428 40.6438 0.1444 13.2255 2.3356 15.5612 4.6526 2.1663 6.8188 0.0000 14,921.34 87 14,921.34
87 2.4207 1.2786 15,362.89
92 2023 1.9738 16.3268 20.3189 0.0444 1.4203 0.7148 2.1352 0.3828 0.6726 1.0554 0.0000 4,385.818 7 4,385.818
7 0.6622 0.1467 4,446.077
2 2024 26.0018 24.9439 35.2970 0.0697 1.8786 1.0904 2.9690 0.5043 1.0227 1.5271 0.0000 6,825.685 1 6,825.685
1 1.2490 0.1526 6,902.375
1 Maximum 26.0018 66.2428 40.6438 0.1444 13.2255 2.3356 15.5612 4.6526 2.1663 6.8188 0.0000 14,921.34 87 14,921.34
87 2.4207 1.2786 15,362.89
92 Unmitigated Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year lb/day lb/day
2022 5.1736 66.2428 40.6438 0.1444 6.4429 2.3356 8.7785 2.1448 2.1663 4.3111 0.0000 14,921.34 87 14,921.34
87 2.4207 1.2786 15,362.89
92 2023 1.9738 16.3268 20.3189 0.0444 1.4203 0.7148 2.1352 0.3828 0.6726 1.0554 0.0000 4,385.818 7 4,385.818
7 0.6622 0.1467 4,446.077
2 2024 26.0018 24.9439 35.2970 0.0697 1.8786 1.0904 2.9690 0.5043 1.0227 1.5271 0.0000 6,825.685 1 6,825.685
1 1.2490 0.1526 6,902.375
1 Maximum 26.0018 66.2428 40.6438 0.1444 6.4429 2.3356 8.7785 2.1448 2.1663 4.3111 0.0000 14,921.34 87 14,921.34
87 2.4207 1.2786 15,362.89
92 Mitigated Construction
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 4 of 30 Date: 4/26/2022 4:43 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
Percent
Reduction

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 41.05 0.00 32.82 45.27 0.00 26.67 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

2.2 Overall Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Area 2.4027 4.5000e0040.0493 0.0000 1.8000e0041.8000e0041.8000e0041.8000e0040.1058 0.1058 2.8000e0040.1127 Energy 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Mobile 1.1433 1.1088 10.0059 0.0198 2.1289 0.0153 2.1441 0.5671 0.0142 0.5812 2,051.502 0 2,051.502
0 0.1622 0.0982 2,084.833
7 Stationary 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 3.5461 1.1092 10.0552 0.0198 2.1289 0.0155 2.1443 0.5671 0.0144 0.5814 2,051.607 8 2,051.607
8 0.1625 0.0982 2,084.946
4 Unmitigated Operational
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 5 of 30 Date: 4/26/2022 4:43 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

2.2 Overall Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Area 2.4001 2.5000e0040.0286 0.0000 7.0000e0057.0000e0057.0000e0057.0000e0050.0570 0.0570 1.2000e0040.0599 Energy 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Mobile 1.1433 1.1088 10.0059 0.0198 2.1289 0.0153 2.1441 0.5671 0.0142 0.5812 2,051.502 0 2,051.502
0 0.1622 0.0982 2,084.833
7 Stationary 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 3.5435 1.1090 10.0345 0.0198 2.1289 0.0153 2.1442 0.5671 0.0142 0.5813 2,051.559 0 2,051.559
0 0.1623 0.0982 2,084.893
7 Mitigated Operational

3.0 Construction Detail
Construction Phase
Phase
Number
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num Days
Week
Num Days Phase Description
1 Demolition Demolition 9/1/2022 10/10/2022 5 28 1.25 months 2 Grading Grading 10/3/2022 11/1/2022 5 22 1 month, assuming a 1 week overlap with demolition activities
3 Building Construction Building Construction 11/2/2022 3/7/2024 5 352 16 months 4 Paving Paving 2/8/2024 3/8/2024 5 22 1 month, assuming to be concurrent with painting
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
Percent
Reduction

0.07 0.02 0.21 0.00 0.00 0.71 0.01 0.00 0.77 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.00 0.00 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 6 of 30 Date: 4/26/2022 4:43 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied 5 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 2/8/2024 4/9/2024 5 44 2 months, assuming 1 month overlap with building construction
OffRoad Equipment
Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor Demolition Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 8.00 81 0.73
Demolition Excavators 3 8.00 158 0.38
Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers 2 8.00 247 0.40
Grading Excavators 1 8.00 158 0.38
Grading Graders 1 8.00 187 0.41
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 247 0.40
Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 8.00 97 0.37
Building Construction Cranes 1 7.00 231 0.29
Building Construction Forklifts 3 8.00 89 0.20
Building Construction Generator Sets 1 8.00 84 0.74
Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 7.00 97 0.37 Building Construction Welders 1 8.00 46 0.45
Paving Cement and Mortar Mixers 2 6.00 9 0.56
Paving Pavers 1 8.00 130 0.42
Paving Paving Equipment 2 6.00 132 0.36
Paving Rollers 2 6.00 80 0.38
Paving Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8.00 97 0.37
Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 6.00 78 0.48
Residential Indoor: 0; Residential Outdoor: 0; Non-Residential Indoor: 156,645; Non-Residential Outdoor: 52,215; Striped Parking Area: 9,096 (Architectural Coating – sqft)
Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0
Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 22
Acres of Paving: 1.16
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 7 of 30 Date: 4/26/2022 4:43 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.2 Demolition - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 3.6684 0.0000 3.6684 0.5554 0.0000 0.5554 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 2.6392 25.7194 20.5941 0.0388 1.2427 1.2427 1.1553 1.1553 3,746.781 2 3,746.781
2 1.0524 3,773.092
0 Total 2.6392 25.7194 20.5941 0.0388 3.6684 1.2427 4.9111 0.5554 1.1553 1.7107 3,746.781 2 3,746.781
2 1.0524 3,773.092
0 Unmitigated Construction On-Site

3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction
Replace Ground Cover
Water Exposed Area
Reduce Vehicle Speed on Unpaved Roads
Trips and VMT
Phase Name Offroad Equipment
Count
Worker Trip
Number
Vendor Trip
Number
Hauling Trip
Number
Worker Trip
Length
Vendor Trip
Length
Hauling Trip
Length
Worker Vehicle
Class
Vendor
Vehicle Class
Hauling
Vehicle Class
Demolition 6 15.00 0.00 475.00 14.70 6.90 50.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Grading 6 15.00 0.00 576.00 14.70 6.90 60.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Building Construction 9 103.00 42.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Paving 8 20.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Architectural Coating 1 21.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 8 of 30 Date: 4/26/2022 4:43 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.2 Demolition - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.1682 6.9036 1.3209 0.0257 0.7418 0.0526 0.7944 0.2033 0.0503 0.2537 2,812.901 3 2,812.901
3 0.1512 0.4464 2,949.699
6 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0556 0.0419 0.5428 1.4500e0030.1677 1.0700e0030.1687 0.0445 9.9000e0040.0455 147.7700 147.7700 4.2700e0034.0100e003149.0720 Total 0.2238 6.9454 1.8638 0.0271 0.9095 0.0537 0.9632 0.2478 0.0513 0.2991 2,960.671 2 2,960.671
2 0.1555 0.4504 3,098.771
6 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 1.3591 0.0000 1.3591 0.2058 0.0000 0.2058 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 2.6392 25.7194 20.5941 0.0388 1.2427 1.2427 1.1553 1.1553 0.0000 3,746.781 2 3,746.781
2 1.0524 3,773.092
0 Total 2.6392 25.7194 20.5941 0.0388 1.3591 1.2427 2.6018 0.2058 1.1553 1.3611 0.0000 3,746.781 2 3,746.781
2 1.0524 3,773.092
0 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 9 of 30 Date: 4/26/2022 4:43 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.2 Demolition - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.1682 6.9036 1.3209 0.0257 0.7418 0.0526 0.7944 0.2033 0.0503 0.2537 2,812.901 3 2,812.901
3 0.1512 0.4464 2,949.699
6 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0556 0.0419 0.5428 1.4500e0030.1677 1.0700e0030.1687 0.0445 9.9000e0040.0455 147.7700 147.7700 4.2700e0034.0100e003149.0720 Total 0.2238 6.9454 1.8638 0.0271 0.9095 0.0537 0.9632 0.2478 0.0513 0.2991 2,960.671 2 2,960.671
2 0.1555 0.4504 3,098.771
6 Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.3 Grading - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 7.1063 0.0000 7.1063 3.4283 0.0000 3.4283 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 1.9486 20.8551 15.2727 0.0297 0.9409 0.9409 0.8656 0.8656 2,872.046 4 2,872.046
4 0.9289 2,895.268
4 Total 1.9486 20.8551 15.2727 0.0297 7.1063 0.9409 8.0471 3.4283 0.8656 4.2939 2,872.046 4 2,872.046
4 0.9289 2,895.268
4 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 10 of 30 Date: 4/26/2022 4:43 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.3 Grading - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.3064 12.6809 2.3705 0.0474 1.3737 0.0974 1.4711 0.3765 0.0931 0.4697 5,194.079 9 5,194.079
9 0.2797 0.8242 5,446.695
2 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0556 0.0419 0.5428 1.4500e0030.1677 1.0700e0030.1687 0.0445 9.9000e0040.0455 147.7700 147.7700 4.2700e0034.0100e003149.0720 Total 0.3620 12.7228 2.9133 0.0488 1.5414 0.0984 1.6398 0.4210 0.0941 0.5151 5,341.849 9 5,341.849
9 0.2839 0.8283 5,595.767
2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 2.6329 0.0000 2.6329 1.2702 0.0000 1.2702 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 1.9486 20.8551 15.2727 0.0297 0.9409 0.9409 0.8656 0.8656 0.0000 2,872.046 4 2,872.046
4 0.9289 2,895.268
4 Total 1.9486 20.8551 15.2727 0.0297 2.6329 0.9409 3.5737 1.2702 0.8656 2.1358 0.0000 2,872.046 4 2,872.046
4 0.9289 2,895.268
4 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 11 of 30 Date: 4/26/2022 4:43 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.3 Grading - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.3064 12.6809 2.3705 0.0474 1.3737 0.0974 1.4711 0.3765 0.0931 0.4697 5,194.079 9 5,194.079
9 0.2797 0.8242 5,446.695
2 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0556 0.0419 0.5428 1.4500e0030.1677 1.0700e0030.1687 0.0445 9.9000e0040.0455 147.7700 147.7700 4.2700e0034.0100e003149.0720 Total 0.3620 12.7228 2.9133 0.0488 1.5414 0.0984 1.6398 0.4210 0.0941 0.5151 5,341.849 9 5,341.849
9 0.2839 0.8283 5,595.767
2 Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.4 Building Construction - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.7062 15.6156 16.3634 0.0269 0.8090 0.8090 0.7612 0.7612 2,554.333 6 2,554.333
6 0.6120 2,569.632
2 Total 1.7062 15.6156 16.3634 0.0269 0.8090 0.8090 0.7612 0.7612 2,554.333 6 2,554.333
6 0.6120 2,569.632
2 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 12 of 30 Date: 4/26/2022 4:43 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.4 Building Construction - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0817 2.1422 0.7298 8.2300e0030.2690 0.0197 0.2887 0.0775 0.0188 0.0963 884.2708 884.2708 0.0295 0.1275 923.0143 Worker 0.3816 0.2876 3.7273 9.9700e0031.1513 7.3800e0031.1587 0.3053 6.7900e0030.3121 1,014.687 2 1,014.687
2 0.0294 0.0275 1,023.627
8 Total 0.4633 2.4297 4.4571 0.0182 1.4203 0.0271 1.4474 0.3828 0.0256 0.4084 1,898.958 0 1,898.958
0 0.0588 0.1551 1,946.642
1 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.7062 15.6156 16.3634 0.0269 0.8090 0.8090 0.7612 0.7612 0.0000 2,554.333 6 2,554.333
6 0.6120 2,569.632
2 Total 1.7062 15.6156 16.3634 0.0269 0.8090 0.8090 0.7612 0.7612 0.0000 2,554.333 6 2,554.333
6 0.6120 2,569.632
2 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 13 of 30 Date: 4/26/2022 4:43 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.4 Building Construction - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0817 2.1422 0.7298 8.2300e0030.2690 0.0197 0.2887 0.0775 0.0188 0.0963 884.2708 884.2708 0.0295 0.1275 923.0143 Worker 0.3816 0.2876 3.7273 9.9700e0031.1513 7.3800e0031.1587 0.3053 6.7900e0030.3121 1,014.687 2 1,014.687
2 0.0294 0.0275 1,023.627
8 Total 0.4633 2.4297 4.4571 0.0182 1.4203 0.0271 1.4474 0.3828 0.0256 0.4084 1,898.958 0 1,898.958
0 0.0588 0.1551 1,946.642
1 Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.4 Building Construction - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.5728 14.3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 2,555.209 9 2,555.209
9 0.6079 2,570.406
1 Total 1.5728 14.3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 2,555.209 9 2,555.209
9 0.6079 2,570.406
1 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 14 of 30 Date: 4/26/2022 4:43 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.4 Building Construction - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0467 1.6879 0.6442 7.8300e0030.2690 8.1500e0030.2772 0.0775 7.8000e0030.0853 842.6053 842.6053 0.0281 0.1213 879.4426 Worker 0.3544 0.2540 3.4307 9.6500e0031.1513 6.9500e0031.1582 0.3053 6.4000e0030.3117 988.0035 988.0035 0.0263 0.0254 996.2285 Total 0.4011 1.9419 4.0749 0.0175 1.4203 0.0151 1.4354 0.3828 0.0142 0.3970 1,830.608 8 1,830.608
8 0.0544 0.1467 1,875.671
1 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.5728 14.3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 0.0000 2,555.209 9 2,555.209
9 0.6079 2,570.406
1 Total 1.5728 14.3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 0.0000 2,555.209 9 2,555.209
9 0.6079 2,570.406
1 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 15 of 30 Date: 4/26/2022 4:43 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.4 Building Construction - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0467 1.6879 0.6442 7.8300e0030.2690 8.1500e0030.2772 0.0775 7.8000e0030.0853 842.6053 842.6053 0.0281 0.1213 879.4426 Worker 0.3544 0.2540 3.4307 9.6500e0031.1513 6.9500e0031.1582 0.3053 6.4000e0030.3117 988.0035 988.0035 0.0263 0.0254 996.2285 Total 0.4011 1.9419 4.0749 0.0175 1.4203 0.0151 1.4354 0.3828 0.0142 0.3970 1,830.608 8 1,830.608
8 0.0544 0.1467 1,875.671
1 Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.4 Building Construction - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.4716 13.4438 16.1668 0.0270 0.6133 0.6133 0.5769 0.5769 2,555.698 9 2,555.698
9 0.6044 2,570.807
7 Total 1.4716 13.4438 16.1668 0.0270 0.6133 0.6133 0.5769 0.5769 2,555.698 9 2,555.698
9 0.6044 2,570.807
7 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 16 of 30 Date: 4/26/2022 4:43 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.4 Building Construction - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0451 1.6913 0.6306 7.7100e0030.2690 8.2100e0030.2772 0.0775 7.8500e0030.0853 829.9802 829.9802 0.0282 0.1196 866.3140 Worker 0.3314 0.2268 3.1962 9.3800e0031.1513 6.6600e0031.1580 0.3053 6.1300e0030.3115 967.7261 967.7261 0.0239 0.0236 975.3566 Total 0.3765 1.9181 3.8268 0.0171 1.4203 0.0149 1.4352 0.3828 0.0140 0.3968 1,797.706 3 1,797.706
3 0.0520 0.1432 1,841.670
6 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.4716 13.4438 16.1668 0.0270 0.6133 0.6133 0.5769 0.5769 0.0000 2,555.698 9 2,555.698
9 0.6044 2,570.807
7 Total 1.4716 13.4438 16.1668 0.0270 0.6133 0.6133 0.5769 0.5769 0.0000 2,555.698 9 2,555.698
9 0.6044 2,570.807
7 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 17 of 30 Date: 4/26/2022 4:43 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.4 Building Construction - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0451 1.6913 0.6306 7.7100e0030.2690 8.2100e0030.2772 0.0775 7.8500e0030.0853 829.9802 829.9802 0.0282 0.1196 866.3140 Worker 0.3314 0.2268 3.1962 9.3800e0031.1513 6.6600e0031.1580 0.3053 6.1300e0030.3115 967.7261 967.7261 0.0239 0.0236 975.3566 Total 0.3765 1.9181 3.8268 0.0171 1.4203 0.0149 1.4352 0.3828 0.0140 0.3968 1,797.706 3 1,797.706
3 0.0520 0.1432 1,841.670
6 Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.5 Paving - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 0.8814 8.2730 12.2210 0.0189 0.3987 0.3987 0.3685 0.3685 1,805.620 5 1,805.620
5 0.5673 1,819.803
9 Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.8814 8.2730 12.2210 0.0189 0.3987 0.3987 0.3685 0.3685 1,805.620 5 1,805.620
5 0.5673 1,819.803
9 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 18 of 30 Date: 4/26/2022 4:43 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.5 Paving - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0644 0.0440 0.6206 1.8200e0030.2236 1.2900e0030.2249 0.0593 1.1900e0030.0605 187.9080 187.9080 4.6300e0034.5800e003189.3896 Total 0.0644 0.0440 0.6206 1.8200e0030.2236 1.2900e0030.2249 0.0593 1.1900e0030.0605 187.9080 187.9080 4.6300e0034.5800e003189.3896 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 0.8814 8.2730 12.2210 0.0189 0.3987 0.3987 0.3685 0.3685 0.0000 1,805.620 5 1,805.620
5 0.5673 1,819.803
9 Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.8814 8.2730 12.2210 0.0189 0.3987 0.3987 0.3685 0.3685 0.0000 1,805.620 5 1,805.620
5 0.5673 1,819.803
9 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 19 of 30 Date: 4/26/2022 4:43 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.5 Paving - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0644 0.0440 0.6206 1.8200e0030.2236 1.2900e0030.2249 0.0593 1.1900e0030.0605 187.9080 187.9080 4.6300e0034.5800e003189.3896 Total 0.0644 0.0440 0.6206 1.8200e0030.2236 1.2900e0030.2249 0.0593 1.1900e0030.0605 187.9080 187.9080 4.6300e0034.5800e003189.3896 Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.6 Architectural Coating - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Archit. Coating 22.9597 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.1808 1.2188 1.8101 2.9700e0030.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 281.4481 281.4481 0.0159 281.8443 Total 23.1404 1.2188 1.8101 2.9700e0030.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 281.4481 281.4481 0.0159 281.8443 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 20 of 30 Date: 4/26/2022 4:43 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.6 Architectural Coating - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0676 0.0462 0.6517 1.9100e0030.2347 1.3600e0030.2361 0.0623 1.2500e0030.0635 197.3034 197.3034 4.8600e0034.8100e003198.8591 Total 0.0676 0.0462 0.6517 1.9100e0030.2347 1.3600e0030.2361 0.0623 1.2500e0030.0635 197.3034 197.3034 4.8600e0034.8100e003198.8591 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Archit. Coating 22.9597 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.1808 1.2188 1.8101 2.9700e0030.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0159 281.8443 Total 23.1404 1.2188 1.8101 2.9700e0030.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0159 281.8443 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 21 of 30 Date: 4/26/2022 4:43 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.6 Architectural Coating - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0676 0.0462 0.6517 1.9100e0030.2347 1.3600e0030.2361 0.0623 1.2500e0030.0635 197.3034 197.3034 4.8600e0034.8100e003198.8591 Total 0.0676 0.0462 0.6517 1.9100e0030.2347 1.3600e0030.2361 0.0623 1.2500e0030.0635 197.3034 197.3034 4.8600e0034.8100e003198.8591 Mitigated Construction Off-Site

4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile

4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 22 of 30 Date: 4/26/2022 4:43 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Mitigated 1.1433 1.1088 10.0059 0.0198 2.1289 0.0153 2.1441 0.5671 0.0142 0.5812 2,051.502 0 2,051.502
0 0.1622 0.0982 2,084.833
7 Unmitigated 1.1433 1.1088 10.0059 0.0198 2.1289 0.0153 2.1441 0.5671 0.0142 0.5812 2,051.502 0 2,051.502
0 0.1622 0.0982 2,084.833
7 4.2 Trip Summary Information

4.3 Trip Type Information
Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated
Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT
Enclosed Parking with Elevator 0.00 0.00 0.00
Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No Rail 0.00 0.00 0.00
Automobile Care Center 495.19 495.19 495.19 1,011,171 1,011,171 Total 495.19 495.19 495.19 1,011,171 1,011,171
Miles Trip % Trip Purpose %
Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by Enclosed Parking with Elevator 16.60 8.40 6.90 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No
Rail

16.60 8.40 6.90 59.00 0.00 41.00 92 5 3
Automobile Care Center 16.60 8.40 6.90 33.00 48.00 19.00 39 51 10

4.4 Fleet Mix
Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH Enclosed Parking with Elevator 0.542464 0.063735 0.188241 0.126899 0.023249 0.006239 0.010717 0.008079 0.000923 0.000604 0.024795 0.000702 0.003352 Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No
Rail

0.542464 0.063735 0.188241 0.126899 0.023249 0.006239 0.010717 0.008079 0.000923 0.000604 0.024795 0.000702 0.003352 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 23 of 30 Date: 4/26/2022 4:43 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied Automobile Care Center 0.542464 0.063735 0.188241 0.126899 0.023249 0.006239 0.010717 0.008079 0.000923 0.000604 0.024795 0.000702 0.003352

5.0 Energy Detail
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
NaturalGas
Mitigated

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 NaturalGas
Unmitigated

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy
Exceed Title 24
Install High Efficiency Lighting
Historical Energy Use: N
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 24 of 30 Date: 4/26/2022 4:43 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
NaturalGa
s Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day
Automobile Care
Center
0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Enclosed Parking
with Elevator
0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No
Rail
0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 25 of 30 Date: 4/26/2022 4:43 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied Use Electric Lawnmower
Use Electric Leafblower
Use Electric Chainsaw
No Hearths Installed

6.1 Mitigation Measures Area

6.0 Area Detail

5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
NaturalGa
s Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day
Automobile Care
Center
0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Enclosed Parking
with Elevator
0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No
Rail
0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 26 of 30 Date: 4/26/2022 4:43 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Mitigated 2.4001 2.5000e0040.0286 0.0000 7.0000e0057.0000e0057.0000e0057.0000e0050.0570 0.0570 1.2000e0040.0599 Unmitigated 2.4027 4.5000e0040.0493 0.0000 1.8000e0041.8000e0041.8000e0041.8000e0040.1058 0.1058 2.8000e0040.1127

6.2 Area by SubCategory
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory lb/day lb/day
Architectural
Coating

0.2768 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products

2.1214 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Landscaping 4.5500e0034.5000e0040.0493 0.0000 1.8000e0041.8000e0041.8000e0041.8000e0040.1058 0.1058 2.8000e0040.1127 Total 2.4027 4.5000e0040.0493 0.0000 1.8000e0041.8000e0041.8000e0041.8000e0040.1058 0.1058 2.8000e0040.1127 Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 27 of 30 Date: 4/26/2022 4:43 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied Install Low Flow Bathroom Faucet
Install Low Flow Kitchen Faucet
Install Low Flow Toilet
Install Low Flow Shower
Use Water Efficient Irrigation System

7.1 Mitigation Measures Water

7.0 Water Detail

6.2 Area by SubCategory
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory lb/day lb/day
Architectural
Coating

0.2768 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products

2.1214 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Landscaping 1.9300e0032.5000e0040.0286 0.0000 7.0000e0057.0000e0057.0000e0057.0000e0050.0570 0.0570 1.2000e0040.0599 Total 2.4001 2.5000e0040.0286 0.0000 7.0000e0057.0000e0057.0000e0057.0000e0050.0570 0.0570 1.2000e0040.0599 Mitigated

8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste
Institute Recycling and Composting Services

8.0 Waste Detail
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 28 of 30 Date: 4/26/2022 4:43 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

11.0 Vegetation

9.0 Operational Offroad
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type

10.0 Stationary Equipment
Fire Pumps and Emergency Generators
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Hours/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type Emergency Generator 1 0 24 335 0.73 Diesel
Boilers
Equipment Type Number Heat Input/Day Heat Input/Year Boiler Rating Fuel Type User Defined Equipment
Equipment Type Number

10.1 Stationary Sources
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Equipment Type lb/day lb/day
Emergency
Generator -
Diesel (300 - 600
HP)

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Unmitigated/Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 29 of 30 Date: 4/26/2022 4:43 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 30 of 30 Date: 4/26/2022 4:43 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project
Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer
Project Characteristics -
Land Use - Per site plan dated September 2021; total lot 3.55 acres, therefore lot acreage modified to match. All parking are counted towards enclosed parking lot spaces for conservative analysis.

