Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration

DRAFT INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION

FOR A 7-UNIT RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION

Prepared for:

City of West Covina 1444 West Garvey Avenue South West Covina, CA 91790

Prepared by:

UltraSystems Environmental Inc. 16431 Scientific Way Irvine, CA 92618-4355 Telephone: 949.788.4900 FAX: 949.788.4901 UEI No. 6007

January 2018

❖ PROJECT INFORMATION SHEET ❖ PROJECT INFORMATION SHEET

1. Project Title 7-Unit Residential Subdivision 0316-F Project

2. Lead Agency and Address City of West Covina Department of Planning 1444 West Garvey Avenue West Covina, CA 91790

3. Contact and Phone Number Ron Garcia Senior Planner (626) 939-8765 [email protected]

4. Project Location 1920 West Pacific Lane West Covina, CA 91790

5. Assessor’s Parcel Numbers APN 8459-026-002 and APN 8459-026-003

6. Project Site General Plan Neighborhood Medium Designation

7. Project Site Zoning Designation Medium Density Multiple-Family Residential-20 (MF-20), which allows up to 20 dwelling units per acre.

8. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting The project site is adjacent to existing single-family and multi-family residential units, which are located to the north, east, and southwest. Commercial developments are located to the west. Interstate 10 Freeway (I-10) is located proximate to the south. 9. Description of Project The construction of a 7-unit, multi-family development on a 27,129 square-foot lot, located at 1920 West Pacific Lane, within the City of West Covina. The proposed new development would include two buildings: • Building A: 4 attached townhomes; and • Building B: 3 attached townhomes. The proposed development would include variances from the zoning standards for minimum lot size, minimum lot width, minimum setback requirements, and landscaping requirements. Development of the proposed 7-unit residential subdivision will require multiple discretionary approvals from the City including:

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page i Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ PROJECT INFORMATION SHEET ❖ 1. Variance for deviations from the City of West Covina zoning standards (Variance No. 15-18) 3. Precise Plan for a Multi-Family Development (Precise Plan No. 15-07). 4. Tentative Tract Map Approval Tentative Tract Map No. 73652). 10. Other Public Agencies whose City of West Covina Building Division Approval is Required City of West Covina Planning Department City of West Covina Fire Department Southern California Gas Company Suburban Water Systems

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page ii Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ TABLE OF CONTENTS ❖

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Project Information Sheet ...... i

Acronyms and Abbreviations ...... vi

1.0 INTRODUCTION ...... 1-1 1.1 Project ...... 1-1 1.2 Project Applicant ...... 1-1 1.3 Lead Agency ...... 1-1 1.4 CEQA Overview ...... 1-1 1.5 Purpose of Initial Study ...... 1-2 1.6 Other Agencies ...... 1-3 1.7 Organization of Initial Study ...... 1-3

2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING ...... 2-1 2.1 Project Site ...... 2-1 2.2 Land Use and Zoning ...... 2-1 2.3 Site Conditions ...... 2-7 2.4 Geology and Soils ...... 2-8 2.5 Hydrology ...... 2-8 2.6 Biology ...... 2-8

3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ...... 3-1 3.1 Project Background ...... 3-1 3.2 Project Overview ...... 3-1 3.3 Construction Activities and Phasing ...... 3-8 3.4 Discretionary Actions ...... 3-9

4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST ...... 4-1 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected ...... 4-1 Determination (To Be Completed by the Lead Agency) ...... 4-1 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts...... 4-2 4.1 Aesthetics ...... 4.1-1 4.2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources ...... 4.2-1 4.3 Air Quality ...... 4.3-1 4.4 Biological Resources ...... 4.4-1 4.5 Cultural Resources ...... 4.5-1 4.6 Geology and Soils ...... 4.6-1 4.7 Greenhouse Gas Emissions ...... 4.7-1 4.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials ...... 4.8-1 4.9 Hydrology and Water Quality ...... 4.9-1 4.10 Land Use and Planning ...... 4.10-1 4.11 Mineral Resources ...... 4.11-1 4.12 Noise ...... 4.12-1 4.13 Population and Housing ...... 4.13-1 4.14 Public Services ...... 4.14-1 4.15 Recreation ...... 4.15-1 4.16 Transportation and Traffic...... 4.16-1

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page iii Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ TABLE OF CONTENTS ❖

4.17 Tribal Cultural Resources ...... 4.17-1 4.18 Utilities and Service Systems ...... 4.18-1 4.19 Mandatory Findings of Significance ...... 4.19-1

5.0 REFERENCES ...... 5-1

6.0 LIST OF PREPARERS ...... 6-1 6.1 Lead Agency ...... 6-1 6.2 UltraSystems Environmental Inc...... 6-1

7.0 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM ...... 7-1

TABLES

Table 2.2-1 - Summary of Land Uses and Zoning ...... 2-1 Table 3.2-1 - Project Summary ...... 3-1 Table 3.2-2 - Summary of Outdoor Space ...... 3-4 Table 3.4-1 - Permits and Approvals ...... 3-11 Table 4.3-1 - Federal and State Attainment Status ...... 4.3-2 Table 4.3-2 - Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Data ...... 4.3-5 Table 4.3-3 - Sensitive Receptors Near Project Site ...... 4.3-6 Table 4.3-4 - SCAQMD Emissions Thresholds for Significant Regional Impacts ...... 4.3-9 Table 4.3-5 - Project Maximum Daily Regional Construction Emissions ...... 4.3-10 Table 4.3-6 - Maximum Daily Project Operational Emissions ...... 4.3-10 Table 4.3-7 - Results of Localized Significance Analysis ...... 4.3-12 Table 4.5-1 - Known Cultural Resources Within a 0.5-mile Radius of the APE ...... 4.5-2 Table 4.7-1 - Unmitigated Annual GHG Emissions, 2018 And Beyond...... 4.7-4 Table 4.7-2 - Project Compatibility with West Covina Energy Action Plan ...... 4.7-5 Table 4.10-1 - Existing General Plan and Land Use Designations for the Project Site and Adjacent Land Uses ...... 4.10-2 Table 4.12-1 - Measured Ambient Noise Levels ...... 4.12-5 Table 4.12-2 - Estimated Unmitigated Construction Noise Exposures at Ambient Noise Monitoring Locations ...... 4.12-7 Table 4.12-3 - Measured and Projected Traffic Volumes at Intersections, A.M. Peak Hour ...... 4.12-9 Table 4.12-4 - Measured and Projected Traffic Volumes at Intersections, P.M. Peak Hour ...... 4.12-9 Table 4.12-5 - Vibration Levels of Typical Construction Equipment ...... 4.12-10 Table 4.16-1 - Existing Without Project Weekday Peak Hour Intersection LOS ...... 4.16-2 Table 4.16-2 - Project Trip Generation ...... 4.16-4 Table 4.16-3 - Existing and Existing plus Project Conditions ...... 4.16-5 Table 4.16-4 - Opening Year (2019) and Opening Year (2019) plus Project Peak Hour Intersection Level of Service ...... 4.16-6 Table 4.16-5 - Construction Activities Trip Generation ...... 4.16-8 Table 4.16-6 - Opening Year (2019) and Opening Year (2019) Plus Construction Activities Peak Hour Intersection Level of Service ...... 4.16-9 Table 7.0-1 - Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program ...... 7-2

FIGURES

Figure 2.1-1 - Regional Location ...... 2-2

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page iv Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ TABLE OF CONTENTS ❖

Figure 2.1-2 - Project Vicinity ...... 2-3 Figure 2.1-3 - Project Location ...... 2-4 Figure 2.2-1 - Existing General Plan Land Use Designations ...... 2-5 Figure 2.2-2 - Zoning ...... 2-6 Figure 2.3-1 - Photos of Project Site ...... 2-7 Figure 3.2-1 - Site Plan ...... 3-2 Figure 3.2-2 – Tentative Tract Map ...... 3-3 Figure 3.2-3 - Conceptual Elevations for Building A (North and South ...... 3-5 Figure 3.2-4 - Conceptual Elevations for Building B (North and South) ...... 3-6 Figure 4.1-1 - Los Angeles County Scenic Highways ...... 4.1-3 Figure 4.1-2 - State Scenic Highways ...... 4.1-4 Figure 4.1-3 - Shadow Model ...... 4.1-6 Figure 4.3-1 - Sensitive Receptors ...... 4.3-7 Figure 4.4-4 - USFWS National Wetlands Inventory ...... 4.4-11 Figure 4.4-5 - CDFW Wildlife Corridors ...... 4.4-12 Figure 4.5-1 - Topographic Map - Baldwin Park Quad ...... 4.5-4 Figure 4.6-1 - Alquist-Priolo Fault Zone Map...... 4.6-3 Figure 4.6-2 - Regionally Active Faults ...... 4.6-4 Figure 4.6-3 - Liquefaction Map ...... 4.6-5 Figure 4.6-4 - Topographic Map ...... 4.6-7 Figure 4.8-1 - Los Angeles County Airport Influence Areas ...... 4.8-6 Figure 4.8-2 - Los Angeles County Fire Hazards State Responsibility Areas ...... 4.8-7 Figure 4.8-3 - Los Angeles County Fire Hazards Local Responsibility Areas ...... 4.8-8 Figure 4.9-1 - USGS Surface Water and Watersheds ...... 4.9-3 Figure 4.9-2 - FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map ...... 4.9-6 Figure 4.9-3 - Tsunami Inundation Area...... 4.9-9 Figure 4.11-1 - Mineral Resources Map ...... 4.11-3 Figure 4.12-1 - Sensitive Receivers Near Project Site ...... 4.12-3 Figure 4.12-2 - Ambient Noise Monitoring Sites ...... 4.12-4 Figure 4.16-1 - Project Site Location and Study Area ...... 4.16-3

APPENDICES

Appendix A Project Plans Appendix B Air Quality Report Appendix C Species List Appendix D Phase I Cultural Resources Report Appendix E Noise Study Appendix F Traffic Study

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page v Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ❖

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

Acronym/Abbreviation Term A.M. ante meridiem AB Assembly Bill AB 32 California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 AB 939 California Integrated Waste Management Act ACM Asbestos-Containing Materials AF acre-feet AFOW acre-feet of water ALUC Airport Land Use Commission ALUP Airport Land Use Plan ALW Azusa Light and Water APCD Air Pollution Control District APE Area of Potential Effect ARB California Air Resources Board AQMP Air Quality Management Plan ARB Air Resources Board BAU business as usual BMPs Best Management Practices BSA Biological Survey Area CAA Clean Air Act CAAQS California Ambient Air Quality Standards CAL FIRE California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection CalEEMod California Emissions Estimator Model CAOs Cleanup and Abatement Orders CARB California Air Resources Board CBC California Building Code CCAA California Clean Air Act CCR California Code of Regulations CDE California Department of Education CDFW California Department of Fish and Wildlife CDOs Cease and Desist Orders CEQA California Environmental Quality Act Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and CERCLA Liability Act CFCs chlorofluorocarbons CH4 methane CHRIS California Historic Resources Information System City City of West Covina CIWMP Countywide Integrated Waste Management Plan CLUP Comprehensive Land Use Plan CMP Congestion Management Program CMU Concrete Masonry Unit CNDDB California Natural Diversity Database CNEL Community Noise Equivalent Level

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page vi Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ❖

Acronym/Abbreviation Term CNPS California Native Plant Society CNRA California Natural Resources Agency CO carbon monoxide CO2e CO2 equivalent CR Regional Commercial CRHR California Register of Historical Resources CVUSD Covina Valley Unified School District dB decibel dBA A-weighted decibel scale DTSC Department of Toxic Substances Control E east EIR Environmental Impact Report EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ESA Environmental Site Assessment Farmland Farmland of Statewide Importance FEMA Federal Emergency Management Area FHSZ Fire Hazard Severity Zones FIRM Flood Insurance Rate Map FMMP Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program GHG greenhouse gas GIS Geographic Information System GWP global warming potential HCP Habitat Conservation Plan HFCs hydrofluorocarbons I-10 Interstate 10 IC internal combustion ICU Intersection Capacity Utilization IEPR California's Integrated Energy Policy Report IPaC Information, Planning and Conservation IPCC International Panel on Climate Change IR Interpretation of Regulations IS Initial Study ITE Institute of Transportation Engineers JOS Joint Outfall System JWPCP Joint Water Pollution Control Plant L90 noise level that is exceeded 90 percent of the time at a given location LACFA Los Angeles County Fire Authority LACHCA Los Angeles County Health Care Agency LACSD Los Angeles County Sanitation District LBP lead-based paint lbs pounds Ldn day-night average noise Lead Agency The City of West Covina Leq equivalent noise level LID Low Impact Development

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page vii Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ❖

Acronym/Abbreviation Term LOS level of service LRA Local Responsibility Area LUST Leaking Underground Storage Tank Main Basin Main San Gabriel Basin MBTA Migratory Bird Treaty Act MF-20 Multi-Family Residential-20 mgd million gallons per day MHPA Multi Habitat Planning Area MMRP Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program MMs Mitigation Measures MND Mitigated Negative Declaration MPE Maximum Probable Earthquake mph miles per hour MRDS Mineral Resources Data System MRF material recovery facility MRZ Mineral Resource Zone MS4 Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems permit MSCP Multiple Species Conservation Program MSL above mean sea level MT Metric ton MWD Metropolitan Water District µg micrograms N north N2O nitrous oxide NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards NAHC Native American Heritage Commission N-C Neighborhood Commercial NCCP Natural Community Conservation Plan ND Negative Declaration NHD National Hydrography Dataset NHMP Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan NO nitric oxide NO2 nitrogen dioxide NOI Notice of Intent NOx nitrogen oxides NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination NRCS Natural Resources Conservation Service NWI National Wetlands Inventory N2O nitrous oxide O3 ozone OPR Office of Planning and Research OPSC Office of Public School Construction OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Administration P.M. post meridiem PM Particulate matter

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page viii Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ❖

Acronym/Abbreviation Term Pb lead PCB polychlorinated biphenyl PCS Permit Compliance System PD police department PEL permissible exposure limits PF Public Facility PFCs perfluorocarbons phf peak hour factor PlanWC West Covina General Plan PM particulate matter PM10 respirable particulates PM2.5 fine particulate matter ppb parts per billion pph persons per household ppm parts per million PPV peak particle velocity PRC Public Resources Code PRD Park and Recreation Department Project 7-Unit Residential Subdivision 0316-F R-1 Residential Single Family RCP Regional Comprehensive Plan RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act RCRIS Resource Conservation and Recovery Information Systems RECs recognized environmental conditions RELs Reference exposure levels RMP Risk Management Plan RMS root mean square ROG Reactive organic gases ROSB Railroad Operations and Safety Branch RTP Regional Transportation Plan RUSD Rowland Unified School District RWQCB Regional Water Quality Control Board S South SB Senate Bill SC Service Commercial SCAB South Coast Air Basin SCAG Southern California Association of Governments SCAQMD South Coast Air Quality Management District SCCIC South Central Coastal Information Center SCE Southern California Edison SCH State Clearinghouse SCIC South Coastal Information Center SCS Sustainable Communities Strategy SEMS Standardized Emergency Management System SF6 sulfur hexafluoride

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page ix Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ❖

Acronym/Abbreviation Term SIA Surface Impoundments SIP California State Implementation Plan SLF Sacred Lands File SLT Screening Level Thresholds SMARA Surface Mining and Reclamation Act SMARTS Stormwater Multi-Application and Report Tracking System SO2 sulfur dioxide SQG Small Quantity Generators SR- State Route SRA State Responsibility Area SRAs source receptor areas SRRE Source Reduction and Recycling Element STP Standard temperature and pressure SUSMP Standard Urban Stormwater Mitigation Plan SWPPP Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan SWRCB State Water Resources Control Board TAC toxic air contaminant TCRs tribal cultural resources TIA Traffic Impact Analysis tonnes metric tons TRIS Toxic Release Inventory Systems UBC Uniform Building Code UCL upper confidence limit UNFCCC United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change USDA United States Department of Agriculture USEPA United States Environmental Protection Agency USFWS United States Fish and Wildlife Service USGS United States Geological Survey VdB vibration decibels VHFHSZ very high fire hazards severity zone VMT Vehicle Miles Traveled VOC volatile organic compound W west Watermaster Main Basin Watermaster WCMC West Covina Municipal Code WCUSD West Covina Unified School District WOS Waters of the State WOUS Waters of the United States WQMP Water Quality Management Plan WRPs water reclamation plants WTP Water Treatment Plan zero dBA based on a reference pressure level of 20 micropascals ZEVs Zero Emission Vehicles § Section °F Fahrenheit

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page x Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 1.0 - INTRODUCTION ❖

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Project

The 7-Unit Residential Subdivision (Project) includes construction of a seven unit, multi-family development on a 27,129 square-foot lot, located at 1920 W. Pacific Lane, in the City of West Covina, California. The project involves new development that would include two buildings:

• Building A: 4 attached townhomes; and • Building B: 3 attached townhomes.

The proposed development would include variances from the zoning standards for minimum lot size, minimum lot width, minimum setback requirements, and landscaping requirements.

1.2 Project Applicant

Golden Creek Holdings c/o Steve Eide Design Group 158 West Orange Street Covina, CA 91723-2011 Telephone: 626-915-2303

1.3 Lead Agency

The City of West Covina is the Lead Agency for this project pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and implementing regulations.1 The Lead Agency has the principal responsibility for implementing and approving a project that may have a significant effect on the environment.

1.4 CEQA Overview

1.4.1 Purpose of CEQA

All discretionary projects within California are required to undergo environmental review under CEQA. A project is defined in CEQA Guidelines § 15378 as the whole of the action having the potential to result in a direct physical change or a reasonably foreseeable indirect change to the environment and is any of the following:

• An activity directly undertaken by any public agency including, but not limited to, public works construction and related activities, clearing or grading of land, improvements to existing public structures, enactment and amendment of zoning ordinances, and the adoption and amendment of local General Plans or elements. • An activity undertaken by a person which is supported in whole or in part through public agency contacts, grants, subsidies, loans, or other forms of assistance from one or more public agencies. • An activity involving the issuance to a person of a lease, permit, license, certificate, or other entitlement for use by one or more public agencies.

1 Public Resources Code §§ 21000 - 21177 and California Code of Regulations Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 1-1 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 1.0 - INTRODUCTION ❖

CEQA Guidelines § 15002 lists the basic purposes of CEQA as follows:

• Inform governmental decision makers and the public about the potential, significant environmental effects of proposed activities. • Identify the ways that environmental damage can be avoided or significantly reduced. • Prevent significant, avoidable damage to the environment by requiring changes in projects through the use of alternatives or mitigation measures when the governmental agency finds the changes to be feasible. • Disclose to the public the reasons why a governmental agency approved the project in the manner the agency chose, if significant environmental effects are involved.

1.4.2 Authority to Mitigate

CEQA establishes a duty for public agencies to avoid or minimize environmental damage where feasible. Under CEQA Guidelines § 15041, a Lead Agency for a project has authority to require feasible changes in any or all activities involved in the project in order to substantially lessen or avoid significant effects on the environment, consistent with applicable constitutional requirements such as the “nexus”2 and “rough proportionality”3 standards.

CEQA allows a Lead Agency to approve a project even though the project would cause a significant effect on the environment if the agency makes a fully informed and publicly disclosed decision that there is no feasible way to lessen or avoid the significant effect. In such cases, the Lead Agency must specifically identify expected benefits and other overriding considerations from the project that outweigh the policy of reducing or avoiding significant environmental impacts of the project.

1.5 Purpose of Initial Study

The CEQA process begins with a public agency making a determination as to whether the project is subject to CEQA at all. If the project is exempt, the process does not need to proceed any further. If the project is not exempt, the Lead Agency takes the second step and conducts an Initial Study to determine whether the project may have a significant effect on the environment.

The purposes of an Initial Study as listed in § 15063(c) of the CEQA Guidelines are to:

• Provide the Lead Agency with information necessary to decide if an Environmental Impact Report (EIR), Negative Declaration (ND), or Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) should be prepared. • Enable a Lead Agency to modify a project to mitigate adverse impacts before an EIR is prepared, thereby enabling the project to qualify for a ND or MND. • Assist in the preparation of an EIR, if required, by focusing the EIR on adverse effects determined to be significant, identifying the adverse effects determined not to be significant, explaining the reasons for determining that potentially significant adverse effects would not be significant, and identifying whether a program EIR, or other process, can be used to analyze adverse environmental effects of the project. • Facilitate an environmental assessment early during project design.

2 A nexus (i.e., connection) must be established between the mitigation measure and a legitimate governmental interest. 3 The mitigation measure must be “roughly proportional” to the impacts of the project.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 1-2 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 1.0 - INTRODUCTION ❖

• Provide documentation in the ND or MND that a project would not have a significant effect on the environment. • Eliminate unnecessary EIRs. • Determine if a previously prepared EIR could be used for the project.

In cases where no potentially significant impacts are identified, the Lead Agency may issue a ND, and no mitigation measures would be needed. Where potentially significant impacts are identified, the Lead Agency may determine that mitigation measures would adequately reduce these impacts to less than significant levels. The Lead Agency would then prepare a MND for the proposed project. If the Lead Agency determines that individual or cumulative effects of the proposed project would cause a significant adverse environmental effect that cannot be mitigated to less than significant levels, then the Lead Agency would require an EIR to further analyze these impacts.

1.6 Other Agencies

Other public agencies are provided the opportunity to review and comment on the IS/MND. Each of these agencies is described briefly below.

• A Responsible Agency (14 CCR § 15381) is a public agency, other than the Lead Agency, that has discretionary approval power over the project, such as permit issuance or plan approval authority. • A Trustee Agency4 (14 CCR § 15386) is a state agency having jurisdiction by law over natural resources affected by a project that are held in trust for the people of the State of California. • Agencies with Jurisdiction by Law (14 CCR § 15366) are any public agencies who have authority (1) to grant a permit or other entitlement for use; (2) to provide funding for the project in question; or (3) to exercise authority over resources which may be affected by the project. Furthermore, a city or county will have jurisdiction by law with respect to a project when the city or county having primary jurisdiction over the area involved is: (1) the site of the project; (2) the area which the major environmental effects will occur; and/or (3) the area in which reside those citizens most directly concerned by any such environmental effects.

1.7 Organization of Initial Study

This IS/MND is organized to satisfy CEQA Guidelines § 15063(d), and includes the following sections:

• Section 1.0- Introduction, which identifies the purpose and scope of the IS/MND. • Section 2.0 - Environmental Setting, which describes location, existing site conditions, land uses, zoning designations, topography, and vegetation associated with the project site and surrounding. • Section 3.0 - Project Description, which provides an overview of the project objectives, a description of the proposed development, project phasing during construction, and discretionary actions for the approval of the project.

4 The four Trustee Agencies in California listed in CEQA Guidelines § 15386 are California Department of Fish and Wildlife, State Lands Commission, State Department of Parks and Recreation, and University of California.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 1-3 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 1.0 - INTRODUCTION ❖

• Section 4.0 - Environmental Checklist, which presents checklist responses for each resource topic to identify and assess impacts associated with the proposed project, and proposes mitigation measures, where needed, to render potential environmental impacts less than significant, where feasible. • Section 5.0 - References, which includes a list of documents cited in the IS/MND. • Section 6.0 - List of Preparers, which identifies the primary authors and technical experts that prepared the IS/MND.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 1-4 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 2.0 - ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING ❖

2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING

2.1 Project Site

The West Covina 7 Unit Subdivision project site occupies 0.623 acres located directly north of Interstate 10 (I-10) in the City of West Covina (City), 18 miles east of downtown Los Angeles (see Figure 2.1-1 and Figure 2.1-2). The primary arterial roadways that connect the project site to the major street network in the City are W. Pacific Avenue, W. Pacific Lane, and Orange Avenue (see Figure 2.1-3). Direct access to the project site is via W. Pacific Lane.

2.2 Land Use and Zoning

The project site and areas to the east and south are zoned Medium Density Multiple-Family Residential-20 (MF-20). The area to the north is zoned Single-Family Residential (R-1) and the area to the west is zoned Neighborhood Commercial (N-C). The City of West Covina General Plan land use designations and zoning in the vicinity of the project site are listed in Table 2.2-1, and shown in Figures 2.2-1 and 2.2-2, respectively.

Table 2.2-1 SUMMARY OF LAND USES AND ZONING

Existing General Plan Area Zoning Existing Use Land Use West Covina 7 Unit Multiple-Family Neighborhood Medium Single family home Subdivision Residential-20 (MF-20) R-1 Residential Single North Neighborhood Low Single family homes Family • Multi-family homes East Neighborhood Medium MF-20 Residential • Single family home • MoneyGram N-C Neighborhood • Alfredo’s Mexican West Commercial Commercial Food • Eddie’s Barber Shop South Neighborhood Medium MF-20 Residential • Multi-family homes

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 2-1 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 2.0 - ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING ❖

Figure 2.1-1 REGIONAL LOCATION

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 2-2 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 2.0 - ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING ❖

Figure 2.1-2 PROJECT VICINITY

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 2-3 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 2.0 - ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING ❖

Figure 2.1-3 PROJECT LOCATION

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 2-4 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 2.0 - ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING ❖

Figure 2.2-1 EXISTING GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATIONS

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 2-5 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 2.0 - ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING ❖

Figure 2.2-2 ZONING

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 2-6 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 2.0 - ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING ❖

2.3 Site Conditions

The project site (1920 W. Pacific Lane) includes an existing single-family home on 0.623 acres. The building encompasses 944 sq. ft. and its primary entrance is located along the northern portion of the project site on W. Pacific Lane. Photographs of major features on and proximate to the site are provided below in Figure 2.3-1. Figure 2.3-1 PHOTOS OF PROJECT SITE

Photo 1: View of existing single-family home on Photo 2: View of the empty lot on the east side of the northern parcel. the single-family home.

Photo 3: View of the vacant southern parcel, Photo 4: View of the dividing wall between the facing northwest. project site and the commercial land use to the west.

Photo 5: View of the project site from the Photo 6: View of West Pacific Avenue from the southern parcel, facing north. southern parcel, facing southeast.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 2-7 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 2.0 - ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING ❖

2.4 Geology and Soils

The geology in the San Gabriel Valley is dominated by unconsolidated to semi-consolidated alluvium deposited by streams flowing out of the San Gabriel Mountains. These deposits include Pleistocene and Holocene (10,000 years ago to the present) alluvium and the lower Pleistocene San Pedro Formation. The Upper Pleistocene alluvium deposits form alluvial fans along the San Gabriel Mountains. The San Pedro Formation is characterized by its interbedded marine sand, gravel, and silt (CDWR 1966)5.

2.5 Hydrology

The site is underlain by the San Gabriel Basin. The watershed coincides with a portion of the upper San Gabriel watershed, and the aquifer underlies most of the San Gabriel valley. The basin is bounded by the San Gabriel Mountains to the north, San Jose Hills to the east, Puente Hills to the south, and a series of hills and the Raymond Fault to the west. The watershed is drained by the San Gabriel River and Rio Hondo channel, a tributary of the Los Angeles River.6

Principal water bearing formations of the basin are unconsolidated and semi-consolidated sediments which range in size from coarse gravel to fine grained sands. The major sources of natural recharge are infiltration of rainfall on the valley floor and percolation of runoff from adjacent mountains. The basin also receives imported water and return flow from recharge basins.7

2.6 Biology

The project site is located in an urban setting that has a low biological resource value. Existing vegetation within the project site is ornamental in nature and is largely confined to perimeter plantings. Several ornamental trees, shrubs, and other landscaping are present primarily near the existing single-family home in the northern parcel. Existing trees located onsite include lemon (Citrus limon) and Brazilian pepper (Schinus terebinthifolius).

5 California Department of Water Resources (CDWR). 1966. California’s Groundwater - Bulletin 118. 6 Main San Gabriel Basin Watermaster. Website http://www.watermaster.org/basin-map Accessed September 26, 2017. 7 Ibid.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 2-8 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 3.0 - PROJECT DESCRIPTION ❖

3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

3.1 Project Background

The City of West Covina (City/Lead Agency) is processing a request to implement a series of discretionary actions that would ultimately allow for the development of a seven-unit, multi-family residential project at 1920 West Pacific Lane, West Covina, California (APN 8459-026-002 and APN 8459-026-003). The project site is approximately 0.62 acre and is currently occupied by a single-family residential building.

The project application is for a tentative tract map, precise plan, and variance to allow the development of a seven-unit residential subdivision. The existing single-family residence located on the project site would be demolished as part of the project. The project site is adjacent to other single-family and multi-family residential units, located to the north, east, and southwest of the site. Additionally, commercial developments are located to the west of the project site and the Interstate 10 (I-10) Freeway is located south of the project site.

The General Plan land use designation for the site is Neighborhood Medium, which allows for a density of 9 to 20 dwelling units per acre. The site is zoned Multi-Family Residential-20 (MF-20), allowing for up to 20 dwelling units per acre.

The proposed project would include two buildings on two separate lots:

• Building A: 4 attached townhomes, and • Building B: 3 attached townhomes.

The proposed new development would include variances from the zoning standards for minimum lot size, minimum lot width, minimum setback requirements, and landscaping requirements.

3.2 Project Overview

The proposed project would consist of: (1) demolition and removal of existing onsite features; (2) utilities improvements; (3) construction of a residential subdivision with two two-story buildings comprising seven townhomes; and (4) landscaping. Table 3.2-1 summarizes the proposed demolition and new construction, Figure 3.2-1 depicts the proposed site plan and Figure 3.2-2 depicts the Tentative Tract Map for this project site.

Table 3.2-1 PROJECT SUMMARY.

Area No. of Stories (Square Feet) Demolition Single Family Residence 944 1 New Construction Building A (4 attached townhomes) 4,418 2 Building B (3 attached townhomes) 3,441 2 Source: Site Plan, Steve Eide Design Group, February 2016

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 3-1 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 3.0 - PROJECT DESCRIPTION ❖

Figure 3.2-1 SITE PLAN

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 3-2 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 3.0 - PROJECT DESCRIPTION ❖

Figure 3.2-2 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 3-3 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 3.0 - PROJECT DESCRIPTION ❖

3.2.1 Proposed Project Features

3.2.1.1 Demolition

The project would include demolition and removal of the existing single-family residence and removal of existing onsite features such as a mulberry tree and a chain-link fence along a portion of the eastern property line of the project site. Demolition is expected to start in March or April of 2018, and last for approximately one month. Demolition would include removal of the building and its concrete foundation, driveway, and landscaping. The building interior, including plumbing, wiring, fixtures, and other items would be inventoried and recycled prior to demolition. Debris that cannot be recycled would be removed from the project site and transported to an inert or Class III landfill for disposal.

