section 1 - City of Montebello

Transcription

CITY OF MONTEBELLO
NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND INITIAL STUDY ● HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE
NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND
INITIAL STUDY
CITY OF MONTEBELLO
HOUSING ELEMENT 2013-2021
LEAD AGENCY:
CITY OF MONTEBELLO
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
1600 WEST BEVERLY BLVD.
MONTEBELLO, CALIFORNIA 90640
NOVEMBER 6, 2013
MONT 018
PAGE 1
CITY OF MONTEBELLO
THIS PAGE HAS BEEN INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK.
PAGE 2
CITY OF MONTEBELLO
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
PROJECT NAME:
Montebello Housing Element Update.
PROJECT ADDRESS:
Housing Element applies to the entire City.
CITY AND COUNTY:
Montebello, Los Angeles County.
PROJECT:
The City of Montebello Community Development Department (referred to
hereinafter as the Lead Agency) is circulating the Housing Element for public
review and comment. The State of California requires that all local governments
(both cities and counties) prepare and maintain housing elements to identify
strategies to conserve, rehabilitate, and provide housing to meet the existing and
projected needs of the community. The City of Montebello Housing Element
fulfills the requirements of the State of California Planning, Zoning, and
Development Laws (PZDL) and the regulations of Sections 65580 through
65589.5 of the California Government Code. The Housing Element is considered
to be a project pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
FINDINGS:
The environmental analysis provided in the attached Initial Study indicates that
the Draft Housing Element will not result in any significant adverse unmitigable
impacts. For this reason, the City of Montebello determined that a Negative
Declaration is the appropriate CEQA document for the proposed project. The
following findings may be made based on the analysis contained in the attached
Initial Study:
● The adoption and subsequent implementation of the Housing Element will
not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment.
not have the potential to achieve short-term goals to the disadvantage of
long-term environmental goals.
not have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable, when considering planned or proposed development in the
City.
not have environmental effects that will adversely affect humans, either
directly or indirectly.
The environmental analysis is provided in the attached Initial Study prepared for
the proposed project. The project is also described in greater detail in the
attached Initial Study.
Signature
City of Montebello Community Development Department
Date
PAGE 3
CITY OF MONTEBELLO
PAGE 4
CITY OF MONTEBELLO
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section
1.0
Page
Introduction ...................................................................................... 7
1.1
1.2
1.3
2.0
Project Description ...........................................................................17
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
3.0
Location of the City .............................................................................................................. 17
Environmental Setting ......................................................................................................... 17
Project Description ............................................................................................................. 20
Project Objectives and Discretionary Actions .................................................................... 29
Environmental Analysis................................................................... 33
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
3.6
3.7
3.8
3.9
3.10
3.11
3.12
3.13
3.14
3.15
3.16
3.17
3.18
4.0
Purpose of the Initial Study ...................................................................................................7
Initial Study’s Organization ...................................................................................................7
Initial Study Checklist ........................................................................................................... 8
Aesthetics ............................................................................................................................ 33
Agricultural and Forestry Resources ...................................................................................35
Air Quality ............................................................................................................................37
Biological Resources ........................................................................................................... 42
Cultural Resources .............................................................................................................. 45
Geology .................................................................................................................................47
Greenhouse Gas Emissions................................................................................................. 50
Hazards and Hazardous Materials ..................................................................................... 52
Hydrology and Water Quality ..............................................................................................55
Land Use.............................................................................................................................. 60
Mineral Resources............................................................................................................... 62
Noise.................................................................................................................................... 63
Population and Housing ..................................................................................................... 66
Public Services..................................................................................................................... 68
Recreation ........................................................................................................................... 70
Transportation and Circulation .......................................................................................... 71
Utilities .................................................................................................................................74
Mandatory Findings of Significance ....................................................................................79
References ....................................................................................... 81
4.1
4.2
Preparers ..............................................................................................................................81
References ............................................................................................................................81
PAGE 5
CITY OF MONTEBELLO
PAGE 6
CITY OF MONTEBELLO
SECTION 1 - INTRODUCTION
1.1 PURPOSE OF THE INITIAL STUDY
This Initial Study evaluates the environmental impacts associated with the adoption and subsequent
implementation of the City of Montebello Draft Housing Element (referred to hereinafter as the “Housing
Element”). The State of California requires that all local governments (both cities and counties) prepare
and maintain housing elements to identify strategies to conserve, rehabilitate, and provide housing to
meet the existing and projected needs of the community. The Montebello Housing Element fulfills the
requirements of the State of California Planning, Zoning and Development Laws (PZDL) and the
regulations of Sections 65580 through 65589.5 of the California Government Code. The Housing
Element’s adoption and subsequent implementation are also considered to be a project pursuant to the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).1
As part of the Housing Element’s environmental review, the City of Montebello authorized the
preparation of this Initial Study. The primary purpose of CEQA is to ensure that decision-makers and the
public understand the environmental implications of a specific action or project. An additional purpose of
this Initial Study is to ascertain whether the Housing Element will have the potential for significant
adverse impacts on the environment once it is implemented. Pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines,
additional purposes of this Initial Study include the following:
●
To provide the City of Montebello with information to use as the basis for deciding whether to
prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR), Mitigated Negative Declaration, or Negative
Declaration for a project;
●
To facilitate the project’s environmental assessment early in the design and development of a
project;
●
To eliminate unnecessary EIRs; and,
●
To determine the nature and extent of any new impacts associated the proposed project.2
1.2 INITIAL STUDY’S ORGANIZATION
The format and structure of this Initial Study generally reflects that of the Initial Study Checklist,
provided in Section 1.3. The following annotated outline summarizes the contents of this Initial Study:
●
Section 1 - Introduction, provides the procedural context surrounding this Initial Study's
preparation and insight into its composition.
1
California, State of, Title 14. California Code of Regulations. Chapter 3. Guidelines for the Implementation of the California
Environmental Quality Act as Amended 2000. (CEQA Guidelines) §15050.
2
Ibid.
SECTION 1 ● INTRODUCTION
PAGE 7
CITY OF MONTEBELLO
●
Section 2 - Project Description, provides an overview of the City of Montebello and summarizes
the Housing Element.
●
Section 3 - Environmental Analysis, includes an analysis of potential impacts associated with the
adoption and the subsequent implementation of the Housing Element.
●
Section 4 - References, identifies the sources used in the preparation of this Initial Study.
1.3 INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
The environmental analysis provided in Section 3 of this Initial Study indicates that the adoption and
subsequent implementation of the Housing Element will not result in any significant adverse impacts on
the environment. For this reason, the City of Montebello has determined that a Negative Declaration is
the appropriate CEQA document for the proposed project. The following findings may be made based on
the analysis completed as part of this Initial Study’s preparation:
●
The Housing Element will not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment.
●
The Housing Element will not have the potential to achieve short-term goals to the disadvantage
of long-term environmental goals.
●
The Housing Element will not have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable, when considering planned or proposed development in the immediate vicinity.
●
The Housing Element will not have environmental effects that will adversely affect humans,
either directly or indirectly.
The findings of this Initial Study are summarized in Table 1 provided below and on the following pages.
Table 1
Summary (Initial Study Checklist)
Environmental Issue Areas Examined
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Impact
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Section 3.1 Aesthetic Impacts. Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse affect on a scenic vista?
³
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including but not
limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a
State scenic highway?
³
c) Create a new source of substantial light or glare that would
adversely affect day- or night-time views in the area?
³
PAGE 8
CITY OF MONTEBELLO
Table 1
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Impact
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Section 3.2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources Impacts. 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?
³
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a
Williamson Act Contract?
³
c) Would the project conflict with existing zoning for or cause
rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code
§4526), or zoned timberland production (as defined by
Government Code §51104[g])?
³
d) Would the project result in the loss of forest land or the
conversion of forest land to a non-forest use?
³
e) Involve other changes in the existing environment that, due to
their location or nature, may result in conversion of farmland to
non-agricultural use?
³
Section 3.3 Air Quality Impacts. Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air
quality plan?
³
b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to
an existing or projected air quality violation?
³
c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any
criteria pollutant for which the project region is in non-attainment
under an applicable Federal or State ambient air quality standard
(including releasing emissions, which exceed quantitative
thresholds for ozone precursors)?
³
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations?
³
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of
people?
³
Section 3.4 Biological Resources Impacts. Would the project have a substantial adverse effect:
a) Either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species
identified as a candidate, sensitive or special status species in local
or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California
Department of Fish and Wildlife or U. S. Fish and Wildlife
Service?
³
b) 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 Wildlide or U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service?
³
PAGE 9
CITY OF MONTEBELLO
Table 1
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Impact
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
c) 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?
³
d) In interfering substantially with the movement of any native
resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established
native resident or migratory life corridors, or impede the use of
native wildlife nursery sites?
³
e) In conflicting with any local policies or ordinances, protecting
biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or
ordinance?
³
f) By conflicting with the provisions of an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or
other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan?
³
Section 3.5 Cultural Resources Impacts. Would the project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a
historical resource as defined in §15064.5 of the CEQA
Guidelines?
³
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an
archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5 of the CEQA
Guidelines?
³
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource
or site or unique geologic feature?
³
d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside
of formal cemeteries?
³
Section 3.6 Geology Impacts. Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts involving:
a) The exposure of people or structures to potential substantial
adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death
involving rupture of a known earthquake fault (as delineated on
the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map
issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other
substantial evidence of a known fault), ground–shaking,
liquefaction, or landslides?
³
b) Substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?
³
c) Location on a geologic unit or a 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?
³
d) Location on expansive soil, as defined in California Building
Code (2012), creating substantial risks to life or property?
³
PAGE 10
CITY OF MONTEBELLO
Table 1
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Impact
Mitigation
e) Soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks
or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not
available for the disposal of wastewater?
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
³
Section 3.7 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Impacts. Would the project:
a) Result in the generation of greenhouse gas emissions, either
directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the
environment?
³
b) Increase the potential for conflict with an applicable plan,
policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing
emissions of greenhouse gases?
³
Section 3.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials Impacts. Would the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment
through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous
materials?
³
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment or
result in reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions
involving the release of hazardous materials into the
environment?
³
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely
hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile
of an existing or proposed school?
³
d) Be located on a site, which is included on a list of hazardous
material sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section
65962.5, and as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the
public or the environment?
³
e) Be located within an airport land use plan, or where such a plan
has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or a
public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for
people residing or working in the project area?
³
f) Within the vicinity of a private airstrip, result in a safety hazard
for people residing or working in the project area?
³
g) Impair implementation of, or physically interfere with, an
adopted emergency response plan or emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan?
³
h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury,
or death involving wild lands fire, including where wild lands are
adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed
with wild lands?
³
Section 3.9 Hydrology and Water Quality Impacts. Would the project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge
requirements?
³
PAGE 11
CITY OF MONTEBELLO
Table 1
Potentially
Significant
Impact
b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere
substantially with groundwater recharge in such a way that would
cause 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
With
Impact
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
³
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or
area, including 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?
³
d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or
area, including the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in
a manner that would result in flooding on-or off-site?
³
e) Create or contribute runoff water, which would exceed the
capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or
provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff?
³
f) Substantially degrade water quality?
³
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?
³
h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area, structures that
would impede or redirect flood flows?
³
i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of flooding
because of dam or levee failure?
³
³
j) Result in inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow?
Section 3.10 Land Use and Planning Impacts. Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established community, or otherwise result
in an incompatible land use?
b) Conflict with an applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation
of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not
limited to, a 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 or natural
community conservation plan?
³
³
³
Section 3.11 Mineral Resources Impacts. 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?
³
PAGE 12
CITY OF MONTEBELLO
Table 1
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Impact
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral
resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific
plan, or other land use plan?
No
Impact
³
Section 3.12 Noise Impacts. 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?
³
b) Exposure of people to, or generation of, excessive ground-borne
noise levels?
³
c) Substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the
project vicinity above noise levels existing without the project?
³
d) Substantial temporary or periodic increases in ambient noise
levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the
project?
³
e) For a project located with 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?
³
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?
³
Section 3.13 Population and Housing Impacts. Would the project:
a) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or
indirectly (e.g., through projects in an undeveloped area or
extension of major infrastructure)?
³
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating
the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
³
c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the
construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
³
Section 3.14 Public Services Impacts. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated
with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which would cause significant
environmental impacts in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives in any of
the following areas:
a) Fire protection services?
³
b) Police protection services?
³
c) School services?
³
PAGE 13
CITY OF MONTEBELLO
Table 1
d) Other governmental services?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Impact
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
³
Section 3.15 Recreation Impacts. Would the project:
a) 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?
³
b) Affect existing recreational facilities or require the construction
or expansion of recreational facilities that might have an adverse
physical effect on the environment?
³
Section 3.16 Transportation Impacts. Would the project:
a) Cause 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 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?
³
b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service
standard established by the County Congestion Management
Agency for designated roads or highways?
³
c) A change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in
traffic levels or a change in the location that results in substantial
safety risks?
³
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g.,
sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses
(e.g., farm equipment)?
³
e) Result in inadequate parking capacity?
³
f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting
alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)?
³
Section 3.17 Utilities Impacts. Would the project:
a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable
Regional Water Quality Control Board?
³
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
impacts?
³
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?
³
PAGE 14
CITY OF MONTEBELLO
Table 1
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Impact
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project
from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded
entitlements needed?
³
e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider
that serves or may serve the project that it has inadequate capacity
to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the
provider’s existing commitments?
³
f) Be served by a landfill with insufficient permitted capacity to
accommodate the project’s solid waste disposal needs?
³
g) Comply with Federal, State, and local statutes and regulations
related to solid waste?
³
h) Result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations in
power or natural gas facilities?
³
i) Result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations in
communication systems?
³
Section 3.18 Mandatory Findings of Significance. The approval and subsequent implementation of the proposed
project:
a) Will not have the potential to degrade the quality of the
environment, with the implementation of the recommended
standard conditions and mitigation measures included herein.
³
b) Will not have the potential to achieve short-term goals to the
disadvantage of long-term environmental goals, with the
implementation of the recommended standard conditions and
mitigation measures referenced herein.
³
c) Will not have impacts that are individually limited, but
cumulatively considerable, when considering planned or proposed
development in the immediate vicinity, with the implementation
of the recommended standard conditions and mitigation measures
contained herein.
³
d) Will not have environmental effects that will adversely affect
humans, either directly or indirectly, with the implementation of
the recommended standard conditions and mitigation measures
contained herein.
³
e) The Initial Study indicated there is no evidence that the
Housing Element will have an adverse effect on wildlife resources
or the habitat upon which any wildlife depends.
³
PAGE 15
CITY OF MONTEBELLO
THIS PAGE HAS BEEN INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
PAGE 16
CITY OF MONTEBELLO
SECTION 2 - PROJECT DESCRIPTION
2.1 LOCATION OF THE CITY
This Housing Element applies to the land area included within the City’s corporate boundaries and the
unincorporated areas the City have designated in its Sphere of Influence. The City of Montebello is
located approximately 7 miles southeast of downtown Los Angeles and is bounded by the cities of
Monterey Park and Rosemead on the north, the City of Commerce and unincorporated portions of Los
Angeles County on the west, the Whittier Narrows Recreation area on the east, the City of Commerce on
the southwest and the City of Pico Rivera on the southeast. The regional location of the City is shown in
Exhibit 1 while a City-wide map is provided in Exhibit 2.
2.2 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The first European settlement in Montebello dates back to the founding of the original San Gabriel
Mission by the Franciscan Missionaries, Fathers Angel Somera and Pedro Cambon. This mission was
founded on September 9, 1771, on a site near San Gabriel Boulevard adjacent to the Rio Hondo River. The
Mission was the third in a system comprised of 21 missions established under the direction of Father
Junipero Serra. The Mission managed to flourish under hardships, but heavy rains and the resulting
flooding caused the mission to relocate to its permanent location in San Gabriel in 1776. The City of
Montebello originally consisted of parts of Rancho San Antonio, Rancho La Merced, and Rancho Paso de
Bartolo. Also within the City, on the banks of the Rio Hondo River, the last armed conflict was staged
with Mexico for possession of California at the Battle of the Rio San Gabriel on January 8, 1847.
Following the Civil War, one of the early settlers in the area, Alessandro Repetto, constructed a ranch
located ½-mile north of where Garfield Avenue crosses the Pomona Freeway. Repetto never married and,
when he died in 1885, his brother Antonio sold his inheritance to Harris Newmark, Kaspar Cohn, John A.
Bicknell, Stephen M. White, and I.W. Hellman, a group of business men well known in Los Angeles
financial circles at that time. The landholdings of Newmark and Cohn consisted of 1,200 acres that
included what is now the City of Montebello. The original town site of forty acres was bounded by First
Street on the east, Fifth Street on the west, Cleveland on the north, and Los Angeles Avenue on the south.
Originally an agricultural community, Montebello had an ideal climate, productive soil, and an abundance
of water for farming. From the turn of the century continuing through the 1920’s, the area was well
known for its production of flowers, vegetables, berries, and fruits. The discovery of oil by Standard Oil
Company on the Anita Baldwin property in 1917, brought about a new era for the City. By 1920,
Montebello oil fields accounted for one-eighth of total California crude oil production. On October 19,
1920, Montebello was incorporated as the 35th of the present cities in Los Angeles County.
The City has a total land area of 8.25 square miles. According to the most recent (January 1, 2013)
Department of Finance (DOF) estimates, the City’s population was 63,184 persons. The same DOF
estimates indicated there is a total of 19,812 housing units located in the City including 9,821 single-family
detached units, 1,542 single-family attached units, 8,183 duplex and multiple-family units, and 266
mobile home units.
SECTION 2 ● PROJECT DESCRIPTION
PAGE 17
CITY OF MONTEBELLO
City of Montebello
EXHIBIT 1
REGIONAL LOCATION OF THE CITY OF MONTEBELLO
SOURCE: DELORME MAPS
PAGE 18
CITY OF MONTEBELLO
City of Montebello
EXHIBIT 2
AREA-WIDE LOCATION OF THE CITY OF MONTEBELLO
SOURCE: DELORME MAPS
PAGE 19
CITY OF MONTEBELLO
2.3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
2.3.1 OVERVIEW OF STATE REQUIREMENTS
The State of California requires that all local governments (both cities and counties) prepare and maintain
housing elements to identify strategies to conserve, rehabilitate, and provide housing to meet the existing
and projected needs of the community. Specific requirements concerning the scope and content of
housing elements have been established by the State Legislature. The Legislature, in turn, has delegated
the responsibility of implementing its directives to the California Department of Housing and Community
Development (HCD). The HCD is responsible for ensuring that State housing law is being implemented at
the local level. To monitor compliance with these requirements and the State’s overall housing policies,
all housing elements must also be reviewed by HCD prior to, and following, their adoption.
2.3.2 OVERVIEW OF REGIONAL HOUSING REQUIREMENTS
This section of the City of Montebello Housing Element compares the housing need projections developed
by the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) as part of the Regional Housing Needs
Assessment (RHNA). The authority to determine housing needs for the various income groups for cities
within the region has been delegated to the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG),
pursuant to Section 65584 of the Government Code. The RHNA housing need for Montebello is
categorized according to the following income groups:
●
The Very Low-income households are those households whose income does not exceed 50% of
the median household income for the greater Los Angeles area;
●
The Low-income households earn from 51% to 80% of the median;
●
The Moderate-income groups earn from 81% to 120% of the median; and,
●
The Above-Moderate households earn over 120% of the median income.
PREVIOUS RHNA OBLIGATION
Montebello’s last adopted Housing Element addressed housing conditions between January 1, 1989, and
December 31, 1997. Montebello did not adopt an updated element for the 2000-2008 planning period.
As such, revised Government Code Section 65584.09 requires Montebello’s 2008-2014 Housing Element
to analyze any unaccommodated housing needs for the previous planning period, in addition to the
current needs. That is, any deficit in housing units from the 1998-2005 RHNA must be accommodated in
this Housing Element (refer to Table 2).
PAGE 20
CITY OF MONTEBELLO
Table 2
Regional Housing Needs Assessment 1998-2014
1998-2005
RHNA
2006-2014
RHNA
Total
Very Low-Income (<50 % MFI)
163
123
286
Low-Income (51-80 % MFI)
107
78
185
Moderate-Income (81-120 % MFI)
118
85
203
Above Moderate-Income (>120 % MFI
175
217
392
Total RHNA
563
503
1,066
Income Category
*State law allows local jurisdictions to use 50% of the very low-income category to represent
households of extremely low-income (less than 30% of the MFI).
Between 1998 and 2006, a total of 342 housing units were constructed (refer to Table 3). These include
the following affordable housing units: 32 apartment units to very low-income residents; 128 apartment
units to low-income residents; 75 apartment units and 13 second units to low moderate-income residents;
and seven owner-occupied homes to low-income residents.
Table 3
Housing Units Built or Under Construction 1998-2006
Very LowIncome
LowIncome
ModerateIncome
Above
ModerateIncome
Total
163
107
118
175
563
Units Built Since 1/98
-
-
-
-
Via Campo Senior Villas
-
-
75
-
75
Montebello Senior Villas
32
128
-
-
160
Lohart Homes
-
7
-
-
7
Second Units
-
-
13
-
13
Single-Family Homes
-
-
-
46
46
Multi-Family Homes
-
-
-
41
41
Total
32
135
88
87
342
Remaining RHNA
131
0
2
88
221
1998 RHNA
Source: City of Montebello, Congestion Management Report for years 1998 to 2005, and second units counts
provided by the City of Montebello, June 2006.
While the City did not meet its RHNA housing unit requirements for very low-income, moderate, and
above moderate-income households for the 1998-2005 period, almost twice as many affordable units
were constructed in the City as compared to market rate units. The remaining RHNA for Montebello is
221 units, including 131 very low-income units, 2 moderate-income units, and 88 above moderate-income
units (refer to Table 3).
PAGE 21
CITY OF MONTEBELLO
The City of Montebello must also accommodate the 2006-2014 RHNA. Since the RHNA uses January 1,
2006, as the baseline for growth projections for the Housing Element planning period of 2008 to 2014,
jurisdictions may count any new units built or approved since January 1, 2006, toward the RHNA. A
significant portion of the RHNA has already been achieved with housing units constructed, under
construction, and approved. Specifically, 167 units have been constructed or approved since January 1,
2006, including 54 low-income units and 18 moderate-income units. An additional 30 accessory (second)
units are projected to be constructed during this planning cycle, and are included in the credits. With
credits from units built, under construction, and approved since 2006, as well as projections on second
units, much of the RHNA has been met. A RHNA of 519 housing units remains, including 254 units for
very low-income households, 24 units for low-income households, 69 units for moderate-income
households, and 151 units for above moderate-income households (refer to Table 4).
Table 4
Remaining RHNA – 1998-2013
Very
LowIncome
LowIncome
ModerateIncome
Above
ModerateIncome
Total
Remaining RHNA 1998-2006
131
0
2
88
221
RHNA 2006-2013
123
78
85
217
503
Total RHNA
254
78
57
305
724
0
54
18
210
167
254
24
39
95
557
Units Built 2006-2008
Remaining RHNA
CURRENT RHNA OBLIGATION
Table 5 illustrates the distribution of the projected housing needs for the four income categories. The
additional housing required to accommodate the remaining RHNA need of 1,061 units may be met with
new infill housing in the residential zones and as part of the new Montebello Hills development.
Table 5
RHNA Allocation for Montebello 2013-2021
Income Level
RHNA (# units)
%
Very Low-income
269
25.2
Low-income
161
15.5
Moderate-income
175
16.5
Above Moderate-income
461
42.8
1,066
100.0
Total
Source: SCAG RHNA.
When considering the previous unmet need of 557 units (refer to Table 4) and the current RHNA (refer to
Table 5), a total RHNA of 1,623 remains.
PAGE 22
CITY OF MONTEBELLO
2.3.3 OVERVIEW OF HOUSING ELEMENT GOALS AND POLICIES
The State requires that local housing elements address a number of key issues through the adoption of
policies and the implementation of corresponding programs. In the remainder of this section, the existing
and recommended housing policies are arranged according to the following issues.
●
Issue No. 1 - Housing Conservation. The policies included in the category indicate the City will
remain committed to those efforts designed to preserve and maintain the existing housing
resources, including affordable housing.
●
Issue No. 2 - Removal of Governmental Constraints. The City will continue to explore and
implement strategies designed to remove those governmental constraints related to the
production of new housing.
●
Issue No. 3 - Identification of Adequate Sites. The City will remain committed to the
identification of potential sites along with the appropriate zoning.
●
Issue No. 4 - Development of New Housing Opportunities for All Income Groups. The policies
included in the issue category underscore the City’s commitment in continuing assistance in the
development of new housing for all income groups.
●
Issue No. 5 - Equal Housing. The City will adopt policies that underscore Montebello’s
commitment to equal housing opportunities.
As indicated previously, the existing, revised, and new Housing Element policies have been arranged
according to the aforementioned issue areas.
MAINTENANCE AND CONSERVATION OF HOUSING
The City of Montebello will remain committed to those efforts designed to preserve and maintain the
existing housing resources in the City, including affordable housing, with the implementation of the
following goal and supporting policies:
Goal 1. The City shall strive to maintain and improve the quality of existing housing and residential
neighborhoods in Montebello.
Policy 1.1. The City shall strive to ensure safe, sanitary and decent housing for all segments of the
community.
Policy 1.2. The City will continue to provide proactive code enforcement activities to maintain and
improve the quality of housing and neighborhoods.
Policy 1.3. The City will preserve existing affordable housing through rehabilitation programs and
code enforcement.
PAGE 23
CITY OF MONTEBELLO
Policy 1.4. The City shall strive make every effort to continue to provide assistance for rehabilitation
of existing structures and will advertise the availability of housing rehabilitation and encourage the
rehabilitation of substandard residential properties by homeowners and landlords.
Policy 1.5. The City will continue to develop strategies for the rehabilitation of multi-unit buildings
that are in need of renovation.
Policy 1.6. The City will continue to work to conserve existing affordable housing for lower-income
renters through continuation of rent subsidies, encouraging landowners to extend Section 8 contracts,
and encouraging the use of rehabilitation programs.
REMOVAL OF CONSTRAINTS
The City of Montebello will continue to explore and implement strategies designed to remove those
governmental constraints to new housing production.
Goal 2. The City will remove potential constraints to housing production and housing affordability.
Policy 2.1. The City will provide financial and regulatory incentives and remove regulatory barriers to
encourage the development of lower-, moderate-, and above-moderate income housing as resources
are made available.
Policy 2.2. The City will continue to review the permit process to reduce the time associated with the
housing approval process.
Policy 2.3. The City will promote consistency between the land use element, including the land use
map, and the zoning ordinance.
Policy 2.4. The City will assist in the provision of housing for extremely low-income and special needs
persons.
Policy 2.5. The City will cooperate with other agencies and organizations to promote programs that
meet the needs of the homeless population.
IDENTIFY ADEQUATE SITES
The following Housing Element policies underscore the City’s commitment in continuing to promote new
residential development through the appropriate Zoning and General Plan designations.
Goal 3. The City will continue to identify adequate housing sites through appropriate land use,
zoning, and specific plan designations to accommodate the City’s share of regional housing needs and
will provide land use policy that encourages, promotes, and provides for the development of various
housing types.
PAGE 24
CITY OF MONTEBELLO
Policy 3.1. The City will promote the implementation of standards to allow mixed use and urban
housing development in appropriate areas (along Whittier Boulevard and at specific intersections on
Beverly Boulevard and along other commercial corridors).
