CITY OF SAN MARINO
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
Susan Jakubowski, Mayor www.cityofsanmarino.org
Steve Talt, Vice Mayor (626) 300-0700 Phone
Steven W. Huang, DDS, Council Member (626) 300-0709 Fax Gretchen Shepherd Romey, Council Member City Hall Council Chamber Ken Ude, Council Member 2200 Huntington Drive
Marcella Marlowe, Ph.D., City Manager San Marino, CA 91108
REGULAR MEETING OF THE
SAN MARINO CITY COUNCIL
WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 12, 2022 AT 6:00 P.M.
SAN MARINO CENTER
1800 HUNTINGTON DRIVE
SAN MARINO, CA 91108
The City of San Marino appreciates your attendance. Citizens’ interest provides the Council with valuable information regarding issues of the community.
Regular meetings are held on the 2nd Wednesday of every month at 6:00 p.m. Typically, adjourned meetings are held on the last Friday of every month at 8:30 a.m.
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, any person with a disability who requires a reasonable modification or accommodation in order to participate in a meeting should contact the City Clerk via email at [email protected] or by phone at (626) 300-0705 prior to the meeting for assistance.
PURSUANT TO ASSEMBLY BILL 361 (AB 361)
Members of the City Council may teleconference into the meeting without noticing each teleconference location from which a member will be participating in a public meeting.
CORONAVIRUS DISEASE (COVID-19) ADVISORY
To protect both staff, our constituents, and elected officials, members of the public must follow the State and County Health Department’s current Health Officer Orders, which require wearing a mask indoors. Given the seriousness of COVID-19, you are encouraged to watch or listen to the meeting from home, or provide input electronically, if you do not feel comfortable attending in person.
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA – JANUARY 12, 2022 PAGE 2 OF 6
How to view or listen to the meeting from home:
1) Via Computer for Video Streaming:
Website: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/86229319876
Meeting ID: 862 2931 9876
2) Via Phone for Audio Only:
Phone Number: (669) 900-9128
Meeting ID: 862 2931 9876
How to offer public comment from home:
1) Public comment will be accepted by email to [email protected] until 3:00 p.m. the day of the meeting, to be read by the City Clerk during public comment. Lengthy public comment may be summarized in the interest of time. Any comments received after 3:00 p.m. will be included in the public comment record but will not be read at the meeting.
2) Public comment will be accepted electronically via the zoom.us teleconference module during the meeting. Zoom comments will be taken after the in-person comments.
CALL TO ORDER
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL: Council Member Huang, Council Member Shepherd Romey, Council Member Ude, Vice Mayor Talt, and Mayor Jakubowski
POSTING OF AGENDA
The agenda is posted 72 hours prior to each meeting at the following locations: City Hall, 2200 Huntington Drive, the Crowell Public Library, 1890 Huntington Drive, and the Stoneman Building, 1560 Pasqualito Drive. The agenda is also posted on the City’s website:
http://www.cityofsanmarino.org.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
The City welcomes public input. Members of the public may address the City Council by completing a public comment card and giving it to the City Clerk prior to the meeting. At this time, the public may address the City Council on items that are not on the agenda. Pursuant to state law, the City Council may not discuss or take action on issues not on the meeting agenda (Government Code Section 54954.2). The Mayor reserves the right to place limits on duration of comments. Staff may be asked to follow up on such items.
CITY MANAGER’S REPORT
This is an opportunity for the City Manager to inform the City Council and the public of any upcoming events or matters of interest to the community.
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA – JANUARY 12, 2022 PAGE 3 OF 6
MOTION TO WAIVE FURTHER READINGS
This action permits the City Council to act on ordinances and resolutions without having to read the entire text of the ordinance or resolution. The title of an ordinance on First Reading must be read in its entirety. An ordinance on Second Reading does not require having the title read.
However, the City Council may request that an ordinance or resolution be read in its entirety before taking any action.
CONTINUED BUSINESS
1. UPDATE ON THE SAN MARINO CENTER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
INCLUDING ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT SCOPING SESSION
Recommendation: Staff recommends that the City Council receive and file the status update on the San Marino Center Renovation Project.
NEW BUSINESS
2. ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION NO. R-22-02, ACCEPTING THE ADVISORY
RECOMMENDATION OF THE ARBITRATOR REGARDING A MANDATORY
VACCINE MANDATE FOR EMPLOYEES REPRESENTED BY THE SAN
MARINO POLICE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION (“SMPOA”)
Recommendation: Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution No. R-22-02, Accepting the Advisory Recommendation of the Arbitrator Regarding a Mandatory Vaccine Mandate for Employees Represented by the San Marino Police Officers Association.
CONSENT CALENDAR
3. RECEIVE AND FILE THE MONTHLY DISBURSEMENTS REPORT FOR DECEMBER 2021
Recommendation: Staff recommends that the City Council receive and file the Monthly Disbursements Report for the month of December 2021.
4. RECEIVE AND FILE CASH AND INVESTMENT REPORT FOR NOVEMBER 2021
Recommendation: Staff recommends that the City Council receive and file the Cash and Investment Report for the month of November 2021.
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA – JANUARY 12, 2022 PAGE 4 OF 6
5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Recommendation: Staff recommends that the City Council approve the special meeting of December 8, 2021, the regular meeting of December 8, 2021, the special closed session meeting of December 15, 2021, and the special meeting of December 15, 2021.
6. ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION NO. R-22-01 TO CONTINUE HYBRID PUBLIC MEETINGS PURSUANT TO AB 361
Recommendation: Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution No. R-22-01 reauthorizing the City Council and the City’s Boards and Commissions to continue teleconference accessibility for conducting public meetings pursuant to AB 361.
7. UPDATE ON CITY RESPONSE TO THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC
Recommendation: Staff recommends that the City Council receive and file the January 12, 2022 report on the City’s response to the COVID-19 Pandemic.
8. APPROVAL OF ORDINANCE NO. O-21-1386 (SECOND READING) Recommendation: Staff recommends that the City Council waive full reading and adopt Ordinance No. O-21-1386, an Ordinance of the City Council of San Marino, California adding Section 23.02.33 to the San Marino Municipal Code to provide for regulations concerning two-unit residential developments in single family residential zones, amending Section
23.02.01 making two-unit residential developments and urban lot splits permitted uses in single-family residential zones, adding Article 06 to Chapter 22 of the San Marino Municipal Code to provide regulations concerning urban lot split subdivisions in single-family residential zones, and adding Section 23.03.10 to provide for objective design standards in the C-1 Zone.
9. APPROVAL OF CONTRACT EXTENSION FOR IT
CONSULTING/MANAGEMENT SERVICES WITH INTELESYS
Recommendation: Staff recommends that the City Council authorize the City Manager to execute the extension of the professional services agreement with Intelesys for the City’s IT Management Services for one year.
10.APPROVAL OF FRANCHISE TAX BOARD DATA SHARING AGREEMENT Recommendation: Staff recommends that the City Council approve the Franchise Tax Board Data Sharing Agreement and direct the City Manager to execute the agreement.
11. ACCEPTANCE OF DONATION FROM THE SAN MARINO POLICE
FOUNDATION
Recommendation: Staff recommends that the City Council accept the donation of $5,250 from the San Marino Police Foundation; approve the fiscal year 2021-2022 revenue budget amendment of $5,250 in the Donations Fund (Acct. 281-30-3601-0000: Police Donations Received); and approve the fiscal year 2021-2022 expense budget amendment of $5,250 in the Donations Fund (Acct. 281-30-4399-0000: Non-Capitalized Equipment.
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA – JANUARY 12, 2022 PAGE 5 OF 6
12. ACCEPTANCE OF DONATION FROM NANCY HOFFMAN
Recommendation: Staff recommends that the City Council accept the donation of the crossbow picture from Ms. Nancy Hoffman.
13. APPROVAL OF NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR YEAR 4 OF THE MULTIYEAR SIDEWALK REPLACEMENT PROGRAM PROJECT NO. 18-9272 Recommendation: Staff recommends that the City Council accept Year 4 of the Multi-Year Sidewalk Replacement Program Project No. 18-9272 performed by FS Contractors, Inc., as complete and authorize the City Clerk to file the Notice of Completion.
14. AWARD OF A PROFESSIONAL DESIGN SERVICES AGREEMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $264,606 TO DUDEK OF ENCINITAS FOR LACY PARK BOX CULVERT REPLACEMENT PROJECT NO. 21-8024 AND APPROPRIATING FUNDING IN THE AMOUNT OF $59,606 FROM THE CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENT FUND RESERVES FOR THE WORK
Recommendation: Staff recommends that the City Council award a professional design services agreement in the amount of $264,606, including Task 6.1 Landscaping Field Support, to Dudek of Encinitas, California, which is attached as Attachment 1 to the staff report, for the preparation of plans, specifications, and cost estimates for the Lacy Park Box Culvert Replacement Project No. 21-8024, authorize the City Manager to execute the agreement on behalf of the City, appropriate $59,606 to account 394-46-4600-8024 (Culvert Replacement Program) from the capital reserves balance, and authorize the Director of Parks and Public Works to issue design change orders not to exceed $5,000.
15. APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL DELEGATE AND ALTERNATE LIST FOR 2022
Recommendation: Staff recommends that the City Council approve the Council List of Delegates and Alternates to agency boards, commissions, and City activities for 2022.
16. APPROVAL OF PURCHASE OF AUTOMATED LICENSE PLATE READERS THROUGH VIGILANT SOLUTIONS, LLC USING 2019 STATE HOMELAND
SECURITY PROGRAM GRANT FUNDS
Recommendation: Staff recommends that the City Council authorize the purchase of six ALPR cameras with 5 years of data hosting from Vigilant Solutions, LLC offered through the reimbursable State of California FY2019 Homeland Security Grant Program (SHSGP) in an amount not to exceed $51,789.
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA – JANUARY 12, 2022 PAGE 6 OF 6
17. APPROVAL OF PURCHASE OF LAW ENFORCEMENT EQUIPMENT USING CITIZENS’ OPTION FOR PUBLIC SAFETY (COPS) FUND MONIES
Recommendation: Staff recommends that the City Council approve the purchase of the law enforcement equipment detailed in the staff report, and appropriate $21,867.58 from the COPS Grant Fund to account 233-30-4399-0000 (Non-Capitalized Equipment) for such equipment.
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS OR PUBLIC WRITINGS DISTRIBUTED
This is an opportunity to announce any written communications pertaining to the City received by members of the City Council. All public writings distributed by the City of San Marino to at least a majority of the City Council regarding any item on this agenda will be made available at the Public Counter at City Hall located at 2200 Huntington Drive, San Marino, California 91108, and will also be included in the public agenda packet that will available for review at the City Council meeting.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
ADJOURNMENT
Dated: January 7, 2022 CHRISTINA BAKER
Posted: January 7, 2022 CITY CLERK
City Manager’s Report and
Operational Dashboard
December 2021 Recap
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0
1 0 0 0
0 0 0
1 Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov 0 Dec 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Emergency Medical Services - Return of Spontaneous
Circulation
FY 20-21 FY 21-22
1 0 0
2 3
2 1
1 2
1 1
0 0 0
2 1
0 1
Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Emergency Medical Services - Cardiac Arrests
FY 20-21 FY 21-22
56 62
55 54
56 101
55 58 53 47 55
81 74
60 66
75 55
89 Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Out-of-City Incidents
FY 20-21 FY 21-22
87 77
72 84
95 97 66 63 68 60
89 82
79 79
72 80 85
119
Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
In-City Incidents
FY 20-21 FY 21-22
FIRE
FY Total:
YTD: 940
514
FY Total:
733
YTD:
419
FY Total:
14 YTD:
4 YTD:
1 FY Total:
1
0:06:00
0:06:37 0:06:33
0:05:34 0:05:47 0:05:47
0:06:22
0:05:44
0:06:25 0:05:51 0:05:44 0:06:46 0:06:05
0:05:38 0:05:41 0:05:37 0:05:56 0:06:05
Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
90th Percentile Response Time: Overall Response
FY 20-21 FY 21-22
0:01:56
0:01:42 0:01:47
0:01:56
0:01:47 0:01:50 0:01:48
0:01:42 0:01:33
0:01:14 0:01:19 0:01:22
0:01:05 0:01:05
0:00:54
0:01:16 0:01:11
0:01:02
Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
90th Perentile Response Time: Fire Turnout
FY 20-21 FY 21-22
0:01:18
0:01:33
0:01:10
0:01:32 0:01:34 0:01:29 0:01:32 0:01:38
0:01:10
0:01:11
0:01:19
0:01:28
0:00:52 0:00:48
0:01:02
0:00:52 0:00:57
0:01:15
Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
90th Percentile Response Time: EMS Turnout
FY 20-21 FY 21-22
FIRE
FY Avg:
YTD Avg: 0:01:25
0:00:58
FY Avg:
0:01:40
YTD Avg:
0:01:06
FY Avg:
0:06:02 YTD Avg:
0:05:57
1 0 0
1 1 1
2 0
3 3
1 3
0 3
1 1
Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov 0 Dec 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May June
Community Engagement Events
FY 20-21 FY 21-22
POLICE
*Part 1 Crimes include homicide, rape, robbery, aggravated assault, burglary, larceny, auto theft, and arson
December 2021 FY to Date
Speed (6) Speed (29)
Unsafe lane change (3) Unsafe lane change (21)
Failure to yield (0) Failure to yield (7)
Failure to stop at red (1) Failure to stop at red (7)
Top Causes of Collisions
FY Total:
YTD: 214
84 FY Total:
16 YTD:
5 18
22 11
20 13
23 19
20 17
22 14 15
12 15
28 11
18 17
Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Part 1 Crimes*
FY 20-21 FY 21-22
11 20
15 8
9 8
7 9 9
6 4
9 13
7 12
10 3 2 Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Tree Removal Permits Issued
FY 20-21 FY 21-22
9 7
8 11
7 6
13 3
4 1
2 4
5 6 1 2 5 5
Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
New Businesses
FY 20-21 FY 21-22
74 53
74 63
52 66
54 45
50 70
62 91 93 88 91 77
52 70
Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Building Permits Issued
FY 20-21 FY 21-22
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
FY Total:
115
YTD:
471
FY Total:
754
YTD:
47 FY Total:
75 YTD:
24
0 1 2 1 1
2 4
0 4
7 1
3 2
5 4 4
1 3
Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
ADU Applications Submitted
FY 20-21 FY 21-22
84 45
68 101
37 75
85 86
110 117
103 101
71 75 78
88 68
41 Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Open Code Enforcement Cases
FY 20-21 FY 21-22
1 3
1 2
1 2
1 2
0 1
0 2
4 1 1
2 3
2 Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
ADU Permits Issued
FY 20-21 FY 21-22
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
FY Total:
26 YTD:
13 FY Total:
16 YTD:
19 FY Avg:
84 YTD Avg:
70
1292 1198 1144
1020 1048
1198
1,159
911
986 921 933 977
1,053 1,000 958 927 928 928
Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Circulation: Digital Catalog
FY 20-21 FY 21-22
2662 2884 2907 2417 2555 2,540 2,398
5,152 4,687 3,708 3,366
10,857
13,667 13,913 13,582 14,406 12,954 12,826
Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Circulation: In Person*
FY 20-21 FY 21-22
3523
424 257
839 249 878
177
715 736 1144 585 867
8,048
1,606 785
3,856
644 412
Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Total Participants
FY 20-21 FY 21-22
32 22
27 37
16 11
13 22 24
49 13
52 40
20 58
27 28
17 Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Programs Offered
FY 20-21 FY 21-22
COMMUNITY SERVICES
*In FY 20-21, in-person circulation was via curbside pickup until June 2021, when the Library reopened to visitors and curbside pickup was discontinued.
FY Total:
10,392
YTD:
81,348
FY Total:
12,787
YTD:
5,794
YTD:
190
FY Total:
318
YTD:
15,351
FY Total:
46,133
$4,332,822
$3,755,102 $2,283,740
$1,839,562
$1,695,205
$2,351,836 $2,673,465
$1,610,426
$2,608,028
$2,082,134 $1,575,099
$3,002,962
$5,277,926
$3,974,682
$1,924,727
$2,323,748
$1,585,764
$1,923,206
Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Expenses
FY 20-21 FY 21-22
$365,175
$951,994
$789,690 $893,919
$882,114
$8,461,707
$3,880,786
$1,696,518
$885,829
$6,891,515
$4,084,349
$1,004,739
$343,813
$959,400
$740,374 $830,473 $839,707 $109,415
Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Revenues
FY 20-21 FY 21-22
FINANCE
Note: December numbers are preliminary until books are officially closed next month. Property Tax revenues will post mid-month.
FY Total:
$30.8m
YTD:
$3.8m
YTD:
$17m
FY Total:
$29.8m
$69,365
$126,629
$203,120
$115,268
$150,764
$128,802
$151,846
$130,797
$119,911
$195,128
$108,281
$335,197
$146,697
$173,033
$144,289
$191,509
$147,045
$112,783
Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Overtime Expenses
FY 20-21 FY 21-22
$4,625
$33,890
$16,790
$8,459
$6,250
$16,045 $15,065
$11,332
$10,351 $12,451 $12,684 $14,090
$3,346 $4,570
$9,848
$32,477
$8,057
$107,977
Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
COVID-19 Expenses
FY 20-21 FY 21-22
$69,365
$126,629
$203,120
$115,268
$150,764
$128,802
$151,846
$130,797
$119,911
$195,128
$108,281
$335,197
$146,697
$173,033
$144,289
$191,509
$147,045
Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Overtime Expenses
FY 20-21 FY 21-22
FINANCE
Note: December numbers are preliminary until books are officially closed next month.
FY Total:
$162,032
YTD:
$166,275
YTD:
$915,356
FY Total:
$1,835,107
FINANCE
Note: December numbers are preliminary until books are officially closed next month. $12,068,456
$10,994,876
$9,305,633
$8,270,093
$7,369,762
$13,353,326
$14,920,377
$11,953,469
$10,850,773
$15,412,645
$17,766,025
$15,363,870
$11,093,660
$9,473,918
$10,054,585
$7,376,221
$6,649,832 $5,987,532
Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
General Fund Balance
FY 20-21 FY 21-22
$34,177,850
$31,078,571
$29,819,586
$28,384,905
$27,751,395
$33,701,344
$34,982,443
$35,039,933
$33,784,836
$38,194,608
$40,886,859
$39,918,291
$36,168,260
$35,388,265
$32,098,787
$30,384,198
$29,992,080
$36,414,654
Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Overall Cash Balance (In Bank)
FY 20-21 FY 21-22
65% 65% 65% 65% 65% 65%
69%
65% 65%
58% 59%
51%
58%
52% 48%
59% 59%
50%
Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Performance Appraisal Completion Rate
FY 20-21 FY 21-22
8.7%
7.8% 7.8%
10.0%
7.8%
7.3%
10.7% 10.7% 10.0%
6.7%
4.8% 4.8%
2.9%
7.7%
3.8%
7.7%
9.0% 8.8%
Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Full-Time Position Vacancy Rate
FY 20-21 FY 21-22
44 44 45 45 46 47
45 45
45 46
52 45
70 64 61
57 56 53
Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Part-Time Employees
FY 20-21 FY 21-22
94 95
95 93
95 97
92 93 94
97 99 99
101 96
100
96 94
92 Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Full-Time Employees
(104 budgeted)
FY 20-21 FY 21-22
HUMAN RESOURCES
FY Avg:
95 YTD Avg:
97 FY Avg:
46 YTD Avg:
60 FY Avg:
8.1%
YTD Avg:
6.65%
FY Avg:
63%
YTD Avg:
54%
22 21 22 22 19
10.3 10
14 10 10 10 10
25 2
8 8
48 21
Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Cumulative Workers' Comp Days Off
FY 20-21 FY 21-22
0 1
0 1 1
3 4
2 1 0 0 0 0
5 1
2 9
1 Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Workers' Comp Claims (New)
FY 20-21 FY 21-22
35 35 35
36 35
33 41 40
37 36 36 37 37 40 40 38
45 44
Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Workers' Comp Claims (Total Open)
FY 20-21 FY 21-22
HUMAN RESOURCES
FY Avg:
36 YTD Avg:
41 FY Total:
12 YTD:
19 FY Total:
180.3 YTD:
112
Note: Numbers for the Cumulate Workers’
Comp Days Off for FY 21-22 have been
corrected based on a correction to the
calculation.
100% 100%
67%
80%
100%
86%
100% 100% 100%
100% 100%
100%
100%
Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
% Customer Survey Rating of Good/Superior
FY 20-21 FY 21-22
0 1 1
3 5 5
7 4
1 1
0 0
7 6
0 0
1 1
Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Customer Service Surveys Received
FY 20-21 FY 21-22
89%
74%
96% 96%
86% 83% 81% 82% 76%
100%
60%
82%
48%
83%
83% 89% 85% 85%
Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
% Service Requests Closed Within 5 Business Days
FY 20-21 FY 21-22
35 23 24
37 72 70
57 45
25 35
57 67
55 57 89
82 71
39 Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Maintenance Service Requests Opened
FY 20-21 FY 21-22
PARKS & PUBLIC WORKS
FY Avg:
84%
FY Total:
28 YTD:
15 FY Avg:
93%
YTD Avg:
100%
YTD:
393
FY Total:
547
YTD Avg:
79%
6%
12%
5%
3%
12%
8%
17%
5% 4% 4%
2%
4%
4% 3% 2% 1%
6%
3%
Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
% Fleet Out of Service More Than 3 Business Days
FY 20-21 FY 21-22
3 3
2 2
1 2 2 2 2
4 4 4 4 4
2 2
3 2
Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Capital Projects in Construction
FY 20-21 FY 21-22
0 1
2 3 3
2 3 3
2 2 2 2
2 2 2
3 3 3
Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Capital Projects in Design
FY 20-21 FY 21-22
PARKS & PUBLIC WORKS
FY Avg:
6.8%
YTD Avg:
3.2%
STRATEGIC PLAN CRITICAL SUCCESS FACTORS
• Engaged and Connected Residents
• Efficient, Responsive, and Effective City Services
• Well-Maintained Infrastructure
• Fiscally Responsible and Transparent City Government
• Inviting and Relevant City Facilities
BACKGROUND
On December 9, 2020, the City Council selected a floor plan scheme and exterior elevations for the renovation of the San Marino Center. Crane Architectural Group of Fullerton has submitted 95 percent plans, which are currently in the second-round of plan check. The documents will be ready for advertisement in early February and six contractors have been prequalified to bid on the project when the project clears the environmental process described herein.
As the proposed improvements to the San Marino Center constitute a “Project” as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Public Resources Code Sections 21000 et seq.) and the CEQA Guidelines, ELMT Consulting was hired by the City Council on December 9, 2020 to conduct the required environmental impact analysis and prepare the appropriate CEQA documents for the project.
The first step in the CEQA process was to prepare an Initial Study (IS) to identify any potential environmental impacts associated with the project. The IS looks at twenty resource areas and analyzes several criteria within each to identify the specific areas of concern or potential impact to help determine the appropriate type of CEQA document. The purpose of the IS is to provide a preliminary analysis of a project to determine whether a negative declaration (“ND”), a mitigated negative declaration (“MND”), or an environmental impact report (“EIR”) should be TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Marcella Marlowe, Ph.D., City Manager
BY: Michael Throne, PE, Director of Parks and Public Works/City Engineer Alex Hamilton, Interim Director of Community Development DATE: January 12, 2022
SUBJECT: UPDATE ON THE SAN MARINO CENTER IMPROVEMENT
PROJECT INCLUDING ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
SCOPING SESSION
Susan Jakubowski, Mayor
Steve Talt, Vice Mayor
Steven W. Huang, DDS, Council Member
Gretchen Shepherd Romey, Council Member
Ken Ude, Council Member
prepared. However, as a result of public statements made by community members indicating a strong potential for legal challenges, San Marino, as the CEQA lead agency, proactively decided to conduct an EIR, which is the highest level of review. With that as a backdrop, the IS has determined that of the twenty resource areas, the project may result in a significant adverse impact in two areas - cultural resources and land use/planning. The IS concluded that based on this, an EIR, focused on the potentially significant cultural and land use/planning impacts, must be prepared for the project (hereinafter “Focused EIR”).
A notice of preparation (NOP) and the IS were prepared in accordance with CEQA guidelines and released for public comment on January 7, 2022. The NOP starts a 30 day period during which the public can submit comments on the scope of the EIR.
A scoping session is being conducted at this Council meeting to gather comments on the scope or any potential areas of concern that could also be addressed in the Focused EIR. It is important to note that “scoping meetings” are not required by CEQA; they are an optional process used to further solicit public comments regarding any areas of environmental concern related to the project.
DISCUSSION
The City has determined through the IS process that the following environmental considerations resulted in either no impact, less than significant impact, or less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated. As a result, the following subjects are not proposed to be considered in further detail in the Focused EIR beyond the analysis in the IS:
• Aesthetics
• Agriculture and Forestry
• Air Quality
• Biological Resources
• Energy
• Geology and Soils
• Greenhouse Gases
• Hazards and Hazardous Materials
• Hydrology and Water Quality
• Mineral Resources
• Noise
• Population and Housing
• Public Services
• Recreation
• Traffic and Circulation
• Tribal Cultural Resources
• Utilities
• Wildfire
The results of the IS determined that the project could have potentially significant impacts that are not easily mitigated in two of the twenty subject areas: Cultural Resources and Land Use/Planning.
Cultural Resources
The Project proposes to upgrade the architectural style of the San Marino Center (SMC) building façade from its existing architectural designation as “Modern Colonial Revival” to a “Spanish Mediterranean” architectural style, which is similar to that of the adjacent buildings. Other upgrades include rehabilitation of the building interior to include additional offices to
accommodate some of the City’s Community Services staff, optimize the interior public gathering space, replace to current standards the heating/air conditioning, plumbing, electrical systems and light fixtures, and update the building and grounds for compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act. In 2011, the San Marino Center was determined eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places and was placed on the California Register.
CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(a) defines historical resources, to include resources listed in, or determined to be eligible by the State Historical Resources Commission, for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources (Pub. Res. Code §5024.1, Title 14 CCR, Section 4850 et seq.). Although the San Marino Center was listed only for its social-historical connection to San Marino and not for its architectural style, the impacts of changing the San Marino Center’s architectural style must be assessed.
Since the building is listed on the California Register of Historic Resources, and is considered a City Landmark by City code, the building is considered a historic resource under CEQA and thus the IS Checklist identified under Criterion V (a) Cultural Resources that the Project could cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource. CEQA Guidelines Sections 15064.5(b)(3) and 15126.4(b)(1) make clear, however, that a project involving a historic resource that follows the Secretary of Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties (“Standards”) shall be considered as mitigated to a level of less than a significant impact on the historical resource. Since the Project, as currently proposed, is not consistent with those Standards, the Focused EIR will explore mitigation and project alternatives that can help the Project achieve consistency with the Standards.
Land Use/Planning
The 2003 Land Use Element of the City’s General Plan identifies fifteen goals to guide land use decisions. In this case, the IS finds the project to be inconsistent with one of the fifteen goals:
Historic Preservation-“Preserve significant historic properties on the State and National Register.” Therefore, this study area is identified in the IS as a potentially significant impact.
Additionally, the City’s General Plan was adopted prior to the City’s acquisition of the San Marino Center and before the 2011 and 2021 studies which assessed and confirmed the Center’s historicity. Therefore, the Land Use Element does not list the San Marino Center as being among the buildings in the City that are listed on the Federal, State, or local registers.
Focused EIR Project Alternatives
The Focused EIR will assess the effects of the Project on the environment, identify potentially significant impacts, identify feasible mitigation measures to reduce or eliminate potentially significant environmental impacts, and discuss potentially feasible alternatives to the Project that may accomplish basic objectives while lessening or eliminating any potentially significant project impacts. The three project alternatives include:
1. Project as currently proposed. This will require the preparation of a Historical American Building Survey (HABS) that would provide photographic documentation of the San
Marino Center. However, because the Project will remove the integrity of the San Marino Center including its design, materials, and workmanship as identified in the 2011 and 2021 studies, the Project would have similar impacts to demolition and thus the HABS survey would not fully mitigate the impact below a level of significance under CEQA. Therefore, a Statement of Overriding Considerations would need to be adopted by the City Council if the currently proposed project were to be approved.
2. Design a Project that is consistent with the Standards. This would include revising the Project design to be consistent with the Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties, likely including a return to the current architectural style of “Modern Colonial Revival.” Any such design changes to ensure consistency with the Standards would be overseen by an historic preservation consultant that meets the Secretary of Interior qualifications.
3. Discontinue the Project. This alternative assumes no renovation or upgrades would occur.
Next Steps
In accordance with Section 15082 of the CEQA Guidelines, on January 7, 2022, the City has issued a NOP to:
1) Serve as the NOP of an EIR for the Office of Planning and Research (OPR), Responsible Agencies, public agencies involved in funding or approving the project, and Trustee Agencies responsible for natural resources affected by the project, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15082; and
2) Advise and solicit comments and suggestions regarding the scope and preparation of the EIR, environmental issues to be addressed in the EIR, and any other related issues, from interested parties, including interested or affected members of the public.
Working with ELMT Consulting, staff will conduct public outreach on the CEQA document by:
• Submitting the NOP and IS to State Clearinghouse online per State submittal requirements;
• Mailing out copies of the NOP to property owners within a 300-foot radius of San Marino Center;
• Posting the NOP and IS on the City’s Website;
• Making the NOP and IS available to all requesting parties; and • Posting a hardcopy of the NOP and IS at Public Library.
The anticipated schedule for preparation of the CEQA document is as follows:
• January 7, 2022 – Release NOP and IS for public review and comment • January 12, 2022 – Scoping session at City Council
• February 6, 2022 – Scoping Comment period ends
• March 1, 2022 – Release draft focused EIR for 30 day review and public comment period
• March 31, 2022 – Comment period concludes and ELMT begins reviewing all comments and preparing responses to comments
• May 1, 2022 – Complete review/responses to all comments and begin preparation of Final
EIR (FEIR)
• June 8, 2022 – City Council to review and consider whether to certify the EIR and approve the Project
• June 9, 2022 – File Notice of Determination if EIR certified and Project approved
FISCAL IMPACT & PROCUREMENT REVIEW
The adopted FY 2021-22 capital improvement plan budget includes $4,758,900 in account no. 394-40-4600-1000 (San Marino Center Renovation) for the preparation of plans, construction activities, environmental documentation, and construction management and inspection services.
If, on June 8, the City Council elects to pursue Alternative Project Option 2, staff will need to obtain a quote from Crane Architectural Group to revise the plan drawings from the “Spanish Mediterranean” style to the “Modern Colonial Revival” style. That contract amendment will exceed the City Manager’s procurement authority and will therefore need to be considered by the City Council.
LEGAL REVIEW
The City Attorney reviewed the staff report and has approved it to legal form.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the City Council receive and file the status update on the project and conduct a scoping session to receive initial comments on the scope of the EIR and provide direction to staff as needed. If the City Council concurs with staff’s recommendation, an appropriate motion would be:
“I move to receive and file the status update on the San Marino Center Renovation Project.”
ATTACHMENTS
1. Notice of Preparation (NOP)
2. Initial Study (IS) with Technical Appendices for Cultural Resources Assessment & Transportation Impact Study
*All other technical appendices can be found at www.cityofsanmarino.org/sanmarioncenter
THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY
City of San Marino
Community Development Department
2200 Huntington Drive, San Marino, CA 91108
(626) 300-0710
Project Title:
Project Location:
Scoping Meeting:
Comment Period:
Notice of Preparation of a Draft Focused EIR and
Notice of Community Public Scoping Meeting for
San Marino Center Improvement Project
San Marino Center Improvement Project
San Marino Center, 1800 Huntington Drive, San Marino
To be held in-person, and through a live virtual forum, on January 12, 2022 at 6 p.m.
January 7, 2022 to February 7, 2022
Lead Agency: City of San Marino- Community Development Department, 2200 Huntington Drive, San Marino, CA 91108 Lead Agency Contact: email: [email protected] / phone (626) 300-0710 Notice of Preparation: In accordance with Section 15082 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, the City of San Marino (City), as the CEQA Lead Agency, is soliciting comments regarding the scope, content and specificity of a Focused Environmental Impact Report (EIR) that will be prepared for the San Marino Center Improvement Project (Project).
Project Description: The Project proposes to make significant exterior and interior improvements to the San Marino Center (SMC), which is eligible for listing to the National Register of Historic Places, is on the California Register of Historical Resources, and which is a City Landmark under San Marino City Code, Chapter XXIII, Article 18 Section 23.18.03 (A). The exterior upgrades will change the existing architectural style of the building fa!;ade from "Modern Colonial Revival" to a "Spanish Mediterranean" architectural style which is similar to that of the adjacent Crowell Library. Building interior upgrades include but are not limited to: adding offices to accommodate six City Recreation Department staff; optimizing the interior public gathering space; replacing to current standards the heating/air conditioning, plumbing, electrical systems; and replacing the period light fixtures and flooring with modern fixtures and flooring. Other updates include various exterior and interior improvements for compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act.
The current plans were found to be inconsistent with the Secretary of the Interior Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties during a recent cultural resources review performed for the Project.
Focused EIR Scope: An Initial Study addressing the potential environmental impacts associated with the Project was prepared in compliance with CEQA (Public Resources Code Sections 21000 et seq.), and the CEQA Guidelines. Of the 20 categories evaluated in the Initial Study, only the categories of Cultural Resources and Land Use/Planning could result in Potentially Significant impacts that could not be easily mitigated, and therefore, needed to be further evaluated in an EIR.
Document Availability: The Initial Study and Notice of Preparation are available as follows:
On-Line: City's website at: www.cityofsanmarino.org/sanmarinocenter Printed: Crowell Library, 1890 Huntington Drive, San Marino, CA 91108. Phone: (626) 300-0777. The document is available for viewing only during regular business hours.
Notice of Scoping Meeting: Pursuant to California Public Resources Code Section 21083.9 and California Code of Regulations, Title 14 ("CEQA Guidelines") Section 15082, the Lead Agency will conduct a scoping meeting for the purpose of soliciting oral and written comments from interested parties requesting notice, responsible agencies, agencies with jurisdiction by law, trustee agencies, and involved federal agencies, as to the appropriate scope and content of the EIR.
ALL INTERESTED PARTIES ARE INVITED TO ATTEND THE PUBLIC SCOPING MEETING TO ASSIST IN IDENTIFYING ISSUES TO BE ADDRESSED IN THE EIR. ATTENDEES WILL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE INPUT TO THE CONSULTANTS PREPARING THE EIR.
Notice of Preparation/Scoping Meeting
San Marino Center Improvement Project
Date: January 12, 2022 Time: 6:00 PM
In Person Attendance: San Marino Center, 1800 Huntington Drive, San Marino, CA 91108 Virtual Attendance: Via Computer for Video Streaming: https:ljus02web.zoom.us/j/86229319876 Meeting ID: 862 2931 9876 Via Phone for Audio Only: (669) 900-9128 Meeting ID: 862 2931 9876 As a covered entity under Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act, the City of San Marino does not discriminate. The meeting facility and its parking are wheelchair accessible. Sign language interpreters, assistive listening devices, or other auxiliary aides and/or services may be provided upon request. Other services, such as translation between English and other languages, may also be provided upon request. To ensure availability of services, please make your request no later than three working days (72 hours) prior to the meeting calling Alex Hamilton at (626) 300-0710 or via email at: [email protected].
Deadline to Submit Written Comments: The City of San Marino, as Lead Agency, is soliciting comments regarding the scope, content and specificity of the Focused EIR from all interested parties requesting notice, responsible agencies, agencies with jurisdiction by law, trustee agencies, and involved agencies. In accordance with CEQA Section 15082, this Notice of Preparation is being circulated for a 30-day comment period. The City of San Marino requests that written comments be provided at the earliest possible date, but no later than 5:00 p.m. on February 7, 2022.
Written comments (including a name, telephone number, and contact information) should be sent to: to the following:
City of San Marino - Community Development Department
Attention: Alex Hamilton, Interim Community Development Director 2200 Huntington Drive, San Marino, CA 91108
Phone: (626) 300-0710
Fax: (626) 300-0716
E-mail: [email protected]
NOP Attachments: Exhibit 1: Existing and Proposed View- Northwest Elevation Notice of Preparation/Scoping Meeting
San Marino Center Improvement Project
Notice of Preparation/Scoping Meeting
San Marino Center Improvement Project
Exhibit 1- Existing {Top) and Proposed {Bottom) View- Northwest Elevation San Marino Center Improvement Project
THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY
INITIAL STUDY
San Marino Center Improvement Project
Prepared for:
City of San Marino
Community Development Department
2200 Huntington Drive
San Marino, CA 91108
Prepared by:
ELMT Consulting, Inc.
2201 N. Grand Avenue #10098
Santa Ana, CA 92711
January 2022
This Page Intentionally Left Blank
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................. 1 2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION................................................................................................................... 4
2.1 PROJECT LOCATION AND SETTING ............................................................................................... 4
2.2 PROJECT OBJECTIVES.................................................................................................................... 6
2.3 PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS.......................................................................................................... 8
2.4 PROJECT TIMING........................................................................................................................... 9 3 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS AND DETERMINATION..................................................................... 19
3.1 ORGANIZATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS....................................................................... 19
3.2 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ............................................................................ 19
3.3 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED ............................................................... 20
3.4 DETERMINATION ........................................................................................................................ 21 4 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ......................................................................................................... 22
4.1 AESTHETICS................................................................................................................................. 22
4.2 AGRICULTURE & FORESTRY RESOURCES .................................................................................... 25
4.3 AIR QUALITY................................................................................................................................ 27
4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ............................................................................................................ 36
4.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES ............................................................................................................... 42
4.6 ENERGY ....................................................................................................................................... 52
4.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS .................................................................................................................. 56
4.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS ................................................................................................... 61
4.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ................................................................................... 66
4.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY............................................................................................ 75
4.11 LAND USE PLANNING.................................................................................................................. 79
4.12 MINERAL RESOURCES ................................................................................................................. 90
4.13 NOISE .......................................................................................................................................... 92
4.14 POPULATION AND HOUSING.................................................................................................... 102
4.15 PUBLIC SERVICES....................................................................................................................... 104
4.16 RECREATION ............................................................................................................................. 108
4.17 TRANSPORTATION.................................................................................................................... 111
4.18 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES................................................................................................. 117
4.19 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS ............................................................................................. 122
4.20 WILDFIRE .................................................................................................................................. 125
4.21 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE............................................................................... 128 5 SUMMARY OF MITIGATION MEASURES ..................................................................................... 130 6 REFERENCES .............................................................................................................................. 136
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)
LIST OF TABLES
Table 2.1-1: Surrounding Land Use............................................................................................................... 3 Table 2.2-1: Example of Existing and Proposed Uses of the SMC................................................................. 7 Table 4.3-1: South Coast Air Basin Attainment Status............................................................................... 28 Table 4.3-2: Local Ambient Air Quality ...................................................................................................... 31 Table 4.3-3: Estimated Maximum Mitigated Daily Construction Emissions..............................................33 Table 4.3-4: Estimated Operational Emissions .......................................................................................... 34 Table 4.3-5: SCAQMD LSTs for Construction ............................................................................................. 35 Table 4.6-1: Construction Worker Gasoline Demand ................................................................................ 55 Table 4.6-2: Construction Equipment Diesel Demand............................................................................... 55 Table 4.11-1: General Plan Consistency Analysis....................................................................................... 84 Table 4.13-1: Land Use Compatibility Guidelines...................................................................................... 93 Table 4.13-2: Vibration Source Levels for Construction Equipment.......................................................... 95 Table 4.13-3: Human Reaction and Damage to Buildings Thresholds....................................................... 95 Table 4.13-4: Noise Monitoring Results – Existing Condition.................................................................... 97 Table 4.13-5: Typical Maximum Construction Equipment Noise Levels.................................................... 98 Table 4.13-6: Typical Construction Noise Levels at Various Distances from Project................................98 Table 4.13-7: Modeled Noise Levels.......................................................................................................... 99 Table 4.13-8: Vibration Source Levels for Construction Equipment........................................................100 Table 4.17-1: Level of Service Descriptors............................................................................................... 111
LIST OF EXHIBITS
Exhibit 2-1: Regional Vicinity...................................................................................................................... 10 Exhibit 2-2: Project Site.............................................................................................................................. 11 Exhibit 2-3: Existing Site – Northwest Elevation ........................................................................................ 12 Exhibit 2-4: Proposed Northwest View (Adjacent to Parking Lot)............................................................. 13 Exhibit 2-5: Proposed Southeast (Building Rear) ....................................................................................... 14 Exhibit 2-6: Proposed Northeast View (Adjacent to Library)..................................................................... 15 Exhibit 2-7: Existing Floor Plan................................................................................................................... 16 Exhibit 2-8: Proposed Floor Plan................................................................................................................ 17 Exhibit 2-9: Approximate Excavation Locations......................................................................................... 18 Exhibit 4-1: Area 3 Operable Unit Location ............................................................................................... 74
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix A Parking Agreement – City of San Marino and SMUSD Appendix B Air Quality / Greenhouse Gas / Energy Analysis Appendix B-1 Energy Analysis
Appendix C Cultural Resources Report
Appendix C-1 Recommendations Memo, Chattel Historic Preservation Consultants Appendix D Noise Analysis
Appendix E Traffic Impact Analysis
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
LIST OF ACRONYMNS
Acronym Definition
AB 32 Assembly Bill 32
AB 52 Assembly Bill 52
ADA American Disabilities Act
AFY Acre Feet Per Year
AQMP Air Quality Management Plan
APE Area of Potential Effect
APN Assessor Parcel Number
APZ Accident Potential Zone
BERD Built Environment Resource Directory
BMPs Best Management Practices
CARB California Air Resources Board
CDFW California Department of Fish and Wildlife
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
City City of San Marino
CMP Congestion Management Program
CNPS California Native Plant Society
CNEL Community Noise Equivalent Level
CO Carbon Monoxide
CRHR California Register of Historic Places
dBA A-Weighted Decibels
DIF Development Impact Fees
DPM Diesel Particulate Matter
DPR California Department of Parks and Recreation
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
ERRP Enhanced Recharge and Recovery Program
ESA Endangered Species Act
FAR Floor Area Ratio
FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency
FMMP Farmland Mapping Management Program
GHG Greenhouse Gas
GSP Groundwater Sustainability Plan
gpd/acre Gallons per Day per Acre
HABS Historic American Buildings Survey
HAER Historic American Engineering Record
ITE Institute of Transportation Engineers
LOS Level of Service
LST Localized Significance Threshold
MLD Most Likely Descendent
MMRP Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
MRZ Mineral Resources Zone
MS4 Municipal Separate Storm Water Sewer System
MTCO2e Metric Tons Carbon Dioxide Equivalent
MWD Metropolitan Water District
NAHC Native American Heritage Commission
NCCP Natural Communities Conservation Plan
ND Negative Declaration
NO2 Nitrogen Dioxide
NOx Nitrogen Oxides
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
OHP California Office of Historic Preservation
PM-2.5 Particulate Matter Less Than 2.5 Microns in Diameter PM-10 Particulate Matter Less Than 10 Microns in Diameter PRIMMP Paleontological Resource Impact Mitigation Monitoring Program RWQCB Regional Water Quality Control Board
SARWQCB Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board
SGMA the Sustainability Groundwater Management Act
sf Square Feet
SCAG Southern California Association of Governments
SCAQMD South Coast Air Quality Management District
SLF Sacred Lands File
SMC San Marino Center
SRA State Responsibility Area
SSC Species of Special Concern
SWPPP Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
SWRCB State Water Resources Control Board
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
1 INTRODUCTION
The California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), codified in the Public Resources Code (PRC), Section 21000 et seq., and the CEQA Guidelines, codified in California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3, Sections 15000–15387 and are herein referred to as the “CEQA Guidelines,” was established to require public agencies to consider and disclose the environmental implications of their actions (projects). CEQA was enacted in 1970 by the California Legislature to disclose to decision makers and the public the significant environmental effects of a proposed project and identify possible ways to avoid or minimize significant environmental effects of a project by requiring implementation of mitigation measures or recommending feasible alternatives. CEQA applies to all California governmental agencies at all levels, including local, regional, and State, as well as boards, commissions, and special districts.
As provided by PRC Section 21067, the public agency with the principal responsibility for approving a project that may have a significant effect upon the environment is considered the Lead Agency. The City of San Marino (“City”), as Lead Agency for the approval of the Proposed Project (“Project”), is responsible for preparing environmental documentation in accordance with CEQA to determine if approval of the discretionary actions requested and subsequent implementation of the Proposed Project could have a significant impact on the environment. As defined by Section 15063 of the CEQA Guidelines, an Initial Study (IS) is prepared to provide the Lead Agency with information to use as the basis for determining whether an Environmental Impact Report (EIR), Negative Declaration (ND), or Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) would be appropriate for providing the necessary environmental documentation and clearance for the Proposed Project. CEQA Guidelines Sections 15006(d) and 15063(c)(3) also allow Lead Agencies to use the Initial Study to identify significant environmental issues and to narrow the scope of an EIR, if required, by focusing the EIR on only those effects determined to be significant.
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
City of San Marino
Initial Study and Environmental Evaluation
1. Project Title: San Marino Center Improvement Project
2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of San Marino
Community Development Department
2200 Huntington Drive
San Marino, CA 91108
3. Contact Person: Alex Hamilton
Interim Community Development Director
[email protected]
(626) 300-0710
5. Project Location: 1800 Huntington Drive, San Marino
South side of Huntington Drive, approximately
345 feet west of West Drive
Adjacent to Crowell Library (east side)
Adjacent to Henry E. Huntington Middle School
(west side)
Assessor Parcel No. 5334-024-903
El Monte USGS Quad; T1 South, R12 West, S2
4. Project Sponsor’s Name and Address: City of San Marino 2200 Huntington Drive
San Marino, CA 91108
6. General Plan Designation: Very Low Density Residential
7. Zoning Designation: Residential (R-1)
8. Description of Project:
The Project proposes to upgrade the architectural style of the San Marino Community Center (SMC) building façade from its existing architectural designation as “Modern Colonial Revival” to a “Spanish Mediterranean” architectural style which is similar to that of the adjacent buildings. Other upgrades include rehabilitation of the building interior to include additional offices to accommodate six City Recreation Department staff, optimize the interior public gathering space, replace to current standards the heating/air conditioning, plumbing, electrical systems and light fixtures, and update the building and grounds for compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act.
9. Surrounding Land Uses:
Surrounding land uses are identified in Table 2.1-1 The Project site is an existing community center, constructed in 1952 as the San Marino Women’s Club.
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
The Project site is bounded on the east by the Crowell Public Library, on the west and south by the Huntington Middle School, and on the north by Huntington Drive.
Table 2.1-1: Surrounding Land Use
Direction Land Use Description
North Huntington Drive – east bound lane. Immediately north is an approximate 55 foot wide landscaped median, the westbound lane of Huntington Drive, and residential uses.
West Henry E. Huntington Middle School, parking lot and campus building. Other uses adjacent and west of the Project site include Valentine Elementary School and the San Marino Unified School District offices. Virginia Road intersects Huntington Drive approximately 1,350 feet west of the Project site.
South Huntington Middle School, parking lot, tennis courts and campus buildings.
East Crowell Public Library and parking lot. West Drive is adjacent on the east side of the library.
10. Other Public Agencies Whose Approval is Required:
The following approvals are required for the Project:
• City of San Marino – City Council; Adoption of the CEQA compliance documentation • City of San Marino – Building Division, Fire Marshall, Parks and Public Works Department, approval of building plans.
11. California Native American Consultation:
The City of San Marino conducted tribal consultation in accordance with AB52 prior to adoption of the environmental documentation by sending letters on June 1, 2021 to the following tribes:
• Mr. Sam Dunlap, Cultural Resources Director, Gabrieleno/Tongva Nation • Chief Anthony Morales, San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians • Chairman Andrew Salas, Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation Mitigation measures requested by the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation (Kizh) as part of the consultation were reviewed and incorporated, as appropriate, into the Initial Study.
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
2.1 PROJECT LOCATION AND SETTING
The San Marino Center Improvement Project (Project) is located at 1800 Huntington Drive, San Marino, which is the south side of Huntington Drive, between West Drive on the east and Virginia Road on the west. (Exhibit 2-1: Regional Vicinity and Exhibit 2-3: ). The Project site is identified as Los Angeles County Assessor’s Parcel Number (APN) 5334-024-903 and currently supports an existing community center. The Project site is adjacent and east of the Huntington Middle School and west of and adjacent to the Crowell Public Library. Residential land uses are located east of West Drive and on the north side of Huntington Drive in proximity to the Project site.
City of San Marino Setting
The City of San Marino’s General Plan (COSM, October 8, 2003) identifies the City as having a “tradition of excellence in residential living.” The General Plan states: “Homes, both old and new, are architecturally appealing and well-maintained in pleasantly landscaped settings” (COSM, October 8, 2003).
In September 1998, the City adopted Commercial Design Guidelines to guide the revitalization of commercial buildings in four major commercial areas located along Huntington Drive. The Design Guidelines generally encourage preservation and reinforcement of the existing architectural heritage and identity of each of the commercial districts, but all guidelines indicate that a Spanish-Mediterranean style is desired. Although the SMC is not located in one of the four major commercial areas identified by the Guidelines, the SMC is located along Huntington Drive, which is a major city thoroughfare.
Project Site Setting
The SMC building was originally constructed in 1952 by the San Marino Woman’s Club to hold community events and club meetings. In 2005, the City purchased the SMC from the San Marino Women’s Club to use as a community center and meeting space for senior and youth recreation programs, and community events and other activities. In 2011, the California State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) found the SMC eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places for its social connection to the community as the City’s first community center.
The SMC is an approximately 10,832 square-foot-building with a concrete foundation, flat roof and raised parapet along the rear and side elevations. The building is two stories, with the primary meeting spaces on the first floor and limited space and mechanical/electrical rooms on the second floor. In its existing configuration, the SMC has a current occupancy rating of 1,020.
The building was designed by Pasadena architect Marion S. Varner and is one of his earlier designs. The front façade features a side-facing medium gable roof with an offset front gable wing. An “L”-shaped porch runs across the front elevation and is supported by decorative wrought iron posts. The roof is covered with wood shingles. A large multi-paned steel framed window is located below the main front gable with brick trim under the window. A tall exterior brick chimney is located on the northeast side. The building windows are primarily multi-pane steel casements, and the siding is stucco.
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
The interior of the building contains a large open-room style auditorium with a theater stage, a meeting room with a fireplace, a commercial kitchen, an office that housesthe San Marino Chamber of Commerce, restrooms and storage rooms.
Renovations conducted in 1958 included the front entrance doors and window replacements. Other improvements over the years have included canvas awnings over the front entry and several windows and additional restroom facilities.
The site is flat at approximately 545 feet above mean sea level, and there are no areas of significant topographic relief.
Two mature, coast live oak trees exist in the front of the building, near the entryway, and the building is surrounded on the north and east sides with low vegetation and urban landscaping.
