Press Alt + R to read the document text or Alt + P to download or print.
This document contains no pages.
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 1STAFF REPORT
Development Services Department
DATE: January 8, 2013
TO: Honorable Chairman and Planning Commission
FROM: Jim Kasama, Community Development Administrator
By: Lisa L. Flores, Senior Planner
Tim Schwehr, Associate Planner
SUBJECT: LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. LLA 12 -03; CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
NO. CUP 11 -18; ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. ADR 11 -29;
AND MODIFICATION NO. MP 12 -10 FOR THREE NEW OFFICE
BUILDINGS TOTALING 64,255 SQUARE FEET, TWO RESTAURANTS
WITHIN THE NEW BUILDINGS TOTALING 4,600 SQUARE FEET, AND
A NEW FOUR -LEVEL PARKING STRUCTURE AT 125 W.
HUNTINGTON DRIVE & 161 COLORADO PLACE.
Recommendation: Conditional Approval
SUMMARY
The project site consists of two parcels totaling 203,277 square -feet in area. The parcel
at 125 W. Huntington Drive is developed with a three -story, 60,811 square -foot,
professional office building constructed in 1978. There are 240 parking spaces on the
site. The parcel at 161 Colorado Place was the site of a motel that was demolished in
2005. The site has since been vacant. Both properties are zoned C -2, General
Commercial with a Downtown Overlay that allows a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of 1.0 and a
maximum building height of forty -five feet (45') or four (4) stories.
The proposed project requires approval of a Lot Line Adjustment to merge the two
existing parcels into one parcel; A Conditional Use Permit and Architectural Design
Review approval to construct three, three -story office buildings (two medical and one
general office) totaling 64,255 square -feet with two restaurant areas within the new
buildings totaling 4,600 square -feet, and a 163,468 square -foot, four - level, 400 -space
parking structure; and approval of four Zoning Modifications.
It is recommended that the Planning Commission approve th,_ se applications, subject to
the conditions listed in this staff report.
BACKGROUND
APPLICANT:
LOCATION:
REQUESTS:
Pacific Design Group, Architect
125 W. Huntington Drive & 161 Colorado Place
Lot Line Adjustment No. LLA 12 -03; Conditional Use Permit No. CUP
11 -18; Architectural Design Review No. ADR 11 -29; and Modification
No. MP 12 -10 for three new office buildings totaling 64,255 square feet,
two restaurants within the new buildings totaling 4,600 square feet, and
a new four -level parking structure.
SITE AREA: 203,277 square -feet (4.67 acres) - as a condition of approval, a right -of-
way dedication will reduce the site area to 200,085 square -feet (4.59
acres).
FRONTAGES: The subject properties have a combined 888 -foot frontage on Colorado
Place /Huntington Drive, 250 -foot frontage on San Rafael Road, and 74-
foot frontage on San Juan Drive.
EXISTING LAND USE & ZONING:
The property at 125 W. Huntington Drive is developed with a three -story, 60,811
square -foot, professional office building constructed in 1978. There are 240
parking spaces on the site. The property at 161 Colorado Place was the site of a
motel that was demolished in 2005. The site has since been vacant. Both
properties are zoned C -2, General Commercial with a Downtown Overlay that
allows a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of 1.0 and a maximum building height of forty -
five feet (45') or four (4) stories.
SURROUNDING LAND USES & ZONING:
North: Single- family Residential, zoned R -1 and Multiple - family Residential,
zoned R -3
South: Santa Anita Park, zoned S -1 and R -1; & 100 to 1 Cocktail Lounge and
Santa Anita Inn, zoned C -2 with Downtown Overlay
East: General Office Uses & Citizens Bank, zoned C -2 with Downtown Overlay
West: Pepper's Restaurant, zoned C -2 with Downtown Overlay
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION:
Commercial with a Downtown Overlay (1.0 FAR) — The Commercial designation
is intended to permit a wide range of commercial uses which serve both
neighborhood and citywide markets. The designation allows a broad array of
commercial enterprises, including restaurants, durable goods sales, food stores,
lodging, professional offices, specialty shop ', indoor and outdoor recreational
facilities, and entertainment uses.
LLA 12 -03, CUP 11 -18, ADR 11 -29, & MP 12 -10
125 W. Huntington Dr. & 161 Colorado PI.
January 8, 2013
Page 2 of 16
The subject properties are within the Downtown focus area as described in the
General Plan. The General Plan states the extension of the Downtown focus
area north and west along Huntington Drive and Colorado Place are designated
Commercial with an FAR overlay of 1.0 to allow a modest increase in
development intensity to encourage owners to pursue private redevelopment
efforts that will provide additional hospitality uses and office space to enhance
the function and appearance of this corridor.
In February 2005, a 78 -unit senior condominium project was approved by the City
Council through a CUP (appeal) at 161 Colorado Place (CUP 04 -14 & Resolution 6460).
After approval of this project, the existing motel at this property was demolished in
preparation for construction. A one -year extension of the senior condominium project
approval was granted by the Planning Commission in 2006 and in 2007, however the
project was never constructed and the approvals expired in January of 2008.
In 2010 as part of the General Plan update, the C -2 zoning and Commercial land use
designation of the two subject properties were amended to include a Downtown
Overlay, which increased the floor area ratio (FAR) from 0.5 to 1.0, and increased the
maximum height limit from three stories and 40 feet, to four stories and 45 feet.
DISCUSSION
The applicant is proposing a lot line adjustment to merge two parcels into one parcel,
and to develop the combined property with two new medical office buildings, one new
general office building, and a new four -level parking structure. The proposed project has
a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of 0.62 in lieu of the maximum 1.0 FAR permitted by the
zoning code. Each of the new buildings are three stories in height in lieu of the
maximum four stories allowed, and all structures comply with the maximum 45' -0"
height restriction. The existing 60,811 square -foot, three -story general office building at
125 W. Huntington Drive will be preserved and is currently occupied by Worley Parsons
(Engineering Firm). The existing surface parking at 125 W. Huntington Drive will be
reconfigured, and a small amount of surface parking will be added at 161 Colorado
Place for a total of 165 surface parking spaces between the two parcels. The proposal
is subject to a Conditional Use Permit because it includes restaurant uses and buildings
of more than 20,000 square -feet on a site that is within 100 feet of residentially -zoned
property.
The project requires a City right -of -way dedication of 3,192 square feet (see Exhibit D)
thereby reducing the lot area to 200,085 square feet. The right -of -way dedication is
being required by the City's Engineering Services Division for a traffic improvement
project to replace the existing transition lane at the Huntington Drive /Colorado Place
intersection with a dedicated westbound and southbound lane.
The proposed development involves three phases. In phase 1, the vacant lot at 161
Colorado Place will be developed with a 163,468 square -foot, four -level 400 -space
parking structure, a 19,995 square -foot, three -story medical office building, and a three -
story, 19,441 square -foot medical office building with 3,000 square -feet of ground floor
LLA 12 -03, CUP 11 -18, ADR 11 -29, & MP 12 -10
125 W. Huntington Dr. & 161 Colorado PI.
January 8, 2013
Page 3 of 16
restaurant area. This phase of the project will also include a new driveway entrance
from San Juan Drive, 26 additional surface parking spaces, new landscaping,
walkways, and outdoor patio areas.
In phase 2, minor changes to the surface parking lot and landscaped areas around the
existing 60,811 square -foot, three -story office building at 125 W. Huntington Drive will
be completed in preparation for phase 3. These changes include restriping and
reconfiguring of the surface parking lot, installation of new landscaping, and eliminating
the surface parking at the southeast corner of the property (the location of the new
building no. 4). The existing office building will remain.
In phase 3, a new, three -story, 24,819 square -foot general office building with 1,600
square -feet of ground floor restaurant area will be constructed at the southeast corner of
125 W. Huntington Drive.
The existing 60,811 square -foot office building currently occupied by Worley Parsons
(an Engineering Firm) will remain and continue to be occupied by this use and /or any
other general office use. The two new medical buildings would be available to various
medical uses. The interior floor plans would be permitted to be modified based on the
leasing demand. The new general office building will be available to general office uses
and similarly the floor plans would be based on demand.
The restaurant spaces would be limited to the areas designated on the floor plans (refer
to the architectural plans). The developer /property owner does not have specific
restaurant tenants at this time. The outdoor patio areas will be required to remain
common seating areas for all office building tenants and patrons to use, and would not
be allowed to be designated for the exclusive use of the restaurants. Designation of the
outdoor patio areas specifically for restaurant use would require the developer to supply
additional parking for expansion of the restaurant areas. The owner's preference is that
the outdoor areas be utilized by everyone and not just the patrons of a restaurant.
Modifications
The applicant is requesting the following four Modifications from the City's Zoning Code:
1. To allow two trash enclosures to be placed within the required 20 -foot rear yard
setback (i.e., setback from the north property line) at 8 -feet and 14 -feet (AMC
Sec. 9263.2.6).
2. To allow windows in the new buildings and openings in the parking structure to
face the residential properties to the north (AMC Sec. 9269.10).
3. To allow 5 designated loading spaces in lieu of 13 spaces required (AMC Sec.
9320.11.2).
4. To allow for a 7' -8" front yard setback for building no. 2 and a 4' -2" front yard
setback for building no. 3 in lieu of the 35' -0" special setback along this block of
Colorado Place (AMC Sec. 9263.6.6).
LLA 12 -03, CUP 11 -18, ADR 11 -29, & MP 12 -10
125 W. Huntington Dr. & 161 Colorado PI.
January 8, 2013
Page 4 of 16
The first Modification would allow two new trash and recyclables enclosures to encroach
into the required 20' -0" rear yard setback (i.e., setback from the north property line).
The two enclosures are proposed to be north of the surface parking lot at 125 West
Huntington Drive. There is currently an existing trash and recyclables enclosure at the
northeast corner of 125 West Huntington Drive that is setback 14' -0" from the north
property line. This enclosure is substandard in size and located within a required
driveway visibility area. The proposal is to replace this enclosure with a new, larger
enclosure placed at 8' -0" from the north property line (labeled enclosure no. 3 on the
site plan). Another trash enclosure is proposed at 14 -feet from the north property line
(labeled enclosure no. 2 on the site plan), which is away from the north property line as
much as is possible if the enclosure is to be located on the north side of the surface
parking lot. Both enclosures will be completely enclosed and covered with a roof. It is
recommended that a Modification be granted to allow enclosure no. 2 at the proposed
location, with the condition that no waste or recyclables material from the on -site
restaurants be deposited in these bins; the odor from restaurant waste is generally
greater than from office waste. It is also recommended that this Modification request be
granted for enclosure no. 2 as an appropriate improvement of a lot. However, it is
recommended that a Modification not be granted for enclosure no. 3. There are several
locations outside of the required setback and driveway visibility areas that can
accommodate a new enclosure. A condition of approval is recommended requiring
enclosure no. 3 to be relocated outside of the required setback and the driveway
visibility areas.
The second Modification would allow windows and parking structure openings to face
the residential property to the north. The C -2 zoning code prohibits any window
openings, balconies, decks, open stairways, or elevated walkways to face abutting
residentially -zoned properties, unless the windows or openings are more than 6' -6"
above the floor level., The three new office buildings are setback a significant distance
from residentially -zoned properties to the north; more than is required by the Zoning
Code, and the existing office building at 125 W. Huntington Drive already has windows
that face these same residential properties. In staffs opinion, limiting north facing
windows to greater than 6' -6" above the finished floor levels would adversely affect the
architectural appearance of the buildings. The parking structure openings facing the
residential properties will be screened by the existing large trees on the residential
properties and by new trees that will be installed as part of this project. The north
portion of the parking structure will be tiered away from the adjacent residential
properties and the openings on this side of the structure are limited in size, which will
help to minimize impacts on the adjacent residential properties. In contrast, not allowing
openings on the north wall of the structure would result in a large concrete wall facing
the residential properties. It is recommended that this Modification be approved as an
appropriate improvement of a lot.
The third Modification would allow five designated loading spaces for merchandise,
supplies, deliveries, etc. in lieu of 13 spaces required. The C -2 zoning regulations
require one designated loading space for every 10,000 square -feet of gross floor area.
This requirement is not differentiated by use, and given thaX the site will consist primarily
LLA 12 -03, CUP 11 -18, ADR 11 -29, & MP 12 -10
125 W. Huntington Dr. & 161 Colorado PI.
January 8, 2013
Page 5 of 16
of professional and medical offices, the developer anticipates a much lesser need for
loading areas than if this was a similar -sized retail project. It is recommended that this
Modification be approved as an appropriate improvement of a lot.
The fourth Modification would allow the two medical buildings to encroach into the 35' -0"
Special setback along Colorado Place (75' -0" from the centerline of the street). The City
Engineer has reviewed the proposal and has no objections to the proposed
encroachments into this Special setback. The proposed front setbacks will be
consistent with the existing office building at 125 West Huntington Drive and the new
general office building proposed for the southeast corner of the site. There is no
Special setback along this portion of West Huntington Drive. It is recommended that
this Modification be approved to promote uniformity of development.
General Plan Consistency
The Arcadia General Plan has established goals and policies for a land use planning
framework based on the land use pattern that has evolved over time, and a "vision" for
the City's future growth and development.
The Land Use and Community Design Element goals promote balanced growth and
development and encourage redevelopment of existing commercial properties to
provide new hospitality uses and office space, and to enhance the function and
appearance of the major commercial corridors. This is to be achieved by encouraging
buildings to be oriented to the pedestrian and the street, and promoting architecture that
uses high - quality, and enduring building materials. The proposed project is consistent
with these policies and goals.
Architectural Design
The three new buildings are modern in style and feature silver and white aluminum
composite panels, blue -green colored spandrel glass, limestone veneer, and aluminum
window and door frames. The proposed materials, colors, and details are characteristic
of modern commercial office buildings. The parking structure will feature gray concrete
walls with two -inch reveals as architectural details. The south, east, and west sides of
the parking structure also include decorative metal guardrails. The openings facing the
residential properties to the north have been minimized, so that guardrails are not
necessary. Planter boxes with cascading landscaping are also proposed for portions of
the top level of the parking structure. A limestone veneered wall, metal staircase, and a
walkway connect the medical buildings to the parking structure.
Site Planning and Landscaping
The buildings are proposed to be very close to the Huntington Drive /Colorado Place
frontage with parking areas located at the rear of the buildings. This configuration is
preferable to other alternatives both aesthetically and functionally. Placing the new
office buildings along the south frontage orients the development to the street and
aligns the buildings with those of the adjacent properties along this commercial corridor.
Placing the parking to the rear of the buildings ensures the parking areas will not act as
LLA 12 -03, CUP 11 -18, ADR 11 -29, & MP 12 -10
125 W. Huntington Dr. & 161 Colorado PI.
January 8, 2013
Page 6 of 16
an obstacle between the buildings and the Huntington Drive /Colorado Place corridor,
and avoids the unattractive, "sea -of- parking" appearance typical of older strip
commercial development.
A detailed conceptual landscape plan has been designed by Wieneke & Associates for
the entire site. New landscaping is proposed around the perimeter of the office
buildings, parking structure, and surface parking Tots. The new trees between the
parking structure and the adjacent residential properties will be 36 -inch box trees to
improve the effectiveness of the landscape screening.
Parking and Traffic
The proposal provides for 565 parking spaces; 400 parking spaces within a four -level
parking structure, and 165 surface parking spaces. This meets the parking requirement
for the three new buildings and existing office building to remain, which have a parking
requirement of 564 spaces. An analysis of the parking calculation is shown below in
Table 1:
Table 1 - Parking Requirement Calculation
Use Area in sq. ft Parking Requirement No. of Spaces Required
General Office 84,030 4 spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. 336 spaces
Medical Office 36,436 5 spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. 182 spaces
Restaurant 4,600 10 spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. 46 spaces
Total: 564 spaces
The proposal provides 30 bicycles lockers and 27 bicycle rack spaces. This exceeds
the City's bicycle parking requirement of 28 bicycles spaces for this development; one
bicycle space for every 20 required parking spaces. The 30 bicycle lockers are divided
into groups of ten and located next to each of the three new buildings. The bicycle racks
are divided into groups of nine and placed at the north and east perimeter of the existing
office building.
A Traffic Impact Analysis was prepared by Linscott Law & Greenspan (LLG) to forecast
peak hour vehicle trip generation, anticipate distribution of vehicle trips, and analyze
existing intersection /corridor operations. The following four intersections were studied:
1. Colorado Place /San Juan Drive
2. Colorado Place /Huntington Drive
3. Santa Clara Street/Huntington Drive
4. Santa Anita Avenue /Huntington Drive
The San Rafael /Huntington Drive intersection was not selected for analysis because
this intersection will be limited to westbound /right -turn and southbound /right -turn
movements (i.e., eastbound /left -turn F,, 'd southbound /left -turn movements will be
precluded in the future by a raised mediae).
LLA 12 -03, CUP 11 -18, ADR 11 -29, & MP 12 -10
125 W. Huntington Dr. & 161 Colorado PL
January 8, 2013
Page 7 of 16
Based on the Traffic Impact Analysis, the proposed project is expected to generate 147
additional vehicle trips during the AM peak hours (7:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m.), 186 trips
during the PM peak hours (4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m.), and 1,866 total trips on a typical
weekday. It was concluded that the proposed project will not create significant traffic
impacts at any of the studied intersections, and the levels -of- service (LOS) will not
decrease.
Another traffic- related impact that was analyzed by staff is the construction truck trips.
Approximately, 2,070 truck trips will be needed to haul the 20,071 cubic yards of earth
that is proposed to be exported from the site. This does not include any truck trips to
haul away construction debris and waste materials. According to the City Engineer, the
number of truck trips will not impact the LOS on the area streets and intersections.
However, depending on the haul route, staff is proposing to have the ability through a
condition of approval to limit the hauling activity to off-peak hours to prevent potential
conflicts at busy intersections or with school traffic.
FINDINGS
Section 9275.1.2 of the Arcadia Municipal Code requires that for a Conditional Use
Permit to be granted, it must be found that all of the following prerequisite conditions
can be satisfied:
1. That the granting of such Conditional Use Permit will not be detrimental to the
public health or welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in such zone or
vicinity.
A commercial office development and restaurants are consistent with the Zoning
and General Plan Land Use Designations of the site and will not conflict with the
other existing uses at the site, or in the neighborhood. The proposed Zoning
Modifications are minor and will not have a significant impact on the surrounding
properties. An Initial Study was prepared to determine if there would be any
potential impacts from the proposed project. A detailed review is included in the
Mitigated Negative Declaration, traffic study, air quality study, noise study,
greenhouse gas study, lighting and photometric light analysis, load calculations for
the sewer system, and the Traffic Impact Analysis. With 23 mitigation measures
incorporated into the project, the proposed project will not be detrimental to the
public health or welfare or injurious to the property.
2. That the use applied for at the location indicated is properly one for which a
Conditional Use Permit is authorized.
In the C -2, General Commercial Zones, a building with more than 20,000 square -
feet of gross floor area and within 100 feet of residentially -zoned property is allowed
with an approved Conditional Use Permit per Section 9263.6.7 of the Arcadia
Municipal Code. And, restaurant uses are allowed with an approved Conditional
Use Permit per Section 9275.1.53.5 of the Arcadia Municipal Code.
LLA 12 -03, CUP 11 -18, ADR 11 -29, & MP 12 -10
125 W. Huntington Dr. & 161 Colorado PI.
January 8, 2013
Page 8 of 16
3. That the site for the proposed use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate
said use, and all yards, spaces, walls, fences, parking, loading, landscaping, and
other features required to adjust said use with the land and uses in the
neig hborhood.
Based on the proposal, the projected parking availability, and the on -site circulation,
the site is adequate for the proposed development.
4. That the site abuts streets and highways adequate in width and pavement type to
carry the kind of traffic generated by the proposed use.
A Traffic Impact Analysis was prepared by Linscott Law & Greenspan (LLG) to
forecast peak hour vehicle trip generation, anticipate distribution of vehicle trips,
and analyze existing intersection /corridor operations. It was concluded that the
proposed project will not create significant traffic impacts at any of the studied
intersections, that the levels -of- service (LOS) will not decrease, and that the
adjacent streets are adequate for the type of traffic that is to be generated by the
proposed project.
5. That the granting of such Conditional Use Permit will not adversely affect the
comprehensive General Plan.
The proposed development is a commercial use that is consistent with the General
Plan Land Use Designation of the site.
The proposed project satisfies each prerequisite condition.
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the
Development Services Department prepared the attached Initial Study and Mitigated
Negative Declaration for the proposed project. The project will have less -than-
significant impacts with mitigation measures for the following areas: Aesthetics, Air
Quality, Biological Resources, Geology and Soils, Hazards and Hazardous Materials,
Hydrology and Water Quality, Noise, Transportation/Traffic, and Utilities and Service
Systems. With mitigations incorporated into the project, the impacts will be reduced to
Tess than significant levels. A detailed review is included in the Initial Study. The
mitigation measures have been added as conditions of approval (Condition nos. 16 -38)
for the project. The City has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration and a Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP).
The Initial Study /Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration was
circulated for public review, for a period of 20 days (December 17, 2012 to January 7,
2013). CEQA also requires the lead agency (City of Arcadia) to specify the location and
custodian of the documents and other materials which constitute the record of
proceedings upon which the lead agency's decision is based. These documents were
made available at Arcadia City Hall and at the Arcadia Public Library.
LLA 12 -03, CUP 11 -18, ADR 11 -29, & MP 12 -10
125 W. Huntington Dr. & 161 Colorado PI.
January 8, 2013
Page 9 of 16
PUBLIC NOTICE /COMMENTS
Public hearing notices for this item were mailed on December 13, 2012 to the property
owners and tenants of those properties that are located within 300 feet of the subject
property — see the attached radius map. Pursuant to the provisions of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the public hearing notice was published in the Arcadia
Weekly on December 17, 2012, including the Notice of Intent to Adopt a Negative
Declaration, which was filed with the L.A. County Recorder's Office for the required 20-
day posting on December 13, 2012.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Planning Commission approve Lot Line Adjustment No. LLA
12 -03; Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 11 -18; Architectural Design Review No. ADR
11 -29; and Modification No. MP 12 -10 subject to the following conditions:
1. Prior to issuance of a building permit, a lot consolidation of the subject lots must be
recorded through a Certificate of Compliance by the Los Angeles County
Recorder's Office for the proposed development.
2. There shall be no hospitals, urgent care clinics, or emergency services permitted
under this Conditional Use Permit.
3. Trash enclosure no. 3 (proposed at the northeast corner of the site at 8' -0" from the
north property line) shall be relocated outside the required 20' -0" rear yard setback.
The new location shall be subject to the approval of the Development Services
Director, or designee. Trash enclosure no. 2 (proposed within the required 20' -0"
rear yard setback) shall not be used for the disposal of any restaurant waste.
4. The on -site restaurants shall be limited to business hours of 6:00 a.m. to 10:00
p.m., every day.
5 No live music or entertainment is approved under this Conditional Use Permit, and
any live music, entertainment, karaoke, etc. shall require a separate Conditional
Use Permit.
6. The shrubs that are located immediately adjacent to both sides of the Colorado
Place driveway, and the western -most tree (i.e., the tree located immediately east
of the subject driveway) shall be removed. The shrubs located adjacent to the
existing monument sign and easterly driveway (i.e. the monument sign that is
located in front of the existing Worley Parson's building entrance) shall be lowered
or removed so as to provide a clear line of sight in compliance with the City's
driveway visibility requirements.
7. An additional roadway dedication is requested on Colorado Place. The developer
shall contact the Engineering Division for the specific dimensions of the dedication.
The existing monument sign will need to be removed from its current location prior
to accepting the dedication.
LLA 12 -03, CUP 11 -18, ADR 11 -29, & MP 12 -10
125 W. Huntington Dr. & 161 Colorado PI.
January 8, 2013
Page 10 of 16
8. The Applicant shall coordinate with South California Edison to install a streetlight
on Colorado Place and on San Juan Drive with underground circuits per City
Standard 805 -1. The proposed location shall be reviewed and approved by the
City Engineer or designee.
9. The Applicant shall close off the existing driveways that are not proposed to be
used off of Colorado Place and construct new curb, gutter, and sidewalk.
10. The Applicant shall submit a Standard Urban Stormwater Mitigation Plan
(SUSMP), and comply with the following Best Management Practices:
• Infiltration systems (e.g. infiltration trenches /swales, grass filter strips, porous
pavement)
• Bio- Filtration /Bio Retention Systems (e.g. Detention basins, bioswales, etc.)
• Stormwater capture and Re -use (e.g. cisterns and rain barrels)
• Mechanical /Hydrodynamic Units (e.g. fossil filters, catch basin inserts)
• Combination of any items listed above
11. All City requirements regarding disabled access and facilities, occupancy limits,
building safety, health code compliance, emergency equipment, environmental
regulation compliance, and parking and site design shall be complied with to the
satisfaction of the Building Official, City Engineer, Community Development
Administrator, Fire Marshal, and Public Works Services Director. Any changes to
the facilities or structures may be subject to required issuance of permits and
having fully detailed plans submitted to the City for plan check review and
approval.
12. The uses approved by these applications shall be operated and maintained in a
manner that is consistent with the proposal and plans submitted and approved;
and shall be subject to periodic inspections, after which the provisions of this
approval may be adjusted after due notice to address any adverse impacts to the
adjacent streets, rights -of -way, and /or the neighboring businesses, residents, or
properties.
13. Noncompliance with the plans, provisions and conditions of approval shall be
grounds for immediate suspension or revocation of any approvals, which could
result in the closing of the on -site businesses.