Policy 3.2. The City will continue to apply residential density standards which preserve the existing
character of the City while increasing the availability of sites for housing.
Policy 3.3. The City will continue to permit a range of residential and mixed use densities to
encourage a wide spectrum of housing with a variety of housing styles and types distributed
throughout the City.
Policy 3.4. The City will continue to increase the availability of sites for housing by requiring the
cleanup of contaminated sites and encouraging the consolidation of irregularly shaped parcels.
Policy 3.5. The City will continue to encourage the development of housing on all parcels suitable for
residential development.
Policy 3.6. The City will continue to encourage a wide variety of housing types including smaller,
more affordable housing to provide options for the City’s existing seniors to relocate when they desire
a smaller home.
DEVELOPMENT OF NEW HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR ALL INCOME GROUPS
The following Housing Element policies underscore the City’s commitment in continuing assistance in the
development of new housing for all income groups.
Goal 4. The City will continue to pursue programs and funding sources and adoption of policies
which allow for continued affordability of housing units.
Policy 4.1. The City will continue to encourage the development of affordable housing throughout the
community.
Policy 4.2. The City will promote the development of housing that provides decent and affordable
housing for households with special needs and for the elderly.
Policy 4.3. The City will continue to look for revenue sources that will replace redevelopment funds as
a means to promote and encourage the development of housing and housing programs.
Policy 4.4. The City will promote homeownership opportunities for low- and moderate-income
households.
Policy 4.5. The City will continue to encourage development of new housing in proximity to public
services, transportation routes, and other community facilities.
PAGE 25
CITY OF MONTEBELLO
Policy 4.6. The City will encourage the establishment of a variety of affordability levels in multipleprojects.
PROMOTE FAIR HOUSING PRACTICES
The following policies indicate the City’s desire to continue to promote equal housing opportunities in
Montebello.
Goal 5. The City will continue to promote fair housing practices and equal housing opportunity for all
residents.
Policy 5.1. The City will continue to enforce fair housing laws prohibiting discrimination in the
building, financing, selling, or renting of housing on the basis of race, ethnicity, ancestry, national
origin, religion, sex, disability, age, marital status, familial status, source of income, sexual
orientation, or any other arbitrary factor.
Policy 5.2. The City will continue to provide fair housing referral services to Montebello residents.
Policy 5.3. The City will require reasonable accommodation in the siting, development, retrofit, and
occupancy of housing to meet the needs of residents with special needs.
Policy 5.4. The City will promote community awareness of available housing programs and services
and encourage participation.
Policy 5.5. The City will continue to support fair housing programs and landlord/tenant mediation to
existing and potential residents of Montebello.
2.3.4 OVERVIEW OF HOUSING ELEMENT PROGRAMS
The Housing Element is structured around a number of Housing Programs that are designed to conserve
existing housing and promote the development of new housing. HCD typically requires new housing
programs to be adopted within 12 months following certification of the Housing Element. The existing
housing programs included in the Draft Housing Element are as follows:
●
Program 1: Code Enforcement Program (CEP). Code enforcement is essential to ensuring
housing conservation and rehabilitation. The City has long maintained an aggressive code
enforcement program (CEP) to preserve and protect existing neighborhoods against the harmful
effects of deterioration caused by neglect, graffiti, and deferred maintenance. In addition, a
property maintenance ordinance was adopted to allow code enforcement to abate specific
conditions on private property as a public nuisance.
●
Program 2: Home Improvement Programs. The City offers multiple home improvement
programs to lower income homeowners with homes in need of repair. The Home Improvement
program maintains affordable single-family housing stock through provision of amortized and
PAGE 26
CITY OF MONTEBELLO
deferred loans to extremely low-, very low-, low-, and moderate-income (as defined by HUD)
homeowners for major home repairs. The Senior Grant Program provides grants for up to
$10,000 to very low-income senior homeowners to fund home repairs.
●
Program 3: Rental Rehabilitation Program (RRP). The City’s Rental Rehabilitation Program
(RRP) is designed to improve the existing rental housing stock and to allow lower income renters
to afford the rehabilitated units. The City will continue to provide funding for the RRP to improve
the City’s rental housing stock in need of rehabilitation, to provide safe, decent, and sanitary
housing for lower income families.
●
Program 4: Neighborhood Revitalization. The goal of the neighborhood revitalization program
is to eliminate slum and blight conditions and improve living conditions through the provision of
rehabilitation activities and public improvement projects. The City’s goal is to stabilize
neighborhoods and create a viable and livable community through rehabilitation and new
homeownership opportunities.
●
Program 5: Preservation of At-Risk Housing. To meet the housing needs of persons of all
economic groups, the City is committed to guarding against the loss of housing units reserved for
lower-income households. Over the next 10 years, one assisted project in Montebello, Beverly
Towers, which provides 189 affordable units, has an expiring Section 8 contract and is at risk of
converting to market rate. However, because the project is owned and operated by a non-profit
organization, it is considered to be at low risk of converting to market rate. The City will continue
to monitor Section 8 legislation and all units considered at risk of conversion to market rate, and
assist property owners in maintaining the affordability of these units.
●
Program 6: Zoning Revision. Upon adoption of the General Plan, the City will undertake a
comprehensive update to the Zoning Code. The update will create consistency between the Land
Use Element of the General Plan and the Zoning Code, provide updated development and use
standards, and will remove constraints to housing development.
●
Program 7: Density Bonuses. The City abides by State density bonus law to facilitate the
development of affordable and senior housing. Pursuant to State law, the City offers density
bonuses of between 20% and 35% for the provision of affordable housing, depending on the
amount and type provided. Financial incentives or regulatory concessions may also be granted
when a developer proposes to construct affordable housing.
●
Program 8: Extremely Low-Income and Special Needs Housing. Extremely low-income
households and households with special needs have limited housing options. Housing types
appropriate for these groups include: emergency shelters, transitional housing, supportive
housing, and single-room occupancy (SRO) units. As part of the Governmental Constraints
analysis for the Housing Element update, the following revisions to the Montebello Zoning
Ordinance were identified as appropriate to better facilitate the provision of a variety of housing
types.
PAGE 27
CITY OF MONTEBELLO
●
Program 9: Water and Sewer Service Providers. In accordance with Government Code Section
65589.7 as revised in 2005, immediately following City Council adoption, the City must deliver
the Housing Element to all public agencies or private entities that provide water or sewer services
to properties within Montebello.
●
Program 10: Provision of Adequate Sites. The City will maximize the density potential of limited
land resources by promoting residential densities that achieve the highest allowable density for
specific properties; to maintain, on an ongoing basis, a vacant and underutilized residential sites
inventory and provide sites information to interested developers; and to provide technical
assistance and information on available City-owned parcels for lower-income developments to
housing providers.
●
Program 11: Mixed use Sites. Mixed use development will add more residential units along
Whittier Boulevard and at strategic intersections along Beverly Boulevard. Such development is
expected to enhance the market for businesses along these corridors, and provide significant
opportunities for affordable housing development. The sites chosen as opportunity areas are
located in high-visibility areas and intersections, and are significantly underutilized given their
size and location. The City’s development standards encourage the development of mixed use in
these areas and interest among developers to complete such projects within Montebello is
evident.
●
Program 12: Affordable Housing Development. For-profit and non-profit developers play a
significant role in providing affordable housing in Montebello. The City provides land, regulatory
incentives, and financial assistance to developers to complete both ownership and rental housing
for very low-, low-, and moderate-income households. On a case-by-case basis, the City will assess
the financial incentives needed to facilitate the development of affordable housing.
●
Program 13: First Time Homebuyer Program.
The City is committed to expanding
homeownership opportunities for lower income households through the First-Time Homebuyer
Program. The goal of this program is to increase the percentage of homeowners in the community
and assist with the stabilization of residential neighborhoods. The program is coordinated by the
Montebello Housing Development Corporation. It provides second mortgage loans to first time
homebuyers of low to moderate-income means. These loans are provided for acquisition of homes
on the City of Montebello open market. The loans provide the bridge between sales purchase price
of homes and the available buying power of the first time homebuyers of low to moderate-income
means, and are funded through a CalHome grant.
●
Program 14: Section 8 Rental Subsidies. Both tenant and project-based Section 8 subsidies
relieve housing costs to households that spend more than 30% of their income on rent. Tenantbased Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program is funded by HUD. Under the project-based
Section 8 program, subsidies are distributed to apartments that house very low-income
households. The County of Los Angeles Housing Authority distributes tenant-based Section 8
Housing vouchers to renters who wish to apply the voucher to landowners who accept such
vouchers.
PAGE 28
CITY OF MONTEBELLO
●
Program 15: Fair Housing Services/Housing Rights Services. The City contracts with the
Housing Rights Center to provide fair housing services in Montebello. Services include housing
discrimination response, landlord-tenant relations, and housing information counseling.
●
Program 16: Housing Mediation Board. The City will continue to provide fair housing services
through the Housing Mediation Board to provide an atmosphere in which disputing parties of
rental housing are able to reach a mutual workable solution to excessive rent increases, claims of
wrongful notices to quit, and clarification of general rights and responsibilities of property owners
and tenants.
●
Program 17: Reasonable Accommodation. Reasonable accommodation provides a means of
requesting from the local government flexibility in the application of land use and zoning
regulations. Cities and counties are required to consider requests for accommodations related to
housing for people with disabilities and provide the accommodation when it is determined to be
“reasonable” based on fair housing laws and case law interpreting the statutes.
2.4 PROJECT OBJECTIVES AND DISCRETIONARY ACTIONS
The objectives that the City of Montebello seeks to accomplish as part of the Housing Element’s
implementation include the following:
●
Goal 1. The City shall strive to maintain and improve the quality of existing housing and
residential neighborhoods in Montebello.
●
Goal 2. The City will remove potential constraints to housing production and housing
affordability.
●
Goal 3. The City will continue to identify adequate housing sites through appropriate land use,
zoning, and specific plan designations to accommodate the City’s share of regional housing needs
and will provide land use policy that encourages, promotes, and provides for the development of
various housing types.
●
Goal 4. The City will continue to pursue programs and funding sources and adoption of policies
which allow for continued affordability of housing units.
●
Goal 5. The City will continue to promote fair housing practices and equal housing opportunity
for all residents.
A Discretionary Decision is an action taken by a government agency (for this project, the government
agency is the City of Montebello) that calls for an exercise of judgment in deciding whether to approve a
potential development. As part of the proposed project’s implementation, the City will consider the
following:
●
The approval of the Negative Declaration; and,
PAGE 29
CITY OF MONTEBELLO
●
The adoption of the General Plan Amendment required to incorporate the Housing Element into
the Montebello General Plan.
Other permits required for the projects identified in this element include issuance of grading, building,
and occupancy permits from the City of Montebello and utility connection permits from the utility
providers.
PAGE 30
CITY OF MONTEBELLO
SECTION 3 - ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
This section of the Initial Study analyzes the potential environmental impacts that may result from the
proposed project’s implementation. The issue areas evaluated in this Initial Study include:
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
Aesthetics (Section 3.1);
Agricultural/Forestry (Section 3.2);
Air Quality (Section 3.3);
Biological Resources (Section 3.4);
Cultural Resources (Section 3.5);
Geology and Soils (Section 3.6);
Greenhouse Gas Emissions (Section 3.7);
Hazards/Hazardous Materials (Section 3.8);
Hydrology and Water Quality (Section 3.9);
● Land Use and Planning (Section 3.10);
● Mineral Resources (Section 3.11);
● Noise (Section 3.12);
● Population and Housing (Section 3.13);
● Public Services (Section 3.14);
● Recreation (Section 3.15);
● Transportation and Traffic (Section 3.16);
● Utilities (Section 3.17).
Under each issue area, an assessment of impacts is provided in the form of questions and answers. The
analysis contained herein serves as a response to the individual questions. For the evaluation of potential
impacts, questions are stated and an answer is provided according to the analysis undertaken as part of
this Initial Study's preparation. To each question, there are four possible responses:
●
No Impact. The adoption and subsequent implementation of the Housing Element will not have
any measurable environmental impact on the environment.
●
Less Than Significant Impact. The adoption and subsequent implementation of the Housing
Element may have the potential for affecting the environment, although these impacts will be
below levels or thresholds that the City of Montebello or other responsible agencies consider to be
significant.
●
Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation. The adoption and subsequent implementation of
the Housing Element may have the potential to generate impacts that will have a significant
impact on the environment. However, the level of impact may be reduced to levels that are less
than significant with the implementation of mitigation measures.
●
Potentially Significant Impact. The adoption and subsequent implementation of the Housing
Element may result in environmental impacts that are significant.
3.1 AESTHETICS
3.1.1 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
According to the City of Montebello, a project may be deemed to have a significant adverse aesthetic
impact if it results in any of the following:
●
An adverse effect on a scenic vista;
SECTION 3 ● ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
PAGE 31
CITY OF MONTEBELLO
●
Substantial damage to scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings,
and historic buildings within a State scenic highway; or,
●
A new source of substantial light and glare that would adversely affect day- or night-time views in
the area.
3.1.2 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
A. Would the project affect a scenic vista? No Impact.
The City’s local relief is generally level and ranges from 1,017 feet above mean sea level (AMSL) to 1,250
feet AMSL. The City’s topography, with the exception of the Montebello Hills portion, is generally level
due to Montebello’s location over an alluvial plain associated with the deposition of water-borne materials
from the Rio Hondo River. Dominant visual elements in the surrounding area include the views of the
Montebello Hills and Puente Hills located to the north and east and the San Gabriel Mountains located
further north. The City is located in the westernmost portion of the San Gabriel Valley.3
The potential infill sites will accommodate the new housing units need to accommodate the remaining
RHNA need. The major infill site corresponds to the development envisioned for the Montebello Hills
pursuant to the Specific Plan which is currently undergoing environmental review. The environmental
studies that will be prepared for the other residential development will consider potential impacts on a
case-by-case basis once the location and extent of this potential development is known. The Housing
Element establishes housing policies and identifies programs that will enable the City of Montebello to
comply with State law. The RHNA that has been assigned to the City is also a State mandate that will
enable Montebello to accommodate its regional housing need. Furthermore, new residential development
will be required to comply with all pertinent land use and development standards. As a result, the
Housing Element’s adoption and subsequent implementation will not result in any significant adverse
impacts.
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.
The potential residential development sites are located within areas that are urbanized. The development
envisioned for the Montebello Hills is currently undergoing environmental review though much of this
area was previously impacted by the on-going oil extraction activities. No natural undeveloped areas
remain within any of the remaining candidate development sites. Future residential development
contemplated under the Housing Element’s implementation for other sites in the City will result in the
replacement of the existing land uses and development with newer homes. As a result, the Housing
Element’s adoption and subsequent implementation will not result in any significant adverse impacts on
scenic resources.
3 County of Los Angeles Department of Public Works. Beverly Boulevard Phase III Widening and Replacement of Beverly
Boulevard Bridge over Rio Hondo River Channel. Draft Initial Study [and] Environmental Assessment. December 2003.
PAGE 32
CITY OF MONTEBELLO
C. Would the project create a new source of substantial light or glare that would adversely affect dayor night-time views in the area? Less Than Significant Impact.
The potential for light and glare will be limited given the type of development promoted as part of the
Housing Element’s implementation. Residential development is considered to be a light sensitive
receptor and, as a result, City development standards will assist in mitigating light trespass and spill over.
As a result, the impacts of the Housing Element’s adoption and subsequent implementation are