Site Access and Parking
Vehicle access to the SMC is located on Huntington Drive and West Drive. Public transit service is provided by Los Angeles Metro (Metro) with bus stops located within walking distance of the SMC.
Parking for the SMC exists on the west and south sides of the building, in the parking lot of the Henry E.
Huntington Middle School, through a cooperative agreement with the San Marino Unified School District (SMUSD) for use of 48 spaces for both the SMC and the Crowell Library. The agreement between the City and the SMUSD was initiated in 2006 after the City purchased the building and the agreement was renewed in 2019 for a 10-year term (Appendix A). The shared parking arrangement with the SMUSD appears to be a traditional feature of the SMC and the Library. The 1952 SMC site plans indicate “school parking area” on the west and south sides of the building footprint. Historical articles in the Los Angeles Times indicate that the San Marino Women’s Club used the “school parking area” for club parking and for community events.
Additionally, there are 18 dedicated spaces for Crowell Library parking directly on the City-owned library parcel and can be accessed from West Drive, which is also the main access entrance to the library. With the SMC and the Library being both City facilities, library spaces may also be utilized for the SMC when the library is not open.
Adjacent Land Uses
Crowell Public Library
The first public library, which was established in 1915 at the Mayberry House in San Marino as a branch of the Los Angeles County Library, was moved to the Henry E. Huntington Middle School (formerly the San Marino Grammar School). The City’s original library was housed in a building on the adjacent school grounds beginning in approximately 1920. In 1932, the City took control of the Library, making it a department of the City.
Outgrowing that location, the City constructed a new library in 1951 at its current location on the southwest corner of Huntington Drive and West Drive, on a parcel owned by the City. Designed by Herbert
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
J. Powell, its architectural style was known as "International-Mediterranean mix," which combined traditional Spanish elements with a modern look.
In 2006, the library was demolished and reconstructed to optimize use of space in the interior and provide updated lighting, internet, telecom and other electrical, and the heating/air conditioning. It was also renamed the Crowell Public Library after former San Marino mayor Suzanne Crowell.
SMUSD Schools and District Office
In 1917, San Marino School District acquired a 5-acre portion of Cooper Ranch, located on the south side of Huntington Drive, near the southeast corner of Huntington Drive and Virginia Road to build the City’s first grammar school. Various school facilities continued to grow at this location, including the Henry E.
Huntington Middle School, the Valentine Elementary School and the SMUSD offices being later constructed within this location.
The SMUSD Program Needs Assessment, which amends its 1996 Facilities Master Plan, states that all of the SMUSD elementary schools, middle school, and District Office have a consistent mission-style architectural design, with stucco exteriors and red tile roofs, with school construction dating back as far as the early 1900’s (gkk works, December 21, 2017). In 1987, Valentine School was declared a historic landmark. In 1993, the original building went through a state-funded modernization. The original Valentine rooms are those on the street side of the long corridor, and all except one room of the four westerly fingers which extend out toward the playground.
2.2 PROJECT OBJECTIVES
In 2020, the City formed a working group to discuss how to revitalize and improve the SMC. A sample schedule of existing and proposed events for the SMC is provided in Table 2.2-1. The primary discussions of the working group focused on how to encourage better use of the facility, the need for facility repair and renovation and the need to create aesthetic continuity with the adjacent public buildings. Through a number of meetings and public hearings, the City working group recommended the following Project objectives:
• Create architectural, aesthetic continuity along eastbound Huntington Drive between Virginia Road and West Drive by changing the SMC building façade’s architectural features from the existing Modern Colonial Revival to the Spanish-Mediterranean style that is used by the City’s library on the east and the school campus structures to the west. • Replace interior aged electrical and mechanical systems with code compliant systems including replacing light fixtures;
• Rehabilitate interior space to house City recreational staff; • Rehabilitate interior space to optimize community use for large and small public and private events; and
• Retrofit and update the facility and grounds with American with Disabilities Act (ADA) compliant features.
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
Table 2.2-1 forms the basis of the analysis of this Initial Study, and the analysis focused on new, Proposed events, primarily with anticipated larger attendance.
Table 2.2-1: Example of Existing and Proposed Uses of the SMC Classes
Existing ( E)
or Proposed
(P)
No. of
Users/
Participants
Frequency
Bridge Club E 40 Mondays 12-4pm, Wednesdays 11am-2pm.
Wednesdays 7:15-10:45pm
Tai Chi Class E/P 10 Mondays & Wednesdays 7-9pm
Gentle Yoga Class E/P 75 Tuesdays & Thursdays 10-11am
Safe & Steady Class E/P 7 Thursdays 12:30-1:30pm
Adult Line Dance Class E/P 12 Thursdays 7:30-9pm
Fit & Fabulous Class E/P 7 Fridays 8-9am
Chair Fitness Class E/P 7 Fridays 9-9:45am
Intro to Piano Class E/P 6 Tuesdays 3-5pm
Musical Theater Camp E/P 25 2 weeks in July 9-3pm
Civic Club/Charitable Group
Events/Meetings
Existing ( E)
or Proposed
(P)
No. of
Users/
Participants
Frequency
City Club E 150 3rd Tuesday of every month 3-10pm
Unit Bridge E 60 1st Sunday of each month 9am-3pm
Rotary Club E 100 Once a year - Weekday 5-10pm
PTA E 250 Twice a year - Weekday & Weekend, 8am 4-(8 hours) NCL E 50 Once a year - Weekend 10am-2pm 4 hours
Civic Club/Charitable Group
Events/Meetings (Large Group)
P 200 Sat PM, 1 per quarter
Private Event Usage Existing (E) or
Proposed (P)
No. of Users/
Participants Frequency
Church Service E 250 2 Saturdays each year - 5-9pm
Private Industry Conferences P 100 2 times per year
Weekday & Weekend 8am – 4pm (varies)
Private Celebrations E/P 75-125 12 rentals on random weekends throughout year (approx.: 6 hours each)
City Administration Uses
Existing ( E)
or Proposed
(P)
No. of
Users/
Participants
Frequency
City Council Meetings E 20-40 24 times per year
Recreation Staff P 7 M-Th 7 am-5 pm
Friday 7 am-11am
Guest Speaker Series’ E/P 30 12 times per year - Weekday 12-3pm Recreation Commission Meetings E/P 15 6 times per year - Weekday 6-9pm Town Hall Meetings E/P 30 12 times per year
Human Resources FD/PD Training E/P 30-50 6 times per year - Weekday & Weekend 8am (Varies 4-8 hours)
Human Resource Testing E/P 30 6 times per year - Weekday 8am (Varies 4-8 hours)
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
2.3 PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS
Consistent with the Project Objectives, the City has developed a Project that proposes to change the SMC building façade from a “Modern Colonial Revival” to a “Spanish Mediterranean” architectural style, which is similar to that of the adjacent buildings. Other upgrades include various retrofitting for Americans with Disability Act (ADA) compliance, rehabilitation of the building interior to include additional offices to accommodate six City Recreation Department staff, optimize the interior public gathering space, and replace the heating/air conditioning, plumbing and electrical systems and light fixtures to current building code standards. The specific improvements for the SMC building are described in the following sections.
The existing building occupancy is 1,020. The proposed interior space reconfiguration will allow for an occupancy rating of 1,083.
2.3.1 Exterior Improvements – Façade Features
Exterior improvements include the following. Refer to Exhibit 2-3 for the existing view and Exhibits 2-4 through 2-6 for proposed views:
• Replace the decorative wrought iron posts along the front patio with stucco columns; • Replace the wood shingled roof with the terra cotta tile; • Replace doors and windows to include grid patterns similar to the library windows; type of windows will be newer energy efficient;
• Add wood accents where appropriate and complimentary such as around windows and the entry door consistent with features of architectural style;
• Add an open patio area at the back of the building that will have a stucco wall and a wood trellis ceiling similar to the open space areas at the library; • Modify concrete walkway and front patio to enhance design elements and ADA compliance; • Remove canopies over patio and windows that were added to the building after its original construction;
• New paint and stucco repair that will match the color of the library; and Exterior features that are anticipated to remain intact or will not be impacted by the proposed improvements include the following:
• The cornerstone of the building inscribed with “San Marino Women’s Club” near the building entry (while plans require that this will be protected in place, utility trenching may impact the cornerstone), and;
• Landscaping, including the two large oak trees adjacent to the front entry, grassy areas and urban landscaping around the west and south of the building. The front yard (Huntington Drive frontage area) landscaping will be replaced with drought-tolerant plant materials suitable for placement underneath oak trees and provide aesthetic continuity with the Crowell Public Library landscaping.
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
2.3.2 Interior Improvements
The improvements to be renovated and/or replaced include the following. Refer to Exhibit 2-7 for the existing interior layout and Exhibit and 2-8 for the proposed interior layout:
• Add two offices (for a total of three offices);
• Install a folding wall in the main room;
• Upgrade the kitchen, bathrooms, ceiling tiles, and electrical and mechanical systems to current code standards;
• Remove and replace light and plumbing fixtures with current style fixtures; • Replace entryway flooring containing the San Marino Women’s Club insignia (insignia may be preserved as a plaque);
• Various upgrades for ADA compliance, including but not limited to: accessible restrooms; appropriate door hardware; door widths, thresholds; correct access to stage from main floor (from only stairs to stair and personnel lift);
• Update paint and carpet; and
• Conduct other deferred maintenance items.
Interior features that are not anticipated to be impacted by the proposed improvements include the following:
• Fireside room fireplace and cabinetry; and
• Stage.
2.3.3 Utility/Hardscape Improvements
Some improvements will occur outside of the building envelope. Site preparation for new ADA parking and loading, sidewalk repair, parking lot paving, and landscaping enhancement as necessary will only require surficial disturbance. There are other improvements that will require excavation that will generally vary between 2 to 3 feet wide by 1 to 3 feet deep, depending on the activity (refer to Exhibit 2-9). The activities that require excavation include but are not limited to the following:
• Install new domestic water service and sewer lines in the same area as the existing lines; • Replace overhead electrical service with new underground electrical service; • Install new landscape irrigation meter, with pipe replacements, as necessary, in the same location as existing;
• Install new, separate water service for the fire sprinkler system; • Install new footings for new patio site walls and pilasters, trash enclosure, building columns; • Add various upgrades for ADA compliance including but not limited to: accessible paths of travel to entry points from parking lot and correct and appropriate disabled parking space; and • Repair existing building footings and slab where applicable.
2.4 PROJECT TIMING
Construction is expected to last approximately 18 months, beginning in late fall/early winter 2022, with facilities opening as available in spring/summer 2023.
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
Exhibit 2-1: Regional Vicinity
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
Exhibit 2-2: Project Site
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
Exhibit 2-3: Existing Site – Northwest Elevation
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
Exhibit 2-4: Proposed Northwest View (Adjacent to Parking Lot)
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
Exhibit 2-5: Proposed Southeast (Building Rear)
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
Exhibit 2-6: Proposed Northeast View (Adjacent to Library)
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
Exhibit 2-7: Existing Floor Plan
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
Exhibit 2-8: Proposed Floor Plan
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
Exhibit 2-9: Approximate Excavation Locations
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
3 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS AND DETERMINATION
In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) this Initial Study has been prepared to analyze the proposed Project to determine any potentially significant adverse impacts upon the environment that would result from construction and/or implementation of the Project. In accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15063, this Initial Study is a preliminary analysis prepared by the Lead Agency in consultation with other responsible agencies, to determine whether a Negative Declaration, Mitigated Negative Declaration, or an Environmental Impact Report is required for the proposed Project.
The purpose of this Initial Study is to inform the decision-makers, affected agencies, and the public of potential environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the proposed Project.
3.1 ORGANIZATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
Section 4 provides a discussion of the potential environmental impacts of the Project. The evaluation of environmental impacts follows the questions provided in the Checklist provided in the Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines.
3.2 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
A brief explanation is required for all answers except “No Impact” answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A “No Impact” answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to the project (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A “No Impact” answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis).
All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off site as well as on site, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts.
Once the Lead Agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant.
“Potentially Significant Impact” is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more “Potentially Significant Impact” entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required.
“Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated” applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from “Potentially Significant Impact” to a “Less Than Significant Impact.” Mitigation measures are identified and explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures may be cross-referenced).
Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the Program EIR or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. (Section 15063[c] [3][D]. In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following:
a) Earlier analyses used where they are available for review.
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
b) Which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards and whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis.
c) The mitigation measures that were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project for effects that are “Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated.
References and citations have been incorporated into the checklist references to identify information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated.
Source listings and other sources used, or individuals contacted are cited in the discussion.
The explanation of each issue should identify:
a) The significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question b) The mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significant.
3.3 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED
Based on the analysis in Section 4, the proposed Project could potentially affect (“Potentially Significant”) the environmental factor(s) checked below. The following pages present a more detailed checklist and discussion of each environmental factor and identifies where mitigation measures would be necessary to reduce impacts to less than significant.
Aesthetics Agriculture and Forestry Resources Air Quality Biological Resources Cultural Resources Energy
Geology / Soils Greenhouse Gas Emissions Hazards & Hazardous Materials Hydrology / Water Quality Land Use / Planning Mineral Resources Noise Population / Housing Public Services
Recreation Transportation Tribal Cultural Resources
Utilities / Service Systems Wildfire Mandatory Findings of Significance
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project-San Marino, California
3.4 DETERMINATION
On the basis of this initial evaluation, the following finding is made:
The proposed Project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
Although the proposed Project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the Project have been made by or agreed to by the Project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
X The proposed Project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
The proposed Project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
Although the proposed Project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed Project, nothing further is required.
Date
Name
January 2022
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
4 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
4.1 AESTHETICS
4.1.1 Environmental Setting
The Project is located along the south side of Huntington Drive, a major thoroughfare, between Virginia Road (east) and Wood Drive/Cambridge Road (west). Huntington Drive is a four-lane road, divided by an approximately 58-foot-wide grassy median with mature trees centrally placed throughout the median.
This wide median was once railroad right of way. The grassy, tree-lined median provides a dramatic road statement for motorists traveling along Huntington Drive, through the City of San Marino.
The north side of Huntington Drive in this segment is lined with residential uses where short walls and tall shrubs and trees separate the property boundary from the adjacent sidewalk and roadway. The south side of Huntington Drive in the Project vicinity is characterized as public facilities, containing the library, the SMC and a school complex.
4.1.2 Impact Analysis
CEQA THRESHOLDS
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact or
Does Not Apply
I. AESTHETICS: Except as provided in Public Resources Code Section 21099, would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic
vista?
X
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including,
but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and
historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
X
c) In nonurbanized areas, substantially degrade the
existing visual character or quality of public views
of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are
those that are experienced from a publicly
accessible vantage point). If the project is in an
urbanized area, would the project conflict with
applicable zoning and other regulations governing
scenic quality?
X
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare
which would adversely affect day or nighttime
views in the area?
X
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
Discussion
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? Less Than Significant Impact. The CEQA Guidelines do not provide a definition of what constitutes a “scenic vista” or “scenic resource” or a reference as to from what vantage point(s) the scenic vista and/or resource, if any, should be observed. Scenic resources are typically landscape patterns and features that are visually or aesthetically pleasing and that contribute affirmatively to the definition of a distinct community or region such as trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings.
A scenic vista is generally identified as a public vantage viewpoint that provides expansive views of a highly valued landscape for the benefit of the general public. Common examples may include a public vantage point that provides expansive views of undeveloped hillsides, ridgelines, and open space areas that provide a unifying visual backdrop to a developed area. The City of San Marino’s General Plan does not identify any scenic vistas in the city.
While Huntington Drive in the Project area is not considered a “scenic vista,” motorists traveling along Huntington Drive in the Project vicinity can enjoy an aesthetically pleasing driving experience offered by the wide, grassy, tree-lined median, the tall trees and shrubs that hide residential uses on the north side, and the residential and commercial uses on the south side that are partially obscured by mature trees in the sidewalk. The Crowell Library and Huntington School, which are adjacent to the SMC on the east and west, are both similar architectural styles of Spanish Mediterranean with stucco and wood accents that complement the mature trees within the landscape. The SMC, however, is clearly architecturally different than the adjacent buildings, therefore, there is a visible variation in the continuity of the aesthetically pleasing driving experience in the immediate area of the Project.
The façade updates proposed by the Project seeks to reduce the visual variation along the south side of Huntington Drive by modifying the SMC exterior to create a similar look and feel as that of the Crowell Library and Huntington School. The views of the south side of Huntington Drive will be temporary disrupted during construction. Therefore, impacts will be less than significant. b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
No Impact. The Project does not occur within a state scenic highway. Therefore, the Project will not damage resources within a state scenic highway.
c) In nonurbanized areas, substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced from publicly accessible vantage point). If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality? Less than Significant Impact. The Project is located in an urbanized area and is zoned R-1 (very low density residential), and the adjacent public buildings (library and school) are within the same
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
zoning designation. The site’s zoning and use are consistent with the City’s applicable zoning and other regulations. The Project would not increase the height or density of development in the area. Impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required. d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
Less than Significant Impact. The Project site is currently developed with an existing community center, with adjacent public uses to the east and west of the site. The Project includes replacement of exterior lighting consistent with the brightness that currently exists, and no new lighting is proposed. Therefore, the improvements will not create a new source of substantial light or glare that would adversely affect day or nighttime views. Impacts would therefore be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.
4.1.3 Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required.
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
4.2 AGRICULTURE & FORESTRY RESOURCES
4.2.1 Environmental Setting
The proposed Project is located an urbanized area of the City of San Marino. The Project improvements will occur on an existing developed site.
4.2.2 Impact Analysis
CEQA THRESHOLDS
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact or
Does Not Apply
II. AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES:
In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state’s inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project; and forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board.
Would the project:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland or
Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as
shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the
Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the
California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural
use?
X
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use
or a Williamson Act contract?
X
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause
rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public
Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as
defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or
timberland zoned Timberland Production (as
defined by Government Code section 51104(g))?
X
d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of
forest land to non-forest use?
X
e) Involve other changes in the existing
environment which, due to their location or nature,
could result in conversion of Farmland, to nonagricultural use or conversion of forest land to nonforest use? X
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
Discussion
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to nonagricultural use?
No Impact. The California Department of Conservation Farmland Mapping and Program identifies the Project site as “Urban and Built-Up Land.” There are no agricultural uses on the site, and none are proposed. No impacts would occur, and no mitigation is required. b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? No Impact. The Project site is not zoned for agricultural use by the City of San Marino General Plan and is not the site of any Williamson Act contracts. No impacts would occur, and no mitigation is required.
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g))? No Impact. No part of the Project site or its surroundings are designated as timberland or for forest use. No impacts would occur, and no mitigation is required. d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? No Impact. There is no designated forestland on the Projectsite, and the proposed Project would; therefore, not affect forests during construction or operations. No impacts would occur, and no mitigation is required.
e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to nonagricultural use or the conversion of forest land to nonforest use? No Impact. The Project site is zoned R-1. It is not zoned for or under use as Farmland or forest land. No impacts would occur, and no mitigation is required.
4.2.3 Mitigation Measures:
No mitigation measures are required.
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
4.3 AIR QUALITY
An Air Quality Analysis was prepared for the proposed Project in September 2021 (Appendix B).
4.3.1 Regulatory Setting
Air pollutants are regulated at the national, state, and air basin level; each agency has a different level of regulatory responsibility. The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulates at the national level under the Clean Air Act of 1970. The California Air Resources Board (ARB) regulates at the state level. The South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) regulates at the air basin level.
There are six common air pollutants, called criteria pollutants, which were identified from the provisions of the Clean Air Act of 1970.
• Ozone
• Nitrogen Dioxide
• Lead
• Particulate Matter (PM10 and PM2.5)
• Carbon Monoxide
• Particulate Matter
• Sulfur Dioxide
The US environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the California Air Resources Board (CARB) designate air basins where ambient air quality standards are exceeded as “nonattainment” areas. If standards are met, the area is designated as an “attainment” area. If there is inadequate or inconclusive data to make a definitive attainment designation, they are considered “unclassified.” National nonattainment areas are further designated as marginal, moderate, serious, severe, or extreme as a function of deviation from standards.
The Project site is located in the City of San Marino, which is part of the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB) that includes all of Orange County as well as the non-desert portions of Los Angeles, Riverside, and San Bernardino Counties. The SCAQMD’s 2016 Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) assesses the attainment status of the SCAB. The National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) attainment statuses for the SCAB are listed in Table 4.3-1. The SCAQMD updates the AQMP every three years. Each iteration of the AQMP is an update of the previous plan and has a 20-year horizon. The latest AQMP, the 2016 AQMP, was adopted on March 3, 2017.
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
Table 4.3-1: South Coast Air Basin Attainment Status
CRITERIA
POLLUTANT STANDARD AVERAGING TIME DESIGNATION a) ATTAINMENT DATE b) 1-Hour Ozone NAAQS
1979 1-Hour
(0.12 ppm) Nonattainment (Extreme)
2/6/2023
Originally 11/15/2010
(not attained)c)
CAAQS 1-Hour
(0.09 ppm) Nonattainment N/A
8-Hour Ozoned
NAAQS
1997 8-Hour
(0.08 ppm) Nonattainment (Extreme) 6/15/2024
NAAQS
2008 8-Hour
(0.075 ppm) Nonattainment (Extreme) 7/20/2032
NAAQS
2015 8-Hour
(0.070 ppm) Nonattainment (Extreme) 8/3/2038
CAAQS 8-Hour
(0.070 ppm) Nonattainment Beyond 2032
CO
NAAQS 1-Hour (35 ppm)
8-Hour (9 ppm) Attainment (Maintenance) 6/11/2007(attained) CAAQS 1-Hour (20 ppm)
8-Hour (9 ppm) Attainment 6/11/2007(attained)
NO2e
NAAQS 1-Hour (0.10 ppm) Unclassifiable/Attainment N/A (attained) NAAQS Annual (0.053 ppm) Attainment (Maintenance) 9/22/1998 (attained) CAAQS 1-Hour (0.18 ppm)
Annual (0.030 ppm) Attainment ---
SO2 f NAAQS 1-Hour (75 ppb)
Designations Pending
(expectUncl./Attainment) N/A (attained)
NAAQS 24-Hour (0.14 ppm)
Annual (0.03 ppm) Unclassifiable/Attainment 3/19/1979(attained) PM10 NAAQS
1987 24-hour
(150 µg/m3)
Attainment
(Maintenance)g)
7/26/2013
(attained)
CAAQS
24-hour (50 µg/m3)
Annual (20 µg/m3) Nonattainment N/A
PM2.5h
NAAQS 2006 24-Hour
(35 µg/m3) Nonattainment (Serious) 12/31/2019
NAAQS 1997 Annual
(15.0 µg/m3) Attainment 8/24/2016
NAAQS 2012 Annual
(12.0 µg/m3) Nonattainment (Serious) 12/31/2025
CAAQS Annual (12.0 µg/m3) Nonattainment N/A
Lead NAAQS 3-Months Rolling
(0.15 µg/m3) Nonattainment (Partial)i) 12/31/2015
Hydrogen Sulfide
(H2S) CAAQS 1-Hour
(0.03 ppm/42 µg/m3) Attainment ---
Sulfates CAAQS 24-Hour
(25 µg/m3) Attainment ---
Vinyl Chloride CAAQS 24-Hour
(0.01 ppm/26 µg/m3) Attainment ---
Notes:
a) U.S. EPA often only declares Nonattainment areas; everywhere else is listed as Unclassifiable/Attainment orUnclassifiable b) A design value below the NAAQS for data through the full year or smog season prior to the attainment date is typicallyrequired for attainment demonstration c) 1-hour O3 standard (0.12 ppm) was revoked, effective June 15, 2005 ; however, the Basin has not attained this standardbased on 2008-2010 data and is still subject to anti-backsliding requirements
d) 1997 8-hour O3 standard (0.08 ppm) was reduced (0.075 ppm), effective May 27, 2008; the revoked 1997 O3 standard isstill subject to anti-backsliding requirements e) New NO2 1-hour standard, effective August 2, 2010; attainment designations January 20, 2012; annual NO2 standardretained
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
f) The 1971 annual and 24-hour SO2 standards were revoked, effective August 23, 2010; however, these 1971 standards willremain in effect until one year after U.S. EPA promulgates area designations for the 2010 SO2 1-hour standard. Area designations are still pending, with Basin expected to be designated Unclassifiable /Attainment. g) Annual PM10 standard was revoked, effective December 18, 2006; 24-hour PM10 NAAQS deadline was 12/31/2006;SCAQMD request for attainment re-designation and PM10 maintenance plan was approved by U.S. EPA on June 26, 2013, effective July 26, 2013. h) Attainment deadline for the 2006 24-Hour PM2.5 NAAQS (designation effective December 14, 2009) is December 31, 2019 (end of the 10th calendar year after effective date of designations for Serious nonattainment areas). Annual PM2.5standard was revised on January 15, 2013, effective March 18, 2013, from 15 to 12 µg/m3.
Designations effective April15, 2015, so serious area attainment deadline is December 31, 2025. i) Partial Nonattainment designation – Los Angeles County portion of Basin only for near-source monitors. Expect re-designation to attainment based on current monitoring data.
Thresholds of Significance
The SCAQMD provides numerical thresholds to analyze the significance of a project’s construction and operational emissions impacts on regional air quality. These thresholds are designed so a project that is consistent with the thresholds would not have an individually or cumulatively significant impact to the SCAB’s air quality.