14. The applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Arcadia and
its officers, employees, and agents from and against any claim, action, or
proceeding against the City of Arcadia, its officers, employees or agents to attack,
set aside, void, or annul any approval or condition of approval of the City of
Arcadia concerning this project and /or land use decision, including but not limited
to any approval or condition of approval of the City Council, Plannir�` Commission,
or City Staff, which action is brought within the time period provided for in
Government Code Section 66499.37 or other provision cf law applicable to this
project or decision. The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim,
LLA 12 -03, CUP 11 -18, ADR 11 -29, & MP 12 -10
125 W. Huntington Dr. & 161 Colorado PI.
January 8, 2013
Page 11 of 16
action, or proceeding concerning the project and /or land use decision and the City
shall cooperate fully in the defense of the matter. The City reserves the right, at its
own option, to choose its own attorney to represent the City, its officers,
employees, and agents in the defense of the matter.
15. Approval of these applications shall not become effective unless the property
owner(s), applicant(s), and /or restaurant owner(s) and operator(s) have executed
and filed an Acceptance Form available from the Development Services
Department to indicate awareness and acceptance of these conditions of approval.
Mitigation Measures as Conditions of Approval
The following conditions are found in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
(MMRP). They are recorded here to facilitate review and implementation. More
information on the timing and responsible parties for these mitigation measures is
detailed in the MMRP.
16. The lights within the parking structure shall be placed on a dimmable switch and
the lights on each level shall be dimmed from 11:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m., every day to
avoid disturbances to the adjacent residential uses. The Development Services
Director or designee shall also review the parking lot lights and determine which
ones are to be turned -off during non - business hours. The developer and the City
shall assess the brightness from the lights prior to occupancy of any part of the
project.
17. The flood lights or area lighting needed for construction activities shall be placed
and directed so as to avoid disturbance to the adjacent residential uses.
18. Low -VOC Architectural Coatings. The applicant is to use low -VOC architectural
coating for all buildings, including the proposed parking structure. At a minimum,
all architectural coatings shall comply with the most recent standards in SCAQMD
Rule 1113 — Architectural Coatings. In addition, architectural coatings should not
be applied to more than 10,500 square feet of construction per day, including both
interior and exterior surfaces.
19. On -site equipment shall not be left idling when not in use.
20. Staging areas for heavy -duty construction equipment shall be located as far as
possible from sensitive receptors (i.e. adjacent residential uses). A staging plan
showing where the construction trucks will line -up and a truck route map shall be
provided to the Development Services Director or designee for review and
approval prior to construction.
21. Minimization of Disturbance. Construction contractors shall minimize the area
disturbed by clearing, grading, earth moving, or excavatici operations to prevent
excessive amounts of dust.
LLA 12 -03, CUP 11 -18, ADR 11 -29, & MP 12 -10
125 W. Huntington Dr. & 161 Colorado PI.
January 8, 2013
Page 12 of 16
22. Soil Treatment. Construction contractors shall treat all graded and excavated
material, exposed soil areas, and active portions of the construction site, including
unpaved on -site roadways to minimize fugitive dust. Treatment shall include, but
not necessarily be limited to, periodic watering, application of environmentally safe
soil stabilization materials, and /or roll compaction as appropriate. Watering shall
be done as often as necessary, and at least twice daily, preferably late in the
morning and after work is done for the day.
23. Soil Stabilization. Construction contractors shall monitor all graded and /or
excavated inactive areas of the construction site at least weekly for dust
stabilization. Soil stabilization methods, such as water and roll compaction, and
environmentally safe dust control materials, shall be applied to portions of the
construction site that are inactive for over four days. If no further grading or
excavation operations are planned for the area, the area shall be seeded and
watered until landscape growth is evident, or periodically treated with
environmentally safe dust suppressants, to prevent excessive fugitive dust.
24. No Grading During High Winds. Construction contractors should stop all clearing,
grading, earth moving, and excavation operations during periods of high winds (20
miles per hour or greater, as measured continuously over a one -hour period).
25. Street Sweeping. Construction contractors shall sweep all on -site driveways and
adjacent streets and roads at least once per day, preferably at the end of the day,
if visible soil material is carried over the adjacent streets and roads.
26. A qualified biologist shall conduct nesting bird surveys in areas with suitable
habitat prior to all construction or site preparation activities that would occur during
the nesting and breeding season for native bird species (typically March 1 through
August 15). The survey area shall include all potential bird nesting areas within
200 feet of any disturbance. The survey shall be conducted no more than three
days prior to commencement of activities (e.g. grading).
If active nests of bird species protected by the MBTA and /or California Fish and
Game code (which, together, apply to all native nesting bird species) are present in
the impact area or within 200 feet of the impact area, a temporary buffer fence
shall be erected a minimum of 200 feet around the nest site. This temporary buffer
may be greater or lesser depending on the bird species and type of disturbance, as
determined by the biologist and /or applicable regulatory agency permits.
Clearing and /or construction within temporarily fenced areas shall be postponed or
halted until juveniles have fledged and there is no evidence of a second nesting
attempt. The biologist shall serve as a construction monitor during those periods
when disturbance activities will occur near active nest areas to ensure that no
inadvertent impacts on these nests will occur.
27. The construction crew shall be required to use Best Management Practices
(BMPs) and standards to control and reduce erosion. These measures could
LLA 12 -03, CUP 11 -18, ADR 11 -29, & MP 12 -10
125 W. Huntington Dr. & 161 Colorado PI.
January 8, 2013
Page 13 of 16
include, but are not limited to protection of all finished graded slopes from erosion
using such techniques as erosion control matting and hydroseeding or other
suitable measures.
28. When working near catch basins, each basin shall be covered and sealed prior to
the start of construction.
29. In accordance with the California Code of Regulations (Title 8, Section 1541), if
any construction, excavations, and new utility lines are proposed near or crossing
existing high pressure pipelines, natural gas /petroleum pipelines, electrical lines
greater than 60,000 volts, and other high priority lines, it is required that the
owner /operator of the line(s) be notified and the locations of subsurface lines be
identified prior to any ground disturbance for excavation. Coordination, approval,
and monitoring by the owner /operator of the line would avoid damage to high
priority lines and prevent the creation of hazards to the surrounding area.
30. The Applicant shall prepare and submit a final drainage plan to the City for
approval by the City. The drainage plan shall include post development designs
that ensure adequate capacity to accommodate and prevent flooding of the site
and adjacent roadways.
31. Construction Timing — Construction activities shall be limited to the hours between
7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday. Construction equipment
maintenance shall be limited to the same hours.
32. Construction Equipment — If electrical service is available within 150 feet, electrical
power shall be used to run air compressors and similar power tools. Internal
combustion engines should be equipped with a muffler of a type recommended by
the manufacturer. No internal combustion engine shall be operated on the project
site without the manufacturer - recommended muffler. All diesel equipment m tnt cto be
operated with closed engine doors and should be equipped factory-
recommended mufflers. Construction equipment that continues to generate noise
that exceeds 70 dBA at the project boundaries should be shielded with a barrier
that meets a sound transmission class (STC) rating of 25.
For all construction activity on the project site, additional noise attenuation
techniques shall be employed as needed to ensure that noise remains within levels
allowed by the City of Arcadia noise standards. Such techniques may include, but
are not limited to, the use of sound blankets on noise generating equipment and
the construction of temporary sound barriers between construction sites and
affected uses.
33. The construction contractor shall place all stationary construction equipment so
that emitted noise is directed away from the noise - sensitive receptors. When
feasible, the construction contractor shall locate equipment staging in areas that
will create the greatest distance between construction - related noise sources and
noise sensitive receptors during all project construction.
LLA 12 -03, CUP 11 -18, ADR 11 -29, & MP 12 -10
125 W. Huntington Dr. & 161 Colorado PL
January 8, 2013
Page 14 of 16
34. The construction contractor shall limit haul truck activities to the same hours
specified for construction. To the extent feasible, haul routes shall not pass
sensitive land uses or residences.
35. Neighbor Notification. Provide notification to residential occupants adjacent to the
project site at least 24 hours prior to initiation of construction activities that could
significantly affect outdoor or indoor living areas. This notification shall include the
anticipated hours and duration of construction and a description of noise reduction
measures. The notification shall include a telephone number for local residents to
call to submit complaints associated with construction noise. The notification shall
be posted on San Juan Drive, Santa Cruz Road, and San Rafael Road adjacent to
the project site, and must be easily viewed from adjacent public areas.
36. The developer shall prepare a haul route plan for trucks hauling earth or
construction materials from the project site to where this material will be disposed.
The plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Arcadia Engineering Services
Division before a grading or building permit is issued by the City, and the City has
the ability to limit any hauling activity to off -peak hours.
37. The developer shall notify the City at least seven (7) days in advance of the
beginning of any earth moving and or truck hauling activities on the site. The City
shall assess the roadway conditions along the haul route and the developer shall
be responsible for any damages caused to the route during the hauling activities.
The developer shall be responsible for repairing any damages identified by the City
prior to occupancy of any part of the project.
38. The existing sewer main on Colorado Place is considered deficient by the City's
Public Works Services Department. A project is under consideration in the City's
Capital Improvement Program for either Fiscal Year 2014 -2015 or 2015 -2016 to
address the current situation. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for the
project, the developer shall perform an area study to determine the impact the
project will have on the capacity of the existing sewer system. This study shall be
used to determine the adequacy of the sewer system and the required fair -share
contribution for this project toward the sewer improvement project. Prior to the
issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the developer shall be required to
construct the necessary improvements if the area study concludes the project will
result in the sewer capacity being exceeded.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
Approval
If the Planning Commission intends to approve this proposal, the Commission should move
to approve Lot Line Adjustment No. LLA 12 -03; Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 11 -18;
Architectural Design Review No. ADR 11 -29; and Modification No. MP 12 -10; state the
supporting findings and environmental determination; and direct staff to prepare a resolution
LLA 12 -03, CUP 11 -18, ADR 11 -29, & MP 12 -10
125 W. Huntington Dr. & 161 Colorado PI.
January 8, 2013
Page 15 of 16
for adoption at the next meeting that incorporates the Commission's decision, specific
determinations and findings, and the conditions of approval.
Denial
If the Planning Commission intends to deny this proposal, the Commission should move
to deny Lot Line Adjustment No. LLA 12 -03; Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 11 -18;
Architectural Design Review No. ADR 11 -29; and /or Modification No. MP 12 -10; state
the finding(s) that the proposal does not satisfy with reasons based on the record; and
direct staff to prepare a resolution incorporating the Commission's decision, and specific
findings for adoption at the next meeting.
If any Planning Commissioner, or other interested party has any questions or comments
regarding this matter prior to the January 8, 2013 hearing, please contact Associate
Planner, Tim Schwehr at (626) 574 -5422 or tschwehraci.arcadia.ca.us, or Senior
Planner, Lisa Flores at (626) 574 -5445 or Iflores(a ci.arcadia.ca.us.
Approved:
Jim sama
C munity Development Administrator
Attachments: Exhibit A Aerial Photo with Zoning Information
Exhibit B Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Air Quality Study Cover Letter & Supplemental Memorandum
Geotechnical Engineering Investigation Submittal Letter &
Conclusions and Recommendations
Standard Urban Stormwater Mitigation Plan Cover Sheet &
Owner's Certification
Greenhouse Gas Study Cover Letter & Supplemental
Memorandum
Noise Study Cover Letter & Supplemental Memorandum
Traffic Impact Analysis Cover Sheet and Conclusions &
Supplemental Memorandum
Exhibit C Lot Line Adjustment Plans
Exhibit D Right -of -Way Dedication Plan
Exhibit E Photos of the subject site and surrounding properties
Exhibit F Architectural Plans
Exhibit G Radius Map
LLA 12 -03, CUP 11 -18, ADR 11 -29, & MP 12 -10
125 W. Huntington Dr. & 161 Colorado PI.
January 8, 2013
Page 16 of 16
R -1
Propose
Location
R -3
R -1
R -1
R -1
R -1
125 W. Huntington Dr. &
161 Colorado PI.
Aerial Photo with Zoning Information
Exhibit A
Exhibit B
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Air Quality Study Cover Letter & Supplemental Memorandum
Geotechnical Engineering Investigation Submittal Letter & Conclusions and
Recommendations
Standard Urban Stormwater Mitigation Plan Cover Sheet & Owner's
Certification
Greenhouse Gas Study Cover Letter & Supplemental Memorandum
Noise Study Cover Letter & Supplemental Memorandum
Traffic Impact Analysis Cover Sheet and Conclusions & Supplemental
Memorandum
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
FOR TWO NEW MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDINGS, A GENERAL OFFICE BUILDING, AND A
FOUR -LEVEL PARKING STRUCTURE AT
161 COLORADO PLACE AND 125 W. HUNTINGTON DRIVE
(Lot Line Adjustment No. LLA 12 -03, Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 11 -17, Modification
Permit No. MP 12 -10, and Architectural Design Review No. ADR 11 -29)
CITY OF
ARC
APPLICANT
Pacific Design Group
Ken Paddock, Senior Project Manager
18071 Irvine Boulevard
Tustin, CA 92780
LEAD AGENCY
City of Arcadia
Development Services Department — Planning Services
Lisa L. Flores, Senior Planner
Tim Schwehr, Assistant Planner
240 W. Huntington Drive
Arcadia, CA 91007
(626) 574 -5445
December 2012
INITIAL STUDY
1. Project Title: Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 11 -18; Lot Line Adjustment No. LLA 12 -03;
Architectural Design Review No. ADR 11 -29; and Modification Application No. MP 12 -10.
2. Lead Agency Name and Address:
City of Arcadia
240 W. Huntington Drive
Arcadia, CA 91006
3. Contact Persons and Phone Number: Lisa Flores, Senior Planner — (626) 574 -5445 and
Tim Schwehr, Assistant Planner — (626) 574 -5422
4. Project Location: 125 W. Huntington Drive & 161 Colorado Place
5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address:
Pacific Design Group — Ken Paddock, Senior Project Architect
18071 Irvine Blvd
Tustin, CA 92780
6. General Plan Designation: Commercial with a Downtown Overlay
7. Zoning: C -2 with a Downtown Overlay
8. Description of Project: (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to
later phases of the project, and any secondary, support, or off -site features necessary for its
implementation. Attach additional sheet(s) if necessary).
A Lot Line Adjustment to merge two (2) parcels into one (1) parcel; approval of a Conditional
Use Permit, Zoning Modifications, and Architectural Design Review to construct the following
new buildings at the subject site. The existing 60,811 square -foot, three -story office building
will remain.
Building 1: A 163,468 square -foot, four -level parking structure
Building 2: A 19,995 square -foot, three -story medical office building
Building 3: A 19,441 square -foot, three -story medical office building with 3,000 square -feet
of ground floor restaurant area
Building 4: A 24,819 square -foot, three -story general office building with 1,600 square -feet of
ground floor restaurant area.
The four (4) requested Modifications from the City's Zoning Code for this project are:
1. To allow the windows in the new buildings and openings in the parking structure to face
the residential properties to the north (AMC Sec. 9263.2.6).
2. To allow five (5) designated loading spaces in lieu of 13 spaces required (AMC Sec.
9269.10).
3. To allow for a 7' -8" front yard setback for Building no. 2 and a 4' -2" front yard setback for
Building no. 3 in lieu of the 35' -0" spec) setback along this block of Colorado Place (AMC
Sec. 9320.11.2).
4. To allow two (2) trash enclosr ryes to be placed within the required 20 -foot rear yard
setback (i.e., from the north property line) at 8 -feet and 14 -feet (AMC Sec. 9263.6.6).
Additionally, the project includes a City right -of -way dedication of 3,192 square feet, thereby
reducing the lot area to 200,085 square feet. The right -of -way dedication is requested by the
City's Engineering Services as part of a future traffic improvement project to add an
Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration
Page 1 of 27 File No: CUP 11 -18, ADR 11 -29, LLA 12 -03, & MP 12 -10
additional westbound transition lane from Huntington Drive to Colorado Place.
9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: (Briefly describe the project's surroundings.)
The subject properties consist of an approximately 1.76 acre property at 161 Colorado Place
that was previously developed with a motel but has been demolished and is currently
undeveloped, and a 2.91 acre property at 125 W. Huntington Drive that is currently
developed with a three -story, 60,811 square -foot, three -story professional office building and
240 space surface parking lot. The properties are zoned General Commercial (C -2) with a
Downtown Overlay.
10. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or
participation agreement):
None.
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
❑ Biological Resources
❑ Greenhouse Gas
Emissions
❑ Land Use / Planning ❑
❑ Population / Housing ❑
❑ Transportation /Traffic ❑
El
El
o
Agriculture Resources
Cultural Resources
Hazards & Hazardous
Materials
Mineral Resources
Public Services
Utilities / Service Systems
Air Quality
Geology / Soils
Hydrology / Water Quality
Noise
Recreation
Mandatory Findings of
Significance
Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 2 of 27
File No: CUP 11 -18, ADR 11 -29, LLA 12 -03, & MP 12 -10
DETERMINATION (To be completed by the Lead Agency):
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
❑ I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a
NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
® I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,
there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been
made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will
be prepared.
❑ I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
❑ I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant" 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
Lisa L. Flores, Senior Planner
Printed Name
Date
?.(lZL12.
City of Arcadia
For
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS:
1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately
supported by the information sources a Lead Agency cites in the parentheses following each
question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources
show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g. the project
falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based
on project- specific factors as well as general standards (e.g. the project will not expose
sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project- specific screening analysis).
2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off -site as well as on -site,
cumulative as well as project - level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as
operational impacts.
3) Once the Lead Agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the
checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than
significant with mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate
if there is substantial evidence that an effect is significant. If there are one or more "Potentially
Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made„ an EIR is required.
Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration
Page 3 of 27 File No: CUP 11 -18, ADR 11 -29, LLA 12 -03, & MP 12 -10
4) "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the
incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact"
to a "Less than Significant Impact." The Lead Agency must describe the mitigation measures,
and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation
measures from Section XVII, "Earlier Analyses," may be cross - referenced).
5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA
process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration.
Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following:
a) Earlier Analyses Used. Identify and state where they are available for review.
b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within
the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal
standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based
on the earlier analysis.
c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures
Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from
the earlier document and the extent to which they address site - specific conditions for the
project.
6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information
sources for potential impacts (e.g. general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a
previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the
page or pages where the statement is substantiated.
7) Supporting Information Sources. A source list should be attached, and other sources used or
individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion.
8) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however,
lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a
project's environmental effects in whatever format is selected.
9) The explanation of each issue should identify:
a) the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and
b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance.
Mitigation Monitoring
Standard Conditions (SC) are existing regulations that are imposed by the City and compliance with
these regulations is largely the responsibility of the project applicant/development. The SCs are not
considered as mitigation measures under CEQA. Rather, they are expected to be implemented as a
matter of course by the City.
Where mitigation measures are required, CEQA law requires the preparation of a mitigation
monitoring and reporting program (MMRP) to monitor the implementation of mitigation measures.
The mitigation measures identified in the attached table has been developed in sufficient detail to
provide the necessary information to identify the party or parties responsible for carrying out the
mitigation measure, when the mitigation will be implemented, and who will verify that the mitigation
has been implemented.
Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 4 of 27 File No: CUP 11 -18, ADR 11 -29, LLA 12 -03, & MP 12 -10
4
VIVO 3LIS4 J33HO FULL
-
t
e i !
j i 1
F
i
nvaoonoioowuia..wiIOW � i
w
DTI $I/6/1.I2iANIAltlid0Y40A
ONIO1I1103OWO 11/$018S33O21dIunman
ONDISVd SONIOl fla 3DdO IVO3
CODE SEARCH CALCULATIONS
ed
FM,* aa�i� �tliraMan s» St
arc -.:
1
1111
1
111 fi t
iiiiif! 1
9
t FR'G'
I
I
l�i'
I
•_[
�(
1
1
J
1. RI le
dill
siill
1!1.1,
.'I
H1'ihh
i
1
{
'
.'lit
i
Si ■c
fj
II
:e�
I
i
i1
4 11
1i1
1 1t
E
1
'���
s
1
•..S
1=
er
lE)1
l
;,1i'11.
' S� 1 :}:
1!
1 kE
i 11�11.1ai
i 1-1,
?l
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
FIRE DEPARTMENT NOTES
Ia
.tt^
,.r 3 11 h - 11
Ii t
1 r.iil
1 i
, .::r:
L`
-1
U
w 1[ 1s • F;
i
i yitti
, : II
ts-•
i�
s ^lit
1s �a
`t
j�
i I �
.,LI
li
i '
t�tl
I li 5
E
1 1,
1 E1
111
E E lill
I
(
�f
E 1 ,1
� � �� 1
l
14
I�
I
,
t�
((tjiiE�
l Dili
1.
it S
111'
ICE ittii IE�
. :ti „a
I
t �
r
E
E
r< I
��
fit
� 1
1 1111
1 �E � .
i i11-
1
t
�( )E
1l!11E
�1
i ;
� f�
1 E I
If
t
1 i" 1
[
' 1
E 1
j1i111f�it!I;
11111
1
' , I ,
) .
S 1 *
•••••••T+ifin4iop.,i wsMw. eIL. MVtm :.u,e:1.0wie<waMIWies.O____.m., n.Mwxpamsl
bANO VONMI3J3VVOitiVld 3.US
MOIK
MO I* Vangt
33(1•31#431:011A MINANOUIMINAWAISII
'6114MISBANI Alt13110Hd OA
ermine 331.4i0 1VNOISS3ACilid 3tIfILDAV1S
ONDIVVgi tormaitne 331diOlV310314
1 A •
giA.A
till!
, ix: ••••.. I
1
oUrs,
NOLLVA313 V0100
031■ Ina
1001111131/100W
37,110111101COISIIIMIMICIMINIDelt1 mat
3111111MILSIMI AMNON OA
ON101M8 331id0 TYNOISSUOVd V onion=
oNopiWOONIaina maim Iv310311
OP iax. 0:1 IR....9..114. • U 4e, 1 ,
•••■•••■•
riorrrJ
llfc
� -
0
K011 OWICIN
011 VItalagaleAltrid01140A
ING 4 - NORTH ELEVATION
~~~~.~.~~�.~.~~.~.-~-~.
t
x x
f 1
11
1
, i
2.04i•Q
W1111
R.140.0.1
11.11.441111111
it
feALL33d8113d
.1111110%
KOS V3YRION/
3711dCOVV7071.1 I/1 PA IMIPCOMPIlif RIO
311 131tONISMNI AMNON OA
°Hipline 33114011%0190310W onion=
ONIMINd VON1011118 301d10 11,31011
I
SOUTHWEST VIEW FROM 3RD LEVEL - PARKING GARAGE
SOUTHWEST VIEW FROM SAN JUAN DR.
•
3 SANTA CRUZ DR.
0
cd
SOUTH VIEW FROM 137 SAN
I
0
I i
I #
III
I
di
I
fc4<
41
z
125 W. HUNTINGTON
2
MI*
Il
IIVedrAti
1177 00731A111740171110/0101fflovAl
oNicrune 3011110 110101116340ild 3$(110(111111
ONMYd ISONMI118 301440 WOICRVI
g
0
9
0
SAN JUAN DR.
3
6
a
SAN JUAN DR.
J. RESTAURANT
11111
0
0_
0
KVA .01 A lo.,4 ...UN .4.1 141 I 4,1. I
Issues:
I. AESTHETICS. Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a
scenic vista?
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
❑ ❑ ❑
The proposed project would not have an adverse effect on a scenic vista. Scenic resources such as
undisturbed or unique vistas, natural or undisturbed areas, or officially recognized areas are not
located on the existing City right -of -way or surrounding area. The San Gabriel Mountains to the
distant north are the most prominent scenic resource that can be viewed from the subject site.
Additionally, no designated scenic highways are located adjacent to or within the view of the subject
right -of -way. Therefore, the proposed project would result in no impact to scenic resources and
views.
b) Substantially damage scenic resources,
including, but not limited to, trees, rock
outcroppings, and historic buildings within a
state scenic highway?
There are no designated scenic highways within the City of Arcadia. The nearest designated State
scenic highway is the Angeles Crest Highway approximately 15 miles away. Therefore, there will be
no impacts to state scenic resources.
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual
character or quality of the site and its
surroundings?
During the construction period, persons traveling on area roadways (e.g. Huntington Drive and
Colorado Place) as well as persons at nearby land uses would have views of the proposed project site
in various stages of site preparation and construction. At times, the disturbed soils and vegetation,
equipment and stocks of materials would be clearly seen. There is no practical way of screening the
entire site from view during this period. However, the City will require standard screened construction
fencing at the project site (chain -link fencing with green material coverings). As such, a temporary
degradation of the project sites visual character would result. However, because of the screened
construction fencing and temporary nature of this effect, it is considered a temporary adverse, but a
less than significant impact.
Additionally, the proposed project will be compatible in terms of uses, scale, and design with the other
existing office building on the subject site, and within the immediate area. It would not detract from
the visual quality of the neighborhood. Based upon the project plans provided by the applicant, the
proposed project would not substantially degrade the visual character of the site and surroundings.
Therefore, the long term impact is considered less than significant.
d) Create a new source of substantial Tight or ❑ ® ❑ ❑
glare which would adversely affect day or
nighttime views in the area?