Construction Phase - Per construction questionnaire
Trips and VMT - Per construction questionnaire, hual trucks would travel 50 miles for disposal during demolition and 60 miles for soil materials during grading.

Demolition -
Grading -
Architectural Coating -
Vehicle Trips - Net trip rate and trip districtution % based on traffic study dated Feb 2022.

Energy Use - Per operational questionniare, no natural gas would be used.

1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No Rail 55.51 1000sqft 1.27 55,508.00 0 Enclosed Parking with Elevator 379.00 Space 1.16 151,600.00 0 Automobile Care Center 48.92 1000sqft 1.12 48,922.00 0

1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization
Climate Zone
Urban
12 Wind Speed (m/s) 2.2 Precipitation Freq (Days) 33

1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data

1.0 Project Characteristics
Utility Company Pasadena Water and Power
Operational Year 2024
CO2 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
872.98 CH4 Intensity 0.033
(lb/MWhr)
N2O Intensity 0.004
(lb/MWhr)
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 30 Date: 4/26/2022 4:41 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied Construction Off-road Equipment Mitigation - Per SCAQMD Rule 403 Area Mitigation - Per operational questionnaire, all landscape equipment would be electric.

Energy Mitigation - Per operational questionnaire, high efficiency lighting would be installed Water Mitigation - Per operational questionnaire, low-flow water fixtures and water-efficient irrigation systems would be installed.

Waste Mitigation - Per AB 341
Stationary Sources - Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps - Per operational questionnaire, an emergency generator would be installed.

Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value
tblConstDustMitigation WaterUnpavedRoadMoistureContent 0 12 tblConstDustMitigation WaterUnpavedRoadVehicleSpeed 0 15 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 18.00 44.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 230.00 352.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 20.00 28.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 8.00 22.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 18.00 22.00
tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 10/17/2023 4/9/2024
tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 8/28/2023 3/7/2024
tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 9/28/2022 10/10/2022
tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 10/10/2022 11/1/2022
tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 9/21/2023 3/8/2024
tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 9/22/2023 2/8/2024
tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 10/11/2022 11/2/2022 tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 9/29/2022 10/3/2022 tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 8/29/2023 2/8/2024
tblEnergyUse NT24NG 0.03 0.00
tblEnergyUse NT24NG 4.45 0.00
tblEnergyUse T24NG 0.83 0.00
tblEnergyUse T24NG 13.51 0.00
tblGrading MaterialImported 0.00 4,611.00
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 2 of 30 Date: 4/26/2022 4:41 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

2.0 Emissions Summary
tblLandUse LotAcreage 3.41 1.16
tblStationaryGeneratorsPumpsEF CH4_EF 0.07 0.07
tblStationaryGeneratorsPumpsEF ROG_EF 2.2480e-003 2.2477e-003 tblStationaryGeneratorsPumpsUse HorsePowerValue 0.00 335.00 tblStationaryGeneratorsPumpsUse HoursPerYear 0.00 24.00 tblStationaryGeneratorsPumpsUse NumberOfEquipment 0.00 1.00 tblTripsAndVMT HaulingTripLength 20.00 50.00
tblTripsAndVMT HaulingTripLength 20.00 60.00
tblVehicleTrips PB_TP 28.00 10.00
tblVehicleTrips PR_TP 21.00 39.00
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 1.74 0.00
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 23.72 10.12
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 1.74 0.00
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 11.88 10.12
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 1.74 0.00
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 23.72 10.12
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 3 of 30 Date: 4/26/2022 4:41 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

2.1 Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission)
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year lb/day lb/day
2022 5.1711 65.4902 40.7138 0.1446 13.2255 2.3355 15.5610 4.6526 2.1662 6.8187 0.0000 14,936.99 06 14,936.99
06 2.4209 1.2779 15,378.33
75 2023 1.9510 16.2269 20.6010 0.0450 1.4203 0.7148 2.1351 0.3828 0.6726 1.0554 0.0000 4,439.387 5 4,439.387
5 0.6620 0.1447 4,499.061
2 2024 25.9700 24.8381 35.6663 0.0704 1.8786 1.0904 2.9690 0.5043 1.0227 1.5270 0.0000 6,899.424 9 6,899.424
9 1.2487 0.1502 6,975.388
3 Maximum 25.9700 65.4902 40.7138 0.1446 13.2255 2.3355 15.5610 4.6526 2.1662 6.8187 0.0000 14,936.99 06 14,936.99
06 2.4209 1.2779 15,378.33
75 Unmitigated Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year lb/day lb/day
2022 5.1711 65.4902 40.7138 0.1446 6.4429 2.3355 8.7784 2.1448 2.1662 4.3110 0.0000 14,936.99 06 14,936.99
06 2.4209 1.2779 15,378.33
75 2023 1.9510 16.2269 20.6010 0.0450 1.4203 0.7148 2.1351 0.3828 0.6726 1.0554 0.0000 4,439.387 5 4,439.387
5 0.6620 0.1447 4,499.061
2 2024 25.9700 24.8381 35.6663 0.0704 1.8786 1.0904 2.9690 0.5043 1.0227 1.5270 0.0000 6,899.424 9 6,899.424
9 1.2487 0.1502 6,975.388
3 Maximum 25.9700 65.4902 40.7138 0.1446 6.4429 2.3355 8.7784 2.1448 2.1662 4.3110 0.0000 14,936.99 06 14,936.99
06 2.4209 1.2779 15,378.33
75 Mitigated Construction
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 4 of 30 Date: 4/26/2022 4:41 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
Percent
Reduction

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 41.05 0.00 32.82 45.27 0.00 26.68 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

2.2 Overall Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Area 2.4027 4.5000e0040.0493 0.0000 1.8000e0041.8000e0041.8000e0041.8000e0040.1058 0.1058 2.8000e0040.1127 Energy 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Mobile 1.1723 1.0265 10.0394 0.0206 2.1289 0.0153 2.1441 0.5671 0.0142 0.5812 2,140.865 9 2,140.865
9 0.1557 0.0939 2,172.745
3 Stationary 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 3.5750 1.0270 10.0886 0.0206 2.1289 0.0154 2.1443 0.5671 0.0143 0.5814 2,140.971 7 2,140.971
7 0.1560 0.0939 2,172.858
0 Unmitigated Operational
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 5 of 30 Date: 4/26/2022 4:41 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

2.2 Overall Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Area 2.4001 2.5000e0040.0286 0.0000 7.0000e0057.0000e0057.0000e0057.0000e0050.0570 0.0570 1.2000e0040.0599 Energy 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Mobile 1.1723 1.0265 10.0394 0.0206 2.1289 0.0153 2.1441 0.5671 0.0142 0.5812 2,140.865 9 2,140.865
9 0.1557 0.0939 2,172.745
3 Stationary 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 3.5724 1.0268 10.0679 0.0206 2.1289 0.0153 2.1442 0.5671 0.0142 0.5813 2,140.922 9 2,140.922
9 0.1558 0.0939 2,172.805
2 Mitigated Operational

3.0 Construction Detail
Construction Phase
Phase
Number
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num Days
Week
Num Days Phase Description
1 Demolition Demolition 9/1/2022 10/10/2022 5 28 1.25 months 2 Grading Grading 10/3/2022 11/1/2022 5 22 1 month, assuming a 1 week overlap with demolition activities
3 Building Construction Building Construction 11/2/2022 3/7/2024 5 352 16 months 4 Paving Paving 2/8/2024 3/8/2024 5 22 1 month, assuming to be concurrent with painting
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
Percent
Reduction

0.07 0.02 0.21 0.00 0.00 0.71 0.01 0.00 0.77 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.00 0.00 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 6 of 30 Date: 4/26/2022 4:41 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied 5 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 2/8/2024 4/9/2024 5 44 2 months, assuming 1 month overlap with building construction
OffRoad Equipment
Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor Demolition Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 8.00 81 0.73
Demolition Excavators 3 8.00 158 0.38
Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers 2 8.00 247 0.40
Grading Excavators 1 8.00 158 0.38
Grading Graders 1 8.00 187 0.41
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 247 0.40
Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 8.00 97 0.37
Building Construction Cranes 1 7.00 231 0.29
Building Construction Forklifts 3 8.00 89 0.20
Building Construction Generator Sets 1 8.00 84 0.74
Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 7.00 97 0.37 Building Construction Welders 1 8.00 46 0.45
Paving Cement and Mortar Mixers 2 6.00 9 0.56
Paving Pavers 1 8.00 130 0.42
Paving Paving Equipment 2 6.00 132 0.36
Paving Rollers 2 6.00 80 0.38
Paving Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8.00 97 0.37
Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 6.00 78 0.48
Residential Indoor: 0; Residential Outdoor: 0; Non-Residential Indoor: 156,645; Non-Residential Outdoor: 52,215; Striped Parking Area: 9,096 (Architectural Coating – sqft)
Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0
Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 22
Acres of Paving: 1.16
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 7 of 30 Date: 4/26/2022 4:41 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.2 Demolition - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 3.6684 0.0000 3.6684 0.5554 0.0000 0.5554 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 2.6392 25.7194 20.5941 0.0388 1.2427 1.2427 1.1553 1.1553 3,746.781 2 3,746.781
2 1.0524 3,773.092
0 Total 2.6392 25.7194 20.5941 0.0388 3.6684 1.2427 4.9111 0.5554 1.1553 1.7107 3,746.781 2 3,746.781
2 1.0524 3,773.092
0 Unmitigated Construction On-Site

3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction
Replace Ground Cover
Water Exposed Area
Reduce Vehicle Speed on Unpaved Roads
Trips and VMT
Phase Name Offroad Equipment
Count
Worker Trip
Number
Vendor Trip
Number
Hauling Trip
Number
Worker Trip
Length
Vendor Trip
Length
Hauling Trip
Length
Worker Vehicle
Class
Vendor
Vehicle Class
Hauling
Vehicle Class
Demolition 6 15.00 0.00 475.00 14.70 6.90 50.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Grading 6 15.00 0.00 576.00 14.70 6.90 60.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Building Construction 9 103.00 42.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Paving 8 20.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Architectural Coating 1 21.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 8 of 30 Date: 4/26/2022 4:41 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.2 Demolition - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.1701 6.6406 1.3102 0.0257 0.7418 0.0526 0.7944 0.2033 0.0503 0.2536 2,812.564 3 2,812.564
3 0.1513 0.4463 2,949.344
4 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0519 0.0379 0.5912 1.5300e0030.1677 1.0700e0030.1687 0.0445 9.9000e0040.0455 156.0191 156.0191 4.2200e0033.7500e003157.2432 Total 0.2220 6.6785 1.9014 0.0272 0.9095 0.0536 0.9631 0.2478 0.0513 0.2991 2,968.583 3 2,968.583
3 0.1555 0.4501 3,106.587
6 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 1.3591 0.0000 1.3591 0.2058 0.0000 0.2058 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 2.6392 25.7194 20.5941 0.0388 1.2427 1.2427 1.1553 1.1553 0.0000 3,746.781 2 3,746.781
2 1.0524 3,773.092
0 Total 2.6392 25.7194 20.5941 0.0388 1.3591 1.2427 2.6018 0.2058 1.1553 1.3611 0.0000 3,746.781 2 3,746.781
2 1.0524 3,773.092
0 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 9 of 30 Date: 4/26/2022 4:41 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.2 Demolition - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.1701 6.6406 1.3102 0.0257 0.7418 0.0526 0.7944 0.2033 0.0503 0.2536 2,812.564 3 2,812.564
3 0.1513 0.4463 2,949.344
4 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0519 0.0379 0.5912 1.5300e0030.1677 1.0700e0030.1687 0.0445 9.9000e0040.0455 156.0191 156.0191 4.2200e0033.7500e003157.2432 Total 0.2220 6.6785 1.9014 0.0272 0.9095 0.0536 0.9631 0.2478 0.0513 0.2991 2,968.583 3 2,968.583
3 0.1555 0.4501 3,106.587
6 Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.3 Grading - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 7.1063 0.0000 7.1063 3.4283 0.0000 3.4283 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 1.9486 20.8551 15.2727 0.0297 0.9409 0.9409 0.8656 0.8656 2,872.046 4 2,872.046
4 0.9289 2,895.268
4 Total 1.9486 20.8551 15.2727 0.0297 7.1063 0.9409 8.0471 3.4283 0.8656 4.2939 2,872.046 4 2,872.046
4 0.9289 2,895.268
4 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 10 of 30 Date: 4/26/2022 4:41 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.3 Grading - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.3094 12.1993 2.3544 0.0474 1.3737 0.0973 1.4710 0.3765 0.0931 0.4696 5,193.560 7 5,193.560
7 0.2798 0.8241 5,446.146
4 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0519 0.0379 0.5912 1.5300e0030.1677 1.0700e0030.1687 0.0445 9.9000e0040.0455 156.0191 156.0191 4.2200e0033.7500e003157.2432 Total 0.3613 12.2372 2.9456 0.0489 1.5414 0.0984 1.6397 0.4210 0.0941 0.5151 5,349.579 7 5,349.579
7 0.2841 0.8279 5,603.389
5 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 2.6329 0.0000 2.6329 1.2702 0.0000 1.2702 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 1.9486 20.8551 15.2727 0.0297 0.9409 0.9409 0.8656 0.8656 0.0000 2,872.046 4 2,872.046
4 0.9289 2,895.268
4 Total 1.9486 20.8551 15.2727 0.0297 2.6329 0.9409 3.5737 1.2702 0.8656 2.1358 0.0000 2,872.046 4 2,872.046
4 0.9289 2,895.268
4 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 11 of 30 Date: 4/26/2022 4:41 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.3 Grading - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.3094 12.1993 2.3544 0.0474 1.3737 0.0973 1.4710 0.3765 0.0931 0.4696 5,193.560 7 5,193.560
7 0.2798 0.8241 5,446.146
4 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0519 0.0379 0.5912 1.5300e0030.1677 1.0700e0030.1687 0.0445 9.9000e0040.0455 156.0191 156.0191 4.2200e0033.7500e003157.2432 Total 0.3613 12.2372 2.9456 0.0489 1.5414 0.0984 1.6397 0.4210 0.0941 0.5151 5,349.579 7 5,349.579
7 0.2841 0.8279 5,603.389
5 Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.4 Building Construction - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.7062 15.6156 16.3634 0.0269 0.8090 0.8090 0.7612 0.7612 2,554.333 6 2,554.333
6 0.6120 2,569.632
2 Total 1.7062 15.6156 16.3634 0.0269 0.8090 0.8090 0.7612 0.7612 2,554.333 6 2,554.333
6 0.6120 2,569.632
2 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 12 of 30 Date: 4/26/2022 4:41 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.4 Building Construction - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0826 2.0573 0.7054 8.2300e0030.2690 0.0196 0.2886 0.0775 0.0188 0.0962 883.9387 883.9387 0.0295 0.1274 922.6356 Worker 0.3565 0.2603 4.0596 0.0105 1.1513 7.3800e0031.1587 0.3053 6.7900e0030.3121 1,071.330 9 1,071.330
9 0.0290 0.0258 1,079.736
4 Total 0.4391 2.3176 4.7649 0.0188 1.4203 0.0270 1.4473 0.3828 0.0255 0.4083 1,955.269 6 1,955.269
6 0.0585 0.1532 2,002.372
0 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.7062 15.6156 16.3634 0.0269 0.8090 0.8090 0.7612 0.7612 0.0000 2,554.333 6 2,554.333
6 0.6120 2,569.632
2 Total 1.7062 15.6156 16.3634 0.0269 0.8090 0.8090 0.7612 0.7612 0.0000 2,554.333 6 2,554.333
6 0.6120 2,569.632
2 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 13 of 30 Date: 4/26/2022 4:41 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.4 Building Construction - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0826 2.0573 0.7054 8.2300e0030.2690 0.0196 0.2886 0.0775 0.0188 0.0962 883.9387 883.9387 0.0295 0.1274 922.6356 Worker 0.3565 0.2603 4.0596 0.0105 1.1513 7.3800e0031.1587 0.3053 6.7900e0030.3121 1,071.330 9 1,071.330
9 0.0290 0.0258 1,079.736
4 Total 0.4391 2.3176 4.7649 0.0188 1.4203 0.0270 1.4473 0.3828 0.0255 0.4083 1,955.269 6 1,955.269
6 0.0585 0.1532 2,002.372
0 Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.4 Building Construction - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.5728 14.3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 2,555.209 9 2,555.209
9 0.6079 2,570.406
1 Total 1.5728 14.3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 2,555.209 9 2,555.209
9 0.6079 2,570.406
1 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 14 of 30 Date: 4/26/2022 4:41 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.4 Building Construction - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0484 1.6121 0.6245 7.8200e0030.2690 8.1000e0030.2771 0.0775 7.7500e0030.0852 841.1864 841.1864 0.0282 0.1209 877.9307 Worker 0.3298 0.2300 3.7324 0.0102 1.1513 6.9500e0031.1582 0.3053 6.4000e0030.3117 1,042.991 2 1,042.991
2 0.0260 0.0238 1,050.724
5 Total 0.3782 1.8421 4.3570 0.0180 1.4203 0.0151 1.4354 0.3828 0.0142 0.3969 1,884.177 6 1,884.177
6 0.0542 0.1447 1,928.655
1 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.5728 14.3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 0.0000 2,555.209 9 2,555.209
9 0.6079 2,570.406
1 Total 1.5728 14.3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 0.0000 2,555.209 9 2,555.209
9 0.6079 2,570.406
1 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 15 of 30 Date: 4/26/2022 4:41 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.4 Building Construction - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0484 1.6121 0.6245 7.8200e0030.2690 8.1000e0030.2771 0.0775 7.7500e0030.0852 841.1864 841.1864 0.0282 0.1209 877.9307 Worker 0.3298 0.2300 3.7324 0.0102 1.1513 6.9500e0031.1582 0.3053 6.4000e0030.3117 1,042.991 2 1,042.991
2 0.0260 0.0238 1,050.724
5 Total 0.3782 1.8421 4.3570 0.0180 1.4203 0.0151 1.4354 0.3828 0.0142 0.3969 1,884.177 6 1,884.177
6 0.0542 0.1447 1,928.655
1 Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.4 Building Construction - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.4716 13.4438 16.1668 0.0270 0.6133 0.6133 0.5769 0.5769 2,555.698 9 2,555.698
9 0.6044 2,570.807
7 Total 1.4716 13.4438 16.1668 0.0270 0.6133 0.6133 0.5769 0.5769 2,555.698 9 2,555.698
9 0.6044 2,570.807
7 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 16 of 30 Date: 4/26/2022 4:41 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.4 Building Construction - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0469 1.6154 0.6112 7.6900e0030.2690 8.1600e0030.2772 0.0775 7.8000e0030.0853 828.5533 828.5533 0.0283 0.1193 864.7968 Worker 0.3074 0.2054 3.4742 9.9000e0031.1513 6.6600e0031.1580 0.3053 6.1300e0030.3115 1,021.491 1 1,021.491
1 0.0235 0.0221 1,028.666
5 Total 0.3543 1.8207 4.0854 0.0176 1.4203 0.0148 1.4352 0.3828 0.0139 0.3967 1,850.044 5 1,850.044
5 0.0518 0.1414 1,893.463
3 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.4716 13.4438 16.1668 0.0270 0.6133 0.6133 0.5769 0.5769 0.0000 2,555.698 9 2,555.698
9 0.6044 2,570.807
7 Total 1.4716 13.4438 16.1668 0.0270 0.6133 0.6133 0.5769 0.5769 0.0000 2,555.698 9 2,555.698
9 0.6044 2,570.807
7 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 17 of 30 Date: 4/26/2022 4:41 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.4 Building Construction - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0469 1.6154 0.6112 7.6900e0030.2690 8.1600e0030.2772 0.0775 7.8000e0030.0853 828.5533 828.5533 0.0283 0.1193 864.7968 Worker 0.3074 0.2054 3.4742 9.9000e0031.1513 6.6600e0031.1580 0.3053 6.1300e0030.3115 1,021.491 1 1,021.491
1 0.0235 0.0221 1,028.666
5 Total 0.3543 1.8207 4.0854 0.0176 1.4203 0.0148 1.4352 0.3828 0.0139 0.3967 1,850.044 5 1,850.044
5 0.0518 0.1414 1,893.463
3 Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.5 Paving - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 0.8814 8.2730 12.2210 0.0189 0.3987 0.3987 0.3685 0.3685 1,805.620 5 1,805.620
5 0.5673 1,819.803
9 Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.8814 8.2730 12.2210 0.0189 0.3987 0.3987 0.3685 0.3685 1,805.620 5 1,805.620
5 0.5673 1,819.803
9 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 18 of 30 Date: 4/26/2022 4:41 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.5 Paving - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0597 0.0399 0.6746 1.9200e0030.2236 1.2900e0030.2249 0.0593 1.1900e0030.0605 198.3478 198.3478 4.5600e0034.2900e003199.7411 Total 0.0597 0.0399 0.6746 1.9200e0030.2236 1.2900e0030.2249 0.0593 1.1900e0030.0605 198.3478 198.3478 4.5600e0034.2900e003199.7411 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 0.8814 8.2730 12.2210 0.0189 0.3987 0.3987 0.3685 0.3685 0.0000 1,805.620 5 1,805.620
5 0.5673 1,819.803
9 Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.8814 8.2730 12.2210 0.0189 0.3987 0.3987 0.3685 0.3685 0.0000 1,805.620 5 1,805.620
5 0.5673 1,819.803
9 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 19 of 30 Date: 4/26/2022 4:41 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.5 Paving - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0597 0.0399 0.6746 1.9200e0030.2236 1.2900e0030.2249 0.0593 1.1900e0030.0605 198.3478 198.3478 4.5600e0034.2900e003199.7411 Total 0.0597 0.0399 0.6746 1.9200e0030.2236 1.2900e0030.2249 0.0593 1.1900e0030.0605 198.3478 198.3478 4.5600e0034.2900e003199.7411 Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.6 Architectural Coating - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Archit. Coating 22.9597 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.1808 1.2188 1.8101 2.9700e0030.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 281.4481 281.4481 0.0159 281.8443 Total 23.1404 1.2188 1.8101 2.9700e0030.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 281.4481 281.4481 0.0159 281.8443 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 20 of 30 Date: 4/26/2022 4:41 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.6 Architectural Coating - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0627 0.0419 0.7083 2.0200e0030.2347 1.3600e0030.2361 0.0623 1.2500e0030.0635 208.2652 208.2652 4.7900e0034.5100e003209.7281 Total 0.0627 0.0419 0.7083 2.0200e0030.2347 1.3600e0030.2361 0.0623 1.2500e0030.0635 208.2652 208.2652 4.7900e0034.5100e003209.7281 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Archit. Coating 22.9597 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.1808 1.2188 1.8101 2.9700e0030.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0159 281.8443 Total 23.1404 1.2188 1.8101 2.9700e0030.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0159 281.8443 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 21 of 30 Date: 4/26/2022 4:41 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.6 Architectural Coating - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0627 0.0419 0.7083 2.0200e0030.2347 1.3600e0030.2361 0.0623 1.2500e0030.0635 208.2652 208.2652 4.7900e0034.5100e003209.7281 Total 0.0627 0.0419 0.7083 2.0200e0030.2347 1.3600e0030.2361 0.0623 1.2500e0030.0635 208.2652 208.2652 4.7900e0034.5100e003209.7281 Mitigated Construction Off-Site