Thresholds of Significance for Construction:
• 75 pounds per day of ROG
• 100 pounds per day of NOx
• 550 pounds per day of CO
• 150 pounds per day of SOX
• 150 pounds per day of PM10
• 55 pounds per day of PM2.5
Thresholds of Significance for Operations:
• 55 pounds per day of ROG
• 55 pounds per day of NOx
• 550 pounds per day of CO
• 150 pounds per day of SOX
• 150 pounds per day of PM10
• 55 pounds per day of PM2.5
Localized Significance Thresholds
In addition to the listed thresholds, the SCAQMD has developed Localized Significance Thresholds (LSTs) in response to the Governing Board’s Environmental Justice Enhancement Initiative (1-4), which was prepared to update the CEQA Air Quality Handbook. LSTs were devised in response to concern regarding exposure of individuals to criteria pollutants in local communities and have been developed for nitrogen oxides (NOX), carbon monoxide (CO), PM10, and PM2.5. LSTs represent the maximum emissions from a project that will not cause or contribute to an air quality exceedance of the most stringent applicable federal or State ambient air quality standard at the nearest sensitive receptor, taking into consideration ambient concentrations in each SRA, distance to the sensitive receptor, and project size. LSTs only apply to emissions within a fixed stationary location and are not applicable to mobile sources, such as cars on a roadway (SCAQMD 2008a). According to the SCAQMD (2008) Final Localized Significant Thresholds
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
Methodology, the use of LSTs is voluntary, to be implemented at the discretion of local agencies. For this Initial Study, the LST Method was utilized.
4.3.2 Environmental Setting
The SCAB is located on a coastal plain with connecting broad valleys and low hills to the east. Regionally, the SCAB is bounded by the Pacific Ocean to the southwest and high mountains to the east forming the inland perimeter. Annual average temperatures vary little throughout the SCAB, ranging from the low‐to‐ middle 60s, measured in degrees Fahrenheit (F). The majority of annual rainfall in the SCAB occurs between October and March. Summer rainfall is minimal and generally limited to scattered thundershowers in coastal regions and slightly heavier showers in the eastern portion of the SCAB and along the coastal side of the mountains. Average temperatures in winter months in the Project area range from a low of 34 degrees F to a high of 68 degrees F. In the summer, average temperatures range from a low of 59 degrees F to a high of 98 degrees F. During an average year, the greatest amount of precipitation,
2.86 inches, occurs in February
Dominant airflows provide the driving mechanism for transport and dispersion of air pollution. The mountains surrounding the region form natural horizontal barriers to the dispersion of air contaminants.
Air pollution created in the coastal areas and around the Los Angeles area is transported inland until it reaches the mountains where the combination of mountains and inversion layers generally prevent further dispersion. This poor ventilation results in a gradual degradation of air quality from the coastal areas to inland areas.
Local Air Quality
The SCAQMD operates a network of 38 ambient air monitoring stations throughout the South Coast Air Basin. The purpose of the monitoring stations is to measure ambient concentrations of the pollutants and determine whether the ambient air quality meets the California and federal standards. The air quality monitoring station located nearest to the Project site is the Pasadena station, located approximately 1.3 miles northwest of the Project site at 725 South Wilson Avenue. Table 4.3-2 identifies the ambient air quality in the Project vicinity, as reported at the Pasadena station and PM10 and PM2.5 as obtained from a Los Angeles station, approximately 8 miles southwest of the Project site.
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
Table 4.3-2: Local Ambient Air Quality
Pollutant 2018 2019 2020
Ozone, ppm – First High 8-Hour Average (2015 Standard) 0.090 0.098 0.115 Number of days of above 2015 standard (>0.070 ppm) 19 24 60 Nitrogen Dioxide, ppm – First High National 68.2 59.1 61.2 Nitrogen Dioxide, ppm – First High State 68 59 61
Days above the State standard (>0.18 ppm) 0 0 0
Days above the national standard (>100 ppb) 0 0 0
Particulate Matter <10 microns, µg/m3 First High Federal 68.2 62.4 83.7 Particulate Matter <10 microns, µg/m3 First High State 81.2 93.9 185.2 Estimated number of days greater than national 24-hour standard (>150 µg/m3) 0 * 0 Estimated number of days greater than state standard (>50 µg/m3) 31 15 34 Particulate Matter <2.5 microns, µg/m3 First High 32.5 41.8 67.7 Annual average (exceedances of 12 µ/m3 standard not reported) * * * Number of samples of Federal exceedances (>12 µg/m3) 0 1 2 Notes:
Pasadena – 725 South Wilson Street Monitoring Station
Los Angeles – 1630 N Main Street
Note – Ozone, Nitrogen Dioxide and PM2.5 data from Pasadena Station; PM10 data from Los Angeles Station *Data insufficient to determine the value
Source: California Air Resources Board, 2018, 2019, 2020 Annual Air Quality Data Summaries available at https://www.arb.ca.gov/adam/topfour/topfour1.php
As shown in Table 4.3-2, both the federal and state ozone standards were exceeded at the Pasadena monitoring station during each of the last three years. The federal PM10 standard was not exceeded during the last three years. Insufficient data was available to determine whether the state standard was exceeded.
Sensitive Receptors
Sensitive receptors are considered land uses or other types of population groups that are more sensitive to air pollution than others due to their exposure. Sensitive population groups include children, the elderly, the acutely and chronically ill, and those with cardio-respiratory diseases. For CEQA purposes, a sensitive receptor would be a location where a sensitive individual could remain for 24-hours or longer, such as residencies, hospitals, and schools (etc.).
Nearby sensitive receptors are the Valentine Elementary School and Huntington Middle School located adjacent to and south/southwest and single‐family residences located across Huntington Drive approximately 200 feet north/northwest and northeast of the site and adjacent to the site on the east side of West Drive.
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
4.3.3 Impact Analysis
CEQA THRESHOLDS
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact or
Does Not Apply
III. AIR QUALITY:
Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations.
Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan?
X
b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net
increase of any criteria pollutant for which the
project region is non-attainment under an
applicable federal or state ambient air quality
standard?
X
c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial
pollutant concentrations?
X
d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading
to odors adversely affecting a substantial number
of people?
X
Discussion
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? Less Than Significant Impact. A project may be inconsistent with the AQMP if it would generate population, housing, or employment growth exceeding the forecasts used in the development of the AQMP. The proposed Project involves remodeling the existing San Marino Center building.
Vehicle trips associated with the Project would be consistent with similar community center uses; and as discussed herein, Project‐related emissions would not exceed thresholds recommended by the SCAQMD. The Project does not include new housing or businesses, nor would operation and maintenance of the proposed Project require new employees; therefore, the Project would not generate population, housing, or employment growth. As a result, the Project would not exceed the Southern California Association of Governments’ projected growth forecasts, which underlie the emissions forecasts in the 2016 AQMP. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the AQMP. Impacts are less than significant, and no mitigation measures are required.
b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard?
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
Less Than Significant Impact. Potential air quality impacts for construction and operations were modeled in Appendix B and are summarized herein.
Construction
Construction activities such as clearing, grading and excavation are common sources of diesel and dust emissions. Construction equipment that would generate criteria air pollutants includes excavators, graders, dump trucks, and loaders. The proposed Project does not require grading, therefore, no heavy equipment is required for grading. Only minor exterior ground disturbance for utility trenching as described in the Project Description is proposed and does not require the use of heavy equipment for trenching. Exterior improvements would consist of concrete demolition/removal, concrete work, landscaping and painting. Construction emissions associated with development of the proposed Project by estimating the types of equipment (including the number) that would be used on‐site during the demolition, building construction and painting phases. The Air Quality Study analyzed construction emissions using the regional thresholds established by the SCAQMD and published in the CEQA Air Quality Handbook (refer to Appendix B)
The Air Quality analysis in Appendix B modeled construction emissions for demolition (which primarily includes roof replacement, window removal and replacement, porch post replacement, and exterior stucco removal and replacement), building construction and architectural coating application based on the overall scope of the proposed Project and construction phasing which is expected to fall/winter 2022 and extend through mid-2023. The total area disturbed as a result of the Project would be limited to the building interior and exterior landscape and hardscape. For modeling purposes, it was assumed the Project would be required to comply with SCAQMD Rule 403, which identifies measures to reduce fugitive dust and is required to be implemented at all construction sites located within the SCAB. In addition to SCAQMD Rule 403 requirements, emissions modeling also accounts for the use of low‐VOC paint (50 g/L for non‐flat coatings) and 100 g/L for parking lot coating as required by SCAQMD Rule 1113.
Table 4.3-3 summarizes the estimated maximum mitigated daily emissions of pollutants anticipated to occur during construction.
Table 4.3-3: Estimated Maximum Mitigated Daily Construction Emissions Construction Phase
Maximum Emissions (lbs/day)
ROG NOx CO SOx PM10 PM2.5
2022 Maximum lbs/day 20.2 7.1 7.8 0.01 0.45 0.36
SCAQMD Regional
Thresholds 75 100 550 150 150 55
Threshold Exceeded 2022 No No No No No No
As shown in Table 4.3-3, construction of the proposed Project would not exceed the SCAQMD regional thresholds. No mitigation in addition to compliance with SCAQMD Rule 403 and Rule 1113 would be required to reduce construction emissions to less than significant.
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
Operations
Operational emissions, as estimated in Table 4.3-4, include emissions from electricity consumption (energy sources), vehicle trips (mobile sources), and area sources including landscape equipment and architectural coating emissions as the structures are repainted over the life of the Project. The majority of operational emissions are associated with vehicle trips to and from the Project site. Trip volumes are based on the trip generation rates in the Traffic Impact Assessment prepared for the proposed Project by Linscott, Law and Greenspan, Inc. (Appendix E).
Area source emissions from the Project include stationary combustion emissions of natural gas used for space and water heating (shown in a separate row as energy), yard and landscape maintenance, consumer use of solvents and personal care products, and an average building square footage to be repainted each year.
Table 4.3-4: Estimated Operational Emissions
Estimated Emissions (lbs/day)
ROG NOx CO Sox PM10 PM2.5
Area 0.2 0.01 0.01 0.0 0.0 0.0
Energy 0.01 0.06 0.4 0.01 0.01 0.01
Mobile 0.7 0.6 6.5 0.01 1.3 0.3
Maximum lbs/day 1.0 0.7 6.5 0.01 1.3 0.3
SCAQMD Thresholds 55 55 550 150 150 55
Threshold Exceeded? No No No No No No
As shown in 4.3-4, daily unmitigated emissions would not exceed the SCAQMD thresholds for ROG, NOX, CO, SOX, PM10 or PM2.5. Therefore, the Project’s regional air quality impacts (including impacts related to criteria pollutants, sensitive receptors and violations of air quality standards) would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required. c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? Less Than Significant Impact. Localized Significance Thresholds (LSTs) were devised by the SCAQMD in response to concern regarding exposure of individuals to criteria pollutants in local communities. LSTs represent the maximum emissions from a project that will not cause or contribute to an air quality exceedance of the most stringent applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard at the nearest sensitive receptor, taking into consideration ambient concentrations in each source receptor area (SRA), project size and distance to the sensitive receptor. The Project site is located in Source Receptor Area 11 (SRA‐11, South San Gabriel Valley).
The nearest sensitive receptors to the Project site are the Huntington Middle School located, approximately 200 feet southwest of the site and the Valentine Elementary School, located approximately 1,000 feet to the west. To provide a conservative evaluation of construction emissions relative to LST thresholds, allowable emissions for 25 meters (82 feet) were used. LSTs for construction related emissions in the SRA 11at varying distances between the source and receiving property are shown in Table 4.3-5.
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
Table 4.3-5: SCAQMD LSTs for Construction
Pollutant
Allowable emissions as a function of receptor distance in meters from a one-acre site (lbs/day)
25 50 100 200 500
Gradual conversion of
NOx to NO2 83 84 96 123 193
CO 673 760 1,113 2,110 6,884
PM10 5 13 29 60 153
PM2.5 4 5 9 20 83
Source: http://www.aqmd.gov/CEQA/handbook/LST/appC.pdf, October 2009.
As shown in Table 4.3-4, total emissions of NOx, CO, PM10 and PM2.5 would not exceed SCAQMD Standards. The LST thresholds at the shortest distance 25 meters, or approximately 82 feet are shown in Table 4.3-5, and potential sensitive receptors are identified at approximately 200 and 1,000 feet, therefore, the Project’s operation emissions are less than significant. d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people?
Less Than Significant Impact. Potential sources of odor during construction activities include equipment exhaust. The objectionable odors that may be produced during the construction process would occur periodically and end when construction is completed. No significant impact related to odors would occur during construction of the proposed Project, and no mitigation is required. Operations of the facility after construction would remain the same as the existing condition, which does not produce odors. Therefore, there would be no odor impact from operations.
4.3.4 Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required.
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Given that the Project is a developed building, a biological resource field assessment was conducted for the Project by an ELMT biologist, and the results of the field assessment is provided as part of the analysis of this section.
4.4.1 Regulatory Setting
Given the urban environment, regulations governing biological resources for this Project include the following:
Migratory Bird Treaty Act
The federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) of 1918 (16 U.S.C 703-711) provides protection for nesting birds that are both residents and migrants whether they are considered sensitive by resource agencies.
The MBTA makes it unlawful to take, possess, buy, sell, purchase, or barter any migratory bird listed under 50 CFR 10, including feathers or other parts, nests, eggs, or products, except as allowed by implementing regulations (50 CFR 21). The direct injury or death of a migratory bird, due to construction activities or other construction-related disturbance that causes nest abandonment, nestling abandonment, or forced fledging would be considered a take under federal law. The USFWS, in coordination with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) administers the MBTA. CDFW’s authoritative nexus to MBTA is provided in California Fish and Game Code (FGC) Sections 3503.5 which protects all birds of prey and their nests and FGC Section 3800 which protects all non-game birds that occur naturally in the State.
City of San Marino Heritage Tree Ordinance
The City of San Marino tree preservation ordinance is contained in Chapter 23, Article 19 of the City Municipal Code. This ordinance requires permits for trimming and/or removal of certain trees including but not limited to:
Trees protected by the City of San Marino’s tree preservation ordinance include:
• ESTABLISHED TREE: A tree that is not a heritage tree or an oak tree, that is at least fifteen feet (15') in height, and/or whose trunk diameter is at least six inches (6") at its widest point, when measured at a point four and one-half feet (4.5') above natural grade.
• HERITAGE TREE: A tree that is at least fifteen feet (15') in height, and/or whose trunk diameter is at least four inches (4") at its widest point, when measured at a point four and one-half feet (4.5') above natural grade, and is one of the following: Platanus racemosa (Western Sycamore), Juglans californica (California Black Walnut), Sambucus nigra (Elder), Sambucus Mexicana (Mexican Elderberry), Aesculus californica (California Buckeye), Salix lasiolepis (Arroyo Willow), Populus fremontii (Fremont Cottonwood), Alnus rhombifolia (White Alder), Umbellularia californica (California Bay Laurel), Populus trichocarpa (Black Cottonwood), Ginkgo biloba (Maidenhair), Cedrus deodora (Deodar Cedar), Pinus canariensis (Canary Island Pine), Pinus halepensis (Aleppo Pine), Pinus pinea (Stone Pine), Pinus thunbergiana (Black Pine), Sequoia sempervirens (Coast Redwood), Taxodium mucronatum (Montezuma Cypress), Calocedrus decurrens (California Cedar), Cupressus sempervirens (Mediterranean Cypress), Podocarpus gracilior (African Fern Pine), Magnolia grandiflora (Southern Magnolia), Magnolia xsoulangeana (Chinese Magnolia),Cinnamomum camphora (Camphor), Persea Americana (Avocado), Liquidambar styraciflua (Sweetgum), Ulmus parvifolia (Chinese Elm), Ficus microcarpa (Chinese banyan),
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
Quercus agrifolia (Coast Live Oak), Quercus engelmannii (Engelmann or Pasadena Oak), Quercus ilex (Holly Oak), Quercus lobata (Valley Oak), Quercus suber (Cork Oak), Brachychiton discolor (Lacebark), Brachychiton populneus (Kurrajong), Chorisia speciose (Silk Floss Tree), Arbutus unedo (Strawberry Tree), Prunus caroliniana (Carolina Cherry-Laurel), Pyrus kawakamii (Evergreen Pear), Cassia spp (Golden Shower Tree), Ceratonia silique (Carob), Lagerstroemia indica (Crepe Myrtle), Callistemon spp (Bottlebrush), Eucalyptus citriodora (LemonScented Gum), Melaleauca quinquenervia (Paper Bark Tea Tree), Grevillea robusta (Southern Silky Oak), Cupaniopsis anacardioides (Carrotwood), Koelreuteria spp (Chinese Flame Tree), Schinus molle (California Pepper Tree), Citrus sinensis (Sweet Orange), Fraxinus uhdei (Shamel Ash), Olea europaea (Olive Tree), Jacaranda mimosifloria (Blue Jacaranda), Tabebuia spp (Tabebuia), Brahea edulis (Guadalupe Palm), Butia capitate (Jelly Palm), Phoenix canariensis (Canary Island Date Palm), Syagrus romanzoffianam (Queen Palm), Washingtonia filifera (California Palm), Washington robusta (Mexican Fan Palm), Cedrus atlantica (Atlas Cedar),and Cedrus atlantica (Blue Atlas).
4.4.2 Environmental Setting
The Project site is located in an urbanized area on the El Monte USGS Quad, Township 1 South, Range 12 West, Section 2.
4.4.3 Biological Resources Study and Results
A biological resource field assessment was conducted by an ELMT biologist to addresses potential Projectrelated effects to designated Critical Habitats and/or any species currently listed or formally proposed for listing as endangered or threatened under the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) and the California Endangered Species Act (CESA), or species designated as sensitive by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), or the California Native Plant Society (CNPS), as well as the City of San Marino General Plan and various ordinances.
The assessment included a literature review and field visit on January 19, 2021. Literature reviewed for the biological assessment included State, federal and local databases that included but are not limited to the following:
• U.S. Fish and Wildlife (USFWS) threatened and endangered species occurrence GIS overlay; • USFWS Information for Planning and Consultation System (IPaC); • California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) Rarefind 5); • CNDDB Biogeographic Information and Observation System (BIOS); • California Native Plant Society Electronic Inventory (CNPSEI) database; • Calflora Database;
• USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Web Soil Survey; • USFWS National Wetland Inventory;
• Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Water Program “My Waters” data layers • USFWS Designated Critical Habitat Maps
• City of San Marino General Plan and ordinances
The survey results indicated that there is no critical habitat, sensitive species or sensitive plants or wildlife that could be on the Project site or in the vicinity.
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
The Project site is currently developed with an existing building, parking lot, and outdoor areas. Existing on-site vegetation consists of heritage and established landscaping and trees including four oaks, one sycamore and urban ornamental shrubs.
No active nests or birds displaying nesting behavior were observed onsite during the field survey. Although heavily disturbed, the Project has the potential to provide minimal foraging and nesting habitat for yearround and seasonal avian residents, as well as migrating songbirds that could occur in the area that area adapted to disturbed areas and urban environments. The coast live oak trees and ornamental trees on the Project site also have the potential to provide avian nesting opportunities.
4.4.4 Impact Analysis
CEQA THRESHOLDS
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact or
Does Not Apply
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES:
Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly
or through habitat modifications, on any species
identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or
regulations, or by the California Department of Fish
and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
X
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian
habitat or other sensitive natural community
identified in local or regional plans, policies,
regulations or by the California Department of Fish
and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
X
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on state or
federally protected wetlands (including, but not
limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through
direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or
other means
X
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any
native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species
or with established native resident or migratory
wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native
wildlife nursery sites?
X
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance?
X
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural Community
Conservation Plan, or other approved local,
regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
X
Discussion
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modification, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. Based on the literature review and field survey, implementation of the Project will have no significant impacts on federally, State, or local species known to occur in the general vicinity of the Project site because the Project exists in an urbanized area, and no sensitive species were determined to exist on-site, nor are any expected to exist on-site.
However, the Project site has the potential to support suitable habitat for foraging and nesting birds, which are protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and the Fish and Game Code. The loss of individuals would result in a potentially significant impact. With the implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-1, located at the end of this section, impacts would be less than significant.
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
No Impact. Based on the records search and field review, there are no riparian habitat or sensitive natural communities on the Project site, which is currently entirely developed. There would be no impacts, and no mitigation is required.
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (including but not limited to marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?
No Impact. The Project site is completely developed and does not contain state or federally protected wetlands. No impacts would occur, and no mitigation is required. d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
No Impact. A wildlife corridor is defined as a linear landscape element which serves as a linkage between historically connected habitats/natural areas and is meant to facilitate movement between these natural areas. During the field survey, the Project site was assessed for its ability to facilitate wildlife movement and for the presence of wildlife corridors. The Project is located in an urbanized area on a developed site. As a result, it does not contain any wildlife corridors or nursery sites. No impacts would occur, and no mitigation is required. e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?
Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. Of the trees on the Project site, five trees (four coast live oak and one western sycamore) are the size and type that qualify as heritage trees per City ordinance. The Project does not propose the removal of these trees. However, some improvements may require minimal excavation or work near the roots of the trees, which if performed improperly, could damage the tree health. With the implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-2, located at the end of this section, impacts would be less than significant. f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? No Impact. There are no approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan for the Project area. Therefore, there would be no impact under this criterion.
4.4.5 Mitigation Measures
The following mitigation measures are required to reduce potentially significant impacts to less than significant:
BIO-1: If construction occurs between February 1st and August 31st, a pre-construction clearance survey for nesting birds should be conducted within three (3) days of the start of any vegetation removal or ground disturbing activities to ensure that no nesting birds will be disturbed during construction. The biologist conducting the clearance survey should document a negative survey with a brief letter report indicating that no impacts to active avian nests will occur. If an active avian nest is discovered during the preconstruction clearance survey, construction activities should stay outside of a nodisturbance buffer. The size of the no-disturbance buffer will be determined by the wildlife biologist and will depend on the level of noise and/or surrounding anthropogenic disturbances, line of sight between the nest and the construction activity, type and duration of construction activity, ambient noise, species habituation, and topographical barriers. These factors will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis when developing buffer distances. Limits of construction to avoid an active nest will be established in the field with flagging, fencing, or other appropriate barriers; and construction personnel will be instructed on the sensitivity of nest areas. A biological monitor should be present to delineate the boundaries of the buffer area and to monitor the active nest to ensure that nesting behavior is not adversely affected by the construction activity. Once the young
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
have fledged and left the nest, or the nest otherwise becomes inactive under natural conditions, construction activities within the buffer area can resume.
BIO-2: Prior to construction, a certified arborist shall be retained to flag trees that will be avoided and observe excavation activities that are planned within the root zone of the protected trees and assist the contractor in conducting excavation in a manner that will not impact the tree roots.
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
4.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES
A Cultural Resources Assessment for the proposed Project was performed by BCR Consulting in September 2021 (Appendix C).
Cultural resources include archaeological sites, buildings and other kinds of structures, historic districts, cultural landscapes, and resources important to specific ethnic groups.
Archaeological sites represent the material remains of human occupation and activity either prior to European settlement (prehistoric sites) or after the arrival of Europeans (historical sites).
The historic built environment includes buildings used for habitation, work, recreation, education and religious worship, and may be represented by houses, factories, office buildings, schools, churches, museums, hospitals, bridges and other kinds of structures.
An historic district is any “geographically definable area, urban or rural, possessing a significant concentration, linkage, or continuity of sites, buildings, structures, or objects united by past events or aesthetically by plan or physical development. A district may also comprise individual elements separated geographically but linked by association or history” (36 CFR 60.3).
The National Park Service defines a cultural landscape as “a geographic area, including both cultural and natural resources and the wildlife or domestic animals therein, associated with a historic event, activity, or person or exhibiting other cultural or aesthetic values”.
4.5.1 Regulatory Setting
The National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) of 1966, as amended and the California Public Resources Code (PRC), Section 5024.1, are the primary federal and state laws and regulations governing the evaluation and significance of historical resources of national, state, regional, and local importance.
National Historic Preservation Act
Section 106 (Protection of Historic Properties) of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (NHPA) requires federal agencies to take into account the effects of their undertakings on historic properties. The Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, an independent federal agency, administers the Section 106 review process with assistance from State Historic Preservation Offices to ensure that historic properties are considered during federal project planning and implementation.
National Register of Historic Resources (National Register) The National Register of Historic Places is the nation's official list of buildings, structures, objects, sites, and districts worthy of preservation because of their significance in American history, architecture, archeology, engineering, and culture. The National Register recognizes resources of local, state and national significance which have been documented and evaluated according to uniform standards and criteria.
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
Authorized under the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, the National Register is part of a national program to coordinate and support public and private efforts to identify, evaluate, and protect historic and archeological resources. The National Register is administered by the National Park Service, which is part of the U. S. Department of the Interior.
As defined in National Register Bulletin #15, “How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation,” resources are eligible for the National Register if they:
A) are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history; or
B) are associated with the lives of significant persons in or past; or C) embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or D) have yielded or may be likely to yield, information important in history or prehistory.
Once a resource has been determined to satisfy one of the above-referenced criteria, then it must be assessed for integrity. Integrity refers to the ability of a property to convey its significance, and the degree to which the property retains the identity, including physical and visual attributes, for which it is significant under the four basic criteria. The National Register recognizes seven aspects or qualities of integrity:
location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association. To retain its historical integrity, a property must possess several, and usually most, of these aspects.
California Register of Historical Resources
The California Register program encourages public recognition and protection of resources of architectural, historical, archeological and cultural significance, identifies historical resources for state and local planning purposes, determines eligibility for state historic preservation grant funding and affords certain protections under the California Environmental Quality Act The California Register was established to serve as an authoritative guide to the state’s significant historical and archaeological resources (Public Resources Code § 5024.1). The California Office of Historic Preservation (OHP), as an office of the California Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR), implements the policies of the NHPA on a statewide level.
