Agenda packet — South El Monte City Council, April 12, 2022 (part 2 of 7)

A-9 • STARLITE SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT
APPENDIX A • GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS
This page is intentionally left blank.

GOAL 5.0: IMPROVE AIR QUALITY FOR FUTURE GENERATIONS OF SOUTH EL MONTE RESIDENTS.

Policy Consistency Analysis
Policy 5.2 Review the zoning regulations annually to
identify whether revisions are required to
accommodate and encourage the use of
alternative-fuel vehicles (e.g. electric cars).

Although this is a City directive, the Specific
Plan promotes the use of alternative-fuel
vehicles and requires that future development
projects comply with the CALGreen code
requirements for EV capable parking spaces
and infrastructure.

GOAL 6.0: CONTROL AND REDUCE THE AMOUNT OF WASTE GENERATED IN THE CITY.

Policy Consistency Analysis
Policy 6.1 Implement a public awareness and education
program about the recycling, reduction, and
reuse of materials.

Although this is a City directive, future
development projects in the Specific Plan
area are required to comply with the
CALGreen’s waste recycling requirements.

Page 203 of 925 ends

A-10 • STARLITE SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT
APPENDIX A • GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS
This page is intentionally left blank.

Page 204 of 925 ends

ATTACHMENT D

Page 205 of 925 ends

January 2022 | Initial Study

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
City of South El Monte
Prepared for:

City of South El Monte
Contact: Colby Cataldi, Community Development Director
City of South El Monte
1415 Santa Anita Avenue,
South El Monte, California 91733
626.579.6540
Prepared by:

PlaceWorks
Contact: JoAnn Hadfield, Principal
3 MacArthur Place, Suite 1100
Santa Ana, California 92707
714.966.9220
[email protected]
www.placeworks.com

Page 206 of 925 ends

Page 207 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE
Table of Contents
January 2022 Page i
Section Page

1. INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................. 1

1.1 PROJECT LOCATION...................................................................................................................... 1

1.2 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING..................................................................................................... 1

1.3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION............................................................................................................... 2

1.4 EXISTING ZONING AND GENERAL PLAN....................................................................... 28

1.5 CITY ACTION REQUESTED ...................................................................................................... 29

2. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST ..................................................................................39

2.1 PROJECT INFORMATION........................................................................................................... 39

2.2 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED.......................................... 41

2.3 DETERMINATION (TO BE COMPLETED BY THE LEAD AGENCY)........................ 41

2.4 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS............................................................... 42

3. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS.....................................................................................45

3.1 AESTHETICS .................................................................................................................................... 45

3.2 AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES.................................................................. 47

3.3 AIR QUALITY................................................................................................................................... 48

3.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES......................................................................................................... 56

3.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES ............................................................................................................. 58

3.6 ENERGY............................................................................................................................................. 66

3.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS................................................................................................................ 68

3.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS ............................................................................................. 72

3.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ....................................................................... 75

3.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY.................................................................................. 89

3.11 LAND USE AND PLANNING...................................................................................................103

3.12 MINERAL RESOURCES..............................................................................................................104

3.13 NOISE................................................................................................................................................105

3.14 POPULATION AND HOUSING............................................................................................... 113

3.15 TRANSPORTATION.....................................................................................................................114

3.16 PUBLIC SERVICES........................................................................................................................117

3.17 RECREATION ................................................................................................................................ 121

3.18 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES........................................................................................... 122

3.19 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS..................................................................................... 127

3.20 WILDFIRE........................................................................................................................................133

3.21 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE................................................................. 134

4. REFERENCES............................................................................................................137

5. LIST OF PREPARERS................................................................................................143 LEAD AGENCY............................................................................................................................................143 PLACEWORKS ..............................................................................................................................................143 SUBCONSULTANTS.................................................................................................................................... 143 APPLICANT TECHNICAL CONSULTANTS ....................................................................................... 144

Page 208 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE
Table of Contents
Page ii PlaceWorks

APPENDICES
Appendix A Draft Specific Plan
Appendix B Air Quality/GHG Modeling
Appendix C-a Cultural and Paleontological Report
Appendix C-b Cultural and Paleontological Report Mitigation Measures Appendix D-a Traffic Impact Analysis
Appendix D-b Vehicle Miles Traveled Evaluation
Appendix E Geotechnical Investigation
Appendix F Phase I ESA
Appendix G Preliminary Hydrology and LID Report
Appendix H Noise Analysis
Appendix I Service Provider Letters

Page 209 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE
Table of Contents
January 2022 Page iii
List of Figures
Figure Page
Figure 1 Regional Location................................................................................................................................. 3 Figure 2 Local Vicinity......................................................................................................................................... 5 Figure 3 Aerial Photograph................................................................................................................................. 7 Figure 4 Conceptual Site Plan............................................................................................................................. 9 Figure 5 Circulation Plan...................................................................................................................................11 Figure 6a Building Elevations.............................................................................................................................13 Figure 6b Building Elevations.............................................................................................................................15 Figure 6c Building Elevations.............................................................................................................................17 Figure 6d Building Elevations.............................................................................................................................19 Figure 6e Building Elevations.............................................................................................................................21 Figure 6f Building Elevations.............................................................................................................................23 Figure 7 Conceptual Open Space Landscape Plan........................................................................................25 Figure 8 Water and Sewer Plan ........................................................................................................................31 Figure 9 Storm Drain Plan ................................................................................................................................33 Figure 10 Existing and Proposed General Plan Land Use Designation......................................................35 Figure 11 Existing and Proposed Zoning Designation ..................................................................................37 Figure 12 Existing Starlite Drive-in Sign...........................................................................................................61 Figure 13 Restored Starlite Drive-in Sign .........................................................................................................63 Figure 14 Approximate Area of Stained and Odorous Soils.........................................................................77 Figure 15 San Gabriel Valley Airport Safety Zones........................................................................................87 Figure 16 Developed Condition Hydrology Map............................................................................................95 Figure 17 Existing Hydrology Map....................................................................................................................99

Page 210 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE
Table of Contents
Page iv PlaceWorks
List of Tables
Table Page
Table 1 Starlite Residential Land Use Statistics.............................................................................................. 2 Table 2 Discretionary Approvals Requested................................................................................................. 29 Table 3 Maximum Daily Regional Construction Emissions......................................................................50 Table 4 Maximum Daily Regional Construction Emissions with Mitigation Incorporated .................52 Table 5 Maximum Daily Regional Operation Emissions...........................................................................53 Table 6 Localized Construction Emissions...................................................................................................54 Table 7 Project-Related GHG Emissions.....................................................................................................74 Table 8 Nearby Potential Recognized Environmental Conditions...........................................................80 Table 9 Construction Best Management Practices......................................................................................91 Table 10 Low Impact Development, Stormwater Quality Design Volume and Flow Rates..................93 Table 11 Low Impact Development Dry Well BMP Design Summary.....................................................94 Table 12 Exterior Noise Limits: City of South El Monte...........................................................................106 Table 13 Project-Related Construction Noise, Leq dBA ..............................................................................109 Table 14 Project and Cumulative Traffic Noise Increase...........................................................................111 Table 15 Vibration Levels for Typical Construction Equipment..............................................................112 Table 16 Vibration Levels for Typical Construction Equipment..............................................................112 Table 17 Estimated Project Student Generation..........................................................................................120 Table 18 Proposed Project Water Demands................................................................................................. 128 Table 19 Landfill Capacity ...............................................................................................................................131 Table 20 Proposed Project Solid Waste Generation ...................................................................................131

Page 211 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE
Abbreviations and Acronyms
January 2022 Page v
AAQS ambient air quality standards
AB Assembly Bill
ACM asbestos-containing materials
ADT average daily traffic
amsl above mean sea level
AQMP air quality management plan
AST aboveground storage tank
BAU business as usual
bgs below ground surface
BMP best management practices
CAA Clean Air Act
CAFE corporate average fuel economy
CalARP California Accidental Release Prevention Program CalEMA California Emergency Management Agency
Cal/EPA California Environmental Protection Agency
CAL FIRE California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection CALGreen California Green Building Standards Code
Cal/OSHA California Occupational Safety and Health Administration CalRecycle California Department of Resources, Recycling, and Recovery Caltrans California Department of Transportation
CARB California Air Resources Board
CBC California Building Code
CCAA California Clean Air Act
CCR California Code of Regulations
CDE California Department of Education
CDFW California Department of Fish and Wildlife
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
CERCLA Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act cfs cubic feet per second
CGS California Geologic Survey
CMP congestion management program
CNDDB California Natural Diversity Database
CNEL community noise equivalent level

Page 212 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE
Abbreviations and Acronyms
Page vi PlaceWorks
CO carbon monoxide
CO2e carbon dioxide equivalent
Corps US Army Corps of Engineers
CSO combined sewer overflows
CUPA Certified Unified Program Agency
CWA Clean Water Act
dB decibel
dBA A-weighted decibel
DPM diesel particulate matter
DTSC Department of Toxic Substances Control
EIR environmental impact report
EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency
EPCRA Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency
FHWA Federal Highway Administration
FTA Federal Transit Administration
GHG greenhouse gases
GWP global warming potential
HCM Highway Capacity Manual
HQTA high quality transit area
HVAC heating, ventilating, and air conditioning system
IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
Ldn day-night noise level
Leq equivalent continuous noise level
LBP lead-based paint
LCFS low-carbon fuel standard
LOS level of service
LST localized significance thresholds
MW moment magnitude
MCL maximum contaminant level
MEP maximum extent practicable
mgd million gallons per day
MMT million metric tons

Page 213 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE
Abbreviations and Acronyms
January 2022 Page vii
MPO metropolitan planning organization
MT metric ton
MWD Metropolitan Water District of Southern California
NAHC Native American Heritage Commission
NOX nitrogen oxides
NPDES National Pollution Discharge Elimination System
O3 ozone
OES California Office of Emergency Services
PM particulate matter
POTW publicly owned treatment works
ppm parts per million
PPV peak particle velocity
RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
REC recognized environmental condition
RMP risk management plan
RMS root mean square
RPS renewable portfolio standard
RWQCB Regional Water Quality Control Board
SB Senate Bill
SCAG Southern California Association of Governments
SCAQMD South Coast Air Quality Management District
SIP state implementation plan
SLM sound level meter
SoCAB South Coast Air Basin
SOX sulfur oxides
SQMP stormwater quality management plan
SRA source receptor area [or state responsibility area] SUSMP standard urban stormwater mitigation plan
SWP State Water Project
SWPPP Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan
SWRCB State Water Resources Control Board
TAC toxic air contaminants
TNM transportation noise model

Page 214 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE
Abbreviations and Acronyms
Page viii PlaceWorks
tpd tons per day
TRI toxic release inventory
TTCP traditional tribal cultural places
USFWS United States Fish and Wildlife Service
USGS United States Geological Survey
UST underground storage tank
UWMP urban water management plan
V/C volume-to-capacity ratio
VdB velocity decibels
VHFHSZ very high fire hazard severity zone
VMT vehicle miles traveled
VOC volatile organic compound
WQMP water quality management plan
WSA water supply assessment

Page 215 of 925 ends

January 2022 Page 1

1. Introduction
The proposed Starlite Residential Development project (proposed project) would result in the redevelopment of the 12.3-acre former Starlite Drive-in Theater site for residential uses with 207 dwelling units. The City of South El Monte, as lead agency, is responsible for preparing environmental documentation in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) to determine if approval of the discretionary actions requested and subsequent development would have a significant impact on the environment. As defined by Section 15063 of the CEQA Guidelines, an Initial Study is prepared primarily to provide the leady 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. This Initial Study has been prepared to support the adoption of an MND.

1.1 PROJECT LOCATION
The 12.3-acre project site is in the City of South El Monte at the former Starlite Drive-in Theater site at 2540 Rosemead Boulevard. Figure 1, Regional Location, and Figure 2, Local Vicinity, show the location of the site within the regional and local contexts of Los Angeles County and the City of South El Monte, respectively. The City is in the central portion of Los Angeles County and is bordered by the cities of El Monte to the north and east, Rosemead to the west, and Whittier Narrows Natural Area to the south.

The project site is accessed off Rosemead Boulevard (State Route 164 [SR-164]), which runs north-south, and is one mile south of Interstate 10 (I-10), which runs east-west.

1.2 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING

1.2.1 Existing Land Use
As shown in Figure 3, Aerial Photograph, the project site is paved and vacant except for a single-family residence at the northeast corner of the site. The drive-in’s snack shop building and accessory building, convenience store, and a maintenance building in the southeast corner of the site were demolished in March 2021. Prior to COVID-19, the site was used on weekends as a swap meet.

1.2.2 Surrounding Land Use
As labeled on Figure 3, Aerial Photograph, the site is surrounded by commercial and industrial uses to the east, south, and west, including auto spray booths, delivery truck operations, and welding operations. Multifamily residential units border the site to the north. Lot 2, which is approximately 1.2 acres, as shown in Figure 3, Aerial Photograph, to the west of the site, along Rosemead Boulevard, would be parceled off and remain with the current landowner.

Page 216 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

1. Introduction

Page 2 ends

1.3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

1.3.1 Proposed Land Use
Figure 4, Conceptual Site Plan, shows the proposed project layout on the 12.3-acre site, including landscaping onsite. An additional entry would be created off of Chico Avenue at the eastern portion of the site (see Figure 5, Circulation Plan). The proposed project would include a traffic signal at the intersection of Rosemead Boulevard and the project entrance. The proposed project would include 207 dwelling units (169 single-family homes and 38 multifamily units); up to 10.0 percent of these units are proposed to be affordable to moderate income households. Table 1, Starlite Residential Land Use Statistics, provides a summary of the units by type and square footage. The proposed project would also include 9,000 square feet of recreational facilities (pool, pool deck, and recreation building). Figures 6a through 6f, Building Elevations, show the elevations of the proposed townhome and single-family structures, which would be three stories and vary in exterior façade, including sand stucco siding; brown, white, and blue trim; and terra cotta roofing. The maximum building height would be 35 feet and 8 inches. The proposed project would also include the demolition of the single-family home in the northeast corner of the site. A Specific Plan was developed for the proposed project and includes design guidelines to provide the framework for high quality design (see Appendix A).

Table 1 Starlite Residential Land Use Statistics
Unit Name/Type # of Bedrooms Square Feet/Unit Number Total Square Feet TH 1 2 1,340 8 10,720
TH 2 2 1,344 8 10,752
TH 3 3 1,782 18 32,076
TH 4 3 2,138 4 8,552
SFD 1 3 1,915 41 78,515
SFD 2 3 2,018 47 94,846
SFD 3 3 2,089 59 123,251
SFD 3-ALT 3 2,100 8 16,800
SFD 4 4 2,328 14 32,592
Total 207 units 408,104
Notes:

TH = Townhome
SFD = Single-Family Dwelling

1.3.2 Landscaping
As shown in Figure 7, Conceptual Open Space Landscape Plan, the proposed project’s landscape plan would feature trees along both sides of the driveway off Rosemead Boulevard and along both sides of the internal drive aisle that loops around the residential units in the center of the site. Additionally, trees would be planted along the central sidewalk, at the Chico Avenue entryway, at the pool area in the southeast corner of the site, and along the eastern and southern boundaries of the site. Shrubs would line all sidewalks on the site, and an open play lawn area would be to the south and north of the proposed pool. The proposed project would provide 140,080 square feet of landscaped areas.

Page 217 of 925 ends

PlaceWorks
Figure 1 - Regional Location

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE
Source: ESRI, 2021
Note: Unincorporated county areas are shown in white.

Project Site
0 Scale (Miles)
3

Page 218 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

1. Introduction

Page 4 ends

This page intentionally left blank.

Page 219 of 925 ends

PlaceWorks
Figure 2 - Local Vicinity

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE
Source: ESRI, 2021
0 Scale (Feet)
2,000
Project Boundary
Montebello
City Boundary
South El Monte
E Monte
Rosemead
Montebello
Lot 1
Lot 2
Lot 2 (not part of this development/entitlement)

Page 220 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

1. Introduction

Page 6 ends

This page intentionally left blank.

Page 221 of 925 ends

Source: Nearmap, 2021
PlaceWorks
0 Scale (Feet)
100

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE
Figure 3 - Aerial Photograph
Marybeth Ave
Klingerman St
Fern St
Lashbrook Ave
Chico Ave
Marybeth Ave
Supermarket Residential
Parking Lot
South El Monte
Lighting Supply
Pet Supply
Ladder & Scaffolding
Cabinet
Store
Rosemead Blvd
Lumber
Supply
Furniture
Design
Kitchen & Bath
Auto Parts Manufacturer
Home
Goods
Store
Door
Supply
Lumber
& Supply
Electric Supply
Plumbing Supply
Restaurant
Bar
Grocery
Store
Clothing
Store
Home
Improvement
Pet Shop
Glass Shop
Auto Body Shop
Auto
Body Shop
Delivery
Service
Cabinet
Shop
Cladding
Company
Motorcycle
Shop
Tool & Die
Pet Supply
Auto Parts
Store
Grocery
Store
Auto Parts
Store
Clothing
Store
Florist
Auto Parts
Store
Sign Shop
Florist
Lot 1
Lot 2
Potrero
School
Residential
Residential
Humbert Ave
Potrero Ave
Adelia Ave
Tamora Ave
Sastre Ave
Fern St
Klingerman St
Kale St
Linn Ave
Klingerman St
Troy Ave
Fern St
Residential
Commercial Commercial
Commercial
Commercial
Project Boundary
Lot 2 (not part of this development/entitlement)

Page 222 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

1. Introduction

Page 8 ends

This page intentionally left blank.

Page 223 of 925 ends

Source: FORMA Engineering, Inc, 2021
PlaceWorks
0 Scale (Feet)
110

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE
Figure 4 - Conceptual Site Plan
LEGEND

Page 224 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

1. Introduction

Page 10 ends

This page intentionally left blank.

Page 225 of 925 ends

3 • PLAN ELEMENTS
STRLAITE SPECIFIC PLAN SCREENCHECK#1 • 3-3
Exhibit 3.1, Land Use and Circulation Plan
Source: FORMA , Google N. T. S.
19 Giovane St
Fern St
Chico Ave
Adelia Ave
Marybeth Ave
Rosemead Blvd
Lashbrook Ave
B
B
C C
A A D
D
LEGEND
Specific Plan Boundary
Medium-Density Residential
Internal Driveways
Entries
Street Cross Section
Pedestrian Circulation
LEGEND
Specific Plan Boundary
Medium-Density Residential
Internal Driveways
Entries
Street Cross Section
Pedestrian Circulation
PlaceWorks
Figure 5 - Circulation Plan

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE
Source: KTGY, 2021
0 Scale (Feet)
320
Street Cross Section
Pedestrian Circulation
Entries
Medium-Density Residential
Internal Driveways
Project Boundary

Page 226 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

1. Introduction

Page 12 ends

This page intentionally left blank.

Page 227 of 925 ends

Starlite
South El Monte, CA DATE: February 26,
KB Home Southern CA - Los Angeles/Ventura
25152 Springfield Court, Suite 180
Valencia, CA 91355
661.219.6901
Townhomes
5-Plex ‘A’ Spanish
Left Elevation
Rear Elevation
Front Elevation
Right Elevation
PlaceWorks
Source: KB Home, 2021
Figure 6a - Building Elevations

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE
Townhomes
5-Plex “A” Spanish

Page 228 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

1. Introduction

Page 14 ends

This page intentionally left blank.

Page 229 of 925 ends

Starlite
South El Monte, CA DATE: February 26, 2021
KB Home Southern CA - Los Angeles/Ventura
25152 Springfield Court, Suite 180
Valencia, CA 91355
661.219.6901
Single Family
Plan 1 - 321.1915 ‘B’ Craftsman
Front Elevation
Right Elevation
Left Elevation
Rear Elevation
A0.3
PlaceWorks
Source: KB Home, 2021
Figure 6b - Building Elevations

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE
Single Family
Plan 1 - 321.1915 “B” Craftsman

Page 230 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

1. Introduction

Page 16 ends

This page intentionally left blank.

Page 231 of 925 ends

Starlite
South El Monte, CA DATE: February 26, 2021
KB Home Southern CA - Los Angeles/Ventura
25152 Springfield Court, Suite 180
Valencia, CA 91355
661.219.6901
Single Family
Plan 2 - 321.2018 ‘C’ Farmhouse
Front Elevation
Right Elevation
Left Elevation
Rear Elevation
A0.4
PlaceWorks
Source: KB Home, 2021
Figure 6c - Building Elevations

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE
Single Family
Plan 2 - 321.2018 “C” Farmhouse

Page 232 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

1. Introduction

Page 18 ends

This page intentionally left blank.

Page 233 of 925 ends

Starlite
South El Monte, CA DATE: February 26, 2021
KB Home Southern CA - Los Angeles/Ventura
25152 Springfield Court, Suite 180
Valencia, CA 91355
661.219.6901
Single Family
Plan 3 - 321.2089 ‘A’ Spanish
Front Elevation
Right Elevation
Left Elevation
Rear Elevation
A0.5
PlaceWorks
Source: KB Home, 2021
Figure 6d - Building Elevations

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE
Single Family
Plan 3 - 321.2089 “A” Spanish

Page 234 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

1. Introduction

Page 20 ends

This page intentionally left blank.

Page 235 of 925 ends

Starlite
South El Monte, CA DATE: February 26, 2021
KB Home Southern CA - Los Angeles/Ventura
25152 Springfield Court, Suite 180
Valencia, CA 91355
661.219.6901
Single Family
Plan 3-ALT. - 321.2089 ‘B’ Craftsman
Front Elevation
Right Elevation
Left Elevation
Rear Elevation (Chico Ave. View)
A0.6
PlaceWorks
Source: KB Home, 2021
Figure 6e - Building Elevations

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE
Single Family
Plan 3-ALT. - 321.2089 “B” Craftsman

Page 236 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

1. Introduction

Page 22 ends

This page intentionally left blank.

Page 237 of 925 ends

Starlite
South El Monte, CA DATE: February 26, 2021
KB Home Southern CA - Los Angeles/Ventura
25152 Springfield Court, Suite 180
Valencia, CA 91355
661.219.6901
Single Family
Plan 4 - 321.2328 ‘C’ Farmhouse
Front Elevation
Right Elevation
Left Elevation
Rear Elevation (Chico Ave. View)
A0.7
PlaceWorks
Source: KB Home, 2021
Figure 6f - Building Elevations

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE
Single Family
Plan 4 - 321.2328 “C” Farmhouse

Page 238 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

1. Introduction

Page 24 ends

This page intentionally left blank.

Page 239 of 925 ends

Source: Wetland Design Group, Inc, 2021
PlaceWorks
0 Scale (Feet)
55 STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE
Figure 7 - Conceptual Open Space Landscape Plan

Page 240 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

1. Introduction

Page 26 ends

This page intentionally left blank.

Page 241 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

1. Introduction
January 2022 Page 27

1.3.3 Infrastructure Improvements and Utility and Service Systems Following is a discussion of the infrastructure improvements and utility and service systems needed to accommodate the proposed project. All proposed infrastructure and improvements would require City approval and where necessary, the approval of the utility/service provider.

1.3.3.1 WATER SYSTEM
The San Gabriel Valley Water Company (SGVWC) would provide water delivery service to the project site. As shown in Figure 8, Water and Sewer Plan, there are existing water lines along Chico Avenue and Rosemead Boulevard. As a part of the proposed project, new on-site water lines would connect to the existing water mains. No off-site water line construction or upsizing would be required to accommodate the proposed project.

However, some construction would occur within the public right-of-way of Chico Avenue and Rosemead Boulevard in order to make the necessary infrastructure connections to the existing water mains. The proposed water system improvements would be designed and constructed in accordance with City and SGVWC requirements and would require City and SGVWC approval.

1.3.3.2 WASTEWATER SYSTEM
Wastewater generated by the proposed project would be collected within the City’s local sewer collection system.