❑ ❑ ❑
Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration
Page 5 of 27 File No: CUP 11 -18, ADR 11 -29, LLA 12 -03, & MP 12 -10
Less Than •
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Issues: Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
A lighting plan and photometric light analysis was prepared for the proposed project. The Lighting
Plan shows the use of Gardco Gullwing G18, the flat glass lens luminaires that will provide full cutoff
performance and it applies to all lateral angles around the luminaire. These lamps are designed to
minimize lighting impacts on the night sky and would be directed as necessary to provide coverage of
onsite parking and walkway areas. The maximum height of the light post and luminaire is 15 feet,
based upon the City's lighting standards because the site is adjacent to a residentially zoned property.
Additionally, there are no highly reflective elements to the project, such as large expanses of mirrored
glass. However, to ensure there will be no potential impacts to the residential neighbors from the
lights in the parking structure or on the subject site after business hours, the following mitigation
measures will help ensure the impact will be less than significant.
A -1: The lights within the parking structure shall be placed on a dimmable switch and the lights in
each level shall be dimmed from 11:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m., every day to avoid any disturbance to
the adjacent residential uses. The Development Services Director or designee shall also review
the parking lot lights and determine which ones should be turned -off during non - business hours.
The developer and the City shall assess the brightness from the lights prior to occupancy of any
part of the project.
A -2: The flood or area lighting needed for construction activities shall be placed and directed away so
as to avoid any disturbance to the adjacent residential uses.
II. AGRICULTURE AND FOREST RESOURCES.
In determining whether impacts to agricultural
resources are significant environmental effects,
lead agencies may refer to the California
Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site
Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the
California Dept. of Conservation as an optional
model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture
and farmland. In determining whether impacts to
forest resources, including timberland, are
significant environmental effects, lead agencies
may refer to information compiled by the
California Department of Forestry and Fire
Protection regarding the state's inventory of
forest land, including the Forest and Range
Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy
Assessment project; and forest carbon
measurement methodology provided in Forest
protocols adopted by the California Air Resources
Board. Would the project:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland,
or Farmland of Statewide Importance
(Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared
pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and
Monitoring Program of the California
Resources Agency, to non - agricultural use?
❑ ❑ ❑
The City of Arcadia is a developed urban area and contains no Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or
Farmland of Statewide Importance. Therefore, the project would not convert farmland to non-
agricultural use.
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural
use, or a Williamson Act contract?
There is no agricultural use zoning or a Williamson Act contract in the City of Arcadia. Therefore, the
proposed project would not have the above impacts.
❑ ❑ ❑
Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration
Page 6 of 27 File No: CUP 11 -18, ADR 11 -29, LLA 12 -03, & MP 12 -10
Issues:
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause
rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public
Resources Code section 12220(g)),
timberland (as defined by Public Resources
Code section 4526), or timberland zoned
Timberland Production (as defined by
Government Code section 51104(g))?
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
❑ ❑ ❑
The City of Arcadia has no timberland or Timberland Production land, and has no land zoned for forest
land. There is no farmland in the City of Arcadia, and the project will not convert farmland to non-
agricultural use.
d) Result in the Toss of forest land or conversion ❑ ❑ ❑
of forest and to non - forest use?
The proposed development will not result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non -
forest use.
e) Involve other changes in the existing
environment which, due to their location or ❑ ❑ ❑ IZI
nature, could result in conversion of
Farmland, to non - agricultural use or
conversion of forest land to non - forest use?
There is no farmland in the City of Arcadia. Therefore, the project would not convert farmland to non-
agricultural use.
III. AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significance
criteria established by the applicable air quality
management or air pollution control district may
be relied upon to make the following
determinations. Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan?
❑ ❑ ❑
The project site is located within the South Coast Air Basin and is governed by South Coast Air
Quality Management District (SCAQMD). According to the guidelines and the Air Quality Management
Plan (AQMP), a project must conform to the local General Plan and must not result or exceed the
City's projected population growth forecast. The proposed project is consistent with planned
development in the City of Arcadia in that it would not generate additional population growth.
Therefore, the project would have no impact on attainment of air quality or congestion management
plans.
b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute
substantially to an existing or projected air
quality violation?
Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration
Page 7 of 27 File No: CUP 11 -18, ADR 11 -29, LLA 12 -03, & MP 12 -10
Issues:
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
The project would be constructed in three phases, with the first phase consisting of Buildings 2 and 3,
comprising a total of 36,436 square feet of medical offices and 3,000 square feet of restaurant space,
as well as the proposed parking structure (Building 1) and new surface parking, located on the
currently undeveloped northwestern portion of the project site. The second phase would include
rehabilitation of existing parking lots and grading in preparation for the third phase of development.
The third phase would consist of Building 4, including approximately 24,819 square feet of general
professional offices and 1,600 square feet of restaurant space located on existing surface parking on
the southeastern portion of the site.
An Air Quality Impact Study was prepared for the project to estimate project emissions. The site
preparation phase would involve the greatest amount of heavy equipment and the most substantial
generation of fugitive dust. This analysis assumes that there would be a net balance of cut and fill
soil, and that no soil import or export would be required. It was assumed that the project would
comply with South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Rule 403, which identifies
measures to reduce fugitive dust and is required to be implemented at all construction sites located
within the South Coast Air Basin. Therefore, the following standard conditions, which would be
required to reduce fugitive dust in compliance with SCAQMD Rule 403, were included in CaIEEMod for
the site preparation and grading phases of construction.
SC -1: Minimization of Disturbance. Construction contractors shall minimize the area disturbed by
clearing, grading, earth moving, or excavation operations to prevent excessive amount of dust.
SC -2: Soil Treatment. Construction contractors shall treat all graded and excavated material, exposed
soil areas, and active portions of the construction site, including unpaved on -site roadways to
minimize fugitive dust. Treatment shall include, but not necessarily be limited to, periodic
watering, application of environmentally safe soil stabilization materials, and/or roll
compaction as appropriate. Watering shall be done as often as necessary, and at least twice
daily, preferably in the later morning and after work is done for the day.
SC -3: Soil Stabilization. Construction contractors should monitor all graded and /or excavated inactive
areas of the construction site at least weekly for dust stabilization. Soil stabilization methods,
such as water and roll compaction, and environmentally safe dust control materials, shall be
applied to portions of the construction site that are inactive for over four days. If no further
grading or excavation operations are planned for the area, the area shall be seeded and
watered until landscape growth is evident, or periodically treated with environmentally safe
dust suppressants, to prevent excessive fugitive dust.
SC -4: No Grading During High Winds. Construction contractors shall stop all clearing, grading, earth
moving, and excavation operations during periods of high winds (20 miles per hour or greater,
as measured continuously over a one -hour period).
SC -5: Street Sweeping. Construction contractors shall sweep all on -site driveways and adjacent
streets and roads at least once per day, preferably at the end of the day, if visible soil material
is carried over the adjacent streets and roads.
The proposed project would also result in temporary reactive organic (ROG) emissions that would
exceed the recommended South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAGMD) threshold.
However, the proposed mitigation (AQ -1) limiting the total area to which architectural coatings could
be applied on a daily basis would reduce the project's temporary regional air quality impacts to a less
than significant level. The proposed project would not result in any other emissions that would
exceed the recommended South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) operational or
constrw ion thresholds. As such, impacts related to air quality as a result of the proposed project
would be less than significant through the implementation of the following mitigation measures:
14Q -1: Low -VOC Architectural Coatings. The applicant should use low -VOC architectural coating for
all buildings, including the proposed parking structure. At a minimum, all architectural
coatings shall comply with the most recent standards in SCAQMD Rule 1113 — Architectural
Coatings. In addition, architectural coatings should not be applied to no more than 10,500
Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration
Page 8 of 27 File No: CUP 11 -18, ADR 11 -29, LLA 12 -03, & MP 12 -10
Issues:
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
square feet of construction per day, including both interior and exterior surfaces.
AQ -2: On -site equipment shall not be left idling when not in use.
AQ -3: Staging areas for heavy -duty construction equipment shall be located as far as possible from
sensitive receptors (i.e. adjacent residential uses). A staging plan showing where the
construction trucks will be line -up and a truck route map shall be provided to the Development
Services Director or designee for review and approval prior to construction.
c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net
increase of any criteria pollutant for which the
project region is nonattainment under an
applicable federal or state ambient air quality
standard (including releasing emissions
which exceed quantitative thresholds for
ozone precursors)?
The majority of the project- related operational emissions would be due to vehicle trips to and from the
site. The Estimated Operational Emissions (Table 5) in the Air Quality Study prepared by Rincon
Consultants, Inc. (August 2012), indicates the project-generated emissions would not exceed SCAQMD
thresholds for ROG, CO Sox, PM1o, or PM2.5. Therefore, the project's regional air quality impacts,
including impacts related to criteria pollutants, sensitive receptors and violations of air quality
standards would be less than significant.
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial
pollutant concentrations?
There are single- family residences adjacent to the northeast boundary of the project site and north of
the project site across San Juan Drive. According to the Air Quality Study, prepared by Rincon
Consultants, Inc. (August 2012), carbon monoxide is a colorless, poisonous gas that is found in high
concentrations near areas of high traffic volumes, such as enclosed parking structures. The lowest
level of the proposed parking structure would be enclosed, whereas the upper levels of the structure
would be open, for ventilation per the California Building Code. However, the enclosed level of the
structure would include a carbon monoxide alarm, and the upper levels of the parking structure would
be open, which generally provides sufficient ventilation to prevent carbon monoxide levels from
exceeding the California AAQS for 1 -hour carbon monoxide concentration of 23 mg /m3 (equivalent to
20 ppm). Therefore, this impact would be less than significant.
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a
substantial number of people?
The office and restaurant uses would not be expected to create or emit objectionable odors.
Therefore, this impact would be less than significant.
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either
directly or through habitat modifications, on
any species identified as a candidate,
sensitive, or special status species in local or
regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by
the California Department of Fish and Game
or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration
Page 9 of 27 File No: CUP 11 -18, ADR 11 -29, LLA 12 -03, & MP 12 -10
Issues:
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
The proposed project will involve vegetation clearing, ground disturbance, and tree removal that could
result in the direct loss of active bird nests or the abandonment of active nests by adult birds. With
the following mitigation measure, it would reduce any adverse impacts to less than significant level.
BIO -1: A qualified biologist shall conduct nesting bird surveys in areas with suitable habitat prior to
all construction or site preparation activities that would occur during the nesting and breeding
season of native bird species (typically March 1 through August 15). The survey area shall
include all potential bird nesting areas within 200 feet of any disturbance. The survey shall be
conducted at least two weeks prior to commencement of activities (e.g. grading).
If active nests of bird species protected by the MBTA and /or California Fish and Game Code
(which, together, apply to all native nesting bird species) are present in the impact area or
within 200 feet of the impact area, a temporary buffer fence shall be erected a minimum of 200
feet around the nest site. This temporary buffer may be greater or lesser depending on the
bird species and type of disturbance, as determined by the biologist and /or applicable
regulatory agency permits.
Clearing and /or construction within temporarily fenced areas shall be postponed or halted until
juveniles have fledged and there is no evidence of a second nesting attempt. The Biologist
shall serve as a construction monitor during those periods when disturbance activities will
occur near active nest areas to ensure that no inadvertent impacts on these nests will occur.
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any
riparian habitat or other sensitive natural
community identified in local or regional
plans, policies, regulations or by the
California Department of Fish and Game or
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
There are no designated riparian habitats or other sensitive natural communities within the City of
Arcadia. The project site is located within an area that is not proximate to sensitive biological
resources. Therefore, the project will not have the above impacts.
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally
protected wetlands as defined by Section 404
of the Clean Water Act (including, but not
limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.)
through direct removal, filling, hydrological
interruption, or other means?
❑ ❑ ❑
There are no federally protected wetlands within the City of Arcadia. The project site is not proximate
to sensitive biological resources. Therefore, the project will not have the above impacts.
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of
any native resident or migratory fish or
wildlife species or with established native
resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or
impede the use of native wildlife nursery
sites?
There are no known native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species within the City of Arcadia.
Therefore, the project will not have the above impacts.
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances �] ❑ ❑
protecting biological resources, such as a
tree preservation policy or ordinance?
Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration
Page 10 of 27 File No: CUP 11 -18, ADR 11 -29, LLA 12 -03, & MP 12 -10
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Issues: Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
The proposed site does not contain any protected oak trees and will not encroach into the protected
zone of any oak trees on adjoining properties. Therefore it will not conflict with the City's Oak Tree
Preservation ordinance. No other tree preservation policies or ordinances exist.
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted
Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural
Community Conservation Plan, or other
approved local, regional, or state habitat
conservation plan?
There are no adopted Habitat Conservation Plans, Natural Conservation Community Plans, or other
approved habitat conservation plan within the City of Arcadia. Therefore, the project will not have the
above impacts.
❑ ❑ ❑
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource as
defined in § 15064.5?
The proposed development would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a
historical resource as defined in §15064.5 since there are no cultural resources on the subject site.
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archaeological resource
pursuant to § 15064.5?
The proposed development will not cause a substantial adverse change since there are no historical
or archaeo logical resources on the subject.
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or unique
geologic feature?
The subject site is not known to contain any paleontological or unique geological resources.
Therefore, the project will in no way destroy a unique paleontological resource, site, or unique
geologic feature. The right -of -way is surrounded by developed properties and located in an urbanized
area.
❑ ❑ ❑
d) Disturb any human remains, including those
interred outside of formal cemeteries?
❑ ❑ ❑
The proposed site does not contain any known human remains. As such, there will be no disturbance
to any human remains.
VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project:
a) Expose people or structures to potential
substantial adverse effects, including the risk
of loss, injury or death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as
delineated on the most recent Alquist - Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the
State Geologist for the area or based on
other substantial evidence of a known fault?
Refer to Division of Mines and Geology
Special Publication 42.
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration
❑ ❑ ❑
❑ ❑ ® ❑
Page 11 of 27 File No: CUP 11 -18, ADR 11 -29, LLA 12 -03, & MP 12 -10
Issues:
iii) Seismic - related ground failure, including
liquefaction?
iv) Landslides?
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
❑ ❑ ❑
❑ ❑ ❑
(a, i -iv) The City of Arcadia contains two local fault zones: the Raymond Hill Fault and the Sierra Madre
Fault. The extremely thick alluvial deposits which underlie the seismic study area are subject to
differential settlement during any intense shaking associated with seismic events. This type of
seismic hazard results in damage to property when an area settles to different degrees over a
relatively short distance, and almost all of this region is subject to this hazard, but building design
standards do significantly reduce the potential for harm.
The project site is not located within an Alquist Priolo Study Zone area, or any other designated
earthquake hazard zone; nor is it located on a hillside where landslides may occur. Therefore, no
significant impacts are expected as a result of the proposed development.
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss ❑ ® ❑ ❑
of topsoil?
The proposed development will require removal of the existing fill soils from the site and expose the
underlying dense native soils. The upper native soils will be removed and re- compacted to create a
uniform fill pad for the support of the proposed foundations and floor slabs.
Construction of the proposed project would result in ground surface disruption during excavation,
grading, and trenching that would create the potential for erosion. Common means of soil erosion for
construction sites include stormwater, high winds, and being tracked off -site by construction vehicles.
The project would be subject to local and state codes and requirements for erosion control and
grading.
Because the site encompasses an area greater than one acre, the applicant is required to obtain a
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. The applicant is also required to
develop and implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan ( SWPPP). If the proposed
improvements will replace more than 5,000 square feet of turf (permeable surface) with a building
(impermeable surface), the applicant is also required to comply with the Los Angeles County Standard
Urban Stormwater Mitigation Plan (SUSMP).
A SWPPP is a fundamental requirement of stormwater permits and 1) identifies all potential sources of
pollution which may reasonably be expected to affect the quality of storm water discharges from the
construction site, and 2) describes practices to be used to reduce pollutants in storm water
discharges from the construction site. The SUSMP requires the installation and maintenance of post
construction treatment control best management practices (BMPs).
Potential for soil erosion exists during construction due to wind or sediment traveling in stormwater
runoff; however, dust control measures (AQMD Rule 403) — see Air Quality SC 1 through 5, and a
stormwater pollution prevention plan are already required by the City to be implemented for the
project site and it would adequately address this concern. Over the long -term the project would be
covered with impervious surfaces, landscaped areas, and should not be subject to substantive
erosion.
With adherence to these codes and regulations, project impacts would be reduced to less than
significant.
GEO -1: The construction crew shall be required to use Best Management Practices (BMPs) and
standards to control and reduce erosion. These measures could include, but are not limited
to, protection all finished graded slopes from erosion using such techniques as erosion
control matting and hydroseeding or other suitable measures.
GEO -2: When working near catch basins, cover and seal each basin prior to the start of construction.
Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration
Page 12 of 27 File No: CUP 11 -18, ADR 11 -29, LLA 12 -03, & MP 12 -10
Issues:
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is
unstable, or that would become unstable as a
result of the project, and potentially result in
on- or off -site landslide, lateral spreading,
subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
❑ ❑ ❑ El
The City of Arcadia is located on an alluvial plain that is relatively flat and expected to be stable. The
project site is a flat site and will not result in an on- or off -site landslide.
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in
Table 18 1 B of the Uniform Building Code
(1994), creating substantial risks to life or
property?
❑ ❑ ❑
The subject site consists of alluvial soil that is in the low to moderate range for expansion potential.
Therefore, there will be no substantial risks to life or property.
e) Have soils incapable of adequately
supporting the use of septic tanks or
alternative waste water disposal systems
where sewers are not available for the
disposal of waste water?
❑ ❑ ❑
The project site would connect with the sewer system, and would not require septic tanks or other
alternative wastewater systems. Therefore, there would be no impacts.
VII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS. Would the
project:
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either
directly or indirectly, that may have a
significant impact on the environment?
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or
regulation adopted for the purpose of
reducing the emission of greenhouse gases?
No Impact a -b: The City of Arcadia has adopted policies under the City's General Plan to reduce
greenhouse gas emissions in compliance with SB 375 and AB 32, to reduce greenhouse gas
emissions to 1990 levels by 2020, and 80% below 1990 levels by 2050. According to the Greenhouse
Gas Study, prepared by Rincon Consultants, Inc. (August, 2012), the increase of GHG emiss ions
associated with the project will be approximately 2,211 metric tons CO2E per year, which does not
exceed SCAQMD's recommended 3,000 MT CO2E per year threshold. The proposed project does not
generate sufficient GHG emissions to create a project - specific impact through a direct influence to
climate change. Therefore, the project's contribution to GHG emissions is less than significant and no
mitigation measures are necessary.
VIII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS.
Would the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or
the environment through the routine
transport, use, or disposal of hazardous
materials?
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or
the environment through reasonably
foreseeable upset and accident conditions
involving the release of hazardous materials
into the environment?
❑ ❑ ® ❑
❑ ❑ ® ❑
❑ ❑ ❑
❑ ❑ ❑
tzi
Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration
Page 13 of 27 File No: CUP 11 -18, ADR 11 -29, LLA 12 -03, & MP 12 -10
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Issues: Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
(a -b) All new development within the City shall comply with the Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (RCRA) on the generation, transportation, treatment, storage, and disposal of hazardous waste.
The proposed project must also comply with California Accidental Release Prevention Progran,
(CaIARP) to prevent the accidental release of regulated toxic and flammable substances, and South
Coast Air Quality Management District's (SCAQMD's) Rules X and XIV, which include regulations for
toxic and hazardous air pollutant emissions. Because this project would involve new construction,
excavations, and new utility lines, the following standard of conditions has been proposed to ensure
there will be no potential impacts
SC -6: In accordance with the California Code of Regulations (Title 8, Section 1541), if any
construction, excavations, and new utility lines are proposed near or crossing existing high
pressure pipelines, natural gas /petroleum pipelines, electrical lines greater than 60,000 volts,
and other high priority lines are required to notify the owner /operator of the line and must
identify the locations of subsurface lines prior to any ground disturbance for excavation.
Coordination, approval, and monitoring by the owner /operator of the line would avoid damage
to high priority lines and prevent the creation of hazards to the surrounding area.
In regards to the use, some of the tenants from the medical use could store, use, generate and dispose
of medical hazardous materials, as well as use and store medical supplies that may be considered
hazardous. Hazardous materials that may be associated with medical offices may include, but are not
limited to are pharmaceuticals, sharps, specific ingredients in sterilizing solutions, laboratory
chemicals, biohazards (e.g. fluid, blood), and electronic devices. There is always a threat of spills,
leaks or unauthorized discharges of hazardous materials associated with these uses. The California
Department of Public Health Environmental Management Branch regulates the collection, storage,
transportation and disposal of sharps and medical wastes (California Department of Toxic Substances
Control). Generators of medical wastes must have a Medical Waste Management Plan pursuant to the
Medical Waste Management Act (MWMA) addressing the processing, storage, treatment and transport
of medical waste generated and it must also include emergency procedures. Assuming that the
individual tenants comply with the legal requirements for use, storage, transport and disposal of
regulated substances, impacts associated with such substances during the routine operation of the
project as well as during an accident is anticipated to be less than significant.
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle
hazardous or acutely hazardous materials,
substances, or waste within one - quarter mile
of an existing or proposed school?
❑ ❑ ❑
Within one - quarter mile of the project site is Barnhart school (Kindergarten through 8th grade).
However, there are no underground or aboveground pipelines that would carry hazardous substances
or hazardous wastes. Therefore, there would be no impact.
d) Be located on a site which is included on a
list of hazardous materials sites compiled
pursuant to Government Code section
65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a
significant hazard to the public or the
environment?
The subject site is vacant. Based upon a review of the California Department of Toxic Substance
Control (DTSC) database covering Federal Superfund Sites (NPL), State Response Sites, Voluntary
Cleanup Sites, School Cleanup Sites, Permitted Sites, and Corrective Action sites, the project site was
not on any of the referenced lists. Additionally, the project site nor any properties within one - quarter
mile of the project site are identified on the California State Water Resources Control Board's
Geotracker list of leaking underground fuel tank (LUFT) sites (2012). The project site is not identified
as being a hazardous material site. Therefore, there would be no impact.
Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration
Page 14 of 27 File No: CUP 11 -18, ADR 11 -29, LLA 12 -03, & MP 12 -10
Issues:
e) For a project located within an airport land
use plan or, where such a plan has not been
adopted, within two miles of a public airport
or public use airport, would the project result
in a safety hazard for people residing or
working in the project area?
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
❑ ❑ ❑ El
The subject site is not located within an airport land use plan or within two miles of a public airport or
public use airport. There would not be any airport related safety hazards for people working at the
subject site. Therefore, there would be no impacts.
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?
There is no private airstrip near the project site. As such, the proposed project would not result in a
safety hazard for people in the project area. Therefore, there would be no impacts.
g) Impair implementation of or physically
interfere with an adopted emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation
plan?
The project will not impair implementation or interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan. Therefore, there would be no impacts.
h) Expose people or structures to a significant
risk of Toss, injury or death involving wildland
fires, including where wildlands are adjacent
to urbanized areas or where residences are
intermixed with wildlands?
California's Public Resource Code and Government Code 51175 -89 directed the California Department
of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL Fire) to map areas of significant fire hazards based on fuels,
terrain, weather, and other relevant factors. CAL Fire created a mapping system that identifies Fire
Hazard Zones, and has created a map showing areas that are considered to be Very High Fire Hazards
Zones in Arcadia. The map has been officially adopted by the City, and the City has targeted these
areas to implement stringent wild land fire mitigation strategies. The subject site does not fall within
any fire hazard zones, and is not within c lose proximity to any wild lands and will not have the above
impact. Therefore, wildfire hazard impacts would be less than significant.
IX. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would
the project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste
discharge requirements?
❑ ❑ ❑
Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration
❑ ❑ ►1 ❑
Page 15 of 27 File No: CUP 11 -18, ADR 11 -29, LLA 12 -03, & MP 12 -10
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Issues: Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
In 1972, the Clean Water Act (CWA) was amended to require National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) permits for the discharge of pollutants into "Waters of the U.S." from any point
source. In 1987, the CWA was amended to require that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
establish regulations for permitting under the NPDES permit program, that at the local level, cities
must ensure provision of vegetated swales, buffers, and infiltration areas In new development
projects. For Arcadia, the NPDES permit is issued by the Regional Water Quality Control Board, Los
Angeles Region. The NPDES program coordinates the actions of all incorporated cities within this
region (except Long Beach) and Los Angeles County to regulate and control storm water and urban
runoff into Los Angeles County waterways and the ocean.
In support of the NPDES permit and the obligation to keep waterways clean by reducing or eliminating
contaminants from storm water and dry weather runoff, the City is required to implement the most
effective combination of Best Management Practices (BMPs) for storm water /urban runoff pollution
control. The City has a storm water education program, an aggressive inspection team that issues
notices of violation for water quality violations, and requires the use of best management practices in
residential, commercial, and development- related activities to reduce runoff. The project is subject to
NPDES requirements to ensure compliance with the water quality standards and waste discharge
requirements, and therefore the impacts will be less than significant.
b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or
interfere substantially with groundwater
recharge such that there would be a net
deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the
local groundwater table level (e.g., the
production rate of pre- existing nearby wells
would drop to a level which would not support
existing land uses or planned uses for which
permits have been granted)?
❑ ❑ ❑
The project is subject to NPDES requirements and will be designed and constructed to ensure
compliance with the water quality standards and waste discharge requirements, and therefore no
impact will result from this project.
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage
pattern of the site or area, including through
the alteration of the course of a stream or
river, in a manner which would result in
substantial erosion or siltation on- or off -site?
Through grading and development of the site, the existing drainage pattern would be altered.
