No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAboutOctober 3, 20060�r AQC it r �Pt c�• IV vaity nSH City of Arcadia Dffice of the '.ity Council i _! NOTICE OF SPECIAL MEETING As authorized by California Government Code Section 54956, a Special Meeting of the Arcadia City Council is hereby called to be held at the City of Arcadia Council Chambers Conference Room, 240 W. Huntington Drive, Arcadia, California at 5:00 p.m. on October 3, 2006. At this Special Meeting, the following matters will be discussed, considered and acted upon: 1. CLOSED SESSION: Coger Chandler dayor Mickey Segal Mayor Pro tempore a. Conference with legal counsel regarding potential litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(c) — one (1) case. 'eter A Amundson b. Conference with Real Property Negotiators pursuant to 7ouncilMember Government Code Section 54956.8: :obert C. Harbicht ,ouncil Member Property Description: Southerly parking area of Santa Anita ; au ncil Member , wno Race Track Property. on Negotiating Parties: Cam: City Manager, Assistant City Manager/Development Services Director and City Attorney Property Owner Caruso Affiliated, Caruso Property Management Company, Magna Entertainment Corporation, the Santa Anita Companies and the Los Angeles Turf Club. Under Negotiation: Price and terms of payment. W West Huntington Drive ast Office Box 60021 rcadia, CA 91066 -6021 ;26) 574 -5403 ;26) 446 -5729 Fax Prior to going into closed session there will be time reserved for those in the audience who wish to address the City Council regarding the above items. No further business other than the above will be considered at this meeting. Dated: September 2? 2006 (2 4�zl � www ay of the City of Arcadia Pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act, persons with a disability who require a disability related modification or accommodation in order to participate in a meeting, including auxiliary aids or services, may request such modification or accommodation from the City Clerk at (626) 574 -5455. Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting with enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to assure accessibility to the meeting. CITY OF ARCADIA CITY COUNCIUREDEVELOPMENT AGENCY REGULAR MEETING TUESDAY, OCTOBER 3, 2006 AGENDA 6:00 p.m. Location: City Council Chamber Conference Room, 240 W. Huntington Drive CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL OF CITY COUNCIUREDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEMBERS: Roger Chandler, Mayor /Agency Chair Mickey Segal, Mayor Pro Tem /Agency Vice Chair Peter Amundson, Council /Agency Member Bob Harbicht, Council /Agency Member John Wuo, Council /Agency Member CLOSED SESSION /STUDY SESSION PUBLIC COMMENTS (5 minutes per person) Any person wishing to address the City Council /Redevelopment Agency during the Public Comments period is asked to complete a 'Public Comments" card available in the Council Chamber Lobby. The completed form should be submitted to the City Clerk/Agency Secretary prior to the start of the Closed Session /Study Session. In order to conduct a timely meeting, there will be a five (5) minute time limit per person. All comments are to be directed to the City Council /Redevelopment Agency and we ask that proper decorum be practiced during the meeting. State law prohibits the City Council /Redevelopment Agency from discussing topics or issues unless they appear on the posted Agenda. STUDY SESSION a. Discussion and direction regarding Lighting Assessment District Formation. b. Discussion and direction regarding the Education Center Project (to be constructed near the Ruth and Charles Gilb Historical Museum). . 7:00 p.m., City Council Chamber RECONVENE CITY COUNCIUREDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING TO OPEN SESSION INVOCATION PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL OF CITY COUNCIUREDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEMBERS: Chandler, Segal, Amundson, Harbicht, and Wuo REPORT FROM CITY ATTORNEY /AGENCY COUNSEL. ON CLOSED SESSION /STUDY SESSION ITEMS SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION FROM CITY MANAGER/EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR REGARDING AGENDA ITEMS MOTION TO READ ALL ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS BY TITLE ONLY AND WAIVE THE READING IN FULL PRESENTATIONS AND PROCLAMATIONS a. Proclamation in honor of Fire Prevention Week. b. Proclamation in honor of Breast Cancer Awareness /End Domestic Violence Month. PUBLIC COMMENTS (5 minutes per person) Any person wishing to address the City Council /Redevelopment Agency during the Public Comments period is asked to complete a "Public Comments" card available in the Council Chamber Lobby. The completed form should be submitted to the City Clerk /Agency Secretary prior to the start of the 7:00 p.m. Open Session. In order to conduct a timely meeting, there will be a five (5) minute time limit per person. All comments are to be directed to the City Council /Redevelopment Agency and we ask that proper decorum be practiced during the meeting. State law prohibits the City Council /Redevelopment Agency from discussing topics or issues unless they appear on the posted Agenda. REPORTS FROM ELECTED OFFICIALS CONSENT CALENDAR All matters listed under the Consent Calendar are considered to be routine and all will be enacted by one roll call vote. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless members of the City Council /Redevelopment Agency request specific items be removed from the Consent Calendar for separate action. REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ITEMS: a. REGULAR MEETING MINUTES, SEPTEMBER 19. 2006. Recommended Action: Approve CITY COUNCIL ITEMS: b. REGULAR MEETING MINUTES, SEPTEMBER 19, 2006. Recommended Action: Approve C. Recommended Action: Adopt R Recommended Action: Approve e. g. CLASSIFICATION SPECIFICATIONS FOR BUILDING OFFICIAL. Recommended Action: Approve h... 2. CITY MANAGER a. ADJOURNMENT The next Regular Meeting of the City Council /Redevelopment Agency will be October 17, 2006 at 6:00 p.m. in the City Council Chamber Conference Room located at 240 W. Huntington Drive, Arcadia. PURSUANT TO THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT, PERSONS WITH A DISABILITY WHO REQUIRE A DISABILITY- RELATED MODIFICATION OR ACCOMODATION IN ORDER TO PARTICIPATE IN A MEETING, INCLUDING AUXILIARY AIDS OR SERVICES, MAY REQUEST SUCH MODIFICATION OR ACCOMODATION FROM THE CITY CLERK AT (626) 574 -5455. NOTIFICATION 46 HOURS PRIOR TO THE MEETING WILL ENABLE THE CITY TO MAKE REASONABLE ARRANGEMENTS TO ASSURE ACCESSIBILITY TO THE MEETING. Recommended Action: Approve Recommended Action: Approve PROJECT. Recommended Action: Approve l CITY COUNCIL /REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING ANNOTATED AGENDA OCTOBER 3, 2006 CLOSED SESSION PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.9(C) TO NO REPORTABLE CONFER WITH LEGAL COUNSEL REGARDING POTENTIAL ACTION WAS LITIGATION — ONE (1) CASE. TAKEN CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.8: Property Description: Southerly parking area of Santa Anita Race Track Property. Negotiating Parties: CCU: City Manager, Assistant City Manager /Development Services Director and City Attorney. Property Owner Caruso Affiliated, Caruso Property , Management Company, Magna Entertainment Corporation, the Santa Anita Companies and the Los Angeles Turf Club. Under Negotiation: Price and terms of payment. STUDY SESSION NO REPORTABLE ACTION WAS TAKEN a. Discussion and direction regarding Lighting Assessment District NO ACTION WAS Formation. TAKEN b. Discussion and direction regarding the Education Center Project (to be NO ACTION WAS constructed near the Ruth and Charles Gilb Historical Museum). TAKEN CONSENT CALENDAR REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ITEMS: a. REGULAR MEETING MINUTES, SEPTEMBER 19, 2006. CITY COUNCIL ITEMS: b. REGULAR MEETING MINUTES, SEPTEMBER 19, 2006. APPROVED 4 -0 HARBICHT ABSTAIN APPROVED 4 -0 HARBICHT ABSTAIN C. ORDINANCE NO. 2219 AMENDING VARIOUS SECTIONS OF THE ADOPTED 5 -0 ARCADIA MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO THE UNIFORM TRAFFIC ORDINANCE. d. AWARD A ONE (1) YEAR CONTRACT EXTENSION TO VARGAS APPROVED 5 -0 OLSON ENTERPRISES FOR CONSTRUCTION SERVICES MAINTENANCE AT VARIOUS CITY FACILITIES IN THE AMOUNT OF $74,890. .: e. AWARD A ONE (1) YEAR CONTRACT EXTENSION TO TRUESDAIL APPROVED 5 -0 LABORATORIES, INC. FOR LABORATORY TESTING SERVICES OF CITY WATER SAMPLES IN THE AMOUNT OF $33,500. AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO A APPROVED 5 -0 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH TRANSCORE IN THE AMOUNT OF $93,000 FOR INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS (ITS) COMMUNICATIONS INTEGRATION SUPPORT, AND APPROPRIATE $100,000 IN PROPOSITION C FUNDING FOR THE PROJECT, AND AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO APPROVE FUTURE AMENDMENTS TO THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT TO A TOTAL AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $100,000. CLASSIFICATION SPECIFICATIONS FOR BUILDING OFFICIAL. APPROVED 5 -0 CLASSIFICATION SPECIFICATIONS AND COMPENSATION LEVEL APPROVED 5 -0 FOR POLICE COMMUNICATIONS COORDINATOR. APPROPRIATE AN ADDITIONAL $15,000 IN CAPITAL OUTLAY APPROVED 5 -0 FUNDS FOR THE REPLACEMENT OF THE TRAFFIC SIGNAL MAST ARMS AND POLES AT THE INTERSECTION OF SANTA ANITA AVENUE AND FOOTHILL BOULEVARD PROJECT. 2. CITY MANAGER AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO A CONTRACT APPROVED 5 -0 WITH BAKERSFIELD WELL AND PUMP CO., IN THE AMOUNT OF $638,254 TO CONSTRUCT THE NEW COLORADO WELL AND TO ADOPT A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) FOR THE COLORADO WELL PROJECT. 48:0094 CITY COUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES TUESDAY, OCTOBER 3, 2006 As authorized by California Government Code Section 54956. The City Council and Redevelopment Agency of the City of Arcadia met at 5:00 p.m. in a Special Meeting at the Arcadia City Council Chamber Conference Room. CALL TO ORDER The Mayor Pro Tempore Segal called the meeting in order at 5:00 p.m. ROLL CALL OF CITY COUNCIL /REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEMBERS: PRESENT: Segal, Amundson, Harbicht, and Wuo ABSENT: Chandler (Arrived at 6:30 p.m.) It was moved by Council /Agency Member Segal, seconded by Council /Agency Member Wuo and carried to excuse Mayor Chandler. CLOSED SESSION a. Conference with legal counsel regarding potential litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(c) — one (1) case. b. Conference with Real Property Negotiators pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8: Property Description: Southerly parking area of Santa Anita Race Track Property. Negotiating Parties: Cam: City Manager, Assistant City Manager /Development Services Director and City Attorney. Property Owner Caruso Affiliated, Caruso Property Management Company, Magna Entertainment Corporation, the Santa Anita Companies and the Los Angeles Turf Club. Under Negotiation: Price and terms of payment. RECONVENE CITY COUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING TO STUDY SESSION AT 6:00 P.M. Mayor Pro Tern Segal convened the Study Session to order at 6:00 p.m. ROLL CALL OF CITY COUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEMBERS: PRESENT: Segal, Amundson, Harbicht, and Wuo ABSENT. Chandler (Arrived 6:30 p.m.) 1 10 -03 -2006 48:0095 STUDY SESSION PUBLIC COMMENTS (5 minutes per person) None. STUDY SESSION a. Discussion and direction regarding the Education Center Project. Bill Kelly, City Manager, provided a brief overview of the proposed Education Center project to be constructed near the Ruth and Charles Gilb Historical Museum. The proposed center can be used for multiple purposes, but primarily will be used as a meeting /conference room for the museum. It was noted that the proposed project is not funded; and, the future of this project will rely on the amount of money, that may be raised by different fundraising events and /or by the society and citizens. b. Discussion and direction regarding Lighting Assessment District Formation. Pat Malloy, Public Works Services Director and Jim McGuire, Senior Project Manager, MuniFinancial, provided an overview of the proposed citywide lighting assessment district which would consist of identifying current street lighting assessment issues, assessment methodology analysis and district formation. Mr. McGuire responded to the questions raised by the Council with regard to the formation of lighting district; the amount of assessment; community workshops; public notices; and, the voting and ballot process. Following discussion, it was noted that at the beginning of next year, a report concerning lighting assessment district formation and alternatives, will be presented, for Council's discussion and deliberation. RECONVENE CITY COUNCIL /REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING TO OPEN SESSION The Mayor convened the Open Session meeting at 7:00 p.m. INVOCATION Reverend Thomas Shriver, Emmanuel Assembly of God. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mark Krikorian, Fire Marshall ROLL CALL OF CITY COUNCIL'/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEMBERS: PRESENT: Chandler, Segal, Amundson, Harbicht, and Wuo ABSENT: None REPORT FROM CITY ATTORNEY /AGENCY COUNSEL ON CLOSED SESSION /STUDY SESSION ITEMS Stephen Deitsch, City Attorney, noted that the Council convened a properly noticed Special meeting at 5:00 p.m. to discuss two Closed Session items. No reportable action was taken. Mr. Deitsch also noted that the City Council met in a Study Session at 6:00 p.m. to discuss the Lighting Assessment District Formation and Education Center Project. No reportable action was taken. 10 -03 -2006 SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION FROM CITY MANAGER/EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR REGARDING AGENDA ITEMS None. MOTION TO READ ALL ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS BY TITLE ONLY AND WAIVE THE READING IN FULL A motion was made by Council /Agency Member Amundson, seconded by Council /Agency Member Segal, and carried on roll call vote to read all ordinances and resolutions by title only and waive the reading in full. PRESENTATIONS AND PROCLAMATIONS a. Proclamation in honor of Fire Prevention Week. Fire Marshall, Mark Krikorian and Fire Inspector, Jill Perumean accepted the proclamation. b. Proclamation in honor of Breast Cancer Awareness /End Domestic Violence Month. Miriam Harrington, Soroptimist Club President, accepted the proclamation. PUBLIC COMMENTS Paul Paquette 2016 Canyon Road, appeared to articulate the Arcadia First's position on statement authored by Council Member Harbicht and read by the Mayor at the September 19th Council meeting regarding Westfield initiatives. Arcadia First did not circulate petitions, submit signatures and did not write the ballot arguments. REPORTS FROM ELECTED OFFICIALS Council Member Wuo urged parents to practice traffic safety rules and pay attention to the safety of their children; congratulated First Avenue Middle School teacher, Nancy Adams for receiving "teacher of the year" title; he asked residents to be aware of their surroundings and watched out for identity theft; further, he encouraged residents to pay attention, read and understand all the fine prints on mailings regarding Measure N and P and then cast their vote. In response to Council Member Amundson's query Mr. Kelly noted that in a near future, staff would submit a report and recommendations to the Council with regard to alternative ways of handling city's investments. Mr. Amundson further requested Council support to place a study session on a future agenda to discuss different community events and activities. Council concurred. Council Member Segal reminded everyone of two upcoming community events: the Methodist Hospital Crystal Ball honoring Ruth and Charles Gilb on October 7th and the Fifth Anniversary celebration of Ruth and Charles Glib Historical Museum on October 22, 2006. Council Member Harbicht endorsed the "Walk to School Week" and encouraged students to walk to school; he requested his e-mail address be added to the City of Arcadia Web site; he commented on the Metro Gold Line Foothill Extension mailing that he received, he felt that this 3 10 -03 -2006 is a waste of money. Mr. Harbicht referred to a letter from Arcadia residents, Dan and Heather Banis, and a conversation with the Arroyo Pacific Academy Principal, Philip Clarke, complimenting the fine work that Development Services Department performed and specifically acknowledging John Building Inspector. Mayor Chandler noted that he had the privilege of greeting United Stated President, George Bush at Los Angeles International Airport this afternoon; he was pleased to see that the advanced representative for the White House was a 1988 Arcadia High School graduate and the Assistant Special Agent of the Secret Service was a former Arcadia Police Officer. City Clerk Barrows sent good thoughts to volunteer petrol officers, which were involved in a traffic accident this evening. 1. CONSENT CALENDAR REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ITEMS: a. REGULAR MEETING MINUTES, SEPTEMBER 19. 2006. Recommended Action: Approve CITY COUNCIL ITEMS: b. REGULAR MEETING MINUTES, SEPTEMBER 19. 2006. Recommended Action: Approve C. Action: Adopt 1 e. AWARD A ONE (1) YEAR CONTRACT EXTENSION TO TRUESDAIL Recommended Action: Approve f. Recommended Action: Approve (This item was pulled from Consent Calendar for separate consideration). g. CLASSIFICATION SPECIFICATIONS FOR BUILDING OFFICIAL. Recommended Action: Approve 4 10 -03 -2006 h. CLASSIFICATION SPECIFICATIONS AND COMPENSATION LEVEL FOR POLICE COMMUNICATIONS COORDINATOR. Recommended Action: Approve A motion was made by Council /Agency Member Segal, seconded by Council /Agency Member Harbicht, and carried on roll call vote to approve the Consent Calendar items 1 -a. through 1 -e and 1 -g through 1 -i. AYES: Segal, Harbicht, Amundson, Wuo and Chandler NOES: None ABSTAIN: Harbicht (Item 1 -a and 1 -b) Action: Approve Don Penman, Assistant City Manager /Development Services Director and Philip Wray, City Engineer, responded to the questions raised by the Council. It was noted now that the major elements of work are in progress; there are some additional components that must be purchased and connections that must be engineered to complete the system. It was also noted that the additional proposed appropriation from Proposition C Funding is available, but was not budgeted for this project. A motion was made by Council /Agency Member Harbicht, seconded by Council /Agency Member Amundson, and carried on roll call vote to authorize the City Manager to enter into a Professional Services Agreement with Transcore in the amount of $93,000 for Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) Communications Integration Support, and appropriate $100,000 in Proposition C Funding for the project, and authorize the City Manager to approve future amendments to the Professional Services Agreement to a total amount not to exceed $100,000. AYES: Harbicht, Amundson, Segal, Wuo and Chandler NOES: None 2. CITY MANAGER a. AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO A CONTRACT WITH BAKERSFIELD WELL AND PUMP CO., IN THE AMOUNT OF $638,254 TO 10 -03 -2006 APPROPRIATE AN ADDITIONAL $15.000 IN CAPITAL OUTLAY FUNDS FOR INTEGRATION SUPPORT, AND APPROPRIATE $100.000 IN PROPOSITION C FUNDING FOR THE PROJECT, AND AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO PROJECT. Recommended Action: Approve 11•• The staff report was presented by Pat Malloy, Public Works Services Director and Ken Herman, Associate Civil Engineer. Staff noted that the 2001 Water Master Plan recommended the construction of several new domestic water wells in the upper water zones to replace existing wells that are reaching the end of their productive life and to meet the growing demand for water in the City. In reviewing several possible locations to place the new well staff concluded that the best location for the new well is on the southwest corner of Colorado Street and Baldwin Avenue. It was also noted that pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) an initial study has been prepared for the proposed project. The study has determined that with the revised mitigated measure the Colorado Well project will not have any significant effect on the environment. A motion was made by Council /Agency Member Segal, seconded by Council /Agency Member Harbicht, and carried on roll call vote to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Colorado Well Project; award a contract in the amount of $638,254.00 to Bakersfield Well and Pump for the construction of the Colorado Well; and, authorize the City Manager and City Clerk to execute a contract in a form approved by the City Attorney. AYES: Segal, Harbicht, Amundson, Wuo and Chandler NOES: None ADJOURNMENT The City Council /Redevelopment Agency adjourned this meeting at 8:15 p.m. to October 17, 2006 at 6:00 p.m. in the City Council Chamber Conference Room located at 240 W. Huntington Drive, Arcadia. James H. Barrows, City Clerk By: Marina Simonian Acting Chief Deputy City Clerk 10 -03 -2006 ORDINANCE NO. 2219 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING VARIOUS SECTIONS OF THE ARCADIA MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO THE UNIFORM TRAFFIC ORDINANCE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Section 3211.1 of the Arcadia Municipal Code is hereby amended in its entirety to read as follows: "Section 3211.1. VIOLATIONS A MISDEMEANOR OR INFRACTION. Any violation of the provisions of the Uniform Traffic Ordinance shall be punishable pursuant to Section 1200 of the Arcadia Municipal Code." SECTION 2. Section 3214.11 of the Arcadia Municipal Code is hereby amended to read in its entirety as follows: 3214.11 SECTION 11.19 ADDED. Section 11.19 of the Uniform Traffic Ordinance as adopted by Section 3211 is hereby amended in its entirety to read as follows: "11.19 Same. Display. No annual all night street parking permit hereafter issued under this Article shall be effective at any time when the same is not affixed to the left side of the rear bumper or the lower most five -inch corner of the rear window on the driver's side of the vehicle for which it is issued." 