4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile

4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 22 of 30 Date: 4/26/2022 4:41 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Mitigated 1.1723 1.0265 10.0394 0.0206 2.1289 0.0153 2.1441 0.5671 0.0142 0.5812 2,140.865 9 2,140.865
9 0.1557 0.0939 2,172.745
3 Unmitigated 1.1723 1.0265 10.0394 0.0206 2.1289 0.0153 2.1441 0.5671 0.0142 0.5812 2,140.865 9 2,140.865
9 0.1557 0.0939 2,172.745
3 4.2 Trip Summary Information

4.3 Trip Type Information
Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated
Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT
Enclosed Parking with Elevator 0.00 0.00 0.00
Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No Rail 0.00 0.00 0.00
Automobile Care Center 495.19 495.19 495.19 1,011,171 1,011,171 Total 495.19 495.19 495.19 1,011,171 1,011,171
Miles Trip % Trip Purpose %
Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by Enclosed Parking with Elevator 16.60 8.40 6.90 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No
Rail

16.60 8.40 6.90 59.00 0.00 41.00 92 5 3
Automobile Care Center 16.60 8.40 6.90 33.00 48.00 19.00 39 51 10

4.4 Fleet Mix
Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH Enclosed Parking with Elevator 0.542464 0.063735 0.188241 0.126899 0.023249 0.006239 0.010717 0.008079 0.000923 0.000604 0.024795 0.000702 0.003352 Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No
Rail

0.542464 0.063735 0.188241 0.126899 0.023249 0.006239 0.010717 0.008079 0.000923 0.000604 0.024795 0.000702 0.003352 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 23 of 30 Date: 4/26/2022 4:41 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied Automobile Care Center 0.542464 0.063735 0.188241 0.126899 0.023249 0.006239 0.010717 0.008079 0.000923 0.000604 0.024795 0.000702 0.003352

5.0 Energy Detail
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
NaturalGas
Mitigated

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 NaturalGas
Unmitigated

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy
Exceed Title 24
Install High Efficiency Lighting
Historical Energy Use: N
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 24 of 30 Date: 4/26/2022 4:41 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
NaturalGa
s Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day
Automobile Care
Center
0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Enclosed Parking
with Elevator
0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No
Rail
0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 25 of 30 Date: 4/26/2022 4:41 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied Use Electric Lawnmower
Use Electric Leafblower
Use Electric Chainsaw
No Hearths Installed

6.1 Mitigation Measures Area

6.0 Area Detail

5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
NaturalGa
s Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day
Automobile Care
Center
0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Enclosed Parking
with Elevator
0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No
Rail
0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 26 of 30 Date: 4/26/2022 4:41 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Mitigated 2.4001 2.5000e0040.0286 0.0000 7.0000e0057.0000e0057.0000e0057.0000e0050.0570 0.0570 1.2000e0040.0599 Unmitigated 2.4027 4.5000e0040.0493 0.0000 1.8000e0041.8000e0041.8000e0041.8000e0040.1058 0.1058 2.8000e0040.1127

6.2 Area by SubCategory
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory lb/day lb/day
Architectural
Coating

0.2768 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products

2.1214 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Landscaping 4.5500e0034.5000e0040.0493 0.0000 1.8000e0041.8000e0041.8000e0041.8000e0040.1058 0.1058 2.8000e0040.1127 Total 2.4027 4.5000e0040.0493 0.0000 1.8000e0041.8000e0041.8000e0041.8000e0040.1058 0.1058 2.8000e0040.1127 Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 27 of 30 Date: 4/26/2022 4:41 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied Install Low Flow Bathroom Faucet
Install Low Flow Kitchen Faucet
Install Low Flow Toilet
Install Low Flow Shower
Use Water Efficient Irrigation System

7.1 Mitigation Measures Water

7.0 Water Detail

6.2 Area by SubCategory
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory lb/day lb/day
Architectural
Coating

0.2768 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products

2.1214 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Landscaping 1.9300e0032.5000e0040.0286 0.0000 7.0000e0057.0000e0057.0000e0057.0000e0050.0570 0.0570 1.2000e0040.0599 Total 2.4001 2.5000e0040.0286 0.0000 7.0000e0057.0000e0057.0000e0057.0000e0050.0570 0.0570 1.2000e0040.0599 Mitigated

8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste
Institute Recycling and Composting Services

8.0 Waste Detail
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 28 of 30 Date: 4/26/2022 4:41 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

11.0 Vegetation

9.0 Operational Offroad
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type

10.0 Stationary Equipment
Fire Pumps and Emergency Generators
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Hours/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type Emergency Generator 1 0 24 335 0.73 Diesel
Boilers
Equipment Type Number Heat Input/Day Heat Input/Year Boiler Rating Fuel Type User Defined Equipment
Equipment Type Number

10.1 Stationary Sources
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Equipment Type lb/day lb/day
Emergency
Generator -
Diesel (300 - 600
HP)

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Unmitigated/Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 29 of 30 Date: 4/26/2022 4:41 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 30 of 30 Date: 4/26/2022 4:41 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project
Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual
Project Characteristics -
Land Use - Per site plan dated September 2021; total lot 3.55 acres, therefore lot acreage modified to match. All parking are counted towards enclosed parking lot spaces for conservative analysis.

Construction Phase - Per construction questionnaire
Trips and VMT - Per construction questionnaire, hual trucks would travel 50 miles for disposal during demolition and 60 miles for soil materials during grading.

Demolition -
Grading -
Architectural Coating -
Vehicle Trips - Net trip rate and trip districtution % based on traffic study dated Feb 2022.

Energy Use - Per operational questionniare, no natural gas would be used.

1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No Rail 55.51 1000sqft 1.27 55,508.00 0 Enclosed Parking with Elevator 379.00 Space 1.16 151,600.00 0 Automobile Care Center 48.92 1000sqft 1.12 48,922.00 0

1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization
Climate Zone
Urban
12 Wind Speed (m/s) 2.2 Precipitation Freq (Days) 33

1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data

1.0 Project Characteristics
Utility Company Pasadena Water and Power
Operational Year 2024
CO2 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
872.98 CH4 Intensity 0.033
(lb/MWhr)
N2O Intensity 0.004
(lb/MWhr)
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 36 Date: 4/26/2022 4:40 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied Construction Off-road Equipment Mitigation - Per SCAQMD Rule 403 Area Mitigation - Per operational questionnaire, all landscape equipment would be electric.

Energy Mitigation - Per operational questionnaire, high efficiency lighting would be installed Water Mitigation - Per operational questionnaire, low-flow water fixtures and water-efficient irrigation systems would be installed.

Waste Mitigation - Per AB 341
Stationary Sources - Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps - Per operational questionnaire, an emergency generator would be installed.

Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value
tblConstDustMitigation WaterUnpavedRoadMoistureContent 0 12 tblConstDustMitigation WaterUnpavedRoadVehicleSpeed 0 15 tblConstructionPhase NumDays 18.00 44.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 230.00 352.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 20.00 28.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 8.00 22.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 18.00 22.00
tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 10/17/2023 4/9/2024
tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 8/28/2023 3/7/2024
tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 9/28/2022 10/10/2022
tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 10/10/2022 11/1/2022
tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 9/21/2023 3/8/2024
tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 9/22/2023 2/8/2024
tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 10/11/2022 11/2/2022 tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 9/29/2022 10/3/2022 tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 8/29/2023 2/8/2024
tblEnergyUse NT24NG 0.03 0.00
tblEnergyUse NT24NG 4.45 0.00
tblEnergyUse T24NG 0.83 0.00
tblEnergyUse T24NG 13.51 0.00
tblGrading MaterialImported 0.00 4,611.00
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 2 of 36 Date: 4/26/2022 4:40 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

2.0 Emissions Summary
tblLandUse LotAcreage 3.41 1.16
tblStationaryGeneratorsPumpsEF CH4_EF 0.07 0.07
tblStationaryGeneratorsPumpsEF ROG_EF 2.2480e-003 2.2477e-003 tblStationaryGeneratorsPumpsUse HorsePowerValue 0.00 335.00 tblStationaryGeneratorsPumpsUse HoursPerYear 0.00 24.00 tblStationaryGeneratorsPumpsUse NumberOfEquipment 0.00 1.00 tblTripsAndVMT HaulingTripLength 20.00 50.00
tblTripsAndVMT HaulingTripLength 20.00 60.00
tblVehicleTrips PB_TP 28.00 10.00
tblVehicleTrips PR_TP 21.00 39.00
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 1.74 0.00
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 23.72 10.12
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 1.74 0.00
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 11.88 10.12
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 1.74 0.00
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 23.72 10.12
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 3 of 36 Date: 4/26/2022 4:40 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

2.1 Overall Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year tons/yr MT/yr
2022 0.1115 1.2188 0.9640 2.7600e0030.1887 0.0476 0.2362 0.0616 0.0444 0.1059 0.0000 254.3514 254.3514 0.0405 0.0170 260.4363 2023 0.2531 2.1238 2.6515 5.7900e0030.1811 0.0929 0.2741 0.0489 0.0874 0.1363 0.0000 518.8784 518.8784 0.0781 0.0173 525.9947 2024 0.5655 0.4960 0.6875 1.4200e0030.0416 0.0212 0.0628 0.0112 0.0199 0.0311 0.0000 126.5959 126.5959 0.0207 3.3300e003128.1064 Maximum 0.5655 2.1238 2.6515 5.7900e0030.1887 0.0929 0.2741 0.0616 0.0874 0.1363 0.0000 518.8784 518.8784 0.0781 0.0173 525.9947 Unmitigated Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year tons/yr MT/yr
2022 0.1115 1.2188 0.9640 2.7600e0030.1071 0.0476 0.1547 0.0329 0.0444 0.0773 0.0000 254.3513 254.3513 0.0405 0.0170 260.4361 2023 0.2531 2.1238 2.6515 5.7900e0030.1811 0.0929 0.2741 0.0489 0.0874 0.1363 0.0000 518.8781 518.8781 0.0781 0.0173 525.9944 2024 0.5655 0.4960 0.6875 1.4200e0030.0416 0.0212 0.0628 0.0112 0.0199 0.0311 0.0000 126.5958 126.5958 0.0207 3.3300e003128.1063 Maximum 0.5655 2.1238 2.6515 5.7900e0030.1811 0.0929 0.2741 0.0489 0.0874 0.1363 0.0000 518.8781 518.8781 0.0781 0.0173 525.9944 Mitigated Construction
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 4 of 36 Date: 4/26/2022 4:40 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
Percent
Reduction

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 19.82 0.00 14.23 23.54 0.00 10.47 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Quarter Start Date End Date Maximum Unmitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter) Maximum Mitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter) 1 9-1-2022 11-30-2022 1.0986 1.0986
2 12-1-2022 2-28-2023 0.6094 0.6094
3 3-1-2023 5-31-2023 0.5986 0.5986
4 6-1-2023 8-31-2023 0.5973 0.5973
5 9-1-2023 11-30-2023 0.5935 0.5935
6 12-1-2023 2-29-2024 0.8365 0.8365
7 3-1-2024 5-31-2024 0.4191 0.4191
Highest 1.0986 1.0986
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 5 of 36 Date: 4/26/2022 4:40 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

2.2 Overall Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Area 0.4382 6.0000e0056.1600e0030.0000 2.0000e0052.0000e0052.0000e0052.0000e0050.0000 0.0120 0.0120 3.0000e0050.0000 0.0128 Energy 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 621.1267 621.1267 0.0235 2.8500e003622.5618 Mobile 0.2037 0.2038 1.8300 3.6400e0030.3799 2.7800e0030.3827 0.1014 2.5800e0030.1039 0.0000 342.2641 342.2641 0.0266 0.0163 347.7779 Stationary 6.6000e0030.0184 0.0168 3.0000e0059.7000e0049.7000e0049.7000e0049.7000e0040.0000 3.0616 3.0616 4.3000e0040.0000 3.0723 Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 48.5250 0.0000 48.5250 2.8677 0.0000 120.2186 Water 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 5.5326 102.3263 107.8589 0.5721 0.0139 126.3002 Total 0.6485 0.2223 1.8530 3.6700e0030.3799 3.7700e0030.3837 0.1014 3.5700e0030.1049 54.0576 1,068.790 6 1,122.848
3 3.4904 0.0330 1,219.943
6 Unmitigated Operational
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 6 of 36 Date: 4/26/2022 4:40 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

2.2 Overall Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Area 0.4379 3.0000e0053.5700e0030.0000 1.0000e0051.0000e0051.0000e0051.0000e0050.0000 6.4700e0036.4700e0031.0000e0050.0000 6.8000e003 Energy 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 574.2388 574.2388 0.0217 2.6300e003575.5656 Mobile 0.2037 0.2038 1.8300 3.6400e0030.3799 2.7800e0030.3827 0.1014 2.5800e0030.1039 0.0000 342.2641 342.2641 0.0266 0.0163 347.7779 Stationary 6.6000e0030.0184 0.0168 3.0000e0059.7000e0049.7000e0049.7000e0049.7000e0040.0000 3.0616 3.0616 4.3000e0040.0000 3.0723 Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 12.1313 0.0000 12.1313 0.7169 0.0000 30.0547 Water 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 4.4261 83.5860 88.0121 0.4578 0.0111 102.7691 Total 0.6482 0.2223 1.8504 3.6700e0030.3799 3.7600e0030.3837 0.1014 3.5600e0030.1049 16.5574 1,003.156 9 1,019.714
3 1.2234 0.0300 1,059.246
3 Mitigated Operational

3.0 Construction Detail
Construction Phase
Phase
Number
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num Days
Week
Num Days Phase Description
1 Demolition Demolition 9/1/2022 10/10/2022 5 28 1.25 months ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
Percent
Reduction