According to the preliminary SUSMP Calculations report that was prepared for this project and
reviewed by Arcadia Engineering Services states that the development would result in additional
runoff due to the proposed impervious surface area. Depending on the location, the stormwater will
be either infiltrated into the ground or directed to several catch basins and storm and the storm drain
pipes will be directed to the storm drain inlet. Thus, new development is required to meet or exceed
pre - project conditions for stormwater discharge, and the proposed project would be required to retain
any additional runoff onsite and discharge it to the storm drain system at rates that do not exceed pre -
project conditions. Therefore, with regard to the storm drain capacity, the project will result in less
than significant impacts with mitigation. Mitigation measure HYD -1 would ensure adequate capacity.
HYD -1: The applicant shall prepare and submit a final drainage plan to the City for approval by the
City. The drainage plan shall include post development designs that ensure adequate
capacity to accommodate and prevent flooding of the site and adjacent roadway.
Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration
Page 16 of 27 File No: CUP 11 -18, ADR 11 -29, LLA 12 -03, & MP 12 -10
Issues:
d) Substantially alter the existing drainage
pattern of the site or area, including through
the alteration of the course of a stream or
river, or substantially increase the rate or
amount of surface runoff in a manner which
would result in flooding on- or off -site?
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
❑ ® ❑ 0
The discussion provided in c) above adequately discusses surface water pollution impacts from the
project. The project would result in less than significant impacts with mitigation. Mitigation measure
HYD -1 would adequately address any surface water pollution.
e) Create or contribute runoff water which would
exceed the capacity of existing or planned ❑ ❑ ® ❑
storm water drainage systems or provide
substantial additional sources of polluted
runoff?
The discussion provided in a) above adequately discuss runoff from the project. The state and federal
requirements for the preparation of the aforementioned plans would reduce potential impacts to a less
than significant level assuming implementation of these plans. No additional mitigation measures are
necessary.
f) Otherwise substantially degrade water
quality?
❑ ❑ ® ❑
The additional volumes of stormwater runoff created by the project would be negligible and would not
significantly impact water quality.
g) Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard
area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard
Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or
other flood hazard delineation map?
The project would not include the development of housing. The subject site does not lie within a 100 -
year flood hazard zone as defined by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).
Implementation of the proposed project would have no impact regarding the placement of housing
within a designated flood hazard area.
h) Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area
structures which would impede or redirect
flood flows?
❑ ❑ ❑
❑ ❑ ❑
The subject site does not He within a 100 -year flood hazard zone. Project implementation would have
no impact on the course of flood flows within such a zone. No significant flood hazard impacts would
occur as a result of the proposed project.
i) Expose people or structures to a significant
risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding,
including flooding as a result of the failure of
a levee or dam?
Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration
Page 17 of 27 File No: CUP 11 -18, ADR 11 -29, LLA 12 -03, & MP 12 -10
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Issues: Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
The project site lies within the flood hazard zone for Santa Anita Dam. The Santa Anita Dam is located
along the Santa Anita Wash approximately two miles north of the subject site. The concrete dam was
completed in 1927 and is owned and operated by the Los Angeles County Development of Public
Works Flood Control District (LACDPW). In 2009, LACDPW started a sediment removal project at the
Santa Anita Reservoir to increase reservoir capacity and ensure compliance with California
Department of Water Resources, Division of Safety Dams' seismic stability requirements for the dam.
Over one -half million tons of sediment is being transferred to the Santa Anita Sediment Placement Site
in Arcadia. Seismic safety retrofits to the dam include modifications to the dam's inlet/outlet works
and the construction of a new dam riser.
The proposed project would involve no housing as a part of this project, and the entire community is
in Zone D, which the City is not required to implement any flood plain management regulations as a
condition per the National Flood Insurance Program from the Federal Emergency Management
Agency. Therefore, the impacts would be less than significant.
j) Expose people or structures to inundation by ❑ ❑ ❑
seiche, tsunami, or mudflow?
The City of Arcadia is not located near any large inland bodies of water or the Pacific Ocean and the
site is not within a seiche, tsunami, or mudflow hazard area.
X. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established community?
❑ ❑ ❑
The proposed medical office and office buildings are consistent and /or compatible with the existing
neighboring land uses and development along Huntington Drive and Colorado Place in terms of land
use, scale, massing, and design of the structures in the area. The surrounding area consists of office
buildings, hotels, and other commercial uses. Residential uses are located north of the site, and only
this site along the Huntington Drive /Colorado Place corridor is vacant. Therefore, the project would
not physically divide an established community. As such, the project would result in no impact.
b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan,
policy, or regulation of an agency with
jurisdiction over the project (including, but not
limited to the general plan, specific plan, local
coastal program, or zoning ordinance)
adopted for the purpose of avoiding or
mitigating an environmental effect?
The City's General Plan land use designation of the project site is Commercial with a Downtown
Overlay (City of Arcadia General Plan 2012) and the zoning designation is C -2, General Commercial,
with a Downtown Overlay. The use is allowed, however it is subject to a Conditional Use Permit with
modifications since it will be larger than 20,000 square feet in area and it is within 100 -feet of
residentially zoned property. The proposed use would continue to use the site as commercial. The
project would not conflict with any plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or
mitigating an environmental effect.
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat
conservation plan or natural community
conservation plan?
There is no habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan on the subject site.
Therefore, the project could not conflict with such plans.
❑ ❑ ❑
Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration
Page 18 of 27 File No: CUP 11 -18, ADR 11 -29, LLA 12 -03, & MP 12 -10
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Issues: Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
Xl. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Result in the Toss of availability of a known
mineral resource that would be of value to the
region and the residents of the state?
❑ ❑ ❑
There are no known mineral resources on the subject site that would be of value to the region and the
residents of the state.
b) Result in the Toss of availability of a locally -
important mineral resource recovery site
delineated on a local general plan, specific
plan or other land use plan?
The subject site is not designated in the General Plan as a mineral resource recovery site. Therefore,
the proposal would not have the above impact.
XII. NOISE. Would the project result in:
a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise
levels in excess of standards established in
the local general plan or noise ordinance, or
applicable standards of other agencies?
A noise study was conducted for this project by a qualified Acoustical Consultant, Rincon
Consultants, Inc. The noise - sensitive uses near the project site include single- family residences
located approximately 50 feet northeast of the boundary of the project site, single- family residential
units located north of the project site across San Juan Drive, and the Santa Anita Inn located south of
the project site across W. Huntington Drive. Arcadia General Plan Noise Element (2010) Policy N -3 -3
also requires that all exterior noise sources (construction operations, pumps, fans, leaf blowers) to
use noise suppression devices and techniques to lower exterior noise to levels that are compatible
with adjacent land uses.
These land uses may experience a temporary noise annoyance during construction. Based on the
current site plans for the project, construction activities may occur within approximately 50 feet of the
single- family residences adjacent to the northeast boundary of the project site, and in excess of the
maximum 55 dba allowed when adjacent to residentially zoned property. The City of Arcadia has not
adopted specific noise standards for construction activity. However, the City limits construction and
maintenance from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday. Construction is prohibited on
Sunday and major holidays (Arcadia Municipal Code Article IV, Chapter 2, Part 6). As a result,
complying with the City's time restrictions would limit construction noise to times when people are
generally less sensitive to noise, and the following mitigation measures would result in a less than
significant impact to the adjacent properties.
N -1: Construction Timing - Construction activities shall be limited to the hours between 7:00 a.m. and
7:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday. Construction equipment maintenance shall be limited to
the same hours.
N -2: Construction Equipment - If electrical service is available within 150 feet, electrical power shall
be used to run air compressors and similar power tools. Internal combustion engines should be
equipped with a muffler of a type recommended by the manufacturer. No internal combustion
engine shall be operated on the project site without the manufacturer - recommended muffler. All
diesel equipment should be operated with closed engine doors and should be equipped with
factory- recommended mufflers. Construction equipment that continues to generate noise that
exceeds 70 dBA at the project boundaries shall be shielded with a barrier that meets a sound
transmission class (STC) rating of 25.
❑ ❑ ❑
Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration
Page 19 of 27 File No: CUP 11 -18, ADR 11 -29, LLA 12 -03, & MP 12 -10
Issues:
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact incorporated Impact Impact
For all construction activity on the project site, additional noise attenuation techniques shall be
employed as needed to ensure that noise remains within levels allowed by the City of Arcadia
noise standards. Such techniques may include, but are not limited to, the use of sound blankets
on noise generating equipment and the construction of temporary sound barriers between
construction sites and affected uses.
N -3: The construction contractor shall place all stationary construction equipment so that emitted
noise is directed away from the noise - sensitive receptors. When feasible, the construction
contractor shall locate equipment staging in areas that will create the greatest distance between
construction - related noise sources and noise sensitive receptors during all project construction.
N -4: The construction contractor shall limit haul truck deliveries to the same hours specified for
construction equipment. To the extent feasible, haul routes shall not pass sensitive land uses or
residential dwellings.
N -5: Neighbor Notification. Provide notification to residential occupants adjacent to the project site at
least 24 hours prior to initiation of construction activities that could significantly affect outdoor
or indoor living areas. This notification shall include the anticipated hours and duration of
construction and a description of noise reduction measures. The notification shall include a
telephone number for local residents to can to submit complaints associated with construction
noise. The notification shall be posted on San Juan Drive, Santa Cruz Road, and San Rafael
Road adjacent to the project site, and must be easily viewed from adjacent public areas.
b) Exposure of persons to or generation of
excessive groundborne vibration or
groundborne noise levels?
Project construction would generally involve the temporary movement of trucks, materials and
equipment at the site and use heavy equipment. The anticipated construction activities would result in
some level of vibration; however, it is not anticipated to be substantially greater in magnitude than that
associated with the passing of other heavy vehicles such as garbage trucks. The proposed project
does not involve rock blasting or pile driving. Therefore, the project's cumulative impact would be
less than significant.
c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient
noise levels in the project vicinity above
levels existing without the project?
The proposed project would not result in any long -term noise levels exceeding the noise standards
policies in the City of Arcadia's General Plan Noise Element or Municipal Code. As such, impacts
related to noise as a result of the proposed project would be less than significant.
❑ ❑ ® ❑
d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase
in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity
above levels existing without the project?
The discussion provided in a) above adequately discuss temporary noise from the proposed project,
and the proposed mitigation measures N -1 through N -3 will result in a less than significant impact.
❑ ® ❑ ❑
e) For a project located within an airport land
use plan or, where such a plan has not been
adopted, within two miles of a public airport
or public use airport, would the project
expose people residing or working in the
project area to excessive noise levels?
❑ ❑ ❑
The subject site is not located within an airport land use plan or within two miles of a public airport or
public use airport.
Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration
Page 20 of 27 File No: CUP 11 -18, ADR 11 -29, LLA 12 -03, & MP 12 -10
Issues:
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private
airstrip, would the project expose people
residing or working in the project area to
excessive noise levels?
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
❑ ❑ ❑ El
There is no private airstrip near the project site. The project would not change the uses of the
surrounding site and would not impact the noise levels for people residing or working in the project
area.
XIII. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the
project:
a) Induce substantial population growth in an
area, either directly (for example, by
proposing new homes and businesses) or
indirectly (for example, through extension of
road or other infrastructure)?
The project is located within an existing urban area. No new residential is proposed. There is no
evidence that the new businesses that will occupy the site will not induce any significant population
growth in the area. No significant infrastructure upgrades or extend the roards are required as part of
this project.
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing
housing, necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere?
Development of the proposed project is limited to the boundaries of the commercial site and would not
result in demolition of any housing. No impacts to existing house would occur.
❑ ❑ ❑
c) Displace substantial numbers of people,
necessitating the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere?
Development of the proposed project is limited to the boundaries of the subject site and would not
result in demolition of any housing. No displacement impact would occur.
XIV. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project:
a) Result in substantial adverse physical
impacts associated with the provision of new
or physically altered governmental facilities,
need for new or physically altered
governmental facilities, the construction of
which could cause significant environmental
impacts, in order to maintain acceptable
service ratios, response times or other
performance objectives for any of the public
services:
Fire protection?
Police protection?
Schools?
Parks?
Other public facilities?
❑ ❑ ® ❑
❑ ❑ �1 ❑
❑ ❑ ❑
❑ ❑ ® ❑
Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration
Page 21 of 27 File No: CUP 11 -18, ADR 11 -29, LLA 12 -03, & MP 12 -10
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Issues: Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
Less Than Significant Impact a -e: The proposed development does not include residential uses, which
typically generate a demand for public services. The proposal is located in an urban area and will not
necessitate any substantial upgrades to fire protection, police protection, schools, parks, or other
public facilities. Further, the proposed project is not anticipated to result in a significant impact or an
increase in demand for governmental services.
XV. RECREATION. Would the project:
a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood
and regional parks or other recreational
facilities such that substantial physical
deterioration of the facility would occur or be
accelerated?
The proposed development will not result in a significant increase in the demand for existing
neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities. Physical impacts to recreation
facilities are usually associated with development of new housing and population in- migration and
growth.
b) Does the project include recreational facilities
or require the construction or expansion of ❑ ❑ ❑ El
recreational facilities which have an adverse
physical effect on the environment?
As discussed above, the proposed development does not include or require the construction or
expansion of recreational facilities.
XVI. TRANSPORTATION / TRAFFIC. Would the
project:
a) Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or
policy establishing measures of effectiveness
for the performance of the circulation system,
taking into account all modes of
transportation including mass transit and non -
motorized travel and relevant components of
the circulation system, including but not
limited to intersections, streets, highways and
freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and
mass transit?
Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration
Page 22 of 27 File No: CUP 11 -18, ADR 11 -29, LLA 12 -03, & MP 12 -10
Issues:
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
A Traffic Impact Analysis was prepared by Linscott Law & Greenspan (LLG) to forecast peak hour
vehicle trip generation, anticipate distribution of project vehicle trips, and analyzed existing
intersection /corridor operations.
The following four intersections that were studied:
1. Colorado Place /San Juan Drive
2. Colorado Place/Huntington Drive
3. Santa Clara Street/Huntington Drive
4. Santa Anita Avenue /Huntington Drive
Based on the analysis, the proposed project is expected to generate 147 additional vehicle trips during
the AM peak hour (7 :00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m.), 186 trips during the PM peak hour (4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m.),
and 1,866 total trips on a typical weekday. It was concluded that the proposed project will not create
significant traffic impacts at any of the study intersections, and the levels -of- service (LOS) will remain
the same.
It is estimated that approximately 2,070 truck trips will be needed, and these truck trips are not
significant enough to impact the existing LOS on area streets and intersections. However, depending
on the haul route, if there are any potential conflicts with busy intersections or schools, the City has
the ability to limit their hauling activity to off -peak hours. As a result, the haul routes will be reviewed
and approved by Arcadia's Engineering Services Division to ensure that the truck trips do not disrupt
traffic on area roadways or schools. The following mitigation measures will address any said potential
impacts; therefore the Impacts are less than significant.
T -1: The developer shall prepare a haul route plan for trucks hauling earth or construction materials
from the project site to where this material will be disposed. The plan shall be reviewed and
approved by the Arcadia Engineering Services Division before a grading or building permit is
issued by the City, and the City has the ability to limit any hauling activity to off -peak hours.
T -2: The developer shall notify the City at least seven (7) days of the beginning of any earth moving
and or truck hauling activities on the site. The City shall assess the roadway conditions along
the haul route and the developer shall be responsible for any damages caused to the route
during the hauling activities. The developer shall be responsible for repairing any damages
identified by the City prior to occupancy of any part of the project.
b) Conflict with an applicable congestion
management program, including, but not
limited to, level of service standards and
travel demand measures, or other standards
established by the county congestion
management agency for designated roads or
highways?
According to the 2010 Congestion Management Program (CMP) for Los Angeles County, there are no
CMP intersection monitoring locations within the City of Arcadia. The nearest CMP intersection
monitoring location is the Rosemead Boulevard /Huntington Drive intersection, located approximately
two miles west of the project site in an unincorporated area of Los Angeles County. The CMP Traffic
Impact Assessment guidelines require that intersection monitoring locations must be examined if the
proposed project will add 50 or more trips during either the weekday AM or PM peak hours.
According to the analysis from the Traffic impact Analysis was prepared by Linscott Law &
Greenspan, the proposed project will not add 50 or more trips to the AM (8 :00 a.m.) or PM (4 :00 p.m.)
peak hours at any CMP monitoring intersections, and no more than 150 trips to the freeway (in either
direction). Therefore, no further review of potential impacts to intersection monitoring locations that
are part of the CMP highway system is required, and there are no impacts. Given the low number of
generated trips per bus (Le. Metro and Foothill Transit), no impacts on existing or future transit
services in the project area are expected to occur as a result of the proposed project.
Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration
Page 23 of 27 File No: CUP 11 -18, ADR 11 -29, LLA 12 -03, & MP 12 -10
Issues:
c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns,
including either an increase in traffic levels or
a change in location that results in substantial
safety risks?
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
❑ ❑ ❑
There are no airports or airstrips in the immediate vicinity of the project site. The nearest airport is El
Monte Airport, which is located approximately three miles south of the project site. The project would
not result in a change in air traffic patterns or safety risky related to the airports. The project would
have no impacts and no mitigation measures would be necessary.
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a
design feature (e.g., sharp curves or
dangerous intersections) or incompatible
uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
The traffic consultant, LLG, reviewed the driveway site distance from all the driveways. The sight
distance analysis is based on the criteria set forth in the American Association of State Highway and
Transportation Officials (AASHTO) and City staff reviewed it based on the driveway visibility standards
from the Municipal Code. If available sight distance for an entering or crossing vehicle is at least
equal to the appropriate stopping sight distance for the major roadway, then drivers have sufficient
sight distance to anticipate and avoid collisions.
Some of the shrubbery located immediately adjacent to the Colorado Place driveway (on both sides of
the driveway) as well as the western -most tree (Le., the tree located immediately east of the subject
driveway) should be removed. In addition, the shrubbery located adjacent to the existing monument
sign easterly of the subject driveway (i.e., the monument sign that is located in front of the existing
Parson's building entrance) should be lowered/removed so as to provide a clear line of sight. But, a
condition of approval to this effect has been proposed on the proposed project. Therefore, the impact
will be less than significant.
e) Result in inadequate emergency access?
❑ ❑ ❑
The proposed development will comply with all of the City's requirements for emergency access.
f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or
programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or
pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease
the performance or safety of such facilities?
❑ ❑ ❑
The proposed project would be consistent with policies supporting public transit, bicycle, and
pedestrian facilities, and the applicant has proposed to install new bike racks on site in accordance
with the City's bike parking requirements. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with the
policies, plans, or programs and no mitigation measures would be necessary.
XVII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would
the project:
a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements
of the applicable Regional Water Quality
Control Board?
b) Require or result in the construction of new
water or wastewater treatment facilities or
expansion of existing facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant
environmental effects?
Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration
Page 24 of 27 File No: CUP 11 -18, ADR 11 -29, LLA 12 -03, & MP 12 -10
Issues:
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
(a -b) The City of Arcadia Public Works Services Department provides water service to the local area.
The department obtains water from two sources: groundwater and imported water. The City also
provides sewer service to the local area, and the wastewater from the area is carried by sewers to the
San Jose Creek Water Reclamation Plant, located at 1965 Workman Mill Road in Whittier and operated
by the Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County. This plant treats 100 million gallons per day of
waste water (Sanitation Districts 2008).
The proposed project will be tied -in to the existing sewer main on Colorado Place. This sewer feed to
Huntington Drive, which is considered to be deficient according to the City's Public Works
Department. However, a Capital Improvement Project (CIP) to upgrade the existing sewer pipe from
10" to 12" will be scheduled in 2014 -15 to handle the current deficiency. Based on the Los Angeles
County Average Daily Sewage Design Standard, estimated tributary flow to the sewer system from the
new project will be substantially more than the previous loading from the property. Based on the load
calculations provided by the Applicant, Arcadia's Public Works Department determined that in all
cases, the flow would be considered greater than the design capacity of the pipe. To address this
deficiency, the sewer main will be upgraded in 2015 -16, as part of a CIP project. However, if this
project begins construction prior to the improvements scheduled for FY 2014 -15 and 2015 -16, then an
area study will be required to determine what affect this project would have on the existing sewer and
how to address any deficiencies. With the proposed mitigation measure, the project would result in a
less than significant impact.
USS -1: The existing sewer main on Colorado Place is considered deficient by the City's Public Works
Services Department. A project is under consideration in the City's Capital Improvement
Program for either Fiscal Year 2014 -2014 or 2015 -2016 to address the current situation. Prior to
the issuance of a building permit for the project, the developer shall perform an area study to
determine the impact the project will have on the capacity of the existing sewer system. This
study shall be used to determine the adequacy of the sewer system and the required fair -share
contribution for this project toward the sewer improvement project. Prior to the issuance of a
Certificate of Occupancy, the developer shall be required to construct the necessary
improvements if the area study concludes the project will result in the sewer capacity being
exceeded.
c) Require or result in the construction of new
storm water drainage facilities or expansion
of existing facilities, the construction of which
could cause significant environmental
effects?
❑ ❑ ® ❑
The City's Public Works Department has reviewed the proposed SUSMP and development, and
determined the impacts will be less than significant.
d) Have sufficient water supplies available to
serve the project from existing entitlements
and resources, or are new or expanded
entitlements needed? In making this
determination, the Lead Agency shall
consider whether the project is subject to the
water supply assessment requirements of
Water Code Section 10910, et. seq. (SB
610), and the requirements of Government
Code Section 664737 (SB 221).
❑ ❑ ® ❑
Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 25 of 27 File No: CUP 11 -18, ADR 11 -29, LLA 12 -03, & MP 12 -10
Issues:
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
The City of Arcadia Public Works Services Department provides water service to the local area. The
Department obtains water from two sources: groundwater and imported water. The department
obtains groundwater from the Main San Gabriel and Raymond Groundwater Basins. The City obtains
water imported by the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD) from the State Water
Project and the Colorado River. MWD forecasts that it will be able to meet the region's water needs
through 2030.
According to Arcadia Public Works Department, there will be no major impact to the water system.
Therefore, the impacts are less than significant.
e) Result in a determination by the wastewater
treatment provider which serves or may serve
the project that it has adequate capacity to
serve the project's projected demand in
addition to the provider's existing
commitments?
❑ ❑ ® ❑
The proposed development would not generate a significant increase in area population or otherwise
induce new population growth. Therefore, there will be no significant impacts to the wastewater
treatment capacity.
f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient
permitted capacity to accommodate the
project's solid waste disposal needs?
The City of Arcadia does not contract with a particular landfill. However, the trash generated from a
project is often taken to the Puente Hills Landfill in Whittier. The Puente Hills Landfill has sufficient
permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs. As a result, the project -
related impacts to landfill capacity would be less than significant.
❑ ❑ ® ❑
g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes
and regulations related to solid waste?
The proposed development will not violate any federal, state or local statues and regulations relating
to solid waste.
XVIII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
❑ ❑ ❑
a) Does the project have the potential to
degrade the quality of the environment,
substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or
wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife
population to drop below self- sustaining
levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or
animal community, substantially reduce the
number or restrict the range of a rare or
endangered plant or animal or eliminate
important examples of the major periods of
California history or prehistory?
❑ ❑ ® ❑
The proposed use is consistent with the General Plan, and does not have the potential to degrade the
quality of the environment. It will not reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species since it is located
in a fully- developed area.
Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 26 of 27 File No: CUP 11 -18, ADR 11 -29, LLA 12 -03, & MP 12 -10
b) Does the project have impacts that are
individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable? ( "Cumulatively
considerable" means that the incremental
effects of a project are considerable when
viewed in connection with the effects of
past projects, the effects of other current
project, and the effects of probable future
projects).
Development of the proposed project would not generate an increase in population or otherwise
induce new population growth. The project is not part of any larger project and would not result in
any future development or infrastructure. The issues relevant to this property are very localized and
largely confined to the immediate vicinity of the construction site. Because the project would not
increase environmental impacts the incremental contribution to cumulative impacts would be less
than significant.
c) Does the project have environmental
effects which will cause substantial adverse
effects on human beings, either directly or
indirectly?
As discussed in the relevant sections of this Initial Study, the project would not result in any
significant permanent impacts. Additionally, the project would not have environmental effects that
would cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. No significant
unmitigated adverse impacts have been identified for the project.
❑ ❑ ® ❑
Source References
1. City of Arcadia General Plan, adopted November 2010
2. City of Arcadia Land Use and Zoning Map, adopted December 7, 2010
3. Lighting, Photometric Light Analysis and Specifications of Gardco, pages E -1 through E -4 of the
Architectural Plans, dated November 27, 2012
4. South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), Rules and Regulations, 2005.
5. Air Quality Study, prepared by Rincon Consultants, Inc., August 2012; Supplemental Memorandum, dated
November 27, 2012
6. Greenhouse Gas Study, prepared by Rincon Consultants, Inc., August 2012; Supplemental Memorandum,
dated November 27, 2012
7. Memorandum from Arcadia Public Works Department — Sewer Capacity, dated October 31, 2012
8. Preliminary SUSMP Calculations prepared by Lin Consulting Inc., dated May 21, 2012
9. City of Arcadia Urban Water Management Plan, 2011
10. Federal Emergency Management Agency (Community Number #065014), dated September 7, 1984
11. City of Arcadia, Noise Regulations, Chapter 6, Article IV, of City of Arcadia Municipal Code
12. Noise Study, prepared by Rincon Consultants, Inc. dated October 2012; Supplemental Memorandum
dated November 27, 2012
13. Traffic Impact Analysis, prepared by Linscott Law & Greenspan, August 15, 2012; Supplemental Trip
Generation Assessment, dated November 27, 2012
14. South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). 2005. California Environmental Quality Act Air
Handbook
15. South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), Rules and Regulations, 2005.
Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 27 of 27 File No: CUP 11 -18, ADR 11 -29, LLA 12 -03, & MP 12 -10
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 11 -18; Lot Line Adjustment No. LLA 12 -03,
Architectural Design Review No. ADR 11 -29, and Modification No. MP 12 -10
125 W. Huntington Drive and 161 Colorado Place
This Standard Conditions, Mitigation and Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) for a new
three three -story office buildings (two medical and one general office) totaling 64,255 square -
feet with two restaurant areas within the new buildings totaling 4,600 square -feet and a 163,468
square -foot, four -level 400 -space parking structure; and approval of several minor Zoning
modifications, has been prepared pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA —
Public Resources Code, Section 21000 et seq.), the CEQA Guidelines (Cal. Code Regs., Title
14, Chapter 3, Sections 15074 and 15097) and the City of Arcadia CEQA Guidelines. A master
copy of the Initial Study and MMRP are available at Planning Services office and the City's
Library.