The City’s local sewers tie into one of the Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County (LACSD) regional trunk sewers. As shown in Figure 8, Water and Sewer Plan, there are existing sewer lines along Chico Avenue and Rosemead Boulevard. As a part of the proposed project, new on-site sewer lines would connect to the existing sewer main in Rosemead Boulevard. No off-site sewer line construction or upsizing would be required to accommodate the proposed project. However, some construction would occur within the public right-of-way of Rosemead Boulevard in order to make the necessary infrastructure connections to the existing sewer main.

The proposed wastewater system improvements would be designed and constructed in accordance with City and LACSD requirements and would require City and LACSD approval.

1.3.3.3 DRAINAGE SYSTEM
Under existing conditions, 87.0 percent of the site drains from east to west to a sump catch basin near the middle of the site. The catch basin drains into the Los Angeles County Flood Control District storm drain running from Rosemead Boulevard to Marybeth Lane, as shown in Figure 9, Storm Drain Plan. The remaining

13.0 percent of the site drains east to west toward Rosemead Boulevard.

Under proposed conditions, stormwater runoff from Lot 1 (see Figure 3, Aerial Photograph) would be conveyed to the same county storm drain as under existing conditions but via a new on-site drainage collection, conveyance, and treatment system shown in Figure 9, Storm Drain Plan. Lot 2 (1.2 acres) would be parceled off and remain with the current landowner. For Lot 1, runoff would be conveyed to a centralized pretreatment chamber before entering a drywell infiltration system. The location of the pretreatment chamber and the drywell is shown in Figure 16, Developed Condition Hydrology Map. If infiltration is determined to be infeasible during the final engineering phase, a biofiltration system would be proposed. The proposed drainage system

Page 242 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

1. Introduction

Page 28 ends

improvements would be designed and constructed in accordance with City requirements and would require City approval.

No changes are proposed to the Los Angeles County Flood Control District storm drain that runs through the project site. The project applicant/developer would submit construction/engineering plans and as-built plans to the County’s engineer to obtain a permit to connect to this storm drain. All construction work in the vicinity of the storm drain would be conducted in accordance with the district’s design manual guidelines and standards.

1.3.4 Project Phasing and Construction
The proposed project would be completed in one phase upon acquisition of permits. Construction is estimated to be completed in approximately 19 months, beginning in Fall 2022 and ending in Spring 2024. Construction equipment required for demolition, excavation, grading, and other building activities would include, but not be limited to, excavators, loaders, forklifts, concrete trucks, and compressors. In compliance with Section

8.20.030(D), Prohibited Acts, of the City’s municipal code, construction activities are only permitted between 7 am to 10 pm Mondays through Fridays and are prohibited on weekends and holidays. An estimated 4,852 cubic yards of soil import are anticipated to require 607 total trip-ends, or 61 trip-ends per day, based on a 10- day, rough-grading, soil-haul phase.

The construction phases are:
 Asphalt and building demolition
 Building demolition debris haul
 Asphalt demolition debris on-site reprocessing
 Rough grading
 Rough grading soil haul
 Utility trenching
 Asphalt paving
 Building construction
 Architectural coating

1.4 EXISTING ZONING AND GENERAL PLAN
According to the City of South El Monte General Plan land use and zoning maps, the project site is currently designated Commercial-Manufacturing and Medium-Density Residential (MDR) and zoned Commercial Manufacturing (C-M) and Medium Density Residential (R-3).

A General Plan Amendment would be required to change the site’s land use designation to Medium Density Residential (MDR) and a Zone Change approval would be required to change the zoning to Specific Plan (SP).

Figure 10, Existing and Proposed General Plan Land Use Designation, and Figure 11, Existing and Proposed Zoning Designation, show the existing and proposed land use and zoning designations for the site.

Page 243 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

1. Introduction
January 2022 Page 29
A Vesting Tentative Tract Map for the Specific Plan area will be prepared and processed through the City in accordance with Chapter 16 of the South El Monte Municipal Code and in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act of the California Government Code.

1.5 CITY ACTION REQUESTED
This Initial Study examines the environmental impacts of the proposed Starlite Residential Development. This Initial Study is also being prepared to address various actions by the City to adopt and implement the proposed project. It is the intent of this Initial Study to enable the City, other responsible agencies, and interested parties to evaluate the environmental impacts of the proposed project and make informed decisions with respect to the requested entitlements. The discretionary actions required by the City of South El Monte and other agencies are shown in Table 2, Discretionary Approvals Requested.

Table 2 Discretionary Approvals Requested
Agency Entitlements/Permits Required
City of South El Monte Mitigated Negative Declaration Adoption General Plan Amendment (GPA)
Specific Plan (SP)
Zone Change (ZC)
Vesting Tentative Tract Map (VTTM)
Lot Line Adjustment (LLA)

Page 244 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

1. Introduction

Page 30 ends

This page intentionally left blank.

Page 245 of 925 ends

3 • PLAN ELEMENTS
3-6 • STARLITE SPECIFIC PLAN SCREENCHECK#1
N. T. S.

Exhibit 3.3, Water and Sewer Plan
19 Giovane St
Fern St
Chico Ave
Adelia Ave
Marybeth Ave
Rosemead Blvd
Lashbrook Ave
LEGEND
Specific Plan Boundary
Existing Sewer
Existing Water
Proposed 8” Sewer
Proposed 8” Water
Proposed 6” Water
Source: FORMA , Google
PlaceWorks
Figure 8 - Water and Sewer Plan

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE
Source: KTGY, 2021
0 Scale (Feet)
320
Project Boundary
Existing Sewer
Existing Water
Proposed 8” Sewer
Proposed 8” Water
Proposed 6” Water

Page 246 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

1. Introduction

Page 32 ends

This page intentionally left blank.

Page 247 of 925 ends

3 • PLAN ELEMENTS
STRLAITE SPECIFIC PLAN SCREENCHECK#1 • 3-7
19 Giovane St
Fern St
Chico Ave
Adelia Ave
Marybeth Ave
Rosemead Blvd
Lashbrook Ave
LEGEND
Specific Plan Boundary
Existing Storm Drain
Proposed Storm Drain
Exhibit 3.4, Storm Drain Plan
N. T. S. Source: FORMA , Google
PlaceWorks
Figure 9 - Storm Drain Plan

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE
Source: KTGY, 2021
0 Scale (Feet)
320
Project Boundary
Proposed Private Storm Drain
Existing Storm Drain

Page 248 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

1. Introduction

Page 34 ends

This page intentionally left blank.

Page 249 of 925 ends

2540
2650
2313
2416
2300
2559
2419
2522
2226
2455
2445
2476
2432
2420
2512
2431
2540
2560
2411
2643
2405
2666
2454
2506
2423
2526
2325
2610
2516
2411
2318
2435
2424
2300
2435
2213
2321
2531
2430
2217
2458
2511
2463
2456
2550
2645
2515
2325
2315
2407
2220
2455
2420
2650
2521
9600
2521
2542
2708
2558
9605
2650
2328
2500
2 2423
2448
2551
2317
2601
2560
2439
2227
2310
2439
2416
2524
2448
2614
2300
2318
2521
2602
9619
9316
2400
2450
9609
2461
2652
2414
2324
2710
2448
2638
2219
2644
2650
2634
2630
2656
2660
2622
2437
2655
2425
2656
2655
2657
2400
2435
2643
2412
2708
2509
2523
2223
2701
2449
2601
2231
2465
2555
24472453
2631
2549
2537
2615
2453
2660
2563
2623
2536
2663
2307
2449
2311
2546
2539
2402
2455
2517
2312
2516
2503
2458
2320
2534
2312
2405
2618
2632
2626
2424
2646
2621
2453
2228
2448
2542
2642
2503
2218
2226
2441
23012304
2218
2631
2436
2447
2630
2465
2317
2544
2531
2413
2460
2553
2459
2620
2654
2526 2527
2651
2453
2611
2411
2552
2414
2422
2315
2541
2445
2551
2603
2217
2306
2305
2408
2404
2526
2458
2437
2325
2436
2505
24672466
2447
2515
2446
2556
2311
2511
2510
2544
2532
2615
2509
2551
2540
2455
2543
25102503
2454
2439
2441
2460 2463
2442
2317
2507
2218
2627
2224
2230
9220
2655
2637
2433
2403
2304
2301
2424
9619
2225
2625
2651
2453
2639
2637
2655
2633
2531
2604
2629
2645
2700
2508
2702
2522
2650
2502
2407
2703
2659
2606
9321
2438
2444
2436
2410
2547
2322
2511
2218
2507
2310
2430
2218
2437
2316
2433
2548
2223
2654
2537
2510
2307
2644
2506
2526
2222
2217
9322
2304
2660
2227
2518
2543
2649
2648
2307
9329
9374
2449
2637
2649
2553
2636
2628
2637
2638
2245
26412642
2632
2611
2641
2622
2642
2431
2535
2227
2223
2623
2643
2557
2617
2327
2607
2703
2702
2708
2707
2611
2604
9212
2560
2330
2631
2709
2615
2628
2610
2621
2706
2620
2614
2326
2709
2563
2657
2706
2658
2631
2627
26632664
2617
2626
2701
2653
27032702
2655 2654
2659
2625
2621
2609
9311
2663
2601
2440
2554
26019
2700
2529
9328
2304
9630
2558
9355
9327
2407
2327
2325
9220
2615
9216
2607
9635
9620
2561
9522
9 9217
9326
2326
2330
9347
9358
9373
2601
9367
9369

CHICO AVE

LEE AVE

TROY AVE

MARYBETH AVE

FERN ST

ADELIA AVE

LOMA AVE
LASHB

KLINGERMAN ST
3 2
2540
2650
2313
2416
2300
2559
2419
2522
2226
2455
2445
2476
2432
2420
2512
2431
2540
2560
2411
2405
2666
2454
9640
9859
2526
2607
2610
2516
2221
2318
2424
2300
9620
2213
9713
2321
2430
2458
2463
2456
2550
2315
2307
2407
2455
2420
2650
2521
9600
9751
2223
2542
2708
2555
9605
2650
2328
2500
9761
27 9835
9739
9839
9733
2000
2560
2703
2227
2310
2416
2524
2448
2427
97159635
2614
9627
2405
2300
97059643
2318
9619
2400
2450
9609
9710
2652
2414
9718
2644
2641
2650
2634
2637
2630
2656
2621
2629
2649
2660
2622
2655
2657
9702
9726
9847
2655
2425
2656
9750
2657
9725
9705
2435
2643
9734
2509
2523
9742
9758
24472453
2312
9849
2228
2218
2700
2311
2453
2706
2209
2411
2428
2552
2315
2315
2541
2217
2445
2439
2551
9812
2603
2318
2305
2511
2319
2404
2457
9843
2537
2463
2451
2443
2526
2523
2543
2531
2515
2503
2420
9822
2458
9832
2436
2466
2437
2448
9821
2302
2436
2314
2468
2544
2467
2313
2550
2466
2443
2508
2518
2447
2302
2515
2437
2446
2516
2305
2512
2456
2467
2534
2504
2442
2556
2549
2449
2510
2544
2436
2308
2532
2506 97352509
2530
2544
2538
2439
2551
2504
2520
2452
2540
2442
2460
2455
2543
25102503
2536
2454
2509
2528
2448
2523
2545
2307
2439
2513
2455
9731
2531
2458
2501
2306
2524
2441
2460 2463
2539
24422443
2463
2525
2218
2627
2224
2230
223022302233
2226
2637
2228
2417
2433
2216
2227
2304
2219
2216
9619
2225
9831
2637
2604
2414
9825
98469836
2606
2410
2322
2314
2218
2316
2506
2222
2304
2649
2648
9374
2637
2649
2553
2636
2628
2637
2638
26412642
2632
2611
2641
2622
2642
2431
2535
2227
2223
2623
2617
2607
2703
2702
2708
2707
2611
2326
2604
9831
2320
2330
2631
2709
2615
2628
2610
2621
2706
2620
2614
2326
2709
2657
2706
2658
2631
2627
26632664
2617
2626
2701
2653
27032702
2655 2654
2659
2625
2621
2609
9858
2663
2440
2325
2700
2529
9868
9630
2558
9355
9714
9832
9702
2550
9652
9868
9635
2406
9811
9620
2423
9522
9822
9819
9643
9649
2402
9825
9347
9358
9373
2601
9367
9369

CHICO AVE

FERN ST

SEAMAN AVE

TROY AVE
AVE

HUMBERT A

TAMORA AVE

KALE ST

FACTORIAL WAY

MARYBETH AVE

ANDERSON RD

SASTRE AVE

FERN ST

ADELIA AVE

KALE ST
LASHB
ST
Source: City of El Monte
PlaceWorks
0 Scale (Feet)
230

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE
Figure 10 - Existing and Proposed General Plan Land Use Designations Medium-Density Residential
Commercial Manufacturing
Industrial
Existing General Plan Proposed General Plan
Project Boundary
Medium-Density Residential
Medium-Density Residential
Industrial
Commercial Manufacturing
Commercial Manufacturing
Industrial
Commercial Manufacturing
Commercial Manufacturing

ROSEMEAD BLVDROSEMEAD BLVD
Medium-Density Residential
Commercial Manufacturing
2540 2559

Page 250 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

1. Introduction

Page 36 ends

This page intentionally left blank.

Page 251 of 925 ends

CHICO AVE

LEE AVE

TROY AVE

MARYBETH AVE

FERN ST

ADELIA AVE

LOMA AVE
LASHB

CHICO AVE

FERN ST

SEAMAN AVE

TROY AVE
AVE

HUMBERT A

TAMORA AVE

KALE ST

FACTORIAL WAY

MARYBETH AVE

ANDERSON RD

SASTRE AVE

FERN ST

ADELIA AVE

KALE ST
LASHB
ST
PlaceWorks

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE
Figure 11 - Existing and Proposed Zoning Designations
R-3 (Multi Family Residential)
C-M (Commercial Manufacturing)
M (Manufacturing)
Existing Zoning Proposed Zoning
SP (Specific Plan)
Source: City of El Monte ROSEMEAD BLVD

ROSEMEAD BLVD
Project Boundary
M
(Manufacturing)
C- M
(Commercial Manufacturing)
C- M
(Commercial Manufacturing)
R-3
(Multi-Family Residential)
M
(Manufacturing)
C- M
(Commercial Manufacturing)
C- M
(Commercial Manufacturing)
R-3
(Multi-Family Residential)
0 Scale (Feet)
230
C- M
(Commercial Manufacturing)
SP (Specific Plan)
SP
(Specific Plan)
2540 2559
2603

Page 252 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

1. Introduction

Page 38 ends

This page intentionally left blank.

Page 253 of 925 ends

January 2022 Page 39

2. Environmental Checklist

2.1 PROJECT INFORMATION

1. Project Title: Starlite Residential Development

2. Lead Agency Name and Address:

City of South El Monte
Community Development Department
1415 Santa Anita Avenue
South El Monte, CA 91733

3. Contact Person and Phone Number:

Colby Cataldi, Community Development Director
626.579.6540

4. Project Location:

The 12.3-acre project site is in the City of South El Monte at the former Starlite Drive-in Theater site at 2540 Rosemead Boulevard.

5. Project Sponsor’s Name and Address:

KB Home
10990 Wilshire Boulevard
Los Angeles, CA 90024

6. General Plan Designation: Medium-Density Residential (Proposed); Commercial-Manufacturing and Medium-Density Residential (MDR) (Existing)

7. Zoning: Specific Plan (SP) (Proposed); Commercial Manufacturing (C-M) and Medium Density Residential (R-3) (Existing)

8. Description of Project:

The proposed project would include 207 dwelling units (169 single-family homes and 38 multifamily units), and up to 10.0 percent of these units are proposed to be at moderate level.

9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting:

A section of the western portion of the site, along Rosemead Boulevard, would be parceled off and remain with the current landowner. The site is surrounded by commercial and industrial uses to the east, south, and west, including auto spray booths, delivery truck operations, and welding operations.

Multifamily residential units border the site to the north. The project site is addressed on Rosemead

Page 254 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH E L MONTE

2. Environmental Checklist

Page 40 ends

Boulevard, which runs north-south and provides access to the project site. I-10 runs east-west and provides access from one mile north of the project site.

10. Other Public Agencies Whose Approval Is Required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participating agreement):

N/A

11. Have California Native American tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project area requested consultation pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21080.3.1? If so, is there a plan for consultation that includes, for example, the determination of significance of impacts to tribal cultural resources, procedures regarding confidentiality, etc.? Note: Conducting consultation early in the CEQA process allows tribal governments, lead agencies, and project proponents to discuss the level of environmental review, identify and address potential adverse impacts to tribal cultural resources, and reduce the potential for delay and conflict in the environmental review process. (See Public Resources Code section 21080.3.2.) Information may also be available from the California Native American Heritage Commission’s Sacred Lands File per Public Resources Code section 5097.94 and the California Historical Resources Information System administered by the California Office of Historic Preservation. Please also note that Public Resources Code section 21082.3(c) contains provisions specific to confidentiality.

Letters were sent to tribal representatives in accordance with Senate Bill 18 and Assembly Bill 52; consultation was set up with the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians–Kizh Nation.

Page 255 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

2. Environmental Checklist
January 2022 Page 41

2.2 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a “Potentially Significant Impact,” as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.

Aesthetics Agriculture / Forestry Resources Air Quality Biological Resources Cultural Resources Energy
Geology/Soils Greenhouse Gas Emissions Hazards and Hazardous Materials Hydrology/Water Quality Land Use / Planning Mineral Resources Noise Population / Housing Public Services
Recreation Transportation Tribal Cultural Resources
Utilities / Service Systems Wildfire Mandatory Findings of Significance

2.3 DETERMINATION (TO BE COMPLETED BY THE LEAD AGENCY)
On the basis of this initial evaluation:

I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.

I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.

I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.

I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.

I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.

Signature Date

Page 256 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH E L MONTE

2. Environmental Checklist

Page 42 ends

2.4 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Page 257 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

2. Environmental Checklist
January 2022 Page 43

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

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

Page 258 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH E L MONTE

2. Environmental Checklist

Page 44 ends

This page intentionally left blank.

Page 259 of 925 ends

January 2022 Page 45

3. Environmental Analysis
This section provides an evaluation of the impact categories and questions in the checklist and identifies mitigation measures, if applicable.

3.1 AESTHETICS
Except as provided in Public Resources Code Section 21099, would the project:

Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? 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 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
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? No Impact. Vistas provide visual access or panoramic views to a large geographic area. The city’s relatively flat topography provides scenic views of mountain ridges to the north. However, these views are often obscured by weather and poor air quality. The highly urbanized setting of the area surrounding the project site (Rosemead Boulevard to the west, Chico Avenue to the east, residential uses and Marybeth Avenue to the north, and commercial and industrial uses to the south) also obscures views of the mountains. Additionally, according to the Resources Element of the City’s General Plan, none of the roads, streets, or highways meet the requirements for designation as a scenic roadway (South El Monte 2000). Therefore, impacts to scenic vistas would be less than significant.

Page 260 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

3. Environmental Analysis

Page 46 ends

b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
No Impact. According to the Resources Element of the City’s General Plan, there are no state-designated highways in the City. The nearest officially designated scenic highway is State Route 2 approximately 14 miles north of the project site (Caltrans 2022). Therefore, no impact would occur. 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 site is in an urbanized area and is vacant except for a structure at the northeast corner of the site. The surrounding area consists of commercial and industrial uses to the east, south, and west and multifamily uses to the north. Although it would change the character of the site, the proposed project would be compatible with the existing development pattern and character surrounding the site, with building materials and colors that complement the existing development on adjacent properties.

Furthermore, the proposed Specific Plan includes design guidelines to provide the framework for high quality design (Appendix A). The architectural design guidelines of the Specific Plan—which specify building orientation and massing, roof forms, architectural enhancements, colors and materials, and plan and elevation requirements—would express the desired character of future development, ensure a consistent level of quality, and accommodate emerging and product trends. Compliance with these standards would ensure that the proposed project would feature quality design and architecture and would be compatible with the character of the adjacent uses. Moreover, the site is currently zoned Multifamily Residential (R-3), which allows a maximum height of 25 feet. The proposed buildings on-site would be 35 feet and 8 inches tall, which exceeds the allowable maximum height in the R-3 zone and requires a change of zone to the Specific Plan (SP) zone. Upon approval of the SP zone, the proposed building heights would not exceed the Specific Plan’s maximum building height of 36 feet. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not substantially degrade the existing visual character of the site and its surroundings. Impacts would be less than significant. 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 two major causes of light pollution are glare and spill light. Spill light is caused by misdirected light that illuminates areas outside the area intended to be lit. Glare occurs when a bright object is against a dark background, such as oncoming vehicle headlights or an unshielded light bulb. The project area includes many existing sources of nighttime illumination and glare, such as lights caused by roadway and residential uses, parking lot lights, vehicle lights, and exterior lighting from commercial and industrial uses.

At buildout, the proposed project would include additional structures on-site and their related lighting sources; its implementation would likely also result in glazing (e.g., windows and doors) that could potentially result in new sources of glare. Despite new sources of nighttime illumination and glare, the proposed project is not expected to generate a substantial increase in light and glare. Additionally, Section 17.12.260, Miscellaneous Standards, for the R-3 zone in the City’s municipal code, states that lighting shall be designed to ensure that

Page 261 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

3. Environmental Analysis
January 2022 Page 47
neighboring properties or public streets are protected from direct or hazardous glare. Glare and lighting from the proposed project would be typical of residential uses and the surrounding area, and would not increase glare and lighting beyond what is expected for the project site. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.

3.2 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:

Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps
prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to nonagricultural 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 non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
X
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? No Impact. The project site has no agricultural or farm uses on it, nor are there agricultural or farm uses in its immediate vicinity. No project-related farmland conversion impact would occur. The project site is zoned R-3 (Multifamily). It is listed as Urban and Built-Up Land and is not mapped as important farmland by the Division of Land Resource Protection (DLRP 2016). Therefore, no impact would occur.

Page 262 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

3. Environmental Analysis

Page 48 ends

b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? No Impact. The zoning designation for the project site is R-3 (Multifamily). The proposed project would not conflict with agricultural zoning or a Williamson Act contract because the site is not zoned for agricultural use.

Williamson Act contracts restrict the use of privately owned land for agriculture and compatible open-space uses under contract with local governments; in exchange, the land is taxed based on actual use rather than potential market value. Since the project site is zoned R-3 (Multifamily), there is no Williamson Act contract in effect on-site. Therefore, no impact would occur.
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. Project development would not conflict with existing zoning for forestland, timberland, or timberland production. Forest land is defined as “land that can support 10.0 percent native tree cover of any species, including hardwoods, under natural conditions, and that allows for management one or more forest resources, including timber, aesthetics, fish and wildlife, biodiversity, water quality, recreation, and other public benefits” (Public Resources Code § 12223 [g]). Timberland is defined as “land…which is available for, and capable of, growing a crop of trees of any commercial species used to produce lumber and other forest products, including Christmas trees” (Public Resources Code § 4526). The project site is zoned R-3 (Multifamily). Therefore, no impact would occur.
d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? No Impact. The project site is paved and contains ornamental trees. Project construction would not result in the loss or conversion of forest land. Therefore, no impact would occur. e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
No Impact. Maps from the Division of Land Resource Protection indicate that there is no important farmland or forest land on the project site or in the surrounding vicinity. Project development would not directly cause conversion of such land to nonagricultural or nonforest use. Therefore, no impact would occur.

3.3 AIR QUALITY
The Air Quality section addresses the impacts of the proposed project on ambient air quality and the exposure of people, especially sensitive individuals, to unhealthful pollutant concentrations. A background discussion on the air quality regulatory setting, meteorological conditions, existing ambient air quality in the vicinity of the project site, and air quality modeling can be found in Appendix B.

