CITY OF SAN GABRIEL ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM

Transcription

1 CITY OF SAN GABRIEL ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM 1. Project title: Greening the Code (Planning Case. PL ) 2. Lead agency name and address: City of San Gabriel, 425 S. Mission Drive, San Gabriel, CA Contact person and phone number: Fang-zhou Zhou: (626) , ext Project location: Citywide 5. Project sponsor's name and address: City of San Gabriel, 425 S. Mission Drive, San Gabriel, CA General plan designation: All designations 7. Zoning: All zones 8. Description of project: (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to later phases of the project, and any secondary, support, or off-site features necessary for its implementation. Attach additional sheets if necessary) The project consists of a package of zoning code amendments and tributary channel guidelines that address landscaping, open space, parking, land use, water and energy use, and a number of other development standards to promote more environmentally sustainable, greener development throughout San Gabriel. The proposed project requires the approval of the City Council. 9. Surrounding land uses and setting: (Briefly describe the project's surroundings) boundaries of the City of San Gabriel, comprising 3.9 square miles and 41,000 residents on gently sloping valley floor 9 miles east of downtown Los Angeles. Contains a range of residential, commercial, industrial and institutional uses. 10. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement) ne Page 1

2 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a " " as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. N/A Aesthetics Agricultural and Forestry Air Quality N/A N/A Resources N/A Biological Resources N/A Cultural Resources N/A Geology/Soils N/A Greenhouse Gas Emissions N/A Hazards & Hazardous Materials N/A Hydrology / Water Quality N/A Land Use / Planning N/A Mineral Resources N/A ise N/A Population / Housing N/A Public Services N/A Recreation N/A Mandatory Findings of N/A N/A Transportation / Traffic Utilities / Service Systems Significance DETERMINATION: (To be completed by the Lead Agency) On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that the proposed project MAY have a potentially significant impact or potentially significant unless mitigated impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. Signature: Printed Name: Date: April 8, 2013 Fang-zhou Zhou, Assistant Planner For: City of San Gabriel EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: 1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except " " answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A " " 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 " " answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project specific screening analysis). Page 2

3 2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. 3) Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. " " is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is significant. If there are one or more " " entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. 4) "Negative Declaration: Less Than With " applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from " " to a "." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section VII, "Earlier Analyses," may be crossreferenced). 5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following: a.) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. b.) s Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c.) Measures. For effects that are with Measures, describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project. 6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, including a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. 7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 8) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project s environmental effects in whatever format is selected. 9) The explanation of each issue should identify: a) The significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and b) The mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance. QUESTION: I. AESTHETICS. Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? a). While the proposed project addresses development citywide, including areas surrounding the Scenic Corridors identified in the Cultural Resources chapter of the General Plan, the proposed code Page 3

4 amendments and guidelines would enhance the appearance of development along these corridors by introducing more landscaping and vegetation. The proposed changes will not result in any changes, such as building height and mass, which could block existing scenic vistas. b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? b). officially designated state scenic routes or highways occur in San Gabriel. c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? c). The project addresses development citywide and will enhance the visual character and quality of affected properties by promoting environments that are greener and more appealing to pedestrians, as well as ensure proper screening of certain structures which could have the potential to degrade the existing visual character. d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? d). The proposed code amendments would not create any new sources of light or glare, and maintains existing code language that protects properties adjacent to parking lots from spillover light and glare. II. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES. In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? a). The project site is urbanized and is not designated as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland or Farmland of Statewide Importance. Project implementation would not result in the conversion of farmland to non-agricultural use. Project implementation may actually result in more land being used as agricultural land in the form of small-scale urban farms and community gardens. b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? b). Implementation of the proposed project would not conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract, because the City has no areas zoned for agricultural use and no Williamson Act contracts. Therefore no impacts would result from the implementation of the proposed project. c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to nonagricultural use? c). The project area is urbanized and there are no farmland uses that are occurring on-site or in the immediate vicinity. Thus, the proposed project does not involve changes in the existing environment that could result in conversion of farmland to non-agricultural uses. Project implementation may actually result in more land being used as agricultural land in the form of small-scale urban farms and community gardens. Page 4