3.2.1.2 New Construction

The proposed two-story townhomes would comprise a gross floor area of 7,859 square feet. The first floor of each unit would include a garage, an entry area, a kitchen, powder room, living space, and dining area. The ground floor also includes a home office area, a pantry, and a private yard. The second floor of each unit would contain two full bathrooms, three bedrooms, a laundry room, and spaces for storage. The proposed townhomes vary in height from 27 feet to 27 feet 8 inches.

Each of the townhomes has a private yard, which ranges in size from 310 square feet to 415 square feet for Building A, and from 330 square feet to 780 square feet for Building B. The project also proposes an on-site 2,464-square-foot recreational leisure area, and a covered picnic shelter with barbeque. The recreational leisure area would be a private park for the exclusive use of the project’s residents and their guests. However, this area is not gated. Table 3.2-2 summarizes the proposed outdoor spaces for the project site.

Table 3.2-2 SUMMARY OF OUTDOOR SPACE

Common Area Unit Number Private Yard Square Footage (square feet) 1 310 N/A 2 415 N/A 3 415 N/A 4 310 N/A 5 780 N/A 6 330 N/A 7 330 N/A TOTAL 2,890 2,464 Source: Steve Eide Design Group, 7 Unit Townhome Site Plan, February 15, 2016. N/A= Not Applicable

Buildings A and B are designed with a contemporary architectural style incorporating projections along the building exteriors and a varied roofline to create visual relief. As shown in Figure 3.2-3 and Figure 3.2-4, the buildings would have tile roofs, wood window trim, decorative gable end vents, wrought iron pot shelves, wooden shutters, exterior light fixtures and decorative house numbers. Additionally, Building A will have fabric awnings on the south and north portions of the building. Wood corbels are featured where the second story extends out, and a brick veneer with a

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 3-4 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 3.0 - PROJECT DESCRIPTION ❖ Figure 3.2-3 CONCEPTUAL ELEVATIONS FOR BUILDING A (North and South)

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 3-5 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 3.0 - PROJECT DESCRIPTION ❖ Figure 3.2-4 CONCEPTUAL ELEVATIONS FOR BUILDING B (North and South)

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 3-6 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 3.0 - PROJECT DESCRIPTION ❖ concrete cap is proposed on the south, north and east building elevations. Garage doors for the four units are proposed along the east elevation of Building A. Pedestrian entrances are proposed along the south, north, and east elevations. In addition, Building B will have wood outlookers and posts along the rear elevation. Garage doors for the three units will be located along the north elevation of Building B. Pedestrian entrances are will be located along the east and west building elevations.

The proposed project will be designed and constructed to comply with all applicable City of West Covina codes, including, but not limited to, the 2013 California Building Code, California Plumbing Code, California Mechanical Code, California Electrical Code, California Building Energy Efficiency Standards, and California Residential Codes.

3.2.1.3 Site Access, Circulation and Parking

Primary access would be via a driveway off West Pacific Lane. Secondary access for pedestrians and the fire department would be through an access gate off West Pacific Avenue. The proposed site plan (refer to Figure 3.2-1) provides 20 parking spaces, which include 14 garage spaces and 6 uncovered guest spaces. A trash bin and enclosure would be located in between two of the public parking spaces on site, adjacent to the eastern project boundary.

3.2.1.4 Landscaping

Existing plants and trees located onsite would be removed prior to construction activities. Construction would require the removal of ornamental plants and trees in the landscaped area near the existing single-family residence. The existing vegetation located south of the existing single-family residence would also be removed. New landscaping would be introduced and include native vegetation and drought resistant species that facilitate water conservation, require little maintenance, and provide desirable shade coverage for the site. Additionally, a 9-foot-2-inch walkway with landscaping that connects the parking lot to the recreational leisure area is proposed. The walkway is proposed east of unit 7 in Building B, between unit 7 and the eastern property line.

3.2.1.5 Exterior Lighting

Lighting for the proposed project would comply with the requirements of the City’s Municipal Code. Specifically, the project would be required to comply with City of West Covina Municipal Code Section 26-519, Lighting, which states that all lighting of building, landscaping, parking area, or similar features shall be hooded and directed to reflect away from adjoining land uses. In addition to exterior lighting for the parking lot, exterior light fixtures would be provided on the southern, north eastern, and western elevations of Building A and on the northern and southern elevations of Building B.

3.2.1.6 Perimeter Fencing and Exterior Walls

A six-foot-high concrete masonry unit (CMU) wall will be constructed along the entire western property line to separate the proposed project from the existing adjacent commercial strip mall. A

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 3-7 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 3.0 - PROJECT DESCRIPTION ❖ new six-foot-high wrought iron fence would be located along the southern portion of the project site, to separate the recreational leisure area from the eight feet of landscaping and trees between the recreational leisure area and the project’s property line. A pedestrian access gate with a Knox box8 is proposed within this wrought iron fence to provide emergency access to the project site. The existing six-foot high CMU wall located along a portion of the eastern property line would be retained in place and the existing chain link fence along a portion of the eastern property line would be removed and replaced with a new six-foot-high block wall.

A six-foot-high wrought iron fence would separate the private yards in Building B from the recreational leisure area. Finally, the private yards for each unit in Building A and Building B would be separated by a six-foot-high wood fence.

3.2.1.7 Utilities

Sanitary Sewer - The site is served by an existing sanitary sewer network. New connections to existing sewer lines located near the project site would be installed. These improvements would require trenching and exposing sewer lines for connections to existing mainlines and manholes. No offsite mainline sewer improvements are necessary to accommodate the project.

Domestic Water - Water is available onsite. There is an existing water service line located in the sidewalk between the project site and Pacific Avenue. New domestic water meters would be installed as required to meet the demands calculated by the plumber for the project and in compliance with the requirements of the City’s Public Works Department. A new fire sprinkler system would be provided in compliance with the requirements of the California Fire Code.

Dry Utilities - A new natural gas connection would be needed to serve the new mechanical system. Natural gas service would be provided to the project site by the Southern California Gas Company.

Stormwater - Stormwater runoff would be collected by downspouts, area drains, or catch basins and directed into the existing drainage system. The project drainage system would be designed and constructed to implement Low Impact Development (LID) Best Management Practices (BMPs) that are designed to retain (i.e., intercept, store, infiltrate, evaporate, and evapotranspire) onsite the volume of storm water runoff produced from a 24-hour, 85th percentile storm event.

3.3 Construction Activities and Phasing

For safety reasons, temporary barricades would be used to limit access to the construction area. Construction activities may include:

• Erect barricade for safety and security prior to demolition work activities, which are expected to last approximately one month; • Maintain safe access for construction workers throughout demolition and construction; • Identify areas affected by the demolition; • Site grading (during grading, soils are anticipated to be balanced on-site); and • New construction.

8 Knox box is the common name for the Knox® Rapid Access System, manufactured by the Knox Company, Phoenix, Arizona. https://www.knoxbox.com/. Accessed September 14, 2017.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 3-8 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 3.0 - PROJECT DESCRIPTION ❖

After site preparation is completed, infrastructure such as sewer and drainage lines would be installed and/or reconnected to existing facilities. The buildings’ foundation would be poured with concrete, and framing of the building would begin. The final stage of construction would involve interior furnishings, detail work, and completion of common areas and outside landscaping.

Construction staging would be limited to the project site; no off-site areas would be used. Project construction employees would park their vehicles on the project site, along the eastern project boundary. No lanes of traffic along West Pacific Lane or West Pacific Avenue would need to be closed during project construction.

3.3.1 Construction Stages

Construction is anticipated to begin in April 2018 and would require approximately one month for demolition and 12 to 14 months for construction. Building occupancy is scheduled for the third quarter of 2019. Construction would be accomplished in the following stages:

Stage 1: Demolition (Duration – April 2018 through May 2018)

Stage 2: Construction (Duration – May 2018 through July 2019)

The number of workers would vary throughout the construction phase of the project, with a maximum of 20 workers onsite at any given time.

The type of construction equipment utilized during construction would include: boom lifts; air compressors; ladders and scaffolding; backhoe; bobcat; and power tools.

3.4 Discretionary Actions

Approvals and entitlement requests associated with this development are described below.

3.4.1 Tentative Tract Map Approval

Currently the project site is comprised of two assessor’s parcels including APN 8459-026-002 and APN 8459-026-003. The California Subdivision Map Act (Map Act) governs the legal and physical requirements of subdividing real property and the process by which cities and counties may approve subdivisions in their jurisdictions. The Map Act requires subdivision developers to obtain the approval of the local government in order to subdivide property. A subdivision is the division or separation of ownership interests in real property. A standard subdivision results in entirely divided interests; i.e., the owner of the subdivided interest owns the entire interest (lot or parcel) exclusively with no common ownership of anything associated with it.9 Therefore, the project would require a tentative tract map approval for development of seven individually owned residential units (attached townhomes) on the site.

9 A Guide to Understanding Residential Subdivisions in California, 2004. Available online at: http://bre.ca.gov/files/pdf/ResidentialSubdivisionsGuide.pdf. Accessed on September 14, 2017.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 3-9 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 3.0 - PROJECT DESCRIPTION ❖

3.4.2 Precise Plan for a Multi-Family Development

The filing of a precise plan of design shall be required as part of an application for multiple-family zoning and as specified in Article VI, Division 2, of the City’s Zoning Code. The project is required to prepare a precise plan, which shall specify and include the following10:

• The location, size, height and type of all structures including signs, architectural lighting, walls and fences; • The location, size and dimensions of all yards and setbacks and all spaces between structures; • The plan of the proposed parking area for the development to which the parking is accessory. The plan shall be drawn to an engineering scale of sufficient size to clearly indicate the proposed development including location, size, shape, design, curb cuts, lighting, drainage, paving, parking stalls, landscaping, and other features and appurtenances of the proposed parking lot; • The location, dimensions and method of improvement of all property to be dedicated to the public or to public utilities; • Examples of proposed architectural treatment in the form of perspectives and elevations, lighting, and such other data as may be required by the planning commission or planning director in evaluating the proposed development shall be required and become an integral part of such a submittal; • In MF-zones, O-P, N-C, C-2, C-3, C-C, S-C, R-C, M, I-P, PAR, O-S and P-B zones, or for any use specifically permitted in said zones, or for any use for which a conditional use permit is required: The general location, area and type of landscaping; and • General nature of the proposed use.

3.4.3 Variance

The project would need variances for the following deviations from the City of West Covina zoning standards:

• Minimum lot size. The City’s zoning code requires a minimum lot size of one acre. The applicant is proposing a lot size of 27,129 square feet (0.62 acre); • Minimum lot width. The City’s zoning code requires a minimum lot width of 150 feet; the applicant is proposing a north lot width of 99.9 feet and a south lot width of 108 feet; • Minimum setback requirements. A 20-foot second story rear and side yard setback is required. The applicant is proposing an east side setback of 9 feet, 2 inches, and a west side setback of 9 feet, 6 inches for Building B; and • Landscaping requirements. The City’s zoning code requires a 6-foot minimum landscape buffer on property lines abutting single-family residential development. The applicant is proposing a 3-foot landscape buffer along the eastern property line.

3.4.4 Other Permits and Approvals

Following Lead Agency approval of the IS/MND (see Section 1.0), the following permits and approvals would be required prior to construction.

10 City of West Covina Municipal Code Section 26-227

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 3-10 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 3.0 - PROJECT DESCRIPTION ❖

Table 3.4-1 PERMITS AND APPROVALS

Agency Permit or Approval Building plan check and approval for use, occupancy group, floor area, type of construction, number of stories, and fire sprinklers. Plan checks are required for electrical, mechanical, City of West Covina Building Division and plumbing, fire sprinklers, smoke evacuation or fire alarm systems, and signs. Plan check for compliance with code and safety requirements, including earthquake and wind load stress determination. Building plan check and approval. Reviewed for compliance with the 2010 California Fire Code, 2010 California Building Code, California Health & Safety City of West Covina Fire Department Code and West Covina Municipal Code (WCMC). Plans for fire detection and alarm systems, and automatic sprinklers. Letter of authorization/consent for proposed Suburban Water Systems improvements to provide water supply connection to new subdivision. Letter of authorization/consent for proposed Southern California Gas Company improvements to provide natural gas connection to new subdivision.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 3-11 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018

❖ SECTION 4.0 - ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST ❖

Evaluation of Environmental Impacts

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

(2) All answers must take into account the whole action involved, including offsite as well as onsite, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts.

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

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

(5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. (See § 15063(c)(3)(D) of the CEQA Guidelines. In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following:

(i) Earlier Analyses Used. Identify and state where the earlier analysis is available for review.

(ii) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of, and adequately analyzed in, an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis.

(iii) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are “Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated,” describe the mitigation measures that were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project.

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

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4-2 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.0 - ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST ❖

attached and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion.

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

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

(9) The explanation of each issue should identify:

(a) The significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and

(b) The mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significant.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4-3 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.1 - AESTHETICS ❖

4.1 Aesthetics

Less than Potentially Significant Less than No Would the project: Significant Impact with Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a X scenic vista? b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, X outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site X

and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect X

day or nighttime views in the area? a) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?

Less Than Significant Impact

The City of West Covina is located in the San Gabriel Valley, with views of the San Gabriel Mountains to the north. The San Jose Hills are located along the City’s southeasterly boundary and provides a backdrop for development in the East Hills section of the City. The project site is located in the western part of the City which consists of highly developed commercial and residential properties. Portions of the San Gabriel Mountains and the San Jose Hills are visible from the project site. The project would have a less than significant impact related to views being blocked from the north towards the San Gabriel Mountains.

An existing apartment complex is located south of the project site, across Pacific Avenue, near the planned townhome complex. This complex has tall shrubbery that block views of the project site and mountains, looking northward, toward the San Gabriel Mountains. Therefore, development of the project site would not have a significant impact on view of the San Gabriel Mountains to the north. Additionally, pedestrian’s views of the San Gabriel Mountains, looking north, are currently partially blocked by the existing tree on the project site, as well as trees located north of the project site.

The City’s Municipal Code11 establishes regulations to protect scenic vistas from residential development. Development of single-family dwelling unit expansions, large homes, and residential/single-family homes is regulated to ensure that scenic vistas or views open to the public or surrounding properties are not disturbed, per §§ 22-296.1300, 26-685.2300, and 26.401.5 of the City’s Municipal Code.12 The City’s municipal code is also applicable to the proposed multi-family

11 City of West Covina Municipal Code Accessed at https://library.municode.com/ca/west_covina/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=MUCO_CH26ZO_ARTVIPRHENOF ECA_DIV10SIMIDWUNAREXMAUNSIEX_S26-296.1300FI, September 13, 2017 12 Page 55 of the City of West Covina 2016 General Plan Update and Downtown Plan and Code EIR.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.1-1 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.1 - AESTHETICS ❖ residential development. Thus, with mandatory compliance with the City’s Municipal code, development of the proposed project would not adversely affect a scenic vista. b) Would the project substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway?

No Impact

According to the California’s Scenic Highway Program13 administered by Caltrans, the project site is not located within or near an officially designated state scenic highway. Presently, West Covina has no officially designated scenic highways.14 Refer to Figure 4.1-1, and Figure 4.1-2, which show that there are no scenic highways in the City of West Covina. However, State Route (SR) 57 between SR-91 and SR-60, located approximately 2 miles east of the southeastern tip of the City, is identified as Eligible for State Scenic Highway designation.15 For these reasons, the proposed project would not substantially damage scenic resources or historic buildings within a state scenic highway and no impacts would occur. c) Would the project substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings?

Less than Significant Impact

Development of the proposed project has the potential for a significant impact if it resulted in substantial degradation of the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings. Degradation of visual character or quality is defined by substantial changes to the existing site appearance through construction of structures such that they are poorly designed or conflict with the site’s existing surroundings.

Construction of the proposed project would result in short-term impacts to the existing visual character and quality of the area. Construction activities would require the use of equipment and storage of materials within the project site. However, construction activities are temporary and would not result in any permanent visual impact.

Construction of two buildings would alter the existing visual character of the site. The project site is currently occupied by a one-story 944 square foot single-family residence and a vacant lot. Trees and ornamental vegetation are planted in the front and rear yards of the existing residence. The proposed two buildings with seven two-story townhomes would have a scale and bulk that is compatible with the visual character and quality of other land uses adjacent to and in the vicinity of the project site.

The City of West Covina General Plan identifies general goals and policies designed to promote a positive City image and maintain an aesthetically pleasing environment.16 To ensure that the proposed buildings would visually integrate into their surroundings, the project design incorporates architectural and landscape features that are compatible with the City’s development

13 http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/LandArch/16_livability/scenic_highways/ Accessed on September 1, 2017. 14 Page 51 of the City of West Covina 2016 General Plan Update and Downtown Plan Code EIR, available online at http://www.westcovina.org/home/showdocument?id=12212 accessed September 8, 2017. 15 Ibid. 16 Pages 43-58 of the City of West Covina General Plan, http://www.westcovina.org/home/showdocument?id=12214. Accessed September 8, 2017.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.1-2 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.1 - AESTHETICS ❖

Figure 4.1-1 LOS ANGELES COUNTY SCENIC HIGHWAYS

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.1-3 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.1 - AESTHETICS ❖

Figure 4.1-2 STATE SCENIC HIGHWAYS

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.1-4 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.1 - AESTHETICS ❖ standards. For example, the architectural detailing would provide visual interest while also avoiding large blank walls on all elevations.

Existing landscaping on site would be removed and new landscape areas with additional trees and plantings would be constructed around the proposed buildings. New landscaping would contribute to the aesthetic enhancement of the site.

The project would increase shade and shadows, both on and offsite, compared to existing conditions. Refer to Figure 4.1-3 below, which illustrates approximate shade and shadow from the project. The project site is oriented north to south, thus shadows produced in the morning from the sun rising in the east are anticipated to fall on the adjacent commercial center/strip mall located adjacent to the western project boundary (see shadows produced for June 21 and December 21 at 9:00 AM). However, these shadows would not be significant because of the commercial and non- sensitive nature of the land use.

Shadows produced in the evening from the setting sun in the west would fall on the adjacent multi- family development located adjacent to the eastern project boundary (see shadows produced for June 21 at 5:00 PM and December 21 at 3:00 PM). Based on the shadow model produced for the project, potential shade and shadow impacts are anticipated to be less than significant for the multi- family development to the east because during the summer the shadow from Building B would fall only on a portion of the multifamily building and on December 21 at 3:00 PM the shadow from Building B would only fall on a very small portion of the building.

Shadows produced for June 21 at 5:00 PM would fall along the property line and not on the adjacent single-family home to the east. Shadows produced for December 21 at 3:00 PM would fall on a portion of the adjacent single-family home to the east. However, given that for a majority of the year shadows from the proposed project would not fall on the single-family home, there would be a less than significant impact in this regard.

In conclusion, the proposed project would have a less than significant impact regarding shade and shadow on adjacent residential uses due to the limited amount of shade/shadow that would be cast and that the shade and shadow would be cast during only the times specified above, which is only a portion of the year.

With the proposed building designs and adherence to applicable municipal codes, the project would not substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings. Therefore, less than significant impacts are anticipated. d) Would the project create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?

Less Than Significant Impact

Excessive or inappropriately directed lighting can adversely impact nighttime views by reducing the ability to see the night sky and stars. Glare can be caused from unshielded or misdirected lighting sources. Reflective surfaces (i.e., polished metal) can also cause glare. Impacts associated with glare range from simple nuisance to potentially dangerous situations (i.e., if glare is directed into the eyes of motorists).

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.1-5 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.1 - AESTHETICS ❖ Figure 4.1-3 SHADOW MODEL

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.1-6 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.1 - AESTHETICS ❖

The project site is located within a heavily developed and urbanized setting. Presently, several sources of illumination are located in the vicinity of the project site, including but not limited to street lights, security lights, traffic signals, and vehicle headlights from vehicles traveling along Pacific Avenue, Pacific Lane, and from the parking lot of the adjacent commercial center to the west of the project site.

The proposed project would add security lighting and building interior lighting to the two-story townhomes. The project would be designed so that exterior lighting would be shielded and directed downward. Light spillover and glare would be controlled by requiring lighting to be shielded to prevent light from shining directly onto surrounding properties, per the requirements of the West Covina Municipal Code § 26-570, Lighting, and the Parking Lot Design and Lighting Standards Guidelines (Planning Commission Resolution No. 2513, Revision No. 8). Additionally, outdoor architectural building lighting would be subject to West Covina Municipal Code § 26-570 that requires all luminaries to be designed and placed to complement the development and reflect away from adjoining properties. Compliance with the Municipal Code standards and Planning Commission guidelines for lighting would ensure that lighting and glare impacts associated with the project are less than significant.

The proposed project is not anticipated to create significant glare because due to the nature of the project the glare produced from sunlight shining off of vehicles and building windows would be similar to glare already produced in the project vicinity. The project does not propose land uses or facilities that would produce significant amounts of glare. Therefore, a less than significant impact would occur from new sources of substantial light or glare that may affect day or nighttime views in the area.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.1-7 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.2 - AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES ❖

4.2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources

Less than Potentially Significant Less than No Would the project: Significant Impact with Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the X

Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act X

contract? c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code § 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by X Public Resources Codes § 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code § 51104(g))? d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest X

use? e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in X conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? a) Would the project convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use?

No Impact

The project site and surrounding land uses are designated by the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program17 (FMMP) as “Out of Survey Area.” The proposed project would be built within an urbanized area, and all construction activities and on-site improvements would occur within an existing developed site. Therefore, no farmland would be converted to non-agricultural use and no impacts would occur.

17 California Important Farmland Finder. http://maps.conservation.ca.gov/ciff/ciff.html/. Accessed on July 14, 2017.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.2-1 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.2 - AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES ❖ b) Would the project conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract?

No Impact

According to the 2016 State of California Williamson Act Contract Land Map,18 the project site is identified as “Non-Enrolled Land” and does not contain land enrolled in a Williamson Act contract. The project site is not located within an area zoned for agricultural use and is currently zoned as “Medium Density Multiple-Family Residential-20 (MF-20).” Therefore, no impact would occur. c) Would the project conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code § 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Codes § 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code § 51104(g))?

No Impact

The project site is located in a highly urbanized setting surrounded by residential and commercial uses. The site’s existing zoning of “MF-20 Residential” does not support the definitions provided by PRC § 42526 for timberland, PRC § 12220(g) for forestland, or Government Code § 51104(g) for timberland zoned for production. Therefore, no impacts related to the conversion of timberlands or forest land would occur. d) Would the project result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?

No Impact

The project site contains a residential building and has a zoning designation of MF-20 Residential.19 All construction activities and on-site improvements would occur within the project site. Implementation of the project would not result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use. Therefore, no impact would occur. e) Would the project involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?

No Impact

Implementation of the proposed project would not result in changes to the environment, due to its location or nature, which would result in the conversion of farmland to non-agricultural use or convert forest land to non-forest use because the project site is located within a highly urbanized setting that is surrounded by commercial establishments and residential uses. Therefore, no impact would occur.

18 Los Angeles County Williamson Act FY 2015/2016 ftp://ftp.consrv.ca.gov/pub/dlrp/wa/LA_15_16_WA.pdf/. Accessed on July 19, 2017. 19 See Section 4.2(c), of this Initial Study, the project site is not zoned for forest land or timberland uses.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.2-2 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.3 - AIR QUALITY ❖

4.3 Air Quality

Less than Potentially Significant Less than No Would the project: Significant Impact with Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air X

quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing X

or projected air quality violation? c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is nonattainment under an applicable X federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to X substantial pollutant concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a X substantial number of people?

The following is summarized from the Air Quality Technical Report (Appendix A) prepared by UltraSystems Environmental Inc.

4.3.1 Pollutants of Concern

Criteria pollutants are air pollutants for which acceptable levels of exposure can be determined and an ambient air quality standard has been established by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and/or the California Air Resources Board (ARB). The criteria air pollutants of concern are nitrogen dioxide (NO2), carbon monoxide (CO), particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5), sulfur dioxide (SO2), lead (Pb), and ozone (O3), and their precursors. Since the proposed project would not generate appreciable SO2 or Pb emissions,20 it is not necessary for the analysis to include those two pollutants. Table 4.3-1 shows the area designation status of the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB) for each criteria pollutant for both the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS). Presented below is a description of the air pollutants of concern and their known health effects.

20 Sulfur dioxide emissions will be about 0.01 pound per day during construction and about 0.006 pound per day during operations.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.3-1 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.3 - AIR QUALITY ❖

Table 4.3-1 FEDERAL AND STATE ATTAINMENT STATUS

Pollutants Federal Classification State Classification

Ozone (O3) Nonattainment (Extreme) Nonattainment

Particulate Matter (PM10) Attainment (Maintenance) Nonattainment

Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5) Nonattainment (Serious) Nonattainment Carbon Monoxide (CO) Attainment (Maintenance) Attainment

Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) Attainment (Maintenance) Nonattainment Sources: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, “8-Hour Ozone (2008) Designated Area State/Area/County Report.” Green Book. [https://www3.epa.gov/airquality/greenbook/hbcs.html#CA]. Data are current as of June 20, 2017. Accessed August 2017. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, “PM-10 (1987) Designated Area State/Area/County Report.” Green Book. [https://www3.epa.gov/airquality/greenbook/pbcs.html#CA]. Data are current as of June 20, 2017. Accessed August 2017. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, “PM-2.5 (2012) Designated Area State/Area/County Report.” Green Book. [https://www3.epa.gov/airquality/greenbook/kbcs.html#CA]. Data are current as of June 20, 2017. Accessed August 2017. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, “Carbon Monoxide (1971) Designated Area State/Area/County Report.” Green Book. [https://www3.epa.gov/airquality/greenbook/cbcs.html#CA]. Data are current as of June 20, 2017. Accessed August 2017. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, “Nitrogen Dioxide (1971) Maintenance Area (Redesignated from Nonattainment) State/Area/County Report.” [https://www3.epa.gov/airquality/greenbook/nmcs.html]. Data are current as of June 20, 2017. Accessed August 2017. California Air Resources Board, “Area Designations Maps/State and National.” [www.arb.ca.gov/desig/adm/adm.htm]. Accessed July 2017.

Nitrogen oxides (NOX) serve as integral participants in the process of photochemical smog production, and are precursors for certain particulate compounds that are formed in the atmosphere. The two major forms of NOX are nitric oxide (NO) and nitrogen dioxide (NO2). NO is a colorless, odorless gas formed from atmospheric nitrogen and oxygen when combustion takes place under high temperature and/or high pressure. NO2 is a reddish-brown pungent gas formed by the combination of NO and oxygen. NO2 acts as an acute respiratory irritant and eye irritant, and increases susceptibility to respiratory pathogens. A third form of NOX, nitrous oxide (N2O), is a greenhouse gas (GHG).

Carbon monoxide (CO) is a colorless, odorless non-reactive pollutant produced by incomplete combustion of carbon substances (e.g., gasoline or diesel fuel). The primary adverse health effect associated with CO is its binding with hemoglobin in red blood cells, which decreases the ability of these cells to transport oxygen throughout the body. Prolonged exposure can cause headaches, drowsiness, or loss of equilibrium; high concentrations are lethal.

Particulate matter (PM) consists of finely divided solids or liquids, such as soot, dust, aerosols, fumes, and mists. Two forms of fine particulate matter are now regulated. Respirable particles, or PM10, include that portion of the particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter of 10 micrometers (i.e., 10 one-millionths of a meter or 0.0004 inch) or less. Fine particles, or PM2.5, have an aerodynamic diameter of 2.5 micrometers (i.e., 2.5 one-millionths of a meter or 0.0001 inch) or less. Particulate discharge into the atmosphere results primarily from industrial, agricultural, construction, and transportation activities. However, wind action on the arid landscape also contributes substantially to the local particulate loading. Fossil fuel combustion accounts for a significant portion of PM2.5. In addition, particulate matter forms in the atmosphere through reactions of NOx and other compounds (such as ammonia) to form inorganic nitrates and sulfates.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.3-2 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.3 - AIR QUALITY ❖

Both PM10 and PM2.5 may adversely affect the human respiratory system, especially in those people who are naturally sensitive or susceptible to breathing problems.

Reactive organic gases (ROG) are compounds comprised primarily of atoms of hydrogen and carbon that have high photochemical reactivity. The major source of ROG is the incomplete combustion of fossil fuels in internal combustion engines. Other sources of ROG include the evaporative emissions associated with the use of paints and solvents, the application of asphalt paving and the use of household consumer products. Some ROG species are listed toxic air contaminants, which have been shown to cause adverse health effects; however, most adverse effects on human health are not caused directly by ROG, but rather by reactions of ROG to form other criteria pollutants such as ozone. ROG are also transformed into organic aerosols in the atmosphere, contributing to higher levels of fine particulate matter and lower visibility. The term “ROG” is used by the CARB for air quality analysis and is defined the same as the federal term “volatile organic compound” (VOC).

Ozone (O3) is a secondary pollutant produced through a series of photochemical reactions involving ROG and NOx. O3 creation requires ROG and NOx to be available for approximately three hours in a stable atmosphere with strong sunlight. Because of the long reaction time, peak ozone concentrations frequently occur downwind of the sites where the precursor pollutants are emitted. Thus, O3 is considered a regional, rather than a local, pollutant. The health effects of O3 include eye and respiratory irritation, reduction of resistance to lung infection and possible aggravation of pulmonary conditions in persons with lung disease. O3 is also damaging to vegetation and untreated rubber.

4.3.2 Meteorology and Climate

Air quality is affected by both the rate and location of pollutant emissions and by meteorological conditions that influence movement and dispersal of pollutants. Atmospheric conditions such as wind speed, wind direction, and air temperature gradients, along with local topography, provide the link between air pollutant emissions and air quality.