1 i I r- , , 3 SECTION 3. Section 3214.15 of the Arcadia Municipal Code is hereby amended by adding Sections 13.15 and 13.15 to read in their entirety as follows: "Section 13.15. Commercial Vehicle on Truck Route. No person shall park or leave standing any commercial vehicle exceeding a maximum gross weight limit of six thousand (6,000) pounds upon any street or portion thereof which is established as a "truck route" for a period of time exceeding one (1) hour except when necessary for the purpose of making pick -ups, or deliveries of goods, wares and merchandise from or to any building or structure upon such restricted streets for which a building permit has previously been obtained therefor and actual loading and unloading operations are in progress. Section 13.16. Commercial Vehicle Prohibited. When any such truck route or routes are established and designated by appropriate signs, the operator of any commercial vehicle exceeding a maximum gross weight limit of six thousand (6,000) pounds shall drive on such route or routes, and none other. Nothing in this section shall prohibit the operator of any commercial vehicle exceeding a maximum gross weight limit of six thousand (6,000) pounds from having ingress and egress by direct route to and from restricted streets when necessary for the purpose of making pick ups or deliveries of goods, wares and merchandise from or to any building or structure located on such restricted streets or for the purpose of delivering materials to b used in the actual and bona fide repair, alteration, `. remodeling or construction of any building or structure upon such restricted streets for which a building permit has previously been obtained therefor. Provided that such commercial vehicle exceeding a maximum gross weight of six thousand (6,000) pounds shall not be parked or left standing on any such restricted street in excess of one (1) hour unless actual loading or unloading operations are in progress." SECTION 4. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause a copy of the same to be published in the official newspaper of the City of Arcadia within fifteen (15) days after its adoption. This Ordinance shall take effect on the thirty-first (31 following its adoption. Passed, approved and adopted this aid day of October , 2006. Mayor of the City of Arcadia ATTEST: / S/ JAMES Ho BAR ROWS City Clerk of the City of Arcadia APPROVED AS TO FORM: Stephen P. Deitsch City Attorney t] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES) SS: CITY OF ARCADIA ) I, JAMES H. BARROWS, City Clerk of the City of Arcadia, hereby certifies that the foregoing Ordinance No. 2219 was passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Arcadia, signed by the Mayor and attested to by the City Clerk at a regular meeting of said Council held on the 3rd day of October, 2006 and that said Ordinance was adopted by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Council Member Amundson, Harbicht, Segal, Wuo and Chandler NOES: None ABSENT: None AS JWES H. BARROWS City Clerk of the City of Arcadia Cl STAFF REPORT Police Department DATE: September 19, 2006 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Robert P. Sanderson, Chief of Police`& Prepared by: Nancy Chik, Management Analyst --- SUBJECT: SUMMARY The Uniform Traffic Ordinance (UTO) was last updated over ten years ago and there have been many changes made in the Arcadia Municipal Code that are not reflected in the UTO. The penalty clause outlined in 3211.1 needs to be modified to conform to Section 1200 of the Arcadia Municipal Code. Section 11.19 must be amended to reflect the proposed changes in the placement of the annual all night street parking permit, and two new sections were added regarding the parking of commercial vehicles. BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION Outdated information has been modified in the UTO and Section 3211.1 needs to be changed in order to be consistent with Section 1200 of the Arcadia Municipal Code. "Section 3211.1. VIOLATIONS A MISDEMEANOR OR INFRACTION. Any violation of the provisions of the Uniform Traffic Ordinance shall be punishable pursuant to Section 1200 of the Arcadia Municipal Code." .. Section 11.19 must be revised to reflect the proposed changes in the placement of the annual all night street parking permit. The modification offers the permittee the option to either place the permit on the left side of the rear bumper or the lower corner of the rear driver's side window. "Section 11.19. Same. Display. No annual all night street parking permit hereafter issued under this Article shall be effective at any time when the same is not affixed to the left side of the rear bumper or the lower most five -inch corner of the rear window on the driver's side of the vehicle for which it is issued." Two new sections were added that pertain to the parking of commercial vehicles. The Police Department receives numerous complaints regarding large commercial vehicles parked for an extended period of time on City streets. These additions will limit the parking of commercial vehicles of up to one hour, unless actual loading and unloading operations are taking place. "Section 13.15. Commercial Vehicle on Truck Route. No person shall park or leave standing any commercial vehicle exceeding a maximum gross weight limit of six thousand (6,000) pounds upon any street or portion thereof which is established as a "truck route" for a period of time exceeding one (1) hour except when necessary for the purpose of making pick -ups, or deliveries of goods, wares and merchandise from or to any building or structure upon such restricted streets for which a building permit has previously been obtained therefor and actual loading and unloading operations are in progress. Section 13.16. Commercial Vehicle Prohibited. When any such truck route or routes are established and designated by appropriate signs, the operator of any commercial vehicle exceeding a maximum gross weight limit of six thousand (6,000) pounds shall drive on such route or routes, and none other. Nothing in this section shall prohibit the operator of any commercial vehicle exceeding a maximum gross weight limit of six thousand (6,000) pounds from having ingress and egress by direct route to and from restricted streets when necessary for the purpose of making pick ups or deliveries of goods, wares and merchandise from or to any building or structure located on such restricted streets or for the purpose of delivering materials to be used in the actual and bona fide repair, alteration, remodeling or construction of any building or structure upon such restricted streets for which a building permit has previously been obtained therefor. Provided that any such commercial vehicle exceeding a maximum gross weight of six thousand (6,000) pounds shall not be parked or left standing on any such restricted street in excess of one (1) hour unless actual loading or unloading operations are in progress." Parking penalties for the commercial vehicle violations will be established by resolution at a future City Council meeting. FISCAL IMPACT None. RECOMMENDATION Introduce Ordinance No. 2219 amending . various sections of the Arcadia Municipal Code relating to the Uniform Traffic Ordinance. Wil�liiam� R K Kelly, City M nager .. i 1 \ 4A t STAFF REPORT Public Works Services Department DATE: October 3, 2006 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Pat Malloy, Public Works Services Director Prepared by: Tom Tait, Deputy Public Works Services irector Dave McVey, General Services Superintendent SUBJECT: Construction Services Contract Recommendation: Award a one (1) year contract extension in the amount of $74,890.00 to Vargas Olson Enterprises for construction services maintenance at various City facilities SUMMARY On September 16, 2003 the City Council approved a one (1) year Agreement with optional contract extensions to Vargas Olson Enterprises Inc. for construction services maintenance at various City facilities. Vargas Olson is reaching the end of their second (2) contract extension and has submitted a written offer to extend the existing contract for an additional one (1) year in accordance with the existing agreement. The contractor's offer of extension does not reflect a change in price and all other conditions of the Agreement are to remain in effect. Based on the excellent service provided by Vargas Olson Enterprises during the last three (3) years, staff recommends that the City Council award a one (1) year contract extension in the amount $74,890.00 to Vargas Olson for the Construction Services Maintenance Contract at various City facilities. DISCUSSION The Public Works Services Department is responsible for the maintenance of all City facilities. Preventative maintenance programs have been implemented at all parks and building facilities. New construction, remodels and custom design projects are funded in the 2005 -06 Capital Improvement Program and Operating Budgets. Page 1 of 2 Mayor and City Council October 3, 2006 During the last year, fifteen (15) construction projects of various sizes were completed. A similar level of construction projects and repairs is anticipated during this fiscal year. Also, the contract provides for any extraordinary services that pertain to emergency response required for sanitary sewer overflows, which at times cause damage to public and /or private property. The contract outlines the costs associated with emergency restoration and repair of damaged areas. Vargas Olson Enterprises has submitted a written offer to renew this contract in accordance with the existing Agreement without a cost increase. All other conditions of the Agreement are to remain the same. Staff recommends that the City Council award a one (1) year contract extension in the amount of $74,890.00 for construction services maintenance at various City facilities. FISCAL IMPACT Sufficient funds have been budgeted in the 2006 -07 Capital Improvement and Operating Budgets. Award a one (1) year contract extension in the amount $74,890.00 to Vargas Olson for Construction Services Maintenance at various City facilities. 2. Authorize the City Manager and City Clerk to execute a contract amendment in a form approved by the City Attorney. APPROVED: ='J William R. Kelly, City Manager PM:TT:DRM:dw Page 2 of 2 gin: ri i'i STAFF REPORT Public Works Services Department DATE: October 3, 2006 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Pat Malloy, Public Works Services Direct r *ll Prepared by: Tom Tait, Field Services Manager Martin Ray, Utilities Superintendent SUBJECT: SUMMARY Recommendation: Award a one (1) year contract extension in the amount of $33,500 to Truesdail Laboratories, Inc. for laboratory testing services of City water samples On December 16, 2003, the City Council approved a one (1) year Professional Services Agreement (PSA) with Truesdail Laboratories, Inc. for laboratory testing services of City water samples with optional annual extensions. Truesdail Laboratories, is reaching the end of their second contract extension, and has submitted a written offer to extend the existing agreement for an additional year. The contractor's offer of extension reflects a 2.0% Cost Of Living Adjustment (COLA). This increase is driven by increasing gas prices, and reflects an overall contract increase of $660.00. Based on the service provided by Truesdail Laboratories, Inc. during the previous years, staff recommends that the City Council award a one (1) year contract extension in the amount of $33,500 to Truesdail Laboratories, Inc. of Tustin for laboratory testing services of City water samples. DISCUSSION The City of Arcadia Public Works Services Department collects water samples from the City's wells and pipelines to ensure the effective delivery of high quality potable water to the residents of Arcadia. The State of California Domestic Water Quality and Monitoring regulations require that samples be collected and tested weekly, monthly, quarterly and annually by a DOHS certified laboratory (Chapter 15, Title 22, California Code of Regulations). Page 1 of 2 Mayor and City Council October 3, 2006 The scope of services for this Professional Services Agreement includes furnishing all labor, services, equipment, supplies and all other items and facilities necessary to appropriately analyze water samples as required by the State of California, which include special samples for discharge of water into the storm drainage system and special samples as required by DOHS. Truesdail Laboratories, Inc. is the current contractor with the City for this work and has provided affordable service during the previous years. For this reason, staff recommends that the City Council award a one (1) year contract extension in the amount of $33,500 to Truesdail Laboratories, Inc. for laboratory testing services of City water samples. FISCAL IMPACT Sufficient funds are budgeted for water quality testing in the 2006 -07 Water Operating Budget. RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Award a one (1) year contract extension in the amount of $33,500 to Truesdail Laboratories, Inc. for laboratory testing services of City, water samples. 2. Authorize the City Manager and City Clerk to execute a contract extension in a form approved by the City Attorney. Approved by: V William R. Kelly, City Manager PM:TT:MR:dw Page 2 of 2 Y x A ,AC0BpORAT�9',BOA STAFF RPORT E Development Services Department DATE: October 3, 2006 TO: Mayor and City Council �J FROM: Don Penman, Assistant City M nager /Development Services Director° Philip A. Wray, City Engineer SUBJECT: Professional Services Agreement Recommendation: Authorize the City Manager.to enter into a Professional Services Agreement with TransCore in the amount of $93,000 for Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) Communications Integration Support, and appropriate $100,000 in Proposition C Funding for the project, and authorize the City Manager to approve future amendments as needed to the Professional Services Agreement to a total amount not to exceed $100,000 SUMMARY The City is currently implementing its Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) Master Plan to more efficiently manage traffic flow on City streets and react and respond to field problems through the Traffic Management Center (TMC) at City Hall. The City has awarded contracts for various elements of the Master Plan such as the installation of conduit and fiber optics lines in City streets and the purchase and development of traffic control system software and hardware for deployment at the City's TMC. The City has also upgraded its traffic signal controllers to be compatible with the new technology. Now that the major elements of work are in progress, staff has determined that there are some additional components that must be purchased and connections that must be engineered to complete the system. The work includes wiring connections, conversion of controller databases and installation of various computer modules at the controllers and the central server. Staff requested and received a proposal from TransCore and has negotiated a final scope of work and cost proposal. The cost for these services is $93,000. Staff recommends that the City Council appropriate $100,000 in Proposition C funding for this work and authorize the City Manager to enter into a Professional Services Agreement with TransCore for $93,000. The additional $7,000 appropriation is requested to cover unforeseen work items and contingencies. Staff Report Professional Services Agreement October 3, 2006 Page 2 BACKGROUND The City is currently implementing its Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) Master Plan. The purpose of the plan is to manage traffic flow more efficiently and react and respond to problems in the field by having a central communication system at City Hall that is able to receive and send information to traffic signals and other field devices such as cameras and message signs., The Master Plan has several elements of design and installation that have been under development for over four years beginning with the City's lobbyist securing a federal grant back in 2002. As part of the Master Plan, the City has upgraded its traffic signal controllers to be compatible with the new ITS technology. The City has been working with the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works, Traffic and Lighting Division to upgrade old traffic signal control equipment through an MTA grant. The only cost to the City has been for the installation. As of this date, all but two (2) of the 22 intersection controllers have been upgraded, and the last two are currently being pursued in discussion with the County. Although the controllers were financed by the grant and are compatible with the new technology, they did not include the needed modules and, therefore, the City must purchase them separately. This past summer, the City Council awarded a public works, contract to Dynalectric to install a network .of conduit and fiber optics communication lines in City streets to connect the 22 critical signalized intersections to City Hall The Council also awarded a Professional Services Agreement (PSA) to TransCore to `provide the traffic control system software and the computer hardware and to develop the City's Traffic Management Center at City Hall. DISCUSSION Now that a software system has been selected and the details of the system are clear, there are some additional components that must be purchased and engineered to complete the system.. TransCore's first item of work in their approved PSA was to provide an inventory of the City's field communication's system, and develop a scope of additional work. The additional work is concentrated at the fiber optics line connections to the controllers and the server. The work includes wiring connections, conversion of controller databases and installation of ethernet switches and various computer modules at the controllers and the central server. The additional equipment will allow for the sending and receiving of information at the controllers including the integration of video into the communications network. The County has committed to provide the new software database for the controllers at no cost to the City. _ Staff requested TransCore to submit a proposal for the scope of services identified above. Staff's decision to deal directly with TransCore was based on their success in Staff Report Professional Services Agreement October 3, 2006 Page 3 the City's lengthy selection process for their previous contract, their knowledge of the City's system, the integration of their program with the City's system, their availability and their ability to proceed immediately. The timing of this work is critical to keep the project on target for its intended completion. The Federal funding process requires that the project stay on schedule and continue to show progress in order to remain eligible. Staff has reviewed the proposal from TransCore and has negotiated a final scope of work and cost proposal. The cost for these services is $93,000. The services average out to approximately $4,000 per controller and server. Staff recommends that the City Council appropriate $100,000 in Proposition C funding for this work and authorize the City Manager to enter into a Professional Services Agreement with TransCore for $93,000. The additional $7,000 appropriation is requested to cover unforeseen work items and contingencies. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS This project is categorically exempt per section 15301© of the California Environmental Quality Act. FISCAL IMPACT This project requires the appropriation of Proposition C funds in the amount of $100,000. Proposition C funds are available through recent savings on other Capital Projects funded by Proposition C. RECOMMENDATION Authorize the City Manager to enter into a Professional Services Agreement with TransCore to provide ITS Communication Integration Support services in the amount of $93,000 and appropriate $100,000 in Proposition C funds for the project, and authorize the City Manager to approve future amendments as needed to the Professional Services Agreement to a total amount not to exceed $100,000. Approved By: wrk! William R. Kelly, City Manager DP:PAW:pa F A$ �L D LlFOJtA�� �� Aury.i 1, IHII o �� 4 nity of t STAFF REPORT Administrative Services Department I DATE: October 3, 2006 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Tracey L. Hause, Administrative Services Direct e By: Michael A. Casalou, Human Resources Administrator SUBJECT: Classification Specifications for Buildino Official Recommended Action: Approve SUMMARY It is recommended that the City Council approve the revision to the job specifications of Building Official in the Development Services Department. BACKGROUND The current educational requirement for the position of Building Official in the Development Services Department calls for an equivalent to a Bachelor's degree from an accredited college or university with major course work in civil engineering, architecture, or a related field. DISCUSSION In anticipation of the retirement of the incumbent in this position, staff conducted a brief survey of public agencies with similar positions. Of all the cities surveyed, only one other city required a Bachelor's degree. The results indicate that most agencies require progressively responsible experience in building construction and inspection, permit issuance and plan check, and do not require a degree. Though there is a citywide emphasis on formal education, the industry standard for Building Official places a heavier emphasis on experience and specialized knowledge and skills. In order to expand recruitment efforts and align the educational requirements in the area of Building Official with other public agencies, the Assistant City Manager /Development Services Director has requested that the educational requirement for the position of Building Official be changed to read as follows: Equivalent to a Bachelor's degree from an accredited college or university with major course work in civil engineering, architecture, or a related field is highly desirable. 1 The Human Resources Commission considered and approved this item at their regularly scheduled meeting on September 14, 2006. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council approve the attached revised job specifications for Building Official. APPROVED: w l� William R. Kelly, City Manager 2 CITY OF ARCADIA BUILDING OFFICIAL DEFINITION Under general direction, to supervise, plan, and coordinate the activities and operations of Building Services within the Development Services Department; to coordinate assigned activities with other divisions, outside agencies, and the general public; and to provide highly responsible and complex staff assistance to the Community Development Administrator. Exercises direct supervision over technical staff. EXAMPLES OF IMPORTANT AND ESSENTIAL DUTIES Coordinate the organization, staffing, and operational activities for Building Services including building inspection, plan review, and permit issuance affecting commercial, industrial, and residential new building construction, alterations, and repair. Participate in the development and implementation of goals, objectives, policies, and priorities for building inspections, plan review, and permit issuance; identify resource needs; recommend and implement policies and procedures. Select, train, motivate, and evaluate assigned personnel; provide or coordinate staff training; work with employees to correct deficiencies; implement discipline and termination procedures. Direct, coordinate, and review the work plan for staff involved in inspections, plan review, and permit issuance activities; meet with staff to identify and resolve problems; assign work activities and projects; monitor work flow; review and evaluate work products, methods, and procedures. Identify opportunities for improving service delivery methods and procedures; review with appropriate management staff, implement improvements. Participate in the development and administration of the Building Services budget; forecast additional funds needed for staffing, equipment, materials, and supplies; direct the monitoring of and approve expenditures; recommend adjustments as necessary. Oversee, monitor and participate in the plan review and permit issuance process; review plans and specifications for conformance with State, Federal, and local building and safety codes; issue building, mechanical, electrical, plumbing, and miscellaneous permits; oversee the maintenance of building plan files and permit records. Oversee, monitor and participate in the field inspection process; supervise and participate in the inspection of buildings and similar structures to ensure that construction, alterations, maintenance, structural, plumbing, electrical, and mechanical work is conducted in compliance with provisions of codes and ordinances and in accordance with approved plans and specifications; advise, investigate and resolve the most technical and political complaints and inquiries. Administer, interpret and enforce the provisions of the building code and other municipal regulations as they apply to building matters including new construction and remodeling existing buildings; review new products or methods of construction for approval or denial of use; prepare and recommend modifications to building code provisions. Cooperate with and assist the Planning Section and Economic Development Division and other City departments. Research code requirements, new material, and methods of construction and related matters; draft code revisions. Maintain records and prepare reports on building inspections and activity. Serve as secretary to the Building Appeals Board. Receive, review, issue, and inspect applications and sites pertaining to encroachments on City property. Coordinate assigned services and activities with those of other divisions and outside agencies and organizations. Confer with architects, contractors, builders, and the general public in the field and office; explain and interpret requirements and restrictions. Provide staff assistance to the Community Development Administrator, Deputy City Manager/Development Services Manager, City Manager, City Council, and various commissions; prepare and present staff reports and other necessary correspondence. Respond to and resolve difficult inquiries and complaints. Attend and participate in professional group meetings; stay abreast of new trends and innovations in the fields of building inspection, plan review, and code enforcement. Cooperate with and assist the Maintenance Services Department regarding the remodeling and improvements to City facilities. OTHER JOB RELATED DUTIES Perform related duties and responsibilities as assigned. JOB RELATED AND ESSENTIAL QUALIFICATIONS Knowledee of Operational characteristics, services, and activities of a comprehensive building inspection, permit issuance, and plans examining program. Organizational and management practices as applied to the analysis and evaluation of Building Division programs, policies and operational needs. Modem and complex principles and practices of building inspection, permit issuance, and plans examining program development and administration. Civil engineering principles, practices, and methods as related to structural engineering. Pertinent Federal, State, and local laws, codes and regulations including the Uniform Building, Plumbing, and Mechanical Codes, and the National Electrical Code. Principles of structural design, engineering mathematics, and soil engineering. Methods, materials, techniques and equipment used in the construction of facilities. Research methods and sources of information related to civil engineering and building code enforcement. Advanced principles and practices of budget preparation and administration. Principles of supervision, training and performance evaluation. Occupational hazards and standard safety practices necessary in the area of work. Safe driving principles and practices. Skill to Operate modem office equipment including computer equipment. Operate a motor vehicle safely. Ability to: Provide administrative and professional leadership and direction for Building Services in the Development Services Department. Recommend and implement goals, objectives, and practices for providing effective and efficient building inspection, plans examination, and permit issuance programs and services. Manage, direct and coordinate the work of technical and clerical personnel. Select, supervise, train and evaluate staff. Apply technical knowledge and follow proper inspection techniques to examine workmanship and materials and detect deviations from plans, regulations, and standard construction practices. Analyze, interpret, and check complex plans, specifications, and calculations. Prepare ordinances and code amendments. Interpret building inspection policies and procedures to contractors, homeowners and the general public. Advise on standard construction methods and requirements for residential, commercial, and industrial buildings. Identify, coordinate, and resolve a wide variety of interests in the development and enforcement of building codes and department policy. Interpret and apply Federal, State and local policies, procedures, laws and regulations. Enforce necessary regulations with firmness and tact. Supervise the preparation and maintenance of records and prepare comprehensive technical reports. Analyze problems, identify alternative solutions, project consequences of proposed actions and implement recommendations in support of goals. Research, analyze, and evaluate new service delivery methods, procedures and techniques. Prepare and administer budgets. Ability to Prepare clear and concise administrative and financial reports. Exercise good judgment, flexibility, creativity, and sensitivity in response to changing situations and needs. Communicate clearly and concisely, both orally and in writing. Establish, maintain, and foster positive and harmonious working relationships with those contacted in the course of work. Minimum Oualifications Experience Five years of increasingly responsible experience in the inspection and plan review of public, commercial, industrial and residential buildings including two years of administrative and supervisory responsibility. Trainina Equivalent to a Bachelor's degree from an accredited college or university with major course work in civil engineering, architecture, or a related field is highly desirable. License or Certificate Possession of, or ability to obtain, an appropriate, valid driver's license. Possession of Council of American Building Officials (CABO) certification as a Building Official. Possession of I.C.B.O. certification as a Plans Examiner is highly desirable. Special Requirements Essential duties require the following physical skills and work environment: Ability to sit, stand, walk, kneel, stoop, crawl, twist, and climb; exposure to cold, heat, noise, outdoors, chemicals, mechanical hazards, and electrical hazards; ability to travel to different sites and locations. Effective Date: October 2006 3 \t STAFF REPORT Administrative Services Department DATE: October 3, 2006 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Tracey L. Hause, Administrative Services Director � By: Michael A. Casalou, Human Resources Admirn tT 'ator SUBJECT: Classification specifications and compensation level for Police Communications Coordinator Recommendation: Approve SUMMARY It is recommended that the City Council approve new classification specifications and compensation level for Police Communications Coordinator, proposed by the Police Department. BACKGROUND The Police Communications and Information Systems Specialist position was originally created in 2002 to meet the complex technical and communications functions of the Police Department. At that time, the department was responsible for implementing, managing, and maintaining its own information systems function. DISCUSSION Within the last few years, Knight Communications, the City's contract information systems firm has taken over a significant portion of the systems at the Police Department. As a result, the incumbent's responsibilities have shifted from the daily maintenance of communications and information systems to primarily coordinating those functions. The incumbent also coordinates the police communications and radio transmission equipment by working with numerous vendors in accordance with Federal Communications Commission regulations. 4 Last year, the incumbent in the Communications Specialist position at the Police Department retired and the department decided not to fill the position. Since then, the incumbent of the Police Communications and Information Systems Specialist has had sole responsibility for coordinating police communications. The incumbent is also a participant in the development and administration of the Department budget as well as capital improvement budgets for other City departments, making his duties extend beyond the scope of a Police Communications and Information Systems Specialist. An assessment of duties indicates that a re- classification is an appropriate course of action to ascertain fair compensation and better delineate required duties of this position. A re- classification of Police Communications and Information Systems Specialist to Police Communications Coordinator will allow the department to efficiently meet their communications and information systems needs without hiring additional personnel. Additionally, the creation of a Police Communications Coordinator position provides flexibility for the department and will provide a promotional opportunity for any future staff that may be hired at a lower level. It is recommended this position be place at Salary Range Number 67 ($4,847 - $6,053). The Human Resources Commission considered and approved this item on September 14, 2006. FISCAL IMPACT Staff anticipates the net cost to the General Fund for this re- classification to be approximately $ 3500.00 annually. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended the City Council approve the attached new classification specifications and compensation level for Police Communications Coordinator. APPROVED: - William R. Kelly, City Manager 2 I CITY OF ARCADIA I' • y Kluli [Ai;![�111YI7►`[.YK� • 1`►k11CIT11 Under general direction, installs, maintains and repairs radio and communications, and electronic equipment operated by the City in conformance with established rules and regulations of the Federal Communications Commission. Coordinates and implements the activities involved in the installation, repair, replacement, and maintenance of computer local and wide area networks, systems, and peripherals; and to perform related duties as assigned. SUPERVISION EXERCISED May exercise technical and functional supervision over subcontractors, volunteers, inmate workers, and construction or electrician employees. EXAMPLES OF IMPORTANT AND ESSENTIAL DUTIES Repair, install, and service mobile and fixed radio transceivers and related electrical and electronic devices, and communications equipment. Repair, install and service emergency warning light systems on City vehicles. Evaluate and assist in the development of various communication policies and procedures. Assist with the review and development of complex equipment specifications for their compliance with communications needs and Federal, State and local regulations. Make recommendations in regard to the design and modification of radio communications equipment. Inspect and test operation of base stations and repeaters. Use a variety of radio and electronic tools and testing equipment. Design and fabricate special electronic apparatus. Direct a preventive maintenance program for radio receiving and transmitting equipment as well as computer hardware and information systems. Operate radio transmitters and receivers in accordance with Federal Communications Commission regulations. Maintain records and files of radio and computer maintenance operations, work performed, and stock and order parts and supplies; maintain adequate stock of parts and supplies. City of Arcadia Police Communications Coordinator (Continued) Page 2 of5 Prepare technical specifications for bid purposes; review bids received and recommend action. Assist with and/or maintain mobile data computers, computer network, hubs, and related computer equipment. Install new mobile data computer equipment, systems, programs, and software upgrades; interface personal computers to related peripheral equipment including servers, printers, and networks; monitor and administer computer systems, usage, and programs; perform routine local and wide area network and system maintenance; perform and maintain systems backups. Administer and coordinate user access and control; install, maintain, and delete users; assign user rights. Prepare instruction briefs and training manuals; conduct training in proper operating procedures for employees using radio and emergency warning equipment; attend communication meetings and training seminars to maintain skills. Conduct formal and informal training programs on the use and operation of various local and wide area network systems hardware and software, and related computer equipment. Attend training seminars to maintain computer skills, and to stay abreast of current trends, equipment and information system changes and innovations. Install, repair, and set levels in 911 dispatch consoles and related equipment. Supervise and coordinate disaster communications "Hamwatch" personnel and equipment. Manage, engineer, and design communications infrastructure for Police and other City departments; plan for long -term growth of systems; work with budgets and available grant funds. Upgrade, maintain, and repair mobile data computers, 