The primary air pollutants of concern for which ambient air quality standards (AAQS) have been established are ozone (O3), carbon monoxide (CO), coarse inhalable particulate matter (PM10), fine inhalable particulate matter (PM2.5), sulfur dioxide (SO2), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), and lead (Pb). Areas are classified under the federal

Page 263 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

3. Environmental Analysis
January 2022 Page 49
and California Clean Air Act as either in attainment or nonattainment for each criteria pollutant based on whether the AAQS have been achieved. The South Coast Air Basin (SoCAB), which is managed by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (South Coast AQMD), is designated nonattainment for O3, and PM2.5 under the California and National AAQS, nonattainment for PM10 under the California AAQS, and nonattainment for lead (Los Angeles County only) under the National AAQS (CARB 2017b).

Furthermore, the South Coast AQMD has identified regional thresholds of significance for criteria pollutant emissions and criteria air pollutant precursors, including volatile organic compounds (VOC), CO, NOX, SOX, PM10, and PM2.5. Development projects below the regional significance thresholds are not expected to generate sufficient criteria pollutant emissions to violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation. Where available, the significance criteria established by the South Coast AQMD may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project:

Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? 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
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? Less Than Significant Impact. The South Coast AQMD adopted the 2016 Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) on March 3, 2017. Regional growth projections are used by South Coast AQMD to forecast future emission levels in the SoCAB. For southern California, these regional growth projections are provided by the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) and are partially based on land use designations included in city/county general plans. Typically, only large, regionally significant projects have the potential to affect the regional growth projections. In addition, the consistency analysis is generally only required in connection with the adoption of General Plans, specific plans for large areas,, and significant projects.

Changes in population, housing, or employment growth projections have the potential to affect SCAG’s demographic projections and therefore the assumptions in South Coast AQMD’s AQMP. The project would build 207 residential units. As discussed in Section 3.14, Population and Housing, the proposed project’s population growth would be within SCAG’s forecast growth projections for the city. Additionally, as demonstrated in Section 3.3(b), the regional emissions that would be generated by the operational phase of the proposed project would be less than the South Coast AQMD emissions thresholds and therefore South Coast AQMD would not

Page 264 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

3. Environmental Analysis

Page 50 ends

consider the project a substantial source of air pollutant emissions that would have the potential to affect the attainment designations in the SoCAB. Therefore, the proposed project would not affect the regional emissions inventory or conflict with strategies in the AQMP. Impacts would be less than significant. 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? Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated. The following describes project-related impacts from regional short-term construction activities and regional long-term operation of the proposed project.

Regional Short-Term Construction Impacts
Construction activities would result in the generation of air pollutants. These emissions would primarily be 1) exhaust from off-road, diesel-powered construction equipment; 2) dust generated by construction activities; 3) exhaust from on-road vehicles; and 4) off-gassing of VOCs from paints and asphalt.

Construction activities for the residential development are anticipated to disturb 12.40 acres1. The project would involve asphalt and building demolition as well as debris haul and reprocessing, grading and grading soil haul, utilities trenching, paving, building construction, and architectural coating. Construction is anticipated to start in October 2022 and finish in April 2024. Construction emissions were estimated using the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod), version 2016.3.2.25, and are based on the preliminary construction duration and equipment mix provided by the applicant. Construction emissions modeling is shown in Table 3, Maximum Daily Regional Construction Emission, and shows maximum daily emissions for NOX, CO, SO2, PM10, and PM2.5 from construction-related activities would be less than their respective South Coast AQMD regional significance threshold values. However, construction-related VOC emissions generated from paints used in architectural coating of the new structures on the project site would exceed the South Coast AQMD regional significance threshold for VOCs.

Table 3 Maximum Daily Regional Construction Emissions
Construction Phase
Pollutants
(lb/day)1, 2
VOC NOX CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5
Year 2022
Asphalt and Building Demolition 2 23 15 <1 1 1
Asphalt and Building Demolition and Debris Haul 3 25 17 <1 2 1 Rough Grading 2022 4 39 30 <1 6 3
Rough Grading 2022 and Asphalt Demolition Debris
On-Site Reprocessing 4 43 34 <1 6 3
Year 2023
Rough Grading 2023 3 35 29 <1 5 3
Rough Grading 2023 and Soil Haul 4 41 30 <1 6 3
Utility Trenching <1 2 3 <1 <1 <1
1 The acreage disturbed used for construction modeling was based on preliminary construction data provided by the applicant. As the site is 12.3 acres, this analysis is conservative.

Page 265 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

3. Environmental Analysis
January 2022 Page 51
Table 3 Maximum Daily Regional Construction Emissions
Construction Phase
Pollutants
(lb/day)1, 2
VOC NOX CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5
Asphalt Paving 1 7 10 <1 <1 <1
Building Construction 2023 1 9 13 <1 1 1
Year 2024
Building Construction 2024 1 9 13 <1 1 1
Building Construction 2024 and Architectural Coating 132 11 17 <1 2 1 Maximum Daily Construction Emissions
Maximum Daily Emissions 132 43 34 <1 6 3
South Coast AQMD Regional Construction
Threshold 75 100 550 150 150 55
Significant? Yes No No No No No
Source: CalEEMod Version 2016.3.2.25. 1 Based on the preliminary information provided by the applicant. Where specific information regarding project-related construction activities was not available, construction assumptions were based on CalEEMod defaults, which are based on construction surveys conducted by South Coast AQMD of construction equipment. 2 Includes implementation of fugitive dust control measures required by South Coast AQMD under Rule 403, including watering disturbed areas a minimum of two times per day, reducing speed limit to 15 miles per hour on unpaved surfaces, replacing ground cover quickly, and street sweeping with Rule 1186–compliant sweepers.

However, as shown in Table 4, Maximum Daily Regional Construction Emissions with Mitigation Incorporated, implementation of Mitigation Measure AQ-1 would reduce construction-related emissions to below the significance thresholds by requiring use of zero-VOC-content paints for buildings’ interior coating. Therefore, air quality impacts from project-related construction activities would be less than significant with incorporation of mitigation.

Mitigation Measures
Construction
AQ-1 The construction contractor(s) shall only use interior paints with a VOC (volatile organic compound) content of zero grams per liter (g/L) to reduce VOC emissions. All building and site plans shall note use of interior paints with a VOC content of 0 g/L. Prior to construction, the construction contractor(s) shall ensure that all construction plans submitted to the City’s Building and Safety Department clearly show the requirement for use of interior paint with a VOC content of 0 g/L for the specified buildings.

Page 266 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

3. Environmental Analysis

Page 52 ends

Table 4 Maximum Daily Regional Construction Emissions with Mitigation Incorporated Construction Phase
Pollutants
(lb/day)1, 2
VOC NOX CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5
Year 2022
Asphalt and Building Demolition 2 23 15 <1 1 1
Asphalt and Building Demolition and Debris Haul 3 25 17 <1 2 1 Rough Grading 2022 4 39 30 <1 6 3
Rough Grading 2022 and Asphalt Demolition Debris
On-Site Reprocessing 4 43 34 <1 6 3
Year 2023
Rough Grading 2023 3 35 29 <1 5 3
Rough Grading 2023 and Soil Haul 4 41 30 <1 6 3
Utility Trenching <1 2 3 <1 <1 <1
Asphalt Paving 1 7 10 <1 <1 <1
Building Construction 2023 1 9 13 <1 1 1
Year 2024
Building Construction 2024 1 9 13 <1 1 1
Building Construction 2024 and Architectural Coating3 34 11 17 <1 2 1 Maximum Daily Construction Emissions
Maximum Daily Emissions 34 43 34 <1 6 3
South Coast AQMD Regional Construction
Threshold 75 100 550 150 150 55
Significant? No No No No No No
Source: CalEEMod Version 2016.3.2.25. 1 Based on the preliminary information provided by the Applicant. Where specific information regarding project-related construction activities was not available, construction assumptions were based on CalEEMod defaults, which are based on construction surveys conducted by South Coast AQMD of construction equipment. 2 Includes implementation of fugitive dust control measures required by South Coast AQMD under Rule 403, including watering disturbed areas a minimum of two times per day, reducing speed limit to 15 miles per hour on unpaved surfaces, replacing ground cover quickly, and street sweeping with Rule 1186–compliant sweepers. 3 Includes implementation of Mitigation Measure AQ-1, which would require use of paints with zero VOC content for interior coatings.

Long-Term Operation-Related Air Quality Impact
Typical long-term air pollutant emissions are generated by area sources (e.g., landscape fuel use, aerosols, architectural coatings, and asphalt pavement), energy use (natural gas), and mobile sources (i.e., on-road vehicles). The proposed project would result in the development of 207 residential units on the project site.

The proposed buildings would, at minimum, be designed and built to meet the 2019 Building Energy Efficiency Standards and the 2019 California Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen). As shown in Table 5, Maximum Daily Regional Operation Emissions, it is anticipated that operation of the proposed project would result in overall minimal emissions and would not exceed the South Coast AQMD regional operation-phase significance thresholds. It should be noted that emissions modeling is conservative because it assumes that there are no active land uses at the project site. An optional approach would be to assume the former weekend swap meets at the site as baseline (existing conditions), which would result in reduced “net” emissions for the proposed project. Impacts to the regional air quality associated with operation of the project would be less than significant.

Page 267 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

3. Environmental Analysis
January 2022 Page 53
Table 5 Maximum Daily Regional Operation Emissions
Source Maximum Daily Emissions (lbs/day)
VOC NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5
Maximum Daily Emissions
Area 10 <1 17 <1 <1 <1
Energy <1 1 1 <1 <1 <1
Mobile 3 3 34 <1 9 3
Total 13 4 52 <1 9 3
South Coast AQMD Regional Threshold 55 55 550 150 150 55 Exceeds Threshold? No No No No No No
Source: CalEEMod Version 2016.3.2.25.

Notes: lbs = pounds
Highest winter or summer emissions are reported.
c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project could expose sensitive receptors to elevated pollutant concentrations if it causes or significantly contributes to elevated pollutant concentration levels. Unlike regional emissions, localized emissions are typically evaluated in terms of air concentration rather than mass so they can be more readily correlated to potential health effects.

Construction LSTs
Localized significance thresholds (LSTs) are based on the California AAQS, which are the most stringent AAQS to provide a margin of safety in the protection of public health and welfare. They are designated to protect sensitive receptors most susceptible to further respiratory distress, such as asthmatics, the elderly, very young children, people already weakened by other disease or illness, and people engaged in strenuous work or exercise.

The screening-level construction LSTs are based on the size of the project site, distance to the nearest sensitive receptor, and source receptor area (SRA). The nearest off-site sensitive receptors are the residences along Marybeth Avenue bordering the project site to the north.

Air pollutant emissions generated by construction activities would cause temporary increases in air pollutant concentrations. Table 6, Localized Construction Emissions, shows that the maximum daily construction emissions (pounds per day) for NOX, CO, PM10, and PM2.5 would be less than their respective South Coast AQMD screening-level LSTs. Therefore, air quality impacts from project-related construction activities would be less than significant.

Page 268 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

3. Environmental Analysis

Page 54 ends

Table 6 Localized Construction Emissions
Construction Activity
Pollutants(lbs/day)1
NOX CO PM102 PM2.52
South Coast AQMD ≤1.00 Acre LST 83 673 5.00 4.00
Asphalt and Building Demolition 22 14 1.07 1.00
Utility Trenching 2 3 0.10 0.10
Asphalt Paving 7 9 0.34 0.32
Building Construction 2023 7 10 0.38 0.36
Building Construction 2024 7 10 0.33 0.31
Building Construction 2024 and Architectural Coating 9 13 0.45 0.43 Exceeds LST? No No No No
South Coast AQMD 1.50-Acre LSTs 102 852 6.00 4.50
Asphalt and Building Demolition and Debris Haul 24 16 1.76 1.17 Exceeds LST? No No No No
South Coast AQMD 2.50 Acre LST 126 805 18.07 5.94
Grading and Grading Soil Haul 21 15 3.75 2.31
Exceeds LST? No No No No
South Coast AQMD 4.50-Acre LSTs 173 1,683 12.83 8.33
Rough Grading 2022 39 29 5.34 3.04
Rough Grading 2022 and Asphalt Demolition Debris
On-Site Reprocessing
42 33 5.52 3.22
Rough Grading 2023 35 28 5.13 2.85
Rough Grading 2023 and Soil Haul 35 28 5.16 2.85
Exceeds LST? No No No No
Source: CalEEMod Version 2016.3.2.25. South Coast AQMD 2008, 2011.

Notes: In accordance with South Coast AQMD methodology, only on-site stationary sources and mobile equipment are included in the analysis. Screening level LSTs are based on a distance of 82 ft to the receptor in SRA 11. 1 Where specific information for project-related construction activities or processes was not available, modeling was based on CalEEMod defaults. These defaults are based on construction surveys conducted by the South Coast AQMD. 2 Includes fugitive dust control measures required by South Coast AQMD under Rule 403, such as watering disturbed areas a minimum of two times per day, reducing speed limit to 15 miles per hour on unpaved surfaces, replacing ground cover quickly, and street sweeping with Rule 1186–compliant sweepers.

Construction Health Risk
Emissions from construction equipment primarily consist of diesel particulate matter. In 2015, the Office of Environmental Health Hazards Assessment adopted guidance for preparation of health risk assessments that included the development of a cancer risk factor and noncancer chronic reference exposure level for diesel particulate matter over a 30-year time frame (OEHHA 2015). Currently, South Coast AQMD does not require the evaluation of long-term excess cancer risk or chronic health impacts for a short-term project. The proposed project is anticipated to be completed in approximately 19 months, which would limit the exposure of on-site and off-site receptors. Furthermore, construction activities would not generate on-site exhaust emissions that would exceed the screening-level construction LSTs. Thus, construction emissions would not pose a health risk to on- and off-site receptors, and project-related construction health impacts would be less than significant.

Page 269 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

3. Environmental Analysis
January 2022 Page 55
Operation LSTs
Operation of the proposed project would not generate substantial emissions from on-site stationary sources.

Land uses that have the potential to generate substantial stationary sources of emissions include industrial land uses, such as chemical processing and warehousing operations with truck idling on-site, that would require a permit from South Coast AQMD. The proposed project does not fall within these categories of uses. While operation of the new buildings would use standard on-site mechanical equipment such as heating, ventilation, and air conditioning, air pollutant emissions would be nominal. Localized air quality impacts related to operation-related emissions would be less than significant.

Carbon Monoxide Hotspots
Vehicle congestion has the potential to create pockets of CO called hotspots. Hotspots are typically produced at intersections, where traffic congestion is highest because vehicles are backed up and idle for longer periods and are subject to reduced speeds. These pockets could exceed the state one-hour standard of 20 parts per million or the eight-hour standard of 9.0 parts per million. Because CO is produced in the greatest quantities from vehicle combustion and does not readily disperse into the atmosphere, adherence to AAQS is typically demonstrated through an analysis of localized CO concentrations.

The SoCAB has been designated attainment under both the national and California AAQS for CO. Under existing and future vehicle emission rates, a project would have to increase traffic volumes at a single intersection by more than 44,000 vehicles per hour—or 24,000 vehicles per hour where vertical and/or horizontal mixing is substantially limited—in order to generate a significant CO impact (BAAQMD 2017). The project-related 189 PM peak hour vehicle trips would be minimal compared to the AAQS screening levels. The project would not substantially increase CO hotspots at intersections, and impacts would be 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. The proposed project would not result in objectionable odors. The threshold for odor is if a project creates an odor nuisance pursuant to South Coast AQMD Rule 402, Nuisance, which states:

A person shall not discharge from any source whatsoever such quantities of air contaminants or other material which cause injury, detriment, nuisance, or annoyance to any considerable number of persons or to the public, or which endanger the comfort, repose, health or safety of any such persons or the public, or which cause, or have a natural tendency to cause, injury or damage to business or property. The provisions of this rule shall not apply to odors emanating from agricultural operations necessary for the growing of crops or the raising of fowl or animals.

The type of facilities that are considered to have objectionable odors include wastewater treatments plants, compost facilities, landfills, solid waste transfer stations, fiberglass manufacturing facilities, paint/coating operations (e.g., auto body shops), dairy farms, petroleum refineries, asphalt batch plants, chemical manufacturing, and food manufacturing facilities. The proposed project involves construction of a residential development and would not fall within the objectionable odors land uses. Emissions from construction

Page 270 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

3. Environmental Analysis

Page 56 ends

equipment, such as diesel exhaust and VOCs from architectural coatings and paving may generate odors.

However, these odors would be low in concentration, temporary, and would not affect a substantial number of people. Odor impacts would be less than significant.

3.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Would the project:

Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
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
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
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? No Impact. The project site, the former Starlite Drive-in Theater, is paved and contains ornamental trees.

Prior to COVID-19, the project site was used as a swap meet on weekends. The project site and surroundings are situated in an urban, built-up area. The City’s General Plan Resources Element states that there are no rare or endangered species of plants, fish, or wildlife because the City is built out. When the site operated as a swap meet, there were frequent disturbances on-site. Therefore, the site does not have native habitat and no habitat suitable for sensitive species on-site. No impact would occur either directly or through habitat modification.

Page 271 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

3. Environmental Analysis
January 2022 Page 57
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?
No Impact. Sensitive natural communities are considered rare in the region by regulatory agencies, are known to provide habitat for sensitive animal or plant species, or are known to be important wildlife corridors. Riparian habitats occur along the banks of rivers and streams. No sensitive natural community or riparian habitat is present on-site, and no impact would occur (Wetlands Mapper 2020). 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 site is fully paved, and there are no wetlands on-site (Wetlands Mapper 2020). Therefore, the proposed project would not have an adverse effect on wetlands, and no impact would occur. 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?
Less Than Significant Impact. Corridors refer to established migration routes commonly used by resident and migratory species for passage from one geographic location to another. Movement corridors may provide favorable locations for wildlife to travel between different habitat areas, such as foraging sites, breeding sites, cover areas, and preferred summer and winter ranges. They may also function as dispersal corridors allowing animals to move between various locations within their range.

Although the project site is in an urbanized and built-up environment, the trees on-site could be used for nesting by birds protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) (US Code Title 16, Sections 703 to 712) and California Fish and Game Code (Sections 3503 et seq.).

Compliance with the MBTA requires:
 Avoiding grading activities during the nesting season, February 15 to August 15.  Or, if grading activities are to be undertaken during the nesting season, a site survey for nesting birds by a qualified biologist before commencement of grading activities. If nesting birds are found, the applicant would consult with the USFWS regarding means to avoid or minimize impacts to nesting birds.

Impacts would be less than significant with compliance with the MBTA. e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?
No Impact. The City of South El Monte does not have an ordinance protecting biological resources on private property. Therefore, no impact would occur.

Page 272 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

3. Environmental Analysis

Page 58 ends

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. The project site is not within a natural community conservation plan or habitat conservation plan area (CDFW 2019). The project site does not contain sensitive biological resources, and there are no local policies protecting biological resources applicable to the site. No impact would occur.

3.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES
The analysis in this section is based in part on the following technical study:
 Cultural and Paleontological Resources Assessment for the Starlite Residential Project, Cogstone, May 2021 (Appendix C-a)
 Mitigation Measures for the Cultural and Paleontological Resources Assessment for the Starlite Residential Project, Cogstone, July 9, 2021 (Appendix C-b)
Would the project:

Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to § 15064.5? 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 dedicated cemeteries? X
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to § 15064.5?
Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. Section 15064.5 defines historic resources as resources listed or determined to be eligible for listing by the State Historical Resources Commission, a local register of historical resources, or the lead agency. Generally, a resource is considered “historically significant” if it meets one of the following criteria:
1) Is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of California’s history and cultural heritage.
2) Is associated with the lives of persons important in our past. 3) Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region or method of construction, or represents the work of an important creative individual, or possesses high artistic values. 4) Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.

Page 273 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

3. Environmental Analysis
January 2022 Page 59
A records search of the California Historic Resources Information System (CHRIS) indicated that 17 previous studies have been completed within a half-mile of the project site. There are no previous studies for the project site (Cogstone 2021, Appendix C-a). The records search also determined there are no previously recorded resources within the project site boundaries. One historic resource, an overhead electrical transmission line, is within a half-mile of the project site.

Due to the demolition of the original projection screen in 1997 and the recent demolition of additional features (e.g., the snack shop and projection booth), the drive-in as a whole has lost a substantial degree of integrity of materials, workmanship, design, and feeling. Therefore, as a whole, the Starlite Drive-in Theater is not recommended to be eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) under Criterion 1 due to a substantial loss of integrity. However, the Starlite Drive-in Theater sign retains much of its integrity and association with its historic period of significance. The existing condition of the Starlite sign is shown in Figure 12, Existing Starlite Drive-in Sign. The Starlite Drive-in Theater sign meets the standards for listing in the CRHR and is recommended eligible for individual listing under Criterion 1 for its association with drive-in theater history in America. Additionally, the Starlite Drive-in Theater sign retains much of its integrity and is a fine example of Streamline Modern / Googie style, which was prevalent at the time of its conception.

It is also a presentation of the artistic esthetic of 1950s America and the surviving work of J. Arthur Drielsma, the drive-in’s architect. Thus, the Starlite Drive-in Theater sign is also recommended individually eligible for listing in the CRHR under Criterion 3. Mitigation Measures CUL-1, CUL-2, and CUL-3 would ensure impacts to the sign are reduced to a less than significant level.

Additionally, the demolished maintenance building in the southeast corner of the site did not meet eligibility for listing under the CRHR because this property had lost a substantial degree of its original feeling and setting due to the addition of commercial buildings, the construction of the drive-in’s wood fence, and the demolition of nearby ancillary and residential buildings. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures
The following mitigation measures outline the requirements to mitigate the potentially significant impacts to the Starlite Drive-In Theatre sign. Preliminary plans to restore the sign in accordance with these requirements are shown in Figure 13, Starlite Drive-In Sign Restoration Plan.

CUL-1 Prior to any rehabilitation, restoration, or relocation, a thorough documentation of the sign, similar to a HABS/HAER report, will be completed. This report will document the sign’s materials, design, character defining features, measurements, and condition of materials . This report will be used to track changes of the sign and provide a guide for future repair work.

Copies will be submitted to one local and one state repository. Restoration, movement, and other handling of the Starlite Drive-In sign will be documented as an update to the Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) record for the sign by the qualified architectural historian if restored, or similarly qualified personnel of the recipient organization if donated, and filed at the South Central Coastal Information Center and at a local library or historical society.

Page 274 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

3. Environmental Analysis

Page 60 ends

CUL-2 The project proponent shall preserve, restore, or rehabilitate the Starlite Drive-In sign, including all historic components, in accordance with the Secretary of the Interior standards based on guidance in NPS Technical Brief 25, The Preservation of Historic Signs https://www.nps.gov/tps/how-to-preserve/briefs/25-signs.htm . To this end, the proponent shall retain a qualified architectural historian to develop a treatment plan for the work detailing a general timeline, changes to be made to the sign, which tasks are anticipated to be completed off-site (e.g. welding, soldering, glasswork), and to oversee the work. Following approval of the HABS/HAER similar documentation, the qualified architectural historian will ensure that the materials are placed on file with the City of South El Monte and responsible agencies, historical societies and preservation groups, local university and community libraries, and other appropriate national and local repositories and archives, as identified by the City of South El Monte. The qualified architectural historian will prepare a brief report detailing the restoration process to show compliance with standards in NPS Bulletin 25.

CUL-3 The Starlite Drive-In sign may be moved a short distance, so long at it remains within the property boundaries of the drive-in and remains highly visible from Rosemead Boulevard.

Alternatively, the sign may be donated to a local historical society for eventual restoration and display. In either case the sign shall be moved by a construction company experienced in handling historic building and structures. The move shall be supervised by the qualified architectural historian, in case of restoration, or recipient organization, in case of donation.

This mitigation measure pertains to movement of the sign from its current location to an eventual new final location. Temporary removal of portions of the sign for repair, refurbishment, or replication is anticipated to be necessary, and will be covered in the treatment plan.
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5?
Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated. A pedestrian survey was conducted due to the heavily developed nature of the site. No archaeological resources were observed on-site (Cogstone 2021).