The South Coast Air Basin (SCAB) is a coastal plain with connecting broad valleys and low hills, bounded by the Pacific Ocean to the southwest and high mountains around its remaining perimeter. The general region lies in the semi-permanent high-pressure zone of the eastern Pacific resulting in a mild climate tempered by cool sea breezes with light average wind speeds. The usually mild climatological pattern is interrupted occasionally by periods of extremely hot weather, winter storms, or Santa Ana winds.

The vertical dispersion of air pollutants in the SCAB is hampered by the presence of persistent temperature inversions. An upper layer of dry air that warms as it descends characterizes high-pressure systems, such as the semi-permanent high-pressure zone in which the SCAB is located. This upper layer restricts the mobility of cooler marine-influenced air near the ground surface and results in the formation of subsidence inversions. Such inversions restrict the vertical dispersion of air pollutants released into the marine layer and, together with strong sunlight, can produce worst-case conditions for the formation of photochemical smog.

The atmospheric pollution potential of an area is largely dependent on winds, atmospheric stability, solar radiation, and terrain. The combination of low wind speeds and low inversions produces the greatest concentration of air pollutants. On days without inversions, or on days of winds averaging over 15 miles per hour, smog potential is greatly reduced.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.3-3 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.3 - AIR QUALITY ❖

Climatological data were obtained from the Western Regional Climate Center’s Cooperative Climatological Data Summaries.21 The annual average high and low temperatures, as recorded at the Azusa City Park (4.8 miles northeast of the proposed project site at 34.13333N, -117.9E), are 77.8 and 47.7 degrees Fahrenheit (°F), respectively. Average winter (December, January, and February) high and low temperatures are approximately 66°F and 40°F and average summer (June, July, and August) high and low temperatures are approximately 90°F and 55°F.22 The annual average of total precipitation is 18.96 inches, which occurs mostly during the winter and relatively infrequently during the summer. Monthly precipitation averaged 10.75 inches during the winter (December, January, and February), 5.25 inches during the spring (March, April, and May), 2.79 inches during the fall (September, October, and November), and 0.17 inches during the summer (June, July, and August).23

Winds in the SCAB are generally light, tempered by afternoon sea breezes. Severe weather is uncommon in the Basin, but strong easterly winds known as the Santa Ana winds can reach 25 to 35 miles per hour below the passes and canyons. During the spring and summer months, air pollution is carried out of the region through mountain passes in wind currents or is lifted by the warm vertical currents produced by the heating of the mountain slopes. From the late summer through the winter months, because of the average lower wind speeds and temperatures in the proposed project area and its vicinity, air contaminants do not readily disperse, thus trapping air pollution in the area.

4.3.3 Local Air Quality

The South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) has divided the SCAB into source receptor areas (SRAs), based on similar meteorological and topographical features. The proposed project site is located just inside SCAQMD’s South San Gabriel Valley SRA (SRA 11). The nearest air quality monitoring station is the Azusa Station, located at 803 North Loren Avenue, Azusa, CA 91702, which is 4.49 miles northwest of the project site. This site records O3, NO2, PM10, and PM2.5. No station within a reasonable distance measures SO2, and all CO monitoring stations in the SCAB ceased operation in 2013. The ambient air quality data in the proposed project vicinity as recorded at the Azusa station for 2014 to 2016 and the applicable federal and state standards are shown in Table 4.3-2. Note that, given the complex way in which violation criteria are defined, an exceedance does not necessarily imply a violation of the federal or state ambient air quality standards.

21 http://www.wrcc.dri.edu/climatedata/climsum/. Accessed August 30, 2017. 22 Western Regional Climate Center. “Western U.S. Climate Historical Summaries.” Web site. Available at: https://wrcc.dri.edu/cgi-bin/cliMAIN.pl?ca0410. Visited August 30, 2017. 23 Period of Record General Climate Summary – Precipitation available at: https://wrcc.dri.edu/cgi- bin/cliMAIN.pl?ca0410. Visited August 31, 2017.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.3-4 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.3 - AIR QUALITY ❖

Table 4.3-2 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY MONITORING DATA

Air Year Standard/Exceedance Pollutant 2014 2015 2016 Year Coverage 95% 86% 99% Max. 1-hour Concentration (ppm) 0.123 0.122 0.146 Ozone Max. 8-hour Concentration (ppm) 0.092 0.096 0.106 (O3) # Days > Federal 8-hour Std. of 0.075 ppm* 11 27 39 # Days > California 1-hour Std. of 0.09 ppm 11 21 30 # Days > California 8-hour Std. of 0.07 ppm 20 28 40 Year Coverage 92% 89% 97% Nitrogen Max. 1-hour Concentration (ppb) 70.2 71.0 74.2 Dioxide Annual Average (ppb) 18 15 17 (NO2) # Days > California 1-hour Std. of 0.18 ppm 0 0 0 Year Coverage 100% 98% 99% Respirable Max. 24-hour Concentration (µg/m3) 96 101 74 Particulate Matter #Days > Fed. 24-hour Std. of 150 µg/m3 0 0 0 (PM10) #Days > California 24-hour Std. of 50 µg/m3 21 12 ND Annual Average (µg/m3) 44.1 37.1 33.7 Year Coverage 20% 99% 100% Fine Particulate Max. 24-hour Concentration (µg/m3) 32.4 70.3 32.1 Matter State Annual Average (µg/m3) ND 9.9 10.1 (PM2.5) #Days > Fed. 24-hour Std. of 35 µg/m3 0 2 0 Federal Annual Average (µg/m3) ND 9.8 10.1 Sources: https://www.arb.ca.gov/adam/topfour/topfour1.php. Accessed September 6, 2017. aND – There were insufficient (or no) data available to determine the value. * Years 2015 and 2016 were compared to the 2015 8-hour ozone standard of 0.070 ppm

4.3.4 Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP)

The SCAQMD is required to produce plans to show how air quality will be improved in the region. The California Clean Air Act (CCAA) requires that these plans be updated triennially to incorporate the most recent available technical information.24 A multilevel partnership of governmental agencies at the federal, state, regional, and local levels implements the programs contained in these plans. Agencies involved include the EPA, ARB, local governments, Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), and SCAQMD. The SCAQMD and the SCAG are responsible for formulating and implementing the AQMP for the SCAB. The SCAQMD updates its AQMP every three years.

The 2016 AQMP was adopted by the SCAQMD Board on March 3, 2017, and on March 10, 2017 was submitted to the ARB as part of the SIP.25 It focuses largely on reducing NOx emissions as a means of

24 CCAA of 1988. 25 Letter from Wayne Nastri, Executive Officer, South Coast Air Quality Management District, Diamond Bar, CA to Richard Corey, Executive Officer, California Air Resources Board, Sacramento, California re Submittal of 2016 Air

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.3-5 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.3 - AIR QUALITY ❖ attaining the 1979 1-hour ozone standard by 2022, the 1997 8-hour ozone standard by 2023, and the 2008 8-hour standard by 2031.26 The AQMP prescribes a variety of current and proposed new control measures, including a request to the EPA for increased regulation of mobile source emissions. The NOx control measures will also help the SCAB attain the 24-hour standard for PM2.5.

4.3.5 Sensitive Receptors

Some people, such as individuals with respiratory illnesses or impaired lung function because of other illnesses, persons over 65 years of age, and children under 14, are particularly sensitive to certain pollutants. Facilities and structures where these sensitive people live or spend considerable amounts of time are known as sensitive receptors. For the purposes of a CEQA analysis, the SCAQMD considers a sensitive receptor to be a receptor such as a residence, hospital, or convalescent facility where it is possible that an individual could remain for 24 hours. Commercial and industrial facilities are not included in the definition of sensitive receptor, because employees typically are present for shorter periods of time, such as eight hours. Therefore, applying a 24-hour standard for PM10 is appropriate not only because the averaging period for the state standard is 24 hours, but because the sensitive receptor would be present at the location for the full 24 hours.

The project site is zoned as Residential – 20 units per acre (MF-20), and its General Plan Land Use designation is Neighborhood Medium.27 The surrounding and adjacent properties are primarily zoned MF-20, Neighborhood Commercial (N-C) or Residential Single Family (R-1). The General Plan designations for the surrounding and adjacent properties to the west, east, and south are Neighborhood Medium and Commercial. To the north the designation is Neighborhood Low. The nearest sensitive receptors to the proposed project site, with the highest potential to be impacted by the proposed project, are displayed below in Figure 4.3-1 and listed in Table 4.3-3.

Table 4.3-3 SENSITIVE RECEPTORS NEAR PROJECT SITE

Distance from Sensitive Receiver Name Location Proposed Project (Meters)

129 Ocean Avenue 1 Apartment Building Adjacent West Covina, CA 91790

1914 West Pacific Lane 2 Private Residence Adjacent West Covina, CA 91790

209 North La Sena Avenue 3 Private Residence 22 West Covina, CA 91790

Quality Management Plan. http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/clean-air-plans/air-quality-management- plans/2016-air-quality-management-plan/final-2016-aqmp/sipsubmittal.pdf?sfvrsn=6. 26 Final 2016 Air Quality Management Plan. Executive Summary. South Coast Air Quality Management District, Diamond Bar, CA. http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/clean-air-plans/air-quality-management-plans/2016-air- quality-management-plan/final-2016-aqmp/executive-summary.pdf?sfvrsn=4. 27 See Section 2.0 Environmental Setting, Figure 2-3 and Figure 2-4 for General Plan land use designations and zoning in the project area.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.3-6 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.3 - AIR QUALITY ❖

Figure 4.3-1 SENSITIVE RECEPTORS

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.3-7 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.3 - AIR QUALITY ❖ a) Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan?

No Impact

The SCAQMD has an air quality management plan (AQMP) that proposes policies and measures to achieve federal and state standards for healthful air quality in the SCAB. The AQMP incorporates land use assumptions from local general plans and regional growth projections developed by the SCAG to estimate stationary and mobile air emissions associated with projected population and planned land uses. If the proposed land use is consistent with the local general plan, then the impact of the project is presumed to have been accounted for in the AQMP. This is because the land use and transportation control sections of the AQMP are based on the SCAG regional growth forecasts, which incorporated projections from local general plans. The proposed project is consistent with the allowable land use type, meets the main objectives of the land use plans and ordinances governing the project site and appropriately balances the requirements of the zoning code with and associated development limitations of the project site.

Another measurement tool in determining consistency with the AQMP is to determine whether a project would generate population and employment growth and, if so, whether that growth would exceed the growth rates forecasted in the AQMP and how the project would accommodate the expected increase in population or employment. The project does not propose significant residential development and would not directly induce substantial growth in West Covina. The project would not indirectly induce growth since no new public infrastructure is proposed or would be required. Therefore, the project would not directly or indirectly induce growth in West Covina and would not violate the assumptions of the AQMP. b) Would the project violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation?

Less than Significant Impact

As required by the Clean Air Act (CAA) and CCAA, NAAQS have been established for the criteria pollutants described above. The State of California has also established ambient air quality standards, known as the California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS). These standards are generally more stringent than the corresponding federal standards and include additional standards for sulfates, hydrogen sulfide, vinyl chloride, and visibility reducing particles.

Significance Thresholds

The SCAQMD has developed criteria for determining whether emissions from a project are regionally significant. They are useful for estimating whether a project is likely to result in a violation of the NAAQS and/or whether the project is in conformity with plans to achieve attainment.

SCAQMD’s significance thresholds for criteria pollutant emissions during construction activities and project operation are summarized in Table 4.3-3, SCAQMD Emissions Thresholds for Significant Regional Impacts. A project is considered to have a regional air quality impact if emissions from its construction and/or operational activities exceed the corresponding SCAQMD significance thresholds.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.3-8 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.3 - AIR QUALITY ❖

Table 4.3-4 SCAQMD EMISSIONS THRESHOLDS FOR SIGNIFICANT REGIONAL IMPACTS

Mass Daily Thresholds (Pounds/Day) Pollutant Construction Operation

Nitrogen Oxides (NOx) 100 55 Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) 75 55 Respirable Particulate Matter (PM10) 150 150 Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5) 55 55 Sulfur Oxides (SOx) 150 150 Carbon Monoxide (CO) 550 550 Lead 3 3 Source: “SCAQMD Air Quality Significance Thresholds.” 2011. Diamond Bar, CA: South Coast Air Quality Management District, http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/ceqa/handbook/scaqmd-air-quality- significance-thresholds.pdf?sfvrsn=2. March 2015. Accessed September 21, 2017.

Air Quality Methodology

Estimated regional air emissions from the project’s onsite and offsite project activities were calculated using the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod),28 Version 2016.3.1. CalEEMod is a planning tool for estimating emissions related to land use projects. The model incorporates EMFAC2014 emission factors to estimate on-road vehicle emissions; and emission factors and assumptions from the ARB’s OFFROAD2011 model to estimate off-road construction equipment emissions. Model-predicted project emissions are compared with applicable thresholds to assess regional air quality impacts. CalEEMod defaults, using default assumptions based upon surveys of various types of construction projects, were used, with the following exceptions:

• Concrete/industrial saws were deleted from the grading phase, and

• Graders were added to the grading phase.

Regional Short-Term Air Quality Effects

Project construction activities will generate short-term air quality impacts. Construction emissions can be distinguished as either onsite or offsite. Onsite air pollutant emissions consist principally of exhaust emissions from off-road heavy-duty construction equipment, as well as fugitive particulate matter from earth working and material handling operations. Offsite emissions result from workers commuting to and from the job site, as well as from trucks hauling materials to the site and construction debris for disposal.

As shown in Table 4.3-4, construction emissions would not exceed SCAQMD regional thresholds. Therefore, the project’s short-term regional air quality impacts would be less than significant.

28 California Emission Estimator Model (CalEEMod)®, Version 2016.3.1. California Air Pollution Control Officers Association. September 2016.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.3-9 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.3 - AIR QUALITY ❖

Table 4.3-5 PROJECT MAXIMUM DAILY REGIONAL CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS

Maximum Emissions (lbs/day) Construction Activity ROG NOx CO PM10 PM2.5

Maximum Emissions, (With Rule 403) 10.1 14.4 9.44 1.65 1.2 SCAQMD Significance Thresholds 75 100 550 150 55 Significant (Yes or No) No No No No No

Regional Long-Term Air Quality Effects

The primary source of operational emissions would be vehicle exhaust emissions generated from project-induced vehicle trips, known as “mobile source emissions.” Other emissions, identified as “energy source emissions,” would be generated from energy consumption for water, space heating, and cooking, while “area source emissions,” would be generated from structural maintenance and landscaping activities, and use of consumer products.

As seen in Table 4.3-5, for each criteria pollutant, operational emissions would be below the pollutant’s SCAQMD significance threshold. Therefore, operational criteria pollutant emissions would be less than significant.

Table 4.3-6 PROJECT MAXIMUM DAILY PROJECT OPERATIONAL EMISSIONS

Pollutant (lbs/day) Emission Source ROG NOX CO PM10 PM2.5

Area Source Emissions 0.20 0.12 063 0.01 0.01 Energy Source Emissions 0.00 0.04 0.02 0.00 0.00 Mobile Source Emissions 0.12 0.55 1.58 0.37 0.10 Total Operational Emissions 0.32 0.71 2.23 0.39 0.12 SCAQMD Significance Thresholds 55 55 550 150 55 Significant (Yes or No) No No No No No Source: Calculated by UltraSystems with CalEEMod (Version 2016.3.1).

The project has less than significant short-term and long-term regional impacts; therefore, the project would not violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.3-10 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.3 - AIR QUALITY ❖ c) Would the project result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)?

Less than Significant Impact

In general, cumulative regional impacts of construction and operation of all projects in the SCAB at any given time are accounted for in the AQMP. The only cumulative impacts with the potential for significance would be localized impacts during construction. The analysis below shows that localized impacts from the project would be less than significant.

As discussed below, the localized significance analysis was performed for the nearest sensitive receptors. For a cumulative impact to occur, another project would have to be built at the same time and the two projects would have to be close enough so that the sensitive receiver would be exposed to both. Since there are no other projects within 200 meters of this project, the cumulative localized input would be less than significant. d) Would the project expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?

Less than Significant Impact

Localized Short-Term Air Quality Effects

Construction of the proposed project would generate short-term and intermittent emissions. Following SCAQMD guidance (Chico and Koizumi 2003), only onsite construction emissions were considered in the localized significance analysis. The activity with the largest emissions of each of the pollutants analyzed would be demolition. It was assumed that, as a worst case, the maximum daily disturbance would be the footprint of the building to be demolished, which is 944 square feet (0.022 acre). Localized significance thresholds were obtained from tables in Appendix C of the SCAQMD’s Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology.29 Table 4.3-7 shows the results of the localized significance analysis for the proposed project. For the unmitigated case, emissions of no criteria pollutant would exceed their threshold for significance. Therefore, localized air pollution impacts are less than significant without mitigation.

29 Chico, T. and Koizumi, J. Op. Cit.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.3-11 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.3 - AIR QUALITY ❖

Table 4.3-7 RESULTS OF LOCALIZED SIGNIFICANCE ANALYSIS

Maximum On-Site Emissions (lbs/day) Nearest Sensitive Receptor NOx CO PM10 PM2.5

Apartment Building and Residence 14.4 8.9 1.54 1.195

SCAQMD LST for 1 acre @ 25 meters 83 673 5 4

Significant (Yes or No) No No No No

Sources: Emissions calculated by UltraSystems with CalEEMod (Version 2016.3.1). Chico, T. and Koizumi, J. Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology. South Coast Air Quality Management District, Diamond Bar, California. June 2003. a Thresholds are for source-receptor area 11 (South San Gabriel Valley)

Although sensitive receptors would be exposed to diesel exhaust from construction equipment, which has been associated with lung cancer (OEHHA 1998), the duration of exposure would not be sufficient to result in a significant cancer risk. Carcinogenic health risk assessments are based upon an assumption of 70 years of continuous exposure, while the exposure in the present case would be for about 167 working days. Therefore, no cancer health risk assessment was necessary. Acute non- cancer risk assessments are based upon one-hour maximum exposures, but acute reference exposure levels (RELs) for diesel exhaust and diesel particulate matter have not been established by the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment.30

Localized Operational Air Quality Effects

CalEEMod estimates that the operation of project will generate 46.13 trips per weekday, 50.12 trips on Saturdays, and 42.49 trips on Sundays. CalEEMod also estimates that 86 percent of the trips will be primary.31 11 percent will be diverted,32 and 3 percent will be pass-by.33 CalEEMod does not predict the number of cold starts, but even in the unlikely event that all of them were cold starts, the increase in the percentage of cold starts in the South San Gabriel Valley Source Receptor Area would be negligible. e) Would the project create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people?

Less than Significant Impact

Construction activities for the proposed project would generate airborne odors associated with the operation of construction vehicles (i.e., diesel exhaust), asphalt patching operations, and the

30 http://www.oehha.ca.gov/air/allrels.html. Accessed June 28, 2014. 31 Primary trips are those where the motorist only goal in getting the vehicle was to come to the development and then return to where they came from. 32 Diverted link trips are those that would have been on the roadway network anyway, but alter their path to visit the site. 33 Pass-by trips are those trips already on the roadways immediately adjacent to the site, but altering their path at the driveway to visit the site.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.3-12 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.3 - AIR QUALITY ❖ application of paints and coatings. These emissions would occur during daytime hours only, and would be isolated to the immediate vicinity of the construction site and activity. Therefore, they would not affect a substantial number of people. In addition, construction-related odors would be temporary in nature. Therefore, construction-related odors would be less than significant. When project construction is completed, odors from the proposed project would be similar to those of nearby residential land uses (i.e., vehicle exhaust, trash, et cetera) and as such would not be of a nature that would impact a substantial number of people. Thus, impacts regarding odors from project operation would be less than significant.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.3-13 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.4 - BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ❖

4.4 Biological Resources

Less than Potentially Significant Less than Would the project: Significant with Significant No Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or X regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional X plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal X pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native X resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, X such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other X approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan?

4.4.1 Methodology

Relevant literature, maps, databases, agency web sites, Geographic Information System (GIS) data, and aerial imagery were obtained from public domain sources to: (1) assess habitats, special-status plant and wildlife species, jurisdictional waters, critical habitats, and wildlife corridors that may potentially occur in and near the project site, and (2) identify local or regional plans, policies, and regulations that may apply to the project.

Plant and wildlife species protected by federal agencies, state agencies, and nonprofit resource organizations, such as the California Native Plant Society (CNPS), are collectively referred to as

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.4-1 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.4 - BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ❖

“special-status species”.34 Some of these plant and wildlife species are afforded special legal or management protection because they are limited in population size, and typically have a limited geographic range and/or habitat. The following data sources were accessed:

• United States Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5-Minute Topographic Map Baldwin Park Quadrangle35 and current aerial imagery.36

• Web Soil Survey provided by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS).37

• California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) provided by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW).38

• Information, Planning and Conservation (IPaC) provided by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS).39

• Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants of California, 8th Edition, provided by the CNPS.40

• National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) provided by the USFWS.41

• National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) provided by the USGS.42

• Critical Habitat Portal provided by the USFWS.43

Following literature and data review, UltraSystems biologist, Ms. Sloane Seferyn, conducted a reconnaissance-level field survey on August 23, 2017 in and near the project site to: (1) assess the potential for sensitive habitats and presence of special-status plant and wildlife species; (2) identify plant communities, jurisdictional waters, and potential wildlife corridors; and (3) identify potential impacts to these biological resources.

Field Survey Methods

The following biological surveys were conducted by UltraSystems’ biologist during the 2017 field survey:

• Habitat assessment and plant community mapping; • General plant survey; • General wildlife survey; and

34 Avian species protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) are not considered “special-status species.” 35 http://atlas.ca.gov/imagerySearch.html. Accessed on August 18, 2017. 36 Google Earth©. Accessed on August 18, 2017. 37 USDA NRCS Web Soil Survey: http://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/WebSoilSurvey.aspx. Accessed on August 18, 2017. 38 CDFW CNDDB: https://map.dfg.ca.gov/rarefind/view/RareFind.aspx. Accessed on July 19, 2017. 39 USFWS IPaC: http://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/. Accessed on August 18, 2017. 40 CNPS Topo Quad Search: http://cnps.site.aplus.net/cgi-bin/inv/inventory.cgi/BrowseAZ?name=quad. Accessed on August 18, 2017. 41 USFWS NWI: http://www.fws.gov/wetlands/Data/mapper.html. Accessed on July 13, 2017. 42 USGS NHD: http://nhd.usgs.gov/. Accessed on July 13, 2017. 43 USFWS Critical Habitat Portal: http://ecos.fws.gov/crithab/. Accessed on August 22, 2017.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.4-2 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.4 - BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ❖

• Wildlife movement assessment.

The purpose of the field work was to evaluate the initial results of the literature review and to collect additional data on existing site conditions. The general biological survey covered accessible areas of the Biological Survey Area (BSA), including areas that would be impacted by the project. The survey was conducted during the daytime on foot by walking slowly across each habitat type. The biologist used binoculars from strategic vantage points to survey areas of private property with no access rights.

The biologist used pertinent regional flora and fauna field guides, and topographic and aerial maps during the field surveys, to identify habitats and physical features, and to identify and record special-status species. In addition, the biologist used Global Positioning System (GPS) units and other GIS and survey-related techniques, hardware and software to collect locational data to record relevant attributes of features or species encountered. Digital color photographs were taken during the field surveys to record site conditions at the time of the field surveys. The methods for each type of biological surveys are described in the following sections.

Habitat Assessment and Plant Community Mapping

The biologist characterized the existing habitat and searched for the presence of sensitive plant communities. The purpose of the habitat assessment was to ascertain existing site conditions and identify habitat areas that could be suitable for special-status plant and wildlife species.

General Plant Surveys

The biologist surveyed the BSA for existing habitat, vegetation and presence of special-status plant species, and focused on those habitat areas that appeared to provide suitable habitat for special-status plant species. Plant species were then identified and recorded in field notes.

After the field surveys and mapping of the plant communities within the BSA was complete, an additional evaluation was conducted in the office for each special-status plant species in the plant inventory. The evaluation considered whether the BSA contained suitable habitats and soils to support those special-status plant species listed in the plant inventory. A species was determined to have “no potential to occur” within the BSA if the existing habitats and/or soils in the BSA were clearly absent or unsuitable to support the species. For example, plant species that are only found within desert sand dunes or coastal bluff scrub would be determined to have no potential to occur because those habitats are clearly absent from the BSA. Those special-status plant species determined to have no potential to occur within the BSA, and therefore, not affected by the project, were eliminated from further evaluation and are not discussed further in this report.

4.4.2 Plants

This section describes the plants detected during the field surveys and the special-status plants that could have a potential to occur within the BSA, as identified by the literature review and field surveys.

Plant Species Recorded During the Field Surveys

Approximately eleven plant species from eleven plant families were observed within the BSA. No listed or sensitive plants were observed during the general biological survey. The literature review

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.4-3 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.4 - BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ❖ and field survey concluded that all the plant species in the plant inventory have no more than a low potential to exist within the BSA due to a lack of suitable habitats, soils, elevation range, distribution, and/or other factors to support them. A list of plant species recorded within the BSA during the field survey is provided in Appendix A, Plant and Wildlife Species Recorded during the Field Survey.

Listed Endangered, Threatened, and Candidate Plants

No listed plant species were observed within the BSA during the field surveys. In addition, the literature review and field survey concluded that all the listed species in the plant inventory do not have more than a low potential to exist within the BSA due to a lack of suitable biological and physical features that are adequately needed to support them. These species include:

• Braunton’s milk-vetch (Astragalus brauntonii); • Nevin’s barberry (Berberis nevinii); • thread-leaved brodiaea (Brodiaea filifolia); and • slender-horned spineflower (Dodecahema leptoceras).

Sensitive Plant Species

No sensitive plant species were observed within the BSA during the field surveys. In addition, the literature review and field survey concluded that a majority of the sensitive species in the plant inventory do not have more than a low potential to exist within the BSA due to a lack of suitable biological and physical features that are needed to support them adequately. These species include:

• round-leaved filaree (California macrophylla); • southern tarplant (Centromadia parryi ssp. australis); • Plummer’s mariposa-lily (Calochortus plummerae); • intermediate mariposa-lily (Calochortus weedii var. intermedius); • lucky morning-glory (Calystegia felix); • Parry’s spineflower (Chorizanthe parryi var. parryi); • California saw-grass (Cladium californicum); • Peruvian dodder (Cuscuta obtusiflora var. glandulosa); • San Gabriel River dudleya (Dudleya cymosa ssp. crebrifolia); • San Gabriel Mountains dudleya (Dudleya densiflora); • many-stemmed dudleya (Dudleya multicaulis); • San Gabriel bedstraw (Galium grande); • California satintail (Imperata brevifolia); • mesa horkelia (Horkelia cuneate var. puberula); • Robinson’s pepper-grass (Lepidium virginicum var. robinsonii); • Brand’s star phacelia (Phacelia stellaris); • white rabbit-tobacco (Pseudognaphalium leucocophalum); • Parish’s gooseberry (Ribes divaricatum var. parishii); • Sonoran maiden fern (Thelypteris puberula var. sonorensis); • southern mountains skullcap (Scutellaria bolanderi ssp. austromontana); • chaparral ragwort (Senecio aphanactis); • Greata’s aster (Symphyotrichum greatae); and • San Bernardino aster (Symphyotrichum defoliatum).

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.4-4 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.4 - BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ❖

4.4.3 Wildlife

This section describes the wildlife observed and/or detected during the field surveys and the special-status wildlife that have a potential to occur within the BSA as determined by the literature review and field survey.

Wildlife Species Recorded During the Field Surveys

The BSA supports a limited assortment of wildlife and provides foraging, nesting, breeding, and cover habitats to amphibians, reptiles, birds (year-round residents, seasonal residents, migrants), and mammals. The number of individual birds and the diversity of bird species observed/detected within the BSA during the field survey were low. During the field survey nine bird species were recorded within the BSA. A list of wildlife species recorded within the BSA during the field survey is provided in Appendix A, Plant and Wildlife Species Recorded during the Field Survey.

Wildlife survey limitations include the following:

• The biological field surveys were conducted during the daytime to maximize the detection of most wildlife. Birds represent the largest component of the fauna observed because most birds are active in the daytime. In contrast, daytime surveys usually result in few observations of mammals, many of which may only be active at night. Many mammal species may also have been unnoticed due to their subterranean habitats; • Many species of amphibians, reptiles, mammals, and even some birds are secretive in their habits and are difficult for biologists to observe in a walking survey; • Many wildlife species are wide-ranging and/or they only occur on a seasonal basis; therefore, they may not have been present within the BSA at the time of the surveys; • Many species are nocturnal, move about a territory, may have become dormant for the season, or are less active during inclement weather. Many species of amphibians are dormant for most of the year and become active only during inclement weather (during and after storm events); and • Additional wildlife species that likely use the BSA were not observed or indirectly detected during the field surveys due to their scarcity or the need for special survey methods.

Vegetation communities form the basis of the wildlife habitats and provide the primary plant productivity upon which wildlife depends, along with nesting and denning sites, escape and movement cover, and protection from adverse weather. Some species are habitat specific for all their life history requirements, while many wildlife species move freely between plant communities to obtain all their life history needs. In general, more complex natural communities with more vegetation layers and more plant species provide higher value wildlife habitat than less complex vegetation communities. More complex communities have more niches for wildlife and usually support more animal species than less complex communities. Although simple communities may support few wildlife species, they may provide habitat for great numbers of those few species. The BSA lacks complex vegetation communities.

Listed Endangered, Threatened, and Candidate Wildlife

No listed wildlife species were observed within the BSA during the field surveys. The literature review and field surveys concluded that all the listed species in the wildlife inventory do not have

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.4-5 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.4 - BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ❖ more than a low potential to exist within the BSA due to a lack of suitable biological and physical features that are adequately needed to support them. These species include:

• western yellow-billed cuckoo (Coccyzus americanus occidentalis); • southwestern willow flycatcher (Empidonax traillii extimus); • least Bell’s vireo (Vireo bellii pusillus); • bank swallow (Riparia riparia); • Swainson’s hawk (Buteo swainsoni); • coastal California gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica californica); and • southern mountain yellow-legged frog (Rana muscosa).