State law provides that in order for a property to be considered eligible for listing in the California Register, it must be found by the Office of Historic Preservation (OHP) to be significant under any of the following four criteria:
1) It is associated with the events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of local or regional history, or the cultural heritage of California or the United States; 2) It is associated with the lives of persons important to local, California, or national history;
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
3) It embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or represents the work of a master, or possesses high artistic values; and/or 4) It has yielded, or has the potential to yield, information important to the prehistory or history of the local area, California, or the nation.
In addition to meeting one or more of the above criteria, the California Register requires that sufficient time has passed since a resource’s period of significance to “obtain a scholarly perspective on the events or individuals associated with the resources.” (CCR 4852 [d][2]). Fifty years is normally considered sufficient time to be considered a potential historical resource. All resources older than 45 years will be evaluated.
The California Register also requires that a resource possess integrity, which is defined as the ability for the resource to convey its significance through seven aspects: location, setting, design, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association.
All resources listed on or formally determined eligible for the National Register are automatically listed in the California Register, in accordance with the California Office of Historic Preservation policies (refer to https://ohp.parks.ca.gov/?page_id=21237). In addition, properties designated under municipal or county ordinances or through local historic resources surveys, are eligible for listing in the California Register.
City of San Marino Local Register of Historic Resources Chapter XXIII, Article 18 of the San Marino City Code is designed to “promote the public health, safety, and general welfare by providing for the identification, designation, protection, enhancement, and ongoing use of historical resources that represent the City's cultural, architectural, social, economic, and political heritage.”
Chapter XXIII, Article 18 of the San Marino City Code, Section 23.18.03 (A) states: “Automatic Designation:
Any property within the City that is listed in the National Register of Historic Places or the California Register of Historic Places is automatically designated as a historic landmark for purposes of this article.”
4.5.2 Environmental Setting
History
The first significant European settlement of California began during the Spanish Period (1769 to 1821) when 21 missions and four presidios were established between San Diego and Sonoma. The land of the City of San Marino, which was part of the San Gabriel Mission, was initially occupied by Gabrielino (Tongva) Indians, who had a village located on what is now the Huntington School.
In 1852, Tennessee native Benjamin Davis Wilson acquired a vast tract of land that included the area that later became San Marino as well as several neighboring towns. In 1873, Benjamin Wilson gave 500 acres of his land to his son in law James Debarth Shorb, who then named the ranch on his land “San Marino” which was inspired by his grandfather’s plantation in Maryland which in turn got its name from the Republic of San Marino, Italy.
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
In 1903, the San Marino land was purchased from James Shorb by Henry E. Huntington, a businessman who was the owner of the Pacific Electric Railway Company in Southern California. Henry Huntington played a major role in shaping the economy of Southern California. Huntington and George Patton Sr. joined with another landowner to incorporate San Marino in 1913. They also spearheaded a campaign to prevent their properties from being developed by the city. Their advocacy for restrictive zoning has prevented the development of strip malls and mansions in San Marino.
In 1904, Pacific Electric (PE), which was owned by Henry Huntington, built a double track line commencing at a connection with the Monrovia Line at Huntington Drive in San Marino northerly on private way to a point near Colorado Street, Pasadena. The line opened for service on March 19, 1904.
The city’s irregular street grid pattern reflects its historic patterns of residential development, which were largely guided by Huntington and oriented around the Pacific Electric Railway (PERy) routes he constructed in the City between 1903 and 1906. Most of the street grid skews northwest/southeast, roughly perpendicular to the northeast/southwest route of Huntington Drive (the PERy’s Monrovia‐ Glendora route). The grid in the northeast portion of the city is skewed in response to the PERy’s Sierra Madre line (now Sierra Madre Boulevard). The northwest part of San Marino, containing the most prominent hills and the largest lots, is marked by curvilinear streets responding to the natural contours of the landscape (ARG, 2020).
Rail operation continued until October 6, 1950, when the line was abandoned in favor of motor coaches.
The median of what is now Huntington Drive was part of this line and was developed with grass and trees after the PERy’s abandonment. The roadways on either side of the median were reconfigured from bidirectional traffic to one-way traffic.
San Marino Women’s Club
During the 1930s, there were many organizations in the community in San Marino that gathered for music, book reviews, and various other activities. However, there were few organizations for women. On June 8th, 1936, a group of 52 women gathered at the San Marino Police Department courtroom to organize a local women’s club. By the time the San Marino Woman’s Club was completely organized, the club already had around 420 members (San Marino Tribune, January 7, 2016). The club catered to elite married white women who could afford to pay the $10 dues and had time to attend frequent events and do charity work.
Most of these women had live-in domestic help in the 1930s and 1940s; those who took on leadership roles were in their forties and fifties, with grown or nearly-grown children.
The San Marino Woman’s Club members were required to wear black dresses and black hats with a pair of white gloves. There were 16 different guilds within in the club: music, drama, literature, writers, home craft, philanthropy, foreign language, current events, travel, bible, home interior, language, sports, public affairs, flower, and garden. Regular meetings were held at Henry E. Huntington Middle School auditorium while the guild meetings were held at homes of the members. The club raised funds for a slightly used ambulance, which it donated to the city in 1940. This was just one of many charitable contributions the group made to the community over the decades.
In 1939, the club purchased the property at 1800 Huntington Drive for $6,000 to build a clubhouse for its growing membership. At the time, the property held a residence and was surrounded by open fields.
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
Members raised most of the funds to complete the clubhouse through bazaars, rummage sales, parties, and various entertainment events over a 10-year period. Fundraising efforts were suspended when the US entered World War II in 1942, and construction remained difficult immediately after the war in the late 1940s. They also made an appeal to the public for funds. In 1949, the club requested and received variances from San Marino City Council because the parcel was zoned for residential use and required setbacks that did not fit in with the club’s plans for the property. By the end of the decade, the club had $57,000 on hand, and was able to borrow an additional $35,000 in 1951 to construct the clubhouse, which was completed in 1952.
In addition to club meetings and events, the facility was used for a variety of community and private functions such as wedding receptions and sorority events. Over the years, the club’s charitable contributions were numerous and included the endowment of a bed at the Orthopedic Hospital, nursing scholarships, Toys for Tots, and others. They also provided help to the Assistance League, American Red Cross and the City of Hope.
The San Marino Woman’s Club moved its organization to Pasadena in 2004, and the City purchased the building in 2005.
Project Site Area Development
The SMC was constructed in approximately 1951/52. Adjacent to the SMC are the Crowell Library (west) which was constructed in 1951/52, at about the same time as the construction of the SMC. The Henry E.
Huntington Middle School (constructed in 1918) is located directly east of the SMC, and the Valentine Elementary School (east of the middle school), constructed in 1938, and the San Marino Unified School District offices, located within the middle school grounds. The Crowell Library was reconstructed to its current design between 2006 and 2008.
4.5.3 Cultural and Archaeological Resources Study and Results BCR Consulting conducted a survey of the Project site through a field survey and a records search. The records search was conducted at the South Central Coastal Information Center and through review of various other State, federal and local databases (Appendix C) for the Project site and a 1 mile radius.
The records search revealed that in June 2011 the SMC underwent a required historical review as part of a project to install an ADA compliant door and other features, which was being funded through the federal Housing and Urban Development through the County of Los Angeles Community Development Block Grant program.
The architectural style was identified in the 2011 study as “Modern Colonial Revival,” which is not recognized as a unique style of architecture. Designed by architect Marion Varner as one of his earlier designs, the SMC large primarily one-story building with a flat roof and raised parapet along the rear and side elevations. The front elevation features a side-facing medium gable roof with an offset front gable wing. An L-shaped porch runs across the front elevation and is supported by decorative wrought iron posts. The roof is covered with wood shingles. A large multi-paned steel framed window is located below the main front gable. Underneath the window is brick trim. A tall exterior brick chimney is located on the northeast elevation. Windows are primarily multi-paned steel casements. Siding is stucco and foundation is concrete. The interior of the building when first built contained a large auditorium, dining room, meeting
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
room and office. There were two additions in 1958 and a separate modular building in rear, constructed at an unknown date.
The 2011 study identified that the integrity of the building appeared sufficient for eligibility to the National Register of Historic Places as follows:
• Location: The property at 1800 Huntington Drive is in its original location. • Setting: The historic setting of the property was found to be partially intact. The relationship to the adjacent library and school remain. However, the original 1950 library was replaced with a new library building within the last several years.
• Design: The original design of the 1952 building was primarily intact except for changes to the front entrance doors and two small additions in 1958 done in the same style. • Materials: The integrity of materials was found to be somewhat intact. • Feeling and Association: The feeling and association as a woman’s club was no longer intact since the building is now the San Marino Community Center, but it continues to function to serve the community.
The California OHP concurred with this recommendation on August 5, 2011; therefore, in accordance with the OHP policy, the SMC was formally listed in the California Register of Historical Resources (California Register) under Criterion 1, for association with an event important to the history of the San Marino community. The OHP identifies the SMC as being listed on the California Register through its listing on the State’s Built Environment Resource Directory (BERD).
During the 2021 fieldwork, BCR Consulting confirmed that that the SMC retained the integrity to convey its historic significance as identified in 2011. No other cultural or archaeological resources were identified within the subject property boundaries.
4.5.4 Impact Analysis
CEQA THRESHOLDS
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact or
Does Not Apply
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES:
Would the project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource as defined in
15064.5?
X
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archaeological resource pursuant
to 15064.5?
X
c) Disturb any human remains, including those
interred outside of formal cemeteries?
X
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
Discussion
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to §15064.5?
Potentially Significant Impact. Section 15064.5(a) of the CEQA Guidelines defines historical resources, which includes: A resource listed in, or determined to be eligible by the State Historical Resources Commission, for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources (Pub. Res. Code § 5024.1, Title 14 CCR, Section 4850 et seq.).
Public Resources Code Section 5020.1(q) defines “Substantial adverse change” as the demolition, destruction, relocation, or alteration such that the significance of an historical resource would be impaired. CEQA Guidelines Section15064.5 (b)(1) and (b)(2) clarify that the impairment must be material and states that material impairment of a historical resource would occur when the Project “demolishes or materially alters in an adverse manner those physical characteristics of an historical resource that convey its historical significance and that justify its inclusion in, or eligibility for, inclusion in the California Register of Historical Resources.” The SMC was formally listed in the California Register of Historical Resources (California Register) under Criterion 1, for association with an event important to the history of the San Marino community. The OHP identifies the SMC as being listed on the California Register through its listing on the State’s BERD.
The SMC is also a City landmark pursuant to the San Marino City Code, Chapter XXIII, Article 18 Section 23.18.03 (A) “Automatic Designation.”
The Project includes changing the exterior architectural design of the SMC building to better aesthetically match the adjacent Crowell Public Library and Henry E. Huntington Middle School and San Marino Unified School District offices. For example, the existing wood shake roof would be replaced with tile, and the decorative wrought iron posts would be changed to stucco columns.
The SMC will remain a community center, open for community events, club meetings, City recreation staff offices, and City recreation classes.
Because the SMC is eligible for listing to the National Register, is listed on the California Register of Historic Resources, and is therefore automatically considered a City landmark, CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(b)(3) states that a project that follows the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring, and Reconstructing Historic Buildings or the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation and Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings (1995), Weeks and Grimmer (collectively referred to as “Secretary’s Standards”), “shall be considered as mitigated to a level of less than a significant impact on the historical resource.” The Secretary’s Standards are intended to pertain to rehabilitation projects in a reasonable manner, taking into consideration economic and technical feasibility.
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
Additionally, in accordance San Marino City Code Section 23.18.08 discusses procedures for the City to issue a Certificate of Appropriateness for rehabilitation of historic structures. One requirement is that the project is consistent with the Secretary's Standards and any applicable design guidelines adopted by the City.
The Project does not qualify as a preservation or rehabilitation project as under the Secretary’s Standards as currently designed, according to the Cultural Resources evaluation in Appendix C. As identified in Appendix C, the proposed Project would materially alter a number of the physical characteristics of the SMC that convey its historical significance and that justify its inclusion in the California Register of Historical Resources
The CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.4(b) addresses impacts to historical resources and mitigation alternatives as follows:
(1) Where maintenance, repair, stabilization, rehabilitation, restoration, preservation, conservation or reconstruction of the historical resource will be conducted in a manner consistent with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring, and Reconstructing Historic Buildings (1995), Weeks and Grimmer, the project's impact on the historical resource shall generally be considered mitigated below a level of significance and thus is not significant.
(2) In some circumstances, documentation of an historical resource, by way of historic narrative, photographs or architectural drawings, as mitigation for the effects of demolition of the resource will not mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effect on the environment would occur.
With respect to CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.4(b)(1), should the Project be re-designed to be consistent with the Standards, the impact would be considered to be mitigated to a less than significant level. In November 2021, the City begun exploring this alternative by consulting with Chattel Historic Preservation Consultants (Chattel), a historic preservation consultant who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards in architecture, historic architecture, and architectural history. Chattel provided the City with a memo that outlined various components of a re-designed project that would be consistent with the Standards and still achieve symmetry with the library (Appendix C-1).
In summary, the memo in Appendix C-1 identified the following: the additions to the building (date unknown) can be removed to return the symmetry of its original design; replace the landscape planter that was removed; repaint the building to the color of the library; replace the wood shake roof with a red asphalt shingle similar to the tile color on the library; and replace the windows with a specific window type that is compliant with the original type yet would complement the window style used in the library. Within the interior, the period chandelier light fixtures are encouraged to be re-lamped, and the San Marino Women’s Club emblem in the floor must be preserved. All safety and HVAC improvements can be completed as planned by the City.
The memo also noted that the design must be performed in collaboration with a qualified historic preservation consultant to ensure compliance with the Secretary’s Standards.
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.4(b)(2), would allow for the City to proceed with the proposed Project by completing a Historical American Building Survey (HABS) to photo document the SMC prior to its renovation. However, CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.4(b)(2) also states that completion of a HABS does not mitigate the impacts to less than significant. This is because the proposed Project is similar to a demolition type project in that it will remove building features that convey its historical significance in accordance with its listing on the California Register of Historic Resources.
Therefore, the proposed Project, as currently designed, will cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource because the Project will materially demolish or materially alter in an adverse manner those physical characteristics of an historical resource that convey its historical significance and that justify its inclusion in, or eligibility for, inclusion in the California Register of Historical Resources, as identified in CEQA Guidelines Section15064.5 (b)(1) and (b)(2).
The Project’s impact would therefore be Potentially Significant. b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5?
Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated. Archaeological sites represent the material remains of human occupation and activity either prior to European settlement (prehistoric sites) or after the arrival of Europeans (historical sites). The SMC and its environs were developed between 1918 and 1950/51 on a portion of land originally known as the Cooper Ranch property, which was used for orange and pear groves. There are no known archaeological sites to be within or underlying the built environment of the Project site.
The Project will involve excavation in limited areas to depths up to 3 feet for the purpose of installing, repairing, and upgrading utilities and various foundations. Given the disturbed nature of the site, it is unlikely that archaeological resources will be uncovered. However, to ensure potential impacts are avoided or minimized, implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL-1, located at the end of this section.
Potential impacts to tribal cultural resources are discussed separately below in Section 4.18. c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? Less than Significant Impact. Based on an analysis of records and archaeological survey of the property, it has been determined that the Project site does not include a formal cemetery or any archaeological resources that might contain interred human remains. Nonetheless, the Project will be required to adhere to State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 if in the event that human remains are encountered and by ensuring that no further disturbance occur until the County Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin of the remains. Furthermore, pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98 (b), remains shall be left in place and free from disturbance until a final decision as to the treatment and their disposition has been made.
This is State Law, is also considered a standard Condition of Approval and as pursuant to CEQA, is not considered mitigation. Therefore, impacts in this regard are considered less than significant.
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
4.5.5 Mitigation Measures
The following mitigation measure is required to reduce potential impacts to unanticipated buried archaeological and cultural resources to less than significant:
CUL-1: Provision for Unanticipated Cultural/Archaeological Buried Resources: In the event that cultural resources are discovered during Project activities, all work in the immediate vicinity of the find (within a 60-foot buffer) shall cease, and a qualified cultural/archaeologist specialist meeting Secretary of Interior standards shall be hired to assess the find. If human remains or funerary objects are encountered during any activities associated with the Project, work in the immediate vicinity (within a 100-foot buffer of the find) shall cease and the County Coroner shall be contacted pursuant to State Health and Safety Code §7050.5 and that code enforced for the duration of the Project.
Work on the other portions of the Project outside of the buffered areas may continue during this assessment period. Salvage operation requirements pursuant to Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines shall be followed, and the treatment of discovered Native American remains shall comply with State codes and regulations of the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC). Any significant archaeological resources found shall be preserved as determined necessary by the Project archaeologist and offered to a qualified repository for curation. Any resulting reports will be submitted to the South Central Coastal Information Center.
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
4.6 ENERGY
This section describes the potential energy usage effects from implementation of the proposed Project for both construction activities as well as long-term operations. A report of estimated energy usage was prepared for the Project in September 2021 and is provided in Appendix B-1.
4.6.1 Regulatory Setting
Building Energy Efficiency Standards
The California Energy Conservation and Development Commission (California Energy Commission) adopted Title 24, Part 6, of the California Code of Regulations; energy Conservation Standards for new residential and nonresidential buildings in June 1977 and standards are updated every three years. Title 24 ensures building designs conserve energy by requiring the use of new energy efficiency technologies and methods into new developments. Currently, the California Energy Commission (CEC) Title 24 2016 Building Energy Efficiency Standards are in effect; they were updated in 2019 and the updates took effect on January 1, 2020. The 2019 Building Energy Efficiency Standards states that nonresidential buildings will use about 30 percent less energy compared to the 2016 standards due mainly to lighting upgrades.
Senate Bill 350
Senate Bill (SB) 350 (de Leon) was signed into law in October 2015 and established new clean energy, clean air, and greenhouse gas reduction goals for 2030. SB 350 establishes periodic increases to the California Renewables Portfolio Standard (RPS) Program with the target to increase the amount of electricity generated per year from eligible renewable energy resources to an amount that equals at least 33% of the total electricity sold annually to retail customers, by December 31, 2020. The SB 350 specifically calls for the quantities of eligible renewable energy resources to be procured for all other compliance periods reflecting reasonable progress in each of the intervening years to ensure that the procurement of electricity products from eligible renewable energy resources achieves 40 percent by December 31, 2024, 45 percent by December 31, 2027, and 50 percent by December 31, 2030.
Senate Bill 100
Senate Bill 100 (SB 100) was signed into law September 2018 and increased the goal of the California RPS Program to achieve at least 50 percent renewable resources by 2026, 60 percent renewable resources by 2030, and 100 percent renewable resources by 2045. SB 100 also includes a State policy that eligible renewable energy resources and zero-carbon resources supply 100 percent of all retail sales of electricity to California end-use customers and 100 percent of electricity procured to serve all State agencies by December 31, 2045. Under the bill, the State cannot increase carbon emissions elsewhere in the western grid or allow resource shuffling to achieve the 100 percent carbon-free electricity target.
CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.2(b)
The CEQA Guidelines identifies that if an analysis of the project’s energy usage reveals that the project may result in significant environmental effects due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption use of energy, and mitigate for that usage. The CEQA Guidelines indicate that the analysis should include the project’s energy use for all project phases and components, including transportation-related energy,
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
during construction and operation. Guidance on information that may be included in the analysis is provided in Appendix F of the CEQA Guidelines.
4.6.2 Environmental Setting
California is one of the lowest per capita energy users in the United States, ranked 48th in the nation, due to its energy efficiency programs and mild climate (United States Energy Information Administration [EIA] 2018). California consumed 292,039 gigawatt-hours (GWh) of electricity and 2,110,829 million cubic feet of natural gas in 2017 (Appendix B-1). In addition, Californians consume approximately 18.9 billion gallons of motor vehicle fuels per year (Federal Highway Administration 2019). The single largest end-use sector for energy consumption in California is transportation (39.8 percent), followed by industry (23.7 percent), commercial (18.9 percent), and residential (17.7 percent) (EIA 2018).
Most of California’s electricity is generated in-state with approximately 30 percent imported from the northwestern United State and Canadian provinces (Alberta, British Columbia, Idaho, Montana, Oregon, South Dakota, Washington, and Wyoming) and southwest (Arizona, Baja California, Colorado, Mexico, Nevada, New Mexico, Texas, and Utah) in 2017. In addition, approximately 30 percent of California’s electricity supply comes from renewable energy sources such as wind, solar photovoltaic, geothermal, and biomass (CEC 2018). Adopted on September 10, 2018, SB 100 accelerates the State’s Renewables Portfolio Standards Program by requiring electricity providers to increase procurement from eligible renewable energy resources to 33 percent of total retail sales by 2020, 60 percent by 2030, and 100 percent by 2045. Southern California Edison (SCE), the region’s electricity supplier, reports that it expects to derive 50 percent of its power from eligible renewable sources by 2030. The Renewables Portfolio Standard (RPS), which is set by the state, includes eligible renewable sources such as solar and wind energy that SCE produces or purchases.
4.6.3 Impact Analysis
CEQA THRESHOLDS
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact or
Does Not Apply
VI. ENERGY:
Would the project:
a) Result in a potentially significant environmental
impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary
consumption of energy resources, during project
construction or operation?
X
b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for
renewable energy or energy efficiency?
X
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
Discussion
a) Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation? Less Than Significant Impact. The Project would not require ground disturbances associated with excavation or grading. Minor demolition would be required. The majority of the work would be completed with hand tools or small pieces of equipment.
After construction, the proposed Project is expected to generate 19 new vehicle trips (13 inbound trips and 6 outbound trips) during the weekday AM peak hour according to the traffic analysis (Appendix E). During the weekday PM peak hour, the proposed Project is expected to generate 25 new vehicle trips (12 inbound trips and 13 outbound trips).
The Energy analysis in Appendix B-1 estimated the daily emissions based on the scope and sequence of construction activities, daily emissions were conservatively estimated using the most intensive mix of equipment over the 180‐day construction period extending from June 2022 to November 2022. The common method is to calculate fuel demand based on the six phases of construction defined in California Emission Estimator Model (CalEEMod) 2020.4.0; demolition, site preparation, grading, building construction, paving and painting (i.e., architectural coating).
However, for the purpose of determining maximum daily air emissions and annual greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, three phases were used; demolition, building construction/improvements and architectural coating (i.e., painting). These data were used to conservatively estimate gasoline and diesel fuel demand during construction using the most equipment intensive operation as the basis for the calculations.
Construction is anticipated to generally require the following or a similar mix of equipment • Air compressor, 78 horsepower at 0.48 load factor;
• Concrete/Industrial saws; 81 horsepower at 0.73 load factor; • Crane (or similar heavy lift equipment); 231 horsepower at 0.29 load factor; • Fork‐Lift (2); 89 horsepower, 0.2 load factor;
• Rubber‐tired dozer; 287 horsepower, 0.4 load factor; and • Tractor/Loader/Backhoe (2), 97 horsepower, 0.37 horsepower.
Because this equipment mix would not be required daily throughout the duration of the Project, fuel consumption calculations likely overestimate actual diesel fuel demand. During operation, fuel demand associated with daily vehicle trips referenced above were estimated. Energy consumption (i.e., natural gas and electricity) estimated for operation of the San Marino Center post‐construction were also considered in the analysis in Appendix B-1.
Table 4.6-1 identifies the estimated gasoline demand for construction workers for work occurring in 2022, as well as projected annual gasoline demand Projected for operation of the San Marino Center assuming a total of 312 daily trips and an average trip length of 16.6 miles.
Table 4.6-2 identifies the estimated diesel fuel demand for equipment operation in 2022.
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
Table 4.6-1: Construction Worker Gasoline Demand
2022 CO2E MT Kg CO2e Gallons
Worker Fuel 4.22 4,220 476
User Fuel 5.2 56,202 5,212
Table 4.6-2: Construction Equipment Diesel Demand
2022 CO2E MT Kg CO2e Gallons
Equipment Fuel 56.2 56,200 5,521
Project modifications to improve energy efficiency include but are not limited to window repair, replacement of HVAC systems and lighting upgrades. The Energy analysis in Appendix B-1 estimates that operation of the San Marino Center post‐construction would generate an annual demand of 194,543 kBTU of natural gas and 117,636 kWh of electricity.
Energy use during construction would be temporary and construction equipment used would be typical of similar-sized construction projects in the region. In the interest of cost efficiency, construction contractors are not anticipated to utilize fuel in a manner that is wasteful or unnecessary. Therefore, Project construction would not result in a potential impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, and no constructionrelated energy impact would occur. The Project upgrades include installation of energy efficient components to reduce energy usage during operations. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation measures are required.
b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency? Less Than Significant Impact. Regarding the State’s Energy Plan and compliance with Title 24 CCR energy efficiency standards, the City is required to comply with the California Green Building Standard Code requirements for energy efficient buildings and appliances as well as utility energy efficiency programs implemented by the SCE and Southern California Gas Company.
Given the above, the proposed Project would have a less than significant potential to conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency.
4.6.4 Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required.
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
4.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
4.7.1 Regulatory Setting
Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning
Earthquake fault zones were conceived in the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act (Alquist-Priolo Act), passed in 1972 with the intent to reduce losses from surface fault rupture following the destructive 1971 San Fernando earthquake (magnitude 6.6), which was associated with extensive surface fault ruptures that damaged numerous structures.