Though the pedestrian survey and cultural resources search did not identify prehistoric archaeological resources within or near the project site, the open pit on-site during the recent demolition showed that intact native young alluvium sediments are present at approximately two to three feet below the modern ground surface. Coupled with the positive Sacred Land Files search result for the site, the project site is assessed to have moderate sensitivity for buried prehistoric archaeological resources. Analysis of the cultural record search, pedestrian survey, historical USDA aerial photographs, and USGS topographic quadrangle maps indicate that the Project Area has a low sensitivity for significant buried historical archaeological features such as foundations or trash pits. With the implementation of Mitigation Measures CUL-4 and CUL-5, impacts would be reduced to less than significant.

Page 275 of 925 ends

PlaceWorks
Figure 12 - Existing Starlite Drive-In Sign

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE
Source: KB Home, photo taken September 9, 2021

Page 276 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

3. Environmental Analysis

Page 62 ends

This page intentionally left blank.

Page 277 of 925 ends

D HEREIN COPY RIGHT
RE THE

ERTY OF TEMEKA

AS SUCH CANNOT BE

WHOLE OR IN PART
R WRITTEN CONSENT.
ar Court “B”
CA 92883
951.277.2546
group.com
ROVAL:

REV.

COLE MANSON)

OME-LAV /
IGN
1)
’
65-0 C
)
4)
.25)

HISTORICAL SIGN RESTORATION FINAL MEASUREMENTS TO BE PERFORMED

PRIOR TO FABRICATION OF NEW ELEMENTS
13'-2 1/8"

EXISTING STEEL I-BEAMS

REPAINTED IF RE-INSTALLING SIGN

IN SAME POSITION
Sign operation to be determined per the City of South El Monte.

NEW ILLUMINATED MARQUEE

WITH BEVELED FRAME AND

NEW NEON OR LED TUBING AROUND FRAME
per City of South El Monte direction
.063 ALUMINUM FACE PANELS ATTACHED TO INNER

WOODEN SIGN SRUCTURE

NEW PAINTED

GOOGIE STYLE

TWINKLE STARS

WITH SMALL LED BULBS

IN THE CENTER OF
1/3 OF THE STARS

EXISTING STEEL I-BEAMS

WRAPPED WITH CORRUGATED

STEEL TUBE

REPAINTED IF RE-INSTALLING SIGN

IN SAME POSITION

MULTIPLE
.063 ALUMINUM

PAINTED PIECES OF VARIOUS SIZE

AFFIXED TO FACE

TWO SETS OF
NEW 4” - 5” DEEP CHANNEL

LETTERS WITH NEON

OR LED TUBING
per City of
South El Monte direction

RESTORE CHANNEL LETTERS (BOTH SIDES)

TO LIKE NEW CONDITION

ADD NEW NEON OR LED TUBING
per City of South El Monte direction
NEW NEON OR LED TUBING per City of South El Monte direction

RESTORE STAR TO LIKE NEW CONDITION

REPLACE RETRO INCONDESCENT

OR ADD NEW LED BULBS
25'-10 5/8"
23'-7 1/2"
5'-1 1/2"
PlaceWorks
Figure 13 - Starlite Drive-In Sign Restoration Plan

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE
Note: Sign Operation to be determined per the City of South El Monte.

Source: Temeka, 2021

Page 278 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

3. Environmental Analysis

Page 64 ends

This page intentionally left blank.

Page 279 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

3. Environmental Analysis
January 2022 Page 65
Mitigation Measures
CUL-4 Prior to the beginning of ground disturbances, the project proponent shall retain an archaeologist meeting Secretary of the Interior Standards (SOI) to oversee spotcheck cultural resources monitoring of all excavations two feet and deeper within the project area.

Spotchecks should occur weekly on average, and no less often than once every seven days that ground disturbance occurs. If a cultural object is uncovered the qualified monitor shall be empowered to temporarily redirect work away from the find while it is evaluated. Work can continue a minimum of 50 feet away from the find. For finds that are not significant, work may resume immediately after the find is documented and removed. If a find is significant, a mitigation plan must be developed, and mitigation completed, prior to work continuing within the 50-foot cordon.

CUL-5 Prior to the beginning of ground disturbances, the qualified monitor will give a short Worker Environmental Awareness Program training presentation prepared by the SOI qualified supervising archaeologist to all construction staff. This presentation will inform construction personnel what cultural resources may be uncovered during the ground-disturbing phases of the project and what to do in case of a find.
c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of dedicated cemeteries? Less Than Significant Impact. The project site would require demolition, ground clearing, excavation, grading, and other construction activities. California Health and Safety Code, Section 7050.5; CEQA Section 15064.5; and Public Resources Code, Section 5097.98, mandates the process to be followed in the event of an accidental discovery of any human remains in a location other than a dedicated cemetery. Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 requires that if human remains are discovered on a project site, disturbance of the site shall remain halted until the coroner has conducted an investigation into the circumstances, manner, and cause of any death, and the recommendations concerning the treatment and disposition of the human remains have been made to the person responsible for the excavation or to his or her authorized representative, in the manner provided in Section 5097.98 of the Public Resources Code. If the coroner determines that the remains are not subject to his or her authority and has reason to believe they are Native American, he or she shall contact, by telephone within 24 hours, the Native American Heritage Commission. In the unlikely event that soil-disturbing activities result in the discovery of human remains, compliance with existing law would ensure that the proposed project would not have significant impacts on human remains.

Page 280 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

3. Environmental Analysis

Page 66 ends

3.6 ENERGY
Would the project:

Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation?
X
b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency?
X
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.

Construction
During construction, the proposed project would consume energy in two general forms: (1) the fuel energy consumed by construction vehicles and equipment; and (2) bound energy in construction materials, such as asphalt, steel, concrete, pipes, and manufactured or processed materials such as lumber and glass.

Construction of the proposed project would require the use of construction equipment for grading, hauling, and building activities. Electricity use during construction would vary during different phases of construction— the majority of construction equipment during demolition and grading would be gas or diesel powered, and the later construction phases would require electricity-powered equipment, such as interior construction and architectural coatings. Construction also includes the vehicles of construction workers traveling to and from the project site and haul trucks for the export of materials from site clearing.

The surrounding area and project site are already served with electricity by Southern California Edison (SCE) and natural gas infrastructure provided by the Southern California Gas Company. Adequate infrastructure capacity in the vicinity of the site would be available to accommodate the electricity and natural gas demand for construction activities and would not require additional or expanded infrastructure.

The construction contractors would minimize idling of construction equipment, as required by state law, and reduce construction waste by recycling. These required practices would limit wasteful and unnecessary electrical energy consumption. Furthermore, there are no unusual project characteristics that would necessitate the use of construction equipment that is less energy efficient than at comparable construction sites in other parts of the state. Therefore, the proposed short-term construction activities would not result in inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary fuel consumption.

Page 281 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

3. Environmental Analysis
January 2022 Page 67
Transportation
Transportation energy use depends on the type and number of trips, vehicle miles traveled, fuel efficiency of vehicles, and travel mode. Transportation energy use during construction would come from the transport and use of construction equipment, delivery vehicles and haul trucks, and construction employee vehicles that would use diesel fuel and/or gasoline. The use of energy resources by these vehicles would fluctuate according to the phase of construction and would be temporary. The majority of construction equipment during demolition and grading would be gas or diesel powered, and the later construction phases would require electricity-powered equipment. Impacts related to transportation energy use during construction would be temporary and would not require expanded energy supplies or the construction of new infrastructure. Impacts would not be significant.

Operation
Operational use of energy would include heating, cooling, and ventilation of buildings; water heating; operation of electrical systems, security, and control center functions; use of on-site equipment and appliances; and indoor, outdoor, perimeter, and parking lot lighting. Additionally, the proposed project would operate as residential uses and would not result in an excessive consumption of energy compared to other residential uses.

The Specific Plan includes sustainability guidelines, which include energy-efficiency recommendations such as using passive sustainable design strategies, including daylighting; natural sources of heating and cooling; operable windows; and encouraging coordination with SCE to identify opportunities to optimize energy infrastructure.

Electricity
In 2019, the latest year for which data are available, SCE provided over 84,654 gigawatt-hours of electricity to its customers (SCE 2019). The proposed project is expected to generate a demand of 1,577,002 kilowatt-hours per year (see Section 3.19, Utilities and Service Systems). Prior to final building plan submittal, the project applicant would provide project plans to SCE to prepare a Method-of-Service Study to determine the exact location of electrical connections at the site and establish estimated electricity demand. Additionally, because the proposed project would be subject to the more stringent 2019 Title 24 Standards, the project’s electricity demand would not be a substantial increase. Therefore, impacts are less than significant.

Natural Gas
The proposed project would construct new structures on the project site that would result in an increase in gas demands. The use of natural gas would be limited to building heating, water heaters, and gas stoves/ovens and would create a demand of 4,954,623 kilo–British thermal unit per year (see Section 3.19, Utilities and Service Systems). Therefore, impacts are less than significant.

Renewable Energy
Project development would not interfere with achievement of the 60.0 percent Renewable Portfolio Standard in SB 100 for 2030 or the 100 percent standard for 2045. These goals apply to SCE and other electricity retailers.

As electricity retailers reach these goals, emissions from end-user electricity use will decrease from current emission estimates.

Page 282 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

3. Environmental Analysis

Page 68 ends

Vehicle Miles Traveled and Fuel Consumption
Transportation energy use depends on the type and number of trips, vehicle miles traveled (VMT), fuel efficiency of vehicles, and travel mode. Transportation energy used during operation of the site would come from resident and visitor vehicles that would typically use diesel fuel and/or gasoline, although some vehicles may be electric cars or hybrids. The use of energy resources by these vehicles would be temporary and would fluctuate throughout the lifespan of the project. The Traffic Impact Assessment (see Appendix D-a) shows that the proposed project would generate 1,874 daily trips and a VMT per capita of 12.67 (approximately 2,620 VMT per day). When compared to the City VMT baseline value of 15.75 home-based VMT per capita and the

15.0 percent below baseline significant value of 13.39, impacts would be less than significant because the proposed project would not generate substantial daily trips. b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency? Less Than Significant Impact. The City of South El Monte is in SCAG’s 2020–2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS), a long-range plan that balances future mobility and housing needs with economic, environmental, and public health goals.

The RTP/SCS sets forth a development pattern for the region, which, when integrated with the transportation network and other transportation measures and policies, would reduce GHG emissions from transportation (excluding goods movement). The RTP/SCS is meant to provide individual jurisdictions with growth strategies that, when taken together, achieve the regional GHG emissions reduction targets. Specifically, the SCS distributes growth forecast data to transportation analysis zones for the purpose of modeling performance.

The City of South El Monte has an Energy Action Plan that identifies the City’s long-term vision and commitment to achieve energy efficiency in the community and in government operations (SGVEWP 2012).

Additionally, development on the site would be subject to 2019 Title 24, Part 6 Standards, which set standards to improve energy efficiency of newly constructed buildings. Additionally, all contractors and waste haulers are required to comply with the Countywide Integrated Waste Management Plan and divert a minimum of 50.0 percent of waste project materials from disposal. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency. Impacts would be less than significant.

3.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
The analysis in this section is based in part on the following technical studies:
 Geotechnical Investigation, RMA GeoScience, September 1, 2020 (Appendix E)  Cultural and Paleontological Resources Assessment for the Starlite Residential Project, Cogstone, May 2021 (Appendix C)

Page 283 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

3. Environmental Analysis
January 2022 Page 69
Would the project:

Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning
Map, issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42.

X
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? X
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? X iv) Landslides? X
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? X c) Be located 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?
X
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?
X
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water?
X
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? X
a) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning map, issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42.

Less Than Significant Impact. According to the Geotechnical Report, the project site is not within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone, and there are no known active faults on or immediately adjacent to the project site (RMA 2020; Appendix E). Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
Less Than Significant Impact. As with the rest of southern California, the project site is near faults that could cause moderate to intense ground shaking during the lifetime of the proposed project. The closest

Page 284 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

3. Environmental Analysis

Page 70 ends

zoned fault is the East Montebello fault zone, about 1.35 miles southwest of the site. The project site is at no greater risk for seismic activity than the surrounding development and infrastructure. All future development would be built to adhere to the most current California Building Code (CBC), which provides minimum standards to protect property and public welfare by regulating design and construction to mitigate the effects of seismic shaking and adverse soil conditions. Compliance with the standards of the most current CBC would reduce impacts from ground shaking to a less than significant level. iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated. Liquefaction refers to loose, saturated sand or gravel deposits that lose their load supporting capability when subjected to intense shaking. The project site lies within a “Zone of Required Investigation for Liquefaction.” Static groundwater was encountered at a depth of approximately 53 feet below ground level. However, according to the California Division of Mines and Geology Seismic Hazard Zone Report for El Monte Quadrangle, the historical high groundwater table is approximately five feet below grade. The Geotechnical Report ran a model using the site lithology and the historical high groundwater table of five feet below grade and found that much of the site soils are liquefiable during an earthquake if groundwater was to rise to historical levels.

Implementation of Mitigation Measure GEO-1 would reduce liquefaction impacts to a less than significant level.

The Geotechnical Report anticipates that total settlement (static and seismic) would be less than 3 inches, with differential settlement (static and seismic) of less than 1.5 inches in a 40-foot span. The Geotechnical Report states that over-excavation would occur; that these areas must be satisfactory for the support of fills; and that soils must be compacted to at least 90.0 percent relative compaction. Given the recommendations of the Geotechnical Report and the requirements of the California Building Code structural measures, total settlement would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measure
GEO-1 Once submitted, a qualified geotechnical professional shall review formal plans for site development and update/refine recommendations included in the Geotechnical Report, as appropriate. Additional site-specific data shall be used, if needed, to create an appropriate foundation design for all structures that mitigates the potential liquefaction conditions in accordance with the California Building Code and City of South El Monte building standards. iv) Landslides?
Less Than Significant Impact. According to the California Geological Survey Seismic Hazard Zones Map of the El Monte Quadrangle, the project site does not lie in a landslide hazard zone. Since the site is relatively flat, earthquake-induced landslides would not be a hazard to the proposed project. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.

Page 285 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

3. Environmental Analysis
January 2022 Page 71
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? Less Than Significant Impact. Erosion is a normal and inevitable geologic process where earthen materials are loosened, worn away, decomposed, or dissolved; removed from one place; and transported to another.

Development under the proposed project would implement structural and nonstructural best management practices (BMPs) before and during construction to control surface runoff and erosion to retain sediment on the project site. Additionally, since this project involves clearing, grading, or excavation that causes soil disturbance of one or more acres, it is subject to the provisions of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) State General Permit. Furthermore, the proposed project would be required to prepare and comply with an approved Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) that provides a schedule for the implementation and maintenance of erosion control measures and a description of the erosion control practices, including appropriate design details and a time schedule. The SWPPP would consider the full range of erosion control BMPs, including any additional site-specific and seasonal conditions. The State General Permit also requires that those implementing SWPPPs meet prerequisite qualifications that would demonstrate the skills, knowledge, and experience necessary to implement such plans. NPDES requirements would significantly reduce the potential for substantial erosion of topsoil to occur in association with new development. Once the project is constructed, soil erosion would be controlled with improvements installed on the project site. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. 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?
Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated. As discussed in question 3.7.a(iv), the project site is not in a landslide hazard zone; impacts would be less than significant. Lateral spreading is a phenomenon where large blocks of intact, nonliquefied soil move downslope on a large liquefied substratum. The mass moves toward an unconfined area, such as a descending slope or stream-cut bluff, and has been known to move on slope gradients as little as one degree. The project site is relatively flat, and impacts would be less than significant. Moreover, subsidence of basins attributed to overdraft groundwater aquifers or overpumping of petroleum reserves has been reported in various parts of southern California. Because static groundwater was encountered at a depth of 53 feet, the probability of collapse, or subsidence is low.

Implementation of the CBC and other related construction standards apply seismic requirements and address certain grading activities. The CBC includes common engineering practices requiring special design and construction methods that reduce or eliminate potential impacts related to unstable soils. Compliance with CBC regulations and Mitigation Measure GEO-1 would ensure impacts are less than significant. 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? Less Than Significant Impact. Expansive soils swell when they become wet and shrink when they dry out, and result in the potential for cracked building foundations. According to the Geotechnical Report, the soils at shallow depths are expected to have an expansion index in the very low range. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.

Page 286 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

3. Environmental Analysis

Page 72 ends

e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? No Impact. Future development under the proposed project would not require the installation of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal system, but would utilize the local sewer system. Therefore, no impact would occur.
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated. According to the cultural resources report, no recorded paleontological localities producing vertebrate fossils were found within the project site or within a mile radius of the project site. However, the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County records localities near the project site with the same or similar sedimentary deposits (Cogstone 2021; Appendix C-a).

The closest locality the museum has recorded is approximately 5.5 miles west of the project site, which produced a fossil of an extinct horse. Based upon records of fossils found in similar sediments nearby, no paleontological monitoring is recommended for the mass excavations. Drilling or pile-driving activities, regardless of depth, have a low potential to produce fossils meeting the significance criteria because any fossils brought up by the auger during drilling would not have information about formation, depth, or context (Cogstone 2021). The only instance in which such fossils would meet significance criteria is if the fossil is a species new to the region. Regardless, Mitigation Measure GEO-2 and Mitigation Measure GEO-3 would be implemented to reduce potential impacts to unanticipated discoveries to less than significant.

Mitigation Measures
GEO-2 If unanticipated fossil discoveries are made, all work must halt within 50 feet until a qualified paleontologist can evaluate the find and determine the appropriate disposition of the resource.

Work may resume immediately outside of the 50-foot radius.

GEO-3 Prior to the beginning of ground disturbances, a qualified paleontologist shall provide a short Worker Environmental Awareness Program training presentation t to all construction staff.

This presenter may be the same specialist specified in MM CUL-4 if that presenter meets both the archaeologist (see MM CUL-3) and paleontologist qualification requirement. This presentation will inform construction personnel what paleontological resources may be uncovered during the ground-disturbing phases of the project and what to do in case of a find.

3.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Scientists have concluded that human activities are contributing to global climate change by adding large amounts of heat-trapping gases, known as greenhouse gases (GHGs), into the atmosphere. The primary source of these GHG is fossil fuel use. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has identified four major GHGs—water vapor, carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), and ozone (O3)—that are the likely cause of an increase in global average temperatures observed in the 20th and 21st centuries. Other GHGs identified by the

Page 287 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

3. Environmental Analysis
January 2022 Page 73
Intergovernmental Panel that contribute to global warming to a lesser extent include nitrous oxide (N2O), sulfur hexafluoride (SF6), hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons, and chlorofluorocarbons.2 Information on manufacture of cement, steel, and other “life cycle” emissions that would occur as a result of the project are not applicable and are not included in the analysis.3 Black carbon emissions are not included in the GHG analysis because the California Air Resources Board (CARB) does not include this short-lived climate pollutant in the state’s Senate Bill 32 (SB 32) inventory but treats it separately.4 A background discussion on the GHG regulatory setting and GHG modeling is in Appendix B to this Initial Study.

Would the project:

Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the
environment?
x
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
x
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
Less Than Significant Impact. Global climate change is not confined to a particular project area and is generally accepted as the consequence of global industrialization over the last 200 years. A typical project, even a very large one, does not generate enough GHG emissions on its own to influence global climate change significantly; hence, the issue of global climate change is, by definition, a cumulative environmental impact.

Project-related GHG emissions are shown in Table 7, Project-Related GHG Emissions. Implementation of the proposed project would result in 207 new residential units. The proposed project would generate 1,874 weekday 2 Water vapor (H2O) is the strongest GHG and the most variable in its phases (vapor, cloud droplets, ice crystals). However, water vapor is not considered a pollutant, but part of the feedback loop rather than a primary cause of change. 3 Life cycle emissions include indirect emissions associated with materials manufacture. However, these indirect emissions involve numerous parties, each of which is responsible for GHG emissions of their particular activity. The California Resources Agency, in adopting the CEQA Guidelines Amendments on GHG emissions found that lifecycle analyses was not warranted for projectspecific CEQA analysis in most situations, for a variety of reasons, including lack of control over some sources, and the possibility of double-counting emissions (CNRA 2018). Because the amount of materials consumed during the operation or construction of the proposed project is not known, the origin of the raw materials purchased is not known, and manufacturing information for those raw materials are also not known, calculation of life cycle emissions would be speculative. A life-cycle analysis is not warranted (OPR 2008).
4 Particulate matter emissions, which include black carbon, are analyzed in Section 3.3, Air Quality. Black carbon emissions have sharply declined due to efforts to reduce on-road and off-road vehicle emissions, especially diesel particulate matter. The state's existing air quality policies will virtually eliminate black carbon emissions from on-road diesel engines within 10 years (CARB 2017a.).

Page 288 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

3. Environmental Analysis

Page 74 ends

vehicle trips, 1,922 Saturday vehicle trips, and 1,684 Sunday vehicle trips. Furthermore, operation of the proposed project would result in an increase in water demand, wastewater and solid waste generation, area sources (e.g., consumer cleaning products), and energy usage (i.e., natural gas and electricity). Annual average construction emissions were amortized over 30 years and included in the emissions inventory to account for one-time GHG emissions from the construction phase of the project. Overall, development and operation of the proposed project would not generate annual emissions that exceed the South Coast AQMD bright-line threshold equivalent to 3,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide (MTCO2e) per year (South Coast AQMD 2010).

Therefore, the proposed project’s cumulative contribution to GHG emissions would be less than significant.

Table 7 Project-Related GHG Emissions
Source
GHG
(MTCO2e/Year)
Area 4
Energy 648
Mobile (Vehicle Trips) 1,319
Solid Waste 163
Water 57
Amortized Construction Emissions1 17
Total 2,207
South Coast AQMD Bright-Line Threshold 3,000 MTCO2e/Yr
Exceeds Bright-Line Threshold? No
Source: CalEEMod, Version 2016.3.2.25.

Notes: MTons = metric tons; MTCO2e = equivalent to a metric ton of carbon dioxide 1 Total construction emission are amortized over 30 years per South Coast AQMD methodology. b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
No Impact. Applicable plans adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions include CARB’s Scoping Plan and SCAG’s RTP/SCS. A consistency analysis with these plans is presented below.

CARB Scoping Plan
On December 24, 2017, CARB adopted the Final 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan Update (Scoping Plan) to address the 2030 interim target to achieve a 40.0 percent reduction below 1990 levels by 2030, established by SB 32 (CARB 2017c). The CARB Scoping Plan is applicable to state agencies and is not directly applicable to cities/counties and individual projects. Nonetheless, the Scoping Plan has been the primary tool used to develop performance-based and efficiency-based CEQA criteria and GHG reduction targets for climate action planning efforts.

Since adoption of the 2008 Scoping Plan, which was adopted to achieve the GHG reduction goals of Assembly Bill 32 (AB 32), state agencies have adopted programs identified in the plan, and the legislature has passed additional legislation to achieve the GHG reduction targets. Statewide strategies to reduce GHG emissions include the Low Carbon Fuel Standard, California Appliance Energy Efficiency regulations, California

Page 289 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

3. Environmental Analysis
January 2022 Page 75
Renewable Energy Portfolio standard, changes in the Corporate Average Fuel Economy standards, and other early action measures as necessary to ensure the state is on target to achieve the GHG emissions reduction goals of AB 32 and SB 32. Also, new buildings are required to comply with the latest applicable Building Energy Efficiency Standards and CALGreen. Though measures in the Scoping Plan apply to state agencies and not the proposed project, the project’s GHG emissions would be reduced by statewide compliance with measures that have been adopted since AB 32 and SB 32 were adopted. Therefore, the proposed project would not obstruct implementation of the CARB Scoping Plan, and impacts would be less than significant.