911 dispatch systems, and surveillance systems. OTHER RELATED JOB DUTIES Perform related duties and responsibilities as assigned. JOB RELATED AND ESSENTIAL QUALIFICATIONS Knowledee of: Tools, equipment, practices, and methods of installing and maintaining electronic communications equipment. City of Arcadia Police Communications Coordinator (Continued) Paze 3 of Knowledee of: Federal, State and local communication regulations and reporting requirements. Modem electronic communication equipment. Modem office practices, methods, and computer equipment. Principles and procedures of record keeping and report preparation. Safe work and driving practices. Organizational and management practices as applied to the analysis and evaluation of local and wide area network systems programs, policies, and operational needs. TCP /IP Ethernet networking Windows NT and Unix operating systems. Methods, materials, and equipment used in the installation, maintenance, testing, and repair of communications, personal computer, and peripheral equipment. Network communications systems and environments. Various network software packages including e-mail, system management, dial -up- networking, office automation, word processing, graphics, spreadsheet, and data processing applications and programs. Organizational practices as applied to the analysis, evaluation, development and implementation of programs and procedures. Skill to: Operate modern office equipment including computer equipment. Operate a motor vehicle safely. Operate electronic, communications and computer diagnostic equipment. Ability to: Diagnose and locate defective communications and computer equipment. Repair and modify communications and computer equipment. e City of Arcadia Police Communications Coordinator (Continued) Page 4 of Ability to: Interpret and explain Federal, State, and local communication regulations. Understand and interpret schematic diagrams and specifications for electronic communication equipment, computers and peripherals. Collect and analyze relevant information and prepare oral and written reports. Conduct work in a safe manner in accordance with established policy. Prepare and maintain accurate and complete records. Communicate clearly and concisely, both orally and in writing. Establish, maintain, and foster positive and harmonious working relationships with those contacted in the course of work. Administer, maintain, and manage aspects of local and wide area network and data communications systems. Perform technical computer local and wide area network systems operation, installation, repair and maintenance. Diagnose, troubleshoot, and analyze problems and identify alternative solutions for local and wide area network systems. Assess, evaluate, and prioritize network hardware and software requests. Respond to requests and inquiries from staff. Exercise good judgment, flexibility, creativity, and sensitivity in response to changing situations and needs. Direct long -term growth of City radio networks and systems. Minimum Oualifications Experience Five years of experience in maintenance and repair of electronic, microwave, very high - frequency (VHF) and ultra high - frequency (UHF) radio communications equipment and computer technology background in installation, repair, replacement and maintenance of local and wide area networks, systems and peripherals. City of Arcadia Police Communications Coordinator (Continued) Page 5 0f5 Trainine• High School Diploma supplemented by training in electronic radio communications, computer science, information systems, or a related field from an accredited college, technical school, or university. License or Certificate: Possession of, or ability to obtain, a Federal Communications Commission General Radiotelephone License. Possession of, or ability to obtain, an appropriate valid driver's license. Special Reauirements: Essential duties require the following physical skills and work environment: Ability to sit, stand, walk, kneel, crouch, stoop, squat, crawl, twist, climb, and lift 50 lbs.; exposure to heat, noise, outdoors, confining work space, chemicals, mechanical hazards, and electrical hazards; ability to travel to different sites and locations; availability for shift work, on -call and stand -by. Effective Date: October 2006 1` A� � �,0oA STAFF REPORT Development Services Department DATE: October 3. 2006 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Don Penman, Assistant City pA anager /Development Services Director Philip A. Wray, City Engineer SUBJECT: Additional Appropriation for the Replacement of the Traffic Sional Mast Arms and Poles at the Intersection of Santa Anita Avenue and Foothill Boulevard Proiect Recommendation: Appropriate an additional $15,000 in Capital Outlay Funds SUMMARY , contract to Freeway Electric Inc. in the amount of $80,346. In the 2006/07 Fiscal Year Capital Improvement Program, staff budgeted $85,000 for the Replacement of the Traffic Signal Mast Arms and Poles at the Intersection of Santa Anita Avenue and Foothill Boulevard. On July 18 2006, the City Council awarded a Upon start of construction, it was discovered that the new pole could not be installed at the northeast corner of the intersection without either providing protection for the existing pole or removing it. A change to the scope of the project is necessary to safely complete the work. Upon review, staff recommends the installation of a temporary pole to allow the traffic signal to continue to operate normally, while the new pole is installed. The additional cost to the project for the temporary pole is approximately $10,000. Staff recommends the appropriation of an additional $15,000 in Capital Outlay Funds to cover the cost of the additional work and provide a contingency for the balance of the project. BACKGROUND On July 18, 2006, the City Council awarded a contract to Freeway Electric Inc. in the amount of $80,346 for the Replacement of Traffic Signal Mast Arms and Poles at the Intersection of Santa Anita Avenue and Foothill Boulevard. The overall budget for the project is $85,000 in Capital Outlay Funds in the 2006/07 Fiscal Year Capital Staff Report Appropriate Additional Funds October 3, 2006 Page 2 F I Improvement Program. The award of this contract along with other project expenses to date leaves less than $5,000 for any other project expenses and contingencies. Upon start of construction, it was discovered that space is extremely limited on the northeast corner to place the new pole. Typically with traffic signal mast arm replacement projects, the new pole and arm are installed while the existing pole and arm are still in place. This minimizes the time that the signal must be taken out of service, and temporarily equipped with stop signs, to perform the conversion. The only available locations for the new pole are in the same location as the existing pole or directly adjacent to the pole. Installing the new pole adjacent to the existing one causes concern for the safety of the existing pole during the excavation and installation of a new foundation. The contractor provided the City with several alternatives to solve the problem. They are as follows: 1. Place the traffic signal in the "red flash" mode and place stop signs at the intersection, so that the existing pole can be removed and a new one installed in its place. This would take at least a week to complete because of the need for a new foundation for the larger pole and mast arm. This could be done at no extra cost. 2. Rent a crane to hold the existing pole in place for the duration of the installation of the new foundation and pole. The additional cost for the crane is approximately $12,000. 3. Install a temporary pole and signal head for the duration of the installation of the new foundation and pole. The additional cost for the temporary pole and head is approximately $10,000. Upon consideration of the alternatives, staff prefers alternative #3 because it provides the most cost effective solution. It allows for the least disruption to the public, and allows the new pole to be placed directly where the old pole is, minimizing the chance of conflicts with other underground utilities at the corner. This condition was unforeseen and is outside the scope of the contract. The safety of the existing pole is a concern if precautions are not taken to protect or remove it prior to the installation of the new pole. Staff will continue to negotiate with the contractor to get the best price for the work. Staff recommends that the City Council appropriate an additional $15,000 to cover this change order and provide a contingency for the balance of the project. Staff Report Appropriate Additional Funds October 3, 2006 Page 3 FICAL IMPACT This project was budgeted in the 2006/07 Fiscal Year Capital Improvement Program budget in the amount of $85,000 in Capital Outlay Funds. An additional appropriation of $15,000 is requested. RECOMMENDATION Appropriate an additional $15,000, in Capital Outlay Funds for the Replacement of the Traffic Signal Mast Arms and Poles at the Intersection of Santa Anita Avenue and Foothill Boulevard Approved By: u�1� William R. Kelly, City Manager DP:PAW:pa Opp oC A �ri S.lr11 STAFF REPORT Public Works Services Department DATE: October 3, 2006 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Pat Malloy, Public Works Services Direct qCiil Prepared by: Lubomir Tomaier, Principal AEnineer Ken Herman, Associate Civil Engineer SUBJECT: Construct Colorado Well Project Recommendation: Authorize the City Manager to enter into a contract with Bakersfield Well and Pump Co., in the amount of $638,254.00 to construct the new Colorado Well and to adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for the Colorado Well Project SUMMARY The 2001 Water Master Plan recommends the construction of several new domestic water wells in the upper water zones to replace existing wells that are reaching the end of their productive life and to meet the growing demand for water in the City. The 2004- 2005 Capital Improvement Program provides for the design and construction of a new well. After careful consideration of several possible well locations and the efficient use of current pumping rights in the three Groundwater Basins, staff concluded that the best location for the new well is in Zone 2 of the West Raymond Basin. The location the new well will be on the southwest corner of Colorado Street and Baldwin. Staff has prepared the appropriate documents relative to this project to satisfy the California Environmental Quality Act requirements and has determined that with the revised mitigated measures the Colorado Well project will not have a significant or potentially significant effect on the environment. Staff therefore recommends that the City Council adopt the attached Mitigated Negative Declaration, which has been prepared for this project. On August 22, 2006, sealed bids were opened for the Colorado Well Construction. Two (2) bids were received. Staff has reviewed the lowest bid, which was submitted by Bakersfield Well and Pump Company, and has found the bid to be satisfactory. Staff recommends that the City Council award a construction contract in the amount of $638,254.00 to Bakersfield Well and Pump for this project. R I Page 1 of 4 Mayor and City Council October 3, 2006 BACKGROUND The City of Arcadia, during normal operation, relies entirely on groundwater pumped from local wells to meet the water system demands. The City presently operates 13 wells that supply water to seven primary pressure zones. The source of water for these wells is from three (3) groundwater basins, which lie beneath the City. The Main San Gabriel Groundwater Basin, lying in the southeastern portion of the City has a stable, sufficient supply of water and accounts for approximately 73% of the water pumped into the distribution system. The East Raymond Basin, located in the north portion of the City, and the West Raymond Basin, located in the west portion of the City, supply the balance of the City's water needs. One of the wells located in the West Raymond Basin is deteriorating rapidly and may require abandonment within the next three (3) years. The proposed Colorado well is intended to replace this well. In reviewing possible locations to place the new well, staff considered the availability of water, available pumping rights for each basin and available land owned by the City or within the public right -of -way. The location of the transition median from Colorado Street to southbound Baldwin Ave. provided the most satisfactory solution to these criteria. The project design will set the new well facility into the natural slope of the median and provide new landscaping to screen the facility and minimize the visual impact from passing motorists on Baldwin Ave. DISCUSSION The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires that prior to the approval of a project, an Initial Study (or Environmental Checklist) must be prepared to analyze and identify any potentially adverse changes that the project may have on the environment both during the construction of the project and after the project is complete. On January 10, 2006 a Notice of Intent regarding this project was sent to the Los Angeles County Clerk to be filed and made available for review. January 16, 2006 the Notice of Intent was also published in the local paper and all documents pertaining to the Mitigated Negative Declaration were made available to the public at the Public Works Services Department for the required 20 -day public review period, in accordance with the California Code of Regulations guidelines concerning the preparation of a negative declaration. No comments were received during the required public review period. Page 2 of 4 Mayor and City Council October 3, 2006 The first major portion of site work associated with this project is the construction of the well, which involves the drilling of the well to a depth of approximately 920 feet below ground surface, the installation of the well casing and gravel pack around the casing, the connection to the discharge drain, and the development and testing of the well which will assist in the final design of the well pump and equipping components. Notices Inviting Bids for this project were published in the adjudicated paper and trade journals. Four (4) firms with the required Class A or Class C57 licenses attended the recommended pre -bid conference with two (2) firms submitting bids. As advertised, the City Clerk publicly opened the sealed bids on August 22, 2006 with the following results: RANK FIRM Price Bakersfield Well and Pump Co. $638,254.00 2 Layne Christensen Company $899,000.00 (Engineers estimate: $668,893.00) Staff has reviewed the bid documents submitted by the lowest responsive bidder, Bakersfield Well and Pump Co., for content and investigated the contractor's background and recent projects for competency. Staff has concluded that Bakersfield Well and Pump Co. is the � lowest responsive bidder to perform this work. Staff recommends that the City Council award a contract in the amount of $638,254.00 to Bakersfield Well and Pump Co. for the construction of the Colorado Well. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT: Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), an Initial Study has been prepared for the proposed project. This Initial study did not disclose any substantial or potentially substantial adverse change in any of the physical conditions within the area affected by the project, including land, air, water, minerals, flora, fauna, ambient noise, and objects of historical or aesthetic significance that could not be made less than significant with mitigation incorporation. When considering the record as a whole, there is no evidence that the proposed project, with the implementation of required mitigation, will have any potential or adverse effect on wildlife resources, or the habitat upon which the wildlife depends. Therefore, a Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared for this project. Page 3 of 4 Mayor and City Council October 3, 2006 FISCAL IMPACT: Water Funds in the amount of $1,500,000 are budgeted in the 2004 -2005 Capital Improvement Program for the design and construction of a new well. Preparation of the Initial study and Negative Declaration are included in the design portion of the project. Implementation of mitigation measures defined in the Initial Study are included in the construction portion of the project. RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. Adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Colorado Well Project. 2. Award a contract in the amount of $638,254.00 to Bakersfield Well and Pump for the construction of the Colorado Well. 3. Authorize the City Manager and City Clerk to execute a contract in a form approved by the City Attorney. Approved: William R. Kelly, City Manager PM:LT:KH:dw Attachments Page 4 of 4 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM 1. Project Title: Construction and Operation of Colorado Well 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Arcadia 240 West Huntington Dr. P.O. Box 60021 Arcadia, CA 91066 -6021 (626) 256 -6654 3. Contact Person and Telephone Number: Arcadia Department of Public Works Services Ken Herman, Associate Civil Engineer (626) 256 -6654 4. Project Location: Southwest comer of Colorado Street and Baldwin Avenue, City of Arcadia 5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Arcadia Department of Public Works Services 11800 Goldring Road Arcadia, CA 91006 (626) 256 -6654 6. General Plan Designation: Public Facilities & Grounds 7. Zoning: S2 — Public Purpose 8. Description of Project: Project Backaround The City of Arcadia encompasses approximately 11 square miles of land is in the westerly end of the San Gabriel Valley at the base of the San Gabriel Mountains. Located approximately 18 miles northeast of downtown Los Angeles, Arcadia is known as the "Community of Homes'. It is a picturesque, affluent, largely built out, and primarily residential community. In addition to its residential sector, the Los Angeles County and State Arboretum, Santa Anita Fashion Park, Santa Anita Race Track Arcadia County Park, and the Santa Anita Golf Course annually attract a substantial number of visitors into Arcadia from other communities. Project Site The well would be located in the City of Arcadia, on the southwest corner of Colorado Street and Baldwin Avenue, adjacent to the Los Angeles County and State Arboretum. Figures 1 through 4 show the regional and local settings, aerial view, and project site. 8407 ISIMND City of p .da C01oretl0 Well Projed P `Yarba IN Figure 1 . Regional Location iiadkk'Ra _ —tQ '5hado�p�`CPie ,�ME-- 3 Puadana - fir li,� _. --� F�_Pbbt7ipCBNtl, J �amdaL =Rd= ^"his: 1i 91 FI f' iaFkehira d i ] C -- Site , _� z Well �f ?�-. Figure 2 . Vicinity Map 8907 IS/MND City at Arcadia 2 Colorado Well PmjW ��'( �.*� i ' P� ^�'�" '" �a'�l� MAP .A� �� ( �., - "b � f ,. 1 C. a �- a fL A"C) 0 'Pa.e.cem WOW. 1 ;1IV I �EaJ Drfe..ti iTD.I. sz, T-1 Bb 1970. , I� N (E� 14 Pi Pa (489) (483) (4 � c..rycrNWw. ciT%( we u,..o Cie pasPoNSlq6 LAS 307FH015 ". - - -- s"oi. TCAW FDA f+oNSa' oP P, (490) 1 (484) (47 Maw . u006mut Ge— Tk%S 1 I..�wl -e oise To Fit Figure 4 . Proposed WOH Site 8407 ISM1NO Cit or Wraaia 4 CWafado Well Pmjeot 306FH 29 OXFORD (469) (480 --� — 7 471 Q I Z Q CD +1 . I� N (E� 14 Pi Pa (489) (483) (4 � c..rycrNWw. ciT%( we u,..o Cie pasPoNSlq6 LAS 307FH015 ". - - -- s"oi. TCAW FDA f+oNSa' oP P, (490) 1 (484) (47 Maw . u006mut Ge— Tk%S 1 I..