This program also includes Standard Conditions (SC). They are existing regulations that are
imposed by the City, County, State, federal agencies or special districts and compliance with
these regulations is largely the responsibility of the project applicant/developer. The SCs are
not considered as mitigation measures under CEQA. Rather, they are expected to be
implemented as a matter of course by the City and other regulatory agencies.
Where mitigation measures are required, CEQA law requires the preparation of a MMRP to
monitor the implementation of mitigation measures. The mitigation measures identified in the
MMRP has been developed in sufficient detail to provide the necessary information to identify
the party or parties responsible for carrying out the mitigation measure, when the mitigation will
be implemented, and who will verify that the mitigation has been implemented.
The Applicant is requesting approval for:
A Lot Line Adjustment to merge two (2) parcels into one (1) parcel; approval of a Conditional
Use Permit, Zoning Modifications, and Architectural Design Review to construct the following
new buildings at the subject site. The existing 60,811 square -foot, three -story office building will
remain.
Building 1: A 163,468 square -foot, four -level parking structure
Building 2: A 19,995 square -foot, three -story medical office building
Building 3: A 19,441 square -foot, three -story medical office building with 3,000 square -feet of
ground floor restaurant area
Building 4: A 24,819 square -foot, three -story general office building with 1,600 square -feet of
ground floor restaurant area
The four (4) requested Modifications from the City's Zoning Code for this project are:
1. To allow the windows in the new buildings and openings in the parking structure to face the
residential properties to the north (AMC Sec. 9263.2.6).
2. To allow five (5) designated loading spaces in lieu of 13 spaces required (AMC Sec.
9269.10).
3. To allow for a 7'-8" front yard setback for Building no. 2 and a 4' -2" front yard setback for
Building no. 3 in lieu of the 35'-0" special setback along this block of Colorado Place (AMC
Sec. 9320.11.2).
4. To allow two (2) trash enclosures to be placed within the required 20 -foot rear yard setback
(i.e., from the north property line) at 8 -feet and 14 -feet (AMC Sec. 9263.6.6).
Additionally, the project includes a City right -of -way dedication of 3,192 square feet, thereby
reducing the lot area to 200,085 square feet. The right -of -way dedication is requested by the
City's Engineering Services as part of a future traffic improvement project to add an additional
westbound transition lane from Huntington Drive to Colorado Place.
This MMRP includes mitigation measures in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Matrix on
the following pages that correspond to the final Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for the
project. The matrix lists each mitigation measure by environmental topic and indicates the
frequency of monitoring and the responsible monitoring entity. Mitigation measures may be
shown in submittals and may be checked only once, or they may require monitoring periodically
during and /or after construction and grading. Once a mitigation measure is complete, the
responsible monitoring entity shall date and initial the corresponding cell and comment on the
effectiveness of the mitigation measure. Wherever the term "project applicant" is used in the
MMRP, it shall be deemed to include each and all successors in interest of the project applicant.
2
Standard Conditions, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Enforcement
Agency /Monitoring
Agency/Reporting
Procedure
City of Arcadia — Planning and
Building Services.
The City Building Official and the
Development Services Director or
designee shall conduct the
inspection and evaluate the
brightness from the lights during
evening or nighttime hours prior
to occupancy of any part of the
project.
City of Arcadia — Planning and
Building Services.
City Building Inspector and
Planner shall periodically conduct
physical monitoring at the project
site during construction period
and document results in project
file.
City of Arcadia — Planning and
Building Services.
Responsible for
Mitigation
c
-o rn
CO ai
c ,U
O 8
>, 0_
m _
O C
d .0 O.
a O- O
F- < C9
The Property Owner and
Applicant — Pacific Design
Group.
The Property Owner and
Applicant — Pacific Design
Grou.
Monitoring and Action
Notes
The electrical plan shall show
the dimmable switches. The
Applicant's Project Manager
shall be made aware of this
design measure. The City
Building Inspector's shall ensure
this design feature have been
installed prior to sign -offs.
Work with Project Manager and
the Architects to document how
siting and design measures are
addressed and incorporated.
Review design plans for the
proposed project to ensure that
such features have been
incorporated in the design to
address the impacts.
The Project Manager shall be
aware of the SCAMD Rule and
issue instructions to the
Mitigation Measures and Standard Conditions
1. Aesthetics
A -1: The lights within the parking structure shall be
placed on a dimmable switch and the lights on
each level shall be dimmed from 11:00 p.m. to
6:00 a.m., every day to avoid any disturbance to
the adjacent residential uses. The Development
Services Director or designee shall also review
the parking lot lights and determine which ones
should be turned -off during non - business hours.
The developer and the City shall assess the
brightness from the lights prior to occupancy of
any part of the project.
A -2: The flood or area lighting needed for construction
activities shall be placed and directed so as to
avoid disturbance to the adjacent residential
uses.
2. Air Quality
AQ -1: Low -VOC Architectural Coatings. The applicant
should use low -VOC architectural coating for all
buildings, including the proposed parking
Enforcement
Agency /Monitoring
Agency /Reporting
Procedure
City Building Inspector shall
periodically conduct physical
monitoring at the project site
during construction period and
document results in project file.
City of Arcadia — Building and
Planning Services
City Building Inspectors shall
periodically conduct physical
monitoring at project site during
construction period and document
results in the project file.
City of Arcadia — Engineering and
Planning Services, and Public
Works Department.
City Engineer and Building
Inspectors shall periodically
conduct physical monitoring at
project site during construction
period and document results in
the project file.
City of Arcadia — Building,
Engineering, and Planning
Services.
Responsible for
Mitigation
The Property Owner, Project
Manager, and On -site
Superintendents.
The Property Owner, Project
Manager, and On -site
Superintendents.
The Property Owner, Project
Manager, and On -site
Superintendents.
Monitoring and Action
Notes
contractors that the architectural
coating should not be applied to
more than 10,500 square feet of
construction per day, for both
interior and exterior surfaces.
Idling time of diesel powered
construction equipment shall be
limited to three minutes. The
Project Manager must
coordinate with the contractors
and On -Site Superintendents.
Prior to issuance of a grading
permit, a staging plan and haul
route plan shall be reviewed and
approved by Engineering
Services and the Project
Manager must coordinate with
the contractors and site
Superintendents.
Issue instructions to each
construction project for
contractors to incorporate these
standard conditions.
The contractor will ere. are a
Mitigation Measures and Standard Conditions
structure. At a minimum, all architectural
coatings shall comply with the most recent
standards in SCAQMD Rule 1113 —
Architectural Coatings. In addition, architectural
coatings should not be applied to more than
10,500 square feet of construction per day,
including both interior and exterior surfaces.
AQ -2: On -site equipment shall not be left idling when
not in use.
AQ -3: Staging areas for heavy -duty construction
equipment shall be located as far as possible
from sensitive receptors (i.e. adjacent
residential uses). A staging plan showing where
the construction trucks will be Tine -up and a
truck route map shall be provided to the
Development Services Director or designee for
review and approval prior to construction.
SC -1: Minimization of Disturbance. Construction
contractors shall minimize the area disturbed
by clearing, grading, earth moving, or
excavation operations to prevent excessive
amount of dust.
Enforcement
Agency /Monitoring
Agency /Reporting
Procedure
Y
^C
W
c E
f0 (0 o U
.c .2'O O
N 0 a) V
N >' ='p G)
o a N C t7..
U •' r) O U
U
O O .4) O N
Q' O C c o aN s
>r cr, Cr c ,
U
l,„.9. N[Q .,
w O O C = o
U0.Ec2
Responsible for
Mitigation
Monitoring and Action
Notes
0 O (ii.
C .0L a) co
U X U Q 'C O
O N N N y O c S 0c d v)
o 3 rn L E c
Q dO .c )
c N O .G C
O m� O N U � co
:�.. flP° �2 2) x17,1 G
EN (Q TO-
O v) Q N as N co N
Mitigation Measures and Standard Conditions
O C O O N
•
t N a) .- co O +cu.- a
N y.- E 'O •C •-
0 N O C f0 +O ., O d N N >:‘
E 0
— C -p " 0 E O- N
U c > 0 0_ C C CD
2 -0 'C • a) L CO .0
o O .7-0 U as 3
LN
U >a "0 .o -NC
N _
O 0 : > N O p C
U, co
V O f4 C y c N Q
O as
i .0 7 a a— •
O c N •(a o
c co C N + ?a 0 °
yE c°E-a
•_ o L
U 2 w .0 = ca V y
c L a N E. >, �.
E o0 C 2 C v c
� LN 6
o:a
L 0 OU>U V EC 0
O O f6 C C .,, c
►— NL3 V o ` a ca o
.. o c c
° x o m
m a� c E
N U N Q G) 0) 0
N
U
V)
— N , ,•, j v ci C O ) 'L .r N G)
>O uC O C aa) C 4->
L - O Ti)
N U >, as U '= N -p N
N Y L = N y> >, O
N N O X
0 0 0 N > , .2 a)
U 'O ..ca C as .. ,N C O
C V O N 0 L O
> .0 d C
C C .; O 0 a) 7 O C -5 C
Vyo OVOO>
oNo .O
0 0)
O a .0 O G) O GC
= O — N o> d O Q
"' N a
oN O C C L
` = 'O O O U "=
.. 'O c O p
0 V cn O a _
L Q a
02 >> Gi
0 c •N im
C O 0 0 >,'O C V)
o ° ... 0.S 0) =�
Nrnc m co c >,
3 QL
_ ON C � �L co 0.N
° Si.
0NE�0) i)Lcm -O
0 O O O L f O N
° y C a.- 'c y
U o�. a c 3 >
p c �
o N t c �)
UE co N O N N O o �
Q 4-
U
V)
C a>
O - C O G)
C ,C
U O o j O
'0o c0
N L
C C L a)
O Q 0
U N >.N ,
•C
N
= 7
C U= E 0
° C
(a O .—
N
Q) Q> O
= _o co N
N X O O
) C
0) O.C2o
o C m
v L
N o) a)
L E_
c0C • �
o c
Lo
L U E N i N
U 6 -o N fl-
m `o
Z 0 a) i_
U a O_ m L
;1.
0
CO
C
�O 'C
as =O
0 o c:1) C
2— 0
V L
W G)
o)
a)
c 0)
u) c
o
Lp2
C <% U
3 E .a?
p °o
>.• 0-
CD-0
o E OS
Q_ U =
.c aO
I-<0
�� cn '- c.0
L C i) O .� a) O° L.c c a)
O O a) a3 U C.0 . _N ° Q
c � cu o � H O a. ° .0 E •,2' n ° E C)
'y , as LC) 3 a ca C a a O uu) C c •' S O C CUII u) •
o 1— .O = N E CD as o O ca so p. '• j N a) >, C
c c °`•'= c S 0 c 2 c-" c mt o o-°a
�� O 0 0)'E o as o° o. °~ 8
ti )C o - ooc °c,c8a) "• 0.°5 3co0
c� .c cu �•cco:,3 °-" .-`' ai- 0 ,„ a) o °
N p) 2 o ,G? ,c t c V c -[, o L a) ..c0. •c
O C i- as O u) a. — O O. U O O O- O a)
z"
, ac)a 0 a3 2 c) y m o=c C .°c a3_c
Mitigation Measures and Standard Conditions
ui
as
2
12omcQ)2 ca�i° tc°° °
oco8Lo o„°)
c• °y O ; p� >, a o
E °
v, a° co .--4-.,-- 0 o a� 0 co c E E E 12 (.7$ a
O C ° °L� v,-- as
O L N a) 0 = a) C) 0 C a) i— " =0 'O
'O a) °L O O OO °.a a) ° a3 —L N� u0, c
C d .- > Q o. L .-- V, as �- a3
U as �t — N U v) O n c V U•= a) O w
O.0 C �N > o a) V� O• a3 a) N' vi
L= w 7 O 0 C a) `> ▪ n- cQ >+ C O_ N 0 p �>,, c `=
co _c co O � w' u, • Q a) E a) L O E
�- 3 N O o u0i -0 E° ca a) 0 c N c a)
O o = cr c 3 o c
2)- .- ° QL =s a°) as a, fl
` • O N v a m u) E o0 a 0° .ca 0) a) c C oi HL c
` ` E 0` 2Qao 0
0) �cv�cU " ) o °�W a y co a co 0 -O O "0 2 ca as a O O a) -o g) a) U A p 0 'C `N c N 0N CL E o , ca o ° O a w 5 co a •C O C 3Cc aS E Q a c °) E m R a a) O � )
° E g ~cvso f, 1g a) Q ? �o �= N 0 U `� 3 � N « 'i) O co a L . o .0 C = .O .fl O
O
M '-
IL p
Enforcement
Agency /Monitoring
Agency /Reporting
Procedure
City of Arcadia — Engineering
Services and Public Works
Department.
Following ground- disturbing
activities for all applicable
projects. It shall be considered
complete upon documentation of
compliance with erosion - control
best management practices and
completion of reveaetation
City of Arcadia — Building
Services and Public Works
Department.
The City Building and Public
Works Inspectors shall
periodically monitor the catch
basins during construction period
and document results in the
project file.
U
a)
7O
a a)
(15
c 1
0 c
y c
o a`•c
m
I-2 co
The Property Owner, Project
Manager, and On -site
Superintendents.
Monitoring and Action
Notes
Shall prepare and implement
construction BMPs and erosion
control plan.
Clearing and /or construction within
temporarily fenced areas shall be postponed
or halted until juveniles have fledged and there
is no evidence of a second nesting attempt.
The biologist shall serve as a construction
monitor during those periods when
disturbance activities will occur near active
nest areas to ensure that no inadvertent
impacts on these nests will occur.
6. Geology and Soils
GEO -1: The construction crew shall be required to use
Best Management Practices (BMPs) and
standards to control and reduce erosion.
These measures could include, but are not
limited to, protection all finished graded slopes
from erosion using such techniques as
erosion control matting and hydroseeding or
other - suitable measures.
GEO -2: When working near catch basins, cover and
seal each basin prior to the start of
construction.
Enforcement
Agency /Monitoring
Agency /Reporting
Procedure
7
b § 0� g
= k k§�
°§ n- _g$�
kE 7 / / /k.
�e6 cm
1 =S E§�°2
§m' EO
'5 r) / § � m a) k E 0
<EE
co c �0/ =ot ,,,„7"(0‘..,-5 £ .2c2
>a% ■b5=�
\3E -� o
City of Arcadia — Building,
Engineering, and Planning
Services.
City of Arcadia Building and
Code Services.
The City Staff shall act as a
liaison with the nei• hbors and
Responsible for
Mitigation
-0 \
%\
c
c0
Ok
>o-
�
\
ci. / Si-
(t) 15- 2
15 ...(-9
The Property Owner and
Applicant - Pacific Design
Group.
The Property Owner, Project
Manager, and On -site
Superintendents.
Monitoring and Action
Notes
% -6,-.: 0 c
5 f /CCOEt
§ _ a) \ \ CU & & �
c§200R ƒf
/°EEC §'2Q)
/222k °§a)%
C c- c m 2 c
g = -
/CD12��%kk\
$£E�: o >, o=
- m77 .c§£0>
\/\52�0
f�k /���ba)\
R £ o.co o 0 k £
A drainage plan shall be
prepared by a licensed Engineer
and submitted to the City for
review and approval.
The Applicant shall issue
instruction to the Project
Manager of the City's
construction hours.
Mitigation Measures and Standard Conditions
8. Hazards and Hazardous Materials
SC -6: In accordance with the California Code of
Regulations (Title 8, Section 1541), if any
construction, excavations, and new utility lines
are proposed near or crossing existing high
pressure pipelines, natural gas /petroleum
pipelines, electrical lines greater than 60,000
volts, and other high priority lines are required to
notify the owner /operator of the line and must
identify the locations of subsurface lines prior to
any ground disturbance for excavation.
Coordination, approval, and monitoring by the
owner /operator of the line would avoid damage to
high priority lines and prevent the creation of
hazards to the surrounding area.
9. Hydrology and Water Quality
HYD -1: The applicant shall prepare and submit a final
drainage plan to the City for approval by the
City. The drainage plan shall include post
development designs that ensure adequate
capacity to accommodate and prevent flooding
of the site and adjacent roadway.
12. Noise
N -1: Construction Timing — Construction activities shall
be limited to the hours between 7:00 a.m. and
7:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday.
Construction equipment maintenance shall be
limited to the same hours.
Enforcement
Agency /Monitoring
Agency /Reporting
Procedure
residents conceming project
construction activities.
$ %
_§ .5 3 t".)
E$ @\@
ek ��k
Cil 2 5� k
a c
03.0 \f0 ai
§ c§
c % oE�
o CO
>, § >_\£
/ E / E k .g
City of Arcadia — Building,
Planning, and Code Services.
The City Staff shall act as a
Responsible for
Mitigation
)
0
CL o
(�
O/f
§�
Q.a§
Q./k
a) c a
/2/
The Property Owner, Project
Manager, and On -site
Superintendents.
Monitoring and Action
Notes
c f _ f
% § m
CL C.) k$
&Ef/ $/c
2' o� 7�§
/0c O�2
2caq %2 7
t a E § /
2 2 g 0 u co o c
§/ g g k b Z. a
Qc\�2 ' g7E
/§ 2$ E c m 2§
The project shall utilize
construction equipment
equipped with standard noise
insulatin • features during
Mitigation Measures and Standard Conditions
§ ■ @ = c o _ = o » CO n m m ® >, _ CD CO
'£® = @g.o mC —£ n o
@ » _ _; E�
22�2§§�%�0.J0_&f ®ggZER�f6
$ c o E $ E 2 § § ° E % ..... $ % R $
0���Eo� -a Ts ° C <2$ .�/ @$°£ =
2 »E Roa2a) @ \ % =a a @ £'$@_$
/a�§�5o§0� q 7E a) .7 k§5
5 2 — o E£ E _ o £ c m _g Q� 0 0
a) a) c0�555 \j\ coc /_�/�°
o U) m' ° 0_$\ 3== o a Q@ q& 2 2
\� /ko22i�=E�\2\ '/£/ ®2R @2
2�2§� 2$FE§§ § ƒ2 2\��d7gkJ
E0 °- -° /§f$k /§ //
0. /SSmk\ /kk���� -u '�2kECa�f
= m CD-0 C0*- ° °@ cs o/ /@ 7 0 2 0 a
® /��£� E�2\ 2 =Eo ���o%§ 7
0 2/�0.cE0§ =k\7 kc�k25 o
t -0 E n -Cr) @ % @ = 3 = 0 2 13 C .0 ° °
22 ko@5 /-0 /\t�2'\ /�/3a$/0c
c c w— cti • 2o$= C §• f U — �E 2 2 f 7/
O 13).0§ %< 0 0.k� �k(k /k /kR
z
N -3: The construction contractor shall place all
stationary construction equipment so that emitted
noise is directed away from the noise - sensitive
receptors. When feasible, the construction
Enforcement
Agency /Monitoring
Agency /Reporting
Procedure
liaison with the neighbors and
residents concerning project
construction activities.
City of Arcadia — Engineering,
Building and Planning Services.
The City shall file the approved
haul route plan in the project file.
City of Arcadia — Planning and
Building Services
The City Staff shall act as a
liaison with the neighbors and
residents concerning project
construction activities.
Responsible for
Mitigation
The Property Owner, the
Applicant — Pacific Design
Group, Project Manager, and
On -Site Superintendents.
c
cca
}r
a) C c
c V N C
0 92 2 2
U
>,aa,CI)
N I'o=
o c a
a` ° a °'
L d . i
E- Q CD O
Monitoring and Action
Notes
construction to reduce source
noise levels.
The contractor shall prepare a
construction noise impact
abatement plan to report on the
implementation of the mitigation
measure.
Designate an On -Site
Superintendent to receive and
resolve construction noise
com • laints.
Haul routes shall be approved by
Engineering Services to
minimize exposure of sensitive
receptions to potential adverse
noise levels from hauling
operations to the adjacent
nei • hbors.
The Applicant shall coordinate
with the City with the information
provided on the notification. The
Property Owner and Project
Manager shall notify the
neighbors and the location of the
signs on the subject property
shall be reviewed and approved
by the City.
Mitigation Measures and Standard Conditions
contractor shall locate equipment staging in
areas that will create the greatest distance
between construction - related noise sources and
noise sensitive receptors during all project
construction.
N-4: The construction contractor shall limit haul truck
deliveries to the same hours specified for
construction equipment. To the extent feasible,
haul routes shall not pass sensitive land uses or
residential dwellings.
N -5: Neighbor Notification. Provide notification to
residential occupants adjacent to the project site
at least 24 hours prior to initiation of construction
activities that could significantly affect outdoor or
indoor living areas. This notification should
include the anticipated hours and duration of
construction and a description of noise reduction
measures. The notification shall include a
telephone number for local residents to call to
submit complaints associated with construction
noise. The notification shall be posted on San
Juan Drive, Santa Cruz Road, and San Rafael
Road adjacent to the • ro'ect site, and must be
Enforcement
Agency /Monitoring
Agency /Reporting
Procedure
City of Arcadia — Engineering and
Planning Services and Public
Works Department.
The City shall file the approved
haul route plan in the project file.
City of Arcadia — Engineering and
Planning Services and Public
Works Department.
City Engineering Inspector shall
periodically conduct physical
monitoring of the site during
construction period and document
results in the project file.
City of Arcadia — Public Works
De • artment, and En • ineerin • and
Responsible for
Mitigation
The Property Owner and
Applicant — Pacific Design
Group.
The Property Owner and
Applicant — Pacific Design
Group.
The Property Owner and
A. • Iicant — Pacific Desi • n
Monitoring and Action
Notes
Prior to issuance of a grading or
building permit issued by the
City, the developer shall prepare
a haul route plan for review and
approval.
The developer shall notify the
City at least seven (7) days of
the beginning of any earth
moving and or truck hauling
activities on the site.
If any damages occur caused to
the route during the hauling
activities, the developer shall be
responsible to repairing any
damages.
The developer shall provide a
construction schedule • rior to
Mitigation Measures and Standard Conditions
easily viewed from adjacent public areas.
16. Traffic
T -1: The developer shall prepare a haul route plan for
trucks hauling earth or construction materials
from the project site to where this material will be
disposed. The plan shall be reviewed and
approved by the Arcadia Engineering Services
Division before a grading or building permit is
issued by the City, and the City has the ability to
limit any hauling activity to off -peak hours.
T -2: The developer shall notify the City at least seven
(7) days of the beginning of any earth moving
and or truck hauling activities on the site. The
City shall assess the roadway conditions along
the haul route and the developer shall be
responsible for any damages caused to the route
during the hauling activities. The developer shall
be responsible for repairing any damages
identified by the City prior to occupancy of any
part of the project.
17. Utilities and Service Systems
USS -1: The existing sewer main on Colorado Place is
considered deficient by the City's Public Works
Enforcement
Agency /Monitoring
Agency /Reporting
Procedure
2
U
•Z w
m
c
c
c
a
Responsible for
Mitigation
Monitoring and Action
Notes
issuance of a grading or building
permit issued by the City. If
construction will occur prior to
the City's Capital Improvement
Projects, the developer shall
perform an area study and
submit the analysis to the City's
Public Works Department and
Development Services
Department for review. The
study shall be used to determine
the adequacy and the required
fair -share contribution for this
project toward the sewer
improvement project. The
property owner or developer
shall be required to pay for its
fair -share contribution to the city
prior to occupancy of any part of
the • ro'ect.
Mitigation Measures and Standard Conditions
City of Arcadia
Medical Office Buildings,
Parking Structure, and
Professional Office Building
Project
Air Quality
Study
August 2012
August 13, 2012
Project No. 12 -00033
Mr. Mike Soo
VG Property Investment, LLC
25 E. Huntington Dr.
Arcadia, CA 91107
Rincon Consultants, Inc.
180 North Ashwood Avenue
Ventura, California 93003
805 644 4455
FAX 644 4240
info @rin000000sultants.cam
www.rinconconsultants.00m
AIR QUALITY STUDY
Medical Office Building, Parking Structure, and Professional Office Building Project
Arcadia, California
Dear Mr. Soo:
Rincon Consultants, Inc. is pleased to submit the attached Air Quality Study for the
proposed Medical Office Building, Parking Structure, and Professional Office Building
Project in Arcadia, California. The proposed project would result in temporary reactive
organic gas (ROG) emissions that would exceed the recommended South Coast Air Quality
Management District (SCAQMD) threshold. Mitigation was provided, limiting the total area
to which architectural coatings could be applied on a daily basis during construction. This
mitigation would reduce the project's temporary regional air quality impacts to a less than
significant level. The proposed project would not result in any other emissions that would
exceed the recommended South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD)
operational or construction thresholds. As such, impacts related to air quality as a result of
the proposed project would be less than significant, with incorporation of the recommended
mitigation measures. If you have any questions regarding this study or if we can provide
you with other environmental consulting services, please feel free to contact us.