Sensitive Wildlife

No sensitive wildlife species were observed within the BSA during the field surveys. The literature review and field surveys concluded that a majority of the sensitive species in the wildlife inventory do not have more than a low potential to exist within the BSA due to a lack of suitable biological and physical features that are needed to support them adequately. These species include:

• Cooper’s hawk (Accipiter cooperii); • southern California rufous-crowned sparrow (Aimophila ruficeps canescens); • grasshopper sparrow (Ammodramus savannarum); • pallid bat (Antrozous pallidus); • California glossy snake (Arizona elegans occidentalis); • coastal whiptail (Aspidoscelis tigris stejnegeri); • Santa Ana sucker (Catostomus santaanae); • Townsend’s big-eared bat (Corynorhinus townsendii); • merlin (Falco columbarius); • arroyo chub (Gila orcuttii); • yellow-breasted chat (Icteria virens); • western red bat (Lasiurus blossevillii); • western yellow bat (Lasiurus xanthinus); • San Diego black-tailed jackrabbit (Lepus californicus bennettii); • coast horned lizard (Phrynosoma blainvilii); • burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia); • western pong turtle (Emys marmorata); • western mastiff bat (Eumops perotis californicus); • big free-tailed bat (Nyctinomops macrotis); • pocketed free-tailed bat (Nyctinomops femorosaccus); • western spadefoot (Spea hammondii); • hoary bat (Lasiurus cinereus); • Santa Ana speckled dace (Rhinichthys osculus ssp. 3); • yellow warbler (Setophaga petechia); • Coast Range newt (Taricha torosa); • two-striped gartersnake (Thamnophis hammondii); • Crotch bumble bee (Bombus crotchii); and • American badger (Taxidea taxus).

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.4-6 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.4 - BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ❖

Management Plans

The BSA does not lie within any management plan areas or land designation areas. The nearest management plan or land designation area (Angeles National Forest) is located approximately 6.0 miles north of the project area.

USFWS Critical Habitats

The BSA is not located within designated or proposed critical habitat for listed plant or wildlife species. The nearest critical habitat (southwestern willow flycatcher) is located approximately 2.5 miles from the project site.44

Wildlife Corridors

The BSA does not serve as a wildlife corridor. The nearest wildlife corridor (natural landscape block) is located approximately 5.0 miles from the project site.45

Federal, State and Local Approvals, Permits, and Fees

This section describes the necessary federal, state, and local biological permits and/or approvals that would be required for project construction to occur. Compliance with the terms and conditions of the permits and regulatory programs would ensure that potential impacts on sensitive biological resources are less than significant.

Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)

A construction SWPPP would be developed as required by, and must be prepared in compliance with, all requirements of the CWA § 402 Construction General NPDES Permit. The SWPPP must identify potential pollutant sources associated with construction of the project, as well as pollutants likely to be discharged in stormwater and non-stormwater discharges during the construction phase; include a water quality monitoring, sampling and reporting plan; identify, and require implementation and maintenance of appropriate BMPs addressing site conditions, construction activities, and potential pollutants as they evolve during construction phases to reduce or eliminate pollutants associated with the construction site; and mandate soil stabilization BMPs and performance standards during and upon termination of construction activities. These measures would minimize erosion, sedimentation, and the discharge of other construction related pollutants during and following the project’s construction phase consistent with the regulatory requirements and performance standards set forth in the Construction General NPDES Permit.

Post-Construction Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP)

The post-construction WQMP must identify potential pollutant sources associated with use and occupation of the project, as well as pollutants likely to be discharged in stormwater and non-stormwater discharges during the post-development phase. The WQMP must include water quality monitoring and reporting measures and identify, and require implementation and long-term maintenance of appropriate BMPs addressing site conditions, on-site activities, and associated potential pollutants to reduce or eliminate pollutants associated with the construction

44 http://ecos.fws.gov/crithab/. Accessed August 22, 2017. 45 ftp://ftp.dfg.ca.gov/BDB/GIS/BIOS/Habitat_Connectivity/. Accessed August 22, 2017.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.4-7 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.4 - BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ❖ site. These measures would minimize erosion, sedimentation, and the discharge of other project related pollutants following construction and during use and occupancy of the project in compliance with the regulatory requirements and performance standards set forth in the MS4 Permit.

4.4.4 Discussion of Impacts a) 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?

Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated

The project site is located in a highly urbanized area, which provides low habitat value for special-status plant and wildlife species. The project site is not located within a State Park or National Forest. The project is also not located in any sensitive or significant resource areas, or critical habitats. Also, the project site contains structures, sidewalks, and a disturbed lot that would not support sensitive habitats or special-status species. No special-status plants or wildlife46 were observed within the project site. According to the literature review and reconnaissance-level survey, the project site includes structures, paving, and other impervious surfaces, and lacks suitable soils, biological resources and physical features to support special-status plant or wildlife species for the project site and 500-foot buffer area. For this reason, no direct or indirect impacts on special-status plant or wildlife species are anticipated as a result of project activities.

The project site supports ornamental vegetation and structures that could potentially provide cover and nesting habitat for bird species that have adapted to urban areas, such as rock pigeons (Columba livia) and mourning doves (Zenaida macroura). Mourning doves are protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and the California Fish and Game Code, which render it unlawful to take native breeding birds, and their nests, eggs, and young. Indirect impacts on breeding birds could occur from increased noise, vibration, and dust during construction, which could adversely affect the breeding behavior of some birds, and lead to the loss (take) of eggs and chicks, or nest abandonment. To be in compliance with the MBTA and the California Fish and Game Code, and to avoid or reduce direct and indirect impacts to migratory non-game breeding birds, and their nests, young, and eggs, to less than significant levels, the following measures would need to be implemented.

Mitigation Measures

BR-1: Construction During Breeding Season

• The breeding bird nesting season is typically from February 15 through September 15, but can vary slightly from year to year, usually depending on weather conditions. If construction cannot be avoided during the breeding season, a qualified biologist will conduct a pre-construction survey for breeding birds, and active and potential nesting sites within the limits of project disturbance up to seven days prior to mobilization, staging and other disturbances.

46 Special-status species include candidate and sensitive species.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.4-8 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.4 - BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ❖

• If no breeding birds or active nests are observed during the pre-construction survey, or if they are observed and will not be impacted, then project activities may begin and no further breeding bird monitoring will be required. • If an active bird nest is located during the pre-construction survey and could be impacted, a no-activity buffer zone will be delineated on maps and marked by flagging or other means up to 500 feet for special-status avian species and raptors, or 100 feet for non-special-status avian species. The biologist will determine the appropriate size of the buffer zone based on the type of activities planned near the nest and bird species because some bird species are more tolerant than others to noise and other disturbances. Buffer zones will not be disturbed until a qualified biologist determines that the nest is inactive, the young have fledged, the young are no longer being fed by the parents, the young have left the area, or the young will no longer be impacted by project activities. Periodic monitoring by a biologist will be performed to determine when nesting is complete. After the nesting cycle, project activities may begin within the buffer zone. • Birds or their active nests will not be disturbed, captured, handled or moved except as noted above. Inactive nests may be moved by a qualified biologist, if necessary, to avoid disturbance by project activities.

BR-2: General Plant and Wildlife Avoidance Measures

• To minimize construction-related mortalities of nocturnally active species such as mammals and snakes, work will be conducted during daylight hours to the extent practicable. Night-time work (and use of artificial lighting) will not be permitted unless specifically authorized by the City of West Covina. If required, night lighting will be shielded to protect species from direct night lighting. All unnecessary lights will be turned off at night to avoid attracting wildlife such as insects, migratory birds, and bats. • Wildlife encountered during the course of project activities will be allowed to freely leave the area unharmed. Wildlife will not be disturbed, captured, harassed, or handled. • Active nests will not be removed or disturbed. Nests may be removed or disturbed if determined inactive by a qualified biologist. • To avoid impacts on wildlife, the applicant will comply with litter and pollution laws and institute a litter control program throughout project construction. All contractors, subcontractors, and employees will adhere to this program. Trash and food items will be disposed of promptly in predator-proof containers with resealing lids. These covered trash receptacles will be placed at each designated work site and the contents will be properly disposed at least once a week. Trash removal will reduce the attractiveness of the area to opportunistic predators such as common ravens (Corvus corax), coyotes (Canis latrans), northern raccoons (Procyon lotor), and Virginia opossums (Didelphis virginiana).

BR-3: Construction Best Management Practices (BMPs)

• Project work crews will be directed to use best management practices (BMPs) to protect wildlife where applicable. These measures will be identified prior to construction and incorporated into the construction operations.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.4-9 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.4 - BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ❖ b) Would the project 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?

No Impact

Review of the USGS National Hydrography data set indicates there are no surface waters within approximately 0.5 mile of the project site.47 For this reason, no direct or indirect impacts to riparian habitat or other sensitive natural communities would occur as a result of project activities. c) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?

No Impact

Review of the national wetlands inventory indicates no wetlands are mapped on the project site.48 For this reason, no direct or indirect impacts to federally protected wetlands as defined by § 404 of the Clean Water Act through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means would occur as a result of project activities. d) Would the project interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native nursery sites?

No Impact

The project site and surrounding areas do not support resident or migratory fish species or wildlife nursery sites. According to the findings of the literature review and reconnaissance-level survey, no established resident or migratory wildlife corridors occur on the project site or in the surrounding areas. As a result, the project would not interfere substantially with or impede: (1) the movement of any resident or migratory fish or wildlife species, (2) established resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or (3) the use of native nursery sites. Therefore, there would be no impacts. e) Would the project conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?

No Impact

The proposed project site is located in a developed area, and as a result, there were not any native trees or shrubs protected by local policies or ordinances observed on the project site during the reconnaissance-level field survey. The project would not conflict with local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources and therefore would not result in any impacts.

47 ftp://nhdftp.usgs.gov/DataSets/Staged/States/FileGDB/HighResolution/. Accessed July 13, 2017. 48 http://www.fws.gov/wetlands/data/State-Downloads.html. Accessed July 13, 2017.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.4-10 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.4 - BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ❖ Figure 4.4-4 USFWS National Wetlands Inventory

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.4-11 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.4 - BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ❖ Figure 4.4-5 CDFW WILDLIFE CORRIDORS

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.4-12 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.4 - BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ❖ f) Would the project conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan?

No Impact

The project site is not located in a Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP), Natural Communities Conservation Plan (NCCP), or other approved HCP area. For this reason, the proposed project would not conflict with the provisions of an adopted HCP, NCCP, or other approved local, regional, or state HCP and therefore, no impacts would result.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.4-13 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.5 - CULTURAL RESOURCES ❖

4.5 Cultural Resources

Less than Potentially Significant Less than No Would the project: Significant Impact with Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource X as defined in § 15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological X resource pursuant to § 15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or X unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal X cemeteries?

4.5.1 Methodology

The following is a summary of the information contained in a cultural resource inventory conducted by UltraSystems in August 2017. A complete copy of this report is available for review in Appendix D of this Initial Study.

This cultural resources inventory included a background archaeological records check (archival research) at the South Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC), California State University, Fullerton; a Sacred Lands File search request to the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC); and the list of local Native American entities to contact from the NAHC and the City of West Covina’s AB 52 outreach. Finally, a pedestrian cultural resource survey of the entire project area was conducted. The cultural resource inventory discusses the results of all of these cultural resource studies including cultural resource management recommendations.

4.5.2 Impact Analysis a) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in § 15064.5?

No Impact

Based on the cultural resources records search conducted at the SCCIC, no prehistoric cultural resource sites or isolates, have been found to be recorded within the project area of potential effect (APE) boundary. Also, there are no known prehistoric cultural resource sites or isolates recorded within the 0.5-mile radius buffer zone of the APE of the Project boundary. The result of the pedestrian survey was negative for both prehistoric and historic sites and isolates on the Project site.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.5-1 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.5 - CULTURAL RESOURCES ❖

There is a single historic resource that has been recorded; a civic structure built 56 years ago (in 1961) within the 0.5-mile buffer zone but not within the APE; it is not listed as eligible for the National Register of Historic Places (Table 4.5-1).

Table 4.5-1 KNOWN CULTURAL RESOURCES WITHIN A 0.5-MILE RADIUS OF THE APE

Site Number Author(s) Date Title 1440 West Covina Parkway; W. Bonner and K. P-19-188850 2010 commercial (bank) building, Modern Crawford style, three stories, built 1961

While a single historic property was identified within the half-mile buffer zone, it is not within the APE and the results of the pedestrian assessment indicate it is very unlikely that historic properties will be adversely affected by construction of the project. Evaluation of significance under the CEQA uses criteria found in eligibility statements for the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR). Generally, a resource is to be considered historically significant if it meets the criteria for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources in the state historic preservation law [Public Resources Code § 5024.1; California Code of Regulations § 15064.5(a)(3)]. The existing structure does not meet this criterion, so demolition of the existing onsite single-family residence would not represent a significant impact. b) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5?

No Impact

The partially built environment of the project site and prior use as an orchard, suggests that the ground here has been disturbed for several feet below the surface. There is an existing single-family residence on the west half of the north lot which would have been graded for construction. The project site is bordered by paved streets to the north and south, with residential buildings to the east and north and a commercial lot to the west (See Figure 4.5-1). The result of the pedestrian survey was negative for both prehistoric and historic sites and isolates on the project site. According to records at the SCCIC, there have been four previous cultural resource surveys within the 0.5-mile radius project buffer but none within the project APE. As noted above, none of these surveys recorded prehistoric or historic cultural resources within the project boundary.

A Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) Sacred Lands File (SLF) search was conducted on and within a 0.5-mile buffer around the project site. The NAHC letter indicated that no records exist documenting the presence of sacred lands within this area. Six Native American tribes were contacted requesting a reply if they have knowledge of cultural resources in the area that they wished to share, and asking if they had any questions or concerns regarding the project. These tribes are:

• Gabrielino-Tongva Tribe; • Gabrielino/Tongva San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians; • Gabrielino/Tongva Nation; • Gabrielino Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation; • Gabrielino Tongva Indians of California Tribal Council; and

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.5-2 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.5 - CULTURAL RESOURCES ❖

• Gabrielino Band of Mission Indians.

None of the parties contacted were aware of tribal resources at the project site.

However, with presence of a single residence on just a portion of the project site, past use of the land being exclusively agricultural, and lack of grading relative to the street level, there appears to have been only moderate impact to subsurface soil. Furthermore, there are two creeks (Walnut to the south and Big Dalton to the north) trending westward that are north and south of the project site that would have provided a suitable environment for resources desired by the local Native American peoples. Therefore, the potential for subsurface cultural and/or historical deposits is considered to be moderate. Still, based on the results of the records search, tribal consultation, and the onsite field survey indicate it is unlikely that cultural resources would be adversely affected by construction of the project and no impact is anticipated due to the proposed project. c) Would the project directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?

No Impact

The partially built environment of the project site and prior use as an orchard suggests that ground here has been disturbed for several feet below the surface. There are no known paleontological resources, sites or unique geologic features located with West Covina. The project’s proposed grading activities are not anticipated to directly or indirectly destroy any resources. Therefore, no impact would occur. d) Would the project disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries?

Less than Significant Impact

As previously discussed in b), the project would be constructed on disturbed land, with an existing single-family residence on the west half of the north lot which would have been graded for construction. No human remains have been previously identified or recorded onsite. The project proposes new grading activities for the implementation of infrastructure that includes water, sewer, and drainage lines.

In the unlikely event that human remains are discovered during grading or construction activities, then the project would be subject to California Health and Safety Code § 7050.5, CEQA § 15064.5, and California Public Resources Code § 5097.98.

California Health and Safety Code § 7050.5 specifies the procedures to follow during the unlikely discovery of human remains. CEQA § 15064.5 describes determining the significance of impacts to archeological and historical resources. California Public Resources Code § 5097.98 stipulates the notification process during the discovery of Native American human remains, descendants, disposition of human remains, and associated grave goods. Therefore, with adherence to all applicable codes and regulations, impacts would be less than significant.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.5-3 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.5 - CULTURAL RESOURCES ❖

Figure 4.5-1 TOPOGRAPHIC MAP – BALDWIN PARK QUAD

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.5-4 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.6 - GEOLOGY AND SOILS ❖

4.6 Geology and Soils

Less than Potentially Significant Less than No Would the project: Significant Impact with Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated a) Expose people or structures to 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 X based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? X iii) Seismic-related ground failure, X including liquefaction? iv) Landslides? X b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the X loss of topsoil? c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and X potentially result in on or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1 B of the Uniform Building X Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal X systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? a) Would the project expose people or structures to 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.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.6-1 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.6 - GEOLOGY AND SOILS ❖

Less than Significant Impact

The project site is located in a highly seismic region of California within the influence of several fault systems. However, according to the California Department of Conservation,49 the project site is not located within the boundaries of a designated Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone50 (see Figure 4.6-1). For these reasons, impacts related to the rupture of known earthquake faults would be less than significant.

ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?

Less than Significant Impact

The proposed project is within a seismically active region, which could potentially cause collapse of structures, buckling of walls, and damage to foundations from strong seismic ground shaking. Figure 4.6-2 shows active faults in the project area. The project would be constructed in conformance with applicable local building codes and requirements under the California Building Standards Code (CBC)51 to reduce impacts from strong seismic ground shaking. With adherence to building codes, impacts resulting from strong seismic ground shaking would be reduced to a less than significant level.

iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction?

Less than Significant Impact

Liquefaction typically occurs when a saturated or partially saturated soil behaves like a liquid as a result of losses in strength and stiffness in response to an applied stress caused by earthquake shaking or other sudden change in stress conditions. According to the Department of Conservation Seismic Hazard Zone map, the project site is not located within an area where historic occurrence of liquefaction, or local geological, geotechnical and groundwater conditions indicate a potential for permanent ground displacements. Furthermore, based on the review of the Seismic Hazard Zone Report for the Baldwin Park Quadrangle, the project site is not located within a designated liquefaction hazards zone.52 See Figure 4.6-3. For these reasons, impacts related to seismic-related ground failure would be less than significant.

iv) Landslides?

No Impact

The project site is flat with no slopes located within the immediate and surrounding vicinity. The Seismic Hazard Evaluation Report for the Baldwin Park Quadrangle indicates that the project site does not lie within a designated Landslide Hazard Zone.53 For these reasons, no impacts to people or structures due to landslides are anticipated.

49 http://gmw.conservation.ca.gov/SHP/EZRIM/Maps/BALDWIN_PARK_EZRIM.pdf, Accessed on July 14, 2017. 50 Prior to January 1, 1994, Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones were known as "Special Studies Zones." 51 Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations. 52 Department of Conservation, Seismic Hazard Zone Report for the Baldwin Park 7.5-Minute Quadrangle, Los Angeles County, California, 1998. 53 Department of Conservation, Seismic Hazard Zone Report for the Baldwin Park 7.5-Minute Quadrangle, Los Angeles County, California, 1998.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.6-2 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.6 - GEOLOGY AND SOILS ❖

Figure 4.6-1 ALQUIST-PRIOLO FAULT ZONE MAP

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.6-3 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.6 - GEOLOGY AND SOILS ❖

Figure 4.6-2 REGIONALLY ACTIVE FAULTS

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.6-4 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.6 - GEOLOGY AND SOILS ❖

Figure 4.6-3 LIQUEFACTION MAP

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.6-5 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.6 - GEOLOGY AND SOILS ❖ b) Would the project result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?

Less Than Significant Impact

The project site has a low potential for soil erosion because it is relatively flat (refer to Figure 4.6-4, which shows the topography of the project site). Additionally, the proposed project must be designed to lessen, to the maximum extent practicable, the introduction of pollutants that may result in significant impacts, generated from site runoff to the storm water conveyance system as approved by the building official. Also, the project would adopt construction best management practices (BMPs) to avoid and minimize the transport of soil or contaminants offsite. For these reasons, the project would have less than significant impacts on soil erosion or loss of topsoil. c) 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?

Less than Significant Impact

Impacts related to liquefaction and landslides are discussed above in a). Lateral spreading is the downslope movement of surface sediment due to liquefaction in a subsurface layer. The downslope movement is due to gravity and earthquake shaking combined. Lateral spreading of the ground surface during a seismic activity usually occurs along the weak shear zones within a liquefiable soil layer and has been observed to generally take place toward a free face (i.e., retaining wall, slope, or channel) and to lesser extent on ground surfaces with a very gentle slope. Due to the absence of any channel within or near the project site, and the subsurface soil conditions that are not conducive to liquefaction, the potential for lateral spread occurring at the project site is considered unlikely. The potential for subsidence to occur is also minimal, since no ongoing oil or groundwater extraction is occurring in the area. As described in response to a) above, the project would be constructed in accordance with the California Building Code, which is designed to assure safe construction and includes building foundation requirements appropriate to site conditions. For these reasons, potential impacts to people or structures due to landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse would be less than significant.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.6-6 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.6 - GEOLOGY AND SOILS ❖

Figure 4.6-4 TOPOGRAPHIC MAP

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.6-7 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.6 - GEOLOGY AND SOILS ❖ d) Would the project be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1 B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property?

Less than Significant Impact

Expansive soils shrink and swell with changes in soil moisture. Soil moisture may change from landscape irrigation, rainfall, and utility leakage. Expansive soils are commonly very fine-grained with high to very high percentages of clay. The soils that underlie the proposed project site are expected to be Urban land-Palmview-Tujunga Complex.54 These soils are composed of discontinuous human-transported material over mixed alluvium derived from granite and do not contain clayey soils. The geotechnical study that will be prepared for the project will confirm the presence or absence of expansive soils. If expansive soils are present, the City would require the project site to comply with the applicable soil and foundation codes of the CBC that specify special foundation design for construction on soils that exceed certain expansion thresholds. With adherence to applicable building codes and implementation of design recommendations included in the geotechnical study, potential impacts would be less than significant. e) Would the project have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water?

No Impact

The proposed use will be required to connect to the existing sanitary sewer system to accommodate waste water. The proposed project would not include septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems. For this reason, no impact from septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems within the proposed project site would occur.

54 United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), Custom Soil Resource Report for Los Angeles County, Southeastern Part, California, July 15, 2017.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.6-8 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.7 - GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS ❖

4.7 Greenhouse Gas Emissions

Less than Potentially Significant Less than No Would the project: Significant Impact with Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may X have a significant impact on the environment? b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose X of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?

4.7.1 GHG Constituents

Greenhouse gases (GHG) are defined under the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB 32) as carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6). Associated with each GHG species is a “global warming potential” (GWP), which is defined as the ratio of degree of warming to the atmosphere that would result from the emission of one mass unit of a given GHG compared with one equivalent mass unit of CO2 over a given period of time. By this definition, the GWP of CO2 is always 1. The GWPs of methane and nitrous oxide are 25 and 298, respectively55. “Carbon dioxide equivalent” (CO2e) emissions are calculated by weighting each GHG compound’s emissions by its GWP and then summing the products.

Carbon dioxide (CO2) is a clear, colorless, and odorless gas. Fossil fuel combustion is the main human-related source of CO2 emissions; electricity generation and transportation are first and second in the amount of CO2 emissions, respectively. Carbon dioxide is the basis of GWP, and thus has a GWP of 1.

Methane (CH4) is a clear, colorless gas, and is the main component of natural gas. Anthropogenic sources of CH4 are leakage from natural gas systems and the raising of livestock. Natural processes in soil and chemical reactions in the atmosphere help remove CH4 from the atmosphere. Wetlands are responsible for most of the natural methane emissions.56 Pound for pound, the comparative impact of CH4 is more than 25 times greater than CO2 over a 100-year period.

Nitrous oxide (N2O) is a colorless, clear gas, with a slightly sweet odor. N2O has both natural and human-related sources, and is removed from the atmosphere mainly by photolysis or breakdown by sunlight, in the stratosphere. The main human-related sources of N2O in the United States are agricultural soil management (synthetic nitrogen fertilization), mobile and stationary combustion of fossil fuel, adipic acid production, and nitric acid production.57 Nitrous oxide molecules stay in

55 Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. 2007 56 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, “Methane Emissions.” Greenhouse Gas Emissions Web Site. Internet URL: https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases#methane. Accessed September 25, 2017. 57 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, “Nitrous Oxide.” Climate Change Web Site. Internet URL: https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases#nitrous-oxide. Updated June 22, 2010.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.7-1 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.7 - GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS ❖ the atmosphere for an average of 114 years before being removed by a sink or destroyed through chemical reactions. The impact of 1 pound of N2O on warming the atmosphere is 298 times that of 1 pound of CO2.58

4.7.2 Climate Action Plans

The City of West Covina does not have a climate action plan or other plan explicitly designed to reduce GHG emissions or the impacts thereof. Because energy use is one of the main drivers of GHG emissions, the project was evaluated against the City of West Covina Energy Action Plan (City of West Covina 2011). Indeed, reducing levels of CO2 emissions “will be the primary environmental focus” of the plan.59 The Energy Action Plan documents baseline (2004 and 2008) annual electrical energy use by City facilities and lists recent and ongoing (in 2011) projects to reduce energy consumption. The baseline does not include energy use from combustion of fossil fuels or any form of energy use by private parties or other governmental agencies. The Energy Action Plan contains the following current (as of 2011) energy policies and goals:60

• Surpass the energy efficiency standards of the California Building Code for proposed and existing municipal buildings and facilities. • Provide on-line (Internet accessible) guidance and assistance to homeowners and builders to make compliance with new Title 24 energy requirements as effective and efficient as possible. • Coordinate City efficiency goals and programs with the efficiency projects and incentive programs of higher jurisdictional agencies. Expand the City’s Residential Solar Power Permit-waiver Program to include other alternative energy applications, Consider fee adjustments or rebates to local businesses and residents in support of those efforts. • Modify the City’s lighting standards to encourage the application of “Dark Skies” goals (discourage excessive and spill-over lighting). • Develop an ordinance to encourage energy efficiency upgrades and improvements in existing buildings. Empower the real estate community and other stakeholders to participate in current financial incentives and energy-retrofit opportunities prior to sale. • Promote energy and water conservation design features in all major renovation and development projects. • Encourage pool covers and solar pool heating systems in place of conventional methods for heating residential swimming pools. • Encourage the efficient use of water and reduce urban runoff through the use of natural drainage, drought-tolerant landscaping, and efficient irrigation systems in major renovation and new development projects. Recommend the incorporation of these practices within the approval processes of other local and regional departments and jurisdictions. • Promote the coordination of landscapers and residential Solar Power contractors to minimize heat buildup at existing and new homes, through more effective shading design. • Continue the planned expansion of the City’s vehicle fleet with less polluting hybrid vehicles that are more energy efficient.

58 Ibid. 59 City of West Covina (2011), pp. 3-4. 60 Ibid., pp. 4-5.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.7-2 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.7 - GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS ❖

• Continue to replace the City’s existing diesel fuel burning rapid transit bus fleet with less polluting natural-gas fueled vehicles. • Explore and implement other energy conservation programs and measures that may prove beneficial to West Covina’s economy and environment.

The Energy Action Plan also contains a list of energy-efficiency and conservation policies that the City of West Covina “is considering.” Because these policies have generally not been adopted and/or pertain only to activities of the municipal government, they were not part of this analysis.

In addition, the City of West Covina is a Tree City USA61 Community, managed by the Arbor Day Foundation. To be a recognized Tree City USA Community, a city must have a tree board or department; a tree care ordinance; a community forestry program with an annual budget of at least $2 per capita; and an Arbor Day observance and proclamation.

4.7.3 Thresholds of Significance

SCAQMD Significance Threshold

SCAQMD’s guidance uses a tiered approach rather than a single numerical emissions threshold. If a project’s GHG emissions “fail” the non-significance of a given tier, then one goes to the next one.

The threshold selected for this analysis is Tier 3, which establishes a screening significance threshold level to determine significance using a 90% emission capture rate. For Tier 3, the SCAQMD estimated that at a threshold of approximately 3,000 metric tons (tones) CO2e per year emissions would capture 90% of the GHG emissions from new residential or commercial projects.62

The present analysis uses 3,000 tonnes of CO2e per year as the significance threshold under the first impact criterion above.

City of West Covina Energy Action Plan

The second criterion was interpreted to mean that a potentially significant impact would result if the project conflicted with relevant policies of the City of West Covina Energy Action Plan (City of West Covina 2011). a) Would the project generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?

Less than Significant Impact

Direct emission sources are those which produce onsite emissions through the combustion of fossil fuels. Typically, the two main direct emission sources will be use of internal combustion (IC) engines and space heating. Indirect GHG source emissions are those for which the project is responsible, but that occur offsite. For example, the solid waste that is distributed to landfills will

61 The Tree City USA program is a community improvement initiative of the Arbor Day Foundation in cooperation with the National Association of State Foresters and the USDA Forest Service. Internet URL: https://www.arborday.org/. 62 South Coast Air Quality Management District. Draft Guidance Document – Interim CEQA Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Significance Threshold. October 2008. Internet URL: http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default- source/ceqa/handbook/greenhouse-gases-(ghg)-ceqa-significance-thresholds/ghgattachmente.pdf?sfvrsn=2. Accessed September 25, 2017.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.7-3 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.7 - GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS ❖ decay and emit the GHGs CO2 and CH4. GHG are also emitted by combustion of fossil fuels to generate electricity used by the project. Production of the electricity used to convey water to the project and to treat wastewater generated by the project is also an indirect source.

Temporary construction and long term operational greenhouse gas emissions from the project’s onsite and offsite project activities were calculated using the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod), Version 2016.3.1. CalEEMod is a planning tool for estimating emissions related to land use projects. CalEEMod estimates emissions from construction and from area sources, energy sources, mobile sources, waste sources, and water sources. As discussed below, construction emissions are “amortized” over 30 years and added to the operational emissions for each year of 30 years of operation. Model-predicted annual project emissions are compared with applicable thresholds to assess regional air quality impacts. Operational emissions are estimated using CalEEMod and take into account area emissions, such as space heating, from land uses and from the vehicle trips associated with the land uses. Project construction emissions were estimated using the construction module of CalEEMod.