considered to be less than significant.
3.1.3 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
The potential aesthetic impact related to views, aesthetics, and light and glare is site specific.
Furthermore, the analysis determined that future residential development arising from the
implementation of the Housing Element would not result in any significant adverse impacts. As a result,
no cumulative aesthetic impacts are anticipated.
3.1.4 MITIGATION MEASURES
The analysis determined that the Housing Element’s adoption and subsequent implementation would not
result in any significant adverse aesthetic or light and glare impacts. As a result, no mitigation measures
are required.
3.2 AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES
According to the City of Montebello, a project may be deemed to have a significant impact on agriculture
and forestry resources if it results in any of the following:
●
The conversion of prime farmland, unique farmland or farmland of Statewide importance;
●
A conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act Contract;
●
A conflict with existing zoning for or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources
Code §4526), or zoned timberland production (as defined by Government Code §51104[g]);
●
The loss of forest land or the conversion of forest land to a non-forest use; or
●
Changes to the existing environment that due to their location or nature may result in the
conversion of farmland to non-agricultural uses.
PAGE 33
CITY OF MONTEBELLO
A. Would the project convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide
Importance, 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.
There are no soils in the City designated as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland or Soils of Statewide
Importance.4 Outside of the Montebello Hills portion of the City, local soils are generally associated with
the alluvial deposition that occurred prior to the area’s urbanization. In addition, all of the candidate sites
identified for future residential development have previously been disturbed. Furthermore, no
agricultural activities are being conducted within the City. As a result, no impacts will occur with the
adoption and subsequent implementation of the Housing Element.
B. Would the project conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act Contract?
No Impact.
No agricultural activities are located within the candidate development sites. The City’s applicable
General Plan and Zoning designations for the candidate housing development sites do not contemplate
agricultural land uses within the affected residential infill sites. In addition, no properties within the City
are subject to a Williamson Act Contract. As a result, no impacts on existing or future Williamson Act
Contracts will result from the implementation of the Housing Element.
C. Would the project conflict with existing zoning for or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in
Public Resources Code Section 4526), or zoned timberland production (as defined by Government
Code § 51104[g])? No Impact.
The City of Montebello is located in the midst of a larger urban area and no forest lands are located within
the City or in the surrounding area. The City of Montebello General Plan does not specifically provide for
any forest land protection. As a result, no impacts on forest land or timber resources will result from the
proposed project’s implementation.
D. Would the project result in the loss of forest land or the conversion of forest land to a non-forest use?
No Impact.
The City and the candidate residential infill development sites are located in the midst of an urban area.
No forest land is located within the City nor does the General Plan provide for any forest land protection.
As a result, no loss or conversion of forest lands will result from the adoption and subsequent
implementation of the Housing Element.
4
State of. Department of Conservation. Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program. July 13, 1995.
PAGE 34
CITY OF MONTEBELLO
E. Would the project involve other changes in the existing environment that, due to their location or
nature, may result in conversion of farmland to non-agricultural use? No Impact.
As indicated previously, no agricultural activities are located within these properties or in the surrounding
area. As a result, the proposed adoption and subsequent implementation of the Housing Element will not
involve the conversion of any existing farmland area to urban uses.
The analysis determined that there is no remaining agricultural or forestry resources in the City.
Furthermore, the analysis determined that future residential development arising from the
implementation of the Housing Element would not result in any significant adverse impacts. As a result,
no cumulative impacts on agricultural or farmland resources will occur.
The analysis of agriculture resources indicated that no significant adverse impacts would result from the
Housing Element’s adoption and subsequent implementation. As a result, no mitigation measures are
required.
3.3 AIR QUALITY
According to the City of Montebello, a project will normally be deemed to have a significant adverse
environmental impact on air quality, if it results in any of the following:
●
A conflict with the obstruction of the implementation of the applicable air quality plan;
●
A violation of an air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air
quality violation;
●
A cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is in
non-attainment under an applicable Federal or State ambient air quality standard;
●
The exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations; or
●
The creation of objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people.
PAGE 35
CITY OF MONTEBELLO
A. Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? No
Impact.
The City of Montebello is located within the South Coast Air Basin which covers a 6,600 square-mile area
within Orange County, non-desert portions of Los Angeles County, Riverside County, and San Bernardino
County. Air quality in the basin is monitored by the South Coast Air Quality Management District
(SCAQMD) at various monitoring stations located throughout the area.5 Measures to improve regional air
quality are outlined in the SCAQMD’s Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP). The Final 2012 AQMP was
jointly prepared with the CARB and the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG).6 The
plan will help AQMD maintain focus on the air quality impacts of major projects associated with goods
movement, land use, energy efficiency and other key areas of growth. Key elements of the 2012 AQMP
include enhancements to existing programs to meet the 24-hour PM2.5 Federal health standard and a
proposed plan of action to reduce ground-level ozone.
The SCAB has experienced poor air quality due in large part to the area’s topography as well as
meteorological influences that often lead to the creation of inversion layers that prevent the dispersal of
pollutants. The primary criteria pollutants that remain non-attainment in the local area include PM2.5 and
Ozone. Specific criteria for determining a project’s conformity with the AQMP is defined in Section 12.3
of the SCAQMD’s CEQA. The Air Quality Handbook refers to the following criteria as a means to
determine a project’s conformity with the AQMP:7
●
Consistency Criteria 1 refers to a proposed project’s potential for resulting in an increase in the
frequency or severity of an existing air quality violation or its potential for contributing to the
continuation of an existing air quality violation.
●
Consistency Criteria 2 refers to a proposed project’s potential for exceeding the assumptions
included in the AQMP or other regional growth projections relevant to the AQMP’s
implementation.8
The RHNA is a mandate required by the State of California as part of the Housing Element’s
implementation. The City is obligated under State law, to fulfill the RHNA requirements that have been
assigned to the City. As part of the RHNA's development, SCAG relied on growth projections developed
as part of the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). These growth projections were evaluated in the
environmental studies prepared for both the RHNA and RTP. The South Coast Air Basin has experienced
poor air quality due in large part to the area’s topography as well as meteorological influences that often
lead to the creation of inversion layers that prevent the dispersal of pollutants. The implementation of the
Housing Element will not result in any exceedance of any employment or population projections.
5
South Coast Air Quality Management District, Final 2012 Air Quality Plan, Adopted 2012.
6
Ibid.
7
South Coast Air Quality Management District. CEQA Air Quality Handbook. April 1993.
8
Ibid.
PAGE 36
CITY OF MONTEBELLO
Therefore, the Draft Housing Element is considered to be in conformance with the AQMP. The General
Plan was used in formulating the AQMP (the AQMP relied on growth projections that were based on the
City’s General Plan). As a result, the proposed project will not result in any significant adverse impact
related to the implementation 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.
Future residential development contemplated under the Housing Element will generate short-term
(construction-related) emissions and long-term (operational) emissions. The potential infill sites will
accommodate the new housing units need to accommodate the remaining RHNA need. The major infill
site corresponds to the development envisioned for the Montebello Hills pursuant to the Specific Plan
which is currently undergoing environmental review. The environmental studies that will be prepared for
the other residential development will consider potential air quality impacts on a case-by-case basis once
the location and extent of this potential development is known.
The Housing Element establishes housing policies and identifies programs that will enable the City of
Montebello to comply with State law. The RHNA that has been assigned to the City is also a State
mandate that will enable Montebello to accommodate its regional housing need. Furthermore, new
residential development will be required to comply with all pertinent land use and development
standards. As a result, the Housing Element’s adoption and subsequent implementation will not result in
any significant adverse impacts.
C. Would the project result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for
which the project region is in 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.
standards. The environmental studies that will be prepared for the other residential development will
consider potential air quality impacts on a case-by-case basis once the location and extent of this potential
development is known. As a result, the cumulative air quality impacts are considered to be less than
significant.
D. Would the project expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? Less Than
Significant Impact.
Sensitive receptors refer to land uses and/or activities that are especially sensitive to poor air quality and
typically include homes, schools, playgrounds, hospitals, convalescent homes, and other facilities where
PAGE 37
CITY OF MONTEBELLO
children or the elderly may congregate.9 The residential uses contemplated as part of the Housing
Element’s implementation are also considered to be sensitive receptors. As a result, no significant
adverse impacts on sensitive receptors are anticipated to result from the Housing Element’s adoption and
subsequent implementation.
E. Would the project create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? No Impact.
The SCAQMD has identified land uses that are typically associated with odor complaints. These uses
include activities involving livestock, rendering facilities, food processing plants, chemical plants,
composting activities, refineries, landfills, and businesses involved in fiberglass molding.10 The
residential uses associated with the adoption and subsequent implementation of the Housing Element will
not result in any significant adverse odor impacts. As a result, no impacts are anticipated.
The Housing Element’s adoption and subsequent implementation would not result in any new exceedance
of air pollution standards nor contribute significantly to an existing air quality violation. Furthermore,
the analysis determined that potential future residential development arising from the implementation of
the Draft Housing Element would not result in any significant adverse impacts. As a result, no significant
adverse cumulative impacts will occur.
The analysis of potential air quality impacts indicated that no significant adverse impacts would result
from the Draft Housing Element’s adoption and subsequent implementation. As a result, no mitigation
measures are required.
3.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
According to the City of Montebello, a project may be deemed to have a significant adverse impact on
biological resources if it results in any of the following:
●
9
A substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species
identified as a candidate, sensitive or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or
regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service;
South Coast Air Quality Management District. CEQA Air Quality Handbook, Appendix 9. 2004 (as amended).
10
Ibid.
PAGE 38
CITY OF MONTEBELLO
●
A substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural plant community
identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the California Department of Fish
and Wildlife or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service;
●
A substantial adverse effect on Federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means;
●
A substantial interference with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife
species or with established native resident or migratory life corridors, or impede the use of native
wildlife nursery sites;
●
A conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance; or,
●
A conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community
Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan.
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 Wildlife or U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service? No Impact.
Whittier Narrows Recreation Area is located approximately 3 miles to the northeast of the City. This large
regional park is situated between the San Gabriel River and the Rio Hondo River and is developed with a
combination of surface waters (lakes and rivers), extensive riparian vegetation, and open fields, all of
which attract and support a wide variety of wildlife species. Staff from the Recreation Area report 297
species of birds, of which 100 are categorized by the Nature Center as "rare," although this is an unofficial
designation. Because Whittier Narrows Recreational Facility is approximately 3 miles from the project
area, and the absence of any relevant linkages, natural habitats, or open spaces, the implementation of the
Housing Element will not have a significant adverse impact on biological resources.
The major infill site that includes the Montebello Hills is undergoing environmental evaluation at this
time for a proposed residential master planned community. There are no sensitive or unique biological
resources located within the remaining areas identified as candidate housing sites. As a result, no impacts
on any candidate, sensitive, or special status species will result from the adoption and subsequent
implementation of the Housing Element. The environmental studies that will be prepared for the other
residential development will consider potential impacts on a case-by-case basis once the location and
extent of the potential development is known.
PAGE 39
CITY OF MONTEBELLO
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 Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? No Impact.
There are no native or natural riparian plant habitats found within the candidate infill sites. The major
infill site corresponds to the development envisioned for the Montebello Hills pursuant to the Specific
Plan which is currently undergoing environmental review. The environmental studies that will be
prepared for the other residential development will consider potential impacts on a case-by-case basis
once the location and extent of this potential development is known. The RHNA that has been assigned to
the City is also a State mandate that will enable Montebello to accommodate its regional housing need.
Furthermore, new residential development will be required to comply with all pertinent land use and
development standards. As a result, no significant adverse impacts on natural or riparian habitats will
result from the Housing Element’s adoption and subsequent implementation.
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.
The City does not contain any natural undisturbed wetland habitat. No natural blue line streams are
identified within the City.11 The Rio Hondo Channel is lined with concrete at its nearest location to the
project area. No other natural surface water bodies are located near the potential residential development
sites.12 As a result, adoption and subsequent implementation of the Housing Element will not impact any
protected wetland area or designated blue-line stream.
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 life corridors, or impede the
use of native wildlife nursery sites? No Impact.
The major infill site corresponds to the development envisioned for the Montebello Hills pursuant to the
Specific Plan which is currently undergoing environmental review. The environmental studies that will be
prepared for the other residential development will consider potential impacts on a case-by-case basis
once the location and extent of this potential development is known. The Housing Element establishes
housing policies and identifies programs that will enable the City to comply with State law. The RHNA
that has been assigned to the City is also a State mandate that will enable Montebello to accommodate its
regional housing need. Furthermore, new residential development will be required to comply with all
pertinent land use and development standards. No natural open space areas are located in the City that
serves as animal migration corridors. In addition, the City of Montebello is surrounded by urban
development. As a result, no significant adverse impacts are anticipated with the Housing Element’s
implementation.
11
United States Geological Survey. Los Angeles 7½ Minute Quadrangle. Release Date March 25, 1999.
12
Ibid.
PAGE 40
CITY OF MONTEBELLO
E. Would the project conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such
as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? No Impact.
All new development contemplated as part of the Housing Element’s implementation will be required to
conform to all pertinent requirements and/or conditions of approval concerning tree removal and/or tree
preservation. As a result, no significant adverse impacts are anticipated.
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 urbanized portion of the City is not located within an area governed by a habitat conservation or
community conservation plan. As a result, no adverse impacts on local, regional, or State habitat
conservation plans will result from the adoption and subsequent implementation of the Housing Element.
The impacts on biological resources are typically site specific. Future development envisioned in the
Housing Element would not involve any loss of protected habitat. Furthermore, the analysis determined
that future residential development arising from the implementation of the Housing Element would not
result in any significant adverse impacts. As result, the Housing Element’s implementation would not