The law requires the state geologist to establish regulatory zones (known as Earthquake Fault Zones or Alquist- Priolo Zones) - averaging about 0.25 mile wide - around the surface traces of active faults, and to publish appropriate maps that depict these zones. The maps are then distributed to all affected cities, counties, and state agencies for their use in planning and controlling new or renewed construction. In general, construction within an Alquist-Priolo Zone requires a fault investigation be approved by the County prior to issuing grading and building permits. The Act seeks to prevent construction or major rehabilitation of structures used for human occupancy within 50 feet of an active fault.
An active fault, for the purposes of the Alquist-Priolo Act, is one that has ruptured in the last 11,000 years.
4.7.2 Environmental Setting
Regional Geologic Setting
The City of San Marino is located in the San Gabriel Valley in Los Angeles County, approximately 9 miles northeast of downtown Los Angeles. San Marino is bounded by the cities of Pasadena and South Pasadena to the north/northwest, the City of Alhambra to the west/southwest, the City of San Gabriel to the south, and the unincorporated communities of East San Gabriel and East Pasadena to the east (ARC 2019) The area’s topography generally slopes gently down to the south, descending from the San Gabriel Mountains, with a small group of hills in the northwestern (Oak Knoll) part of the city. The slopes generally rise north of Euston Road, Virginia Road, and Old Mill Road, and are incised with south-trending canyons and gullies and are heavily vegetated with native oak woodland wherever land is undeveloped. One channelized wash, Rubio Wash, runs from Robles Avenue (north of San Marino High School) south past the southern city limits (ARG 2020).
Soils
The Project site soils are classified by the US Dept. of Agriculture as Urban land-Azuvina-Montebello complex, 0 to 5 percent slopes. This type of soil is identified as urban uses constructed over remnant alluvium (USDA 2021).
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
Liquefaction
Liquefaction is a process whereby soil is temporarily transformed to fluid form during intense and prolonged ground shaking or because of a sudden shock or strain. There are no liquefaction zones in the city (CSM, Feb 2019, refer to maps in Appendix H). In addition, Project construction would comply with California Building Code, which requires that structures be designed and constructed to resist seismic hazards, such as liquefaction, through foundation design, making potential risks to life or property related to liquefaction less than significant.
Faulting
The City of San Marino is located in the southern California basin, a complex geological region that has a history of seismic activity due to the number of faults in the region. There are two active fault systems - the San Andreas and San Gabriel. There is also a system of faults associated with the transverse ranges.
The Raymond Hill Fault is an active fault with a known length of 12 miles, extending through the cities of Monrovia, Arcadia, Pasadena, San Marino, and into the Highland Park neighborhood of the City of Los Angeles. The fault traverses east-west through the City, and approximately 0.5 mile north of the SMC. Due to its active status, this has been identified as an Alquist-Priolo Hazard Zone.
Classified as a “left-lateral,” the Raymond Hill Fault slip rate is estimated between 0.10 and 0.22 millimeters per year. The mostrecent surface rupture was during the Holocene era (within the past 10,000 years). It is estimated that the interval between ruptures is roughly 4,500 years. Although the exact nature of the slip has been debated, the fault produces an obvious south-facing scarp along much of its length.
The steepness of the fault scarp that can be seen in both Arcadia and San Marino indicates that there has not been significant erosion recently, but depression along the fault trace suggests recent, small movements. The most recent activity on the Raymond fault was from the Pasadena earthquake in December 1988.
4.7.3 Impact Analysis
CEQA THRESHOLDS
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact or
Does Not Apply
VII. GEOLOGY AND SOILS:
Would the project:
a) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial
adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
• Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as
delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the
State Geologist for the area or based on other
substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to
X
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
Division of Mines and Geology Special
Publication 42.
• Strong seismic ground shaking? X
• Seismic-related ground failure, including
liquefaction?
X
• Landslides? X
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of
topsoil?
X
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is
unstable, or that would become unstable as a result
of the project, and potentially result in on- site or
off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence,
liquefaction or collapse?
X
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table
18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating
substantial risks to life or property?
X
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the
use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater
disposal systems where sewers are not available for
the disposal of wastewater?
X
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or unique geologic
feature?
X
Discussion
a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
• Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. • Strong seismic ground shaking?
• Seismic related ground failure, including liquefaction? • Landslides?
Less than Significant Impact. The Project is located in Southern California, a seismically active area and susceptible to the effects of seismic activity include rupture of earthquake faults. The Project is not located on or near a Alquist-Priolo Earthquake fault. The closest known active earthquake fault
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
with a documented location is the Raymond Fault Zone located approximately 0.5 mile to the north, in Lacy Park. In addition, other relatively close active faults include the San Andreas fault located approximately 13.5 miles to the northeast, the Elsinore fault located approximately 21.4 miles to the southwest, and the Cucamonga fault located approximately 24 miles to the north.
All proposed improvements would comply with the latest seismic provisions of applicable building codes, designed to reduce impacts to earthquakes.
The City of San Marino’s Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (CSM, Feb 2019) identifies that the City is not subject to liquefaction.
The Project site and the surrounding area is flat; thus, there is no potential for landslides.
Overall, the impact is less than significant, and no mitigation is required. b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? Less Than Significant. Construction activities associated with the Project would not require earth moving to the extent that it would expose soil that would temporarily increase erosion susceptibility.
Excavation for the Project only consists of shallow utility trenches. Therefore, there are no impacts. c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
No Impact. Refer to the discussion of Thresholds above for a discussion of hazards associated with liquefaction and landslide hazards. As noted, there is no potential for landslide or liquefaction.
Therefore, because no aspects of the proposed Project could increase the likelihood of landslides, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, there are no impacts. d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property? No Impact. The subsurface soils primarily consist of urbanized compacted soil. There will be no impacts, and mitigation is required.
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? No Impact. The building would remain connected to the existing sewer system. The Project does not propose to install any septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems. No impacts would occur.
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
f) Would the project directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?
Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated. The Project will conduct minor utility excavation, and no paleontological resources are anticipated to occur. However, implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL-1 describes procedures if unanticipated cultural resources are found. A qualified cultural/archaeological resource specialist typically also have training in paleontological resources, and/or be able to identify which paleontological resources are significant and engage additional professionals. Implementation of this mitigation measure will also reduce potential impacts to paleontological resources if discovered.
4.7.4 Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required.
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
4.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
An Air Quality/Greenhouse Gas Assessment for the Project was prepared in June 2021 (Appendix B).
4.8.1 Regulatory Setting
Since 1988, many countries around the world have made an effort to reduce GHG emissions since climate change is a global issue. Over the past 30 years, the United States, and the State of California, have enacted a myriad of regulations that have evolved over time aimed at reducing GHG emissions in transportation, building and manufacturing.
Assembly Bill 32
In 2006, the CA Legislature passed Assembly Bill (AB) 32, the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 designed to further the goals established in EO S‐3‐05, which was an Executive Order signed in June 2005 by then CA Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger. AB 32 requires California to reduce its GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. Under AB 32, CARB is responsible for and is recognized as having the expertise to carry out and develop the programs and requirements necessary to achieve the GHG emissions reduction mandate of AB 32. Further, in 2008, CARB adopted the Scoping Plan in accordance with Health and Safety Code, Section 38561. The Scoping Plan establishes an overall framework for the measures that will be adopted to reduce California’s GHG emissions for various emission sources/sectors to 1990 levels by 2020.
The Scoping Plan undergoes updates as more data becomes available.
Senate Bill 32 and Assembly Bill 197
SB 32 and AB 197 (enacted in 2016) are companion bills that set new statewide GHG reduction targets, make changes to CARB’s membership, increase legislative oversight of CARB’s climate change–based activities, and expand dissemination of GHG and other air quality–related emissions data to enhance transparency and accountability. More specifically, SB 32 codified the 2030 emissions reduction goal of EO B‐30‐15 by requiring CARB to ensure that statewide GHG emissions are reduced to 40% below 1990 levels by 2030. AB 197 established the Joint Legislative Committee on Climate Change Policies, consisting of at least three members of the Senate and three members of the Assembly, in order to provide ongoing oversight over implementation of the state’s climate policies. AB 197 added two members of the Legislature to CARB as nonvoting members; requires CARB to make available and update (at least annually via its website) emissions data for GHGs, criteria air pollutants, and toxic air contaminants from reporting facilities; and requires CARB to identify specific information for GHG emissions reduction measures when updating the Scoping Plan.
South Coast Air Quality Management District
The Project is within the SCAB, which is under the jurisdiction of the SCAQMD. California Resources Agency has adopted amendments to the State CEQA Guidelines for the feasible mitigation of GHG emissions or the effects of GHG emissions. The adopted CEQA Guidelines provide general regulatory guidance on the analysis and mitigation of GHG emissions in CEQA documents, but contain no suggested thresholds of significance for GHG emissions. Instead, lead agencies are given the discretion to set quantitative or qualitative thresholds for the assessment and mitigation of GHGs and climate change impacts. In 2008 the SCAQMD adopted quantitative significance thresholds for GHGs.
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
Rule 2700 of the SCAQMD currently includes three rules:
• The purpose of Rule 2700 is to define terms and post global warming potentials. • The purpose of Rule 2701, SoCal Climate Solutions Exchange, is to establish a voluntary program to encourage, quantify, and certify voluntary, high quality certified greenhouse gas emission reductions in the SCAQMD.
• Rule 2702, Greenhouse Gas Reduction Program, was adopted on February 6, 2009. The purpose of this rule is to create a Greenhouse Gas Reduction Program for greenhouse gas emission reductions in the SCAQMD. The SCAQMD will fund projects through contracts in response to requests for proposals or purchase reductions from other parties.
SCAQMD has established recommended significance thresholds for greenhouse gases for local lead agency consideration. The 2008 adopted SCAQMD threshold considers emissions of over 10,000 metric tons CO2E /year to be significant. However, the SCAQMD’s threshold applies only to stationary sources and is expressly intended to apply only when the SCAQMD is the CEQA lead agency. SCAQMD also published a five-tiered draft GHG threshold which includes a 10,000 metric tons of CO2e per year for industrial projects and two options for non-industrial projects. Tier 3 is anticipated to be the primary tier by which the SCAQMD will determine significance for projects. The Tier 3 screening level for stationary sources is based on an emission capture rate of 90 percent for all new or modified projects. A 90-precent emission capture rate means that 90 percent of total emissions from all new or modified stationary source projects would be subject to CEQA analysis. The 90-percent capture rate GHG significance screening level in Tier 3 for stationary sources was derived using the SCAQMD’s annual Emissions Reporting Program.
The current draft thresholds consist of the following tiered approach:
Tier 1 consists of evaluating whether or not the project qualifies for any applicable exemption under CEQA.
Tier 2
consists of determining whether or not the project is consistent with a greenhouse gas reduction plan. If a project is consistent with a qualifying local greenhouse gas reduction plan, it does not have significant greenhouse gas emissions.
Tier 3
consists of screening values, which the lead agency can choose but must be consistent. A project’s construction emissions are averaged over 30 years and are added to a project’s operational emissions. If a project’s emissions are under one of the following screening thresholds, then the project is less than significant:
- Industrial projects: 10,000 MTCO2e per year
- Based on land use types: residential is 3,500 MTCO2e per year; commercial is 1,400 MTCO2e per year; and mixed use is 3,000 MTCO2e per year
or
- All non-industrial land use types: 3,000 MTCO2e per year Tier 4
has the following options:
- Option 1: Reduce emissions from business as usual by a certain percentage; this percentage is currently undefined
- Option 2: Early implementation of applicable AB 32 Scoping Plan measures - Option 3: Year 2020 target for service populations (SP), which includes residents and employees:
4.8 MTCO2e/SP/year for projects and 6.6 MTCO2e/SP/year for plans;
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
- Option 3, 2035 target: 3.0 MTCO2e/SP/year for projects and 4.1 MTCO2e/SP/year for plans Tier 5 involves mitigation offsets to achieve target significance threshold.
Although not formally adopted, the SCAQMD has developed a draft quantitative threshold for all land use types of 3,000 metric tons CO₂E /year (Appendix B). Note that lead agencies retain the responsibility to determine significance on a case‐by‐case basis for each specific project.
Local jurisdictions, such as the City of San Marino, have the authority and responsibility to reduce air pollution through its police power and decision-making authority. The City of San Marino is in the process of developing its Climate Action Plan (CAP), but does not yet have an approved CAP. Therefore, for the purpose of evaluating potential project related impacts, the SCAQMD threshold of 3,000 (Tier 3) annual metric tons is used herein due to the land use type.
4.8.2 Environmental Setting
Global Climate Change (GCC) refers to the change in average meteorological conditions on the earth with respect to temperature, wind patterns, precipitation and storms. Global temperatures are regulated by naturally occurring atmospheric gases such as water vapor, CO2 (carbon dioxide), N2O (nitrous oxide), CH4 (methane), hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons and sulfur hexafluoride. These particular gases are important due to theirresidence time (duration they stay) in the atmosphere, which ranges from 10 years to more than 100 years. These gases allow solar radiation into the earth’s atmosphere, but prevent radioactive heat from escaping, thus warming the earth’s atmosphere. GCC can occur naturally as it has in the past with the previous ice ages.
Gases that trap heat in the atmosphere are often referred to as greenhouse gases (GHG). These gases are released into the atmosphere by both natural and anthropogenic (human) activity. Without the natural greenhouse gas effect, the earth’s average temperature would be approximately 61° Fahrenheit (F) cooler than it is currently. The cumulative accumulation of these gases in the earth’s atmosphere is considered to be the cause for the observed increase in the earth’s temperature.
Since 1988, many countries around the world have made an effort to reduce GHG emissions since climate change is a global issue. Over the past 30 years, the United States, and the State of California, have enacted a myriad of regulations that have evolved over time aimed at reducing GHG emissions in transportation, building and manufacturing.
To reduce statewide vehicle emissions, California requires that all motorists use California Reformulated Gasoline, which is sourced almost exclusively from refineries located in California. Gasoline is the most used transportation fuel in California with 15.5 billion gallons sold in 2017 and is used by light-duty cars, pickup trucks, and sport utility vehicles (California Department of Tax and Fee Administration 2018). Diesel is the second most used fuel in California with 4.2 billion gallons sold in 2015 and is used primarily by heavy duty-trucks, delivery vehicles, buses, trains, ships, boats and barges, farm equipment, and heavyduty construction and military vehicles (CEC 2016). Both gasoline and diesel are primarily petroleumbased, and their consumption releases greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, including CO2 and NOX. The transportation sector is the single largest source of GHG emissions in California, accounting for 41 percent of all inventoried emissions in 2016 (California Air Resources Board [CARB] 2018).
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
Local jurisdictions, such as the City of San Marino, have the authority and responsibility to reduce air pollution through its police power and decision-making authority.
For the purposes of Greenhouse Gas Analysis (Appendix B), the focus was on emissions of CO2, CH4, and N2O because these gasses are the primary contributors to Global Climate Change (GCC) from development projects. Although there are other substances such as fluorinated gases that also contribute to GCC, these fluorinated gases were not evaluated as their sources are not well-defined and do not contain accepted emissions factors or methodology to accurately calculate these gases.
4.8.3 Impact Analysis
CEQA THRESHOLDS
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact or
Does Not
Apply
VIII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS:
Would the project:
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the
environment?
X
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of
greenhouse gases?
X
Discussion
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
Less Than SignificantImpact. The greenhouse gas emissions from Project construction equipment and worker vehicles are shown on Table 6 of Appendix B. The emissions are from all phases of construction. The total construction emissions amortized over a period of 30 years are estimated at 2 metric tons of CO2e per year. Annual CalEEMod output calculations are provided in Appendix A of Appendix B.
Operational emissions occur over the life of the Project. The operational emissions for the Project are 31 metric tons of CO2e per year as shown in Table 7 of Appendix B. These emissions would not exceed the SCAQMD 3,000 metric ton annual threshold for non-industrial projects.
Therefore, the proposed Project’s GHG emissions are considered to be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
b) Would the project conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
As stated previously, the applicable plan for the proposed Project is the SCAQMD's tier 3 thresholds which used Executive Order S-3-05 goal as the basis for deriving the screening level.
The California Governor issued Executive Order S-3-05, GHG Emission, in June 2005, which established the following reduction targets:
• 2010: Reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 2000 levels
• 2020: Reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels
• 2050: Reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels.
In 2006, the California State Legislature adopted AB 32, the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006. AB 32 requires CARB, to adopt rules and regulations that would achieve GHG emissions equivalent to statewide levels in 1990 by 2020 through an enforceable statewide emission cap which was phased in starting in 2012.
Therefore, as the Project's emissions meet the threshold for compliance with Executive Order S3-05, the Project's emissions also comply with the goals of AB 32. Additionally, as the Project meets the current interim emissions targets/thresholds established by SCAQMD, the Project would also be on track to meet the reduction target of 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 mandated by SB-32. Furthermore, all of the post 2020 reductions in GHG emissions are addressed via regulatory requirements at the State level and the Project will be required to comply with these regulations as they come into effect.
The City of San Marino is in the process of developing its Climate Action Plan (CAP), but does not yet have an approved CAP. Therefore, for the purpose of evaluating potential Project-related impacts, the SCAQMD threshold of 3,000 (Tier 3) annual metric tons is used herein. The Project is therefore in compliance with the Tier 3 annual metric tons guidelines.
Therefore, the impacts are less than significant, and no mitigation is required.
4.8.4 Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required.
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
4.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
4.9.1 Regulatory Setting
The City of San Marino has a mutual aid agreement with nearby fire departments from Burbank, Glendale, and Los Angeles County Fire Department (LACoFD). The Cities of Burbank or Glendale will respond to hazardous materials incidents within the City of San Marino. In the event of a hazardous materials incident, either City would provide a qualified hazardous materials response unit. In case a Burbank or Glendale unit is not available, the County of Los Angeles would be utilized to provide hazardous materials units to the City. The San Marino Police Department (SMPD) is responsible for maintaining the free flow of traffic through the City’s transportation corridors and providing for the safety of the public. In the event of a hazardous materials spill/release, it would be the SMPD’s responsibility to cordon off the area limiting access to only the appropriate emergency response personnel. In addition, SMPD personnel would be responsible for any necessary evacuations (CSM Feb 2019).
The air toxics provisions of the Clean Air Act (CAA) require EPA to develop and enforce regulations to protect the public from exposure to airborne contaminants that are known to be hazardous to human health. In accordance with Section 112 of the CAA, EPA establishes National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP). The list of hazardous air pollutants (HAP), or “air toxics”, includes specific compounds that are known or suspected to cause cancer or other serious health effects.
Asbestos was one of the first hazardous air pollutants regulated under the air toxics program. Three of the major health effects associated with asbestos exposure are lung cancer, mesothelioma, and asbestosis. On March 31, 1971, EPA identified asbestos as a hazardous pollutant, and on April 6, 1973, EPA promulgated the Asbestos NESHAP, currently found in 40 CFR Part 61, Subpart M. The Asbestos NESHAP has been amended several times, most comprehensively in November 1990. In 1995, the rule was amended to correct cross-reference citations to other federal and EPA rules governing asbestos.
SCAQMD Rule 1403
The SCAQMD specifies work practice requirements to limit asbestos emissions from building demolition and renovation activities, including the removal and associated disturbance of asbestos-containing materials (ACM). The requirements for demolition and renovation activities include asbestos surveying, notification, ACM removal procedures and time schedules, ACM handling and clean-up procedures, and storage, disposal, and landfilling requirements for asbestos-containing waste materials (ACWM). All operators are required to maintain records, including waste shipment records, and are required to use appropriate warning labels, signs, and markings.
4.9.2 Environmental Setting
A hazardous material is a substance that is toxic, flammable/ignitable, reactive, or corrosive. Extremely hazardous materials are substances that show high or chronic toxicity, carcinogenic, bioaccumulative properties, persistence in the environment, or that are water reactive. Improper use, storage, transport, and disposal of hazardous materials and waste may result in harm to humans, surface and groundwater degradation, air pollution, fire, and explosion.
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
Typical equipment which may contain fuel or hydraulic oil that may be used during construction could include a crane, a forklift/pallet jack, jackhammers, and demolition saws.
Additionally, the SMC was constructed in 1952. Asbestos was used extensively in building construction from the early 1940s through the 1970s as highly-effective and inexpensive fire-retardant material and thermal and acoustic insulator. Asbestos is most commonly found as thermal insulation on pipes, but also may be found in certain types of floor and ceiling tiles. There are two types of asbestos: “friable” and "non-friable.” Friable asbestos generally contains more than 1 percent asbestos by weight or area, and can be crumbled, pulverized, or reduced to powder by the pressure of an ordinary human hand, which releases fibers. Non friable asbestos generally contains more than 1 percent asbestos but cannot be pulverized under hand pressure and generally does not release asbestos fibers.
In November 2021, the City performed a “Comprehensive Hazardous Materials Survey Report” (Vista, November 2021), which is on file with the City Public Works Department. This report will be integrated into the construction documents and contractor compliance.
The results of the survey and testing indicate that hazardous or regulated materials are present at the Project site including asbestos and lead based paint. Asbestos was found to occur in various materials typically used at the time of the building’s construction including but not limited to: flooring, sealing mastic in various locations and various areas of the plaster walls and ceiling. Removal of these hazardous and/or regulated materials is part of the Project construction. The City is required to comply with all regulations related to disturbance and/or removal operations of hazardous materials. State law requires that asbestos-containing materials, or those assumed to contain asbestos, must be performed by a registered and State licensed asbestos removal contractor in accordance with Title 8 of the California Code of Regulations, Section 1529 (8 CCR 1529).
4.9.3 Impact Analysis
CEQA THRESHOLDS
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact or
Does Not Apply
IX. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS:
Would the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials?
X
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable upset
and accident conditions involving the release of
hazardous materials into the environment?
X
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or
acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste
within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed
school?
X
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result,
would it create a significant hazard to the public or
the environment?
X
e) For a project located within an airport land use
plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted,
within two miles of a public airport or public use
airport, would the project result in a safety hazard
for people residing or working in the project area?
X
f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere
with an adopted emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan?
X
g) Expose people or structures, either directly or
indirectly to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires?
X
Discussion
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
Less than Significant Impact. Construction of the proposed Project would involve the use of construction-related chemicals. These include but are not limited to hydraulic fluids, motor oil, grease, runoff, and other related fluids and lubricants. The construction activities would involve the disposal and recycling of materials, trash, and debris. The City’s Local Hazards Mitigation Plan addresses potential hazards in the City and identifies activities to reduce risks and damages associated with hazards, including disposal of hazardous materials due to human activities.
In general, operations are not anticipated to handle hazardous materials, aside from routine cleaning supplies. The proposed Project would comply with local, state, and federal requirements for proper storage and handling of hazardous materials, including development of a hazardous materials business plan if required. In addition, the Project would implement Best Management Practices to minimize impacts in the event of a spill or release of hazardous materials used on site.
These include, but are not limited to routine cleaning, inspection, and maintenance, development of procedures to mitigate spills, provide signage in construction areas, proper storage and handling procedures, and providing secondary containment of liquid materials. Activities inside the building are not anticipated to require the transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials, therefore, the impact of operations is less than significant.
With mandatory regulatory compliance with federal, State, and local laws (as described above), potential hazardous materials impacts associated with construction of the Project would be less than significant and no mitigation is required.
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? Less than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated. Construction and operation of the Project would involve the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials on- and offsite.
Construction activities would require the temporary use of hazardous substances, such as fuel, lubricants, and other petroleum-based products for operation of construction equipment as well as oil, solvents, or paints. As a result, the proposed Project could result in the exposure of persons and/or the environment to an adverse environmental impact due to the accidental release oil, solvents, or paints. However, the transportation, use, and handling of these materials would be temporary and would coincide with the short-term Project construction activities. Further, these materials would be handled and stored in compliance with all with applicable federal, state, and local requirements, any handling of hazardous materials would be limited to the quantities and concentrations set forth by the manufacturer and/or applicable regulations, and all hazardous materials would be securely stored in a construction staging area or similar designated location within the Project site. In addition, the handling, transport, use, and disposal of hazardous materials must comply with all applicable federal, state, and local agencies and regulations, including the Department of Toxic Substances Control; Occupational Health and Safety Administration (OSHA); Caltrans; and the County Health Department - Hazardous Materials Management Services.
Compliance with local, state, and federal regulations would minimize short-term construction impacts associated with the handling, transport, use, and disposal of hazardous materials would be less than significant.
During asbestos removal, the City and the contractor is required to comply with regulations that include but are not limited to, and which are outlined in the “Comprehensive Hazardous Materials Survey Report” (Vista, November 2021), which is on file with the City Public Works Department:
• All disturbance and/or removal operations of asbestos containing materials (ACMs), including Assumed ACMs must be performed by a Cal/OSHA registered and State licensed asbestos removal contractor in accordance with Title 8 of the California Code of Regulations, Section 1529 (8 CCR 1529). Notification must be provided to the Division of Occupational Safety and Health (Cal/OSHA) 24 hours prior to commencing such activities in accordance with 8 CCR 5203. All disturbance and/or abatement operations should be under the direction of a California Certified Asbestos Consultant.
Should the removal of identified asbestos-containing materials involve at least 100 square feet then a 14 calendar day written notification to the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) in accordance with Rule 1403, and a 24 hour written notice to Cal/OSHA prior to the initiation of such activities are required. Notification to employees and contractors working within the building should be made in accordance with the California Health and Safety Code, Section 25915 et.seq., and Proposition 65.
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
• All activities involving potential and identified lead-containing surfaces should be performed in accordance with California Health & Safety Code sections 17920.10 and 10525, 10525.7, Title 8, California Code of Regulations (CCR), Section 1532.1. In addition, all activities involving identified lead-based paints (LBP) must be performed in accordance with Title 17, CCR, Division 1, Chapter 8, Sections 35001 through 36100, and 40 CFR 745 which proscribe the use of California Department of Public Health (CDPH) or Federal EPA certified firms, workers, work practices, and other requirements.