SCAG’s Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy SCAG adopted the 2020-2045 RTP/SCS (Connect SoCal) in September 2020. Connect SoCal identifies that land use strategies that focus on new housing and job growth in areas rich with destinations and mobility options are consistent with a land use development pattern that supports and complements the proposed transportation network. The overarching strategy in Connect SoCal is to plan for the southern California region to grow in more compact communities in transit priority areas and priority growth areas; provide neighborhoods with efficient and plentiful public transit; establish abundant and safe opportunities to walk, bike, and pursue other forms of active transportation; and preserve more of the region’s remaining natural lands and farmlands (SCAG 2020). Connect SoCal’s transportation projects help more efficiently distribute population, housing, and employment growth, and forecast development is generally consistent with regionallevel general plan data to promote active transportation and reduce GHG emissions. The projected regional development, when integrated with the proposed regional transportation network in Connect SoCal, would reduce per-capita GHG emissions related to vehicular travel and achieve the GHG reduction per capita targets for the SCAG region.

The Connect SoCal Plan does not require that local general plans, specific plans, or zoning be consistent with the SCS, but provides incentives for consistency to governments and developers. The proposed project is a residential development project that would provide new single-family and multifamily housing on an infill site that is served by transit, which would contribute to reducing the VMT per capita between residential and service needs. Therefore, the proposed project would not interfere with SCAG’s ability to implement the regional strategies outlined in Connect SoCal, and impacts would be less than significant.\

3.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
The analysis in this section is based in part on the following technical study:
 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment and Limited Subsurface Assessment, Stantec, October 12, 2021 (Appendix F)
Historic and Current Site Conditions
As shown in Figure 3, Aerial Photograph, the project site is paved and vacant except for a structure at the northeast corner of the site. Prior to COVID-19, the site was used on weekends for swap meets. The project site was historically used as agricultural land dating back to 1928. By 1938 a dairy appeared to have been developed on the western portion of the site, and residences were developed on the eastern portion. By 1952 the western

Page 290 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

3. Environmental Analysis

Page 76 ends

portion of the site was redeveloped with a drive-in theater, and by 1972 the eastern portion of the site was redeveloped with two commercial structures and two large parking lots. By 1989 two of the three residences at the site were demolished, and in 2002 the screen of the drive-in theater was removed. In March 2021, the convenience store, snack shop, maintenance building and asphalted areas associated with the drive-in theater were demolished (see Figure 14, Approximate Area of Stained and Odorous Soils).

Methane Investigation
In August and September 2015, Hillmann Consulting conducted subsurface investigations, which included the installation of 15 soil vapor probes across the project site. Results of this subsurface assessment detected elevated concentrations of methane in the east-central portion of the site. Hillmann detected elevated concentrations of methane at several locations, with the maximum concentration detected at 620,000 parts per million by volume (ppmv). The source of the elevated methane was not determined during this assessment, and the concentrations of methane indicated a risk for accumulation under any proposed buildings.

In June 2018 Fulcrum Resources Environmental (FRE) further investigated the presence of methane on the property. FRE reported concentrations of methane ranging from less than 10 to a peak level of 235,000 ppmv in the eastern portion of the site. The elevated concentration of methane detected in the subsurface appeared to be near a gas pipeline leading from the maintenance building to the snack shop (see Figure 14, Approximate Area of Stained and Odorous Soils). Following the June 2018 investigation, SoCalGas closed and locked out the gas pipeline valve at the maintenance building, terminating gas service to the snack shop.

Stantec completed a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) and limited subsurface assessment between July 16 and 24, 2020, to further assess possible methane contamination on the project site. Upon confirmation that the SoCalGas service line was still closed and locked out since 2018, Stantec installed soil vapor probes at six locations near the gas pipeline. The methane concentrations in these probes ranged from 7,000 ppmv to 66,000 ppmv. The reported concentrations showed a decrease since detection by Hillmann in 2015 and FRE in 2018. However, the concentrations detected by Stantec were still a concern to site development for residential purposes. No methane concentrations were detected in the western, southeast, or northeast parts of the site.

The area with elevated methane in the soil appeared to be limited to the east-central area, centered between the former snack bar, the former maintenance building, and the northeast corner of the property.

Page 291 of 925 ends

G G G

ROSEMEAD BOULEVARD

CHICO AVENUE
G

APPROXIMATE AREA

OF IMPACTED SOIL

BASED ON FIELD NOTES
G

ADDITIONAL TEST PIT LOCATION
SAMPLES COLLECTED ON 7/14-15/20

GAS UTILITY LINE

APPROXIMATE PROPERTY BOUNDARY
PREVIOUS SOIL BORING, 2015
SG = PREVIOUS GAS LOCATION, 2015
MULTI-DEPTH PROBE, 10/9/15
SOIL VAPOR PROBE, 6/13/18
SOIL VAPOR PROBE SET AT 5' AND 15'
N
NOTES:
0 100 200

APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET
Source: Stantec, 2020
PlaceWorks
0 Scale (Feet)
100

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE
Figure 14 - Approximate Area of Stained and Odorous Soils

FORMER CONVENIENCE STORE

AND SNACK BAR
FORMER

MAINTENANCE

BUILDING

APPROXIMATE
FORMER

UST LOCATION

APPROXIMATE AREA OF

STAIN AND ODOROUS SOIL

BASED ON FIELD NOTES

ROSEMEAD AVENUE
B4/SG4
G G G
B5
B6/SG6
B7
B12
B9/SG9
B8
B10
B25
B18/SG18
B24
B26
B19/SG19
SG24
B22/SG22
SG26
B2/SG22
B23
B21/SG21
B3/SG3
B13 SB35 B1/SG1
SB34
SB32
SB28
SB27
B17/SG17
TPT-1-W

ROSEMEAD BOULEVARD

CHICO AVENUE
SG23
G
150'

APPROXIMATE AREA

OF IMPACTED SOIL

BASED ON FIELD NOTES
SV-1
SV-2
SV-3
SV-5
SV-4
SV-6
SB33
SB31
SV-7
SV-8
SV-9
SV-10 SV-11
B14
SG25 SB30
SB29
B20/SG20
B15/SG15
TPT-3
TPT-1
TPT-2
B16/SG16
B11/SG11
G

ADDITIONAL TEST PIT LOCATION
SAMPLES COLLECTED ON 7/14-15/20

GAS UTILITY LINE
450'

APPROXIMATE PROPERTY BOUNDARY
PREVIOUS SOIL BORING, 2015
SG = PREVIOUS GAS LOCATION, 2015
MULTI-DEPTH PROBE, 10/9/15
SOIL VAPOR PROBE, 6/13/18
SOIL VAPOR PROBE SET AT 5' AND 15'
SOIL VAPOR PROBES SET AT 5', 10' AND 20'
NOTES:
0 100

APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET

APPROXIMATE AREA OF STAIN AND

ODOROUS SOIL BASED ON FIELD NOTES

GAS UTILITY LINE

APPROXIMATE PROPERTY BOUNDARY
G
TPT-3-200’

Page 292 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

3. Environmental Analysis

Page 78 ends

This page intentionally left blank.

Page 293 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

3. Environmental Analysis
January 2022 Page 79
At the completion of demolition activities in March 2021, Stantec installed soil vapor probes throughout the east-central area to evaluate the remaining methane concentrations at the site. Over the span of four months, between March and July 2021, methane concentrations decreased from a high of 55,000 ppmv to less than the reporting limit in all post-demolition soil vapor probes across the east-central area of the property. Methane concentrations experienced a decreasing trend after demolition of the asphalt cover and a three-inch-thick concrete layer two to three feet below ground surface (bgs). Based on the results of a combustible gas survey completed at the east-central area in July 2021 and the prior methane readings in the soil vapor probes in the remaining areas of the property, no further assessment regarding methane would be required.

Underground Storage Tank
On March 16, 2021, during the removal of the three-inch-thick concrete layer from the east-central area of the property an abandoned underground storage tank (UST) was discovered northeast of the natural gas line (see Figure 14, Approximate Area of Stained and Odorous Soils). Soil samples were collected at both ends of the UST and analyzed for total petroleum hydrocarbon (TPH) and volatile organic compounds (VOC). No TPHs were detected, and trace amounts of VOCs were reported. The reported VOCs were orders of magnitude below their corresponding residential screening limits (RSL). Given that the UST was completely empty, and the recent soil sample result collected directly below the tank indicated no release had occurred that exceeded current cleanup requirements, the City of South El Monte approved removal of the UST under the existing demolition permit on April 19, 2021. No additional investigation or assessment pertaining to the UST was required by the City of South El Monte.

Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons, Metals, and Volatile Organic Compounds in Soils Hillman’s subsurface investigation included 26 soil borings on the project site. No significant concentrations of petroleum hydrocarbons were detected in the soil matrix samples and, other than arsenic, concentrations of metals in soil appear to represent expected background levels. Although arsenic was detected at a concentration of 8.2 milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg), this is below the generally accepted statistically derived background for arsenic (12 mg/kg) accepted by the California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) for school sites. Therefore, metals and total petroleum hydrocarbons were not identified as contaminants of concern.

In July 2020, trenching and test pit activities were performed by Stantec in the east-central area of the property where the natural gas line was reported and where areas of visibly stained and odorous soil were present (see Figure 14, Approximate Area of Stained and Odorous Soils). Soil samples were analyzed for TPHs and VOCs. No detection of TPH as gasoline or VOCs were detected above the laboratory reporting limits, with the exception of one de minimus area with TPH as diesel and oil slightly above the environmental screening level for residential land use in soil sample TPT-3-200’ (see Figure 14, Approximate Area of Stained and Odorous Soils).

Historical Agricultural Use
Soil samples on site were analyzed by Stantec for organochlorine pesticides (OCP) that could have been used when the site operated as agricultural land. OCPs were detected at minor concentrations that are below their respective RSLs. Additionally, all detected metal concentrations were within typical naturally occurring California background concentration ranges. Based on the composite soil samples results, historical agricultural

Page 294 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

3. Environmental Analysis

Page 80 ends

use would not represent an environmental concern, and no further investigation is warranted related to this issue.

Groundwater Superfund Plume and Offsite Environmental Concerns The project site lies within the San Gabriel Valley Regional Groundwater Superfund plume. The groundwater in this area is contaminated with elevated levels of tetrachloroethene (PCE), trichloroethene (TCE), carbon tetrachloride (CTC), and other VOCs from multiple point sources in the San Gabriel Valley. Because groundwater at the project site was reported at 53 feet bgs, Stantec analyzed soil vapor samples for VOCs.

Minor concentrations of VOCs were detected, including TCE and PCE concentrations, below DTSC’s RSL for soil vapor and with an attenuation factor of 0.001.

Additionally, Stantec assessed data presented in the environmental agency database search report to evaluate adjacent and nearby potential recognized environmental conditions (REC).5 Based on this evaluation, the most likely RECs near the proposed site are shown in Table 8, Nearby Potential Recognized Environmental Conditions.

However, the VOC results from the on-site investigation showed that none of these sites have an impact on the proposed project.

Table 8 Nearby Potential Recognized Environmental Conditions Facility Name Distance/Direction from the Project Site Potential Recognized Environmental Conditions Bright-Way Laundry
2622 Chico Avenue
El Monte, CA 91733
Approximately 265 feet/
northeast
The former dry cleaners at this site included a
registered waste UST that is currently out of service.

A prior release from this UST could represent an
environmental concern if the land use on the project
site were to change to residential. However, the low
levels of detected VOC concentrations in soil vapor
show that there are no impacts from this UST.

Eldon Drapery Cleaners
2461 Chico Avenue
El Monte, CA 91733
Approximately 100 feet/
southeast
No releases have been reported for this facility.

However, the dry cleaners could be an
environmental concern due to the potential for
unknown releases to have occurred that would
present a potential vapor migration issue at the
proposed site. The low levels of detected VOC
concentrations in soil vapor at the project site show
that there are no impacts from this facility.

Champ Corp.
2500 Rosemead Blvd
El Monte, CA 91733
Approximately 315 feet/
west-southwest
This site is listed for a release of gasoline to soil. No information regarding remedial activities is provided.

However, the Regional Water Quality Control Board
(RWQCB) issued closure for this release on June 18,
1996. Although the impact appears to be to the soil
only, no soil vapor data or samples have been
collected along the property boundary. Given the low
5 A recognized environmental condition (an REC) is “the presence or likely presence of any hazardous substances or petroleum products in, on, or at a property: (1) due to any release to the environment; (2) under conditions indicative of a release to the environment; or (3) under conditions that pose a material threat of a future release to the environment.”

Page 295 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

3. Environmental Analysis
January 2022 Page 81
Table 8 Nearby Potential Recognized Environmental Conditions Facility Name Distance/Direction from the Project Site Potential Recognized Environmental Conditions levels of detected VOC concentrations in soil vapor
at the project site, there are no impacts from this
facility.

General Enameling Co.
2463 Chico Ave
American General Bus
2430 Chico Avenue
Raypack, Inc
2416 Chico Avenue
Monterey Caskett Co.
2404 Chico Ave
M&T
2500 Rosemead Blvd
Hooter Bros Enamelin
2460 Rosemead Blvd
Silver Streak Traile
2319 Chico Ave
Hyde Engineering
2428 Rosemead Blvd
< 1/8 mile southeast and
southwest
Each of the eight facilities listed have reported a
release of chlorinated solvents that affected
groundwater below their respective properties. Of the
eight listings, four have received case closure from
the RWQCB. Two of the listed facilities, M&T and
Hooter Bros Enamelin are located adjacent to the
southwest of the property. The remaining facilities
are located further to the southwest and southeast
but are at a density such that combined effects of
these releases could present a vapor migration
potential.

Stantec initially identified this facility as an REC due to the potential for elevated soil vapor concentrations to exist beneath the project site. That issue no longer appears to be a concern, given the low levels of
detected VOC concentrations in soil vapor at the
property.

Source: Stantec, 2021.

Would the project:

Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
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

Page 296 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

3. Environmental Analysis

Page 82 ends

Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code
§ 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment?
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 or excessive noise 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 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. Project construction would require small amounts of hazardous materials, including fuels, greases and other lubricants, and coatings such as paint. The handling, use, transport, and disposal of hazardous materials during the construction phase of the project would comply with existing regulations of several agencies––the EPA, the Orange County Environmental Health Division, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, California Division of Occupational Safety and Health, and the US Department of Transportation.

Based on the age of the existing structure onsite, it is possible that asbestos-containing materials and lead-based paint are present in the building’s materials.. Project-related demolition activities that have the potential to expose construction workers and/or the public to asbestos or lead would be conducted in accordance with applicable regulations, which would ensure impacts would be less than significant, including, but not limited to:
 South Coast Air Quality Management District’s Rule 1403  California Health and Safety Code (Section 39650 et seq.)  California Code of Regulations (Title 8, Section 1529)  California Occupational Safety and Health Administration Regulations (California Code of Regulations, Title 8, Section 1529 [Asbestos] and Section 1532.1 [Lead])  Code of Federal Regulations (Title 40, Part 61 [asbestos], Title 40, Part 763 [asbestos], and Title 29, Part 1926 [asbestos and lead])

Page 297 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

3. Environmental Analysis
January 2022 Page 83
Compliance with these regulations would mitigate the potential of hazardous materials that may be present in the existing structure.

The proposed project would operate as residential uses. Project maintenance may require the use of cleaners, solvents, paints, and other custodial products that are potentially hazardous. These materials would be used in relatively small quantities, clearly labeled, and stored in compliance with state and federal requirements.

Moreover, the residents living in the proposed project may also use such products. With the exercise of normal safety practices, the proposed project would not create substantial hazards to the public or the environment and impacts would be less than significant.
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. During demolition activities in March 2021, an abandoned UST was discovered northeast of the natural gas line. Even though no additional investigation or assessment was required by the City of South El Monte, there is a possibility to encounter another UST onsite during the construction phase, which could create an accidental release of hazardous material that would create a hazard to construction workers and the environment. However, with the implementation of mitigation measure HAZ-1, impacts would be reduced to a less than significant.

Additionally, visibly stained and odorous soil is present on site as shown in Figure 14, Approximate Area of Stained and Odorous Soils. TPH as diesel and oil were detected above the environmental screening level for residential land use in one sample collected from this area. Potential impacts to construction workers and the environment could occur as a result of excavation and handling of these on-site soils. Additionally, future residents could be impacted by soils containing residual levels of TPH that are not properly identified, monitored, and managed. However, with the implementation of Mitigation Measure HAZ-1, impacts would be reduced to a less than significant level.

The project site also lies within the San Gabriel Valley Regional Groundwater Superfund plume and could be contaminated with VOCs from past use of the land. Although soil vapor samples from the project site showed minor concentrations of VOCs, elevated soil vapor concentrations could still impact residential units on the site; Mitigation Measure HAZ-2 would reduce impacts to less than significant.

Furthermore, strict adherence to all emergency response plan requirements by the Los Angeles County Fire Department would be required throughout the duration of the project. In the event of a hazardous materials spill of greater amount or toxicity than on-site personnel could safely contain and clean up, assistance would be requested from the LACFD hazmat team.

Therefore, compliance with applicable laws and regulations and mitigation measures HAZ-1 and HAZ 2 would ensure that impacts would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures
HAZ-1 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the project applicant shall retain a qualified environmental consultant to prepare a Soil Management Plan (SMP). The SMP shall be

Page 298 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

3. Environmental Analysis

Page 84 ends

distributed to all grading contractors and must be kept on site during grading activities. The SMP shall include the following:
 Procedures and protocols should another underground storage tank (UST) be encountered during grading. Requirements detailed in the SMP shall be in accordance with the requirements of the Los Angeles County Public Works’ UST Program.  Procedures and protocols for onsite management of soils to ensure that soils containing residual levels of Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH) are properly identified, monitored, and managed on-site. Requirements shall include the following:
• A certified hazardous waste hauler shall remove all subsurface materials identified in the Phase I Environmental Assessment Report as being contaminated with TPH above the Environmental Screening Levels (ESLs) for residential land. In addition, sampling of soil shall be conducted during excavation to ensure that all TPH impacted soils are removed, and that ESLs for residential uses are not exceeded. Excavation confirmation samples should be collected from the bottom and sidewalls of each excavation at a frequency of one sample every 25 feet. Confirmation soil samples should be collected into laboratory supplied clean, glass jars directly from the bottom and sidewall or from the excavator bucket. Samples should be sealed, labeled, and placed on ice for transportation under proper chain-of-custody to a California statecertified laboratory for analysis of TPH by USEPA Methods 8015M. Excavated materials shall be transported per California Hazardous Waste Regulations to a landfill permitted by the State to accept hazardous materials.
• The SMP shall include a Health and Safety Plan (HSP) that addresses potential safety and health hazards and includes the requirements and procedures for employee protection; each contractor shall be required to have their own HSP tailored to their particular trade that addresses the general project safety requirements. The HSP shall also outline proper soil handling procedures and health and safety requirements to minimize worker and public exposure to hazardous materials during construction. • The SMP shall be prepared and executed in accordance with South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Rule 1166, Volatile Organic Compound (VOCs) Emissions from Decontamination of Soil. The SMP shall require the timely testing and sampling of soils so that contaminated soils can be separated from inert soils for proper disposal. The SMP shall specify the testing parameters and sampling frequency.

Anticipated testing includes screening excavated soils for VOS. During excavation, Rule 1166 requires that soils identified as contaminated shall be sprayed with water or another approved vapor suppressant or covered with sheeting during periods of inactivity of greater than an hour, to prevent contaminated soils from becoming airborne. Under Rule 1166, contaminated soils shall be transported from the project site by a licensed transporter and disposed of at a licensed storage/treatment facility to prevent contaminated soils from becoming airborne or otherwise released into the environment.

Page 299 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

3. Environmental Analysis
January 2022 Page 85
• All SMP measures shall be printed and distributed to all grading contractors and must be kept on site during grading activities prior to beginning any grading activities.

HAZ-2 Because on-site soils could be contaminated with residual VOCs from past use of the land, installation of a passive soil vapor barrier shall be required. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the project applicant shall retain a qualified environmental consultant to design a passive vapor barrier that further mitigates vapor intrusion risk from residual VOC impacts at the site. The vapor barrier design shall be distributed to all construction contractors and must be kept on site during construction activities. The passive vapor barrier design shall include the following:
 A multi-layer composite membrane that extends continuously beneath the floor slab of each building and is sealed against all utilities and other penetrations.  The associated ventilation system beneath the foundation of each building.  The passive ventilation system which shall include perforated collection vents embedded in a layer of sand beneath the multi-layer composite membrane. The collection vents shall connect to non-perforated vent riser that extent outlets at the roof of the building.  For each soil boring, soil and soil gas samples shall be collected at depths of 5 and 10 feet below ground surface (bgs).
 A land use covenant e recorded on title to the site to prohibit any disturbance of the vapor barriers.

Upon completion of Mitigation Measure HAZ-2 and prior to the issuance of a Permit to Occupy, the City shall require a report with a no further action determination be submitted from a qualified environmental consultant. This can be determined in the following way:
 Upon completion of Mitigation Measure HAZ-2, a Remedial Action Completion Report (RACR) by a qualified environmental engineer is prepared documenting that all of the remedial measures in Mitigation Measure HAZ-2 have been successfully completed. c) 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 within a quarter mile of Potrero Elementary School. Operation of the proposed project would not result in the release of hazardous emissions. No significant hazardous materials, substances, or wastes would be transported, used, or disposed of in conjunction with the proposed project’s operation. The on-site use of hazardous materials at the project site would be restricted to cleaning solvents and paints used by facilities maintenance staff and cleaning solvents used by residents of the proposed project. The materials used by facilities maintenance staff would be used in small quantities and stored in compliance with state and federal requirements.

However, potential VOC hazards associated with the project site could impact students and staff at the Potrero Elementary School. Mitigation measure HAZ-2 would address residual VOCs on the site and outline how risks would be managed during site redevelopment if VOCs exceed relevant screening levels. Therefore, with the implementation of these mitigation measures, impacts would be less than significant.

Page 300 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

3. Environmental Analysis

Page 86 ends

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?
No Impact. A regulatory database record search was conducted as part of the Phase I Environmental Assessment report prepared for the proposed project (see Appendix F) in accordance with Government code Section 65962.5. The project site was not listed on any of the regulatory databases searched. Therefore, No impact would occur and no mitigation measures are necessary. e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles or a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area? No Impact. The San Gabriel Valley Airport (formerly known as the El Monte Airport) in the City of El Monte is approximately 2 miles northeast of the project site. The El Monte Airport Master Plan Report shows the airport’s 60 CNEL noise contour does not extend to the project site. Additionally, Figure 15, San Gabriel Valley Airport Safety Zones, shows that the City of South El Monte is not within the San Grabriel Airport safety hazard zones. Workers or people residing in the project area would not be exposed to excessive airport noise or safety hazards. Therefore, no impact would occur.
f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project would not conflict with adopted emergency response or evacuation plans. The surrounding roadways would continue to provide access to the project site and surrounding properties during construction and post-construction. The existing driveway at Rosemead Boulevard would not be altered, and a new driveway would be constructed on Chico Street that would be designed to meet standards and specifications to allow ambulance and fire vehicle access. The County of Los Angeles Fire Department reviewed the project plans and recommended clearance with the incorporation of conditions of approval which pertain to access and water system requirements (see Appendix I). Additionally, the project applicant would include a knox box onsite for emergency access. With the incorporation of the Fire Department’s conditions of approval and project features, the proposed project would not result in inadequate emergency access, and impacts to adopted emergency response and evacuation plans are less than significant. g) Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires?
Less Than Significant Impact. According to the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection's Fire and Resource Assessment Program (CAL FIRE FRAP), the project area is not in a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (FHSZ) (CAL FIRE 2021). The site is in a built-out portion of the city. Therefore, impacts of exposing project occupants to pollutant concentrations from or exacerbating a wildfire would be less than significant.

Page 301 of 925 ends

Source: AECOM, 2016
PlaceWorks
0 Scale (Feet)
1,100

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE
Figure 15 - San Gabriel Valley Airport Safety Zones

Page 302 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

3. Environmental Analysis

Page 88 ends

This page intentionally left blank.