result in an incremental loss or degradation of those protected habitats found in the Southern California
region. As a result, no cumulative impacts on biological resources will be associated with the proposed
project’s implementation.
The analysis indicated that the adoption and subsequent implementation of the Draft Housing Element
would not result in any significant adverse impacts on biological resources. As a result, no mitigation
3.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES
According to the City of Montebello, a project will normally have a significant adverse impact on cultural
resources if it results in any of the following:
●
A substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in §15064.5 of
the State CEQA Guidelines;
●
A substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to
§15064.5 of the State CEQA Guidelines;
PAGE 41
CITY OF MONTEBELLO
●
The destruction of a unique paleontological resource, site or unique geologic feature; or
●
The disturbance of any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries.
A. Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as
defined in §15064.5 of the State CEQA Guidelines? No Impact.
A total of 20 cultural resources were documented during the course of the archaeological and historic
architectural surveys that were previously conducted for the City. All buildings and structures over 45
years old within the City for architectural resources were documented on California Department of Parks
and Recreation (DPR) forms and evaluated for eligibility for inclusion on the NRHP and CRHR. The
properties were also evaluated in accordance with Section 15064.5(a)(2)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines using
the criteria outlined in Section 5024.1 of the California Public Resources Code.
The City of Montebello has several sites of historical significance, including the Mission Viejo site and the
Rio San Gabriel battlefield. The Mission Viejo predated the original San Gabriel Mission and the first
structures were erected on a site located in the vicinity of San Gabriel Boulevard and North Lincoln
Avenue.54 A second significant historic site, located in the southern portion of the City and is the site of a
battle between the United States and the Californians during the Mexican War. On January 8, 1847,
American forces commanded by Captain Robert F. Stockton and Brigadier General Stephen W. Kearney,
fought Californian forces commanded by General Jose Maria Flores. There are also a number of
historically significant sites in the City of Montebello, including the Woman’s Clubhouse and the SotoSanchez Adobe. The Montebello Woman’s Clubhouse is owned by the Montebello Woman’s Club, which
was formed in 1909. This Clubhouse was constructed in 1925 and is listed on the National Register of
Historic Places. The Soto-Sanchez Adobe is a City-owned historic landmark that was the former residence
of Juan Sanchez and Casilda Soto.
The major infill site corresponds to the development envisioned for the Montebello Hills pursuant to the
Specific Plan which is currently undergoing environmental review. The environmental studies that will be
prepared for the other residential development will consider potential cultural resources impacts on a
case-by-case basis once the location and extent of this potential development is known.
standards. As a result, the adoption and subsequent implementation of the Housing Element will not
result in any significant adverse impacts on any historic site or other historic structures.
54
- Atkinson, Janet. Los Angeles County Historical Directory. 1988.
PAGE 42
CITY OF MONTEBELLO
B. Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological
resource pursuant to §15064.5 of the State CEQA Guidelines? No Impact.
The cultural sensitivity of the Montebello Hills is being analyzed as part of the preparation of the
environmental documents being prepared in support of the Montebello Hills Specific Plan. The
remaining potential development sites in the City were previously disturbed and no archaeological
resources were reported during previous grading and excavation activities in the area. In addition, the
potential residential development sites have undergone extensive disturbances as part of past
construction activities. No known sites are known or suspected to be present in the urban portions of the
City. As a result, no impacts on archaeological resources are anticipated from the proposed project.
C. Would the project directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource, site or unique
geologic feature? No Impact.
The cultural sensitivity of the Montebello Hills is being analyzed as part of the preparation of the
environmental documents being prepared in support of the Montebello Hills Specific Plan. The potential
for paleontological resources in the remaining infill areas is considered low due to the character of
subsurface soils (recent alluvium) and the amount of disturbance associated with the aforementioned past
development. As a result, no significant adverse impacts are anticipated.
D. Would the project disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal
cemeteries? No Impact.
There is a single cemetery located within the City of Montebello (Resurrection Cemetery and Mausoleum).
Future development within the candidate infill sites will not affect this cemetery. As a result, no
significant adverse impacts are anticipated.
The potential environmental impacts related to cultural resources are site specific. Furthermore, the
analysis herein also determined that the adoption and subsequent implementation of the Housing
Element would not result in any impacts on cultural resources. As a result, no cumulative impacts will
occur.
The analysis of potential cultural resources impacts indicated that no significant adverse impacts would
result from the Housing Element’s adoption and subsequent implementation and no mitigation measures
are required.
PAGE 43
CITY OF MONTEBELLO
3.6 GEOLOGY
According to the City of Montebello, a project may be deemed to have a significant adverse impact on the
environment if it results in the following:
●
The exposure of people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of
loss, injury, or death involving rupture of a known earthquake fault (as delineated on the most
recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or
based on other substantial evidence of a known fault), ground–shaking, liquefaction, or
landslides;
●
Substantial soil erosion resulting in the loss of topsoil;
●
The exposure of people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including location on
a geologic unit or a 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;
●
Locating a project on an expansive soil, as defined in the California Building Code (2012), creating
substantial risks to life or property; or,
●
Locating a project in, or exposing people to potential impacts, including soils incapable of
adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where
sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater.
A. Would the project expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the
risk of loss, injury, or death involving rupture of a known earthquake fault (as delineated on the
most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area
or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault), ground–shaking, liquefaction, or
landslides? No Impact.
The City of Montebello is located in the Peninsular Range geologic province, which is bounded by the
Transverse Range province to the north and the Colorado Desert province to the west. The inland portion
of the Peninsular Range province consists of numerous mountain ranges that are composed of igneous
and metamorphic rocks of Mesozoic and Paleozoic age. An irregular coastal plain extends along the
western edge of the province that includes the Los Angeles Coastal Plain. The coastal plain’s geology is
composed of marine and non-marine elastic deposits of Upper Cretaceous, Tertiary and Quaternary age.
PAGE 44
CITY OF MONTEBELLO
The most probable major sources of a significant earthquake affecting the Montebello area include the
San Andreas Fault Zone, located approximately 50 miles to the northwest, and the Sierra Madre Fault
zone, located approximately 20 miles to the north and northeast. Both the San Andreas and Sierra Madre
zones have been recognized for some time as being active. Both the San Andreas and Sierra Madre zones
have been associated with surface rupturing as well as significant ground-shaking effects. However, no
active faults are known to exist in the City.13 All of the major faults are located outside of the City’s
corporate boundaries though there is a fault located in the vicinity of the Montebello Hills. No areas of
the City are included within an Aquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone.
The California Geological Survey is authorized to implement the Seismic Hazards Mapping Act of 1990
(the “Act”). The Act directs the Department of Conservation (of which the California Geological Survey is
a part) to identify and map areas prone to earthquake hazards of liquefaction, earthquake-induced
landslides and amplified ground-shaking. The purpose of the Act is to reduce the threat to public safety
and to minimize the loss of life and property by identifying and mitigating these seismic hazards.14 The
Act requires site-specific geotechnical investigations be conducted to identify the hazard and to assist in
the formulation of mitigation measures prior to permitting most developments designed for human
occupancy within the Zones of Required Investigation. The Seismic Hazard Zone Maps indicate those
areas where site-specific investigation is required.15 According to the Seismic Zones Hazard Map
prepared for the Montebello area, the areas where there is a potential liquefaction risk is found in the
eastern portion of the City.
The City is also located within a seismically active region and is subject to ground-shaking hazards
associated with earthquake events in the region. Seismicity in the Los Angeles area historically has been
defined by earthquake events along the Newport-Inglewood, San Fernando, San Jacinto and San Andreas
faults. Other faults of concern in the area include the Whittier Fault, the Elysian Park Thrust, and Santa
Monica-Hollywood Fault. The level of risk for the candidate housing infill sites is no greater than that of
the remainder of the City. As a result, no significant adverse impacts are anticipated to result from the
adoption and subsequent implementation of the Housing Element.
B. Would the project expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including
substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? No Impact.
The environmental studies that will be prepared for the candidate infill sites involving residential
development will consider potential impacts on a case-by-case basis once the location and extent of this
potential development is known. Furthermore, the standard conditions and storm water runoff
14
Seismic Hazards Mapping Act of 1990 (Public Resources Code, Chapter 7.8, Section 2690-2699.6).
15 A copy of each approved geotechnical report including the mitigation measures is required to be submitted to the California
Geological Survey within 30 days of approval of the report. A Certified Engineering Geologist or Registered Civil Engineer with
competence in the field of seismic hazard evaluation is required to prepare, review and approve the geotechnical report. The Act
requires peer review and this individual may be either local agency staff or a retained consultant. It must be noted that the
Department of Conservation does not have authority to approve or disapprove the geotechnical reports; rather the data is utilized for
future updates as well as monitor the effectiveness of the Program. In addition, cities and counties are to incorporate the Seismic
Hazard Zone Maps into their Safety Elements. Both the Act and the Natural Hazard Disclosure Statement also require sellers of real
property to disclose to buyers if property is in a Seismic Hazard Zone of Required Investigation.
PAGE 45
CITY OF MONTEBELLO
regulations will also mitigate potential erosion impacts. As a result, no significant adverse impacts related
to soil erosion are anticipated.
C.
Would the project expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including
location on a geologic unit or a soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the
project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction,
or collapse? No Impact.
The environmental studies that will be prepared for the candidate infill sites involving residential
potential development is known. The potential liquefaction and slope failure risk will be addressed
through adherence to existing building codes. As a result no additional significant adverse impacts are
anticipated.
D. Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts, including location on expansive
soil, as defined in Uniform Building Code (2012), creating substantial risks to life or property? No
Impact.
Montebello is located in the midst of a larger existing urban area. The potential development sites have
undergone previous development and all of the sites are surrounded by existing development. The soils in
the City are suitable for development as demonstrated by existing development. Thus, no expansive soil
impacts will occur as part of the proposed project’s implementation.16
E. Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts, including soils incapable of
adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where
sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? No Impact.
No septic tanks will be used as part of any future residential development. Future residential
development will be required to connect with the nearby sanitary sewer system. As a result, no impacts
associated with the use of septic tanks will occur as part of the Housing Element’s adoption and
subsequent implementation.
The potential cumulative impacts related to earth and geology is typically site specific. Furthermore, the
analysis herein determined that the adoption and subsequent implementation of the Housing Element
would not result in significant adverse impacts related to landform modification, grading, or the
destruction of a geologically significant landform or feature. As a result, no cumulative earth and geology
impacts will occur as part of the Housing Element’s implementation.
16
California, State of. Department of Conservation. Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program. July 13, 1995.
PAGE 46
CITY OF MONTEBELLO
The analysis determined that the adoption and subsequent implementation of the Housing Element
would not result in any significant adverse impacts related to earth and geology. As a result, no mitigation
3.7 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
greenhouse gas emissions if it results in any of the following:
●
The generation of greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a
significant impact on the environment; and,
●
The potential for conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of
reducing emissions of greenhouse gases.
A.
Would the project generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a
significant impact on the environment? No Impact.
The State of California requires CEQA documents to include an evaluation of greenhouse gas (GHG)
emissions or gases that trap heat in the atmosphere. GHG are emitted by both natural processes and
human activities. Examples of GHG that are produced both by natural and industrial processes include
carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), and nitrous oxide (N2O). The accumulation of GHG in the
atmosphere regulates the earth's temperature. Without these natural GHG, the Earth's surface would be
about 61°F cooler.17 However, emissions from fossil fuel combustion by humans have elevated the
concentrations of GHG in the atmosphere to above-natural levels. Scientific evidence indicates there is a
correlation between increasing global temperatures/climate change over the past century and humaninduced levels of GHG.
These and other environmental changes have potentially negative
environmental, economic, and social consequences around the globe.
GHG differ from criteria or toxic air pollutants in that the GHG emissions do not cause direct adverse
human health effects. Rather, the direct environmental effect of GHG emissions is the increase in global
temperatures, which in turn has numerous impacts on the environment and humans. For example, some
observed changes include shrinking glaciers, thawing permafrost, later freezing and earlier break-up of
ice on rivers and lakes, a lengthened growing season, shifts in plant and animal ranges, and earlier
flowering of trees. Other, longer term environmental impacts of global warming may include a rise in sea
level, changing weather patterns with increases in the severity of storms and droughts, changes to local
17
California, State of. OPR Technical Advisory – CEQA and Climate Change: Addressing Climate Change through the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Review. June 19, 2008.
PAGE 47
CITY OF MONTEBELLO
and regional ecosystems including the potential loss of species, and a significant reduction in winter
snow pack. The California Natural Resources Agency is presently developing the State's Climate
Adaptation Strategy. Currently, there are no Federal standards for GHG emissions and Federal
regulations have not yet been promulgated. Recently, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the effects
associated with climate change are serious and the EPA must regulate GHG as pollutants including the
development of regulations for GHG emissions from new motor vehicles. A number of states, including
California, have set Statewide GHG emission targets. The passage of Assembly Bill (AB) 32, the
California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, established the California target to achieve reductions
in GHG to 1990 GHG emission levels by the year 2020.18
The proposed project involves the adoption and subsequent implementation of the Montebello Housing
Element. The RHNA housing need represents a mandate required by the State of California as part of the
RHNA’s implementation. The City is obligated under State law, to fulfill the RHNA requirements that
have been assigned to the City. As part of the RHNA's development, SCAG relied on growth projections
developed as part of the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). These growth projections were evaluated in
the environmental studies prepared for both the RHNA and RTP. As a result, no significant additional
greenhouse gas emissions are anticipated as part of the Housing Element’s adoption and subsequent
implementation.
B. Would the project conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of
reducing emissions of greenhouse gases? No Impact.
The proposed project involves the adoption and subsequent implementation of the City of Montebello
Housing Element. The RHNA housing need represents a mandate required by the State of California as
part of the RHNA’s implementation. As stated previously, the City is required to fulfill the RHNA
requirements that have been assigned to the City. As part of the RHNA's development, SCAG relied on
growth projections developed as part of the RTP. These growth projections were evaluated in the
environmental studies prepared for both the RHNA and RTP. The proposed project will not involve or
require any variance from an adopted plan, policy, or regulation governing GHG emissions. As a result,
no significant additional greenhouse gas emissions are anticipated with the adoption and subsequent
The adoption and subsequent implementation of the Housing Element would not result in any significant
adverse impacts related to the emissions of greenhouse gases. Furthermore, the analysis determined that