Sincerely,
RINCON CONSULTANTS, INC.
Chris Bersbach
Associate Environmental Planner
Environmental Scientists
Joe Power, AICP
Principal
Planners Engineers
November 27, 2012
Project No. 12 -00033
Mr. Mike Soo
VG Property Investment, LLC
25 E. Huntington Dr.
Arcadia, CA 91107
Rincon Consultants, Inc.
180 North Ashwood Avenue
Ventura, California 93003
805 644 4455
FAX 644 4240
iofo@rmconconsultants.c001
www.rincanconsultents.conl
AIR QUALITY STUDY - SUPPLEMENTAL MEMORANDUM
Medical Office Building, Parking Structure, and Professional Office Building Project
Arcadia, California
Dear Mr. Soo:
This memorandum has been prepared by Rincon Consultants, Inc. to supplement the Air
Quality Study for the proposed Medical Office Building, Parking Structure, and Professional
Office Building Project in the City of Arcadia. Rincon previously prepared the Air Quality
Study dated August 13, 2012 for the proposed project. While the proposed floor area and
land use components associated with Buildings 1, 2, and 3 remain the same, it is our
understanding that the proposed project has been revised to reflect a conversion of 400
square feet of restaurant floor area into general office space in Building 4. Rincon has
prepared this supplemental memorandum to determine whether the findings from the Air
Quality Study remain valid based on the recommended South Coast Air Quality
Management District (SCAQMD) thresholds.
Because the overall floor area of the project would remain the same, no substantial change
to short -term construction emissions would be anticipated. Similarly, no substantial change
to energy emissions or area source emissions would be anticipated. However, the proposed
revision would potentially result in a change in the volume of vehicle traffic generated by
the proposed project, which may result in a change in mobile source emissions.
Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers (LLG Engineers) prepared a supplemental trip
generation assessment, dated November 27, 2012, intended to supplement the traffic impact
study prepared for the proposed project, dated August 15, 2012. Briefly, the supplemental
trip generation assessment indicated that the proposed project, as revised, is forecast to
generate approximately 1,866 daily trip ends during a typical weekday, as compared to the
prior proposed project, which was was forecast to generate 1,888 vehicle trip ends during a
typical weekday. Therefore, the revised project would result in somewhat fewer vehicle
trips, as compared to the prior proposed project.
Environmental Scientists
Planners Engineers
Rincon Consultants, Inc.
180 North Ashwood Avenue
Ventura, California 93003
805 644 4455
FAx 644 4240
info@rinconconsultants.com
www.rinconconsultants.com
Based on a review of the revised trip generation forecast, described above, the revised
project is anticipated to result in a small overall decrease in the project's long -term mobile
source criteria pollutant emissions. Accordingly, it is determined that the analysis and
findings from the August 13, 2012 Air Quality Study remain valid. Additional air quality
analysis will not be required for the proposed revised project.
If you have any questions regarding this study, please feel free to contact us.
Sincerely,
RINCON CONSULTANTS, INC.
Chris Bersbach
Associate Environmental Planner
Environmental Scientists
Joe Power, AICP
Principal
Planners Engineers
Geotechnologies, Inc.
Consulting Geotechnical Engineers
ears
0 e`
S��
1971 -2011
April 26, 2012
Revised July 24, 2012
File No. 20300
VG Property Investments, LLC
25 East Huntington Drive
Arcadia, California 91006
Attention: Mike Soo
Subject: Geotechnical Engineering Investigation
Proposed Medical Office Buildings, Parking Structure, and Professional Office Building
125 West Huntington Drive and 161 Colorado Place, Arcadia, California
Ladies and Gentlemen:
This letter transmits the Geotechnical Engineering Investigation for the subject property prepared by
Geotechnologies, Inc. This report provides geotechnical recommendations for the development of
the site, including earthwork, seismic design, foundation, retaining walls, excavations, and shoring
design. Engineering for the proposed project should not begin until approval of the geotechnical
investigation is granted by the local building official. Significant changes in the geotechnical
recommendations may result due to the building department review process.
The validity of the recommendations presented herein is dependant upon review of the geotechnical
aspects of the project during construction by this firm. The subsurface conditions described herein
have been projected from limited subsurface exploration and laboratory testing. The exploration and
testing presented in this report should in no way be construed to reflect any variations which may
occur between the exploration locations or which may result from changes in subsurface conditions.
Should you have any questions please contact this office.
Respectfully submitted,
GEOTECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Distribution: (2) Addressee
(5) Pacific Design Group; Attn: Ken Paddock
439 Western Avenue, Glendale, California 91201 -2837 • 818.240.9600 • 818.240.9675 fax
April 26, 2012
Revised July 24, 2012
File No. 20300
Page 10
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Based upon the exploration, lab oratory testing, and research, it is the finding of Geotechnologies, Inc.
that construction of the proposed office buildings and parking structure is considered feasible from
a geotechnical engineering standpoint provided the advice and recommendations presented herein are
followed and implemented during construction.
Between 11/2 and 3 feet of existing fill materials was encountered during exploration at the site. Due
to the variable nature and the varying depths of the existing fill materials, the existing fill materials
are considered to be unsuitable for support ofthe proposed foundations, floor slabs, or additional fill.
The proposed medical office buildings (Building 2 and 3) and parking structure (Building 1) will be
constructed entirely over one subterranean level of parking garage, extending between 111/2 to 161/2
feet below the first floor elevation. It is anticipated that excavation of the proposed subterranean
level will remove the existing fill soils from the site, and expose the underlying dense native soils. The
proposed medical office buildings and parking structure may be supported on conventional
foundations bearing in the underlying dense native soils.
The proposed professional office building (Building 4) will be constructed at or near the present
grade. It is recommended that all existing fill materials and the upper native soils be removed and
recomp acted to create an uniform fill pad for the support of the proposed foundations and floor slabs.
The proposed professional office building may be constructed on conventional foundations bearing
in the newly placed uniform fill pad.
All existing fill materials shall be properly removed and recompacted for support ofthe professional
office building. The proposed uniform fill pad shall extend a minimum of 5 feet below the existing
Geotechnoloales, Inc.
N. 439 Western Avenue, Glendale, California 91201 -2837 • 818.240.9600 • 818.240.9675 fax
April 26, 2012
Revised July 24, 2012
File No. 20300
Page 11
site grade, or 3 feet below the bottom of the proposed foundation system, whichever is greater. In
addition, the proposed fill pad shall be overexcavated a minimum of 3 feet horizontally beyond the
edge of foundations or for a distance equal to the depth of fill below the foundations, whichever is
greater. The existing fill materials may be utilized for the construction of the proposed fill pad. Any
imported fill materials shall be verified and tested by this office prior to usage on site.
It is anticipated that excavation of the proposed subterranean level will require shoring measure to
provide a stable working area due to the proposed depth, the granular nature of the onsite soils, and
the proximity of adjacent properties and public right of ways.
Foundations for small outlying structures, such as property line walls, trash enclosures, and planters,
which will not be tied -in to the proposed structures may be supported on conventional foundations
bearing in the underlying native soils and/or certified compacted fill.
The following statement is made in regard to Los Angeles County Code Sections 110 and 111: It
is the opinion of the undersigned based on the findings of this investigation, that provided the
recommendations presented in this report are followed, the proposed development will be safe for
its intended use against hazard from landsliding, settlement or slippage. The proposed development
will have no adverse effect on the stability of the site of adjoining properties.
The validity of the conclusions and design recommendations presented herein is dependant upon
review of the geotechnical aspects of the proposed construction by this firm. The subsurface
conditions described herein have been projected from borings on the site as indicated and should in
no way be construed to reflect any variations which may occur between these borings or which may
result from changes in subsurface conditions. Any changes in the design or location of any structure.
Geotochnologies, Inc.
439 Western Avenue, Glendale, California 91201 -2837 • 818.240.9600 • 818.240.9675 fax
April 26, 2012
Revised July 24, 2012
File No. 20300
Page 12
as outlined in this report, should be reviewed by this office. The recommendations contained herein
should not be considered valid until reviewed and modified or reaffirmed subsequent to such review.
FILL SOILS
The maximum depth of fill encountered on the site was 3 feet. This material and any fill generated
during demolition should be removed during the excavation of the subterranean level, and properly
recompacted for support of the at -grade structure.
EXPANSIVE SOILS
The onsite geologic materials are in the very low to moderate expansion range. The Expansion Index
was found to be between 7 and 64 for bulk samples remolded to 90 percent of the laboratory
maximum density. Recommended reinforcing is noted in the "Foundation Design" and "Slabs On
Grade" sections of this report.
GRADING GUIDELINES
Site Preparation
All vegetation, existing fill, and soft or disturbed geologic materials should be removed from the areas
to receive controlled fill. A thorough search should be made for possible underground utilities and /or
structures. The excavated areas shall be carefully observed by the geotechnical engineer prior to
placing compacted fill.
Geotech®G$OUJOS, Inc.
439 Western Avenue, Glendale, California 91201 -2837 •818.240.9600. 818.240.9675 fax
Standard Urban Stormwater Mitigation Plan
(SUSMP)
for
New Medical office Building & New Parking Structure
161 W. Colorado PI, ARCADIA, CA 91007
Parcel No. 12826 & Tract No. 62234
APN: 5775 - 015 -024, 025, 026, &027
PREPARED FOR
VG Property Investments, LLC
25 E. Huntington Drive,
Arcadia, CA 91006
Tel: 626 - 821 -8777
Fax: 626- 821 -8778
PREPARED BY
Lin Consulting, Inc.
21660, E. Copley Drive, #270
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
Tel: 909 -396 -6850
Fax: 909 - 396 -8150
SUSMP Prepared: May 21', 2012
OWNER'S CERTIFICATION
Standard Urban Stormwater Mitigation Plan
for
New Medical Office Building
Parcel No. 12826 & Tract No. 62234
This Standard Urban Stormwater Mitigation Plan (SUSMP) for New Medical Office Building has been
prepared for VG Property Investments, LLC. by LIN Consulting, Inc. This SUSMP is intended to comply
with the requirements of the City of Arcadia, County of Los Angeles, requiring the preparation of a project
specific SUSMP.
I certify under penalty of law that this document and all attachments were prepared under my jurisdiction or
supervision in accordance with a system designed to assure that qualified personnel properly gather and
evaluate the information submitted. Based on my inquiry of the person or persons who manage the system or
those persons directly responsible for the gathered information, to the best of my knowledge and belief, the
information submitted is true, accurate, and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for
submitting false information, including the possibility of fine and imprisonment for knowing violations.
The undersigned, while it owns the subject property, is responsible for the implementation of the provisions of
this plan and will ensure that this plan is amended as appropriate to reflect up -to -date conditions on the site
consistent with the current Los Angeles County Stormwater Quality Management Plan (SQMP), and the intent
of the stormwater and urban runoff NPDES Permit and Waste Discharge Requirements for the County of Los
Angeles, Los Angeles County Flood Control District and the incorporated Cities of Los Angeles County under
the jurisdiction of the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board. A copy of this SUSMP will be
maintained at the project site /office.
This SUSMP will be reviewed with the facility operator, facility supervisors, employees, tenants, maintenance
and service contractors, or any, other party having responsibility for implementing portions of this SUSMP. At
least one copy of the approved and certified copy of this SUSMP shall be available on the subject property in
perpetuity. Once the undersigned transfers its interest in the property, its successors -in- interest shall bear the
aforementioned responsibility to implement and amend the SUSMP.
Mike Soo
Owner
Printed Name /Title
(626) 821 -8777
Telephone No.
VG Property Investments, LLC
Company
25 E. Huntington Dr., Arcadia, CA 91006
Company Address
Date
City of Arcadia
Medical Office Buildings,
Parking Structure, and
Professional Office Building
Project
Greenhouse Gas
Study
August 2012
August 13, 2012
Project No. 12 -00033
Mr. Mike Soo
VG Property Investment, LLC
25 E. Huntington Dr.
Arcadia, CA 91107
Rincon Consultants, Inc.
180 North Ashwood Avenue
Ventura, California 93003
805 644 4455
FAX 644 4240
Info @rinc0nconsultants.c0m
www.rinc0nconsultants.c0m
GREENHOUSE GAS STUDY
Medical Office Building, Parking Structure, and Professional Office Building Project
Arcadia, California
Dear Mr. Soo:
Rincon Consultants, Inc. is pleased to submit the attached Greenhouse Gas Study for the
proposed Medical Office Building, Parking Structure, and Professional Office Building
Project in Arcadia, California. The proposed project would result in 2,211 metric tons CO2E
per year, and therefore would not exceed the 3,000 metric tons per year threshold
recommended by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). As such,
the proposed project's contribution to cumulative GHG emissions and climate change
would be less than significant. It should be noted that this threshold is a recommended
threshold by SCAQMD, and has not yet been formally adopted. If you have any questions
regarding this study or if we can provide you with other environmental consulting services,
please feel free to contact us.
Sincerely,
RINCON CONSULTANTS, INC.
L'4";
Chris Bersbach oe Power, AICP
Environmental Planner Principal
Environmental Scientists
Planners Engineers
November 27, 2012
Project No. 12 -00033
Mr. Mike Soo
VG Property Investment, LLC
25 E. Huntington Dr.
Arcadia, CA 91107
Rincon Consultants, Inc.
180 North Ashwood Avenue
Ventura, California 93003
805 644 4455
FAX 644 4240
info@nnconconsultants.com
www.rinconconsultants.c001
GREENHOUSE GAS STUDY - SUPPLEMENTAL MEMORANDUM
Medical Office Building, Parking Structure, and Professional Office Building Project
Arcadia, California
Dear Mr. Soo:
This memorandum has been prepared by Rincon Consultants, Inc. to supplement the
Greenhouse Gas Study for the proposed Medical Office Building, Parking Structure, and
Professional Office Building Project in the City of Arcadia. Rincon previously prepared the
Greenhouse Gas Study dated August 13, 2012 for the proposed project. While the proposed
floor area and land use components associated with Buildings 1, 2, and 3 remain the same, it
is our understanding that the proposed project has been revised to reflect a conversion of
400 square feet of restaurant floor area into general office space in Building 4. Rincon has
prepared this supplemental memorandum to determine whether the findings from the
Greenhouse Gas Study remain valid based on the 3,000 metric tons per year threshold
recommended by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD).
Because the overall floor area of the project would remain the same, no substantial change
to short -term construction emissions would be anticipated. Similarly, no substantial change
to on -site operational emissions would be anticipated. However, the proposed revision
would potentially result in a change in the volume of vehicle traffic generated by the
proposed project, which may result in a change in GHG emissions from mobile combustion.
Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers (LLG Engineers) prepared a supplemental trip
generation assessment, dated November 27, 2012, intended to supplement the traffic impact
study prepared for the proposed project, dated August 15, 2012. Briefly, the supplemental
trip generation assessment indicated that the proposed project, as r wised, is forecast to
generate approximately 1,866 daily trip ends during a typical weekr'ay, as compared to the
prior proposed project, which was was forecast to generate 1,888 vehicle trip ends during a
typical weekday. Therefore, the revised project would result in somewhat fewer vehicle
trips, as compared to the prior proposed project.
Environmental Scientists
Planners Engineers
Rincon Consultants, Inc.
180 North Ashwood Avenue
Ventura, California 93003
805 644 4455
FAX 644 4240
inf0©rinconconsultants.c0nl
www.rincunconsultants.c0nl
Based on a review of the revised trip generation forecast, described above, the revised
project is anticipated to result in a small overall decrease in the project's long -term GHG
emissions from mobile combustion. Accordingly, it is determined that the analysis and
findings from the August 13, 2012 Greenhouse Gas Study remain valid. Additional GHG
analysis will not be required for the proposed revised project.
If you have any questions regarding this study, please feel free to contact us.
Sincerely,
RINCON CONSULTANTS, INC.
Chris Bersbach
Environmental Planner
Environmental Scientists
oe Power, AICP
Principal
Planners Engineers
City of Arcadia
Medical Office Buildings,
Parking Structure, and
Professional Office Building
Project
Noise Study
October 2012
October 2, 2012
Project No. 12 -00033
Mr. Mike Soo
VG Property Investment, LLC
25 E. Huntington Dr.
Arcadia, CA 91107
Rincon Consultants, Inc.
180 North Ashwood Avenue
Ventura, California 93003
805 644 4455
FAX 644 4240
Info @rinconconsultants.com
wWW.rinconconsultants.c0111
NOISE STUDY
Medical Office Building, Parking Structure, and Professional Office Building Project
Arcadia, California
Dear Mr. Soo:
Rincon Consultants, Inc. is pleased to submit the attached Noise Study for the proposed
Medical Office Building, Parking Structure, and Professional Office Building Project in
Arcadia, California. The proposed project would have a potentially significant impact
related to temporary construction noise; however, restrictions on the timing of construction
operations, construction equipment requirements, and neighbor notification would reduce
this impact to a less than significant level. The proposed project would not result in any
long -term noise levels exceeding the noise standards policies in the City of Arcadia's
General Plan Noise Element or Municipal Code. As such, impacts related to noise as a result
of the proposed project would be less than significant. If you have any questions regarding
this study or if we can provide you with other environmental consulting services, please feel
free to contact us.
Sincerely,
RINCON CONSULTANTS, INC.
o
Chris Bersbach e Power, AICP
Environmental Planner Principal
Environmental Scientists
Planners Engineers
November 27, 2012
Project No. 12 -00033
Mr. Mike Soo
VG Property Investment, LLC
25 E. Huntington Dr.
Arcadia, CA 91107
Rincon Consultants, Inc.
180 North Ashwood Avenue
Ventura, California 93003
805 644 4455
FAX 644 4240
inf0@rii)COnC005Ultallts.00 1)
www.rI0000000S0ltant5.00m
NOISE STUDY - SUPPLEMENTAL MEMORANDUM
Medical Office Building, Parking Structure, and Professional Office Building Project
Arcadia, California
Dear Mr. Soo:
This memorandum has been prepared by Rincon Consultants, Inc. to supplement the Noise
Study for the proposed Medical Office Building, Parking Structure, and Professional Office
Building Project in the City of Arcadia. Rincon previously prepared the Noise Study dated
October 2, 2012 for the proposed project. While the proposed floor area and land use
components associated with Buildings 1, 2, and 3 remain the same, it is our understanding
that the proposed project has been revised to reflect a conversion of 400 square feet of
restaurant floor area into general office space in Building 4. Rincon has prepared this
supplemental memorandum to determine whether the findings from the Noise Study
remain valid based on the noise standards policies in the City of Arcadia's General Plan
Noise Element or Municipal Code.
Because the overall size and scope of the project would remain the same, no changes to
temporary construction noise would be anticipated. Similarly, no substantial change to
long -term operational noise would be anticipated. However, the proposed revision would
potentially result in a change in the volume of vehicle traffic generated by the proposed
project, which may result in a change in long -term regional noise levels.
Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers (LLG Engineers) prepared a supplemental trip
generation assessment, dated November 27, 2012, intended to supplement the traffic impact
study prepared for the proposed project, dated August 15, 2012. Briefly, the supplemental
trip generation assessment indicated that the proposed project, as revised, is forecast to
generate approximately 1,866 daily trip ends during a typical weekday, as compared to the
prior proposed project, which was was forecast to generate 1,888 vehicle trip ends during a
typical weekday. Therefore, the revised project would result in somewhat fewer vehicle
trips, as compared to the prior proposed project.
Environmental Scientists
Planners Engineers
Rincon Consultants, Inc.
180 North Ashwood Avenue
Ventura, California 93003
X05 644 4455
FAX 644 4240
1iifo@rinconconsultants.c0111
www.rinconcon5ultalltS.00 0
Based on a review of the revised trip generation forecast, described above, the revised
project is anticipated to result in a small overall decrease in the project's long -term regional
noise levels. Accordingly, it is determined that the analysis and findings from the October 2,
2012 Noise Study remain valid. Additional noise analysis will not be required for the
proposed revised project.
If you have any questions regarding this study, please feel free to contact us.
Sincerely,
RINCON CONSULTANTS, INC.
Chris Bersbach
Environmental Planner
Environmental Scientists
oe Power, AICP
Principal
Planners Engineers
Pr pared
TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS
125 W. HUNTINGTON DRIVE AND
161 COLORADO PLACE
PROJECT
City of Arcadia, California
August 15, 2012
Prepared for
VG Property Investments
25 East Huntington Drive
Arcadia, California 91006
LLG Ref. 1 -11- 3942 -1
Under the Supervision of:
7)2 oab-
Alfred C g, P. , PjTP % Clare M. Look - Jaeger, P.E.
Senior - .portati n Eng eer Principal
LiNSUO7'
LAW
GREENSPAN
engineers
Linscott. Law &
Greenspan, Engineers
236 N. Chester Ave.,
Suite 200
Pasadena, CA 91106
626.796.2322 r
626.792.0941 F
www.Ilgengineers.com
13.0 CONCLUSIONS
This traffic impact study has been prepared to identify and evaluate the potential impacts of
traffic generated by the proposed 125 W. Huntington Drive and 161 Colorado Place project. The
proposed project consists of the development of the following gross square feet (GSF) of
building floor area and corresponding land use components:
• Building 1: 163,468 GSF Parking Structure
• Building 2: 19,995 GSF of Medical Office Use
• Building 3: 16,441 GSF of Medical Office Use + 3,000 GSF of Restaurant Use
• Building 4: 22,819 GSF of General Office Use + 2,000 GSF of Restaurant Use
Construction of the proposed project is planned to be built and occupied by 2015.
In order to evaluate the potential impacts due to the proposed project, four intersections were
identified for evaluation in consultation with the City of Arcadia to determine changes in
operations following occupancy and utilization of the project. The proposed project is expected
to generate 149 additional vehicle trips (113 inbound trips and 36 outbound trips) during the AM
peak hour. During the PM peak hour, the proposed project is expected to generate 187 additional
vehicle trips (56 inbound trips and 131 outbound trips). Over a 24 -hour period, the proposed
project is forecast to generate approximately 1,888 daily trip ends during a typical weekday
(approximately 944 inbound trips and 944 outbound trips).
It is concluded that the proposed project will not create significant traffic impacts at any of the
study intersections. Incremental, but less than significant impacts are noted at the study
intersections. Therefore, no traffic mitigation measures are required or recommended for the
study intersections.
A review was conducted to determine whether the proposed project would result in significant
traffic impacts to the Congestion Management Program (CMP) roadway system. Based on the
CMP threshold criteria, it is concluded that the proposed project will not result in significant
impacts at any of the CMP intersection or freeway monitoring locations.
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers
- 50 -
LLG Ref. 1 -11- 3942 -1
125 W. Huntington Drive and 161 Colorado Place Project
MEMORANDUM
To:
Ken Paddock
Pacific Design Group
Date: November 27, 2012
From:
Alfred C. Ying, P.E., PTP LLG Ref: 1 -11- 3942 -1
Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers
Subject:
125 W. Huntington Drive and 161 Colorado Place Project —
Supplemental Trip Generation Assessment
This memorandum has been prepared by Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers
(LLG Engineers) to summarize the supplemental trip generation assessment prepared
for the proposed 125 W. Huntington Drive and 161 Colorado Place project in the
City of Arcadia. LLG Engineers previously prepared the traffic impact study dated
August 15, 2012 for the proposed project. While the proposed floor area and land use
components associated with Buildings 1, 2, and 3 remain the same, it is our
understanding that the proposed project has been slightly revised to reflect a
conversion of 400 square feet of restaurant floor area into general office space in
Building 4. LLG Engineers has prepared this trip generation assessment to determine
whether the findings from the traffic impact study remain valid based on City of
Arcadia traffic analysis guidelines.
Briefly, it is concluded that the proposed revised project is expected to result in small
overall decreases in project traffic volumes during the AM and PM peak hours, as
well as on a daily basis. As such, it is determined that the analysis and findings from
the traffic impact study remain valid. Additional traffic analysis will not be required
for the proposed revised project.
Revised Project Trip Generation
The revised trip generation forecast for the 125 W. Huntington Drive and 161
Colorado Place project is summarized in Table 6 -1 (Revised). As shown in Table 6 -1
(Revised), the revised project is expected to generate 147 additional vehicle trips (113
inbound trips and 34 outbound trips) during the AM peak hour. During the PM peak
hour, the revised project is expected to generate 186 additional vehicle trips (55
inbound trips and 131 outbound trips). Over a 24 -hour period, the revised project is
forecast to generate approximately 1,866 daily trip ends during a typical weekday
(933 inbound trips and 933 outbound trips).
When compared with the trip generation forecast for the previously proposed 125 W.
Huntington Drive and 161 Colorado Place project analyzed in the August 15, 2012
traffic impact study, it is concluded that the trip generation forecast for the revised
project description results in a decrease in traffic volumes for the AM and PM peak
hours, as well as on a daily basis. The prior proposed project was forecast to generate
149 additional vehicle trips during the AM peak hour, 187 additional vehicle trips
during the PM peak hour, and 1,888 additional vehicle trip ends during a typical
weekday. As such, the trip generation forecast for the revised project reflects
decreases of two vehicle trips during the AM peak hour, one vehicle trip during the
PM peak hour, and 22 vehicle trips on a daily basis when compared to the previously
0 JOB •FILE2.39412ureport'v9J2- Supplemental Trip Generation Memo. doe
Li N COT
LAW &
GREENSPAN
engineers
Engineers & Planners
Traffic
Transportation
Parking
Linscott, Law &
Greenspan, Engineers
;600 S. Lake Avenue
:Suite 500
Pasadena, CA 91106
626.796.2322
626.792.0941
www.ligengineers.com
Pasadena
Costa Mesa
San Diego
Las Vegas
Ken Paddock
November 27, 2012
Page 2
proposed project. For comparison purposes, a copy of the project trip generation
(Table 6 -1) as contained in the August 15, 2012 traffic impact study is attached.
