Agenda packet — South Pasadena City Council, May 30, 2023 (part 6 of 12)

The CDFW, as a trustee agency, must be notified of CEQA documents regarding projects involving fish and wildlife of the state as well as Rare and Endangered native plants, wildlife areas, and ecological reserves. Although, the CDFW cannot approve or disapprove a project since it is a trustee agency, lead and responsible agencies are required to consult with them. The CDFW, as the trustee agency for fish and wildlife resources, shall provide the requisite biological expertise to review and comment upon environmental documents and impacts arising from project activities and shall make recommendations regarding those resources held in trust for the people of California (California Fish and Game Code, Section 1602).

Sections 1600–1616
All diversions, obstructions, or changes to the natural flow or bed, channel, or bank of any river, stream, or lake in California that support wildlife resources and/or riparian vegetation are subject to CDFW regulations, pursuant to Section 1600 through Section 1603 of the California Fish and Game Code. Under Section 1602, it is unlawful for any person to substantially divert or obstruct the natural flow or substantially change the bed, channel or bank of any river, stream, or lake designated by CDFW as waters within their jurisdiction, nor can a person use any material from streambeds without first notifying the CDFW of such activity. For a project that may affect stream channels and/or riparian vegetation regulated under Sections 1600 through 1603, CDFW authorization is required in the form of a Streambed Alteration Agreement. 3 - 799
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.3_Bio_Resources-050923.docx 3.3-9 Biological Resources Birds of Prey and Migratory Birds
Sections 3503 and 3503.5 of the California Fish and Game Code makes it unlawful to take, possess, or destroy the nests and eggs of birds of prey.

Section 3513 of the California Fish and Game Code duplicates the federal protection of migratory birds and prohibits the taking and possession of any migratory nongame bird, as designated in the MBTA.

California Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act
Pursuant to the California Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act, the SWRCB and the nine RWQCBs may require permits (known as waste discharge requirements [WDRs]) for the fill or alteration of “waters of the State”. The term “waters of the State” is defined as “any surface water or groundwater, including saline waters, within the boundaries of the state” (California Water Code, Section 13050[e]). The State and Regional Boards have interpreted their authority to require WDRs to extend to any proposal to fill or alter “waters of the State”, even if those same waters are not under USACE jurisdiction. Pursuant to this authority, the State and Regional Boards may require the submission of a “report of waste discharge” under Section 13260, which is treated as an application for WDRs.

Local
City of South Pasadena Tree Ordinance
Chapter 34, “Trees and Shrubs”, of the City of South Pasadena Municipal Code (SPMC) contains regulations protecting trees within the City, referred to herein as the tree ordinance or tree preservation ordinance. The SPMC regulates adverse effects to the following groups of trees once they are considered mature or significant: trees in the oak (Quercus spp.) genus, trees native to southern California, and heritage trees as determined by the tree’s historical value. A mature tree has a trunk diameter (or collective diameter of multitrunked trees) of at least four inches where the trunk is four feet above grade. A significant tree has a diameter of at least one foot at four feet above grade. The City regulates effects on these trees by requiring a permit prior to any significant trimming, or prior to tree relocation or removal. Significant trimming is defined as removing greater than 20 percent (or greater than 10 percent of oak trees or native tree species) of the live foliage within one year. No new structure shall be located nor shall any construction requiring a permit occur within six feet of the trunk of a significant or heritage tree.

The SPMC further states that City permission must be granted prior to removal of any tree regardless of size or classification that is within a parkway, or part of a watershed, erosion control, or wildlife habitat. All applications for tree removal shall also include submission of a tree plan.

Any subsequent approval by the City is discretionary and could be subject to conditional requirements, including planting of replacement trees, posting of bonds ensuring the success of replacement trees, and review of the tree plan by an International Society of Arboriculture certified arborist at the cost of the applicant.

3.3.4 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
The criteria for determining significant impacts on biological resources were developed in accordance with the State CEQA Guidelines. Section 15065(a) of the State CEQA Guidelines states that a project may have a significant effect on the environment if “…the project has the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat 3 - 800
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.3_Bio_Resources-050923.docx 3.3-10 Biological Resources of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of an endangered, rare, or threatened species”. An evaluation of whether an impact on biological resources would be significant must consider both the resource itself and how that resource fits into a regional or local context. Significant impacts would be those that would diminish or result in the loss of an important biological resource or those that would obviously conflict with local, State, or federal resource conservation plans, goals, or regulations. Impacts are sometimes locally adverse but not significant because, although they would result in an adverse alteration of existing conditions, they would not substantially diminish or result in the permanent loss of an important resource on a population- or region-wide basis.

The following significant criteria are derived from Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines.

A project would result in a significant adverse biological resources impact if it would:

Threshold 3.3a: Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; Threshold 3.3b: 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 Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service;
Threshold 3.3c: 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; Threshold 3.3d: 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;
Threshold 3.3e: Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance; and/or Threshold 3.3f: Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan.

3.3.5 PROPOSED HOUSING ELEMENT GOALS AND POLICIES
There are no Housing Element goals or policies related to biological resources. 3 - 801
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.3_Bio_Resources-050923.docx 3.3-11 Biological Resources

3.3.6 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Sensitive Species
Threshold 3.3a: Would the Project have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S.

Fish and Wildlife Service?
Habitat potentially suitable for native wildlife species in the City is limited to the ornamental vegetation in developed areas and the native soils and vegetation in the undeveloped open space areas. Habitat potentially suitable for native plant species is restricted to the undeveloped, naturally vegetated open space areas. Cooper’s hawk and western mastiff bat are special status wildlife species with potential to occur in the large trees that are located throughout the City.

Removal, trimming, or other disturbance of occupied trees may result in loss or harm to individuals of these species and may negatively affect the local population. Potential impacts to Cooper’s hawk and western mastiff bat would be avoided with implementation of mitigation measure (MM) BIO-1 and MM BIO-2. MM BIO-1 requires that a qualified biologist conduct nesting bird surveys prior to all construction or site preparation activities situated near potentially suitable habitat, such as trees and shrubs, that would occur during the nesting and breeding season of native bird species (typically March 1 through August 15). If an active nest is present, the biologist would place a temporary buffer around the nest site. MM BIO-2 requires that trimming or removal of mature or significant trees, as defined by the City, be conducted outside the breeding season for native bird and bat species (typically August 16 through February 28) whenever feasible, and if this activity must occur during the breeding season, a qualified biologist would survey the tree to assess the presence or absence of any active bird nest or bat maternity roost.

No other special status plant or wildlife species have potential to occur in the ornamental vegetation associated with the developed areas in the City of South Pasadena. The proposed Project would mostly direct future development to occur in areas of existing development, and implementation of the Project would limit development of otherwise undeveloped, naturallyvegetated open space that may be used by special status plant or wildlife species.

As discussed previously, the minimally developed, open space areas supporting stands of native vegetation have potential to support various special status plant and wildlife species. Although future development would be focused away from these areas, some potential housing and development sites include properties adjacent to undeveloped or vacant open space areas.

Introduction of invasive plant species by future development near these undeveloped or vacant open space areas could result in the spread of the plant species to native habitats in the undeveloped, naturally-vegetated open space areas subsequently displacing potentially suitable or occupied habitat of special status plant and wildlife species. This would be considered a significant impact. Therefore, MM BIO-3 requires the City to develop a list of fire-resistant plant species that excludes exotic plant species with a high or moderate rating on the California Invasive Plant Council’s invasive plant inventory. This fire-resistant plant list would be used for any requirements of recommendations to residents, businesses, and/or developers of future projects in hillside areas that require fire-resistant construction and landscaping. MM BIO-3 would ensure that residents and other parties are not encouraged to plant exotic, invasive species for fire resistance, and would reduce the potential impact to less than significant.

As previously mentioned, the undeveloped and vacant open space areas supporting stands of native vegetation have potential to support various special status plant and wildlife species. 3 - 802
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.3_Bio_Resources-050923.docx 3.3-12 Biological Resources Although future development would be focused away from these areas, there may be direct impacts of projects and indirect impacts of activities occurring adjacent to these areas. Such activities may result in loss or harm of special status native species within these areas. MM BIO-4, which requires an applicant to conduct a biological resources assessment and appropriate surveys and implement any recommended avoidance measures prior to project initiation within or adjacent to native-vegetated open space areas, would reduce this potential impact to a less than significant level.

With implementation of MMs BIO-1 through BIO-4, impacts to special status species would be less than significant.

Threshold 3.3b: Would the Project have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, and regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? The proposed Project would generally direct future development to areas of existing development, and limit development of otherwise undeveloped, native-vegetated open space, thereby limiting potential effects to sensitive natural communities. Regardless, the Project may result in future development of vacant areas supporting native vegetation communities, potentially containing sensitive upland vegetation types. Implementation of MM BIO-4, which requires the Applicant/Developer of future development projects to have a biological assessment conducted, would reduce potential impacts to sensitive upland vegetation types to a less than significant level.

Furthermore, sensitive riparian vegetation types are typically associated with drainage features.

As such, these communities are protected under State and federal law as discussed above in Section 3.3.3. Implementation of MM BIO-5, which requires the Applicant/Developer of future development projects to conduct a delineation, if recommended by a qualified biologist, and subsequent consultation with and acquisition of permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies prior to initiation of any site disturbance activities, would reduce this potential impact to a less than significant level.

Threshold 3.3c: Would the project 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?
The proposed Project would mostly direct future development to areas of existing development, limiting development of naturally-occurring drainage features, and therefore minimizing potential impacts to any vegetated riparian or wetland habitat. Furthermore, cement-lined jurisdictional drainage features are dispersed across the City and impacts to those features may occur as a result of the proposed Project.

As discussed in Section 3.3.3, Relevant Programs and Regulations, the CWA requires permits for activity involving jurisdictional waters. Prior to any impacts to the resources under the jurisdiction of the USACE, CDFW, or RWQCB, appropriate permits would have to be obtained from these resource agencies. These permits would identify necessary mitigation to reduce disturbance impacts and require appropriate replacement habitat to ensure no net loss in biological resource values. Compliance with the permit requirements would reduce potential impacts to wetlands and riparian communities to a less than significant. Also, implementation of MM BIO-3, discussed under Threshold 3.3a, would avoid impacts related to introduction of invasive plant species installed for the purpose of fire-resistant landscaping into riparian habitats.

Furthermore, implementation of MM BIO-5, which requires the Applicant/Developer of future 3 - 803
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.3_Bio_Resources-050923.docx 3.3-13 Biological Resources development projects to conduct a delineation, if recommended by a qualified biologist, and subsequent consultation with and acquisition of permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies prior to initiation of any site disturbance activities, would reduce this potential impact to a less than significant level.

Threshold 3.3d: Would the Project interfere substantially with the movement of any native or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?
Wildlife movement is already greatly restricted within the City due to existing urban development in most areas. Wildlife movement is likely to be confined to the Arroyo Seco along the western boundary of the City and within the vacant, naturally-vegetated open space areas in the southwestern portion of the City. The proposed General Plan and DTSP Update would direct future development to occur in areas of existing development, and not to areas of undeveloped, naturally-vegetated open space. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not reduce the amount of available undeveloped, naturally-vegetated open space used by wildlife for migration.

Future development pursuant to the Project may involve vegetation clearing and tree removal that could also result in the direct loss of active bird nests, active bat maternity roosts, or the abandonment of active nests or roosts by adults. Bird nests with eggs or young are protected under the MBTA and the California Fish and Game Code and may be considered native wildlife nursery sites. Active bat maternity roosts are considered native wildlife nursery sites.

Implementation of MMs BIO-1 and BIO-2 would reduce adverse impacts to nesting birds to a less than significant level by minimizing or avoiding disturbance through seasonal scheduling and/or pre-construction surveys and avoidance of designated active nesting areas. Implementation of MM BIO-2 would reduce impacts to an active bat maternity roost to a less than significant level through seasonal avoidance or pre-construction surveys and avoidance.

Threshold 3.3e: Would the Project conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?
The City of South Pasadena has a detailed tree preservation ordinance. Because all development within the City would be required to comply with the policies and regulations set forth in the City’s tree preservation ordinance, the proposed Project would not conflict with this local policy. There would be a less than significant impact, and no mitigation is required.

Threshold 3.3f: Would the Project conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan? There are no adopted, approved, or proposed Habitat Conservation Plans (HCP); Natural Community Conservation Plans (NCCP); or other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plans that cover habitats located within the City of South Pasadena. There would be no conflict with any such provisions and no impact would occur with implementation of the Project.

No mitigation is required.
3 - 804
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.3_Bio_Resources-050923.docx 3.3-14 Biological Resources

3.3.7 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
The cumulative impacts on biological resources are evaluated based on the potential impacts of growth and development in the City and in the San Gabriel Valley. Future development pursuant to the Project could contribute to the cumulative changes in plant and wildlife habitats in the San Gabriel Valley due to increasing urbanization and population growth in the region.

Development on disturbed lands and developed areas, which are likely to support non-native species or disturbed habitats, are less likely to have adverse impacts on special status plant and wildlife species. The proposed Project would mostly direct future development to occur in areas of existing development. With implementation of MMs BIO-1 and BIO-2, which reduce impacts related to the potential presence of special status bird and bat species in developed areas of the City; MM BIO-3, which reduce impacts related to invasive plant species for fire-resistant landscaping; and MM BIO-4, which requires an impact assessment for future development of vacant, naturally vegetated areas, the Project would not contribute to a significant cumulative impact to sensitive plant and wildlife species, riparian habitat, and jurisdictional resources.

Compliance with the City’s tree preservation ordinance would ensure that future development within the City would result in a less than significant cumulative impact on trees and associated policies protecting a biological resource. There is no adopted HCP/NCCP for the City or surrounding area.

Because potentially significant impacts to biological resources resulting from future development pursuant to the Project would be less than significant with MMs BIO-1 through BIO-5, future development under the Project is not expected to contribute to a cumulatively significant impact to biological resources.

3.3.8 MITIGATION MEASURES
MM BIO-1 A qualified biologist shall conduct nesting bird surveys in areas with potentially suitable habitat prior to all construction or site preparation activities that would occur during the nesting and breeding season of native bird species (typically March 1 through August 15). The survey area shall include all potential bird nesting areas within 200 feet of any disturbance. The survey shall be conducted no more than three days prior to commencement of activities (i.e., grubbing or grading).

If active nests of bird species protected by the MBTA and/or the California Fish and Game Code (which, together, apply to all native nesting bird species) are present in the impact area or within 200 feet of the impact area, a temporary buffer shall be placed a minimum of 200 feet around the nest site. This temporary buffer may be greater or lesser depending on the bird species and type of disturbance, as determined by the biologist and/or applicable regulatory agency permits.

Clearing and/or construction within the buffer shall be postponed or halted until juveniles have fledged and there is no evidence of a second nesting attempt. The biologist shall serve as a construction monitor during those periods when disturbance activities will occur near active nest areas to ensure that no inadvertent impacts on these nests will occur.

MM BIO-2 Trimming or removal activities of mature or significant trees will be conducted between August 16 and February 28, outside of the breeding season for native bird and bat species. If activities trimming or removal activities must be conducted during the breeding season, a qualified biologist shall survey the tree to be 3 - 805
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.3_Bio_Resources-050923.docx 3.3-15 Biological Resources impacted to assess the presence or absence of any active bird nest or bat maternity roost. If either are determined to be present, trimming or removal activities will be postponed until after the breeding season has concluded, or until otherwise deemed acceptable by the qualified biologist due to a discontinuation of nesting bird activity or bat roost vacancy.

MM BIO-3 Within three months of the adoption of the General plan and Downtown Specific Plan Update, the City shall develop a list of fire resistant plant species that excludes exotic plant species with a high or moderate rating on the California Invasive Plant Council’s invasive plant inventory. This fire-resistant plant list shall be the basis of any requirements of recommendations to residents, businesses, and/or developers of future projects in hillside areas that require fire-resistant construction and landscaping.

MM BIO-4 If the disturbance limits of any future development project are within 500 feet of native vegetation located in the Arroyo Seco drainage corridor, the Applicant/Developer shall have a biological assessment conducted. A biological assessment shall also be conducted for all future development on or immediately adjacent to vacant, naturally vegetated parcels. All assessments shall be conducted by a qualified biologist and shall identify all potential sensitive biological resources and provide recommendations for focused surveys (if warranted) and/or avoidance or minimization conditions for project implementation. The assessment shall be reviewed and approved by the City prior to initiation of any site disturbance activities (including, but not limited to, equipment and materials staging, grubbing, and fence installation). As a condition of project approval, the City shall require the Applicant/Developer to adhere to all recommendations of the biological assessment such that project-level impacts are not expected to reduce regional populations of plant and wildlife species to below self-sustaining levels.

MM BIO-5 If project construction activities of any future development project have the potential to impact (e.g., dredge and fill, demolition, dewatering or other discharge) a channel/drainage that conveys water during rainfall events, at a minimum, or as recommended by the qualified biologist conducting an assessment per MM BIO-4 above (if also applicable), shall conduct a jurisdictional delineation to determine if impacted channel/drainage meets definition of State and federal regulations. If the delineation report, prepared by a qualified biologist, indicates potential regulated drainage(s), subsequent consultation with appropriate regulatory agencies (depending on the agency jurisdiction[s]) and acquisition of permits, if required, prior to initiation of any site disturbance activities (including, but not limited to, equipment and materials staging, grubbing, and fence installation). As a condition of project approval, the City shall require the Applicant/Developer to adhere to all permit conditions.

3.3.9 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION
Less than significant.
3 - 806
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.3_Bio_Resources-050923.docx 3.3-16 Biological Resources

3.3.10 REFERENCES
Blair, R.B. 1996. Land use and avian species diversity along an urban gradient. Ecological Applications, 6: 506–519.

Beissinger, S.R., and D.R. Osborne. 1982. Effects of urbanization on avian community organization. Condor, 84: 75–83.

Bennett, A.F. 1990. Habitat Corridors and the Conservation of Small Mammals in the Fragmented Forest Environment. Landscape Ecology 4(2–3):109–122. New York, NY: International Association for Landscape Ecology.

California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2021a (May 26). California Natural Diversity Database. Records of Occurrence for the Los Angeles, El Monte, Mt. Wilson, and Pasadena 7.5-minute topographic quadrangles. Sacramento, CA: CDFW, Natural Heritage Division.
———. 2021b (April). Special Vascular Plants, Bryophytes, and Lichens List. Sacramento, CA:

CDFW, Natural Heritage Division.
———. 2021c (April). Special Animals. Sacramento, CA: CDFW, Natural Heritage Division.

California Native Plant Society (CNPS). 2021a (May 26). Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants (online edition, v8-03 0.39). Records of Occurrence for the Los Angeles, El Monte, Mt. Wilson, and Pasadena 7.5-minute topographic quadrangles. Sacramento, CA: CNPS. http://www.rareplants.cnps.org/.
———. 2021b. The California Rare Plant Ranking System. Sacramento, CA: CNPS. http://cnps.org/cnps/rareplants/ranking.php.

Chace J.F., and J.J. Walsh. 2004. Urban effects on native avifauna: a review. Landscape and Urban Planning, 74: 46–69.

DeGraaf, R.M. 1991. Winter foraging guild structure and habitat associations in suburban bird communities. Landscape and Urban Planning, 21: 173–180.

Emlen, J.T. 1974. An urban bird community in Tucson, Arizona: derivation, structure, regulation.

Condor, 76: 184–197.

Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (Technical Report Y-87-1). Vicksburg, MS: U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station.

Fahrig, L. and G. Merriam. 1985. Habitat Patch Connectivity and Population Survival. Ecology 66(6): 1762–1768. Tempe, AZ: Ecological Society of America.

Harris, L.D. and P.B. Gallagher. 1989. New Initiatives for Wildlife Conservation: The Need for Movement Corridors (pp. 11–34). Preserving Communities and Corridors (G. Mackintosh, Ed.). Washington, D.C.: Defenders of Wildlife.

Johnson, C. W. 1988. Planning for avian wildlife in urbanizing areas in America desert/mountain valley environments. Landscape and Urban Planning, 16: 245–252. 3 - 807
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.3_Bio_Resources-050923.docx 3.3-17 Biological Resources MacArthur, R.H. and E.O. Wilson. 1967. The Theory of Island Biogeography. Princeton, NJ:

Princeton University Press.

Melles, S., Glenn, S., and K. Martin. 2003. Urban Bird Diversity and Landscape Complexity:

Species–environment Associations along a Multiscale Habitat Gradient. Conservation Ecology 7(1): 5. [online] URL: http://www.consecol.org/vol7/iss1/art5/.

Mills, G.S., Dunning Jr., J.B., and J.M. Bates. 1989. Effects of urbanization on breeding bird community structure in southwestern desert habitats. Condor, 91: 426–428.

Noss, R.F. 1983. A Regional Landscape Approach to Maintain Diversity. BioScience. 33(11):
700–706. Washington, D.C.: American Institute of Biological Sciences.

Rosenberg, K.V., Terrill, S.B., and G.H. Rosenberg. 1987. Value of suburban habitats to desert riparian birds. Wilson Bulletin, 99: 642–654.

Simberloff, D. and J. Cox. 1987. Consequences and Costs of Conservation Corridors.

Conservation Biology 1(1): 63–71. Boston, MA: Blackwell Scientific Publications.

Soule, M.E. 1987. Viable Populations for Conservation. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and Environmental Protection Agency (USACE and USEPA). 2015 (June 29). Clean Water Rule: Definition of “Waters of the United States”. Federal Register 80(124): 37054–37127. Washington, D.C.: USACE and USEPA.

3 - 808
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.3_Bio_Resources-050923.docx 3.3-18 Biological Resources This page intentionally left blank
3 - 809
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Draft Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.4_Cultural_and_Tribal-050823.docx 3.4-1 Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources

3.4 CULTURAL AND TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES

3.4.1 METHODOLOGY
This section analyzes cultural resources (historic, archaeological, and tribal cultural) impacts with implementation of the proposed 2021–2029 Housing Element and the non-residential development capacity envisioned in the General Plan and Downtown Specific Plan (DTSP) Update (Project). Information in this section is derived from historic resources research and analysis conducted by Architectural Resources Group and based in part of the City’s Citywide Historic Resources Survey prepared by Historic Resources Group (HRG) and dated June 20, 2017 (2017 Survey), a historic and archaeological records search conducted by the South Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC) on August 17, 2020 (Appendix A-1), Senate Bill (SB) 18 and Assembly Bill (AB) 52 outreach records regarding tribal cultural resources conducted by the City (Appendix A-2), and review of recent California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) documentation for City of South Pasadena projects.

3.4.2 EXISTING CONDITIONS
Ethnographic and Development History
The original inhabitants of the present-day City of South Pasadena (City) were members of the Hahamog’na tribe, a band of the native Tongva people, who settled along the banks of the Arroyo Seco (Pasadena Savings and Loan Association 1952). The tribe elected to settle in this area because of the plentiful water supplied by both the Arroyo Seco and a small brook located to the east of Raymond Hill. It also occupied a geographically strategic site that allowed them to control trade and access across the San Gabriel Mountains (HRG 2014). Like most of Southern California’s indigenous populations, the Hahamog’na have been described in ethnographic accounts as a peaceful group of hunter-gatherers who subsided on small game as well as berries, seeds, roots, and nuts derived from native plants.

Circa 1770, Spanish explorer Gaspar de Portolá came upon the Hahamog’na’s territory while embarking on an overland excursion between San Diego and Monterey that led to the Spanish colonization of California. Accompanying him was Father Junípero Serra, who was charged with founding a network of missions to spread the Catholic faith and cement Spain’s stronghold in the region. In 1771 Father Serra founded the Mission San Gabriel Arcángel roughly five miles to the east of the City. The Hahamog’na peaceably received Portola and his entourage; and eventually they were assimilated into mission life. As neophytes, they were compelled to perform the unpaid labor that kept the mission running, including making bricks, tanning leather, tending vineyards, herding sheep, and working as lime burners (HRG 2014).

California remained a Spanish colony until 1822, when it was ceded to Mexico. Under Mexican rule the missions were secularized, and almost all of the land within California was divided into expansive land grants — or ranchos — that were given to those who were held in high regard with the Mexican government. An area comprising 14,000 acres and comprising the present-day cities of Pasadena, South Pasadena, and San Marino was given to Spanish lieutenant Juan Mariné and was known as Rancho San Pascual (HRG 2014). Rancho San Pascual passed through a succession of owners over time, and portions of it were eventually carved out and sold off. What is now the City of South Pasadena was primarily used for cattle grazing, dairy farming, and other types of agribusiness, and a handful of small adobe houses were erected in the vicinity.

The roots of the present-day City of South Pasadena are associated with those of the City Pasadena, its northern neighbor. In 1873 an area comprising nearly 4,000 acres was deeded to 3 - 810
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Draft Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.4_Cultural_and_Tribal-050823.docx 3.4-2 Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources the Indiana Colony (reorganized as San Gabriel Orange Grove Association) and was settled by a group of Indiana investors who sought better weather and fertile soil on which to cultivate citrus and other cash crops (HRG 2014, Creason 2016). Much of this area was subsequently named Pasadena. As the City of Pasadena began to grow into a vibrant community in the late nineteenth century, those who had settled in the southern reaches of the colony — the area south of Columbia Street — began to see themselves as a separate community. They chartered their own school district (1878) and post office (1882), and when the City of Pasadena incorporated in 1886 the southern area was not included within the Pasadena city limits (HRG 2014).

The City of South Pasadena witnessed a frenzy of development activity in the 1880s, upon the arrival of railroad lines to the area. In 1885, the Los Angeles and San Gabriel Valley Railroad arrived and connected the City with the cities of Pasadena and Los Angeles. A transcontinental railroad line to Los Angeles was also constructed at around the same time, which put Southern California squarely on the national radar and brought scores of visitors, settlers, and speculators to the region. In 1886, travel agent Walter Raymond opened the 200-room Raymond Hotel, a resplendent edifice that instantly became a tourist attraction (Thomas 2008). Also, that year, Edwin Cawston opened the Cawston Ostrich Farm, an equally popular tourist destination where guests could ride the birds, feed them oranges, and buy products that were made of their skin and feathers (HRG 2014). The City of South Pasadena incorporated in 1888 and became the County of Los Angeles’ sixth city.

By the turn of the 20th century, the City boasted a population of 1,001 and had matured into an early residential suburb. Just ten years later, in 1910, its population had grown more than fourfold, to 4,600 (HRG 2014). Almost all of the development that took place during this early period of the City’s history consisted of single-family houses that exhibited Arts and Crafts influences. A small, yet vibrant commercial node had also emerged along Mission Street, to the east of Meridian Avenue. Anchored by the local railroad depot, it consisted predominantly of one and two-story brick commercial buildings and resembled a typical, small-town business street complete with retail stores on the ground level and apartments and meeting halls up above (NRHP Inventory 1977).

The population of Southern California grew steadily in the early decades of the 20th century, and many newcomers were attracted to the suburban setting and bucolic atmosphere afforded by the City. By the 1920s, the City’s subdivisions and neighborhoods were almost entirely developed with detached, single-family dwellings predominantly designed in the Craftsman and Period Revival idioms that were popular at the time. New businesses and institutions also arose to meet the day-to-day needs of the growing city, with most commercial development concentrated along Mission Street and Fair Oaks Avenue.1 The City also made notable improvements to its infrastructure and increased the scope of its civic resources.

In 1923, amid this period of growth, the City implemented a zoning ordinance that regulated future development and notably permitted the construction of multi-family residences, primarily along major vehicular thoroughfares. By the end of the decade the City had the look and feel of a quintessential suburb. Far enough removed from, yet within a reasonable distance, to the City Los Angeles’ central business district and other urban amenities, it appealed to commuters who relied upon Los Angeles but sought a living environment that, on the whole, was safer, more tranquil, and more bucolic. Though the City had a well-defined business district and a smattering of institutions and light industry, it was known as a residential community and was lauded for its tranquil, tree-lined streets and for the quality of its housing stock. 1 Information relating to development patterns was derived from analysis of Sanborn Fire Insurance maps. 3 - 811
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Draft Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.4_Cultural_and_Tribal-050823.docx 3.4-3 Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources The Great Depression stymied development in the City, as it did throughout virtually all of Southern California. Though some new houses continued to be erected on vacant parcels within existing subdivisions, the pace of development paled when compared to the prosperous times of previous decades. New construction at this time was largely limited to institutional buildings and other public works endeavors that were funded by the array of federal programs associated with the New Deal. The Depression also spelled disaster for some of the City’s most iconic and enduring institutions, chief among them being the Raymond Hotel. The hotel was foreclosed on in 1931; three years later, in 1934, it was demolished (HRG 2014).

Historically accessed and traversed primarily by rail, the City increasingly became the domain of the automobile as the 20th century progressed. Buses replaced trolleys on Mission Street in 1935 (HRG 2014). In 1938, ground was broken on the Arroyo Seco Parkway, the first high speed, limited access, divided lane highway in the western United States. Construction of the parkway — which provided a direct vehicular route between the cities of Pasadena and Los Angeles, and charted a course that passed through the City of South Pasadena — marked the first stretch of road in what would eventually develop into an expansive regional freeway network (i.e., State Route [SR] 110) (HRG 2014, NPS 2018). It also rendered it easier for the motoring public to access the suburban environment of the City by car.

Most of the developable land within the City was built out by World War II, aside from two areas that were seen as prime development sites: the location of the demolished Raymond Hotel, and the Monterey Hills area near the southwest corner of the City (HRG 2014). Both were targeted for development after World War II, at which time Southern California experienced a sudden and substantial population increase and a corresponding shortage of housing. The Raymond Hotel site was rezoned to accommodate mid-rise multi-family residential development, and the Monterey Hills were subdivided and developed predominantly with single-family houses. Other development that took place at this time was limited to infill within existing neighborhoods. New commercial development was also pursued on an infill basis within existing commercial nodes. In 1983, voters approved a ballet measure to adopt a Citywide 45-foot building height limit.

In 1959, the State of California adopted its Master Plan of Freeways and Expressways, which included a northward extension of the Long Beach Freeway (then signed SR-7, and now as Interstate [I] 710) between the cities of Alhambra and Pasadena. In 1964, State transit officials formally adopted the “Meridian Route” as the alignment of this extension, which was to pass directly through the City and effectively divide the community in half (South Pasadena 2018). Due to its potential to alter the City’s built landscape, these plans engendered a considerable amount of community opposition among City residents and emerged as one of the most divisive, controversial, and enduring planning issues affecting the City. For several successive years, the entire City was identified as one of the Eleven Most Endangered Places in the United States by the National Trust for Historic Preservation, as a result of the irreparable impact the proposed freeway would likely yield on historical resources within the City (South Pasadena 2018). In 2017, essential funding was pulled from the freeway project, which would have connected the I-710 to the I-210, which effectively terminated it (NTHP 2017). In October 2019, Senate Bill (SB) 7, Surplus Nonresidential Property and State Highway Route 710, was signed into law. Among other items, the bill removed, effective January 1, 2024, from the California freeway and expressway system the portion of I-710 between Alhambra Avenue in the City of Los Angeles and California Boulevard in the City of Pasadena.

Historical Resources
The City has an active historic preservation program that promotes and protects significant elements of its architectural and cultural heritage. The local historic preservation movement was 3 - 812
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Draft Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.4_Cultural_and_Tribal-050823.docx 3.4-4 Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources conceived in 1970, when South Pasadena Beautiful2 created a subcommittee to study ways and means to promote historic preservation in the community. Eventually, the subcommittee became the Jean Driskel Foundation, later renamed the South Pasadena Preservation Foundation, a private non-profit organization. The City’s first Historic Preservation Ordinance followed soon after in 1971, putting the City on the forefront of preservation planning.

In 1991, the City Council commissioned the first comprehensive, citywide historic resource survey. This survey generated an inventory of historic resources and also provided a foundation for their recognition and protection in future planning endeavors. The City updated its Cultural Heritage Ordinance in 1992, which included the then present-day criteria and mechanisms for designating individual resources and historic districts at the local level. On July 19, 2017, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 2315 that repealed the current ordinance and replaced it with a new ordinance that was effective August 18, 2017 and addresses current preservation issues and strengthens the City’s legal framework needed to assure continued protection of its historic character and scale.

In 1994, findings from the comprehensive historic resource survey were adopted by the City Council; the inventory that was generated from this exercise was known as the Historic Resources Survey: Inventory of Addresses; it included designated properties, as well as properties that appear eligible for federal, State, or local listing. The Inventory of Addresses was updated in 2002; and again in 2017 in the Citywide Historic Resources Survey (2017 Survey). The following analysis is based on information in the 2017 Survey.

The pool of known historical resources in the City can be classified in the following two categories:
(1) designated historical resources and (2) potential historical resources. The former includes individual resources and concentrations of resources (historic districts) that have been formally designated at the federal (i.e., National Register of Historic Places [NRHP]), State (i.e., California Register of Historic Resources [CRHR]), and/or local level (i.e., City of South Pasadena). The latter consists of individual resources and historic districts that have been identified as potentially eligible for federal, State, and/or local listing through survey evaluation. The 2017 survey produced a comprehensive list of historical resources (designated and potential) within the City that were built through the year 1972. The 2017 Survey derived from the survey is considered to constitute a complete and authoritative list of known historical resources within the City (HRG 2017). The 2017 Survey comprises 2,718 entries and consists of designated individual properties, historic districts, and district contributors; eligible individual properties, historic districts, and district contributors; and properties that merit special consideration in the local planning process or require additional study. In accordance with Section 2.65(e)(3)(D)(ii) of the SPMC and the City’s Cultural Heritage Ordinance, all properties in the 2017 Survey are considered historical resources for purposes of CEQA, and, therefore, the analysis in this Environmental Assessment (EA).

Designated Historical Resources
Per the 2017 Survey, 288 individual properties, districts (some of which include individual properties), and district contributors are designated as historic at the federal, State, and/or local level. Table 3.4-1, Designated Individual Resources, summarizes the 61 individual properties within the City that are designated as historic. This table only includes properties that have been individually designated, including individual resources that also fall within the boundaries of a designated historic district.
2 A volunteer non-profit organization that partners with governmental, volunteer, philanthropic, and educational organizations to pursue sustainability and beautification projects in the City. 3 - 813
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Draft Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.4_Cultural_and_Tribal-050823.docx 3.4-5 Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources TABLE 3.4-1

DESIGNATED INDIVIDUAL RESOURCES
Address/Location Year Built Resource Name
Landmark
Number Status
1414 Alhambra Road 1923 Lloyd E Morrison Residence 24 City 425 Arroyo Drive N/A Garfias Spring 38 City
430 Arroyo Drive N/A Manuel Garfias Adobe Site 20 City
431 Arroyo Drive 1953 Cathedral Oak Monument 19 City
Ashbourne Drive N/A Ashbourne Drive and Chelton Way 12 City 2007 Ashbourne Drive 1917 Ashbourne/Chelton Hybrid Oak Tree 14 City 209 Beacon Avenue 1907; 1946;
1962 Whitney R Smith House and Studio 52 City
2031 Berkshire Avenue 1914 Mabel Packard House 39 City
816 Bonita Drive 1928 Grokowski House 28 CRHR; City
929 Buena Vista Street 1901 Torrance Childs House 11 City 1001 Buena Vista Street 1905 Garfield Residence 4 City
1005 Buena Vista Street 1897 Howard Longley Residence 17 City 1107 Buena Vista Street 1910 David M Rabb Family Homestead 53 City 1120 Buena Vista Street 1870 Knox-Merwin-Porter House 42 City 1243 Brunswick Avenue 1906 Single-Family Residence N/A CRHR 1301 Chelten Way 1911 Miltimore House 11 NRHP; City
919 Columbia Street 1885 Riggins House 48 CRHR; City
1109 Columbia Street N/A Single-Family Residence N/A CRHR 1127 Columbia Street 1908 Single-Family Residence N/A CRHR 1131 Columbia Street N/A Single-Family Residence N/A CRHR 1327 Diamond Avenue N/A School Administration Building 30 City 2017 Edgewood Drive N/A Eddie House and Memorial Park 32 City 1019 El Centro Street N/A South Pasadena Bank Building 8 CRHR; City 1115 El Centro Street N/A South Pasadena Library 10 NRHP; City 200 Fair Oaks Avenue N/A Raymond Hill Waiting Station 16 City 435 Fair Oaks Avenue N/A South Pasadena War Memorial
Building 2 CRHR; City
435 Fair Oaks Avenue N/A Oaklawn Bridge and Waiting Station 3 CRHR; City 800 Fair Oaks Avenue 1911 Fair Hope Building 49 City
1019 Fair Oaks Avenue 1925 Rialto Theater 25 City
1414 Fair Oaks Avenue 1958 Smith and Williams Building 46 City 1804 Foothill Street 1919 Adobe Flores and Cactus Garden 1 NRHP; City 221 Fremont Avenue 1908 Single-Family Residence N/A CRHR 920 Fremont Avenue 1920 Grace Brethren Church 22 City
517 Garfield Avenue 1924 Adobe Eulalia Perez 35 City
1114 Garfield Avenue 1907 Chouinard House 44 City
225 Grand Avenue 1917 Dr John S Tanner Residence 23 City 1635 Laurel Street 1923 Clokey Oak Tree 13 City
851 Lyndon Street 1887 Wynyate 6 NRHP; City
909 Lyndon Street 1896 East Wynyate 43 CRHR; City
913 Meridian Avenue N/A Meridian Iron Works 5 City
636 Mission Street 1928 Markey Building 31 City
3 - 814
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Draft Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.4_Cultural_and_Tribal-050823.docx 3.4-6 Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources TABLE 3.4-1

DESIGNATED INDIVIDUAL RESOURCES
Address/Location Year Built Resource Name
Landmark
Number Status
729 Mission Street 1925; 1943;
1985 Baranger Studios 27 City
815 Mission Street 1939 Municipal Plunge Building 45 City 950 Mission Street 1923 Mission Arroyo Hotel 26 City
1000 Mission Street 1903 Century House 34 City
1501 Mission Street 1923 Pettee Building 37 City
237 Monterey Road 1887 Single-Family Residence N/A CRHR 309 Monterey Road 1889 Vivekananda House 29 City
323 Monterey Road 1947 Fleet House 51 City
355 Monterey Road 1986 Burwood House 47 City
844 Monterey Road 1908 Washburn House 40 City
911 Monterey Road N/A Single-Family Residence N/A CRHR
921 Monterey Road 1912 Single-Family Residence N/A CRHR 1103 Monterey Road 1885 Leo Longley Residence 21 City
1325 Monterey Road 1907 St James Episcopal Church 33 City Oaklawn Avenue N/A Oaklawn Portals 9 City
201 Orange Grove Avenue 1887 Bissell House 36 City
215 Orange Grove Avenue 1875 Andrew O Porter Residence 15 City 220 Orange Grove Avenue 1913 Single-Family Residence N/A CRHR 1040 Stratford Avenue 1910 Huntzinger House 50 City
1010 Sycamore Avenue 1896 Cawston Ostrich Farm Site 18 City N/A: not available; NRHP: National Register of Historic Places; CRHR: California Register of Historic Resources; City:
designated by the City of South Pasadena
Source: Historic Resources Group (HRG). 2017 (Revised June). City of South Pasadena Citywide Historic Resources Survey.

Pasadena, CA: HRG. 636721709083330000 (southpasadenaca.gov).

The 2017 Survey also identifies ten designated historic districts in the City, as follows:
 Arroyo Seco Parkway Historic District (NRHP);
 Buena Vista Historic District (City);
 El Centro/Indiana/Palm Historic District (City);
 Mission West/Historic Business District (NRHP);
 North of Mission Historic District (CRHR);
 Oak/Laurel Historic District (City);
 Oaklawn District/Oaklawn District Addition (NRHP);
 Prospect Circle Historic District (City);
 Ramona Craftsman District (City); and
 South of Mission Historic District (CRHR).

Collectively, there are 236 contributing properties within South Pasadena’s ten historic districts. 3 - 815
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Draft Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.4_Cultural_and_Tribal-050823.docx 3.4-7 Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources Archaeological Resources
Based on review of recent CEQA documentation for projects within the City and consultation with the City, there are no known archaeological resource sites within the City of South Pasadena (South Pasadena 2012, 2016).

An updated cultural resources records search was conducted for the Project site at the SCCIC at California State University, Fullerton on August 19, 2020. The SCCIC is the designated branch of the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS) for the Project site and houses records concerning archaeological and historic resources in Los Angeles, Ventura, San Bernardino, and Orange Counties. The review consisted of an examination of the U.S. Geological Survey’s Los Angeles and Pasadena, California 7.5-minute quadrangles to determine if any cultural resources studies have been conducted within the Project site. The records search provided data on recorded archaeological and built environment resources within the Project site.

Sources consulted at the SCCIC included archaeological records, Archaeological Determinations of Eligibility, historic maps, and the Historic Property Data File (HPDF) maintained by the California Office of Historic Preservation. The HPDF contains listings for the CRHR and/or the NRHP, California Historical Landmarks, and California Points of Historical Interest.

A total of 45 archaeological and/or historic studies have been conducted within the Project site, as shown in Table 3.4-2, Cultural Resources Studies Within the Project Site.

TABLE 3.4-2

CULTURAL RESOURCES STUDIES WITHIN THE PROJECT SITE
Report No. Year Title Author/Affiliation
LA-00112 1974 Impact on Archaeological Resources of Proposed Upgrading Ramps on the Pasadena Freeway
University of California,
Los Angeles
Archaeological
Survey
LA-00115 1974
Evaluation of the Archaeological Resources and Potential Impact of Proposed Extension of the Long Beach Freeway
(rt.7) North From Valley Blvd. to Rt. 210 (Colorado
Freeway)
University of California,
Los Angeles
Archaeological
Survey
LA-01319 1983 Archaeological Survey Report for Two Proposed Disposal Sites 07-la 7 Routes 10 to 210 07-204-020090 Caltrans
LA-03440 1994
Third Supplemental Historic Architectural Survey Report 710 Freeway Gap Closure Report (07-la 710, 26.5/r32.7 Ea 07-020090) Volume II: Pasadena Avenue District
Reevaluation
Caltrans District 7:

Environmental Planning
Branch
LA-03497 1994 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Report Pasadena-Los Angeles Light Rail Transit Project Tetra Tech, Inc.

LA-03498 1994 Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report Pasadena-Los Angeles Light Rail Transit Project Tetra Tech, Inc.

LA-03498A — Evaluation of Change in Noise Impacts, Proposed Blue Line Wayside Horn System
Harris Miller, Miller &
Hanson Inc.

LA-04216 1900
Report of the US National Museum Under the Direction of the Smithsonian Institute for the
Year Ending June 30, 1900
The Smithsonian
Institute
LA-04386 1993
Cultural Resources Overview Los Angeles County
Metropolitan Transportation Authority's Interstate
Commerce Commission Abandonment Exemption
Pasadena-Los Angeles Light Rail Transit Project
Caltrans
LA-04451 1993 Route 7 Environmental Impact Statement Supplement Caltrans 3 - 816
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Draft Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.4_Cultural_and_Tribal-050823.docx 3.4-8 Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources TABLE 3.4-2

CULTURAL RESOURCES STUDIES WITHIN THE PROJECT SITE
Report No. Year Title Author/Affiliation
LA-04638 1999
Cultural Resource Assessment for Pacific Bell Mobile
Services Facility La 948-01, in the County of Los Angeles, California
LSA Associates, Inc.

LA-04890 2000 Negative Archaeological Survey Report, Highway Project Description Caltrans District 7
LA-04909 2000 Cultural Resources Investigation for the Nextlink Fiber Optic Project, Los Angeles and Orange Counties, California Jones & Stokes LA-05132 1999
A Phase I Cultural Resources Investigation and
Architectural Evaluation of Properties Located at 1319 and 1921 Fremont Avenue, South Pasadena, Los Angeles
County, California
McKenna et al.

LA-05421 2000 Negative Archaeological Survey Report: 07-la-110-07-174- 965120 Caltrans District 7
LA-05434 2001
A Phase I Cultural Resources Investigation and
Architectural Evaluation of Properties Located at 809 and 813 Meridian Avenue, South Pasadena, Los Angeles
County, California
Mc Kenna et al.

LA-06334 2002 Below the Basketball Court: Burial Recovery at Arroyo Seco Park
Greenwood and
Associates
LA-06362 1994 Finding of Effect on Historic Properties Arroyo Seco Parkway and Four Level Interchange Caltrans District 7
LA-06385 2001 Section 106 Review for 5568 Via Marison Avenue Arroyo Seco Park Historic District Los Angeles, Ca
Historic Resources
Group
LA-06835 2003
Cultural Resource Assessment Cingular Wireless Facility No. Vy311-01 South Pasadena, Los Angeles County,
California
LSA Associates, Inc.

LA-06839 2003 Burial Data Summary Arroyo Seco/San Pascual Park Los Angeles, California
Greenwood and
Associates
LA-07426 2004 Caltrans Historic Bridges Inventory Update: Concrete Arch Bridges
JRP Historical
Consulting
LA-07553 2004
Cultural Resource Assessment Cingular Wireless Facility No. Vy 311-01 South Pasadena, Los Angeles County,
California
LSA Associates, Inc.

LA-08526 2004 Historic Resources Report, 258-266 Monterey Road, South Pasadena, California
San Buenaventura
Research Associates
LA-08542 2004
Cultural Resource Records Search Results and Site Visit for Cingular Wireless Facility Candidate Sb-390-01 (Bilicke Water Tank) 700 La Portada, South Pasadena, Los
Angeles County, California
Michael Brandman
Associates
LA-08634 2007
Cultural Resources Study of the Arroyo Seco Park Project, Royal Street Communications Site No. La0108b, Stoney
Drive, South
Pasadena, Los Angeles County, California 91030
Historic Resource
Associates
LA-08928 2007
A Phase I (CEQA) and Class II (NEPA) Cultural Resources Investigation for the Lower Arroyo Seco Trail and Trailhead Improvements Project Area in the City of Pasadena, Los
Angeles County, California
McKenna et al.

LA-08948 2007 Public Review Draft Environmental Impact Report, Downtown Revitalization Project, Sch No. 2007031024 RBF Consulting 3 - 817
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Draft Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.4_Cultural_and_Tribal-050823.docx 3.4-9 Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources TABLE 3.4-2

CULTURAL RESOURCES STUDIES WITHIN THE PROJECT SITE
Report No. Year Title Author/Affiliation
LA-09098 2006
Extended Phase I Testing for Cingular Wireless Facility Candidate 950-014 198e/lsanca0336 (Arroyo Park) Arroyo
Seco Park, South Pasadena, Los Angeles County,
California
Michael Brandman
Associates
LA-09099 2005
Cultural Resources Records Search Results and Site Visit for Cingular Wireless Site 950-014-198e (City Park) Arroyo Park, Near Intersection of Comet Street and Pasqual
Avenue, South Pasadena, Los Angeles County, California
Michael Brandman
Associates
LA-09489 2003 Arroyo Seco Parkway Historic District California Archives LA-09601 2008
Cultural Resources Records Search and Site Visit Results for AT&T Candidate SV0061-01
(OG Park), 820 El Centro Street, South Pasadena, Los
Angeles County, California.

Michael Brandman
Associates
LA-10209 2004 Finding of Effect Report for the Raymond Ave. To SR110 Connector Project, Los Angeles County, CA
Myra L. Frank &
Associates,
Inc
LA-10388 2009
Direct APE Historic Architectural Assessment for Clearwire Candidate CALOS0099A/ LA03XC129A (S. Pasadena
Water Tank), 700 S. La Portada, South Pasadena, Los
Angeles County, California
MBA
LA-10541 2005 Finding of Effect for the Proposed Arroyo Seco Bike Path, Los Angeles County, California EDAW, Inc.

LA-10541A 2003 Historic Property Survey Report Proposed Arroyo Seco Bike Path County Of Los Angeles, California EDAW
LA-10541B 2003 Arroyo Seco Bike Path Historic Resources Evaluation Report HRER - Appendix 1 EDAW
LA-10541C 2004 HPSR / Determinations of Eligibility for Arroyo Seco Bike Path Project Caltrans
LA-10576 2004
Historic Property Survey Report for the Raymond Avenue to SR 110 Connector Project for the Raymond Avenue to SR
110 Connector Project
Myra L. Frank &
Associates,
Inc.

LA-10866 2007
Cultural Resources Study of the Arroyo Seco Park Project Royal Street Communications Site No. LA0108B, Stoney
Drive, South
Pasadena, Los Angeles County, California 91030
Historic Resource
Associates
LA-11231 2009
Historic American Engineering Record Arroyo Seco Flood
Control Channel, Los Angeles
County, California
EDAW, Inc.

LA-11529 2008 Arroyo Seco Channel Project in the cities of Los Angeles and Pasadena, Los Angeles County, California Department of the Army LA-11554 2000
Historic Resources Evaluation Report and Finding of No
Adverse Effect for Oaklawn Bridge, City of South Pasadena Seismic Retrofit and Historic Restoration Project
California Archives
LA-11650 2011
Cultural Resources Records Search and Site Visit Results for T-Mobile USA Candidate IE24844-G (Stein Rooftop),
1959 Huntington Drive, Alhambra, Los Angeles County,
California
Michael Brandman
Associates
LA-12060 2012
Cultural Resources Study of the South Pasadena Water
Tank Project, MetroPCS California, LLC Site No.

MLAX04166, 700 La
Portdada Street, South Pasadena, Los Angeles County,
California 91030
Historic Resource
Associates
3 - 818
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Draft Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.4_Cultural_and_Tribal-050823.docx 3.4-10 Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources TABLE 3.4-2

CULTURAL RESOURCES STUDIES WITHIN THE PROJECT SITE
Report No. Year Title Author/Affiliation
LA-12221 2012
Cultural Resources Records Search and Site Visit Results for T-Mobile West, LLC Candidate IE04862A (SB390
Billcke Water
Tank) 700 La Portada, South Pasadena, Los Angeles
County, California
MBA
LA-12422 2013
Cultural Resources Assessment Arroyo Seco Pedestrian
and Bicycle Path Project Cities of
South Pasadena and Los Angeles Los Angeles County,
California
LSA
LA-12423 2013
Cultural Resources Records Search and Site Visit Results for T-Mobile West, LLC Candidate IE04948A (LA948
Sinclair) 1499
Huntington Drive, South Pasadena, Los Angeles County,
California
MBA
LA-13148 2013 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Sewer Rehabilitation and Replacement Project DUDEK
SCCIC 2020
Additionally, 108 cultural resources were identified within the Project site, as shown in Table 3.4-3, Archeological and Historical Resources Near the Project Site.

TABLE 3.4-3

ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL RESOURCES

WITHIN THE PROJECT SITE
Primary No. Age Type Resource Name Recorded Date (Author) P-19-003057 Prehistoric Site Resource Name – Arroyo
Seco/San Pascual Site
2002 (John M. Foster, Greenwood
& Associates)
P-19-150039 Historic Building
OHP Property Number – 116020;
Resource Name – Whitney &
Virginia Smith House
1993 (Anne Schield, Caltrans)
P-19-150040 Historic Building
OHP Property Number – 102633;
Resource Name – Warren D
House
1994 (D. Kane, Caltrans)
P-19-150041 Historic Building OHP Property Number – 116021; Resource Name – East Wynyate 1993 (Anne Schield, Caltrans) P-19-150042 Historic Building
OHP Property Number – 116022;
Resource Name – Otake/Nambu
House
1994 (Anne Schield, Caltrans)
P-19-150075 Historic District
OHP Property Number – 116029;
Resource Name – Stimson
Historic District; Voided – 19-
185128
1994 (D. Kane, Caltrans)
P-19-150078 Historic
Building,
Element of
District
OHP Property Number – 030300;
Resource Name – Stone/Brooks
House; Voided – 19-179611
1993 (A. Scheid, Caltrans)
P-19-150079 Historic
Building,
Element of
District
OHP Property Number – 030301;
Resource Name – Henry
Stephen Boice House; Voided –
19-179612
1993 (A. Scheid, Caltrans)
3 - 819
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Draft Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.4_Cultural_and_Tribal-050823.docx 3.4-11 Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources TABLE 3.4-3

ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL RESOURCES

WITHIN THE PROJECT SITE
Primary No. Age Type Resource Name Recorded Date (Author) P-19-150080 Historic Building
OHP Property Number – 030302;
Resource Name – Frank P
O'Connor House; Voided – 19-
179613
1994 (A. Scheid, Caltrans)
P-19-179471 Historic Building
OHP Property Number – 030160;
Resource Name – Leo Longley
House
1977 (Tom Sitton, Natural History
Museum)
P-19-179472 Historic Building
OHP Property Number – 030161;
Resource Name – William
Cooper House
1977 (Tom Sitton, Natural History
Museum)
P-19-179473 Historic Building
OHP Property Number – 030162;
Resource Name – Anna B
McKay House; Other – Marins S
Daniels House
1977 (Tom Sitton, Natural History
Museum)
P-19-179474 Historic Building OHP Property Number – 030163; Resource Name – Porter House
1977 (Tom Sitton, Natural History
Museum)
P-19-179475 Historic Building
OHP Property Number – 030164;
Resource Name – South
Pasadena School
1977 (Tom Sitton, Natural History
Museum)
P-19-179476 Historic Building
OHP Property Number – 030165;
Resource Name – Raymond Hill
Waiting Station; Other – SW Fair
Oaks Ave & Raymond Hill Rd
1977 (Tom Sitton, Natural History
Museum)
P-19-179477 Historic Building
OHP Property Number - 030166;
Resource Name - Kate Plumb
House
1977 (Tom Sitton, Natural History
Museum)
P-19-179478 Historic Building
OHP Property Number – 030167;
Resource Name – Kate A White
House
1977 (Tom Sitton, Natural History
Museum)
P-19-179479 Historic
Building,
Element of
District
OHP Property Number – 030168;
Resource Name – A S Hoyt
House
1977 (Tom Sitton, Natural History
Museum)
P-19-179481 Historic
Building,
Element of
District
OHP Property Number – 030170;
Resource Name – WilliamsPerrin House; Other – Charles P Williams House
1977 (Tom Sitton, Natural History
Museum)
P-19-179482 Historic
Building,
Element of
District
Resource Name – Garfield
House; Other – Mrs. Lucretia R
Garfield House; Other – Mrs.