Page 303 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

3. Environmental Analysis
January 2022 Page 89

3.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
The analysis in this section is based partly on the following technical study:
 Preliminary Hydrology and LID Report, Forma, March 1, 2021 (Appendix G) Would the project:

Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality?
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:

X
i) result in a substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site; X ii) substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or offsite;
X
iii) create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage
systems or provide substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff; or
X
iv) 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 a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality?
Less Than Significant Impact. The project site is in the Rio Hondo Watershed, a 142-square-mile subwatershed of the Los Angeles River watershed (CDFW 2021). The upper reaches of the watershed start at the steep terrain of the San Gabriel Mountains, much of which lies within the Angeles National Forest. This natural undeveloped landscape changes below the foothills, and the nature of the watershed is transformed to an urban and largely built-out landscape. This built area includes only a few remaining areas of open space and isolated patches of natural habitat (Arroyo Seco Foundation 2021).

Page 304 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

3. Environmental Analysis

Page 90 ends

Water quality in South El Monte is regulated by the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and its water quality control plan (Basin Plan), which contains water quality standards and identifies beneficial uses (wildlife habitat, agricultural supply, fishing, etc.) for receiving waters along with water quality criteria and standards necessary to support these uses consistent with federal and state water quality laws.

Impacts to water quality of receiving waters generally range over three different phases of a development project:
 During the earthwork and construction phase, when the potential for erosion, siltation, and sedimentation would be the greatest.
 Following construction and before the establishment of ground cover, when the erosion potential may remain relatively high.
 Following project completion, when impacts related to sedimentation would decrease markedly, but those associated with urban runoff would increase.

Following is a discussion of the potential water quality impacts resulting from urban runoff that would be generated during the construction and operational phases of the proposed project.

Project Construction
Construction-related runoff pollutants are typically generated from waste and hazardous materials handling or storage areas, outdoor work areas, material storage areas, and general maintenance areas (e.g., vehicle or equipment fueling and maintenance, including washing). The proposed project’s construction phase may cause deterioration in the quality of downstream receiving waters if construction-related sediments or pollutants wash into the existing storm drain system and facilities in the area.

Construction-related activities that are primarily responsible for sediment releases are related to exposing previously stabilized soils to potential mobilization by rainfall/runoff and wind. Such activities include removing vegetation from the site, grading the site, and trenching for infrastructure improvements.

Environmental factors that affect erosion include topographic, soil, and rainfall characteristics. Non-sedimentrelated pollutants that are also of concern during construction relate to non-stormwater flows and generally include construction materials (e.g., paint and stucco); chemicals, liquid products, and petroleum products used in building construction or the maintenance of heavy equipment; and concrete and related cutting or curing residues. Construction-related activities of the proposed project would generate pollutants that could adversely affect the water quality of downstream receiving waters if appropriate and effective stormwater and nonstormwater management measures are not used to keep pollutants out of and remove pollutants from urban runoff.

Construction projects of one acre or more are regulated under the Statewide Construction General Permit (CGP), Order No. 2012-0006-DWQ, issued by the State Water Resources Control Board in 2012. Projects obtain coverage by developing and implementing a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), estimating sediment risk from construction activities to receiving waters, and specifying BMPs that would be used by the

Page 305 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

3. Environmental Analysis
January 2022 Page 91
project to minimize pollution of stormwater. Categories of BMPs used in SWPPPs are described in Table 9, Construction Best Management Practices.

Table 9 Construction Best Management Practices
Category Purpose Examples
Erosion Controls Protects the soil surface and prevents soil particles from being detached by rainfall, flowing water, or wind.

Scheduling, preserving existing conditions,
mulch, soil binders, geotextiles, mats,
hydroseeding, earth dikes, swales, velocity
dissipating devices, slope drains, streambank
stabilization, compost blankets, soil
preparation/roughening, and non-vegetative
stabilization.

Sediment Controls Traps soil particles after they have been detached and moved by rain, flowing water, or wind.

Barriers such as silt fences, straw bales,
sandbags, fiber rolls, and gravel bag berms;
sediment basins; sediment traps; check
dams; storm drain inlet protection; compost
socks and berms; biofilter bags; manufactured
linear sediment controls; and cleaning
measures such as street sweeping and
vacuuming
Wind Erosion Controls Minimizes dust nuisances. Applying water or other dust palliatives to prevent or minimize dust nuisance, reducing
soil-moving activities during high winds, and
installing erosion control BMPs for temporary
wind control.

Tracking Controls Prevents or reduces the tracking of soil offsite by vehicles
Stabilized construction roadways and
construction entrances/exits and
entrance/outlet tire wash.

Non-Storm Water Management
Controls
Prevents pollution by limiting or reducing potential
pollutants at their source or eliminating off-site
discharge.

Prohibits illicit connections or discharges.

Water conservation practices, BMPs
specifying methods for: dewatering
operations; temporary stream crossings; clear
water diversions; pile driving operations;
temporary batch plants; demolition adjacent to
water; materials over water; potable water
and irrigation; paving and grinding operations;
cleaning, fueling, and maintenance of vehicles
and equipment; concrete curing; concrete
finishing.

Waste Management and
Controls (i.e., good
housekeeping practices)
Management of materials and wastes to avoid
contamination of stormwater.

Proper material delivery and storage and
material use, spill prevention and control,
stockpile management, contaminated soil
management, and management of solid,
concrete, sanitary/septic, liquid, and
hazardous wastes.

Source: CASQA 2019.

The proposed project’s construction contractor would be required to prepare and implement an SWPPP and associated BMPs in compliance with the CGP during grading and construction. The SWPPP would specify BMPs, such as those outlined in Table 9, that the construction contractor would implement to protect water quality by eliminating and/or minimizing stormwater pollution prior to and during grading and construction The SWPPP would also show the placement of those BMPs.

Page 306 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

3. Environmental Analysis

Page 92 ends

Adherence to the BMPs in the SWPPP would reduce, prevent, minimize, and/or treat pollutants and prevent degradation of downstream receiving waters. BMPs identified in the SWPPP would reduce or avoid contamination of stormwater with sediment and other pollutants such as trash and debris; oil, grease, fuels, and other toxic chemicals; paint, concrete, asphalt, bituminous6 materials, etc.; and nutrients.

Based on the preceding, water quality and waste-discharge impacts from project grading and construction activities would be less than significant, and no mitigation measures are necessary.

Project Operation
Operational-related activities of the proposed project (e.g., runoff from parking areas, solid waste storage areas, and landscaped areas) would generate pollutants that could adversely affect the water quality of downstream receiving waters if effective measures are not used to keep pollutants out of urban runoff.

Standards governing discharges to stormwater from project operation are in the Municipal Stormwater (MS4) Permit for Los Angeles County under the jurisdiction of the Los Angeles RWQCB, Order No. R4-2012-0175 as amended by WQ 2015-0075. The MS4 was adopted on November 8, 2012, and is in the process of renewal.

The County of Los Angeles also issued a Low Impact Development (LID) Standards Manual on developing water quality management plans for projects and selecting BMPs for a project. Additionally, Chapter 8.44 of the municipal code, Stormwater Management and Discharge Control, includes requirements to reduce pollutants in stormwater discharges, regulate illicit connections and illicit discharges, decrease the level of contamination of stormwater and urban runoff in the municipal stormwater system, and control nonstormwater discharges to the municipal stormwater system.

LID is a stormwater management and land development strategy that combines a hydrologically functional site design with pollution prevention measures to compensate for land development impacts on hydrology and water quality. LID techniques mimic the site predevelopment hydrology by using site design techniques that store, infiltrate, evapotranspire, biofilter, or detain runoff close to its source. Source control BMPs reduce the potential for pollutants to enter runoff and are classified in two categories—structural and nonstructural.

Structural source control BMPs have a physical or structural component, such as inlet trash racks, trash bin covers, and an efficient irrigation system, to prevent pollutants from contacting stormwater runoff.

Nonstructural source control BMPs are procedures or practices used in project operation, such as stormwater training or trash management and litter control practices.

According to the Los Angeles County LID Manual, the proposed project is a designated priority project defined as a development of a new project equal to one acre or greater of disturbed area and adding more than 10,000 square feet of impervious area. Priority projects must meet the requirements of municipal code Chapter 8.44 through the preparation and submittal of a standard urban stormwater mitigation plan, which shall include the applicable LID requirements in the MS4 permit. Priority projects are required to retain 100 percent of the 6 Bituminous means resembling or containing bitumen. Bitumen is any of various viscous or solid impure mixtures of hydrocarbons that occur naturally in asphalt, tar, mineral waxes, and so forth and are used as a road surfacing and roofing material.

Page 307 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

3. Environmental Analysis
January 2022 Page 93
stormwater quality design volume7 on-site through infiltration, evapotranspiration, stormwater runoff harvest and use, or a combination of these (LARWQCB 2012).

The proposed project would comply with requirements in the MS4 Permit, the Los Angeles County LID Manual, and the municipal code. Per the City’s requirements for priority projects, the project applicant prepared a Preliminary Hydrology and LID Report for City review (Appendix G). The report specifies BMPs that would be implemented to minimize water pollution from the project site during the operational phase. A detailed discussion of how the BMPs were selected is provided in the report and summarized in this section. The final BMPs to be implemented for the proposed project would be determined through the City’s review of the Final Hydrology and LID Report.

Proposed drainage subareas A and B are shown in Figure 16, Developed Condition Hydrology Map. Proposed subarea B would be parceled off and remain with the current landowner. Proposed subarea A is to be developed into the residential condominiums, with a central LID BMP. Overflow from the proposed BMP would be directed to county storm drain Project No. 7750, Line A. The water quality design volume (SWQDv) and flow rate (Qpm) resulting from the 85th percentile rain event are summarized in Table 10, Low Impact Development, Stormwater Quality Design Volume and Flow Rates.

Table 10 Low Impact Development, Stormwater Quality Design Volume and Flow Rates Subarea
SWQDv
(ft3)
Qpm
(ft3/s) Outfall Location
A 27,807 1.56 Project No. 7750, Line A
Source: Forma, Hydrology and LID Report, March 1, 2021.

According to the Los Angeles County LID Manual, infiltration BMPs are considered a first option for a project site when screening potentially feasible LID BMPs. Infiltration BMPs collect stormwater runoff and divert it into permeable soils beneath the site. This effectively reduces pollution, runoff, and flooding and recharges groundwater. Therefore, the Preliminary Hydrology and LID Report proposed a drywell designed using an estimated infiltration rate since initial soil investigations did not include infiltration testing on-site. Runoff would be temporarily detained upstream of the drywell in a proprietary chamber system that serves as a settling basin for silt and debris. The chamber system would pretreat the water before it entered the drywell. The locations of the proposed chamber system and dry well are shown on Figure 16, Developed Condition Hydrology Map.8 The chamber system is in open areas of the site, which would allow the detention volume to be adjusted once infiltration testing has occurred and required detention volume is adjusted based on infiltration. For the drywell, Table 11, Low Impact Development Dry Well BMP Design Summary, shows the BMP area and volume required to treat the SWQDv on-site. The table also includes the BMP area and volume provided. As shown, the proposed drywell is adequately sized.
7 The design storm, from which the stormwater quality design volume is calculated, is defined as the greater of:
• The 0.75-inch, 24-hour rain event.
• The 85th percentile, 24-hour rain event.
8 The chamber system is referred to as a detention system on Figure 16.

Page 308 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

3. Environmental Analysis

Page 94 ends

Table 11 Low Impact Development Dry Well BMP Design Summary Subarea BMP
BMP Area
Required
(ft2)
BMP Area
Provided
(ft2)
BMP Area
Provided
(ft3)
BMP Area
Provided
(ft3)
A Drywell 3,476 3,572 27,807 28,067
Source: Forma, Hydrology and LID Report, March 1, 2021 (Appendix G).

If infiltration is determined to be infeasible during final engineering, a biofiltration system is proposed. The chamber system described above would detain and treat runoff during a rain event. Any runoff in excess of the system’s capacity would be pumped into a modular wetland unit. The wetland would remove pollutants from the runoff, and clean water would be discharged to the Los Angeles County Storm Drain Project No. 7750, Line A. The modular wetland unit and association sump pump are sized to satisfy the County of Los Angeles LID guidelines, as shown in the Preliminary Hydrology and LID Report (see Appendix G).

Furthermore, the proposed project is exempt from hydromodification requirements since the site was previously developed in an urbanized area and does not increase the effective impervious area of the site as compared to the pre-project conditions. Furthermore, the proposed project discharges into a Los Angeles County Flood Control storm drain and satisfies the allowable discharge flow rates provided by the County.

The information provided in the Preliminary Hydrology and LID Report provides sufficient detail to identify the LID BMPs that would be implemented as a part of the proposed project and would prevent impacts to the quality of receiving waters. The combination of BMPs identified in the report addresses all identified pollutants of the proposed project. Implementation of the BMPs would be ensured through the City’s development review and building plan check process. Additionally, Chapter 8.44 of the municipal code includes standards that prohibit the discharge of specific pollutants into stormwater and regulates connections to the storm drain system.

Based on the preceding, no significant water-quality and waste-discharge impacts from project operation activities would occur, and no mitigation measures are necessary. b) 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 Impact. The project site is over the Main San Gabriel groundwater basin (Main Basin).

SGVWC would provide potable water to the project site. The SGVWC’s water supply sources include groundwater pumped from the Main Basin and the Coastal Plain of Los Angeles Central Basin, recycled water, and imported treated water from the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD). Groundwater from the Main Basin historically accounted for approximately 90.0 percent of the SGVWC’s overall water supplies. The water company has 30 active groundwater wells within its distribution system that are actively used to pump groundwater from the Main Basin, which encompasses 255 square miles and has an estimated total water storage capacity over 10 million acre-feet (SGVWC 2017, DWR 2004).

Page 309 of 925 ends

Source: Forma Engineering, Inc, 2021
PlaceWorks
0 Scale (Feet)
100

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE
Figure 16 - Developed Condition Hydrology Map

Page 310 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

3. Environmental Analysis

Page 96 ends

This page intentionally left blank.

Page 311 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

3. Environmental Analysis
January 2022 Page 97
The SGVWC estimates that water demands in its service area for normal years would increase from approximately 37,708 acre-feet per year (afy) in 2020 to approximately 48,604 afy in 2040. The water company forecasts that it will have sufficient water supplies to meet water demands in its service area for normal, singledry, and multiple dry years. The addition of the proposed project’s water demand would be minimal and would not decrease groundwater supplies or impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin.

Additionally, as stated in the geotechnical investigation prepared for the proposed project (see Appendix E), groundwater was encountered at a depth of 53 feet. No excavation on-site would intersect the groundwater at these levels, and dewatering during construction is not anticipated. Furthermore, the project site is not in or near a groundwater recharge area/facility, nor does it represent a source of groundwater recharge.

Therefore, the proposed project would not substantially interfere with groundwater supplies or recharge.

Impacts to groundwater supplies would be less than significant, and no mitigation measures are necessary. c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would:
i) Result in a substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? Less Than Significant Impact. Erosion and siltation impacts potentially resulting from alteration of the drainage pattern occur mostly during the project’s construction phase, which would include site preparation and grading activities. Environmental factors that affect erosion include topographic, soil, wind, and rainfall characteristics. Siltation is most often caused by soil erosion or sediment spill. Following is a discussion of the potential erosion and siltation impacts that could occur during the construction and operational phases of the proposed project.

Project Construction
As discussed above in Section 3.10.a, the project construction contractor would be required to prepare and implement a SWPPP pursuant to the CGP during grading and construction. The SWPPP would specify erosion- and sediment-control BMPs that the project construction contractor would implement prior to and during grading and construction to minimize erosion and siltation impacts on- and off-site. Erosioncontrol BMPs are designed to prevent erosion, and sediment controls are designed to trap or filter sediment once it has been mobilized. BMPs that would be implemented during the proposed project’s construction phase are discussed in detail in Section 3.10.a, above. For example, BMPs would include but are not limited to installation of perimeter silt fences; installation of silt fences around stockpile and covering of stockpiles; and stabilization of disturbed areas where construction ceases for a determined period of time (e.g., one week) with erosion controls.

Adherence to the BMPs in the SWPPP would reduce, prevent, or minimize soil erosion from projectrelated grading and construction activities. The construction-phase BMPs would also ensure effective control of not only sediment discharge, but also of pollutants associated with sediments (e.g., nutrients, heavy metals, and certain pesticides).

Page 312 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

3. Environmental Analysis

Page 98 ends

Therefore, project-related construction activities would not result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site. Construction-related impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation measures are necessary.

Project Operation
As shown in Figure 3, Aerial Photograph, the vast majority of the project site is paved. Under existing conditions, the county drainage map shows approximately 87.0 percent of the site drains from east to west to a sump catch basin near the middle of the site. The catch basin drains into the Los Angeles County Flood Control District system. The remaining 13.0 percent of the site drains east to west toward Rosemead Boulevard (see Figure 17, Existing Hydrology Map). The proposed drainage pattern remains generally the same as the predeveloped condition.

The proposed project would be implemented in accordance with the Hydrology and LID Report and abide by the requirements of the MS4 permit and the LID Standards Manual. For example, project design and operation would include implementation of BMPs specified in the Hydrology and LID report that would minimize runoff and soil erosion and siltation into stormwater and thus minimize sedimentation downstream.

Additionally, project development would be required to comply with the standards of Chapter 8.44 of the municipal code, which prohibits the discharge of specific pollutants into stormwater, regulates connections to the storm drain system, and requires development projects to implement permanent BMPs on individual sites to reduce pollutants in the stormwater.

Therefore, project development would not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area in a manner that would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site, and operation-related impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation measures are necessary. ii) Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or offsite?
Less Than Significant Impact. Under existing conditions (see Figure 17, Existing Hydrology Map), subarea A, which has a total of 11.06 acres, drains from east to west to a sump catch basin that discharges into the Los Angeles County Flood Control District, Project No. 7750, Line A. The allowable discharge to Line A is 1.90 cubic feet per second (cfs) per acre. Therefore, the allowable flow to Line A from the site is 22.04 cfs. Subarea B drains toward Rosemead Boulevard on paved surfaces and discharges to County Municipal Transfer Drain (MTD) 138.

Under proposed conditions, stormwater from the proposed project would be collected by a private underground storm drain system and discharged to Line A via a new junction structure (see Figure 16, Developed Condition Hydrology Map). The proposed flow for the 50-year storm event to Line A is 21.86 cfs.

The flow calculation is based on the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works’ 2006 Hydrology Manual. The flow rate under proposed conditions would be less than the current allowable flow rate to Line A.

Page 313 of 925 ends

Source: Forma Engineering, Inc, 2021
PlaceWorks
0 Scale (Feet)
100

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE
Figure 17 - Existing Hydrology Map

Page 314 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

3. Environmental Analysis

Page 100 ends

This page intentionally left blank.

Page 315 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

3. Environmental Analysis
January 2022 Page 101
Based on the preceding, project development would not substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner that would result in flooding on- or off-site. Impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation measures are necessary.
iii) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? Less Than Significant Impact. The following describes the proposed project’s potential impacts related to storm drainage systems and runoff.

Capacity of Stormwater Drainage Systems
Project impacts on the capacity of storm drainage systems would be less than significant, as substantiated in Section 3.10.c.ii, above. No mitigation measures are necessary.

Polluted Runoff
The proposed project’s stormwater pollution impacts would be less than significant, as substantiated in Section 3.10.a, above. No mitigation measures are necessary. iv) Impede or redirect flood flows?
Less than Significant Impact. The project site is not in a 100-year flood hazard zone (FEMA 2008), but it is in the dam inundation zone of the Santa Fe Dam (South El Monte 2000). The dam is approximately seven miles northeast of the project site. The Santa Fe dam and reservoir are a flood control project, completed in January 1949, in the Los Angeles County Drainage Area flood control system. The dam’s embankment is on the San Gabriel River, south of Azusa. The primary purpose of the dam is to provide flood risk management to the communities along the San Gabriel River downstream of the reservoir. The Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) operates the dam and reservoir and engages in routine maintenance activities within the operational areas of the reservoir year-round to maintain the operational capacity of the dam. As congressionally appropriated funding allows, the USACE works to upgrade aging structures and systems. Annual maintenance activities include grading of access roads, vegetation removal, and an annual safety inspection. In addition, the control house, gates, and all mechanical and electrical equipment are checked at the dam to make sure that the dam is functioning in accordance with State standards (USACE 2021).

The Emergency Action Plan (EAP) for the Santa Fe Dam includes procedures for damage assessment and emergency warnings per the requirements of the California Division of Safety of Dams. The plan has been developed in coordination with local emergency management officials. The EAP identifies potential emergency conditions and specifies preplanned actions to help minimize property damage and loss of life.

The EAP also contains procedures to issue early warning and notification messages to downstream emergency management authorities. Additionally, the dam is governed by the USACE’s Dam Safety Program to maintain public safety, and an integral part of the program is the risk-informed screening process. Dams are classified based on confirmed or unconfirmed dam safety issues, the combination of life or economic consequences if failure occurs, and the probability of failure. This process enables the

Page 316 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

3. Environmental Analysis

Page 102 ends

USACE to prioritize dam safety actions to correct deficiencies, which include interim risk reduction measures to be undertaken while further investigations are conducted, and remedial actions are implemented (Army Corps of Engineers 2012). Therefore, impacts due to inundation by Santa Fe Dam are less than significant.
d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation? Less than Significant. As noted in Section 3.10.c.iv, the project site is not in 100-year flood zone but is within the dam inundation area of the Santa Fe Dam. However, with the implementation of the EAP and the USACE’s Dam Safety Program, impacts would be less than significant.

A seiche is an oscillating surface wave in a restricted or enclosed body of water, generated by ground motion, usually during an earthquake. Seiches are of concern for water storage facilities, because inundation from a seiche can occur if the wave overflows a containment wall, such as the wall of a reservoir, water storage tank, dam, or other artificial body of water. The Santa Fe Reservoir and smaller reservoirs within a three-mile radius of the Santa Fe Reservoir could generate seiches. A seiche could theoretically occur in these reservoirs as the result of an earthquake or other disturbance, but the flooding impact would be less than for the dam inundation zone. The closest of these reservoirs is five miles away and is not anticipated to affect the site.

Tsunamis are a type of earthquake-induced flooding produced by large-scale sudden disturbances of the sea floor. The proposed project is approximately 23 miles inland; therefore, the site is outside the tsunami hazard zone and would not be affected by a tsunami.

Based on the preceding, the proposed project would not risk release pollutants as the result of floods, tsunami, or seiche. Therefore, no impact would occur and no mitigation measures are necessary. e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan?
No Impact. Water quality in South El Monte is regulated by the Los Angeles RWQCB and its Basin Plan for the Coastal Watersheds of Los Angeles and Ventura Counties. As substantiated in Section 3.10.a, the proposed project would not violate any water quality standards and would therefore not obstruct the implementation of the Basin Plan. Therefore, no impact would occur and no mitigation measures are necessary.

Additionally, the project site is in the Main San Gabriel Groundwater Basin, which is characterized as a low priority basin9 and is not governed by a groundwater quality management plan. As substantiated in Sections

3.10.a and b, the proposed project would not violate any water quality standards and would not decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge. Moreover, the Specific Plan includes sustainability guidelines that highlight water efficiency strategies such as minimizing turf areas within the 9 Basins designated as low and very-low priority are not subject to the requirements of the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act but are encouraged to form groundwater sustainability agencies and develop new groundwater management plans or update existing management plans in accordance with the water code.

Page 317 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

3. Environmental Analysis
January 2022 Page 103
community, using drought-tolerant plants, and using reclaimed water for irrigation of common areas.

Therefore, no impact would occur and no mitigation measures are necessary.

3.11 LAND USE AND PLANNING
Would the project:

Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Physically divide an established community? X
b) Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? X a) Physically divide an established community?
No Impact. Development on the project site would occur within the project site boundaries. The proposed project would not disrupt the internal circulation within the residential neighborhood to the north of the site.