Summary
Based on a review of the trip generation forecast, the proposed revised project is
anticipated to result in small overall decreases in project traffic volumes during the
AM and PM peak hours, as well as on a daily basis. Accordingly, it is determined
that the analysis and findings from the August 15, 2012 traffic impact study remain
valid. Additional traffic analysis will not be required for the proposed revised
project.
Please feel free to contact us should you have any questions or comments regarding
this supplemental trip generation assessment.
Attachments
c.
Clare M. Look - Jaeger, P.E., LLG Engineers
O.`dOI3 FILi 3942`report 39.12- Supplemental Trip Generation Memo. clot
Exhibit C
Lot Line Adjustment Plans
EXHIBIT "A"
Existing Legal Description
PARCEL 1
Parcel 1 of Parcel Map 12826, per map recorded in Book 129, page 31 of Parcel Maps, Records of
the County of Los Angeles, State of California;
Excepting therefrom that portion per deed to the City of Arcadia, recorded November 26, 1979 as
Document No. 79- 1326058, Official Records of said County.
PARCEL 2
Lot 1 of Tract 62234, as per map recorded in Book 1345, pages 92 -93 inclusive, of Maps, Official
Records of the County of Los Angeles, State of California.
Prepared by me or under my supervision.
1?-eitiviet CL-4'--
ROBERT J lN DAWSON, P.L.S.
L -'7 -IZ
Date
��ANQ sh
� ��
� ROBERT JOHN %
DAWSON
* NO. 6932 *
EXP. 9 -30-13
OF CA-\
N
OMER
VC PROPERTY INVESTMENTS, LLC
25 E. HUNTINGTON DR.
626 - 821 -8777
DAWSON SURVEYING, Inc.
575 Carreon Dr.
Colton, CA 92324
909 - 430 -0016
909- 430 -0046 FAX
k,4_,<(5 LANDG9F
tip' ROBERT JOHN o
DAWSON
* No. 6932
Exp. 9- 30 -13 .�Q-
lcc
1
50.00
1\
Qv
q
• P $0`9
ao;
fv ti^(
�O v`°•
b
84SI5 OF 13E4RD11r v
TI-E BEARINGS AND
DISTANCES ARE BASED
ON M.B. 1345/92 -93.
EXHIBIT 'B "
EXISTING CONDITIONS
1EQ
EXISTING LOT LIRE
TO REMAIN
PARCEL LIAE
TO BE REMOVED
O EASEMENT PER
TITLE REPORT
-a
'G
Q •
h
J
C5
557- 015 -024
\ 557-015-024
57,01 No A 62234
TA 1 1345/ 1 -2
L OT MB
557 - -015 -024
N 01
SAN AR SAN RD
3 58 " W 230.13
•
am
IN 0
\())/
cob
Tj
0
�2
ti •0 �`� LEG4L41PTIGW
PARCEL 1 OF PARCEL MAP12826
�ti hP \ P.M.B. 129/35 2.91 AC.
LOT 1 OF TRACT 62234
3
M.B. 1345/92 -93 1.76 AC.
II
I I
III
4 Ir
L6
—; Os:
SCALE 1"= 100 '
NOTE
BLOCK WALL ALONG
NORTHERLY PROPERTY LINE
AND THE COMMON PROPERTY
LINE OF THE TWO PARCELS.
ca
())
N 89 57 33 "
-J
TOTAL AREA 4.67 AC.
EASEIENT AO7ES
O1 = Easement to Southern California
Edison Company per deed recorded
Nov. 27, 1978 as Doc.# 78- 13009B2 0.R.
0= Easement to Southern California
Edison Company per deed recorded
Nov. 27, 1978 in Book 52356, page 296
c> Easement to Southern California
Edison Company per deed recorded
June 8, 1989 as Doc.# 89- 924801, 0.R.
LINE
BEARING
DISTANCE
L 1
N89 57 33"W
65.35 '
L2
SBB 56 29'W
59.81 '
L3
S88 °56 29'W
41.95 '
L4
N30 33 '15'W
54.B2 '
L5
N06 °05 '52 "W
129.95 '
L6
N06 '05 52 "W
99.83 '
L7
S59 26 44 "W
3.10 '
0.R.
LINE
RADIUS
DELTA
LENGTH
C1
20.00 '
90
'00
27 "
31.42 '
C2
340.00 '
11
57
20 "
70.95 '
EXHIBIT "C"
New Legal Description
PARCEL 1
Parcel 1 of Parcel Map 12826, per map recorded in Book 129, page 31 of Parcel Maps, Records
of the County of Los Angeles, State of California;
Excepting therefrom that portion per deed to the City of Arcadia, recorded November 26, 1979 as
Document No. 79- 1326058, Official Records of said County.
Together with Lot 1 of Tract 62234, as per map recorded in Book 1345, pages 92 -93 inclusive, of
Maps, Official Records of the County of Los Angeles, State of California.
Prepared by me or under my supervision.
ROBERT J HN DAWSON, P.L.S. Date
(C:
AND
J ROBERT JOHNS
DAWSON
ilr NO.6932 *
tP EXP. 9 -30-13 .'T
9��o f CA�`�a��
OMER
PROPERTY INVESTMENTS,LLC
25 E. HUNTINGTON DR.
526- 821 -8777
AFRIGWT
DAWSON VEYING, Inc.
575 Carreon dr.
Colton, CA 92324
909 - 430 -0016
909 - 430 -0046 FAX
EXHIBIT 'D "
LOT MERGER
175 COLORADO PL .
125 W. HUNTINGTON DR.
ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA
BASIS OF BE/RAGS
Tf;E BEARINGS AND
DISTANCES ARE BASED
ON M.B. 1345/92 -93.
lQ
EXISTING LOT LD'
TO REMAIN
PARCEL LINE
TO BE REMOVED
O EASEMENT PER
TITLE REPORT
L6
N895733 "W
Z
ti
50.00'
o N 01 '03 56" W 230.13
SAN RAFAEL RD
29
�Ir SCALE 1"— 100 '
b
LEGAL LE5 MYTION
PARCEL 1 OF PARCEL MAP12826
P.M .8 129/35 2.91 AC.
LOT 1 OF TRACT 62234
M. B .1345/92-93 1.76 A C.
TOTAL AREA 4.67 AC.
EASEMENT MITES
O1 = Easement to Southern California
Edison Company per deed recorded
Nov. 27, 1978 as Doc.# 78- 1300982, O.R.
O2 = Easement to Southern California
Edison Company per deed recorded
Nov. 27, 1978 in Book 52356 page 298, O.R.
O3 = Easement to Southern California
Edison Company per deed recorded
June 8, 1989 as Doc.# 89- 924801, 0.R.
LINE
BEARING
DISTANCE
L 1
N89 '57 33 'W
65.35 '
L2
S88 56 29'W
59.81 '
L3
588 56 '29 "Al
41.95 '
L4
N30 '33 '16 "W
54.82 '
L5
N06 '05 52'W
129.95 '
L5
N06 °05 52 'W
99.83 '
, L7
559 26 44 'W
3.10 '
LINE
RADIUS
DELTA
LENGTH
C1
20.00 '
90
'00
27 "
31.42 '
C2
340.00 '
11
'57
20"
70.95 '
RIGHT -OF -WAY DEDICATION - 3,192 SQUARE -FEET
arec .u5c.
47 .70, 04.5t r
i7;be, r1C45
Right -of -Way Dedication Plan
Exhibit D
Exhibit E
Photos of the subject site and surrounding properties
Subject Properties - Driveway Approach off of Colorado Place
161 Colorado Place - view from Colorado Place
161 Colorado Place - looking northwest
161 Colorado Place - looking north
161 Colorado Place - Existing Driveway Approach off of San Juan Dr.
161 Colorado Place - looking southeast
161 Colorado Place - looking east
125 W. Huntington Drive - view from Colorado Place
125 W. Huntington Drive - looking west from San Rafael Road
125 W. Huntington Drive - Driveway Approach off of San Rafael Road
125 W. Huntington Drive - surface parking lot and north wall of building
Adjacent commercial building to the east
Adjacent commercial building to the east
Adjacent hotel to the south
Adjacent restaurant to the west
Multiple - family residential - across San Juan Drive
Adjacent residential to the north - typical of the surrounding residential neighborhood
Adjacent residential to the north - new two -story residence under construction
Existing mature landscaping on adjacent residential properties north of 161 Colorado Place that will help
to screen the new parking structure and medical buildings
Existing mature landscaping on adjacent residential properties north of 161 Colorado Place that will help
to screen the new parking structure and medical buildings
Existing mature landscaping on adjacent residential properties north of 125 W. Huntington Drive that
will help to screen the new general office building
Adjacent residential property at 101 Santa Cruz Road - currently not screened by existing landscaping,
but new 24 -inch box trees are proposed on the subject property in this location
Exhibit F
Architectural Plans
4
LL. ce
N.
0
'�
0
W
2
o.
�--
czE
!w
1•'
AM MOAN
YDI
wmooS,7M0•MM,MdN,Y11LLItlWr1 um
III VnlutailthIANI MUM DA
ONI(11119 aowO 1VNO $g OMd3 Ufli312I19
CORM `SONKTVt18 801130Itl010aV
v
<
111
111
' 1
. 1 !
ll
tIa lip
!
,.144 ■.i
c"511
1g
•
!
N
I
II
.tl
I,
I
!
s. 11;,
1 i�
1:'
f Ii
.. iik
1 i�1i
,';
11
i
11(t
ssitI
1
{11111
;It
5, -iii
i ,I l
Iii
1, 1
1
i
91ut
it
' 11
, �1'i.
{ilk
III
1 j
Sj
1
I!.
i
e'
11
1
R:,E
1
1
a•
1
1
1
F 0
i
1
i
1
��
`
;S 1{
i
1 Y
IIi11
1i
I,
1 I!
��ii i�
1 Iii,
I
c(
1
lti
-III:
IIijj f
i
I� �
,,:;:c
,
11
E` i
)��
I
II2
1
,
1.
1
I
T El' IS
1
S
l
F � t!fli
'- �^y
f g
±
i
S
lit
�
�
1iit
ILLS
it
jt:(
�f:lf3�i
S
4
H
, I,
F:
t
Se '
1
i
1
1
S "(
Iitj
�� 11,111.
iI ��
I !'a 12
F i
1 1,
i I;
; i �
( a
. ii
ItI�.I ..
ii F
I'i
1�
I�iflil
.et.:Iar.�
tilt
[1:'t
;
i
41
(1tt(
!�I
:YI
,
S�I
moaloamai
....•.,.... UI o.. m.. en. wv: noi. vuatuxna+.cnM.w...n.a..waMn.xvn
. .-
VIVO aUS OO 1aaHS 11J1L
!
1F a j pa !i
d e 1 ! !
1 p 1 1
�--
czE
!w
1•'
AM MOAN
YDI
wmooS,7M0•MM,MdN,Y11LLItlWr1 um
III VnlutailthIANI MUM DA
ONI(11119 aowO 1VNO $g OMd3 Ufli312I19
CORM `SONKTVt18 801130Itl010aV
S310N'9 SNOIIVIA3219fIV
TWO.
Me V3 Yagw
3OVtl WNO=M I%1 P Mil HOLMIUM 'M9MI
011'91N3WUS3ANIA1N3d0Ud0A
0NIUlif16 3014401VNOISS340ad'9 32U1i3laiS
0ND121Vd'SJN10lID8 301410 1V010341
0
p8 y FF99� s Y III
H Ili!! I.; y eQ p pe r 9FI
11511 4111 11 / 11 4/ -7 8 Fg 11 � 111 q
B U i� o CC ! tC CC � � C1 E v ctH € 8
-
ABBREVIATIONS
kd kggit aA LINY oLdt __!€I!^ , 1; S„ siK9;,, , ,Irht: ks; :s:
I
11111111 ;1lg11Ep 1thiglId1W1 1141111111114111111i11411111g ll1itilidign6r ili1191111@ 1c11388111111111k11111? 1
Asd.1�
� t
012419:aFg pti tVg e.gAttl,a51BS5q�sds_S,gittiVIOV its 4Cgr wv$:,OltAt;g'6WEehMhe l ;rt.419 hrtgggiltitqAPIAiititogVW
x ° ¢ e° -� � �' £9 M N�6 � ��� s a @v � �$ ,e, i ++ pIy¢���1� ��4Yi1��`�@ 4
i iei �6 4sti q°e°°°b Sy E..
k���o,e §� 8��� ������1��g����a�1�a1G�1�s���r��1 $��?+ �����1�y[ ������li���11��6�����1a��Q�1���k�� ;��op��o�� � lEGS q
iYOOS'iiit iliiva��,1 �i7,gAe8J &5a� 7 ¢ 9 ¢ ��b�xF..i��a� @11��9�
,. • Ja3A 9tigg9gBl., g; it dtkth attasiath110 .,bYJdli3g!gatlItghrr;; "..," 0g "8445.
ett; Nf'ea35§
11100001••••
w
w
Ott1
•41...11
Mr1Pr
S3A1/03dSil3d
g
t 2 f 2 2
4 1 g 1
Me 'MYRON
30,01400410W MIN P. INVONOIONILWN MIZI
311 VIN3W1S3ANI ADMI0Vd OA
oNialins 3011d01VNOISS3408d V 3an13nas
ONDitlYd teNia-one 331140 1v3ia3iv
LWOW
z
0
w
—J
w
z
z
0
OUTH ELEVA
0
z
CO
ING 4 - NORTH ELEVATION
< <
ARKING GARAGE
2
U.
5
SOUTHWEST VIEW FROM 3RD LEVEL - PARKING GARAGE
MS%
f.180
TAM TY
S3A1133dend
111/01
90010
Y119
3011100190193 MI*IM�II�MI?flINW
311VIWARL83ANI ALIJNOVel DA
oNicruns 331J10 11/14011383401Id V 321111011M
ONDINVel 'seracnina 011i0 1V0103P1
•12.01.84
0
w
ANTA CRUZ DR.
SOUTH VIEW FROM 137 SANTA CRUZ DR.
c)1
NOILVA313 x0103
10114 YOV4AW
rXWO0YY0Y0 VA 111 M 11N01031014101 RI
on'swam/km uuadO Id OA
014101H18 331d301VN01SS3I0ad V 3af110na1S
eNIMINd'SONIO'lina 30IddO 1V310311
COLORADO PLACE ELEVATION
g
a1 :iI
NV1d ]OVNIVNCI'+P ONIOVNO 1Vnld 3 O3
am 1 »ve
90x16 V3 VIOYOHY
'10Vld 00Yr0100 'M 191 '' '3A1210 NOJ. NILNnu 'M Stl
Olt 'S1.N31k1S3ANI A183dOtld OA
ON ■O1N18 33U-0 1VNOlSS3i0Nd
3Nn10ny1S 9Nlkavd SONFO11nB 3OUd0 1VO!O3a
It
13i
/.
CJ:
ha
N 4'.- .!L(4
110
i
;
!il
a
i 1!
!It
NV1d ]OVNIVNCI'+P ONIOVNO 1Vnld 3 O3
am 1 »ve
90x16 V3 VIOYOHY
'10Vld 00Yr0100 'M 191 '' '3A1210 NOJ. NILNnu 'M Stl
Olt 'S1.N31k1S3ANI A183dOtld OA
ON ■O1N18 33U-0 1VNOlSS3i0Nd
3Nn10ny1S 9Nlkavd SONFO11nB 3OUd0 1VO!O3a
It
13i
/.
CJ:
ha
N 4'.- .!L(4
i
I
I
141
li fill
j I
Id
ill
DEMOLITION NOTES
CONSTRUCTION. NOTES
zwasw !vv..*
C:141:11
MEM
• II
.1111104.4
I...a* • nal lune. • a. Ira, a. • so ...co sm. r. owns a as... wra
Nvld 30VNIVel0 ,11 01■110vb3 lo711,13DNO0
90016 V) viaVoLiv
33r1,1 0000103 9 i9i '3pj90 90109119911 i6 SZL
311 'SIN3A1S3ANI A183d018 OA
09101106 101130 1VNOISS3.10Nd
uniormts 5NIYFTVd .soNralina 331330 111310319
I
LI. 3 L9 Ni L^J (1,1
;
.aR;.
$ :1 1118
eeeeeeeeeeee(Do@oo@em)@oo@ocixt)
LEGENDS & ABBREVIATIONS
HWY
1h10,006,
'l1P. 09 411
9
9
9
/Myna 1....1•71W.1.1,4 4.• l"....1“1.400“11,4410,31:0■4 .1.0111.16[•■.....:91.110.69.0.0,i0■10/0.101:1(1.■■
1
a
lid
1,.1.t
1
1
i S
l q'
IN
tit
.1.00 4.1
1.11.11.11011,
SN011 33S
.IIU 1.11t
90016 .16 vi0v311 v
'331rld 00Y0103 'M 191 I4 '3,1180 NOLONLINCIII 61
DTI .SIN3INIS3ANI A.183dOad
ONt011110 331330 1VNOISS13021d
3NntoraiJs MIN/1\1d 'S9NI0IV18 301.330 1V,30y
.77/71277.7
5-.<5041ft.1.65 "1"
"),E
1
4
F1.06.11661
rrarirfli
1/VINO a ON3U3.4321 tiOdrNYld 3.1.IS
...,
6 i l' I
11;11
macaw= As 191 PualangianfAlliall MO
011 'OLIGIVI83ANIIIMOOd OA
maim 301S40 1VNOISS3402Id is atinionais
DNINtIVesoratrune 9314d0 ,V31011
/
6
•
66.11•01•6
S{TE PLAN (FOR
N,
4 73
t
NV(If NVG
-\\
1
71, 1 1
X
1
NVld NO11.1101N30 3.1.18
�Xl rawnw
3 3 V I E I O C M I D I D 0 7 4 Ill P M CI
Oil 'OIN319.113ANI A1213d0Vd OA
wawa a3IJA0 1VNOISS3d0Vel sanionais
ONDIVVd tON1011118 3311d0 11(31031N
9 g 1
IP
?i 101
01111111111i1
h11111{111111111111
BEEBEIBBSBCICIEEKIKIDORI
11
/
/
'N a Nynr nv5
3
X
aina
r9W1
riu iaTc
NVld 3119 03O21V1N3
rut Wa.1
37111OOYtl0133 M191 yA 31h0N010MINON'URI
011.61N3W183ANI A1tl3d011d OA
ONIOill9 301dd01VNOISS34011d V 3N1110f1N1S
ONINatld ISONIOlIf19 301d301b0103W
A
f
?N$ -4
11711
a
1
{
0
}I ii
1 i i 31 i
' I;f1
i
&
y
e $
P
y
118
0
2
411
0
e yg
/
1
A
ae g
Qgh R
4 y
itto 011
p
110010111
.!
s
g
15 0
@00
1
s
g
j
8
;
irral
lell> 1'S�
NVId 31IS 03011V1N3
foie YJNOON
90YN004JTRMA1el Pu3W08018811Pal.M521
377r$1N3111S3ANJAUN3d0Nd OA
sNIOlIns 301440IVNOISS310ad'8 3ani3nms
ONI>favd `s7NI071ns 3013d01VDI03w
i
d g
k e u
a i
7d F
td p
a' i g + g
)1 � "9�; 111140111 1 offN !! 0 11
!1
ill114111111111d Ilit:11141h Ohl l' ;v.'
f.-]L]ECEBBEI(7C10L-1EE0gbPE WORM l7LlOKO ERENE[iC1C'[NLI Affi YE
1I
'1
14...1■411
SNY1d 3i'1IT9I0J 10S'Nl3 HS1 V IM 3il 4l 1 0N3Oa0tVrI3N
CON0I2 IONIW1AS3 21
OIN3KSANI AldOld on
0N1011A9 30AdO1VNOIS3401d 9 uni3ns
ONIANd soNtalna 310 11310V
003sil Y3 VCaN
.Vai■mmr
• 0. 4. 17 SY. ISV, (1, • V
o'Igg
111;
ct
.4111••••■•••
H ENCLOSURE SECTIONS
z
2
g
1 V
0
H ENCLOSURE SECTIONS
CU
HUNTINGTON DR.
125 W. HUNTINGTON
A. ENTRANCE
W. COLORADO PL
M.MYW
SOLOHd 3115 ONUSIX3
MIMS
�oo1e YeNtaW
7]VIdOONM:0 'M010.W NOWN111011AWI
311 N3rus3nxrue3d0adOA
mama 30I4d01VNOISS340ad V 3tlfIJA(1w8
ONIVVVel'SON(a1If B 301d401V0IO31V
W. COLORADO PL
z
a4
uJ
w
ui
g
W
MI 103,1 mt4a 911.0
2
SAN JUAN DR.
SAN JUAN DR.
SAN JUAN DR.
I 1 @I
IIS 7
O
0
O
a
rn
6
igt
2 41
NVld E100111N3VMSVS - Sanionais ONINVVd
MU M.
0:014 VJVC/JEAl
3301201101:01t III MEMO NOLONLIMIUM
31 .10.N3W1S3ANI A.1.113dMid DA
ONI011118 30W0 lYNOISS3CRId V asnionais
ONINVVel 'SCHIG11111:1 3014i0 1V31031,1
LWOW
A
1
v
11 I
11 ql
10PHOIr01141111!
Ihti011111 i Ri
881338BEIESMONCOMMEROMNii
11111
? T T ? ? ? 9seeeeee
. . „ •
i
1.1 _JI-- - I f. _, 2_51:4k44:4#71.6 _ , ,.(,S,
1. _. _ — 9 4
1 1 . i
,
I !
-1" 1 - -. ,T•'•-7 -
N :
! ! i . \ •
i I I
I > ! i
I ,1_,®
I
• --- :--2b
A .
I
0
—If\ - \ • 0
0
0D
1 1
iic; ----
1 !
I 1 1.1 ilii. „k
1. I
2
1 \ i
- ic''' 're'
1,1 ',
1.41'1.T "TO
rr
A P__
' ill 1 01) t
*
,
'''-'-'-----f ' - - - -IF --:--- - 1i10• '®
• b• 1' ----7':
< .
1!,\ -,-,F,
1 . __1.' ....J14
1 Ss, .. j,, .„ - ,-
-----1 - k
J _$it„.--
I I _ ,. , , _._
i 11 1 i
'
'. . , ,
li.- L ! 4 li ' ...4.5;.____. . _
- - -I - - - I-- - - I -:4 !_4(.3
V
§
22.
4
0
0
4
gqq1
63
"a 9
tl�
qa
4
4
5
9
13A31.3Nfl10fl81S ONINUJVd
MI OM
mw wvvrwe
30YMOW b1O MIUF wmfaiOM1M1uM U
011 UNOVIINANI AIN3dONd OA
ONI011f18 30I4401VNOISS3dOad V 3afliOflitiS
ONINMVd'SONI01ifl@ 30Idd01113I03W
1.0■
g
k
it
$$E
"Illg1/1111°1111111111
///'
.
)).-.—
. ___,._
i\
I
;
r rl I
.I I r
oI �hjs I
i' n i i� n 0���
PARKING STRUCTURE - LEVEL 1
8
reita
NO 6711
ruii
Z 13A31.3an1analS ONDI) JVd
toomwmovow
3JVId00/a017J'At101 W mokommm MR,
DTI 'S1N3W163ANI A1113d0114 OA
'Maws 33I410 '1VNOISS3d0ad V mamas
ONDONd'SONIa -un9 301ddO 1V0103W
113e1
6
III
111
°
i
e
le
11
i
v
i
i It H 1
WBP�F4ifilliliRillgil
F
c
§ : i E
/111
/ '� \
011 tild
/� —
I d01 a
C�C7flEBBBECIO 9HOEIBEID SE RIFE
s�!
1� a
PARKING STRUCTURE - LEVEL 2
1
i 1
ii'
a
5
• y
E 17 il P g
t hiloi,p li $ 0 g
1 ;111111111dil 11011;
P°1 9011111°411 111111
Rdt rIA ot.f g k g 0
8111EIBEIBBEfflPEEEMffl9RINNEPRPg
AlPik•ks
7
-- _
-1411v..,
,
a
•,-, - 7
— 1
•
-
t 41
4 4
.
1 •
- -
,11 ,
.
E13/131 - Unionsis %DIM
mewammtm
mrlimmwhimmmusolommmm
Vieran1931N1 ADMINd OA
manna 301101VNOISS34021d v 3Jn.t3nas
EINIM21Y4 SON10111123014d01V31031,1
g il,
0
e
g , 1
1i 11
ii I ,
i g i I
l 1 If i
dif P 1
V tP , i V P
§ i :.7., don .
x g
41-
ii'
a
5
• y
E 17 il P g
t hiloi,p li $ 0 g
1 ;111111111dil 11011;
P°1 9011111°411 111111
Rdt rIA ot.f g k g 0
8111EIBEIBBEfflPEEEMffl9RINNEPRPg
AlPik•ks
7
-- _
-1411v..,
,
a
•,-, - 7
— 1
•
0
0—
0-
C-
0
C-
e-
0;0 E),
e CP). C-)
HT-r- T
TTFI T
z,-,.,, I
i
i
•
-
----------,1
. •
4. -
.