Table 4.7-1 gives a detailed breakdown of the results of the GHG emissions analysis for both direct and indirect related sources.

Table 4.7-1 UNMITIGATED ANNUAL GHG EMISSIONS, 2018 AND BEYOND (Emissions in tonnes)

Emission Source CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Constructiona 5.99 0.00170 0.0000 6.03 Area 1.80 0.00015 0.00003 1.812 Energy 17.86 0.00057 0.00023 17.94 Operations Mobile 72.01 0.00423 0.0000 72.12 Waste 0.65 0.0386 0.0000 1.62 Water 3.05 0.0150 0.00038 3.54 Totals 95.4 0.059 0.00064 103 Note: Proposed project is expected to be operational in 2019. a Amortized over 30 years per SCAQMD Interim CEQA GHG Significance Threshold.

Source: UltraSystems Environmental Inc. with CalEEMod (Version 2016.3.1).

Construction

The proposed project will include demolition and removal of a single-family residential building; utilities improvements; construction of a residential subdivision with two two-story buildings comprising seven townhomes; and landscaping. Each construction phase involves the use of a different mix of construction equipment and therefore has its own distinct GHG emissions characteristics. Construction emissions occur both onsite and offsite. Onsite air pollutant emissions consist principally of exhaust emissions from off-road heavy-duty construction equipment. Offsite emissions result from workers commuting to and from the job site, as well as from vendor vehicles and trucks hauling materials to the site and construction debris for disposal.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.7-4 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.7 - GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS ❖

CalEEMod estimated construction GHG emissions in 2018 and 2019 are, combined, 181 tonnes of CO2e. The 30-year amortized value is 6.0 tonnes per year. Therefore, under the first significance criterion, GHG emissions would be less than significant, and no mitigation is necessary.

Operation

Total annual unmitigated CO2e emissions from the project would be 103 tonnes per year. Energy production and mobile sources account for about 87% of these emissions. Therefore, under the first significance criterion, GHG emissions would be less than significant, and no mitigation is necessary. b) Would the project conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?

Less than Significant Impact

The project was evaluated against the six relevant current policies of the West Covina Energy Action Plan. The results of the evaluation are shown in Table 4.7-2.

Table 4.7-2 PROJECT COMPATIBILITY WITH WEST COVINA ENERGY ACTION PLAN

Current Policy Goals Evaluation Provide on-line (Internet accessible) guidance and assistance to homeowners and builders to make Compatible. This resource is available to the project compliance with new Title 24 energy requirements designers if needed. as effective and efficient as possible. Expand the City’s Residential Solar Power Permit- waiver Program to include other alternative energy Compatible. This resource is available to the project applications, Consider fee adjustments or rebates to designers if needed. local businesses and residents in support of those efforts. Modify the City’s lighting standards to encourage the Compatible. The project will comply the application of “Dark Skies” goals (discourage requirements of the City’s Municipal Code. excessive and spill-over lighting). Specifically, the project would be required to comply with City of West Covina Municipal Code Section 26- 519, Lighting, which states that all lighting of building, landscaping, parking area, or similar features shall be hooded and directed to reflect away from adjoining land uses.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.7-5 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.7 - GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS ❖

Current Policy Goals Evaluation Promote energy and water conservation design Compatible. New landscaping would be introduced features in all major renovation and development and include native vegetation and drought-resistant projects. species that facilitate water conservation, require little maintenance, and provide desirable shade coverage for the site.

Energy efficient features for the new building include dual-glazed windows, and insulation would be incorporated into building design to comply with the provisions of the California Green Building Code. Title 24, Part 11 of the California Code of Regulations requires new structures to incorporate a variety of mandatory features to promote green buildings such as means to improve energy efficiency, reduce water demand, promote recycling, and other measures. Encourage the efficient use of water and reduce Compatible. The project drainage system would be urban runoff through the use of natural drainage, designed and constructed to implement Low Impact drought-tolerant landscaping, and efficient irrigation Development (LID) Best Management Practices systems in major renovation and new development (BMPs) that are designed to retain (i.e., intercept, projects. store, infiltrate, evaporate, and evapotranspire) onsite the volume of storm water runoff produced from a 24-hour, 85th percentile storm event. Explore and implement other energy conservation Compatible. This resource is available to the project programs and measures that may prove beneficial to designers if needed. West Covina’s economy and environment.

The proposed project would be compatible with all the Energy Action Plan policies that are relevant. Therefore, GHG emissions from the project would be less than significant.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.7-6 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.8 - HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ❖

4.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials

Less than Potentially Significant Less than No Would the project: Significant Impact with Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the X routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and X accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within X one quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government X Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, X would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people X residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency X response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including X where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands?

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.8-1 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.8 - HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ❖ a) Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?

Less than Significant Impact

The proposed project proposes residential uses which would involve storage and use of small amounts of commercially available janitorial and landscaping supplies. The use of these materials would be stored, handled, and disposed of in accordance with applicable regulations. These uses would not involve the routine transport, use, or disposal of quantities of hazardous materials that may create a significant hazard to the public or environment. Thus, the project would have a less than significant impact. b) Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment?

Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation

The existing single-family residence on the project site was constructed in 1947.63 Thus, demolition of the building may require the removal of building material containing potentially hazardous substances including Asbestos Containing Material (ACM) and lead based paint (LBP). To ensure compliance with applicable regulatory requirements and the safe removal of ACMs and LBPs, mitigation measure HAZ-1 shall be implemented.

Demolition of the existing residence and construction of the new buildings would include the transport, storage, and use of additional chemical agents, solvents, paints, and other hazardous materials commonly associated with construction activities. Construction activities, including chemical transport, storage, and use, would comply with the relevant sections of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA); Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA); California Hazardous Waste Control Law64; and with requirements of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA); South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD); Los Angeles County Health Care Agency (LCHCA) and the City of West Covina Fire Department requirements.

Mitigation Measure

The following mitigation measure will be adopted to avoid and reduce potential impacts from asbestos-containing materials and lead based paint:

HAZ-1: Performance Abatement Specification

Prior to demolition of the existing on-site single-family home, the project applicant shall ensure that an Asbestos Containing Material (ACM) and lead based paint (LBP) materials survey shall be conducted to determine the presence of hazardous materials within the existing single-family home. A copy of the report shall be provided to the City of West Covina prior to issuance of a demolition permit. If ACMs or LBPs are detected, the applicant shall develop and submit to the City

63 https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/1920-W-Pacific-Ln-West-Covina-CA-91790/21560991_zpid/, Accessed September 28, 2017 64 Codified in California Health and Safety Code, Division 20, Chapter 6.5, Hazardous Waste Control.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.8-2 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.8 - HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ❖ a performance abatement specification for the removal of ACMs and/or LBPs including the utilization of proper work practices to avoid exposure. All measures outlined in the specification shall be implemented during demolition activities. c) Would the project emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?

Less than Significant Impact

There is a potential for release of hazardous emissions or handling of hazardous materials and substances during the short-term construction activities for the proposed development. However, because substantial federal, state and local regulations addressing the transport, use, storage and disposal of hazardous materials are in place, the potential for substantial effects to schools would be less than significant. Compliance with applicable hazardous materials regulations would reduce the likelihood of unsafe release of hazardous emissions to less than significant levels. d) Would the project be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code § 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment?

No Impact

Government Code § 65962.5 requires the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) to compile and update, at least annually, lists of the following:

• Hazardous waste and substances sites from the DTSC EnviroStor database.

• Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST) sites by county and fiscal year in the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) GeoTracker database.

• Solid waste disposal sites identified by SWRCB with waste constituents above hazardous waste levels outside waste management units.

• SWRCB Cease and Desist Orders (CDOs) and Cleanup and Abatement Orders (CAOs).65

• Hazardous waste facilities subject to corrective action pursuant to § 25187.5 of the Health and Safety Code, identified by DTSC.66

These lists are collectively referred to as the “Cortese List.”

The proposed project site is not listed on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5.67, 68 Therefore, no impacts would occur.

65 CDOs and CAOs may be issued for discharges of domestic sewage, food processing wastes, or sediment that do not contain hazardous materials. 66 If corrective action is not taken on or before the date specified in a CDO or CAO, or if immediate corrective action is necessary to remedy or prevent an imminent substantial danger to the public health, domestic livestock, wildlife, or the environment, the DTSC may take, or contract for corrective action and recover the cost for a responsible party. 67 http://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/. Accessed July 14, 2017.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.8-3 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.8 - HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ❖ e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area?

No Impact

California law requires Airport Land Use Commissions (ALUCs) to adopt a Comprehensive Land Use Plan (CLUP) to: (1) coordinate planning for the areas surrounding public use airports to protect public health, safety and welfare by ensuring the orderly expansion of airports; (2) adopt measures that minimize public exposure to excessive noise and safety hazards; (3) identify airport activities which may adversely affect adjacent areas; and (4) identify nearby land use which may interfere with airport operations. ALUCs have the authority to review and make recommendations, but do not have jurisdiction over airport operations.69

The project is not located within the boundary of an ALUP, or within two miles of a public airport or public use airport.70 (Refer to Figure 4.8-1). For these reasons, the project would not expose people to safety hazards due to proximity to a public airport, and no impacts are anticipated. f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area?

No Impact

The proposed project is not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip. For this reason, the project would not expose people to safety hazards due to proximity with a private airstrip, and no impacts are anticipated. g) Would the project impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?

No Impact

The City’s Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan (NHMP) addresses West Covina’s planned response to extraordinary emergency situations associated with man-made and natural disasters.71 The proposed project would be reviewed by the City’s Fire Department to ensure that the project would not interfere with the City’s NHMP or evacuation routes. The proposed Project will be confined to the Project site and will not obstruct access to the surrounding lots or otherwise hinder emergency evacuation within the surrounding properties. At no time will any of the surrounding streets be completely closed to traffic to accommodate construction equipment or activities. The addition of project generated traffic would not change the level of service from current levels72 and as such, would not impede the ability to evacuate in the event of a natural or man-made disaster. For these reasons, the project would not impair implementation of, or physically interfere with, an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan.

68 http://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/. Accessed July 14, 2017. 69 California Public Utilities Code §§ 21670to 21679.5. 70 Google Earth, accessed July 14, 2017. 71 Page 161 of the City of West Covina 2016 General Plan Update and Downtown Plan and Code EIR. 72 Page 27, Transpogroup. 2017. Traffic Impact Analysis for the 7 Dwelling-Unit Residential Subdivision West Covina, dated November 15, 2017.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.8-4 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.8 - HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ❖ h) Would the project expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands?

No Impact

The California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CALFIRE) developed Fire Hazard Severity Zones (FHSZ) for State Responsibility Areas (SRA) and Local Responsibility Areas (LRA). The project site is located in a LRA area with a non-fire hazard designation.73 Refer to Figure 4.8-2, which shows Los Angeles County fire hazards State Responsibility Areas, and Figure 4.8-3, which shows Local Responsibility Areas.

The proposed project would include required fire suppression design features identified in the latest edition of the California Building Code (CBC) and is located in a developed area that is presently afforded fire protection and emergency medical services. For these reasons, no significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires is anticipated.

73 Calfire website located at http://www.fire.ca.gov/fire_prevention/fhsz_maps/FHSZ/los_angeles/West_Covina.pdf, accessed July 14, 2017.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.8-5 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.8 - HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ❖

Figure 4.8-1 LOS ANGELES COUNTY AIRPORT INFLUENCE AREAS

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.8-6 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.8 - HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ❖

Figure 4.8-2 LOS ANGELES COUNTY FIRE HAZARDS STATE RESPONSIBILITY AREAS

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.8-7 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.8 - HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ❖

Figure 4.8-3 LOS ANGELES COUNTY FIRE HAZARDS LOCAL RESPONSIBILITY AREAS

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.8-8 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.9 - HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY ❖

4.9 Hydrology and Water Quality

Less than Potentially Significant Less than No Would the project: Significant Impact with Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated a) Violate any water quality standards or X waste discharge requirements? b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table X level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a X stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alternation of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase X the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or X provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Otherwise substantially degrade water X quality? g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate X Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect X flood flows? i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death X involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j) Cause inundation by seiche, tsunami, or X mudflow?

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.9-1 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.9 - HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY ❖ a) Would the project violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements?

Less than Significant Impact

Development of the proposed project may result in two types of water quality impacts: (1) short- term impacts due to construction related discharges; and (2) long-term impacts from operation or changes in site runoff characteristics. Runoff may carry onsite surface pollutants to water bodies such as lakes, streams, or rivers that ultimately drain to the ocean (refer to Figure 4.9-1, United States Geological Service (USGS) Surface Water and Watersheds). Projects that increase urban runoff may indirectly increase local and regional flooding intensity and erosion.

Construction Pollutant Controls

Construction of the proposed project would include the transport, storage, and use of chemical agents, solvents, paints, and other hazardous materials commonly associated with construction activities. Chemical transport, storage, and use would comply with the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA); Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act; (CERCLA); California’s Hazardous Waste Control laws74;Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA); City of West Covina Fire Department; and Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) requirements.

The proposed project may result in water quality impacts during the short-term construction process. The grading and excavation required for project implementation would result in exposed soils that may be subject to wind and water erosion. Since the project impact area would be less than one acre, the proposed project would not be subject to the requirements of the Construction General Permit under the NPDES program administered by the State Water Resources Control Board. However, construction of the proposed Project would be required to comply with water quality control measures of the City’s Municipal Code including specifically Chapter 9 - Drainage and Grading.75 This chapter includes requirements for the implementation of Best Management Practices to minimize the potential for water quality impacts during construction. Upon adherence to these existing requirements, short-term impacts to water quality standards and waste discharge requirements would be less than significant.

For these reasons, potential violations of water quality standards or waste discharge requirements would be less than significant during project construction.

74 See California’s Health and Safety Code, Division 20. Miscellaneous Health and Safety Provisions, §§ 24000-26204, Chapter 6.5. Hazardous Waste Control. 75 https://library.municode.com/ca/west_covina/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=MUCO_CH9DRGR, accessed July 14, 2017.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.9-2 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.9 - HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY ❖ Figure 4.9-1 USGS Surface Water and Watersheds

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.9-3 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.9 - HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY ❖

Operational Pollutant Controls

The proposed project would not substantially affect hydrology or water quality in the project area upon completion of construction. Development of the project site would increase the amount of impervious area as compared to existing conditions, since the project would include the development of new buildings and associated paving on the currently vacant portion of the project site. However, due to the size of the project site, drainage conditions in the project area would only be slightly altered. Adherence to the water quality control measures included in the City’s Municipal Code would reduce the potential effects to levels that are less than significant.

For these reasons, potential violations of water quality standards or waste discharge requirements would be less than significant during project operation. b) Would the project substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)?

Less than Significant Impact

Grading related activities are not anticipated to encounter and deplete groundwater supplies from any underlying aquifer. In addition, the proposed project would be connected to the City’s water lines and as such, would not significantly deplete groundwater supplies (water consumption effects are analyzed herein). Implementation of the proposed project would increase the amount of impervious surface on the project site; however, it would not significantly interfere with recharge as the project site is less than one acre and is not within an area designated as a recharge basin or spreading ground. Thus, effects to groundwater supply and recharge would be less than significant. c) Would the project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site?

Less Than Significant Impact

The project site has an existing residence that is served by a stormwater drainage system located in the surrounding streets. No substantial changes in the existing drainage pattern of the area are proposed, and no streams, rivers, or drainage channels that contribute runoff to the local drainage network would be impacted by the project. d) Would the project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alternation 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? e) Would the project 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?

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.9-4 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.9 - HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY ❖ f) Would the project otherwise substantially degrade water quality?

Less than Significant Impact

There are no streams or rivers in the immediate vicinity of the project site. Runoff from the project site currently discharges to storm drains in surrounding streets, which are designed to accommodate project runoff volumes. The runoff pattern would substantially remain the same as the current condition. Existing gutters and storm drains would be used for drainage and disposal of storm water and no new utilities are proposed. For these reasons, the potential for the project to: (1) substantially alter the existing drainage pattern, (2) result in on- or off-site flooding, (3) create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems, (4) provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff, or (5) substantially degrade water quality would be less than significant. g) Would the project place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map?

No Impact

The project site is in Federal Emergency Management Area (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM), Zone X (See Figure 4.9-2), which is outside the 100-year flood zone (Panel 06037C1700F).76 Therefore, no impact would occur from placing housing within a 100-year flood hazard area. h) Would the project place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows?

No Impact

As specified in g) above, the project site is in FEMA FIRM, Zone X, which is outside the 100-year flood zone.77 The FIRM Zone X containing the project site is described as “Areas of 0.2% annual chance flood; areas of 1% annual chance flood with average depths of less than 1 foot or with drainage areas less than 1 square mile; and areas protected by levees for 1% annual chance flood” and also described as “1% annual chance flood discharge contained in channel.” The project site is approximately 0.5 mile north of the Walnut Creek Wash, and would not impede or redirect flood flows within the 100-year flood plain. For these reasons, no impacts are anticipated.

76 FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map Flood Map Service Center. Internet URL: https://msc.fema.gov/portal. Accessed in July 2017. 77 FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map Flood Map Service Center. Internet URL: https://msc.fema.gov/portal. Accessed in July 2017.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.9-5 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.9 - HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY ❖ Figure 4.9-2 FEMA FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.9-6 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.9 - HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY ❖ i) Would the project expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam?

Less than Significant Impact

The project site is not located within an area designated by the City or by FEMA as presenting substantial flooding risks associated with a 100- or 500-year flooding event. The FEMA FIRM Map shows that the project site is protected from the 100-year flood by a levee system.

According to the City’s Hazard Mitigation Plan, the City would be subject to inundation flooding if any of the following three dams were to fail: San Dimas Dam, Puddingstone Dam at Bonelli Park, or Santa Fe Dam. According to the City’s General Plan Safety Element, the project site is located within the Puddingstone Dam Inundation Area. Water flowing from the Puddingstone Dam fills Walnut Creek and this watershed transects the City of West Covina as the Walnut Creek Wash. The project site is located approximately 0.5 mile north of the Walnut Creek Wash.78

The Walnut Creek spreading basin is controlled by the Los Angeles County Flood Control District. The spreading basin is fed by the Walnut Creek Wash and any overage would flow down the storm channel from this location. Flooding from this water source would only be possible if the body of water is disturbed by shaking due to an earthquake, or if any water was displaced by a landslide into the basin. This is a natural basin and there is no dam holding back the water.

Implementation of the procedures outlined in the City’s Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan would mitigate any potential threats to public safety should a failure of the Puddingstone Dam occur or should an earthquake affecting the Walnut Creek Wash occur. Therefore, impacts related to potential inundation from the failure of a levee or dam are anticipated to be less than significant. j) Would the project cause inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow?

No Impact

A seiche is an oscillating wave in a closed or partially closed water body such as a river, lake, reservoir, pond, or other large inland water body, caused by wind, tidal forces, earthquakes, landslides and other phenomena. Tsunamis are long wave-length, earthquake-generated ocean waves. Mudflows are fast-moving landslides composed of mud and debris, typically caused by heavy rainfall or melting snow on steep hillsides.

The project site is located over twenty miles inland of the Pacific Ocean, as depicted in Figure 4.9-3. According to the California Emergency Management Agency, this location is not within a Tsunami Inundation Area for Emergency Planning.79

There is one open reservoir in the City of West Covina that is utilized for landscape irrigation at South Hills Country Club. The reservoir is fed by pipeline from Suburban Water Company and has minimal slope runoff. The natural reservoir holds over 10,000 gallons of water and is located

78 City of West Covina, Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan. Internet URL: http://www.westcovina.org/departments/fire- /disaster-preparedness/natural-hazaard-mitigation-plan/section-8-flood. Accessed in July 14, 2017. 79 Tsunami Inundation Map for Emergency Planning, Internet URL: http://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/geologic_hazards/Tsunami/Inundation_Maps/LosAngeles. Accessed on July 14, 2017.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.9-7 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.9 - HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY ❖ between Crescent View Drive, Sandy Hill Drive, and Golden Vista Drive. The reservoir is referred to by local citizens as Lake West Covina80 and is located approximately 3.5 miles southeast of the project site. Because there are no existing large water storage reservoirs or other inland water bodies in the vicinity of the proposed project site, hazards from a seiche are considered negligible. Therefore, no impact would occur.

The project site is not mapped within a landslide hazard zone in the state Seismic Hazard Zone Report.81 The potential for seismically-induced landslides or mud debris flows within or near the project site is considered negligible. For these reasons, no impacts from inundation by a seiche, tsunami, or mudflow are anticipated.

80 City of West Covina, Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan. Internet URL: http://www.westcovina.org/departments/fire- /disaster-preparedness/natural-hazaard-mitigation-plan/section-8-flood. Accessed in July 14, 2017. 81 Southern California Interactive Quadrangle Map, Baldwin Park Quadrangle, Internet URL: http://gmw.consrv.ca.gov/shmp/MapProcessor.asp?Action=Quad&Location=SoCal. Accessed on July 14, 2017.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.9-8 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.9 – HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY ❖

Figure 4.9-3 TSUNAMI INUNDATION AREA

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.9-9 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.10 – LAND USE AND PLANNING ❖

4.10 Land Use and Planning

Less than Potentially Significant Less than No Would the project: Significant Impact with Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated a) Physically divide an established X community? b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the X general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural X community conservation plan? a) Would the project physically divide an established community?

No Impact

The project site is zoned Medium Density Multiple-Family Residential-20 (MF-20), which permits 20 dwelling units per acre82, and the General Plan designation is Neighborhood Medium, which allows for a density of 9 to 20 dwelling units/per acre.83 Land to the north is zoned as Residential Single Family (R-1) and is comprised of single-family homes. Land to the south is zoned MF-20 and is comprised of apartments. Land to the east is zoned R-1, which has one single family home, and zone MF-20, which is comprised of multi-family housing. Land to the west is zoned Neighborhood Commercial (N-C) and it is occupied by a small commercial strip mall.

The proposed project is consistent and compatible with the surrounding land uses and will not divide an established community. Adjacent to the eastern boundary of the project site there are multi-family housing units in the Pacific Village complex. Upon approval of the project’s requested General Plan amendment and zone change, the project would be consistent with the site’s zoning and General Plan designations.

The project would not divide any public spaces or extend beyond the property’s existing boundaries. The project does not propose construction of any roadway, flood control channel, or other structure that will physically divide any portion of the community. Furthermore, no streets or sidewalks would be permanently closed as a result of the development. The proposed project would utilize existing roadways; thus, there would be no change in roadway patterns. No separation of uses or disruption of access between land use types would occur as a result of the proposed project. Therefore, the proposed project would not physically divide an established community and no impacts would occur.

82 http://www.westcovina.org/home/showdocument?id=631. Accessed on September 7, 2017 83 http://www.westcovina.org/home/showdocument?id=13045. Accessed on September 7, 2017

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.10-1 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.10 – LAND USE AND PLANNING ❖ b) Would the project conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?

Less Than Significant Impact

The General Plan land use designation for the project site is Neighborhood Medium, which allows for a density of 9 to 20 dwelling units/per acre. The project site is zoned Multi-Family Residential-20 (MF-20), allowing for up to 20 dwelling units/per acre. Refer to Table 4.10-1 below, which shows the existing and proposed land use and zoning designations for the project site and adjacent/nearby land.

Table 4.10-1 Existing General Plan Land Use and Zoning Designations

Location Existing General Plan Existing Zoning Designation Designation Project Site Neighborhood Medium1 Multi-Family Residential-20 (MF-20)2 Land to the North Neighborhood Low3 Residential Single Family (R-1) Land to the South Neighborhood Medium4 Multi-Family Residential-20 (MF-20) Land to the East Neighborhood Medium1 Residential Single-Family (R-1), Multi-Family Residential-20 (MF-20) Land to the West Commercial Neighborhood Commercial (N-C) Notes: 1 9 to 20 units per acre 2 up to 20 dwelling units per acre 3 8.1 to 15.0 dwelling units per acre 4 up to 8 units/acre Source: http://www.westcovina.org/home/showdocument?id=631 and http://www.westcovina.org/home/showdocument?id=13045 Accessed on September 7, 2017

The proposed new development would include variances from the zoning standards for minimum lot size, minimum lot width, minimum setback requirements, and landscaping requirements. As detailed in Section 3.0 of this document, the project would require a tentative tract map approval for development of seven individually owned residential units (attached townhomes) on the site. Approval of a precise plan is required, which specifies project details including but not limited to the location, size, and height of all structures as well as building setbacks and related project details. Additionally, the project would require variance for deviations from the City’s zoning standards for: minimum lot size, minimum lot width, minimum setback requirements, and landscaping requirements. The project would need permits and approvals from the following agencies: City of West Covina Building Division, Planning Department, and Fire Department, as well as a letter from Suburban Water System and the Southern California Gas Company. Upon approval of the entitlements discussed above, the project would not conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation. The project site is not located within a specific plan84 area. The project would be designed and constructed to meet City development standards and comply with the

84 The project site is not located within a specific plan, see City of West Covina Zoning Map (2013), located online at http://www.westcovina.org/home/showdocument?id=631, accessed September 7, 2017.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.10-2 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.10 – LAND USE AND PLANNING ❖ requirements of the General Plan Land Use Element, Zoning Ordinance, and the City’s Municipal Code.85

Furthermore, the proposed project would be compatible with the California Wetlands Policy and California Endangered Species Act, because, as detailed in the biological resources report for the proposed project, there are no wetlands on the project site and no endangered species exist on the project site, nor do they have the potential to occur. The project would be compatible with Southern California Association of Governments’ (SCAG’s) Regional Comprehensive Plan (RCP) because it would implement RCP’s land use and housing goal to inject new life into under-used areas by creating housing on vacant lots. The southern portion of the project site is vacant and contains trash and weedy vegetation. The proposed project would develop the entire project site and in doing so would be compatible with the RCP.86 The project would be compatible with SCAG’s Regional Transportation Plan/ Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) because the proposed project would not generate significant amounts of traffic nor would it significantly impact the city’s transportation system.87 The project would be compatible with the South Coast Air Quality Management District’s (SCAQMD’s) Final 2016 Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) because it would have a negligible impact to air quality and as such is not of a nature or scale that would impact SCAQMD’s AQMP.88 Potential project impacts to air quality are addressed in Section 4.3 of this document.

With adherence to all applicable codes, ordinances, plans, policies, and regulations from intergovernmental agencies with jurisdiction over the project site that have been adopted in order to avoid or mitigate an environmental effect, a less than significant impact would occur. c) Would the project conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan?

No Impact

The project site is located in a highly developed urban area with single-family and multi-family residential units located to the north, south, and east of the project site. A strip mall is located adjacent to the project site to the west. The project site is not located within an area covered by a Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP), Natural Communities Conservation Plan (NCCP) or other approved HCP. For this reason, the project would not conflict with the provisions of an adopted HCP, NCCP or other approved local, regional, or state HCP. The City of West Covina does not currently have a habitat conservation or natural community conservation plan and is not part of a habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan. 89 Therefore, no impacts would occur.

85 https://library.municode.com/ca/west_covina/codes/code_of_ordinances, Accessed on September 7, 2017. 86 Page 17 (Land Use and Housing Section) of the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) 2008 Regional Comprehensive Plan. Available at http://www.scag.ca.gov/NewsAndMedia/Pages/RegionalComprehensivePlan.aspx, Accessed on September 7, 2017. 87 SCAG 2016-2040 Regional Transportation Plan/ Sustainable Communities Strategy (2016 RTP/SCS) available at http://scagrtpscs.net/Pages/FINAL2016RTPSCS.aspx, Accessed September 7, 2017. 88 South Coast Air Quality Management District Final 2016 AQMP-CARB/EPA/SIP Submittal (March 2017), Available at http://www.aqmd.gov/home/library/clean-air-plans/air-quality-mgt-plan/final-2016-aqmp, Accessed on September 7, 2017. 89 Page 200 of the City of West Covina 2016 General Plan Update and Downtown Plan and Code Final Environmental Impact Report (SCH No. 2016021069), available at http://www.westcovina.org/departments/planning/general- plan-update, accessed September 7, 2017.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.10-3 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.11 – MINERAL RESOURCES ❖

4.11 Mineral Resources

Less than Potentially Significant Less than Would the project: Significant Impact with Significant No Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be X of value to the region and the residents of the state? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local X general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? a) Would the project result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the State?

No Impact

The availability of mineral resources in the vicinity of the project site was evaluated by reviewing the California Department of Conservation Surface Mining and Reclamation Act of 1975 (SMARA) Mineral Land Classification Map for the County of Los Angeles.90 According to the SMARA Generalized Mineral Land Classification Map for the County of Los Angeles, the project site is within Mineral Resource Zone (MRZ)-2 (refer to Figure 4.11-1), which is an area that contains identified mineral resources.91

Although the proposed project is within MRZ-2, there are no known areas within West Covina containing known mineral resources that are appropriate for mineral extraction.92 Therefore, development of the proposed project would not result in a loss of availability of a known mineral resource and the project would not result in a loss of a locally important mineral resource recovery site. Additionally, the State Department of Oil and Gas has indicated that there are no significant energy producing minerals (i.e., oil, gas, or geothermal fields) in the City.93 Therefore, there is no drilling or production of these elements. For these reasons, no impacts are anticipated related to the availability of known mineral resources of value to the region or state residents. b) Would the project result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan?

No Impact

The project site currently contains a single-family home. No mineral extraction or recovery operations are located onsite. As detailed in Section 3.0, the project site has a General Plan

90 ftp://ftp.consrv.ca.gov/pub/dmg/pubs/ofr/OFR_94-14/OFR_94-14_Plate1B.pdf Accessed on July 5, 2017. 91 Page 3, http://www.consrv.ca.gov/smgb/Guidelines/Documents/ClassDesig.pdf Accessed on July 5, 2017. 92 Page 287, City of West Covina 2016 General Plan Update and Downtown Plan and Code EIR. 93 https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/doggr/wellfinder/ Accessed July 5, 2017

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.11-1 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.11 – MINERAL RESOURCES ❖ designation of Neighborhood Medium, which allows for a density of 9 to 20 dwelling units/per acre. As such, the project site is not designated as a mineral resource recovery site. Additionally, as stated in threshold a) above, there are no areas in the City that contain known mineral resources appropriate for mineral extraction. Thus, no impacts would occur to a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general, specific, or other land use plan.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.11-2 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.11 – MINERAL RESOURCES ❖

Figure 4.11-1 MINERAL RESOURCES MAP

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.11-3 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.12 – NOISE ❖

4.12 Noise

Less than Potentially Significant Less than Would the project result in: Significant Impact with Significant No Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise level in excess of standards established in the local general plan or X

noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ground-borne vibration or X ground-borne noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project X vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the X project vicinity above levels existing without the project? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, X would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in X the project area to excessive noise levels?