Additionally, the proposed project would introduce a compatible residential use to the south of existing residential uses. Therefore, the proposed project would not divide an established community. b) Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? Less Than Significant Impact. The project site is currently zoned Commercial Manufacturing (C-M) and Medium Density Residential (R-3), and the land use designation of the site is Commercial-Manufacturing (CM) and Medium-Density Residential (MDR). The proposed project would require a zone change to Specific Plan (SP) and a land use change to Medium Density Residential (MDR) in order to implement the proposed project. The Specific Plan, which has been prepared to realize the objectives of the proposed project, would require approval by the City Council. The Specific Plan (SP) zone would allow for residential uses and open space areas on the project site in planned building groups while ensuring compliance with the spirit and intent of the zoning code and the City’s adopted General Plan. Moreover, the proposed project would be consistent with the policies for the General Plan. For example, Policy 1.1 of the Land Use Element states that a range of densities and housing types should be provided. The proposed project would provide townhomes and singlefamily homes, which would provide a range of housing density in the project area. Additionally, Policy 4.2 of the Land Use Element indicates that new opportunities for housing in South El Monte should be provided such as through intensification in designated neighborhoods. The proposed provide would increase the number of housing units in the city. Policy 6.1 of the Land Use Element encourages redevelopment activities, and the proposed project would revitalize an underutilized site to provide additional housing opportunities in the City.

Impacts would be less than significant.

Page 318 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

3. Environmental Analysis

Page 104 ends

3.12 MINERAL RESOURCES
Would the project:

Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be a value to the region and the residents of the state?
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
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be a value to the region and the residents of the state?
No Impact. There are four mineral resource zones (MRZ):
 MRZ-1. Adequate information indicates that no significant mineral deposits are present or likely to be present.
 MRZ-2. Adequate information indicates that significant deposits are present or there is a high likelihood for their presence, and development should be controlled.  MRZ-3. The significance of mineral deposits cannot be determined from the available data.  MRZ-4. There is insufficient data to assign any other MRZ designation.

The mineral resource designation is intended to prevent incompatible land use development on areas determined to have significant mineral resource deposits. The project site and surrounding areas are not developed for mineral resources, and the City’s General Plan Resources Element indicates that there are no mineral resources in the city. The project site is in MRZ-3 (CDC 2015). The areas surrounding the project site are developed with buildings, and therefore no loss of known resources would result from project implementation. No impact would occur.
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? No Impact. No mining sites are identified in the City of South El Monte General Plan. Therefore, development of the proposed project would not cause a loss of availability of a mining site. No impact would occur.

Page 319 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

3. Environmental Analysis
January 2022 Page 105

3.13 NOISE
The analysis in this section is based in part on the following, included as Appendix H:
 Noise Analysis, PlaceWorks, May 2021
Would the project result in:

Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?
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

3.13.1.1 NOISE FUNDAMENTALS
Noise is unwanted sound, known to have several adverse effects on people, including hearing loss, speech and sleep interference, physiological responses, and annoyance. Based on these known adverse effects of noise, the federal, state, and city governments have established criteria to protect public health and safety and to prevent the disruption of certain human activities, such as classroom instruction, communication, or sleep. Appendix H provides the fundamentals of noise and vibration, additional local regulatory background information, and the construction and traffic noise modeling data for the proposed project.

3.13.1.2 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Existing Noise Conditions
The project site noise environment is primarily characterized by roadway noise. The primary traffic noise source is from Rosemead Boulevard, west of the project site. Secondary noise sources include parking lot noise, and air handling equipment such as HVAC mechanical noise from retail stores to the north and west and adjacent residential uses. The City of South El Monte General Plan Future Noise Contours figure shows the project site to be predominately outside the 65 CNEL noise contour, with the exception of the project driveway off Rosemead Boulevard. Therefore, proposed dwelling units would be outside the 65 CNEL noise contour. Per the CBIA v. BAAQMD ruling, noise compatibility for future on-site sensitive receptors is generally no longer the purview of the CEQA. However, the City requires that residential projects achieve the interior 45 dBA CNEL noise standard of the California Building Code Title 24.

Page 320 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

3. Environmental Analysis

Page 106 ends

Sensitive Receptors
Certain land uses are particularly sensitive to noise and vibration. These uses include residences, schools, hospital facilities, houses of worship, and open space/recreation areas where quiet environments are necessary for the enjoyment, public health, and safety of the community. The nearest sensitive receptors to the proposed project are residences adjacent to the north. Other sensitive receptors include additional residences 450 feet to the east and Potrero Intermediate School 0.23 mile to the northeast in the City of El Monte.

3.13.1.3 APPLICABLE STANDARDS
California Building Code
The California Building Code is Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations. California Building Code Part 2, Volume 1, Chapter 12, Section 1207.11.2, Allowable Interior Noise Levels, requires that interior noise levels attributable to exterior sources shall not exceed 45 dBA in any habitable room. The noise metric is evaluated as either the Ldn or the CNEL, consistent with the noise element of the local general plan.

Per the California Building Industry Association v. Bay Area Air Quality Management District ruling, noise compatibility for future on-site sensitive receptors is generally no longer the purview of the CEQA. However, the City requires that residential projects achieve the interior 45 dBA CNEL noise standard of the California Building Code Title 24.

City of South El Monte Municipal Code
Exterior Noise Standards
The City of South El Monte Municipal Code has established exterior noise limits in Chapter 8.20, Noise Regulations. The permissible sound levels by receiving land use are summarized in Table 12, Exterior Noise Limits: City of South El Monte.

Table 12 Exterior Noise Limits: City of South El Monte
Land Use
Daytime
7:00 am to 10:00 pm
Nighttime
10:00 pm to 7:00 am
One- or Two-Family Residential Zone 55 dBA 45 dBA
Multiple Dwelling Residential Zone, Public Zone 60 dBA 50 dBA Commercial Zone or Commercial-Manufacturing Zone 60 dBA 55 dBA Manufacturing Zone 70 dBA 70 dBA
Source: South El Monte Municipal Code.

Notes:

In the event the alleged offensive noise contains a steady, audible tone such as a whine, screech, or hum, or it is a repetitive noise such as a hammering or riveting, or contains music or speech conveying informational content, the exterior noise limits shall be reduced by 5 dBA.

The exterior noise limit shall not exceed:

The noise standard for a cumulative period of more than thirty minutes in any hour (L50); The noise standard plus 5 dBA for a cumulative period of more than fifteen minutes in any hour (L25); The noise standard plus 10 dBA for a cumulative period of more than five minutes in any hour (L8); The noise standard plus 15 dBA for a cumulative period of more than one minute in any hour (L1); or The noise standard plus 20 dBA for any period of time (Lmax).

Page 321 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

3. Environmental Analysis
January 2022 Page 107
Vibration
Section 8.20.020(B) states that no person shall operate or permit the operation of any device or machine that creates a vibration above the vibration perception threshold when measured at or beyond the property boundary of the source. Because the City does not quantify this standard, the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) criterion for vibration annoyance of 72 VdB at residential receptors is used to determine impact significance.

Construction Noise
No person shall operate or cause or authorize the operation of any tools or equipment used in construction, drilling, repair, alteration, or demolition work between the hours of 10:00 pm and 7:00 am or at any time on weekends or holidays, such that the sound creates a noise disturbance across the real property line of an adjacent or nearby property developed entirely or partially for residential use. However, the City does not include a quantified construction noise limit for work during the daytime hours of 7:00 am to 10:00 pm.

Therefore, the FTA construction noise criterion of 80 dBA Leq(8hr) for residential receptors is used to determine impact significance.

Air Handling Equipment
No person shall operate or permit the operation of any air conditioning or air handling equipment (such as HVAC equipment) in such a manner as to exceed 55 dBA at any point on neighboring property line, five feet above grade level, no closer than three feet to any wall. a) Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?
Less Than Significant Impact. Construction is estimated to be completed in approximately 19 months, beginning in Fall 2022 and ending in Spring of 2024. The construction workday is anticipated to be 7:00 am to 4:00 pm, Monday through Friday. Construction equipment required for excavation, grading, and other construction activities would include but is not limited to, concrete saws, excavators, dozers, loaders, backhoes, forklifts, scrapers, tractors, trencher, pavers, welders, cranes, generators, and air compressors.

Construction Noise
Construction Vehicles
The transport of workers and materials to and from the construction site could incrementally increase noise levels along access road or roads. Individual construction vehicle pass-bys may create momentary noise levels of up to approximately 85 dBA (Lmax) at 50 feet from the vehicle, but these occurrences would generally be infrequent and short lived.

Construction would generate temporary trips from workers’ and vendors’ vehicles. Based on data provided by the applicant, project construction is anticipated to generate up to 110 daily worker and vendor trips during overlapping phases. For hauling, construction activities would generate up to 32 daily haul truck trips during

Page 322 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

3. Environmental Analysis

Page 108 ends

demolition debris haul and grading soil haul. Access to the project site would be through Rosemead Boulevard or Chino Avenue via Garvey Avenue or Rush Street, which have existing average daily traffic (ADT) volumes ranging from 4,020 to 53,360 (see Table 14, Project and Cumulative Traffic Noise Increase). Additional trips from construction vehicles would be temporary, and the addition of 110 worker and vendor trips and 32 haul trips would result in a negligible noise increase. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant.

Construction Equipment
Noise generated by on-site construction equipment is dependent on the type of equipment used, its location relative to sensitive receptors, and the timing and duration of noise-generating activities. Each phase of construction involves different kinds of equipment and has distinct noise characteristics. The basis for noise levels from construction activities are typically the loudest piece or pieces of equipment. The dominant equipment noise source is typically the engine, although work-piece noise (such as dropping of materials) can also be noticeable.

Heavy equipment, such as a dozer or a loader, can have maximum, short-duration noise levels of up to 85 dBA at 50 feet. However, overall noise emissions vary considerably, depending on the specific construction activity performed at any given moment. Noise attenuation due to distance, the number and type of equipment, and the load and power requirements to accomplish tasks at each construction phase would result in different noise levels from construction activities at a given receptor. Since noise from construction equipment is intermittent and diminishes at a rate of at least 6 dBA per doubling of distance (conservatively ignoring other attenuation effects from air absorption, ground effects, and shielding effects), the average noise levels at noise-sensitive receptors could vary considerably, because mobile construction equipment would move around the project site with different loads and power requirements.

The average noise produced at each construction phase is determined by combining the Leq contributions from the three loudest pieces of construction equipment by phase, while accounting for the ongoing time variations of noise emissions (commonly referred to as the usage factor). Noise levels were also calculated at spatially averaged distances (i.e., from the acoustical center of the general construction site) to the property line of the nearest receptors. Although construction may occur across the entire construction area, the area around the center of construction activities best represents the potential average construction-related noise levels at the various sensitive receptors.

PlaceWorks used construction activity information by phase provided by the applicant to estimate construction noise using the Federal Highway Administration Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM). The associated, aggregate sound levels—grouped by construction activity—are summarized in Table 13, Project-Related Construction Noise, Leq dBA. RCNM modeling input and output worksheets are included in Appendix H. As shown in Table 13, average construction-related noise levels would be up to 68 dBA and not exceed the 80 dBA Leq(8hr) threshold at the nearest sensitive receptors. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.

Page 323 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

3. Environmental Analysis
January 2022 Page 109
Table 13 Project-Related Construction Noise, Leq dBA
Construction
Activity Phase
Reference Noise
Level at 50 feet
Attenuated Noise Levels
Residential Uses to North
at 335 feet
Residential Uses to
East at 450 feet
Potrero Intermediate
School to Northeast at
1,200 feet
Asphalt/Building Demolition 84.6 68 66 57
On-Site Reprocessing /Crushing1 77.9 61 61 50
Rough Grading 85.0 68 66 57
Utility Trenching 81.9 76 63 54
Paving 83.5 67 64 56
Building Construction 83 66 64 55
Architectural Coating 74 57 55 46
Notes: Decibels rounded up to the nearest whole number.

Calculations performed with RCNM are included in Appendix H. Distance measurements were taken using Google Earth from the approximate acoustical center of the construction site. 1 Rock Crushing equipment based on 85 dB at 7 meters (approximately 22 feet). Source: Screens & Crushers Ltd C12+ Crusher Extec. 2007, November. Operating and Maintenance Manual.

Stationary Noise
HVAC Equipment
HVAC units are proposed to be located in the residential backyards. The nearest sensitive receptors to HVAC equipment would be residences approximately 60 feet to the north. HVAC specifications provided by the applicant show that, depending on the unit size and series, the proposed HVAC equipment (Carrier model CA15NA) could generate sound power levels between 71 and 76 dBA without shielding. This would result in a sound pressure level of up to approximately 40 dBA at 60 feet. This would be below the 55 dBA daytime noise standards for the air handling equipment set forth in the municipal code. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.

Community Recreational Area
The proposed community recreational area would include a pool, spa, open space, lawn play areas, and a barbeque counter. Use of the community recreational area would be limited to residents and guests only. Noise generated would mostly be from people using the recreational space. Based on similar uses, it is calculated that the proposed pool area would generate noise levels of approximately 55 dBA at 77 feet. The nearest sensitive receptor to the pool area is approximately 90 feet to the north. At this distance, noise levels would attenuate to approximately 54 dBA. Additionally, a seven-foot-high wall is proposed to be constructed around the northern perimeter. This wall would block line-of-sight to the sensitive receptors to the north, providing an additional 5 dBA of noise attenuation. The proposed operational hours for the recreational area are 8:00 am to 10:00 pm, which are within the municipals code’s daytime hours. Therefore, noise levels would not exceed the daytime noise limit of 55 dBA, and impacts would be less than significant.

Traffic Noise
Noise increases can be put into three categories—audible, potentially audible, and inaudible. “Audible” increases are perceptible to humans and generally refer to a change of 3 dBA or more, because 3 dBA is the threshold

Page 324 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

3. Environmental Analysis

Page 110 ends

of perceptibility in exterior (uncontrolled) environments. For example, traffic flows would need to double (e.g., 10,000 vehicles per day to 20,000 per day) to create a 3 dBA CNEL increase in traffic-generated noise levels. A “potentially audible” noise increase refers to a change in noise level between 1 and 3 dBA. A change in noise level of less than 1 dBA is typically “inaudible” to humans except under quiet conditions in controlled environments. A project will normally have a significant effect on the environment related to noise if it will substantially increase the ambient noise levels for adjoining areas. Based on these categories, a significant impact would occur if the following thresholds of significance, similar to those recommended by the Federal Aviation Administration, would be exceeded at sensitive receptor locations. A significant impact would occur if traffic noise increases would exceed:
 1.5 dBA for existing ambient noise environments of 65 dBA CNEL and higher.  3 dBA for existing ambient noise environments of 60 to 64 CNEL.  5 dBA for existing ambient noise environments of less than 60 dBA CNEL.

ADT volumes for existing and future conditions provided by Iteris were used to calculate traffic noise increases.

Noise increase is calculated by comparing Existing Plus Project traffic volumes to Existing no Project volumes logarithmically. Similarly, cumulative noise impacts were calculated by comparing Cumulative Plus Project to Cumulative no Project logarithmically.10
As shown in Table 14, Project and Cumulative Traffic Noise Increase, the maximum traffic noise increase is 0.4 dBA CNEL along Chico Avenue from Garvey Avenue to Fern Street. All study roadway segments would experience project and cumulative traffic noise increase of less than 1.5 dBA CNEL. Therefore, traffic noise impacts would be less than significant.
10 Project noise increase = 10*Log(Existing Plus Project/Existing no Project); Cumulative noise increase = 10*Log(Future with Project/Existing no Project).

Page 325 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

3. Environmental Analysis
January 2022 Page 111
Table 14 Project and Cumulative Traffic Noise Increase
Roadway Segment
ADT Volumes dBA CNEL
Existing
No Project
Existing
Plus
Project
Cumulative
No Project
Cumulative
with
Project
Project
Related
Increase
Cumulativ
e Increase
Rosemead Boulevard – Garvey Avenue to Fern
Street 53,360 53,901 53,810 54,351 0.0 0.1
Rosemead Boulevard – Fern Street to Project
Entrance 52,140 52,681 52,780 53,321 0.0 0.1
Rosemead Boulevard – Project Entrance to Rush
Street 50,240 51,054 50,880 51,694 0.1 0.1
Garvey Avenue – Rosemead Boulevard to Chico
Avenue 21,980 22,074 22,100 22,194 0.0 0.0
Garvey Avenue – east of Chico Avenue 21,840 22,123 22,100 22,383 0.1 0.1 Chico Avenue – Garvey Avenue to Fern Street 4,020 4,422 4,020 4,422 0.4 0.4 Chico Avenue – Project entrance to Rush Street 4,020 4,149 4,020 4,149 0.1 0.1 Rush Street – east of Chico Avenue 11,600 11,789 11,600 11,789 0.1 0.1 Rush Street – west of Chico Avenue 12,960 13,019 12,960 13,019 0.0 0.0 Fern Street – Chico avenue to Potrero Avenue 2,370 2,464 2,370 2,464 0.2 0.2 Potrero Avenue – Fern Street to Garvey Avenue 3,830 3,924 3,830 3,924 0.1 0.1 Potrero Avenue – Rush Street to Fern Street 4,030 4,030 4,030 4,030 0.0 0.0 Source: Iteris, 2021
b) Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation.

Construction can generate varying degrees of ground vibration, depending on the construction procedures and equipment. Operation of construction equipment generates vibrations that spread through the ground and diminish with distance from the source. The effect on buildings near the construction site varies depending on soil type, ground strata, and receptor-building construction. The effects from vibration can range from no perceptible effects at the lowest vibration levels, to low rumbling sounds and perceptible vibrations at moderate levels, to slight structural damage at the highest levels. Vibration from construction activities rarely reaches the levels that can damage structures.

Vibration Annoyance
As mentioned in Section 3.13.1.3, Applicable Standards, the City does not establish a quantified vibration annoyance threshold. The FTA criterion of 72 VdB is used to determine significance. Vibration due to the project would be generated from temporary construction activities. To determine attenuated average vibration levels at the nearest sensitive receptors, vibration levels are calculated by measuring the distance from the center of the project site to the sensitive receptor building façade. The nearest sensitive receptors are the residences approximately 340 feet to the north, and Potrero Intermediate School approximately 1,200 feet to the northeast.

As shown in Table 15, Vibration Levels for Typical Construction Equipment, vibration levels would not exceed 72 VdB at the nearest sensitive receptors. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.

Page 326 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

3. Environmental Analysis

Page 112 ends

Table 15 Vibration Levels for Typical Construction Equipment Equipment
FTA Reference Vibration Levels
VdB at 25 feet
VdB at Residences to North
at 340 feet
VdB at Potrero Intermediate School
to Northeast at 1,200 feet
Vibratory Roller 94 60 44
Large Bulldozer 87 53 37
Loaded Trucks 86 53 36
Jackhammer 79 52 29
Small Bulldozer 58 45 8
Source: FTA 2018.

Architectural Damage
For reference, a vibration level of 0.2 inch per second (in/sec) peak particle velocity (PPV) is used as the limit for non-engineered timber and masonry buildings, which would be applied to the surrounding structures (FTA 2018). Table 16, Vibration Levels for Typical Construction Equipment, shows that typical construction equipment produces vibration levels up to 0.21 in/sec PPV at a distance of 25 feet. A significant impact would occur if vibration levels would exceed 0.2 in/sec PPV at the façade of the surrounding structures.

The nearest structures to the project site are the residential uses immediately to the north of the project site.

Based on available site plans, the residential buildings would be within 20 feet of proposed paving activities for driveways. Due to the proximity of paving activities and potential use of a vibratory roller for paving, impacts would be potentially significant.

Table 16 Vibration Levels for Typical Construction Equipment Equipment
FTA Reference Vibration Levels
PPV (in/sec) at 25 feet PPV (in/sec) at 20 feet
Vibratory Roller 0.21 0.293
Large Bulldozer 0.089 0.124
Loaded Trucks 0.079 0.106
Jackhammer 0.035 0.049
Small Bulldozer 0.003 0.001
Source: FTA 2018.

Note: Values in bold exceed the significance threshold of 0.2 in/sec PPV.

Implementation of Mitigation Measure N-1 would reduce temporary construction vibration levels at the surrounding structures to a less than significant level. Specifically, the use of a static roller is estimated to generate vibration levels of approximately 0.05 in/sec PPV at a distance of 25 feet (New Zealand Transport Agency 2012), which would reduce construction vibration levels below the significance threshold of 0.2 in/sec PPV.

Page 327 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

3. Environmental Analysis
January 2022 Page 113
Mitigation Measures
N-1 Where paving is required within 25 feet of adjacent, off-site structures, a static roller shall be used in lieu of a vibratory roller. This requirement shall be included in the list of conditions on construction plans.
c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? No Impact. The nearest airport or airstrip to the project site is San Gabriel Valley Airport (formerly known as the El Monte Airport) in the City of El Monte, approximately two miles to the northeast. The El Monte Airport Master Plan Report shows the Airport’s 60 CNEL noise contour does not extend to the project site. Figure 7B of the El Monte Airport Master Plan depicts the southwestern point of the 60 CNEL extending just past the I-10 freeway, but does not pass Brockway Street, which is approximately 1 mile northeast of the project site (Los Angeles County 1995). Workers or people residing in the project area would not be exposed to excessive airport noise. Therefore, no impact would occur.

3.14 POPULATION AND HOUSING
Would the project:

Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
X
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing
elsewhere?
X
a) Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
Less Than Significant Impact. Construction of the proposed project would require contractors and laborers.

Because of the size of the project, the City expects that the supply of general construction labor would be available from the local and LA County regional labor pool because the current regional unemployment is 9.9 percent (BLS 2020).

Page 328 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

3. Environmental Analysis

Page 114 ends

Once complete, the 207 dwelling units would be expected to add 913 residents,11 averaging 4.4 residents per household (DOF 2020). When compared to the 2020 population of 21,204, the proposed project would result in an approximately 4.3 percent increase to the City of South El Monte (DOF 2020). SCAG projects population growth in its member cities as part of the Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS). The projections show an estimated 2040 population of 22,500, which is an increase of 1,296 residents from the 2020 estimated population. The potential 913 new residents of the project would make up about 70.0 percent of the projected 20-year increase for the city based on the SCAG RTP/SCS (SCAG 2016).

If the project population is added to the existing population, the resulting estimated population of 22,117 residents, which assumes all of the project’s residents are new to the city, would remain below the year SCAG 2040 projection by 383. Because the projected increase in population from the proposed project is less than the regionally anticipated population growth, the impact to population is considered less than significant.

The proposed project would provide more housing opportunities in the city. The new units would increase housing in the City by 207 units, which would represent about 4.2 percent12 of the 2040 housing projection.

The state of California has a shortage of housing, and in 2019, Governor Newsom signed several bills aimed to address the need for more housing, including the Housing Crisis Act of 2019 (Senate Bill 330). The proposed project would help address housing needs and accommodate population growth in the city. Impacts would be less than significant.
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
No Impact. The project site is currently vacant except for a rental structure at the northeast corner of the site; the occupants of this structure have relocated by choice. The proposed project would introduce residential uses onto the project site, resulting in an increase in the city’s housing supply. The proposed project would displace one household but provide 207 new housing units, and it would not result in the need for replacement housing elsewhere. Impacts would be less than significant.

3.15 TRANSPORTATION
The analysis in this section is based in part on the following, included as Appendix D-a and D-b, respectively:
 Starlite Development Traffic Impact Analysis, Iteris, June 9, 2021  2540 Rosemead Boulevard – San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments Vehicle Miles Traveled Evaluation Tool Report, Iteris, June 11, 2021
11 207 dwelling units x 4.41 (average persons per household) = 912.87 residents = 913 residents 12 SCAG 2040 Household estimate for South El Monte = 5,200 households Housing units in SCAG projections are estimated based on number of households and a healthy vacancy rate of 5.0 percent: 0.05 (vacancy rate) x 5,200 households (SCAG 2040 estimate) = 4,940 housing units in 2040.

Page 329 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

3. Environmental Analysis
January 2022 Page 115
Would the project:

Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities?
X
b) Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines § 15064.3, subdivision (b)? X
c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
X
d) Result in inadequate emergency access? X
a) Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities?
Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. Under baseline conditions, the project site was not in operation as a swap meet and generated no daily vehicle trips. The proposed project would generate 1,874 daily trips with 143 trips in the AM peak hour and 189 trips in the PM peak hour, based on the ITE Trip General Manual 10th edition.