0.05 0.01 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.27 0.00 0.00 0.28 0.01 69.37 6.14 9.19 64.95 9.06 13.17 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 7 of 36 Date: 4/26/2022 4:40 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied 2 Grading Grading 10/3/2022 11/1/2022 5 22 1 month, assuming a 1 week overlap with demolition activities
3 Building Construction Building Construction 11/2/2022 3/7/2024 5 352 16 months 4 Paving Paving 2/8/2024 3/8/2024 5 22 1 month, assuming to be concurrent with painting
5 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 2/8/2024 4/9/2024 5 44 2 months, assuming 1 month overlap with building construction
OffRoad Equipment
Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor Demolition Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 8.00 81 0.73
Demolition Excavators 3 8.00 158 0.38
Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers 2 8.00 247 0.40
Grading Excavators 1 8.00 158 0.38
Grading Graders 1 8.00 187 0.41
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 247 0.40
Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 8.00 97 0.37
Building Construction Cranes 1 7.00 231 0.29
Building Construction Forklifts 3 8.00 89 0.20
Building Construction Generator Sets 1 8.00 84 0.74
Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 7.00 97 0.37 Building Construction Welders 1 8.00 46 0.45
Paving Cement and Mortar Mixers 2 6.00 9 0.56
Paving Pavers 1 8.00 130 0.42
Paving Paving Equipment 2 6.00 132 0.36
Residential Indoor: 0; Residential Outdoor: 0; Non-Residential Indoor: 156,645; Non-Residential Outdoor: 52,215; Striped Parking Area: 9,096 (Architectural Coating – sqft)
Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0
Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 22
Acres of Paving: 1.16
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 8 of 36 Date: 4/26/2022 4:40 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction
Replace Ground Cover
Water Exposed Area
Reduce Vehicle Speed on Unpaved Roads
Paving Rollers 2 6.00 80 0.38
Paving Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8.00 97 0.37
Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 6.00 78 0.48
Trips and VMT
Phase Name Offroad Equipment
Count
Worker Trip
Number
Vendor Trip
Number
Hauling Trip
Number
Worker Trip
Length
Vendor Trip
Length
Hauling Trip
Length
Worker Vehicle
Class
Vendor
Vehicle Class
Hauling
Vehicle Class
Demolition 6 15.00 0.00 475.00 14.70 6.90 50.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Grading 6 15.00 0.00 576.00 14.70 6.90 60.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Building Construction 9 103.00 42.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Paving 8 20.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Architectural Coating 1 21.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 9 of 36 Date: 4/26/2022 4:40 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.2 Demolition - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 0.0514 0.0000 0.0514 7.7800e0030.0000 7.7800e0030.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0370 0.3601 0.2883 5.4000e0040.0174 0.0174 0.0162 0.0162 0.0000 47.5863 47.5863 0.0134 0.0000 47.9205 Total 0.0370 0.3601 0.2883 5.4000e0040.0514 0.0174 0.0688 7.7800e0030.0162 0.0240 0.0000 47.5863 47.5863 0.0134 0.0000 47.9205 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 2.3700e0030.0981 0.0184 3.6000e0040.0102 7.4000e0040.0109 2.8000e0037.0000e0043.5100e0030.0000 35.7230 35.7230 1.9200e0035.6700e00337.4603 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 7.2000e0046.0000e0047.8000e0032.0000e0052.3000e0032.0000e0052.3200e0036.1000e0041.0000e0056.3000e0040.0000 1.9049 1.9049 5.0000e0055.0000e0051.9216 Total 3.0900e0030.0987 0.0262 3.8000e0040.0125 7.6000e0040.0133 3.4100e0037.1000e0044.1400e0030.0000 37.6279 37.6279 1.9700e0035.7200e00339.3820 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 10 of 36 Date: 4/26/2022 4:40 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.2 Demolition - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 0.0190 0.0000 0.0190 2.8800e0030.0000 2.8800e0030.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0370 0.3601 0.2883 5.4000e0040.0174 0.0174 0.0162 0.0162 0.0000 47.5863 47.5863 0.0134 0.0000 47.9204 Total 0.0370 0.3601 0.2883 5.4000e0040.0190 0.0174 0.0364 2.8800e0030.0162 0.0191 0.0000 47.5863 47.5863 0.0134 0.0000 47.9204 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 2.3700e0030.0981 0.0184 3.6000e0040.0102 7.4000e0040.0109 2.8000e0037.0000e0043.5100e0030.0000 35.7230 35.7230 1.9200e0035.6700e00337.4603 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 7.2000e0046.0000e0047.8000e0032.0000e0052.3000e0032.0000e0052.3200e0036.1000e0041.0000e0056.3000e0040.0000 1.9049 1.9049 5.0000e0055.0000e0051.9216 Total 3.0900e0030.0987 0.0262 3.8000e0040.0125 7.6000e0040.0133 3.4100e0037.1000e0044.1400e0030.0000 37.6279 37.6279 1.9700e0035.7200e00339.3820 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 11 of 36 Date: 4/26/2022 4:40 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.3 Grading - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 0.0782 0.0000 0.0782 0.0377 0.0000 0.0377 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0214 0.2294 0.1680 3.3000e0040.0104 0.0104 9.5200e0039.5200e0030.0000 28.6602 28.6602 9.2700e0030.0000 28.8920 Total 0.0214 0.2294 0.1680 3.3000e0040.0782 0.0104 0.0885 0.0377 9.5200e0030.0472 0.0000 28.6602 28.6602 9.2700e0030.0000 28.8920 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 3.3900e0030.1417 0.0260 5.2000e0040.0149 1.0700e0030.0159 4.0800e0031.0200e0035.1000e0030.0000 51.8289 51.8289 2.7900e0038.2200e00354.3496 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 5.7000e0044.7000e0046.1300e0032.0000e0051.8100e0031.0000e0051.8200e0034.8000e0041.0000e0054.9000e0040.0000 1.4967 1.4967 4.0000e0054.0000e0051.5098 Total 3.9600e0030.1421 0.0321 5.4000e0040.0167 1.0800e0030.0177 4.5600e0031.0300e0035.5900e0030.0000 53.3255 53.3255 2.8300e0038.2600e00355.8595 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 12 of 36 Date: 4/26/2022 4:40 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.3 Grading - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 0.0290 0.0000 0.0290 0.0140 0.0000 0.0140 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0214 0.2294 0.1680 3.3000e0040.0104 0.0104 9.5200e0039.5200e0030.0000 28.6602 28.6602 9.2700e0030.0000 28.8919 Total 0.0214 0.2294 0.1680 3.3000e0040.0290 0.0104 0.0393 0.0140 9.5200e0030.0235 0.0000 28.6602 28.6602 9.2700e0030.0000 28.8919 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 3.3900e0030.1417 0.0260 5.2000e0040.0149 1.0700e0030.0159 4.0800e0031.0200e0035.1000e0030.0000 51.8289 51.8289 2.7900e0038.2200e00354.3496 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 5.7000e0044.7000e0046.1300e0032.0000e0051.8100e0031.0000e0051.8200e0034.8000e0041.0000e0054.9000e0040.0000 1.4967 1.4967 4.0000e0054.0000e0051.5098 Total 3.9600e0030.1421 0.0321 5.4000e0040.0167 1.0800e0030.0177 4.5600e0031.0300e0035.5900e0030.0000 53.3255 53.3255 2.8300e0038.2600e00355.8595 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 13 of 36 Date: 4/26/2022 4:40 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.4 Building Construction - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 0.0367 0.3357 0.3518 5.8000e0040.0174 0.0174 0.0164 0.0164 0.0000 49.8209 49.8209 0.0119 0.0000 50.1193 Total 0.0367 0.3357 0.3518 5.8000e0040.0174 0.0174 0.0164 0.0164 0.0000 49.8209 49.8209 0.0119 0.0000 50.1193 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 1.7600e0030.0464 0.0154 1.8000e0045.6900e0034.2000e0046.1100e0031.6400e0034.0000e0042.0500e0030.0000 17.2435 17.2435 5.8000e0042.4900e00317.9991 Worker 7.5900e0036.3200e0030.0822 2.2000e0040.0243 1.6000e0040.0244 6.4500e0031.5000e0046.5900e0030.0000 20.0871 20.0871 5.7000e0045.5000e00420.2639 Total 9.3500e0030.0528 0.0976 4.0000e0040.0300 5.8000e0040.0305 8.0900e0035.5000e0048.6400e0030.0000 37.3306 37.3306 1.1500e0033.0400e00338.2631 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 14 of 36 Date: 4/26/2022 4:40 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.4 Building Construction - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 0.0367 0.3357 0.3518 5.8000e0040.0174 0.0174 0.0164 0.0164 0.0000 49.8209 49.8209 0.0119 0.0000 50.1193 Total 0.0367 0.3357 0.3518 5.8000e0040.0174 0.0174 0.0164 0.0164 0.0000 49.8209 49.8209 0.0119 0.0000 50.1193 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 1.7600e0030.0464 0.0154 1.8000e0045.6900e0034.2000e0046.1100e0031.6400e0034.0000e0042.0500e0030.0000 17.2435 17.2435 5.8000e0042.4900e00317.9991 Worker 7.5900e0036.3200e0030.0822 2.2000e0040.0243 1.6000e0040.0244 6.4500e0031.5000e0046.5900e0030.0000 20.0871 20.0871 5.7000e0045.5000e00420.2639 Total 9.3500e0030.0528 0.0976 4.0000e0040.0300 5.8000e0040.0305 8.0900e0035.5000e0048.6400e0030.0000 37.3306 37.3306 1.1500e0033.0400e00338.2631 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 15 of 36 Date: 4/26/2022 4:40 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.4 Building Construction - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 0.2045 1.8700 2.1117 3.5000e0030.0910 0.0910 0.0856 0.0856 0.0000 301.3462 301.3462 0.0717 0.0000 303.1383 Total 0.2045 1.8700 2.1117 3.5000e0030.0910 0.0910 0.0856 0.0856 0.0000 301.3462 301.3462 0.0717 0.0000 303.1383 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 6.1700e0030.2200 0.0824 1.0200e0030.0344 1.0600e0030.0355 9.9300e0031.0100e0030.0109 0.0000 99.2749 99.2749 3.3200e0030.0143 103.6155 Worker 0.0425 0.0338 0.4574 1.2700e0030.1467 9.0000e0040.1476 0.0390 8.3000e0040.0398 0.0000 118.2573 118.2573 3.1100e0033.0400e003119.2410 Total 0.0487 0.2538 0.5398 2.2900e0030.1811 1.9600e0030.1831 0.0489 1.8400e0030.0507 0.0000 217.5323 217.5323 6.4300e0030.0173 222.8564 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 16 of 36 Date: 4/26/2022 4:40 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.4 Building Construction - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 0.2045 1.8700 2.1117 3.5000e0030.0910 0.0910 0.0856 0.0856 0.0000 301.3458 301.3458 0.0717 0.0000 303.1380 Total 0.2045 1.8700 2.1117 3.5000e0030.0910 0.0910 0.0856 0.0856 0.0000 301.3458 301.3458 0.0717 0.0000 303.1380 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 6.1700e0030.2200 0.0824 1.0200e0030.0344 1.0600e0030.0355 9.9300e0031.0100e0030.0109 0.0000 99.2749 99.2749 3.3200e0030.0143 103.6155 Worker 0.0425 0.0338 0.4574 1.2700e0030.1467 9.0000e0040.1476 0.0390 8.3000e0040.0398 0.0000 118.2573 118.2573 3.1100e0033.0400e003119.2410 Total 0.0487 0.2538 0.5398 2.2900e0030.1811 1.9600e0030.1831 0.0489 1.8400e0030.0507 0.0000 217.5323 217.5323 6.4300e0030.0173 222.8564 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 17 of 36 Date: 4/26/2022 4:40 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.4 Building Construction - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 0.0361 0.3294 0.3961 6.6000e0040.0150 0.0150 0.0141 0.0141 0.0000 56.8030 56.8030 0.0134 0.0000 57.1388 Total 0.0361 0.3294 0.3961 6.6000e0040.0150 0.0150 0.0141 0.0141 0.0000 56.8030 56.8030 0.0134 0.0000 57.1388 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 1.1300e0030.0416 0.0152 1.9000e0046.4900e0032.0000e0046.6900e0031.8700e0031.9000e0042.0600e0030.0000 18.4288 18.4288 6.3000e0042.6500e00319.2356 Worker 7.4800e0035.6800e0030.0803 2.3000e0040.0277 1.6000e0040.0278 7.3400e0031.5000e0047.4900e0030.0000 21.8290 21.8290 5.3000e0045.3000e00422.0010 Total 8.6100e0030.0472 0.0955 4.2000e0040.0341 3.6000e0040.0345 9.2100e0033.4000e0049.5500e0030.0000 40.2578 40.2578 1.1600e0033.1800e00341.2366 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 18 of 36 Date: 4/26/2022 4:40 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.4 Building Construction - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 0.0361 0.3294 0.3961 6.6000e0040.0150 0.0150 0.0141 0.0141 0.0000 56.8030 56.8030 0.0134 0.0000 57.1388 Total 0.0361 0.3294 0.3961 6.6000e0040.0150 0.0150 0.0141 0.0141 0.0000 56.8030 56.8030 0.0134 0.0000 57.1388 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 1.1300e0030.0416 0.0152 1.9000e0046.4900e0032.0000e0046.6900e0031.8700e0031.9000e0042.0600e0030.0000 18.4288 18.4288 6.3000e0042.6500e00319.2356 Worker 7.4800e0035.6800e0030.0803 2.3000e0040.0277 1.6000e0040.0278 7.3400e0031.5000e0047.4900e0030.0000 21.8290 21.8290 5.3000e0045.3000e00422.0010 Total 8.6100e0030.0472 0.0955 4.2000e0040.0341 3.6000e0040.0345 9.2100e0033.4000e0049.5500e0030.0000 40.2578 40.2578 1.1600e0033.1800e00341.2366 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 19 of 36 Date: 4/26/2022 4:40 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.5 Paving - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 9.7000e0030.0910 0.1344 2.1000e0044.3900e0034.3900e0034.0500e0034.0500e0030.0000 18.0184 18.0184 5.6600e0030.0000 18.1599 Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 9.7000e0030.0910 0.1344 2.1000e0044.3900e0034.3900e0034.0500e0034.0500e0030.0000 18.0184 18.0184 5.6600e0030.0000 18.1599 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 6.5000e0045.0000e0047.0000e0032.0000e0052.4100e0031.0000e0052.4200e0036.4000e0041.0000e0056.5000e0040.0000 1.9031 1.9031 5.0000e0055.0000e0051.9181 Total 6.5000e0045.0000e0047.0000e0032.0000e0052.4100e0031.0000e0052.4200e0036.4000e0041.0000e0056.5000e0040.0000 1.9031 1.9031 5.0000e0055.0000e0051.9181 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 20 of 36 Date: 4/26/2022 4:40 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.5 Paving - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 9.7000e0030.0910 0.1344 2.1000e0044.3900e0034.3900e0034.0500e0034.0500e0030.0000 18.0183 18.0183 5.6600e0030.0000 18.1599 Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 9.7000e0030.0910 0.1344 2.1000e0044.3900e0034.3900e0034.0500e0034.0500e0030.0000 18.0183 18.0183 5.6600e0030.0000 18.1599 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 6.5000e0045.0000e0047.0000e0032.0000e0052.4100e0031.0000e0052.4200e0036.4000e0041.0000e0056.5000e0040.0000 1.9031 1.9031 5.0000e0055.0000e0051.9181 Total 6.5000e0045.0000e0047.0000e0032.0000e0052.4100e0031.0000e0052.4200e0036.4000e0041.0000e0056.5000e0040.0000 1.9031 1.9031 5.0000e0055.0000e0051.9181 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 21 of 36 Date: 4/26/2022 4:40 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.6 Architectural Coating - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Archit. Coating 0.5051 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 3.9800e0030.0268 0.0398 7.0000e0051.3400e0031.3400e0031.3400e0031.3400e0030.0000 5.6172 5.6172 3.2000e0040.0000 5.6251 Total 0.5091 0.0268 0.0398 7.0000e0051.3400e0031.3400e0031.3400e0031.3400e0030.0000 5.6172 5.6172 3.2000e0040.0000 5.6251 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 1.3700e0031.0400e0030.0147 4.0000e0055.0600e0033.0000e0055.0900e0031.3400e0033.0000e0051.3700e0030.0000 3.9964 3.9964 1.0000e0041.0000e0044.0279 Total 1.3700e0031.0400e0030.0147 4.0000e0055.0600e0033.0000e0055.0900e0031.3400e0033.0000e0051.3700e0030.0000 3.9964 3.9964 1.0000e0041.0000e0044.0279 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 22 of 36 Date: 4/26/2022 4:40 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.6 Architectural Coating - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Archit. Coating 0.5051 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 3.9800e0030.0268 0.0398 7.0000e0051.3400e0031.3400e0031.3400e0031.3400e0030.0000 5.6172 5.6172 3.2000e0040.0000 5.6251 Total 0.5091 0.0268 0.0398 7.0000e0051.3400e0031.3400e0031.3400e0031.3400e0030.0000 5.6172 5.6172 3.2000e0040.0000 5.6251 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 1.3700e0031.0400e0030.0147 4.0000e0055.0600e0033.0000e0055.0900e0031.3400e0033.0000e0051.3700e0030.0000 3.9964 3.9964 1.0000e0041.0000e0044.0279 Total 1.3700e0031.0400e0030.0147 4.0000e0055.0600e0033.0000e0055.0900e0031.3400e0033.0000e0051.3700e0030.0000 3.9964 3.9964 1.0000e0041.0000e0044.0279 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 23 of 36 Date: 4/26/2022 4:40 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Mitigated 0.2037 0.2038 1.8300 3.6400e0030.3799 2.7800e0030.3827 0.1014 2.5800e0030.1039 0.0000 342.2641 342.2641 0.0266 0.0163 347.7779 Unmitigated 0.2037 0.2038 1.8300 3.6400e0030.3799 2.7800e0030.3827 0.1014 2.5800e0030.1039 0.0000 342.2641 342.2641 0.0266 0.0163 347.7779

4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile

4.2 Trip Summary Information

4.3 Trip Type Information
Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated
Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT
Enclosed Parking with Elevator 0.00 0.00 0.00
Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No Rail 0.00 0.00 0.00
Automobile Care Center 495.19 495.19 495.19 1,011,171 1,011,171 Total 495.19 495.19 495.19 1,011,171 1,011,171
Miles Trip % Trip Purpose %
Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by Enclosed Parking with Elevator 16.60 8.40 6.90 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No
Rail

16.60 8.40 6.90 59.00 0.00 41.00 92 5 3
Automobile Care Center 16.60 8.40 6.90 33.00 48.00 19.00 39 51 10 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 24 of 36 Date: 4/26/2022 4:40 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

4.4 Fleet Mix
Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH Enclosed Parking with Elevator 0.542464 0.063735 0.188241 0.126899 0.023249 0.006239 0.010717 0.008079 0.000923 0.000604 0.024795 0.000702 0.003352 Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No
Rail

0.542464 0.063735 0.188241 0.126899 0.023249 0.006239 0.010717 0.008079 0.000923 0.000604 0.024795 0.000702 0.003352 Automobile Care Center 0.542464 0.063735 0.188241 0.126899 0.023249 0.006239 0.010717 0.008079 0.000923 0.000604 0.024795 0.000702 0.003352

5.0 Energy Detail
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Electricity
Mitigated

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 574.2388 574.2388 0.0217 2.6300e003575.5656 Electricity
Unmitigated

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 621.1267 621.1267 0.0235 2.8500e003622.5618 NaturalGas
Mitigated

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 NaturalGas
Unmitigated

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy
Exceed Title 24
Install High Efficiency Lighting
Historical Energy Use: N
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 25 of 36 Date: 4/26/2022 4:40 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
NaturalGa
s Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr
Automobile Care
Center
0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Enclosed Parking
with Elevator
0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No
Rail
0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 26 of 36 Date: 4/26/2022 4:40 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
NaturalGa
s Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr
Automobile Care
Center
0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Enclosed Parking
with Elevator
0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No
Rail
0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 27 of 36 Date: 4/26/2022 4:40 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity
Electricity
Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kWh/yr MT/yr
Automobile Care
Center
531293 210.3798 7.9500e0039.6000e004210.8659
Enclosed Parking
with Elevator
824704 326.5639 0.0123 1.5000e003327.3184
Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No
Rail
212596 84.1830 3.1800e0033.9000e00484.3775
Total 621.1267 0.0235 2.8500e003622.5618
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 28 of 36 Date: 4/26/2022 4:40 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied Use Electric Lawnmower
Use Electric Leafblower
Use Electric Chainsaw
No Hearths Installed

6.1 Mitigation Measures Area

6.0 Area Detail

5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity
Electricity
Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kWh/yr MT/yr
Automobile Care
Center
506294 200.4807 7.5800e0039.2000e004200.9439
Enclosed Parking
with Elevator
745114 295.0481 0.0112 1.3500e003295.7298
Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No
Rail
198774 78.7100 2.9800e0033.6000e00478.8919
Total 574.2388 0.0217 2.6300e003575.5656
Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 29 of 36 Date: 4/26/2022 4:40 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Mitigated 0.4379 3.0000e0053.5700e0030.0000 1.0000e0051.0000e0051.0000e0051.0000e0050.0000 6.4700e0036.4700e0031.0000e0050.0000 6.8000e003 Unmitigated 0.4382 6.0000e0056.1600e0030.0000 2.0000e0052.0000e0052.0000e0052.0000e0050.0000 0.0120 0.0120 3.0000e0050.0000 0.0128

6.2 Area by SubCategory
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory tons/yr MT/yr
Architectural
Coating

0.0505 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer
Products

0.3872 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Landscaping 5.7000e0046.0000e0056.1600e0030.0000 2.0000e0052.0000e0052.0000e0052.0000e0050.0000 0.0120 0.0120 3.0000e0050.0000 0.0128 Total 0.4382 6.0000e0056.1600e0030.0000 2.0000e0052.0000e0052.0000e0052.0000e0050.0000 0.0120 0.0120 3.0000e0050.0000 0.0128 Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 30 of 36 Date: 4/26/2022 4:40 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied Install Low Flow Bathroom Faucet
Install Low Flow Kitchen Faucet
Install Low Flow Toilet
Install Low Flow Shower
Use Water Efficient Irrigation System

7.1 Mitigation Measures Water

7.0 Water Detail

6.2 Area by SubCategory
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory tons/yr MT/yr
Architectural
Coating

0.0505 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer
Products

0.3872 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Landscaping 2.4000e0043.0000e0053.5700e0030.0000 1.0000e0051.0000e0051.0000e0051.0000e0050.0000 6.4700e0036.4700e0031.0000e0050.0000 6.8000e003 Total 0.4379 3.0000e0053.5700e0030.0000 1.0000e0051.0000e0051.0000e0051.0000e0050.0000 6.4700e0036.4700e0031.0000e0050.0000 6.8000e003 Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 31 of 36 Date: 4/26/2022 4:40 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category MT/yr
Mitigated 88.0121 0.4578 0.0111 102.7691
Unmitigated 107.8589 0.5721 0.0139 126.3002

7.2 Water by Land Use
Indoor/Out
door Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use Mgal MT/yr
Automobile Care
Center

4.60245 /

2.82086

37.6003 0.1513 3.7100e00342.4883
Enclosed Parking
with Elevator
0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No
Rail

12.8367 /
0 70.2587 0.4208 0.0102 83.8119
Total 107.8589 0.5721 0.0139 126.3002
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 32 of 36 Date: 4/26/2022 4:40 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

7.2 Water by Land Use
Indoor/Out
door Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use Mgal MT/yr
Automobile Care
Center

3.68196 /

2.64878

31.8052 0.1211 2.9700e00335.7196
Enclosed Parking
with Elevator
0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No
Rail

10.2693 /
0 56.2069 0.3366 8.1400e00367.0495
Total 88.0121 0.4578 0.0111 102.7691
Mitigated

8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste
Institute Recycling and Composting Services

8.0 Waste Detail
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 33 of 36 Date: 4/26/2022 4:40 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
MT/yr
Mitigated 12.1313 0.7169 0.0000 30.0547
Unmitigated 48.5250 2.8677 0.0000 120.2186
Category/Year

8.2 Waste by Land Use
Waste
Disposed
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use tons MT/yr
Automobile Care
Center
186.87 37.9329 2.2418 0.0000 93.9772
Enclosed Parking
with Elevator
0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No
Rail

52.18 10.5921 0.6260 0.0000 26.2414
Total 48.5250 2.8677 0.0000 120.2186
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 34 of 36 Date: 4/26/2022 4:40 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

8.2 Waste by Land Use
Waste
Disposed
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use tons MT/yr
Automobile Care
Center

46.7175 9.4832 0.5604 0.0000 23.4943
Enclosed Parking
with Elevator
0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Unrefrigerated
Warehouse-No
Rail

13.045 2.6480 0.1565 0.0000 6.5604
Total 12.1313 0.7169 0.0000 30.0547
Mitigated

9.0 Operational Offroad
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type

10.0 Stationary Equipment
Fire Pumps and Emergency Generators
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Hours/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type Emergency Generator 1 0 24 335 0.73 Diesel
Boilers
Equipment Type Number Heat Input/Day Heat Input/Year Boiler Rating Fuel Type User Defined Equipment
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 35 of 36 Date: 4/26/2022 4:40 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

11.0 Vegetation
Equipment Type Number

10.1 Stationary Sources
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Equipment Type tons/yr MT/yr
Emergency
Generator -
Diesel (300 - 600
HP)

6.6000e0030.0184 0.0168 3.0000e0059.7000e0049.7000e0049.7000e0049.7000e0040.0000 3.0616 3.0616 4.3000e0040.0000 3.0723 Total 6.6000e0030.0184 0.0168 3.0000e0059.7000e0049.7000e0049.7000e0049.7000e0040.0000 3.0616 3.0616 4.3000e0040.0000 3.0723 Unmitigated/Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 36 of 36 Date: 4/26/2022 4:40 PM Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied Porsche Dealership Project
Energy Calculations
(kWh/yr) (MWh/yr)
Automobile Care Center 506,294 506
Enclosed Parking with Elevator 745,114 745
Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No Rail 198,774 199
Totals 1,450,182 1,450
1 kBTU = 0.01 therms
Electricity (MWh) 1,450 65,649,878 0.0022%
Land Use Electricity Use
Percentage Increase
Countywide
Source: Refer to CalEEMod outputs for assumptions used in this analysis.