The following is summarized in part from the Noise Technical Report (see Appendix E) prepared by UltraSystems.

4.12.1 Characteristics of Sound

Sound is a pressure wave transmitted through the air. It is described in terms of loudness or amplitude (measured in decibels [dB]), frequency or pitch (measured in hertz (Hz) or cycles per second), and duration (measured in seconds or minutes). The dB scale is a logarithmic scale that describes the physical intensity of the pressure vibrations that make up any sound. The pitch of the sound is related to the frequency of the pressure vibration. Because the human ear is not equally sensitive to all frequencies, a special frequency-dependent rating scale is used to relate noise to human sensitivity. The A-weighted decibel scale (dBA) provides this compensation by discriminating against upper and lower frequencies in a manner approximating the sensitivity of the human ear. The scale is based on a reference pressure level of 20 micropascals (zero dBA). The

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.12-1 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.12 – NOISE ❖ scale ranges from zero (for the average least perceptible sound) to about 130 (for the average human pain level).

4.12.2 Noise Measurement Scales

Several rating scales have been developed to analyze adverse effects of community noise on people. Since environmental noise fluctuates over time, these scales consider that the effect of noise on people depends largely upon the total acoustical energy content of the noise, as well as the time of day when the noise occurs. Those that are applicable to this analysis are as follows:

• Leq, the equivalent noise level, is an average of sound level over a defined time period (such as 1 minute, 15 minutes, 1 hour or 24 hours). Thus, the Leq of a time-varying noise and that of a steady noise are the same if they deliver the same acoustic energy to the ear during exposure;

• L90 is a noise level that is exceeded 90 percent of the time at a given location; it is often used as a measure of “background” noise;

• Lmax is the root mean square (RMS) maximum noise level during the measurement interval. This measurement is calculated by taking the RMS of all peak noise levels within the sampling interval. Lmax is distinct from the peak noise level, which only includes the single highest measurement within a measurement interval;

• Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL), is a 24-hour average Leq with a 4.77-dBA “penalty” added to noise during the hours of 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m., and a 10-dBA penalty added to noise during the hours of 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. to account for noise sensitivity in the evening and nighttime (Caltrans, 2013). The logarithmic effect of these additions is that a 60-dBA 24-hour Leq would result in a calculation of 66.7 dBA CNEL; and

• Ldn, the day-night average noise, is a 24-hour average Leq with an additional 10-dBA “penalty” added to noise that occurs between 10 p.m. and 7 a.m. The Ldn metric yields values within 1 dBA of the CNEL metric. As a matter of practice, Ldn and CNEL values are considered to be equivalent and are treated as such in this assessment.

4.12.3 Existing Noise

Ambient noise levels were monitored at five locations near noise sensitive receivers. The principal existing sensitive receivers nearest the project site are residential areas north of the I-10 Freeway; the California Central Probation Office, West Covina, about 280 feet to the southeast, and West Covina Medical Center about 830 feet to the south. (See Figure 4.12-1.)

Ambient noise monitoring sites are shown in Figure 4.12-2. As seen in Table 4.12-1, average ambient noise levels (Leq) ranged from 53.2 to 67.2 dBA. The highest average noise levels were at measurement point 4, which is a multi-family residential complex, having a 25-foot chain-link fence covered with thick bushes of vegetation. All monitored noise levels were within the range considered normally acceptable.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.12-2 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.12 – NOISE ❖

Figure 4.12-1 SENSITIVE RECEIVERS NEAR PROJECT SITE

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.12-3 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.12 – NOISE ❖

Figure 4.12-2 AMBIENT NOISE MONITORING SITES

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.12-4 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.12 – NOISE ❖

Table 4.12-1 MEASURED AMBIENT NOISE LEVELS

Measurement Results (dBA) Point 15-Minute Leq Lmax L90

1 53.2 60.7 49.9 2 61.7 74.3 50.5 3 58.4 71.9 50.7 4 67.2 82.5 52.0 5 64.5 86.8 54.4

4.12.4 Regulatory Setting

4.12.4.1 State of California

The most current guidelines prepared by the State Noise Officer are contained in the “General Plan Guidelines” issued by the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research in 2003 (OPR, 2003). These guidelines establish four categories for judging the severity of noise intrusion on specified land uses:

• Normally Acceptable: Is generally acceptable, with no mitigation necessary;

• Conditionally Acceptable: May require some mitigation, as established through a noise study;

• Normally Unacceptable: Requires substantial mitigation; and

• Clearly unacceptable: Probably cannot be mitigated to a less than significant level.

4.12.4.2 General Plan Noise Element

The City of West Covina adopted the General Plan Update (Plan WC) in December 2016. The Our Healthy and Safe Community Chapter provides a description of existing noise levels and sources, and incorporates comprehensive goals and policies. The Chapter includes several policies on noise and acceptable noise levels. Plan WC has adopted the State of California’s recommended Noise/Land Use Compatibility Matrix where “normally acceptable” noise exposure for exterior residential land uses is 60 dBA Ldn or CNEL94 (City of West Covina 2016b).

To implement the City’s noise policies, the City adopted a Noise Ordinance. West Covina’s Noise Ordinance (Article IV of Chapter 15 of the City’s Ordinance Code) states that it is the City’s policy to regulate and control annoying noise levels from all sources, and prohibits loud, unnecessary or

94 Normally acceptable: Specified land use is satisfactory, based upon the assumption than any buildings involved are of normal conventional construction, without any special noise insulation requirements. The day-night average level (Ldn) and the Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) are two commonly used noise metrics. The Ldn is a 24-hour average noise level that adds 10 dBA to actual nighttime (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.) noise levels to account for the greater sensitivity to noise during that time period. The CNEL is identical to the Ldn, except it also adds a 4.77-dBA penalty for noise occurring during the evening (7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m.).

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.12-5 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.12 – NOISE ❖ unusual noise that unreasonably disturbs the peace and quiet of any residential neighborhood or that causes discomfort or annoyance to any reasonable person of normal sensitiveness residing in the area. The Noise Ordinance states that, if noise is plainly audible at a distance of 50 feet from the property line of any property, unit, building, structure or vehicle in which it is located, it shall be presumed that the noise being created is in violation. The Noise Ordinance also contains provisions regulating particular nuisance noise sources, such as repairing, rebuilding, or testing of any motor vehicles on private property, and the operation of two- and four-stroke engines. Any noise from these sources that exceed ambient noise levels by five decibels or more is considered a noise violation (City of West Covina 2016a).

4.12.4.3 West Covina Municipal Code

With a few minor and inapplicable exceptions, the WCMC does not have quantitative ambient noise standards or exposure limits. The only relevant provisions are in a section concerning construction projects.95 § 15-95 has the following pertinent requirements:

Between 8:00 p.m. of one day and 7:00 a.m. of the next day, no construction activities in or within 500 feet of a residential zone are allowed if they increase the noise exposures at the property line by 5 dBA over the ambient value, unless a permit is obtained; and

Between 8:00 p.m. of one day and 6:00 a.m. of the next day, construction-related unloading, loading, or other preparatory activities are allowed within 500 feet of generally occupied residences.

4.12.5 Impact Analysis a) Would the project expose persons to or generate noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?

Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated

Construction activities, especially heavy equipment operation, would create noise effects on and adjacent to the construction site. Long-term noise impacts include project-generated on-site and off-site operational noise sources. On-site (stationary) noise sources from the family residences would include operation of mechanical equipment such as air conditioners, landscape and building maintenance. Off-site noise would be attributable to project-induced traffic, which would cause an incremental increase in noise levels within and near the project vicinity. Each is described below.

Short Term Construction Noise

Noise impacts from construction activities are a function of the noise generated by the operation of construction equipment and on-road delivery and worker commuter vehicles, the location of equipment, and the timing and duration of the noise-generating activities. Because of mitigating factors to be discussed below, only a screening analysis of construction noise was necessary. First, taking into account the maximum noise generation levels and usage factors shown in Table 5.1-1 of the Noise Technical Report, UltraSystems determined that the noisiest construction phase would be paving, which would have a maximum hourly Leq of 88.7 dB at 50 feet. Using calculation methods

95 City of West Covina Municipal Code, Chapter 15. – Miscellaneous Provisions Relating to Public Health and Safety, Article IV. – Noise Regulations, Division 2, - Specific Noise Sources, §15-95. – Construction and building projects.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.12-6 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.12 – NOISE ❖ published by the Federal Transit Administration (FTA, 2006), UltraSystems estimated the average hourly exposures at the five ambient noise measurement locations, each of which was at a sensitive receiver. The distances used for the calculation were the geometric means of the shortest and longest distances between the site boundaries and each ambient noise measurement point. Results are shown in Table 4.12-2.

Table 4.12-2 ESTIMATED UNMITIGATED CONSTRUCTION NOISE EXPOSURES AT AMBIENT NOISE MONITORING LOCATIONS

Distance 1-Hour Leq (dBA) Site Sensitive Receiver (feet) Existing Projecteda Change

1920 W Pacific Ln 1 33.2 53.2 92.2 +39 West Covina, CA 91790 209 N La Sena Ave 2 79.2 41.7 79.3 +37.6 West Covina, CA 91790 129 Ocean Ave 3 88.4 58.4 88.4 +30 West Covina, CA 91790 2000 W Pacific Ave 4 77.5 67.2 77.9 +10.69 West Covina, CA 91790 2007 W Pacific Ave, West Covina, 5 84.5 64.5 84.5 +20.0 CA 91790 Note: Cross-reference Figure 4.12-2, Noise Monitoring Locations.

Short-term noise exposures would increase by considerably more than the criterion of 5 dBA Leq at all the evaluated construction noise exposure locations. The sensitive receiver at Site #5, a restaurant, would be partially shielded by an approximately six-foot-high cinder block wall. The shielding would reduce exposures, but not to below the significance threshold. The following mitigation measures would reduce short-term construction noise impacts to a less than significant level.

Mitigation Measures

N-1: Noise Monitoring

If surrounding residents or businesses complain of excessive noise during construction, then the construction contractor will conduct noise monitoring in the residential or commercial area of concern during the suspected noise-producing construction activities. If the monitored noise levels exceed regulatory noise restrictions or standards, taking into account background noise, then the construction contractor will mitigate noise levels using temporary noise shields, noise barriers or other mitigation measures to comply with those restrictions or standards. (See below.)

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.12-7 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.12 – NOISE ❖

N-2: Noise Source Controls

The construction contractor will use the following source controls, except where not physically feasible:

• Use of noise-producing equipment will be limited to the interval from 8 a.m. to 6 p.m., Monday through Friday; • For all noise producing equipment, use types and models that have the lowest horsepower and the lowest noise generating potential practical for their intended use; • The construction contractor will ensure that all construction equipment, fixed or mobile, is properly operating (tuned-up) and lubricated, and that mufflers are working adequately. • Have only necessary equipment onsite; and • Use manually-adjustable or ambient sensitive backup alarms.

N-3: Noise Path Controls

The contractor will use the following path controls, except where not physically feasible:

• Install portable noise barriers, including solid structures and noise blankets, between the active noise sources and the nearest noise receivers. • Temporarily enclose localized and stationary noise sources. • Store and maintain equipment, building materials, and waste materials as far as practical from as many sensitive receivers as practical.

N-4: Construction Notices

Advance notice of the start of construction shall be delivered to all noise sensitive receivers adjacent to the project area. The notice shall state specifically where and when construction activities will occur, and provide contact information for filing noise complaints with the contractor and the City. Additionally, a sign will be posted on-site during construction and include contact information for filing noise complaints.

Operational Noise

On-Site

On-site noise sources from the proposed housing project would include operation of mechanical equipment such as air conditioners, lawnmowers, leaf blowers, and building maintenance equipment; and motor vehicles accessing, driving on, and exiting the parking lot. Noise levels associated with operation of the project are expected to be comparable to those of nearby residential areas. Noise from onsite sources would be less than significant.

Mobile Source

The principal noise source in the project area is traffic on local roadways and the I-10 Freeway. The project may contribute to a permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity due to project-generated vehicle traffic on neighborhood roadways and at intersections.

Tables 4.12-3 and 4.12-4 show the existing and projected future cumulative traffic at intersections investigated by the traffic study, without and with the project’s contribution.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.12-8 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.12 – NOISE ❖

Table 4.12-3 MEASURED AND PROJECTED TRAFFIC VOLUMES AT INTERSECTIONS, A.M. PEAK HOUR

2016 – Existing Projected Cumulative Intersection Without With % Without With % Project Project Increase Project Project Increase West Pacific Avenue-West Covina Parkway/I-10 WB 2,173 2,176 0.13 2,259 2,262 0.13 Ramps Source: Traffic study (Transpo Group, 2017) and Calculations by UltraSystems.

Table 4.12-4 MEASURED AND PROJECTED TRAFFIC VOLUMES AT INTERSECTIONS, P.M. PEAK HOUR

2016 – Existing Projected Cumulative Intersection Without With % Without With % Project Project Increase Project Project Increase

West Pacific Avenue-West Covina Parkway/I-10 WB 2,406 2,409 0.12 2,512 2,515 0.12 Ramps Source: Traffic study (Transpo Group, 2016) and Calculations by UltraSystems.

The maximum increase in peak-hour traffic volume at any intersection would be about 0.13%. Given the logarithmic nature of the decibel, traffic volume needs to be doubled in order for the noise level to increase by 3 dBA, the minimum level perceived by the average human ear. A doubling is equivalent to a 100% increase. Because the maximum increase in traffic at any intersection is far below 100%, the increase in roadway noise experienced at sensitive receivers would not be perceptible to the human ear. Therefore, roadway noise associated with project operational traffic noise impacts on sensitive receivers would be less than significant.

b) Would the project expose persons to or generate excessive ground-borne vibration or ground-borne noise levels?

Less than Significant Impact

It is expected that ground-borne vibration from project construction activities would cause only intermittent, localized intrusion. The project’s construction activities most likely to cause vibration impacts are:

• Heavy Construction Equipment: Although all heavy, mobile construction equipment has the potential of causing at least some perceptible vibration while operating close to buildings, the vibration is usually short-term and is not of sufficient magnitude to cause building damage. It is not expected that heavy equipment such as large bulldozers would operate closely enough to any sensitive receivers to cause vibration impact; and

• Trucks: Trucks hauling building materials to construction sites can be sources of vibration intrusion if the haul routes pass through residential neighborhoods on streets with bumps

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.12-9 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.12 – NOISE ❖

or potholes. The Federal Transit Administration (FTA 2006) has published standard vibration levels for construction equipment operations, at a distance of 25 feet. The calculated vibration levels expressed in vibration decibels (VdB) and peak particle velocity (PPV) for construction equipment at distances of 25, 50, and 33.2 feet are listed in Table 4.12-5.

Table 4.12-5 VIBRATION LEVELS OF TYPICAL CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT

Vibration Vibration Vibration PPV PPV PPV Decibels Decibels Decibels at 33.2 Equipment at 25 feet at 50 feet at 33.2 at 25 feet at 50 feet feet (in/sec) (in/sec) feet (VdB) (VdB) (in/sec)a (VdB)a Loaded trucks 0.076 86 0.0269 80 0.050 83 Jackhammer 0.035 79 0.0124 73 0.023 77 Small bulldozer 0.003 58 0.0011 52 0.002 56 Source: Calculated by UltraSystems from FTA data. a 33.2 feet is representative of the nearest sensitive receiver to the proposed construction.

As shown in Table 4.12-5, the PPV of construction equipment at the nearest sensitive receiver (33.2 feet) is at most 0.05 inch per second, which is less than the FTA damage threshold of 0.12 inch per second PPV for fragile historic buildings. As shown in the table above, maximum vibration decibels at 33.2 feet are 83 VdB, which exceeds the FTA threshold for human annoyance of 80 VdB. However, the vibration exposures would be for only a few minutes per day, as trucks come onto the site to deliver construction materials and take away construction waste. The nearest residence would already be experiencing truck vibrations from truck traffic on West Pacific Lane. Vibration impacts would therefore be less than significant.

Construction of the proposed project would not involve significant sources of ground-borne vibration or ground-borne noise. Thus, construction of the proposed project would result in a less than significant impact.

Operation of the proposed project would not involve significant sources of groundborne vibration or groundborne noise. Thus, operation of the proposed project would result in a less than significant impact. c) Would the project cause a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project?

Less than Significant Impact

The project site is zoned for Residential use and is located near major transportation facilities including the Interstate 10 Freeway. On-site noise sources from operation of the proposed project would include operation of mechanical equipment such as air conditioners, lawnmowers, leaf blowers, and building maintenance equipment; and motor vehicles accessing, driving on, and exiting the parking lot. Noise from on-site sources would be less than significant.

The primary noise source in the project area is roadway noise. As described above in a), the operation of the project would generate noise levels consistent with the residential nature of the

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.12-10 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.12 – NOISE ❖ site and surroundings. Increased roadway noise generated by vehicles traveling to and from the project would not increase noise levels along studied roadway segments by 3dB(A), which is the minimum level perceptible to the human ear. Project operation would not result in a substantial increase in noise levels from that currently experienced at studied locations. Noise from project- induced traffic is not projected to increase by a noticeable amount at nearby sensitive receivers within the planning horizon. These projections include cumulative traffic from the project and other proposed projects. Therefore, cumulative impacts from the proposed project would be less than significant. d) Would the project cause a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project?

Less than Significant Impact

As discussed in a), the area surrounding the project site would experience a temporary increase in noise exposure from construction activities. However, as detailed in threshold a), implementation of mitigation measures N-1 through N-4, would reduce short-term construction impacts to a less than significant level. Section 6.0 of the project’s Noise Report analyzed potential cumulative noise impacts. The cumulative project that is closest to any of the sensitive receivers identified in Section 5.1 of the project’s Noise Report is the medical facility at 1400 West Covina Parkway. The medical facility is about 1,883 feet from sensitive receiver site 1 (West Covina Medical Center at 725 S Orange Avenue). At that distance, noise from the medical center construction project (if simultaneous with the seven-unit multi-family development project) would make a negligible addition to the noise from the proposed project. Therefore, the short-term cumulative noise impact would be less than significant. e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?

No Impact

The project site is not located within the boundary of an airport land use plan or within two miles of a public airport.96 Therefore, the project would not expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels and no impact would occur. f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?

No Impact

The project is not in the vicinity of a private airstrip. Therefore, the project would not expose people to excessive noise levels related to a private airstrip and no impact would occur.

96 Based on County of Los Angeles Airport Land Use Commission GIS Interactive Map (A-NET). Internet URL: http://egis3.lacounty.gov/dataportal/2016/03/30/airport-land-use-commission-aluc-layers/

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.12-11 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.13 – POPULATION AND HOUSING ❖

4.13 Population and Housing

Less than Potentially Significant Less than Would the project: Significant Impact with Significant No Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) X or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction X

of replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of X

replacement housing elsewhere? a) Would the project induce substantial growth in an area either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and business) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?

Less than Significant Impact

The project proposes the demolition of an existing single-family home and the subsequent construction of two multi-family buildings that will consist of a total of seven townhomes, positioned between existing residential and commercial land uses. As detailed in the City’s 2016 General Plan Update and Downtown Plan and Code Final Environmental Impact Report, there are an average of 3.41 persons per household (pph) in the City.97 Therefore, it is anticipated that the proposed 7-unit project would result in an increased population of approximately 24 persons (3.41 x 7=23.87) in the project area. According to the California Department of Finance, the City’s estimated 2017 population is 107,813 persons.98 Thus, the proposed project would represent an approximately 0.022 percent increase (24/107,813=0.00022) in the City’s population. Due to the project’s negligible increase in population and location in an already developed area of the City, the project would not induce substantial population growth (either directly or indirectly). Therefore, the project would have a less than significant impact.

97 Page 222 of the City of West Covina 2016 General Plan Update and Downtown Plan and Code Final Environmental Impact Report. http://www.westcovina.org/departments/planning/general-plan-update, Accessed September 11, 2017. This persons per household (pph) number is based on 2016 California Department of Finance information and is a worst-case (i.e. higher) pph than the more recent 2017 Department of Finance information (which states West Covina has an estimated 3.40 pph): Table 2: E-5 City/County Population and Housing Estimates (1/1/2017) Available at: http://www.dof.ca.gov/Forecasting/Demographics/Estimates/E-5/, accessed September 11, 2017. 98 2017 Department of Finance, Table 2: E-5 City/County Population and Housing Estimates (1/1/2017) Available at: http://www.dof.ca.gov/Forecasting/Demographics/Estimates/E-5/, accessed September 11, 2017. Accessed September 11, 2017.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.13-1 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.13 – POPULATION AND HOUSING ❖ b) Would the project displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?

Less than Significant Impact

The project proposes the demolition of an existing single-family home. The project’s demolition of one single-family home would not necessitate the construction of replacement housing elsewhere because the owners of the home elected to sell their property and leave the project site. Thus, the project would not displace a substantial number of existing housing units and the project would have a less than significant impact in this regard. c) Would the project displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?

Less than Significant Impact

The project proposes the demolition of one existing single-family home. Based on the City’s rate of 3.41pph, the proposed project is estimated to displace four people. As such, the project would not displace a substantial number of people and would not necessitate construction of replacement housing elsewhere. Therefore, the project would have a less than significant impact.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.13-2 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.14 – PUBLIC SERVICES ❖

4.14 Public Services

Less than Potentially Significant Less than Would the project: Significant Impact with Significant No Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, the need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: a) Fire protection? X b) Police protection? X c) Schools? X d) Parks? X e) Other public facilities? X

a) Fire protection?

Less than Significant Impact

The City has its own Fire Department, with five strategically-located fire stations that provide fire and emergency medical services. Fire Station No. 1 is the closest fire station to the project site, located at 819 Sunset Avenue, approximately 1.1 mile south of the project site. Fire Department personnel are anticipated to have an approximately five-minute response time from Fire Station No. 1 to the project site.99 All fire and police stations are strategically located to maintain a 2.5-road mile zone to keep response times within the 5-minute maximum range. 100

Currently, City firefighters staff five engine companies, one truck company, three paramedic rescue ambulances, and one command unit throughout the City. The West Covina Fire Department is well-positioned to have personnel on-scene to treat an ill or injured person within five minutes of a call for help.

Implementation of the proposed project is expected to induce population growth by approximately 24 people101, an amount which would not adversely affect the City’s existing fire protection services. Demolition of the existing building and the construction and replacement with seven new two-story structures would not require the physical development of new fire station facilities. The City levies development impact fees, which mitigate capital costs associated with development for fire protection services. The project would be required to pay development impact fees to reduce potential impacts to fire protection services. Furthermore, a fire sprinkler system would be installed in both buildings in compliance with current City of West Covina Fire Code requirements. Thus, the project would have a less than significant impacts to fire protection.

99 Google Earth, 2016 100 City of West Covina Website. http://www.westcovina.org/departments/fire-/. Accessed September 5, 2017. 101 Using the persons per household (pph) number of 3.41 pph from page 222 of the City of West Covina 2016 General Plan Update and Downtown Plan and Code Final Environmental Impact Report http://www.westcovina.org/departments/planning/general-plan-update Accessed September 12, 2017

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.14-1 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.14 – PUBLIC SERVICES ❖ b) Police protection?

Less than Significant Impact

The City has its own Police Department which provides law enforcement services. The City’s police station, located at 1444 West Garvey Avenue, provides dispatch and emergency police services. The police station is located approximately half a mile from the project site. The City is divided into four service areas. Each of the four service areas has one lieutenant assigned.102 The project site is located in Service Area 1. Police personnel are anticipated to have an approximately 13-minute response time from the City’s police station to the project site.103

Implementation of the proposed project is expected to induce population growth by approximately 24 people, an amount which would not adversely affect the City’s existing law enforcement services. The project would not require the physical development of new police station facilities. The proposed project would be required to pay development impact fees, which mitigate capital costs associated with development, for police protection services. As a result, less than significant impacts are anticipated. c) Schools?

Less than Significant Impact

The project proposes to build seven two-story townhomes on a project site that is currently occupied by an existing single-family residence. As discussed in a) and b) above, the construction of these units is expected to induce population growth by approximately 24 people. The project site is located within the West Covina Unified School District (WCUSD), an open enrollment district, which allows students living anywhere within its boundaries to attend any of its schools.

The majority of West Covina is within the WCUSD, which currently has fifteen local area schools, two charter schools, and one Pre-School.104 The northeast portion of the City is within the boundaries of the Covina Valley Unified School District (CVUSD), which has four Elementary Schools, one Middle School and one High School.105 The southern portion of the City is within the boundaries of the Rowland Unified School District (RUSD), which has one Elementary School, one Kindergarten through Grade 8 School, and one Intermediate School.106

Using the WCUSD’s adjusted student generation factor of 0.3753107, the project is expected to generate approximately two elementary school students, one middle school student, and one high school student108 whom are anticipated to attend WCUSD schools.

102 City of West Covina Website https://www.wcpd.org/services/service-areas/. Accessed September 5, 2017. 103 Google Earth, 2016 104 Page 228 of the City of West Covina 2016 General Plan Update and Downtown Plan and Code EIR. 105 Page 229 Ibid. 106 Ibid. 107 Page 8, Table 5, Adjusted Student Generation Factors (used for a more conservative analysis than the lower student generation factors which understate the number of students generated by single family development and multifamily attached units). Source: West Covina Unified School District Residential Development School Fee Justification Study, July 23, 2015. Available at http://wcusd- ca.schoolloop.com/file/1456827404951/1430721957899/5620422669143437788.pdf/. Accessed September 5, 2017.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.14-2 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.14 – PUBLIC SERVICES ❖

In 1986, the state enacted AB 2926, which authorizes school districts to levy School Fees on new residential and commercial/industrial developments to pay for school facilities. As detailed in WCUSD’s residential development fee justification study, these fees are able to mitigate most of the district’s school facilities cost impacts caused by the development of multiple-family units. This fee must be paid before the issuance of a building permit from the City. With payment of the required development impact fee, the proposed project would have a less than significant impact on school facilities. d) Parks?

Less than Significant Impact

The City of West Covina has approximately 499 acres of park and open space which is equivalent to approximately 4.62 acres of open space per 1,000 residents at the current population level which is 107,813 persons, per the Department of Finance 2017 projections.109 There are two pocket parks, eight neighborhood parks, three community parks, two wilderness areas, specialized sports facilities, paseos, and conservation areas.110 The City of West Covina is 16 square miles111 in size and is primarily built out.

Per the guidelines issued by the National Parks and Recreation Association, it is recommended that residents have access to 10.0 acres of parkland per 1,000 people112, but that is not possible due to limited undeveloped land area. Pursuant to City Municipal Code Section 20-40, Parks and Recreation, dedications for parks and recreation shall be three acres per one thousand residents of the subdivision. Where dedication is not required, in total or in part for a subdivision, an in-lieu fee shall be paid. The fee shall be equivalent to the value of the land which would have been dedicated if dedication were required.113 Based on the ratio of three acres per one thousand residents, the project’s 24 residents are estimated to result in a park requirement of approximately 0.072 acres (3,136.32 square feet). Because the developer would be required to pay all applicable in-lieu fees, potential project impacts would be decreased to a less than significant level.

The City of West Covina has an average of 3.41 persons per household. The proposed project’s seven units would increase the City’s population by approximately 24 persons. The population generated by the proposed project would not have a significant impact on city parks because the developer would be required to pay development impact fees to offset any incremental increase in wear and tear of park facilities resulting from the project’s residents. The project proposes an approximately 2,464 square foot recreation leisure area at the southwest corner of the project site which would include a barbeque and picnic shelter. This proposed area is anticipated to at least partially off-set potential project impacts to City recreational facilities.

108 Adjusted student generation factors for multifamily attached units of: 0.1644 elementary school, 0.0860 for middle school, and 0.1249 for high school, the student generation factor was multiplied by the number of units to determine how many elementary, middle school, and high school students would be generated by the proposed project. 109 2017 Department of Finance, Table 2: E-5 City/County Population and Housing Estimates (1/1/2017) Available at: http://www.dof.ca.gov/Forecasting/Demographics/Estimates/E-5/, accessed September 11, 2017. Accessed September 13, 2017. 110 Page 244 of the City of West Covina 2016 General Plan Update and Downtown Plan and Code EIR. 111 Page 32. Ibid. 112 Page 244 Ibid. 113 Section 20-40 of the City of West Covina Municipal Code, available at https://library.municode.com/ca/west_covina/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=MUCO_CH20SURE, accessed September 11, 2017

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.14-3 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.14 – PUBLIC SERVICES ❖ e) Other public facilities?

Less than Significant Impact

Other public facilities in the City of West Covina that could be impacted by the proposed project include library and hospital facilities, which are discussed below. The city’s public library services are provided by the Los Angeles County Public Library system. The City’s library is located at 1601 West Covina Parkway. The West Covina public library is 42,345 square feet and has study rooms, a meeting room, and public computers.114 Library members have access to other nearby Los Angeles County Public Libraries, including: the Baldwin Park Library, Covina Library, Sunkist Library, El Monte Library, Norwood Library and Charter Oaks Library, all of which are within eight miles of the West Covina Public Library.115 As detailed in d) above, the project is anticipated to increase the City’s population by 24 persons. The addition of the proposed project’s 24 residence would have a negligible impact to the public library system because residents of the project site would have access to several library facilities and resources.