5 III. AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significant criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? c) 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)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? a-d). The project site is located within the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB), monitored by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). The U.S. EPA has classified the SCAB as a nonattainment area for Federal and State air quality standards. Approval of the Greening the Code amendment package would not, by itself, result in any impacts on air quality. The proposed code changes would not result in more intensive commercial or residential development and the corresponding increase in trip generation. Furthermore, the propose code changes would result in increased vegetation, which improves local air quality, and will result in more pedestrian- and transit-friendly developments, which will reduce vehicle use and vehicle emissions. Increased vegetation will also serve to protect and buffer sensitive receptors from pollutants such as vehicle emissions. e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? e) Less Than. The proposed code amendments will allow community gardens in residential zones that may have compost bins. However, the placement and design of such compost bins will be conditioned so that they will not be visible from adjacent properties, and so that odors, infestations and runoff will be controlled. As such, this new land use will have a less than significant impact. IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? a). Landscaping within the project area consists of both native and non-native vegetation and no species that are candidate, sensitive or special status species are known to exist in the vicinity due to the urbanized conditions. The proposed project would not result in significant adverse impacts to Federal or State listed or other designated species. Page 5

6 b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b). The project area is completely urbanized. riparian habitat or sensitive natural communities exist within the City. The project will affect development citywide. Many of these areas are adjacent to environmental resources identified in Figure 8-1 of the Environmental Resources Element of the General Plan, such as public and private open spaces and flood control channels. Many of the areas that will be affected by the project are also within identified tree planting areas. However, the effect of the proposed code changes will be to enhance or restore the quality of these environmental resources, rather than to adversely affect them. 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 pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? c). federally protected wetlands occur in the project area. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not result in any impacts in this regard. d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? d). migratory wildlife corridors or native wildlife nurseries exist in the project area. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not result in any impacts in this regard. e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? e). The project does not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance. The project will amend existing policies related to landscaping and open space so that these resources are enhanced throughout the community. f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? f). There are no adopted Habitat Conservation Plans, Natural Community Conservation Plans or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plans applicable to the project area. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in impacts in this regard. V. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in Section ? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section ? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal Page 6

7 cemeteries? a-d). While the project area encompasses the entire City, which does contain historical resources, archaeological resources, paleontological resources and human remains, no adverse impact on these resources is anticipated from the project. The project will actually include code changes that incentivize historic preservation of existing historical resources as defined in Section of the CEQA guidelines. As a result, the City s capability to preserve these resources is enhanced. VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse affects, 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. a)i). active faults are known to traverse the project area and the project area is not located within, or immediately adjacent to an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone. Therefore, rupture of a known earthquake fault would not occur within the project area. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? a)ii). Southern California has numerous active and potentially active faults that could produce strong ground shaking that could impact the project area. The City of San Gabriel is in proximity to the San Andreas and Sierra Madre Fault zone. The Raymond Fault is the closest active fault, and is located north of the City of San Gabriel. This project is a zoning code amendment package which does not propose any new development. Any new construction done consistent with the proposed code amendments would need to comply with the requirements of the California Building Code for structural design and construction methods that minimize the effects of strong seismic ground shaking. iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? a)iii)less Than. The project area includes the entire city, which does have an area that is identified in the General Plan s Public and Environmental Safety Element as being subject to liquefaction. However, the proposed code amendments and guidelines would not increase people s exposure to the threat of liquefaction. Infiltration through new landscaping would occur over time, and will be designed to avoid saturation of soils that could cause liquefaction. Special care will be taken in the design of infiltration in the area designated for liquefaction in the General Plan, particularly in the areas adjacent to foundations. Surface landscaping is encouraged because it will promote evaporation and transpiration in addition to infiltration. iv) Landslides? a)iv). While the project area does contain some mildly hilly areas, project implementation would not expose people or structures to landslides as it does not authorize development in areas where development was not already allowed. Therefore no impact would occur in this regard. b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? b). The proposed code amendments would actually have a positive effect on soil erosion and loss of topsoil as they will require more landscaping than is currently required by the zoning code. This additional landscaping will secure loose soil and will prevent soil erosion from wind and water. Page 7

8 c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? c). The project area has not been identified as a geologic unit that is unstable, and would not become unstable as a result of project implementation. d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? d). Generally, there is not an expansive soil problem in the City. Localized pockets of expansive soils may be found sporadically. However, new construction provides mitigation through grading to reduce or eliminate expansive soils if found on-site. The project will not create substantial risks to life or property. VII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS. Would the project: a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? a). The project will result in reduced greenhouse gas emissions as a result of code changes that will enhance the city s pedestrian, bike and transit-friendliness. The proposed code amendments will not result in densities greater than what is currently permitted. Parking and open space requirements will only be reduced when accompanied by transportation demand management measures, or through the payment of in-lieu fees and/or dedications to provide parking and open space off-site. Furthermore, the proposed requirement for more trees and landscaping than what is currently required by code will help clean the city s air. Reduced energy and water usage resulting from the proposed changes in landscaping and irrigation requirements will further reduce greenhouse gas emissions that can be attributed to activity and development in San Gabriel. adverse effect on greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, is expected from the project. b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? b). The proposed code amendments do not conflict with the measures in the City s Energy Action Plan, which specifically addresses electricity use. The proposed code amendments will actually further the City s progress towards greater energy efficiency through the promotion of solar panels and landscaping that requires less water, uses more water-efficient irrigation and provides greater shading to buildings. VIII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? a). The proposed project is a zoning code amendment package that will make development in the City more sustainable. The project therefore would not involve the use, transport or disposal of hazardous materials. Page 8