future residential development arising from the implementation of the Housing Element would not result
in any significant adverse impacts. As a result, no significant adverse cumulative impacts will result from
the proposed project’s implementation.
18
California, State of. OPR Technical Advisory – CEQA and Climate Change: Addressing Climate Change through the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Review. June 19, 2008.
PAGE 48
CITY OF MONTEBELLO
The analysis of potential impacts related to greenhouse gas emissions indicated that no significant
adverse impacts would result from the Housing Element’s adoption and subsequent implementation. As
a result, no mitigation measures are required.
3.8 HAZARDS & HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
According to the City of Montebello, a project may be deemed to have a significant adverse impact on risk
of upset and human health if it results in any of the following:
●
The creation of a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine
transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials;
●
The creation of 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;
●
The generation of hazardous emissions or the handling of hazardous or acutely hazardous
materials, substances or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school;
●
Locating the project on a site that is included on a list of hazardous material sites compiled
pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 resulting in a significant hazard to the public or
the environment;
●
Locating the project within an area governed by an airport land use plan, or where such a plan has
not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or a public use airport;
●
Locating the project in the vicinity of a private airstrip that would result in a safety hazard for
people residing or working in the project area;
●
The impairment of the implementation of, or physical interference with, an adopted emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation plan; or,
●
The exposure of people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wild
land fire, including where wild lands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are
intermixed with wild lands.
PAGE 49
CITY OF MONTEBELLO
A. Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine
transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? No Impact.
The proposed project involves the adoption and subsequent implementation of the Housing Element. The
hazardous materials that may potentially be associated with any future residential development will be
limited to potential hazardous materials encountered during site demolition and preparation phases of
development. The environmental studies that will be prepared for the remaining residential development
will consider potential impacts on a case-by-case basis once the location and extent of this potential
development is known. As a result, no significant adverse impacts are anticipated.
B. Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment, or result in
reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials
into the environment? No Impact.
use of any hazardous materials as part of any new housing development will be limited to those that are
commercially available and typically used in a household setting. As a result, no significant adverse
impacts concerning a release of hazardous materials are anticipated.
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? No impact.
The use of any hazardous materials in any future residential development will be limited to those that are
commercially available and typically used in a household setting. Because of the nature of the residential
uses, no hazardous or acutely hazardous materials will be emitted that may affect a school site. As a
result, no significant impacts on area schools are anticipated as part of the proposed improvements.
D. Would the project be located on a site, which is included on a list of hazardous material sites
compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5, and, as a result, would it create a
significant hazard to the public or the environment? No Impact.
The sites selected as proposed development sites are not included on a hazardous sites list compiled
pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. The candidate infill sites are not included on the Cortese
list.19 As a result, no impacts will occur with respect to locating the project on a site included on a
hazardous list pursuant to the Government Code.
19
California, State of, Department of Toxic Substances Control, DTSC's Hazardous Waste and Substances Site List - Site Cleanup
(Cortese List), 2009.
PAGE 50
CITY OF MONTEBELLO
E. Would the project be located within an airport land use plan, or where such a plan has not been
adopted, within two miles of a public airport or a public use airport, would the project result in a
safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? No Impact.
The City of Montebello is not located within two miles of an operational public airport. The nearest
airport is El Monte Airport, located approximately 5 miles to the northeast. Los Angeles International
Airport (LAX) is located approximately 20 miles to the southwest. As a result, any future development
arising as part of the Housing Element’s implementation will not present a safety hazard to aircraft
and/or airport operations at a public use airport.
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 City of Montebello is not located within two miles of an operational private airport or airstrip. As a
result, future residential development will not present a safety hazard related to aircraft and/or airport
operations at a private use airstrip.
G. Would the project impair implementation of, or physically interfere with, an adopted emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation plan? No Impact.
The proposed project involves the adoption and subsequent implementation of the Housing Element. At
no time will any designated emergency evacuation routes be completely closed to vehicular traffic as a
result of the proposed construction activities. Thus, no impacts on emergency response or evacuation
plans will result from the project’s construction.
H. Would the project expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving
wild lands fire, including where wild lands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are
intermixed with wild lands? No Impact.
The entire City is urbanized and the majority of the parcels are developed.20 There are no areas of native
vegetation found within the candidate residential development sites or in the surrounding properties. As
a result, there is no wildfire risk from off-site locations.
The potential impact related to hazardous materials is site specific. Furthermore, the analysis herein also
determined that the adoption and subsequent implementation of the Housing Element would not result in
any significant unmitigable impacts related to hazards and/or hazardous materials. As a result, no
significant adverse cumulative impacts related to hazards or hazardous materials will result from the
20
California, State of, Department of Toxic Substances Control, DTSC's Hazardous Waste and Substances Site List - Site
Cleanup (Cortese List), 2009.
PAGE 51
CITY OF MONTEBELLO
The analysis of potential impacts with respect to hazardous materials indicated that no significant adverse
impacts would result from the Housing Element’s adoption and subsequent implementation. As a result,
no mitigation measures are required.
3.9 HYDROLOGY & WATER QUALITY
According to the City of Montebello, a project may be deemed to have a significant adverse environmental
impact on water resources or water quality if it results in any of the following:
●
A violation of any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements;
●
A substantial depletion of groundwater supplies or interference with groundwater recharge such
that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table
level;
●
A substantial alteration of the existing drainage pattern of the site or area through the alteration
of the course of a stream or river in a manner that would result in substantial erosion or siltation
on or off-site;
●
A substantial alteration of the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including the alteration
of the course of a stream or river, in a manner that would result in flooding on or off-site;
●
The creation or contribution of water runoff that would exceed the capacity of existing or planned
storm water drainage systems or the generation of substantial additional sources of polluted
runoff;
●
The substantial degradation of water quality;
●
The placement of housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a Federal Flood
Hazard Boundary, Flood Insurance Rate Map, or other flood hazard delineation map;
●
The placement of structures within 100-year flood hazard areas that would impede or redirect
flood flows;
●
The exposure of people or structures to a significant risk of flooding as a result of dam or levee
failure;
●
The exposure of a project to inundation by seiche, tsunami or mudflow.
PAGE 52
CITY OF MONTEBELLO
A. Would the project violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? No
Impact.
The proposed project involves the adoption and subsequent implementation of the Housing Element. For
purposes of this analysis, it is assumed that up to 1,623 additional units would be constructed as part of
the Element’s implementation. All new residential development will be required to conform to any
pertinent standards and/or regulations related to the implementation of the Clean Water Act (CWA).
Furthermore, the environmental impacts of any future residential development will be evaluated on a
case-by-case basis once the location and extent of this future development is known. As a result, the
Housing Element’s adoption and subsequent implementation will not result in any significant water
quality impacts.
B. Would the project substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with
groundwater recharge in such a way that would cause a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering
of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of a pre-existing nearby well 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.
The City of Montebello is located within the central section of the Downey Plain and is underlain by the
Central groundwater basin.
Water-bearing deposits found beneath the Downey plain include
unconsolidated and semi-consolidated marine and non-marine alluvial sediments that yield significant
amounts of groundwater. The Central Basin is bounded on the north by the Elysian and Repetto Hills; on
the northeast by the Merced and Puente Hills; on the east by the Los Angeles County line and on the
southwest by the Newport-Inglewood Fault along the Rosecrans, Dominguez, Signal and Bixby Ranch
Hills.
Groundwater resources in the Central Basin consists of a body of shallow, unconfined and semi-perched
water on the upper part of the alluvial deposits; the principal body of fresh groundwater within the Recent
and Pleistocene deposits; and salt water under the freshwater resources. Groundwater basins are
recharged by surface and subsurface flows from the bordering hills and mountains; by downward
percolation of waters from major streams; and by direct percolation of rain and artificial recharge at
spreading basins or injection wells. The discharge of the groundwater is through pumping for domestic
use and flows to the ocean through sewers and drainage channels. Future water consumption will be
limited to that used for landscaping, restroom use, and routine maintenance and cleaning.
The new infill construction will also involve the installation of water-conserving plumbing in conformance
with local ordinances that require water-conserving equipment and plumbing fixtures as a means to
reduce water consumption. The environmental studies that will be prepared for the remaining residential
potential development is known. As a result, the potential impacts are considered to be less than
significant.
PAGE 53
CITY OF MONTEBELLO
C. Would the project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including 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? No Impact.
No natural drainage or riparian areas remain within the project site or surrounding area due to earlier
development.21 In addition, no streams or rivers are located within the candidate infill sites. As a result,
no impacts on streams or natural hydrology will occur with the adoption and subsequent implementation
of the Housing Element.
D. Would the project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including the
alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner, which would result in flooding on- or offsite? No Impact.
There are no natural lakes or streams within or adjacent to the planning area. The City is currently
developed and no natural drainage features are found within the planning area boundaries.22 The
adoption and subsequent implementation of the Housing Element will not impact any natural drainage.
As a result, no impacts are anticipated.
E. Would the project create or contribute runoff water that would exceed the capacity of existing or
planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff?
No Impact.
All new residential development will be required to conform to any pertinent standards and/or
regulations related to the control and impoundment of storm water runoff. Furthermore, the
environmental impacts of any future residential development will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis
once the location and extent of this future development is known. No surface water bodies are found
within the proposed development sites, or in the immediate vicinity, that would be affected by future
residential development.23 As a result, no significant adverse impacts are anticipated.
F. Would the project otherwise substantially degrade water quality? No Impact.
The proposed project involves the adoption and subsequent implementation of the Housing Element. As
indicated previously, all new residential development will be required to conform to standards and/or
regulations related to the control and impoundment of storm water runoff. In addition, future
construction activities would be required to adhere to all development standards governing water runoff.
21
United States Geological Survey. Whittier7½ Minute Quadrangle. 1984.
22
Ibid.
23
Ibid.
PAGE 54
CITY OF MONTEBELLO
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? Less than
Significant Impact.
eastern portion of the City located near the Rio Hondo River channel is located within a flood zone area as
defined by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). All new residential development will be
required to conform to any pertinent standards and/or regulations related to the protection of the new
units from flood-related impacts. Furthermore, the environmental impacts of any future residential
development will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis once the location and extent of this future
development is known. As a result, the potential impacts are considered to be less than significant.
H. Would the project place within a 100-year flood hazard area, structures that would impede or
redirect flood flows? Less than Significant Impact. .
All new residential development will be required to conform to any pertinent standards and/or
regulations related to the protection of the new units from flood-related impacts. Furthermore, the
environmental impacts of any future residential development will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis
once the location and extent of this future development is known. As a result, the potential impacts are
considered to be less than significant.
I.
Would the project expose people or structures to a significant risk of flooding as a result of dam or
levee failure? Less than Significant Impact.
According to the Army Corps of Engineers, small portions of the City are within potential the inundation
areas of the Rio Hondo River, the Whittier Narrows Dam, or the Garvey Reservoir. Emergency response
and evacuation plans for the affected areas have been established by the U.S. Corps of Engineers and
other responsible agencies to facilitate emergency operations in the event of dam failure or river overflow.
As indicated previously, the environmental impacts of any future residential development will be
evaluated on a case-by-case basis once the location and extent of this future development is known. As a
result, the impacts related to flood flows are anticipated to be less than significant.
J. Would the project result in inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? No Impact.
Future residential development in the City will not be exposed to a tsunami since the City is located
approximately 19 miles inland from the Pacific Ocean. In addition, there are no surface water bodies
located in the immediate area that would result in a seiche. As a result, no significant adverse impacts are
expected.
The potential impacts related to hydrology and storm water runoff are typically site specific. The Housing
Element will not result in any significant adverse impacts related to hydrology.
PAGE 55
CITY OF MONTEBELLO
The analysis indicated that no significant adverse impacts related to hydrology and water would result
from the Housing Element’s adoption and subsequent implementation. As a result, no mitigation
3.10 LAND USE
According to the City of Montebello, a project may be deemed to have a significant impact on land use and
development if it results in any of the following:
● The disruption or division of the physical arrangement of an established community;
● A conflict with an applicable land use plan, policy or regulation of the agency with jurisdiction
over the project; or
● A conflict with any applicable conservation plan or natural community conservation plan.
A. Would the project physically divide or disrupt an established community or otherwise result in an
incompatible land use? No Impact.
The State of California requires that all local governments (both cities and counties) prepare and maintain
housing elements to identify strategies to conserve, rehabilitate, and provide housing to meet the existing
and projected needs of the community. Specific requirements concerning the scope and content of
housing elements have been established by the State Legislature. No zone changes or general plan
amendments will be required to facilitate the development of the candidate infill sites. Furthermore, the
implementation of the Housing Element will not lead to any division of an established residential
community or neighborhood. As a result, no significant adverse impacts are anticipated.
B. Would the project conflict with an applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with
jurisdiction over the project (including but not limited to, a general plan, specific plan, local coastal
program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental
effect? No Impact.
No land areas within Montebello are subject to a Habitat Conservation Plan or a Coastal Plan. As a result,
no significant adverse impacts are anticipated. As a result, the impacts will be less than significant.
PAGE 56
CITY OF MONTEBELLO
C. Will the project conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community
conservation plan? No Impact.
No undisturbed natural open space areas are located within the candidate development sites or the
adjacent parcels. In addition, no adjacent properties are subject to habitat conservation plans. The
planning area is neither subject to a habitat conservation plan nor a coastal plan. Finally, there are no
designated Significant Ecological Areas (SEA’s) located within one mile of the City. As a result, the
Housing Element’s adoption and subsequent implementation will not result in any impact on a habitat