The City of West Covina has several hospital facilities, including but not limited to:116

1. Queen of the Valley Hospital, located at 1115 South Sunset Avenue, approximately 0.75 mile south of the project site, with an estimated 5-6-minute drive time.117

2. West Covina Medical Center, located at 725 South Orange Avenue, approximately 0.18 mile south of the project site.118

3. Kindred Hospital San Gabriel Valley, located at 845 North Lark Ellen Avenue, approximately 1.8 miles northeast of the project site.119

The addition of approximately 24 residents to the project site would have a negligible impact on city hospital facilities because there are three hospitals in the project vicinity to serve the additional residents. Project residents would be able to choose which hospital to visit, depending on their location and circumstances. Additionally, other medical facilities are located in nearby cities. Thus, the project would have a less than significant impact in this regard.

114 Page 230 of the City of West Covina 2016 General Plan Update and Downtown Plan and Code EIR. 115 Ibid. 116 Google Maps, 2017 117 Google Earth, 2017 118 Ibid. 119 Ibid.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.14-4 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.15 – RECREATION ❖

4.15 Recreation

Less than Potentially Significant Less than No Would the project: Significant Impact with Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities X such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities X which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?

Less Than Significant Impact

The proposed project includes the development of seven attached townhomes that may increase the use of existing neighborhood parks, regional parks or other recreational facilities. The new units are estimated to be inhabited by approximately 24 new residents. The average household size for the City of West Covina is 3.41 persons per household. The City has 17 parks and six recreational facilities. Parks and recreational facilities in close proximity to the project site include120

1) Del Norte Park, located at 1500 West Rowland Avenue in West Covina, approximately 0.37 mile northeast of the project site.

2) Palmview Park, located at 1340 E. Puente Avenue in West Covina, approximately 1.54 miles northeast of the project site.

3) Orangewood Park, located at 1615 West Merced Avenue in West Covina, approximately 0.60 mile southwest of the project site.

The project proposes an approximately 2,464 square foot recreation leisure area at the southwest corner of the project site which would include a barbeque and picnic shelter. This proposed area is anticipated to at least partially off-set potential project impacts to City recreational facilities. The addition of an estimated 24 new residents is considered less than significant because it would result in an incremental increase in usage of neighborhood parks and recreational facilities. Pursuant to City Municipal Code Section 20-40, Parks and Recreation, dedications for parks and recreation shall be three acres per one thousand residents of the subdivision. Where dedication is

120 Google Earth Pro, 2017

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.15-1 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.15 – RECREATION ❖ not required, in total or in part for a subdivision, an in-lieu fee shall be paid. The fee shall be equivalent to the value of the land which would have been dedicated if dedication were required.121 Based on the ratio of three acres per one thousand residents, the project’s 24 residents are estimated to result in a park requirement of approximately 0.072 acres (3,136.32 square feet). Because the developer would be required to pay all applicable in-lieu fees, potential project impacts would be decreased to a less than significant level. b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?

Less Than Significant Impact

As discussed in threshold a) above, the project proposes an approximately 2,464 square foot recreational leisure area, which will include natural turf and a barbeque/picnic area. It is anticipated that the development of the onsite recreation area will partially off-set the potential project impacts to offsite recreational facilities. In compliance with Section 20-40 of the City’s Municipal Code, the project would be required to pay all applicable in-lieu fees and as such, would reduce the project’s impact to a less than significant level.

121 Section 20-40 of the City of West Covina Municipal Code, available at https://library.municode.com/ca/west_covina/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=MUCO_CH20SURE, accessed September 11, 2017

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.15-2 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.16 - TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC ❖

4.16 Transportation and Traffic

Less than Potentially Significant Less than No Would the project: Significant Impact with Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated a) Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit X and non-motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit? b) Conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including, but not limited to level of service standards and travel demand X measures, or other standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location, X which results in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or X incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency X access? f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or X otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities?

The following analysis is based upon a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) prepared by Transpo Group, dated September 21, 2017. A copy of the TIA is included as Appendix F to this Initial Study. a) Would the project conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non-motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.16-1 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.16 - TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC ❖

intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit?

Less than Significant Impact

The project is accessible from a well-developed street and highway network using a variety of travel modes including car, bus, bicycle and pedestrian access via sidewalks. Access to the project site would be provided by a driveway on Pacific Lane. The proposed 25-foot-wide driveway would generally align with North La Sena Avenue and would allow for two-way travel.122 Figure 4.16-1 depicts the roadway network and location of the study area intersection.

Table 4.16-1 summarizes the operating condition of study intersections during the AM and PM weekday peak hours under existing conditions (without the project). Traffic counts were taken at the Pacific Avenue/Pacific Lane intersection in late August 2017 when schools were in session. The intersection as a whole and its individual turning movements can be described alphabetically with a range of levels of service (A through F), with level of service (LOS) A indicating free-flow traffic and LOS F indicating extreme congestion and long vehicle delays. 123

Table 4.16-1 EXISTING WITHOUT PROJECT WEEKDAY PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION LOS124

As shown in Table 4.16-1, the Pacific Avenue/Pacific Lane intersection is currently operating at LOS D during the AM peak hour and LOS C during the PM peak hour. The W. Pacific Avenue-W. Covina Parkway/Garvey Avenue at the I-10 W/B ramps was not analyzed for existing conditions.

Operation of the proposed project would introduce vehicle trips onto the local roadway network from workers, deliveries and patrons traveling to and from the site. The trip rate calculation and trip generation for the project is shown below in Table 4.16-2. Trip rates are based upon a traffic survey conducted on August 30, 2017 at the Pacific Avenue/Pacific Lane intersection.

122 Page 25 of the Traffic Impact Analysis for the 7-Dwelling Unit Residential Subdivision Development in West Covina prepared by Transpogroup, November 15, 2017. 123 At signalized intersections, LOS was calculated using the Intersection Capacity Utilization methodology. LOS at signalized intersections is measured based on the sum of the volume to capacity (v/c) ratio of the critical movements. 124 Page of the Traffic Impact Analysis for the 7-Dwelling Unit Residential Subdivision Development in West Covina prepared by Transpogroup, November 15, 2017.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.16-2 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018  SECTION 4.16 ‐ TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC 

Figure 4.16‐1 PROJECT SITE LOCATION AND STUDY AREA

6007/7‐Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.16‐3 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.16 – TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC ❖

Table 4.16-2 PROJECT TRIP GENERATION

AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour

Land Use Units Daily In Out Total In Out Total

Trip Rates

Single Family Detached Housing1 DU 9.52 0.19 0.56 0.75 0.63 0.37 1.00 Tow nhomes2 DU 5.81 0.07 0.37 0.44 0.35 0.17 0.52

Project Trip Generation

Existing Single Family Home 1 DU -10 0 -1 -1 -1 0 -1 New Tow n Homes 7 DU 41 1 3 4 2 1 3

Total Trip Generation 31 1 2 3 1 1 2

DU = dw elling unit 1 Trip rates from the Institute of Transporation Engineers, Trip Generation, 9th Edition, 2012. Land Use Code 210 - Single Family Home Detached. 2 Trip rates from the Institute of Transporation Engineers, Trip Generation, 9th Edition, 2012. Land Use Code 230 - Residential Condominium/. Source: Table 6 of the Traffic Impact Analysis for the 7-Dwelling Unit Residential Subdivision Development in West Covina prepared by Transpogroup, November 15, 2017.

As shown in Table 4.16-2, the project would generate approximately three AM peak hour trips (one inbound and two outbound), and two PM peak hour trips (one inbound and one outbound). For purposes of analysis, project trips were distributed to the study area intersections using logical travel paths between the project and other local land uses, as well as the location of the project in relation to local and regional transportation facilities.125 Pacific Avenue/I-10 westbound ramps were under construction and both on- and off-ramps were closed at the time that the traffic study was conducted. However, because the project would generate less than 10 AM and PM peak hour trips (net 3 in AM peak hour, and net 2 in PM peak hour), the proposed project would not significantly impact operations at the ramp intersections.126

An intersection operations analysis was conducted for the study intersection to evaluate the existing plus Project weekday AM and PM peak hour conditions, as these periods represent the highest cumulative total traffic for the adjacent street system. These are typically the time periods when the highest traffic volumes are on the street system, and typically represent peak commute hours. Table 4.16-3 provides a comparison between the Existing and Existing Plus project conditions for the weekday AM and PM peak hours. As shown in Table 4.16-3, the Pacific Avenue/Pacific Lane intersection currently operates at LOS D in the AM peak hour and LOS C in the PM peak hour. With the addition of the project, this intersection would continue operate at LOS D in

125 Page 13 of the Traffic Impact Analysis for the 7-Dwelling Unit Residential Subdivision Development in West Covina prepared by Transpogroup, November 15, 2017. 126 Page 13 Ibid.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.16-4 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.16 – TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC ❖ the AM peak hour and LOS C in the PM peak hour. The project would not impact this intersection under Existing plus Project conditions because it falls below the City’s thresholds of significance127 and the project would increase the V/C ratio128 less than 0.02. Therefore, no impacts are expected in the Existing plus Project condition.

Table 4.16-4 provides a comparison between the Opening Year (2019) and Opening Year plus project conditions for the weekday AM and PM peak hours. As shown in this table, the Pacific Avenue/Pacific Lane intersection is forecast to operate at LOS D in both peak hours under Opening Year (2019) conditions. With the addition of the project, this intersection is forecast to continue to operate at LOS D during both peak hours. The W. Pacific Avenue/W. Covina Parkway/Garvey Avenue at the I10 W/B ramps intersection is forecast to operate at LOS D during the AM peak hour and LOS E, during the PM peak hour under the ICU methodology. The project would not impact this intersection under Opening Year (2019) plus Project conditions as it falls below the City’s thresholds of significance, and the project would add less than 0.02 to the volume to capacity ratio at the Pacific Avenue/Pacific Lane intersection. Therefore, no impacts are expected in the Opening Year (2019) plus Project condition. Under the HCM 2010 methodologies, this intersection is forecast to operate at LOS F, during both peak hours.

Table 4.16-3 EXISTING AND EXISTING PLUS PROJECT CONDITIONS

Source: Table 7 of the Traffic Impact Analysis for the 7-Dwelling Unit Residential Subdivision Development in West Covina prepared by Transpogroup, November 15, 2017.

127 Increasing the volume to capacity ratio (V/C) at an intersection by 0.02 or more when the intersection is operating at LOS D, E, or F. 128 The V/C ratio is the volume to capacity ratio, which represents the sufficiency of an intersection to accommodate the vehicular demand. https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/research/safety/04091/07.cfm

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.16-5 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.16 – TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC ❖

Table 4.16-4 OPENING YEAR (2019) AND OPENING YEAR (2019) PLUS PROJECT PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE

Source: Table 8 of the Traffic Impact Analysis for the 7-Dwelling Unit Residential Subdivision Development in West Covina prepared by Transpogroup, November 15, 2017. b) Would the project conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including, but not limited to level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways?

Less than Significant Impact

The Los Angeles County Congestion Management Program (CMP) requires evaluation of all CMP arterial monitoring intersections where the project adds 50 or more new peak hour trips. The nearest CMP monitoring intersections are Azusa Avenue/Cameron Avenue and Azusa Avenue/Workman Avenue. Due to the location of these intersections and their distance, it is unlikely that 50 peak hour trips would be added to these locations. Similarly, the CMP requires CMP freeway mainline monitoring locations to be evaluated when the project would add 150 or more trips at the monitoring location. The nearest CMP freeway monitoring station is located on I-10, east of Puente Avenue. The project would not add 150 trips to this CMP freeway mainline monitoring station. Based on the trip generation and location, no CMP arterial intersection or freeway mainline monitoring stations are required to be included in the analysis.129 Therefore, the project would not conflict with an applicable congestion management program and less than significant impacts are anticipated. c) Would the project result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location, which results in substantial safety risks?

No Impact

The project proposes infill development of seven townhomes with an estimated population of 24 persons. The project proposes two-story buildings which would not interfere with airport operations because it is not of a height that would interfere with airplane flights. Thus, due to the project’s nature and location it would not result in a change in air traffic patterns, would not substantially increase air traffic levels or in any way alter the location of air traffic. Additionally, the

129 Page 1 of the Traffic Impact Analysis for the 7-Dwelling Unit Residential Subdivision Development in West Covina prepared by Transpogroup, November 15, 2017

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.16-6 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.16 – TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC ❖ project is not located within the boundary of an Airport Land Use Plan (ALUP), or within two miles of a public airport or public use airport.130 For these reasons, the project would have no impacts on air traffic. d) Would the project substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?

No Impact

The project would retain the existing point of ingress and egress to the site. Access to the project site would be provided by a driveway on Pacific Lane. This driveway would generally align with North La Sena Avenue. The driveway intersecting with Pacific Lane would be 25 feet in width, and would allow for two-way travel. Site design includes five parallel parking spaces on the east side of the drive aisle. The project has been designed to provide adequate lines of sight, proper emergency access, and allows smooth vehicle flow in the project site. The proposed land use is similar to the existing multi-family residential land use located immediately east of the project site. Therefore, the project would not increase hazards due to a design feature, and no impact would occur. e) Would the project result in inadequate emergency access?

Less than Significant Impact

The project site plan would provide ingress to and egress from the site via Pacific Lane. The area north of Building B and south of Building A is designated for emergency access, with “NO PARKING, FOR MEDIC PARKING ONLY” written on the pavement. Additionally, the project includes a pedestrian access gate with Knox box131 for fire department access so that the fire department can access the site from Pacific Avenue. The project site plan has been reviewed by the City’s fire department and the project complies with all emergency access and site line requirements. Therefore, the project would not result in inadequate emergency access during operation and no impacts would occur.

Construction activity would temporarily increase the number of heavy trucks and equipment that travel to the site, which could impede emergency access to the site through congestion or restricting movement due to equipment size. According to the project’s architect, a maximum of 20 construction workers would be on site during the project’s construction phase. The project applicant is estimating that the project would receive materials three times a week and materials would be hauled off site once a week. It should be also noted that the soil would be balanced onsite. For the purposes of the construction analysis, construction workers and trucks on a peak construction day were analyzed. A construction analysis was conducted for the Opening Year (2019) conditions, as this would consider the growth from the existing traffic volumes and the cumulative projects. Construction is expected to start in March/April of 2018 and take approximately one year. Based on the data provided by the project architect and applicant, the construction activities are expected to generate a maximum of 44 daily vehicle trips, 22 AM peak hour trips (22 inbound and 0 outbound), and 22 PM peak hour trips (0 inbound and 22 outbound). A 3.0 passenger-car-equivalent (PCE) factor was applied to all truck traffic. The PCE factor converts trucks into the equivalent passenger car equivalent for the purposes of analysis. This would result

130 Google Earth Pro, accessed July 14, 2017. 131 A Knox Box houses entry keys and/or access cards so that emergency responders can access a site or building(s) in the event of an emergency.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.16-7 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.16 – TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC ❖ in 52 daily PCE trips, 26 PCE AM peak hour trips (26 inbound and 0 outbound), and 26 PCE PM peak hour trips (0 inbound and 26 outbound).132

Table 4.16-5 illustrates the trip generation estimates for the construction activities.

Table 4.16-5 CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES TRIP GENERATION

AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour

Land Use Units Daily In Out Total In Out Total

Construction Trip Generation (in vehicles)

Construction Workers 20 WORKERS 40 20 0 20 0 20 20 Materials Delivery 1 TRUCKS 2 1 0 1 0 1 1 Materials Haul 1 TRUCKS 2 1 0 1 0 1 1 Total Trip Generation (in vehicles) 44 22 0 22 0 22 22

Construction Trip Generation (in PCE) 1 Construction Workers (@ 1.0 PCE) 20 WORKERS 40 20 0 20 0 20 20 Materials Delivery (@ 3.0 PCE) 1 TRUCKS 6 3 0 3 0 3 3 Materials Haul (@ 3.0 PCE) 1 TRUCKS 6 3 0 3 0 3 3 Total Trip Generation (in PCE) 52 26 0 26 0 26 26 1 PCE = passenger car equivalence. A 1.0 PCE w as assumed for construction w orkers and a 3.0 PCE w as assumed for trucks.

Source: Table 9 of the Traffic Impact Analysis for the 7-Dwelling Unit Residential Subdivision Development in West Covina prepared by Transpogroup, November 15, 2017.

As shown in Table 4.16-5, the total construction trips generated by the project would be 52 daily peak hour trips, which would be from construction workers, materials delivery, and hauling materials from the site.

Table 4.16-6 provides a comparison between the Opening Year and Opening Year plus Construction Activities for the weekday AM and PM peak hours.

132 Page 20 of the Traffic Impact Analysis for the 7-Dwelling Unit Residential Subdivision Development in West Covina prepared by Transpo Group, November 15, 2017.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.16-8 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.16 – TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC ❖

Table 4.16-6 OPENING YEAR (2019) AND OPENING YEAR (2019) PLUS CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE

Source: Table 10 of the Traffic Impact Analysis for the 7-Dwelling Unit Residential Subdivision Development in West Covina prepared by Transpo Group, November 15, 2017

As shown in Table 4.16-6, the Pacific Avenue/Pacific Lane intersection is forecast to operate at LOS D in both peak hours under Opening Year (2019) conditions. With the addition of the construction activities, this intersection is forecast to continue to operate at LOS D during both peak hours. The project would not impact this intersection under Opening Year (2019) plus Construction Activities conditions, since it falls below the City’s thresholds of significance (i.e., the City considers an impact when the project would increase the V/C ratio at an intersection by 0.02 or more when the intersection is operating at LOS D, E, or F), and the project would increase the V/C ratio less than 0.02.

The W. Covina Parkway/Garvey Avenue at the 1-10 W/B ramps intersection is forecast to operate at LOS D during the AM peak hour and LOS E during the PM peak hour under the ICU methodology. Under the HCM 2010 methodology, this intersection is forecast to operate at LOS F during both peak hours. During the PM peak hour, the decrease with the addition of construction traffic is attributed to the intersection already being forecast to operate at a high delay. Under both methodologies, the change in ICU and delay is barely measurable.

Therefore, no impacts are expected in the Opening Year (2019) plus Construction Activities scenario and as such, the project would have less than significant impacts regarding emergency access during the construction phase. f) Would the project conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities?

Less than Significant Impact

The project site has no publicly accessible throughways and no bicycle paths are directly adjacent to the site.133 Any effects on sidewalk accessibility would be temporary and transient, during the construction phase of the project. For these reasons, the project would not conflict with policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities and impacts would be less than significant.

133 Google Earth Pro, 2017.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.16-9 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.17 – TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES ❖

4.17 Tribal Cultural Resources

Less-than- Potentially Significant Less-than- Would the Project: Significant Impact with Significant No Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource that is listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of X Historical Resources or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code § 5020.1(k)? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource that is determined to be a significant resource to a California X Native American tribe pursuant to the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code § 5024.1(c)? a) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource that is listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code § 5020.1(k)?

Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation

Assembly Bill 52 (AB 52) requires meaningful consultation with California Native American Tribes on potential impacts to tribal cultural resources (TCRs), as defined in Public Resources Code § 21074. Tribal cultural resources are sites, features, places, cultural landscapes, sacred places, and objects with cultural value to a California Native American tribe that are either eligible or listed in the California Register of Historical Resources or local register of historical resources.134

As part of the AB 52 process, Native American tribes must submit a written request to lead agency to be notified of projects within their traditionally and culturally affiliated area. The lead agency must provide written, formal notification to those tribes within 14 days of deciding to undertake a project. The tribe must respond to lead agency within 30 days of receiving this notification if they want to engage in consultation on the project, and the lead agency must begin the consultation process within 30 days of receiving the tribe’s request. Consultation concludes when either (1) the parties agree to mitigation measures to avoid a significant effect on a tribal cultural resource, or (2) a party, acting in good faith and after reasonable effort, concludes mutual agreement cannot be reached.

134 California Natural Resources Agency (CNRA), 2007. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act. Electronic document.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.17-1 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.17 – TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES ❖

Letters were sent by the City, the lead agency, to local Native American tribes asking if they wished to participate in AB 52 consultation for projects within the City of West Covina. The City received a reply only from the Soboba Band of Luiseño Indians requesting to be notified of such projects. The City sent notice of the 7-Unit Subdivision Project to the Soboba Band of Luiseño Indians on September 19, 2017. There has not been a reply requesting consultation to date from this tribe. No sites were documented in the NAHC’s Sacred Lands File search. No resources as defined by Public Resources Code § 21074 have been identified (Attachment C: “Native American Heritage Commission Records Search and Native American Contacts” in Appendix D). Additionally, the project site has not been recommended for historic designation for prehistoric and tribal cultural resources. No specific Tribal resources have been identified.

No prehistoric or historic archaeological resources were observed during the field survey. The previous cultural resources surveys within the half-mile buffer zone resulted in no archaeological sites or isolates being recorded. A single historic property was identified within the half-mile buffer zone, none are within the area of potential effect (APE), and the results of the pedestrian assessment indicate it is highly unlikely that historic properties will be adversely affected by construction of the project. The cultural resource study findings at the South Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC) suggest that there is a low potential for finding resources.

A mitigation measure (MM) for minimizing impacts on potential Tribal Cultural Resources is applicable to the project site because there are two creeks trending westward that are north and south of the project site that would have provided a suitable environment for resources desired by the local Native American peoples. Therefore, the potential for subsurface cultural and or historical deposits is considered to be moderate.135 . The applicable mitigation related to Tribal Cultural Resources is provided below.

Mitigation Measure

TCR-1: All work shall stop within a 30-foot radius of the discovery. Work shall not continue until the discovery has been evaluated by a qualified archaeologist and the local Native American representative has been contacted and consulted to assist in the accurate recordation and recovery of the resources.

The City would implement mitigation measure TCR-1, which requires consultation of a qualified archaeologist and the local Native American representative, if unanticipated discoveries are made during construction activities. With implementation of mitigation measureTCR-1, impacts to tribal cultural resources from the proposed project would be less than significant. b) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource that is determined to be a significant resource to a California Native American tribe pursuant to the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code § 5024.1(c)?

No Impact

To date, the lead agency has received a single request for notification from a California Native American tribe regarding resources defined by Public Resources Code § 21074. This was from the

135 Page 14 of the UltraSystems Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for the 7-Unit Subdivision Project in the City of West Covina.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.17-2 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.17 – TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES ❖

Soboba Band of Luiseño Indians (Soboba Band). The City sent notice of the 7-Unit Subdivision project to the Soboba Band on September 19, 2017. There has not been a reply requesting consultation to date from this tribe. There is no substantial evidence that Tribal Cultural Resources are present on the project site, including no sites listed with the SLF. Therefore, the proposed project would not be expected to result in an impact related to tribal cultural resources, pending consultation with the Soboba Band.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.17-3 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.18 – UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS ❖

4.18 Utilities and Service Systems

Less than Potentially Significant Less than No Would the project: Significant Impact with Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable X Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB)? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing X facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new stormwater drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the X construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or X are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the X project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments? f) Would the project be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted X capacity to accommodate the project’s solid waste disposal needs? g) Would the project comply with federal, state, and local statutes and X regulations related to solid waste?

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.18-1 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.18 – UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS ❖ a) Would the project exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB)?

Less than Significant Impact

The project site is located in the jurisdiction of the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board.136 The project site is currently served by existing sewer infrastructure. Wastewater generated by the proposed project would be typical of other residential land uses in the City of West Covina, comprised of domestically generated wastewater. As is the case with the existing single-family home, wastewater generated by the proposed project would be conveyed to the San Jose Creek Water Reclamation Plant (San Jose Creek WRP), which is operated by the Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts (LACSD). Based on an estimated residential wastewater generation of 101 gallons per day (gpd) per capita137, the proposed project’s water demand138 would be estimated to be approximately 2,410.87 gpd139, which would be an increase in wastewater generation compared to existing conditions. However, the San Jose Creek WRP has the capacity to treat wastewater from the proposed project, as detailed in b) below. Thus, the project would not exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the Los Angeles RWQCB. b) Would the project require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects?

Less than Significant Impact

Wastewater Treatment

The City of West Covina’s wastewater system is managed by the City of West Covina Public Works Department. The collection system contains 227 miles of gravity flow sewer lines and six pump stations. About 98% of sewer flows from these local sewers, discharge into the LACSD facilities for treatment and disposal. The remaining two percent of total sewage discharges into the adjacent City of Baldwin Park sewer system and unincorporated county sewer systems, and is then treated at the LACSD’s Whittier Narrows treatment facilities. A sewer system capacity evaluation indicates the sanitary sewer system serving the City is operating within 65% to 85% of capacity.140 Sewers above 65% capacity will need to be assessed and replaced to accommodate new growth. Construction of new or replacement sewer lines shall be consistent with the City’s Sewer System Management plan and cost will be allocated equitably and fairly between the existing and new users.141

Effluent is collected for treatment at a sanitation plant operated by LACSD. LACSD operates ten water reclamation plants (WRPs) and one ocean discharge facility (Joint Water Pollution Control

136 State and Regional Water Boards Interactive Map. Accessed at http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/waterboards_map.shtml, on September 12, 2017. 137 County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County, JOS 2010 Master Facilities Plan, Draft Program EIR, November 1994, page 2-5. 138 Based on average household size of 3.41 from page 222 of the City of West Covina 2016 General Plan Update and Downtown Plan and Code Final Environmental Impact Report. http://www.westcovina.org/departments/planning/general-plan-update Accessed September 11, 2017. 139 3.41 persons per household x 7 households= 23.87 persons and 23.87 persons x 101 gpd per capita= 2,410.87 gpd for the proposed project). 140 Wildan Engineering, Sewer System Management Plan for City of West Covina, 2016 Update (January 2017). 141 City of West Covina, West Covina General Plan, December 2016, page 82.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.18-2 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.18 – UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS ❖

Plant), which treat approximately 510 million gallons per day (mgd), 165 mgd of which are available for reuse. The capacities at these facilities range from 0.2 mgd (La Cañada WRP) to 400 mgd (Joint Water Pollution Control Plant).142

The City of West Covina is part of the Joint Outfall System (JOS), which covers approximately 660 square miles, from the foothills of the San Gabriel Mountains in the north to San Pedro Bay in the south, and from the Los Angeles city limits on the west to the Los Angeles County border on the east. The JOS includes the main Joint Water Pollution Control Plant (JWPCP) in Carson and six satellite water reclamation plants (WRPs). The JWPCP serves a population of about 3.5 million people and has a treatment capacity of 400 mgd.143

As described in a), wastewater generated in the project area is conveyed to the San Jose Creek WRP, located at 1965 Workman Mill Road, in unincorporated Los Angeles County, provides primary, secondary, and tertiary treatment. The San Jose Creek WRP has a design capacity of 100 mgd and currently processes an average flow of 42 mgd.144

As detailed in a), there are an average of 3.41 persons per household in the City based on an estimated residential wastewater generation of 101 gpd per capita145, the proposed project’s water demand would be estimated to be approximately 2,410.87 gpd.

The projected wastewater generation of the proposed project is well under the remaining capacity of the San Jose Creek WRP. No new offsite treatment facilities will be required to meet the projected demand. As a result, the project’s potential effects regarding wastewater treatment facilities are less than significant.

The project may require construction of new sewer lateral to the existing sewer main located along adjacent roadways. These improvements would take place within the existing right-of-way. The City has Standard Plans and Specifications for the Construction of Sanitary Sewers to ensure sewer lines and connections are properly designed and constructed. The plans are submitted to the City’s Department of Public Works for review of functional design and ensure adequate capacity of the public sewer system to accommodate the waste.

Given the above, the project would not result in the construction of new wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects.

Water Treatment

As discussed in d), Azusa Light & Water would provide water to the project site. The project’s anticipated water demand of 3.71-acre-feet per year would not require or result in the construction of new water facilities or expansion of existing facilities from Suburban Water Company. Therefore, the project would have a less than significant impact in this regard.

142 http://www.lacsd.org/wastewater/wwfacilities/default.asp, accessed July 14, 2017. 143 http://www.lacsd.org/wastewater/wwfacilities/joint_outfall_system_wrp/san_jose_creek.asp, accessed July 14, 2017. 144 http://www.lacsd.org/wastewater/wwfacilities/joint_outfall_system_wrp/san_jose_creek.asp, accessed July 14, 2017. 145 County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County, JOS 2010 Master Facilities Plan, Draft Program EIR, November 1994, page 2-5.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.18-3 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.18 – UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS ❖ c) Would the project require or result in the construction of new stormwater drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects?

Less than Significant Impact

Implementation of the proposed project would result in a nominal increase in the amount of impervious surface on the project site; however, no significant change in the amount of surface runoff volumes within the project site is anticipated due to relatively small area that would be made impervious, compared to existing conditions. The storm-water runoff would continue to be conveyed to local storm drains and channels via the curb and gutters. The nature and extent of storm water runoff ultimately discharged into the existing storm drain system would not be significantly increased compared to existing levels. Therefore, the project is anticipated to result in a less than significant impact to stormwater drainage facilities. d) Would the project have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed?

Less than Significant Impact

Potable water for the project site is provided by Azusa Light & Water (ALW).146 ALW provides water service to an approximately 14.2-square-mile service area that covers all of the City of Azusa and portions of the cities of Glendora, Covina, West Covina, Irwindale, and unincorporated Los Angeles County.147 ALW serves a population of about 106,332 through a water distribution system that includes 11 wells, 13 reservoirs and 231 miles of pipeline. ALW's water project supply availability through 2040 consists of an estimated 24,350 AFY of groundwater pumped from the Main Basin, 10,100 AFY of treated surface water from the San Gabriel River, and 4,000 AFY of imported water purchased from Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD) for a total of 38,450 AFY. From 2010 through 2015, ALW consumed roughly 20,000 AF of water on an annual basis. Based on the current capacity of ALW's supply availability described above (38,450 AFY), ALW can expect to meet the needs of its customers through 2040.148

Based on an estimated residential water demand of 0.53 acre-feet (AF)/unit/year149, the proposed project’s water demand would be estimated to be approximately 3,311 gpd (3.71 AFY), or 0.009 percent of ALW’s current water supply. The project would result in a negligible increase in the demand for domestic water. However, the increase would not be significant because adequate water supplies and facilities are available to serve the proposed project, as the project constitutes a fraction (0.009 percent)150 of the ALW’s available water supplies. In addition, the proposed project would be required to implement features that would reduce water consumption as defined in the City’s municipal code, including but not limited to § 26-750.1300, Landscape water use standards, which implements the City’s water efficient landscape ordinance.151 Based on these reasons, impacts are considered to be less than significant.