9 b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonable foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? b). The proposed project is a zoning code amendment package that will make development in the City more sustainable. The project therefore would not involve the use, transport or disposal of hazardous materials and the possibility of upset or accident conditions. c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? c). The proposed project is a zoning code amendment package that will make development in the City more sustainable. Therefore, there will not be potentially significant environmental impacts on schools, which are located throughout the project area. d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? d). The project area covers the entire City of San Gabriel, which includes properties and areas listed on the California Department of Toxic Substances Hazardous Waste and Substances Site List. However, the proposed code amendments will not dictate particular projects being sited at particular locations, and will not 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, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? e). There are no airport land use plans for San Gabriel, nor are there any public airports or public use airports within two miles of the City. impacts would occur in this regard. 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? f). The project area is not located in the vicinity of a private airport. The nearest airport is El Monte Airport, approximately five miles southeast of the project site. impacts would occur in this regard. g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? g). The project would not impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan because the project consists of zoning code amendments that affect development on private property. The proposed code amendments do not propose changes to existing standards such as driveway and drive aisle widths, the narrowing or closure of public streets, and other standards that affect emergency response or evacuation plans. Projects that are developed under the proposed code amendments would still be vetted with the City s public safety departments to ensure they do not interfere with emergency response or evacuation plans, and a separate environmental review would be conducted, with mitigation measures as appropriate included. Page 9

10 h) 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? h). The project area is completely urbanized and built out. While the proposed code amendments would allow for community gardens and small-scale urban farming, these do not constitute wildlands. The project would not result in the intermixing of residences and wildlands nor expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires. I. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? a). The proposed project will not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. The project will result in greater on-site water drainage and less stormwater runoff, which will reduce the amount of stormwater pollution from impacting waters of the U.S. in the vicinity of the project area. 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 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)? b). The proposed project will not 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. The project would actually have the opposite effect as it would result in reduced hardscape and reduced runoff into the stormwater system. The project would result in increased amounts of onsite landscaping that will allow water to infiltrate into the ground and recharge groundwater supplies. More water-efficient irrigation and landscaping practices would also result in slower depletion of groundwater resources. c) 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? c). There are no streams or rivers in San Gabriel. The proposed project will not substantially alter the existing drainage in the area. If there is any alteration, it will reduce erosion and siltation both on- and off-site because additional landscaping will allow more water to stay on-site, and additional plants will help secure loose soil and dirt. There will be less water entering the stormwater system, and as a result, less loose sediments being transported. In urban areas, siltation is typically the result of construction activities that expose loose dirt. The proposed project does not affect construction practices. d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? Page 10

11 d-e). The proposed project will not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, increase the rate or amount of surface runoff, or create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff. The project will have the opposite effect by allowing more water to be retained on-site, cleaned and percolated into the local water table through increased and improved landscaping throughout the city as properties are (re)developed. This reduction in runoff will also reduce the likelihood and severity of flooding. f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? f). The proposed project will not otherwise substantially degrade water quality. It will improve water quality by allowing water to remain on-site and be naturally filtered into the local water table rather than running off-site and washing pollutants into the stormwater system, and eventually into coastal waters. g) 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? h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? i) 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? g-i). According to the Public and Environmental Safety Element of the General Plan, the project area is not located within a flood zone. Additionally, the City of San Gabriel is not subject to any major flood hazards, or potential inundation due to nearby dam failures. Furthermore, the Federal Emergency Management Agency s (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Map designates the entire City as within a Flood Zone C. Flood Zone C is identified as a non flood hazard area. The proposed project would not involve the placement of structures within a 100-year flood hazard area. j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? j). The proposed project area is 25 miles inland from the Pacific Ocean and there are no large bodies of water within the vicinity of the project area that would cause inundation by seiche, tsumami, or mudflow. Therefore, there would be no impacts related to inundation from the proposed project.. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? a). The proposed project would not disrupt or physically divide an established community. On the contrary, the project may improve connectivity across properties throughout the city by allowing off-site open space dedications and payment of in-lieu fees that can go towards providing additional public open space. The proposed amendments will incentivize connectivity by allowing reductions in total common open space requirements if developers provide common space that is publicly accessible, contiguous and directly accessible from a public park, has connections to public amenities and trails, or dedicate scenic and public access easements along flood control channels. Page 11