conservation plan or natural community conservation plan.
The proposed project involves the adoption and subsequent implementation of the Housing Element.
Future development will be required to conform to the requirements of the Montebello Municipal Code
and General Plan. Furthermore, the analysis determined that future residential development arising from
the implementation of the Housing Element would not result in any significant adverse impacts. As a
result, no significant adverse cumulative land use impacts will occur.
The analysis of land use and development impacts indicated that no significant adverse impacts on land
use and planning impacts would result from the adoption and subsequent implementation of the Draft
Housing Element. As a result, no mitigation measures are required.
3.11 MINERAL RESOURCES
energy and mineral resources if it results in any of the following:
●
The loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the
residents of the State; or
● 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.
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 or the State? No Impact.
The only resource extraction activities in the City are found within the Montebello Hills where there are a
number of active oil wells. The City, however, is not located within a Significant Mineral Aggregate
PAGE 57
CITY OF MONTEBELLO
Resource Area (SMARA). The environmental studies that will be prepared for candidate residential infill
sites will consider potential impacts on a case-by-case basis once the location and extent of the
development is known. As a result, no impacts on existing mineral resources will result from the adoption
and subsequent implementation of the Housing Element.
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 resources and materials used in the future residential construction will not include any materials that
are considered rare or unique. Thus, the Housing Element’s adoption and subsequent implementation
will not result in any significant adverse effects on mineral resources in the region.
The potential impacts on mineral resources are site specific. Furthermore, the analysis determined that
the adoption and subsequent implementation of the Housing Element would not result in any impacts on
mineral resources and no cumulative impacts will occur.
The analysis of potential impacts related to mineral resources indicated that no significant adverse
impacts would result from the Housing Element’s adoption and subsequent implementation. As a result,
no mitigation measures are required.
3.12 NOISE
According to the City of Montebello, a project may be deemed to have a significant impact on the
environment if it results in any of the following:
●
The exposure of persons to, or the generation of, noise levels in excess of standards established in
the local general plan, noise ordinance or applicable standards of other agencies;
●
The exposure of people to, or generation of, excessive ground-borne noise levels;
●
A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project above levels
existing without the project;
●
A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above
levels existing without the project;
PAGE 58
CITY OF MONTEBELLO
●
Locating within an area governed by an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been
adopted, within two miles of a public airport or private use airport, where the project would
expose people to excessive noise levels; or,
●
Locating within the vicinity of a private airstrip that would result in the exposure of people
residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels.
A. Would the project result in exposure of persons to, or the generation of, 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.
Future residential development will be required to adhere to the City’s Noise Control Ordinance which
will further reduce the potential for an adverse impact. A change of 5.0 dBA is generally considered to
represent a significant adverse impact for purposes of environmental review. This figure is generally
accepted by acoustics experts as the lower-range where a person with normal hearing could perceive a
noticeable change. As part of future development of multiple-family residential development, insulation
and other design measures will be required to reduce the interior ambient noise levels to 45 CNEL or less.
The additional vehicle trips that will be generated by the future residential development will be
distributed throughout the City. The cumulative traffic will not be great enough to result in a measurable
or perceptible increase in traffic noise (it typically requires a doubling of traffic volumes to increase the
ambient noise levels to 5.0 dBA or greater).
A majority of the potential infill sites are located in close proximity to mobile noise sources (arterial
roadways, etc.). New residential development that may occur within the candidate infill sites must adhere
to the applicable building code requirements that are designed to attenuate noise. In addition, the
construction of these units and their subsequent occupancy must adhere to the City’s noise control
regulations. As a result, the impacts related to the Housing Element’s adoption and subsequent
implementation will be less than significant.
B. Would the project result in exposure of people to, or the generation of, excessive ground-borne noise
levels? No Impact.
Future construction activities could lead to noise impacts on the adjacent residential uses in the absence
of mitigation. Construction machinery will be capable of generating periodic peak noise levels ranging
from 70 to 95 dBA at a distance of 50 feet from the source. These impacts will be short-term and cease
once construction has been completed. All construction activities must conform to the City’s Noise
Control regulations. As part of future multiple-family residential development, insulation and other
design measures will be required to reduce the interior ambient noise levels to 45 CNEL or less. The
additional vehicle trips that will be generated by up to a maximum of 1,623 units on a daily basis will be
distributed throughout the City.
PAGE 59
CITY OF MONTEBELLO
New residential development that may occur within the candidate infill sites will be required to adhere to
the applicable Building Code requirements that are designed to attenuate noise. In addition, the
construction of these units and their subsequent occupancy must adhere to the City’s noise control
regulations. As a result, the Housing Element’s adoption and subsequent implementation will not result
in any significant adverse impacts.
C. Would the project result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project
vicinity above levels existing without the project? Less than Significant Impact.
Future residential development will involve uses and activities which are not likely to generate significant
increases in the ambient noise levels. Traffic noise generated by future development will not result in a
measurable or discernable increase in the ambient noise levels. The additional traffic on area roadways
will result in noise level increases of less than 5.0 dBA, as indicated previously. As a result, the Housing
Element’s adoption and subsequent implementation will not result in any significant adverse impacts.
D. Would the project result in a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in
the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? Less than Significant Impact.
The construction activities related to site preparation and building construction may lead to relatively
high noise levels during the construction period. Composite construction noise is best characterized by
Bolt, Beranek, and Newman.24 In this study, the noisiest phases of construction are anticipated to be 89
dBA as measured at a distance of 50 feet from the construction activity. This value takes into account
both the number of pieces and spacing of the heavy equipment typically used in a construction effort. In
later phases during building erection, noise levels are typically reduced from these values and the physical
structures further break up line-of-sight noise. However, for a total build-out scenario, the 89 dBA value
was used as an average noise level for the construction activities. Based on spreading losses, noise levels
could exceed 70 dBA at the property line. These impacts will be short-term and cease once construction
has been completed. All construction activities must conform to the City’s Noise Ordinance. As a result,
the potential impacts are 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 City is not located within two miles of an operational public airport. The nearest airport is El Monte
Airport, located approximately 5 miles to the northeast. Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) is
located approximately 20 miles to the southwest. As a result, no significant adverse impacts related to the
exposure of persons to aircraft noise from a public use airport are anticipated.
24
USEPA, Protective Noise Levels. 1971.
PAGE 60
CITY OF MONTEBELLO
F. 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 City is not located within two miles of an operational private airport. As a result, no impacts related
to the exposure of persons to aircraft noise from a private airstrip will result from the proposed project.
The analysis indicated that the adoption and subsequent implementation of the Housing Element would
not result in any significant adverse cumulative noise impacts. Furthermore, the analysis determined that
future residential development arising from the implementation of the Housing Element would not result
in any significant adverse impacts. As a result, no significant adverse cumulative noise impacts will occur.
The analysis of potential noise impacts indicated that no significant adverse impacts would result from the
Draft Housing Element’s adoption and subsequent implementation. As a result, no mitigation measures
are required.
3.13 POPULATION & HOUSING
According to the City of Montebello, a project may be deemed to have a significant impact on housing and
population if it results in any of the following:
●
A substantial growth in the population within an area, either directly or indirectly related to a
project;
●
The displacement of a substantial number of existing housing units, necessitating the
construction of replacement housing; or,
●
The displacement of substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement
housing.
A. Would the project induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly or indirectly
(e.g., through projects in an undeveloped area or extension of major infrastructure)? No Impact.
According to the most recent (January 1, 2013) Department of Finance (DOF) estimates, the City’s
population was 63,184 persons. The same DOF estimates indicated there is a total of 19,812 housing units
located in the City including 9,821 single-family detached units, 1,542 single-family attached units, 8,183
duplex and multiple-family units, and 266 mobile home units. When considering the previous unmet
PAGE 61
CITY OF MONTEBELLO
need of 557 units (refer to Table 4 in Section 2) and the current RHNA (refer to Table 5 also in Section 2),
a total RHNA of 1,623 remains. Assuming an average household size of 3.27 persons per unit (this
statistic was obtained from the 2010 U.S. Census), the ultimate population associated with the additional
1,623 units is 5,307 persons.
The potential infill sites are designed to accommodate the new housing units need to accommodate the
remaining RHNA need. The environmental studies that will be prepared for the other residential
potential development is known. The Housing Element establishes housing policies and identifies
programs that will enable the City of Montebello to comply with State law. The RHNA that has been
assigned to the City is also a State mandate that will enable Montebello to accommodate its regional
housing need. Furthermore, new residential development will be required to comply with all pertinent
land use and development standards. As a result, the Housing Element’s adoption and subsequent
implementation will not result in any significant adverse impacts. The utility connections and other
infrastructure will continue to serve the infill sites only. As a result, no significant adverse impacts are
anticipated.
B. Would the project displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere? No Impact.
The RHNA housing need represents a mandate required by the State of California as part of the RHNA’s
implementation. The City is obligated under State law to fulfill the RHNA requirements that have been
as part of the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). These growth projections were evaluated in the
environmental studies prepared for both the RHNA and RTP. The City, as part of this Housing Element’s
implementation will accommodate its remaining RHNA housing need. As a result, no impacts are
anticipated to result from the Housing Element’s adoption and subsequent implementation.
C. Would the project displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere? No Impact.
The proposed project involves the adoption and subsequent implementation of the Housing Element. No
affordable housing units will be removed as part of the project’s implementation. The primary objective
of the Housing Element is to both conserve existing affordable housing and to facilitate the construction
of new affordable housing. As a result, no significant adverse displacement impacts will occur with the
The analysis of potential noise impacts indicated that no significant adverse impacts would result from the
Housing Element’s adoption and subsequent implementation. As a result, no significant adverse
cumulative population and housing impacts will occur.
PAGE 62
CITY OF MONTEBELLO
The analysis of potential population and housing impacts indicated that no significant adverse impacts
would result from the Housing Element’s adoption and subsequent implementation. Future residential
development will be required to conform to the requirements of the City of Montebello Zoning Ordinance
and the Montebello General Plan. As a result, no mitigation measures are required.
3.14 PUBLIC SERVICES
public services if it results in any of the following:
●
A substantial adverse physical impact associated with the provision of new or physically altered
governmental facilities, the construction of which would cause significant environmental impacts
in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives
relative to fire protection services;
●
relative to police protection services;
●
relative to school services; or,
●
relative to other government services.
A. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of
new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which would cause significant
environmental impacts in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other
performance objectives relative to fire protection services? Less than Significant Impact.
The City of Montebello maintains and operates its own fire department which consists of three stations.
Emergency response times in the City average less than three minutes. The Fire Department has
additional resources located in the surrounding communities that may be called upon as the need arises.
PAGE 63
CITY OF MONTEBELLO
Additionally, the Department has a mutual aid agreement with other fire departments if additional
personnel or equipment is necessary. New residential development will result in an incremental increase
in the demand for emergency services. However, all new development will be reviewed by the Fire
Department to ensure compliance with applicable Building and Safety codes. The potential residential
development applications will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. As a result, the impacts are less than
significant.
B. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of
performance objectives relative to police protection? Less than Significant Impact.
The City of Montebello Police Department provides law enforcement services in the City. The station
operates out of a complex located in the Civic Center (1600 West Beverly Boulevard). Montebello is
obligated under State law to fulfill the RHNA requirements that have been assigned to the City. The
incremental increase in demand is not anticipated to require any modifications to any existing law
enforcement facilities or involve the need for any new facilities. The potential residential development
applications will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. As part of this development review process, the City
may require the payment of a community benefit fee and/or a development agreement to finance any
public improvements that may be needed to accommodate the proposed development. As a result, the
impacts are less than significant.
C. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of
environmental impacts in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, or other performance
objectives relative to school services? Less than Significant Impact.
The project area is located within the boundaries of the Montebello Unified School District. Future
residential development will be required to pay school development fees. The payment of these fees will
mitigate potential impacts. As a result, the impacts associated with the Housing Element’s adoption and
subsequent implementation will be less than significant.
D. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of
performance objectives relative to other governmental services? Less than Significant impact.
New residential development will translate into an incremental increase in the demand for other
governmental services. This impact may be partially offset by the increase in the taxes and fees that will
be collected. As a result, the potential impacts associated with the Housing Element’s adoption and
subsequent implementation is considered to be less than significant.
PAGE 64
CITY OF MONTEBELLO
The future development contemplated as part of the Housing Element’s implementation will result in an
incremental increase in the demand for police and fire service calls. This future development will be
required to conform to the requirements of the City of Montebello Zoning Ordinance and the Montebello
General Plan. The potential residential development applications will be reviewed on a case-by-case
basis. As part of this development review process, the City may require the payment of a community
benefit fee and/or a development agreement to finance any public improvements that may be needed to
accommodate the proposed development.
The analysis of public service impacts indicated that no significant adverse impacts would result from the
proposed project’s implementation. As a result, mitigation with respect to public services is not required.
The potential residential development applications will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. As part of
this development review process, the City may require the payment of a community benefit fee and/or a
development agreement to finance any public improvements that may be needed to accommodate the
proposed development.
3.15 RECREATION IMPACTS
According to the City of Montebello, a project may be deemed to have a significant adverse impact on the
environment if it results in any of the following:
●
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; or,
●
The construction or expansion of recreational facilities, 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? No Impact.
Park and recreational facilities in the City are operated and maintained by the Department of Parks and
Recreation. All of the candidate residential infill sites are located on private property. No existing or
proposed park sites or recreational facilities will be physically impacted by this future potential residential
development. The individual development applications will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. As part