James A Garfield House
1973 (M L Fey, South Pasadena
Cultural Heritage Commission)
P-19-179483 Historic
Building,
Element of
District
OHP Property Number – 030172;
Resource Name – Howard
Longley House
1973 (M L Fey, South Pasadena
Cultural Heritage Commission)
P-19-179484 Historic District
OHP Property Number – 030173;
Resource Name – Buena Vista
District
1976 (Lois M. Webb, Caltrans)
3 - 820
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Draft Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.4_Cultural_and_Tribal-050823.docx 3.4-12 Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources TABLE 3.4-3

ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL RESOURCES

WITHIN THE PROJECT SITE
Primary No. Age Type Resource Name Recorded Date (Author) P-19-179486 Historic
Building,
Structure,
Element of
District
OHP Property Number – 030175;
Resource Name – Oaklawn
Bridge & Waiting Station
1972 (M L Fey, South Pasadena
Cultural Heritage Commission);
2000 (Daniel Abeyta, OHP);
2001 (Dan Peterson, Avila Tom
Architects);
2001 (Glen Duncan, S. Pasadena
Cultural Heritage Commission
P-19-179499 Historic District
OHP Property Number – 030188;
Resource Name – Oaklawn
District; Other – Oak Lawn Place
1976 (L Webb, CA Department of
Transportation);
2008 (Robert J. Magiligan)
P-19-179500 Historic Building
OHP Property Number – 030189;
Resource Name – Seymour
House
1977 (T Sitton, Natural History
Museum)
P-19-179501 Historic Building
OHP Property Number – 030190;
Resource Name – J R Riggins
House, Gertmenian House
1977 (T Sitton, Natural History
Museum; John W. Snyder,
Caltrans)
P-19-179502 Historic
Building,
Element of
District
OHP Property Number – 030191;
Resource Name – Alexander
Block
1977 (T Sitton, Natural History
Museum)
P-19-179503 Historic
Building,
Element of
District
OHP Property Number – 030192;
Resource Name – Graham Block
1977 (T Sitton, Natural History
Museum)
P-19-179505 Historic
Building,
Element of
District
OHP Property Number – 030194;
Resource Name – Shapiro Block
1977 (T Sitton, Natural History
Museum)
P-19-179506 Historic
Building,
Element of
District
OHP Property Number – 030195;
Resource Name – Edwards &
Faw Block
1977 (T Sitton, Natural History
Museum)
P-19-179509 Historic
Building,
Element of
District
OHP Property Number – 030198;
Resource Name – Herlihy Block;
Other – South Pasadena Review
Bldg
1977 (T Sitton, Natural History
Museum)
P-19-179510 Historic
Building,
Element of
District
OHP Property Number – 030199;
Resource Name – Taylor Block
1977 (T Sitton, Natural History
Museum)
P-19-179516 Historic
Building,
Element of
District
OHP Property Number – 030205;
Resource Name – Mission Hotel
1977 (T Sitton, Natural History
Museum)
P-19-179518 Historic District
OHP Property Number – 030207;
Resource Name – South
Pasadena Historic District;
Resource Name – Mission West
District
1976 (L Webb, CA Department of
Transportation);
1977T (Sitton, Natural History
Museum)
P-19-179519 Historic Building OHP Property Number – 030208; Resource Name – Jacobs Block
1977 (T Sitton, Natural History
Museum)
P-19-179520 Historic Building
OHP Property Number – 030209;
Resource Name – Fremont Ave
Brethren Church
1977 (T Sitton, Natural History
Museum)
P-19-179521 Historic
Building,
Element of
District
OHP Property Number – 030210;
Resource Name – Rialto Theater
1977 (T Sitton, Natural History
Museum)
3 - 821
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Draft Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.4_Cultural_and_Tribal-050823.docx 3.4-13 Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources TABLE 3.4-3

ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL RESOURCES

WITHIN THE PROJECT SITE
Primary No. Age Type Resource Name Recorded Date (Author) P-19-179522 Historic Building
OHP Property Number – 030211;
Resource Name – War Memorial
Bldg
1977 (T Sitton, Natural History
Museum)
P-19-179523 Historic Building
OHP Property Number – 030212;
Resource Name – South
Pasadena High School
Administration Bldg;
Other – South Pasadena School
District Office
1977 (T Sitton, Natural History
Museum)
P–19–179524 Historic Building
OHP Property Number – 030213;
Resource Name – A Mitchell
House, Dieterle House, Wilson
House; Other – Albert A Mitchell
House; Other – Wililam Dieterle
House; Other – Wilson House
1977 (T Sitton, Natural History
Museum)
P-19-179525 Historic Building
OHP Property Number – 030214;
Resource Name – A C Bilicke
House; Other – South Pasadena
Methodist Church
1977 (T Sitton, Natural History
Museum)
P-19-179526 Historic Building
OHP Property Number – 030215;
Resource Name – St James
Episcopal
1977 (T Sitton, Natural History
Museum)
P-19-179527 Historic Building OHP Property Number – 030216; Resource Name – Tanner House
1977 (T Sitton, Natural History
Museum)
P-19-179528 Historic Building
OHP Property Number – 030217;
Resource Name – Grokowsky
House
1976 (L M Webb & A Cole, CA
Department of Transportation)
P-19-179529 Historic Building OHP Property Number – 030218; Resource Name – Sherry House 1982 (J Snyder, DOTP Caltrans) P-19-179530 Historic Building
OHP Property Number – 030219;
Resource Name – Kenneth W
Joy House
1982 (J Snyder, DOTP Caltrans)
P-19-179531 Historic Building
OHP Property Number – 030220;
Resource Name – The Captain's
House
1982 (J Snyder, DOTP Caltrans)
P-19-179561 Historic District
OHP Property Number – 030250;
Resource Name – North of
Mission District; Voided – 19-
179647
1982 (J Snyder, DOTP Caltrans)
P-19-179610 Historic District
OHP Property Number – 030299;
Resource Name – South of
Mission District; Voided – 19-
179648
1982 (J Snyder, DOTP Caltrans)
P-19-179614 Historic Building
OHP Property Number – 030303;
Resource Name – J G Pierce
House
1982 (J Snyder, DOTP Caltrans)
P-19-179615 Historic Building
OHP Property Number – 030304;
Resource Name – Miltimore
House
1970 (E McCoy, UCSB/UCLA)
P-19-179616 Historic Building
OHP Property Number – 030305;
Resource Name – Adobe Flores;
Other – La Casa de Jose Perez
1972 (M Fay, South Pasadena
Cultural Heritage Commission)
3 - 822
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Draft Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.4_Cultural_and_Tribal-050823.docx 3.4-14 Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources TABLE 3.4-3

ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL RESOURCES

WITHIN THE PROJECT SITE
Primary No. Age Type Resource Name Recorded Date (Author) P-19-179617 Historic Building
OHP Property Number – 030306;
Resource Name – Wynyate;
Other – Welsh for Vineyard
1973 (Margaret Leslie Fay, S. LA12060, LA-12221
Pasadena Cultural Heritage
Commission)
P-19-179618 Historic Building OHP Property Number – 030307; Resource Name – Tanner House 1982 (J Snyder, DOTP Caltrans) P-19-179645 Historic Structure,
District
OHP Property Number – 030334;
Resource Name – Arroyo Seco
Parkway Historic District; Other –
SR-110 Pasadena Freeway,
Arroyo Seco Freeway; OHP
Property Number – 177126;
National Register – NPS10001198-9999
1982 (Snyder, John W., Cal
Trans);
2003 (David Greenwood, Myra L.

Frank & Assoc.);
2008 (Janice Calpo, Cal Trans)
P-19-179649 Historic Building
OHP Property Number – 030339;
Resource Name – 1100 Loma
Vista Ct; OHP Property Number
– 064983
1986 (J. Triem, McClelland
Engineers)
P-19-179650 Historic Building
OHP Property Number – 030340;
Resource Name – Swimming
Pool Bldg; Other – Plunge
1986 (J Snyder, Caltrans)
P-19-179651 Historic Building
OHP Property Number – 030342;
Resource Name – Edward Hall
House
1986 (J Snyder, Caltrans)
P-19-179652 Historic Building
OHP Property Number – 030343;
Resource Name – E C Emmons
House
1986 (J Snyder, Caltrans)
P-19-179653 Historic Building
OHP Property Number – 030344;
Resource Name – 1002 Highland
St
1986 (J Snyder, Caltrans)
P-19-179654 Historic Building
OHP Property Number – 030345;
Resource Name – 1004 Highland
St
1986 (J Snyder, Caltrans)
P-19-179655 Historic Building
OHP Property Number – 030346;
Resource Name – Anna S Breed
House
1986 (J Snyder, Caltrans)
P-19-179656 Historic Building
OHP Property Number – 030347;
Resource Name – Drachmann
House
1986 (J Snyder, Caltrans)
P-19-179657 Historic Building
OHP Property Number – 030348;
Resource Name – Groetzinger
House; Other – Ruddock House
1986 (J Snyder, Caltrans)
P-19-179658 Historic Building
OHP Property Number – 030349;
Resource Name – 629 Grand
Ave
1986 (J Snyder, Caltrans)
P-19-179659 Historic Building
OHP Property Number – 030350;
Resource Name – Thomson
House; Other – Garrison House;
OHP Property Number – 064905
1986 (J Snyder, Caltrans)
3 - 823
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Draft Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.4_Cultural_and_Tribal-050823.docx 3.4-15 Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources TABLE 3.4-3

ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL RESOURCES

WITHIN THE PROJECT SITE
Primary No. Age Type Resource Name Recorded Date (Author) P-19-179660 Historic Building
OHP Property Number – 030351;
Resource Name – 400 Prospect
Circle; OHP Property Number –
149742
1986 (J Snyder, Caltrans)
P-19-179661 Historic Building
OHP Property Number – 030352;
Resource Name – Mrs. E
Ambrose House; OHP Property
Number – 149744
1986 (J Snyder, Caltrans)
P-19-179662 Historic Building
OHP Property Number – 030353;
Resource Name – 420 Prospect
Circle; OHP Property Number –
149747
1985 (J Snyder, Caltrans)
P-19-179663 Historic Building
OHP Property Number – 030354;
Resource Name – R L Gabriel
House; Other – Percy &
Emogene Griffin
House; OHP Property Number –
149749
1985 (J Snyder, Caltrans)
P-19-179664 Historic Building
OHP Property Number – 030355;
Resource Name – 902 Buena
Vista
1985 (J Snyder, Caltrans)
P-19-179665 Historic Building
OHP Property Number – 030356;
Resource Name – R L Spayde
House
1985 (J Snyder, Caltrans)
P-19-179666 Historic Building
OHP Property Number – 030357;
Resource Name – Jessie
Waterman House
1985 (J Snyder, Caltrans)
P-19-179667 Historic Building
OHP Property Number – 030358;
Resource Name – P A Reid
House
1985 (J Snyder, Caltrans)
P-19-179668 Historic Building
OHP Property Number – 030359;
Resource Name – Donald E
Marquis House
1985 (J Snyder, Caltrans)
P-19-179669 Historic Building
OHP Property Number – 030360;
Resource Name – Kenneth A
Gabriel House
1985 (J Snyder, Caltrans)
P-19-179670 Historic Building OHP Property Number – 030361; Resource Name – P Tully House 1985 (J Snyder, Caltrans) P-19-179671 Historic Building
OHP Property Number – 030362;
Resource Name – Stillman B
Jameson House
1985 (J Snyder, Caltrans)
P-19-179672 Historic Building
OHP Property Number – 030363;
Resource Name – 310 Orange
Grove Ave
1985 (J Snyder, Caltrans)
P-19-179673 Historic Building
OHP Property Number – 030364;
Resource Name – D C Smith
House
1985 (J Snyder, Caltrans)
P-19-179674 Historic Building
OHP Property Number – 030365;
Resource Name – 330 Orange
Grove Ave
1985 (J Snyder, Caltrans)
3 - 824
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Draft Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.4_Cultural_and_Tribal-050823.docx 3.4-16 Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources TABLE 3.4-3

ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL RESOURCES

WITHIN THE PROJECT SITE
Primary No. Age Type Resource Name Recorded Date (Author) P-19-179675 Historic Building
OHP Property Number – 030366;
Resource Name – 340 Orange
Grove Ave
1985 (J Snyder, Caltrans)
P-19-179676 Historic Building
OHP Property Number – 030367;
Resource Name – 441 Prospect
Circle; OHP Property Number –
149751
1985 (J Snyder, Caltrans)
P-19-179677 Historic Building
OHP Property Number – 030368;
Resource Name – Lucian M
Williams House; OHP Property
Number – 149750
1985 (J Snyder, Caltrans)
P-19-179678 Historic Building
OHP Property Number – 030369;
Resource Name – Percy &
Emogene Griffin House; OHP
Property Number – 149749
1985 (J Snyder, Caltrans)
P-19-179679 Historic Building
OHP Property Number – 030370;
Resource Name – A C Buttalph
Jr House; OHP Property Number
– 149748
1985 (J Snyder, Caltrans)
P-19-179680 Historic Building
OHP Property Number – 030371;
Resource Name – Edward Byrne
House; OHP Property Number –
149743
1985 (J Snyder, Caltrans)
P-19-179681 Historic Building
OHP Property Number – 030372;
Resource Name – Marie Emry
House; OHP Property Number –
149755
1985 (J Snyder, Caltrans)
P-19-179682 Historic Building
OHP Property Number – 030373;
Resource Name – H A Wilcox
House; OHP Property Number –
149754
1985 (J Snyder, Caltrans)
P-19-179683 Historic Building
OHP Property Number – 030374;
Resource Name – 461 Prospect
Circle; OHP Property Number –
149753
1985 (J Snyder, Caltrans)
P-19-179684 Historic Building
OHP Property Number – 030375;
Resource Name – 451 Prospect
Circle; OHP Property Number –
149752
1985 (J Snyder, Caltrans)
P-19-179685 Historic Building
OHP Property Number – 030376;
Resource Name – T L Stearns
House
1985 (J Snyder, Caltrans)
P-19-179686 Historic Building
OHP Property Number – 030378;
Resource Name – M Brokaw
House
1985 (J Snyder, Caltrans)
P-19-179687 Historic Building
OHP Property Number – 030378;
Resource Name – C E Tracy
House; OHP Property Number –
149737
1985 (J Snyder, Caltrans)
P-19-179688 Historic Building
OHP Property Number – 030379;
Resource Name – 430 S Orange
Grove Ave
1985 (J Snyder, Caltrans)
3 - 825
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Draft Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.4_Cultural_and_Tribal-050823.docx 3.4-17 Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources TABLE 3.4-3

ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL RESOURCES

WITHIN THE PROJECT SITE
Primary No. Age Type Resource Name Recorded Date (Author) P-19-179689 Historic Building
OHP Property Number – 030380;
Resource Name – R L Langer
House; OHP Property Number –
149738
1985 (J Snyder, Caltrans)
P-19-179690 Historic Building
OHP Property Number – 030381;
Resource Name – I F Gordon
House; OHP Property Number –
149739
1985 (J Snyder, Caltrans)
P-19-179691 Historic Building
OHP Property Number – 030382;
Resource Name – J F Gordon
House; OHP Property Number –
149740
1985 (J Snyder, Caltrans)
P-19-179692 Historic Building
OHP Property Number – 030383;
Resource Name – Prospect
Circle District; OHP Property
Number – 149735
1985 (J Snyder, Caltrans)
P-19-186859 Historic Building
Resource Name – Arroyo Seco
Flood Control Channel; OHP
Property Number – 147051
status code (2S2); OHP Property
Number – 173825 status code
(6X); National Register – NPS –
08000579-0027
2003 (M. Strauss, EDAW)
P-19-187627 Historic Building
OHP Property Number – 126436;
Resource Name – El Centro
Market
2000 (G. Duncan, South Pasadena
Cultural Heritage Commission)
P-19-188513 Historic Building
OHP Property Number – 147063;
Resource Name – S Pasadena
Water Tower; Other – Sprint CA
–LOS0099A; Other – Bilicke
Water Tank
2009 (K.A. Crawford, Michael
Brandman Associates)
P-19-189325 Historic Building
OHP Property Number – 177126;
Resource Name – Arroyo Seco
Park; Other – Art in the Park
2000 (Christy Johnson, Historic
Resources Group)
P-19-190613 Historic Building Resource Name – Arroyo Seco Golf Course
2013 (Casey Tibbet, Associates,
Inc)
P-19-190632 Historic Building
Resource Name – Medical
Offices; Other – T-Mobile West
LLC IE04948A/LA948 Sinclair
2013 (K.A. Crawford, Michael
Brandman Associates)
P-19-190788 Historic Building
Resource Name – 1000 Block
Fair Oaks District; OHP Property
Number – 150988
2002 (Jan Ostashay, Peter
Moruzzi,
PCR Services Corporation)
P-19-190789 Historic Building Resource Name – 1100 Block Fair Oaks District
2002 (Jan Ostashay, Peter
Moruzzi,
PCR Services Corporation)
P-19-191944 Historic District Resource Name – Garfield
Substation Property
2015 (Wendy L. Tinsley Becker,
Urbana Preservation & Planning)
SCCIC 2020
3 - 826
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Draft Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.4_Cultural_and_Tribal-050823.docx 3.4-18 Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources One known prehistoric archaeological resource (P-19-0003057) is within the City of South Pasadena (SCCIC 2020). The archaeological resource is a prehistoric archaeological site also known as the Arroyo Seco/San Pascual Site and was originally documented in 2002 when a human skull from a burial was identified during the trenching for an irrigation line. Upon discovery of the burial, the Los Angeles Police Department was notified, who retrieved the skull elements, and then turned over the remains to the Los Angeles Coroner, who notified the Native American Heritage Council (NAHC). Subsequent investigations with assistance of the Most Likely Descendent, Samuel Dunlap, revealed a rock cairn on the top of the human remains. Cultural constituents found with the burial included a chert projectile point base and marine shell (Protothaca staminea). A local informant claims that “milling tools” were found in his yard across the street from the discovery, but these items have yet to be verified to actual provenience.

Additionally, the area where the discovery was made has been designated as an archaeological site because of the important information and lack of ground visibility for the entire area.

Sacred Lands File Search
An inquiry was made on of the NAHC on July 10, 2020, to request a review of the Sacred Lands File (SLF) database regarding the possibility of Native American cultural resources and/or sacred places in the Project vicinity that are not documented on other databases. The NAHC completed its SLF search on July 15, 2020. The results from the NAHC Sacred Lands Files search for the Project site was positive, meaning one or more Native American sacred sites are documented within or near the City. The locations and other details of sacred sites are kept confidential in order to protect the sites.

3.4.3 RELEVANT PROGRAMS AND REGULATIONS
Federal
National Historic Preservation Act
The National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) of 1966, as amended, calls for the preservation of cultural resources through one of its implementing regulations (36 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] Section 800, Protection of Historic Properties), as well as under the National Environmental Policy Act. Properties of traditional religious and cultural importance to Native Americans are protected under Section 101(d)(6)(A) of the NHPA.

Section 106 of the NHPA (16 United States Code [USC] Section 470f) requires federal agencies to take into account the effects of their undertakings on any district, site, building, structure, or object that is included in or eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) and to afford the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation a reasonable opportunity to comment on such undertakings (36 CFR 800.1). Under Section 106, the significance of any adversely affected cultural resource is assessed and mitigation measures are proposed to reduce the impacts to an acceptable level.
3 - 827
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Draft Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.4_Cultural_and_Tribal-050823.docx 3.4-19 Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources National Register of Historic Places
Significant cultural resources include resources that are listed in or are eligible for listing in the NRHP per the criteria listed at 36 CFR 60.4:

Criteria
To be eligible for listing in the National Register, a property must be at least 50 years of age and possess significance in American history and culture, architecture, or archaeology. The quality of significance in American history, architecture, archaeology, engineering and culture is present in districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects that possess integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association and that meet one or more of four established criteria:
(a) Are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history; or
(b) Are associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; or (c) Embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of installation, or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or
(d) Have yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.

Physical Integrity
According to National Register Bulletin No. 15, “to be eligible for listing in the National Register, a property must not only be shown to be significant under National Register criteria, but it also must have integrity”. Integrity is defined in National Register Bulletin No. 15 as “the ability of a property to convey its significance”. Within the concept of integrity, the NRHP recognizes seven aspects or qualities that, in various combinations, define “integrity”. They are feeling, association, workmanship, location, design, setting, and materials, and they are defined by National Register Bulletin No. 15 as follows:
 Location is the place where the historic property was constructed or the place where the historic event occurred.
 Design is the combination of elements that create the form, plan, space, structure, and style of a property.
 Setting is the physical environment of a historic property.  Materials are the physical elements that were combined or deposited during a particular period of time and in a particular pattern or configuration to form a historic property.  Workmanship is the physical evidence of the crafts of a particular culture or people during any given period in history or prehistory.
 Feeling is a property’s expression of the aesthetic or historic sense of a particular period of time.
 Association is the direct link between an important historic event or person and a historic property.
3 - 828
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Draft Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.4_Cultural_and_Tribal-050823.docx 3.4-20 Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources Historic Contexts
To be eligible for listing in the NRHP, a property must also be significant within a historic context.

National Register Bulletin No. 15 states that the significance of a historic property can be judged only when it is evaluated in its historic context. Historic contexts are “those patterns, themes, or trends in history by which a specific . . . property or site is understood and its meaning . . . is made clear”. A property must represent an important aspect of the area’s history or prehistory and possess the requisite integrity to qualify for the NRHP.

Historic Districts
The NRHP includes significant properties, which are classified as buildings, sites, districts, structures, or objects. A historic district “derives its importance from being a unified entity, even though it is often composed of a variety of resources. The identity of a district results from the interrelationship of its resources, which can be an arrangement of historically or functionally related properties”.

A district is defined as a geographically definable area of land containing a significant concentration of buildings, sites, structures, or objects united by past events or aesthetically by plan or physical development. A district’s significance and historic integrity should help determine the boundaries. Other factors include the following:
 Visual barriers that mark a change in the historic character of the area or that break the continuity of the district, such as new construction, highways, or development of a different character;
 Visual changes in the character of the area due to different architectural styles, types, or periods, or to a decline in the concentration of contributing resources;  Boundaries at a specific time in history, such as the original city limits or the legally recorded boundaries of a housing subdivision, estate, or ranch; and  Clearly differentiated patterns of historical development, such as commercial versus residential or industrial.

Within historic districts, properties are identified as contributing and noncontributing. A contributing building, site, structure, or object adds to the historic associations, historic architectural qualities, or archeological values for which a district is significant because:
 It was present during the period of significance, relates to the significance of the district, and retains its physical integrity or
 It independently meets the criterion for listing in the NRHP.

Secretary of the Interior’s Standards
The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, and Reconstructing Historic Buildings or the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation and Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings (Weeks and Grimmer 1995) (Secretary of the Interior’s Standards) assist in the preservation of a property’s historical significance by preserving historic materials and features of historic buildings of all materials, construction types, sizes, and occupancy. The standards include preservation of exterior and interior building components, related landscape features and the building’s site and environment, as well as the compatibility of attached, adjacent, or related new construction. 3 - 829
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Draft Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.4_Cultural_and_Tribal-050823.docx 3.4-21 Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources Implementation of these “standards” is identified in the State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(3) as generally resulting in the reduction of an impact on an identified historic resource to a less than significant level.

State
California Environmental Quality Act
Section 15064.5 of the State CEQA Guidelines requires a Lead Agency to determine whether a project would have a significant effect on one or more historical resources. A “historical resource” is defined as a resource listed in or determined to be eligible for listing in the CRHR (PRC 21084.1); a resource included in a local register of historical resources (14 California Code of Regulations [CCR] Section 15064.5[a][2]); or any object, building, structure, site, area, place, record, or manuscript that a Lead Agency determines to be historically significant (14 CCR 15064.5[a][3]). The definitions of “historic” for CEQA purposes have been summarized by the California appellate courts as including mandatory, presumptive, and discretionary categories.

Projects that affect the historical significance of a resource that is listed in or has been formally determined eligible for listing in the CRHR are considered to have a significant effect on the environment. Impacts to cultural resources from a project are thus considered significant and adverse under Section 15064.5 (b) of the State CEQA Guidelines if the project (1) physically destroys, demolishes, relocates, or alters the resource or its immediate surroundings; or (2) materially impairs, demolishes or alters the physical characteristics of an historical resources that convey its historical significance and that justify its inclusion in, or eligibility for, inclusion in the California Register of Historical Resources; its inclusion in a local register of historical resources; its identification in an historical resources survey; or its eligibility for inclusion in the California Register of Historical Resources as determined by a lead agency for purposes of CEQA.

California Register of Historical Resources
The Office of Historic Preservation (OHP) administers the CRHR, which was established in 1992 through Sections 5020 et seq. of the California Public Resources Code (PRC) to be “an authoritative guide in California to be used by State and local agencies, private groups, and citizens to identify the State’s historical resources and to indicate what properties are to be protected, to the extent prudent and feasible, from substantial adverse change” (PRC Section 5024.1[a]).

The CRHR listing criteria focus on resources of State, rather than national, significance. The CRHR includes the following types of resources, either as an individual property or a contributor to a historic district: (1) properties listed in or determined eligible for listing in the NRHP (automatically included); (2) California Historical Landmarks numbered 770 and higher (automatically included); (3) California Points of Historical Interest recommended for listing by the OHP; and (4) resources nominated for listing and determined eligible by meeting one or more of the CRHR criteria.

The CRHR consists of properties that are listed automatically, as well as those that must be nominated through an application and public hearing process. The CRHR automatically includes the following:
 California properties listed in the NRHP and those formally Determined Eligible for the NRHP;
3 - 830
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Draft Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.4_Cultural_and_Tribal-050823.docx 3.4-22 Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources  California Registered Historical Landmarks from No. 0770 onward; and  Those California Points of Historical Interest that have been evaluated by the OHP and have been recommended to the State Historical Resources Commission for inclusion on the CRHR.

The criteria for listing resources in the CRHR, which were expressly developed to be in accordance with previously established criteria developed for listing in the NRHP (per the criteria listed at 36 CFR 60.4), are stated below.

The quality of significance in American history, architecture, archaeology, engineering and culture is present in districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects that possess integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling and association and that:
(1) Are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of local or regional history or the cultural heritage of California or the United States; or
(2) Are associated with the lives of persons important to local, California, or national history; or
(3) Embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values; or
(4) Have yielded, or have the potential to yield, information important to the prehistory or history of the local area, California or the nation.

Historic resources eligible for listing in the California Register may include buildings, sites, structures, objects, and historic districts. The minimum age criterion for the CRHR is generally 50 years. Under the Special Considerations provided in the California Code of Regulations (Title 14, Division 3, Chapter 11.5, 4852[d][2]), resources less than 50 years old may be eligible for listing if “it can be demonstrated that sufficient time has passed to understand its historical importance”. Once listed, the historical resource is protected from any detrimental changes and any alterations, repairs, and additions must be reviewed and approved by the State Historical Resources Commission under the State Historical Building Code to ensure that the quality of the resource remains intact.

California Historical Building Code
The California State Historical Building Code (CHBC) (California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 8) is intended to save California’s architectural heritage by recognizing the unique construction issues inherent in maintaining and adaptively reusing historic buildings. The CHBC’s standards and regulations facilitate the rehabilitation or change of occupancy so as to preserve their original or restored elements and features; to encourage energy conservation and a cost effective approach to preservation; and to provide for reasonable safety from fire, seismic forces, or other hazards for occupants and users of such buildings, structures, and properties and to provide reasonable availability and usability by the physically disabled. The 2016 triennial edition of the CHBC, effective January 1, 2017, is the currently adopted code. The City has adopted the CHBC by reference (Section 9.50 of the South Pasadena Municipal Code). 3 - 831
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Draft Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.4_Cultural_and_Tribal-050823.docx 3.4-23 Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources Mills Act
Enacted in 1972, the Mills Act (California Government Code, Article 12, Section 50280-50290; California Revenue and Taxation Code, Article 1.9, Sections 4.9-439.4) grants participating local governments (cities and counties) the authority to enter into contracts with owners of qualified historic properties, pursuant to the CHBC, who actively participate in the restoration and maintenance of their historic properties while receiving property tax relief.

Senate Bill 18
SB 18 (California Government Code, Section 65352.3) incorporates the protection of California traditional tribal cultural places into land use planning for cities, counties, and agencies. It establishes responsibilities for local governments to contact, refer plans to, and consult with California Native American tribes as part of the adoption or amendment of any general or specific plan proposed on or after March 1, 2005. SB 18 requires public notice to be sent to tribes listed on the (NAHC’s SB 18 Tribal Consultation List within the geographical areas affected by the proposed changes. Tribes must respond to a local government notice within 90 days (unless a shorter time frame has been agreed upon by the tribe), indicating whether or not they want to consult with the local government. Consultations are for the purpose of preserving or mitigating impacts to places, features, and objects described in Sections 5097.9 and 5097.993 of the California Public Resources Code that may be affected by the proposed adoption of or amendment to a general or specific plan. The Project is subject to SB 18. A description of the City’s SB 18 process for the Project is provided in the analysis below.

Assembly Bill 52
AB 52 is applicable to projects that have filed a Notice of Preparation (NOP) of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) or notice of a Negative Declaration (ND) or Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) on or after July 1, 2015. AB 52 requires that the tribes ask the lead agency to be contacted for consultation. Then, the lead agency must contact the tribes to initiate consultation with California Native American Tribes that are traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area of the project and have requested such consultation prior to determining the type of CEQA documentation that is applicable to the project (i.e., EIR, ND, MND). AB 52 allows Tribes 30 days after receiving notification to request consultation. The lead agency then has 30 days to initiate consultation. Significant impacts to Tribal cultural resources are considered significant impacts to the environment. The Project is subject to AB 52. A description of the City’s AB 52 process for the Project is provided in the analysis below.

Discovery of Human Remains
Section 7050.5 of the California Health and Safety Code provides for the disposition of accidentally discovered human remains. Section 7050.5 states that, if human remains are found, no further excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent remains shall occur until the County Coroner has determined the appropriate treatment and disposition of the human remains.

Section 5097.98 of the PRC states that, if the remains are determined by the Coroner to be of Native American origin, the Coroner must notify the NAHC within 24 hours which, in turn, must identify the person or persons it believes to be the most likely descendant (MLD) from the deceased Native American. The MLD shall complete their inspection and make a recommendation within 48 hours of being granted access to the site. The MLD’s recommendation shall be followed if feasible and may include scientific removal and non-destructive analysis of the human remains 3 - 832
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Draft Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.4_Cultural_and_Tribal-050823.docx 3.4-24 Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources and any items associated with Native American burials. If the landowner rejects the MLD’s recommendations, the landowner shall rebury the remains with appropriate dignity on the property in a location that will not be subject to further subsurface disturbance (California Public Resources Code, Section 5097.98).

City
Cultural Heritage Ordinance
The City’s Cultural Heritage Ordinance has been utilized since 1992 as a tool for implementing the City’s preservation efforts. On July 19, 2017, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 2315 that repealed the ordinance in place at that time and replaced it with a new ordinance that helps property and business owners gain a clear understanding of the Cultural Heritage Commission’s (CHC) purpose and processes, assists the CHC with its decision making, and strengthens the City’s legal framework to assure continued protection of its historic character and scale. The purpose of the Cultural Heritage Ordinance “is to promote the public health, safety, and general welfare by providing for the identification, protection, enhancement, perpetuation, and use of improvements, buildings, structures, signs, objects, features, sites, places, landscapes, and areas representing the City’s architectural, artistic, cultural, engineering, aesthetic, historical, political, social, and other heritage” (South Pasadena 2017). The Cultural Heritage Ordinance also discusses the designation criteria for landmarks and historic districts in the City, and procedures for listing landmarks and districts on the South Pasadena Register of Landmarks and Historic Districts. Additionally, this ordinance mandates the establishment of a cultural resources inventory and defines the process for obtaining certificates of appropriateness, which authorize work that may affect cultural resources. The current Cultural Heritage Ordinance became effective August 2017.

3.4.4 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
The following significance criteria are derived from Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines. A project would result in a significant adverse cultural and tribal cultural resources impact if it would:

Threshold 3.4a: Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to § 15064.5;
Threshold 3.4b: Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5;
Threshold 3.4c: Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of dedicated cemeteries; and/or
Threshold 3.4d: 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:
a) 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
b) 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. 3 - 833
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Draft Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.4_Cultural_and_Tribal-050823.docx 3.4-25 Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.

3.4.5 PROPOSED HOUSING ELEMENT GOALS AND POLICIES
There are no Housing Element goals or policies related to cultural or tribal cultural resources.

3.4.6 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Threshold 3.4a: Would the Project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to § 15064.5? As discussed above and articulated in the 2017 Survey, the City is a community that has numerous designated historical resources. At present there are 61 designated individual resources, 10 designated historic districts containing a collective total of 236 contributing properties, and 2,257 additional properties that have been identified as potentially eligible historical resources. In total, there are 2,718 properties (designated and potential resources at the federal, State, and/or local level) in the City that possess, or may possess, historical merit. All the five focus areas include one or more parcels that are designated or potentially historic, either as individual resources or contributors to a district.

The proposed Project would not directly cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource. The policies and actions articulated in both documents represent broad, programmatic objectives, and as such they do not call for targeted demolition or substantial alteration of a known historical resource in the City. However, it is possible that the Project would indirectly facilitate development activities, which may in turn indirectly cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an individual historical resource and/or a historic district.

Since the City is an established community that was largely built out by World War II, the number of properties dating to the post-war era and more contemporary periods of history is generally less than other municipalities in Southern California. The survey upon which the 2017 Survey is predicated accounted for resources that were constructed through the year 1972. It is possible that, over time, there will be additional resources within the City that possess potential historical significance but are not currently identified in the 2017 Survey. One of the new provisions in the Cultural Preservation Ordinance updated in 2017 is to allow the Cultural Heritage Commission to review any proposed demolition of structures not listed in the 2017 Survey and greater than 45 years old. Properties may be determined to be eligible for listing as a historic resource based on various criteria, including properties that:
 Are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of local or regional history or the cultural heritage of California or the United States; or  Are associated with the lives of persons important to local, California, or national history; or
 Embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values; or  Have yielded, or have the potential to yield, information important to the prehistory or history of the local area, California or the nation.

There are other elements of the City’s architectural and cultural heritage that contribute to its significance but are not accounted for in the 2017 Survey or other repositories of information. This 3 - 834
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Draft Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.4_Cultural_and_Tribal-050823.docx 3.4-26 Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources includes trees and other landscape and hardscape features, and properties whose significance is derived primarily from their association with ethnic and cultural groups and is therefore somewhat intangible. These types of resources are often not accounted for in surveys and other conventional methods of inventorying historical properties. Like the contemporary resources discussed above, landscape features and resources with intangible significance may be adversely affected by the Project because they fall outside the purview of the City’s policies and procedures related to historical resources.

The City’s approach to future development has a focus on the preservation and maintenance of historical resources, balanced with required incorporation of housing opportunities . The approach includes awareness and understanding of the City’s historical resources and best professional practices for managing said resources; encourage the designation of historical resources listed in the 2017 Survey; and ensure that development objectives are compatible with the character of the existing built environment. The City intends to preserve the integrity of historic districts, and to prevent infill development that is incongruent with the essential characteristics of historic districts. The importance of integrating new development with the historic character of neighboring historic buildings and districts; and preserving, enhancing, and building on existing downtown assets to harness the power of place-making in the Downtown area are integral to the City’s approach. In doing so, it recognizes the importance of maintaining the historical character of the Downtown commercial core. The City’s approach, in combination with the extensive regulatory framework of federal, State, and local regulations governing the treatment of historical resources, in particular the City’s Cultural Heritage Ordinance, would contribute to the protection and maintenance of historical resources within the City.

The City’s approach would facilitate the prevention of substantial alterations to historical resources. This includes developing and support an understanding among members of the community — including Cultural Heritage Commissioners, property owners, architects, contractors, and others — of how to apply the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties (Standards). When a development project conforms to the Standards, it is generally considered to not have a significant adverse impact on historical resources. Increasing the public’s understanding of the Standards and their proper application would reduce inappropriate and substantial alterations to historical resources.

The City intends to establish an updated inventory, in the future, to clarify which properties are considered to be resources. Updating the 2017 Survey would ensure that resources that come of age over time are accounted for; it also calls for the development of theme studies relating to the history of locally significant cultural groups. Enhancing awareness of local historical resources is anticipated to foster a sense of appreciation and civic pride, which in turn would aid in preventing their extensive alteration or demolition.

As discussed above, without safeguards it is possible that development under the Project could result in substantial adverse changes to historical resources. In the instance that a project results in the demolition of a historical resource, or substantial alterations to a historical resource that are not in conformance with the Standards, a significant impact would occur. Unless it is possible to relocate the resource in question to an appropriate receiver site, demolition is generally considered to be a significant unavoidable impact. However, the City’s policies would facilitate the required increased hosing opportunities, while preventing adverse changes to and protection of historical resources. The City’s established historic preservation policies and procedures, combined with existing State and local preservation laws and regulations, would adequately protect existing and future historical resources.

There would be a less than significant impact to historical resources, and no mitigation is required. 3 - 835
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Draft Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.4_Cultural_and_Tribal-050823.docx 3.4-27 Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources Threshold 3.4b: Would the proposed General Plan and Specific Plan cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5?
The results of the 2020 SCCIC records search indicate that one previously recorded prehistoric archaeological site, P-19-003057, has been identified within the City; however, the archaeological site would not be impacted by Project-related activities. The proposed Project would not directly cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource. The City is almost completely built out and is in a highly developed, urban area of Los Angeles County.

Because there are few vacant parcels and the projected growth is limited, future development would largely occur in areas of the City that are already developed and/or built out. As many of these sites are likely already disturbed, implementation of the Project is not anticipated to introduce a substantial amount of new development that would impact archaeological resources.

However, grading and construction activities in undeveloped areas, or redevelopment that requires deeper or more extensive soil excavation than in the past, could potentially cause the disturbance of previously unknown/unrecorded archaeological resources. In general, any development that requires grading, excavation of undisturbed or shallowly disturbed ground, or excavation to levels below current building foundations has the potential to encounter unknown archaeological resources.

Review and protection of archaeological resources are afforded under CEQA for individual development projects that would be, the subject of discretionary actions that are implemented in accordance with the City’s development review process. Per Section 21083.2(a) of the Public Resources Code, a lead agency is required to determine whether a development project may have a significant effect on archaeological resources. Specifically, pursuant to Section 15064.5(f) of the State CEQA Guidelines, should archaeological resources be found during grounddisturbing activities, a qualified archaeologist must make an immediate evaluation of the find to determine whether it is a “Tribal Cultural Resource” pursuant to Section 21074 of the California Public Resources Code, a “unique archaeological resource” pursuant to Section 21083.2(g) of the California Public Resources Code, or a buried “historical resource” pursuant to Section 15064.5(a) of the State CEQA Guidelines. Tribal cultural resources are discussed further below under Threshold 3.4(d). If the archaeological resource is determined to be a “unique archaeological resource” or a “historical resource”, the archaeologist shall formulate a mitigation plan in consultation with the City and the developer, when present, that satisfies the requirements of the above-referenced sections. If the archaeologist determines that the archaeological resource is not a “unique archaeological resource” or “historical resource”, s/he may record the site and submit the recordation form to the CHRIS at the SCCIC at California State University, Fullerton.

However, while the above-described sections of the California Public Resources Code provide a process to manage unanticipated archaeological resources, they are not presented as a single, cohesive requirement. It is possible that the appropriate processes may not be implemented due to lack of awareness. Therefore, MM CUL-1 requires that future development projects retain a qualified archaeologist to monitor excavation activities and salvage any encountered resources as necessary and appropriate.

Although soil-disturbing activities associated with development in accordance with the Project could unearth previously unknown archaeological resources, compliance with existing regulations and MM CUL-1 would reduce potential impacts to archaeological resources to a less than significant level.
3 - 836
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Draft Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.4_Cultural_and_Tribal-050823.docx 3.4-28 Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources Threshold 3.4c: Would the Project disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of dedicated cemeteries?
The proposed Project would not directly disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of dedicated cemeteries. As discussed under Threshold 3.4b, future development would largely occur in areas of the City that are already developed and/or built out. As many of these sites are likely already disturbed, implementation of the Project is not anticipated to introduce a substantial amount of new development that would potentially impact human remains. However, any development that requires grading, excavation of undisturbed or shallowly disturbed ground, or excavation to levels below current building foundations has the potential to encounter undiscovered unknown remains. Destruction of pre-historic or historic remains can result in the loss of information important to the history of the State, the region, or the immediate locality.

Destruction of recent human remains could result in destruction of evidence associated with a crime.

If human remains are encountered, the discovery is required to comply with Section 5097.98 of the California Public Resources Code and Section 7050.5 of the California Health and Safety Code. This includes halting all work in the immediate vicinity of the discovery and notifying the County Coroner, who will determine whether the remains are of forensic interest. If it is determined that the remains are prehistoric, the NAHC will then be contacted to designate the MLD. Pursuant to Section 7050.5 of the California Health and Safety Code, the MLD will make their recommendation within 48-hours of being granted access to the site and is responsible for the ultimate disposition of the remains. The MLD’s recommendation will be followed if feasible and may include scientific removal and non-destructive analysis of the human remains and any items associated with Native American burials. If the landowner rejects the MLD’s recommendations, the landowner will rebury the remains with appropriate dignity on the property in a location that will not be subject to further subsurface disturbance.

Although soil-disturbing activities associated with development in accordance with the Project could encounter undiscovered human remains, compliance with existing regulations would reduce potential impacts to human remains to a less than significant level, and no mitigation is required.

Threshold 3.4d: 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:
a) 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
b) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe?
3 - 837
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Draft Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.4_Cultural_and_Tribal-050823.docx 3.4-29 Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources Pursuant to SB 18 and AB 52, the City initiated government-to-government consultation with NAHC-identified California Native American tribes and those tribes that have requested such consultation in order to identify, protect, and/or mitigate potential impacts to cultural places/resources. On March 13, 2018, the City initiated the offer of consultation under SB 18 and AB 52 by sending a letter to the Gabrieleno/Tongva Tribe; Gabrieleno/Tongva San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians; Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians, Kizh Nation; and Soboba Band of Luiseño Indians. No tribes had requested to be notified of projects in the City pursuant to AB 52; these were the tribes identified by the Cityas having requested notification.

On April 21, 2021, the City initiated consultation under SB 18 and AB 52, pursuant to the change in the Project and associated Recirculated NOP, by sending a letter to the Gabrieleno/Tongva San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians; Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians, Kizh Nation; Gabrieleno/Tongva Tribe; Gabrieleno/Tongva Indians of California Tribal Council; and Soboba Band of Luiseño Indians. An inquiry was made to the NAHC by Psomas to request a review of the SLF database regarding the possibility of Native American cultural resources and/or sacred places in the Project vicinity that are not documented on other databases. The NAHC completed its SLF search on July 15, 2020. The results of the SLF check conducted through the NAHC was positive. Additionally, the Native American tribes that received the 2021 consultation letter are all those that were identified by the NAHC. These tribes also received the Recirculated NOP dated April 20, 2021. One tribe, the Gabrieleno/Tongva San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians (Gabrielino Tongva Tribe), responded to the consultation request.

On June 10, 2021, a virtual consultation between the City and the Gabrieleno Tongva Tribe was conducted. The Gabrielino Tongva Tribe indicated they have ancestral ties (i.e., cultural affiliation) to the area within the jurisdiction of the City of South Pasadena and claim to any Tribal Cultural Resources that may be encountered during future development projects within the City's jurisdiction. The Gabrielino Tongva Tribe is aware that archaeological resources may not have been recorded during prior development within the City's jurisdiction; therefore, the possibility of new archaeological discoveries does exist. The Gabrielino Tongva Tribe wished to have the opportunity to participate in Native American monitoring if mitigation measures or conditions for monitoring for tribal cultural resources are incorporated into future development projects within the City's jurisdiction. The Gabrielino Tongva Tribe also indicated that they believe a project applicant has the right to contract with a tribal group of their choosing for the purpose of Native American monitoring and is opposed to measures or conditions designating one particular Gabrielino Tribal group for the purpose of Native American monitoring (Dunlap 2021). There were no tribal cultural resources known to the Gabrielino Tongva Tribe apart from the site(s) associated with the NAHC’s Sacred Lands File.

Additionally, as discussed under Thresholds 3.4a and 3.4d, when excavating in native (i.e., undisturbed) soils, there is always the potential to encounter unanticipated archaeological resources, which may include Tribal Cultural Resources and/or Native American remains. As discussed above, with compliance with existing regulations potential impacts to human remains would be less than significant. Additionally, implementation of regulations and MM CUL-1 would reduce potential impacts to unknown archaeological resources, including tribal cultural resources, to a less than significant level. No further mitigation is required.

3.4.7 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
Development pursuant to the Project has the potential to disturb or destroy historical resources associated with the City’s history and local culture. Historic structures that may be altered or demolished in and near the City would affect the cultural significance of an individual site or the structure, as well as incrementally diminish the City’s historical context. Similarly, growth and 3 - 838
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Draft Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.4_Cultural_and_Tribal-050823.docx 3.4-30 Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources development in the San Gabriel Valley may involve demolition of older structures that may be important to the valley’s history. Demolition or alterations that do not follow the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards would lead to the cumulative loss of historic resources in the San Gabriel Valley. Implementation of historic preservation ordinances by individual cities would preserve sites and structures of local importance. Compliance with the City’s Cultural Heritage Ordinance and City policies pertaining to the preservation of historic resources by the City of South Pasadena would prevent significant adverse impacts on historical resources in the City and avoid a cumulative contribution to the loss of historical resources. There would be a less than significant cumulative impact, and no mitigation is required.

Direct impacts to cultural resources are generally site specific. Although a project, in conjunction with the effects of past projects, other current projects, and probable future projects, could potentially result in the disturbance of prehistoric archaeological resource sites (including Tribal Cultural Resources and Native American remains) throughout the region, the City requires the mitigation of impacts to these resources (i.e., MM CUL-1). Growth and development in the San Gabriel Valley would also lead to new development on vacant and undeveloped lots. Future development and public and infrastructure projects not subject to CEQA could adversely affect in-situ archaeological resources, and cumulative impacts may occur. However, implementation of MM CUL-1 would prevent significant adverse impacts on archaeological resources in the City and thus, would avoid a cumulative contribution to the loss of archaeological resources in the Valley.

There would be a less than significant cumulative impact to archaeological resources with implementation of MM CUL-1, and no further mitigation is required.

3.4.8 MITIGATION MEASURES
MM CUL-1 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, Applicants for future development projects shall demonstrate to the City Planning and Building Department that a qualified Archaeologist has been retained by the applicant to attend the pre-grading meeting with the construction contractor to establish, based on the site plans, appropriate procedures for monitoring earth-moving activities during construction. The Archaeologist shall determine when monitoring of grading activities is needed. If any archaeological resources are discovered, construction activities must cease within 50 feet of the discovery, or as determined by the Archaeologist, and they shall be protected from further disturbance until the qualified Archaeologist evaluates them using standard archaeological protocols.

The Archaeologist must first determine whether an archaeological resource uncovered during construction is a “Tribal Cultural Resources” pursuant to Section 21074 of the California Public Resources Code, or a “unique archaeological resource” pursuant to Section 21083.2(g) of the California Public Resources Code or a “historical resource” pursuant to Section 15064.5(a) of the State CEQA Guidelines. If the archaeological resource is determined to be a “Tribal Cultural Resource”, “unique archaeological resource” or a “historical resource”, the Archaeologist shall formulate a Mitigation Plan in consultation with the Applicant and the City Planning and Building Department that satisfies the requirements of the above-listed Code sections. Upon approval of the Mitigation Plan by the City, the Project shall be implemented in compliance with the Plan.

If the Archaeologist determines that the resource is not a “Tribal Cultural Resource”, “unique archaeological resource” or “historical resource,” s/he shall record the site and submit the recordation form to the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS) at the South Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC). The Archaeologist shall prepare a report of the results of any 3 - 839
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Draft Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.4_Cultural_and_Tribal-050823.docx 3.4-31 Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources study prepared as part of a testing or mitigation plan, following accepted professional practice. The report shall follow guidelines of the California Office of Historic Preservation. Copies of the report shall be submitted to the City and to the CHRIS at the SCCIC at the California State University, Fullerton.

3.4.9 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION
Less than significant.
3 - 840
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Draft Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.4_Cultural_and_Tribal-050823.docx 3.4-32 Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources

3.4.10 REFERENCES
Creason, G. 2016 (July 20). Los Angeles Magazine. Pasadena was Founded by “Colonists” from Indiana. Los Angeles, CA: Los Angeles Magazine.
http://www.lamag.com/citythinkblog/pasadena-founded-colonists-indiana/.

Dunlap, S. 2021 (August 28). Personal communication. E-mail from Sam Dunlap (Cultural Resource Director, Gabrielino Tongva Tribe) to Jillian Neary (Project Manager, Psomas) summarizing the results of consultation between the Gabrielino Tongva Tribe and the City of South Pasadena.

Historic Resources Group (HRG). 2017 (Revised June). City of South Pasadena Citywide Historic Resources Survey. Pasadena, CA: HRG. 636721709083330000 (southpasadenaca.gov). ______. 2014 (December 16). City of South Pasadena Citywide Historic Context Statement, Final Administrative Draft. Pasadena, CA: HRG.
http://www.plansouthpasadena.org/assets/south-pasadena-city-wide-historic-contextstatement---dated-12-18-14.pdf.

National Trust for Historic Preservation (NTHP). 2017 (May 25). Press Release: Los Angeles County’s Historic Communities of the 710 Move Towards Sustainable Transportation Solutions. Washington, DC: NTHP. https://savingplaces.org/press-center/mediaresources/los-angeles-countys-historic-communities-of-the-710-move-towardssustainable-transportation-solutions#.WnJM_KinHmY.

Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC). 2020 (July 15). Re: Native American Tribal Consultation, Pursuant to the Assembly Bill 52 (AB 52), Amendments to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Chapter 532, Statutes of 2014), Public Resources Code Sections 5097.94 (m), 21073, 21074, 21080.3.1, 21080.3.2, 21082.3, 21083.09, 21084.2 and 21084.3, 3ARD012200, 3PAS012100, and 3SPA010100 Projects, Los Angeles County. Sacramento, CA: NAHC.

South Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC). 2020 (August 17). Re: Records Search Results for the 3SPA0100 Project. Fullerton, CA: SCCIC.

South Pasadena, City of. 2018 (Last accessed January). State Route 710 (SR-710): SR-710 History. South Pasadena: the City. http://www.ci.southpasadena.ca.us/index.aspx?page=57. ______. 2017 (adopted July 19). Ordinance No. 2315; An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of South Pasadena, California, Repealing and Replacing Article IVH (Cultural Heritage Commission) of Chapter 2 (Administration) with a New Article IVH (Cultural Heritage Commission) of the South Pasadena Municipal Code to Update the Legal Framework Needed to Protect the City’s Cultural Resources. South Pasadena, CA: the City. http://www.ci.south-pasadena.ca.us/modules/showdocument.aspx? documentid=13396.
______. 2016 (January). South Pasadena Unified School District Mission Place Project, Draft Environmental Impact Report. Prepared by Michael Baker International for the City of South Pasadena. South Pasadena, the City.
3 - 841
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Draft Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.4_Cultural_and_Tribal-050823.docx 3.4-33 Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources ______. 2012. 820 Mission Street Mixed Use Project Draft Environmental Checklist Form. South Pasadena, the City.

South Pasadena Savings and Loan Association. 1952. Valley of the Hahamog-na: Pasadena Through Two Centuries. Los Angeles, CA: Cole-Holmquist Press.

Thomas, R. 2008 (November 3). South Pasadena’s Raymond Hotel. Arcadia Publishing. Mount Pleasant, SC: Arcadia Publishing.
https://www.arcadiapublishing.com/Products/9780738559193.

U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service (NPS). 2018 (Last accessed January).

Route 66: Arroyo Seco Parkway, Los Angeles, California. Washington, DC: NPS. https://www.nps.gov/nr/travel/route66/arroyo_seco_parkway.html.

U.S. Department of the Interior, National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) Inventory. 1977 (July). Nomination Form, South Pasadena Historic Business District. Prepared by T. Sitton of the Los Angeles County Museum of Natural History.
https://npgallery.nps.gov/GetAsset/2e2d4713-e919-4f52-9aae-b0fb2eda03ab.

Weeks (K.D.) and Grimmer (A.E.). 2017. The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring and Reconstructing Historic Buildings. Washington, D.C.: Weeks and Grimmer. The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties With Guidelines For Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring & Reconstructing Historic Buildings (nps.gov).

3 - 842
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Draft Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.4_Cultural_and_Tribal-050823.docx 3.4-34 Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources This page intentionally left blank
3 - 843
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.5_Energy-050823.docx 3.5-1 Energy

3.5 ENERGY

3.5.1 METHODOLOGY
This section addresses energy use associated with the implementation of the proposed 2021– 2029 Housing Element and the non-residential development capacity envisioned in the General Plan and Downtown Specific Plan (DTSP) Update (Project).

Section 21100(b)(3) of the California Public Resources Code and Appendix F to the State CEQA Guidelines require a discussion of potential energy impacts of proposed projects. Appendix F states:

The goal of conserving energy implies the wise and efficient use of energy. The means of achieving this goal include:
(1) Decreasing overall per capita energy consumption,
(2) Decreasing reliance on fossil fuels such as coal, natural gas and oil, and (3) Increasing reliance on renewable energy sources.