�wl -e oise To Fit Figure 4 . Proposed WOH Site 8407 ISM1NO Cit or Wraaia 4 CWafado Well Pmjeot 306FH 29 OXFORD (469) (480 --� — Proposed Project The City of Arcadia's Public Works Department is sponsoring the proposed Colorado Well project. This would entail the construction and operation of new domestic water well and associated facilities, to increase groundwater production in Pressure Zone 2. Construction and Operations The new well will be drilled to a depth of approximately 1000 feet below ground surface (bgs). Drilling and development of the well will require approximately three workers and will take three months to complete. The well will be drilled using the reverse circulation method in which water is used as the drilling fluid. Drilling and well construction will be conducted 24 hours per day for a continuous period of approximately four to five weeks, with two short periods (one or two days) of non - drilling time within the total time frame. The initial boring is considered a "pilot hole" and is used to collect data on the aquifers and determine the optimum screen intervals to use in the well. Water samples will be obtained from specific depths to ensure the well is designed to provide the highest water quality and most efficient extraction rates. This process requires two weeks to complete. After data from the pilot hole has been analyzed and the final well design has been completed, the pilot hole is over - drilled to enlarge the diameter. The well is then constructed by lowering steel casing, with predetermined screen intervals into the borehole. Clean gravel is added between the casing and the borehole to ensure good water flow into the well casing. A 300 -foot sanitary seal will be constructed. This seal will help protect the well and prevent any surface contaminants from reaching the drinking water aquifers. This process requires approximately one week to complete. Finally, utilizing a surge block followed by pumping water into portable water tanks until the water becomes clear will develop the well. Water will be discharged from the portable tanks to the storm drain system and may require a permit issued by the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board that ensures minimal levels of total suspended solids enter the storm drain. Another permit could be required from the County of Los Angeles for discharge to the Arcadia Wash Channel. This process requires between one and two weeks to complete. All construction equipment, worker vehicles and construction materials would stay within this area and the area would be fenced for security and public safety. All equipment will meet State of California waterworks standards and all other regulatory requirements. This process requires between one and two weeks to complete. The property will be re- landscaped. Work will be performed on weekdays between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. The type of heavy equipment to be used includes a drilling rig, drilling material truck, 22,000 gallon baker tanks, pump rig, pump and engine, front end loader, backhoe, haul truck, concrete truck, crane, and construction worker vehicles. To connect the new well to the City's distribution system, water main improvements will include a 16 -inch diameter main from the well site to an existing pipeline ( ±100 feet). The drain line will consist of a new 15 -inch or larger pipe from the well site to an existing line ( ±500 feet). The water main would be constructed concurrently with the construction of the wellhead facilities. A maximum of six workers are expected at the pipeline construction site. Pipeline installation activities would occur on weekdays between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 3:30 p.m. The well will operate 24 hours per day. Scheduled routine maintenance would occur 15 to 30 minutes per day, conducted by one staff person during normal business hours, except in the event of an emergency involving a repair or well shut down. 84071SIMND City of Nwdia 5 Culrnedo Well Project 9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: Approximately 250 feet to the east of the project site is a single - family housing residential area. The project site is at the southwest corner of Baldwin Avenue and Colorado Boulevard, adjacent to the Los Angeles County and State Arboretum. 10. Other Public Agencies Whose Approvals Are Required: Agency Permit or Approval California Regional Water Quality Control Board NPDES Permit California Department of Water Resources Issuance of Well Number California Department of Health Services Domestic Water Supply Permit Environmental Factors Potentially Affected The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. ❑ Aesthetics ❑ Hazards /Hazardous Materials ❑ Agriculture Resources ❑ HydrologyM/ater Quality ❑ Air Quality ❑ Land Use and Planning ❑ Biological Resources ❑ Mineral Resources ❑ Cultural Resources ❑ Noise ❑ Geology and Soils ❑ Population and Housing • Public Services • Recreation • Transportation /Circulation ❑ Utilities and Service Systems ❑ Mandatory Findings of Significance 8407 IsMND City of Arcadia 6 Colorado Wall Project Determination On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because mitigation measures have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. N 0 find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact' or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is ❑ required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are ❑ imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. Signature Printed Name - I A- /o` Date City of Arcadia Agency BOOM ISlMND City W A dm Colwado Well P.pd I. AESTHETICS a) Would the project have a substantial adverse Less than effect on a scenic vista? Potentially Significant Less than Significant with Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 The project site is not located within a city- designated scenic corridor, and there are no scenic vistas in the area. There would be no impact to scenic vistas. b) Would the project substantially damage scenic Lessthan resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State scenic highway? 9 y ? Potentially Significant Impact Lessthan Significant with Mitigation Incorporation Lessthan No Significant Impact Impact is surroundings? ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ Trees on the project site are tagged and cataloged by the Los Angeles County Arboretum. Removal and replacement of trees will be done in cooperation with the Arboretum and the City will consider recommendations by the by the Arboretum in the final landscaping design. c) Would the project substantially degrade the Lessthan existing visual character or quality of the site and Potentially Significant Lessthan is surroundings? Significant with Mitigation Significant No 9 Impact Incorporation Impact Impact ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 The property will be re- landscaped to blend in with existing vegetation. No significant impacts are expected. d) Would the project create a new source of Less than substantial light or glare, which would adversely Potentially Significant Lessthan or nighttime views in the area? affect day 9 Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporation Significant No Impact Impact ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ To ensure safe working conditions and proper operation of equipment during well installation, lighting would be used during nighttime hours for four to five weeks. Construction floodlights (500 -watt) would be used with directional shielding applied to avoid disturbance to nearby single - family residents. These lights will have a significant impact prior to mitigation measures. The following mitigation measures are incorporated into the project design to reduce adverse impacts to less than significant. No new sources of light or glare will be associated with operation of the well. Mitigation Measures: AES 1: A photometric lighting plan will be prepared prior to construction. Construction lighting fixtures shall be shielded by providing side flaps on lights, or providing a temporary drape /wall so that illumination is confined to within the water well site boundaries. Onsite construction lighting shall be arranged so that direct rays shall not shine in or produce glares for the residential properties to the south, or to vehicular traffic on Baldwin Avenue. 8407 ISNNC City or Arcadia Colmdo Well Pmject II. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Lessthan agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? Potentially Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps Less than Significant with Mitigation prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Impact Lessthan Impact Impact Monitoring Program of the California Resources 9 9 potentially Significant significant with Mitigation Lessthan Significant No Agency, to non - agricultural use? Impact Incorporation Impact Impact ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 The project does not involve any conversion of land use, thus, no impacts to any areas designated as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland or Farmland of Statewide Importance would occur. b) Would the project conflict with existing zoning for Lessthan agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? Potentially Significant Less than Significant with Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact ❑ ❑ ❑ 10 The project does not involve any conversion of land use; therefore, the project would not result in a conflict with an agricultural or a Williamson Act contract zoning designation. c) Would the project involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location Less than or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, Potentially Significant Lessthan Significant with Mitigation Significant No t0nOn -a non-agricultural use? 9 Impact Incorporation Impact Impact ❑ 1 ❑ ❑ 10 The project does not involve any conversion of land use; therefore, the project would not result in the conversion of Farmland to non - agricultural use. III. AIR QUALITY The project site is located within the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB), which includes Orange County and the non - desert portions of Los Angeles, Riverside, and San Bernardino Counties. Air quality conditions in the SCAB are under the jurisdiction of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). Both the state and federal governments have established health based Ambient Air Quality Standards (AAQS) for six air pollutants, which include: carbon monoxide (CO), ozone (0 nitrogen dioxide (NO sulfur dioxide (S0 lead (Pb), and suspended particulate matter less than 10 microns in diameter (PM The SCAB does not attain California and federal AAQS for four of the six criteria air pollutants. The air basin is in compliance with federal S02 and Pb standards, but ambient CO, 03, and PM reach twice the standards. SCAB is currently in the process of requesting redesignation on attainment of the federal NO standard. A complete analysis of air quality is included as Appendix A to this document. MOT ISIMND City of krt . Colorado well P.Ied a) Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? Less than Potentially Significant Less than Significant with Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 The proposed project would not involve growth- inducing impacts or'cause an exceedance of established population or growth projections. The project is consistent with the Air Quality Management Plan as well as the goals of the City and would not produce either short- or long -term significant quantities of criteria pollutants or violate AAQS. b) Would the project violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or Less than projected air quality violation? Potentially Significant Less than Significant with Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact ❑ ❑ B ❑ Short-term construction - related air quality impacts will occur during site preparation and construction activities. Sources of emissions during this phase include exhaust emissions generated by construction equipment, fugitive dust generated as a result of soil disturbances during grading activities, and the emission of reactive organic compounds during the painting of the structure. Well construction emissions were calculated using emission factors included in the CEQA Air Quality Handbook (Handbook). Emissions for the subsequent site construction were based on the Handbook methodology and the results are included in Appendix A. Because the site is relatively small and already level, the use,of heavy equipment would be limited and neither exhaust emissions nor dust generated from construction activities would be projected to exceed the SCAQMD daily or quarterly thresholds. To further minimize dust impacts generated by construction activities, the following mitigation measures will be incorporated into the project. AQ1: Construction plans for the proposed project shall reflect the following notes, a copy of which will be provided at the construction site: ➢ All material excavated or graded will be sufficiently watered to prevent excessive amounts of dust. Watering with complete coverage shall occur at least twice daily, once in the late morning and once after work is completed for the day. ➢ All clearing and earthwork activities shall cease during periods of high winds (winds greater than 25 mph averaged over one hour) or during Stage 1 or Stage 2 smog episodes. ➢ Baldwin Avenue and Colorado Street should be cleaned at the end of each day of construction. ➢ All material transported offsite shall be sufficiently watered or securely covered to prevent excessive amounts of dust. ➢ The amount of area disturbed by clearing and earthwork activities shall be minimized at all times. ➢ To the extent feasible, equipment engines shall be maintained in good condition and in proper tune according to manufacturer's specifications. The well operation is automated and with the exception of one daily inspection, does not generate additional vehicle trips. Electricity will be required during well operation. The well pump is estimated at 250 horsepower. The emissions for the generation of this electricity were determined using use factors and emission rates included in the Handbook and included in Appendix A. All emissions are within their respective criteria and the impact is less than significant. W7 JWMND City of Arcadia 10 Colorado Well Project Would the project result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non - attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? In accordance with SCAQMD methodology, any project that does not exceed the daily threshold values or can be mitigated to less than these values would not add to a cumulative impact. The project is not expected to exceed daily threshold values. As such, the proposed project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP). d) Would the project expose sensitive receptors to Less than substantial pollutant concentrations? Potentially Significant Le n Significant with Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ The project would not result in emissions in excess of the SCAQMD threshold values nor expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. No additional impacts would result from this project and no mitigation measures are necessary. e) Would the project create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? Potentially Significant Less than Less than Significant No Potentially Significant Lessthan Significant with Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ In accordance with SCAQMD methodology, any project that does not exceed the daily threshold values or can be mitigated to less than these values would not add to a cumulative impact. The project is not expected to exceed daily threshold values. As such, the proposed project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP). d) Would the project expose sensitive receptors to Less than substantial pollutant concentrations? Potentially Significant Le n Significant with Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ The project would not result in emissions in excess of the SCAQMD threshold values nor expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. No additional impacts would result from this project and no mitigation measures are necessary. e) Would the project create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? Potentially Significant Less than Significant with Mitigation Less than Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ The only potential odors associated with the project are from diesel exhaust and the application of paint during the construction period. These odors, if perceptible, would have very limited duration. Therefore, any odor impacts would not be considered as significant. IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Due to the urban nature of the community, Arcadia has relatively few areas that are biologically sensitive. Those areas that are considered to be environmentally sensitive occur along existing creeks, upper watershed areas, existing flood control and infiltration facilities, and in natural hillside areas. 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 Potentially Less than Significant Less than b the California Department of Fish and game or Y P 9 Significant with Mitigation Significant No U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? Impact Incorporation Impact Impact ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 The existing site vegetation is non - native, introduced, exotic and ornamental species. No candidate, sensitive or special status species are expected to occur onsite. No impacts would occur. 8607 VIAND City of Arc dia Colaratb Well Project b) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive Potentially Significant Less than Less than Significant No natural community identified in local or regional Potentially Significant significant with Mitigation Less than Significant No plans, policies, regulations or by the California Impact Less than Impact Impa De Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and P Potentially Significant Significant with Mitigation Less than Significant No Wildlife Service? Impact Incorporation Impact Impact ❑ ❑ ❑ a No riparian habitat or sensitive natural communities are located onsite and no impacts would occur. c) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined Potentially Significant Less than Less than Significant No by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, Potentially Significant significant with Mitigation Less than Significant No but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, Impact Less than Impact Impa through direct removal, fillip hydrological etc.) 9 9. Potentially Significant Significant with Mitigation Less than Significant No interruption, or other means? Impact Incorporation Impact Impact No wetlands are located onsite and no impacts would occur. movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native Potentially Significant Less than Less than Significant No migratory wildlife corridors, or impede resident or mi 9 ry P Potentially Significant significant with Mitigation Less than Significant No the use of native wildlife nursery sites? Impact Incorporation Impact Impa ❑ ❑ H ❑ The proposed project would not impact any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species and would not interfere with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites. Removal of potential urban raptor habitat is the only potential adverse impact from new construction. Construction may require the removal of large trees that could support urban nesting raptors. This potential impact is considered adverse, though not significant, because a minimal amount of trees would need to be removed. The impacts would be less than significant. e) Would the project conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? Potentially Significant Less than Significant with Mitigation Less than Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact ❑ ❑ ❑ B The City has an oak tree preservation policy as a part of its Municipal Code (Article IX, Chapter 7) and a tree management plan (Article IX, Chapter 8). No on -site trees apply to these ordinance criteria. No impacts would occur. 