12 b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but to limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? b). The proposed project implements many of the policies of the City s General Plan. These include: i. Target Provide incentives for developing mixed-use projects at transit stops. ii. Target Review the development standards for commercial and industrial development and amend them as necessary to provide for meaningful buffering between differing land uses. iii. Action Through subdivision and zoning ordinances, and through the permit process, encourage use of innovative construction techniques, design standards, and energy conservation methods in new housing development. iv. Target Promote the maintenance of currently sound housing. v. Target Provide pedestrian amenities in new development and in street improvement programs. vi. Target Encourage the development of transit-oriented developments at key nodes in the City. vii. Action Encourage the development of projects which are mixed-use. viii. Target Promote the use of defensible space concepts (site and building lighting, visual observation of open space, secured areas, and so on) in project design to enhance public safety. ix. Target Promote opportunities for aquifer recharge to minimize groundwater hazards by encouraging developers to minimize paved areas in new developments and requiring these areas to be interspersed with landscaping. x. Action Encourage, where feasible, use of turf block, decomposed granite, or similar permeable surfaces rather than conventional pavement. xi. Target Work with the development community and amend the City Zoning Code if necessary to encourage land uses and developments that encourage transportation oriented designed buildings and uses surrounding Park-and-Ride lots. xii. Target Develop miniparks, medians, and other green spaces to offset the impacts of denser population and more intense development. xiii. Target Develop new bicycle and pedestrian trails in commercial and residential neighborhoods, parks, or rail corridors that create walkable close-knit neighborhoods that will reduce air pollution and energy consumption. xiv. Target Develop a dedication program to accept private property for parks and open space opportunities. xv. Target Use drought-tolerant species on public and private developments to reduce water consumption. xvi. Target Create urban landscapes that will reduce heat/solar gain. xvii. Target The City shall work to plant additional trees throughout San Gabriel. xviii. Target Encourage property owners to maintain existing vegetation on developed sites and replace unhealthy or dead landscaping. xix. Target Require that all new construction include a landscape component that will increase the number of trees on-site. xx. Target Implement policies to require developers to plant one tree for every one thousand square feet of net lot area on new commercial and residential projects. At least one tree shall be planted in the front yard of every new house or addition. xxi. Target Require applicants submitting plans for all additions of more than 800 square feet and all new buildings to submit landscape plans. xxii. Target Encourage property owners to use paving surfaces that reduce the amount of urban storm water runoff. Page 12

13 xxiii. xxiv. xxv. xxvi. Target Investigate the feasibility of using the flood control channels for functional and/or passive open space. Target Encourage the use of mass transit, car pooling, bicycling, and other alternative transportation options. Encourage the planting of street trees and yard trees because of air quality contribution. Target Update the City s Municipal Code to require architects to design buildings that promote pedestrian activity, transit use, and other forms of alternative transportation. xxvii. Target Adopt the principles for design enhancement. Create designs that live and breathe like the neighborhoods in which they are placed, make good landscaping a part of every project, and design for pedestrian safety and comfort. xxviii. Target Encourage the application of sustainable design principles and materials that do not consume irreplaceable resources. xxix. xxx. xxxi. Target Require that all new developments screen utility structures with a combination of landscaping, berming, walls, screens, or other features designed to blend with the architecture and landscape amenities of the site. Target Establish a broad set of City-wide landscape design guidelines to improve the quality of landscaping. Target Require all new construction projects to provide textured paving to distinguish pedestrian and vehicle areas, public vs. private spaces, and other features. xxxii. Target Develop specific plans and zoning standards that promote reduced vehicle trips, pedestrian and transit options, and mixed uses. xxxiii. Target Require new developments adjoining flood control channels to integrate the channels into project design through the development of paths, landscaping, and full architectural treatment along them. xxxiv. Target Use the principles and practices of land use planning, historic preservation, archaeology, art history, anthropology and history to promote preservation and adaptive reuse of cultural resources. c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? c). The project area is not subject to any habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan. I. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? a). There are no known mineral resources in the project area, therefore there will be no impact on their availability. b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? Page 13