of this development review process, the City will determine the amount of open space that will be
required. As a result, no significant adverse impacts are anticipated.
PAGE 65
CITY OF MONTEBELLO
B. Would the project affect existing recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of
recreational facilities that might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? No Impact.
The implementation of the Housing Element will not physically affect parks and recreational facilities in
the City. None of the candidate sites serve or provide a sanctioned recreational use for the public. As a
result, the Housing Element’s adoption and subsequent implementation will not result in any significant
adverse impacts.
The analysis determined that the proposed project would not result in any potential impacts on
recreational facilities and services. As a result, no cumulative impacts on recreational facilities would
result from the adoption and subsequent implementation of the Housing Element.
The analysis of potential impacts related to parks and recreation indicated that no significant adverse
impacts would result from the Housing Element’s adoption and subsequent implementation. Future
development will be required to conform to the requirements of the City of Montebello Zoning Ordinance
and the Montebello General Plan. As a result, no mitigation measures are required.
3.16 TRANSPORTATION & CIRCULATION
According to the City of Montebello, a project will normally have a significant adverse impact on traffic
and circulation if it results in any of the following:
●
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 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;
●
A 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;
●
Results in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change
in the location that result in substantial safety risks;
●
Substantially increases hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous
intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment);
PAGE 66
CITY OF MONTEBELLO
●
Results in Inadequate emergency access; and,
●
A conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or
pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities.
A. Would the project cause 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 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? Less than Significant Impact.
As indicated in the previous sections, the City is obligated under State law to fulfill the RHNA
environmental studies prepared for both the RHNA and RTP. Furthermore, the residential development
envisioned as part of the Housing Element’s implementation is consistent with that contemplated under
the City of Montebello General Plan. The potential residential development applications will be reviewed
on a case-by-case basis. As a result, impacts are less than significant.
B. Would the project result in a conflict with an applicable congestions 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 City of Montebello is obligated under State law, to fulfill the RHNA requirements that have been
as part of the RTP. These growth projections were evaluated in the environmental studies prepared for
both the RHNA and RTP. Furthermore, the residential development envisioned as part of the Housing
Element’s implementation is consistent with that contemplated under the RTP. As a result, the impacts
are less than significant.
C. Would the project result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic
levels or a change in the location that results in substantial safety risks? Less Than Significant
Impact.
There are no airports located within the corporate boundaries of the City. The nearest general aviation
airport is the El Monte Airport located approximately 3 miles northeast of Montebello. The future
residential development will not affect the operation of this existing airport. As a result, the Housing
Element’s adoption and subsequent implementation impacts will be less than significant.
PAGE 67
CITY OF MONTEBELLO
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.
Future residential development of the infill sites contemplated under the implementation of the Housing
Element may involve limited disruption of the roadways for utility connections. However, at no time will
any of these arterial roadways, or any other designated emergency evacuation routes, be closed to traffic
due to future construction activities within the project site. As a result, the Housing Element’s adoption
and subsequent implementation will not result in any significant adverse impacts.
E. Would the project result in inadequate emergency access? No Impact.
Future residential development anticipated as part of the Housing Element’s implementation will be
required to conform to the City’s requirements governing emergency access and the provision of fire
lanes. Furthermore, the environmental impacts of any future residential development will be evaluated
on a case-by-case basis once the location and extent of this future development is known. As a result, the
Housing Element’s adoption and subsequent implementation will not result in any significant adverse
impacts.
F. Would the project result in a conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public
transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such
facilities? No Impact.
The potential design changes to area roadways will largely be limited to ingress and egress modifications.
For the larger residential projects, the City will require that traffic studies be prepared to evaluate
potential traffic and circulation impacts once the precise nature of potential development is known. As a
adverse impacts.
The future development contemplated as part of the Housing Element’s implementation will result in an
incremental increase in City-wide traffic. This future development will be required to conform to the
requirements of the City of Montebello Zoning Ordinance and the Montebello General Plan. As a result,
no accumulative impacts are anticipated.
The analysis of potential traffic and circulation impacts indicated that no significant adverse impacts
would result from the Housing Element’s adoption and subsequent implementation. Future development
will be required to conform to the requirements of the City of Montebello Zoning Ordinance and the
Montebello General Plan. As a result, no mitigation measures are required.
PAGE 68
CITY OF MONTEBELLO
3.17 UTILITIES
utilities if it results in any of the following:
●
An exceedance of the wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water
Quality Control Board;
●
The construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing
facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts;
●
The construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant environmental effects;
●
An overcapacity of the storm drain system causing area flooding;
●
A determination by the wastewater treatment provider that serves or may serve the project that it
has inadequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand;
●
The project will be served by a landfill with insufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the
project’s solid waste disposal needs;
●
Non-compliance with Federal, State, and local statutes and regulations relative to solid waste;
●
A need for new systems, or substantial alterations in power or natural gas facilities; or,
●
A need for new systems, or substantial alterations in communications systems.
A. Would the project exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water
Quality Control Board? No Impact.
The County Sanitation District maintains and operates the sewer system in the City of Montebello. Sewer
lines are maintained by the County Department of Public Works with sewage from the area conveyed
through sewer mains into the Joint Water Pollution Control Plant (JWPCP) in Cerritos. The wastewater
generated by future development within the project site will be treated at the Los Coyotes Water
Reclamation Plant located in the City of Cerritos. This plant has a design capacity of 37.5 million gallons
per day (mgd) and is currently treating an average of 31.3 mgd. As indicated in the previous sections, the
City is obligated under State law to fulfill the RHNA requirements that have been assigned to the City.
These RHNA growth projections were evaluated in the environmental studies prepared for both the
RHNA and RTP. Furthermore, the residential development envisioned as part of the Housing Element’s
PAGE 69
CITY OF MONTEBELLO
implementation is consistent with that contemplated under the City of Montebello General Plan. As part
of this development review process, the City may require infrastructure improvements to accommodate
demand. As a result, the potential impacts will be less than significant.
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 impacts? No Impact.
The County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County (Districts) treat wastewater from the City of
Montebello. Local sewer lines are maintained by the City of Montebello, while the Districts own, operate
and maintain the large trunk sewers of the regional wastewater conveyance system. District No. 2, 3, 18
and 19 all serve the City. Three Districts' wastewater treatment plants treat wastewater flow originating
from Montebello. The Los Coyotes Water Reclamation Plan (WRP) located within the City, has a design
capacity of 37.5 million gallons per day (mgd) and currently processes an average flow of 32.2 mgd. The
Joint Water Pollution Control Plant (JWPCP) located in the City of Carson has a design capacity of 385
mgd and currently processes an average flow of 326.1 mgd. The Long Beach WRP has a design capacity of
25 mgd and currently processes an average flow of 20.2 mgd. The City is located within the Central Basin
Municipal Water District (CBMWD) which regulates groundwater pumping rights in the basin. The
district charges a fee for water in excess of pumping rights, and water companies may buy or lease
additional water from the CBMWD. The district's reclaimed water line extends through the City of
Montebello in Otis Avenue. This line was installed in 1994, although the water districts serving the City
have not tapped into this lateral as of this time.
C. Would the project 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? No Impact.
The regional storm drains in the City are owned and maintained by the Los Angeles County Flood Control
District that connect directly to the Los Angeles River to the east. Drainage lines are located on northsouth streets and are connected to the Los Angeles River by drainage lines on east-west streets. Local
storm drains and catch basins are maintained by the City. While the majority of the candidate
development sites are underutilized, the projected runoff may be accommodated by existing storm drain
infrastructure. The projected storm water runoff is not anticipated to significantly increase with future
residential development. As a result, no significant adverse impacts are anticipated.
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? No Impact.
As indicated in the previous sections, the City is obligated under State law to fulfill the RHNA
environmental studies prepared for both the RHNA and RTP. Furthermore, the residential development
envisioned as part of the Housing Element’s implementation is consistent with that contemplated under
PAGE 70
CITY OF MONTEBELLO
the City of Montebello General Plan. As a result, no significant adverse impacts on water supplies or
services are anticipated.
E. Would the project result in a determination by the provider that serves or may serve the project that
it has inadequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s
existing commitments? No Impact.
The potential infill sites are designed to accommodate the new housing units need to accommodate the
remaining RHNA need. The environmental studies that will be prepared for the other residential
potential development is known. The Housing Element establishes housing policies and identifies
programs that will enable the City of Montebello to comply with State law. The RHNA that has been
assigned to the City is also a State mandate that will enable Montebello to accommodate its regional
housing need. Furthermore, new residential development will be required to comply with all pertinent
land use and development standards. As a result, no significant adverse impacts on existing wastewater
treatment infrastructure will result from the proposed improvements.
F. Would the project be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the
project’s solid waste disposal needs? No Impact.
Trash collection is provided by the Metropolitan Waste Disposal Company and other private haulers for
disposal into the Commerce Incinerator or in area landfills (the Puente Hills Landfill is slated for closure
before the end of 2013). As indicated previously, the potential infill sites are designed to accommodate
the new housing units need to accommodate the remaining RHNA need. The Housing Element
establishes housing policies and identifies programs that will enable the City of Montebello to comply
with State law. The RHNA that has been assigned to the City is also a State mandate that will enable
Montebello to accommodate its regional housing need. Furthermore, new residential development will be
required to comply with all pertinent regulations that govern solid waste collection and/or disposal. As a
adverse impacts.
G. Would the project comply with Federal, State, and local statutes and regulations related to solid
waste? No Impact.
Future residential development, 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, no adverse waste impact on
regulations pertaining to solid waste generation will result from the proposed project’s implementation.
H. Would the project result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations in power or natural
gas facilities? No Impact.
SCE and Sempra Energy will provide service upon request though early coordination with these utility
companies will ensure adequate and timely service to the project. Both utilities currently serve the City.
PAGE 71
CITY OF MONTEBELLO
Thus, no impacts on power and natural gas services will result from the adoption and subsequent
I.
Would the project result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations in communications
systems? No Impact.
Future residential development will require continued telephone service from various local and longdistance providers. The existing telephone lines will be utilized to provide service to future residential
development. Thus, no impacts on communication systems are anticipated.
The potential impacts related to water and sewer line capacities are site specific. Furthermore, the
analysis herein also determined that the proposed project would not result in any significant adverse
utility impact. The ability of the existing sewer and water lines to accommodate the projected demand
from future related projects will require evaluation on a case-by-case basis. As a result, no cumulative
impacts on utilities will occur.
The analysis of utilities impacts indicated that no unmitigable significant adverse impacts would result
from the proposed project’s implementation. The potential residential development applications will be
reviewed on a case-by-case basis. As part of this development review process, the City may require the
installation of certain public improvements that may be needed to accommodate a potential residential
development. As a result, no additional mitigation is required.
3.18 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
The following findings can be made regarding the Mandatory Findings of Significance set forth in Section
15065 of the CEQA Guidelines based on the results of this environmental assessment:
●
The approval and subsequent implementation of the Housing Element will not have the potential
to degrade the quality of the environment, with the implementation of the recommended
standard conditions and mitigation measures included herein.
● The approval and subsequent implementation of the Housing Element will not have the potential
to achieve short-term goals to the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals, with the
implementation of the recommended standard conditions and mitigation measures referenced
herein.
● The approval and subsequent implementation of the Housing Element will not have impacts that
are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable, when considering planned or proposed
development in the immediate vicinity, with the implementation of the recommended standard
conditions and mitigation measures contained herein.
PAGE 72
CITY OF MONTEBELLO
● The approval and subsequent implementation of the Housing Element will not have
environmental effects that will adversely affect humans, either directly or indirectly, with the
implementation of the recommended standard conditions and mitigation measures contained
herein.
● The Initial Study indicated there is no evidence that the Housing Element will have an adverse
effect on wildlife resources or the habitat upon which any wildlife depends.
PAGE 73
CITY OF MONTEBELLO
PAGE 74
CITY OF MONTEBELLO
SECTION 4 - REFERENCES
4.1 PREPARERS
BLODGETT/BAYLOSIS ASSOCIATES
16388 E. Colima Road, Suite 206
Hacienda Heights, CA 91745
(626) 336-0033
Marc Blodgett, Project Manager
Rosalyn Perry, Project Planner
4.2 REFERENCES
Bugliarello, et. al., The Impact of Noise Pollution, Chapter 127, 1975.
California Department of Conservation, Mineral Land Classification of the Orange County Area, 1987.
California Department of Conservation, Division of Oil, Gas and Geothermal Resources, Regional Wildcat
Map 101, 1990.
California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Natural Diversity Database, 2013.
California Division of Mines and Geology, Seismic Hazards Mapping Program, 1999.
California Department of Parks and Recreation, California Historical Landmarks, 2013.
California Department of Water Resources, Progress Report on Groundwater Geology of the Coastal
Plain of Orange County, 1967.
California Environmental Protection Agency, Hazardous Material Users/Generators in Orange County,
2004.
California Office of Planning and Research, California Environmental Quality Act and the CEQA
Guidelines, as amended 2011.
California, State of California Public Resources Code Division 13, The California Environmental Quality
Act. Chapter 2.5, Section 21067 and Section 21069.2011.
Montebello, City of. Montebello General Plan. 1996
Montebello, City of. Zoning Ordinance. 2010.
Federal Emergency Management Agency, Flood Insurance Rate Map, 2013.
Southern California Association of Governments, Regional Housing Needs Assessment, 2010.
SECTION 4 REFERENCES●
PAGE 75
CITY OF MONTEBELLO
Southern California Association of Governments, Population, Housing and Employment Projections,
1999.
South Coast Air Quality Management District, CEQA Air Quality Handbook, 2000.
South Coast Air Quality Management District, Air Quality Management Plan, 2012.
Thomas Brothers Maps, The Thomas Guide for Los Angeles and Orange Counties, 2000.
U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2000 U.S. Census, 2010.
U.S. Geological Survey, Evaluating Earthquake Hazards in the Los Angeles Region - An Earth Science
Perspective, USGS Professional Paper 1360, 1985.
U.S. Geological Survey, Montebello 7-1/2 Minute Quadrangle, 1986.
SECTION 4 REFERENCES●
PAGE 76

section 1 - City of Montebello

Transcription

Similar documents

Mesrobian School Children Experience

December 2015 - Montebello Reporter

multifamily development and investment

September 2016 - Montebello Reporter

Think soliciTors should sTick To your schedule

Moving Beyond “Eeny, Meeny, Miny, Moe”: What Factors

Deborra-lee Furness launches #AdoptChange

Helping Classmates Understand Adoption

Creekside at Berkeley Hills

Candinas Plans

Untitled - Childrens Center of Hamden