Energy Type
Los Angeles
County Annual
Energy
Consumption
(2020)
Project Annual
Energy
Consumption
Porsche Dealership Project
Energy Calculations
Phase Phase Length
(# days) # Worker Trips Worker Trip Length Total VMT Fuel Consumption Factor (Miles/Gallon/Day) Total Fuel Consumption Demolition 28 15 14.7 6174 247.92
Grading 22 15 14.7 4851 194.80
Building Construction 352 103 14.7 532963 21401.70
Architectural Coating 44 21 14.7 13583 545.43
Paving 22 20 14.7 6468 259.73
22649.58
Phase Phase Length
(# days) # Vendor Trips Vendor Trip Length Total VMT Fuel Consumption Factor (Miles/Gallon/Day) Total Fuel Consumption Demolition 28 0 6.9 0 0.00
Grading 22 0 6.9 0 0.00
Building Construction 352 42 6.9 290 34.73
Architectural Coating 44 0 6.9 0 0.00
Paving 22 0 6.9 0 0.00

34.73 Phase Phase Length
(# days) # Hauling Trips Hauling Trip Length Total VMT Fuel Consumption Factor (Miles/Gallon/Day)1 Total Fuel Consumption
Demolition 28 475 50 23750 2846.40
Grading 22 576 60 34560 4141.95
Building Construction 352 0 20 0 0.00
Architectural Coating 44 0 20 0 0.00
Paving 22 0 20 0 0.00
6988.35
TOTAL OFF-SITE MOBILE GALLONS CONSUMED DURING CONSTRUCTION 29,672.67

WORKER TRIPS

VENDOR TRIPS

HAULING TRIPS

24.90284233

8.343886151

8.343886151
Porsche Dealership Project
Energy Calculations
Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Consumption Rate (gallons per hour)
Duration (total
hours/day) # days Total Fuel Consumption (gallons)
Demolition Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 8 81 0.73 2.3652 8 28 529.80 Demolition Excavators 3 8 158 0.38 2.4016 8 28 537.96
Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers 2 8 247 0.40 3.952 8 28 885.25 Grading Excavators 1 8 158 0.38 2.4016 8 22 422.68
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8 247 0.40 3.952 8 22 695.55 Grading Graders 1 8 187 0.41 3.0668 8 22 539.76
Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 8 97 0.37 1.4356 24 22 758.00 Paving Pavers 1 8 130 0.42 2.184 8 22 384.38
Paving Paving Equipment 2 6 132 0.36 1.9008 12 22 501.81 Paving Cement and Mortar Mixers 2 6 9 0.56 0.2016 12 22 53.22 Paving Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8 97 0.37 1.4356 8 22 252.67 Paving Rollers 2 6 80 0.38 1.216 12 22 321.02
Building Construction Cranes 1 7 231 0.29 2.6796 7 352 6602.53 Building Construction Generator Sets 1 8 84 0.74 2.4864 8 352 7001.70 Building Construction Welders 1 8 46 0.45 0.828 8 352 2331.65 Building Construction Forklifts 3 8 89 0.20 0.712 24 352 6014.98 Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 7 97 0.37 1.4356 21 352 10611.96 Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 6 78 0.48 1.4976 6 44 395.37 Total: 38,840
Notes: Off-Site Mobile Construction Total: 29,673
Fuel Consumption Rate = Horsepower x Load Factor x Fuel Consumption Factor TOTAL: 68,513 Where:

Fuel Consumption Factor for a diesel engine is 0.04 gallons per horsepower per hour (gal/hp/hr) and a gasoline engine is 0.06 gal/hp/hr.

County Offroad Gallons 390,111,209
2022 0.0176%
Source: Refer to CalEEMod outputs for assumptions used in this analysis.

Porsche Dealership Project
Energy Calculations
Vehicle Type Percent of Vehicle Trips1 Daily Trips2 Annual Vehicle Miles Traveled Average Fuel
Economy (miles per
gallon)3
Total Annual Fuel
Consumption
(gallons)4
Passenger Cars 0.54 269 548,524 22 24,933
Light/Medium Trucks 0.41 202 412,925 17.3 23,868 County On-Road Heavy Trucks/Other 0.05 24 49,721 6.4 7,769 2025
TOTAL 6 1.00 495 1,011,171 -- 56,570 3,742,125,048

0.0015%

5. Values may be slightly off due to rounding.

Source: Refer to CalEEMod outputs for assumptions used in this analysis.

Notes:

1. Percent of Vehicle Trip distribution based on trip characteristics within the CalEEMod model.

2. Daily Trips taken from ITE manual.

3. Average fuel economy derived from the Department of Transportation.

4. Total Daily Fuel Consumption calculated by dividing the daily VMT by the average fuel economy (i.e., VMT/Average Fuel Economy).

Appendix B.2:

CAP Consistency Checklist

This page intentionally left blank
APPENDIX d
climate action plan
consistency checklist
Appendices
Appendix D – Climate Action Plan Consistency Checklist
December 28, 2017
1 Climate Action Plan Consistency Checklist
Introduction
The Climate Action Plan Consistency Checklist (Checklist) is intended to be a tool for new development projects to demonstrate consistency with Pasadena’s Climate Action Plan (CAP), which is a qualified greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reduction plan in accordance with California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15183.5.

This Checklist has been developed as part of the CAP implementation and monitoring process and will support the achievement of individual CAP measures as well as Pasadena’s overall GHG reduction goals. In addition, this Checklist will further Pasadena’s sustainability goals and policies that encourage sustainable development and aim to conserve and reduce the consumption of resources, such as energy and water, among others.

CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.5 allows lead agencies to analyze the impacts associated with GHG emissions at a programmatic level in plan-level documents such as CAPs, so that project-level environmental documents may tier from the programmatic review. Projects that meet the requirements of this Checklist will be deemed to be consistent with Pasadena’s CAP and will be found to have a less than significant contribution to cumulative GHG (i.e., the project’s incremental contribution to cumulative GHG effects is not cumulatively considerable), pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15064(h)(3), 15130(d), and 15183(b). Projects that do not meet the requirements in this Checklist will be deemed to be inconsistent with Pasadena’s CAP and must prepare a project-specific analysis of GHG emissions, including quantification of existing and projected GHG emissions and incorporation of the measures in this Checklist to the extent feasible.

Applicability
This Checklist is only required for discretionary projects1that are subject to and not exempt from CEQA. Projects that are exempt from CEQA are deemed to be consistent with Pasadena’s CAP, and no further review is necessary, with the exception of the Class 32 “In-Fill Development Projects” categorical exemption (CEQA Guidelines Section 15332), for which Projects are required to demonstrate consistency with the CAP through this Checklist.

1 In this context a project is any action that meets the definition of a “Project” in Section 15378 of the State CEQA Guidelines.

Appendix D – Climate Action Plan Consistency Checklist
December 28, 2017
2 Climate Action Plan Consistency Checklist
Application Form
When required, the Checklist must be included in the project submittal package. The requirements in the Checklist will be included in the project’s conditions of approval. The applicant is required to provide supporting documentation on how the proposed project will implement the measures identified in the Checklist to the satisfaction of the Planning & Community Development Department.

Step 1: Complete a Master Land Use Application Form (separate attachment) Step 2: Demonstrate consistency with the Land Use Element of the General Plan The growth projections outlined in the 2015 General Plan Land Use Element were used in Pasadena’s CAP to estimate community-wide GHG emissions over time. Therefore, new development projects must be consistent with the Land Use Element to be consistent with Pasadena’s CAP. In order for City staff to determine a project’s consistency with the Land Use Element, please answer the following question and provide explanation with supporting documentation for each response.

Is the proposed project consistent with the existing land use designation of the Land Use Element? Yes No
If “Yes,” proceed and complete Step 3 of the Checklist.

If “No,” the proposed project may not tier from this document and must prepare a comprehensive project-specific analysis of GHG emissions and incorporate the measures in this Checklist to the extent feasible.

Appendix D – Climate Action Plan Consistency Checklist
December 28, 2017
3 Step 3: Demonstrate consistency with Pasadena’s CAP
Proposed projects which complete one of the following three options will be deemed to be consistent with Pasadena’s CAP and will be found to have a less than significant contribution to cumulative GHG emissions (i.e., the project’s incremental contribution to cumulative GHG effects is not cumulatively considerable), pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15064(h)(3), 15130(d), and 15183(b).

Please select one of the following options:

Option A: Sustainable Development Actions – Demonstrate that the proposed project is consistent with the Pasadena CAP by incorporating applicable actions intended to ensure that the project contributes its fair share to the City’s cumulative GHG reduction goals
Option B: GHG Efficiency - Demonstrate that the proposed project is consistent with Pasadena’s per person GHG efficiency thresholds
Option C: Net Zero GHG Emissions – Demonstrate that the proposed project would not result in a net increase in GHG emissions
Appendix D – Climate Action Plan Consistency Checklist
December 28, 2017
4 Option A: Sustainable Development Actions
In order to complete this option, a proposed project must incorporate applicable Sustainable Development Actions to the satisfaction of the applicable City Departments. Incorporating these actions will ensure that the project is reducing its fair share of GHG emissions and support the achievement of Pasadena’s overall GHG emissions reduction goals. For each action selected, please submit the requested documentation. If a mandatory action is not applicable to the project, please provide a description as to why that action cannot be implemented.

Mandatory Actions (all of the actions below are required) GHG Reduction
Strategy
(Measure in Pasadena’s
CAP)
Sustainable Development Actions Yes N/A
Check the appropriate
box and provide
explanation
T-1.2: Continue to improve
bicycle and pedestrian safety
Bicycle Storage: Does the project provide bicycle storage lockers, racks, or other bicycle storage facilities for residents/employees?
Check “N/A” only if the project does not include residents or employees.

T-3.1: Decrease annual
commuter miles traveled by
single occupancy vehicles
Transportation Demand Management (TDM): Does the project include a TDM plan? A TDM plan is required for the following projects: multifamily residential development that are 100 or more units; mixed-use developments with 50 or more residential units or 50,000 square feet or more of non-residential development; or non-residential projects which exceed 75,000 square feet. If applicable, please submit the TDM plan for review.

T-4.1: Expand the availability
and use of alternative fuel
vehicles and fueling
infrastructure
Alternative Vehicle Fueling Wiring: For projects with more than three parking spaces, does the project provide wiring for at least one 240V Type II electric car charger? Please include specifications on the project plans.

Check “N/A” only if the project does not include more than three parking spaces.

E-1.2: Encourage the use of
energy conservation devices
and passive design concepts
that make use of the natural
climate to increase energy
efficiency
Passive Design Features: Does the project utilize passive design techniques such as awnings or overhangs on the east, west, and south facing windows which block the high summer sun but allow in lower winter sun? Please include specifications on the project plans.

WC-1.1: Reduce potable
water usage throughout
Pasadena
Irrigation Efficiency: Will the project utilize drought tolerant landscaping and/or drip irrigation and/or weather controllers to reduce outdoor water use? Please include specifications on the project plans.

Check “N/A” only if the project does not include any landscaping.

WR-1.1: Continue to reduce
solid waste and landfill GHG
emissions
Facilitate Recycling: Does the project include a space for separate trash and recycling bins as well as provide informational signage/handouts for residents/employees outlining materials to be recycled? Please include specifications on the project plans.

Appendix D – Climate Action Plan Consistency Checklist
December 28, 2017
5 Selective Actions
In addition the mandatory actions, the proposed project must implement the following:
 One additional action in the Energy Efficiency and Conservation category  One additional action in the Sustainable Mobility and Land Use category  Three additional actions from any category
Energy Efficiency and Conservation (select a minimum of one action) GHG Reduction Strategy
(Measure in Pasadena’s CAP)
Sustainable Development Actions Yes No
E-1.1: Increase energy efficiency
requirements of new buildings to perform
better than 2016 Title 24 Standards
Zero-Net Energy (ZNE): Does the project generate 100% of electricity required on site? ZNE calculations must be provided.

E-1.1: Increase energy efficiency
requirements of new buildings to perform
better than 2016 Title 24 Standards
Energy Efficiency (Exceed 2016 Title 24): Does the project exceed the 2016 Title 24 Efficiency Standards by at least 5%? Please include Title 24 energy model.

E-4.1: Increase city-wide use of carbonneutral energy by encouraging and/or supporting carbon-neutral technologies
Renewable Energy: Does the project generate at least 60% of the building’s projected electricity needs through renewable energy? Please include specifications on the project plans.

Sustainable Mobility and Land Use (select a minimum of one action) GHG Reduction Strategy
(Measure in Pasadena’s CAP)
Sustainable Development Action Yes No
T-1.1: Continue to expand Pasadena’s
bicycle and pedestrian network
End-of-Trip Bicycle Facilities (Commercial Development): Does the project provide at least one shower for every 50 employees? Please include these specifications on the project plans.

T-1.1: Continue to expand Pasadena’s
bicycle and pedestrian network
Bike Share: Does the project include a bike share station? Please include these specifications on the project plans.

T-3.1: Decrease annual commuter miles
traveled by single occupancy vehicles
Car Sharing: Does the project provide/facilitate car sharing by providing a designated car share space on or within the immediate vicinity of the project site? Examples of car share options include ZipCar, PitCarz, and Getaround.

Please include these specifications on the project plans.

T-3.1: Decrease annual commuter miles
traveled by single occupancy vehiclesT-3.1
Parking De-Coupling: Does the project separate the cost of parking from the cost of commercial space and/or residential housing by charging for each individually? Please include these specifications on the project plans.

T-3.1: Decrease annual commuter miles
traveled by single occupancy vehicles
Transportation Demand Management (TDM): Does the project include a TDM plan? Please submit the TDM plan for review (Note: this measure cannot be combined with the mandatory measure that requires a TDM plan for projects that meet certain size thresholds.)
T-4.1: Expand the availability and use of
alternative fuel vehicles and fueling
infrastructure
Alternative Vehicle Fueling Infrastructure: Does the proposed project include functioning 240V Type II electric car chargers at 3% of parking spaces (at least one charger) AND conduit to allow for future charger installation to 25% of spaces?
T-5.1: Facilitate high density, mixed-use,
transit-oriented, and infill development
Transit Oriented Development: Is the project located within 0.25 mile of a major transit stop as defined in the Zoning Code. Please include a map outlining the nearest transit stop.

T-6.1: Reduce GHG emissions from heavyduty construction equipment and vehiclesReduce GHG emissions from heavy-construction equipment: Will the project utilize at least 30% alternative fueled construction equipment (by pieces of equipment) and implement an equipment idling limit of 3 minutes? Please provide idling limit plan including implementation strategies along with the total pieces of equipment and those utilizing alternative fuels. ?
Appendix D – Climate Action Plan Consistency Checklist
December 28, 2017
6 Water Conservation
GHG Reduction Strategy
(Measure in Pasadena’s CAP)
Sustainable Development Action Yes No
WC-1.1: Reduce potable water use
throughout Pasadena
Indoor Water Efficiency: Will the project achieve at least a 35% reduction in indoor water use per the LEED V4 Indoor Water Use Reduction Calculator? Please attach the calculator output.

WC-2.1: Increase access to and use of nonpotable waterRainwater Capture and Reuse: Does the project utilize a rainwater capture and reuse system to reduce the amount of potable water consumed on site? Please include these specifications on the project plans.

WC-2.1: Increase access to and use of nonpotable waterIndoor & Outdoor Recycled Water: Will the project be plumbed to utilize recycled water for either indoor or outdoor water use? Please include these specifications on the project plans.

WC-2.1: Increase access to and use of nonpotable waterGreywater: Will the project be plumbed to take advantage of greywater produced on site such as a laundry to landscape system or another on-site water reuse system? Please include these specifications on the project plans.

WC-3.1: Improve storm water to slow, sink,
and treat water run-off, recharge
groundwater, and improve water quality
Permeable Surfaces: Is at least 30% of the hardscape (e.g., surface parking lots, walkways, patios, etc.) permeable to allow infiltration? Please include these specifications on the project plans.

WC-3.1: Improve storm water to slow, sink,
and treat water run-off, recharge
groundwater, and improve water quality
Stormwater Capture: Is the project designed to retain stormwater resulting from the 95th percentile, 24 hour rain event as defined by the Los Angeles County 95th percentile precipitation isohyetal map? Please provide the engineered stormwater retention plan with the project plans (http://dpw.lacounty.gov/wrd/hydrologygis/)
Waste Reduction
Urban Greening
GHG Reduction Strategy
(Measure in Pasadena’s CAP)
Sustainable Development Action Yes No
UG-1.1: Continue to preserve, enhance, and
acquire additional green space throughout
Pasadena to improve carbon sequestration,
reduce the urban heat-island effect, and
increase opportunities for active recreation
Greenspace: Does the project include at least 500 sq. ft. of public use greenspace (landscaped yards, parklets, rooftop garden, etc.)? At a minimum, 50% of the required greenspace must include softscape landscaping (e.g., trees, plants, grass, etc.).

UG-2.1: Continue to protect existing trees
and plant new ones to improve and ensure
viability of Pasadena’s urban forest
Trees: Does the project result in a net gain of trees? Please include these specifications on the project plans.

GHG Reduction Strategy
(Measure in Pasadena’s CAP)
Sustainable Development Action Yes No
WR-1.1: Continue to reduce solid waste and
landfill GHG emissions
Recycled Materials: Does the project utilize building materials and furnishings with at least 50% (pre- or post-consumer) recycled content or products which are designed for reuse? At a minimum, projects must show at least 10% of the material by cost meets the recycled content requirement? Please submit the plan for review.

WR-3.1: Implement a city-wide composting
program to limit the amount of organic
material entering landfills
On-Site Composting: Does the project include an area specifically designated for on-site composting? Please include these specifications on the project plans.
?
?
?
Appendix D – Climate Action Plan Consistency Checklist
December 28, 2017
7 Total Actions Taken
Sector Actions Selected (#) Actions Required
Mandatory Actions 6
Energy Efficiency and Conservation 1
Sustainable Mobility and Land Use 1
Water Conservation 0
Waste Reduction 0
Urban Greening 0
Total # of Actions Selected
Total Required 11
Supporting Documentation
Use the section below to provide supporting information describing how each selected Sustainable Development Action will be implemented in the proposed project. Additional information such as model outputs, invoices, and project plans should be noted below and attached to this submittal as needed.

Sustainable
Development Action Description of Project Implementation 1 1
0 1
3 5
11 Appendix D – Climate Action Plan Consistency Checklist December 28, 2017
8 Sustainable
Development Action Description of Project Implementation Appendix D – Climate Action Plan Consistency Checklist
December 28, 2017
9 Option B: GHG Efficiency
The efficiency threshold assesses the GHG efficiency of a proposed project on a service person (residents + full time employees) basis. This method recognizes that highly efficient projects (e.g., compact and mixed-use development) with relatively high mass emissions may nevertheless meet the local and State GHG reduction goals/targets. Using the demographic projections developed for the CAP, Pasadena has developed service person efficiency thresholds for the years of 2020, 2025, 2030 and 2035 which are consistent with Pasadena’s GHG emission goals included in the CAP and the State targets it is designed to achieve (AB 32, SB 32, and substantial progress towards EO S-3-05). Applicants may decide to assess their proposed project’s GHG emissions relative to Pasadena’s GHG efficiency thresholds in lieu of completing the Sustainable Development Actions. Applicants should utilize standard GHG modeling techniques (such as CalEEMod2) to estimate total GHG emissions associated with the proposed project. Models should include all construction emissions (amortized over 30 years) and operational emissions. Total annual emissions should be divided by the proposed project’s service population (residents + full time employees) to determine the efficiency of the proposed project using the following equation:

Proposed Project’s GHG Efficiency = Annual GHG Emissions / Service Population (Residents + Full Time Employees)
The proposed project must be able to demonstrate a GHG efficiency which is less than or equal to the threshold listed below for the projects first operational year to be considered consistent with the Pasadena CAP and State targets it is designed to achieve. Refer to Appendix B for a complete description of the methodology used to calculate the efficiency thresholds.

Project First Operational Year Threshold
2017 – 2020 5.63 MT CO2e/Service Person
2021 – 2025 4.56 MT CO2e/Service Person
2026 – 2030 3.57 MT CO2e/Service Person
2031 – 2035 2.73 MT CO2e/Service Person

2 The California Emissions Estimator Model® (CalEEMod) is a statewide land use emissions computer model designed to provide a uniform platform for assessing air quality and GHG impacts associated with construction projects. Available at: http://www.caleemod.com/ Appendix D – Climate Action Plan Consistency Checklist
December 28, 2017
10 Option C: Net Zero GHG Emissions
In lieu of Option A or B, applicants can demonstrate consistency with this CAP by demonstrating their proposed project would result in no net increase of GHG emissions. A proposed project can reduce its GHG emissions through the purchasing of carbon offsets issued by Climate Action Reserve3 or other validated carbon offset registry to a level which results in zero net GHG emissions. The following methodology must be followed to prove zero net GHG emissions.

1. The applicant must model the proposed project’s annual emissions using the most recent version of CalEEMod or equivalent model accepted by SCAQMD and/or CARB for CEQA purposes. Each model must include all emissions associated with the project including land clearing, demolition, earth moving, construction activities and operational related emissions such as energy use, water use, waste generation, transportation, area sources, and vegetation change, if applicable. The total annual operational emissions over 30 years as projected by the model should then be summed and added to the construction emissions to estimate the total lifetime GHG emissions associated with the project. CalEEMod is able to estimate operation related emissions over time taking into account changes to grid mix and vehicle fleet mandated by state legislation such as Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) and Pavley. Applicants should use CalEEMod forecasting to show overall GHG emissions and existing conditions (if applicable) should be modeled separately using CalEEMod for operations only and then subtracted from the project total to show the net change in GHG emissions.

Example:

Construction Emissions (1,000 MT of CO2e) + Sum of Annual Emissions over 30 years (90,000 MT of CO2e) – Existing Conditions (500 MT CO2e) = 90,500 MT of CO2e

2. The total emissions for the project must then be offset by Climate Reserve Tonnes or CRT’s through the Climate Action Reserve marketplace. In the above example, the proposed project would be required to purchase 90,500 CRT’s through the carbon marketplace. Offsets cost between $12-$15 as of September 2017 but prices are subject to changes in the carbon market. The marketplace can be found here:
http://www.climateactionreserve.org/how/crt-marketplace/ The full CalEEMod output and verification of the CRT’s purchased must be provided to the City of Pasadena as part of the review process.

3 The Climate Action Reserve can be considered a bank which holds credits that amount to 1 metric ton of CO2e per Climate Reserve Tonne (CRT). These credits get their reduction value through projects which reduce GHG emissions such as renewable energy development or through carbon sequestration. Those projects can sell CRT’s equal to the amount of GHG emissions reduced. Other projects, can then purchase those CRT’s to offset their own emissions. For more information see the Technical Appendix B of the Climate Action Plan
Appendix C:

Cultural Resources Report

This page intentionally left blank
MBAKERINT L .COM 2729 Prospect Park Drive, Suite 220, Rancho Cordova, CA 95670 P: (916) 361-8384 F: (916) 361-1574
1 April 29, 2022
Beilin Yu, Senior Planner

CITY OF PASADENA

PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
175 North Garfield Ave
Pasadena, CA 91101
RE: CULTURAL RESOURCES TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM FOR THE RUSNAK PORSCHE

PASADENA PROJECT, CITY OF PASADENA, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Dear Ms. Yu:

In support of the environmental documentation for the proposed Rusnak Porsche Pasadena Project (project), Michael Baker International completed a cultural resources evaluation consisting of a South Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC) records search, literature and historical map review, field survey, interested historical parties consultation, archaeological sensitivity analysis, and evaluation of the Swanson and Peterson Furniture Manufacturing building for eligibility to the California Register of Historical Resources (California Register) and for listing as a City of Pasadena (City) landmark using the City’s criteria for designation of historic resources, outlined in Title 17, Article 6, Chapter 17.62.040(A) and (D)(2) of the City’s Municipal Code. These efforts were completed to determine if the project area contains historical resources and/or unique archaeological resources, as defined in California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Sections 15064.5(a) and 15064.5(c), that may be impacted by the project.