The proposed signalized intersection at the project driveway on Rosemead Boulevard would be consistent with Policy 2.2 of the Circulation Element, “Support Caltrans efforts to facilitate smooth traffic flow along Rosemead Boulevard.” A traffic signal at this intersection would regulate traffic flow in the project area.

The proposed project would be consistent with the Circulation Element’s Policy 2.3, “Support efforts of the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority to increase the use of mass transit and other alternatives to the private automobile as a way to reduce traffic loads on State Route 60,” since the project site is adjacent to the Rosemead/Fern Metro Bus Lines 176 and 266 stop and is approximately 1,500 feet (0.28 mile) from the Garvey/Rosemead Stop on Metro Bus Line 70. The frequency of Metro Bus Line is 15 minutes or less in peak hours and is considered to operate in a high-quality transit area (HQTA Additionally, the proposed project would construct a traffic signal at the intersection of Rosemead Boulevard and the project site’s entrance, which would allow for crossing between the northbound or southbound Metro Bus Lines 176 and 266 stops.

The proposed project would not modify pedestrian facilities with the exception of a new crosswalk at the proposed signalized intersection. Future pedestrian circulation would be provided throughout the project site by a network of walkways along the internal drives and open space areas, which would connect to the existing City sidewalks along Rosemead Boulevard and Chico Avenue (see Figure 5, Circulation Plan).

The 2000 General Plan identified a bikeway network in the City of South El Monte that did not include any roadways near the project site. The South El Monte Recommended Bikeway Network in the City’s section of

Page 330 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

3. Environmental Analysis

Page 116 ends

the San Gabriel Valley Bicycle Master Plan includes proposed Class II bicycle lanes on Rosemead Boulevard, Garvey Avenue, Rush Street, and Potrero Avenue within the City limits (south of Kale Street). The implementation of the proposed project would not modify existing bicycle facilities.

Despite traffic along Chico Avenue being uncontrolled, there is no advanced-warning signage alerting drivers to the presence of the Chico Avenue and Fern Street intersection, which provides a marked crosswalk on the north leg of the intersection crossing Chico Avenue and an unmarked crossing, denoted by curb ramps, on the east leg of the intersection crossing Fern Street. In addition, the curb ramps are not aligned with the crosswalk and require pedestrians using the curb ramps to step into the intersection outside of the crosswalk, reducing the safety of the location. The safety condition of the location could be impacted by the proposed project’s additional residents utilizing the crossing, in conflict with the Circulation Element traffic safety goal of a transportation network to provide personal safety for motorists and pedestrians at intersections and roadways throughout the City. To address this potentially significant impact, Mitigation Measure T-1, which states that California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) Pedestrian W11-2 signs should be installed at least 150 feet upstream from the crosswalk in both directions as well as at the crosswalk itself, the crosswalk should be repainted to ensure high visibility, and the curb ramps on Chico Avenue be realigned with the crosswalk itself, would reduce impacts to less than significant.

Mitigation Measures
T-1 Prior to the issuance of an occupancy permit, the applicant shall enhance the pedestrian crossing at the Chico Avenue/Fern Street intersection as follows:
 Install pedestrian crossing signs at least 150 feet ahead of the crosswalk in both directions as well as at the crosswalk itself pursuant to California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) Pedestrian W11-2.
 Repaint the crosswalk to ensure high visibility.
 Realign the curb ramps with the crosswalk.
b) Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines § 15064.3, subdivision (b)? Less Than Significant Impact. CEQA analysis for determining potential significant transportation impacts from vehicle traffic transitioned from an automobile delay or capacity measure to a Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) of automobiles and light trucks metric in July 2020, as required by Senate Bill (SB) 743. VMT is an areawide performance measure which helps compare the overall performance of a project or project alternatives and is also used as a metric to ultimately assess the transportation environmental impacts of a project. VMT analysis shifts the focus towards impacts caused by the distance traveled by vehicles rather than the localized congestion created by vehicles (i.e., intersection-level delay). VMT is generally calculated using a travel demand model that captures the movement of all trips over a highway network. Analysis is limited to automobile travel (automobiles and light-trucks) and excludes heavy trucks.

The City of South El Monte prepared City of South El Monte Transportation Study Guidelines for Vehicle Miles Traveled and Level of Service Assessment (October 2020) that provide technical guidance regarding

Page 331 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

3. Environmental Analysis
January 2022 Page 117
assessment of VMT, thresholds of significance, and mitigation measures for land development and transportation projects in the unincorporated area.

The proposed project would add housing in a predominately commercial and industrial area that is well-served by public transportation, thereby diversifying the land use types and contributing to a reduction in vehicle miles traveled per capita.

The proposed project was analyzed using the San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments Vehicle Miles Traveled Evaluation Tool for the three Project parcels (APNs: 8102-037-020, 8102-037-022, 8102-037-024) in traffic analysis zone (TAZ) 22195100. The proposed project is not located in a Transit Priority Area and would have a project generated VMT rate of 12.67 home-based VMT per capita. When compared to the City VMT baseline value of 15.75 home-based VMT per capita and the 15.0 percent below baseline significance value of

13.39, the proposed Project is presumed to have a less than significant impact. c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project would not increase traffic hazards or create incompatible uses. The proposed project signalized intersection at the Rosemead Boulevard driveway and the new driveway on Chico Avenue would be designed to meet the City of South El Monte and Caltrans’ standards and specifications, and therefore would not increase geometric design hazards. d) Result in inadequate emergency access?
Less Than Significant Impact. The current site entrance driveway at Rosemead Boulevard would not be altered and the new driveway on Chico Street would be constructed to meet standards and specifications to allow for ambulance and fire vehicle access. A traffic control plan and parking and driveway plan would be submitted to the City of South El Monte for review and approval prior to any temporary construction period lane or road closures. Impacts would be less than significant.

3.16 PUBLIC SERVICES
The analysis in this section is based in part on the following service-provider questionnaire responses and conditions of approval. These documents are included as Appendix I:
 Proposed Starlite Residential Development Police Questionnaire, Tracy Jue, Director, Facilities Planning Bureau, February 18, 2021
 County of Los Angeles Fire Department Final Map Requirements (Conditions of Approval), project review by Claudia Soiza, June 16, 2021
Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services:

Page 332 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

3. Environmental Analysis

Page 118 ends

Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the public services:
a) Fire protection? X
b) Police protection? X
c) Schools? X
d) Parks? X
e) Other public facilities? X
a) Fire protection?
Less Than Significant According to the City’s General Plan Public Safety Element, fire response and prevention services are provided by the Los Angeles County Fire Department. The City’s contract with the Los Angeles County Fire Department is reviewed annually to ensure adequate fire protection services are provided.

The nearest fire station is Station 90, approximately 0.72 mile southeast of the project site. Los Angeles County Fire Department maintains a policy of responding to fires within five minutes from notification, which is acknowledged by the National Fire Protection Association.

The proposed project and improvements will require site plan review for consistency with the City’s Public Safety Element and Los Angeles County Fire Department requirements. Upon development and operation, the project will contribute to the City’s General Fund through property taxes, and the General Fund pays for the City’s contract with County Fire. Any facility expansion or additional personnel needs generated by the development will be reflected in the annual review of the City’s contract with the Los Angeles County Fire Department. Expansion or any requirement for new facilities (stations) would be speculative, but would also require environmental review under CEQA. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. b) Police protection?
Less Than Significant Impact. The project site is within the service area of the Los Angeles County Sheriff Department’s (LASD) Temple Station at 8838 Las Tunas Drive in Temple City, approximately 3.1 miles north of the project site. The station provides community services such as organized Neighborhood Watch meetings.

LASD recommends that the general principles of Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design be implemented in the design phase.

The LASD does not have a current standard law enforcement service ratio because staffing level needs vary from station to station due to criteria such as service call volume and type, patrol and travel time by priority,

Page 333 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

3. Environmental Analysis
January 2022 Page 119
personnel workload and performance levels, and modeling the flow of calls for service ratios. The station’s average or anticipated response times for emergent, priority, and routine calls for service received from the proposed project are 6, 20, and 60 minutes,13 respectively. The LASD generally adheres to the following industry standard among law enforcement agencies for responses categorized as emergent, priority, and routine calls for service: 10, 20, and 60 minutes, respectively.

The station’s desired law enforcement service ratio is 1 deputy for every 1,000 residents. The station is currently staffed by 190 sworn personnel and 48 civilian employees. The station services the following areas: Chantry Flats, Monrovia-Arcadia-Duarte, City of Bradbury, City of Duarte, City of Rosemead, City of South El Monte, Temple City, North San Gabriel/East Pasadena, and South San Gabriel. The estimated population for the station’s service area is approximately 230,389, which would require 230 deputies.

At 190 deputies, the station is currently understaffed; however, assigning additional personnel to the station would exacerbate the current shortage of facility space and supporting equipment. As indicated above, the proposed project is expected to generate 913 residents, and therefore the project would generate the demand for an additional deputy. If the station were to be expanded in the future, the expansion would be required to undergo the applicable CEQA process which would provide mitigation, if required. According to the City’s General Plan, the City’s contract with the LASD is reviewed to ensure that the City is receiving the appropriate level of response service and crime prevention. The contract, which is updated annually, is funded by the City’s General Fund, and includes funding for departmental supplies. The proposed project would pay into the General Fund, which would fund services for the LASD. Impacts would be less than significant. c) Schools?
Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project would result in the construction of 207 dwelling units.

The proposed project would result in an increase of approximately 913 residents in the City of South El Monte.

Potrero Elementary School and South El Monte High School in the El Monte City School District and El Monte Union High School District, respectively, would serve the proposed project. For the 2020-2021 enrollment year, Potrero Elementary School, which serves kindergarten through eighth-grade students, had an enrollment of 782 students, and South El Monte High School, which serves ninth- through twelfth-grade students, had an enrollment of 1,261 students (CDE 2021).

Table 17, Estimated Project Student Generation, shows the total enrollment for El Monte City School District and El Monte Union High School District and the project’s estimated student generation. 13 These are approximate time ranges only and could be affected by traffic conditions. Response times are variable because the responding unit may be elsewhere within the station’s service area and not necessarily dispatched from the station itself.

Page 334 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

3. Environmental Analysis

Page 120 ends

Table 17 Estimated Project Student Generation
Enrollment 2019-20201 Student Generation2
Estimated Project Student
Generation
El Monte City School District 7,921 0.53 457
El Monte Union High School District 8,299 0.2 183
Total 16,220 0.7 640
Sources and notes:
1 CDE 2021 2 El Monte 2011. 3 Elementary school generation rate (0.4) + Middle school generation rate (0.1) As shown on Table 17, the proposed project would generate approximately 640 students. Individual projects in the City of South El Monte would be required to pay school impact fees under Government Code Section 65995. School fees levied by school districts under Senate Bill 50 (SB 50) are defined as comprising full mitigation for a project’s impacts on public schools. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. d) Parks?
Less Than Significant Impact. According to the Resources Element of the City’s General Plan, the city has one City-owned park (Mary Van Dyke Park) and three joint-use parks (New Temple Park, Dean Shively Park/School, and Potrero School), which totals to 636 acres. Whittier Narrows Regional Park is a 1,092-acre County-operated park that is south of the city. The City’s goal is to provide a ratio of approximately 2 acres of parkland per 1,000 city residents, according to the Resources Element of the General Plan. Including Whittier Narrows Regional Park, the city has approximately 1,728 acres of parkland (South El Monte 2000).

The City currently requires 42.4 acres to meet the demand for parklands for the existing population of 21,204 residents. With the existing 636 acres of parkland, the City exceeds the minimum standard by approximately 594 acres. Using the City’s parkland ratio of 2 acres of parkland per 1,000 residents, the proposed project would create a demand for 1.83 acres of parkland. With the implementation of the proposed project, the City’s minimum parkland standard would be exceeded by 591 acres.

Additionally, Section 16.36.015, Park Land Dedications and Fees, of the South El Monte Municipal Code, requires that every person who constructs dwelling units or subdivides land for residential purposes pay a fee or dedicate land for parks. The proposed project would provide 140,080 square feet of landscaped areas, and the proposed Specific Plan provides landscape and open space guidelines. As indicated in the Specific Plan, the recreational center would include a pool and recreation building, open lawn area, and a community recreation area. Therefore, project implementation would result in a less than significant impact because the City exceeds the minimum standard for parkland, and the applicant would be required to pay parkland dedication fees. e) Other public facilities?
Less Than Significant Impact. The only library in the City of South El Monte, South El Monte Library, is approximately 1.2 miles southeast of the project site. It is part of the Los Angeles County Library system that serves 49 of the 88 cities. The Los Angeles County Library guidelines recommend a minimum of 0.5 square foot per capita (Los Angeles County 2014). The South El Monte Library is 6,416 square feet (Los Angeles

Page 335 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

3. Environmental Analysis
January 2022 Page 121
County 2021). With the existing population of 21,204, there would be a need for 10,602 square feet of library space. Therefore, there is currently a deficiency of 4,186 square feet in library space.

Based on the recommended standard, the 913 residents of the project would generate the need for 456 square feet of library space, which would increase the existing deficiency to 4,642 square feet. The Los Angeles County Library also provides a wide range of electronic and digitized resources that do not require physical library space.

The LA County Library is a special fund department under the jurisdiction of the County Board of Supervisors.

It is financed primarily by a dedicated share of property tax from the service areas, with other revenues including general fund contribution, a parcel tax, grants, and fees. The proposed project would generate its proportionate share of library funding through these mechanisms, and therefore, would not result in a significant impact.

3.17 RECREATION
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?
X
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?
X
a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities, such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?
Less Than Significant Impact. Project development would create a demand for 1.83 acres of park space in the City of South El Monte. However, as substantiated above, the City of South El Monte would exceed the minimum parkland standard by 591 acres with project implementation. The Mary Van Dyke park is approximately 0.9 mile southeast of the site. The proposed project would include 140,080 square feet of landscaped areas. Additionally, the proposed Specific Plan would provide guidelines for landscape and open space. The recreation center would include various features, including but not limited to a pool and recreation building, open-play lawn, and community recreation area. Therefore, the proposed project would have a less than significant impact on neighborhood and regional parks and other recreational facilities in the City. b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project would include approximately 140,080 square feet of landscaped areas, and would include recreational facilities. The construction associated with landscaped areas

Page 336 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

3. Environmental Analysis

Page 122 ends

and recreational facilities are included as part of the project site’s development. The construction or expansion of such areas would not result in an adverse physical effect on the environment beyond those analyzed for the overall development of the project in this Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.

3.18 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
The analysis in this section is based in part on the following technical study:
 Cultural and Paleontological Resources Assessment for the Starlite Residential Project, Cogstone, May 2021 (Appendix C-a)
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code § 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
i) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section
5020.1(k), or
X
ii) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its
discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code § 5024.1. In applying the
criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code § 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the
significance of the resource to a California Native
American tribe.

X
a) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
i) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k), or Less Than Significant Impact. As stated in Section 3.5(a), the Starlite Drive-in sign is eligible for listing under CRHR Criteria 1 and 3. However, the sign is not attributed to Native American tribes, and therefore, impacts would be less than significant.

Page 337 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

3. Environmental Analysis
January 2022 Page 123
ii) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.

No Impact. Less Than Significant Impact. Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated. A Sacred Lands File (SLF) search was requested from the Native American Heritage Commission on February 12, 2021, and it indicated that there are sacred lands or resources known within the project area (Cogstone 2021, Appendix C-a). The NAHC recommended that eight representatives from local Native American tribes be contacted for further information. In accordance with SB 18 and AB 52, the City informed the tribes of the proposed project, and consulted with the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians–Kizh Nation on June 3, 2021. The tribe requested mitigation to reduce potential impacts to tribal cultural resources. Since the proposed project would require ground-disturbing activities, Mitigation Measure TCR-1 through Mitigation Measure TCR-3 would be implemented to ensure potential impacts to tribal cultural resources are reduced to a less than significant level.

Mitigation Measures
TCR-1 Retain a Native American Monitor Prior to Commencement of Ground-Disturbing Activities.
 The project applicant/lead agency shall retain a Native American monitor from (or approved by) the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation (the “Kizh” or the “Tribe”) - the direct lineal descendants of the project location. The monitor shall be retained prior to the commencement of any “ground-disturbing activity” for the subject project, at all project locations (i.e., both on-site and any off-site locations that are included in the project description/definition and/or required in connection with the project, such as public improvement work). “Ground-disturbing activity” includes, but is not limited to, pavement removal, potholing, auguring, grubbing, tree removal, boring, grading, excavation, drilling, and trenching.
 A copy of the executed monitoring agreement shall be provided to the lead agency prior to the earlier of the commencement of any ground-disturbing activity for the project, or the issuance of any permit necessary to commence a ground-disturbing activity.  The project applicant/developer shall provide the Tribe with a minimum of 30 days advance written notice of the commencement of any project ground-disturbing activity so that the Tribe has sufficient time to secure and schedule a monitor for the project.  The project applicant/developer shall hold at least one (1) pre-construction sensitivity/educational meeting prior to the commencement of any ground-disturbing activities, where at a senior member of the Tribe will inform and educate the project’s construction and managerial crew and staff members (including any project subcontractors and consultants) about the TCR mitigation measures and compliance

Page 338 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

3. Environmental Analysis

Page 124 ends

obligations, as well as places of significance located on the project site (if any), the appearance of potential TCRs, and other informational and operational guidance to aid in the project’s compliance with the TCR mitigation measures.  The monitor will complete daily monitoring logs that will provide descriptions of the relevant ground-disturbing activities, the type of construction activities performed, locations of ground-disturbing activities, soil types, cultural-related materials, and any other facts, conditions, materials, or discoveries of significance to the Tribe. Monitor logs will identify and describe any discovered TCRs, including but not limited to, Native American cultural and historical artifacts, remains, places of significance, etc., (collectively, tribal cultural resources, or “TCR”), as well as any discovered Native American (ancestral) human remains and burial goods. Copies of monitor logs will be provided to the project applicant/lead agency upon written request.
 Native American monitoring for the project shall conclude upon the latter of the following: (1) written confirmation from a designated project point of contact to the Tribe that all ground-disturbing activities and all phases that may involve ground-disturbing activities on the project site and at any off-site project location are complete; or (2) written notice by the Tribe to the project applicant/lead agency that no future, planned construction activity and/or development/construction phase (known by the Tribe at that time) at the project site and at any off-site project location possesses the potential to impact TCRs.

TCR-2 Discovery of TCRs, Human Remains, and/or Grave Goods.  Upon the discovery of a TCR, all construction activities in the immediate vicinity of the discovery (i.e., not less than the surrounding 50 feet) shall cease. The Tribe shall be immediately informed of the discovery, and a Kizh monitor and/or Kizh archaeologist will promptly report to the location of the discovery to evaluate the TCR and advise the project manager regarding the matter, protocol, and any mitigating requirements. No project construction activities shall resume in the surrounding 50 feet of the discovered TCR unless and until the Tribe has completed its assessment/evaluation/recovery of the discovered TCR and surveyed the surrounding area.
 The Tribe will recover and retain all discovered TCRs in the form and/or manner the Tribe deems appropriate in its sole discretion, and for any purpose the Tribe deems appropriate, including but not limited to, educational, cultural and/or historic purposes.  If Native American human remains and/or grave goods are discovered or recognized on the project site or at any off-site project location, then all construction activities shall immediately cease. Native American “human remains” are defined to include “an inhumation or cremation, and in any state of decomposition or skeletal completeness.” (Pub. Res. Code § 5097.98 (d)(1).) Funerary objects, referred to as “associated grave goods,” shall be treated in the same manner and with the same dignity and respect as human remains. (Pub. Res. Code § 5097.98 (a), d)(1) and (2).)

Page 339 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

3. Environmental Analysis
January 2022 Page 125
 Any discoveries of human skeletal material or human remains shall be immediately reported to the County Coroner (Health & Safety Code § 7050.5(c); 14 Cal. Code Regs. § 15064.5(e)(1)(B)), and all ground-disturbing project ground-disturbing activities on site and in any other area where the presence of human remains and/or grave goods are suspected to be present, shall immediately halt and remain halted until the coroner has determined the nature of the remains. (14 Cal. Code Regs. §15064.5(e).) If the coroner recognizes the human remains to be those of a Native American or has reason to believe they are Native American, he or she shall contact, within 24 hours, the Native American Heritage Commission, and Public Resources Code Section 5097.98 shall be followed.  Thereafter, construction activities may resume in other parts of the project site at a minimum of 200 feet away from discovered human remains and/or grave goods, if the Tribe determines in its sole discretion that resuming construction activities at that distance is acceptable and provides the project manager express consent of that determination (along with any other mitigation measures the Tribal monitor and/or archaeologist deems necessary). (14 Cal. Code Regs. § 15064.5(f).)
 Preservation in place (i.e., avoidance) is the preferred manner of treatment for discovered human remains and/or grave goods.
 Any historic archaeological material that is not Native American in origin (non-TCRs) shall be curated at a public, non-profit institution with a research interest in the materials, such as the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County or the Fowler Museum, if such an institution agrees to accept the material. If no institution accepts the archaeological material, it shall be offered to a local school or historical society in the area for educational purposes.
 Any discovery of human remains and/or grave goods discovered and/or recovered shall be kept confidential to prevent further disturbance.

TCR-3 Procedures for Burials, Funerary Remains, and Grave Goods.  As the Most Likely Descendant (“MLD”), the Koo-nas-gna Burial Policy shall be implemented for all discovered Native American human remains and/or grave goods.

Tribal Traditions include, but are not limited to, the preparation of the soil for burial, the burial of funerary objects and/or the deceased, and the ceremonial burning of human remains.
 If the discovery of human remains includes four (4) or more burials, the discovery location shall be treated as a cemetery and a separate treatment plan shall be created.  The prepared soil and cremation soils are to be treated in the same manner as bone fragments that remain intact. Associated “grave goods” (aka, burial goods or funerary objects) are objects that, as part of the death rite or ceremony of a culture, are reasonably believed to have been placed with individual human remains either at the time of death or later, as well as other items made exclusively for burial purposes or to contain human

Page 340 of 925 ends

STARLITE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE

3. Environmental Analysis

Page 126 ends

remains. Cremations will either be removed in bulk or by means necessary to ensure complete recovery of all sacred materials.
 In the case where discovered human remains cannot be fully recovered (and documented) on the same day, the remains will be covered with muslin cloth and a steel plate that can be moved by heavy equipment placed over the excavation opening to protect the remains.

If this type of steel plate is not available, a 24-hour guard should be posted outside of working hours. The Tribe will make every effort to divert the project while keeping the remains in situ and protected. If the project cannot be diverted, it may be determined that burials will be removed.
 In the event preservation in place is not possible despite good faith efforts by the project applicant/developer and/or landowner, before ground-disturbing activities may resume on the project site, the landowner shall arrange a designated site location within the footprint of the project for the respectful reburial of the human remains and/or ceremonial objects. The site of reburial/repatriation shall be agreed upon by the Tribe and the landowner, and shall be protected in perpetuity.  Each occurrence of human remains and associated grave goods will be stored using opaque cloth bags. All human remains, grave goods, funerary objects, sacred objects and objects of cultural patrimony will be removed to a secure container on site if possible.

These items will be retained and shall be reburied within six months of recovery.  The Tribe will work closely with the project’s qualified archaeologist to ensure that the excavation is treated carefully, ethically and respectfully. If data recovery is approved by the Tribe, documentation shall be prepared and shall include (at a minimum) detailed descriptive notes and sketches. All data recovery data recovery-related forms of documentation shall be approved in advance by the Tribe. If any data recovery is performed, once complete, a final report shall be submitted to the Tribe and the NAHC.

The Tribe does NOT authorize any scientific study or the utilization of any invasive and/or destructive diagnostics on human remains.

Page 341 of 925 ends

South El Monte City CouncilApril 12, 2022

South El Monte City Council
April 12, 2022