Written notification to Cal/OSHA must be accomplished should LBP activities involve equal to or more than 100 square feet or 100 linear feet of removal in accordance with the requirements of 8 CCR 1532.1. Written notification to CDPH may be required.
Any welding, cutting or heating of metal surfaces containing surface coatings should be conducted in accordance with 8 CCR 1537 Welding, Cutting, and Heating of Coated Metals. This standard requires surfaces covered with toxic preservatives, and in enclosed areas, be stripped of all toxic coatings for a distance of at least 4 inches, in all directions, from the area of heat application prior to the initiation of such heat application, or 8 CCR 1536 Ventilation Requirements for Welding, Brazing, and Cutting.
Therefore, because the City and its contractors are required to comply with federal, State, and local regulations, impacts associated with the handling, transport, use, and disposal of hazardous materials and the release of hazardous materials into the environment would be less than significant.
However, due to the age of the building and the potential for hazardous wastes to be discovered during construction that was not identified in the hazardous waste survey, Mitigation Measure HAZ-1, located at the end of this section, will ensure that potential impacts from hazardous waste that was not identified in the report are less than significant by stopping work and having the suspect material evaluated as a potentially hazardous material. c) Would the project emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated. The proposed Project is adjacent to the Huntington Middle School. And while the contractors will be handling all equipment and materials in accordance with State, federal and local regulations which will minimize potential emissions, implementation of Mitigation Measures HAZ-1 and HAZ-2, located at the end of this section, will ensure that potential impacts from potential emissions and construction debris are minimized to less than significant.
d) Would the project be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment?
Less Than Significant Impact. Section 65962.5(a)(1) requires that Department of Toxic Substance Control (DTSC) “shall compile and update as appropriate, but at least annually, and shall submit
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
to the Secretary for Environmental Protection, a list of all the following: ....(1) all hazardous waste facilities subject to corrective action pursuant to Section 25187.5 of the Health and Safety Code (“HSC”).” The hazardous waste facilities identified in HSC § 25187.5 are those where DTSC has taken or contracted for corrective action because a facility owner/operator has failed to comply with a date for taking corrective action in an order issued under HSC § 25187, or because DTSC determined that immediate corrective action was necessary to abate an imminent or substantial endangerment. This is known as the “Cortese List.” This is a very small and specific subgroup of facilities and they are not separately posted on the DTSC or Cal/EPA’s website. The following databases that meet the “Cortese List” requirements were reviewed for this Project.
Envirostore Database. There are no sites listed in the Envirostore Database within 1,000 feet of the Project site.
Geotracker Database. Geotracker is the SWRCB’s database that manages potential hazardous sites to groundwater. There are no sites listed in the Geotracker Database within 1,000 feet of the Project site.
Based on the result of the database review, the Project site has not been identified in accordance with Section 65962.5 of the Government Code.
The site is located within the San Gabriel Valley Groundwater Basin. Portions of the San Gabriel Valley Groundwater Basin have been listed on the National Priority List (NPL), or Superfund Site, for volatile organic compound (VOC) impacted groundwater. These areas of impacted groundwater are referred to by the EPA as “Operable Units.” The Operable Units are contaminated with chlorinated solvents, namely trichloroethene (TCE) and tetrachloroethylene (PCE), which were historically used by the commercial and industrial facilities located in these areas.
The Project site is located near Area 3 Operable Unit, but not within any known groundwater plumes (refer to Exhibit 4-1 located at the end of this section). In addition, and the Project site is not listed on the EPA database as being a potentially responsible party. Based on this information, there is a low likelihood that elevated concentrations of VOCs are present in groundwater beneath the site or that the site has contributed to the regional groundwater issue.
The scope of work entails working above the ground surface on the interior and exterior of an existing community center. Any exterior work will be focused on the stucco, window and door replacement, tree protection measures by way of protective screens, new landscaping and hardscape work. The hardscape work will only required the removal and reestablishing of approximately 3 inches of the top soil. The Project does not include trenching or boring into the earth in order to capture groundwater. As a result, the Project would not contribute constituents to the Superfund site, therefore, there will be a less than significant impact, and no mitigation is required.
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan had not been adopted, within 2 miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area?
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
No Impact. No airports exist within 2 miles of the Project site. There would be no impact, and no mitigation is required.
f) Would the project impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated. No construction equipment or operations would necessitate lane closures along Huntington Drive. As a result, construction of the proposed Project would have no impact on City emergency response or evacuation plans.
The Crowell Library, located adjacent to the SMC, also has an evacuation plan that allows patrons easy access to its parking lot and exit onto West Drive.
The Huntington Middle School and SMC have shared the same parking lot for decades. To date there has been no emergency documented that caused a conflict of the parking lot or the buildings. Because the City desires to offer the SMC for larger venues as outlined in Table 2.2-1, and the parking lot is a shared resource, there may be an unknown future event that may conflict with the SMC and the Huntington Middle School’s use of the parking lot and/or the buildings. For example, the school may use the parking lot to evacuate students to a safe distance in the event of an emergency inside the school grounds, such as a fire or earthquake. During Project construction, construction equipment and personnel may occasionally be staged in the parking lot during various phases of construction. In the event the school would need to utilize the parking lot for an evacuation during construction, implementation of Mitigation Measure HAZ-2, located at the end of this section, will ensure potential impacts to the school’s evacuation plan are reduced to less than significant.
During Project operations, SMC patrons would be utilizing the parking spaces within the shared parking lot. In the event the school needed to utilize the entire parking lot for an evacuation or evacuation staging, or conversely, the SMC patrons needed to utilize the parking lot for an evacuation of the SMC, both school personnel and SMC patrons may be required to relocate their vehicles and/or coordinate emergency personnel and resources. Implementation of implementation of Mitigation Measure HAZ-3, located at the end of this section will also ensure that both the SMC and the Huntington Middle School have appropriate communication during emergencies that require evacuation.
g) Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires?
No Impact. The Project is located in an urban area, and there are no wildlands in the vicinity of the Project. The new facilities will be constructed in accordance with all local, State and federal regulations regarding fire safety devices, including but not limited to fire sprinklers in the building.
Therefore, there is no impact, and no mitigation is required.
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
4.9.4 Mitigation Measures
The following mitigation measures are required to reduce potential impacts to less than significant:
HAZ-1: Unanticipated Encounters With Hazardous Waste: Following the abatement of hazardous materials by contractors licensed to remove said materials, should materials similar to those identified in “Comprehensive Hazardous Materials Survey Report” (Vista, November 2021), or if other forms of suspect hazardous materials are discovered during the remaining work activities, maintenance personnel and/or contractors must immediately cease work activities which may initiate an exposure episode, and notify the City Public Works Department manager. All such materials should be assumed to be hazardous and handled accordingly until properly tested and assessed.
HAZ-2: Construction Safety and Evacuation Plan: Prior to the start of Project construction, the City shall designate construction equipment and materials safety and staging areas for the City employees and contractors to follow during construction. The staging area plan shall be prepared collaboratively with and/or approved by the San Marino Unified School District and Huntington School personnel. Additional items to be addressed in the plan shall include but not be limited to safety barrier locations, identifying a clear walking path for students, posting hazard signs, and identifying a construction communication protocol between City and School staff.
Additionally, the plan shall address the evacuation protocol for the school, and procedures that the City and contractor must adhere to in the event of a school evacuation during SMC construction.
HAZ-3: Shared Evacuation Plan – Operations. The City shall work with the San Marino Unified School District and Huntington School to create an evacuation plan that addresses procedures if an emergency occurs that effects both facilities, as well as emergency communication protocols when an emergency would impact the parking lot for both facilities.
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
Exhibit 4-1: Area 3 Operable Unit Location
Project Site
1800 E. Huntington Drive
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
4.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
4.10.1 Regulatory Setting
The Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board also requires that dischargers whose construction projects disturb one (1) or more acres of soil or whose projects disturb less than one acre but are part of a larger common plan of development that in total disturbs one or more acres, obtain coverage under the General Permit for Discharges of Storm Water Associated with Construction Activity Construction General Permit Order 2009-0009-DWQ. Construction activity subject to this permit includes clearing, grading and disturbances to the ground such as stockpiling, or excavation. The Construction General Permit requires the development of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) by a certified Qualified SWPPP Developer (QSD). The SWPPP would include BMPs to be implemented during and after Project construction to minimize erosion and sedimentation of downstream watercourses. Only minor utility trenching is proposed for the Project.
4.10.2 Environmental Setting
The Project site is located within the Los Angeles River Watershed (HCU8). The Los Angeles River Watershed is one of the largest in the Region at 824 square miles; the river is 55 miles long. It is also one of the most diverse in terms of land use patterns. Approximately 324 square miles of the watershed are covered by forest or open space land including the area near the headwaters which originate in the Santa Monica, Santa Susana, and San Gabriel Mountains. The rest of the watershed is highly developed.
The Project lies within the Arroyo Seco subwatershed of the Los Angeles River, which stretches from the San Gabriel Mountains to downtown Los Angeles, and drains into the Los Angeles River at the confluence in Lincoln Heights.
Floodplains
The Project site does not contain any natural drainages or waterways. The Flood Insurance Rate Map issued by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) indicates that the Project site is located within Zone X / “shaded” (Map 06037C1675F). Zone X is defined as an area of moderate and minimal flood risk. Shaded areas are characterized as moderate risk within the 0.2-percent-annual-chance floodplain, areas of 1-percent-annual-chance flooding where average depths are less than 1 foot, areas of 1- percentannual-chance flooding where the contributing drainage area is less than 1 square mile, and areas protected from the 1-percent-annual-chance flood by a levee.
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
4.10.3 Impact Analysis
CEQA THRESHOLDS
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact or
Does Not Apply
X. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY:
Would the project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste
discharge requirements?
X
b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or
interfere substantially with groundwater recharge
such that the project may impede sustainable
groundwater management of the basin?
X
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of
the course of a stream or river, or through the
addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which
would:
• result in substantial erosion or siltation
onsite or offsite;
X
• substantially increase the rate or amount of
surface water runoff in a manner which
would result in flooding on or offsite;
X
• create or contribute to runoff water which
would exceed the capacity of existing or
planned stormwater drainage systems or
provide substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff; or
X
• impede or redirect flood flows? X
d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk
release of pollutants due to project inundation??
X
e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a
water quality control plan or sustainable
groundwater management plan?
X
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
Discussion
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements, or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality?
Less Than Significant. The Project is to improve and operate an existing building and does not involve grading that would impact surface waters. No changes or improvements are planned to the existing on-site stormwater flow or flow direction. Ground disturbance consists of limited, minor utility trenching, less than 1 acre, therefore, no SWPPP is required. The impact is less than significant, and no mitigation is required.
b) Would the project substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin?
Less Than Significant. The Project is to improve and operate an existing building and does not impact groundwater supplies. Potable and non-potable water usage is not anticipated to increase above historic existing levels after completion of the Project. The impact is less than significant, and no mitigation is required.
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would:
• result in substantial erosion or siltation onsite or offsite; • substantially increase the rate or amount of surface water runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on or offsite;
• create or contribute to runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff; or • impede or redirect flood flows?
No Impact. The Project is to improve and operate an existing building on a paved site. No changes to the existing on-site drainage patterns are proposed, nor are there any natural drainages on site. Additionally, the Project will not create new impervious surfaces. There will be no impacts, and no mitigation is required.
d) Would the project in flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation?
No Impact. According to the FEMA flood map, the Project site is located within Zone X / “shaded” (Map 06037C1675F), outside the 100-year floodplain, therefore is not in a flood hazard zone. The proposed Project is located inland, more than 40 miles northeast of the Pacific Ocean, and therefore not subject to a tsunami. There are no bodies of water in the vicinity of the site where the oscillation in the water level of a lake or partially enclosed body of water could impact the
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
site; therefore, the site is not located in or near any seiche zone. There are no impacts, and no mitigation is required.
e) Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan?
No Impact. The proposed Project is to improve an existing building that is used for recreational purposes. There will be no grading or changes in the existing grading, drainage patterns or existing use.
4.10.4 Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required.
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California December 2021
4.11 LAND USE PLANNING
4.11.1 Environmental Setting
The Project is located within the City limits. The Project proposes to improve an existing City building that is used for recreation. The Project site is zoned R-1, Residential. According to Section 23.02.01 of the San Marino Municipal Code, Recreational and child care activities may be conducted by the City of San Marino on properties in residential zones that are owned by the City.
4.11.2 Impact Analysis
CEQA THRESHOLDS
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact or
Does Not Apply
XI. LAND USE AND PLANNING:
Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established community? X
b) Cause a significant environmental impact due to
a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or
regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or
mitigating an environmental effect?
X
Discussion
a) Would the project physically divide an established community? No Impact. The Project proposes to improve an existing City building to continue use as a community center. No zoning or land use revisions are proposed that would divide the community. No impacts would occur, and no mitigation is required. b) Would the project cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?
Potentially Significant. The Project’s Land Use Designation is Very Low Density Residential. In 1949, the San Marino Women’s Club requested and received approval from San Marino City Council because the parcel was zoned for residential use, and the intended use of a community center and building setbacks did not fit in with the club’s plans for the property. The Project will not change the land use or use of the building as a public gathering space as it has existed for decades. Moreover, according to Section 23.02.01 of the San Marino Municipal Code, Recreational and child care activities may be conducted by the City of San Marino on properties
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California December 2021
in residential zones that are owned by the City. Therefore, the Project is consistent with the City’s Land Use designation.
The City’s General Plan and Circulation Element identifies Goals, Policies and Implementation measures that guide the City’s actions. “Goals” represent a synthesis of input from those who live and work in the City of San Marino and define desired General Plan outcomes. “Policies” provide the overall direction for choosing among alternative courses of action necessary to achieve the Goals while also providing a measure of flexibility needed to adapt the action to changes over the life of the General Plan. “Implementation Measures” are specific, discreet actions the City may take to achieve the future conditions reflected in the General Plan element. Implementation Measures define the municipal work program for providing transportation improvements needed to meet Goals identified in the General Plan element, consistent with the element’s policies.
When the Project is evaluated against the City’s goals and objectives of its General Plan and Circulation Element, the Project is generally consistent with the City’s Vision Statement, identified in the following excerpt from the General Plan:
The city government embraces the values of the community, and recognizes the need to make our City more attractive, more desirable, and more responsive to the changing needs of its citizens.
Decision makers are accessible to residents. Although the City adapts to change in a deliberate way, its intent is to satisfy residents’ needs while protecting its financial resources.
Table 4.11-1 at the end of this section provides an evaluation of Project consistency with the specific Goals and Policies identified in the Circulation Element and General Plan that have been adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. For the purposes of Table 4.11-1, only those Goals, policies and implementation measures that are applicable to the Project approvals are identified.
In summary, Table 4.11-1 identifies the following:
• Circulation Element: Consistent.
• General Plan - Land Use Chapter
o Section One - Land Use Designations - Consistent
o Section Three – Preservation - Inconsistent
• General Plan – Community Services Chapter
o Section One – Recreational Services: Consistent
• General Plan – Safety Chapter
o Section Four – Noise: Consistent
In general, the Land Use Chapter, which includes Section Three – Preservation, identifies the following overarching guiding principals for its Goals, Policies and Implementation Measures:
1. Maintain the residential character of San Marino.
2. Protect the single-family home pattern of development in San Marino neighborhoods.
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California December 2021
3. Protect existing lot sizes and discourage lot subdivisions that are incompatible with the neighborhood in which they are located.
4. Support unique commercial areas - business activities should meet the needs of local residents while recognizing that some businesses are attractive regionally.
5. Perpetuate a healthy, but contained and limited, commercial environment as a service and convenience to San Marino residents, without detrimental encroachment upon the single-family areas of the community.
6. Accommodate future needs for municipal facilities.
7. Protect existing and provide for more recreational space for residents.
8. Cooperate with The Huntington and support the Old Mill as local cultural resources.
9. Ensure high quality design characteristics of existing and proposed structures in San Marino.
10. Ensure that new development is compatible with established neighborhoods.
11. Preserve significant historic properties on the State Register and National Register.
12. Maintain the current standard of high-quality and well-maintained properties.
13. Maintain reasonable buffers between residential neighborhoods and commercial uses in the City.
14. Establish policies for on-site parking for all uses and allow for adequate alternative parking sites for commercial uses.
15. Protect property values.
Therefore, the Project is consistent with the overarching guidelines, except for No. 11 which is the preservation of significant historic properties on the State Register and National Register.
Additionally, the City’s General Plan was prepared prior to the City’s acquisition of the SMC.
Therefore, the historical and cultural land uses, goals and policies contained in the General Plan were identified only for The Huntington Library, Art Collections, and Botanical Gardens, The Old Mill, and Lacy Park, but were not identified for the SMC. Therefore, the General Plan, Land Use Chapter Section Three – Preservation does not list the SMC as being among the buildings in the City that are listed on the Federal, State, or local registers.
The Land Use Chapter, Section Three – Preservation identifies the following City process with respect to historic properties in the City:
The City has an intensive design review process and has adopted residential design guidelines. These include detailed text and illustrations intended to ensure the compatibility of overall architecture as well as architectural detailing with existing development. Currently, a design review committee appointed by the Council reviews development plans to ensure compatibility with the existing historic fabric of San Marino neighborhoods. Alterations to property visible from public view as well as all new construction are scrutinized.
The City’s review process for its citizens is outlined in Chapter XXIII, Article 18 and is designed to work with property owners of historic properties to encourage the retention of the character of the structure while bringing the structure up to current codes and in accordance with the Secretary’s Standards. Specifically, Chapter XXIII, Article 18 states it is designed to “promote the public health, safety, and general welfare by providing for the identification, designation,
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California December 2021
protection, enhancement, and ongoing use of historical resources that represent the City's cultural, architectural, social, economic, and political heritage.” As discussed in Section 4.5, the SMC is considered a City Landmark. Chapter XXIII, Article 18 of the San Marino City Code, Section 23.18.03 (A) states: “Automatic Designation: Any property within the City that is listed in the National Register of Historic Places or the California Register of Historic Places is automatically designated as a historic landmark for purposes of this article.” The California OHP identifies the SMC as being listed on the California Register through its listing on the State’s BERD.
Chapter XXIII, Article 18, Section 23.18.07 of the San Marino City Code also identifies that no alteration, restoration, rehabilitation, construction, removal, relocation, or demolition of any historic landmark shall occur unless the City has first issued a Certificate of Appropriateness (Certificate) or Certificate of Economic Hardship. Section 23.18.08(C) states that the Planning Commission must approve the Certificate of Appropriateness if more than minor modifications are proposed that are beyond the authority of the Planning and Building Director to issue such Certificate. However, the Planning Commission must make the following findings to issue a Certificate of Appropriateness:
a. The project will not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historic landmark within the meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act as determined by the commission and the Council;
b. The project is consistent with the provisions of this article; and c. The project is consistent with the Secretary's Standards and any applicable design guidelines adopted by the City.
Because the SMC is a public building and a historic structure, the City conducted extensive outreach for the Project beginning in January 2018 when the City Recreation Commission began holding public discussions regarding re-envisioning the City’s recreation program. In 2018, the City Council adopted a strategic plan that identified developing a plan for the future of the SMC and appointed a “Blue Ribbon Committee” to evaluate the recreational programming. In August 2019, conceptual plans were developed for the SMC. Between August and September 2020, the City surveyed the community regarding the needs and appearance of the SMC. One of the survey questions asked the community if the City should restore the original 1950s exterior architecture or remodel it to match other adjacent buildings. Of the 209 responses received, the results indicated:
• Restore 1950 's 79
• Match Crowell Library 95
• Match Barth Athletic Center 4
• Do something different 10
• No response 21
The result of the outreach was that nearly equal portions of the community supported retaining the existing design or supported a more modern look. Given that there was no clear community consensus, the City Council, after deliberations, determined that redesigning the SMC to more closely align with the architectural style of the Crowell Public Library would more closely align
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California December 2021
with the overall City’s vision, “to make our City more attractive, more desirable, and more responsive to the changing needs of its citizens.” An architect was retained to provide the current plans.
Therefore, while the City did conduct extensive outreach and the Project does align with the overall vision, the Project does not align with the overall goal to preserve the historical structures in San Marino. Therefore, the Project impact is Potentially Significant.
Additionally, the Project is not consistent with Chapter XXIII, Article 18, Section 23.18.07 findings for the Planning Commission to make to issue a Certificate of Appropriateness when renovating historic buildings. Therefore, the Project impact is Potentially Significant.
4.11.3 Mitigation Measures
Potential mitigation measures to reduce the impact to less than significant would be the same as discussed in Section 4.5.4 and include re-designing the Project to a design that is compliant with the Secretary’s Standards. Currently, no mitigation measures are proposed to reduce impacts to less than significant.
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
Table 4.11-1: General Plan Consistency Analysis
General Plan Goal or Policy Project Consistency Analysis Circulation Element
San Marino Entry Statements
Policy 1. The City shall develop a design for
entrance treatments to the City and install them in
priority order in accordance with the hierarchy of
streets established in the functional classification
map, as resources permit. The entrance treatments
shall be designed to communicate the message to
drivers entering the City that San Marino is a
residential community and that driving habits
should reflect that fact.
Consistent. The Project site is not considered a City
entry point, but is located along Huntington Drive,
a parkway road and a main entry road to the City
of San Marino, approximately 1.4 miles west of the
City boundary. The Project site is generally situated
in a residentially-zoned neighborhood, within a
pocket of public service buildings, as they have
existed for decades, including the Crowell Library,
the SMC (Project), Huntington Middle School,
School District office, and the Valentine
Elementary School. And though the Project is not
located at the entrance to the City limits, the
Project attempts to embody the spirit of Policy 1 by
envisioning an aesthetically similar group of public
use buildings to give visitors a residential
community feel in the otherwise residential
neighborhood that surrounds the Project.
Functional Classifications of Roadways
Policy 11. Maintain and enhance the character of
Huntington Drive as a Parkway and as the main
commercial/civic center of San Marino, thereby
strengthening support for these commercial areas,
through landscaping and pedestrian amenities in
keeping with the residential character of the
community.
Consistent. Huntington Drive will remain as a
Parkway with the Project. The redesign of the
building from its 1950s style to the “Spanish
Mediterranean” style that is more closely matched
with the Crowell Library and Huntington Middle
School is intended to enhance the character of
Huntington Drive by identifying it architecturally as
being associated with the main commercial/civic
center of San Marino.
Neighborhood Traffic Control Plans
Policy 13: Develop and implement neighborhood
traffic control plans which will reduce the speed
and volume of traffic on residential streets to
acceptable levels.
Policy 17: Improve safety at school drop-off areas
and employ appropriate traffic control measures in
the vicinity of schools to maximize safety for school
children walking or bicycling to/from school.
Consistent. The Project’s Traffic Impact Study
determined that the Project would not contribute
to additional traffic in the vicinity to the levels that would require traffic mitigation measures.
Consistent. The Project includes implementation of
Mitigation Measure HAZ-1 to address safety of the
school-aged pedestrians during construction.
Public Transportation
Policy 18: The City shall work with public transit
agencies to ensure that transit lines are routed on
streets in accordance with the policies of [the]
Circulation Element.
Consistent. The Project occurs on a major street
where transit is located.
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
General Plan Goal or Policy Project Consistency Analysis Policy 22. The City shall continue to provide paratransit (Dial-A-Ride) services to residents, to the extent that resources allow.
Consistent. The City provides a Dial-A-Ride service
for San Marino residents who are 60 years and
older or for those under 60 years with a physiciancertified disability that prevents the use of regular public transit. To use this service, you must apply
for membership. The Project includes
implementation of PS-4 to encourage the use of
paratransit services such as Dial-A-Ride services.
Non-Motorized Transportation
Policy 25: In areas of the City, where commercial
or public facilities are located, the City shall
implement measures to enhance the pedestrian
and bicycle environment, to attempt to slow
passing vehicular traffic, and to ensure
handicapped accessibility in accordance with the
requirements of the Americans with Disabilities
Act.
Policy 26: Install pedestrian-activated signals,
where appropriate, and crosswalks to provide
safe, adequate pedestrian accessibility for
shopping areas and residences.
Consistent. The Project is located along Huntington
Drive, near West Drive. The Huntington/West
intersection contains ADA-compliant cross-walks
that are clearly marked, and in which the signals
are pedestrian activated, and where there are ADA
compliant ramps.
Transportation Demand Management
Policy 36: The City shall encourage its residents
and employees to utilize alternative modes of
transportation such as buses, light rail transit,
carpools, Dial-A-Ride vehicles, bicycles and
walking and shall take measures to ensure that
these alternate modes are available in the City.
Policy 37: The City shall encourage Transportation
Demand Management programs as a mechanism
to reduce parking demands in the City.
Consistent. The Project includes implementation of
Mitigation Measure PS-4 that encourages the use
of alternative transportation methods.
Consistent. The Project includes implementation of
Mitigation Measure PS-2 and PS-4 that seek to
manage parking for large events and encourage
ride share opportunities.
General Plan - Land Use Chapter
Section One – Land Use Designations
Residential Land Uses
Objective L.2 Very Low Density Residential (2-4
d.u./acre)– Provide residential area districts with
large lots in traditional neighborhood patterns for
single-family residential use
Consistent. The SMC, located in a Very Low Density
Residential Zone, was constructed in the 1950s
after the San Marino Women’s Club received
special approval from the City at that time to
construct a community center. The City purchased
the building in 2005. City Code Section 23.06.01(D)
allows for public buildings in residential zones
provided that the use is not obnoxious or
detrimental to the welfare of the community. The
Project seeks to make improvements to the
building, and this Initial Study has determined that
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
General Plan Goal or Policy Project Consistency Analysis there would be no detrimental impact to the
welfare of the community.