This memo report summarizes the methods and results of the resource identification and evaluation efforts described above. The project is subject to CEQA review; the City of Pasadena (City) is the lead agency.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The project entails the demolition of all existing buildings to construct and operate an approximately 154,638-square-foot (3.55 acres) automotive dealership and service center located across eight parcels within the City. The two-story, approximately 101,380-square-foot dealership building would be located in the center of the project area with showrooms, offices, a service area, parts storage, and rooftop parking. Vehicle access to the rooftop parking would be via a ramp on the northern portion of the building and vehicle access to the second level display would be via a ramp located on the western portion of the building. It would be surrounded by surface parking intended for both customer parking and vehicle display. The automated car wash building would be constructed on the northeastern portion of the site, with a total area of approximately 2,960 square feet, and would serve cars from the existing automotive dealership located to the east of the project and cars from the proposed project.

MICHAEL BAKER INTERNATIONAL
RE: CULTURAL RESOURCES TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM FOR THE RUSNAK PORSCHE PASADENA

PROJECT, CITY OF PASADENA, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA MBAKERINT L .COM 2729 Prospect Park Drive, Suite 220, Rancho Cordova, CA 95670 P: (916) 361-8384 F: (916) 361-1574
2 PROJECT AREA
The project area is bound by East Walnut Street to the north, East Colorado Boulevard to the south, North Sunnyslope Drive to the west, and bisected by Nina Street. It is mapped within the Mount Wilson, California USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle map (Township 1 North, Range 12 West, part of Rancho Santa Anita, San Bernardino Base Meridian) (Attachment 1). The project area encompasses the extent of ground-disturbing project activities associated with the demolition of the extant buildings, site preparation, and construction of the new dealership center.

The project area north of Nina Street is currently occupied by a former furniture manufacturing building known as the Swanson and Peterson Furniture Manufacturing building, with a main block and two additions (2914 East Walnut Street, 2926 East Walnut Street, and 60 North Sunnyslope Avenue), as well as a garage structure, surface parking, and vacant lots. Constructed in 1929 as a furniture manufacturing facility, the building at 2914 East Walnut Street has a generally rectangular footprint set on a concrete foundation. The sawtooth roofline, comprising three clerestory risers, is largely obscured from view by a low brick parapet wall at the roof edge. The primary north façade facing East Walnut Street and the broad, secondary elevation facing North Sunnyslope Avenue are separated into full-height bays by simple brick pilasters. Fenestration consists of original multi-pane, steel-sash windows spanning the width of each bay. The main entrance is the original opening at the center of the façade facing East Walnut Street, which contains a replacement metal-frame glazed door with rectangular sidelights and a transom. The secondary entrance is located within the third bay of the façade facing North Sunnyslope Avenue.

The entry is recessed within a stepped brick surround and features what appears to be an original or older replacement metal-frame, glazed door with single transom. The southwest corner of the original building extent includes a garage entry with a roll-up metal door. A two-story addition constructed in 1973—numerically identified as 2926 East Walnut Street—is attached to the east wall of the original factory building. This addition constructed of concrete blocks is fenestrated with aluminum-frame windows and a recessed garage entry at its northeast corner. A much larger, single-story addition constructed in 1979—identified as 60 North Sunnyslope Avenue—adjoins the southern terminus of the original factory building and the south end of the addition constructed in 1973. This addition is sheathed in clay tiles that evoke the appearance of bricks. A detached garage building built in 1997—2929 Nina Street—is located directly east of this addition.

South of Nina Street, the project area is occupied by a commercial building and surface parking currently in use by the automotive dealership to the east of the project area. All existing buildings and all driveways except one (located south of Nina Street on North Sunnyslope Drive) would be removed.

MICHAEL BAKER INTERNATIONAL
RE: CULTURAL RESOURCES TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM FOR THE RUSNAK PORSCHE PASADENA

PROJECT, CITY OF PASADENA, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA MBAKERINT L .COM 2729 Prospect Park Drive, Suite 220, Rancho Cordova, CA 95670 P: (916) 361-8384 F: (916) 361-1574
3 CULTURAL RESOURCES IDENTIFICATION METHODS
Methods and results of the SCCIC record search, literature, historical map, and aerial photo review, interested historical parties consultation, built environment survey, California Register/Pasadena landmark evaluation, and archaeological site sensitivity analysis are presented below.

SOUTH CENTRAL COASTAL INFORMATION CENTER
SCCIC staff conducted a records search (File No. 23059.9187) of the project area with quarter-mile radius on January 10, 2022. The SCCIC, as part of the California State University, Fullerton, an affiliate of the California Office of Historic Preservation (OHP), is the official state repository of cultural resources records and reports for Los Angeles County. As part of the records search, the following federal and California inventories were also reviewed:
• California Inventory of Historic Resources (OHP 1976). • California Points of Historical Interest (OHP 1992 and updates). • California Historical Landmarks (OHP 1996).
• Archaeological Determinations of Eligibility (OHP 2012) for Los Angeles County.

Results
SCCIC records search identified three cultural resources within the project area (P-19-183186, P19-183488, and P-19-184688) as described below.

Lamanda Park Commercial Area (P-19-183186) – This multiple-property resource, located between 2415 and 2980 East Colorado Boulevard, was surveyed by Nancy Impasto and recorded on a California Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) 523 form set in April 1987, at which time it was assigned National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) resource status codes 5 and 6. Only one building, located at 2915 East Colorado Boulevard, was located within what is now the project area (see P-19-183488 below). At the time of this survey, status codes 5 and 6 indicated that the component resources were either found to be ineligible but of local interest (5), or were simply ineligible (6). The current California Built Environmental Resource Directory (BERD) list for Los Angeles County assigns the Lamanda Park Commercial Area the resource status code 7R, indicating that the resource was identified in a reconnaissance-level survey but was not formally evaluated at the national, state, or local level. At the time of the previous survey, the Lamanda Park Commercial Area consisted of a variety of commercial buildings in a range of sizes and architectural styles built between 1908 and 1956. The Lamanda Park Commercial Area is not a historical resource as defined by CEQA Section 15064.5(a).

Gwinn’s Restaurant (P-19-183488) – This resource, formerly located at 2915 East Colorado Boulevard, was surveyed as a component of the Lamanda Park Commercial Area by Nancy Impasto and recorded on a DPR 523 continuation sheet in April 1987, at which time it was assigned NRHP resource status code 6, indicating that the resource was

MICHAEL BAKER INTERNATIONAL
RE: CULTURAL RESOURCES TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM FOR THE RUSNAK PORSCHE PASADENA

PROJECT, CITY OF PASADENA, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA MBAKERINT L .COM 2729 Prospect Park Drive, Suite 220, Rancho Cordova, CA 95670 P: (916) 361-8384 F: (916) 361-1574
4 ineligible. The current BERD list for Los Angeles County assigns this resource the status code 7R, indicating that the resource was identified in a reconnaissance-level survey but was not formally evaluated at the national, state, or local level. Gwinn’s Restaurant, called Bengie’s Coffee Shop at the time of the previous survey, was designed by Harold Bissner and constructed in 1947. Historical aerial photographs indicate that the building was demolished between 1992 and 1993. The former restaurant site presently consists of an asphalt-paved surface parking lot that serves the automotive dealership adjacent to the subject project area. The site of Gwinn’s Restaurant is not a historical resource as defined by CEQA Section 15064.5(a).

Swanson and Peterson Furniture Manufacturing (P-19-184688) – This resource, located at 2914 East Walnut Street and within the project area, was surveyed by S. DeWolfe as part of the citywide Unreinforced Masonry Building Survey and recorded on a DPR 523 form set in June 1990, at which time it was assigned NRHP resource status code 6, indicating that the resource was ineligible. The property was reevaluated by Leonard Kliwinski and James C. Wilson in February 1994 as part of the survey associated with the East Pasadena Specific Plan, at which time it was assigned resource status code 5S3. The associated survey report defined this code as meaning that the resource was not eligible for separate listing or designation under the existing local ordinance, but could be eligible for special consideration in local planning and that the rating included individually ineligible resources that could contribute to a thematically related grouping linked by design, type, plan, or physical development. With specific regard to 2914 East Walnut Street, the property was noted as having “limited local significance” as one of the few remaining factory buildings along the former East Walnut Street industrial corridor (Thirtieth Street Architects, Inc. 1994). The BERD list for Los Angeles County assigns this resource the status code 6L, indicating that the resource was determined ineligible for local listing or designation through the local government review process, but may warrant special consideration in local planning. Nearly three decades have passed since the previous survey, and a current evaluation of this property is included herein.

Sixteen cultural resources were identified within the quarter-mile radius of the project area, and are summarized in the table below.

Resource #
/Name
Address Resource
Type
Built
Date
OHP Status
Code
Historical
Resource
Distance to
Project Area
P-19-183162/
Pasadena
Motel
Grouping
East
Colorado
Blvd
District 1945-1970 7R – Identified in
reconnaissancelevel survey; not
evaluated
No Quarter-mile
radius
P-19-183164/
Travelodge
2767 East
Colorado
Blvd
Building;
element of
district
1952 7R – Identified in
reconnaissancelevel survey; not
evaluated
No Quarter-mile
radius

MICHAEL BAKER INTERNATIONAL
RE: CULTURAL RESOURCES TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM FOR THE RUSNAK PORSCHE PASADENA

PROJECT, CITY OF PASADENA, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA MBAKERINT L .COM 2729 Prospect Park Drive, Suite 220, Rancho Cordova, CA 95670 P: (916) 361-8384 F: (916) 361-1574
5 Resource #
/Name
Address Resource
Type
Built
Date
OHP Status
Code
Historical
Resource
Distance to
Project Area
P-19-183165/
Swiss Lodge
2800 East
Colorado
Blvd
Building;
element of
district
1961 5S1 – Individual
property that is
listed or
designated
locally1
Yes Quarter-mile
radius
P-19-183166/
Astro Motel
2818 East
Colorado
Boulevard
Building;
element of
district
1962 5S1 – Individual
property that is
listed or
designated
locally2
Yes Quarter-mile
radius
P-19-183167/
Vagabond Inn
2863 East
Colorado
Boulevard
Building;
element of
district
1970 7R – Identified in
reconnaissancelevel survey; not
evaluated
No Quarter-mile
radius
P-19-183168/
Ace Motel
2870 East
Colorado
Boulevard
Building;
element of
district
1946 6L – Determined
ineligible for
local listing or
designation
through local
government
review process;
may warrant
special
consideration
in local planning
No Quarter-mile
radius
P-19-183192/
Third Church
of Christ
Scientist
2801-2803
East
Colorado
Boulevard
Building 1935 5S2 – Individual
property that is
eligible for local
listing or
designation
Yes Quarter-mile
radius
P-19-183489/
Serendipity
2966 East
Colorado
Boulevard
Building;
element of
district
1927 5S1 – Individual
property that is
listed or
designated
locally3
Yes Quarter-mile
radius
1 Resource listed in the BERD with OHP Status Code 5S1; City of Pasadena records indicate that the OHP Status Code should be 5S2.
2 Resource listed in the BERD with OHP Status Code 5S1; City of Pasadena records indicate that the OHP Status Code should be 5S2.
3 Resource listed in the BERD with OHP Status Code 5S1; resource is not individually designated at the local level per City of Pasadena’s records.

MICHAEL BAKER INTERNATIONAL
RE: CULTURAL RESOURCES TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM FOR THE RUSNAK PORSCHE PASADENA

PROJECT, CITY OF PASADENA, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA MBAKERINT L .COM 2729 Prospect Park Drive, Suite 220, Rancho Cordova, CA 95670 P: (916) 361-8384 F: (916) 361-1574
6 Resource #
/Name
Address Resource
Type
Built
Date
OHP Status
Code
Historical
Resource
Distance to
Project Area
P-19-183490/
Serendipity
2970 East
Colorado
Boulevard
Building;
element of
district
1927 7R – Identified in
reconnaissancelevel survey; not
evaluated
No Quarter-mile
radius
P-19-183491/
Serendipity
2980 East
Colorado
Boulevard
Building;
element of
district
1888-1928 7R – Identified in
reconnaissancelevel survey; not
evaluated
Yes Quarter-mile
radius
P-19-183492/
Serendipity
2966-80
East
Colorado
Boulevard
(rear
building)
Building;
element of
district
1900 7R – Identified in
reconnaissancelevel survey; not
evaluated
No Quarter-mile
radius
P-19-184687/
Glo-Quartz
Mfg.
2714 East
Walnut
Street
Building 1945 7R – Identified in
reconnaissancelevel survey; not
evaluated
No Quarter-mile
radius
P-19-189228/
Suzuki
Dealership
2900 East
Colorado
Boulevard
Building 1976 6L – Determined
ineligible for
local listing or
designation
through local
government
review process;
may warrant
special
consideration
in local planning
No Quarter-mile
radius
P-19-189236/
Street Lights
East
Colorado
Boulevard
Object 1928-1950 6L – Determined
ineligible for
local listing or
designation
through local
government
review process;
may warrant
special
consideration
in local planning
No Quarter-mile
radius
P-19-190502/
SCE MesaAnita-Eaton
N/A Object 1951 6Y - Determined
ineligible for NR
by consensus
No Quarter-mile
radius

MICHAEL BAKER INTERNATIONAL
RE: CULTURAL RESOURCES TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM FOR THE RUSNAK PORSCHE PASADENA

PROJECT, CITY OF PASADENA, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA MBAKERINT L .COM 2729 Prospect Park Drive, Suite 220, Rancho Cordova, CA 95670 P: (916) 361-8384 F: (916) 361-1574
7 Resource #
/Name
Address Resource
Type
Built
Date
OHP Status
Code
Historical
Resource
Distance to
Project Area
66kV
Transmission
Line
through Section
106 process; not
evaluated for CR
or local listing
P-19-192479/
Naval
Ordinance
Test Station;
Pasadena,
Foothill Plant
3202 East
Foothill
Boulevard
Building;
structure
1973 6Y - Determined
ineligible for NR
by consensus
through Section
106 process; not
evaluated for CR
or local listing
No Quarter-mile
radius
No cultural resources studies have been previously completed within the project area; ten have been previously recorded within a quarter-mile radius, as identified below.

Report
#
Author Date Title Distance to
Project Area
LA-03497 Anonymous 1994 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Report Pasadena-Los Angeles Light Rail Transit Project
Quarter-mile
radius
LA-03498 Anonymous 1994 Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report Pasadena-Los Angeles Light Rail Transit Project
Quarter-mile
radius
LA-03498 Saurenman,
Hugh
N/A Evaluation of Change in Noise Impacts, Proposed
Blue Line Wayside Horn System
Quarter-mile
radius
LA-04386 Anonymous 1993 Cultural Resources Overview Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority's
Interstate Commerce Commission Abandonment
Exemption Pasadena-Los Angeles Light Rail
Transit Project
Quarter-mile
radius
LA-07201 Kyle, Carolyn
E.
2002 Cultural Resource Assessment for Cingular
Wireless Facility Vy239-02 City of Pasadena Los
Angeles County, California
Quarter-mile
radius
LA-09705 Anonymous 2007 Cultural Resources Inventory of the Southern California Edison Company Tehachapi Renewable
Transmission Project, Kern, Los Angeles and San
Bernardino Counties, California. ARR #05-01-
01046
Quarter-mile
radius
LA-10175 Unknown 2009 Confidential Cultural Resources Specialist Report for the Tehachapi Transmission Project
Quarter-mile
radius
LA-10746 Wlodarski,
Robert
2010 Record Search and Field Reconnaissance phase
for the Proposed AT&T Wireless
Quarter-mile
radius

MICHAEL BAKER INTERNATIONAL
RE: CULTURAL RESOURCES TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM FOR THE RUSNAK PORSCHE PASADENA

PROJECT, CITY OF PASADENA, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA MBAKERINT L .COM 2729 Prospect Park Drive, Suite 220, Rancho Cordova, CA 95670 P: (916) 361-8384 F: (916) 361-1574
8 LITERATURE AND HISTORICAL MAPS REVIEW
Michael Baker International staff reviewed literature, historical maps, aerials, and databases to understand the existing terrain and cultural resources within the project area, including its potential for historical resources, as well as to identify the property’s development history, associated people, and architectural significance. Below is a list of resources reviewed, followed by a narrative description of the results.

Historical Maps
• Township 1N, Range 12W, San Bernardino Base Line Meridian, Original Survey Plat Map (Bureau of Land Management [BLM] 1870)
• Township 1N, Range 12W, San Bernardino Base Line Meridian, Original Survey Plat Map (BLM 1900)
• Los Angeles, Calif. 1:62,500 scale topographic quadrangle (US Geological Survey [USGS] 1894)
• Sierra Madre, Calif. 1:24,000 scale topographic quadrangle (USGS 1928) • Mt. Wilson, Calif. 1:24,000 scale topographic quadrangle (USGS 1995) • “Pasadena, California” Vol 7, Sheet 924 (Sanborn Map Company 1930a) • “Pasadena, California” Vol 7, Sheet 925 (Sanborn Map Company 1930b) • “Pasadena, California” Vol 7, Sheet 937 (Sanborn Map Company 1930c) • “Pasadena, California” Vol 1, Sheet 124 (Sanborn Map Company 1931) • “Pasadena, California” Vol 7, Sheet 924 (Sanborn Map Company 1950a) • “Pasadena, California” Vol 7, Sheet 925 (Sanborn Map Company 1950b) • “Pasadena, California” Vol 7, Sheet 937 (Sanborn Map Company 1950c) Aerial Photographs
• Single-frame aerial photograph: AJX-1938, 44-15 (UCSB 1938) Telecommunications Site LAD491 (Foothill and
210 Freeway) located at 3401 East Foothill
Boulevard, Pasadena, California 91007
LA-10991 Grimes, T. 2001 East Colorado Boulevard, Specific Plan, Historic Resources Survey
Quarter-mile
radius
LA-13421 Treffers,
Steven, Susan
ZamudioGurrola,
Shannon
Carmack,
Ashlee
Menchaca,
and
Christopher
Duran
2018 3200 E. Foothill Boulevard Mixed Use Project,
Cultural Resources Study
Quarter-mile
radius

MICHAEL BAKER INTERNATIONAL
RE: CULTURAL RESOURCES TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM FOR THE RUSNAK PORSCHE PASADENA

PROJECT, CITY OF PASADENA, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA MBAKERINT L .COM 2729 Prospect Park Drive, Suite 220, Rancho Cordova, CA 95670 P: (916) 361-8384 F: (916) 361-1574
9 • Single-frame aerial photograph: C-22555, 1041 (UCSB 1956) • Single-frame aerial photograph: TG-7600, 13-19 (UCSB 1976) • Historic aerials 1952-2014 (Historicaerials.com n.d.) • Aerial maps and street view 2011-2021 (Google Maps 2021) Historical Databases and Collections
• Built Environmental Resource Directory (BERD): the online directory includes resources evaluated for listing and listed in the National Register, National Historic Landmarks, California Register, California Historical Landmarks, and California Points of Historical Interest (OHP 2021)
• California Historical Resources Inventory Database (CHRID) (City of Pasadena 2017) • Greene & Greene Architectural Records and Papers Collection, ca. 1896 – ca. 1963 (Columbia University n.d.)
• American Furniture Industries Survey Collection 1977-1980 (Smithsonian National Museum of American History 1988)
• Pacific Coast Architecture Database (PCAD 2021)
Historical Contexts
• “Architecture/Historical Development of the City of Pasadena: Historic Context/Property Type Report” (City of Pasadena 1993)
• Cultural Resources of the Recent Past, City of Pasadena (HRG 2007) • East Pasadena Specific Plan: 2.0 History and Existing Conditions (City of Pasadena 2000) • “Historic Architectural Resources Inventory for the East Pasadena Specific Plan” (Thirtieth Street Architects, Inc. 1994)
• East Colorado Boulevard Specific Plan (PRM Design Group et al. 2003) • “National Register of Historic Places Multiple Property Documentation Form: Cultural Resources of the Recent Past, City of Pasadena” (ICF Jones and Stokes 2008) • “Heritage: A Short History of Pasadena” (City of Pasadena 2021) • “Los Angeles Citywide Historic Context Statement, Context: Industrial Development, 1850-1980” (SurveyLA 2011)
Books, Magazines and Publications
• Greene & Greene (Bosley 2003)
• Furniture Forum: a handbook of contemporary design (1949-1975) • The American Bungalow 1880-1930 (Lancaster 2012)
• Shop Drawings for Greene & Greene Furniture: 23 American Arts and Crafts Masterpieces (Lang 2006)
• Kem Weber, Designer and Architect (Long 2014)
• Greene & Greene, Furniture and Related Designs (Makinson 1982) • Toward a Simpler Way of Life: The Arts & Crafts Architects of California (Winter 1997) • Historic Pasadena, An Illustrated History (Lund 1999)

MICHAEL BAKER INTERNATIONAL
RE: CULTURAL RESOURCES TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM FOR THE RUSNAK PORSCHE PASADENA

PROJECT, CITY OF PASADENA, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA MBAKERINT L .COM 2729 Prospect Park Drive, Suite 220, Rancho Cordova, CA 95670 P: (916) 361-8384 F: (916) 361-1574
10 • Architectural Digest (1930, 1954, 1955, 1959, 1961, 1962) • “Pasadena Permits: Shop, 920 S Raymond Ave” (Southwest Builder and Contractor 1920) • “Scandinavian Modern Furniture in the Arts and Crafts Period: The Collaboration of the Greenes and the Halls,” American Furniture (Cooke 1993) • “Gabrielino” (Bean and Smith 1978)
• “One If by Land, Two If by Sea: Who Were the First Californians?” (Erlandson et al. 2007) • California Archaeology (Moratto 1984)
• The First Angelinos: The Gabrielino Indians of Los Angeles (McCawley 1996) • “The Del Rey Tradition and Its Place in the Prehistory of Southern California” (Sutton 2010)
• “A Suggested Chronology for Southern California Coastal Archaeology” (Wallace 1955) • “Cultural Tradition and Ecological Adaptation on the Southern California Coast” (Warren 1968)
• “Reconceptualizing the Encinitas Tradition of Southern California” (Sutton and Gardener 2010)
Genealogy Resources
• U.S. City Directories, 1822-1955: Pasadena 1969-1970; United States Federal Census 1910- 1940; U.S., World War I Draft Registration Cards 1917-1918; California, Federal Naturalization Records, 1843-1999; California, Voter Registration, 1900-1968; California, Death Index, 1940-1997 (Ancestry.com 2021)
• Historic newspaper articles, Los Angeles Times, and Pasadena Post Other
• Building Property Record for APNs 5748-036-001, 5748-036-002, 5748-036-032 (Los Angeles County Assessor 2021)
• Building Permits (City of Pasadena 1929, 1973, 1979, 1997) • “Technical Assistance Series #7: How to Nominate a Resource to the California Register of Historical Resources” (OHP 2001)
• Correspondence between Mrs. Gould and Henry Greene (Greene 1944) Results
The division of prehistory into temporal periods provides a framework for understanding culture change in years before present (BP). The earliest inhabitants to the Los Angeles Basin occurred in the Paleocoastal or Paleoindian Period terms, indicating proximity to the coast (Moratto 1984; Erlandson et al. 2007), and is generally dated between about 13,000 and 8,500 BP. These earliest inhabitants were highly mobile hunter-gatherers. Warren (1968) and others (Sutton and Gardner 2010) redefined the Millingstone Horizon as the Encinitas Tradition, which dates to between about 8,500 BP and 3,500 BP. Encinitas is a widespread cultural phenomenon distinguished by an abundance of manos and metates and a dearth of vertebrate faunal remains, projectile points, and mortar and pestle groundstone tools. Definitions of the Intermediate Period (3500–3000 B.P)

MICHAEL BAKER INTERNATIONAL
RE: CULTURAL RESOURCES TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM FOR THE RUSNAK PORSCHE PASADENA

PROJECT, CITY OF PASADENA, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA MBAKERINT L .COM 2729 Prospect Park Drive, Suite 220, Rancho Cordova, CA 95670 P: (916) 361-8384 F: (916) 361-1574
11 and Late Prehistoric Period (1,500 years ago to the Mission Era in the late eighteenth century) continue to be employed as temporal periods as Wallace (1955) defined them, though understanding of cultural practices, technology, and migrations, among other aspects, has been thoroughly deepened (Sutton 2010).