146 City of Azusa, GIS, Azusa Light & Water-Water Service Area Map, May 21, 2008. 147 Azusa Light & Water 2015 Urban Water Management Plan, page 1. 148 Azusa Light & Water 2015 Urban Water Management Plan, page 2-14. 149 Azusa Light & Water 2015 Urban Water Management Plan, page 4-14. 150 3.71 AFY project demand/38,450 AFY= .0096 percent (24,350AFY+10,100 AFY+4,000 AFY= 38,450 AFY) 151 City of West Covina Municipal Code https://library.municode.com/ca/west_covina/codes/code_of_ordinances Accessed September 12, 2017

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.18-4 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.18 – UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS ❖ e) Would the project result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments?

Less than Significant Impact

As described in b), the volume of wastewater generated by the project would represents only a fraction of the existing daily capacity of the wastewater treatment facility providing service in the area. Therefore, the project would be within the existing capacity of the wastewater treatment provider and less than significant impacts would occur. f) Would the project be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project’s solid waste disposal needs?

Less than Significant Impact

Athens Services is contracted by the City to provide waste hauling service in West Covina and for Athens' materials recovery facility (MRF) program. The City's waste is sent to one of three materials recovery facilities where recyclables from the waste stream are retrieved. Waste does not go directly to a landfill. Instead, waste goes to Athens's MRF for separation of recyclable materials from disposable materials. After the materials are sorted, tires, green waste, steel, and wood are sent to special facilities for disposal or recycling. The remaining waste materials are loaded onto trailers and taken to one of many landfills found in southern California.152

The majority of the waste generated within the City of West Covina in 2016 was taken to the Mid-Valley Sanitary Landfill.153 The Mid-Valley Sanitary Landfill is a Class-III landfill that currently accepts up to 7,500 tons per day, with a permitted total capacity of 101,300,000 cubic yards and a remaining capacity of 67,520,000 cubic yards. Anticipated closure date for this facility is 2033.154

Based on a per resident disposal rate of 12.23 pounds/household/day155, the proposed project’s solid waste generation is estimated to be approximately 85.61 pounds per day. The estimated 15.3 tons156 of waste generated by the proposed project annually can be accommodated within the existing landfill capacity and as such, the project would have a less than significant impact in this regard. g) Would the project comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste?

152 Athens Services http://www.westcovina.org/departments/public-works/environmental-services/athens-services Accessed October 10, 2017 153 http://www.calrecycle.ca.gov/LGCentral/Reports/Viewer.aspx?P=ReportYear%3d2016%26 ReportName%3dReportEDRSJurisDisposalByFacility%26OriginJurisdictionIDs%3d569, accessed July 14, 2017. 154 http://www.calrecycle.ca.gov/SWFacilities/Directory/36-AA-0055/Detail/, accessed July 14, 2017. 155 Page 284 of the City of West Covina 2016 General Plan Update and Downtown Plan and Code EIR. Which provides projected solid waste generation factors by land use. The single family residential generation factor of 12.23 pounds per household per day is used as a worst-case analysis (12.23 pounds per household per day= 85.61 pounds of solid waste for the entire proposed project). 156 85.61 pounds per day x 365 days/year= approximately 31,248 pounds per year= approximately 15.62 tons.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.18-5 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.18 – UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS ❖

Less than Significant Impact

In 1989, the California Legislature enacted the California Integrated Waste Management Act (AB 939), in an effort to address solid waste problems and capacities in a comprehensive manner. The law required each city and county to divert 50 percent of its waste from landfills by the year 2000. The law further required every city and county to prepare a Source Reduction and Recycling Element. Requirements established by AB 939 are implemented through the County of Los Angeles Countywide Integrated Waste Management Plan (CIWMP) and the City of West Covina Source Reduction and Recycling Element (SRRE). The proposed project would comply with the requirements mandated by the CIWMP, West Covina SRRE, and West Covina Municipal Code for reduction and disposal of solid waste.

Solid waste generated by the project would be collected by Athens Services, the designated waste hauler, and transported offsite to transfer facilities and landfills for reuse, recycling and/or disposal, as appropriate.

The proposed project, like all other development in the City, will be required to adhere to all pertinent ordinances related to waste reduction and recycling. As a result, the project would comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.18-6 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.19 – MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE ❖

4.19 Mandatory Findings of Significance

Less than Potentially Significant Less than No Would the project: Significant Impact with Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated a) The potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal X community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in X connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? c) Environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human X beings, either directly or indirectly? a) Would the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory?

Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated

The project site is located in a highly urbanized area, which provides low habitat value for special- status plant and wildlife species. Also, the project site contains structures, sidewalks, and a disturbed lot that would not support sensitive habitats or special-status species. No special-status plants or wildlife157 were observed within the project site. Thus, no direct or indirect impacts on special-status plants or wildlife species are anticipated.

The project site contains vegetation and structures that could potentially provide cover and nesting habitat for urbanized bird species protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and the

157 Special-status species include candidate and sensitive species.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.19-1 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.19 – MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE ❖

California Fish and Game Code. Indirect impacts on breeding birds could occur from increased noise, vibration, and dust during construction, which could adversely affect the breeding behavior of some birds, and lead to the loss (take) of eggs and chicks, or nest abandonment. If construction occurs during breeding bird season, a qualified biologist will conduct a pre-construction survey for breeding birds, and active and potential nesting sites within the limits of project disturbance,158 as required by BR-1 to ensure compliance with MBTA and the Fish and Game Code. Furthermore, implementation of construction best management practices and general plant and wildlife avoidance measures would ensure the protection of biological resources. Thus, potential impacts to biological resources would be reduced to less than significant levels.

No impacts were identified which would affect resources from major periods of California history or prehistory. None of the Native American tribes consulted were aware of tribal resources at the project site.159 b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)?

Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated

Section 4.3 of this Initial Study concludes that construction and operation of the project would not generate air emissions that exceed significant thresholds for criteria air pollutants, nor conflict with policies of the air quality management plan for the South Coast Air Basin.

Section 4.7 of this Initial Study concludes that construction and operation of the project would not generate greenhouse gas emissions that exceed significant thresholds for the South Coast Air Quality Management District.

Section 4.4 of this Initial Study found that with implementation of mitigation measures BR-1 through BR-3, potential impacts to biological resources would be reduced to less than significant.

Section 4.8 of this Initial Study found that with implementation of mitigation measure HAZ-1, potential impact from asbestos containing materials and lead based paint would be reduced to a less than significant level.

Section 4.12 of this Initial Study found that with implementation of mitigation measures N-1 through N-4, potential short-term construction noise impacts would be reduced to a less than significant level.

Section 4.16 of this Initial Study found that the Pacific Avenue/Pacific Lane intersection is forecast to operate at LOS D in both peak hours under Opening Year (2019) conditions. With the addition of the project, this intersection is forecast to continue to operate at LOS D during both peak hours. The project would not impact this intersection under Opening Year (2019) plus Project conditions as it falls below the City’s thresholds of significance and the project would increase the volume to capacity ratio less than 0.02. Therefore, no impacts are expected in the Opening Year (2019) plus

158 Described in Section 4.4, mitigation measure BR-1 for construction during breeding season. 159 See Section 4.5 in this Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.19-2 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 4.19 – MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE ❖

Project condition. Similarly, the project would have not impacts in the Existing plus Project condition.

Section 4.17 of this Initial Study found that with implementation of mitigation, measure TCR-1 the project would have a less than significant impact regarding tribal cultural resources.

Concurrent and future projects within the jurisdiction of the City would be subject to discretionary review processes and standard conditions of approval that regulate compliance with building codes. All projects would be examined on a project-by-project basis to determine the applicable type of CEQA review process and would be required to recommend mitigation measures that would reduce potentially significant impacts (where necessary). These projects would be subject to applicable City development standards and design review procedures stipulated in the City’s Municipal Code. Impacts of the proposed project in conjunction with those current and future projects would be less than significant when viewed together. c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?

Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated

Section 4.8 of this Initial Study includes mitigation measure HAZ-1 to reduce potential impacts from asbestos-containing materials and lead based paint to a less than significant level. With implementation of mitigation measure HAZ-1, potential hazardous materials impacts from demolition of the existing onsite home would be less than significant.

As discussed in Sections 4.1 through 4.18 of this Initial Study, no environmental effects were identified as having any significant impacts after mitigation measures were incorporated. Hence, no environmental factors or effects were found to cause a substantial adverse effect on human beings, either directly or indirectly. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant after mitigation.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 4.19-3 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 5.0 – REFERENCES ❖

5.0 REFERENCES

A Guide to Understanding Residential Subdivisions in California, 2004. Available online at: http://bre.ca.gov/files/pdf/ResidentialSubdivisionsGuide.pdf. Accessed on September 14, 2017.

Athens Services. Available online at: http://www.westcovina.org/departments/public- works/environmental-services/athens-services. Accessed on October 10, 2017

Azusa Light & Water 2015 Urban Water Management Plan, page 4-14.

Calfire website located at: http://www.fire.ca.gov/fire_prevention/fhsz_maps/FHSZ/los_angeles/West_Covina.pdf. Accessed on July 14, 2017.

California Code of Regulations Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3.

California Department of Water Resources (CDWR). 1966. California’s Groundwater - Bulletin 118.

California Emission Estimator Model (CalEEMod)®, Version 2016.3.1. California Air Pollution Control Officers Association. September 2016.

California Important Farmland Finder. Available online at: http://maps.conservation.ca.gov/ciff/ciff.html/. Accessed on July 14, 2017.

California Natural Resources Agency (CNRA), 2007. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act. Electronic document.

California Public Utilities Code §§ 21670to 21679.5.

California’s Health and Safety Code, Division 20. Miscellaneous Health and Safety Provisions, §§ 24000-26204, Chapter 6.5. Hazardous Waste Control.

CDFW CNDDB, Available online at: https://map.dfg.ca.gov/rarefind/view/RareFind.aspx. Accessed on July 19, 2017.

Chico, T. and Koizumi, J. Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology. South Coast Air Quality Management District, Diamond Bar, California. June 2003.

City of West Covina Energy Action Plan. 2011.

City of West Covina 2016 General Plan Update and Downtown Plan and Code Final Environmental Impact Report (SCH No. 2016021069), available at http://www.westcovina.org/home/showdocument?id=12212, accessed September 7, 2017.

City of West Covina General Plan, http://www.westcovina.org/home/showdocument?id=12214. Accessed on September 8, 2017.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 5-1 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 5.0 – REFERENCES ❖

City of West Covina Municipal Code. Available online at: https://library.municode.com/ca/west_covina/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=MUCO_ CH26ZO_ARTVIPRHENOFECA_DIV10SIMIDWUNAREXMAUNSIEX_S26-296.1300FI. Accessed on September 13, 2017

City of West Covina Municipal Code. Available online at: https://library.municode.com/ca/west_covina/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=11504. Accessed on September 21, 2017.

City of West Covina Website: https://www.wcpd.org/services/service-areas/. Accessed on September 5, 2017

City of West Covina Website: http://www.westcovina.org/departments/fire-/. Accessed on September 5, 2017

City of West Covina Zoning Map (2013). Available online at: http://www.westcovina.org/home/showdocument?id=631. Accessed on September 7, 2017.

City of West Covina, Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan. Internet URL: http://www.westcovina.org/departments/fire-/disaster-preparedness/natural-hazaard- mitigation-plan/section-8-flood. Accessed on July 14, 2017.

Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. 2007

CNPS Topo Quad Search: http://cnps.site.aplus.net/cgi- bin/inv/inventory.cgi/BrowseAZ?name=quad. Accessed on August 18, 2017.

County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County, JOS 2010 Master Facilities Plan, Draft Program EIR, November 1994, page 2-5.

Department of Conservation, Seismic Hazard Zone Report for the Baldwin Park 7.5-Minute Quadrangle, Los Angeles County, California, 1998.

Department of Finance, 2017. Table 2: E-5 City/County Population and Housing Estimates (1/1/2017). Available online at: http://www.dof.ca.gov/Forecasting/Demographics/Estimates/E-5/. Accessed on September 11, 2017.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 5-2 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 5.0 – REFERENCES ❖

FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map Flood Map Service Center. Available online at: https://msc.fema.gov/portal. Accessed on July 2017.

Final 2016 Air Quality Management Plan. Executive Summary. South Coast Air Quality Management District, Diamond Bar, CA. Available online at: http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default- source/clean-air-plans/air-quality-management-plans/2016-air-quality-management- plan/final-2016-aqmp/executive-summary.pdf?sfvrsn=4. ftp://ftp.consrv.ca.gov/pub/dmg/pubs/ofr/OFR_94-14/OFR_94-14_Plate1B.pdf. Accessed on July 5, 2017. ftp://ftp.dfg.ca.gov/BDB/GIS/BIOS/Habitat_Connectivity/. Accessed on August 22, 2017. ftp://nhdftp.usgs.gov/DataSets/Staged/States/FileGDB/HighResolution/. Accessed on July 13, 2017. http://atlas.ca.gov/imagerySearch.html. Accessed on August 18, 2017. http://ecos.fws.gov/crithab/. Accessed on August 22, 2017. http://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/. Accessed on July 14, 2017. http://gmw.conservation.ca.gov/SHP/EZRIM/Maps/BALDWIN_PARK_EZRIM.pdf, Accessed on July 14, 2017. http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/LandArch/16_livability/scenic_highways/ Accessed on September 21, 2017 http://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/. Accessed on July 14, 2017. http://www.fws.gov/wetlands/data/State-Downloads.html. Accessed on July 13, 2017. http://www.lacsd.org/wastewater/wwfacilities/default.asp. Accessed on July 14, 2017. http://www.lacsd.org/wastewater/wwfacilities/joint_outfall_system_wrp/san_jose_creek.asp. Accessed on July 14, 2017. http://www.lacsd.org/wastewater/wwfacilities/joint_outfall_system_wrp/san_jose_creek.asp. Accessed on July 14, 2017. http://www.oehha.ca.gov/air/allrels.html. Accessed on June 28, 2014. http://www.westcovina.org/home/showdocument?id=13045. Accessed on September 7, 2017. http://www.westcovina.org/home/showdocument?id=631. Accessed on September 7, 2017. http://www.wrcc.dri.edu/climatedata/climsum/. Accessed on August 30, 2017. https://library.municode.com/ca/west_covina/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=MUCO_CH9DRG R. Accessed on July 14, 2017.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 5-3 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 5.0 – REFERENCES ❖ http://www.consrv.ca.gov/smgb/Guidelines/Documents/ClassDesig.pdf. Accessed on July 5, 2017. https://www.arb.ca.gov/adam/topfour/topfour1.php. Accessed on September 6, 2017. https://library.municode.com/ca/west_covina/codes/code_of_ordinances. Accessed on September 7, 2017. https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/doggr/wellfinder/. Accessed on July 5, 2017. https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/research/safety/04091/07.cfm. Accessed on October 3, 2017. https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/1920-W-Pacific-Ln-West-Covina-CA- 91790/21560991_zpid/. Accessed on September 28, 2017.

Knox® Rapid Access System website https://www.knoxbox.com/. Accessed on September 14, 2017.

Letter from Wayne Nastri, Executive Officer, South Coast Air Quality Management District, Diamond Bar, CA to Richard Corey, Executive Officer, California Air Resources Board, Sacramento, California re Submittal of 2016 Air Quality Management Plan. http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/clean-air-plans/air-quality-management- plans/2016-air-quality-management-plan/final-2016-aqmp/sipsubmittal.pdf?sfvrsn=6.

Los Angeles County Emergency Planning, Disaster Routes. Available online at: http://dpw.lacounty.gov/dsg/disasterroutes/. Accessed on July 14, 2017.

Los Angeles County Williamson Act FY 2015/2016. Available online at: ftp://ftp.consrv.ca.gov/pub/dlrp/wa/LA_15_16_WA.pdf/. Accessed on July 19, 2017.

Main San Gabriel Basin Watermaster. Available online at: http://www.watermaster.org/basin- map. Accessed on September 26, 2017.

Period of Record General Climate Summary – Precipitation. Available online at: https://wrcc.dri.edu/cgi-bin/cliMAIN.pl?ca0410. Accessed on August 31, 2017.

Public Resources Code §§ 21000 – 21177.

SCAG 2016-2040 Regional Transportation Plan/ Sustainable Communities Strategy (2016 RTP/SCS). Available online at: http://scagrtpscs.net/Pages/FINAL2016RTPSCS.aspx. Accessed on September 7, 2017.

Section 20-40 of the City of West Covina Municipal Code. Available online at: https://library.municode.com/ca/west_covina/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=MUCO_ CH20SURE. Accessed on September 11, 2017

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 5-4 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 5.0 – REFERENCES ❖

South Coast Air Quality Management District Final 2016 AQMP-CARB/EPA/SIP Submittal (March 2017). Available online at: http://www.aqmd.gov/home/library/clean-air-plans/air- quality-mgt-plan/final-2016-aqmp. Accessed on September 7, 2017.

South Coast Air Quality Management District. Draft Guidance Document – Interim CEQA Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Significance Threshold. October 2008. Available online at: http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/ceqa/handbook/greenhouse-gases-(ghg)- ceqa-significance-thresholds/ghgattachmente.pdf?sfvrsn=2. Accessed on September 25, 2017.

Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) 2008 Regional Comprehensive Plan. Page 17 of the (Land Use and Housing Section). Available online at: http://www.scag.ca.gov/NewsAndMedia/Pages/RegionalComprehensivePlan.aspx. Accessed on September 7, 2017.

Southern California Interactive Quadrangle Map, Baldwin Park Quadrangle. Available online at: http://gmw.consrv.ca.gov/shmp/MapProcessor.asp?Action=Quad&Location=SoCal. Accessed on July 14, 2017.

State and Regional Water Boards Interactive Map. Available online at: http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/waterboards_map.shtml. Accessed on September 12, 2017.

Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations.

Transpogroup. 2017. Traffic Impact Analysis for the 7 Dwelling-Unit Residential Subdivision West Covina, dated November 15, 2017.

Tsunami Inundation Map for Emergency Planning, Available online at: http://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/geologic_hazards/Tsunami/Inundation_Maps/LosAn geles. Accessed on July 14, 2017.

UltraSystems. 2017. Air Quality Report, dated October 2017.

UltraSystems. 2017. Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for the 7-Unit Subdivision Project, in the City of West Covina, Los Angeles County, CA, dated October 2017.

UltraSystems. 2017. Noise Report for the 7 Unit Subdivision City of West Covina Los Angeles County, California, dated October 2017

United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), Custom Soil Resource Report for Los Angeles County, Southeastern Part, California, July 15, 2017.

USDA NRCS Web Soil Survey. Available online at: http://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/WebSoilSurvey.aspx. Accessed on August 18, 2017.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 5-5 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 5.0 – REFERENCES ❖

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, “Methane Emissions.” Greenhouse Gas Emissions Web Site. Available online at: https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse- gases#methane. Accessed on September 25, 2017.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, “Nitrous Oxide.” Climate Change Web Site. Available online at: https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases#nitrous-oxide. Updated June 22, 2010.

USFWS Critical Habitat Portal: http://ecos.fws.gov/crithab/. Accessed on August 22, 2017.

USFWS IPaC: http://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/. Accessed on August 18, 2017.

USFWS NWI: http://www.fws.gov/wetlands/Data/mapper.html. Accessed on July 13, 2017.

USGS NHD: http://nhd.usgs.gov/. Accessed on July 13, 2017.

West Covina Unified School District Residential Development School Fee Justification Study, July 23, 2015. Available online at: http://wcusd- ca.schoolloop.com/file/1456827404951/1430721957899/5620422669143437788.pdf/. Accessed on September 5, 2017.

Western Regional Climate Center. “Western U.S. Climate Historical Summaries.” Web site. Available online at: https://wrcc.dri.edu/cgi-bin/cliMAIN.pl?ca0410. Accessed on August 30, 2017.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 5-6 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 6.0 – LIST OF PREPARERS ❖

6.0 LIST OF PREPARERS

6.1 Lead Agency

City of West Covina Planning Department 1444 West Garvey Avenue West Covina, CA 91790 Contact: Ron Garcia, Senior Planner

6.2 UltraSystems Environmental Inc.

6.2.1 Environmental Planning Team

Betsy Lindsay, MURP, Senior Project Manager Hina Gupta, MURP, Associate Planner Margaret Partridge, MURP, Associate Planner Tanner Wolverton, BS, Environmental Analyst

6.2.2 Technical Team

Michael Rogozen, D. Env., Senior Principal Engineer Mohamed Sayed, MS, Environmental Engineer Joe O’ Bannon, BS, Air Quality Specialist Air Quality/GHG/Noise Technical Analysis

Paula Fell, Senior Planner Hazards, Hydrology, Utilities

Steve O’Neil, MS, RPA, Cultural Resources Manager Cultural Resources and Tribal Consultation

Sloane Seferyn, BS, Senior Biologist Biological Resources

Mina Rouhi, MURP, Senior Planner GIS Spatial Analysis

Pamela Burgett, AA, Word Processor Word Processing/Technical Editing

6.2.3 Subcontractor

Transpogroup Rudy Garcia, BS Traffic Impact Analysis

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 6-1 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 7.0 – MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM ❖

7.0 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM

The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) has been prepared in conformance with § 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code and § 15097 of the CEQA Guidelines, which require all state and local agencies to establish monitoring or reporting programs whenever approval of a project relies upon a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) or an Environmental Impact Report (EIR). The MMRP ensures implementation of the measures being imposed to mitigate or avoid the significant adverse environmental impacts identified through the use of monitoring and reporting. Monitoring is generally an ongoing or periodic process of project oversight; reporting generally consists of a written compliance review that is presented to the decision-making body or authorized staff person.

It is the intent of the MMRP to: (1) provide a framework for document implementation of the required mitigation; (2) identify monitoring/reporting responsibility; (3) provide a record of the monitoring/reporting; and (4) ensure compliance with those mitigation measures that are within the responsibility of the City of West Covina (City) to implement.

The following table lists impacts, mitigation measures adopted by the City in connection with approval of the proposed project, level of significance after mitigation, responsible and monitoring parties, and the project phase in which the measures are to be implemented.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision 0316-F Page 7-1 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 7.0 – MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM ❖

Table 7.0-1 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM

1. ENFORCEMENT AGENCY RESPONSIBLE/ MONITORING IMPACT MITIGATION MEASURE MONITORING 2. MONITORING AGENCY ACTION PARTY 3. MONITORING PHASE BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Threshold 4.4(a) BR-1: Construction During Breeding Season City of West Field City of West Covina Have a substantial adverse effect, The breeding bird nesting season is typically from February 15 through Covina Verification either directly or through habitat September 15, but can vary slightly from year to year, usually depending City of West Covina modifications, on any species on weather conditions. If construction cannot be avoided during the identified as a candidate, sensitive, breeding season, a qualified biologist will conduct a pre-construction During Construction or special status species in local or survey for breeding birds, and active and potential nesting sites within regional plans, policies, or the limits of project disturbance up to seven days prior to mobilization, regulations, or by the California staging and other disturbances. Department of Fish and Game or U.S. • If no breeding birds or active nests are observed during the pre- Fish and Wildlife Service construction survey, or if they are observed and will not be impacted, then project activities may begin and no further breeding bird monitoring will be required. • If an active bird nest is located during the pre-construction survey and could be impacted, a no-activity buffer zone will be delineated on maps and marked by flagging or other means up to 500 feet for special-status avian species and raptors, or 100 feet for non-special-status avian species. The biologist will determine the appropriate size of the buffer zone based on the type of activities planned near the nest and bird species because some bird species are more tolerant than others to noise and other disturbances. Buffer zones will not be disturbed until a qualified biologist determines that the nest is inactive, the young have fledged, the young are no longer being fed by the parents, the young have left the area, or the young will no longer be impacted by project activities. Periodic monitoring by a biologist will be performed to determine when nesting is complete. After the nesting cycle, project activities may begin within the buffer zone. • Birds or their active nests will not be disturbed, captured, handled or moved except as noted above. Inactive nests may be moved by a qualified biologist, if necessary, to avoid disturbance by project activities.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 7-2 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 7.0 – MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM ❖

1. ENFORCEMENT AGENCY RESPONSIBLE/ MONITORING IMPACT MITIGATION MEASURE MONITORING 2. MONITORING AGENCY ACTION PARTY 3. MONITORING PHASE Threshold 4.4(a) BR-2: General Plant and Wildlife Avoidance Measures City of West Field City of West Covina Have a substantial adverse effect, • To minimize construction-related mortalities of nocturnally Covina Verification either directly or through habitat active species such as mammals and snakes, work will be City of West Covina modifications, on any species conducted during daylight hours to the extent practicable. Night identified as a candidate, sensitive, time work (and use of artificial lighting) will not be permitted During Construction or special status species in local or unless specifically authorized. If required, night lighting will be regional plans, policies, or shielded to protect species from direct night lighting. All regulations, or by the California unnecessary lights will be turned off at night to avoid attracting Department of Fish and Game or U.S. wildlife such as insects, migratory birds, and bats. Fish and Wildlife Service • Wildlife encountered during the course of project activities will be allowed to freely leave the area unharmed. Wildlife will not be disturbed, captured, harassed, or handled. • Active nests will not be removed or disturbed. Nests may be removed or disturbed if determined inactive by a qualified biologist. • To avoid impacts on wildlife, the applicant will comply with litter and pollution laws and institute a litter control program throughout project construction. All contractors, subcontractors, and employees will adhere to this program. Trash and food items will be disposed of promptly in predator- proof containers with resealing lids. These covered trash receptacles will be placed at each designated work site and the contents will be properly disposed at least once a week. Trash removal will reduce the attractiveness of the area to opportunistic predators such as common ravens (Corvus corax), coyotes (Canis latrans), northern raccoons (Procyon lotor), and Virginia opossums (Didelphis virginiana).

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 7-3 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 7.0 – MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM ❖

1. ENFORCEMENT AGENCY RESPONSIBLE/ MONITORING IMPACT MITIGATION MEASURE MONITORING 2. MONITORING AGENCY ACTION PARTY 3. MONITORING PHASE Threshold 4.4(a) BR-3: Construction Best Management Practices (BMPs) City of West Field City of West Covina Have a substantial adverse effect, • Project work crews will be directed to use best management Covina Verification either directly or through habitat practices (BMPs) to protect wildlife where applicable. These City of West Covina modifications, on any species measures will be identified prior to construction and identified as a candidate, sensitive, incorporated into the construction operations. Prior to and During or special status species in local or Construction regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Threshold 4.8 (b) HAZ-1: Performance Abatement Specification Project Report City of West Covina Create a significant hazard to the • Prior to demolition of the existing on-site single-family home, Applicant Submittal public or the environment through the project applicant shall ensure that an Asbestos Containing and Submittal City of West Covina reasonably foreseeable upset and Material (ACM) and lead based paint (LBP) materials survey of a accident conditions involving the shall be conducted to determine the presence of hazardous Performance Prior to Demolition/ release of hazardous materials into materials within the existing single-family home. A copy of the Abatement During Demolition the environment report shall be provided to the City of West Covina prior to Specification issuance of a demolition permit. If ACMs or LBPs are detected, the applicant shall develop and submit to the City a performance abatement specification for the removal of ACMs and/or LBPs including the utilization of proper work practices to avoid exposure. All measures outlined in the specification shall be implemented during demolition activities. NOISE Threshold 4.12(a) N-1: Noise Monitoring Exposure of persons to or If surrounding residents or businesses complain of excessive noise during generation of noise level in excess of construction, then the construction contractor will conduct noise standards established in the local monitoring in the residential or commercial area of concern during the general plan or noise ordinance, or suspected noise-producing construction activities. If the monitored noise applicable standards of other levels exceed regulatory noise restrictions or standards, taking into agencies account background noise, then the construction contractor will mitigate noise levels using temporary noise shields, noise barriers or other mitigation measures to comply with those restrictions or standards. (See below.)

N-2: Noise Source Controls The construction contractor will use the following source controls,

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 7-4 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 7.0 – MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM ❖

1. ENFORCEMENT AGENCY RESPONSIBLE/ MONITORING IMPACT MITIGATION MEASURE MONITORING 2. MONITORING AGENCY ACTION PARTY 3. MONITORING PHASE except where not physically feasible: • Use of noise-producing equipment will be limited to the interval from 8 a.m. to 6 p.m., Monday through Friday. • For all noise producing equipment, use types and models that have the lowest horsepower and the lowest noise generating potential practical for their intended use. • The construction contractor will ensure that all construction equipment, fixed or mobile, is properly operating (tuned-up) and lubricated, and that mufflers are working adequately. • Have only necessary equipment onsite. • Use manually-adjustable or ambient sensitive backup alarms

N-3: Noise Path Controls The contractor will use the following path controls, except where not physically feasible: • Install portable noise barriers, including solid structures and noise blankets, between the active noise sources and the nearest noise receivers. • Temporarily enclose localized and stationary noise sources. • Store and maintain equipment, building materials, and waste materials as far as practical from as many sensitive receivers as practical.

N-4: Construction Notices Advance notice of the start of construction shall be delivered to all noise sensitive receivers adjacent to the project area. The notice shall state specifically where and when construction activities will occur, and provide contact information for filing noise complaints with the contractor and the City.

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 7-5 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018 ❖ SECTION 7.0 – MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM ❖

1. ENFORCEMENT AGENCY RESPONSIBLE/ MONITORING IMPACT MITIGATION MEASURE MONITORING 2. MONITORING AGENCY ACTION PARTY 3. MONITORING PHASE TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES Threshold 4.17(a) TCR-1: Inadvertent Discovery City of West Field City of West Covina Cause a substantial adverse change All work shall stop within a 30-foot radius of the discovery. Work shall Covina Verification in the significance of a tribal cultural not continue until the discovery has been evaluated by a qualified City of West Covina resource that is listed or eligible for archaeologist and the local Native American representative has been listing in the California Register of contacted and consulted to assist in the accurate recordation and During Construction Historical Resources or in a local recovery of the resources. register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code § 5020.1(k).

6007/7-Unit Residential Subdivision Page 7-6 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2018