Appendix F of the State CEQA Guidelines also identifies that “EIRs include a discussion of the potential energy impacts of proposed projects, with particular emphasis on avoiding or reducing inefficient, wasteful and unnecessary consumption of energy”.

3.5.2 EXISTING CONDITIONS
Global climate change and the importance of energy in the need to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are discussed in Section 3.7, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, of this Environmental Assessment (EA). A 2016 analysis of the City of South Pasadena’s (City) GHG emissions found that energy use is the second largest contributor, being approximately 39 percent of the total, with the energy use approximately equally divided between electricity and natural gas (South Pasadena 2020).

3.5.3 RELEVANT PROGRAMS AND REGULATIONS
State
The Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings (Title 24, Part 6 of the California Code of Regulations [CCR]) were established in 1978 in response to a legislative mandate to reduce California’s energy consumption. The CEC adopted the 2008 changes to the Building Energy Efficiency Standards in order to (1) “Provide California with an adequate, reasonably-priced, and environmentally-sound supply of energy” and (2) “Respond to Assembly Bill 32, the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, which mandates that California must reduce its greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by 2020”. The current applicable standards are the 2019 Standards, effective January 1, 2020. Analysis by the California Energy Commission concludes that the 2019 energy efficiency standards are projected to result in a 30 percent improvement in energy efficiency for nonresidential buildings over the 2016 standards. The 2019 standards require photovoltaic solar systems on newly constructed single-family residences and on newly constructed multi-family residential structures of three stories or less. Single-family homes built to the 2019 standards will be about 7 percent more efficient than homes built to the 2016 standards; and about 53 percent more efficient after factoring in the required solar systems (CEC 2020).
3 - 844
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.5_Energy-050823.docx 3.5-2 Energy The 2019 California Green Building Standards Code (24 CCR, Part 11), also known as the CALGreen code, contains mandatory requirements and voluntary measures for new residential and nonresidential buildings (including buildings for retail, office, public schools and hospitals) throughout California. The development of the CALGreen Code is intended to improve public health, safety, and general welfare by enhancing the design and construction of buildings through the following construction practices: (1) planning and design; (2) energy efficiency; (3) water efficiency and conservation; (4) material conservation and resource efficiency; and (5) environmental quality. In short, the code is established to reduce construction waste; make buildings more efficient in the use of materials and energy; and reduce environmental impact during and after construction.

The CALGreen Code contains requirements for construction site selection, storm water control during construction, construction waste reduction, indoor water use reduction, material selection, natural resource conservation, site irrigation conservation, and more. The code provides for design options allowing the designer to determine how best to achieve compliance for a given site or building condition. The code also requires building commissioning, which is a process for the verification that all building systems, such as heating and cooling equipment and lighting systems, are functioning at their maximum efficiency.

The CALGreen Code provides standards for bicycle parking, carpool/vanpool/electric vehicle spaces, light and glare reduction, grading and paving, energy efficient appliances, renewable energy, graywater systems, water efficient plumbing fixtures, recycling and recycled materials, pollutant controls (including moisture control and indoor air quality), acoustical controls, storm water management, building design, insulation, flooring, and framing, among others.

The California Renewables Portfolio Standard (RPS) was established in 2002 under Senate Bill 1078. The RPS program required investor-owned utilities, electric service providers, and community choice aggregators to increase the use of eligible renewable energy resources to 33 percent of total procurement by 2020. The CPUC is required to provide annual progress reports regarding the State’s progress toward RPS goals. This has accelerated the development of renewable energy projects throughout the State. Based on the November 2019 annual report, most retail sellers procured at or above the 29 percent RPS annual target for 2018; and the large investor-owned utilities have executed renewable electricity contracts needed to meet the 2020 RPS requirement of 33 percent (CPUC 2020). Since 2003, the three large investor-owned utilities have contracted for over 21,000 megawatts (MW) of renewable energy capacity (CPUC 2020).

Senate Bill 100 (California Public Utilities Code Sections 399.11 et seq.), enacted in 2018, updated the RPS, requiring electricity sales to California end-use customers to be 100 percent renewable energy and zero-carbon sources by the year 2045 (CEC 2020).

The California Advanced Clean Cars program (January 2012) is a new emissions-control program for model years 2015 through 2025. The program combines the control of smog- and soot-causing pollutants and GHG emissions into a single coordinated package. The package includes elements to reduce smog-forming pollution, reduce GHG emissions, promote clean cars, and provide the fuels for clean cars (CARB 2012). To improve air quality, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) has implemented new emission standards to reduce smog-forming emissions beginning with 2015 model year vehicles. It is estimated that in 2025 cars will emit 75 percent less smogforming pollution than the average new car sold today. To reduce GHG emissions, CARB, in conjunction with EPA and NHTSA, adopted new GHG standards for model year 2017 to 2025 vehicles; the new standards are estimated to reduce GHG emissions by 34 percent in 2025. The Zero- Emissions Vehicle (ZEV) program will act as the focused technology of the Advanced Clean Cars program by requiring manufacturers to produce increasing numbers of ZEVs and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles in the 2018 to 2025 model years. Technologies to achieve the new 3 - 845
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.5_Energy-050823.docx 3.5-3 Energy standards include engine and emission control advancements, wider application of advanced hybrid technologies and greater use of stronger and lighter materials. These new standards will result in lower fuel use over the life of the vehicle. The automobiles used by workers and residents of the Project are currently fueled primarily by gasoline. However, projections indicate that there will be a transition to electric vehicles. It is estimated that by the year 2040, 57 percent of all passenger vehicle sales will be battery electric vehicles (BNEF 2020). It is also estimated within the same projection that by 2040, 70 percent of the global fleet of buses will also be electrically fueled. As 56 percent of commercial vehicle sales are anticipated for light and medium commercial vehicles in the U.S.; consequently, fuel use for transportation by workers and residents is anticipated to transition from gasoline to electricity.

City of South Pasadena
South Pasadena Municipal Code
Section 36.540.030(c) of the South Pasadena Municipal Code (SPMC) states that the design of a subdivision for which a Tentative and Final Map are required by the zoning code shall provide, to the extent feasible, for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities in the subdivisions, in compliance with Section 66473.1 of the Subdivision Map Act. Sections 9.20 et. seq. of the SPMC sets forth procedures for permitting small residential rooftop solar energy systems.

South Pasadena Climate Action Plan
The City of South Pasadena adopted its first Climate Action Plan (CAP) on December 16, 2020.

The CAP is a long-range planning document that guides the City towards long-term emissions reductions in accordance with State of California goals. Energy is one of seven sectors for GHG reduction action identified in the CAP. The GHG reduction measures and supporting actions (called Plays and Moves, respectively, in the CAP) are shown in Table 3.5-1.

TABLE 3.5-1

SOUTH PASADENA CLIMATE ACTION PLAN ENERGY SECTOR

MEASURES (PLAYS) AND ACTIONS (MOVES)
Measures (Plays) Actions (Moves)
E.1. Maximize the usage of
renewable power within the
community, by continuing to
achieve an opt-out rate lower than
4% for the Clean Power Alliance.

E.1.a Monitor progress and perform public outreach and education campaigns highlighting the benefits of 100% renewable energy, including:
 Monitoring opt-out rates on an annual basis
 Tabling at community events
 Establishing an informational resource page on the City website  Regular social media posts
 Energy bill inserts
E.2. Electrify 100% of newly
constructed buildings.

E.2.a. Develop a webpage and materials for display at City Hall promoting the benefits of electrification and resources that can assist with the fuel switching process.

E.2.b Provide financial and technical resources, including hosting workforce development trainings for installers and building owners/operators to discuss benefits and technical requirements of electrification.

E.2.c Perform regular internal trainings with planners and building officials on current state decarbonization goals and incentives available for electric homes. 3 - 846
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.5_Energy-050823.docx 3.5-4 Energy TABLE 3.5-1

SOUTH PASADENA CLIMATE ACTION PLAN ENERGY SECTOR

MEASURES (PLAYS) AND ACTIONS (MOVES)
Measures (Plays) Actions (Moves)
E.2.d Provide education around cooking with electric appliances, including demonstrations from chefs and/or local restaurants, as available.

E.2.e Adopt an Electrification Readiness Reach Code per California Energy Commission (CEC) reach code requirements for all new buildings and accessory dwelling units which eliminates the piping of natural gas. In doing so the City will:
 Engage with stakeholders, both internal stakeholders, such as City staff and officials, and external stakeholders, such as local developers regarding the purpose and impact of the reach code
 Conduct a cost effectiveness study
 Develop and draft an ordinance
 Conduct public hearings, public notices, and formally adopt the ordinance  Submit the adopted ordinance to the California Energy Commission (CEC) E.2.f Adopt an ordinance that allows granting of minor allowances for certain site development standards when there is no practical ways to design a project to be all electric.

E.3 Electrify 5% of existing
buildings by 2030 and 80% by
2045.

E.3.a Develop an existing building electrification permit tracking program to track annual progress in achieving the targeted electrification goal.

E.3.b Keep an updated list of rebates and incentives available to residents who would like to convert their buildings to electric power.

E.3.c Provide education on the potential energy savings and benefits of electric heat pumps for water heating and space heating when permits for replacement are obtained.

E.3.d Work with Southern California Edison (SCE) and/or the Clean Power Alliance to provide rebates for residential replacement of natural gas powered air and water heating appliances with electric powered.

E.3.e Promote water heater, space heating, and appliance (electric stoves/dryers) replacement programs and incentives (residential) at time of construction permit.

E.3.f Perform an existing buildings analysis in order to understand the potential for electrification retrofitting in South Pasadena and establish a roadmap for eliminating natural gas from existing buildings.

E.3.g Establish a comprehensive, coordinated education campaign focused towards property owners, landlords, property management companies, and occupants for reducing the use of natural gas in homes and businesses.

Establish a shared understanding of existing incentives for electric appliances and upgrades, and how to access them, including SCE incentive programs and rebates.

E.3.h Perform a cost effectiveness study for electrification retrofitting, including requirements for newly permitted HVAC/hot water heaters and other appliances to be electric.

E.3.i Develop a best practices model based on the progress electrifying existing buildings in South Pasadena and outside of South Pasadena to significantly increase electrification post 2030.
3 - 847
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.5_Energy-050823.docx 3.5-5 Energy TABLE 3.5-1

SOUTH PASADENA CLIMATE ACTION PLAN ENERGY SECTOR

MEASURES (PLAYS) AND ACTIONS (MOVES)
Measures (Plays) Actions (Moves)
E.4 Develop and promote reduced
reliance on natural gas through
increased clean energy systems
that build off of renewable energy
development, production, and
storage.

E.4.a Conduct a Feasibility Study to assess cost and applicable locations for installation of battery back up systems or generators throughout the City.

E.4.b Promote installation of storage technology in concert with renewable energy infrastructure through educational programs, outreach, and information provided via City platforms.

E.4.c Conduct "micro*grid" Feasibility/Pilot Study in support of the General Plan.

E.4.d In support of the General Plan, develop and implement a Solar Action Plan with a goal of meeting 50% of South Pasadena's power demand through solar by 2040.

E.4.e In support of the 2018 2019 City Strategic Plan, develop a strategy and implementation schedule for the Renewable Energy Plan, after completion of the feasibility study.

E.4.f Adopt a PV (Solar) Ordinance requiring newly constructed and majorly renovated multi family and commercial buildings to install PV systems with an annual output greater or equal to 25% of buildings electricity demand.

E.4.g Require all new structures or major retrofits to be pre-wired for solar panels.

E.4.h Work with various City departments to establish and streamline battery storage requirements to allow for easier implementation of these technologies throughout the City.

E.4.i Work with home and business owners, including those in the historic districts, to identify and promote renewable energy demonstration projects to showcase the benefits.

E.4.j Work with SCE and the CPA to develop a program and timeline for increasing resilience to power losses, including Public Safety Power Shutoffs (PSPS), and climate driven extreme weather events for low income, medically dependent, and elderly populations through installation of renewable energy and onsite energy storage with islanding capabilities, following appropriate project level environmental review.

Source: South Pasadena 2020

Clean Power Alliance
The City is a member of Clean Power Alliance (CPA), which offers 100 percent renewable electricity as its default option to customers (South Pasadena 2020b). CPA, a community choice aggregator serving 32 member jurisdictions in Los Angeles and Ventura counties, buys electricity from Southern California Edison (SCE) and sells it to customers in its member jurisdictions (CPA 2020). The City has defaulted to 100 percent Green Power for residential uses and Clean Power for non-residential uses. A 100 percent Green Power source produces 100 percent carbon-free energy generation, whereas Clean Power has 50 percent carbon-free energy generation. Based on the CAP, approximately 4 percent of the electricity customers in the City have opted out of the CPA. Specifically, the total breakdown of residential and non-residential participation in this program is 82 percent with 100 percent Green Power, 10 percent Clean Power, 3 percent Lean Power with 40 percent carbon-free power generation, and 4 percent opting out. As such, most customers are choosing 100 percent carbon-free power.
3 - 848
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.5_Energy-050823.docx 3.5-6 Energy

3.5.4 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
The following significance criteria are derived from Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines. A project would result in a significant adverse energy impact if it would:

Threshold 3.5a: Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation.

Threshold 3.5b: Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency.

3.5.5 PROPOSED HOUSING ELEMENT GOALS AND POLICIES
Goal 1.0 Conserve the Existing Housing Stock and Maintain Standards of Livability Policy 1.1 Adopt and implement Zoning and Building Code standards and provide incentives for building owners to upgrade energy conservation in existing buildings including the use of solar energy, to reduce energy costs to residents.

3.5.6 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Threshold 3.5a: Would the Project result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation? Construction Energy Demand
Future construction activities throughout the City are expected to require the use of construction equipment for grading, hauling and building activities; all off-road construction equipment is assumed to use diesel fuel. Construction also includes the vehicles of construction workers and vendors traveling to and from a particular project site and on-road haul trucks for the export of materials from site clearing and demolition and the export and import of soil for grading. Fuel would be consumed from construction worker, vendor, and delivery/haul trucks and light duty gasoline trucks. Fuel energy consumed during construction would be temporary in nature and there are no unusual development characteristics in the City that would necessitate the use of construction equipment that would be less energy-efficient than at comparable construction sites in other parts of the region or State. Construction equipment would conform to applicable CARB emissions standards, which promote equipment fuel efficiencies. Construction contractors would be required to comply with the provisions of Section 2485 the California Code of Regulations (CCR), which prohibits diesel-fueled commercial motor vehicles and off-road diesel vehicles from idling for more than five minutes and would minimize unnecessary fuel consumption. Construction activities would be required to comply with all applicable local and State regulations related to recycling of construction and demolition debris. Therefore, construction of future projects would not result in inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary fuel consumption.

Operational Transportation
The proposed Project would promote walking and biking as alternatives to automobile use through the goal of creating a multi-modal circulation network that is connected to available transit, which would provide convenient access to the employment centers in the City. 3 - 849
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.5_Energy-050823.docx 3.5-7 Energy The northwesterly extension of the Metro Light Rail Line, the L Line, was established in 2003 and runs from East Los Angeles to the City of Azusa, via downtown Los Angeles. This light rail line passes through the City of South Pasadena, with a station at the intersection of Mission Street and Meridian Avenue. Metro is continuing to extend the Gold Line through the San Gabriel Valley, with the second phase of the Gold Line Foothill Extension Project running an additional 12 miles to a station in the City of Montclair.

There would be reduced vehicle miles traveled (VMT) per capita and VMT per service population (SP) when compared with the No Project (2040) scenario. Thus, vehicle operation would be more energy efficient with implementation of the Project.

When taking into consideration the City’s compact land use pattern and the mixed-use nature of the proposed Project, as well as the proximity to transit, it is anticipated that both fuel efficiency and VMT would reduce over time. Independent projections of EV adoption for California show increases in EV utilization, with California leading in U.S. for Zero-Emission Vehicle (ZEV) sales.

Future project development would be required to comply with all applicable local and State regulations related to alternative vehicle charging availability and EV use would also grow in accordance with market factors that support the turnover of the existing vehicle fleet to accommodate hybrid, EV, and ZEV. This includes all applicable CALGreen Code requirements, which includes the installation of electric vehicle and plug-in hybrid vehicle charging stations to reduce fuel consumption from vehicle trips.

Because the Project would improve the VMT/capita and VMT/SP while accommodating anticipated growth, promote the use of multi-modal forms of transportation—which includes mass transit and non-automobile related transportation—accommodate alternative-fueled transportation options, as well as complementary mixed-use land use development, future use of energy due to increased traffic associated with Project buildout would not result in inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary fuel consumption.

Operational Energy Demand
The proposed Project’s emphasis on redevelopment primarily targeted to the proposed focus areas, which are adjacent to existing employment opportunities, public transit, recreational amenities, and services, is representative of the efficient land use development that would reduce vehicle trips and their associated energy use. As discussed in Section 2.6, Project Objectives, development of pedestrian-oriented mixed-use land use patterns that maximize the use of transit are fully integrated into the Project.

The Project would develop new residential and non-residential buildings that would meet the current Title 24 Energy Efficiency Standards and CALGreen standards in effect at the time of construction. The Project would require or promote all-electric design and solar electric generation on all new construction and would further encourage conversion from natural gas to electric and added solar electric generation in existing buildings. In addition, as discussed above, residents and businesses in the City have adopted electricity generation from the Clean Power Alliance that is overwhelmingly carbon free.

In conclusion, implementation of the Project would result in less than significant impacts related to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during both construction or operation, and no mitigation is required.
3 - 850
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.5_Energy-050823.docx 3.5-8 Energy Threshold 3.5b: Would the Project conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency?
As described above, the would be required to comply with the State of California’s Title 24 Building Standards and Title 24 Energy Efficiency Standards. Because the Project would comply with the latest energy efficiency standards and most local residential and non-residential uses would incorporate 100 percent renewable energy, the Project would not conflict with or obstruct a State plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency.

Table 3.5-1, above, presents the measures and actions from the City’s adopted CAP. As discussed for the analysis of long-term energy demand, when taking into consideration the City’s compact land use pattern, redevelopment primarily targeted to the proposed focus areas, and proximity to transit, the Project would be consistent with the CAP and therefore would not conflict with or obstruct the local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency.

3.5.7 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
The cumulative impacts related to energy use and efficiency are analyzed within the San Gabriel Valley (Valley). Future development throughout the Valley would generate additional energy demand and construction and operational fuel energy demand. Future development projects in the Valley would also need to comply with all applicable local and State energy efficiency and electric vehicle/plug-in hybrid vehicle charging stations. The electrification of the transportation sector is anticipated throughout California and would contribute to reduced fuel energy use related to future development throughout the Valley. Also, regional (i.e., Southern California Association of Governments) planning documents support a denser land use pattern with a focus on proximity to transit. In addition, most residential and non-residential land uses have opted for 100 percent carbon-neutral Green Power. Therefore, the Project’s contribution to cumulative impacts would be a less than significant related to the efficient use of energy.

3.5.8 MITIGATION MEASURES
No significant adverse impacts related to energy have been identified with implementation of the Project. Therefore, no mitigation is required.

3.5.9 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION
Less than significant.
3 - 851
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.5_Energy-050823.docx 3.5-9 Energy

3.5.10 REFERENCES
California Energy Commission (CEC). 2020 (April 29, access date). 2019 Building Energy Efficiency Standards: Frequently Asked Questions.
https://www.energy.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2020-
03/Title_24_2019_Building_Standards_FAQ_ada.pdf.

California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC). 2020 (April 29, access date). California Renewables Portfolio Standard Annual Report: 2019.
https://www.cpuc.ca.gov/uploadedFiles/CPUC_Public_Website/Content/Utilities_and_In dustries/Energy_-Electricity_and_Natural_Gas/2019%20RPS%20Annual%20Report.pdf.

California, State of. 2018 (January 26, published). Governor Brown Takes Action to Increase Zero-Emission Vehicles, Fund New Climate Investments. Sacramento, CA: California, the State. https://www.gov.ca.gov/2018/01/26/governor-brown-takes-action-to-increasezero-emission-vehicles-fund-new-climate-investments/.

Clean Power Alliance (CPA). 2020 (April 29, access date). About us. https://cleanpoweralliance.org/about-us/.

Cooper, J.J. 2018 (January 27, published). California Governor Pushes for 5 Million ZeroEmission Cars. https://apnews.com/6bd313487476449bb92bec62f8fa3626.

South Pasadena (City of). 2020a (Adopted December 16). South Pasadena 2020 Final Climate Action Plan. South Pasadena, CA: the City.
https://www.southpasadenaca.gov/government/departments/publicworks/environmental-programs/sustainable-south-pasadena/climate-action-plan. ———. 2020b (April 29, access date). Clean Power Alliance. https://www.southpasadenaca.gov/government/departments/publicworks/environmental-programs/energy-efficiency/clean-power-alliance.

Next 10. 2018 (January). The Road Ahead for Zero-Emission Vehicles in California; Market Trends & Policy Analysis. San Francisco, CA: Next 10.
http://next10.org/sites/default/files/ca-zev-brief.pdf.

3 - 852
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.5_Energy-050823.docx 3.5-10 Energy This page intentionally left blank
3 - 853
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.6_Geology-050823.docx 3.6-1 Geology and Soils

3.6 GEOLOGY AND SOILS

3.6.1 METHODOLOGY
This section discusses the potential seismic and geologic hazards that may adversely be affected by implementation of the proposed 2021–2029 Housing Element and the non-residential development capacity envisioned in the General Plan and Downtown Specific Plan (DTSP) Update (Project). Information presented in this section was derived from the U.S. Geological Survey, California Geological Survey (CGS), the Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey, the existing City of South Pasadena General Plan, a paleontological records search conducted by the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County (NHMLA) on May 3, 2021 (Appendix B), and other publicly available resources, as cited below.

3.6.2 EXISTING CONDITIONS
Regional and Local Geology
The City is located near the boundary between the Peninsular Ranges geomorphic province (on the south) and the Transverse Ranges geomorphic province (on the north). The east-west trending San Gabriel Mountains, located approximately five miles to the north-northwest, are part of the Transverse Ranges. The City is located along the west-central boundary of the San Gabriel Valley, which is bound on the north by the San Gabriel Mountains, on the west by the Repetto and Merced Hills, on the south by the Puente Hills, and on the east by the San Jose Hills.

Erosion of the San Gabriel Mountains due to water and gravity has formed fan-shaped alluvial wedges that fill the San Gabriel Valley, providing a basin for groundwater storage (i.e., the Raymond and San Gabriel Valley Basins). The majority of the City is underlain by Pleistocene- and Holocene-age alluvial deposits comprised primarily of sand, silt, and gravel.

There are outcroppings of the Tertiary-age Topanga Formation, comprised of sandstone and siltstone, along the northern boundary and in the southwest portion of the City (CGS 1998).

Faults and Seismicity
Within Los Angeles County, numerous regional and local faults are capable of producing severe earthquakes (magnitude [M] of 6.0 or greater). Active and potentially active faults that cross the City include the Raymond fault (also known as the Raymond Hill fault) and the Upper Elysian Park blind thrust. Other faults located near the City (within approximately ten miles) include the Eagle Rock, Sierra Madre, Hollywood, and Santa Monica faults.

Raymond (also Raymond Hill) Fault
The east-west trending Raymond Fault passes through the northern portion of the City of South Pasadena, as well as the cities of San Marino, Pasadena, Arcadia, and Los Angeles. This fault is considered active and the CGS has established an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone on the entire segment, which extends approximately 500 feet on each side of the fault.

The Raymond Fault is the easternmost section of the generally east-west trending Malibu Coast–Santa Monica–Hollywood–Raymond Fault System. To the east, near Monrovia, it appears to merge into the central part of the Sierra Madre Fault Zone; to the west, it may step over or merge with the Hollywood Fault (CGS 2017a,b). The Raymond Fault is predominantly a left-lateral fault and is thought to be capable of a 6.0 to 7.0 magnitude earthquake. The slip rate for the 3 - 854
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.6_Geology-050823.docx 3.6-2 Geology and Soils Raymond Fault is between 0.10 to 0.22 millimeters per year and an average recurrence interval of about 4,500 years (Caltech 2018).

Elysian Park Blind Thrust
The Elysian Park Fault is a blind thrust fault that has been identified as a seismically active plane fault buried at a depth of approximately 10 kilometers beneath the City. It underlies most of the City, including the former 710 Freeway extension through South Pasadena. Because the Elysian Park Fault is buried and runs horizontally underground, it is not easily depicted on a map (South Pasadena 1998).

Paleontological Resources
Based on review of recent California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) documentation for projects within the City and consultation with the City, there are no known paleontological resource sites within the City of South Pasadena (South Pasadena 2012, SPUSD 2016).

According to the paleontological records search conducted by the NHMLA, three fossil localities were identified within the City, as shown in Table 3.6-1 below.

TABLE 3.6-1

FOSSIL LOCALITIES WITHIN THE CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA
Locality Number Location Formation Taxa Depth
LACM IP 2542 838 Lyndon Street, South Pasadena Topanga Formation Mantis
shrimp
(Squillidae)
Surface
LACM IP 23222
On Fair Oaks Avenue; north of the
intersection of Fair Oaks and the Arroyo
Seco Freeway
Unknown formation
(Pliocene)
Invertebrates
(unspecified)
Surface,
along bluff
next to
sidewalk
LACM IP 24385
South Pasadena; on the east side of Fair
Oaks Avenue just north the intersection of
the Pasadena Freeway and Fair Oaks
Avenue
Unknown formation
(Pliocene)
Invertebrates
(unspecified) Unknown
Source: NHMLA 2021.
3 - 855
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.6_Geology-050823.docx 3.6-3 Geology and Soils The following table shows six additional known localities in the collection of the NHMLA that are near the City:

TABLE 3.6-2

ADDITIONAL KNOWN LOCALITIES NEAR THE CITY OF

SOUTH PASADENA
Locality Number Location Formation Taxa Depth
LACM VP CIT424 Near the intersection of Burleigh
Road and Avenue 64
Topanga
Formation
Herring (Ganolytes),
perch-like fish
(Thyrsocles),
ray-finned fish
(Etringus), and
other unspecified
Unknown

LACM VO
CIT342
Sparkletts property near 45th and
Lincoln in Highland Park
Unknown
formation
(Pleistocene)
Mammoth
(Mammuthus),
Bison (Bison)
14 ft bgs
LACM VP 6934
Along the slope between Quail Drive
and Pheasant Drive; East of Mt.

Washington Elementary School
Monterey
Formation
(yellowish tan
siltstone)
Baleen whale
(Mysticeti)
found in
hillslope rubble
LACM VP 7507 Near the intersection of San
Fernando Road and Humbolt Street
Monterey
Formation
Perch-like fish
(Thyrsocles
kriegeri)
31–32 meter
bgs (collected
during
excavations of
the Humboldt
Street Sewer
Shaft)
LACM VP 1023 Workman and Alhambra Streets
Unknown
formation
(Pleistocene)
Sabertooth cat
(Smilodon), horse
(Equus), deer
(Odocoileus),
Turkey (Meleagris)
Unknown
(excavations
for storm
drains)
LACM VP 2032 Los Angeles Brickyard Mission Road
and Daly Street
Unknown
Formation
(Pleistocene,
silt & clay)
Mastodon
(Mammut) 20–35 feet bgs
bgs: below ground surface
Source: NHMLA 2021.

3.6.3 RELEVANT PROGRAMS AND REGULATIONS
Federal
International Building Code
The International Building Code (IBC) is the national model building code. The 2021 IBC is the most recent edition of the IBC, which was incorporated into the 2022 California Building Code, and currently applies to all structures being constructed in California. The national model codes are incorporated by reference into the California, County, and City building codes, discussed below.
3 - 856
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.6_Geology-050823.docx 3.6-4 Geology and Soils State
California Building Code
The California Building Code is promulgated under Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations, Parts 1 through 12 (also known as the “California Building Standards Code” or CBC) and is administered by the California Building Standards Commission. The national model code standards adopted into Title 24 apply to all occupancies in California except for modifications adopted by State agencies and local governing bodies. The 2022 triennial edition incorporates the 2021 IBC, discussed above, and applies to all occupancies that apply for a building permit on or after January 1, 2023. The CBC may be adopted wholly or with revisions by local municipalities.

Alquist-Priolo Act of 1972
The Alquist-Priolo (AP) Earthquake Fault Zoning Act (AP Act) was adopted by the State of California in 1972 after the 1971 San Fernando Earthquake in order to mitigate the hazard of surface fault rupture along known active faults (California Public Resources Code [PRC], Section 2621 et. seq.). The purpose of the AP Act is to reduce the threat to life and property, specifically from surface fault rupture, by preventing the construction of buildings used for human occupancy on the surface trace of active faults. Under this Act, the State has defined an “active” fault as having had surface displacement during the past 11,000 years (Holocene time). This law directs the State Geologist to establish Earthquake Fault Zones (known as “Special Studies Zones” prior to January 1, 1994) in order to regulate development within designated hazard areas. City and County jurisdictions must require a geologic investigation to demonstrate that a proposed development project, which includes structures for human occupancy, is adequately set back (usually at least 50 feet) from an active fault prior to permitting. In accordance with the AP Act, the State has delineated “Earthquake Fault Zones” along identified active faults throughout the state.

Seismic Hazards Mapping Act
The Seismic Hazards Mapping Act (Act) was passed in 1990 and directs the State Department of Conservation to identify and map areas subject to earthquake hazards, such as liquefaction, earthquake-induced landslides, and amplified ground shaking (PRC 2690–2699.6). Passed by the State legislature after the 1989 Loma Prieta Earthquake, the Act was aimed at reducing the threat to public safety and minimizing potential loss of life and property in the event of a damaging earthquake event. Seismic Hazard Zone Maps are a product of the resultant Seismic Hazards Mapping Program and are produced to identify Zones of Required Investigation; most developments designed for human occupancy in these zones must conduct site-specific geotechnical investigations to identify the hazard and to develop appropriate mitigation measures prior to permitting by local jurisdictions.

Natural Hazards Disclosure Act
The Natural Hazards Disclosure Act (effective June 1, 1998) requires that sellers of real property and their agents provide prospective buyers with a disclosure statement when the property is located within one or more State-mapped hazard areas, including a Seismic Hazard Zone. The disclosure can be made as a Local Option Real Estate Transfer Disclosure Statement or a Natural Hazard Disclosure Statement.
3 - 857
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.6_Geology-050823.docx 3.6-5 Geology and Soils California Plumbing Code
Part 5 of the California Building Code (Title 24 of the Code of Regulations) is the California Plumbing Code, which provides standards for the design and construction of water and sewer systems, storm drains and recycled water system in buildings. It prohibits connection to a septic tank in areas served by a public sewer system and requires the proper abandonment of septic tanks, cesspools, and seepage pits.

City
Municipal Code
Building Regulations
The City of South Pasadena has adopted by reference the County of Los Angeles Building Code (which adopts the 2019 California Building Code) as the City’s building code in Section 9.1 et. seq. of the South Pasadena Municipal Code (SPMC). This is herein referred to as the City Building Code. Certain chapters or sections of the SPMC specifically pertain to construction in areas that present seismic risks and would apply to the Project. These requirements are described below.

Section 110.2, “Geotechnical Hazards”, of the SPMC restricts building and grading activities in areas where geotechnical hazards of landslide, settlement, and slippage may be activated or increased because of Project activities. The City Building Official has the authority to require that Project applicants submit an Engineering Geology and/or Soils Engineering Report to indicate how the hazard will be eliminated or mitigated prior to the use or occupancy of the land.

Section 111, “Engineering Geology and Soils Engineering Reports”, of the SPMC gives the Building Official the authority to require an Engineering Geology Report, a Soils Engineering Report, or both, in cases where such reports are considered essential for the evaluation of the site’s safety. The Engineering Geology and/or Soils Engineering Reports must be prepared by a California-certified engineering geologist or California-licensed civil engineer, respectively, and must contain a finding regarding the safety of the site of the proposed work against hazard from landslide, settlement, or slippage and a finding regarding the effect that the proposed work will have on the geotechnical stability of the area outside the proposed work.

Section 113, “Earthquake Fault Maps”, of the SPMC defines the additional requirements for construction of a building or structure near a known active earthquake fault, including, but not limited to, those shown on the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Zones Map. If a Project is proposed near the trace of a known active fault, the SPMC defines additional geologic investigations to confirm the presence or absence of active earthquake faults. The results of the investigations, conclusions, and recommendations shall be presented in a geology report prepared by a by a geologist licensed by the California State Board for Geologists and Geophysicists.

Hillside Protection
Section 36.340 et. seq. of the SPMC defines additional requirements, beyond the City Building Code, for development on sites with an average slope of 20 percent or greater, except parcels within the Altos de Monterey (AM) overlay zone situated along Via Del Rey and adjoining streets in the south-central portion of the City. These sites are instead subject to the AM Overlay District (Section 36.250.030 of the SPMC). There are parcels identified for potential housing in the Suitable Sites within the AM Overlay District. Development in hillside areas requires a Hillside 3 - 858
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.6_Geology-050823.docx 3.6-6 Geology and Soils Development Permit as a discretionary zoning approval of the City. Procedures for Hillside Development Permits are established in Section 36.410.065 of the City Municipal Code.

3.6.4 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
The following significance criteria are derived from Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines. A project would result in a significant adverse geology and soils impact if it would:

Threshold 3.6a: 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.
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking.
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction. iv) Landslides;
Threshold 3.6b: Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil; Threshold 3.6c: 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; Threshold 3.6d: 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; and/or
Threshold 3.6e: 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.

Threshold 3.6f: Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature.

3.6.5 PROPOSED HOUSING ELEMENT GOALS AND POLICIES
There are no Housing Element goals or policies related to geology and soils. 3 - 859
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.6_Geology-050823.docx 3.6-7 Geology and Soils

3.6.6 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Threshold 3.6a: Would the Project 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.
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
Surface Rupture
As discussed above, active and potentially active faults that cross the City include the Raymond fault and the Upper Elysian Park blind thrust. Other faults located near the City (within approximately 10 miles) include the Eagle Rock, Sierra Madre, Hollywood, and Santa Monica faults. A potential for surface fault rupture hazard exists along the faults underlying the City. “Active” faults (demonstrated offset of Holocene materials [less than 10,000–12,000 years ago] or significant seismic activity) and “potentially active” faults (Pleistocene [greater than 12,000 but less than 1,600,000 years ago]), as defined by the CGS, must be considered as potential sources for fault rupture.

The CGS has identified an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone for the Raymond fault. The AP Zone runs east-west through the northernmost portion of the City, largely overlying the State Route 110 alignment. Surface rupture movements on the Raymond fault could cause damage to overlying structures, utility infrastructure, and streets. The surface rupture of the Raymond fault presents a seismic hazard to the developments situated near the fault. Fault rupture hazards do not change for existing land uses. However, future development may be exposed to these hazards if located on the fault traces.

The northern portion of the City includes parcels located within the AP Zone. This area is currently developed with commercial/retail land uses, residential, and surface parking. A number of existing regulations prevent development over a fault trace or protect structures and infrastructure from surface rupture hazards. Specifically, compliance with AP Act requirements for detailed fault investigations would identify the presence of a fault trace on a proposed development or redevelopment site. As discussed above, the AP Act states that all jurisdictions require a geologic investigation to demonstrate that a proposed development project that includes structures for human occupancy is adequately set back (usually at least 50 feet) from an active fault prior to permitting. The extent of an AP Zone is not the area wherein surface rupture would necessarily occur, but the area in which a proposed development with human occupancy must complete additional, specific geologic investigation. Also, compliance with seismic design criteria in the City Building Code would promote the structural integrity of structures and infrastructure near faults to the maximum extent feasible under current engineering practice at the time of design and construction within the AP Zone. Through compliance with existing regulations, impacts related to surface rupture of a known active fault would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.
3 - 860
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.6_Geology-050823.docx 3.6-8 Geology and Soils Strong Ground Shaking
As with all of southern California, the City is located in a seismically active region and is at risk of strong seismic ground shaking. Earthquake-related hazards have the potential to cause serious damage to people and/or structures, including the risk of loss, injury, or death if the seismic event is large enough to generate short-duration, high peak ground accelerations or long-duration, moderate to high ground accelerations. Potential earthquake effects on structures and facilities within the City would depend upon the size (amount of energy release) and relative location of the earthquake in relation to a specific structure, and its location and underlying geologic conditions.

Future development of the remaining capacity of the City or pursuant to the Project would be subject to ground shaking hazard during earthquake events. The severity of ground shaking would depend on the magnitude of the earthquake, its distance to the City, and site geologic conditions.

Local differences in subsurface conditions (e.g., density, water content, grain size, subgrade soil profile classification) could increase or decrease the effective shaking compared to another location within the City. Therefore, site-specific geological, geotechnical, soil engineering, and earthquake engineering studies are mandatory for all proposed structures in accordance with the City Building Code.

Earthquake-resistant design and materials used in new construction or seismic retrofitting must meet the current seismic engineering standards of the California Building Code Seismic Zone 4 requirements, as incorporated by reference in the City Building Code, in effect at the time of design and construction. Buildings constructed or retrofitted according to newer/updated standards would have the highest level of resistance to building collapse during a seismic event compared to existing structures, in particular older structures and/or unreinforced masonry buildings that have not received retrofitting and/or were constructed in accordance with older building codes. Future development or redevelopment within the areas subject to a Hillside Development Permit, largely in the southwest portion of the City, would also be required to prepare site-specific geotechnical investigations that include analysis of slope stability, erosion, subsidence, groundwater effects, and earthquakes as it pertains to the site’s unique topography, to identify these hazards and provide appropriate construction recommendations, as necessary.

Development in the City and in the hillside areas is subject to regulations related to grading and geotechnical study. The City also has a continuing program to require structural reinforcement of all inventoried unreinforced masonry structures, as these buildings are the most susceptible to damage during a major earthquake. Through compliance with existing regulations and application of requirements related to earthquake construction and retrofitting, there would be less than significant impacts related to strong ground shaking, and no mitigation is required.

Threshold 3.6a: Would the Project directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? iv) Landslides?
The CGS broadly identifies areas of seismic-induced liquefaction and landslide risk pursuant to the Seismic Hazards Mapping Act. There are discrete areas designated as potentially susceptible to either liquefaction or landslide within the hilly area in the southwest portion of the City. These issues are discussed further below.
3 - 861
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.6_Geology-050823.docx 3.6-9 Geology and Soils Liquefaction is defined as the transformation of a granular material from a solid state into a liquid state with vibration (most commonly seismic shaking) in the presence of water. It is a phenomenon that tends to occur in areas with shallow groundwater and where the soils are composed of loosely compacted granular materials. During an earthquake, saturated, cohesionless soil particles tend to decrease in volume (condense) because the vibration causes smaller particles to shift and fill in the voids (pores) between larger soil particles normally filled with water. As the soil condenses, less space is left for water, causing an increase in pore water pressure.1 If the pore water pressure increases sufficiently, the soil loses its strength and transforms into a liquid state. This condition can lead to damage of overlying structures caused by loss of bearing, settlement, or subsidence of the soil; severe settlement of aboveground structures; and, in some cases, uplift of buried structures (e.g., large pipelines). Landslides typically consist of shallow failures involving surficial soils and the underlying highly weathered bedrock in moderate to steep terrain. Structures, roadways, utilities, and the general population located on or below these hazard areas could be subject to severe damage or injury.

These potential geotechnical risks would be addressed by the site-specific geotechnical report required pursuant to the City Building Code. Through compliance with existing regulations related to secondary seismic hazards, there would be less than significant impacts related to ground failure, and no mitigation is required.

Threshold 3.6b: Would the Project result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?
The largest source of erosion and topsoil loss, particularly in a developed environment, is uncontrolled drainage during construction activities. Construction activities produce loose soils, which would be subject to erosion if the surface areas were to be left uncovered and exposed to weather conditions. Grading, excavation, and trenching for construction may expose soils to short-term wind and water erosion, which could result in increased particulate matter (i.e., PM10) in the air and/or increased sediment runoff in surface waters.

For development or redevelopment projects over one acre, compliance with the current State Water Resources Control Board’s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with the Construction and Land Disturbance Activities (Construction General Permit) would be required. Compliance with the Construction General Permit is also required pursuant to Section 23.12 of the SPMC. Section 23.13 of the SPMC requires that all construction activities not subject to the Construction General Permit comply with the requirements of the City’s watershed management program, defined in Chapter 23, Stormwater and Urban Runoff Pollution Control, of the SPMC. Through compliance with State and local stormwater runoff permitting and management requirements, there would be less than significant impacts related to soil erosion, and no mitigation is required.

Threshold 3.6c: Would the Project 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?
Secondary seismic hazards related to the underlying geologic unit include several types of ground failure that can occur as a result of severe ground shaking. These hazards include landslides, collapse, ground lurching, shallow ground rupture, and liquefaction. The probability for each type of ground failure depends on the severity of the earthquake, the site’s distance from the fault, the 1 Pore water is the water existing in the pores or spaces between grains in sedimentary materials. 3 - 862
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.6_Geology-050823.docx 3.6-10 Geology and Soils local topography, and subsoil and groundwater conditions, among other factors. In addition, there can be soil engineering characteristics inherent in the underlying sediments on a site that can adversely affect structures if not appropriately managed during construction, including subsidence, hydroconsolidation, and other forms of collapse.

Potential hazards to future development and redevelopment pursuant to the Project due to the characteristics of the underlying geologic unit or soils would be identified during the preparation of required geotechnical investigations and/or soils reports (Section 36.540.090 of the SPMC) for individual projects, with recommendations on the soil expansion index that needs to be considered in the design and construction of structures and infrastructure. Through compliance with existing regulations, there would be a less than significant impact related to location on expansive soils, and no mitigation is required.

Threshold 3.6d: Would the Project 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?
Expansive soils are generally associated with soils, alluvium, and bedrock formations that contain clay minerals susceptible to expansion under wetting conditions and contraction under drying conditions. Depending upon the type and amount of clay present in a geologic deposit, volume changes (shrink and swell) can cause severe damage to slabs, foundations, and concrete flatwork.

Soil expansion hazards to future development and redevelopment pursuant to the Project would be identified during the preparation of required geotechnical investigations and/or soils reports (Section 36.540.090 of the SPMC) for individual, future projects. Specifically, recommendations on the soil expansion index that needs to be considered in the design and construction of structures and infrastructure would be part of these reports. Through compliance with existing regulations, there would be a less than significant impact related to location on expansive soils, and no mitigation is required.

Threshold 3.6e: Would the Project have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? Most of the City is served by the municipal sewer system. Future development and redevelopment would be required to connect to the public sewer system where existing sewer lines are available, as required under the California Plumbing Code. While the majority of the City is served by the sewer system, there are septic tanks that remain in the Altos de Monterey area in the southwest portion of the City. Redevelopment of a site with a septic tank would require abandonment of the septic tank and connection to the public sewer system under the California Plumbing Code. Also, compliance with Order No. R4-2004-0146 of the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) is required to regulate the type of discharge; surface overflows; disposal of wastes in geologically unstable areas; odors; and groundwater pollution, including annual inspections, connection to public sewer system within six months of availability, and monitoring.

The regulations protect shallow groundwater and adjacent water bodies. Through compliance with regulations, no development or redevelopment under the Project would use septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems. There would be no impact, and no mitigation is required. 3 - 863
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.6_Geology-050823.docx 3.6-11 Geology and Soils Threshold 3.6f: Would the Project directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? The proposed Project would not directly destroy a unique paleontological resource or unique geologic feature. Future development would largely occur in areas of the City that are already developed and/or built out. However, as discussed above in Section 3.6.2, based on the records search conducted by the NHMLA, nine fossil localities have been identified within or near the City.

Therefore, as with archaeological resources, grading and construction activities in undeveloped areas, or redevelopment that requires deeper or more extensive soil excavation than in the past, could potentially cause the disturbance of previously unknown paleontological resources. In general, any development that requires grading, excavation of undisturbed or shallowly disturbed ground, or excavation to levels below current building foundations has the potential to encounter unknown paleontological resources.

Unlike archaeological resources, there are no provisions in CEQA to afford protection of paleontological resources for individual development projects that would be accommodated by the Project. Therefore, in the event an unanticipated paleontological resource is encountered, MM GEO-1 would require that ground-disturbing activities are halted, and a qualified paleontologist would be hired to evaluate the find. If the resource is determined to be significant, the paleontologist shall determine appropriate actions, in consultation with the City and the developer (if present), for further exploration and/or salvage. With implementation of MM GEO-1, there would be less than significant impacts to potential paleontological resources.

3.6.7 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
Geology and soils impacts are generally site specific and there is typically little, if any, cumulative relationship between the development of individual projects on separate sites. As such, one development would not alter geologic events or soil features/characteristics (such as ground shaking, seismic intensity, or soil expansion) at another site, nor change geologic conditions or hazards at off-site locations.

Geological and seismic conditions are regional in nature and affect large areas, rather than individual parcels. Therefore, future development in the City, as well as development within the San Gabriel Valley, would be subject to geologic hazards including development potentially affected by faults, ground shaking, surface rupture, liquefaction, landslides, subsidence, soil collapse, expansive soils, and other geologic issues.

Compliance with applicable State and local regulations would be required of all development within the San Gabriel Valley. Individual projects would be designed and built in accordance with applicable standards in the CBC and the individual building regulations of local jurisdictions, including pertinent seismic design criteria. Site-specific geologic hazards would be addressed by the geotechnical investigation required by individual cities and the County for each development proposal. Geotechnical investigations would identify the geologic and seismic characteristics on a site and provide guidelines for engineering design and construction to provide for the structural integrity of proposed development. Compliance with applicable State and local regulations and standard engineering practices related to seismic and geologic hazard reductions would prevent significant adverse impacts associated with geologic hazards, and impacts associated with the Project would not be cumulatively considerable.

Development projects in the San Gabriel Valley would connect to the public sewer system where available but may utilize septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems in areas without 3 - 864
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.6_Geology-050823.docx 3.6-12 Geology and Soils sewer service. Compliance with the Los Angeles RWQCB regulations and the California Plumbing Code would prevent hazards associated with soils incapable of supporting septic systems.

Therefore, compliance with applicable State and local regulations and standard engineering practices related to septic hazard reductions would prevent significant adverse impacts.

Therefore, impacts associated with the Project would not be cumulatively considerable.

Direct impacts to paleontological resources are generally site specific. Although a project, in conjunction with the effects of past projects, other current projects, and probable future projects, could potentially result in the disturbance of paleontological resources throughout the region, the City requires the mitigation of impacts to these resources (i.e., MM GEO-1). Growth and development in the San Gabriel Valley would also lead to new development on vacant and undeveloped lots. Future development and public and infrastructure projects not subject to CEQA could adversely affect in-situ paleontological resources, and cumulative impacts may occur.

However, implementation of MM GEO-1 would prevent significant adverse impacts on paleontological resources in the City and thus, would avoid a cumulative contribution to the loss of paleontological resources in the Valley. There would be a less than significant cumulative impact to paleontological resources with implementation of MM GEO-1, and no further mitigation is required.

3.6.8 MITIGATION MEASURES
MM GEO-1 Should potential paleontological resources be found during ground-disturbing activities for any individual project, ground-disturbing activity in the immediate vicinity of the find shall be temporarily halted and a qualified paleontologist will be hired to evaluate the resource. If the potential resource is found not to be significant by the paleontologist, construction activity in the area of the find can resume. If the resource is found to be significant, the paleontologist shall determine appropriate actions, in consultation with the City and the developer (if present), for further exploration and/or salvage. A Disposition of the Recovered Paleontological Resources and Mitigation Report shall be prepared by the qualified paleontologist and submitted to the City. Any recovered fossils shall be deposited in an accredited institution or museum, such as the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County.

3.6.9 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION
Less than Significant.

3.6.10 REFERENCES
California Department of Conservation, California Geological Survey (CGS). 1998. Seismic Hazard Zone Report for the Los Angeles 7.5-Minute Quadrangle, Los Angeles County, California.

Sacramento, CA: CGS.
http://gmw.conservation.ca.gov/SHP/EZRIM/Reports/SHZR/SHZR_029_Los_Angeles.pdf. ———. 2017a (April 20). The Raymond Fault in the Mt. Wilson and El Monte Quadrangles, Los Angeles County, California. Sacramento, CA: CGS.
http://gmw.conservation.ca.gov/SHP/EZRIM/Reports/FER/264/FER_264_Report_20170 615.pdf.
———. 2017b (Released June 15). Earthquake Zones of Required Investigation, Los Angeles Quadrangle. Sacramento, CA: CGS.
http://gmw.conservation.ca.gov/SHP/EZRIM/Maps/LOS_ANGELES_EZRIM.pdf. 3 - 865
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.6_Geology-050823.docx 3.6-13 Geology and Soils California Institute of Technology (Caltech). 2018 (February 8, last accessed). Southern California Earthquake Data Center, Significant Earthquakes and Faults, Raymond Fault. Pasadena, CA: Caltech. http://scedc.caltech.edu/significant/raymond.html.

Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County (NHMLA). 2021 (May 3). Re: Paleontological Resources for the Project 3SPA010100. Los Angeles, CA: NHMLA.

South Pasadena, City of. 2012 (April). 820 Mission Street Mixed Use Project Draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration. Prepared by Rincon for City of South Pasadena.

South Pasadena, CA: the City.
———. 1998. South Pasadena General Plan: Chapter VIII, Safety and Noise Element. South Pasadena, the City. http://www.ci.southpasadena.ca.us/modules/showdocument.aspx?documentid=213.

South Pasadena Unified School District (SPUSD). 2016 (January). Mission Place Project Draft Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse Number 2015071001). Prepared by Michael Baker International for SPUSD. South Pasadena, CA: SPUSD.

3 - 866
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.6_Geology-050823.docx 3.6-14 Geology and Soils This page intentionally left blank
3 - 867
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.7_GHG-050923.docx 3.7-1 Greenhouse Gas Emissions

3.7 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS

3.7.1 METHODOLOGY
This section addresses greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions associated with the implementation of the proposed 2021–2029 Housing Element and the non-residential development capacity envisioned in the General Plan and Downtown Specific Plan (DTSP) Update (Project)and their relationship to climate change.

3.7.2 EXISTING CONDITIONS
Global Climate Change and Greenhouse Gases
Climate change is a recorded change in the Earth’s average weather measured by variables such as wind patterns, storms, precipitation, and temperature. Historical records show that global temperature changes have occurred naturally in the past, such as during previous ice ages. The year 2020 ranks as Earth’s hottest year on record, tying 2016 (NASA 2021).1 And the Earth’s global average temperature in 2021 tied with 2018 as the sixth warmest on record. Collectively, the past eight years are the warmest years since modern recordkeeping began in 1880 (NASA 2022). Overall, Earth’s average temperature has risen more than 2 degrees Fahrenheit since the 1880s. Continuing the planet’s long-term warming trend, 2020’s globally averaged temperature was 1.84 degrees Fahrenheit (1.02 degrees Celsius) warmer than the baseline 1951-1980 mean (NASA 2021).

The global atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide (CO2), the most abundant GHG, has increased from a pre-industrial (roughly 1750) value of about 280 parts per million (ppm) to a seasonally-adjusted 418.39 ppm in July 2022, primarily due to fossil fuel use, with land use change providing a significant but smaller contribution (ESRL 2022a). The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Annual Greenhouse Gas Index (AGGI) for 2021 was 1.49, which means the warming influence of GHGs has increased 49 percent since 1990. It took about 240 years for the AGGI to go from zero to one, and 31 years to increase by another 49 percent (ESRL 2022b).

Greenhouse Gases
GHGs are global pollutants and are therefore unlike criteria air pollutants such as ozone (O3), particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5), and toxic air contaminants (TACs), which are pollutants of regional and local concern. While pollutants with localized air quality effects have relatively short atmospheric lifetimes (generally on the order of a few days), GHGs have relatively long atmospheric lifetimes, ranging from one year to several thousand years. Long atmospheric lifetimes allow for GHGs to disperse around the globe. Therefore, GHG effects are global, as opposed to the local and/or regional air quality effects of criteria air pollutant and TAC emissions.

GHGs, as defined under California’s Assembly Bill (AB) 32, include CO2, methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6).

GHGs vary widely in the power of their climatic effects; therefore, climate scientists have established a unit called global warming potential (GWP). The GWP of a gas is a measure of both potency and lifespan in the atmosphere as compared to CO2. For example, as CH4 and N2O are approximately 25 and 298 times (respectively) more powerful than CO2 in their ability to trap heat in the atmosphere, they have GWPs of 25 and 298, respectively (CO2 has a GWP of 1). Carbon 1 A separate, independent analysis by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) concluded that 2020 was the second-warmest year in their record, behind 2016 (NASA 2022). 3 - 868
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.7_GHG-050923.docx 3.7-2 Greenhouse Gas Emissions dioxide equivalent (CO2e) is a quantity that enables all GHG emissions to be considered as a group despite their varying GWP. The GWP of each GHG is multiplied by the prevalence of that gas to produce CO2e.

General Environmental Effects of Global Climate Change
Executive Order S-3-05 mandates the preparation of biennial science assessment reports on climate change impacts and adaptation options for California. Executive Order S-13-08 directs the California Natural Resources Agency (CNRA) to develop a State Climate Adaptation Strategy and to provide State land use planning guidance related to sea level rise and other climate change impacts. Current reports resulting from these directed actions are the Climate Action Team Report to the Governor and Legislature and the California Climate Adaptation Strategy (CalEPA 2010; CNRA 2009a). These studies report that global warming in California is anticipated to impact resources including, but not limited to, those discussed below.  Public Health. Many Californians currently experience the worst air quality in the nation, and climate change is expected to make matters worse. Higher temperatures would increase the frequency, duration, and intensity of conditions conducive to air pollution formation. If global background O3 levels increase as predicted under some scenarios, it may become impossible to meet local air quality standards. Air quality could be further compromised by more frequent wildfires, which emit fine particulate matter that can travel long distances. Rising temperatures and more frequent heat waves would increase the risk of death from dehydration, heat stroke/exhaustion, heart attack, stroke, and respiratory distress. Climate change may also increase asthma rates and the spread of infectious diseases and their vectors, as well as challenge food and water supplies.