The project area is within the boundaries of Gabrielino Indians’ territory. The name “Gabrielino” was given by the Spanish to the Indians that lived within the boundaries of the Mission San Gabriel Arcángel. Generally, their territory included all the Los Angeles Basin, parts of the Santa Ana and Santa Monica Mountains, along the coast from Aliso Creek in the south to Topanga Canyon in the north, and San Clemente, San Nicolas, and Santa Catalina Islands. The Gabrielino spoke a dialect of the Cupan group of the Takic language family. The Gabrielino lived in autonomous villages often connected by trails, utilizing drainages such as the Los Angeles and San Gabriel Rivers. Each village had access to hunting, collecting, and fishing areas (Bean and Smith 1978). The project area is located north of the Aluupkenga and the Akuuronga Gabrielino place names. The placename for Pasadena is reported to have been Punitavajat (McCawley 1996). The nearest water source is located approximately 0.12 miles to the east of the project area.

The project area was part of Rancho Santa Anita (BLM 1870), just south of the Atchison Topeka and Santa Fe Railroad and west of Eaton Wash stream in the rural Lamanda Park neighborhood east of the Pasadena (USGS 1894). The Lamanda Park area developed as a small agricultural village and railroad stop in the 1880s and remained primarily rural until the 1920s when it was annexed by the City of Pasadena and roads were platted with sporadic residential and commercial development. Development waves in the 1920s and 1930s transformed the residential uses in the area to commercial and industrial as well as defense and aerospace development and manufacturing by the 1940s and 1950s (USGS 1928; Thirtieth Street Architects, Inc. 1994).

Development within the project area by 1930 included the Swanson and Peterson Furniture Manufacturing (P-19-184688) building at 2914 East Walnut Street, a former instrumental organ manufacturing building at the northeast corner of the project area, and several one-story, singlefamily dwellings along East Walnut Street, North Sunnyslope Avenue, and Nina Street (Sanborn Map Company 1930a; UCSB 1938). The 1950s brought further development to the project area along East Colorado Boulevard at the intersection of North Sunnyslope Avenue in the form of a restaurant (Gwinn’s Restaurant [P-19-183488]) and the addition of a pottery manufacturing plant at 2926 East Walnut Street (Sanborn Map Company 1950a; Historicaerials.com n.d.: 1952; UCSB 1956).

Between 1956 and 1972, the single-family dwellings on the south side of Nina Street were demolished and replaced with paved parking (UCSB 1956; Historicaerials.com n.d.: 1972). The project area changed dramatically in the 1970s with the removal of the pottery manufacturing plant and replacement by a two-story concrete addition off the east elevation of the Swanson and Peterson Furniture Manufacturing (P-19-184688) building in 1973 (Historicaerials.com n.d.: 1972; UCSB 1976; Los Angeles County Assessor 2021: APN 5748-036-002). Between 1976 and 1980, the remaining single-family dwellings were demolished and replaced with the extant, single-story

MICHAEL BAKER INTERNATIONAL
RE: CULTURAL RESOURCES TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM FOR THE RUSNAK PORSCHE PASADENA

PROJECT, CITY OF PASADENA, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA MBAKERINT L .COM 2729 Prospect Park Drive, Suite 220, Rancho Cordova, CA 95670 P: (916) 361-8384 F: (916) 361-1574
12 addition to the Swanson and Peterson Furniture Manufacturing (P-19-184688) building (UCSB 1976; Historicaerials.com n.d.: 1980). Gwinn’s Restaurant at the corner on East Colorado Boulevard was demolished during the early 1990s (Historicaerials.com n.d.: 1992, 1993).

INTERESTED HISTORICAL PARTIES CONSULTATION
On October 22, 2021, Michael Baker International staff emailed a letter and figures depicting the project area to Pasadena Heritage and Pasadena Historical Society and Museum of History. The correspondence requested any information or concerns regarding historical resources within the project area (Attachment 2).

Susan N. Mossman, Executive Director of Pasadena Heritage, responded on October 22, 2021, via email with information regarding the potential historic significance of the Swanson and Peterson Furniture Manufacturing building at 2914 East Walnut Street. Andrew Salimian, Preservation Director for Pasadena Heritage, provided additional background sources regarding the building’s history. No additional consultation between Michael Baker International and Pasadena Heritage has occurred. No response has been received from the Pasadena Historical Society to date.

Additionally, staff reached out to Ann Scheid, Director of the Greene and Greene Archives at the Gamble House, via email on December 9, 2021 inquiring about written records regarding Swanson and Peterson’s business relationship with the Greene brothers. Ms. Scheid relayed that the Archives did not hold any specific materials relating Swanson and Peterson, but suggested relevant collections housed at the Huntington Library, the University of Texas, and Columbia University as possible research avenues. Ms. Scheid also suggested contacting Ted Bosley (recently retired Director of the Gamble House), Virginia Hales (granddaughter of Henry Greene), and John Ripley (local historian). Staff emailed Mr. Bosley and Ms. Hale on December 13, 2021 and Mr. Ripley on December 14, 2021. Mr. Bosley and Ms. Hale responded on December 14, 2021 and January 1, 2022, respectively , and both identified a letter dated March 20, 1954 from Henry Greene to David Swanson in which Greene informs Swanson where he might locate illustrations of the furniture in the Charles Pratt House in Ojai (Greene 1954). Mr. Ripley responded on December 14, 2021 and indicated that he did not know of any sources that would demonstrate a relationship between the Greene brothers and the Swanson and Peterson firm.

FIELD SURVEY
An intensive level built-environment survey of the project area and the commercial building at 2914 East Walnut Street, 2926 East Walnut Street, and 60 North Sunnyslope Avenue was conducted on October 28, 2021. Photographs and notes were taken during the survey. Notes consisted of observations of all exposed building elevations, architectural design, materials, and alterations. Photographs are presented in the DPR 523 form set (see Attachment 3).

Archaeological survey of the undeveloped portion of the project area north of Nina Street behind the Swanson building identified no cultural resources.

MICHAEL BAKER INTERNATIONAL
RE: CULTURAL RESOURCES TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM FOR THE RUSNAK PORSCHE PASADENA

PROJECT, CITY OF PASADENA, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA MBAKERINT L .COM 2729 Prospect Park Drive, Suite 220, Rancho Cordova, CA 95670 P: (916) 361-8384 F: (916) 361-1574
13 ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS
The project is located within a highly developed commercial and industrial area. Previous ground disturbances include historical and modern construction. The project area is mapped as Urban Land of varying complexes (NRCS 2022). Urban Land is heavily modified through the creation of fills, soil import, and construction, and is typical of low sensitivity for significant prehistoric resources. While the project is close to Eaton Wash which could indicate an elevated sensitivity for prehistoric resources, no Gabrielino villages have been recorded within two miles of the project location (McCawley 1996: Map 6). Likely the project area would be an outlier for prehistoric settlement because of its distance to fresh water and known village sites (McCawley 1996:41 and references therein). Furthermore, according to the SCCIC records search, no prehistoric archaeological resources were identified within or in the vicinity of the project area. As a consequence of these factors, the prehistoric site sensitivity is low.

Many of the same factors in prehistoric site sensitivity factor in historic archaeology site sensitivity.

The high degree of disturbance associated with construction, demolition, and rebuilding in the project area would likely have impacted the archaeological integrity of any historic period feature like a privy or midden. Furthermore, the association of historic archaeological features would likely be geographically closest to the built environment resource which has been evaluated and found to not be significant. Therefore, the potential to find significant historic archaeological resources is low.

CALIFORNIA REGISTER AND PASADENA LANDMARK DESIGNATION EVALUATION FRAMEWORK The following includes an evaluation of the former industrial property at 2914 East Walnut Street in Pasadena for its eligibility to the California Register (OHP 2001) and as a Pasadena landmark using the City of Pasadena Criteria for Designation of Historic Resources. For a detailed historical development of the project area, see the Literature and Historical Maps Review results section above; for a detailed historical context of the area, see Attachment 3.

The criteria for eligibility in the California Register are based upon the National Register of Historic Places (National Register). To be eligible for listing in the California Register, a property must be at least 50 years of age (resources less than 50 years of age may be eligible if they can demonstrate that sufficient time has passed to understand its historical importance) and possess significance at the local, state, or national level, under one or more of the following criteria:

Criterion 1. It is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of California’s history and cultural heritage.

Criterion 2. It is associated with the lives of persons important in our past.

Criterion 3. It embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or represents the work of an important creative individual, or possesses high artistic value.

Criterion 4. It has yielded, or may yield, information important in history or prehistory.

MICHAEL BAKER INTERNATIONAL
RE: CULTURAL RESOURCES TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM FOR THE RUSNAK PORSCHE PASADENA

PROJECT, CITY OF PASADENA, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA MBAKERINT L .COM 2729 Prospect Park Drive, Suite 220, Rancho Cordova, CA 95670 P: (916) 361-8384 F: (916) 361-1574
14 In addition to meeting a significance criterion, a property must also have integrity or the ability to convey its significance under a majority of the seven aspects of integrity: location, design, materials, workmanship, setting, feeling, and association.

The criteria for eligibility for listing as a Pasadena landmark is outlined in Chapter 17.62.040(D)(2) of the City of Pasadena Municipal Code, which follows the National and California Register criteria applied locally. In evaluating proposed City of Pasadena landmarks, the Pasadena Preservation Commission considers the following factors:

Criterion A. It is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of the history of the City.

Criterion B. It is associated with the lives of persons who are significant in the history of the City.

Criterion C. It embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, architectural style, period, or method of construction, or represents the work of an architect, designer, engineer, or builder whose work is significant to the City, or possesses artistic values of significance to the City.

Criterion D. It has yielded, or may yield, information important in history or prehistory.

California Register and Pasadena Landmark Evaluations
California Register Criterion 1/Pasadena Landmark Criterion A – Research did not demonstrate that this property is associated with events significant to the broad patterns of our history at the local, state, or national level. No demonstrably significant events are known to have occurred at the property or as a result of its presence in the community, and it does not appear to be singularly important within the context of industrial development in Pasadena. The Lamanda Park area, annexed by Pasadena prior to the construction of the subject property, was not a particularly early or noteworthy industrial hub relative to the timeline and nature of industrial development citywide. Until recent decades, the immediate vicinity of the subject property consisted of a mix of residences, commercial establishments, and a few manufacturing facilities, indicating that this neighborhood was not a predominantly industrial corridor at any point during the early or midtwentieth century. The property is not known to have ushered in any new or influential industrial practices or to have made a significant contribution to other broad patterns of local, regional, state, or national culture and history. Therefore, the property is recommended not eligible for listing in the California Register under Criterion 1 or as a Pasadena landmark under Criterion A.

California Register Criterion 2/Pasadena Landmark Criterion B – Source materials consulted during research failed to support that Swanson and Peterson were prominent, prolific master artisans within the context of American furniture manufacturing, particularly during the years in which they occupied the subject property. Prior to forming their partnership, Swanson and Peterson had both been employed by the Hall Manufacturing Company, during which time they worked on multiple high-profile furniture-making projects for famed architect brothers Charles Sumner Greene and Henry Mather Greene, who were pioneers of the Craftsman architectural style. On the whole, it

MICHAEL BAKER INTERNATIONAL
RE: CULTURAL RESOURCES TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM FOR THE RUSNAK PORSCHE PASADENA

PROJECT, CITY OF PASADENA, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA MBAKERINT L .COM 2729 Prospect Park Drive, Suite 220, Rancho Cordova, CA 95670 P: (916) 361-8384 F: (916) 361-1574
15 appears that Swanson and Peterson carried out much of their most noteworthy work during this early period. The dissolution of the Greene and Greene firm and the closure of the Hall Manufacturing Company occurred during the early 1920s, well before Swanson and Peterson occupied the property in question. Swanson and Peterson formally partnered in 1924 and first began production in a factory at 920 South Raymond Avenue. By the time the factory at 2914 East Walnut Street was completed in 1929, the popularity of Craftsman architecture and related custom-made furniture had rapidly declined. As such, any significant association that Swanson and Peterson had with the Greene brothers and Craftsman furnishings predates the development of the subject factory by several years. From the 1930s onward, Swanson and Peterson largely transitioned to producing office furniture and offering furniture repair services. In 1935, the company designed and built the furniture for the Art Deco-style Los Angeles Times building, but no other post-1930 projects of such caliber could be linked to them through research. Beyond advertisements in local newspapers and a few architectural magazines, little information was revealed about Swanson and Peterson’s work during the years in which they operated their business at the subject property, suggesting they weren’t widely known or regarded as significant masters of their trade during that period. For this reason, the subject property is recommended not eligible under California Register Criterion 2 or Pasadena Landmark Criterion B.

California Register Criterion 3/Pasadena Landmark Criterion C – The original 1929-built building of the subject property was designed by renowned and master Los Angeles-based architect McNeal Swasey during his professional partnership with architect Benjamin Hayne. Swasey was well known during his tenure for his Spanish and Mediterranean-influenced period revival designs.

A prolific architect, he co-designed many Los Angeles-area landmarks while working as a project manager for celebrated architect Myron Hunt, and went on to design many residential, civic, and commercial buildings in the greater Los Angeles area. However, the subject property is a modest, unexemplary representation of Swasey’s broader body of work. The building lacks striking architectural elements and high artistic value, and it is not one of the notable buildings designed by Swasey and Hayne during their partnership. Beyond the original building permit and a single mention in the Pasadena Post, no information was uncovered during research that would suggest that Manfred Magnusson, the contractor on the project, was a master builder among his contemporaries in Pasadena (Pasadena Post 1929c; City of Pasadena 1929). The later buildings located at 2926 East Walnut Street and 60 North Sunnyslope Avenue, added in 1973 and 1979, respectively, are not individually exceptional for their design or method of construction. As such, the subject property is recommended not eligible under California Register Criterion 3 or Pasadena Landmark Criterion C as the work of a master architect or builder, or for its artistic value.

As a property type, the original building at 2914 East Walnut Street can be characterized as an industrial daylight factory. The SurveyLA citywide historic context statement “Industrial Development, 1850-1980” describes important examples of this property type as being significant because they embody a unique historical method of construction. Industrial daylight factories, most of which were constructed between 1910 and 1940—a period bookended by the introduction of steel-sash windows followed by the proliferation of fluorescent lighting—utilized large windows and distinctive roof forms to maximize interior light. The subject building is not an

MICHAEL BAKER INTERNATIONAL
RE: CULTURAL RESOURCES TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM FOR THE RUSNAK PORSCHE PASADENA

PROJECT, CITY OF PASADENA, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA MBAKERINT L .COM 2729 Prospect Park Drive, Suite 220, Rancho Cordova, CA 95670 P: (916) 361-8384 F: (916) 361-1574
16 excellent example of the type. While it incorporates some features of an industrial daylight factory, it has fewer defining characteristics in comparison to other more representative examples in Pasadena. For instance, while the building has industrial steel-sash windows, the windows are not arranged in continuous or oversized bays. It has a partial sawtooth roofline, but the majority of the roof is flat. In September 2021, City of Pasadena staff determined another former furniture manufacturing building, located at 403-421 South Raymond Avenue, to be eligible for listing as a landmark under Pasadena Landmark Criterion C as a significant example of an industrial daylight factory (Reyes 2021). When comparing the subject building and the facility at 403-421 South Raymond Avenue, which was built five years earlier, it is clear that the latter factory is a more distinct example of the type in terms of its scale, its expansive steel-sash windows, and its dominant sawtooth roof. In this vein, the subject property is recommended not eligible under California Register Criterion 3 or Pasadena Landmark Criterion C because it does not embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, architectural style, period, or method of construction.

California Register Criterion 4/Pasadena Landmark Criterion D – The property is not likely to yield valuable information which will contribute to our understanding of human history because the property is not and never was the principal source of important information pertaining to significant events, people, or architectural style. Therefore, the property is recommended not eligible for listing under California Register Criterion 4 or Pasadena Landmark Criterion D.

Integrity – This property retains integrity of location, but it no longer retains integrity of setting because modern infill and commercial development have supplanted much of its formerly industrial surroundings along East Walnut Street. The property also no longer retains integrity of association because it no longer serves an industrial manufacturing purpose. Although the original brick building has undergone some exterior modifications and the footprint of the facility has been greatly expanded on its south and east sides, the property generally retains integrity of location, design, materials, workmanship, and feeling to its initial period of construction. However, the property lacks significance under any of the California Register or Pasadena Landmark criteria, and is therefore not eligible for listing in either register.

Conclusion – Lacking significance under any of the above listed criteria, the subject property is recommended not eligible for listing in the California Register nor as a City of Pasadena landmark.

Therefore, it is not a historical resource as defined by CEQA Section 15064.5(a).

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The SCCIC records search, literature review, historical map review, interested parties consultation, field survey, and evaluation identified no historical or archaeological resources, as defined by CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(a), within the project area. The archaeological site sensitivity analysis conducted for the project concluded that the project area has a low sensitivity for prehistoric and historic period archaeological resources.

MBAKERINT L .COM 2729 Prospect Park Drive, Suite 220, Rancho Cordova, CA 95670 P: (916) 361-8384 F: (916) 361-1574
17 MICHAEL BAKER INTERNATIONAL
RE: CULTURAL RESOURCES TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM FOR THE RUSNAK PORSCHE PASADENA

PROJECT, CITY OF PASADENA, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA While research suggests that archaeological sensitivity is low within the project area, there is the potential to identify resources during earth-moving activities. Impacts to archaeological resources will be avoided through implementation of the City’s General Plan Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, Mitigation Measure 4-1 (Morse 2015):
4-1 If cultural resources are discovered during construction of land development projects in Pasadena that may be eligible for listing in the California Register for Historic Resources, all ground disturbing activities in the immediate vicinity of the find shall be halted until the find is evaluated by a Registered Professional Archaeologist. If testing determines that significance criteria are met, then the project shall be required to perform data recovery, professional identification, radiocarbon dates as applicable, and other special studies; and provide a comprehensive final report including site record to the City and the South Central Coastal Information Center at California State University Fullerton.

No further grading shall occur in the area of the discovery until Planning Department approves the report.

Applicable state and federal laws include California Health and Safety Code Sections 7050.5-7055, and Section 5097.98 of the California Public Resources Code.

PREPARER QUALIFICATIONS
This report was prepared by Michael Baker International Senior Architectural Historian Aisha Fike, Architectural Historian Michelle Van Meter, and Senior Archaeologist Kholood Abdo. Senior Cultural Resources Manager Margo Nayyar provided QA/QC review.

MICHELLE VAN METER, ARCHITECTURAL HISTORIAN
Ms. Van Meter is an architectural historian with more than three years of full-time professional experience in cultural resources management. She has conducted fieldwork and research throughout California and has authored and contributed to historic resource inventory and evaluation reports for a variety of municipal, state, and federal clients. Her technical expertise is well suited for archival research, field recordation, and preparation of architectural descriptions, historic contexts, and evaluations. Through her academics and work experience, Ms. Van Meter meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards in history and architectural history.

KHOLOOD ABDO, SENIOR ARCHAEOLOGIST
Ms. Abdo is an archaeologist with 26 years of experience in prehistoric and historical archaeology and cultural resources management. Her experience includes writing technical reports, including National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), and CEQA compliance documents. She has supervised and managed all phases of archaeological fieldwork, including survey, Phase II testing and evaluations and data recovery, and monitoring at sites throughout California and Arizona since 1999. In her current capacity as senior archaeologist and

MICHAEL BAKER INTERNATIONAL
RE: CULTURAL RESOURCES TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM FOR THE RUSNAK PORSCHE PASADENA

PROJECT, CITY OF PASADENA, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA MBAKERINT L .COM 2729 Prospect Park Drive, Suite 220, Rancho Cordova, CA 95670 P: (916) 361-8384 F: (916) 361-1574
18 laboratory director, Ms. Abdo oversees the processing, analysis, and curation of artifact collections from both prehistoric and historical sites. Her cultural material analysis experience includes flaked and ground stone lithics, glass, prehistoric and historic ceramic, and bead analysis. Ms. Abdo meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards for prehistory and historical archaeology.