14 b). The proposed project will not result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan, because the project area contains no known mineral resources. II. NOISE. Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? a-d). The adoption of the proposed code amendments and guidelines will not result in the generation of noise, increase in ambient noise levels, or increased exposure to noise. The project may even result in reduced exposure to noise through increased plant buffering around buildings. 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? e). The proposed project would have no impact with regards to airports. The project area is not located within two miles of any public airport or within an airport land use plan. Therefore, no impacts 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? f). The proposed project would have no impact with regards to private airstrips. The project area is not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip. Therefore, no impacts would occur. III. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? a). The proposed code amendments and guidelines will not increase the allowable density of residential or commercial development, nor will it result in the extension of any roads or infrastructure. The Page 14

15 project will not induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly or indirectly. b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? b-c). Adoption of the proposed code amendments and guidelines would not result in the displacement of substantial numbers of existing housing or people, and thus will not necessitate the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. IV. PUBLIC SERVICES. a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: i) Fire protection? ii) Police protection? iii) Schools? iv) Parks? v) Other public facilities? a). Adoption of the proposed code amendments and guidelines will not result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, or the need for new or physically altered government facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives. Adoption of the proposed code amendments and guidelines will not affect the demand on fire protection, police protection, schools, parks or other public facilities. The project actually opens up the possibility of additional parks being created, or existing parks being enhanced, through the payment of fees inlieu of providing on-site open space for private development. V. RECREATION. a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Significa nt Page 15

16 a-b). The proposed code amendments and guidelines would not result in the increased use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities, nor would it require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment. The proposed code amendments would allow for on-site open space requirements in multi-family residential zones to be met through off-site dedication and improvement of public open space, contingent on the City establishing a program to guide such dedications. The proposed amendments would also allow on-site common open space to be met through payment of an in-lieu fee to the City that will go toward providing, enhancing or expanding public park and open space areas. In both of these cases, public open space would be provided under the guidance of a program to be established by the City. Any such programs and improvements would undergo environmental review as necessary, prior to their establishment. VI. TRANSPORTATION / TRAFFIC. Would the project: a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? a) Less Than. Approval of the proposed code amendments would allow for the reduction of on-site parking requirements for commercial uses in instances where a project uses transportation demand and trip reduction measures, has transit accessibility, motorcycle or bicycle parking facilities, or uses a shared parking facility serving more than one use. The presence of these qualifying factors means that allowing parking reductions would not result in on-site parking shortages and a corresponding increase in on-street parking. The proposed code amendments will not result in increased trip generation, a substantial increase in the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections. The project also proposes to allow small commercial buildings under a certain number of units and unit sizes to have no onsite parking. This would not increase trip generation as the maximum floor area allowed remains the same. If there is any impact, it will be a reduction in vehicle trip generation because of other requirements for bicycle-, pedestrian- and transit-friendly design. Although there would be less on-site parking available, the small scale under consideration means that impacts from on-street parking are likely to be de minimus. b) 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? b). The proposed code amendments and guidelines do not 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. There are no designated roads or highways or any applicable congestion management programs in San Gabriel. c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? c). The proposed code amendments and guidelines will not result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks because there is no airport nearby. Page 16

17 d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? d) Less Than. The proposed project would allow community gardens in residential zones and the Open Space and Public Facilities zone, subject to a set of standard conditions. These include prohibitions on mechanized equipment, outdoor lighting, and other features that would be incompatible with surrounding uses. With these conditions and standards in place, the impacts of a community garden would be less than significant e) Result in inadequate emergency access? e). The proposed code amendments and guidelines will not result in inadequate emergency access. The proposed code amendments have been reviewed by the Police and Fire Departments. All development standards pertinent to emergency access will remain in place. f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities? f). The proposed code amendments will actually strengthen the performance and safety of public transit, bicycle and pedestrian facilities by encouraging the use of transportation demand management measures, encouraging the provision of pedestrian connections to existing open spaces, parks, or other public amenities, and requiring the provision of short- and long-term bicycle facilities in commercial and mixed-use developments. The proposed amendments would also require pedestrian-friendly features in mixed-use developments above three acres and improve the overall pedestrian-friendliness in both residential and commercial development by providing more landscaping and shading. VII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) 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? a-b). Adoption of the proposed code amendments and guidelines would not, by itself, result in any impacts on water or wastewater treatment facilities, as it will not automatically generate new development. The project will not result in increased intensity of development. The proposed development standards will not result in increased development intensity, and will require more landscaping that will help reduce the amount of polluted surface runoff and filter water entering the water table. c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c). The proposed code amendments and guidelines would not require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects. The project will require development to incorporate more landscaping that will perform on-site drainage functions, but this will have a positive effect on the environment. d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? Page 17