Children, the elderly, people with chronic heart or lung disease, outdoor workers, people who exercise outdoors and the economically disadvantaged would be particularly vulnerable to these changes. In addition, more frequent extreme weather events could also result in increased injuries and deaths from these phenomena.  Energy. Increasing mean temperature and more frequent heat waves will drive up demand for cooling in summer; this new energy demand will only be partially offset by decreased demand for heating in winter. Hydropower, which currently provides 15 percent of in-state generation, would be threatened by declining snowpack, which serves as a natural reservoir for hydropower generation in the spring and summer. Winter storms, earlier snowmelt, and greater runoff may combine to cause flooding, which could, in turn, damage transmission lines and cause power outages.
 Water Resources. Rising temperatures, less precipitation, and more precipitation falling as rain instead of snow could severely diminish snowpack. Because the Sierra Nevada snowpack provides most of California’s available water, this potential loss would increase the risk of summer water shortages and would hamper water distribution and hydropower generation. The diminished snowpack would also nearly eliminate all skiing and other snow-related recreation. Rising sea levels would push saltwater into California’s estuaries, wetlands, and groundwater aquifers, threatening the water quality and reliability in the Sacramento/San Joaquin River Delta—a major California freshwater supply. Extreme precipitation and flooding could also damage water quality by creating sudden increases in runoff. Moreover, warming would increase evapotranspiration rates from plants, soil, and open water surfaces, which would result in greater demand for irrigation. Overall, climate change would reduce California’s water supplies even as its growing population requires additional resources.
3 - 869
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.7_GHG-050923.docx 3.7-3 Greenhouse Gas Emissions  Sea Level and Flooding. Sea level at California’s coasts is expected to rise by 11 to 18 inches above 2000 levels by 2050 and by 23 to 55 inches by 2100. If realized, these increases would create more frequent and higher storm surges; would erode some coastal areas; and would increase pressure on existing levees. These increases would create a greater risk of flooding in previously untouched inland areas. Consequently, continued development in vulnerable coastal areas would put more people and infrastructure at risk.  Agriculture. Although higher CO2 levels can stimulate plant production and increase plant water-use efficiency, in the long-term, climate change would reduce the quantity and quality of agricultural products statewide. As temperatures rise, farmers will face greater water demand for crops and a less reliable water supply, as well as increased competition from urban water users. Sea level rise may cause saltwater intrusion in the Delta region, making it difficult to raise certain crops. Rising temperatures will likely aggravate O3 pollution, interfering with plant growth and making plants more susceptible to disease and pests. In addition, warming would reduce the number of colder hours needed for fruit and nut production; would shift pest and weed ranges; would alter crop-pollinator timing; and would increase the frequency of droughts, heat waves, and floods. Higher average temperatures would also increase mortality and decrease productivity in livestock.  Forestry. California timber production has declined over the past few decades due, in part, to warming and increased wildfires. While further warming may increase production for some species in some locations, climate change is expected to reduce overall forest growth. Increasing average temperatures and drought frequency would result in more wildfires and greater burned areas, while less frequent and more intense rainfall would increase soil erosion and landslides. Higher temperatures and less water would force many tree species to shift their ranges; those that run out of livable habitat may die out.

Pests, diseases, and invasive species may also colonize new areas, further challenging forest health and biodiversity.
 Ecosystems. Rising average temperatures would subject plants and animals to greater thermal stress, causing some species to adapt or shift their ranges, while others may face extinction. Invasive species may also shift their ranges, threatening native species.

Changing temperatures would also alter the timing of plant flowering and insect emergence, damaging species’ ability to reproduce. Changing precipitation patterns would impact aquatic and riparian ecosystems by reducing snowpack, stream flow, and groundwater, while increasing the frequency of droughts, floods, and wildfires. As sea levels rise, some coastal habitats may be permanently flooded or eroded, and saltwater intrusion into freshwater resources may threaten terrestrial species. Changes in ocean circulation and temperature, ocean acidification, and increased runoff and sedimentation would threaten pelagic species. In sum, continued global warming would alter natural ecosystems and threaten California’s biological diversity.

Global, National, and State Contributions to Greenhouse Gas Emissions Table 3.7-1 compares the magnitude of GHG emissions on the global, national and State scales.

It shows the relative estimated quantities of GHG emissions from worldwide to California. CO2e emissions are commonly expressed as metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MTCO2e). Larger quantities of emissions, such as on the State or world scale, are expressed as million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MMTCO2e). Metric tons may also be stated as “tonnes”. 3 - 870
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.7_GHG-050923.docx 3.7-4 Greenhouse Gas Emissions TABLE 3.7-1

COMPARISON OF WORLDWIDE GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Area and Data Year
Annual GHG Emissions
(MMTCO2e)
World (2019) 49,758
United States (2019) 5,771
California (2019) 418
SCAG region (2020) 216
South Pasadena (2016) 0.125
GHG: greenhouse gas; MMTCO2e: million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent Source: Climate Watch 2022 (world & U.S.); CARB 2022 (California); SCAG 2020 (SCAG region); South Pasadena 2020 (City).

As shown, the U.S. contributes approximately 11.6 percent of worldwide GHG emissions per year and California contributes approximately 0.8 percent. The SCAG region, which includes the counties of Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, Ventura, and Imperial contributes approximately 52 percent of California’s GHG emissions. The City of South Pasadena’s (City) GHG emissions are approximately 0.06 percent (1/17) of the SCAG region’s emissions.

The most common GHG is CO2, which constitutes approximately 80 and 83 percent of all GHG emissions in the U.S. and California, respectively. The primary contributors to California GHG emissions are (1) transportation; (2) industrial uses; and (3) electric power production from both in-State and out-of-State sources. The primary contributors to the City’s GHG emissions are (1) transportation–54 percent and (2) energy–39 percent, approximately equally divided between electricity and natural gas.

3.7.3 RELEVANT PROGRAMS AND REGULATIONS
There are a multitude of federal and State regulations and programs related to GHG emissions, many of which overlap in goals and/or requirements. Those listed below most directly relate to emissions that would be expected to result from growth at the city and county level, primarily mobile (vehicle) emissions and building-related energy efficiency and alternative energy use.

Federal
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Findings
On December 7, 2009, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) Administrator signed two distinct findings regarding GHGs under Section 202(a) of the Clean Air Act (CAA). The findings do not themselves impose any requirements on industry or other entities. However, this action is a prerequisite to finalizing the USEPA’s proposed GHG emission standards for light-duty vehicles (USEPA 2021). A light-duty vehicle is defined as any motor vehicle with a gross vehicle weight of 6,000 pounds or less (CARB 2021b).

Light-Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emissions Standards and Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards
The USEPA and the Department of Transportation’s National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) have been working together on developing a National Program of regulations to reduce GHG emissions and to improve the fuel economy of light-duty vehicles. On 3 - 871
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.7_GHG-050923.docx 3.7-5 Greenhouse Gas Emissions April 1, 2010, the USEPA and NHTSA announced a joint Final Rulemaking establishing standards for 2012 through 2016 model year vehicles. On October 15, 2012, the agencies issued a Final Rulemaking with standards for model years 2017 through 2025. The rules require these vehicles to meet an estimated combined average emissions level of 295 grams of CO2 per mile by 2012, decreasing to 250 grams per mile by 2016, and finally to an average industry fleet-wide level of 163 grams per mile in model year 2025. The 2016 standard is equivalent to 35.5 miles per gallon (mpg) and the 2025 standard is equivalent to 54.5 mpg if the levels were achieved solely through improvements in fuel efficiency. The agencies expect, however, that a portion of these improvements will occur due to air conditioning technology improvements (i.e., they will leak less) and due to the use of alternative refrigerants, which would not contribute to fuel economy. These standards would cut GHG emissions by an estimated 2 billion metric tons and 4 billion barrels of oil over the lifetime of the vehicles sold under the program (model years 2017–2025). The combined USEPA GHG standards and NHTSA Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards resolve previously conflicting requirements under both federal programs and the standards of the State of California and other States that have adopted the California standards (USEPA and NHTSA 2012).

On September 19, 2019, NHTSA and the USEPA issued a final action entitled the “One National Program Rule” to enable the federal government to provide nationwide uniform fuel economy and greenhouse gas emission standards for automobile and light duty trucks. This action finalizes critical parts of the Safer, Affordable, Fuel-Efficient (SAFE) Vehicles Rule that was first proposed in August 2018. In this proposal, the agencies proposed new and amended greenhouse gas (GHG) and Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards for model year 2021 to 2026 light duty vehicles (USEPA and NHTSA 2019). In this action, USEPA withdrew the Clean Air Act waiver that had been granted to the State of California in January 2013 for the State’s Advanced Clean Car program with respect to GHG and Zero Emission Vehicle (ZEV) elements. In November 2019, California, 21 other states, the District of Columbia, and four California cities filed a petition for EPA to reconsider SAFE-1. A petition for recosideration was also files by several enviromental groups. On April 28, 2021, USEPA published a Notice of Reconsideration: California State Motor Vehicle Pollution Control Standards; Advanced Clean Car Program; Reconsideration of a Previous Withdrawal of a Waiver of Preemption; Opportunity for Public Hearing and Public Comment. The public comment period closes July 6, 2021 (USEPA 2021b). On March 25, 2022, after reviewing all the public comments, NHTSA finalized the CAFE Preemption rulemaking to withdraw its portions of the so-called SAFE I Rule (NHTSA 2022).

On March 31, 2022, NHTSA finalized CAFE standards that require an industry-wide fleet average of approximately 49 mpg for passenger cars and light trucks in model year 2026, the strongest cost savings and fuel efficiency standards to date. The new standards will increase fuel efficiency percent annually for model years 2024-2025 and 10 percent annually for model year 2026. They will also increase the estimated fleetwide average by nearly 10 miles per gallon for model year 2026, relative to model year 2021 (NHTSA 2022).

State
Assembly Bill 1493 (Mobile Source Reductions)
Assembly Bill (AB) 1493, adopted September 2002, also known as Pavley I, requires the development and adoption of regulations to achieve the maximum feasible reduction of GHGs emitted by noncommercial passenger vehicles, light-duty trucks, and other vehicles used primarily for personal transportation in the State. The emission standards have become increasingly more stringent through the 2016 model year. California is also committed to further strengthening these standards beginning in 2017 to obtain a 45 percent GHG reduction from 2020 model year vehicles 3 - 872
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.7_GHG-050923.docx 3.7-6 Greenhouse Gas Emissions (CARB 2021c). Regulations to make California emissions standards for model year 2017 and beyond consistent with federal standards were adopted in 2012 and are discussed further below.

CARB’s Advanced Clean Cars Program
In January 2012, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) approved the Advanced Clean Cars Program, an emissions-control program for model year 2017 through 2025. The program combines the control of smog, soot and GHGs with requirements for greater numbers of zeroemission vehicles. By 2025, when the rules will be fully implemented, the new automobiles will emit 34 percent fewer global warming gases and 75 percent fewer smog-forming emissions. The program also requires car manufacturers to offer for sale an increasing number of zero-emission vehicles (ZEVs) each year, including battery electric, fuel cell, and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles.

In March 2017, CARB adopted GHG standards for 2022 through 2025 model years and directed staff fo begin rule development for 2026 and subsequent model years (CARB 2021d).

Executive Order S-3-05 (Statewide GHG Targets)
On June 1, 2005, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed Executive Order S-3-05, which proclaims that California is vulnerable to the impacts of climate change. It declares that increased temperatures could reduce snowpack in the Sierra Nevada Mountains; could further exacerbate California’s air quality problems; and could potentially cause a rise in sea levels. In an effort to avoid or reduce the impacts of climate change, Executive Order S-3-05 calls for a reduction in GHG emissions to the year 2000 level by 2010, to year 1990 levels by 2020, and to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050.

However, executive orders do not have the same status as a law because in California’s constitutional system, it is the Legislature, not the Governor, who is entrusted with the role of making statewide laws. The Legislature declined to include the Executive Order's 2050 goal in AB 32 (discussed below), and again declined to use the EO's 2050 goal in adopting Senate Bill (SB) 375 (discussed below), nor has it incorporated it in any implementing legislation or applicable plans. Additionally, although CARB has the requisite authority to adopt whatever regulations are necessary beyond the AB 32 horizon year 2020 to meet the target set forth in S-3-05, the agency has not done so. Since the Legislature has never enacted EO S-3-05’s 2050 target, and no expert agency has interpreted CEQA to require it, the 2050 target has only the force and effect of an executive order issued by a former Governor. If the Legislature has delegated any of its authority to define CEQA’s requirements, it delegated that authority to the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR).

Senate Bill 97 and the State CEQA Guidelines
Pursuant to Senate Bill (SB 97), OPR developed proposed amendments to the State CEQA Guidelines (CEQA Amendments) for the feasible mitigation of GHG emissions and their effects, which it first submitted to the Secretary of the CNRA on April 13, 2009. After a public review and comment period, on December 30, 2009, the CNRA adopted the CEQA Amendments, which became effective on March 18, 2010.

The CEQA Amendments for Greenhouse Gas Emissions state in Section 15064.4(a) that lead agencies should “make a good faith effort, to the extent possible on scientific and factual data, to describe, calculate or estimate” GHG emissions. The CEQA Amendments note that an agency may identify emissions by either selecting a “model or methodology” to quantify the emissions or by relying on “qualitative analysis or other performance based standards” (CNRA 2009b). Section 15064.4(b) of the State CEQA Guidelines provides that the lead agency should consider the 3 - 873
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.7_GHG-050923.docx 3.7-7 Greenhouse Gas Emissions following when assessing the significance of impacts from GHG emissions on the environment (CNRA 2009b):
 The extent a project may increase or reduce GHG emissions as compared to the environmental setting.
 Whether the project emissions exceed a threshold of significance that the lead agency determines applies to the project.
 The extent to which the project complies with regulations or requirements adopted to implement a statewide, regional, or local plan for the reduction or mitigation of GHG emissions.

All of these are considered in the impact analysis presented in this section. In addition, the revisions to Appendix G, Environmental Checklist Form, of the State CEQA Guidelines, which is often used as a basis for lead agencies’ selection of significance thresholds, does not prescribe specific thresholds. Rather, Appendix G asks whether the project would conflict with a plan, policy or regulation adopted to reduce GHG emissions or would generate GHG emissions that would significantly affect the environment, indicating that the determination of what is a significant effect on the environment should be left to the lead agency. Accordingly, the CEQA Amendments do not prescribe specific methodologies for performing an assessment; they do not establish specific thresholds of significance; and they do not mandate specific mitigation measures. Rather, the CEQA Amendments emphasize the lead agency’s discretion to determine the appropriate methodologies and thresholds of significance consistent with the manner in which other impact areas are handled in CEQA (CNRA 2009b).

The CEQA Amendments indicate that lead agencies should consider all feasible means, supported by substantial evidence and subject to monitoring and reporting, of mitigating the significant effects of GHG emissions. As pertinent to the Project, these potential mitigation measures, set forth in Section 15126.4(c) of the State CEQA Guidelines, may include (1) measures in an existing plan or mitigation program for the reduction of GHG emissions that are required as part of the lead agency’s decision; (2) reductions in GHG emissions resulting from a project through implementation of project design features; (3) off-site measures, including offsets, to mitigate a project’s emissions; and (4) carbon sequestration measures (CNRA 2009b).

Among other things, the CNRA noted in its Public Notice for these changes that impacts of GHG emissions should focus on the cumulative impact on climate change. The Public Notice states (CNRA 2009):

While the Proposed Amendments do not foreclose the possibility that a single project may result in greenhouse gas emissions with a direct impact on the environment, the evidence before [CNRA] indicates that in most cases, the impact will be cumulative.

Therefore, the Proposed Amendments emphasize that the analysis of greenhouse gas emissions should center on whether a project’s incremental contribution of greenhouse gas emissions is cumulatively considerable.

Thus, the CEQA Amendments continue to make clear that the significance of greenhouse gas emissions is most appropriately considered on a cumulative level.

Assembly Bill 32 (Statewide GHG Reductions)
In furtherance of the goals established in EO S-3-05, the California Legislature adopted the public policy position that global warming is “a serious threat to the economic well-being, public health, 3 - 874
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.7_GHG-050923.docx 3.7-8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions natural resources, and the environment of California” (California Health and Safety Code, Section 38501). The public policy statements became law with the enactment of the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB 32) in September 2006, after considerable study and expert testimony before the Legislature. The law instructs CARB to develop and enforce regulations for the reporting and verifying of statewide GHG emissions. AB 32 directed CARB to set a GHG emission limit based on 1990 levels, to be achieved by 2020. The bill set a timeline for adopting a scoping plan for achieving GHG reductions in a technologically and economically feasible manner. The scoping plan is described further below.

Executive Order B-30-15 (Statewide Interim GHG Targets) California EO B-30-15 (2015) set an “interim” statewide emission target to reduce GHG emissions to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030, and directed State agencies with jurisdiction over GHG emissions to implement measures pursuant to statutory authority to achieve this 2030 target and the 2050 target of 80 percent below 1990 levels. Specifically, the Executive Order directed CARB to update the Scoping Plan to express this 2030 target in metric tons.

Senate Bill 32/Assembly Bill 197
SB 32, signed September 8, 2016, implements a goal of EO B-30-15. Under SB 32, in "adopting rules and regulations to achieve the maximum technologically feasible and cost-effective greenhouse gas emissions reductions," CARB must ensure that statewide greenhouse gas emissions are reduced to 40 percent below the 1990 level by 2030. SB 32's findings state that CARB will “achieve the state’s more stringent greenhouse gas emission reductions in a manner that benefits the state’s most disadvantaged communities and is transparent and accountable to the public and the Legislature.” AB 197, a companion to SB 32, adds two members to the CARB and requires measures to increase transparency about GHG emissions, climate policies, and GHG reduction actions.

California Air Resources Board Scoping Plan
On December 11, 2008, CARB adopted the Scoping Plan to achieve the goals of AB 32. The Scoping Plan establishes an overall framework for the measures that will be adopted to reduce California’s GHG emissions. CARB determined that achieving the 1990 emission level would require a reduction of GHG emissions of approximately 28.5 percent below what would otherwise occur in 2020 in the absence of new laws and regulations (referred to as “business as usual”).

The Scoping Plan evaluates opportunities for sector-specific reductions; integrates all CARB and Climate Action Team early actions and additional GHG reduction measures by both entities; identifies additional measures to be pursued as regulations; and outlines the role of a cap-andtrade program.

First Update to the Climate Change Scoping Plan
CARB approved the final “First Update to the Climate Change Scoping Plan” on May 22, 2014.

The first update describes California’s progress towards AB 32 goals, stating that “California is on track to meet the near-term 2020 greenhouse gas limit and is well positioned to maintain and continue reductions beyond 2020 as required by AB 32”. Specifically, “if California realizes the expected benefits of existing policy goals (such as 12,000 megawatts [MW] of renewable distributed generation by 2020, net zero energy homes after 2020, existing building retrofits under AB 758, and others) it could reduce emissions by 2030 to levels squarely in line with those needed in the developed world and to stay on track to reduce emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050” (CARB 2014). Reducing the "business as usual" or NAT condition of 509 MMTCO2e to 3 - 875
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.7_GHG-050923.docx 3.7-9 Greenhouse Gas Emissions the 1990 emissions level of 431 MMTCO2e will require a reduction of 78 MMTCO2e, or approximately a 15.3 percent reduction (compared to a 28.5 percent reduction as set forth in the original Scoping Plan but not directly comparable because of the change in methodology).

Second Update to the Climate Change Scoping Plan
CARB prepared a second update to the Scoping Plan to reflect the 2030 target established in Executive Order B-30-15 and in Senate Bill 32 (discussed above). The Final Proposed 2017 Scoping Plan was published in November 2017, and the third public Board Meeting for the Proposed Scoping Plan was held on December 14, 2017, where the Final Proposed 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan (Second Update to the Climate Change Scoping Plan, or 2017 Scoping Plan Update) was adopted.

The 2017 Scoping Plan Update includes new statutory GHG reduction requirements that were not included in the current Scoping Plan, including Senate Bill 32 (discussed below) which sets a 40 percent GHG reduction target below 1990 GHG levels to be achieved by 2030, SB 350 (which sets a 50 percent reduction in GHG emissions from electricity generation and other energy uses in existing structures, and a 50 percent renewable energy portfolio requirement), and SB 650 (which establishes priority GHG reduction targets for designated types of greenhouse gases such as methane). The key elements of the 2017 Scoping Plan Update proposal call for further GHG reductions from the refinery sector specifically, further reductions from other stationary sources through either a renewed and expanded cap-and-trade or carbon tax program, further reductions from other sectors such as transportation technologies and services, water and solid waste conservation and management, and land uses in both open space and urban areas (CARB 2017). 2022 Scoping Plan Update
The Draft 2022 Scoping Plan Update, dated May 2022, assesses progress toward the statutory 2030 target, while laying out a path to achieving carbon neutrality no later than 2045. The 2022 Scoping Plan Update focuses on outcomes needed to achieve carbon neutrality by assessing paths for clean technology, energy deployment, natural and working lands, and others, and is designed to meet the State’s long-term climate objectives and support a range of economic, environmental, energy security, environmental justice, and public health priorities (CARB 2022b).

This is the first Scoping Plan that adds carbon neutrality as a science-based guide beyond statutorily established emission reduction targets. It identifies a technologically feasible, costeffective and equity-focused path to achieve carbon neutrality by 2045, or earlier, while also assessing the progress the state is making toward reducing its GHG emissions by at least 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030, as called for in SB 32 and laid out in the 2017 Scoping Plan (CARB 2022c).

Senate Bill 375 (Land Use Planning)
Signed September 30, 2008, SB 375 provides for a new planning process to coordinate land use planning and regional transportation plans (RTPs) and funding priorities in order to help California meet the GHG reduction goals established in AB 32. SB 375 requires Metropolitan Planning Organizations, including the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), to incorporate a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) in their regional transportation plans that will achieve GHG emission reduction targets set by CARB. There are two mutually important facets to SB 375: reducing vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and encouraging more compact, complete, and efficient communities for the future. SB 375 also includes provisions for exemptions from or streamlined CEQA review for projects classified as transit priority projects (SCAG 2016).

See additional discussion of the SCAG plan under “Regional” regulations below. 3 - 876
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.7_GHG-050923.docx 3.7-10 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Senate Bills 1078, 107, and SBX1-2 (Renewable Portfolio Standards) Established in 2002 under SB 1078, accelerated in 2006 under SB 107, and again in 2011 under SBX1-2, California’s Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) requires retail sellers of electric services to increase procurement from eligible renewable energy resources to 33 percent of total retail sales by 2020. Initially, the Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) provisions applied to investor-owned utilities, community choice aggregators, and electric service providers. SBX1-2 added, for the first time, publicly owned utilities to the entities subject to RPS.

Senate Bill 350
SB 350, signed October 7, 2015, is the Clean Energy and Pollution Reduction Act of 2015. SB 350 is the implementation of some of the goals of EO B-30-15. The objectives of SB 350 are:
(1) To increase from 33 percent to 50 percent, the procurement of our electricity from renewable sources.
(2) To double the energy efficiency savings in electricity and natural gas final end uses of retail customers through energy efficiency and conservation (CEC 2021a).

Senate Bill 100
On September 10, 2018, Governor Brown signed SB 100, the 100 Percent Clean Energy Act of 2018. SB 100 requires renewable energy and zero-carbon resources to supply 100 percent of electric retail sales to end-use customers and 100 percent of electricity procured to serve state agencies by December 31, 2045. This policy requires the transition to zero-carbon electric systems that do not cause contributions to increase of GHG emissions elsewhere in the western electricity grid (CEC 2021b). SB 100 also creates new standards for the RPS goals established by SB 350 in 2015. Specifically, the bill increases required energy from renewable sources for both investor-owned utilities and publicly owned utilities from 50 percent to 60 percent by 2030.

Executive Order B-55-18
On September 10, 2018, Governor Brown also signed California EO B-55-18, which sets a new statewide goal of carbon neutrality as soon as possible, and no later than 2045, and achieve net negative emissions thereafter. EO B-55-18 was added to the existing Statewide targets of reducing GHG emissions, including the targets previously established by Governor Brown of reducing emissions to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 (EO B-30-15 and SB 32), and by Governor Schwarzenegger of reducing emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2040 (EO S-3-05).

Title 24 Energy Efficiency Standards
The Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings (Title 24, Part 6 of the California Code of Regulations [CCR]) were established in 1978 in response to a legislative mandate to reduce California’s energy consumption. The currently applicable standards are the 2019 Standards, effective January 1, 2020. The 2019 standards focus on four key areas: smart residential photovoltaic systems, updated thermal envelope standards (preventing heat transfer from the interior to exterior and vice versa), residential and nonresidential ventilation requirements, and nonresidential lighting requirements. The ventilation measures improve indoor air quality, protecting homeowners from air pollution originating from outdoor and indoor sources (CEC 2021c). The requirements of the energy efficiency standards result in the reduction of natural gas and electricity consumption. Both natural gas and electricity use produce GHG 3 - 877
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.7_GHG-050923.docx 3.7-11 Greenhouse Gas Emissions emissions. The goal of the standards is to reduce energy use in new homes by more than 50 percent.The 2019 standards require that there is sufficient on-site electricity generation to meet the annual electricity usage for low rise residential buildings. A 30 percent reduction in energy uses is anticipated for nonresidential uses. The requirement for low-rise residential buildings to develop onsite electricity generation is consistent with the goal to develop renewable sources of energy.

The CEC adopted the 2008 changes to the Building Energy Efficiency Standards in order to (1) “Provide California with an adequate, reasonably-priced, and environmentally-sound supply of energy” and (2) “Respond to Assembly Bill 32, the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, which mandates that California must reduce its greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by 2020”.

Additionally, it has been California policy that all new residential buildings will be zero net energy (ZNE) by 2020 and new commercial buildings will be ZNE by 2030, as described in the 2008 California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) long-term energy efficiency strategic plan. In 2013, the California Energy Commission (CEC), in coordination with the CPUC, commenced a process to update the Title 24 energy efficiency standards and, the 2016 Title 24 Energy Efficiency Standards establish building design and construction requirements that move closer to achieving California’s ZNE goals. The requirements of the energy efficiency standards result in the reduction of natural gas and electricity consumption. Both natural gas use and electricity generation result in GHG emissions.

California Green Building Standards Code
The 2022 California Green Building Standards Code (24 CCR, Part 11), also known as the CALGreen code, contains mandatory requirements and voluntary measures for new residential and nonresidential buildings (including buildings for retail, office, public schools and hospitals) throughout California). The development of the CALGreen Code is intended to improve public health, safety, and general welfare by enhancing the design and construction of buildings through the following construction practices: (1) planning and design; (2) energy efficiency; (3) water efficiency and conservation; (4) material conservation and resource efficiency; and (5) environmental quality. In short, the code is established to reduce construction waste; make buildings more efficient in the use of materials and energy; and reduce environmental impact during and after construction.

California Air Pollution Control Officers Association
The California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) is the association of Air Pollution Control Officers representing all 35 local air quality agencies throughout California.

CAPCOA is not a regulatory body, but has been an active organization in providing guidance in addressing the CEQA significance of GHG emissions and climate change as well as other air quality issues. The August 2010 CAPCOA publication entitled Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures, A Resource for Local Government to Assess Emission Reductions from Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures provides guidance on the quantification of project-level mitigation of GHGs associated with land use, transportation, energy use, and other related project areas. The guidance includes detailed procedures about the approaches to assessing and calculating the GHG emissions reductions associated with project design features and mitigation measures (CAPCOA 2010). This publication’s methods are used in the CalEEMod computer model that is used to calculate GHG emissions.
3 - 878
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.7_GHG-050923.docx 3.7-12 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Regional
South Coast Air Quality Management District
The City lies within the boundaries of the SCAQMD. SCAQMD is the regulatory agency responsible for improving air quality for large areas of Los Angeles, Orange County, Riverside and San Bernardino counties, including the Coachella Valley. The region is home to more than 17 million people–about half the population of the entire state of California. The mission of the SCAQMD is “To clean the air and protect the health of all residents in the South Coast Air District through practical and innovative strategies (SCAQMD 2021).

Beginning in April 2008, the SCAQMD convened a Working Group to provide guidance to local lead agencies on determining significance for GHG emissions in their CEQA documents. On December 5, 2008, the SCAQMD Governing Board adopted its staff proposal for an interim CEQA GHG significance threshold of 10,000 metric tons of CO2 equivalent per year (MTCO2e/year) for industrial projects where the SCAQMD is the lead agency. The policy objective for establishing this significance threshold is to capture projects that represent approximately 90 percent of GHG emissions from new sources and to avoid EIR-level analysis for relatively small impacts (SCAQMD 2008).

In September 2010, the Working Group proposed extending the 10,000 MTCO2e/year screening threshold currently applicable to industrial projects where the SCAQMD is the lead agency, described above, to other lead agency industrial projects. For all other projects, SCAQMD staff proposed a multiple tier analysis to determine the appropriate threshold to be used. The draft proposal suggests the following tiers: Tier 1 is any applicable CEQA exemptions, Tier 2 is consistency with a GHG reduction plan, Tier 3 is a screening value or bright-line2, Tier 4 is a performance-based standard, and Tier 5 is GHG mitigation offsets. According to the presentation given at the September 28, 2010, Working Group meeting, SCAQMD staff proposed a Tier 3 draft threshold of of 3,000 MTCO2e per year for all non-industrial land use types (SCAQMD 2010). For the Tier 4 draft threshold, SCAQMD staff presented a percent emission reduction target option but did not provide any specific recommendation for a numerical target; instead it referenced the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD) approach. The percent reduction target is based on consistency with AB 32 as it was based on the same numeric reductions calculated in the Scoping Plan to reach 1990 levels by 2020. The second Tier 4 option is to utilize efficiency targets: 2020 targets are 4.8 MTCO2e per year per service population (SP) for projectlevel thresholds where SP is project residents plus employees and 6.6 MTCO2e per year per SP for a plan-level threshold (SCAQMD 2010). Targets for 2035 are 3.0 MTCO2e per SP for project level thresholds and 4.1 MTCO2e per year per SP for plan level threshold. The Working Group has not convened since the fall of 2010. As of the publication of this EA, the proposal to establish a GHG threshold for developments like the Project (e.g., general plans, housing elements) has not been considered or approved for use by the SCAQMD Board but the methodology has been used by lead agencies to evaluate GHG impacts under CEQA. 2 A bright-line is a single value, applicable to all projects of one type, regardless of size. Thus, a bright-line is different from performance standards or efficiency standards that are generally based on a per-unit basis. 3 - 879
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.7_GHG-050923.docx 3.7-13 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Southern California Association of Governments
As previously discussed, SB 375 specifically required Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs), including SCAG, to incorporate a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) in their Regional Transportation Plan (RTPs) that will achieve GHG emission reduction targets set by CARB. SCAG’s current SCS is included in its 2020–2045 RTP/SCS Connect SoCal (SCAG 2020).3 The 2020 RTP/SCS combines the need for mobility with a “sustainable future” through a reduction in the amount of emissions produced from transportation sources. The 2020 RTP/SCS includes population, housing, and employment forecasts for the City. The document was adopted by SCAG on September 3, 2020. The 2020–2045 RTP/SCS is expected to reduce per capita transportation emissions by 19 percent by 2035 relative to 2005.

Local
South Pasadena Climate Action Plan
The City of South Pasadena adopted its first Climate Action Plan (CAP) on December 16, 2020.

The CAP is a long-range planning document that guides the City towards long-term emissions reductions in accordance with State of California goals. The CAP analyzes emission sources within the City, forecasts future emissions, and establishes emission reduction targets. This CAP is the City of South Pasadena’s roadmap to achieving the City’s target and state mandated goal of 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030, with the ultimate goal of achieving carbon neutrality by 2045. The CAP also establishes a framework for implementation and monitoring of reduction activities, and further promotes adaptation and preparedness actions. The plan is intended to be a qualified GHG Reduction Plan and meets the requirements of Section 15183.5(b) of the State CEQA Guidelines (South Pasadena 2020). The CAP states, “In the City of South Pasadena, the most pronounced effects of climate change will be increased average temperature, more days of extreme heat, and elevated drought risk, all of which may lead to increased wildfires.” The CAP targets are to reduce the City’s GHG emissions from a level of approximately 125,269 MTCO2e/year in 2016, when the CAP was prepared, to approximately 75,000 MTCO2e/year in 2030, 25,000 MTCO2e/year in 2040, and zero in 2045. CAP emission reduction measures and actions are called Plays and Moves, respectively, in the CAP. The GHG emission reduction measures (Plays) are shown in Table 3.7-2.
3 The 2020-2045 RTP/SCS succeeds the 2016-2040 RTP/SCS. 3 - 880
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.7_GHG-050923.docx 3.7-14 Greenhouse Gas Emissions TABLE 3.7-2

SOUTH PASADENA CLIMATE ACTION PLAN

MEASURES (PLAYS) SUMMARY
Sector Play
GHG Emissions
Reduction Contribution
Cornerstone C.1 Engage South Pasadena youth in climate action and provide education on ways to live a sustainable lifestyle. 2030: 25 MT CO2e
2045: 78 MT CO2e
Energy
E.1
Maximize the usage of renewable power within the
community, by continuing to achieve an opt-out rate lower than 4% for the Clean Power Alliance.
2030: 13,408 MT CO2e
2045: 0 MT CO2e
E.2 Electrify 100% of newly constructed buildings. 2030: 228 MT CO2e 2045: 935 MT CO2e
E.3 Electrify 5% of existing buildings by 2030 and 80% by 2045. 2030: 1,184 MT CO2e 2045: 19,355 MT CO2e
E.4
Develop and promote reduced reliance on natural gas
through increased clean energy systems that build off of renewable energy development, production, and storage.

Supportive of 2030
and 2045 Goals
Transportation
T.1 Increase zero-emission vehicle and equipment adoption to 13% by 2030 and 25% by 2045.
2030: 3,774 MT CO2e
2045: 6,629 MT CO2e
T.2
Implement programs for public and shared transit that
decrease passenger car vehicle miles traveled 2% by 2030 and 4% by 2045.
2030: 807 MT CO2e
2045: 1,399 MT CO2e
T.3
Develop and implement an Active Transportation Plan to
shift 3% of passenger car vehicle miles traveled to active transportation by 2030, and 6% by 2045.
2030: 1,186 MT CO2e
2045: 2,015 MT CO2e
Water and
Wastewater1 W.1 Reduce per capita water consumption by 10% by 2030 and 35% by 2045.
2030: 414 MT CO2e
2045: 0 MT CO2e
Solid Waste
SW.1
Implement and enforce SB 1383 organics and recycling
requirements to reduce landfilled organics waste emissions 50% by 2022 and 75% by 2025.
2030: 1,702 MT CO2e
2045: 1,764 MT CO2e
SW.2 Reduce residential and commercial waste sent to landfills by 50% by 2030 and 100% by 2045.
2030: 415 MT CO2e
2045: 859 MT CO2e
Carbon
Sequestration CS.1 Increase carbon sequestration through increased tree planting and green space. 2030: 19 MT CO2e
2045: 39 MT CO2e
Municipal
M.1 Reduce carbon intensity of City operations. 2030: 188 MT CO2e 2045: 188 MT CO2e
M.2 Electrify the municipal vehicle fleet and mobile equipment. 2030: 23 MT CO2e 2045: 23 MT CO2e
M.3 Increase City's renewable energy production and energy resilience.

Supportive of 2030
and 2045 Goals
Totals 2030: 22,959 MT CO2e
2045: 33,284 MT CO2e
"Note: South Pasadena would be required to reduce 18,578 MT CO2e by 2030, 53,874 MT CO2e by 2040, and 73,969 MT CO2e by 2045 to meet the City’s targets and state goals.
1 There is risk of double counting emission reductions from Play W.1 with Play E.1. Play W.1 emission reductions totals are provided for informational purposes but are not added to the emission reduction totals." Source: South Pasadena 2020
Gas-Powered Leaf Blower Ban
On September 1, 2020, the City Council passed an ordinance phasing out the use of gas-powered leaf blowers Citywide. There is a phase-in period for the gas-powered leaf blower ban, and the ordinance prohibits any person in the City from using a gas-powered leaf blower after October 1, 2022. As part of the Council consideration of the ban, the City allocated funding to engage in an 3 - 881
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.7_GHG-050923.docx 3.7-15 Greenhouse Gas Emissions outreach program to ensure the public is aware of the obligations that they and their landscaping contractors face regarding gas-powered equipment. The ordinance also addresses restrictions on noise pollution and amended the fine structure for violations of the code, which includes anyone who authorizes the use of gas-powered leaf blowers, which was effective in Fall 2021.

3.7.4 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
The following significance criteria are derived from Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines. A project would result in a significant adverse greenhouse gas emissions impact if it would:

Threshold 3.7a: Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment; and/or
Threshold 3.7b: Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases.

Like most municipalities, the City of South Pasadena has not adopted its own numeric threshold of significance for determining impacts with respect to GHG emissions. Two suggested thresholds will be examined: bright-line and efficiency.

As discussed above, the SCAQMD recommended a 3,000 MTCO2e/yr threshold for all nonindustrial projects. This threshold has been and continues to be used in CEQA project analysis.

The threshold as a “bright-line” is not appropriate for use at the plan level but will be examined as guidance.

An efficiency screening threshold of 1.3 MTCO2e per service population (SP) per year is also used as guidance to a potential significant impact. The efficiency threshold for the Project’s buildout year of 2040 was calculated using linear interpolation between the 2020 target of 6.6 MTCO2e/SP/yr and the 2045 target of 0 MTCO2e/SP/yr. The 2045 target is an 80 percent reduction in the 2020 target, consistent with the requirement of Executive Order B-55-18 to achieve carbon neutrality by 2045. The service population is the sum of residents and employees.

This approach was a widely accepted screening threshold used by numerous cities in the SoCAB; however, its use to determine significant impact has been invalidated in court cases.

3.7.5 PROPOSED HOUSING ELEMENT GOALS AND POLICIES
Goal 1.0 Conserve the Existing Housing Stock and Maintain Standards of Livability Policy 1.1 Adopt and implement Zoning and Building Code standards and provide incentives for building owners to upgrade energy conservation in existing buildings including the use of solar energy, to reduce energy costs to residents.

3.7.6 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Threshold 3.7a: Would the Project generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? Construction-related GHG emissions have been excluded from this GHG analysis. As the proposed Project only identifies future land uses and does not contain specific development proposals, construction-related emissions are speculative and cannot be accurately determined at this stage of the planning process. Therefore, such impacts are too speculative to evaluate, consistent with Section 15145 of the State CEQA Guidelines. To the extent that specific projects 3 - 882
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.7_GHG-050923.docx 3.7-16 Greenhouse Gas Emissions are known, those projects have already been or would be subjected to their own environmental analysis.

Operational emissions associated with buildout of the Project. would result in emissions of CO2, CH4, and N2O from area sources (hearths/fireplaces, landscape maintenance equipment); energy sources, mobile sources (vehicles), solid waste, water usage, and stationary sources.

Estimated Emissions
As a conservative estimate, GHG emissions are expected to exceed both guidance thresholds (see Section 3.7.4, Thresholds of Significance, above). Regardless, at the program level, GHG emissions must be considered potentially significant, and the Project may generate GHG emissions that would have a significant impact on the environment. Therefore, mitigation measure (MM) GHG-1 requires project-level GHG analysis, and appropriate mitigation actions shall be implemented. Because the effects of MM GHG-1 cannot be quantified at this time, impact would remain significant and unavoidable.

Threshold 3.7b: Would the Project conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
A lead agency may assess the significance of GHG emissions by determining a project’s consistency with a local GHG reduction plan or Climate Action Plan (CAP) that qualifies under Section 15183.5 of the State CEQA Guidelines. A CAP is designed to ensure that development within a jurisdiction occurs in a manner that supports the goals of AB 32. The City adopted the South Pasadena 2020 Final CAP in December 2020. As described above, the CAP is a longrange planning document that guides the City towards long-term emissions reductions in accordance with State of California goals. The CAP analyzes emission sources within the City, forecasts future emissions, and establishes emission reduction targets. This CAP is the City of South Pasadena’s roadmap to achieving the City’s 2030 target and state mandated goal of 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030, with the ultimate goal of achieving carbon neutrality by 2045.

Thus, the CAP is consistent with State plans, policies, and regulations, AB 32, the AB 32 scoping plan and updates, EO B-30-15, SB32, and EO B-55-18.

When taking into consideration the City’s compact land use pattern, redevelopment primarily targeted to the proposed focus areas, and proximity to transit, the Project would be consistent with the CAP and is therefore consistent with State plans, policies and regulations adopted for the purpose of reducing emissions of GHGs.

The Sustainable Development strategies of the SCAG 2020–2045 RTP/SCS include to: focus growth near destinations and mobility options; promote diverse housing choices; leverage technology innovations; support implementation of sustainability policies; and promote a green region (SCAG 2020). As discussed related to the City’s CAP, when taking into consideration the City’s compact land use pattern, redevelopment primarily targeted to the proposed focus areas, and proximity to transit, the Project would be consistent with all applicable RTP/SCS goals.

Therefore, the Project is consistent with SB 375.

Based on the consistency demonstrations above, the Project would not conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions. The impact would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required. 3 - 883
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.7_GHG-050923.docx 3.7-17 Greenhouse Gas Emissions

3.7.7 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
Because the magnitude of global GHG emissions is extremely large when compared with the emissions of typical development projects, it is accepted as very unlikely that any individual development project would have GHG emissions of a magnitude to directly impact global climate change. CAPCOA’s CEQA and Climate Change Report states, “GHG impacts are exclusively cumulative impacts; there are no non-cumulative GHG emission impacts from a climate change perspective” (CAPCOA 2008). As noted by the CNRA, “Due to the global nature of GHG emissions and their potential effects, GHG emissions will typically be addressed in a cumulative impacts analysis” (CNRA 2009b). Therefore, the analysis presented above represents the cumulative impact analysis for the Project related to GHG emissions. As discussed, there would be a significant and unavoidable impact even with implementation of MM GHG-1.

3.7.8 MITIGATION MEASURES
MM GHG-1 To assess GHG emissions from the construction of individual projects, the Applicant/Developer of future development projects shall provide a project-specific GHG emissions analysis that includes mitigation measures, as needed, to reduce any significant impacts to the maximum extent feasible.

Alternatively, the Applicant/Developer of future development projects shall demonstrate that the proposed Project is consistent with the South Pasadena 2020 Final Climate Action Plan. If consistency is demonstrated, the Project would have a less than significant GHG Emissions impact.

3.7.9 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION
Significant and unavoidable.
3 - 884
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.7_GHG-050923.docx 3.7-18 Greenhouse Gas Emissions

3.7.10 REFERENCES
California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA). 2010 (August). Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures: A Resource for Local Government to Assess Emission Reductions from Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures. Sacramento, CA:

CAPCOA. http://www.capcoa.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/CAPCOA-QuantificationReport-9-14-Final.pdf. ———. 2008 (January). CEQA and Climate Change. http://www.capcoa.org/wpcontent/uploads/2012/03/CAPCOA-White-Paper.pdf California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2022a (July 19, last accessed). Current California GHG Emission Inventory Data. Sacramento, CA: CARB.
https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/inventory/data/data.htm.
———. 2022b (July 19, last accessed). 2022 Scoping Plan Documents. Sacramento, CA: CARB. https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/ab-32-climate-change-scoping-plan/2022- scoping-plan-documents.
———. 2022c (May 10). Draft 2022 Scoping Plan Update.
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2022-05/2022-draft-sp.pdf. ———. 2021b (June 8, access date). Glossary of Air Pollution Terms. Sacramento, CA: CARB. http://www.arb.ca.gov/html/gloss.htm.
———. 2021c (June 8, access date). California's Greenhouse Gas Vehicle Emission Standards under Assembly Bill 1493 of 2002 (Pavley). https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/californiasgreenhouse-gas-vehicle-emission-standards-under-assembly-bill-1493-2002-pavley. ———. 2021d (June 8, access date). Advanced Clean Cars Program. https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/ourwork/programs/advanced-clean-cars-program/about. ———. 2017 (November). California’s 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan. Sacramento, CA:

CARB. https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/ab-32-climate-change-scoping-plan. ———. 2014. First Update to the Climate Change Scoping Plan: Building on the Framework Sacramento, CA: CARB. https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/ab-32-climatechange-scoping-plan. ———. 2012 (January 27). California Air Resources Board Approves Advanced Clean Car Rules.

Sacramento, CA: CARB. http://arb.ca.gov/newsrel/newsrelease.php?id=282.

California Energy Commission (CEC). 2021a (April 11, last accessed). Clean Energy and Pollution Reduction Act—SB 350. Sacramento, CA: CEC.
https://www.energy.ca.gov/rules-and-regulations/energy-suppliers-reporting/cleanenergy-and-pollution-reduction-act-sb-350. ———. 2021b (April 11, last accessed). SB 100 Joint Agency Report. Sacramento, CA: CEC. https://www.energy.ca.gov/sb100.
———. 2021c (accessed February 19). 2019 Energy Efficiency Building Standards. https://www.energy.ca.gov/programs-and-topics/programs/building-energy-efficiencystandards/2019-building-energy-efficiency. 3 - 885
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.7_GHG-050923.docx 3.7-19 Greenhouse Gas Emissions ———. 2018 (March) “2019 Building Energy Efficiency Standards Frequently Asked Questions”.

Sacramento, CA: CEC. https://www.energy.ca.gov/media/3452. ———. 2015b (June 10). News Release. Energy Commission Continues March Towards Zero Net Energy with 2016 Building Energy Efficiency Standards. http://www.energy.ca.gov/releases/2015_releases/2015-06- 10_building_standards_nr.html.

California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA). 2010 (December). Climate Action Team Report to Governor Schwarzenegger and the California Legislature. Sacramento, CA:

CalEPA. http://www.energy.ca.gov/2010publications/CAT-1000-2010-005/CAT-1000- 2010-005.PDF.

California Natural Resources Agency (CNRA). 2009a. 2009 California Climate Adaptation Strategy. Sacramento, CA: CNRA.
https://resources.ca.gov/CNRALegacyFiles/docs/climate/Statewide_Adaptation_Strategy .pdf
———. 2009b (December). Final Statement of Reasons for Regulatory Action. https://resources.ca.gov/CNRALegacyFiles/ceqa/docs/Final_Statement_of_Reasons.pdf.

Climate Watch. 2022 (July 19, last accessed). Data Explorer. https://www.climatewatchdata.org/data-explorer/historical-emissions?historicalemissions-data-sources=cait&historical-emissions-gases=all-ghg&historical-emissionsregions=All%20Selected&historical-emissions-sectors=total-including-lucf&page=1.

National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). 2022 (January 13, Posted). 2021 Tied for 6th Warmest Year in Continued Trend, NASA Analysis Shows: NASA, NOAA. New York, NY: NASA, the Goddard Institute for Space Studies. https://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/news/20220113/.
———. 2021 (January 14, Posted). 2020 Tied for Warmest Year on Record NASA Analysis Shows: NASA, NOAA. New York, NY: NASA, the Goddard Institute for Space Studies. https://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/news/20210114/.

South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). 2021 (June 10, access date). About South Coast AQMD: Diamond Bar, CA: SCAQMD. https://www.aqmd.gov/nav/about. ———. 2010 (September 28). Greenhouse Gas CEQA Significance Threshold Stakeholder Working Group Meeting #15 (slide presentation). Diamond Bar, CA: SCAQMD. http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/ceqa/handbook/greenhouse-gases-(ghg)- ceqa-significance-thresholds/year-2008-2009/ghg-meeting-15/ghg-meeting-15-mainpresentation.pdf?sfvrsn=2. ———. 2008 (October). Draft Guidance Document – Interim CEQA Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Significance Thresholds. Diamond Bar, CA: SCAQMD.
http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/ceqa/handbook/greenhouse-gases-(ghg)- ceqa-significance-thresholds/year-2008-2009/ghg-meeting-6/ghg-meeting-6-guidancedocument-discussion.pdf?sfvrsn=2.

Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). 2020 (May). Certified Program Environmental Impact Report. Connect SoCal, The 2020-2045 Regional Transportation 3 - 886
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.7_GHG-050923.docx 3.7-20 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Plan/ Sustainable Communities Strategy of The Southern California Association Of Governments. Los Angeles, CA. SCAG. https://scag.ca.gov/read-plan-adopted-final-plan.

Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). 2020 (Adopted September 3). Connect SoCal, The 2020-2045 Regional Transportation Plan/ Sustainable Communities Strategy of The Southern California Association Of Governments. Los Angeles, CA. SCAG. https://scag.ca.gov/read-plan-adopted-final-plan.
———. 2016 (April). The 2016–2040 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy. A Plan for Mobility, Accessibility, Sustainability and a High Quality of Life. Los Angeles, CA: SCAG. http://scagrtpscs.net/Documents/2016/final/f2016RTPSCS.pdf.

South Pasadena 2020 (Adopted December 16). South Pasadena 2020 Final Climate Action Plan. https://www.southpasadenaca.gov/government/departments/publicworks/environmental-programs/sustainable-south-pasadena/climate-action-plan.

U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Earth System Research Laboratory, Global Monitoring Laboratory (ESRL). 2022a (July 19, last accessed). Trends in Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide. Boulder, CO: ESRL. https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends/global.html#global_data. ———. 2022b. (July 19, last accessed). NOAA’s Annual Greenhouse Gas Index. Boulder, CO: ESRL. https://gml.noaa.gov/aggi/.U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 2021 (accessed June 8). Endangerment and Cause or Contribute Findings for Greenhouse Gases under Section 202(a) of the Clean Air Act. Washington, D.C.: USEPA. epa.gov/ghgemissions/endangerment-and-cause-or-contribute-findings-greenhousegases-under-section-202a-clean. ———. 2021b (Accessed June 8). Notice of Reconsideration of a Previous Withdrawal of a Waiver for California’s Advanced Clean Car Program (Light-Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emission Standards and Zero Emission Vehicle Requirements). https://www.epa.gov/regulations-emissions-vehicles-and-engines/notice-reconsiderationprevious-withdrawal-waiver.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and U.S. Department of Transportation, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (USEPA and NHTSA). 2019 (September 19). One National Program Rule on Federal Preemption of State Fuel Economy Standards. ———. 2012 (October 15). 2017 and Later Model Year Light-Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards. Federal Register (Volume 77, No. 199, pp. 62623–63200). Washington, D.C.: USEPA and NHTSA.

U.S. Department of Transportation, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). 2022 (July 19, last accessed). Corporate Average Fuel Economy. Washington, D.C.:

NHTSA. https://www.nhtsa.gov/laws-regulations/corporate-average-fuel-economy. 3 - 887
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.8_Hazards-050923.docx 3.8-1 Hazards and Hazardous Materials

3.8 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS

3.8.1 METHODOLOGY
This section analyzes potential hazards from historic uses in the City, use and transport of hazardous materials, and wildfire hazards associated with implementation of the proposed 2021–2029 Housing Element and the non-residential development capacity envisioned in the General Plan and Downtown Specific Plan (DTSP) Update (Project). Information in this section was derived from the California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA), California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, and City websites.

3.8.2 EXISTING CONDITIONS
Hazardous Materials
Hazardous materials1 that may be commonly encountered in a typical urban environment generally include petroleum products (including oil and gasoline), automotive fluids (i.e., antifreeze, hydraulic fluid), paint, cleaners (i.e., dry cleaning solvents, cleaning fluids), and pesticides from current or historical agricultural uses (if in significant concentrations). By-products generated as a result of activities using hazardous materials (e.g., dry cleaning solvents, oil, and gasoline) are considered hazardous waste. Contamination, when present, often takes the form of a hazardous material or hazardous waste spill, which can penetrate soils and also potentially reach groundwater, resulting in the pollution of shallow groundwater and/or a local water supply.

Commercial and industrial uses, including those that have underground storage tanks and/or use hazardous materials in their operations, are common sources of soils and/or groundwater contamination in urban areas.

The CalEPA has compiled the data resources that provide information regarding the facilities or sites identified as meeting the requirements of Section 65962.5 of the California Government Code, referred to as the Cortese List (CalEPA 2023a). No properties in the City of South Pasadena are identified on the following: the California Department of Toxic Substances Control’s (DTSC) Hazardous Waste and Substances Site List (DTSC 2023); the list of sites identified by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) with waste constituents above hazardous waste levels outside the waste management unit (CalEPA 2023b); the list of active Cease and Desist Orders and Cleanup and Abatement Orders from the SWRCB (CalEPA 2021c), or the list of hazardous waste facilities identified by DTSC as subject to corrective action pursuant to Section 25187.5 of the Health and Safety Code (CalEPA 2023d). There are a total of 18 (1 open and eligible for closure, 17 closed) sites in the City identified on the list of leaking underground storage tank (LUST) sites from the SWRCB’s GeoTracker database (SWRCB 2023). The LUST sites are concentrated along Fair Oaks Avenue, Mission Street, and Huntington Drive.