8407 VIAND City of Ar=$ia 12 Cola o Well Prged f) Would the project conflict with the provisions of an Less than adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Potentially Lessthan Lessthan Community Conservation Plan, or other approved Potentially Significant Lessthan No regional, or state habitat conservation Ian? local, re g P significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporation significant Impact Impact ❑ ❑ ❑ Q Vegetation onsite includes grass and ornamental flowers and trees. No habitat or conservation plans apply to the site, thus no conflicts with any conservation plans would result. V. CULTURAL RESOURCES a) Would the project cause a substantial adverse Less than change in the significance of a historical resource Potentially significant Lessthan as defined in 15064.5? significant Impact with Mitigation incorporation significant No Impact Impact geologic ❑ ❑ ❑ Q National, state, and local historic resources are listed in the Historic Resources section of the City's General Plan. No structures are located in the project area. No impacts would occur. b) Would the project cause a substantial adverse Lessthan change in the significance of an archaeological Potentially significant Lessthan resource pursuant to 15064.5? P § Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporation Significant No Impact Impact geologic ❑ ❑ ❑ Q The site does not have any identified archaeological resources. Previous grading and contouring of the area during its development would already have disturbed resources. Thus, no impacts would be expected. c) Would the project directly or indirectly destroy a Less than unique paleontological resource or site or unique Potentially Significant Lessthan is feature? Significant with Mitigation Significant No geologic Impact Incorporation Impact Impact ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 j The area has been previously disturbed by grading and contouring. No impacts would be expected from well site development. d) Would the project disturb any human remains, Lessthan including those interred outside of formal Potentially Significant Lessthan cemeteries? significant with Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact ❑ ❑ ❑ B No disturbance of any human remains is expected. However, state law requires certain procedures if any human remains are encountered during construction activities. If human remains are encountered, all work in the vicinity must stop and the County Coroner must be notified immediately, The Coroner or his/her representatives will determine whether the remains should be investigated by the Coroner's office as evidence in a crime or are the remains of prehistoric Native Americans. The required procedures will be followed if human remains were discovered during construction activities. This will reduce any potential significant impacts to a level of insignificance. B4071SIMND City d Ncadia 13 Colcmdo Well PmjeO VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS a) Would the project expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss. iniurv, or death involvinq: Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist- Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. The City of Arcadia General Plan states that there are no Alquist - Priolo earthquake fault zones and no known major fault traces (City of Arcadia, 1996). As such no ground rupture would be expected to occur. However, similar to other areas in southern California, slight to moderate shaking may occur if an earthquake occurs in the region. To reduce potential impacts associated with seismic activity, the proposed well building would be designed in accordance with the latest seismic safety standards of the Uniform Building Code (UBC). ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? Less than Potentially Significant Less than Significant with Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact " Impact ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ The City of Arcadia General Plan states that there are no Alquist - Priolo earthquake fault zones and no known major fault traces (City of Arcadia, 1996). As such no ground rupture would be expected to occur. However, similar to other areas in southern California, slight to moderate shaking may occur if an earthquake occurs in the region. To reduce potential impacts associated with seismic activity, the proposed well building would be designed in accordance with the latest seismic safety standards of the Uniform Building Code (UBC). ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? liquefaction? Less than Potentially Significant Less than Significant with Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ As above, adherence to the latest seismic safety standards of the UBC would reduce the potential for impacts from strong ground shaking to less than significant. iii) Seismic - related ground failure, including liquefaction? Less than Potentially Significant Lessthan Significant with Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ The site is located in an area deemed to have a very low potential for liquefaction (City of Arcadia 1996). Thus, impacts from liquefaction are considered to be less than significant. iv) Landslides? Less than Potentially Significant Less than Significant with Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 The area is flat with no potential for landslides to occur. 8407 ISIMND City of A dia 14 COIUWD Well PmjGd b) Would the project result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? Lessthan Potentially Significant Lessthan Significant with Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ Construction of the well would require the removal of the top 1 to 7 feet of soil to create the construction pad. The ground would be leveled and prepared as a base from which drilling and then well construction would occur, after which the site will be paved. The soil would be subject to short-term erosion by wind and water. During well completion and startup, back flushing of the well would occur; however, this would be directly connected to the existing drain and would not contribute to erosion. The project would be required to comply with City codes and requirements for erosion control. Impacts would be less than significant. c) Would the project be located on a geologic unit or Less than soil that is unstable, or that would become Potentially Lessthan Less than unstable as a result of the project, and potentially Potentially Lessthan Lessthan result in onsite or offsite landslide, lateral Potentially Signficant Significant with Mitigation Lessthan Significant No spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? Impact Incorporation Impact Impact ❑ ❑ H ❑ The proposed project would be required to comply with City codes and requirements as discussed in a) above. The City's Public Works Engineering Section would also approve the structure through the Design Review and Plan Check processes prior to construction. Impacts would be less than significant. d) Would the project be located on expansive soil, as Less than defined in Table 18 -1 -B of the Uniform Building Potentially Lessthan Less than Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or Potentially Significant Lessthan available for the disposal of waste water? Significant with Mitigation Significant No property? Impact Incorporation Impact Impact ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 The project site is not located on expansive soil, and would not create a substantial risk to life or property. The proposed project would be required to comply with City and State codes and requirements as previously stated. e) Would the project have soils incapable of adequately Less than supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative Potentially Lessthan Less than waste water disposal systems where sewers are not Potentially Significant Lessthan available for the disposal of waste water? Signfcant with Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 The proposed project would not require septic tanks, or alternative wastewater disposal. VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS a) Would the project create a significant hazard to the Less than public or the environment through the routine Potentially Significant Less than transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? Sj cant IIn S I g mpact nt mpel ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ Diesel fuel would be used at the site only during construction. Diesel fuel and the transport of hazardous 8407 ISIMNO City of Arrad,. 15 C01a 0 Well Project materials is regulated by the state and the transport of such materials to the site would be in compliance with all state regulations. The Water Resources Division would have a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan in place that specifies spill prevention and management practices. With prevention and management programs in place, impacts from construction would be less than significant. During operations, liquid sodium hypochlorite would be used for disinfection. The only chemical transported to the site is 15% sodium hypochlorite solution. This material is hazardous. The storage container will be double - walled, to contain any leakage. Adherence to local, state, and federal regulations reduces impacts to less than significant. b) Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably Less than foreseeable upset and accident conditions Potentially Less than Signifi Less than involving he release of hazardous materials into 9 Significant with Mitigation Significant No the environment? Impact Incorporation Impact Impact ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ See response to a) above. Adherence to local, state, and federal regulations reduces impacts to less than significant. c) Would the project emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, Less than substances, or waste within one - quarter mile of an Potentially Significant Less than existing p roposed SChOO1? 9 Or P P Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporation Significant No Impact Impact for people residing or working in the project area? ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 There are no schools within one - quarter mile of the site. The project would not emit hazardous emissions or acutely hazardous materials. No impacts to any existing schools are expected. d) Would the project be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Govemment Code Section Less than 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a Potentially Sign�ca Less than Significant with Mitigatiti on Significant No significant hazard to the public or the environment? Impact Incorporation Impact Impact ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 The site is not located on a list of hazardous materials sites. No impacts would result from the proposed project. e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use Potentially Less than Significant Less than airport, would the project result in a safety hazard Significant with Mitigation Significant No for people residing or working in the project area? Impact Incorporation Impact Impact ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 There are no public airports within 2 miles of the project site. No impacts would result from the proposed project. 8407IS11dND City of A dia 16 Colaratlo WNI Pmjed 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? Potentially Significant Less than Significant with Mitigation Less than Significant No physically interfere with an adopted emergency Impact Incorporation Impact Impact response plan or emergency evacuation plan? ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 The project site is not within the vicinity of a private airstrip. No impacts would result from the proposed project. g) Would the project impair implementation of or standards or waste discharge requirements? physically interfere with an adopted emergency Less than Significant response plan or emergency evacuation plan? Potentially Significant Lessthan adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences ad J Significant with Mitigation Significant No are intermixed with wildlands? Impact Incorporation Impact Impact ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 The local streets adjacent to the project area are not designated as emergency evacuation routes. The project would not interfere with or alter emergency response or emergency evacuation routes. h) Would the project expose people or structures to a standards or waste discharge requirements? significant risk of loss, injury or death involving Potentially Significant wildland fires, including where wildlands are Potentially Lessthan significant Lessthan adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences ad J Significant with Mitigation Significant No are intermixed with wildlands? Impact Incorporation Impact Impact ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 There are no wildlands on the site. The project would not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death from wildland fires. VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY a) Would the project violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? Lessthan Potentially Significant Lessthan Significant with Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ The City's Water Resource Division is required to comply with all applicable requirements of the Drinking Water Source Assessment and Protection Program as set forth by the California Department of Health Services (DHS). The water quality must fall below set levels for total dissolved solids, total hardness, nitrate, arsenic, iron, manganese, volatile organic compounds, and synthetic organic compounds. No significant violation of water quality standards would occur. As part of Section 402 of the Clean Water Act, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has established regulations under the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System ( NPDES) program to control direct stormwater discharges. In California, the State Water Quality Control Board administers the NPDES program that regulates industrial pollutant discharges, which include construction activities. NPDES permits require pollution prevention and treatment measures referred to as Best Management Practices be incorporated into NPDES permits. The City is a co- permittee with the County NPDES permit. However, an NPDES permit for the well from the RWQCB would be required. During well development and start up, periodic well back flushing is required, resulting in water that would be discharged into the storm drain system. With adherence to the BMPs as identified in the NPDES permit, these discharges would not violate waste discharge requirements. The impacts would be less than significant. 8407 Ia/MND cry &A�ma 17 Col"do Well Project b) Would the project substantially deplete . groundwater supplies or interfere substantially Potentially significant Impact Less than Less than significant No Impact Impact with groundwater recharge such that there would Potentially Significant Significant with Mitigation Less Significant No be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of Impact Incorporation Impact Impact the local groundwater table level (e.g., the ❑ ❑ m ❑ production rate of pre- existing nearby wells would Impact Incorporation Impact Impact drop to a level which would not support existing ❑ Less than Less than land uses or planned uses for which permits have P P Si nifcant Significant with with Significant No been granted)? Impact Incorporation Impact Impact ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ The proposed project would not substantially deplete groundwater supplies or'interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level. A less than significant impact is expected. drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or Potentially significant Impact Less than Less than significant No Impact Impact river, in a manner which would result in substantial Potentially Significant Significant with Mitigation Less Significant No erosion or siltation on- or offsite? Impact Incorporation Impact Impact of surface runoff in a manner that would result in ❑ ❑ m ❑ No streams or rivers are near the site. The site presently is covered with grass and provides for a pervious surface that allows for water penetration. Construction activities would involve a small portion of the site and minimal erosion problems would be expected. d) Would the project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including Potentially significant Impact Less than significant with Mitigation Incorporation Less than significant No Impact Impact through the alteration of the course of a stream or ❑ ❑ Q ❑ river, or substantially increase the rate or amount Less than of surface runoff in a manner that would result in Potentially Significant Significant with Mitigation Less than Significant No flooding on- or offsite? Impact Incorporation Impact Impact ❑ ❑ B ❑ The site is not located near a stream or river. As stated above, minimal changes to site drainage would be associated with construction of the well enclosure building. As part of well completion and startup back flushing will be conducted. The well would be connected directly to the storm drain located in the street, and thus, no surface runoff would occur. e) Would the project create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? P Potentially significant Impact Less than significant with Mitigation Incorporation Less than significant No Impact Impact ❑ ❑ Q ❑ A minimal area around the well area would be paved to provide walking access and parking for one maintenance vehicle. No substantial increase in runoff would occur. U01 ISNNO City of Nradia 18 Colorado Well Project f) Would the project otherwise substantially degrade Lessthan water quality? Potentially significant Lessthan Significant with Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation impact Impact ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ Wells operating in the West Raymond groundwater basin include some older, shallow wells that have been found to have contaminants from local industries or from past agricultural operations. The only potential to degrade water quality would be if any hazardous materials onsite would migrate into the water system. However, the appropriate handling of these materials (see VII. a) above) results in a less than significant impact. g) Would the project place housing within a 100 -year Less than Lessthan or mudflow? Potentially flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation ma P Potentially Significant Impact Lessthan Significant with Mitigation Incorporation Lessthan Significant No Impact Impact redirect flood flows? ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 The proposed project does not involve housing. No impacts would result. h) Would the project place within a 100 -year flood Less than Lessthan or mudflow? Potentially hazard area structures that would impede or Potentially Significant Lessthan redirect flood flows? Significant with Mitigation Significant No ❑ Impact Incorporation Impact Impact ❑ 1 ❑ ❑ 0 The site is located outside of both the 100 -year and 500 -year flood zones (Federal Emergency Management Agency, 1996). There would be no impacts that would result from impeded or redirected flood flows. i) Would the project expose people or structures to a Less than or mudflow? Potentially significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, Including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? Potentially Significant Impact Lessthan Significant with Mitigation Incorporation Lessthan Significant No Impact Impact Significant No ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 The project would not expose people or structures to risk or injury as a result of the failure of a levee or dam. j) Would the project inundation by seiche, tsunami, Less than or mudflow? Potentially Significant Lessthan Significant with Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 Seiche, tsunami, or mudflow are not hazards in the project area. The project would not expose people or structures to inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow. 84071S/MND city of Media 19 Colmdo Well Projed IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING a) Would the project physically divide an established Less than community? Potentially Significant Less than Significant with Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 The project is the construction and operation of a well and associated facilities. The proposed project will not divide an established community. b) Would the project conflict with any applicable land Less than use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with Potentially Significant Less than jurisdiction over the project (including, but not Significant with Mitigation Significant No limited to the general plan, specific plan, local Impact Incorporation Impact Impact coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for ❑ Less than ❑ 0 the of avoiding or mitigating an purpose 9 9 9 Potentially Significant Significant with Mitigation Less than Significant No environmental effect? Impact Incorporation Impact Impact ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ The City allows for development of public utilities on publicly owned land with reviews and approvals by applicable City agencies (Parks & Recreation, Community Development, and Public Works.) No conflicts with land use plans, policies, or agency regulations would occur, with the exception of the City's Noise Ordinance. See Section XI- Noise. c) Would the project conflict with any applicable Less than habitat conservation plan or natural community Potentially Significant Less than conservation Ian? Significant with Mitigation Significant No P Impact Incorporation Impact Impact ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 There are no habitat conservation or natural community conservation plans near the proposed project. X. MINERAL RESOURCES a) Would the project result in the loss of availability of Less than a known mineral resource that would be of value Potentially Significant Less than ion and the residents of the state? to the region Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporation Significant No Impact Impact ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 There are no significant mineral resources areas in the City. The project site does not contain mineral deposits or resources of regional or state value. There would be no impact. 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 Ian? P Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation Less than Significant No Impact Impact ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 The project site does not contain locally important mineral resources. M07 IsIMNO city of nrradia 20 colmr o Well Project XI. NOISE A noise analysis for the proposed project is as follows Noise Analysis To estimate the noise associated with the proposed project, data obtained by Synectecology in the preparation of a similar project was used as the basis for analysis. On June 3, 1997, a noise survey was conducted at the City of Arcadia groundwater extraction well and pumping facility located at 141 East Camino Real within the City of Arcadia. Noise monitoring was performed using certified Type 2 noise monitoring equipment. The meter was field calibrated immediately prior to the measurement. The 141 East Camino Real facility is located within an area of single - family residential units. The facility includes a well that uses a 75 horsepower motor for water extraction. The pump head is exposed and not contained in a subterranean vault. Other appurtenant equipment includes a block wall pump house that uses two large pumps in excess of 100 horsepower each. One side of the pump house is louvered for air circulation and all noise emanated from this area. A large water storage tank is also located on -site. A 6- foot high block wall surrounds the entire site. Because the well pump was not discernable above the noise produced by the pumps in the pump house, the meter was located at a distance of 10 feet from the well. At this distance, the well pump was barely discernable over that from the pump house located at a distance of 75 feet. A 5- minute reading was obtained from 10:00 a.m. to 10:05 a.m. The measured Leq was 51.5 dBA with Lmin and Lmax values of 49.2 dBA and 55.4 dBA, respectively. Again, note that even at a distance of 10 feet, noise from the well pump was not readily discernable over that from the pump house. The human ear can typically discern the noise from two separate events to a difference of about 20 dBA. Thus, the noise from the pump, if it were measured by itself, could be on the order of 40 dBA at a distance of 10 feet. The noise from the operation of the proposed well is projected at less than 40 dBA at a distance of 10 feet. As such, the noise from the use of well pumps would not exceed the City of Arcadia's criterion of 55 dBA. Well pump noise would not be audible at the nearest sensitive land uses and presents less than a significant impact. The Colorado Well Project is approximately ± 250 feet from residential receptors; well facility noise should be on the order of less than 55 dBA at the residential units. This level would be further reduced by intervening structures and in no case would this noise be significant (or audible) at any neighboring sensitive land uses. Noise levels would be less than the City of Arcadia nighttime standard of 50 dBA at a distance of 50 feet from the treatment facility and any potential impact would be less than significant. All well equipment onsite would be automated and the project would require only minimal staff to maintain and operate the well facility. Water Department staff would conduct daily site visits for the first two months of operation to monitor the systems, and then monthly site visits thereafter to collect water quality samples. Additionally, staff would visit the sites approximately four times a year to perform maintenance activities. An increase of 3 dBA (the impact criterion) would require that the project double the existing volumes of traffic, and such an increase in not plausible. As such, any increase in roadway noise would be less than significant. U07 IS/MN0 City of Arcadia 21 Colorado Well Project a) Would the project result in exposure of persons to Less than or generation of noise levels in excess of or generation of excessive groundborne vibration Potentially Significant standards established in the local general plan or Or groundborne noise levels? 9 Less than with Mitigation Incorporation noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other PP Significant Si nificant Significant with Mitigation Les than Significant No agencies? Impact Incorporation Impact Impact ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ The project consists of the construction of a well and associated facilities. 24 -hour construction will violate the City's noise ordinance. b) Would the project result in exposure of persons to Less than or generation of excessive groundborne vibration Potentially Significant Less than Or groundborne noise levels? 9 Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporation Significant No Impact Impact ❑ ❑ ❑ Q Excessive groundborne vibration is typically caused by activities such as blasting used in mining operations, or the use of pile drivers during construction. The project does not require this type of construction and there would be no 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? P r0 1 Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation Less than Significant No Impact Impact ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ Subsequent to construction, the facility would require only routine maintenance. No adverse impacts would occur. 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? Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation Lessthan Significant No Impact Impact ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ Short-term construction— related noise impacts will occur.during construction. These activities would result in short-term noise levels that would be higher than the existing ambient noise levels in the project area. Two types of short-term noise impacts could occur during the construction of the proposed project. First, the transport of workers and export of debris and import of construction materials from the site could incrementally increase noise levels along area roads. Project construction would generate only one daily truck trip. This volume of vehicles is too small to add measurably to the existing noise in the project vicinity. Therefore, the increase in long -term ambient noise levels would not exceed 1 dBA when averaged over a 24 -hour period and construction - related impacts associated with vehicle travel would not result in a significant adverse impact. The other potential impact is from the use of construction equipment. Construction noise represents a short-term impact on ambient noise levels, as noise levels produced by construction activities can reach relatively high levels. As discussed above, construction noise could reach 55 dBA at the most proximate residents. This noise could be continuous, 24 -hours per day for a period of about 3 weeks. This level is above the ambient level and represents a significant adverse impact. The proposed project includes the following mitigation measures. 8407 ISNNO can m arum 22 Colorado Well Project Mitigation Measures: N 1: Noise attenuation /suppression methods shall be implemented by the drilling Contractor to minimize disturbance to persons living and /or working nearby, and to the general public. The Contractor shall be made aware that adjacent residences are only about 250 feet away from the proposed location of the well. N 2: During drilling, well construction, and testing, the maximum noise level shall not exceed 50 dBA at any residential dwelling between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. on weekdays, including Saturday, and all day on Sundays and Federal Holidays. If noise emanating from the site exceeds acceptable levels at the nearest property line, then the contractor will not be allowed to proceed with operations until the condition(s) causing the excessive noise has been corrected. The cost for delays due to the condition(s) will be the Contractor's responsibility. N 3: The Contractor shall submit to the City for acceptance, a noise abatement plan showing the equipment noise level measurements, noise abatement equipment and performance, drilling equipment locations and layout, and calculations of predicted noise levels to bring noise levels within the limits imposed by the City of Arcadia noise ordinance. A registered professional engineer specializing in noise abatement shall prepare the noise abatement plan. As part of the plan, a note shall be included stating the engineer certifies that the plan complies with noise ordinance. N 4: Prior to commencing the actual drilling operation, the Contractor shall demonstrate onsite compliance by taking actual noise level measurements. Those noise level measurements shall be performed using a sound level meter, and instrument meeting ANSI Standard S1.4 -1971 for Type 1 or Type 2 sound level meters or an instrument and the associated recording and analyzing equipment which will provide equivalent data. The location for measuring the noise levels shall be at any point at the City's discretion along the perimeter, which is the City's property line. The Contractor shall submit the name and qualifications of the firm proposed to conduct the actual noise level measurements in the field within ten days of the Notice of Award. The Contractor shall be required to demonstrate onsite compliance a minimum of three additional times during the 24 -hour drilling period of the work. The City will establish the times, for those field tests at the pre - construction meeting. N 5: If, at any time prior to or during the drilling operation, the noise limits are exceeded, immediate corrective action shall be taken through drilling equipment modifications, addition of noise abatement equipment, and installation of noise attenuation barrier walls or change in operating procedures. Once the corrective action has been taken, the Contractor shall be responsible to demonstrate compliance through actual noise level measurements. N 6: High performance mufflers shall be used on all diesel engines in regular use on the drill site. Truck engines are excluded, but shall not have unmuftled exhaust. The use of air impact wrenches or similar equipment used on drill pipe flange bolts shall conform to all noise abatement requirements. N 7: All internal combustion equipment shall be properly tuned -up to minimize noise emissions. N 8: The contractor shall provide an onsite name and telephone number of a contact person to the City 8407 ISIMND City of Arcadia 23 Colorado Well Project e) For a project located within an airport land.use Less than plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, Potentially Significant Lessthan within two miles of a public airport or public use Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporation Significant No Impact Impact airport, would the project expose people residing ❑ Lessthan ❑ 0 In the project area to excessive noise or working P ) Potentially Significant Significant with Mitigation Lessthan Significant No levels? Impact Incorporation Impact Impact ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 There are no public airports with in two miles of the project site. No impacts are expected to occur. f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, Less than would the project expose people residing or working Potentially Significant Lessthan in the project area to excessive noise levels? P 1 Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporation Significant No Impact Impact for example, through extension of roads indirectly ( P 9 ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 There are no private airstrips located near the project. XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING a) Would the project induce substantial population Lessthan growth in an area, either directly (for example, by Potentially Significant. Less than proposing new homes and businesses) or Potentially Lessthan significant Less than for example, through extension of roads indirectly ( P 9 Significant with Mitigation Significant No or other infrastructure)? Impact Incorporation Impact Impact ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 The proposed project would not directly or indirectly induce population growth. The, proposed project is located in an urbanized area. Thus, no impacts would result. b) Would the project displace substantial numbers of Lessthan existing housing, necessitating the construction of Potentially Significant. Less than replacement housing elsewhere? Si ct ncorpo tion No S IImpact nt Impact ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 No displacement of housing is associated with the project. c) Would the project displace substantial numbers of I Lessthan eo le, necessitating the construction of P P 9 Potentially Significant Significant with Mitigation Lessthan Significant No replacement housing elsewhere? Impact Incorporation Impact Impact ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 The project would not displace homes or people. eao7 ISMIND city of Mwdie 24 colorado Well Projed XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of Less than new or physically altered governmental facilities, Potentially Lessthan Lessthan need for new or physically altered governmental Potentially Significant significant with Mitigation Lessthan Significant No facilities, the construction of which could cause Impact Incorporation Impact Impact significant environmental impacts, in order to ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire Protection? Police Protection? Lessthan SCh00 {S? Potentially Significant with Lessthan Parks? Significant Mitigation Significant No Other public facilities? Impact Incorporation Impact Impact ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 The operation of the well would involve routine maintenance activities. The proposed project would not create a need for additional police or fire services or create a public safety hazard. No employment would be generated that would have impacts to schools, parks, or other public facilities. No impacts will occur. XIV. RECREATION a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other Less than recreational facilities such that substantial physical Potentially Lessthan Lessthan rioration of the facility ould occur or be deterioration Potentially Significant significant with Mitigation Lessthan Significant No accelerated? Impact Incorporation Impact Impact ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 The proposed project will not affect recreational facilities. b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion or Less than recreational facilities which might have an adverse Potentially Significant Lessthan physical effect on the environment? Sign Impact Incorporation No S lImpact nt Impact 11 ❑ ❑ 0 The project would not include or require the expansion of recreational facilities. There would be no significant impact. M07 Ia/MND City of Arcadia 25 Colarado Well Project XV. TRANSPORTATIONITRAFFIC a) Would the project cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic Potentially Significant Impact Less man Significant with Mitigation Incorporation Less than Significant No Impact Impact load and capacity of the street system (i.e.. result ❑ Less than ❑ 0 in a substantial increase in either the number of Potentially Significant Less than Less than Significant No s, the volume to capacity ratio on vehicle trips, P Y Potentially Significant Significant with Mitigation Less than Significant No roads, or congestion at intersections)? Impact Incorporation Impact Impact ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ Typical well drilling includes about three pieces of construction equipment; a backhoe to maintain the site, a drill rig to drill the hole, and a crane to set the casing and pump in place. Staging would be placed in a secured, fenced area of about 100 feet by 200 feet and keep the surface streets clear of equipment and worker vehicles. Once construction equipment is onsite, they would stay onsite for the duration of construction. b) Would the project exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard Potentially Significant Impact Less man Significant with Mitigation Incorporation Less than Significant No Impact Impact established by the county congestion ❑ Less than ❑ 0 management agency for designated roads or Potentially Significant Significant with Mitigation Less than Significant No highways? Impact Incorporation Impact Impact ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 The project would add a minimal amount (average of 11 trips per day including worker vehicles) of construction- related trips during the construction period. The number of workers associated with construction would not substantially contribute to the existing load and capacity of the local street system. The project would add maintenance trip. Therefore the project will not exceed a level of service standard. c) Would the project result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? Potentially Significant Impact Less man Significant with Mitigation Incorporation Less than Significant No Impact Impact ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 The proposed project would not affect air traffic patterns. 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)? Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation Less than Significant No Impact Impact ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ The project would have no effect on area roadway design nor cause any traffic /transportation hazards. The City should require that the contractor employ standard safety measures while accessing the site with the construction equipment to ensure the safety of the public. During all construction there is concern of safety to local residents due to heavy equipment and construction activities. This could result in a significant impact that would be reduced to less than significant with incorporation of the following mitigation measures. Mitigation Measures: TRANS - 1: The City shall require the contractor to completely fence and secure all construction areas and equipment, and shall cover all open trenches with plates. 