Objective L.5 Neighborhood Character – Preserve
the character of existing neighborhoods.
Policies:
Place limits on mass, scale, and site placement of
new construction and additions.
Maintain residential design guidelines that require
compatibility with the neighborhood, while still
allowing for design choice.
Prohibit parking of vehicles in front yards, except
as permitted for short-term parking in driveways.
Encourage parking of vehicles in garages
Consistent. The SMC is an existing public building
constructed in the 1950s in a residential zone. The
building is adjacent to the Crowell Library, the
Huntington Middle School and the School District
offices. The Project proposes to revise the style of
the 1950s building to a “Spanish Mediterranean”
architectural style that more closely matches that
of the adjacent buildings.
Commercial Land Uses
Objective L.8 Huntington Drive – Designate areas for
commercial use on Huntington Drive consistent with
existing commercial locations.
Policies:
Limit building height and mass to maintain a
suburban scale to the commercial district.
Consistent. The SMC is an existing public building
constructed in the 1950s along Huntington Drive in
a residential zone. The building is adjacent to the
Crowell Library, the Huntington Middle School and
the School District offices. The Project proposes to
revise the style of the 1950s building to a “Spanish
Mediterranean” architectural style that more
closely matches that of the adjacent buildings.
Section Three - Preservation
Goal: Protect the historical and culturally significant resources that contribute to community identity
and a sense of history.
Objective L.23 Review existing listed resources and
determine appropriate action for state and national
listings.
Policies:
Consider whether or not resources are
appropriately placed on current lists.
Recognize, publicize, and maintain the sites that
are locally significant.
Identify significant architectural, cultural, and
historic resources within the city that would qualify
for the state or national register.
Inconsistent. The SMC is eligible to the National
Register of Historic Places, is listed on the California Register of Historic Resources, is a city landmark
per the Code, and was identified in a “Citywide
Historic Resources Survey Report.” The SMC was
identified to be the first community center in San
Marino. The Project consists of materially altering
the architectural design of the SMC in a manner
that is not consistent with the Secretary of the
Interior Standards for the Treatment of Historic
Properties. The proposed design, however, was a
result of significant City outreach effort among the
community groups – some of which agreed with
the revised architectural design and some of which
did not feel the architectural design should be
changed. Therefore, while the Project is consistent
with some of the polices identified in Section Three
of the Land Use Element, the Project is not
consistent with the Goal or Objective to, overall,
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
General Plan Goal or Policy Project Consistency Analysis Cooperate with the San Marino Historical Society
and other community groups involved in
recognizing the City’s history.
protect the resource. The City Council has the
ultimate authority to determine the appropriate
action for state and national listings.
Objective L.24 Encourage the preservation of
significant architectural, historic, and cultural
resources.
Policies:
Encourage the identification of areas and
structures of historic, architectural, and cultural
significance within the city.
Any designation based upon area, site or structure
within the city should be subject to the City’s
approval.
Any designation of a property within the City
should be subject to the property owner’s
approval.
Inconsistent. The policies that support Objective
L.24 are related to the encouraging the
identification of historic properties. The Project
will materially alter the SMC, a listed resource, in a
manner that would jeopardize its listing, making it
ineligible for listing in a future study.
Objective L.25 Encourage and provide incentives to
achieve preservation of significant architectural,
historical, and cultural buildings and
neighborhoods.
Policies:
Support tax incentives and other methods deemed
mutually agreeable to the City and the property
owner, which will help to preserve historic
resources.
Consider the relaxation of current building and
zoning codes, as necessary, to preserve significant
structures, while ensuring that basic health and
safety goals are met.
Provide information to property owners who
desire such information on how to rehabilitate,
research, and appreciate their architecturally,
historically, and culturally significant property.
Inconsistent. The Project is to make alterations to
the SMC in a manner that is not consistent with the
Secretary of the Interior Standards for the
Treatment of Historic Properties (Standards). The
Standards are designed to assist property owners
with the rehabilitation of historic properties in a
manner that will retain their historical value yet
allow the structure to be brought into current
safety and other code compliance.
General Plan – Community Services Chapter
Section One – Recreation Services
Objective CS.3 Maximize program opportunities by
coordinating resources.
Policies:
Consistent. The SMC was the first community
center in the City of San Marino, operated by the
San Marino Women’s Club. The City, which
purchased the building in 2005, plans to continue
to operate the building as a public recreation
center.
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
General Plan Goal or Policy Project Consistency Analysis Meet regularly and coordinate resources with all
community organizations and agencies that serve
the City’s recreational needs.
Coordinate programs with the San Marino Unified
School District.
Objective CS.5 Provide efficiently-used, wellmaintained space for staff, volunteers, and participants in the recreation program.
Policies:
Inventory the facilities annually to ensure the
appearance, safety, and accommodations meet
the needs of the program and participants.
Identify facilities that are needed by the
community because existing facilities are
inadequate, unavailable, offer poor conditions, or
do not exist.
Manage long-term facilities needs using the
information of facility use, identification of needs,
and community input.
Consistent. The Project provides for interior
modifications to accommodate recreation staff
offices, as well as proposes various energy
efficiency and other upgrades to the plumbing,
mechanical, lighting, etc to ensure the overall
space is adequate for community programs. The
City also conducted extensive community outreach
as part of the Project development.
Section Four - Education
Objective CS.15 Ensure public safety in and around
school sites.
Policies:
Work with the District and other schools to ensure
efficient and safe traffic flow around schools.
Work with the District and other schools to develop
public information for parents regarding safety
issues.
Consistent. The SMC is located adjacent to the
Huntington Middle School and shares a parking lot.
The Project includes mitigation measures HAZ-1
and HAZ-2 that identifies strategies to ensure
safety of the students during construction and
development of a long-term strategy for
emergency evacuation procedures during either a
school or community emergency. Mitigation
measures PS-1 through PS-5 are designed to
mitigate for potential parking and traffic conflicts
during flow during large events held at the school
and the SMC.
Objective CS.16 Maximize use of school facilities.
Policies:
Explore joint use of facilities for activities such as
service yards, maintenance, and recreation, where
appropriate.
Include the school district in the City’s master
planning efforts to discuss joint use of parking,
access, and traffic management and circulation.
Consistent. The SMC is located adjacent to the
Huntington Middle School and shares a parking lot.
A formal shared parking agreement between the
City and the SMUSD was initiated in 2006 after the
City purchased the building, and the agreement
was renewed in 2019 for a 10-year term. Project
mitigation measures PS-1 through PS-5 are
designed to mitigate for potential parking and
traffic conflicts during flow during large events held
at the school and the SMC.
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
General Plan Goal or Policy Project Consistency Analysis Continue working with Southwestern Academy as
needed to ensure use of facilities for City programs
and community activities.
Continue joint use of space at school district
facilities as needed for City programs.
General Plan – Safety Chapter
Section Four - Noise
Objective S. 14 Maintain a Noise Ordinance that
includes the latest technologies and policies in the
field of noise.
Policies:
Continuously evaluate existing noise ordinance
requirements for mechanical equipment and leaf
blowers.
Consider structuring the City’s Noise Ordinance to
include specific time duration requirements for
various noise levels.
Restrict grading and construction activities to daily
operation between 7 a.m. and 6 p.m. Monday
through Friday and 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. on Saturdays,
with no construction on Sundays or federal
holidays.
Include a provision in the noise ordinance requiring
that all construction, grading, and gardening
equipment be properly maintained.
Require vehicles and compressors to utilize
exhaust mufflers and engine enclosure covers as
designed by the manufacturer.
Consistent. The SMC construction would occur
within the times permitted by the City ordinance.
The Noise Study conducted for the Project
identified that while construction noise is
anticipated to exceed the limits allowed in a
residential zone, the Project surroundings are
public buildings within a residential zone, and
there are less than significant impacts.
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
4.12 MINERAL RESOURCES
4.12.1 Regulatory Setting
In 1975, the California legislature enacted the Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (SMARA). This act provides for the reclamation of mined lands and directs the State Geologist to classify (identify and map) the non-fuel mineral resources of the state to show where economically significant mineral deposits occur and where they are likely to occur based upon the best available scientific data.
4.12.2 Environmental Setting
The Project is located in an urbanized area of San Marino. The California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology has not identified significant mineral resources within the City of San Marino.
4.12.3 Impact Analysis
CEQA THRESHOLDS
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact or
Does Not Apply
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?
X
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally
important mineral resource recovery site delineated
on a local general plan, specific plan or other land
use plan?
X
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?
No Impact. The Project site is not located on a known important mineral resource recovery site and is not currently being mined or has plans to be mined. No impacts would occur, and no mitigation is required.
b) Would the project result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? No Impact. As discussed above, the Project site is not located on a known mineral deposit and is not currently being mined or has plans to be mined. No land use plan that applies to the site
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
designates it as a mineral resource recovery site. No impacts would occur, and no mitigation is required.
4.12.4 Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required.
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
4.13 NOISE
A Noise Impact Study was prepared for the proposed Project in June 2021 (Appendix D).
Environmental noise is commonly measured in A-weighted decibels (dBA). A decibel (dB) is a unit of sound energy intensity. Sound waves, traveling outward from a source, exert a sound pressure level (commonly called a “sound level”) measured in dB. An A-weighted decibel (dBA) is a decibel corrected for the variation in frequency response that duplicates the sensitivity of human ears. Decibels are measured on a logarithmic scale. Generally, a three dBA increase in ambient noise levels represents the threshold at which most people can detect a change in the noise environment; an increase of 10 dBA is perceived as a doubling of loudness.
Noise Descriptors
The noise descriptors utilized in the noise study for this Project include but are not limited to the following:
• Ambient Noise Level: The composite of noise from all sources, near and far. In this context, the ambient noise level constitutes the normal or existing level of environmental noise at a given location.
• Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL): The average equivalent A-weighted sound level during a 24- hour day, obtained after addition of five (5) decibels to sound levels in the evening from 7:00 to 10:00 PM and after addition of ten (10) decibels to sound levels in the night before 7:00 AM and after 10:00 PM.
• Equivalent Sound Level (LEQ): The sound level corresponding to a steady noise level over a given sample period with the same amount of acoustic energy as the actual time-varying noise level.
The energy average noise level during the sample period.
Federal Regulations
The adverse impact of noise was officially recognized by the federal government in the Noise Control Act of 1972, which serves three purposes:
• Publicize noise emission standards for interstate commerce • Assist state and local abatement efforts
• Promote noise education and research
The federal government advocates that local jurisdictions use their land use regulatory authority to arrange new development in such a way that “noise sensitive” uses are either prohibited from being constructed adjacent to a highway or, or alternatively that the developments are planned and constructed in such a manner that potential noise impacts are minimized.
Since the federal government has preempted the setting of standards for noise levels that can be emitted by the transportation source, the City is restricted to regulating the noise generated by the transportation system through nuisance abatement ordinances and land use planning.
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
State Regulations
The State of California has established noise insulation standards as outlined in Title 24 and the Uniform Building Code (UBC) which in some cases requires acoustical analyses to outline exterior noise levels and to ensure interior noise levels do not exceed the interior threshold.
The State Department of Health Services has published guidelines that rank noise land use compatibility in terms of normally acceptable, conditionally acceptable, normally unacceptable, and clearly unacceptable as illustrated in Table 4-13-1.
Table 4.13-1: Land Use Compatibility Guidelines
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
City of San Marino
The City of San Marino outlines their noise regulations and standards within the Municipal Code and the General Plan.
The Project site is zoned Residential (R)‐1. Per Section 14.04.04 of the Municipal Code, noise levels in R‐1 Residential zones must not exceed 55 dBA between 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. and 45 dBA 10:00 p.m. 7:00 a.m.
Per Section 14.04.07 of the Municipal Code, it is unlawful for a person within a residential zone, or within a radius of five hundred feet (500 feet) therefrom, to operate equipment or perform any outside construction or repair work on buildings, structures or projects or to operate equipment in such a manner that noise is produced which would constitute a violation of Section 14.04.05 of the Municipal Code unless, a permit is obtained from the planning and building director. As defined in Section 14.04.05, noise levels at any adjacent residential property line must not exceed 65 dB when originating from any parcel in an R‐1 Zone and 75 dB from any parcel in a C‐1 Zone, Park and Recreational Zone or Historical and Cultural Zone. These standards are used herein for the purpose evaluating stationary noise impacts.
With respect to traffic noise, no specific standards for this source are provided in the San Marino Municipal Code. In 1976, the California Department of Health, State Office of Noise Control published a recommended noise/land use compatibility matrix which many jurisdictions have adopted as a standard in their general plan noise elements. The California State Office of Planning and Research 2017 updates to General Plan Guidelines for cities, Appendix D Noise Element Guidelines, identifies that exterior noise levels up to 60 dBA (CNEL or Ldn) are normally compatible. Noise levels between 60 dBA and 70 dBA (CNEL or Ldn) are conditionally compatible. These noise levels are referenced in the Noise Element of the San Marino General Plan (page V‐82); and thus, are used as the standard herein for the purpose of evaluating traffic noise impacts.
Vibration
Ground-borne vibrations consist of rapidly fluctuating motions within the ground that have an average motion of zero. The effects of ground-borne vibrations typically only cause a nuisance to people, but at extreme vibration levels, damage to buildings may occur. Although ground-borne vibration can be felt outdoors, it is typically only an annoyance to people indoors where the associated effects of the shaking of a building can be notable. Ground-borne noise is an effect of ground-borne vibration and only exists indoors since it is produced from noise radiated from the motion of the walls and floors of a room and may also consist of the rattling of windows or dishes on shelves.
The San Marino Municipal Code does not address construction‐related vibration; thus, for the purpose of evaluating Project‐related vibration impacts, the Noise Impact Assessment (Appendix D) utilized: 1) the source data established by Table 6-3 of the Federal Transit Administration’s (FTA) Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment (September 2018), identified in Table 4.13-2; and 2) the Caltrans Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual, April 2020 that identifies physical effects at various levels (Table 4.13-3).
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
Table 4.13-2: Vibration Source Levels for Construction Equipment Peak Particle Velocity Approximate Vibration Level
(inches/second) at 25 feet LV (dVB) at 25 feet
Pile driver (impact) 1.518 (upper range) 11
2 0.644 (typical) 10
4 Pile driver (sonic) 0.734 upper range 10
5 0.170 typical 93
Clam shovel drop (slurry wall) 0.202 94
Hydromill 0.008 in soil 66
(slurry wall) 0.017 in rock 75
Vibratory Roller 0.21 94
Hoe Ram 0.089 87
Large bulldozer 0.089 87
Caisson drill 0.089 87
Loaded trucks 0.076 86
Jackhammer 0.035 79
Small bulldozer 0.003 58
Source: Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment, Federal Transit Administration, September 2018.
Table 4.13-3: Human Reaction and Damage to Buildings Thresholds Peak Particle
Velocity
(inches/second)
Approximate
Vibration
Velocity Level
(VdB)
Human Reaction Effects on Buildings
0.006–0.019 64–74 Range of threshold of perception.
Vibrations unlikely to cause
damage of any type.
0.08 87 Vibrations readilyperceptible.
Recommended upper level to
which ruins andancient
monuments should be
subjected.
0.01 92
Level at which continuousvibrations
may begin to annoy people,
particularly those involved in vibration
sensitive activities.
Virtually no risk of architectural
damage to normal buildings.
0.2 94 Vibrations may begin to annoy people
in buildings.
Threshold at which thereis a risk
of architectural damage to
normaldwellings.
0.4–0.6 98-104
Vibrations considered unpleasant by
people subjected to continuous
vibrations and unacceptable to
some people walking on bridges.
Architectural damage and
possibly minor structural
damage.
Source: California Department of Transportation, Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual, April 2020.
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
Construction activities such as blasting, pile driving, demolition, excavation or drilling have the potential to generate ground vibrations. With respect to ground‐borne vibration impacts on structures, the Caltrans Manual states that ground‐borne vibration levels in excess of 94 VdB (0.2 PPV) would damage buildings extremely susceptible to vibration damage.
A threshold of 65 VdB is used for buildings where low ambient vibration is essential for interior operations, such as hospitals and recording studios. A threshold of 72 VdB is used for residences and buildings where people normally sleep (i.e., hotels and rest homes). A threshold of 75 VdB is used for institutional land uses where activities occur primarily during the daytime (i.e., churches and schools).
Because the proposed project would modify an existing building, a vibration threshold of 94 VdB (0.2 PPV) is used herein for the purpose of identifying a potentially significant impact under CEQA.
4.13.1 Environmental Setting
The Project site is an existing community center, constructed in 1952 as the San Marino Women’s Club.
The Project site is bounded on the west by the Crowell library, on the east and south by the Huntington Middle School, and on the north by Huntington Drive. The most common and primary sources of noise in the Project site vicinity are motor vehicles (e.g., automobiles and trucks) operating on Huntington Drive.
Motor vehicle noise is of concern because where a high number of individual events occur, it can create a sustained noise level. Aircraft overflights were observed but do not noticeably contribute to the ambient noise environment.
The Noise Analysis in Appendix D included data gathering on the general noise environment at the Project site by collecting two weekday morning 15‐ minute noise measurements on and in proximity to the site on April 7, 2021, using an ANSI Type II integrating sound level. The temperature during monitoring was 65 degrees Fahrenheit with no perceptible wind.
Site 1 is located on the Project site approximately 30 feet south of the nearest north/eastbound lanes of Huntington Drive. This location is on the site and represents noise levels at the sensitive receivers located along the north side of Huntington Drive. During monitoring, 224 cars/light trucks, four medium trucks (six tires/two axles) and zero heavy trucks (all vehicles with three or more axles) passed the site. Site 2 is located in front of the Crowell Public Library north of the site near the intersection of Huntington Drive and West Drive. This location is northeast of the site and represents noise levels at the nearest sensitive receivers located to the north of West Drive.
During monitoring, 290 cars/light trucks, 10 medium truck (six tires/two axles) and zero heavy trucks (all vehicles with three or more axles) passed the site. The dominant noise source is traffic operating primarily on Huntington Drive. Table 4.13-4 identifies the noise measurement locations and measured noise levels.
Monitoring locations are shown in Figure 3 of Appendix D. As shown, the Leq was 61.6 dBA at Site M1 and
63.7 dBA at Site M2. The monitoring data sheet is provided as part of the Noise Analysis in Appendix D.
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
Table 4.13-4: Noise Monitoring Results – Existing Condition Monitoring
Station Measurement Location Primary NoiseSource Sample Time Leq (dBA) M1 Project site approximately 30 feet south of the
nearest Huntington Drive travel lane Traffic Weekday morning 61.6 M2 Adjacent to the Crowell Library north of the site. Traffic Weekday morning 63.7
4.13.2 Impact Analysis
CEQA THRESHOLDS
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact or
Does Not
Apply
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 site in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?
X
b) Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or
groundborne noise levels?
X
c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public
airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to
excessive noise levels?
X
a) Would the project result in generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? Less Than Significant Impact. The Noise Analysis in Appendix D identified the following:
Construction
The primary main noise source during construction activities would be associated with demolition and construction of the proposed improvements. Exterior improvements requiring removal of concrete or other hardscape materials would require the use of jackhammers and small tractors/bobcats to transport material to haul trucks. A jackhammer is likely to be the noisiest
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
type of equipment used over a sustained period of time during exterior demolition. Installation of new concrete hardscape would require use of concrete mixers to deliver the material.
Interior improvements would require materials be delivered to the site; however, noise would be limited to haul trucks. Interior improvements would be inaudible to neighboring uses.
Table 4.13-5 identifies typical maximum construction noise levels based on 25, 50 and 100 feet from the Project site.
Table 4.13-5: Typical Maximum Construction Equipment Noise Levels Equipment Onsite
Typical Maximum
Level (dBA) 25 Feet
from the Source
Typical Maximum
Level (dBA) 50 Feet
from the Source
Typical Maximum
Level (dBA) 100
Feet from the
Source
Air Compressor 84 79 73
Backhoe 84 79 73
Bobcat Tractor 84 79 73
Concrete Mixer 85 78 72
Bulldozer 88 82 76
Jack Hammer 95 89 83
Pavement Roller 86 80 74
Street Sweeper 88 82 76
Man Lift 81 75 69
Dump Truck 82 76 70
Noise sensitive uses near the Project site include the Crowell Public Library which is located adjacent to and northeast of the San Marino Center. Existing school buildings and single‐family residences are located 200‐300 feet west, south and east of the site. Table 4.13-6 identifies the anticipated typical maximum noise levels at various distances from the Project site.
Table 4.13-6: Typical Construction Noise Levels
at Various Distances from Project
Distance from
Construction
Typical Maximum Noise
Level at Receptor (dBA)
25 feet 88
50 feet 82
100 feet 76
250 feet 68
500 feet 62
1,000 feet 56
Actual noise levels will fluctuate throughout the day and may periodically exceed 95 dBA at the property line depending on the location of jackhammer use used and whether multiple pieces of equipment are operating simultaneously in the same area.
Because the Project is located within a Residential (R)‐1 zone, as stated above, Section 14.04.07 of the San Marino Municipal Code requires that equipment operation or outside construction and
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
repair must not exceed 65 dB when originating from any parcel in an R‐1 Zone without a permit from the planning and building director. Therefore, because the Project may exceed 65 dB at the property line, the Project would require a permit from the planning and building director per the City’s code.
Because the City would comply with its ordinance and noise levels at the actual sensitive receptor locations are anticipated to be within the range of 65 dB, impacts would be less than significant.
However, because the City’s code requires special considerations when construction noise at the property line of within R-1 zone is above 65 dB, Mitigation Measure NOI-1, located at the end of this section, should be implemented to ensure impacts will be less than significant.
Operations
Operation of the proposed Project was evaluated for potential exterior traffic related impacts caused by increased traffic volumes associated with the Project. Noise levels associated with existing and future traffic were based on trip generation estimates provided in the Traffic Impact Analysis (Appendix E). A doubling of baseline traffic volumes would be required to cause a noticeable increase (3 dBA) in traffic noise. As stated, baseline conditions currently exceed 60 dBA, the normally acceptable sound level referenced in the San Marino General Plan Noise Element. Thus, the baseline and with Project sound levels were calculated to determine whether the Project would generate enough traffic to noticeably increase (+3 dBA or greater) the Leq over baseline conditions.
The Noise Analysis in Appendix D identified that baseline noise levels exceed the 60 dBA exterior standard at existing single‐family residences and are consistent with measured noise levels. Noise levels associated with the Project were calculated by distributing the 25 P.M. peak hour Project trips into the baseline traffic volumes on Huntington Drive and West Drive for the purpose of evaluating worst case noise conditions.
Table 4.13-7 identifies projected operational noise impacts.
Table 4.13-7: Modeled Noise Levels
Receptor Distance
from Site
Existing
Leq
Existing
CNEL
With
Project Leq
With Project
CNEL
Decibel
Change
Significant
Impact
Site 1:
Crowell Library 35 ft 62.6 63.6 62.6 63.6 +0.0 No
Site 2:
Huntington Middle
School buildings
275 ft 63.6 64.6 63.6 64.6 +0.0 No
Site 3:
Single‐family
residence at 1600
West Drive
320 ft 63.1 64.1 63.1 64.1 +0.0 No
As shown in Table 4.13-7, Project peak hour traffic will have no effect on baseline traffic noise conditions.
Initial Study
San Marino Center Improvement Project – San Marino, California January 2022
Therefore, overall, permanent and temporary noise impacts are less than significant, and no mitigation is required.
b) Would the project result in the generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?
Less Than Significant Impact. Potential impacts from vibration are anticipated to occur during construction. No impacts are anticipated to occur from operations. Thus, this discussion focuses on temporary vibration caused by construction. As referenced in Appendix D, the closest building is the San Marino Center and neighboring Crowell Library. Use of a jackhammer and small tractor/bobcat may generate localized vibration. Table 4.13-8 identifies typical vibration experienced from various construction equipment at various distances, according to the Federal Rail Administration (FRA) Guidelines (Report Number 293630‐1), December 1998.
Table 4.13-8: Vibration Source Levels for Construction Equipment Equipment Approximate VdB
25 Feet 50 Feet 60 Feet 75 Feet 100 Feet
Large Bulldozer 87 81 79 77 75
Loaded Trucks 86 80 78 76 74
Jackhammer 79 73 71 69 67
Small Bulldozer 58 52 50 48 46
Source: Federal Railroad Administration, 1998
As identified in Table 4.13-3, ground‐borne vibration levels in excess of 94 VdB would damage buildings extremely susceptible to vibration damage. The existing San Marino Center building is included on the California Register of Historic Places and eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places; and thus, may be susceptible to vibration damage. However, no construction activities with the potential to generate ground vibration above 94 VdB, such as the use of bulldozers or jackhammers, would be required to complete the proposed improvements.
Thus, 94 VdB (PPV 0.2) is used herein to evaluate potential vibration impacts to neighboring structures. Construction activities referenced above that would generate significant vibration levels are not proposed.
Based on the information in Table 4.13-8, vibration levels would not reach or exceed levels required to cause any structural damage or related impacts to the San Marino Center or Crowell Public Library.
The nearest residence is approximately 205 feet north of the site across Huntington Drive. Based on the information presented in Table 4.13-8, vibration levels would attenuate to approximately 61 dBA at this residence during construction assuming use of a jackhammer. Vibration levels would be below the 72 VdB threshold required to be perceptible at neighboring residences.
Temporary vibration impacts would be less than significant.