In addition to the Cortese list resources, the SWRCB’s GeoTracker identifies Cleanup Program Sites (CPS; formerly known as the Spills, Leaks, Investigations, and Cleanups database) and DTSC Cleanup Sites, which are separate from the sites listed on the Cortese List. The DTSC Cleanup Sites are also identified on DTSC’s EnviroStor database. There are no sites identified on the California Department of Toxic Substances Control’s (DTSC) Hazardous Waste and Substances Sites list via its EnviroStor database (DTSC 2023). 1 A hazardous material, as defined in the Section 25501 of the California Health and Safety Code, is “any material that, due to quantity, concentration, or physical or chemical characteristics, poses a significant potential hazard to public health and safety or to the environment, if released into the workplace or the environment”. 3 - 888
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.8_Hazards-050923.docx 3.8-2 Hazards and Hazardous Materials Wildland Fire Hazards
No portion of the City is identified by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection as a very high fire hazard severity zone (VHFHSZ)(CAL FIRE 2023). However, the western and southwestern borders of the City are adjacent to VHFHSZs. The southwestern portion of the City, located west of Meridian Avenue and south of Monterey Road, is a hilly area that is defined as a high fire hazard area by the City within which the South Pasadena Fire Department (SPFD) enforces annual brush clearance requirements to reduce the risks associated with being located adjacent to a wildland interface.

3.8.3 RELEVANT PROGRAMS AND REGULATIONS
Federal
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) was authorized by Congress on October 21, 1976. This law creates the framework for the proper management of hazardous and nonhazardous solid waste. To achieve its goals, RCRA established the following programs:
 The Solid Waste Program encourages States to develop comprehensive plans to manage nonhazardous industrial solid waste and municipal solid waste; sets criteria for municipal solid waste landfills and other solid waste disposal facilities; and prohibits the open dumping of solid waste.
 The Hazardous Waste Program establishes a system for controlling hazardous waste from the time it is generated until its ultimate disposal, in effect from “cradle to grave”.  The Underground Storage Tank Program regulates underground storage tanks containing hazardous substances and petroleum products.

Emergency Planning and Community Right-To-Know Act
The Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act was enacted by Congress on October 17, 1986. This Act began as a grassroots right-to-know movement at the State and local levels. Labor unions and citizen activists initially worked together for a common goal: greater protection of the public from chemical emergencies and dangers through public disclosure by business and industry of the chemicals they store, use, and release. This law requires businesses to report on emissions of certain toxic chemicals, and that information is placed into the Toxics Release Inventory (TRI), a publicly accessible database. There are no records of businesses or sites in the City on the most recent TRI records dated 2016 (USEPA 2016).

Hazardous Materials Transportation Act
The main purpose of the Hazardous Materials Transportation Act is to provide adequate protection against risks to life and property inherent in the transport of hazardous materials by improving the regulatory and enforcement authority of the Secretary of Transportation. This Act contains requirements for hazardous materials classification, hazard communication, packaging requirements, operational rules, training and security, and registration. 3 - 889
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.8_Hazards-050923.docx 3.8-3 Hazards and Hazardous Materials State
California Hazardous Waste Control Act
The California Hazardous Waste Control Act (HWCA), as found in the California Health and Safety Code (Section 25100, et seq.), authorizes the DTSC and local Certified Unified Program Agencies (CUPA; i.e., the City of South Pasadena) to regulate facilities that generate or treat hazardous waste.

Certified Unified Program Agency
In 1993, Senate Bill 1082 created the CUPA to foster effective partnerships between local, State, and federal agencies. The program consolidated the administrative, permitting, inspection, and enforcement activities of the following environmental and emergency management programs:
 Hazardous Materials Release Response Plans and Inventories (Business Plans);  California Accidental Release Prevention Program;
 Underground Storage Program;
 Aboveground Petroleum Storage Act Program;
 Hazardous Waste Generator and Onsite Hazardous Waste Treatment Programs; and  California Uniform Fire Code: Hazardous Material Management Plans and Hazardous Material Inventory Statements.

CUPA is implemented at the local level by government agencies certified by the Secretary of the CalEPA. The City of South Pasadena is a CUPA.

California Accidental Release Prevention Program
The California Accidental Release Prevention Program (CalARP) is a merging of the Federal Accidental Release Prevention Program and State programs for the prevention of accidental release of regulated toxic and flammable substances. Stationary sources exceeding a threshold quantity of regulated substances are evaluated under this program to determine the potential for and impacts of accidental releases from the source. Depending on the potential hazards, the owner or occupant of a stationary source may be required to develop and submit a risk management plan. The CalARP is administered by the CUPA.

Lead Abatement
Because of its toxic properties, lead is regulated as a hazardous material. Inorganic lead is also regulated as a toxic air contaminant. In California, lead abatement must be performed and monitored by contractors with appropriate certifications from the California Department of Health Services. In addition, the California Division of Occupational Safety and Health (better known as the California Occupational Safety and Health Administration [CalOSHA]) has adopted regulations to protect worker safety during potential exposure to lead under Title 8 of the California Code of Regulations (Section 1532.1 Lead). All demolition that could result in the release of lead must be conducted according to these standards, which were developed to protect the general population and construction workers from respiratory and other hazards associated with lead exposure.
3 - 890
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.8_Hazards-050923.docx 3.8-4 Hazards and Hazardous Materials Asbestos Abatement
Asbestos is a known human carcinogen and the United States Environmental Protection Agency and CalEPA have identified asbestos as a hazardous air pollutant pursuant to Section 12 of the Federal Clean Air Act. Further, the California Air Resources Board has identified asbestos as a Toxic Air Contaminant pursuant to the California Health and Safety Code (Section 39650 et seq.).

Asbestos is also regulated as a potential worker safety hazard under the authority of the CalOSHA. These rules and regulations prohibit emissions of asbestos from asbestos-related demolition or construction activities; require medical examinations and monitoring of employees engaged in activities that could disturb asbestos; specify precautions and safe work practices that must be followed to minimize the potential for release of asbestos fibers; and require notice to federal and local government agencies prior to beginning renovation or demolition that could disturb asbestos.

In California, asbestos abatement must be performed and monitored by contractors with appropriate certifications from the California Department of Health Services. In addition, CalOSHA has regulations to protect worker safety during potential exposure to asbestos under Title 8 of the California Code of Regulations (Section 1529 Asbestos). All demolition that could result in the release of asbestos must be conducted according to CalOSHA standards. These standards were developed to protect the general population and construction workers from respiratory and other hazards associated with exposure to these materials.

Wildland-Urban Interface Fire Area Building Standards
Title 24, Part 2 of California Code of Regulations, also known as the 2019 California Building Code, addresses building standards for new structures constructed in or near a designated fire hazard severity zone. New buildings located in any fire hazard severity zone must comply with all sections of the current building code. Specifically, minimum standards are established for materials and to provide a reasonable level of protection from wildfire exposure for buildings in Wildland-Urban Interface Fire Areas. Ignition-resistant materials and design are required to reduce the risk from flame or burning embers projected by a vegetation fire.

Regional
Asbestos Removal
The South Coast Air Quality Management District’s (SCAQMD’s) Rule 1403 provides guidelines for the proper removal and disposal of asbestos-containing materials. In accordance with Rule 1403, structures that may contain asbestos are required to be subject to an asbestos survey by a Certified Asbestos Consultant (certified by CalOSHA) to identify building materials that contain asbestos. Under this rule, removal of asbestos must include prior SCAQMD notification; compliance with removal procedures and time schedules; asbestos-handling and clean-up procedures; and storage, disposal, and landfilling requirements.

Countywide Household Hazardous Waste Program
The County Department of Public Works’ Hazardous Waste Management Division organizes regular household hazardous waste “round-ups” for residents to discard refuse items such as paints, oils, or pesticides that require special handling. Household hazardous waste roundups are held nearly every week, typically on Saturdays, at various locations throughout the County. The County also provides information on the locations of motor oil recycling centers. The City hosts household hazardous waste (HHW) and electronic waste collection events, generally on an 3 - 891
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.8_Hazards-050923.docx 3.8-5 Hazards and Hazardous Materials annual basis in the fall, and provides information the on the City’s website2 regarding how and where to properly dispose of many categories of materials, including HHW, less hazardous products, and used motor oil.

City
Municipal Code
Article VI, Hazardous Materials, South Pasadena Certified Unified Program Agency The City of South Pasadena has adopted by reference all applicable State statutes for implementation of Section 25404 et. seq. of the California Health and Safety Code with respect to formation and implementation of a CUPA. Sections 17.59 through 17.70 of the South Pasadena Municipal Code (SPMC) defines the roles and responsibilities of the City in maintaining a hazardous materials list (Sections 17.61 through 17.65). Section 17.61(a) of the SPMC states that: “Hazardous material shall mean any substance or product found on the California Occupational Safety and Health Administration list or which is listed as a radioactive material set forth in Chapter 1, Title 10, Appendix B, maintained by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission; and Section 17.61(b) states that “Hazardous waste shall mean hazardous or extremely hazardous waste as defined by Sections 25115 and 25117 of the California Health and Safety Code and as set forth in Sections 66680 and 66685 of Title 22 of the California Administrative Code”. It also defines the authority of the SPFD Fire Chief to enforce the provisions of the CUPA, which may include the inspection of hazardous materials in use, storage, or disposal; review of hazardous material records; and the sampling and testing of hazardous materials. Section 17.70 of the SPMC states “The fire department is authorized to clean up or abate the effects of any hazardous material deposited upon or onto public or private property or facilities of the city, and any person or persons who intentionally or negligently caused such deposit shall be liable for the payment of all costs incurred by the fire department as a result of such clean up or abatement activity.”

3.8.4 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
The following significance criteria are derived from Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines. A project would result in a significant adverse hazards and hazardous materials impact if it would:

Threshold 3.8a: Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials; Threshold 3.8b: 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;
Threshold 3.8c: Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school;
Threshold 3.8d: 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; 2 https://www.southpasadenaca.gov/government/departments/public-works/environmental-programs/wastereduction/hazardous-waste. 3 - 892
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.8_Hazards-050923.docx 3.8-6 Hazards and Hazardous Materials Threshold 3.8e: 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;
Threshold 3.8f: Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan; and/or
Threshold 3.8g: Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires.

3.8.5 PROPOSED HOUSING ELEMENT GOALS AND POLICIES
There are no Housing Element goals or policies related to hazards and hazardous materials.

3.8.6 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Threshold 3.8a: Would the Project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
Construction activities associated with new development pursuant to the Project, or public or infrastructure projects in the City, would commonly involve the use of hazardous materials for construction, such as paints, thinners, solvents, acids, curing compounds, grease, oils, and other chemicals, which could pose risks to construction workers or lead to soil and groundwater contamination, if not properly stored, used, or disposed.

Operation of future development pursuant to the Project is not expected to utilize or generate hazardous materials or wastes in quantities that would pose a significant hazard to the public.

The proposed increase in non-residential uses is limited to office and retail development, and no new industrial/manufacturing land uses that would more likely handle hazardous materials are proposed. The proposed dwelling units would use hazardous materials (e.g., paint, pesticides, cleansers, and solvents) for maintenance activities but any use would be in limited household quantities. The proposed dwelling units would not utilize, store, or generate hazardous materials or wastes in quantities that would pose a significant hazard to the public, similar to the existing conditions. These hazardous materials would be stored and used at individual sites and may create a public health and safety hazard through routine transport, use, or disposal. However, the Project would not substantively alter this risk when compared with the existing land uses in the City.

A number of existing regulations require that industrial and commercial users, generators, and transporters provide operational safety and emergency response measures, so that no major threats to public health and safety are created. Compliance with existing hazardous material regulations, described in Section 3.8.3 above, would prevent undue hazards. As discussed above, the City is a CUPA and maintains and enforces a hazardous material list3. 3 Section 17.61(a) of the SPMC states that: “Hazardous material shall mean any substance or product found on the California Occupational Safety and Health Administration list or which is listed as a radioactive material set forth in Chapter 1, Title 10, Appendix B, maintained by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission; and Section 17.61(b) states that “Hazardous waste shall mean hazardous or extremely hazardous waste as defined by Sections 25115 and 25117 of the California Health and Safety Code and as set forth in Sections 66680 and 66685 of Title 22 of the California Administrative Code”.
3 - 893
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.8_Hazards-050923.docx 3.8-7 Hazards and Hazardous Materials Through compliance with existing regulations, impacts related to the routine transport, use and disposal of hazardous materials would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.

Threshold 3.8b: Would the Project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment?
As discussed under Threshold 3.8a, future development could involve the use of chemical agents, solvents, paints, fuel for equipment, and other hazardous materials that are associated with construction. These materials are common to typical construction activities, and compliance with existing hazardous material regulations on the storage, use, and disposal of hazardous materials at construction sites would prevent hazards to the public or environment through reasonably foreseeable upset or accident conditions. Construction activities in the City would also occur on a temporary and intermittent basis, and at staggered schedules as individual development projects are implemented throughout the planning period of the Project.

Redevelopment activities that involve demolition or reuse of existing buildings may result in the need to remove and dispose of asbestos-containing materials and/or lead-based paint, dependent on the age of the structure. Compliance with SCAQMD Rule 1403, the CalOSHA regulations on asbestos and lead abatement, would ensure that handling and disposal of these materials is conducted safely, and accident conditions would not be reasonably foreseeable.

In addition to the identified hazardous materials sites, as discussed above, there may be sites in the City impacted by hazardous materials or hazardous wastes from historic use that are not identified on current databases. Therefore, MM HAZ-1 requires that a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) be prepared by the Applicant for future development projects and submitted to the City. If the Phase I ESA identifies the potential for on-site contamination, MM HAZ-1 describes a series of actions required by the Applicant up to, if warranted, remediation of contaminated conditions and submittal of a closure report or equivalent documentation to the City and the assigned regulatory oversight agencies (e.g., DTSC, Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board [RWQCB]). The final step is the process described in MM HAZ-1, as appropriate, for each proposed development site that shall be completed prior to issuance of a grading permit by the City. If, even with implementation of MM HAZ-1, unanticipated contamination is encountered during construction of a project, MM HAZ-1 requires that all activities in the immediate vicinity of the suspect contamination cease and the City is notified. The Applicant would be responsible for the preparation of a Risk Management Plan to identify the contaminants of concern and their risks and describes measures to protect workers and the public from exposure to potential site hazards. Depending on the nature of the contamination, appropriate regulatory oversight agencies shall be notified. Through compliance with MMs HAZ-1 and HAZ-2 and implementation of any necessary soil and/or water remediation under the RCRA, the HWCA, and CalARP, safe and appropriate remediation (i.e., cleanup) of affected sites prior to their redevelopment and reuse would be ensured. Thus, with mitigation, there would be a less than significant impact from the use and disposal of common, construction-related hazardous materials or encounter of hazardous materials during redevelopment activities due to accident conditions.

As discussed under Threshold 3.8a, the Project does not propose industrial/manufacturing land uses that would more likely handle hazardous materials. As discussed above, the proposed dwelling units would use hazardous materials (e.g., paint, pesticides, cleansers, and solvents) for maintenance activities but any use would be in limited household quantities. The dwelling units would not utilize, store, or generate hazardous materials or hazardous wastes in quantities that would pose a significant hazard to the public, similar to the existing residential development in the 3 - 894
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.8_Hazards-050923.docx 3.8-8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials City. These users would be subject to various State and federal regulations on storage, use, handling, transport, or disposal of hazardous materials and hazardous wastes, as discussed in Section 3.8.3. Compliance with pertinent regulations would avoid the creation of a significant hazard to the public and reduce the potential for the release of hazardous materials into the environment.

Through compliance with MMs HAZ-1 and HAZ-2 and existing regulations, impacts related to the potential for accidental release of hazardous materials would be less than significant.

Threshold 3.8c: Would the Project emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?
All schools in the City are located near residential or civic land uses where hazardous materials use is limited. However, given the modest size of the City, some existing schools are within

0.25 mile of one or more focus areas, which would have a mixed-use land use designation and may include retail and office uses that could handle materials classified as hazardous, as discussed under Thresholds 3.8a and 3.8b. However, no industrial/manufacturing land uses that would more likely handle hazardous materials are proposed. Proposed commercial/retail and office land uses would not be expected to result in hazardous emissions or handle acutely hazardous materials or substances that could pose hazards to nearby school children in the event of an accidental release or spill. These would be similar land uses to what are already present in portions of the City, and the proposed commercial/retail and office land uses would not present a new hazard to schools. Residential activities associated with occupancy of the proposed dwelling units would be similar to other residential uses in the area and would not generate hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances or waste in quantities that may impact students at schools within 0.25 mile of the site. As with existing residential, commercial, and light industrial land uses in the City, compliance with existing regulations related to transport, use, and disposal of hazardous materials would ensure that any schools located within 0.25 mile of a proposed development that would have hazardous materials typical of urban environments would not be adversely affected.

Through compliance with existing regulations, impacts related to exposure of school-aged children to hazardous emissions, materials, substances, or wastes would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.

Threshold 3.8d: Would the Project be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment?
As discussed above, there are a total of 18 sites in the City identified on the list of leaking LUST sites from the SWRCB’s GeoTracker database, which are concentrated along Fair Oaks Avenue, Mission Street, and Huntington Drive. These sites are compiled as part of the Cortese List, compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code. In addition, there are seven SWRCB CPS sites and five DTSC Cleanup Sites identified via the GeoTracker database, which is not part of the Cortese list. Of these, one CPS site is in the “site assessment” phase, and one DTSC site is “active” and undergoing a voluntary cleanup. The remaining CPS sites have a status of either “open-inactive” or “completed-case closed”. The remaining DTSC sites have a status of “no further action”, “certified O&M-land use restrictions only”, or “refer: other agency” and are not undergoing cleanup activities (SWRCB 2022). These findings are typical of urban environments with uses such as gas stations, automotive repair facilities, dry cleaners, medical facilities, and 3 - 895
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.8_Hazards-050923.docx 3.8-9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials municipal facilities and do not ordinarily represent conditions that are hazardous to the general public. As discussed under Threshold 3.8b, MMs HAZ-1 and HAZ-2 require actions by the Applicant for future development projects to characterize the potential risk associated with historic and/or current land uses on the proposed project site such that the contamination, if any, is addressed prior to construction and occupancy of that project.

Through compliance with MMs HAZ-1 and HAZ-2 and existing regulations, impacts related to the potential location of a site of the Cortese list would be less than significant.

Threshold 3.8e: 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? The nearest airport is the El Monte Airport, located at 4233 Santa Anita Avenue, El Monte, approximately six miles east-southeast of the City at the nearest points. There would be no impact, and no mitigation is required.

Threshold 3.8f: Would the Project impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
Construction activities on public rights-of-way may temporarily block traffic and access near the construction zone. As discussed above, compliance with Section 36.310.090 of the SPMC in the design and construction of future projects would always maintain emergency access to individual parcels. Impacts on traffic flows for emergency response or evacuation would be less than significant during construction activities, and no mitigation is required.

The City has a developed roadway network that provides emergency access and evacuation routes to existing development. Evacuation routes include major roadways in the City, with the State Route 110 and Interstate 210 freeways serving as primary regional exit routes. These freeways provide area-wide evacuation routes, with major north-south and east-west roadways in the City connecting to the freeways and adjacent cities. No major change to the existing roadway system serving the City is proposed. Access to individual development sites would be available through existing or planned on-site roadways/driveways, as required under Section

36.310.090 “Driveways and Site Access” of the SPMC. Section 36.310.090 of the SPMC defines requirements for all access from public streets to private property to ensure adequate and safe access by vehicular and other traffic. The plan check and building permit process by the SPFD includes review of access for emergency vehicles in accordance with the California Fire Code, as adopted by reference by the City (Chapter 14 of the SPMC). Compliance with the requirements for emergency lane width, vertical clearance, and distance would provide adequate emergency access to all new development pursuant to the Project and public and infrastructure projects.

Continued implementation of State and City emergency access requirements would provide future development with adequate access for emergency response or evacuation.

Impacts related to emergency response and evacuation would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.
3 - 896
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.8_Hazards-050923.docx 3.8-10 Hazards and Hazardous Materials Threshold 3.8g: Would the Project expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires?
Individual development projects would be reviewed by the SPFD as part of the City’s project review process and would be required to comply with all State (CBC) and City fire code standards in effect at the time the building permit is issued, pursuant to Chapter 14, Fire Prevention, of the SPMC. Section 14.4 of the SPMC includes requirements for building construction, fire flows and pressures, hydrant placement and other requirements that would reduce the creation of fire hazards and facilitate emergency response. In addition to City-wide fire code standards, Section

14.1 of the SPMC requires that development of any parcels in the High Risk Fire Area would be required to have Class A roof assemblies, which are effective against severe fire test exposures, with exceptions including, but not limited to, installation of an entirely non-combustible roof assembly, clay or concrete tile or ferrous or copper shingles or sheets on an entirely noncombustible substructure, and timing and amount of roof replacements.

Also, as discussed under Threshold 3.8f, the proposed General Plan Update includes actions to update the City’s Hazard Mitigation Plan to address disaster recovery in the business community, explore the development of a Business Disaster Assistance Center, develop a rapid response team to support safe evacuation in the hillside areas, and periodically review and update the City’s post-disaster recovery plan. Also, the City has an Emergency Management Program, which includes all elements necessary to respond quickly and effectively to major emergencies. These elements include: Emergency Operations Plan, Emergency Operations Center, Emergency Response Program, and Public Education Program.

While implementation of the Project would not exacerbate existing fire hazards in the area, the Project has the potential to introduce additional development and population into a wildfire hazard area. However, through compliance with State and local fire code requirements, continued implementation of the City’s emergency response programs, and implementation of the policies and actions identified above, the Project would not directly or indirectly expose people or structures to a significant wildfire-related risks. There would be a less than significant impact related to wildfires, and no mitigation is required.

3.8.7 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
The cumulative impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials are analyzed within the San Gabriel Valley (Valley). Existing developments in the Valley pose risks to public health and safety, as they relate to the use, storage, handling, generation, transport, and disposal of hazardous materials. Future development in the City and in the rest of the San Gabriel Valley would increase these risks as more facilities or operations utilize hazardous materials; are located near airports; and are developed in hillside areas identified as high risk fire areas by the City.

Existing regulations for a variety of activities and uses relate to the protection of public health and safety at all levels of government. Future development projects in the Valley would also need to be made part of emergency planning efforts for natural or manmade disasters that may occur in the area. Compliance of individual projects with pertinent regulations would preserve public health and safety and would prevent hazards to existing and future developments. Thus, future growth and development in the Valley is not expected to present significant risks to public health and safety with compliance with regulations. Future growth and development in the Valley would also be subject to review and approval by the SPFD, other jurisdictional fire departments/agencies, and the County Fire Department for fire safety and preparedness, as well as the provision of 3 - 897
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.8_Hazards-050923.docx 3.8-11 Hazards and Hazardous Materials adequate emergency access and evacuation. Compliance with pertinent requirements of the fire agencies would prevent the creation of fire hazards and would reduce wildland fire hazards.

The proposed Project’s compliance with existing health and safety regulations, and MMs HAZ-1 and HAZ-2, outlined in this section would prevent the creation of health risks and public safety hazards. Therefore, the Project’s contribution to cumulative impacts would be less than significant.

3.8.8 MITIGATION MEASURES
MM HAZ-1 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, Applicants for future development projects shall:
1) Investigate the project site to determine whether it or immediately adjacent areas have a record of hazardous material contamination via the preparation of a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, which shall be submitted to the City Planning and Building Department for review. If the Phase I ESA concludes there are recognized environmental conditions that indicate the potential for on-site contamination, the Applicant shall direct the performance of a subsurface investigation appropriate in scope to the likely contaminants (e.g., water, soil, soil vapor). The results of the investigation shall be submitted to the City.
2) If contamination is identified on the site, the City, in accordance with appropriate regulatory oversight agencies (e.g., California Toxic Substances Control, Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board), shall determine the need for further investigation and/or remediation of the site. If further investigation or remediation is required, it shall be the responsibility of the Applicant(s) to complete such investigation and/or remediation to the satisfaction of the City and the local oversight agency(ies). 3) Closure reports or other reports that document the successful completion of required remediation activities, if any, shall be submitted to and approved by acceptable to the City (as the Certified Uniform Program Agency) and the local oversight agency(ies) prior to the issuance of a grading permit for the proposed site development.

MM HAZ-2 In the event that previously unknown or unidentified soil and/or groundwater contamination that could present a threat to human health or the environment is encountered during construction, construction activities in the immediate vicinity of the contamination shall cease immediately and the City shall be notified. If contamination is encountered, the Applicant for the proposed development shall be responsible for preparing and implementing a Risk Management Plan that (1) identifies the contaminants of concern and the potential risk each contaminant would pose to human health and the environment during construction and post-development and (2) describes measures to be taken to protect workers and the public from exposure to potential site hazards. Such measures could include, but not be limited to, physical site controls during construction, remediation, long-term monitoring, post-development maintenance or access limitations, or some combination thereof. Depending on the nature of contamination, if any, appropriate oversight agencies shall be notified. If determined necessary by the oversight agency(ies), a Site Health and Safety Plan that meets California Occupational Safety and Health Administration requirements shall be prepared and in place prior to commencement of work in any contaminated area. 3 - 898
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.8_Hazards-050923.docx 3.8-12 Hazards and Hazardous Materials

3.8.9 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION
Less than significant.

3.8.10 REFERENCES
California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC). 2023 (April 25, access date).

EnviroStor Database. Sacramento, CA: DTSC. https://dtsc.ca.gov/dtscs-cortese-list/.

California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA). 2023a (April 25, access date). Cortese List Data Resources. Sacramento, CA: CalEPA. https://calepa.ca.gov/sitecleanup/corteselist/. ———. 2023b (April 25, access date). Sites Identified with Waste Constituents Above Hazardous Waste Levels Outside the Waste Management Unit. Sacramento, CA: CalEPA. https://calepa.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/sites/6/2016/10/SiteCleanup-CorteseListCurrentList.pdf. ———. 2023c (April 25, access date). List of “Active” Cease and Desist Orders and Cleanup and Abatement Orders from Water Board. Sacramento, CA: CalEPA. https://calepa.ca.gov/sitecleanup/corteselist/section-65962-5c/. ———.2023d (April 25, access date). Cortese List: Section 65962.5(a). Sacramento, CA:

CalEPA. https://calepa.ca.gov/site-cleanup/cortese-list-data-resources/section-65962- 5a/.

California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE). 2023. (April 25, last accessed) FHSZ Viewer. Sacramento, CA: CAL FIRE. https://egis.fire.ca.gov/FHSZ/.

California Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). 2023 (April 25, access date). Geotracker Database. Sacramento, CA: SWRCB. https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/search.

United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 2016. Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) Program, TRI Basic Data Files: Calendar Years 1987–2016: 2016 data for California.

Washington, D.C.: USEPA. https://www.epa.gov/toxics-release-inventory-tri-program/tribasic-data-files-calendar-years-1987-2016. 3 - 899
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.9_Hydrology-050923.docx 3.9-1 Hydrology and Water Quality

3.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY

3.9.1 METHODOLOGY
This section describes the hydrology and water quality characteristics in the City of South Pasadena (City) and analyzes potential impacts on hydrology and water quality that may occur with implementation of the proposed2021–2029 Housing Element and the non-residential development capacity envisioned in the General Plan and Downtown Specific Plan (DTSP) Update (Project). Information presented in this section was derived from the City’s website, information from the City Public Works Department staff, the existing General Plan, Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), California Department of Water Resources, Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), Los Angeles County Flood Control District, and the City of South Pasadena Final Draft 2020 Urban Water Management Plan dated September 2021 (South Pasadena 2021).

3.9.2 EXISTING CONDITIONS
Hydrology
Surface Water
The Los Angeles River drains an area of about 824 square miles along its 55-mile length. The main tributaries to the lower stretch of this river include the Arroyo Seco, the Rio Hondo, and Compton Creek. The City of South Pasadena is located within the watershed of the Los Angeles River, which drains through the Arroyo Seco tributary within the western portion of the City. This portion of the stream is concrete-lined with no native substrate, and it flows through the Lower Arroyo that provides both undisturbed open space and public recreation opportunities such as the Arroyo Park, Arroyo Woodland and Wildlife Nature Park, and the Arroyo Seco Golf Course.

Storm Drainage
Storm drainage in the City is provided by curbs and gutters along streets, which direct storm water into the catch basins, pipes, and washes that run southerly in or near the City and are maintained by the City’s Department of Public Works. City-maintained storm water management facilities are present throughout the City, which connect to regional flood-control and runoff conveyance facilities. While the primary purpose of the storm drain system is to reduce or eliminate flood hazards, the system carries both dry and wet weather urban runoff1 and the pollutants associated with activities from urban land that are transported by runoff.

Groundwater
The City is underlain by the Main San Gabriel Groundwater Basin (Basin). As shown, the City is situated in the northwest corner of the area encompassed by the Basin. The Main San Gabriel Basin includes the entire valley floor of San Gabriel Valley, with the exception of the Raymond Basin and Puente Basin. The boundaries of the Basin are the Raymond Basin on the northwest, the base of the San Gabriel Mountains on the north, the groundwater divide between the cities of San Dimas and La Verne and the lower boundary of the Puente Basin on the east, and Whittier Narrows on the southwest. Subbasins within the Basin include the Upper San Gabriel Canyon Basin, Lower San Gabriel Canyon Basin, Glendora Basin, Foothill Basin, Way Hill Basin, and 1 Dry weather urban runoff, also referred to as nuisance runoff, occurs when there is no precipitation-generated runoff. Wet weather urban runoff refers collectively to diffuse source discharges that result from precipitation events.
3 - 900
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.9_Hydrology-050923.docx 3.9-2 Hydrology and Water Quality San Dimas Basin. In addition, the Puente Basin is tributary to the Basin from the southeast, between the San Jose and Puente Hills (DWR 2004).

Pumping and recharge of the Basin is administered by the Main San Gabriel Basin Watermaster (Watermaster), as it has been an adjudicated water basin since 1973. The Basin has a freshwater storage capacity of about 8.7 million acre-feet (af), of which the top 125 feet of storage, or about

1.0 million af has been used for historic Basin operations. Local runoff is stored in a series of reservoirs operated by the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works and diverted into spreading grounds to replenish the groundwater supply. In addition to groundwater replenishment with local storm water runoff, the Watermaster maintains records of each producer’s water rights and annual production. Although there is no limit on the quantity of water that may be produced, production in excess of a water right is subject to a Replacement Water assessment. The Watermaster uses funds collected from producers’ overproduction to purchase imported water from municipal water districts. The Upper San Gabriel Valley Municipal Water District and the Three Valleys Municipal Water District (TVMWD) obtain their water from the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD). The San Gabriel Valley Municipal Water District has its own contract for State Water Project water. The Watermaster coordinates purchase and delivery of imported water to replenish the Basin, thus offsetting the producers’ overproduction and making the Basin whole (South Pasadena 2021).

Water Quality
Surface Water Quality
Water bodies that do not meet water quality standards are deemed “impaired” and, under Section 303(d) of the federal Clean Water Act, are placed on a list of impaired waters for which a total maximum daily load (TMDL) must be developed for the impairing pollutant(s). A TMDL is an estimate of the total load of pollutants from point, non-point, and natural sources that a water body may receive without exceeding applicable water quality standards (with a “factor of safety”). Once established, the TMDL is allocated among current and future pollutant sources to the water body.

Runoff from the City of South Pasadena flows into the Alhambra Wash, to the southeast, and the Arroyo Seco, to the west. The Alhambra Wash is listed as “impaired” for ammonia; a TMDL for ammonia is expected to be completed in 2027 (SRWCB 2022). Reaches 1 and 2 of the Arroyo Seco is listed for indicator bacteria and trash; TMDLs have been established for both impairments for both Reach 1 and Reach 2 of the Arroyo Seco (SWRCB 2022). While the impairment listing of the Arroyo Seco is not directly attributable to pollutants and land uses in South Pasadena, discharges from the City are subject to the discharge limitations of the established TMDLs.

Groundwater Quality
The City has four wells located within the Main Basin: Graves Well No. 2, Wilson Well No. 2, Wilson Well No. 3, and Wilson Well No. 4 with approximate pumping capacities of 705 gallons per minute (gpm), 750 gpm, 1,960 gpm and 1,100 gpm, respectively. The City installed a volatile organic compound (VOC) treatment system (Granular Activated Carbon and Ion Exchange) at Graves Well No. 2 in 2020. Wilson Well No. 2 is inactive as of June 2018, but City staff indicated there are plans to rehabilitate the Wilson Well No. 2 by 2025. The City installed a VOC treatment system (Granular Activated Carbon treatment) at Wilson Wells No. 3 and No. 4 in December 2018. The current collective well capacity from Graves Well No. 2, Wilson Wells No. 3, and No. 4 is about 4,960 gpm or about 7.1 million gallons per day (mgd). By 2045, the collective capacity from Graves Well No. 2, Wilson Wells No. 2, No. 3, and No. 4 is anticipated to be about 4,500 gpm or about 6.5 mgd. Assuming the City wells were limited to 75 percent of capacity during 3 - 901
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.9_Hydrology-050923.docx 3.9-3 Hydrology and Water Quality calendar years 2020 through 2045, the available pumping capacity would be about 5.3 mgd (about 5,900 af) in 2021 and about 4.9 mgd (5,500 af) in 2045.

Over the past 20 years, the City’s groundwater production has ranged from approximately 1,950 afy to approximately 5,264 afy, with an average production of approximately 4,026 afy (Watermaster 2020).

Dam Inundation
Devil’s Gate Dam is located approximately five miles north of the northwesterly City boundary.

This dam is owned and operated by the Los Angeles County Flood Control District (LACFCD) and is a concrete gravity dam. Dam failure could lead to the sudden release of waters and the creation of inundation hazards to downstream areas. Extensive retrofitting was completed in early 1998 and approved by the California Department of Water Resources, Division of Safety of Dams (South Pasadena 1998). The LACFCD has recently removed 1.7 million cubic yards of accumulated sediment from the reservoir behind Devil’s Gate Dam, which was adversely affecting its capacity and function as a flood control facility. Therefore, the capacity of the facility to accommodate future storm water flows and sediment has been restored.

3.9.3 RELEVANT PROGRAMS AND REGULATIONS
Sections 401 and 404 of the Clean Water Act
Section 401 of the Clean Water Act (CWA, United States Code [USC], Title 33, Sections 1251 et seq.) requires that any person applying for a federal permit or license that may result in a discharge of pollutants into “waters of the U.S.” obtain a State water quality certification which concludes that the activity complies with all applicable water quality standards, limitations, and restrictions. Subject to certain limitations, no license or permit may be issued by a federal agency until a Section 401-required certification has been granted. Further, no license or permit may be issued if certification has been denied. The CWA Section 404 permits and authorizations, described in the next paragraph, are subject to Section 401 certification by the local RWQCBs.

Section 404 of the CWA is a program that regulates the discharge of dredged and fill material into “waters of the U.S.”, including wetlands. Activities in “waters of the U.S.” that are regulated under this program include fills for development (including physical alterations to drainages to accommodate storm drainage, stabilization, and flood-control improvements); water resource projects (e.g., dams and levees); infrastructure development (e.g., highways and airports); and conversion of wetlands to uplands for farming and forestry. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers have issued Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines (Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40, Section 230) that regulate dredge and fill activities, including water quality aspects of such activities. Subpart C of Sections 230.20–230.25 contains water quality regulations applicable to dredge and fill activities. Among other topics, these guidelines address discharges that alter substrate elevation or contours; suspended particulates and water clarity; nutrients and chemical content; current patterns and water circulation; water fluctuations (including those that alter erosion or sediment rates); and salinity gradients.

National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
The National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit program is authorized by the federal CWA and regulates point sources that discharge pollutants into “waters of the U.S.”.

Point sources are discrete conveyances such as pipes or man-made ditches. Examples of pollutants include, but are not limited to, rock, sand, dirt as well as agricultural, industrial, and 3 - 902
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.9_Hydrology-050923.docx 3.9-4 Hydrology and Water Quality municipal waste discharged into “waters of the U.S.”. Point sources that discharge into municipal sewer systems (e.g., residential wastewater conveyance pipes) do not require individual permits, but the sewer systems do require an NPDES permit.

In California, responsibility for implementing the NPDES program has been delegated to the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) and the nine RWQCBs acting under the auspices of the state board. The State and regional boards typically issue NPDES permits that also include waste discharge requirements (WDRs) under State law. The Los Angeles County MS4 permit and the State General Construction Permit have been issued as NPDES permits and as WDRs and are discussed in more detail below. The City’s storm water permitting is discussed further below.

Federal Emergency Management Act- Executive Order 11198 In 1977, the President of the United States issued Executive Order 11198 to regulate impacts associated with development within a designated 100-year floodplain. This Executive Order is implemented through FEMA’s Floodplain Mapping Program and through federal agency review of projects that may require federal permits or approvals. Flood hazard areas identified on the Flood Insurance Rate Map are identified as Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHAs). SFHAs are areas that will be inundated by a flood event and have a one percent chance of being equaled or exceeded in any given year. The areas of minimal flood hazard, which are the areas outside the SFHA and higher than the elevation of the 0.2-percent-annual-chance flood, are labeled “Zone C” or “Zone X”. The entirety of the City is designated “Zone X” (FEMA 2023).

State
California Porter-Cologne Act
The Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act of 1970 (Porter-Cologne Act)(California Water Code, Sections 13000 et. seq.) is California‘s primary statute governing water quality and water pollution issues, including sediment transport and protection of surface waters and groundwater.

The Porter-Cologne Act provides the SWRCB and nine RWQCBs the authority to protect water quality and is the primary vehicle for implementing California’s responsibilities under the federal CWA. Each RWQCB must formulate and adopt a water quality control plan (commonly referred to as a basin plan) for the region within its jurisdiction. The basin plan must conform to the policies set forth in the Porter-Cologne Act and the State water policy established by the SWRCB. The basin plan establishes beneficial uses for surface and groundwaters in the region and includes narrative and numeric water quality standards to protect those beneficial uses. Each RWQCB is also authorized to include water discharge prohibitions applicable to particular conditions, areas, or types of waste within its jurisdiction. The Act requires that, unless otherwise authorized by a general or other permit, reports of waste discharges to regulated waters of the state must be provided to each RWQCB. The RWQCB may issue discharge permits under State law in response to a report of waste discharge. These permits are commonly referred to as “waste discharge requirements” and are issued by the RWQCBs for activities within each regional board’s jurisdiction.

Sustainable Groundwater Management Act
On September 16, 2014, Governor Jerry Brown signed into law a three-bill legislative package, comprised of AB 1739 (Dickinson), SB 1168 (Pavley), and SB 1319 (Pavley), collectively known as the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act. The act provides a framework for sustainable management of groundwater supplies by local authorities, with a limited role for state intervention 3 - 903
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.9_Hydrology-050923.docx 3.9-5 Hydrology and Water Quality only if necessary, to protect the resource. The act requires the formation of local groundwater sustainability agencies that must assess conditions in their local water basins and adopt locally based management plans. The act provides a 20-year timeline for the groundwater sustainability agencies to implement the plans to achieve long-term groundwater sustainability. Further, the act protects existing surface water and groundwater rights and does not interfere with current drought response measures.

California Green Building Standards Code
In 2021, the State of California enacted the fourth revision of the California Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen Code) as part 11 of the California Building Standards Code (Title 24).

CALGreen provides mandatory direction to developers of all new construction and renovations of residential and non-residential structures with regard to all aspects of design and construction, including but not limited to site drainage design, storm water management, and water use efficiency. Required measures are accompanied by a set of voluntary standards that are designed to encourage developers and cities to aim for a higher standard of development.

Under CALGreen, all residential and non-residential sites are required to be planned and developed to keep surface water from entering buildings and to incorporate efficient outdoor water use measures. Construction plans are required to show appropriate grading and surface water management methods such as swales, water collection and disposal systems, French drains, water retention gardens, and other water measures that keep surface water away from buildings and aid in groundwater recharge. Plans should also include outdoor water use plans that utilize weather- or soil moisture-controlled irrigation systems. Non-residential structures are also required to develop an irrigation water budget for landscapes greater than 2,500 square feet that conforms to a local water efficient landscape ordinance or to the state Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance, per Title 31, Green Building Standards Code, where no local ordinance is applicable.

Also, for construction activities that disturb less than one acre, a storm water soil loss prevention plan (also referred to as an erosion control plan) must be developed that prevents the pollution of storm water runoff (Section 4.106.2 and Section 5.106.2 of the 2021 California Green Building Standards Code). This can be achieved either through compliance with a storm water management and/or erosion control ordinance or implementation of best management practices (BMPs). The City has a storm water management ordinance, discussed below.

Construction General Permit
The NPDES program allows for the issuance of general permits that cover specific actions by multiple parties, such as construction activities. Dischargers covered under a general permit must comply with the permit terms and conditions. In 2009, the SWRCB issued the statewide Construction General Permit to regulate discharges or pollutants in storm water associated with construction activities (NPDES No. CAR000002, Water Quality Order 2009-0009-DWQ as amended by 2010-0014-DWQ and 2012-006-DWQ). Dischargers are required to obtain coverage under the Construction General Permit if a project disturbs one or more acres of soil or disturbs less than one acre but is part of a larger common plan of development that in total disturbs one or more acres. The Construction General Permit requires that projects implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) that includes specific BMPs and establishes numeric effluent limitations to meet water quality and technology-based standards. 3 - 904
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.9_Hydrology-050923.docx 3.9-6 Hydrology and Water Quality Discharges of Groundwater to Surface Waters
The Los Angeles RWQCB Order R4-2003-0111 contains the waste discharge requirements for discharges of groundwater from construction and project dewatering to surface waters in the coastal watersheds of Los Angeles and Ventura Counties (General NPDES Permit No. CAG994004). This order regulates the discharge of groundwater that may or may not be impacted by toxic compounds and/or conventional pollutants. It requires that dewatering activities prevent water quality degradation and protect beneficial uses of receiving surface water bodies.

The order also includes discharge limitations and discharge prohibitions, as well as Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) for receiving water bodies.

Regional
Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region
The Water Quality Control Plan: Los Angeles Region Basin Plan for the Coastal Watersheds of Los Angeles and Ventura Counties (Basin Plan) seeks to preserve and enhance water quality and protect the beneficial uses of water bodies in the region (LARWQCB 1994). The Basin Plan provides quantitative and narrative criteria for a range of water quality constituents applicable to certain receiving water bodies and groundwater basins within the Los Angeles Region. The Basin Plan (1) designates beneficial uses for surface and ground waters; (2) sets narrative and numerical objectives that must be attained or maintained to protect the designated beneficial uses and to conform to the State’s anti-degradation policy; and (3) describes implementation programs to protect all waters in the region. All applicable SWRCB and RWQCB plans and policies and other pertinent water quality policies and regulations are incorporated by reference into the Basin Plan.

Water quality objectives for ammonia, coliform bacteria, bioaccumulation, biochemical oxygen demand, biostimulatory substances, chemical constituents, total residual chlorine, color, exotic vegetation, floating material, methylene blue activated substances, mineral quality, nitrogen, oil and grease, dissolved oxygen, pesticides, pH, polychlorinated biphenyls, radioactive substances, suspended solids, taste and odor, temperature, toxicity, and turbidity are also included in the Basin Plan. Implementation of the Basin Plan occurs primarily through issuance of Waste Discharge Requirements, including regulatory enforcement action, as necessary. The existing, potential, or intermittent beneficial uses for the Alhambra Wash and the Arroyo Seco (Reach 1), where storm water runoff from the City is discharged and for the underlying groundwater basins in the City (Main San Gabriel Groundwater Basin), are summarized below in Table 3.9-1, Beneficial Uses of Receiving Waters. The beneficial uses defined in the Basin Plan identified for the receiving waters in the City include:
 Municipal and Domestic Supply (MUN): Uses of water for community, military, or individual water supply systems including, but not limited to, drinking water supply.  Industrial Service Supply (IND): Uses of water for industrial activities that do not depend primarily on water quality including, but not limited to, mining, cooling water supply, hydraulic conveyance, gravel washing, fire protection, or oil well repressurization.  Industrial Process Supply (PROC): Uses of water for industrial activities that depend primarily on water quality.
 Agricultural Supply(AGR): Uses of water for farming, horticulture, or ranching including, but not limited to, irrigating, stock watering, or supporting vegetation for range grazing. 3 - 905
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.9_Hydrology-050923.docx 3.9-7 Hydrology and Water Quality  Groundwater Recharge (GWR): Uses of water for natural or artificial recharge of groundwater for future extraction, to maintain water quality, or to halt saltwater intrusion into freshwater aquifers.
 Warm Freshwater Habitat (WARM): Uses of water that support warm water ecosystems including, but not limited to, preservation or enhancement of aquatic habitats, vegetation, fish, or wildlife (including invertebrates).
 Wildlife Habitat (WILD): Uses of water that support terrestrial ecosystems including, but not limited to, preservation and enhancement of terrestrial habitats, vegetation, wildlife (e.g., mammals, birds, reptiles, amphibians, invertebrates), or wildlife water and food sources.
 Rare, Threatened, or Endangered Species (RARE): Uses of water that support habitats necessary, at least in part, for the survival and successful maintenance of plant or animal species established under State or federal law as rare, threatened, or endangered.

TABLE 3.9-1

BENEFICIAL USES OF RECEIVING WATERS
Water Body
Applicable Beneficial Uses

MUN IND PROC AGR GWR WARM WILD
RAR
E
Alhambra Wash P* — — — I P P E
Arroyo Seco (Reach 1) P* — — — — P P —
Main San Gabriel Groundwater Basin E E E E — — — —
MUN: Municipal and Domestic Supply; IND: Industrial Service Supply; PROC Industrial Process Supply; AGR: Agricultural Supply: GWR: Groundwater Recharge; WARM: Warm Freshwater Habitat; WILD: Wildlife Habitat; Rare: Rare, Threatened, or Endangered Species; E: Existing Beneficial Use; P: Potential Beneficial Use; I: Intermittent Beneficial Use * Designated under State Water Quality Control Board Resolution No. 88-63 followed by Los Angeles RWQCB Resolution No. 89-03. Some designations may be considered for exemption at a later date.

Source: LARWQCB. 1994 (June). Water Quality Control Plan, Los Angeles Region: Basin Plan for the Coastal Watersheds of Los Angeles and Ventura Counties.

Storm Water Permitting (Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System Permit) In December 2012, the Los Angeles RWQCB reissued the “Waste Discharge Requirements for Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) Discharges within the Coastal Watersheds of Los Angeles County, Except Those Discharges Originating from the City of Long Beach MS4” (Los Angeles County MS4 permit, MS4 permit) to the County of Los Angeles, 84 incorporated cities within Los Angeles County (including South Pasadena), and the Los Angeles County Flood Control District in accordance with the federal NPDES permit program and Waste Discharge Requirements (WDRs) under State law (CAS004001, Order No. R4-2012-0175) (MS4 Permit).

The City of South Pasadena is a co-permittee to the County’s MS4 permit. The City has developed a Low Impact Development (LID) ordinance and Green Streets policies in accordance with Los Angeles RWQCB requirements under the MS4 permit to ensure storm water runoff meets the WDRs; these are discussed further below.

Groundwater Rights
Groundwater pumping in the groundwater basin underlying the City is regulated by the Main San Gabriel Basin Watermaster. As noted above, adjudication of the water rights of the Main San Gabriel Groundwater Basin was entered in 1973. The Basin Judgment does not restrict the 3 - 906
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.9_Hydrology-050923.docx 3.9-8 Hydrology and Water Quality quantity of water that parties may extract from the Basin. Rather, it provides a means for replacing all annual extractions in excess of a party’s annual right to extract water with supplemental water.

The Watermaster annually establishes an Operating Safe Yield for the Main Basin, which is then used to allocate its portion of the Operating Safe Yield to each party.

The City currently has a prescriptive pumping right of 1.80520 percent of the Basin’s Operating Safe Yield. The Operating Safe Yield in the Basin has averaged about 150,000 af per year over the past five years (fiscal years 2015–2016 through 2019–2020) plus the surface water rights are fixed at about 10,500 af for a total of about 160,500 af of water rights. If the City pumps more water than the allowed amount, a Replacement Water Assessment is charged by the Watermaster that is used to purchase untreated imported water for replacement/recharge into the Basin (South Pasadena 2021).

City
Municipal Code
Chapter 23, Stormwater and Urban Runoff Pollution Control Chapter 23 of the South Pasadena Municipal Code (SPMC) is defined as the “Storm Water and Urban Runoff Pollution Prevention Control Ordinance of the City of South Pasadena” and was enacted to ensure the City meets federal and State Clean Water Act requirements and complies with Los Angeles County MS4 permit requirements.

The purpose of this chapter is to protect and improve water quality of receiving waters by:
a) Reducing illicit discharges to the municipal storm water system to the maximum extent practicable;
b) Eliminating illicit connections to the municipal storm water system; c) Eliminating spillage, dumping, and disposal of pollutant materials into the municipal storm water system;
d) Reducing pollutant loads in storm water and urban runoff from land uses and activities identified in the municipal NPDES permit; and
e) Reducing the contribution of pollutants from the MS4 through interagency coordination.

The intent of this chapter is to enhance and protect the water quality of the receiving waters of the United States in a manner that is consistent with the Clean Water Act and acts amendatory thereof or supplementary thereto; applicable implementing regulations, the MS4 permit and any amendment, revision, or reissuance thereof.

Section 23.12 et. seq. of the SPMC requires that for projects with construction activity subject to the Construction General Permit, proof of application for this permit would be required before the City issues a grading permit, and also requires that all records associated with coverage under the Construction General Permit be retained at the construction site. Section 23.13 et. seq. of the SPMC addresses construction activities not subject to the Construction General Permit (i.e., less than one acre of disturbance) but that would be subject to the MS4 requirements, which encompasses all anticipated development in the City. These projects would be required to comply with requirements contained in the MS4 permit, as specified in the City’s watershed management program, defined in Section 23.14 et. seq. of the SPMC. 3 - 907
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.9_Hydrology-050923.docx 3.9-9 Hydrology and Water Quality Section 23.14 et. seq. of the SPMC contains requirements for storm water pollution control measures in construction activities and facility operations of development and redevelopment projects to comply with the current MS4, lessen the water quality impacts of development by using smart growth practices, and integrate LID design principles to mimic predevelopment hydrology through infiltration, evapotranspiration, and rainfall harvest and use. LID, in simplest terms, consists of building and landscape features designed to retain or filter storm water runoff.

The LID principles shall be inclusive of the Standard Urban Stormwater Mitigation Plan (SUSMP) requirements under the MS4. This section authorizes the City to further define and adopt storm water pollution control measures, develop LID principles and requirements, including, but not limited to, the objectives and specifications for integration of LID strategies, and collect funds for projects.

Urban Water Management Plan
The City is a retail water supplier that serves the majority of the residents within South Pasadena.

As its own water supplier, the City is required to prepare an Urban Water Management Plan (Plan) in accordance with the California Urban Water Management Planning Act (UWMP Act) which was established in 1983. The primary objective of the UWMP Act is to direct urban water suppliers to evaluate their existing water conservation efforts and, to the extent practicable, review and implement alternative and supplemental water conservation measures. Section 10621(a) of the California Water Code states, “Each water supplier shall update its plan at least once every five years on or before December 31, in years ending in five and zero.” The 2020 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP), dated October 2021, for the City of South Pasadena was prepared to meet the mandates of the California Urban Water Management Planning Act. The UWMP identifies historic and projected water supplies available to the City of South Pasadena; existing and projected water demand; available water rights; and programs to meet demand during an average year, single-dry year, and a five-consecutive-year drought. The UWMP is the foundational document for compliance with both the California Water Code and SB 610 and SB 221 documentation for applicable development projects in the City.

3.9.4 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
The following significance criteria are derived from Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines. A project would result in a significant adverse hydrology and water quality impact if it would:

Threshold 3.9a: Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality; Threshold 3.9b: Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin;
Threshold 3.9c: Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would:
(i) result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site; (ii) substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or offsite; or 3 - 908
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.9_Hydrology-050923.docx 3.9-10 Hydrology and Water Quality (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?
Threshold 3.9d: Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site; or
Threshold 3.9e: Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff.

3.9.5 PROPOSED HOUSING ELEMENT GOALS AND POLICIES
There are no Housing Element goals or policies related to hydrology and water quality.

3.9.6 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Threshold 3.9a: Would the Project violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or groundwater quality?
There are two major classes of pollutants: point source and non-point source. Point-source pollutants can be traced to their original source and are discharged directly from pipes or spills.

Non-point-source pollutants cannot be traced to a specific original source. Non-point source pollution is caused by rainfall or snowmelt moving over and through the ground. Storm water runoff (i.e., non-point source) occurs when rainfall is collected by storm drains instead of being absorbed into groundcover or soil as is common in undeveloped and in landscaped areas.

Common pollutants associated with storm water runoff in urban areas include sediment, nutrients, bacteria and viruses, oil and grease, metals, organics, oxygen-demanding substances, pesticides, and trash and debris. Wet- and dry-weather runoff typically contain similar pollutants of concern; however, after long dry periods between rainfall events, the concentrations of pollutants in dry weather flows are higher and potentially more harmful. Sediments and contaminants may be transported through runoff to downstream drainages and ultimately into the receiving waterways, and potentially even into the Pacific Ocean, thereby affecting surface water and offshore water quality without appropriate management. In the City of South Pasadena, the Los Angeles RWQCB administers NPDES permitting and is responsible for issuance of Waste Discharge Requirements (WDRs).

Construction
Storm water runoff from individual construction sites could contain pollutants such as soils and sediments that are released during grading and excavation activities and petroleum-related pollutants due to spills or leaks from heavy equipment and machinery. Other common pollutants that may result from construction activities include solid or liquid chemical spills; concrete and related cutting or curing residues; wastes from paints, stains, sealants, solvents, detergents, glues, acids, lime, plaster, and cleaning agents; and heavy metals from equipment. Construction activities could include demolition of existing structures for new development or replacement, new development, road improvements and realignments, installation and realignment of utilities, and the potential replacement of utilities. Construction runoff would flow into the storm drain inlets in the City or in the surrounding area and would enter receiving water bodies. As discussed above, 3 - 909
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.9_Hydrology-050923.docx 3.9-11 Hydrology and Water Quality the City’s receiving water (Arroyo Seco Reach 1 and Alhambra Wash) are considered impaired water bodies; pollutants in the storm water could add to further degradation of water quality and violation of TMDLs and affect the identified beneficial uses for these waters.