8407 ISIMND City of Arcadia 26 Colorado Well Project TRANS - 2: The City shall require the contractor to employ flagmen during the movement of construction vehicles on the local streets, and during construction activities in the street to assure public safety. e) , Would the project result in inadequate emergency Less than access? Potentially Significant Lessthan Significant with Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ During construction equipment movement, there could be a potential to temporarily block access for emergency vehicles or create street closure. With incorporation of mitigation measure TRANS -2 above and the mitigation measure below any adverse Impacts would be reduced to less than significant. Mitigation Measure: TRANS - 3: Prior to any closure of Baldwin Avenue for construction, the City shall require the contractor to inform local police and emergency services of such closure. f) Would the project result in inadequate parking Lessthan capacity? Potentially Significant Lessthan Significant with Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 The project has no impacts on parking capacity. g) Would the project conflict with adopted policies, Lessthan plans, or programs supporting alternative Potentially Significant Lessthan trans transportation e. bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? P g., Y ) significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporation Significant No Impact Impact significant construction of which could cause si 9 ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 The project does not conflict with adopted transportation policies. XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS a) Would the project exceed wastewater treatment Lessthan requirements of the applicable Regional Water Potentially Significant Lessthan Quality Control Board? tY Significant with Mitigation Significant No significant construction of which could cause si 9 Impact Incorporation Impact Impact environmental effects? ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 The project would not exceed wastewater treatment requirements, as there is no wastewater treatment associated with the project. b) Would the project require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the Lessthan significant construction of which could cause si 9 Potentially Significant Significant with Mitigation Less than Significant No environmental effects? Impact Incorporation Impact Impact ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 M07 ISUND City of Arcadia 27 COIW W Well Prcled The project would not require expansion of such facilities. There would be no impact. c) Would the project require or result in the construction Less than of new stormwater drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the_ construction of which could c significant environmental effects? cause si 9 Potentially significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation Less than Significant No Impact Impact entitlements and resources, or are new or ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 The project would be connected to an existing storm channel and would not result in the need for new facilities. d) Would the project have sufficient water supplies Less than available to serve the project from existing Potentially Significant Less than Less than Significant No entitlements and resources, or are new or Potentially Significant Less than capacity to serve the project's projected demand ca P Y P J P 1 Significant with Mitigation Significant No ex expanded entitlements needed? P Impact Incorporation Impact Impact ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 The proposed project would not require a water supply from existing entitlements or resources; therefore, no impacts would occur. e) Would the project result in a determination by the Less than wastewater treatment provider which serves or Potentially Significant Significant with Mitigation Less than Significant No may serve the project that it has adequate Impact Less than Impact Impact capacity to serve the project's projected demand ca P Y P J P 1 Potentially Significant Significant with Mitigation Less than Significant No in addition to the provider's existing commitments? Impact Incorporation Impact Impact ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 The proposed project would have no connections to a wastewater treatment provider; thus no increased demand in capacity would be required. f) Would the project be served by a landfill with Less than sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the su P P ty Potentially Significant Significant with Mitigation Less than Significant No project's solid waste disposal needs? Impact Incorporation Impact Impact ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ A minimal amount of solid waste would be associated with construction. The material would have a less than significant impact on landfill capacity. g) Would the. project comply with federal, state, and Less than regulations related to solid local statutes and re g Potentially Significant Significant with Mitigation Lessthan Significant No waste? Impact Incorporation Impact Impact ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 No solid waste is associated with the proposed project. 8407 ISfMND City of Ncatlia 28 Colomdo Well Pmjed XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE quality of the environment, substantially reduce Less than the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a Potentially Significant Significant with Mitigation Lessthan Significant No fish or wildlife population to drop below self - Impact Incorporation Impact Impact sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or ❑ H ❑ ❑ animal community, reduce the number or restrict Potentially Less than significant Less than the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal Potentially Less than Significant Less than important examples of the major or eliminate im P P 1 Significant with Mitigation Significant No periods of California history or prehistory? Impact Incorporation Impact Impact ❑ ❑ ❑ Q The project does not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment and would not have a significant impact on any fish or wildlife or their habitat. No historic resources are known to exist onsite. b) Does the project have impacts that are individually Less than limited, but cumulatively considerable? Potentially Significant Significant with Mitigation Lessthan Significant No ( "Cumulatively considerable" means that the Impact Incorporation Impact Impact incremental effects of a project are considerable ❑ H ❑ ❑ when viewed in connection with the effects of past Potentially Less than significant Less than the effects of other current projects, and projects, P 1 Significant with Mitigation Significant No the effects of probable future projects)? Impact Incorporation Impact Impact ❑ ❑ ❑ Q The proposed project would not have impacts that are cumulatively considerable. c) Does the project have environmental effects that Less than will cause substantial adverse effects on human Potentially Significant Significant with Mitigation Lessthan Significant No beings, either direct) indirect) g y or y. Impact Incorporation Impact Impact ❑ H ❑ ❑ The project would have short -term adverse construction - related impacts. These include night lighting, noise, and safety concerns that would have the potential to cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. These impacts would be mitigated to less than significant levels by incorporation of the mitigation measures into the proposed project. 9407 ISlMND City of Arcadia 29 Colorado Well Project SOURCES City of Arcadia 1996 City of Arcadia General Plan, Adopted September 3, 1996. City of Arcadia 2001 City of Arcadia 2000 -2005 Housing Element, Approved and Adopted on November 6, 2001. Synectocology 1997 Noise Monitoring Analysis conducted in the City of Arcadia. Groundwater extraction well and pumping facility for 141 East Camino Real, dated June 3, 1997. State of California California Geologic Survey, Alquist- Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone. http:llwww.consrv.ca.aov /CGS /rahm/aplindex.htm 8407 ISIMND City of Ar dia 30 Colorado Well PM d The emissions from the three construction phases are summarized in the attached table. None of the significance thresholds for construction will be exceeded. The threshold for oxides of nitrogen emissions will be close because the equipment will operate 24 hours per day during this phase. There are not expected to be any additional operational emissions for this project. The pump at the well will be electrically driven. There will be periodic visits by maintenance crews. But, these should not be substantially different in number than currently required. 94071SIMNO CO of Arcadia 33 Colaado Well Project Table 1 Peak Daily Construction Emissions (Pre- Mitigation) Source CO ./day VOC .1da NO x lb/day So lb/day Exhaust PM 10 lb/day Fugitive PM 10 Ibida Total PM 10 lb/da Drid and Testing On -Site Construction Equipment Exhaust 76.9 11.6 92.7 7.7 5.8 5.8 On -Site Motor Vehicles 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 On -Site Fugitive PM10 0.0 0.0 Asphalt Paving 0.0 0.0 Architectural Coating 0.0 0.0 Total On -Site 76.9 11.6 92.7 7.7 5.8 0.0 5.8 Off -Site Haul Truck Soil Loss 0.0 0.0 Off -Site Motor Vehicles 6.5 0.9 0.3 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.1 Total Off -Site 6.5 0.9 0.3 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.1 TOTAL 83.4 12.5 93.0 7.7 5.9 0.0 5.9 Well Head Construction On -Site Construction Equipment Exhaust 7.8 1.8 13.1 1.2 0.7 0.7 On -Site Motor Vehicles 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 On -Site Fugitive PM10 0.0 0.0 Asphalt Paving 0.0 0.0 Architectural Coating 0.0 0.0 TotalOnSite 7.8 1.8 13.1 1.2 0.7 0.0 0.7 Off -Site Haul Truck Soil Loss 0.0 0.0 Off -Site Motor Vehicles 3.2 0.4 2.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 TotalOffSite 3.2 0.4 2.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 TOTAL 11.0 2.2 15.5 1.2 1 0.7 0.0 0.7 Pi a Line Construction On -Site Construction Equipment Exhaust 25.1 5.6 49.4 4.5 2.6 2.6 On -Site Motor Vehicles 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 On -Site Fugitive PM10 0.0 0.0 Asphalt Paving 0.0 0.0 Architectural Coating 0.0 0.0 Total On -Site 25.1 5.6 49.4 4.5 2.6 0.0 2.6 Off -Site Haul Truck Soil Loss 0.0 0.0 Off -Site Motor Vehicles 5.0 0.7 5.2 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.1 Total Off -Site 5.0 0.7 5.2 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.1 TOTAL 30.1 6.2 54.7 4.5 2.7 0.0 2.7 CEQA Significance Level 550 75 100 150 -- - 150 Si nificant? (Yes/No) No No No No - No 8407 ISLAND City of A oadia 34 Colorado Well Prged CITY OF ARCADIA 240 W. HUNTINGTON DRIVE ARCADIA, CA 91007 CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION File No.: N/A A. Name, if any, and a brief description of the project: Colorado Well — Construction of a new 1,000 GPM municipal groundwater well. B. Location of Project: 500 W. Colorado St. C. Name of Applicant, Sponsor or Person Undertaking Project: A. City of Arcadia B. Other (Private) (1) Name N/A (2) Address NIA The City Council ❑, Public Works Services Department ❑ having reviewed the Initial Study of this proposed project and having reviewed the written comments received prior to the public meeting of the City Council, including the recommendaiton of the City's staff, does hereby find and declare that the proposed project will not have a siginificant effect on the environment. A brief statement of the reasons supporting the Public Works Services Department/City Council's findings are as follows: The City Council ❑ Public Works Services Department ❑, hereby finds that the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects its independent judgement. A copy of the Initial Study may be obtained at: Public works Services Department City of Arcadia 11800 Goldring Road Arcadia, CA 91006 (626) 256 -6554 The location and custodian of the documents and any other material which constitutes the record of proceedings upon which the City based its decision to adopt this Mitigated Negative Declartion are as follows: Public works Services Department City of Arcadia 11800 Goldring Road Arcadia, CA 91006 (626) 256 -6554 Date: Staff Form "E" 4/03 w ■ 0 ) 0 0 U / 0 0 P: F- F- 0) 0 0 x w 0 LL ■ � 0 0 a 0 0 0 ■ 0 a g w f ) ) ) §� I # * FE s # #Q] \� \ \ \ }/ �\ �§ w E a )f Em < a �\® . LU /()A \#) ecl= 03§7 $k tm \ \ • CL G 3 IM ] _| m3 _ CD O O 0 =fEfU E !m {t,= i5\ ca �E� kk �( \�t{7)! �()} } \ }0CL0w0 /§[ } /(Z /\ /�/ /\ cn 0. k \)0'a )a CO agE� a ) ( )— @ _23 'a==&&§ , o � . i7b =!@o °m` §0)N �Er0 < - @ |& IGza§ =2�c §« ) }\ (u _ 7)k ___ 15 .- / - /k� �� , -- 00 \ r=!m»° /[t) - 222 4)0 =iCL :- _ )�{ - -� -� E 0 w B) /\:m -._- 2 o mf]]))( | /=0w \w ]k ƒ §/@Z <0 k j \ z � . z 0 C w d C O Q P d N U_ > 2 � N N � Y N ' N O U N N n > E a 1u m m� L m m U N c o p m o m N 3 ro a) 6 UU2a 0 U m C Rf N 1 > O O C N m mom N C m m � a d o 'a rnC m � C N c � N � N m n C U C d L t C � m m 3 N N C L) p o U a m c w 0 0 0 m E m c m m m C (D n U QE CL 0 'a C L U O � n o 0 ` o U m C O A le m C 0) a 0 C CU 0 - 0 '- CL c N ai m a d o N N d p c E 'p C E Q m m N 0 U V N= ZZ O N C N a._ w w .o d o1 o a n m �, a�i c' v d c a 2 n N m o C m 60 0 0) Q) y G) C) N 0 N C Lo O C . m a w L .L- I- d _ 0 C U LL � C C C N 0 C N N C E N' m G> v m 3 c m N U o m N ° o> T C - c a -p a _ o . 'N m 0 -- O1 Y ,m � m (D U m S 0 C C 0 p_ U 0 w y N 3 f6 N C p X 0 N— 3 C > U 0 N C m L N m. U N �p O T d m 3 U a - m 01 L= d N m 0 - O m c 3 "ov o CL v m 3 C N O m c m ,., p o f a.) 0 o U p o C c w U m C E a r- m— m C O N d N ' J N - cc 0 0 0 C N C N o p nV)x m nm 8mo 8 �' N `, N 0 C cm a) O C d N C a C m w O N 3 p E m - o -D N m. M U L E o L c N N 3 0 t mCa Q!� a) o Q w m o w o_ a1 > o c N C r o E o E Qi :N .0 0 U C C m N U m C m U m E E N m f/1 N 0 ' N 0 L C C E $) > c C C c a _ a v a m m o_ c N m U ,O d m 0 N 0 n C 0 N E d p U L m m Y. 0 0 L a) ) O 0 'O ~ C N N C O dw w c o c m E "3 m a m m3 m E aE) ao N m N C C ,= f0 N CO > C C N N n a d. Q o a) E O r0 O' m N E 0 0 N m U m 1 � U 10/1 O w N C 2 C L U 0 SIC O E m m U m H m w c-o c U n m a n 2 w � 0 ) 0 0 u x � 0 0 v J z 0 0 / 0 LL s / 0 w 0 § q 0 s 0 � 0 § §§ s / §J / \ 0)\ \ \) �& _ @2 (§ k® /0 0 §§ < ■%� ■2 LU /} { §Ak O =$§§w Bk \ . CL G )_ c / m # ]E EcLE ( co m CL §{ {)§ �� �fg�e, /{/ �tQEea§£ : - ��� == c = _2)$ \ % /j[)£\,�)` \■ e35r =, -� = -Wc, _ - ® eE ` ra` 0=`2>&)! - $ /a - _ "= \E {a =§) 2N ca «{Ea - m §a%7a2 =l�a0. . k< U) CU / w- 5. o.- E \ 3 _ _ $ �- = §« ƒ / \� §0 / °f // fk 00 , =e2E cc e- - E�za © (u (D ± �| §)� /# O� =a0o � e: 0 \) §f \ 'aE \)k _; .442 /){ ° j 0 {k 2 _ \dk\cik� ®��` \%;) | 3`2$§`« §)]{2 a«; ©« _ )om zooEEw <wm CL0 -L)u I I U) 0 ° Q7 CA m a E N m N E . N N C C U X T a) U U U U 0 o Z m y c Z Y Z 2 N E y m E O a) m O J O d yL m. U N YO U m m E a N E N Y N m Y E y 0 `m 0 c U v c d c ' o N O U m L t U U C U U C V) C J L m U J = ✓p al o a L yL a N a n O 15 m 3. m m c m m Ea NE2 m a) m E ca i= mew m 2 m> E m v 2 m o ¢ E a 2 Q a) E 2 a c Q E m o m _Q It m m r , O r m c Q ° m a) ) 3 0 ° m a• m ° m ° m m .2: L(° Z`� 2w a) CUOZ m UOQ c UO U�U O d c a O m a °' N `oo `o `U a7 L U U U U m N m N C C C C m 0 U U a) CU m N m m T a) 0 NE a ° rnQ `o m a E 'o >t ° c o3 m ° C O) °— N J E C= N U E a) O cu y a) U m a) C " m E N O c — a) L> E m m L > N E p O d M N m m O 0 N m N 'o W o p d m o d n a v E m m `m m o U c O O. o m ° m E 3 ... w c a) C 3 or N O 4) N C C o 'a D— C O N '° m �O > E m ° c L m Q a) a m ¢ 3 m CL U `o Q w�$ U w a` U c C1 N C C 0 L @> f0 N> 'C N M Vi E O — Y m fJ) ... a) C 0 m O. -6 O C m C m U c U o- o U m c c O a c m L y N �— d a) L v -0 a E SOY E m o Nv ` '0 c — O M E V � Lm. M w o c a ° U m d m E J C L Cf �O C N O J m m N m C N (D C J m m m J m a c m O- C m 0 c m v c c o -° y 7 L m y o J m a) H oo E ° E m m U c o N J a o a0) N g m y o - � o EJO m •� a CD a m m' m m - U > Q o o m CL J a - N o. C m y W 0 M M tm d L CD x � L w m E -) .Q a)o o• m m m Elm mNE Jo mE c °' c v N o `� 4 u C E d E N c c rn L m m p? d m a o c E o. u m m vi N y L N a v v� o a) o � c o o a) € s c m o 2 _ m c o)c >, m o c c 2 0 E o 0) me m E EL w O C C fa > C N N C N N O T C N �U m 'O -oLCmd CA O— m J n — L=E UY2 N m maEo�yLOOO� a) .0 a) 0aa))2c�n.0 -o Lim - 0E�m�000oE ¢a Hm� iri f0 I� N Z Z Z Z LU » 0 } q 0 U x w 0 0 to v k 0 0 k � 0 LL s � 0 0 w CL 0 § 0 0 2 0 a 0 � R LO 0 g EL J 3 } 0 ) ■ LU » 0 } q 0 U x w 0 0 to v k 0 0 k � 0 LL s � 0 0 w CL 0 § 0 0 2 0 a 0 � R \ / /o ) k§ j }} /k {\. tmz%a »[f«& o =Q@« 0 g 3 J 3 } (> ) f� A % A \k { - ) f) ) { $@ � - - )\(jkk CL C CL § _- \% )I)§ a) ~ k() -�)o }[2! \[)e b =ea Q =agq \ / /o ) k§ j }} /k {\. tmz%a »[f«& o =Q@« � � 2 K j k CL 3 CL cu cu \ \ \\ \�k /2) ( B m > a (D Ca �)E-0 e` / - 't L) <0.aca E } 0ca \\ /\\ a) -2 / /\§i 00ooc �c� =m \U j�\ a) ou m )\\\ 0 g 3 J 3 � � 2 K j k CL 3 CL cu cu \ \ \\ \�k /2) ( B m > a (D Ca �)E-0 e` / - 't L) <0.aca E } 0ca \\ /\\ a) -2 / /\§i 00ooc �c� =m \U j�\ a) ou m )\\\ 0 g (Z 2 77 { [) { _ E - )\(jkk � � 2 K j k CL 3 CL cu cu \ \ \\ \�k /2) ( B m > a (D Ca �)E-0 e` / - 't L) <0.aca E } 0ca \\ /\\ a) -2 / /\§i 00ooc �c� =m \U j�\ a) ou m )\\\ October 3, 2006 Robert Harbicht, Councilman City of Arcadia 240 West Huntington Drive Arcadia, CA 91007 RE: STATEMENT READ AT SEPTEMBER 19th CITY COUNCIL MEETING Dear Councilman Harbicht: I have received a copy of your statement read at the September 19th Council meeting by Mayor Chandler and would appreciate it if you would correct the record on the following items: • Arcadia First!, A Coalition for Sensible Growth, did not have anything to do with any aspect of the initiative measures that will appear on the November ballot. We did not circulate petitions, we did not submit signatures and we most certainly did not write the ballot arguments as you stated. Arcadia First! has 4,300 members and supporters from all across the City of Arcadia. You have seen their names in the more than 3,000 comment forms that Arcadia First! has submitted to the City over the past fourteen months and countless more have been submitted by our members and supporters directly to the City. A review of the administrative record on the proposed regional mall would verify this information. ■ Like your own city manager or the Chamber of Commerce Executive Director, Arcadia First! Executive Director Berretta Reade was hired by Arcadians to do a job and where she, your city manager or the Chamber of Commerce Executive Director live had nothing to do with getting their jobs. For the record, Berretta and her family have lived in Reseda, CA since 1988, not Santa Monica, CA as mentioned in your statement. Finally, Bernetta is not now, nor has she ever been an employee of Westfield. She was hired by, and is now managed by, the Arcadia First! Executive Committee. Also, Arcadia First! has received contributions from dozens of community members and has always acknowledged that Westfield supports us as well. This breadth of support is reflected by the Executive Committee of Arcadia First! which is made up of Arcadia residents and business owners. Westfield has one seat, and one vote, on the Executive Committee. Page Two October 3, 2006 Councilman Harbicht I hope you will enter this factual information into the record so that Arcadians looking to you for accurate information can be assured they have it. Please be sure to call our office should you have any further questions about our organization or work in opposition to the proposed regional mall at Santa Anita Racetrack. As a community organization we are always available to you, City staff and fellow Arcadia residents. Thank you. Sincerely, lf"/'// 9, It Paul Paquette Arcadia First! Member Cc: Mayor Chandler Members of the City Council Los Angeles Times Pasadena Star News Arcadia Weekly MountainView News San Marino Tribune Chinese Daily News Arcadia First! Executive Committee