AISHA FIKE, SENIOR ARCHITECTURAL HISTORIAN
Ms. Fike is a senior architectural historian and cultural resources specialist with 12 years of experience in cultural resource management. She is skilled in conducting historic research and completing field inventories and site assessments. Ms. Fike has completed numerous documentations in support of a range of projects requiring compliance with CEQA and various local agency regulations, such as Chapter 9, Division 22 of the Los Angeles Administrative Code (Cultural Heritage Ordinance) and Chapter 9, Article 6, Title 17 of the City of Pasadena Municipal Code (Historic Preservation Zoning Code). As the lead architectural historian on multiple California-based development, redevelopment, and transportation projects, Ms. Fike has acquired expertise in assessing both direct and indirect impacts to historic resources and in preparing Historic Resource Inventory and Evaluation Reports, DPR 523 Forms, cultural resources sections of environmental documents, finding of effects documents, and Secretary of the Interior Standards analyses. Ms. Fike served on the board of the Northern California Chapter of the Documentation and Conservation of buildings, sites, and neighborhoods of the modern movement (Docomomo/Noca). Ms. Fike meets the Secretary of the Interior's Professional Qualifications Standards for history and architectural history.

MARGO NAYYAR, SENIOR CULTURAL RESOURCES MANAGER
Senior Cultural Resources Manager Margo Nayyar provided QA/QC review of this report and evaluation. Ms. Nayyar is an architectural historian with 12 years of cultural management experience in California, Nevada, Arizona, Idaho, Texas, and Mississippi. Her experience includes built environment surveys, evaluation of historic-era resources using guidelines outlined in the National and California Registers, and preparation of cultural resources technical studies pursuant to CEQA and Section 106 of the NHPA, including identification studies, finding of effect documents, memorandum of agreements, programmatic agreements, and Historic American Buildings Survey/Historic American Engineering Record/Historic American Landscapes Survey mitigation documentation. She prepares cultural resources environmental document sections for CEQA environmental documents including infill checklists, initial studies, and environmental impact reports, as well as NEPA environmental documents, including environmental impact statements and environmental assessments. She also specializes in municipal preservation planning, historic preservation ordinance updates, Native American consultation, and provision of Certified Local Government training to interested local governments. She develops Survey 123 and Esri Collector applications for large-scale historic resources surveys, and authors National Register nomination packets. Ms. Nayyar meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards for history and architectural history.

MICHAEL BAKER INTERNATIONAL
RE: CULTURAL RESOURCES TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM FOR THE RUSNAK PORSCHE PASADENA

PROJECT, CITY OF PASADENA, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA MBAKERINT L .COM 2729 Prospect Park Drive, Suite 220, Rancho Cordova, CA 95670 P: (916) 361-8384 F: (916) 361-1574
19 Sincerely,
Michelle Van Meter, MA
Architectural Historian
Kholood Abdo, RPA
Senior Archaeologist
Aisha Fike, MA
Senior Architectural
Historian
Margo Nayyar, MA
Senior Cultural Resources
Manager
Attachments:

Attachment 1 – Figures
Attachment 2 – Interested Parties Consultation Letters
Attachment 3 – DPR 523 Forms

MICHAEL BAKER INTERNATIONAL
RE: CULTURAL RESOURCES TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM FOR THE RUSNAK PORSCHE PASADENA

PROJECT, CITY OF PASADENA, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA MBAKERINT L .COM 2729 Prospect Park Drive, Suite 220, Rancho Cordova, CA 95670 P: (916) 361-8384 F: (916) 361-1574
20 REFERENCES
Architectural Digest. 1930. “Residence of Mr. and Mrs. Henry S. McKee, Montecito – McNeal Swasey, Architect; Benjamin S. Hayne, Associate.” Vol. 7, Issue 4. Accessed November 2021. https://archive.architecturaldigest.com/article/1930/1/residence-of-mr-and-mrshenry-s-mckee-montecito---mcneal-swasey-architect-benjamin-s-hayne-associate. ———. 1954. “Swanson and Peterson Inc.” Vol. 14, Issue 3. Accessed January 2022. https://archive.architecturaldigest.com/article/1954/1/swanson-and-peterson-inc. ———. 1955. “Swanson and Peterson Inc.” Vol. 14, Issue 4. Accessed January 2022. https://archive.architecturaldigest.com/article/1955/1/swanson-and-peterson-inc. ———. 1959. “Swanson and Peterson Inc.” Vol. 16, Issue 4. Accessed November 2021. https://archive.architecturaldigest.com/issue/19590301/print. ———. 1961. “Swanson and Peterson Inc.” Fall 1961. Accessed January 2022. https://archive.architecturaldigest.com/article/1955/1/swanson-and-peterson-inc. ———. 1962. “Swanson and Peterson Inc.” Fall 1962. Accessed January 2022. https://archive.architecturaldigest.com/article/1962/9/swanson-and-peterson-inc.

Ancestry.com. 2021. U.S. City Directories, 1822-1955: Pasadena 1969-1970; United States Federal Census 1910-1940; U.S., World War I Draft Registration Cards 1917-1918; California, Federal Naturalization Records, 1843-1999; California, Voter Registration, 1900-1968; California, Death Index, 1940-1997. Online database. Accessed November 2021. www.ancestry.com.

Bean, Lowell J. and Charles R. Smith. 1978. “Gabrielino.” In “California,” edited by Robert F.

Heizer, 538–549. Handbook of North American Indians, Vol. 8. William C. Sturtevant, general editor. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution.

BLM (Bureau of Land Management). 1870. “Township 1 North, Range 12 West.” Accessed November 2021.
https://glorecords.blm.gov/details/survey/default.aspx?dm_id=286344andsid=45rlwjqj.u afandsurveyDetailsTabIndex=1.
———. 1900. “Township 1 North, Range 12 West.” Accessed November 2021. https://glorecords.blm.gov/details/survey/default.aspx?dm_id=286354andsid=dudsmux w.cwgandsurveyDetailsTabIndex=1.

Bosley, Edward R. 2003. Greene & Greene. New York: Phaidon Press. https://books.google.com/books?id=rIdOAAAAYAAJ&focus=searchwithinvolume&q=Sw anson.

City of Pasadena. 1929. Permit 550-E. Provided to Michael Baker International by the City of Pasadena.
———. 1973. Permit 44347. Provided to Michael Baker staff by City of Pasadena.

MICHAEL BAKER INTERNATIONAL
RE: CULTURAL RESOURCES TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM FOR THE RUSNAK PORSCHE PASADENA

PROJECT, CITY OF PASADENA, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA MBAKERINT L .COM 2729 Prospect Park Drive, Suite 220, Rancho Cordova, CA 95670 P: (916) 361-8384 F: (916) 361-1574
21 ———. 1979. [Permit illegible, 70 North Sunnyslope Avenue]. Provided to Michael Baker International by the City of Pasadena.
———. 1993. “Architecture/Historical Development of the City of Pasadena: Historic Context/Property Type Report.” Prepared by Pamela O’Conner, Urban Conservation Section, Planning Division of City of Pasadena. Accessed October 2021. http://pasadena.cfwebtools.com/search.cfm?display=search. ———. 1997. Permit 97-00659. Provided to Michael Baker International by the City of Pasadena. ———. 2000. East Pasadena Specific Plan: 2.0 History and Existing Conditions. Accessed November 2021. https://www.cityofpasadena.net/planning/wpcontent/uploads/sites/30/Chapter-02-History-and-ExistingConditions.pdf?v=1636492538012. ———. 2017. California Historical Resources Inventory Database (CHRID). Electronic database.

Accessed October 2021. http://pasadena.cfwebtools.com/search.cfm?display=search. ———. 2021. “Heritage: A Short History of Pasadena.” Accessed July 2021. https://www.cityofpasadena.net/about-pasadena/history-of-pasadena/.

Columbia University. Greene & Greene Architectural Records and Papers Collection, ca. 1896 – ca. 1963. Accessed January 2022.
http://www.columbia.edu/cu/lweb/eresources/archives/avery/greene/.

Cooke, Edward S. 1993. “Scandinavian Modern Furniture in the Arts and Crafts Period: the Collaboration of the Greenes and the Halls.” In American Furniture. Accessed October 2021. http://www.chipstone.org/article.php/388/American-Furniture-1993/ScandinavianModern-Furniture-in-the-Arts-and-Crafts-Period:-The-Collaboration-of-the- %E2%80%A61/26.

Furniture Forum: a handbook of contemporary design. 1949-1975. Accessed January 2022. https://books.google.com/books.

Erlandson, Jon M., Rick C. Torben, Terry L. Jones, and Judith F. Porcasi. 2007. “One If by Land, Two If by Sea: Who Were the First Californians?” In California Prehistory: Colonization, Culture, and Complexity, edited by Terry L. Jones and Kathryn A. Klar. Lanham, MD:

AltaMira Press.

Google Maps. 2021. Historic street view imagery for N. Lake Avenue at Boylston Street. 2007- 2021. Accessed July 2021. https://www.google.com/maps/.

Greene, Henry M. 1944. Letter to Mrs. Gould. April 20, 1944. Provided to Michael Baker International by Pasadena Heritage.
———. 1954. Letter to David C. Swanson. March 20, 1954. University of Southern California, Huntington Library, Greene and Greene Digital Library. Accessed December 2021. https://digitallibrary.usc.edu/CS.aspx?VP3=DamView&VBID=2A3BXZX90VR1&PN=1&WS =SearchResults&FR_=1&W=1536&H=722.

MICHAEL BAKER INTERNATIONAL
RE: CULTURAL RESOURCES TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM FOR THE RUSNAK PORSCHE PASADENA

PROJECT, CITY OF PASADENA, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA MBAKERINT L .COM 2729 Prospect Park Drive, Suite 220, Rancho Cordova, CA 95670 P: (916) 361-8384 F: (916) 361-1574
22 Historicaerials.com. n.d. “2914 East Walnut Street, Pasadena, CA. 1952-2014.” Accessed October 2021. http://www.historicaerials.com.

HRG (Historic Resources Group and Pasadena Heritage). 2007. Cultural Resources of the Recent Past Historic Context Report, City of Pasadena. Prepared for the City of Pasadena.

Accessed October 2021.
https://www.laconservancy.org/sites/default/files/community_documents/Recent%20Pas t%20context%20statement%2C%202007.pdf.

ICF Jones and Stokes. 2008. “National Register of Historic Places Multiple Property Documentation Form: Cultural Resources of the Recent Past, City of Pasadena.” Prepared by Barbara Lamprecht and Diel Paul. Accessed December 2021. http://pasadena.cfwebtools.com/search.cfm?display=search.

Lancaster, Clay. 2012. The American Bungalow 1880-1930. Mineola, NY: Dover Publications.

Accessed January 2022. https://archive.org/details/americanbungalow0000lanc.

Lang, Robert. 2006. Shop Drawings for Greene & Greene Furniture: 23 American Arts and Crafts Masterpieces. Mount Joy, PA: Fox Chapel Publishing. Accessed January 2022. https://www.amazon.com/Shop-Drawings-Greene-FurnitureMasterpieces/dp/1892836297/ Long, Christopher. 2014. Kem Weber, Designer and Architect. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Accessed January 2022. https://www.amazon.com/Weber-Designer-ArchitectChristopher-Long/dp/0300206275?.

Los Angeles County Assessor. 2021. APN 5748-036-001; APN 5748-036-002; APN 5748-036-032.

Accessed October 2021. https://portal.assessor.lacounty.gov/parceldetail/.

Lund, Ann Scheid. 1999. Historic Pasadena, An Illustrated History. Published for the Pasadena Historical Museum. San Antonio, TX: Lammert Publications, Inc. Accessed November 2021. https://books.google.com/books.

Makinson, Randell. 1982. Greene & Greene, Furniture and Related Designs. Layton, UT: Peregrine Smith. Accessed January 2022.
https://www.google.com/books/edition/Greene_Greene/twJQAAAAMAAJ.

McCawley, William. 1996. The First Angelinos: The Gabrielino Indians of Los Angeles. Banning, CA: Malki Museum Press.

Moratto, Michael J. 1984. California Archaeology. San Diego: Academic Press.

Morse, Nicole. 2015. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program State Clearinghouse No. 2013091009 , Pasadena General Plan City of Pasadena. Prepared for City of Pasadena

MICHAEL BAKER INTERNATIONAL
RE: CULTURAL RESOURCES TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM FOR THE RUSNAK PORSCHE PASADENA

PROJECT, CITY OF PASADENA, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA MBAKERINT L .COM 2729 Prospect Park Drive, Suite 220, Rancho Cordova, CA 95670 P: (916) 361-8384 F: (916) 361-1574
23 Planning and Community Development Department. Prepared by Place works, Santa Ana, California.

Newspapers.com. 2021. Los Angeles Times, Pasadena Post. Accessed November 2021. https://www.newspapers.com/.

NRCS (Natural Resources Conservation Service). 2022. “2914 East Walnut Street, Pasadena, CA.” Web-based soil mapping interface. Accessed February 2022. https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/WebSoilSurvey.aspx.

OHP (California Office of Historic Preservation). 1976. California Inventory of Historic Resources.

Sacramento: California Department of Parks and Recreation. ———. 1992. California Points of Historical Interest. Sacramento: California Department of Parks and Recreation.
———. 1996. California Historical Landmarks. Sacramento: California Department of Parks and Recreation.
———. 2001. “Technical Assistance Series #7: How to Nominate a Resource to the California Register of Historical Resources.” Sacramento: California Department of Parks and Recreation. Accessed July 2021.
https://ohp.parks.ca.gov/pages/1056/files/07_TAB%207%20How%20To%20Nominate%2 0A%20Property%20to%20California%20Register.pdf.
———. 2012. Archaeological Determinations of Eligibility for Los Angeles County. Sacramento:

California Department of Parks and Recreation.
———. 2021. Built Environment Resource Directory for Los Angeles County. Accessed October 2021. https://ohp.parks.ca.gov/?page_id=30338.

PCAD (Pacific Coast Architecture Database). 2021. “McNeal Swasey (Architect),” “Swasey and Hayne, Architects (Partnership).” Accessed November 2021. http://pcad.lib.washington.edu.

PRM Design Group, Kimley Horn and Associates, and Natalson Company Inc. 2003. East Colorado Boulevard Specific Plan. Prepared for the City of Pasadena. Accessed November 2021. https://www.cityofpasadena.net/wp-content/uploads/sites/30/East-ColoradoSpecific-Plan.pdf.

Reyes, David M. 2021. Director of Planning and Community Development, City of Pasadena.

Letter to Michael J. Rogerson. Notice of Determination: Historic Resource Evaluation, 403-421 S. Raymond Avenue. DHP2021-00121. September 13, 2021.

Sanborn Map Company. 1930a. Pasadena, California. Vol 7, Sheet 924. New York, NY: Sanborn Map Company. Accessed February 2022. https://www.lapl.org/. ———. 1930b. Pasadena, California. Vol. 7, Sheet 925. New York, NY: Sanborn Map Company.

Accessed February 2022. https://www.lapl.org/.

MICHAEL BAKER INTERNATIONAL
RE: CULTURAL RESOURCES TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM FOR THE RUSNAK PORSCHE PASADENA

PROJECT, CITY OF PASADENA, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA MBAKERINT L .COM 2729 Prospect Park Drive, Suite 220, Rancho Cordova, CA 95670 P: (916) 361-8384 F: (916) 361-1574
24 ———. 1930c. Pasadena, California. Vol. 7, Sheet 937. New York, NY: Sanborn Map Company.

Accessed February 2022. https://www.lapl.org/.
———. 1931. Pasadena, California. Vol. 1, Sheet 124. New York, NY: Sanborn Map Company.

Accessed February 2022. https://www.lapl.org/.
———. 1950a. Pasadena, California. Vol. 7, Sheet 924. New York, NY: Sanborn Map Company.

Accessed February 2022. https://www.lapl.org/.
———. 1950b. Pasadena, California. Vol. 7, Sheet 925. New York, NY: Sanborn Map Company.

Accessed February 2022. https://www.lapl.org/.
———. 1950c. Pasadena, California. Vol. 7, Sheet 937. New York, NY: Sanborn Map Company.

Accessed February 2022. https://www.lapl.org/.

Smithsonian National Museum of American History. 1988. American Furniture Industries Survey Collection 1977-1980. Accessed January 2022. https://sova.si.edu/record/NMAH.AC.0286.

Southwest Builder and Contractor. 1920. “Pasadena Permits: Shop, 920 S Raymond Ave.” Accessed November 2021. https://books.google.com/books.

SurveyLA. 2011. “Los Angeles Citywide Historic Context Statement, Context: Industrial Development, 1850-1980.” Prepared for the City of Los Angeles. Revised 2018.

Sutton, Mark Q. 2010. “The Del Rey Tradition and Its Place in the Prehistory of Southern California.” Pacific Coast Archaeological Society Quarterly 44 (2): 1-54.

Sutton, Mark Q. and Jill K. Gardner. 2010. “Reconceptualizing the Encinitas Tradition of Southern California.” Pacific Coast Archaeological Society Quarterly 42 (4): 1-64. Thirtieth Street Architects, Inc. 1994. “East Pasadena Specific Plan, Historic Architectural Resources Inventory.” Prepared for the City of Pasadena. Provided to Michael Baker International by the City of Pasadena.

UCSB (University of California, Santa Barbara) Map and Imagery Lab. 1938. “Flight AJX-1938, Frame 44-15.” Aerial photograph. Accessed October 2021. https://mil.library.ucsb.edu/ap_indexes/FrameFinder/.
______. 1956. “Flight C-22555, Frame 1041.” Aerial photograph. Accessed October 2021. https://mil.library.ucsb.edu/ap_indexes/FrameFinder/.
______. 1976. “Flight TG-7600, Frame 13-19.” Aerial photograph. Accessed October 2021. https://mil.library.ucsb.edu/ap_indexes/FrameFinder/.

USGS (US Geological Survey). 1894. Los Angeles, Calif. 1:62,500 scale topographic quadrangle. ______. 1928. Sierra Madre, Calif. 1:24,000 scale topographic quadrangle. ______. 1995. Mt. Wilson, Calif. 1:24,000 scale topographic quadrangle.

Wallace, William J. 1955. “A Suggested Chronology for Southern California Coastal Archaeology.” Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 11 (3): 214-230.

MICHAEL BAKER INTERNATIONAL
RE: CULTURAL RESOURCES TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM FOR THE RUSNAK PORSCHE PASADENA

PROJECT, CITY OF PASADENA, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA MBAKERINT L .COM 2729 Prospect Park Drive, Suite 220, Rancho Cordova, CA 95670 P: (916) 361-8384 F: (916) 361-1574
25 Warren, Claude N. 1968. “Cultural Tradition and Ecological Adaptation on the Southern California Coast.” In Archaic Prehistory in the Western United States, edited by C. IrwinWilliams. Portales, NM: Eastern New Mexico University.

Winter, Robert, ed. 1997. Toward a Simpler Way of Life: The Arts & Crafts Architects of California.

Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. Accessed January 2022, https://archive.org/details/towardsimplerway0000unse.

Attachment 1
Figures
Regional Vicinity
Figure 1

RUSNAK PORSCHE DEALERSHIP
Source: Esri, ArcGIS Online, National Geographic World Map: Pasadena, California Project Location
¯
0 2.5 5 10
Miles
Los Angeles
County
Map Detail
&
Project Vicinity
Figure 2

RUSNAK PORSCHE DEALERSHIP
Source: Esri, ArcGIS Online, USGS 7.5-Minute topographic quadrangle maps (2018): Pasadena, California Project Site
¯
0 0.25 0.5 1
Miles
Mount Wilson Quad
Mount Wilson Quad
Project Site
Figure 3

RUSNAK PORSCHE DEALERSHIP
Source: Esri, ArcGIS Online, 2021 Nearmap Imagery: Pasadena, California Nina St
E Walnut St N Sunnyslope Ave
E Colorado Blvd
Project Site
¯
0 50 100 200
Feet
Attachment 2
Interested Parties Consultation
Letters

MBAKERINTL.COM 2729 Prospect Park Drive, Suite 220, Rancho Cordova, CA 95670 P: (916) 361-8384 F: (916) 361-1574
October 22, 2021

PASADENA HISTORICAL SOCIETY

PASADENA MUSEUM OF HISTORY
479 W. WALNUT ST
PASADENA, CA 91103
via email: [email protected]
RE: CONSULTATION FOR THE RUSNAK PORSCHE DEALERSHIP PROJECT, CITY OF PASADENA,

LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
To whom it may concern:

Michael Baker International is conducting a cultural resources investigation for the Rusnak Porsche Dealership Project (project) for the City of Pasadena, Planning & Development Department. The project contains eight parcels located north of East Colorado Blvd, south of Walnut Street, and east of North Sunnyslope Dr, in the City of Pasadena, as depicted on the accompanying figures (see Attachment 1).

The project proposes the construction and operation of an automotive dealership located across eight parcels within the City. The proposed project is 154,638 sf (3.55 acres) and includes two structures: a dealership building which would be two levels and a carwash building. The dealership building would be in the center of the project site and would be two levels with a total of 101,470 sf. The dealership building would be surrounded by surface parking designed for inventory display and customer parking.

The automated carwash building would be located in the northeastern portion of the site, with a total of 2,960 sf and would serve cars from the existing automotive dealership to the east of the project and cars from the proposed project itself. The project site is currently occupied by three commercial buildings (built ca. 1929, 1973, 1980), and an industrial building (ca. 1990). Under the proposed Project, all existing buildings, landscaping and vegetation, and all driveways except one (located south of Nina Street on North Sunnyslope Drive) would be removed.

Please notify us if your organization has any information or concerns about historical resources on the project site. This is not a request for research; it is solely a request for public input related to any concerns that the Pasadena Historical Society and Museum of History may have. If you have any questions, please contact me at your earliest convenience at [email protected] or (925) 925-3539.

Sincerely,
Aisha Fike, MA
Architectural Historian
Attachments:

Attachment 1 - Figures
Project Vicinity
Figure 2
2915 E COLORADO BLVD.,
PASADENA, CA 91107
Source: Esri, ArcGIS Online, USGS 7.5-Minute topographic quadrangle maps (2018): Pasadena, California Project Site
¯
0 0.25 0.5 1
Miles
Mount Wilson Quad
Mount Wilson Quad
Record Search Map
TOWNSHIP 1 NORTH, RANGE 12 WEST
LOT NO. 38 PART OF RANCHO SANTA ANITA
Source: Esri, ArcGIS Online, USGS 7.5-Minute topographic quadrangle maps (2018): Pasadena, California Project Site
1/4 Mile Search Area
¯
0 0.25 0.5 1
Miles
Mount Wilson Quad
Mount Wilson Quad
Attachment 3
DPR 523 Forms