As discussed above, construction activities that disturb one or more acres of land are subject to the Construction General Permit (Order 2009-0009-DWQ as amended by 2010-0014-DWQ and 2012-006-DWQ). Compliance with the Construction General Permit would involve filing a Notice of Intent with the SWRCB, then preparing and submitting a SWPPP prior to construction activities.

The SWPPP must describe the site, the facility, erosion and sediment controls, runoff water quality monitoring, means of waste disposal, implementation of approved local plans, control of construction sediment discharge and erosion control measures, maintenance responsibilities, and non-storm water management controls. Inspection of construction sites before and after storms is required to identify storm water discharge from the construction activity and to identify and implement controls where necessary. As noted above, the City requires proof of application for coverage under the Construction General Permit and retention of all associated documents on the construction site, pursuant to Section 23.12 of the SPMC.

The preparation of a SWPPP requires the individual developer to implement best management practices (BMPs) that are designed specifically to address the potential pollution risks that would be incurred during project construction. The BMPs set forth in the SWPPP and implemented during construction activities that are most often used include (1) erosion-control BMPs such as hydraulic mulch, soil binders, and geotextiles and mats to stabilize soils; (2) temporary drainage swales to divert runoff from exposed soils; (3) sediment controls such as fiber rolls along disturbed areas, temporary desilting basins, and gravel bags around storm drain inlets; (4) watering of exposed soils and covering stockpiles of soil; (5) stabilization of construction entrance/exit points to reduce tracking of sediments on vehicles; and (6) timing of grading to avoid the rainy season (i.e., November through April). Effective implementation of the project-specific measures in the SWPPP would comply with the Construction General Permit requirements, and, therefore, would not violate applicable waste discharge requirements.

As discussed, for construction activities that disturb less than one acre, CALGreen requires a storm water soil loss prevention plan (also referred to as an erosion control plan) to be developed that prevents the pollution of storm water runoff, and this can be achieved by through compliance with the City’s storm water management ordinance (Chapter 23 of the SPMC).

Therefore, all construction activities would be required to meet permitting requirements, at either the State or local level, to effectively control storm water runoff pollution control and ensure applicable waste discharge requirements, pursuant to the SPMC, are not violated, which would reduce short-term, construction-related water quality impacts to surface water and groundwater to a less than significant level, and no mitigation is required.

Operation
Future development pursuant to the Project would have the potential to increase non-point-source runoff, and associated pollutants, from residential, office/retail, utility, and roadway uses. All proposed projects would be required to comply with applicable requirements of the Los Angeles County MS4 permit, implemented via the City’s storm water management ordinance (Chapter 23 of the SPMC).

This includes preparation of a SUSMP, which must include a drainage concept and storm water quality plan that reduces peak storm water runoff discharge rates; conserves natural areas; minimizes storm water pollutants of concern; protects slopes and channels; provides storm drain 3 - 910
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.9_Hydrology-050923.docx 3.9-12 Hydrology and Water Quality system stenciling and signage; properly designs outdoor material storage areas and trash storage areas; and provides proof of ongoing BMP maintenance through structural or treatment-control BMPs. Section 23.14 et. seq. of the SPMC contains requirements for storm water pollution control measures for both construction and operation of development/redevelopment projects to comply with the current MS4 permit. These requirements lessen the water quality impacts of development by using smart growth practices and integrate LID design principles to mimic predevelopment hydrology through infiltration, evapotranspiration, and rainfall harvest and use. The City’s LID ordinance and Green Streets policies have been adopted in accordance with Los Angeles RWQCB requirements under the MS4 permit to ensure storm water runoff meets the WDRs.

Because most of the development that may occur pursuant to the Project would be redevelopment of existing, fully developed sites, buildout of the Project would result in a minimal increase in impervious surfaces. Also, replacement of existing land uses through redevelopment activities presents an opportunity to better control runoff through the implementation of current, mandated storm water management features.

Through compliance with State and local regulations by future development storm water runoff, impacts related to operational water quality standards and waste discharge requirements would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.

Threshold 3.9b: Would the project substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin?
Groundwater Supplies
The City operates its own municipal water services, with water supplies from the underlying Main San Gabriel Groundwater Basins. The City obtains its groundwater supply through four wells, of which two are currently active.

Future development pursuant to the Project would create a long-term demand for water to be used for domestic purposes, landscape irrigation, and maintenance activities. This water demand would lead to an increase in groundwater pumping from local wells. As discussed above, groundwater pumping is regulated by the Watermaster. As discussed in Section 3.14, Utilities and Services Systems, the City complies with its pumping rights and the need to replenish groundwater when the City exceeds its allocation. Thus, groundwater pumping that may lead to the depletion of local groundwater resources is not expected to occur. Continued management of the groundwater basins by the Watermaster would also prevent overdraft conditions or other adverse impacts to local groundwater. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not substantially deplete groundwater supplies. There would be a less than significant impact, and no mitigation is required.

Groundwater Recharge
The City is largely built out and has an established land use pattern, with limited available vacant or underutilized land throughout the City. Groundwater recharge is accomplished through the infiltration of storm water and irrigation water runoff into pervious soils, whether through an engineered spreading ground facility, through creeks and drainages, and/or through vacant and vegetated (including landscaped) areas. The construction of new impervious surfaces, including roadways, building foundations, parking lots, and other concrete or asphalt surfaces, would prevent rainwater from infiltrating the soils, potentially reducing groundwater recharge. 3 - 911
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.9_Hydrology-050923.docx 3.9-13 Hydrology and Water Quality As discussed above, because virtually all the development that may occur pursuant to the Project would be redevelopment of existing, fully developed sites, buildout of the Project would result in a minimal increase in impervious surfaces. The vacant parcels available for development occupy less than one percent of the City’s land area (Inloes 2018). Also, not all vacant parcels are necessarily pervious. The development of this very small increment of land area would not result in the creation of substantial interference to groundwater recharge. There are no groundwater recharge facilities within the City, and existing parks and open space areas would not be altered as a result of the Project. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not interfere substantially with groundwater recharge. There would be a less than significant impact, and no mitigation is required.

Threshold 3.9c: Would the project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would:
(i) result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site; Changes in drainage patterns would be confined to individual development sites and would not affect major underground storm drain lines and concrete-lined drainages in the City. As discussed above, most development sites pursuant to the proposed Project would be redevelopment of existing, fully developed sites, the change in drainage patterns on these sites would be nominal.

All development must be conducted in compliance with applicable State and local regulations, which prevent substantial alteration of site drainage patterns by controlling the volume and direction of runoff. Since drainages in the City are concrete-lined, no alteration in the course of these channels would occur from future development. Impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.
(ii) substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or offsite; or (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? The construction of new impervious surfaces would reduce the amount of rainwater that could infiltrate the soils, potentially increasing storm water runoff due to reductions in infiltration. This would occur primarily through the introduction of new structures, driveways, parking lots, walkways, and other site improvements on vacant properties. As previously discussed, the City is largely built out and has an established land use pattern, with limited available vacant or underutilized land throughout the City. Less than one percent of the land available for development within the City is vacant, and not all vacant sites are necessarily pervious. Therefore, development pursuant to the Project would not appreciably increase the amount of impervious surface areas in the City. Further, the City’s storm water management requirements (Section

23.14) state that projects shall be designed to control pollutants, pollutant loads, and runoff volume to the maximum extent feasible by minimizing impervious surface area and controlling runoff from impervious surfaces through infiltration, evapotranspiration, bioretention, and/or rainfall harvest and use (i.e., LID features).

Therefore, due to the nominal potential for increased runoff volumes and the City’s storm water management requirements, there would be less than significant impacts related to alternating the 3 - 912
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.9_Hydrology-050923.docx 3.9-14 Hydrology and Water Quality drainage pattern, substantially increasing surface water runoff, or the capacity of the municipal storm drain system, and no mitigation is required.

Threshold 3.9d: In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, would the project risk release of pollutants due to project inundation?
The City of South Pasadena is not located within the 100-year flood hazard area, as mapped by FEMA (FEMA 2023). Future development pursuant to the Project, including housing or other structures, would not be exposed to flood hazards. Structures that would be built as part of future development would not impede or redirect flood flows. Impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.

A seiche is the formation of large waves in landlocked bodies of water due to seismic activity. In the event of an earthquake, a seiche can occur and potentially cause major flooding and water inundation damage. There are no large open water bodies in or near the City that could be susceptible to seiche. There would be no impacts.

Tsunami (sea waves) hazards do not affect the City due to the City’s elevation and distance from the ocean. The City is located outside the tsunami inundation areas in the Los Angeles County Tsunami Inundation Maps prepared by the California Department of Conservation (CGS 2021).

There would be no impacts.

Mudflows are fluid masses of rock, earth, and other debris saturated with water and with the consistency of wet cement. They develop when water rapidly accumulates in the ground, such as during heavy rainfall or rapid snowmelt, changing the earth into a flowing river or slurry of mud.

Mountainous areas are susceptible to mudflows. The foothills of the San Gabriel Mountains are located approximately five miles to the north-northwest. As such, there is no mudflow hazard from this area. Most of the City is relatively flat, with steeper hillside areas primarily in the southwest portion of the City.

As discussed in Section 3.5, Geology and Soils, of this EA, development in hillside areas (sites within an average slope of 20 percent or greater) requires a Hillside Development Permit as a discretionary zoning approval of the City. Future development or redevelopment within the areas subject to a Hillside Development Permit, largely in the southwest portion of the City, would also be required to prepare site-specific geotechnical investigations that include analysis of slope stability, erosion, subsidence, groundwater effects, and earthquakes as it pertains to the site’s unique topography, to identify these hazards and provide appropriate construction recommendations, as necessary. Compliance with erosion-control measures required for a Hillside Development Permit would reduce the potential for mudflow from development sites with steep slopes. Therefore, mudflow hazards in the City would be less than significant levels, and no mitigation is required.

Threshold 3.9e: Would the Project conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan? As discussed under Threshold 3.9(a) above, implementation of the Project would not adversely affect water quality through compliance with the Construction General Permit, CALGreen, and the SPMC during construction and City LID and County MS4 permit requirements during operation.

The San Gabriel Basin, the City’s source of groundwater, is defined by the California Department of Water Resources as very low priority pursuant to the 2014 Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (DWR 2023). As such, there is currently no sustainable groundwater 3 - 913
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.9_Hydrology-050923.docx 3.9-15 Hydrology and Water Quality management plan applicable to the City. Regardless, as discussed under Threshold 3.9(b) above, the increase in demand for potable water associated with buildout of the Project is not expected to result in depletion of local groundwater resources because the Main San Gabriel Basin is managed by the Watermaster. Continued management of the groundwater basins by the Watermaster would also prevent overdraft conditions or other adverse impacts to local groundwater. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not obstruct implementation of groundwater management of the Basin. There would be a less than significant impact, and no mitigation is required.

3.9.7 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
Water Quality
Cumulative water quality impacts are considered for the Los Angeles River Watershed, where the City of South Pasadena is located. Future development within the Los Angeles River Watershed, which includes the majority of Los Angeles County, would generate new sources for urban pollutants, which could impact water quality. However, construction activities throughout Los Angeles County are required to conduct all construction activities on one acre or more in compliance with the NPDES Construction General Permit, which would prevent short-term construction activities from resulting in significant water quality impacts; and construction activities on less than one acre in compliance with CALGreen.

Cities in the County have adopted programs for long-term storm water pollution mitigation through the requirement for SUSMPs for individual developments. Waste Discharge Requirements, defined by the Los Angeles RWQCB, also impose guidelines for individual developments that may lead to discharges into the storm drain system or surface water bodies. These regulations implement the Basin Plan for the Los Angeles region and help meet the established water quality objectives for both groundwater and surface water bodies.

Also, the Los Angeles River has an 824-square-mile watershed. Runoff originating within the City (3.4 square miles) represents a minor portion (0.4 percent) of the total runoff volume when compared to the water volumes handled by the Los Angeles River as a whole. Runoff from future development activity would be a minor amount of the total runoff from the City. Therefore, no cumulative adverse impacts related to water quality would occur.

Groundwater
Cumulative groundwater impacts are considered for the Main San Gabriel Groundwater Basin, from which the City provides the majority of its water supply. Increases in the resident population and intensity of development would translate to a greater demand for water and increased pumping of the groundwater basins, as well as greater use of imported water sources. Individual developments would coordinate with their respective water service providers to allow them to provide water service in a timely and adequate manner. The water service provider’s groundwater supplies are controlled by the Main San Gabriel Basin Watermaster, who is responsible for monitoring groundwater levels and water quality, including the operating safe yields of the basin and extraction limits and amounts. Continued management of the groundwater basin would prevent overdraft conditions, water quality problems, and other impacts on groundwater resources. Therefore, no cumulative impacts related to groundwater recharge or supplies would occur.
3 - 914
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.9_Hydrology-050923.docx 3.9-16 Hydrology and Water Quality Hydrology and Drainage
Cumulative water quality impacts are considered for the Los Angeles River Watershed. Future growth and development within the watershed would increase impermeable surfaces and decrease water percolation areas. Increase in impervious surfaces would increase storm water volumes and flow rates in local and regional drainage channels. However, all development within Los Angeles County is subject to development in compliance with SUSMP and local municipal code standards for reducing storm drain capacity impacts. Storm drain infrastructure is incrementally improved with project-specific design plans that are subject to the review and approval of local jurisdiction. Project-specific design and utility improvements would prevent negative impacts to regional drainage channel capacity. Therefore, no cumulative impacts related to changes in drainage patterns or inadequate storm drainage would occur.

Inundation
Cumulative inundation impacts are considered for the San Gabriel Valley. Several dams at the foothills of the San Gabriel Mountains pose inundation hazards to development across the San Gabriel Valley in the event of dam failure. Failure of any dam could affect existing and future developments within identified inundation areas. The potential for property damage and personal injury is reduced by the construction of dams in accordance with State and federal dam safety regulations and the preparation of emergency action plans for individual dams, which include warning, evacuation, and post-disaster actions. Therefore, no cumulative impacts related to dam inundation would occur.

Seiche hazards would affect local areas downstream of a water body or reservoir and would not create cumulative impacts. The hazards associated with a tsunami are confined to the shoreline and coastal areas of Los Angeles County; the San Gabriel Valley is not susceptible to tsunami.

Future development on steep hillside areas throughout the San Gabriel Valley may be exposed to potential mudflow hazards. The debris basins that have been constructed by the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works at the foothills of the San Gabriel Mountains are expected to reduce storm water flows and debris volumes, preventing mudflow hazards. Therefore, no cumulative impacts related to water retention facilities would occur.

3.9.8 MITIGATION MEASURES
No significant adverse impacts related to hydrology and water quality have been identified with implementation of relevant policies and actions . Therefore, no mitigation is required.

3.9.9 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION
Less than significant.

3.9.10 REFERENCES
California Department of Water Resources (DWR). 2019 (December). Basin Prioritization: SGMA Basin Prioritization Dashboard. Sacramento, CA: DWR. SGMA Basin Prioritization Dashboard (ca.gov).
———. 2004 (February). California’s Groundwater Bulletin 118 – San Gabriel Valley Groundwater Basin. Sacramento, CA: DWR. https://water.ca.gov/-/media/DWR-Website/WebPages/Programs/Groundwater-Management/Bulletin-118/Files/2003-BasinDescriptions/4_013_SanGabrielValley.pdf. 3 - 915
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.9_Hydrology-050923.docx 3.9-17 Hydrology and Water Quality California Geological Survey (CGS). 2021 (May 18, access date). Tsunami Inundation Maps.

Sacramento, CA: CGS. https://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/tsunami/maps/los-angeles.

Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). 2023 (April 25, access date). The National Flood Insurance Program, FEMA Flood Map Service Center: South Pasadena, City of.

Washington, D.C.: FEMA. https://msc.fema.gov/portal/search.

Inloes, D. Jr. 2018 (February 4). Personal communication. E-mail correspondence from D. Inloes Jr. (Daniel Inloes Planning/GIS Services) to K. Rangwala (Rangwala Associates) and J.

Neary (Psomas) with attachments “Land Use Comparison By Acreage” and “GP Capacity”.

Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board (LARWQCB). 1994 (as amended). Water Quality Control Plan, Los Angeles Region: Basin Plan for the Coastal Watersheds of Los Angeles and Ventura Counties. Los Angeles, CA: LARWQCB. https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/losangeles/water_issues/programs/basin_plan/.

South Pasadena, City of, Department of Public Works. South Pasadena, City of. 2021 (September). City of South Pasadena Final Draft 2020 Urban Water Management Plan.

South Pasadena, CA: the City. Microsoft Word - Final City of South Pasadena 2020 UWMP (Redlines) (southpasadenaca.gov).
———. 2019. 2019 Water Quality Report. South Pasadena, CA: the City. https://www.southpasadenaca.gov/government/departments/public-works/water-division. ———. 1998. South Pasadena General Plan Safety and Noise Element. South Pasadena, CA:
the City.
https://www.southpasadenaca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/213/6367217090833 30000.

State Water Resources Control Board (SRWCB). 2022 (May 11, approved by U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). Final 2020-2022 California Integrated Report (Clean Water Act Section 303(d) List and 305(b) Report): 303(d) list-Excel file. Sacramento, CA: SWRCB. https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/tmdl/2020_2022state_ir_reports _revised_final/apx-a-303d-list.xlsx.
———. 2021 (June 4, last accessed). Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) Program: RB4-Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board. Sacramento, CA: SWRCB. Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) | California State Water Resources Control Board. ———. 2012. National Pollution Elimination System General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Construction and Land Disturbance Activities, Order No. 2012-0006- DWQ. Sacramento, CA: SWRCB.
http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/board_decisions/adopted_orders/water_quality/2012/wq o2012_0006_dwq.pdf.

3 - 916
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.9_Hydrology-050923.docx 3.9-18 Hydrology and Water Quality This page intentionally left blank
3 - 917
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.10_Land Use-050923.docx 3.10-1 Land Use and Planning

3.10 LAND USE AND PLANNING

3.10.1 METHODOLOGY
This section describes the existing land uses in the City and discusses the currently adopted General Plan and Mission Street Specific Plan (MSSP). It also discusses the proposed 2021– 2029 Housing Element and the non-residential development capacity envisioned in the General Plan and Downtown Specific Plan (DTSP) Update (Project), proposed changes in land uses with Project implementation, and consistency with regional plans and policies.

Land use impacts can be direct or indirect. Direct impacts result from land use incompatibilities, division of neighborhoods or communities, or interference with other land use plans, such as habitat conservation plans. This section of the Environmental Assessment (EA) focuses on direct land use impacts. Indirect land use impacts are secondary effects that may arise from land use policy implementation, such as an increased demand for public services and utilities, or increased traffic. Indirect impacts related to other environmental topics are addressed in the other topical sections in this EA.

3.10.2 EXISTING CONDITIONS
Existing Land Uses
The City of South Pasadena covers approximately 3.4 square miles, or 2,187 acres. Existing land use types in the City are shown in Exhibit 2-2, Existing Land Use Policy Map, Section 2.0, Environmental Setting and Project Description, of this EA.

The City’s development character is predominantly low- and mid-rise residential, with low- to mid-rise neighborhood-serving retail uses, office buildings, and civic uses generally located along its main corridors: Mission Street, Fair Oaks Avenue, Huntington Drive, Fremont Avenue, and Monterey Road. Residential uses cover approximately 63.4 percent (1,386.3 acres) of the City’s land area. Commercial uses cover approximately 3.0 percent (64.8 acres) of the City’s land area, office uses cover 0.8 percent (16.9 acres), and light industrial uses cover 0.6 percent (12.2 acres).

Community facilities cover 3.9 percent of the City (85.0 acres). The MSSP area, parks and other open space, utility easements, and rights-of-way cover 32.3 percent of the City (707 acres).

The City of South Pasadena has an estimated 11,156 dwelling units, comprised of nearly equal amount of single- and multi-family units. The vast majority of housing units in the City were built prior to 1980, including a number of officially and unofficially designated historic structures.

However, from 1980 to 1990 was the most significant decade of multi-family housing development in the City. Regardless, the City has added only 839 net new dwelling units in the last approximately 40 years (South Pasadena 2021.) Retail uses in the City are generally small-scale and neighborhood-oriented. Retail development over the past decade has been predominantly ground-floor space within transit-oriented mixed-use buildings with multi-family units on the floors above, primarily on or near Mission Street and close to the Metro Gold Line station. The City has a small share of the office space within the Pasadena/Arcadia/Monrovia submarket; however, the City contains a disproportionate share of creative office space1 within its submarket, which is primarily located in the Ostrich Farm District (HR&A 2017). 1 Creative office space typically refers to space that falls outside the traditional layout (such as cubicles and perimeter offices). This type of office space generally has more open, flexible-use space, and is intended to encourage creativity and collaboration. Often utilized by creative/design businesses, such as architecture, advertising, and production.
3 - 918
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.10_Land Use-050923.docx 3.10-2 Land Use and Planning

3.10.3 RELEVANT PROGRAMS AND REGULATIONS
State
Land Use Planning Law
The requirements and authority for local municipalities (i.e., counties and cities) in California to prepare and administer general plans are contained in Sections 65300 et. seq. of the California Government Code. A general plan is a regulatory document established by a city or county to provide a guide for the future physical, economic, social, and environmental well-being of the city or county. It generally consists of goals, policies, actions and/or programs that would achieve the community’s vision for its future. For cities, the general plan guides the development of the incorporated city, plus any land outside city boundaries that has a relationship to the city’s planning activities. This area outside a city’s boundaries is called the Sphere of Influence. The City of South Pasadena does not have a sphere of influence; its jurisdictional boundaries align with the City limits.

The housing element is one of the State-mandated elements of a general plan. It identifies the City’s housing conditions, needs, and opportunities; and establishes the programs that are the foundation of each municipalities housing strategy. However, unlike all other general plan elements, State law requires each municipality to update its housing element on a prescribed schedule (most commonly every eight years). The City’s 2013–2021 Housing Element is in effect through 2021. State law required City Council adoption of the 2021–2029 Housing Element Update by October 15, 2021, with a 120-day grace period (i.e., February 15, 2022) after which cities and counties face statutory penalties. Additionally, if a city cannot identify sufficient sites adequate to accommodate its RHNA allocation, the Housing Element must commit to rezone properties within three years to allow "by right" development of 20 percent below market rate projects. Assembly Bill (AB) 398 also requires a locality that fails to adopt an HCD-compliant housing element within 120 days of the statutory deadline to complete this required rezoning no later than one year from the housing element adoption deadline. Also, AB 398 prohibits the Housing Element from being found in substantial compliance until that rezoning is completed.

Previously, an agency had three years to rezone. AB 215 requires local agencies to make draft revisions of the housing element available for public comment for 30 days. The agency (i.e., City of South Pasadena) must consider and incorporate public comments prior to submission to the HCD for review. Because of legal action against the City related to its Housing Element preparation, the City is the subject of a Court Order2 to bring its Housing Element into compliance with Government Code Section 65754 within the timeframe stated within the Court Order. This Court Order supersedes the time limits discussed above. Legislation related to housing element content, rather than processing, is discussed further below.

The requirements for preparation and implementation of specific plans are contained in Sections 65450–65457 of the California Government Code. Specific plans are a tool for the systematic implementation of a general plan and establish a link between implementing policies of the general plan and the individual development proposals in a defined area. The provisions of Section 65450 et. seq. of the California Government Code require that a specific plan be consistent with the adopted general plan of the jurisdiction within which it is located. In turn, all development, all public works projects, and zoning regulations must be consistent with the specific plan. The requirements for the adoption and administration of zoning laws, ordinances, and other 2 Settlement Agreement (Californians For Homeownership V. City of South Pasadena, LASC Case Nos. 22STCP01388 & 22STCP01161)
3 - 919
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.10_Land Use-050923.docx 3.10-3 Land Use and Planning regulations by counties and cities is contained in Sections 65800–65912 of the California Government Code.

Additionally, on September 30, 2008, AB 1358, the California Complete Streets Act was signed into law and became effective on January 1, 2011. AB 1358 places the planning, designing, and building of complete streets into the larger planning framework of a general plan by requiring jurisdictions to amend their circulation elements to plan for multimodal transportation networks.

If a jurisdiction fails to implement programs in its housing element to identify adequate sites or fails to adopt an adequate housing element, AB 1233 requires local governments to zone or rezone adequate sites by the first year of the new planning period. Specifically, AB 1233 applies to local governments that:
 Failed to adopt an updated Housing Element for the prior planning period;  Adopted a Housing Element that the HCD found out of compliance due to failure to substantially comply with the adequate sites requirement;  Failed to implement the adequate sites programs to make sites available within the planning period; or
 Failed to identify or make available adequate sites to accommodate a portion of the regional housing need.

The City of South Pasadena has reutilized rezoning and other strategies to identify adequate sites to meet the 6th Cycle RHNA allocation. Additionally, the housing units allocated for the City in the 5th Cycle Housing Element planning period (i.e., 63 du) were accommodated in the City’s 2014–2021 Housing Element.

Senate Bill 375
Senate Bill (SB) 375, approved by the Governor in 2008, aligns land use and transportation planning to drive development towards transit-accessible places and reduce car dependency.

SB 375 is the land use component of California’s wider strategy to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, codified by the 2006 Global Warming Solutions Act (Assembly Bill [AB] 32).

SB 375 also requires that housing elements identify the existing and projected housing needs of all economic segments of the community. In certain cases, the State requires rezoning actions to be included within the housing elements to accommodate 100 percent of the need for very low and low-income households. If a jurisdiction does not fulfill the housing element action programs that are tied to affordability levels (prior to the June 30, 2020, deadline for the 5th Cycle production period), then penalties may be incurred in accordance with SB 375 and AB 1233 (discussed above).
3 - 920
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.10_Land Use-050923.docx 3.10-4 Land Use and Planning Housing Legislation
The California legislature has passed numerous bills related to housing in the last several years.

The following discussion briefly describes housing laws applicable to the City’s planning documents and policies and those that may affect future City decision-making. It is anticipated that further legislation will be passed in coming years in light of the continuing housing shortage in the State.

Assembly Bill 1397
AB 1397 made several changes to housing element law by revising what could be included in a municipality’s inventory of land suitable for residential development. AB 1397 changed the definition of land suitable for residential development to increase the number of multi-family sites.

Identified sites must be “available” and “suitable” for residential development and have a “realistic and demonstrated potential” for redevelopment during the planning period. In addition, AB 1397 requires housing element inventory sites to be 0.5 acre to 10 acres, have sufficient infrastructure, or to be included in a program to provide such infrastructure, to support and be accessible for housing development. Further, the municipality must specify the realistic unit count for each site and whether it can accommodate housing at various income levels.

However, SB 375 provides that communities preparing an eight-year housing element must complete all required rezoning if the available housing sites inventory does not identify adequate sites to accommodate the RHNA allocation. The planned rezoning must include "minimum density and development standards" for all sites, and, for sites designated for very low and low-income housing, rezoning must provide for "by right" zoning at certain minimum densities, with no discretionary approvals allowed except design review and subdivision map approval. In these instances, CEQA review cannot be required unless a subdivision map is needed. Additionally, the programmed rezoning must be completed within certain time frames.

Housing Crisis Act of 2019 (Senate Bill 330) and Senate Bill 8 The California Housing Crisis Act (HCA, SB 330) was enacted by Governor Newson in 2019 to combat the State’s growing housing crisis. This legislation’s goal is to increase California’s affordable housing stock by 3.5 million new units by 2025. To streamline residential development, a new preliminary development application process is required, which includes a staff-level review of basic information regarding a project such as:
 Site characteristics;
 The planned project;
 Certain environmental concerns;
 Facts related to any potential density bonus;
 Certain coastal zone-specific concerns;
 The number of units to be demolished; and
 The location of recorded public easements.
3 - 921
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.10_Land Use-050923.docx 3.10-5 Land Use and Planning SB 330 further streamlines housing development by reducing the number of public meetings or hearings to five or less (e.g., workshops, design review board meetings, planning commission meetings, advisory committee meetings, and city council meetings). A shortened approval time of 90 days instead of 120 days from the time of certification for an EIR is also required to streamline the development approval process.

Local agencies are no longer able to remove or modify land use designations or allowances to inhibit the development of housing, unless the local agency replaces the lost housing potential; therefore, ensuring no net loss in housing availability. Further, local agencies will no longer be able to limit the annual number of housing-focused land use approvals, create caps on the amount of constructed housing units, or limit the population size of their city. Subjective design limitations on parcels where housing is an allowable use is also no longer permissible for projects that are subject to processing per SB 330 (any housing project).

Assembly Bill 345
AB 345 further facilitates ADUs by removing the requirement for a local agency to first pass an ordinance allowing the conveyance of an ADU separately from a primary residence (which can be an extended process) before such conveyance occurs and permits an ADU to be sold or conveyed separately from the primary residence to a qualified buyer (low- and moderate-income individuals and families as defined in California Health and Safety Code Section 50093) and if certain conditions are met, including that the primary residence or ADU was built by a qualified nonprofit corporation and that the property is held pursuant to a recorded tenancy in common agreement.

Assembly Bill 491
AB 491 requires that, for any residential structure with five or more residential dwelling units that include both affordable housing units and market-rate housing units, the BMR units must provide the same access to common entrances, areas, and amenities as non-BMR units, and the building "shall not isolate the affordable housing units within that structure to a specific floor or an area on a specific floor."
Assembly Bill 787
AB 787 expands existing law that permits jurisdictions to claim credit for up to 25 percent of their RHNA from the conversion of existing housing units for very low- and low-income households by also permitting cities and counties to satisfy up to 25 percent of the local agency's moderateincome regional housing need through RHNA by permitting the conversion of units in an existing multifamily building to be restricted for moderate-income households. To qualify, the conversion 3 - 922
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.10_Land Use-050923.docx 3.10-6 Land Use and Planning 1) must occur beginning January 1, 2022; 2) units may not be previously affordable to very low-, low-, or moderate-income households; 3) must be subject to a 55-year recorded agreement; and 4) the initial post-conversion rent for the unit must be at least 10 percent less than the average monthly rent charged during the 12 months prior to conversion.

State Density Bonus Law and Related Legislation
California’s Density Bonus Law (Section 65915 et. seq. of the Government Code) grants bonuses, concessions, waivers, and parking reductions to projects with qualifying affordable housing. The State’s Density Bonus Law continues to be the most commonly used tool to increase housing density and production. Prior to the passage of Assembly Bill (AB) 1763, projects qualifying for a density bonus were entitled to one to three “incentives” and “concessions” to help make the development of affordable and senior housing more economically feasible, such as reduced setback and minimum square footage requirements as requested by the developer. AB 1763 provides a fourth incentive and concession to 100 percent affordable projects. If the project is located within a half mile of a major transit stop, AB 1763 goes even further by eliminating all local government limits on density and allowing a height increase of up to 3 stories or 33 feet.

The Density Bonus Law was further amended by SB 1227, which provided density bonuses for projects that included student housing, and SB 290 adds the ability to request one concession or incentive for projects that include at least 20 percent of the total units for lower-income students in a student housing development. In connection with for-sale density bonus units that qualified a developer for an award of a density bonus under the Density Bonus Law, SB 728 requires that such unit be either 1) initially occupied by a person or family of the required income, offered at an affordable housing cost and subject to an equity sharing agreement, or 2) purchased by a qualified nonprofit housing organization receiving a property tax welfare exemption.

AB 571 prohibits agencies from imposing affordable housing impact fees, including inclusionary zoning fees and in lieu fees, on affordable units proposed as part of a Density Bous Law project.

The floor area ratio (FAR) is a common mechanism in local zoning codes that limits the total floor area of a building in relation to the square footage of a lot. SB 478 prohibits agencies from imposing a FAR of less than 1.0 for a housing development project (comprised solely of residential units, a mixed-use development with at least two-thirds of the square footage attributed to residential uses or transitional or supportive housing) consisting of three to seven units and a FAR of less than 1.25 for housing development project consisting of eight to 10 units. Additionally, an agency may not deny a housing development project located on an existing legal parcel solely on the basis that the lot area does not meet the agency's requirement for minimum lot size. To qualify, a project must consist of 3 to 10 units in a multifamily residential zone or mixed-use zone in an urbanized area and cannot be within a single-family zone or within a historic district.

Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions Legislation
AB 721 makes recorded covenants that limit residential development unenforceable against qualifying affordable housing developments. The law builds on existing law that allows parties to eliminate unenforceable racially restrictive covenants from recorded documents–but goes further by making any recorded covenants, conditions, and restrictions (CC&Rs) that restrict the number, size, or location of residences that may be built on a property, or that restrict the number of persons or families who may reside on a property, unenforceable against the owner of a 100 percent below market rate housing development that is affordable to lower-income households.

There are exceptions for certain conservation easements and covenants required to comply with State or federal law.
3 - 923
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.10_Land Use-050923.docx 3.10-7 Land Use and Planning AB 1584, a housing omnibus bill, establishes a restriction on contractual development controls that mirrors AB 721 by declaring unenforceable any CC&R contained within a deed, contract, security instrument, or other instrument that prohibits, effectively prohibits, or restricts the construction or use of an ADU on a lot zoned for single-family use.

SB 9 provides for the ministerial approval of converting existing homes occupied by a homeowner into a duplex if certain eligibility restrictions are satisfied. It also allows a single-family home lot to be split into two lots, and a duplex to be built on each lot, provided that the initial home is occupied by an owner who attests that the owner will continue to live in a unit on the property as their primary residence for at least three years. The most notable exceptions to duplex and lot split by right approvals are 1) the property could not have been used as a rental for the past three years, 2) the property cannot already have an accessory dwelling unit or junior ADU, 3) the new lot may not be less than 40 percent of the property and must be at least 1,200 square feet, 4) modifications to the existing home may not require the demolition of more than 25 percent of an exterior wall, and 5) neither the new duplex nor the lot split with up to four new units (a duplex on each) may not result in a significant adverse impact to the physical environment.

Regional
Southern California Association of Governments
The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) is the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) for six counties: Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino, Riverside, Ventura, and Imperial Counties, an area that encompasses more than 38,000 square miles. As the designated MPO, the federal government mandates that SCAG research and draw up plans for transportation, growth management, hazardous waste management, and air quality. Among the leading activities SCAG undertakes are the following:
 Maintaining a continuous, comprehensive, and coordinated planning process resulting in a Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) and a Federal Transportation Improvement Program (FTIP);
 Developing a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) to reduce greenhouse gas emissions as required by applicable State law (SB 375) as an element of the RTP;  Developing demographic projections;
 Developing integrated land use, housing, employment, transportation programs, and strategies for South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) planning purposes;  Serving as co-lead agency for air quality planning in the Central Coast and Southeast Desert air basin districts;
 Developing and ensuring that the RTP and the FTIP conform to the purposes of the State Implementation Plans for specific transportation-related criteria pollutants, per the Clean Air Act;
3 - 924
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.10_Land Use-050923.docx 3.10-8 Land Use and Planning  Serving as authorized regional agency for intergovernmental review of proposed programs for federal financial assistance and direct development activities;  Reviewing environmental impact reports for projects having regional significance to ensure they are in line with approved regional plans;
 Developing an area-wide, waste treatment management plan;  Preparing the RHNA for review and approval by the State, including planning for future population, housing, and employment growth throughout the SCAG region; and  Preparing the Southern California Hazardous Waste Management Plan with the San Diego Association of Governments and the Santa Barbara County/Cities Area Planning Council.

SCAG’s 2020–2045 RTP/SCS and current RHNA allocation are discussed further below.

Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy The RTP is a long-range transportation plan that is developed and updated by SCAG every four years to guide transportation investments throughout the region. The SCS is a required element of the RTP that integrates land use and transportation strategies to achieve California Air Resources Board emissions reduction targets pursuant to Senate Bill SB 375.

On September 3, 2020, the SCAG Regional Council adopted the 2020–2045 RTP/SCS (RTC/SCS; also referred to as Connect SoCal) and the addendum to the Connect SoCal Program Environmental Impact Report. The 2020–2045 RTP/SCS is a long-range visioning plan that builds upon and expands land use and transportation strategies established over several planning cycles to increase mobility options and achieve a more sustainable growth pattern. It charts a path toward a more mobile, sustainable, and prosperous region by making connections between transportation networks, between planning strategies, and between the people whose collaboration can improve the quality of life for Southern Californians (SCAG 2020).

High-Quality Transit Areas
With adoption of the former 2012 RTP/SCS, the areas formerly known as 2% Strategy Opportunity Areas were replaced with what are now referred to as High-Quality Transit Areas (HQTAs).

HQTAs are areas within one-half mile of a fixed guideway transit stop or a bus transit corridor where buses pick up passengers at a frequency of every 15 minutes or less during peak commuting hours. The one-half mile radius area around Metro’s L (formerly Gold) Line Station at the Mission Street and Meridian Avenue intersection and Fair Oaks Avenue through the City are identified as a HQTAs.

Regional Housing Needs Assessment
Housing needs are determined by the California Housing and Community Development Department (HCD), which allocates numerical housing targets to the MPOs, including SCAG, through the RHNA process. The RHNA identifies the existing and projected housing needs of each municipality (city and county) within the SCAG region. Based on SCAG’s 2020 RHNA, approved by HCD on March 22, 2021, the City’s proposed 2021–2029 Housing Element has a 3 - 925
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.10_Land Use-050923.docx 3.10-9 Land Use and Planning need for 2,067 new units to be provided, distributed across the four income levels established by HCD, including the following:
 Very Low Income (757),
 Low Income (398),
 Moderate Income (334), and
 Above Moderate Income (578) (SCAG 2021).

The above-moderate income units are considered market rate, while units for the remaining income levels are considered below market rate at a range of affordability levels. The current RHNA allocation of 2,067 units is almost 33 times higher than the last cycle (63 units). Additionally, the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) has required the 2021–2029 Housing Element to demonstrate capacity for a surplus of units beyond the RHNA allocation. The surplus would be 708 DUs for a total of 2,775 DUs.

Cities and counties are not responsible for building the number of units specified in the RHNA, but rather are required to plan for them, by demonstrating the sufficiency of current land use and development standards and identifying specific housing element programs to provide capacity to accommodate the RHNA with implementation dates within three years. A municipality’s housing element will not be certified by HCD if it does not demonstrate standards and programs for housing production capacity to accommodate the RHNA including rezoning, if necessary.

Penalties, including fines and loss of local discretion, can be levied against cities and counties that fail to implement the housing element programs that are included to reach the required housing production capacity. Per State requirements, the City’s proposed Housing Element Update will include the following components:
 A detailed analysis of the City’s demographic, economic, and housing characteristics;  An analysis of the barriers to producing and preserving housing;  A review of the City’s progress in implementing current housing policies and programs;  An identification of goals, policies, and actions in addition to a full list of programs that will implement the vision of the Housing Element; and
 A list of sites (Suitable Sites Inventory) that could accommodate new housing, demonstrating the City’s ability to meet the quantified housing number established in the RHNA.

South Coast Air Quality Management District
The SCAQMD prepares an Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) every four years to address State and federal ambient air quality standards within the South Coast Air Basin. The 2022 AQMP is the current management plan, and consistency with this plan is addressed in Section 3.2, Air Quality, of this EA.

City
Existing General Plan and Housing Element
The current South Pasadena General Plan (General Plan) was last updated and adopted by the City in 1998, with the 2013–2021 Housing Element last adopted in 2014 to address the City’s future housing needs for the 2013–2021 planning period, in accordance with State laws (South 3 - 926
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.10_Land Use-050923.docx 3.10-10 Land Use and Planning Pasadena 1998, 2014). The currently adopted (1998) General Plan includes the following seven elements:
 Land Use & Community Design (addressing land use and development issues);  Circulation & Accessibility (addressing transportation issues);  Economic Development & Revitalization (addressing economic issues);  Historic Preservation (addressing historic resource issues);  Housing (addressing RHNA allocation and housing issues for the 2013–2021 period);  Open Space & Resource Conservation (addressing natural and open space resource issues); and
 Safety & Noise (addressing public health and safety issues).

The goals and policies of the Land Use & Community Design Element (Land Use Element) are further interpreted in the form of a diagram, referred to as Land Use Policy Map, which defines the general location and development intensity/density of these uses within the City. Exhibit 2, Existing Land Use Policy Map, presented in Section 2.0 of this EA, depicts the current land use plan for the City.

Existing Mission Street Specific Plan
The MSSP was adopted in 1996 (South Pasadena 1996). Under State law (Section 65450 et. seq. of Government Code), a municipality may use a specific plan to develop detailed regulations, programs, and/or legislation to implement its adopted general plan for a specific area within its local jurisdiction. As with the proposed update, the MSSP is a companion document to the 1998 General Plan, tailored to the particular needs of a specific area of the City. The MSSP includes the Mission Street right-of-way from Pasadena Avenue to Fair Oaks Avenue, parcels fronting Mission Street between Fremont Avenue and Indiana Avenues, and areas to the north and south of Mission Street between Fremont Avenue and Orange Avenues.

When adopted, the MSSP supplemented and refined the City’s Zoning Code and other relevant ordinances. The MSSP regulations equivalent to zoning code regulations. All other provisions of the Zoning Code and other ordinances apply to the MSSP area.

The key actions identified in the MSSP, which must be taken by the City and by property owners, merchants, and residents to implement the MSSP, include the following:
 Provide a central parking facility to serve the Blue Line (now Gold Line) station;  Establish a Business Improvement District (BID) to help finance parking and streetscape improvements;
 Hire a manager to attract desirable businesses, implement streetscape improvements, and promote the MSSP area; and
 Increase the water pressure so that on-pumps are not required for second and third story uses (South Pasadena 1996).

Zoning Code
The City of South Pasadena Zoning Code (Chapter 36 of the South Pasadena Municipal Code [SPMC]) implements the policies of the General Plan by classifying and regulating the uses of 3 - 927
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.10_Land Use-050923.docx 3.10-11 Land Use and Planning land and structures within the City in a manner consistent with the General Plan. South Pasadena has been divided into zoning districts that implement the General Plan.

3.10.4 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
The following significance criteria are derived from Appendix G of the State California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA Guidelines). A project would result in a significant adverse land use and planning impact if it would:

Threshold 3.10a: Physically divide an established community; or Threshold 3.10b: 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.

3.10.5 PROPOSED HOUSING ELEMENT GOALS AND POLICIES
Goal 1.0 Conserve the Existing Housing Stock and Maintain Standards of Livability Policy 1.1 Adopt and implement Zoning and Building Code standards and provide incentives for building owners to upgrade energy conservation in existing buildings including the use of solar energy, to reduce energy costs to residents.

Policy 1.2 Promote rehabilitation, as that term is defined by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), and home improvement assistance to low- and moderateincome households.

Policy 1.3 Continue to use the City’s code enforcement program to bring substandard units into compliance with City codes and improve overall housing conditions in South Pasadena.

Goal 2.0 Encourage and Assist in the Provision of Affordable Housing Policy 2.1 Use local, regional, and state funding to assist in development of new multifamily housing for low- and moderate-income households.

Policy 2.4 Consider declaring publicly-owned sites as “Surplus” and offering development opportunities on those sites to non-profit affordable housing developers.

Goal 3.0 Provide opportunities to increase housing production Policy 3.1 Promote mixed-use developments by continuing to allow development of residential uses in the Mixed-Use zoning district and the Downtown Specific Plan zoning districts and encourage on-site inclusionary housing units within the residential component of all residential and mixed-use projects and planned development permits, as required by the City’s Zoning Code. Conduct early consultations with developers of all residential and mixeduse projects to explain the requirements and design incentives.

Policy 3.2 Maintain an inventory of vacant and underdeveloped properties in the City with potential for development of new residential dwelling units. Improve the City’s ability to monitor through introducing electronic permit system and other technology to facilitate research of property data.

Policy 3.3 Encourage the development of housing types that offer options for seniors to remain within the community when remaining in their existing homes is no longer viable. 3 - 928
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.10_Land Use-050923.docx 3.10-12 Land Use and Planning Policy 3.4 Allow for and encourage new residential and/or mixed-use development in or near commercial districts, with access to services, transit and schools. Allow for employment centers to be located near housing developments to increase job opportunities.

Policy 3.5 Provide objective standards and ministerial application processes to implement 2021 State housing legislation (SB9 and SB10) that requires the City to permit construction of two dwelling units on single-family lots and allows density increases for multi-family properties up to 10 units with a CEQA exemption.

Goal 4.0 Compliance with State Housing Laws
Policy 4.2 Require new medium- to large-scale residential and mixed-use projects to meet ADA accessibility standards and provide a sufficient number of ADA-accessible and/or ADAready units.

Policy 4.4 Include low-barrier navigation centers as a form of transitional and supportive housing allowed in residential zoning districts.

Policy 4.5 Review and revise the Zoning Code regulations for allowing emergency shelters to maintain compliance with State laws for such uses
Goal 5.0 Promote fair housing while acknowledging the consequences of past discriminatory housing practices
Policy 5.5 In conjunction with the inclusionary housing ordinance, allow and encourage rental and deed-restricted affordable housing units across a wide geographic area of the City.

Policy 5.6 Allow and encourage a variety of residential types and living arrangements, including expanding housing opportunities pursuant to SB9, which allows duplex development on single-family parcels, with some specific exemptions. The combination of new and existing homes in South Pasadena should offer a variety of unit sizes, configurations, and contexts, including, but not limited to, single-family homes, efficiency apartments, multi-bedroom apartments, fourplexes, cooperative housing, group living, etc.

Goal 6.0 Expand and strengthen tenant protections for South Pasadena’s existing renters Policy 6.1 Collect and monitor data on South Pasadena’s affordable and market rate rental housing stock, including the rents, tenancy, and affordability details of certain rental units.

Policy 6.2 Provide information on applicable state and local tenant protections to both landlords and tenants.

Policy 6.3 Establish and/or strengthen local tenant protections to mitigate or prevent housing instability and displacement of South Pasadena residents who rent their homes.

3.10.6 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Threshold 3.10a: Would the Project physically divide an established community? The City of South Pasadena is largely built out with established residential neighborhoods and commercial corridors. While this fact has contributed to difficulty finding a feasible way to accommodate the high RHNA allocation, the central strategy of the Project is preservation of existing neighborhoods and directing calibrated growth. . The 2021–2029 Housing Element identifies developable vacant parcels and developed parcels with potential to be redeveloped to accommodate additional housing. Land uses would be intensified in selected areas to 3 - 929
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.10_Land Use-050923.docx 3.10-13 Land Use and Planning accommodate growth and support economic development, but there would be no change in the general land use pattern throughout the City. The primary change would be the introduction of mixed residential/non-residential development and/or higher density residential development in more locations in the City, particularly along major thoroughfares.

The planned development and redevelopment is meant to revitalize neighborhoods, rather than divide them, and would enable more residential development or mixed-use development (i.e., residential and commercial) than presently allowed. The purpose of the Project is to locate carefully calibrated and designed growth that can accommodate the bulk of anticipated growth while conserving the established residential neighborhoods while meeting the City’s required RHNA allocation and RHNA surplus while providing an enhanced variety of housing. The City’s design guidelines and design review process and zoning regulations would help ensure that proposed intensification of land uses on selected parcels would not be of sufficient size, scale, and/or massing to divide the surrounding community. In some instances, addition of new streets may be necessary to break up the large-scale super-blocks into pedestrian-oriented blocks, or complete a block with missing buildings, open space, or infrastructure. However, any new streets would be necessary to create a greater sense of place and community, rather than dividing a community. As discussed, the existing development pattern in the City would not be substantively altered with implementation of the Project. Therefore, implementation of development pursuant to the Project would not result in division of any existing, established communities. There would be less than impact, and no mitigation is required.

Threshold 3.10b: Would the Project cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? Consistency of the 2021–2029 Housing Element with regional and local land use planning documents and programs that apply to the City, as well as land use compatibility, is discussed below.

Consistency with State Land Use Planning Laws
The current statutory State planning priorities, as defined in Section 65041.1 of the Government Code, “which are intended to promote equity, strengthen the economy, protect the environment, and promote public health and safety in the state, including in urban, suburban, and rural communities, shall be as follows:
a) To promote infill development and equity by rehabilitating, maintaining, and improving existing infrastructure that supports infill development and appropriate reuse and redevelopment of previously developed, underutilized land that is presently served by transit, streets, water, sewer, and other essential services, particularly in underserved areas, and to preserving cultural and historic resources. b) To protect environmental and agricultural resources by protecting, preserving, and enhancing the state’s most valuable natural resources, including working landscapes such as farm, range, and forest lands, natural lands such as wetlands, watersheds, wildlife habitats, and other wildlands, recreation lands such as parks, trails, greenbelts, and other open space, and landscapes with locally unique features and areas identified by the state as deserving special protection.
3 - 930
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.10_Land Use-050923.docx 3.10-14 Land Use and Planning c) To encourage efficient development patterns by ensuring that any infrastructure associated with development, other than infill development, supports new development that does all of the following:
1) Uses land efficiently;
2) Is built adjacent to existing developed areas to the extent consistent with the priorities specified pursuant to subdivision (b);
3) Is located in an area appropriately planned for growth; 4) Is served by adequate transportation and other essential utilities and services; and 5) Minimizes ongoing costs to taxpayers.”
The proposed General Plan and DTSP Update & 2021–2029 Housing Element is consistent with all State planning priorities. The primary focus of the Project is to direct carefully calibrated growth to five focus areas within the City. These focus areas were selected in part to conserve the established residential neighborhoods, and also because they are the more urban areas of the City with existing infrastructure, near transit service, and are therefore appropriate for the greatest concentration of infill redevelopment, ensuring efficient use of land and environmental resources.

As noted above, the 2021–2029 Housing Element identifies developable vacant parcels and developed parcels with potential to be redeveloped to accommodate additional housing both within and outside of the focus areas. The proposed General Plan and DTSP Update has been prepared in accordance with State requirements for General Plans and specific plans pursuant to Sections 65300 et. seq. of the Government Code. The proposed 2021–2029 Housing Element has been prepared in accordance with all current State requirements that apply specifically to housing elements, as one of the mandated General Plan elements, including but not limited to SB 375, SB 330, SB166, AB 1233, and AB 1397.

The provisions of Section 65450 et. seq. of the Government Code require that a specific plan be consistent with the adopted general plan of the jurisdiction within which it is located. As the General Plan and DTSP Update are being prepared contemporaneously with the 2021–2029 Housing Element, the documents would be internally consistent. There would be no impact, and no mitigation is required.

Consistency with SCAG 2020–2045 RTC/SCS
Table 3.10-1, SCAG 2020–2045 RTP/SCS Consistency Analysis, provides an assessment of the Project’s consistency with the 2020-2045 RTP/SCS goals. As demonstrated through this analysis, implementation of the 2021–2029 Housing Element would be consistent with the goals of SCAG’s RTP/SCS. Consistency with the SCAG and other applicable demographic projections are addressed separately in Section 3.12, Population and Housing. 3 - 931
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.10_Land Use-050923.docx 3.10-15 Land Use and Planning TABLE 3.10-1
SCAG 2020-2045 RTP/SCS CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS
RTP/SCS Plan Goals Consistency Analysis
Goal 1: Encourage regional economic
prosperity and global competitiveness.

Consistent: Encouraging regional economic development and competitiveness is not the purview of the City, but SCAG.

However, providing affordable and quality housing, amenities, and services that make South Pasadena a desirable place for employees to work and live is a goal of the City.

Goal 2: Improve mobility, accessibility,
reliability, and travel safety for people and
goods.

Consistent: The transportation network in the City is well established; however, some improvements to the network could occur with implementation of the Project.

As with the existing transportation network, any improvements proposed would be designed and maintained to continue to meet the needs of local and regional mobility. The Project supports development of a multi-modal transportation system integrated with the existing and proposed land uses, particularly along major thoroughfares and promotes pedestrian-oriented mixed-use development to reduce vehicle use.

Goal 3: Enhance the preservation, security,
and resilience of the regional transportation
system.

Consistent: Enhancing the regional transportation system is not the purview of the City, but SCAG. However, all modes of travel, both motorized and non-motorized, and commercial transit throughout the City would be required to follow safety standards established by corresponding State, regional (i.e., SCAG, Caltrans), and local (i.e., County and City) regulatory standards.

Goal 4: Increase person and goods movement
and travel choices within the transportation
system.

Consistent:, The local transportation system would continue to be improved and/or maintained to maximize circulation
productivity with convenient accessibility to multiple travel modes within the City (pedestrian, bike, rail, bus, and auto).

Goal 5: Reduce greenhouse gas emissions
and improve air quality.

Consistent: The reduction of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and improvement of air quality would be encouraged through the development of green design techniques for buildings and other energy-reducing techniques.

The expansion of the mixed-use development capacity in the in the City places emphasis on focusing new development capacity in established transit corridors incentivizes non-motorized transportation modes such as biking and walking. This strategy, which acknowledges the relationship between land use and mobility, would reduce vehicle miles traveled per capita and thereby reduce impacts related to air quality and GHG.

Goal 6: Support healthy and equitable
communities.

Consistent: The Project would increase opportunities for a variety of housing types near jobs, services, recreation, and transit. The Project would also introduce a greater variety of housing types and serving all income levels, thereby supporting healthy and equitable communities.

Goal 7: Adapt to a changing climate and
support an integrated regional development
pattern and transportation network.

Consistent: As discussed for Goal 4, the expansion of the mixed-use development capacity in the in the City places emphasis on focusing new development capacity in established transit corridors incentivizes non-motorized transportation modes such as biking and walking. This strategy, which acknowledges the relationship between land use and mobility, would reduce vehicle miles traveled per capita and thereby reduce impacts related to air quality and GHG emissions.

The Project would increase opportunities for a variety of housing types near jobs, services, recreation, and transit. This densification with a mix of land uses accessible through multiple transportation modes contributes to climate change adaptation 3 - 932
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.10_Land Use-050923.docx 3.10-16 Land Use and Planning TABLE 3.10-1
SCAG 2020-2045 RTP/SCS CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS
RTP/SCS Plan Goals Consistency Analysis
and integrates into the regional development pattern proposed by SCAG.

Goal 8: Leverage new transportation
technologies and data-driven solutions that
result in more efficient travel.

Consistent: As transportation-related technologies develop that would be applicable at the scale of an individual city, the City Public Works Department would leverage these technologies where economically feasible.

Goal 9: Encourage development of diverse
housing types in areas that are supported by
multiple transportation options.

Goal 10: Promote conservation of natural and
agricultural lands and restoration of habitats.

Consistent: The City’s existing parks and open space areas are not proposed to be converted to residential or non-residential (i.e., commercial, retail, office) land uses.

As shown in Table 3.10-1, the proposed 2021–2029 Housing Element is consistent with SCAG’s 10 goals for the 2020–2045 RTC/SCS. This is because the Project promotes a land use pattern with increasing density, a mix of housing types and land uses, and places the highest density proximate to local and regional, multi-modal transportation systems. There would be no impact, and no mitigation is required.

Zoning Code
Whereas the 2021–2029 Housing Element is a policy document and sets forth direction for housing related development decisions, the Zoning Code in the SPMC is the regulatory “document” that establishes specific standards for the use and development of all properties in the City. The Zoning Code regulates development intensity using a variety of methods, such as setting limits on building setbacks, yard landscaping standards, and building heights; it also indicates which land uses are permitted in the various zones.

As a result of the 2021–2029 Housing Element, some portion of the City’s Zoning Code would no longer be consistent with the goals, policies, and actions of the existing General Plan. If the 2021– 2029 Housing Element is adopted, the City will subsequently need to review and update, as needed, its Zoning Code to make sure it is consistent with the land use policies in the planning documents.

Therefore, with the planned review and update of the Zoning Code, , subsequent to adoption of the 2021–2029 Housing Element, there would be no conflict between the City’s Zoning Code regulations and the Project. There would be no impact, and no mitigation is required.

Land Use Compatibility
Future development pursuant to the proposed Project has been considered during the planning process to create a balance among land uses and promote land use compatibility within the City.

Except for the Huntington Drive/Garfield Avenue and Huntington Drive/Fletcher Avenue intersections and some of the proposed housing sites, there would be no changes to existing and planned land uses along the boundaries of South Pasadena with the cities of Los Angeles, Pasadena, San Marino, and Alhambra with implementation of the Project. The compatibility of 3 - 933
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.10_Land Use-050923.docx 3.10-17 Land Use and Planning proposed land uses in the two focus areas with boundaries along adjacent municipalities are discussed below:
 Huntington Drive and Garfield Avenue: Current land uses within this focus area include three commercial businesses and a vacant lot owned by the YMCA. The portion of this neighborhood center on the north of Huntington Drive abuts the City of San Marino on the east across Garfield Avenue, where a small office park is present. The portion on the south side of the street abuts the City of Alhambra of the east and the south across Garfield Avenue, Atlantic Boulevard, and Pine Street, where commercial, multi-family, and singlefamily land uses are present. The City of San Marino has designated the adjacent area as Commercial, and the City of Alhambra has designated the adjacent areas as General Commercial, and High, Medium, and Low Density Residential (San Marino 2016, Alhambra 2010). The proposed Mixed-Use designation for this Neighborhood Center would be consistent with these existing land uses and provide increased compatibility with the residential uses in the City of Alhambra compared to the existing conditions. There would be no land use incompatibility in this area.
 Huntington Drive and Fletcher Avenue: Current land uses within this focus area include five buildings with commercial and office uses. The southeastern portion of this neighborhood center abuts the City of Alhambra on the east, where similarly scaled commercial land uses are present. At present, the Eden Preschool is situated adjacent to the southeastern boundary of this neighborhood center. The City of Alhambra has designated the adjacent area as General Commercial (Alhambra 2010). The proposed Mixed-Use Designation for this Neighborhood Center would be consistent with these existing land uses. Residential land uses are situated to the south, in South Pasadena, and to the southeast, in Alhambra. The Mixed-Use Designation would provide an appropriate bridging of land uses. There would be no land use incompatibility in this area.

There is one vacant parcel identified in the northeastern corner and several parcels, both vacant and developed, identified along the western and southwestern boundaries of the City as potential housing sites. The parcel in the northeastern corner abuts the City of Pasadena where public facilities (Pasadena Water and Power and Blair Middle School and High School campuses) are present. Development of housing on this parcel would be consistent with the existing residential land uses located to the south and west within the City. The parcels within the westernmost portion of the City abut the City of Los Angeles where primarily single- and multi-family residential land uses and open space land uses are present. Development of housing on these parcels would be consistent with the existing residential land uses located both within the City of South Pasadena and the City of Los Angeles. Where parcels border the open space area off the southwestern corner of the City, allowable residential development would be of a type and scale appropriate to bridge between the existing residential and the open space.

As discussed above, the proposed Project would not result in land use incompatibilities, including with adjacent jurisdictions. Impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.

3.10.7 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
The cumulative impacts related to demographic growth are analyzed within the County of Los Angeles, because County-wide demographic data is available from SCAG, Department of Finance, and Employment Development Department. Also, because of the interconnected of cities and unincorporated areas in the Los Angeles metropolitan area, due to roadways, increasing transit, and other sociological factors, demographic growth in a smaller sized City like South Pasadena cannot be treated like an “island” as it is part of the fabric of the region. 3 - 934
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.10_Land Use-050923.docx 3.10-18 Land Use and Planning Growth and development in the City and surrounding jurisdictions would be accompanied by changes in existing land uses throughout the County and the SCAG region. New development on vacant areas and underutilized lots are anticipated to be developed in accordance with each local jurisdiction’s respective general plan and associated housing element and would lead to intensification of housing, commercial, and industrial/manufacturing development, as well as public and institutional uses, throughout the region. SCAG estimates there could be as many as 11,423,962 persons, 4,002,104 households (not housing units), and 5,276,927 jobs throughout the County by 2040 (SCAG 2020; Aguilar 2021). This increasing urbanization and development in the County and throughout the SCAG region are a result of vacant lands being replaced with more urban land uses and underutilized lots being redeveloped into uses that are more intensive.

The Project would not divide established communities or result in the introduction of incompatible uses in the area, provided compliance with the City’s development standards and applicable regulations.

New development in adjacent jurisdictions would be evaluated for consistency with the local jurisdiction’s land use policies, just as proposed projects in the City would be evaluated for consistency with the proposed Project. If discretionary actions are needed, individual projects would be subject to evaluation for potential environmental impacts as required by CEQA. This review process would address potential land use compatibility issues and planning policy conflicts. Future growth and development in the City and the surrounding areas would proceed in accordance with the applicable municipality’s general plan and zoning code. Required review processes for new developments would analyze a project for conformity with applicable land use plans and policies, and within the context of existing and planned developments relative to the environmental goals and policies of the applicable general plan. Projects requiring general plan amendments or zone changes/variances would need to show consistency with the applicable goals, policies, and/or actions and thus are not expected to lead to land use incompatibilities or conflicts. Planned or required infrastructure and public facilities associated with individual projects would provide the necessary facilities and services to existing and future developments. Thus, these projects would complement the private development projects planned for the Valley. The cumulative land use impacts of growth and development in the San Gabriel Valley would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.

3.10.8 MITIGATION MEASURES
No significant adverse impacts related to land use and planning have been identified with implementation of the Project. Therefore, no mitigation is required.

3.10.9 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION
Less than significant.
3 - 935
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.10_Land Use-050923.docx 3.10-19 Land Use and Planning

3.10.10 REFERENCES
Alhambra, City of. 2010 (Revised April 12). City of Alhambra General Plan Map. Alhambra, CA:
the City. http://www.cityofalhambra.org/imagesfile/file/201311/general_plan_map.pdf.

HR&A Advisors (HR&A). 2017 (April). City of South Pasadena General Plan & Mission Street Specific Plan Update Real Estate Market Analysis. Los Angeles, CA: HR&A. http://www.plansouthpasadena.org/market-analysis.html.

San Marino, City of. 2016 (September 14). Revised General Plan Map. San Marino, CA: the City. http://www.ci.san-marino.ca.us/DocumentCenter/View/53.

South Pasadena, City of. 2021 (May 26). Staff Presentation on the General Plan/Downtown Specific Plan Update & 2021-2029 Housing Element at the Special Planning Commission Meeting. South Pasadena, the City. The New Housing Narrative (southpasadenaca.gov). ———. 2014. City of South Pasadena 2014-2021 Housing Element. South Pasadena, the City. http://www.ci.south-pasadena.ca.us/modules/showdocument.aspx?documentid=5556. ———. 1998. City of South Pasadena General Plan. South Pasadena: the City. http://www.ci.south-pasadena.ca.us/index.aspx?page=120. ———. 1996 (April). Mission Street Specific Plan. South Pasadena: the City. http://www.ci.southpasadena.ca.us/modules/ showdocument.aspx?documentid=9763.

3 - 936
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.10_Land Use-050923.docx 3.10-20 Land Use and Planning This page intentionally left blank
3 - 937
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.11_Noise-050923.docx 3.11-1 Noise

3.11 NOISE

3.11.1 METHODOLOGY
This section analyzes potential noise and vibration impacts associated with the implementation of the proposed 2021–2029 Housing Element and the non-residential development capacity envisioned in the General Plan and Downtown Specific Plan (DTSP) Update (Project). Existing Conditions
Noise Background
Noise has been simply defined as "unwanted sound." Sound becomes unwanted when it interferes with normal activities, when it causes actual physical harm, when it has adverse effects on health, or, as stated in the South Pasadena Municipal Code (SPMC), is unnecessary, excessive, or annoying. Noise is measured on a logarithmic scale of sound pressure level known as a decibel (dB). A-weighted decibels (dBA) approximate the subjective response of the human ear to broad frequency noise source by discriminating against very low and very high frequencies of the audible spectrum. They are adjusted to reflect only those frequencies which are audible to the human ear.

Range of Noise
Since the range of intensities that the human ear can detect is so large, the scale frequently used to measure intensity is a scale based on multiples of 10, the logarithmic scale. The scale for measuring intensity is the decibel scale. Each interval of 10 decibels indicates a sound energy ten times greater than before, which is perceived by the human ear as being roughly twice as loud. The most common sounds vary between 40 dBA (very quiet) to 100 dBA (very loud). Normal conversation at 3 feet is roughly at 60 dBA, while loud jet engine noises equate to 110 dBA at approximately 100 feet, which can cause serious discomfort. Another important aspect of noise is the duration of the sound and the way it is described and distributed in time.

Noise Descriptors
Environmental noise descriptors are generally based on averages, rather than instantaneous noise levels. The most commonly used figure is the equivalent level (Leq). Equivalent sound levels are not measured directly but are calculated from sound pressure levels typically measured in Aweighted decibels (dBA). The equivalent sound level (Leq) represents a steady state sound level containing the same total energy as a time varying signal over a given sample period and is commonly used to describe the “average” noise levels within the environment.

Peak hour or average noise levels, while useful, do not completely describe a given noise environment. Noise levels lower than peak hour may be disturbing if they occur during times when quiet is most desirable, namely evening and nighttime (sleeping) hours. To account for this, the Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL), representing a composite 24-hour noise level is utilized. The CNEL is the weighted average of the intensity of a sound, with corrections for time of day, and averaged over 24 hours. The time of day corrections require the addition of 5 decibels to dBA Leq sound levels in the evening from 7:00 PM to 10:00 PM, and the addition of 10 decibels to dBA Leq sound levels at night between 10:00 PM and 7:00 AM. These additions are made to account for the noise-sensitive time periods during the evening and night hours when sound appears louder. CNEL does not represent the actual sound level heard at any time, but rather represents the total sound exposure. The City of South Pasadena relies on the 24-hour CNEL level to assess land use compatibility with transportation-related noise sources. 3 - 938
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.11_Noise-050923.docx 3.11-2 Noise Sound Propagation
When sound propagates over a distance, it changes in level and frequency content. The way noise reduces with distance depends on the following factors.

Geometric Spreading
Sound from a localized source (i.e., a stationary point source) propagates uniformly outward in a spherical pattern. The sound level attenuates (or decreases) at a rate of 6 dB for each doubling of distance from a point source. Highways consist of several localized noise sources on a defined path and hence can be treated as a line source, which approximates the effect of several point sources. Noise from a line source propagates outward in a cylindrical pattern, often referred to as cylindrical spreading. Sound levels attenuate at a rate of 3 dB for each doubling of distance from a line source.

Ground Absorption
The propagation path of noise from a highway to a receptor is usually very close to the ground.

Noise attenuation from ground absorption and reflective wave canceling adds to the attenuation associated with geometric spreading. Traditionally, the excess attenuation has also been expressed in terms of attenuation per doubling of distance. This approximation is usually sufficiently accurate for distances of less than 200 feet. For acoustically hard sites (i.e., sites with a reflective surface between the source and the receptor, such as a parking lot or body of water), no excess ground attenuation is assumed. For acoustically absorptive or soft sites (i.e., those sites with an absorptive ground surface between the source and the receptor such as soft dirt, grass, or scattered bushes and trees), an excess ground attenuation value of 1.5 dB per doubling of distance is normally assumed. When added to the cylindrical spreading, the excess ground attenuation results in an overall drop-off rate of 4.5 dB per doubling of distance from a line source.

Atmospheric Effects
Receptors located downwind from a source can be exposed to increased noise levels relative to calm conditions, whereas locations upwind can have lowered noise levels. Sound levels can be increased at large distances (e.g., more than 500 feet) due to atmospheric temperature inversion (i.e., increasing temperature with elevation). Other factors such as air temperature, humidity, and turbulence can also have significant effects.

Shielding
A large object or barrier in the path between a noise source and a receptor can substantially attenuate noise levels at the receptor. The amount of attenuation provided by shielding depends on the size of the object and the frequency content of the noise source. Shielding by trees and other such vegetation typically only has an “out of sight, out of mind” effect. That is, the perception of noise impact tends to decrease when vegetation blocks the line-of-sight to nearby resident.

However, for vegetation to provide a substantial or even noticeable noise reduction, the vegetation area must be at least 15 feet in height, 100 feet wide and dense enough to completely obstruct the line-of sight between the source and the receiver. This size of vegetation may provide up to 5 dBA of noise reduction.
3 - 939
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.11_Noise-050923.docx 3.11-3 Noise Community Response to Noise
Community responses to noise may range from registering a complaint by telephone or letter, to initiating court action, depending upon everyone’s susceptibility to noise and personal attitudes about noise. Approximately ten percent of the population has a very low tolerance for noise and will object to any noise not of their making. Consequently, even in the quietest environment, some complaints will occur. Another 25 percent of the population will not complain even in very severe noise environments. Thus, a variety of reactions can be expected from people exposed to any given noise environment. Surveys have shown that about ten percent of the people exposed to traffic noise of 60 dBA will report being highly annoyed with the noise, and each increase of one dBA is associated with approximately two percent more people being highly annoyed. When traffic noise exceeds 60 dBA or aircraft noise exceeds 55 dBA, people may begin to complain. Despite this variability in behavior on an individual level, the population can be expected to exhibit the following responses to changes in noise levels. An increase or decrease of 1 dBA cannot be perceived except in carefully controlled laboratory experiments, a change of 3 dBA is considered barely perceptible, and changes of 5 dBA are considered readily perceptible.

Land Use Compatibility with Noise
Some land uses are more tolerant of noise than others. For example, schools, hospitals, churches, and residences are more sensitive to noise intrusion than are commercial or industrial developments and related activities. As ambient noise levels affect the perceived amenity or livability of a development, so too can the mismanagement of noise impacts impair the economic health and growth potential of a community by reducing the area’s desirability as a place to live, shop, and work. For this reason, land use compatibility with the noise environment is an important consideration in the planning and design process. The FHWA encourages State and local governments to regulate land development in such a way that noise-sensitive land uses are either prohibited from being located adjacent to a highway, or that the developments are planned, designed, and constructed in such a way that any noise impacts are minimized.

Vibration
Per the FTA, vibration is the periodic oscillation of a medium or object. The rumbling sound caused by the vibration of room surfaces is called structure-borne noise. Sources of ground-borne vibrations include natural phenomena (e.g., earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, sea waves, landslides) or human-made causes (e.g., explosions, machinery, traffic, trains, construction equipment). Vibration sources may be continuous, such as factory machinery, or transient, such as explosions. As is the case with airborne sound, ground-borne vibrations may be described by amplitude and frequency.

There are several different methods that are used to quantify vibration. The peak particle velocity (PPV) is defined as the maximum instantaneous peak of the vibration signal. The PPV is most frequently used to describe vibration impacts to buildings but is not always suitable for evaluating human response (annoyance) because it takes some time for the human body to respond to vibration signals. Instead, the human body responds to average vibration amplitude often described as the root mean square (RMS). The RMS amplitude is defined as the average of the squared amplitude of the signal and is most frequently used to describe the effect of vibration on the human body. Decibel notation (VdB) is commonly used to measure RMS. VdB serves to reduce the range of numbers used to describe human response to vibration. Typically, groundborne vibration generated by man-made activities attenuates rapidly with distance from the source of the vibration. Sensitive receivers for vibration include structures (especially older masonry structures), people (especially residents, the elderly, and sick), and vibration-sensitive equipment. 3 - 940
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.11_Noise-050923.docx 3.11-4 Noise The background vibration-velocity level in residential areas is generally 50 VdB. Ground-borne vibration is normally perceptible to humans at approximately 65 VdB. For most people, a vibrationvelocity level of 75 VdB is the approximate dividing line between barely perceptible and distinctly perceptible levels. Typical outdoor sources of perceptible ground-borne vibration are construction equipment, steel-wheeled trains, and traffic on rough roads. If a roadway is smooth, the groundborne vibration is rarely perceptible. The range of interest is from approximately 50 VdB, which is the typical background vibration-velocity level, to 100 VdB, which is the general threshold where minor damage can occur in fragile buildings.

3.11.2 RELEVANT PROGRAMS AND REGULATIONS
Noise Standards
Public agencies have established noise guidelines and standards to protect citizens from potential hearing damage and various other adverse physiological and social effects associated with noise.

California Noise Insulation Standards
Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations, also known as the California Building Standards Code or, more commonly, as the California Building Code (CBC), codifies the State’s noise insulation standards applicable to all occupancies throughout the State. Section 1206.4, Allowable Interior Noise Levels, of the CBC states “Interior noise levels attributable to exterior sources shall not exceed 45 dB in any habitable room. The noise metric shall be either the day-night average sound level (Ldn) or the community noise equivalent level (CNEL), consistent with the noise element of the local general plan.”
The 2022 California’s Green Building Standards Code, also known as CALGreen, contains mandatory measures for non-residential building construction in Section 5.507 on Environmental Comfort. These noise standards are applied to new construction in California for controlling interior noise levels resulting from exterior noise sources. The regulations specify that acoustical studies must be prepared when non-residential structures are developed in areas where the exterior noise levels exceed 65 dBA CNEL, such as within a noise contour of an airport, freeway, railroad, and other areas where noise contours are not readily available. If the development falls within an airport or freeway 65 dBA CNEL noise contour, the combined sound transmission class (STC) rating of the wall and roof-ceiling assemblies must be at least 50. For those developments in areas where noise contours are not readily available and the noise level exceeds 65 dBA Leq for any hour of operation, a wall and roof-ceiling combined STC rating of 45 and exterior windows with a minimum STC rating of 40 are required (Section 5.507.4.1.1). Alternatively, if the interior noise levels of non-residential buildings satisfy the performance criteria of 50 dBA Leq (1 hour), then the performance method to meet CALGreen standards defined in Section 5.507.4.2.2 has been met.

City of South Pasadena Safety and Noise Element
The existing Safety and Noise Element of the City of South Pasadena General Plan was adopted to address the health and well-being of its citizens and businesses. The Safety and Noise Element identifies goals and polices related to noise, including Policy 5.1 that defines a noise increase threshold as follows:

Policy 5.1: Consider the noise impacts of new projects involving increases in noisy activities or traffic. An increase of 3 dBA or noise in excess of 65 dBA in sensitive areas shall be considered significant.
3 - 941
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.11_Noise-050923.docx 3.11-5 Noise In addition, the Safety and Noise Element identifies the following implementing policies and strategies to reduce noise levels in the City, including Strategy 5.5 that defines a sound insulation standard consistent with State standards as follows:

Strategy 5.5: Require sound insulation of all new development adjacent to high noise areas, including arterials and the freeway, to reduce interior noise levels to 45 dBA.

South Pasadena and Land Use Compatibility
The noise criteria identified in Table Viii-4 of the existing Safety and Noise Element are guidelines to evaluate the land use compatibility of transportation-related noise. The compatibility criteria provide the City with a planning tool to gauge the compatibility of land uses relative to existing and future exterior noise environment.

Single-family residential uses are considered normally acceptable with exterior noise levels of up to 60 CNEL and conditionally acceptable up to 70 CNEL. Multi-family residential land use is considered normally acceptable in exterior noise environments up to 65 CNEL and conditionally acceptable up to 70 CNEL. Schools, libraries, and churches are considered normally acceptable up to 70 CNEL, as are office buildings and business, commercial and professional uses.

Recreational uses are considered normally acceptable with exterior noise levels of up to 70 CNEL and normally unacceptable from 70 to 80 CNEL.

A conditionally acceptable designation indicates that new construction or development should be undertaken only after a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements for each land use type is made and needed noise insulation features are incorporated in the design. By comparison, a normally acceptable designation indicates that standard construction can occur with no special noise reduction requirements.

Operational Noise Standards
To analyze noise impacts originating from a designated fixed location or private property such as the retail and office uses that may be constructed pursuant to the Project, stationary-source (operational) noise is typically evaluated against standards established under a city’s municipal code.

Chapter 19A, Noise Regulation, of the SPMC establishes exterior noise level limits for stationary noise sources in the City as measured at the adjacent property line. Sections 19A.7(b) and 19A.12 of the SPMC indicate that radios, television sets, machinery, equipment, fans, air conditioning units, and similar devices/equipment shall not generate exterior noise levels in excess of the ambient noise level by more than 5 dBA. Further, amplified sound (e.g., any machine or device for the amplification of the human voice, music, or any other sound) shall not generate noise levels in excess of the ambient noise level by more than 15 dBA. Table 3.11-1, South Pasadena Municipal Code Operational Noise Standards, summaries the exterior noise level standards. 3 - 942
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.11_Noise-050923.docx 3.11-6 Noise TABLE 3.11-1

SOUTH PASADENA MUNICIPAL CODE OPERATIONAL NOISE STANDARDS SMPC
Section1 Title
Exterior Noise Level
Standard (dBA)2
19A.7(b) Radios, television sets and similar devices Ambient + 5 dBA 19A.12 Machinery, equipment, fans, and air-conditioning Ambient + 5 dBA 19A.21(c) Regulations (Article 5. Amplified Sound) Ambient + 15 dBA SMPC: South Pasadena Municipal Code
1 South Pasadena Municipal Code, Chapter 19A Noise Regulation 2 These standards apply at the property line of the adjacent use.

Source: South Pasadena Municipal Code
Construction Noise Standards
Noise from construction activities are typically evaluated against standards established under a city’s municipal code. Section 19A.13(a) of the SMPC indicates that within a residential zone or within 500 feet thereof, construction activities are limited to between 8:00 AM to 7:00 PM Monday through Friday; 9:00 AM to 7:00 PM Saturdays; and 10:00 AM to 6:00 PM Sundays and holidays.

However, the City’s General Plan and the SPMC do not establish numeric maximum acceptable construction source noise levels at potentially affected receivers, which would allow for a quantified determination of what CEQA constitutes as “generation of noise levels in excess of standards or as a substantial temporary or periodic noise increase”. The FTA Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment identifies detailed assessment criteria including an eight-hour construction noise level threshold of 80 dBA Leq during daytime at residential (noise-sensitive) uses, and 85 dBA Leq during daytime hours at commercial uses.

Vibration Standards
The following vibration standards are used in the Noise Analysis to assess the potential vibration impacts of future Metro L Line operations on the future development within the focus areas or elsewhere in the City, and the potential operational and construction vibration levels generated by future land uses at adjacent, existing land uses.

On-Site Rail Vibration
The FTA Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment identifies ground borne vibration levels for land use categories based on the frequency of rail events. For rapid-transit rail lines such as the Metro L Line, the frequent event vibration criteria for residential uses is 72 VdB, and for nonresidential primarily daytime-only uses (e.g., office, retail) the vibration criterion is 75 VdB.

Operational and Construction Vibration
The City’s General Plan or the SPMC do not identify specific vibration level standards; therefore, Section 12.08.350 of the Los Angeles County Code’s root-mean-square (RMS) vibration perception threshold of 0.01 in/sec RMS is used in this analysis. Typically, the human response at the perception threshold for vibration includes annoyance in residential areas when vibration levels expressed in vibration decibels (VdB) approach 75 VdB. The County, however, identifies a vibration perception threshold of 0.01 in/sec RMS. The RMS of a signal is the average of the squared amplitude of the signal, typically calculated over a one-second period. As with airborne sound, the RMS velocity is often expressed in decibel notation as vibration decibels (VdB), which 3 - 943
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.11_Noise-050923.docx 3.11-7 Noise serves to reduce the range of numbers used to describe human response to vibration. Therefore, the County of Los Angeles standard of 0.01 in/sec in RMS velocity levels is most applicable to the Project. The Project is not expected to include any specific type of operational vibration sources.

3.11.3 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
The following significance criteria are derived from Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines. A project would result in a significant adverse noise impact if it would:

Threshold 3.11a: Result in generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies;
Threshold 3.11b: Result in generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels;
Threshold 3.11c: For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels; Noise-Sensitive Receivers
Noise level increases resulting from the Project are evaluated based on the Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines described above at the closest sensitive receiver locations. Sensitive receiver locations, as defined by the adopted General Plan Safety and Noise Element, include residences, schools, libraries, hospitals and convalescent homes, and recreational uses. Under CEQA, consideration must be given to the magnitude of the increase, the existing ambient noise levels, and the location of noise-sensitive receivers to determine if a noise increase represents a significant adverse environmental impact. Unfortunately, there is no completely satisfactory way to measure the subjective effects of noise or of the corresponding human reactions of annoyance and dissatisfaction. This is primarily because of the wide variation in individual thresholds of annoyance and differing individual experiences with noise. Thus, an important way of determining a person’s subjective reaction to a new noise is the comparison of it to the existing environment to which one has adapted—the ambient environment. In general, the more a new noise exceeds the previously existing ambient noise level, the less acceptable the new noise will typically be judged. As discussed previously, Policy 5.1 of the Safety and Noise Element identifies a 3 dBA increase (permanent) as significant at noise-sensitive land uses. In addition, Project-generated noise levels shall not exceed 65 dBA at noise-sensitive uses.

Significance Criteria Summary
The following summarizes the thresholds considered most applicable to the Project. Noise impacts shall be considered significant if any of the thresholds shown in Table 3.11-2, Significance Criteria Summary, occurs as a direct result of the construction or operation of future land uses pursuant to the Project.
3 - 944
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.11_Noise-050923.docx 3.11-8 Noise TABLE 3.11-2

SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA SUMMARY
Analysis
Receiving
Land Use Condition(s) Significance Criteria
Traffic (Off-Site/
Existing Uses)1 Noise-Sensitive
Exterior Noise Level Standard 65 dBA CNEL
Long-Term Noise Level Increase ≥ 3 dBA CNEL Project increase Traffic (On-Site/
Proposed Uses)2
Residential
Exterior Noise Level Standard 65 dBA CNEL
Interior Noise Level Standard 45 dBA CNEL
On-Site Vibration
Level Threshold3
72 VdB
Non-Residential 75 VdB
Operational
All4 Exterior Noise Level Standard Ambient + 5 dBA
Amplified Sound Ambient + 15 dBA
Noise-Sensitive Vibration Level Threshold5 0.01 in/sec RMS Construction Noise-Sensitive
Residential Noise Level Threshold3 80 dBA Leq (8-Hour)
Commercial Noise Level Threshold3 85 dBA Leq (8-Hour)
Vibration Level Threshold5 0.01 in/sec RMS
Sources:
1 City of South Pasadena General Plan Safety and Noise Element, Policy 5.1. 2 City of South Pasadena General Plan Safety & Noise Element, Policy 5.1 & Strategy 5.5. 3 Federal Transportation Authority, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment. 4 City of South Pasadena Municipal Code, Sections 19A.7(b), 19A.12, and 19.21(c) (Appendix 3.1). 5 Los Angeles County Code, Section 12.08.350

3.11.4 PROPOSED HOUSING ELEMENT GOALS AND POLICIES
There are no Housing Element goals or policies related to noise.

3.11.5 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Threshold 3.11a: Would the Project result in generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? Construction (Short-term and Periodic Noise)
Noise generated by the construction equipment would include a combination of trucks, power tools, concrete mixers, and portable generators that, when combined, can reach high levels. To describe the construction noise levels that may be generated by implementation of future development projects, measurements were collected for similar activities. Table 3.11-3, Construction Reference Noise Levels, provides a summary of construction reference noise level measurements. Since the reference noise levels were collected at varying distances, all construction noise level measurements were adjusted to describe a common reference distance of 50 feet. Noise levels generated by heavy construction equipment, not including pile driving equipment, can range from approximately 68 dBA to in excess of 80 dBA when measured at 50 feet. Hard site conditions are used in the construction noise analysis, which result in noise levels that attenuate (or decrease) at a rate of 6 dBA for each doubling of distance from a point source (i.e., construction equipment).
3 - 945
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.11_Noise-050923.docx 3.11-9 Noise TABLE 3.11-3

CONSTRUCTION REFERENCE NOISE LEVELS
Noise Source
Reference
Distance
From Source
(Feet)
Reference
Noise Levels
(dBA Leq)
@ Reference
Distance @ 50 feet8
Truck Pass-Bys & Dozer Activity1 30 63.6 59.2
Dozer Activity1 30 68.6 64.2
Construction Vehicle Maintenance Activities2 30 71.9 67.5 Foundation Trenching2 30 72.6 68.2
Rough Grading Activities2 30 77.9 73.5
Framing3 30 66.7 62.3
Water Truck Pass-By & Backup Alarm4 30 76.3 71.9
Dozer Pass-By4 30 84.0 79.6
Two Scrapers & Water Truck Pass-By4 30 83.4 79.0
Two Scrapers Pass-By4 30 83.7 79.3
Scraper, Water Truck, & Dozer Activity4 30 79.7 75.3
Concrete Mixer Truck Movements5 50 71.2 71.2
Concrete Paver Activities5 30 70.0 65.6
Concrete Mixer Pour & Paving Activities5 30 70.3 65.9
Concrete Mixer Backup Alarms & Air Brakes5 50 71.6 71.6 Concrete Mixer Pour Activities5 50 67.7 67.7
Forklift, Jackhammer, & Metal Truck Bed Loading6 50 67.9 67.9 Pile Driver (Impact) 7 50 94.0 94.0
Sources:
1 As measured by Urban Crossroads, Inc. on 10/14/15 at a business park construction site located at the northwest corner of Barranca Parkway and Alton Parkway in the City of Irvine. 2 As measured by Urban Crossroads, Inc. on 10/20/15 at a construction site located in Rancho Mission Viejo. 3 As measured by Urban Crossroads, Inc. on 10/20/15 at a residential construction site located in Rancho Mission Viejo. 4 As measured by Urban Crossroads, Inc. on 10/30/15 during grading operations within an industrial construction site located in the City of Ontario. 5 Reference noise level measurements were collected from a nighttime concrete pour at an industrial construction site, located at 27334 San Bernardino Avenue in the City of Redlands, between 1:00 a.m. to 2:00 a.m. on 7/1/15. 6 As measured by Urban Crossroads, Inc. on 9/9/16 during the demolition of an existing parking lot at 41 Corporate Park in Irvine. 7 Source: FHWA Roadway Construction Noise Model, January 2006. 8 Reference noise levels are calculated at 50 feet using a drop off rate of 6 dBA per doubling of distance (point source).

Mobile construction equipment, such as the reference dozer pass-by, typically generates the highest construction noise levels during construction activities. As such, the highest construction reference noise level of 79.6 dBA Leq is used in this program-level analysis to determine potential impacts at sensitive receiver locations adjacent to development within the focus areas. Pile driving activity is represented by the FHWA Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM) reference noise level of 94.0 dBA Leq at 50 feet and is used in this analysis to determine potential impacts for future development that could require this construction method. Based on the reference construction noise levels, the estimated highest noise level generated by unmitigated typical 3 - 946
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.11_Noise-050923.docx 3.11-10 Noise construction activity and pile driving activity would be expected to range from approximately 80 dBA Leq at 50 feet and approximately 94 dBA Leq at 50 feet, respectively.

The highest reference construction noise level of approximately 80 dBA Leq at 50 feet for construction activity, not including pile driving, is expected to satisfy the FTA 80 dBA Leq residential and 85 dBA Leq commercial 8-hour construction noise level thresholds at distances greater than 50 feet. However, at distances of 50 feet or less, Project construction noise levels could exceed the FTA thresholds at nearby receiver locations. Therefore, construction noise levels at receiver locations within 50 feet of construction activities, such as existing residential, retail, and office uses in the focus areas, are considered a potentially significant noise impact.

For development requiring pile driving, construction noise levels are anticipated to exceed the FTA 80 dBA Leq residential and 85 dBA Leq commercial 8-hour construction noise level thresholds at distances of 200 feet or less. Therefore, pile driving construction noise levels at receiver locations within 200 feet of construction activities are considered a potentially significant noise impact. Therefore, MMs NOI-4 and NOI-7 prescribe several means to reduce noise level from both typical construction activity and pile driving activity during future development in the focus areas or elsewhere in the City. However, even with application of the construction noise reduction measures, it is anticipated the construction and/or pile driving noise levels at nearby receiver locations could exceed the FTA construction noise level thresholds. Therefore, constructionrelated noise levels for development requiring pile driving are considered a significant and unavoidable impact.

Operation (Long-Term Future Noise)
Traffic Noise
Noise contours represent the distance to noise levels of a constant value and do not consider the effect of any existing noise barriers or topography that may attenuate ambient noise levels. In addition, because the noise contours reflect modeling of vehicular noise on area roadways, they do not reflect noise contributions from the surrounding stationary noise sources within the area.

These contours also do not take into account the effect of any noise barriers, topography, or final roadway grades that may reduce traffic noise levels, providing a conservative analysis.

The Project traffic noise levels at adjacent land uses are estimated to range from approximately 63 to 76 dBA CNEL. Although there would be additional traffic generated from the Project, because of the logarithmic nature of sound it requires a doubling or a halving of traffic levels to generate an audible (about 3 dBA) difference in noise levels. Also, as the Project would result generally in denser land uses, especially along arterial thoroughfares and near transit, vehicle miles traveled (VMT) per capita would decrease. As such, Project-generated noise level increases from traffic at existing adjacent receptors would not likely be perceptible to human hearing. Based on the significance criteria for off-site noise impacts), the Project-related increases in noise levels at the nearest sensitive receptors due to traffic noise alone represent a less than significant impact under the future (2040) with Project scenario, and no mitigation is required.

However, the worst-case exterior traffic noise level ranges for proposed residential uses in future development in some growth areas.
3 - 947
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.11_Noise-050923.docx 3.11-11 Noise TABLE 3.11-4
FUTURE (2040) WITH PROJECT TRAFFIC NOISE LEVELS BY FOCUS AREA Focus Area
Future CNEL
(Worst-Case Transportation Noise Levels)
Corridors (Downtown Specific Plan)
Mission Street and Fair Oaks Avenue 65 to 75
Districts
Ostrich Farm 70 to 80
Neighborhood Centers
Huntington Drive & Garfield Avenue <70 to 75>
Huntington Drive & Fremont Avenue <70 to 75>
Huntington Drive & Fletcher Avenue 65 to 75
Source: Psomas 2021, modeling inputs and results for this scenario are presented in Appendix E-2 The proposed residential uses would be expected to be greater than the normally acceptable exterior noise level compatibility criteria identified in the existing General Plan Safety and Noise Element. Based on this and the proximity of future noise-sensitive land uses to SR-110 and the Metro L Line, the on-site transportation-related noise impacts at future uses within some growth areas would be expected to exceed 65 dBA CNEL, which would be a significant impact. Therefore, MM NOI-1 requires that prior to issuance of a building permit the Project Applicant/Developer of future projects with residential units submit an acoustical report to the City, which identifies reasonable and feasible measures to achieve a 65 dBA CNEL exterior noise level. Measures to achieve the required exterior noise level could include features such as sound walls, selective patio/balcony orientation, site configuration, and architectural fenestration to deflect sound. The proposed Project includes actions to use the Land Use Noise Compatibility Matrix to evaluate land use decisions and to require development projects to implement mitigation measures, where necessary, to reduce exterior and interior noise levels to meet standards. While it may be possible to satisfy the exterior noise standards for some projects, the transportation noise levels may still exceed the exterior 65 dBA CNEL standard for some projects. Therefore, the exterior on-site transportation noise impact is considered significant and unavoidable.

The interior noise levels of future developments must comply with the CBC interior noise level standards. The interior noise level is the difference between the predicted exterior noise level at the building facade and the noise reduction (NR) of the structure. Typical building construction provides a noise reduction of approximately 12 dBA with windows open and a minimum 25 dBA noise reduction with windows closed. However, sound leaks, cracks, and openings within the window assembly can greatly diminish its effectiveness in reducing noise. Several methods are used to improve interior noise reduction, including: (1) weather-stripped solid core exterior doors; (2) upgraded dual glazed windows; (3) mechanical ventilation/air conditioning; and (4) exterior wall/roof assembles free of cut outs or openings.

To provide the necessary interior noise level reduction, all future buildings developed with residential units would be required to provide a windows-closed condition and a means of mechanical ventilation (e.g., air conditioning) such that the residents of those buildings can achieve a 45 dBA CNEL environment. As previously discussed, the estimated traffic noise contours indicate some focus areas would experience exterior noise levels, which exceed 70 dBA CNEL at the building facade. With typical building construction and a windows-closed condition, a minimum 25 dBA CNEL reduction is achievable for residential dwelling units. However, the minimum 25 dBA CNEL with standard building construction may result in interior noise levels 3 - 948
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.11_Noise-050923.docx 3.11-12 Noise greater than 45 dBA CNEL, which would be considered a significant impact. Therefore, MM NOI-2 requires that the Project Applicant/Developer of future residential and mixed-use projects submit an interior noise analysis, which demonstrates that the interior noise level meets 45 dBA CNEL, to the City prior to issuance of a building permit. With implementation of MM NOI-2, traffic noise impacts on future development would be less than significant.

Stationary Source Noise
The proposed residential land uses would be noise-sensitive receiving land uses and are not expected to include any specific type of stationary noise sources beyond the typical noise sources (e.g., heating, ventilating and air conditioning [HVAC] units) associated with existing residential land use in the City. Project-related stationary source (operational) noise could be generated by the operation of potential commercial/retail and office uses. Such noise sources could include HVAC units, loading dock activities, outdoor restaurant dining and music activities, and parking lot vehicle movements. It is noted that these potential noise sources are consistent with type of existing stationary noise sources observed in the City. The proposed Project includes actions to require mixed-use structures to minimize the transmission of noise generated by commercial uses affecting residential uses, minimize stationary noise impacts on sensitive receptors, and require control of noise from construction activities, private developments/residences, landscaping activities, and special events. However, because the stationary source noise levels due to operation of future commercial/retail and office uses would vary depending on the tenant, the impacts due to operation of non-residential uses are considered potentially significant. Therefore, MM NOI-3 requires that the Applicant/Developer of future projects with non-residential uses that are near noise-sensitive land uses submit an acoustical report, which demonstrates that exterior noise levels at adjacent noise-sensitive land use property lines satisfy Section 19A.7(b), 19A.12, and 19.21(c) of the SPMC. The acoustical report shall provide specific site mitigation, if needed, to ensure that all exterior noise standards are implemented to the satisfaction of the City prior to issuance of a building permit. With implementation of MM NOI-3, on-site operational noise impacts from stationary sources would be less than significant.

To summarize the Project noise analysis:
 Project-generated traffic noise level increases at off-site sensitive receptors would be less than significant and no mitigation is required;
 Exterior transportation noise levels at proposed future development would be a significant and unavoidable impact even with implementation of MM NOI-1;  Interior noise impacts at proposed future development would be less than significant with implementation of MM NOI-2; and
 Stationary source noise impacts would be less than significant with implementation of MM NOI-3.

Threshold 3.11b: Would the Project result in generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?
Construction
Construction activity can result in varying degrees of ground vibration, depending on the equipment and methods used and distance to the affected structures and soil type. It is expected that ground-borne vibration from Project construction activities would cause only intermittent, localized intrusion. Construction activities that would have the potential to generate low levels of ground-borne vibration include mobile equipment activities and pile driving, among others. 3 - 949
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.11_Noise-050923.docx 3.11-13 Noise Ground vibration levels associated with various types of construction equipment are summarized in Table 3.11-5, Vibration Source Levels for Construction Equipment, which is based on the reference vibration levels provided by the FTA.

TABLE 3.11-5

VIBRATION SOURCE LEVELS FOR

CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT
Equipment
PPV (in/sec)
at 25 feet
Small bulldozer 0.003
Jackhammer 0.035
Loaded Trucks 0.076
Large bulldozer 0.089
Source: FTA 2007.

Based on the reference vibration levels provided by the FTA, a large bulldozer represents the highest source of typical construction-related vibration with a reference velocity of 0.089 in/sec PPV at 25 feet. At distances ranging from 25 to 400 feet from the site of construction activity, typical construction (i.e., non-pile driving) vibration velocity levels are expected to range from less than 0.001 to 0.089 in/sec PPV.

Compared with the County of Los Angeles construction vibration standard of 0.01 in/sec RMS, the typical construction activities (i.e., non-pile-driving) associated with future development projects would exceed the vibration standard at receiver locations within 25 feet for jackhammers, 50 feet of loaded trucks, and 100 feet of large bulldozers, if used. Therefore, MM NOI-4 requires that the use of loaded trucks, large bulldozers, and jackhammers at construction sites nearby sensitive land uses (e.g., residential, school) shall be minimized to the maximum extent feasible unless the vibration levels are shown to be less than the County threshold of 0.01 in/sec RMS.

Similarly, pile driving vibration levels would exceed the County construction vibration standard of

0.01 in/sec RMS at receiver locations within 400 feet of the pile locations if impact pile drivers are used during Project construction. MM NOI-4 also requires pile driving activity within 400 feet of nearby sensitive land uses (e.g., residential, school) be minimized, or alternative methods be used, unless the vibration levels are shown to be less than the County threshold of 0.01 in/sec RMS.

MM NOI-4 prescribes various means to reduce both construction vibration levels and noise levels (discussed further below under Threshold 3.11d). Additionally, vibration levels exceeding standards have the potential to damage fragile historic structures. Therefore, MM NOI-5 requires a pre-construction assessment of possible structural damage for construction activity within 25 feet of a historic building, as identified on the City of South Pasadena Historic Resources Survey at that time. The construction vibration levels at the site of the closest sensitive receivers are unlikely to be sustained during the entire construction period but would occur only during the times that heavy construction equipment is operating adjacent to the construction site perimeter.

Further, construction would be restricted to SPMC daytime construction hours, unless otherwise permitted by the City, thereby reducing potential vibration impacts during the sensitive nighttime hours. With implementation of MMs NOI-4 and NOI-5, the construction-related vibration impacts at nearby sensitive receiver locations would be reduced to a less than significant level impact during the worst-case construction activities at the site boundary. 3 - 950
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.11_Noise-050923.docx 3.11-14 Noise Rail Line Operation
Based on the methodology provided by the FTA’s General Vibration Assessment, Metro L Line rail activities are anticipated to generate vibration levels of up to 73 VdB at 50 feet from trains traveling at 50 mph. At the average speed of 35 mph, the reference vibration level is reduced by 3 VdB, and results in estimated vibration impacts of 70 VdB at 50 feet from the railroad tracks. It is important to note that this rail vibration assessment likely overstates the vibration levels at the future Project uses since the FTA Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment states that “although actual levels fluctuate widely, it is rare that ground-borne vibration will exceed the curves by more than one or two decibels unless there are extenuating circumstances, such as wheel or running-surface defects”.

However, some residential and non-residential uses within the focus areas are anticipated to be located within 50 feet of the Metro L Line railroad tracks and may experience vibration levels greater than 70 VdB, which can exceed the residential 72 VdB and non-residential 75 VdB criteria for frequent rail events. This would be considered a significant impact. Therefore, MM NOI-6 requires that the Applicant/Developer of future projects within 50 feet of the Gold Line submit a Vibration Study, which identifies all reasonable and feasible measures to avoid exceeding a 72 VdB residential and 75 VdB non-residential vibration level, to the City prior to issuance of a building permit. With implementation of MM NOI-6, operational vibration impacts would be less than significant.

It is noted that while future development could be exposed to vibration from off-site sources (i.e., train activity on the railroad tracks), the proposed land uses (i.e., residential and commercial/office) are not expected to include any specific type of operational vibration sources.

Threshold 3.11c: For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the Project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
The nearest airport is the El Monte Airport, located at 4233 Santa Anita Avenue, El Monte, approximately six miles east-southeast of the City at the nearest points. There are no private airstrips in or near the City; thus, no noise from airstrips would occur. There would be no impact, and no mitigation is required.

3.11.6 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
Future development in the City and the surrounding area would add new mobile and stationary noise sources, resulting in increased noise levels. The analysis of buildout of the proposed Project includes cumulative traffic volumes in the region by 2040. Thus, noise impacts associated with the Project account for cumulative noise impacts.

The Project-only traffic noise levels would not exceed a 3 dBA threshold and therefore would not be audible to human hearing. Therefore, the off-site traffic noise increase would be less than significant cumulative impact under the future (2040) with Project scenario, which accounts for regional traffic growth. However, the year 2040 traffic would be expected to result in on-site exterior noise levels that would exceed the standard of 65 dBA CNEL at future development in the focus areas. This would be a significant and unavoidable impact with implementation of MM NOI-1. This would also be considered a significant and unavoidable cumulative impact. 3 - 951
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.11_Noise-050923.docx 3.11-15 Noise Interior noise levels at future development in the focus areas with traffic would be less than significant with implementation of MM NOI-2, and on-site operational noise impacts from stationary sources would be less than significant with implementation of MM NOI-3. Therefore, there would be less than significant cumulative impacts related to interior noise levels and operational noise from stationary sources.

Noise and vibration impacts related to the Metro L Line and construction activity would be limited geographically to the alignment of the L Line within the City of South Pasadena and individual construction sites, respectively. Therefore, these noise and vibration sources would not contribute to a cumulatively significant impact due to the effects of noise attenuation.

3.11.7 MITIGATION MEASURES
NOI-1 Prior to the issuance of a building permit for new residential development projects, the Project Applicant/Developer shall submit an acoustical report or other substantial evidence to the City of South Pasadena Community Development Department, or designee, that demonstrates that the project will satisfy the 65 dBA CNEL exterior noise level standard, including identification of reasonable and feasible noise mitigation measures if determined necessary. It is the responsibility of the City of South Pasadena Community Development Department, or designee, to ensure that any necessary mitigation measures are fully and properly implemented.

NOI-2 Prior to the issuance of a building permit for new residential development projects, the Project Applicant/Developer shall submit an acoustical report or other substantial evidence to the City of South Pasadena Community Development Department, or designee, that demonstrates that the interior noise levels in all habitable rooms will satisfy the California Building Code 45 dBA CNEL interior noise level standard, including identification of reasonable and feasible noise mitigation measures if determined necessary. It is the responsibility of the City of South Pasadena Community Development Department, or designee, to ensure that any necessary mitigation measures are fully and properly implemented.

NOI-3 Prior to the issuance of a building permit and/or certificate of occupancy for nonresidential development projects, the Project Applicant/Developer shall submit an acoustical report or other substantial evidence to the City of South Pasadena Community Development Department, or designee, that demonstrates:
 Exterior noise levels at adjacent property lines will satisfy the South Pasadena Municipal Code Section s19A.7(b), 19A.12, and 19.21(c) exterior noise level limits, and satisfy any conditions of approval. The site-specific acoustical report shall identify the necessary measures, if any, required to reduce exterior noise levels to below the South Pasadena Municipal Code Section 19A.7(b), 19A.12, and 19.21(c) exterior noise level limits, and satisfy any conditions of approval.  Acoustical isolation between units has been included in the project design for residential dwelling units situated above non-residential uses. 3 - 952
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.11_Noise-050923.docx 3.11-16 Noise NOI-4 Prior to the issuance of a building permit for new development, the Project Applicant/ Developer shall submit a final acoustical report to the City of South Pasadena Community Development Department, or designee, that demonstrates:
 Exterior construction noise levels at the closest sensitive receiver locations will satisfy the FTA 80 dBA Leq residential and 85 dBA Leq commercial 8-hour construction noise level standards and the County of Los Angeles 0.01 in/sec root-mean-square velocity (RMS) vibration standard. The site-specific report shall identify the necessary reduction measures, if any, required to reduce exterior noise and vibration levels to below FTA noise and County of Los Angeles vibration thresholds.
 Measures to reduce construction noise and vibration levels, such as but not limited to those provided below, shall be incorporated in the final acoustical report:
o Install temporary construction noise barriers at the project site boundary that break the line of sight for occupied sensitive uses for the duration of construction activities. The noise control barrier(s) must provide a solid face from top to bottom and shall:
 Provide a minimum transmission loss of 20 dBA and be constructed with an acoustical blanket (e.g., vinyl acoustic curtains or quilted blankets) attached to the construction site perimeter fence or equivalent temporary fence posts;
 Be properly maintained with any damage promptly repaired. Gaps, holes, or weaknesses in the barrier or openings between the barrier and the ground shall be promptly repaired.
 Install sound dampening mats or blankets to the engine compartments of heavy mobile equipment (e.g., graders, dozers, heavy trucks). The dampening materials must be capable of a 5 dBA minimum noise reduction, must be installed prior to the use of heavy mobile construction equipment, and must remain installed for the duration of the equipment use.  Construction activities requiring pile driving within 400 feet, large bulldozers within 100 feet, loaded trucks within 50 feet, or jackhammers within 25 feet of nearby sensitive land uses (e.g., residential, school) shall be minimized, or alternative equipment or methods shall be used, unless the vibration levels are shown to be less than the County of Los Angeles RMS threshold of 0.01 in/sec.

NOI-5 The Project Applicant/Developer of any site-specific development within 25 feet of an extremely fragile historic building, as defined by the South Pasadena Historic Resources Survey, shall engage a qualified structural engineer to conduct a preconstruction assessment of the structural integrity of the nearby historic structure(s) and, prior to the issuance of a building permit, submit evidence to the City of South Pasadena Planning and Building Department, or designee, that the operation of vibration-generating equipment associated with the new development would not result in structural damage to the adjacent historic building(s). If recommended by the pre-construction assessment, ground borne vibration monitoring of nearby historic structures shall be required. 3 - 953
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.11_Noise-050923.docx 3.11-17 Noise NOI-6 Prior to the issuance of a building permit for new development projects within 50 feet of the Metro L Line, the Project Applicant/Developer shall submit a final vibration study to the City of South Pasadena Planning and Building Department, or designee, which shall identify and require implementation of reasonable and feasible vibration reduction measures to avoid exceeding the 72 VdB residential and 75 VdB non-residential vibration level standards.

NOI-7 The Project Applicant/Developer for new development shall be responsible for ensuring that following requirements are implemented by the contractor throughout the construction period. Construction contractors shall be required to implement the following measures to reduce noise levels from construction activity:
 equip all construction equipment, fixed or mobile, with properly operating and maintained mufflers, consistent with manufacturers’ standards, and all stationary construction equipment shall be placed so that emitted noise is directed away from the noise-sensitive use nearest the construction activity;  locate equipment staging in areas that will create the greatest distance between construction-related noise sources and noise-sensitive receiver nearest to the construction activity; and
 limit haul truck deliveries to the same hours specified for construction equipment by Section 19A.13(a) of the South Pasadena Municipal Code. The contractor shall design delivery routes to minimize the exposure of sensitive land uses to delivery truck noise.

3.11.8 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION
Construction Noise Levels
Significant Unavoidable Impact with Mitigation
Construction and Operational Vibration Levels
Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation
On-Site Stationary Source Noise
Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation
Exterior Traffic Noise
Significant Unavoidable Impact with Mitigation
Interior Traffic and Stationary Source Noise
Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation
Airport and Airstrip Noise
No Impact
3 - 954
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.11_Noise-050923.docx 3.11-18 Noise Cumulative Impacts
Significant Unavoidable Impact with Mitigation
3 - 955
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.12_Pop_Housing-050923.docx 3.12-1 Population and Housing

3.12 POPULATION AND HOUSING

3.12.1 METHODOLOGY
This section addresses the existing population, housing, and employment conditions in the City of South Pasadena (City) and analyzes anticipated changes to population, housing, and employment related to implementation of the proposed 2021–2029 Housing Element and the non-residential development capacity envisioned in the General Plan and Downtown Specific Plan (DTSP) Update (Project)ss. Existing and future population and housing characteristics are based on the California Department of Finance (DOF) estimates, U.S. census data, and growth projections from the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) 2020–2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (2020–2045 RTP/SCS; also referred to as Connect SoCal). Existing employment statistics were taken from the U.S.

Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), California Employment Development Department (EDD), and SCAG growth projections. The assessment of population, housing, and employment impacts assumes full buildout of the proposed General Plan and DTSP Update & 2021–2029 Housing Element.

3.12.2 EXISTING CONDITIONS
Population
Table 3.12-1, Historic Population Trends, 1990–2022, shows the population and percent change in the City and the County in 1990, 2000, and 2010, based on U.S. Census data, and for 2021 based on the most recent California DOF estimates. The City has experienced an approximately

6.9 percent increase in population between 1990 and 2022, compared to an approximately

11.3 percent increase in population in Los Angeles County as a whole. As shown below, the City has experienced minimal but steady population growth since 1990, with the greatest growth between 2000 and 2010 at approximately 0.55 percent annually. The City’s trends do not always mimic the County’s population trends.

TABLE 3.12-1
HISTORIC POPULATION TRENDS, 1990–2021
Year
South Pasadena Los Angeles County
Population
Average Change
Per Year
[and Per Decade] Population
Average Change
Per Year
[and Per Decade]
1990 23,936 — 8,863,052 —
2000 24,292 +0.15% [1.49%] 9,519,338 +0.69% [7.40%]
2010 25,619 +0.55% [5.46%] 9,818,605 +0.31% [3.14%]
2022 25,580 -0.01% [N/A] 9,861,224 +4.3% [N/A]
Sources: U.S. Census 1992, 2002, 2012; and DOF 2022
Housing
Table 3.12-2, Historic Housing Trends, 1990–2022, shows the housing units (including vacant units) and percent change in the City and the County in 1990, 2000, and 2010, based on the decennial U.S. Census data, and for 2022 based on the DOF estimates. The City has experienced an approximately 4.1 percent increase in housing units between 1990 and 2022, compared to an approximately 15.0 percent increase in housing units in Los Angeles County as a whole. As shown 3 - 956
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.12_Pop_Housing-050923.docx 3.12-2 Population and Housing below, the City has experienced relatively minor housing growth since 1990, with a total of 437 net new units, with the greatest growth between 2000 and 2010 at approximately 0.25 percent annually. The City’s trends often, but not always, mimic the County’s housing trends.

TABLE 3.12-2
HISTORIC HOUSING TRENDS, 1990–2022
Year
South Pasadena Los Angeles County
Housing Units
Average Change
Per Year
[and Per Decade]
Housing
Units
Average Change
Per Year
[and Per Decade]
1990 10,719 — 3,163,310 —
2000 10,850 +0.12% [1.22%] 3,270,909 +0.34% [3.40%]
2010 11,118 +0.25% [2.47%] 3,445,076 +0.53% [5.32%]
2022 11,156 +0.03% [N/A] 3,635,915 +0.46% [N/A]
Sources: U.S. Census 1992, 2002, 2012; and DOF 2022.

Employment
Table 3.12-3, Historic Employment Trends, 2000–2022, shows the number of jobs and percent change in the City and the County in 2000, 2010, and 2022 based on BLS and EDD data estimates. As shown below, the City has experienced modest employment growth since 2010, approximately 1.3 percent. There was a substantial reduction in jobs in the City between 2000 and 2010 of over 13 percent, reflecting the effects of the Great Recession. The relatively low increase in jobs between 2010 and 2022, represented by estimated employment in 2022, reflects the ongoing recovery from the Great Recession combined with the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic. What these perturbations show is the strong link between unanticipated–yet periodic– economic upheavals and associated employment levels. The City’s trends generally mimic the County’s employment trends.

TABLE 3.12-3
HISTORIC EMPLOYMENT TRENDS, 2000–2021
Year
South Pasadena Los Angeles County
Jobs Percent Change Jobs Percent Change
2000 14,857a — 4,413,200c —
2010 13,128a -13.2% 4,318,700c -2.2%
2022 13,700b +4.4% 4,703,800b +8.9%
Sources:
a BLS 2018 b EDD 2022 c
EDD 2021
Growth Projections
Growth projections for the City of South Pasadena have been developed by SCAG as part of its regional planning efforts for the development of the 2020 RTP/SCS and the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA). The projections for the 2020–2045 RTP/SCS (SCAG 2021a) are presented in the Demographics and Growth Forecast Technical Report (SCAG 2021b). In this technical report, the jurisdiction-level forecast is provided for the years 2016 and 2045 only. 3 - 957
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.12_Pop_Housing-050923.docx 3.12-3 Population and Housing Therefore, Psomas submitted a public records request to SCAG for the forecast data by jurisdiction for more intervals between 2016 and 2045. The SCAG-provided forecast included the years 2016, 2020, 2040, 2035, and 2045, but not 2040; however, SCAG indicated the year 2040 projections could be calculated by using a linear interpolation between 2035 and 2045 data sets (Aguilar 2021).

According to SCAG, the City is projected to have a 2040 population of 27,004 persons, with 11,109 households, and an employment base of 11,984 persons. It is noted these projections are based in part on coordination between the City and SCAG during preparation of the RTP/SCS and reflects the anticipated growth in the City prior to release of the unexpectedly high 6th Cycle RHNA. Specifically, it more closely matches the 2040 conditions with 589 dwelling units (DUs) and 430,000 sf of non-residential, which was envisioned prior to including the 2021–2029 Housing Element in this Environmental Assessment (EA). Table 3.12-4, SCAG Growth Projections for South Pasadena, summarizes SCAG’s growth forecast for the City.

TABLE 3.12-4

SCAG GROWTH PROJECTIONS FOR SOUTH PASADENA
South Pasadena Los Angeles County
2016 2020 2040 2016 2020 2040
Population 25,992 26,088 27,100 10,110,339 10,407,326 11,423,962 Households 10,431 10,517 11,109 3,318,988 3,471,759 4,002,104 Employment 11,411 11,528 11,984 4,743,403 4,838,458 5,276,927 Source: SCAG 2020, Aguilar 2021.

It is noted that the SCAG employment figure (11,528 jobs in 2020) is well below the EDD employment figure (13,700 jobs in 2022) (see Table 3.12-3 above). This EA utilizes the EDD 2022 estimate of employment as the more relevant figure for this issue (i.e., employment) for purposes of determining impacts, because it is derived from more frequently updated, real-time datasets.

Jobs – Housing Balance
SCAG states that “a balance between jobs and housing in a metropolitan region can be defined as a provision of an adequate supply of housing to house workers employed in a defined area (i.e., community or subregion). Alternatively, a jobs/housing balance can be defined as an adequate provision of employment in a defined area that generates enough local workers to fill the housing supply” (SCAG 2001). Jobs and housing are considered in balance when a subregion has enough employment opportunities for most people who live there and enough housing opportunities for most people who work there. SCAG uses the jobs/housing ratio to assess the relationship between housing and employment growth. An area with a ratio between 1.0 and 1.29 is considered to be “balanced” (SCAG 2001). The jobs/housing balance is one indicator of quality of life in a project area.

Jobs-rich areas in Southern California are located in the highly urbanized areas in the western portion of the region primarily in southern and western Los Angeles County, and in central and northern Orange County. Housing-rich areas are located in suburban communities located east of these employment centers, including San Bernardino and Riverside Counties and North Los Angeles County. Table 3.12-5, Los Angeles County and South Pasadena Jobs-Housing Ratios (2016–2040), identifies the projected jobs-housing ratio for both the County and the City between 2016 and 2040 based on SCAG data, for purposes of disclosure. 3 - 958
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.12_Pop_Housing-050923.docx 3.12-4 Population and Housing TABLE 3.12-5

COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES AND CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA
PROJECTED JOBS-HOUSING RATIOS (2016–2040)
2016 2020 2040
South Pasadena
Households (DUs)a 10,431 10,517 11,109
Housing Units 11,038 11,129 11,756
Employmenta 11,411 11,528 11,984
Jobs/Housing Ratio 1.03 1.04 1.02
Los Angeles County
Households (DUs)a 3,318,988 3,471,759 4,002,104
Housing Units 3,545,927 3,709,144 4,275,752
Employmenta 4,246,600 4,662,500 5,225,800
Jobs/Housing Ratio 1.34 1.30 1.23
DUs: dwelling unit(s)
Note: Housing units estimated based on number of households and a vacancy rate of 5.5 percent for South Pasadena and 6.4 percent for Los Angeles County (DOF 2022).

Sources: SCAG 2020, Aguilar 2021.

As shown in Table 3.12-5, based on SCAG data, the City’s jobs-housing ratio was 1.04 in 2020 with a slight decrease to 1.02 in 2040. The County is also projected to experience a declining jobs-housing ratio, though at approximately three times the rate of the City. A declining jobshousing ratio results from households increasing relative to employment.

However, as discussed previously, SCAG’s existing employment figures are well below jobs figures calculated by the EDD and do not accurately reflect the reality of employment provided in the City. Based on California EDD data, the estimated 2022 employment was reported as 13,700 jobs (EDD 2022). Based on an estimated 11,156 housing units in 2022 reported by DOF, the jobshousing balance in the City of South Pasadena is, more accurately, approximately 1.23. The estimated jobs-housing ratio in the future with Project implementation is discussed in the impact analysis below.

3.12.3 RELEVANT PROGRAMS AND REGULATIONS
Federal
Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Act The Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Act (42 United States Code Section 4601 et. seq.) was passed by Congress in 1970 and establishes standards for federally-funded programs and projects that require the acquisition of real property (real estate) for the displaced persons from their homes, businesses, or farms. It applies to projects using U.S.

Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) funds and HUD programs only. It calls for (1) just compensation of any real property acquisition, including reimbursement for expenses resulting from the transfer of title (such as recording fees, prepaid real estate taxes, or other expenses); (2) relocation services to displaced residential tenants and owner occupants with adequate notice; (3) reimbursement for moving expenses and payments for the added cost of renting or purchasing comparable replacement housing; (4) relocation services for displaced 3 - 959
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.12_Pop_Housing-050923.docx 3.12-5 Population and Housing businesses, farms, and nonprofit organizations with adequate notice; and (5) reimbursement for moving and re-establishment expenses.

State
It is noted that the California legislature continues to consider, and is expected to pass, additional regulations that could affect housing requirements and/or development mandates. Pending legislation is not analyzed in this EA. The State regulations below are those already passed that are most relevant to the environmental analysis of the Project.

California Relocation Assistance Act
In 1970, the State adopted the California Relocation Assistance Act (California Government Code §7260 et seq.), which follows the federal Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Act. Like the federal program, this regulation does not apply to private projects; the State law applies for displacement due to a program or project undertaken by a public entity (Section 7260 of the Government Code). This State law requires public agencies to provide procedural protections and benefits when they displace businesses, homeowners, and tenants in the process of implementing public programs and projects. The act calls for fair, uniform, and equitable treatment of all affected persons through the provision of relocation benefits and assistance to minimize the hardship of displacement on the affected persons.

AB 1482
In 2019, Assembly Bill (AB) 1482 was signed into law by Governor Newson and caps rent increases statewide for the next 10 years. Specifically, effective on January 1, 2020, annual rent increases are limited to 5 percent plus any rise in the consumer price index, which cannot exceed 10 percent. AB 1482 does not apply to all residential dwellings, such as buildings constructed within the past 15 years. AB 1482 includes apartments and multi-family buildings containing two or more units but exempts single-family residences, owner-occupied duplexes, and condominiums except when owned by corporations or an LLC in which at least one member is a corporation. In addition to limiting rent increases, AB 1482 prevents evictions without just cause for tenants that have lived in the unit for at least one year. Just cause for eviction includes failure to pay rent, criminal activity, or breach of a material term of the lease. It also includes repossessing the property for the owner or owner’s immediate family member to move in, demolish or substantially remodel the property, and withdraw the property from the rental market.

Land Use Planning Law
The requirements and authority for local municipalities (i.e., counties and cities) in California to prepare and administer general plans are contained in Sections 65300 et. seq. of the California Government Code. A general plan is a regulatory document established by a city or county to provide a guide for the future physical, economic, social, and environmental well-being of the city or county. It generally consists of goals, policies, actions and/or programs that would achieve the community’s vision for its future. For cities, the general plan guides the development of the incorporated city, plus any land outside city boundaries that has a relationship to the city’s planning activities. This area outside a city’s boundaries is called the Sphere of Influence. The City of South Pasadena does not have a sphere of influence; its jurisdictional boundaries align with the City limits.

The housing element is one of the State-mandated elements of a general plan. It identifies the City’s housing conditions, needs, and opportunities; and establishes the programs that are the 3 - 960
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.12_Pop_Housing-050923.docx 3.12-6 Population and Housing foundation of each municipalities housing strategy. However, unlike all other general plan elements, State law requires each municipality to update its housing element on a prescribed schedule (most commonly every eight years). State law required City Council adoption of the 2021–2029 Housing Element Update by October 15, 2021, with a 120-day grace period (i.e., February 15, 2022) after which cities and counties face statutory penalties. Additionally, if a city cannot identify sufficient sites adequate to accommodate its RHNA allocation, the Housing Element must commit to rezone properties within three years to allow "by right" development of 20 percent below market rate projects. Assembly Bill (AB) 398 requires a locality that fails to adopt a housing element that Housing and Community Development (HCD) has found to be in substantial compliance with State law within 120 days of the statutory deadline to complete this required rezoning no later than one year from the deadline for adoption of the housing element – and prohibits the Housing Element from being found in substantial compliance until that rezoning is completed. Previously, an agency had three years to rezone. AB 215 requires local agencies to make draft revisions of the housing element available for public comment for 30 days. The agency (i.e., City of South Pasadena) must consider and incorporate public comments prior to submission to the HCD for review. Because of legal action against the City related to its Housing Element preparation, the City is the subject of a Court Order1 to bring its Housing Element into compliance with Government Code Section 65754 within the timeframe stated within the Court Order. This Court Order supersedes the time limits discussed above.

The requirements for preparation and implementation of specific plans are contained in Sections 65450–65457 of the California Government Code. Specific plans are a tool for the systematic implementation of a general plan and establish a link between implementing policies of the general plan and the individual development proposals in a defined area. The provisions of Section 65450 et. seq. of the California Government Code require that a specific plan be consistent with the adopted general plan of the jurisdiction within which it is located. In turn, all development, all public works projects, and zoning regulations must be consistent with the specific plan. The requirements for the adoption and administration of zoning laws, ordinances, and other regulations by counties and cities is contained in Sections 65800–65912 of the California Government Code.

Additionally, on September 30, 2008, Assembly Bill (AB) 1358, the California Complete Streets Act was signed into law and became effective on January 1, 2011. AB 1358 places the planning, designing, and building of complete streets into the larger planning framework of a general plan by requiring jurisdictions to amend their circulation elements to plan for multimodal transportation networks.

Assembly Bill 1233
Assembly Bill 1233, approved by the Governor in 2005, requires that housing elements analyze vacant sites, sites having potential for redevelopment, and the relationship of zoning, facilities, and services to these sites. AB 1233 requires that housing elements specify action programs that will be taken to make sites available during the 6th Cycle Housing Element planning period (2021-2029), as necessary to accommodate the RHNA units assigned to each municipality, plus any additional actions that are necessary to make sites available to accommodate any RHNA units that were assigned during the 5th Cycle Housing Element (2013–2021) that were not accommodated.
1 Settlement Agreement (Californians For Homeownership V. City of South Pasadena, LASC Case Nos. 22STCP01388 & 22STCP01161)
3 - 961
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.12_Pop_Housing-050923.docx 3.12-7 Population and Housing If a jurisdiction fails to implement programs in its housing element to identify adequate sites or fails to adopt an adequate housing element, AB 1233 requires local governments to zone or rezone adequate sites by the first year of the new planning period. Specifically, AB 1233 applies to local governments that:
 Failed to adopt an updated Housing Element for the prior planning period;  Adopted a Housing Element that California HCD found out of compliance due to failure to substantially comply with the adequate sites requirement;  Failed to implement the adequate sites programs to make sites available within the planning period; or
 Failed to identify or make available adequate sites to accommodate a portion of the regional housing need.

The City of South Pasadena has reutilized rezoning and other strategies to identify adequate sites to meet the 6th Cycle RHNA allocation. Additionally, the housing units allocated for the City in the 5th Cycle Housing Element planning period (i.e., 63 DUs) were accommodated in the City’s 2014– 2021 Housing Element.

Senate Bill 375
Senate Bill (SB) 375, approved by the Governor in 2008, aligns land use and transportation planning to drive development towards transit-accessible places and reduce car dependency.

SB 375 is the land use component of California’s wider strategy to reduce GHG emissions, codified by the 2006 Global Warming Solutions Act (Assembly Bill [AB] 32).

Assembly Bill 1397
AB 1397 (2017) made several changes to housing element law by revising what could be included in a municipality’s inventory of land suitable for residential development. AB 1397 changed the definition of land suitable for residential development to increase the number of multi-family sites.

If a community does not have enough sites to accommodate its housing need, it must adopt a program to make adequate sites available, including a program for rezoning sites to provide lowerincome housing. Pre-SB 375 housing law, cities asserted they were only required to identify actions that would be undertaken to make sites available to accommodate various housing needsthat they were not mandated to actually adopt the rezoning included in the Housing Element programs. However, SB 375 provides that communities preparing an eight-year housing element 3 - 962
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.12_Pop_Housing-050923.docx 3.12-8 Population and Housing must complete all required rezoning if the available housing sites inventory does not identify adequate sites to accommodate the RHNA allocation. The planned rezoning must include "minimum density and development standards" for all sites, and, for sites designated for very low and low-income housing, rezoning must provide for "by right" zoning at certain minimum densities, with no discretionary approvals allowed except design review and subdivision map approval. In these instances, CEQA review cannot be required unless a subdivision map is needed.

Additionally, the programmed rezoning must be completed within certain time frames.

Housing Crisis Act of 2019 (SB 330) and Senate Bill 8
The California Housing Crisis Act (SB 330) was enacted by Governor Newson in 2019 to combat the State’s growing housing crisis. This legislation’s goal is to increase California’s affordable housing stock by 3.5 million new units by 2025. To streamline residential development, a new preliminary development application process is required, which includes a staff-level review of basic information regarding a project such as:
 Site characteristics;
 The planned project;
 Certain environmental concerns;
 Facts related to any potential density bonus;
 Certain coastal zone-specific concerns;
 The number of units to be demolished; and
 The location of recorded public easements.

SB 330 further streamlines housing development by reducing the number of public meetings or hearings to five or less (e.g., workshops, design review board meetings, planning commission meetings, advisory committee meetings, and city council meetings). A shortened approval time of 90 days instead of 120 days from the time of certification for an EIR is also required to streamline the development approval process.

SB 8 extends until 2034 the HCA provision that prohibits cities from conducting more than five hearings on an application as well as HCA provisions that provide vesting rights for housing projects that submit a qualifying "preliminary application." Applicants who submit qualifying preliminary applications for housing developments prior to January 1, 2030, can now invoke vesting rights until January 1, 2034. SB 8 extends until 2030 provisions that limit localities' authority to impose shifting requirements as part of application "completeness" review, as well as provisions that require localities to render any decision about whether a site is historic at the time the application for the housing development project is deemed complete. SB 8 also enacts a series of reforms intended to provide that HCA provisions apply to both discretionary and ministerial approvals as well as to the construction of a single dwelling unit and makes a series of revisions to the already complex replacement housing and relocation requirements. 3 - 963
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.12_Pop_Housing-050923.docx 3.12-9 Population and Housing Senate Bill 166
SB 166 (2017) requires a city or county to ensure that its housing element inventory can accommodate its share of the RHNA throughout the planning period. It prohibits a city or county from reducing, requiring, or permitting the reduction of the residential density to a lower residential density than what was utilized by the California Department of Housing and Community Development for certification of the housing element, unless the city or county makes written findings supported by substantial evidence that the reduction is consistent with the adopted general plan, including the housing element. In such cases, any remaining sites identified in the housing element must be adequate to accommodate the jurisdiction’s share of the RHNA. A city or county may reduce the residential density for a parcel only if it identifies sufficient sites remaining within the housing element, as replacement sites, so that there is no net loss of residential unit capacity.

Assembly Bill 491
AB 491 requires that, for any residential structure with five or more residential dwelling units that include both affordable housing units and market-rate housing units, the BMR units must provide the same access to common entrances, areas, and amenities as non-BMR units, and the building "shall not isolate the affordable housing units within that structure to a specific floor or an area on a specific floor."
Assembly Bill 787
AB 787 expands existing law that permits jurisdictions to claim credit for up to 25 percent of their RHNA from the conversion of existing housing units for very low- and low-income households by also permitting cities and counties to satisfy up to 25 percent of the local agency's moderateincome regional housing need through RHNA by permitting the conversion of units in an existing multifamily building to be restricted for moderate-income households. To qualify, the conversion 1) must occur beginning January 1, 2022; 2) may not be for a unit previously affordable to very low-, low-, or moderate-income households; 3) must be subject to a 55-year recorded agreement; and 4) have an initial post-conversion rent at least 10 percent less than the average monthly rent charged during the 12 months prior to conversion.

State Density Bonus Law and Related Legislation
California’s Density Bonus Law (Section 65915 et. seq. of the Government Code) grants bonuses, concessions, waivers, and parking reductions to projects with qualifying affordable housing. The State’s Density Bonus Law continues to be the most commonly used tool to increase housing density and production. Prior to the passage of AB 1763, projects qualifying for a density bonus were entitled to one - three “incentives” and “concessions” to help make the development of 3 - 964
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.12_Pop_Housing-050923.docx 3.12-10 Population and Housing affordable and senior housing more economically feasible, such as reduced setback, additional height, and/or minimum square footage requirements as requested by the developer. AB 1763 provides a fourth incentive and concession to 100 percent affordable projects. If the project is located within a half mile of a major transit stop, AB 1763 goes even further by eliminating all local government limits on density and allowing a height increase of up to 3 stories or 33 feet.

AB 571 prohibits agencies from imposing affordable housing impact fees, including inclusionary zoning fees and in lieu fees, on affordable units proposed as part of a Density Bous Law project.

The floor area ratio (FAR) is a common mechanism in local zoning codes that limits the total floor area of a building in relation to the square footage of a lot. SB 478 prohibits agencies from imposing a FAR of less than 1.0 for a housing development project (comprised solely of residential units, a mixed-use development with at least two-thirds of the square footage attributed to residential uses or transitional or supportive housing) consisting of three to seven units and a FAR of less than 1.25 for housing development project consisting of 8 to 10 units. Additionally, an agency may not deny a housing development project located on an existing legal parcel solely on the basis that the lot area does not meet the agency's requirement for minimum lot size. To qualify, a project must consist of 3 to 10 units in a multifamily residential zone or mixed-use zone in an urbanized area and cannot be within a single-family zone or within a historic district.

There are exceptions for certain conservation easements and covenants required to comply with State or federal law.

AB 1584, a housing omnibus bill, establishes a restriction on contractual development controls that mirrors AB 721 by declaring unenforceable any CC&R contained within a deed, contract, security instrument, or other instrument that prohibits, effectively prohibits, or restricts the construction or use of an ADU on a lot zoned for single-family use.

Existing law notifies a buyer of real property that recorded covenants on the property may contain racially restrictive or other unenforceable discriminatory provisions and informs buyers of their right to file a Restrictive Covenant Modification (RCM) form. AB 1466 aims to hasten the removal of these covenants by requiring all county recorders throughout the State to establish a program to identify and redact unlawfully restrictive covenants and easing restrictions on the ability of other parties to seek to remove such covenants.
3 - 965
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.12_Pop_Housing-050923.docx 3.12-11 Population and Housing SB 9 provides for the ministerial approval of converting existing homes occupied by a homeowner into a duplex if certain eligibility restrictions are satisfied. It also allows a single-family home lot to be split into two lots, and a duplex to be built on each lot, provided that the initial home is occupied by an owner who attests that the owner will continue to live in a unit on the property as their primary residence for at least three years. The most notable exceptions to duplex and lot split by right approvals are 1) the property could not have been used as a rental for the past three years, 2) the property cannot already have an accessory dwelling unit or junior ADU, 3) the new lot may not be less than 40 percent of the property and must be at least 1,200 square feet, 4) modifications to the existing home may not require the demolition of more than 25 percent of an exterior wall, and 5) neither the new duplex nor the lot split with up to four new units (a duplex on each) may not result in a significant adverse impact to the physical environment.

Regional
Southern California Association of Governments
SCAG functions as the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) for six Southern California counties: Imperial, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, Ventura, and Los Angeles. Regional plans are prepared and adopted by SCAG, which is the Council of Governments for the County of Los Angeles. The federal government mandates that SCAG research and draw up plans for transportation, growth management, hazardous waste management, and air quality for its region.

SCAG has developed several plans to achieve these regional objectives. The most applicable to the Project are the 2020–2045 RTP/SCS and RHNA.

On September 3, 2020, the SCAG Regional Council adopted the 2020–2045 RTP/SCS (RTC/SCS; also referred to as Connect SoCal) and the addendum to the Connect SoCal Program Environmental Impact Report. The 2020–2045 RTP/SCS is a long-range visioning plan that builds upon and expands land use and transportation strategies established over several planning cycles to increase mobility options and achieve a more sustainable growth pattern. It charts a path toward a more mobile, sustainable, and prosperous region by making connections between transportation networks, between planning strategies and between the people whose collaboration can improve the quality of life for Southern Californians (SCAG 2020).

Regional Housing Needs Allocation
Housing needs are determined by the California HCD, which allocates numerical housing targets to the MPOs, including SCAG, through the RHNA process. The RHNA identifies the existing and projected housing needs of each municipality (city and county) within the SCAG region. The 2021- 2029 housing element cycle (6th Cycle) for the Southern California region departs significantly from past housing element cycles due to significant changes in State law. State requirements to boost housing production and provide more affordable housing units and justification for such new additions. Accordingly, the proposed Housing Element update balances strategic and targeted potential housing sites adequate to meet the RHNA allocation and Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH) concerns. It also introduces new policies and programs consistent with State law 3 - 966
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.12_Pop_Housing-050923.docx 3.12-12 Population and Housing based on a comprehensive and inclusive strategy to encourage housing production and retention to serve the entire community.

Based on the 6th Cycle RHNA, approved by HCD on March 22, 2021, the City’s proposed 2021– 2029 Housing Element has a need for 2,067 new units to be provided, distributed across the four income levels established by HCD, including the following:
 Very Low Income (757),
 Low Income (398),
 Moderate Income (334), and
 Above Moderate Income (578) (SCAG 2021).

The above-moderate income units are considered market rate, while units for the remaining income levels are considered below market rate at a range of affordability levels. The current RHNA allocation of 2,067 units is almost 33 times higher than the last cycle (63 units). Additionally, the California Department of HCD has required the 2021–2029 Housing Element to demonstrate capacity for a surplus of units beyond the RHNA allocation. The surplus would be 708 DUs for a total of 2,775 DUs.

Penalties, including fines and loss of local discretion, can be levied against cities and counties that fail to implement the housing element programs that are included to reach the required housing production capacity. Per State requirements, the City’s proposed Housing Element Update includes the following components:
 A detailed analysis of the City’s demographic, economic, and housing characteristics;  An analysis of the barriers to producing and preserving housing;  A review of the City’s progress in implementing current housing policies and programs;  An identification of goals, policies and actions in addition to a full list of programs that will implement the vision of the Housing Element; and
 A list of sites (Suitable Sites Inventory) that could accommodate new housing, demonstrating the City’s ability to meet the quantified housing number established in the RHNA.

City
Existing General Plan and Housing Element
The current South Pasadena General Plan (General Plan) was last updated and adopted by the City in 1998, with the 2013–2021 Housing Element last adopted in 2014 to address the City’s future housing needs for the 2013–2021 planning period, in accordance with State laws (South Pasadena 1998, 2014). The currently adopted (1998) General Plan includes the following seven elements:
 Land Use & Community Design (addressing land use and development issues); 3 - 967
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.12_Pop_Housing-050923.docx 3.12-13 Population and Housing  Circulation & Accessibility (addressing transportation issues);  Economic Development & Revitalization (addressing economic issues);  Historic Preservation (addressing historic resource issues);  Housing (addressing RHNA allocation and housing issues for the 2013–2021 period);  Open Space & Resource Conservation (addressing natural and open space resource issues); and
 Safety & Noise (addressing public health and safety issues).

The goals and policies of the Land Use & Community Design Element (Land Use Element) are further interpreted in the form of a diagram, referred to as Land Use Policy Map, which defines the general location and development intensity/density of these uses within the City. Exhibit 2-2, Existing Land Use Policy Map, presented in Section 2.0 of this EA, depicts the current land use plan for the City.

Existing Mission Street Specific Plan
The Mission Street Specific Plan (MSSP) was adopted in 1996 (South Pasadena 1996). Under State law (Section 65450 et. seq. of Government Code), a municipality may use a specific plan to develop detailed regulations, programs, and/or legislation to implement its adopted general plan for a specific area within its local jurisdiction. As with the proposed update, the MSSP is a companion document to the 1998 General Plan, tailored to the particular needs of a specific area of the City. The MSSP includes the Mission Street right-of-way from Pasadena Avenue to Fair Oaks Avenue, parcels fronting Mission Street between Fremont Avenue and Indiana Avenues, and areas to the north and south of Mission Street between Fremont Avenue and Orange Avenues. Exhibit 2-3, Mission Street Specific Plan Area, presented in Section 2.0, provides an illustration of the geographic area covered by the MSSP.

The key actions identified in the MSSP, which must be taken by the City and by property owners, merchants, and residents to implement the MSSP, include the following:
 Provide a central parking facility to serve the Blue Line (now Gold Line) station;  Establish a Business Improvement District (BID) to help financing parking and streetscape improvements;
 Hire a manager to attract desirable businesses, implement streetscape improvements, and promote the MSSP area; and
 Increase the water pressure so that on-pumps are not required for second and third story uses (South Pasadena 1996).

Municipal Code
The Section 36.530.020 of the South Pasadena Municipal Code (SPMC) provides that where a residential structure is proposed at the time of construction as a condominium or other common interest development, and would involve conversion of an existing residential use, the Applicant must provide the City with a Relocation Assistance Program. This program must show how the Applicant will assist tenants displaced through the conversion in relocating to equivalent or better housing. Additionally, Section 36.530.020 of the SPMC requires the Applicant to give notice to all 3 - 968
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.12_Pop_Housing-050923.docx 3.12-14 Population and Housing existing or prospective tenants as set forth in the Subdivision Map Act (Map Act) (Sections 66410 through 66413.5 of the California Government Code). The City will not approve a project converting residential real property unless the findings, regarding notification, set forth in Section 66427.1 of the Map Act are first made (Section 36.530.020[B][6][b] of the SPMC).

3.12.4 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
The following significance criteria are derived from Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines. A project would result in a significant adverse population and housing impact if it would:

Threshold 3.12a: 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); and/or Threshold 3.12b: Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere.

3.12.5 PROPOSED HOUSING ELEMENT GOALS AND POLICIES
Goal 1.0 Conserve the Existing Housing Stock and Maintain Standards of Livability Policy 1.1 Adopt and implement Zoning and Building Code standards and provide incentives for building owners to upgrade energy conservation in existing buildings including the use of solar energy, to reduce energy costs to residents.

Policy 1.2 Promote rehabilitation, as that term is defined by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), and home improvement assistance to low- and moderateincome households.

Policy 1.3 Continue to use the City’s code enforcement program to bring substandard units into compliance with City codes and improve overall housing conditions in South Pasadena.

Policy 2.2 Provide information to developers regarding the City’s inclusionary housing requirements and the availability of streamlined density bonus opportunities in compliance with incentives for well-designed housing and implement approval processes that reflect the priority of providing housing in the community.

Policy 2.3 Provide residents with information to receive rental assistance, including housing vouchers, from the County of Los Angeles and other support for tenants from the Housing Rights Center.

Policy 2.4 Consider declaring publicly-owned sites as “Surplus” and offering development opportunities on those sites to non-profit affordable housing developers.

Policy 2.5 Provide adequate access to housing that supports educational and economic opportunities for all, as well as transit options and a walkable lifestyle. 3 - 969
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.12_Pop_Housing-050923.docx 3.12-15 Population and Housing Goal 3.0 Provide opportunities to increase housing production Policy 3.1 Promote mixed-use developments by continuing to allow development of residential uses in the Mixed-Use zoning district and the Downtown Specific Plan zoning districts and encourage on-site inclusionary housing units within the residential component of all residential and mixed-use projects and planned development permits, as required by the City’s Zoning Code. Conduct early consultations with developers of all residential and mixeduse projects to explain the requirements and design incentives.

Policy 3.3 Encourage the development of housing types that offer options for seniors to remain within the community when remaining in their existing homes is no longer viable.

Policy 3.4 Allow for and encourage new residential and/or mixed-use development in or near commercial districts, with access to services, transit and schools. Allow for employment centers to be located near housing developments to increase job opportunities.

Goal 4.0 Compliance with State Housing Laws
Policy 4.1 Educate City staff, property owners, and homebuilders about ADA accessibility and universal design principles. Encourage and/or incentivize the creation of homes with universal design features.

Policy 4.2 Require new medium- to large-scale residential and mixed-use projects to meet ADA accessibility standards and provide a sufficient number of ADA-accessible and/or ADAready units.

Policy 4.3 Establish transparent procedures for requesting reasonable accommodations, on a case-by-case basis to promote equal access to housing for disabled persons.

Policy 4.4 Include low-barrier navigation centers as a form of transitional and supportive housing allowed in residential zoning districts.

Policy 4.5 Review and revise the Zoning Code regulations for allowing emergency shelters to maintain compliance with State laws for such uses.

Goal 5.0 Promote fair housing while acknowledging the consequences of past discriminatory housing practices
Policy 5.1 Provide information on fair housing practices and resources on the City’s website.

Policy 5.2 Coordinate with the Housing Rights Center to provide referral and mediation services for tenants and property managers. Educate and assist landlords, housing managers, real estate professionals and tenants regarding fair housing issues and laws.

Provide public information regarding the Housing Rights Center at City Hall. Take measures to quickly and fairly resolve fair housing complaints or conflicts as they are reported. 3 - 970
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.12_Pop_Housing-050923.docx 3.12-16 Population and Housing Policy 5.3 Comply with all applicable federal, State, and local Fair Housing and antidiscrimination laws and regulations that make it illegal to discriminate with respect to housing against any person because of race, color, national origin, ancestry, religion, disability, familial status, marital status, gender or gender expression, sexual orientation, source of income, or age. This includes in the rental or sale, financing, advertising, appraisal, and/or provision of housing and associated real estate and financial services, as well as land-use practices.

Policy 5.4 Proactively encourage community members to learn more about the social impacts of housing discrimination.

Policy 5.5 In conjunction with the inclusionary housing ordinance, allow and encourage rental and deed-restricted affordable housing units across a wide geographic area of the City.

Policy 6.2 Provide information on applicable state and local tenant protections to both landlords and tenants.

Policy 6.3 Establish and/or strengthen local tenant protections to mitigate or prevent housing instability and displacement of South Pasadena residents who rent their homes.

3.12.6 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Threshold 3.12a: Would the Project 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)?
Housing, Population, and Employment Growth
Future development under the proposed Project would increase housing, population, and employment in the City. As discussed in Section 2.4, buildout of a city under an adopted general plan is not tied to a specific timeline. However, for the purposes of this EA, development of the proposed Project is assumed to occur by the horizon year of 2040.

To encompass all possible future development capacity within the City, this EA addresses the buildout of up to an additional 2,775 DUs and 430,000 sf of commercial/office, which is estimated to generate up to an additional 6,882 residents2 and 1,978 jobs3 in the City through 2040 compared to existing conditions. The maximum of 6,882 residents equate with full occupancy of 2,775 units; however, the City had a vacancy rate of 5.5 percent in both 2017 and 2018, and the 2 Based on a rate of 2.48 persons per household derived from the California Department of Finance demographic data for the City (2022).
3 Based on a rate of 1 employee per 200 sf with an 8 percent vacancy as per the Market Analysis (HR&A 2017). 3 - 971
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.12_Pop_Housing-050923.docx 3.12-17 Population and Housing County’s vacancy rate was 6.3 percent in 2017 and 6.4 percent in 2018 (DOF 2021). A vacancy rate of 5.5 percent for the City and 6.4 for the County are applied in this analysis as they are the most recent prior to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Based on this vacancy rate, the maximum of 2,775 DUs in the proposed 2021–2029 Housing Element would result in a resident population increase of approximately 6,503persons occupying an estimated 2,622 DUs. Also, this approach conservatively estimates the total population increase even with a reasonable vacancy rate because some of the new dwelling units would replace dwelling units removed as part of a redevelopment project. Table 3.12-6, Comparison of Existing and Projected Conditions, provides context for the intensity of proposed growth in the City with buildout of the Project.

TABLE 3.12-6

COMPARISON OF EXISTING AND PROJECTED CONDITIONS
Existing Conditions Project Buildout (2040) Growth Difference Households (DUs) 10,623a 13,245 2,622 +25.0%
Housing Units (DUs) 11,156a 13,931 2,775 +25.0%
Population (residents) 25,580a 32,083 6,503 +25.4%
Non-residential (sf) 1,256,000b 1,686,000 430,000 +34.2% Employment (jobs) 13,700c 15,678 1,978 +14.4%
DUs: dwelling units; sf: square feet
Note: Population in this table based on 5.5 percent housing vacancy rate Sources:
a DOF 2022 b HR&A 2017 c EDD 2022
As shown, the maximum 2,775 DUs would be expected to result in approximately 1,953 occupied DUs and would represent an approximate 25 percent increase‒or about 1.25 percent per year‒ in the City’s households. Assuming a 5.5 percent vacancy rate, this would result in a population of approximately 32,083 residents, which would represent an approximate 25.4 percent increase‒ or about 1.25 percent per year‒in population. If all potential homes were occupied, the City would have a population of up to approximately 32,462 persons. However, no municipality experiences full occupancy of all housing units.

The maximum 430,000 sf of non-residential uses represent an approximate 34.2 percent increase‒or about 1.7 percent per year‒in the City’s commercial and office space and would represent an approximate 14.4 percent increase‒or about 0.7 percent per year‒in the number of jobs within the City. The annual increase rates are based on 20 years and assume maximum buildout of all development capacity in the City by 2040.

Table 3.12-7, Comparison of SCAG Growth Projections and Project Buildout, provides a comparison of the 2040 SCAG growth projections and the General Plan Update buildout projections.
3 - 972
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.12_Pop_Housing-050923.docx 3.12-18 Population and Housing TABLE 3.12-7

COMPARISON OF SCAG PROJECTIONS AND PROJECT BUILDOUT
Existing
Conditions Project Buildout (2040)
SCAG Projections
(2040) Difference
Households 10,623a 13,245 (2,622 DUs)a 11,109c +2,136 DUs / +19.2% Housing Units 11,156a 13,931 (2,775 DUs) N/A N/A
Population 25,580a 30,083 (6,503 persons)a 27,004c +5,079 persons / +18.8% Employment 13,700b 15,678 (1,978 jobs) 11,984c +3,694 jobs / +30.8% Jobs-Housing Ratio 1.23 1.13 1.01 N/A
DUs: dwelling units; N/A not applicable
Note: Housing units estimated based on number of households and a vacancy rate of 5.5 percent for South Pasadena.

Population based on 2.48 persons per household for the number of housing units at this vacancy rate.

Sources:
a DOF 2022 b EDD 2022a c SCAG 2020, Aguilar 2021
As shown in Table 3.12-7, the number of households, residents, and jobs in the City at buildout of the Project would exceed SCAG’s regional projections derived from the 2020–2045 RTP/SCS.

The number of housing units is presented solely for purposes of calculating the jobs-housing ratio, discussed further below, because SCAG forecasts number of households only.

The household and population growth in the City would exceed the SCAG projections by 2,136 DUs (19.2 percent) and 5,079 persons (18.8 percent), respectively. As previously mentioned, SCAG’s projections in the RTP/SCS are based in part on coordination between the City and SCAG during preparation of the RTP/SCS and reflects the anticipated growth in the City prior to release of the unexpectedly high 6th Cycle RHNA. At that time, the City would have provided to SCAG demographic projections based on the proposed 589 DUs and 430,000 sf of non-residential formerly envisioned for the City. The 2020–2045 RHNA was approved by SCAG’s Regional Council on September 3, 2020. While preparation of the 6th Cycle RHNA partially overlapped preparation of the RTP/SCS, the 6th Cycle RHNA preparation continued beyond its adoption and was approved by HCD almost seven months later on March 22, 2021. Therefore, the SCAG 2020–2045 RTP/SCS projections are internally inconsistent with the SCAG 6th Cycle RHNA.

SB 375 promotes consistency between RTP’s and regional housing policy. It requires the RTP to plan for the RHNA, and the RHNA to be consistent with the RTP’s projected development pattern.

SB 375 also aligned the RHNA with the regional transportation planning process and created an eight-year planning period for cities within MPOs. Allocation of housing share to various cities and counties must be consistent with the SCS. Nonetheless, the necessity of the RHNA to meet the very considerable, recent changes in housing policy at the State level and other processes have resulted in this inconsistency. At the time of preparation of these SCAG documents, and this EA, the legislative and planning environment for providing housing and preferable land use patterns to meet GHG reduction and air quality goals is undergoing a marked transformation. The City is required to demonstrate it can accommodate the RHNA allocation. At the same time, accommodating this RHNA allocation results in a substantial unplanned population growth.

Therefore, buildout of the Project would result in a significant and unavoidable impact related to population growth. There are no feasible mitigation measures to avoid or reduce this impact, because any such mitigation would reduce the potential housing stock to be constructed and 3 - 973
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.12_Pop_Housing-050923.docx 3.12-19 Population and Housing thereby place the City in violation of State law and susceptible to a variety of penalties, including monetary fines.

Regarding employment, as discussed previously, the SCAG projections of employment in the City are substantively underestimated (refer to Tables 3.12-6 and 3.12-7). Therefore, this analysis does not directly compare the SCAG projection for employment and the City’s anticipated future employment to reach a significance finding. For comparison, the projected employment of 15,678 jobs represents an increase of 1,978 jobs (or about a 14.4 increase or 0.72 percent per year) from EDD’s 2021 estimate of 13,700 jobs. The City’s jobs-housing balance, a different metric for consideration of a City’s employment, is presented below.

Jobs-Housing Balance
Jobs-housing balance defines an area where the number of housing units available for the employed population is equivalent to the number of jobs in an area. Alternatively, the provision of employment to fill the housing supply may also be considered jobs-housing balance. Assuming a reasonable match between the affordability of housing and the incomes of jobs in the local market, if the number and proximity of residences is proportionate to the number and proximity of jobs, the majority of employees would have the opportunity to work and reside in the same community.

A well-balanced ratio of jobs and housing can contribute to reductions in the number of vehicle trips resulting from commuting due to employment opportunities in closer proximity to residential areas, although this may not occur. Such a reduction in vehicle trips would result in lower levels of air pollutant emissions (including lower GHG emissions) and less congestion on area roadways and intersections.

An area with a ratio between 1.0 and 1.29 is considered “balanced” (SCAG 2001). Table 3.12-7 also compares the City’s existing (1.23) and buildout (1.13) jobs-housing balance. Therefore, the City would have slightly more balanced jobs-housing ratio with buildout of the Project. Although the SCAG employment projection cannot be feasibly compared to the anticipated 2040 conditions, consideration of jobs-housing balance indicates the increase in employment would not be considered a substantial inducement of growth, as the jobs-housing would be only slightly decreased (i.e., more housing-rich than the existing conditions). However, the proposed land use plan is consistent with SCAG policies to encourage higher-density and mixed-use development, particularly near transit centers such as the Mission L Line Station and the Metro bus lines along Fair Oaks Avenue and Huntington Drive. Consistency with SCAG policies is discussed further in Section 3.10, Land Use and Planning. There would be a less than significant impact related to employment growth, and no mitigation is required.

Improvements to roads and other infrastructure would be implemented either to alleviate existing capacity issues or in support of anticipated future growth. In conclusion, there would be a significant and unavoidable impact related to direct population growth, through provision of a land use plan that supports the 6th Cycle RHNA allocation; and less than significant impacts related to indirect population growth or direct employment growth, and no mitigation is required.

Threshold 3.12b: Would the Project displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
As discussed above in Section 3.12.3, Relevant Programs and Regulations, the 2021-2029 housing element cycle (6th Cycle) for the Southern California region departs significantly from past housing element cycles due to significant changes in State law. Additionally, the California legislature has passed numerous housing-related bills in recent years. 3 - 974
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.12_Pop_Housing-050923.docx 3.12-20 Population and Housing The central strategy of the Project is to preserve and enhance the distinctive neighborhoods and direct calibrated growth primarily to the identified growth areas. Preserving housing supports sustainability objectives, and it is also less expensive to create affordable units in existing housing stock. However, to accommodate the 6th Cycle RHNA allocation, the City must determine policies and zoning thresholds that allow and encourage production of new housing units in a manner that South Pasadena has not contemplated in the past. The multi-pronged strategy that the housing element update relies on includes inclusionary housing requirements that the City Council adopted in 2020; encouraging ADUs with simpler, objective requirements; and rezoning for higher density and mixed-use commercial/residential development. The rezoning of non-residential parcels to allow densities that support and encourage both market rate and affordable housing units would follow the adoption of a revised General Plan Land Use Element together with the DTSP, an update and expansion of the 1996 Mission Street Specific Plan (MSSP).

The Project encourages most of the new housing to be in walkable mixed-use environments in the Downtown and along major transit corridors and arterial roadways but also accommodates increased housing opportunities within existing residential neighborhoods. In addition, the Project introduces an affordable housing overlay district to allow projects with affordable housing to be distributed across the City on appropriate sites. The Housing Element update balances strategic and targeted potential housing sites adequate to meet the RHNA allocation with the pattern of the existing land use plan outside of the focus areas.

Thus, most of the residential land uses in the City are expected to remain in place. New residential development on the limited number of vacant lots in the City would not involve any displacement of housing; however, transitions to higher densities within the focus areas or those lots outside the focus areas that have been determined a possibility for redevelopment and currently contain residential land uses could result in displacement. However, it is speculative at this time due to lack of sufficient information.

As discussed above, the 2021–2029 Housing Element has the need for 2,775 DUs across the four income levels defined by HCD. The new residential, and non-residential, uses are anticipated to occur primarily as infill redevelopment or development in the five focus areas; however, suitable sites for development or redevelopment of housing are identified outside of the focus areas. There are existing residential and mixed-use (i.e., retail ground floor with residential above) land uses within the focus areas. Therefore, there is a potential that existing residential uses would be removed to accommodate new development. The locations of future redevelopment projects, and, by extension, the precise number of existing housing units and people that may be displaced cannot be reasonably foreseen and would be speculative to define.

As noted above, Section 36.530.020 of the SPMC describes requirements for tenant notification, consistent with the Subdivision Map Act, and preparation of a Relocation Assistance Program by the Applicant for a development project involving conversion of residential use as a condominium or other common interest development. Where a development that would involve conversion of residential uses is due to a program or project undertaken by a public entity, the development process must be conducted in compliance with the California Relocation Assistance Act. This includes adequate notification of affected properties and provision of fair compensation and relocation assistance. This State law requires public agencies to provide procedural protections and benefits when they displace businesses, homeowners, and tenants in the process of implementing public programs and projects.

However, displacements that may occur would not necessitate construction of housing elsewhere, as a net increase in housing would be accommodated in the City. As such, there would be no impact under this threshold because there would be no indirect environmental impact from 3 - 975
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.12_Pop_Housing-050923.docx 3.12-21 Population and Housing construction of housing elsewhere. There would be no impacts related to displacement of housing or people that would necessitate construction of housing elsewhere, and no mitigation is required.

3.12.7 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
The cumulative impacts related to demographic growth are analyzed within the County of Los Angeles, because County-wide demographic data are available from SCAG, DOF, and EDD.

Also, because of the interconnectedness of cities and unincorporated areas in the Los Angeles metropolitan area, due to roadways, increasing transit, and other sociological factors, demographic growth in smaller sized cities like South Pasadena cannot be treated like an isolated phenomenon as it is part of the fabric of the region.

Increases in the population, housing, and employment base of the County are expected over time due to in-migration and birth. Future growth and development in the City of South Pasadena and in the County would lead to the development of new homes, the creation of new jobs, and the increase in the resident population of the City and the rest of the region. SCAG estimates there could be as many as 11,423,962 persons, 4,002,104 households (not housing units), and 5,276,927 jobs throughout the County by 2040 (Table 2-4; SCAG 2020; Aguilar 2021).

As discussed above, because of the inconsistency between SCAG’s RTP/SCS and 6th Cycle RHNA, the increase in population and housing is considered a significant and unavoidable impact.

This is more of a technicality due to timing and rapid changes in housing policy. However, a direct cumulative adverse impact would not be expected if there is housing that can adequately accommodate the population and there are goods and services available to meet residents’ needs. The cumulative increase in population in the County would be accompanied by an increase in housing stock as projected by SCAG. This balance is partially driven by economic and other market forces out of the control of any single municipality. Whether this housing is adequate would depend on the rate of housing development and the success of housing programs in the various cities and communities in the region.

As discussed above, there would be a less than significant impact related to employment growth because the City would have a balanced jobs-housing ratio with buildout of the Project, and proposed land use plan is consistent with SCAG policies. As such, no significant adverse cumulative impacts related to employment growth would occur with the Project and future growth and development in the County.

Redevelopment projects that occur on developed or underutilized lots may involve some displacement of local housing stock or population in the San Gabriel Valley. However, the City’s vacant housing stock and the County’s vacant housing stock are expected to provide sufficient alternative accommodation for displaced households and residents, and significant displacement is not anticipated in the County. As such, displacements that may occur would not necessitate construction of housing elsewhere, as a net increase in housing would be accommodated in the City. No significant cumulative adverse impacts related to displacement would occur with the Project and future growth and development in the County, and no mitigation is required.

3.12.8 MITIGATION MEASURES
There would be less than significant impacts related to substantial growth and no impacts related to displacement of housing or people necessitating construction elsewhere, and no mitigation is required.
3 - 976
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.12_Pop_Housing-050923.docx 3.12-22 Population and Housing

3.12.9 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION
Significant and unavoidable related to population and housing growth.

Less than significant related to employment growth and related job-housing ratio, and no impact for displacements of housing or people that would necessitate construction of housing elsewhere.

3.12.10 REFERENCES
Aguilar, M. 2021 (June 10). Personal Communication. E-mail correspondence between M. Aguilar (Clerk of the Board, Southern California Association of Governments) and J. Neary (Project Manager, Psomas) regarding 2040 demographic projections pursuant to the 2020–2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy.

California Department of Finance (DOF). 2022 (January). Report E-5 Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State, January 2021-2022, with 2020 Benchmark.

Sacramento, CA: DOF. E-5 Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State, January 2021-2022, with 2020 Benchmark. (E-5 Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State, 2020-2022 | Department of Finance (ca.gov).

California Employment Development Department, Labor Market Information Division (EDD). 2022a (July). Unemployment Rates and Labor Force: Cities and Census Designated Places by Individual County: Los Angeles. Sacramento, CA: EDD. https://www.labormarketinfo.edd.ca.gov/file/lfmonth/lasub.xls. ———. 2021 (June 8, last accessed). Historic Labor Force Data: County: Los Angeles County:

Annual: Not Seasonally Adjusted: Not Preliminary: Employment: 2010 and 2000.

Sacramento, CA: EDD. California LaborMarketInfo, Data Library.

South Pasadena, City of. 1998. City of South Pasadena General Plan. South Pasadena: the City. http://www.ci.south-pasadena.ca.us/index.aspx?page=120. ———. 1996 (April). Mission Street Specific Plan. South Pasadena: the City. http://www.ci.southpasadena.ca.us/modules/ showdocument.aspx?documentid=9763.

Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). 2021 (March 22, approved). SCAG 6th Cycle Final RHNA Allocation Plan. Los Angeles, CA: SCAG. SCAG 6th Cycle Final RHNA Allocation Plan (approved by HCD on 3/22/21).
———. 2020a (September 3). 2020–2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy. Los Angeles, CA: SCAG. Read the Plan Adopted Final Plan - Southern California Association of Governments.
———. 2020b (September 3). Demographics and Growth Forecast Technical Report. Los Angeles, CA: SCAG. Final Connect SoCal Demographics and Growth Forecast Adopted September 3, 2020.
3 - 977
City of South Pasadena
2021–2029 Housing Element
Environmental Assessment
R:\Projects\SPA\3SPA010100\Environmental Documentation\Settlement Agreement\EA\3.12_Pop_Housing-050923.docx 3.12-23 Population and Housing ———. 2001 (April). The New Economy and Jobs/Housing Balance in Southern California. Los Angeles, CA: SCAG.
http://www.scag.ca.gov/Documents/NewEconomyJobsHousingBalance.pdf.

U.S. Census Bureau. 2012 (Issued August). California 2010: Population and Housing Unit Counts. Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau.
https://www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/cph-2-6.pdf.
———. 2002 (Issued November). California 2000: Summary Population and Housing Characteristics. Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau.
ftp://ftp2.census.gov/library/publications/2002/dec/phc-1-6.pdf. ———. 1992 (Issued November). 1990 Census of Population: General Population Characteristics: California, Section 1 – Tables 1 through 61. Washington, DC: U.S.

Census Bureau. https://www2.census.gov/library/publications/decennial/1990/cp-1/cp-1- 6-1.pdf.

U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). 2018 (April 3, access date). BLS Data Viewer: Local Area Unemployment Statistics: South Pasadena City, CA: 2000 to 2017: Excel. Washington, DC: BLS.
https://beta.bls.gov/dataViewer/view/timeseries/LAUCT067322000000003.

South Pasadena City CouncilMay 30, 2023

South Pasadena City Council
May 30, 2023