1 •
- -
,11 ,
.
. j
,..... ,
,, ,_
t . .
.
"
.
1 1 v 1 ,
4!--
--s.
_
' I
i
..----r
- I
-L- - - - i 1
J:-...• 4
/
/ U
0 ,
, fL
— itm...–.7...
U i f
f 1
A
.
Li
st
PARKING STRUCTURE - LEVEL 3
R
NV1d 110014 .122ili • ONIC111118
0.21■4 VIOYDIN
INSIOGY0310M 0.1A1110 NOLONWOWAMI
0fl V1t4311123ANI■UV3d0Vd OA
ONICI1418 331440 14NOISSadOtid V Baniontus
DNININd 'semolina 33W01Y0103W
„
-
11111
g
1
i
i
11
§
P
i
N
f !
1 § 1
A 6f
11 If g .
• Ris 1 I
kii- 1
51 0 If
BBB BB EIBBBC5
'
1 10 i
80 6
glizol v
111111§ 1 i
/111411 if1
, tig2 1 ti
OBOCIROBOEMBE
P.101, .-------
‘,,vgg4, ,
,..,
-
,
;
i
0
!!!
-t-
(‘'
BUILDING 2 - FIRST FLOOR PLAN
NVId 21001d ONO03S - Z ONIO1in9
M n1otgt
3N1dah1101 p'M 191 M WEI ADIVAIMIH htgl
DNlalln8 30Idd01VNOISS3doad'8 3ani3nais
ONINNVd'SONIOIina 301ddO 1V01133W
0 0
AAA
}
2e
2
Ntlld N0014 OaINl - Z ONIl0111e
vawron
1741101M103 191 PR SUN hOL KINMI MOD
DTI $1N3W183ANI AlkladOTld OA
ONICIlIng 3014d01VNOISS31011d Q 3JJn10nals
ONIN}JVd'soNIOIino 301d401VOI03141
MOW
1
BUILDING 2 - THIRD FLOOR PLAN
14
.6"
41nt
NV-Id i0021. ervalms
111/111174
9:0111 WOMEN
33114100A101:0771191.P.INION010111/4111MPA
011 VI /19111.11aANI 41113d0Sd DA
emaltne 301110 1VNOISS34021d V Bunion:as
9NIM2Nd sorttcrona 301130 1V010314
r
t t I I
1
1
;
11
1;P.
0
g_
, fll
g
i 1
g 1
1 Y k k 18$
I
g; 1 I 1 14
Ig PI
f620101. ;, hi
m /11114111 ° 11
'do o oetAlhi
(11BBEHHBEITIfflOndlliNM
- ,.
°
III xo
_, L . --4,— 4k-_.,0
1 T A \
0 0 e e C ?), \c)
BUILDING 2 - ROOF PLAN
.0.011■11•
0
ninrSTZ
NY1d110014 ISVII • C ONI011118
.11
i02,81 11110eN/
3:1110002711 Mtn P.3NVONOIDNIINfil
011'SINSW1S3ANI A1113.1011d OA
maws 331A40 1VNOISS34011d V 3tIni3ntsis
DNINVVd 'sorgia-sing 301d401V01011
CY.
0
t
LI
1 Ft
\\\
'X&
r
A
L
j
©
0
BUILDING 3 - FIRST FLOOR PLAN
III
.1.91•11.1
MI.. tall
11)
11 ■t
NY1d SOOld ON003S - C maws
MU.
OCOla VOVICKJIM
32eld 00VV3/337A 191 PA 3AMI 14/191.10111117ARI
DTI 'OINNIISIANI AlS3d011el OA
wawa 301SiO 1VNOISS3i0lid 1 StInionais
DNDitfdd 'semolina 301d40 1113103111
1 2
v 5
c"!
*Ti
en
2
§
; 1
0
2
S
1
1 1
hl 1 1 ill 1
00 idi 1 1
0 1 1 111116° 1
'R'ti i h1/ 10
11 ill 11111111i1111116
m
linfihMffilhOilliffiri
v DD DB E5300E DEMIEME119191Ell@EFO
r
/
l'u
.$.
\
.
.
I(
1 ,
—
0
NO
-10
—0
[Er
'04
PI R.
8
BUILDING 3 - SECOND FLOOR PLAN
I
1 1
2
5
1
L illi i 6
11,11 iiiii§g, 1 I
"9 DP 41101 I"
11 " 111 1119 "
lin thhiidihilltIll
vj 00E1 E-10 SHEER] fgElOOPKIEDDRPR
.. //Lz.
_.,...,
ii
--1
1 1
1 1
b
I i
I 41
< <
NY1d HOOld
PIRO.
0011VV003IN
324103M1D3 7A19 401018.1141111A121
011 S1N3A1S3ANI AL213dOtid OA
maws 331dAO lYNOISS3d011d aanionais
ONINIA/d 'soNialing 331d0 W310111
6
..■•■■•••••
E
E
1
2
5
1
L illi i 6
11,11 iiiii§g, 1 I
"9 DP 41101 I"
11 " 111 1119 "
lin thhiidihilltIll
vj 00E1 E-10 SHEER] fgElOOPKIEDDRPR
.. //Lz.
_.,...,
ii
--1
BUILDING 3 - THIRD FLOOR PLAN
1
X
A
6
NVld 40011 oNicrone
/1111.11ixt
Ca V3 YAWN
32010CW/1W M191 Mw2a11IM2l
311 UN3VilS3ANI ALV3(1011d OA
maws 331440 1YNOISS31021d V atinanais
ONDINV4 .soNialing 331440 1V31031t1
)
1 0 ;
0
—
cv.,1
grt-f■
■••
L ®
661 4
-0)
BUILDING 3 - ROOF PLAN
2
1
r
GENERAL NOTES _...
uamwrrro+ca�ma. a.
Yi
Figiot
litiliihIllifidh
1:2803810EDFIDEID513
i
; 1
i 13
1 II f
I. t V
t 1 ii
v 1 g 0'! $ HI
ItO ; ei
„
CI
- - ,.. ,
4 : - . .. ■■
.
5,
/ ri ,
(
a-----%
ll
it ------2
i----__=nz."7-
.
;-
1i
1
,-----,
0
—
cv.,1
grt-f■
■••
L ®
661 4
-0)
BUILDING 3 - ROOF PLAN
gr
i27:211516
1;71.7.1111
01.1
.16.41.10.1
Hi i
Hind OOld INN • 1, OW101111E1
IVY 11.
i�i
rAncee
,K,Iwareanotrla sin MRIONOIDILIMIIMIZI
011 UrillISBNii /MUM' 0A
ONI011(19 331440 1VN018B3ANd V ainionme
ONDIldV21 %mama 301dd0 1V0103W
1
II
1 ?
1 t
1 1
1 1 1
I i 1
i
i 1 1 1 1 II 1
11 W 11 1 01 8
II
/""X1V1I , 11 g11il111110 1
111119 011111111111111111
EIBE He I3GANANM
e/ .
,
0 1l1 l:
I , 7
---''
-
i
1
0 ®
• ,2•• 2,2,, 2-, :,■rsx;
BUILDING 4 - FIRST FLOOR PLAN
A
NV1d NOON CIN003S • emaiing
1,17110.6
Wats Y3Viaf4VO
NiltP3N�1bMII(44WI
NOINAllall IA
011.81N3N1SaANI Alt111011d DA
mows 33W0 TINOISMOIld V atInionws
ONNIVd 'solacnine 30I440 1V3103W
11111
i
1
i
tiV
1 1
11111/0111/11/1401111111
BBB
s 1
I 1
Iii
IN p 1 il
0 01 I li
"Pi 111
BB OBBBEI
11 ik i
Eemc v
II" il 1 h
lilligliiiis
k 1E °
CMCMOCIMMIg
%TAN---,
i
1 / . —
i —_=
,
0 0
--e
1;
k t E ik -----
0
--e
--e
BUILDING 4 - SECOND FLOOR PLAN
1
NVIdS001A01b1141-17 owns
VGI VONI0v3Ite
MIOGYS31037A1191M1/1110NOLOMLNIVMSZI
DTI lemawlegANIAlig3d021d OA
maws 301A01VNOISS340t1r1V3antonais
DNINHYd'soNicr1Ins301A10 1VOICIEW
1 a
till!
4.7
BUILDING 4 - THIRD FLOOR PLAN
1
11
,
2
g
1
i 1
I i ' 1
i il HI 1
Iq ki i
P it 1 11/g1 1
gh 1 1113111k 1
,. I 1 I 1 I 1-1 III0 !I
p 9 DP IIIIIIteI I 1 I I
1 IN 1 0 1 1 1 1 i 1 1
illifig10 1 11IllseatIallii
FIFICI @El ClEIDER9 ElEailEEMDCAPITI!
•-k.,
;
HE:
--.
B
.,
BUILDING 4 - THIRD FLOOR PLAN
I
I 1
i
11
#1
cp
;
g
6
t ' 6 J b i
I' 1
li I 1 ,§
lilli 1 i. h pi
ilinihnhlhill
v GEBBEIEBEICAMEOGI 0
v
, ,
.
JL
r
.l_
•-
_-_-_-_---.,_,—
1 I
1 1
4 43
< <
wriddow-tomamns
MOM
commwom
mammmmlummmmwmwmum
01 .S1N3Y1193ANI AlladOild OA
ONI011119 33W0 11/NOISS34011d 1 unman
DNINNIfd 'soNicruns 3314i0 Imam
4.1,1301
tlipn
@
§
I
;
i
11
#1
cp
;
g
6
t ' 6 J b i
I' 1
li I 1 ,§
lilli 1 i. h pi
ilinihnhlhill
v GEBBEIEBEICAMEOGI 0
v
, ,
.
JL
r
.l_
•-
_-_-_-_---.,_,—
_.........
\
0 C) .0 8 ® 0 0
BUILDING 4 - ROOF PLAN
f."
7 ? \ ,._
0 \
)11'11.d
1. BUILDING 1 & 2 SECTION
SNOLL33S moue
.16 YPACIMY
.37,1d0fIVWX>3 M nif4,3/%10 MAWR Mgt
ALII3d011d OA
9Nicuna 30WAO 1VNOISS3dOtld V 3uni3nms
otouvd 'soma-one a01140 1vmagv4
0-
m Of .9'4 le.
•''
VM.reffi,.
2. BUILDING 2 8 PARKING STRUCUTRE
1. BUILDING 4 SECTION
- :h1 ■
SNO11098 manna
nu »sumer
onunra 'm IntINOIORMI1H
311 11N3 1,11SANI MUM OA
maws 331AdO 1VNOISSUOtid w armorials
ONINtiVel 'SONICIlIns 331dA0 1V3109141
11111111MM=
2. BUILDING 4 SECTION
g 4
.01.1.11101,
Tifl
VIIC
unionais SWIM • SNOILVA313
1,14
OMS V 1104,1ii
33(1100AM* M 114 PA 3WGI1.D41J1l1I1'MI
011 'OIN3W1O3ANI Ali33dOtld OA
emaime 3011d0 1YNOISS34011d V 31ini3nsis
DNIMLIVd 'sstacrune 33f440 1V3113311
11.11.41
251=-04 -
27E-
a-
a
d _
X 4V
Inn
co
4
11.•••■■■•
mn,1
i
g 1 g
: 1
i • is f 56 g
0 gl 1101
I 1 1 1: 1000
ilif lil'h h
0 lEnldn
onto
EEERVIENril
P_
0
LI
g
1
1 f
1111
9 R
R R
4.<<<
32il10lb1S oNI1I21Vd • SNOI1VAM
IOW q MOON
lart/0001003'MNIP WM 1010M4BN'MRI
311'SiN3141S3ANI Ali3dOtld OA
ONI011t1B 3014d01VNOISS3d01Id V amiantus
ONINWVd'SONI01It1S 301dd01V31031V
4
e
1 111
Q
1
8686 00000RIocEu
I !!!
b
OEM
.0•141011
titifi
) ; I ) ■
z wawa - SNOLLVA.313
'MOM
WON V01.70Iff
Mi00001COIAIIIMINVOMOIDMININ
TI viNardsama ALIMOIld OA
move 3014d01VNOISS31021d V atintonas
ONIXLIVd 'somenine 301AdO 1Y0103W
'UMW
F--t
4. WEST ELEVATION
;Ili!
:04
1
1
14
Eli
hl
111
80
Ili
ElElff]
6 i
. g t h t
i H P - iii
!gill Oil Illill 1
4Pg-Iiiila( ii? q
hillINi5 h
2 18 2 1111:01411ii
ilihnlAilitilf
mill1Cligqt!la
i glihlitnilidii
(!.3 BCE 21E1 BERT,E1940
E
i
',OM.. 1 Ir.... P..47,11•1■1.4,•:. !Mo.. . . telx doto,,.!•.• i
woo.,
1'11) trIT
c moms • sNOIIVA313
PM IOW
0:0111 WIKIYAY
37e11074101:YX1/1191 MVO NO1D111NY1 cLI
311 'IlLtarlIS1911 Alti3dOthi OA
Dmialins 331410 1VNOISS340t1d V aunionuis
ONIKIVal 'sernalins 301440 1V01031/1
14 rta
worn tortAm ingt tt Putts
MEM HU =Ai aittma
Kinti Kum
itmqii, I t tnd
ttetAkii.1401
117- ataturiv
IMMIMPUNCOXPILINIVENO
ti."K; A714,1
4'4 AY,
.1= -
LL
2. SOUTH ELEVATION
[td
I I,
z I i
o
P 1 I
L—UJ
w
co ! ! 1
Fil LU
•■•• i. i, r
2. EAST ELEVATION
1
fi
i p
i 1
1 0
D
eiRIF-1
121
A id
E 61k
Ng
090figh
PoqiilliP110
914..0111i45z1dalil
IIIIMOilir
Lihri011)
PpilifiNghliPM
0 DEO
1
i
! hf
11 IP
gq WI t
i 1111 ph
Mg q
h
ilh
EEO EESEOM
0
1
$ 1
q
I i
i 1
t
t
; c
4
E pp
f
ep1
8
: g
EICA
ONIO11f18 • SNOLLVA313
N nwnw
VAIONWOVIASIWUMOWWWWWWZI
011'sLNN1UB ANIAla]dOUdOA
°NIOlIflO 3314d014NOISS3d011d V 3Nf113fRf15
9NINZIVd'SONIOltflQ 3311d01V31031/1
f .
1�7r�
P
II
Hi
nary
E
`c g
IV
ir
1
C
a
L
i
t
; c
4
E pp
f
ep1
8
: g
GENERAL NOTES
rfr1121V.41,1•;.N.,!..1,:"".
e111
) 1 'DT
oNicrune- SNOUVA313
11111t Inn
MS Y3 WM'?
Vele100111=11191 MVO
Oil IN11183.ANIAlii3d0Vd OA
eNia1on8 a3dd0 'MO198310111 V aanIontus
emmtiva'seNialna 331,140 1V3103W
0.104
Ipili
11111
co
4
1
II
0
10
i 1
n
1 1
0199
t 1
i 14
ti t1P
"VIIIIII
101°1401g
tilliii4Pi'15
l'ii11110Tg"if
lni
Me
Old/111101H
0 800
1
I
i
v i
! lig
1 Pii
g w Pi 1 i
Ph 1
11
11
1011 111'
lirtO1'
03E1 OBEa-M!1
2
g
s
oa
...LON �
f1
;u rosy J aepauol1
6r,rrtJ
MUM
1
NV1d3dVOSONV11Vn1d3ONO3
I4611 wWW3W
11WY000.X11RJ'M Iil Wr1NWMOIOMjM'IN MiCI
3�1 'siH3wualwuua3dO Id OA
9NNOiina 93W01VNOIS8340Nd 4 3MniOnbis
ONINNVd's9NI011ne 3OId101V0103W
1ilil3
J
«1
Awl
ogn.uguY
IOSS 1.? t131A.
ram
1,1"11
riTi7r1
ONIdVOSONV1 3anionais ONINVd
r••9
Ma YAWN/
37f1d00Y031a31.1191M 3Mi9li010141MIN M
311 '2/N3Y1163ANI AltladOkld OA
enniolina aoI440 1VNOISS31021c1 V avnionais
ONINSVd 'semolina 3014101110103W
(r) •
2 /
9
/
/
1.• •••
••••.:
■•••■•■•••••
••■••=11111*.
z
0
2
P 0 0
k
I tt
! 4 ,
"il; •
MOT
.iX7baterau'l—s...%•11.
fr -
z
•N a N v n r N V
60
le
=PI Zo':irc;
.4.1144=
aussv olaua%
/
A A/
0 /
/
0/
41,011
..411.481
=MI
SNOUN1flOVOONWVOSONV1ONVONNUVd
P11111114
11.666/3166
3361d00663103 M 016.3/120 NOIOHIA66 6tt
al `11119391193ANI Alli3d0Nd DA
014111011M 331dJ01/N018633011d 3811.1.311111S
'stnacnine 301440 1V3103W
0
N.- -- ..... _
1,432.1A i z
N N 5
. B ritrni
. - -----
, J /,' /7 4 zr .ktvgyi..... .._ .g.
i 0
i -
litiippi
! 9 - -
■
Of
'NO Nvnr NVG
,II K
1 1
_
yp
Yi'y- i
t t
1 I H 1
t
1
T
w
ONIO1H18
ODON0m
11010171110M9
171MWM71777M wW11M01131M UM
DTI 1110111111111M AMMON SA
O1YN01Y63301ld11
Ya
ill
tt.
141A
M
NV1d oRA3M010Hd - ONDONd 14Y3_
_
yp
Yi'y- i
t t
1 I H 1
t
1
T
w
ONIO1H18
ODON0m
11010171110M9
171MWM71777M wW11M01131M UM
DTI 1110111111111M AMMON SA
O1YN01Y63301ld11
Ya
y 11
wlwe.t
tt.
, 3 , 33
33 33
3 3 3 3 3. 3 3
et 3 3 3 81
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 1 1 3 l�\l
3,V 3 3 2 l 1 3
, St. 3 - 3 : 5 3 1 1
V 2 , 1
s 3 �.Y `` f i 3 3 3 3 , fartp
/1 S F i , 3 , 1 S H O 1
3 ,"1 • ' • ' N 21 0 3 �' 1' • 3 1 1 1 1 NnN
S 1 ,
3 3 3 3 3 3
3: t:
18 33
f 3 ] 3
3 3 3 3 1
3 3 1 1
3 3 3 3
22 3 3 3
3 3 3 3 3
z 33:
3 23
33x3
\• s
® 3 1 1 S 3
t 33
3 23
11
1
11
1 "
1 '
1 1 1
Ii
Hill ill
II..
ti
11
I
1
;
s
lib
"-O
1
1
1
I�
III
�t
1
ii
Ili
�j
Iii
bL
ED
t
1
1
I
b
•
1
1
+
3 ! ,
32
.
S 1 3
1 3 1 3
1 3 3
• 3 1
,s I i
• :
, Mdt3v rv. PoOlmtll tt1 *Ua1Weloltn3twntl11 +tturm1 04.7.P1111IL0 1.71 iterY3l3tI,1••IettW3 1.S.I l WIIOVtrt lleottoWWmMFl .VMmkrviaweM0w1Yt3U52VI* &3 I3Mew ll 3Jtxnvw.nndfwLN M210.11.IW.t11eMeieltaa
MI
1111
14A14
a
1
1
1
A
5
111
31111.311101011fd -MOH 20VVV0
'IMMO
VLENICISI
1211s10610100%111/X1R1111110/01111019ANS
olVtanamaram mum OA
0141011118 301440 imonalova it MUM=
ONDIVid ISON101118 3IO 1V010311
1.
IN,1 1 1.18 1 0 1 ; 1
1 t
: 4:31;;73
,
:: is
,L 111:: s : I
S
01 1 1 1 1 . ; .
1 Pi 1 1 1 ,. 1 . . , I
-- ICI : .
;
; 7
: 3 I
1111111 X1
1_ : t 7
.1
1
1 1 1 1:11: :
1
1
I 1 1 1
1 : 1 A 11
1 1 :
111
1 . - --- I
1 1 1
1
1 4 . . 1 1 1 . 1 1,1
1 I
,..,.: !
1
r.- -
1111111
: 1 3 z
A
1
;
LastawasksrmattlaartmesmolaLsorm
11111
1
411
1!
141
1
1
1
1
41
N111d 9R1191101OHd -101 eNDwva
■mY.
1.
a
112-1
elf)!
(hill
W
i
loftoaNOroow in pa svala5lwawa
o lunnWlhNIAli os+[N
wove ammo IWKIISSL4011d =! 3UflLOf ala
ONDRIVd 1 iONIC1 119 3011d0 1100311
21
23
21
1 1
t , F
2 12
i ! 3 2 2
J
31 22
3 i 31 1 J
f 1 2 1 2 22
2 3 1 3 1:
1 J F J
1 3 2
2 3 1 2
7 1 2 1
2 3 1
2 3 1 1
11
2 1 7
11
1222
. lat tam.MtiDN.cr.y2uvr1.1Nia'rett'll aum\ 1124 .amn2WDMibNVse..lr...16,1a'.MI 3Y2P1WIWJ aI.w2,.:saarw.l,. *. 101... u. TyWWW4/ 10. 2DpJtl0Mee1. 411.111., 1• Na .myt1.1.0181.4.Ir.0,7*2.l14.611 .1111.1 ..p..lr
4,
212
2 3 1 1 :
,, 2 1 2 1 7
3 3 2 1 1 3 3 3 3 3
1 2 1 1 1 x 3 1 3 1
2 t l 2 2 t J 3 7 2
2 2 1 1 2 1 1 3 3
3 1 3 2 1 2 2 2 2
2 1! 1 1 1 2 2 2
1 1 1 2 1 2 3 2
1 1 1 2 2 2 3
1 3 3 5 1 2
1 3 1 2 3
1 2 1 1 2
1 1 2 2 3
2 1 2 2 3
2 3 1 2 2
2 3 , 3
12323
1 1 1 3
2:12.
5121
1 2 1 3
t 1 t 2
J2132
1 1 1
3 1 i 3
3 2 2 2
3 2 2 1
1 2 2 2
1122
1 2 3 3
3 3 2 2
1 1 1 1
2 1 2 2
1 2 1 s
2118
1 1 2 1
2 2 1 3
2 3 1 2
1 2 2 2
1 3 3 t
1 2 2 i
J i 1
2 5 2 2
3 1 2 2
3 2 2
2 2 2 t
..1
F 2
3 i .
. 1
2 2 1
J J
1 51
3 3 2 1 3
A 2
13
3 1 3 1
12 232
1 3 1 1
2 . 1
! 1 2 1 1
A
mt 2 !
ayy
1 5
1 9
11
1'
1
1E�111f
11111431
1 f5a�d
I ■.
5
5
1
1
r
P
9!
!J6'
..
9
5
1
1•
e
11131
J!PIJ11Ihf
!�k
U
,
9
1
ire
1k
if
5R
11
�
lhls
E
9
9
1
1
a
E
a
H
•
2
22
J 2 7
23 22 i 2 ) 2 2 2 2 3 2 2 2 ; 2 2 2 2 2, J 3
l 2 3 7 2 2 22321213s;;;,• t 1 3 3 ..
3 1 3 3 7 2'Y Q 7147v2n2rJ ,NSVTJ 3 1 3, 1 7 2 1 7 3 1
2 2 2
2 - 2 2
2 1 2
2 22
2 2 2
2 22
1 22
1 1 2 2
2
12
421
6 1 2
k 2
1..1 1 i
I_ ♦I
u2N MNi
23
3 . . : :
28
32
3
2 2 2
21
1
I1
a
1
1
1
1
4
1
3
1
1
I
1
1.
1
I
1!
1i.
1
1
2
1
1
ill
1
1
1
1 1
1
;
'
1
1 iiihiUU
h
idht1
ill
i
1 I1ill
1 1.
HI!
I11
d L
5
.
ri •.
..
V
®
•
3
•
1
4.
7 1 5 7 1
2 J 7 3
2 1 2 2 2
1 2 2 2
2 2 2 1 2
2 2 2 2
2 J 2 2
3 l 7 1
3 2 t 2
1 3 1 1
1 2 7
1 5 2 7
2 S 1 f
2 2 t 7
3 1 7 7
3 l 3 7
2 2 7 2
1 1 2 J
3 3 2 2
2 2 3 2
2 2 2 1
3 1 2 3
3 3 2 1
2 2 2 2
3 2 3 2
7 7 t 3
2 7 2 3
2 7 1 1
*28
7 3 2
1 i 2 3
3 3 t A
. 3 1
7 2 3
1 1
22
24
! 1±
1 3 i
22
• St"A.i._j2 f 2 5 3 2 2 3 3 3 3 5 1 t i l t
2 2 2 1 2 3 2 t t 2 t 3 2 3 2 t t 22 t t
```"��•,�1 t a t s 2• 13 2N3Ytn3t2 1N4VT S 1 2
87
51
57
31
•
2 3
2 .
2
1
7 3
S
74
7
71
71
12
22
Si
22
22
s s 2
3 7 7 2 1 7 2 7 1
25J 3: 2 2
2 2 2 2 . 1 2 2
wml rl..gownpae7 vr�fw.roar..•.wuirlVl h.IWwurcee4.Ixlwwrlmeu C*1IW2l'I4 t9I Wewwniwuoliil awrw..rmnrru+^'+2l,4. 4*m'Irta.rau.mmw'rlmprtia riAIS1I mik.Mni r
g11NAMW PMMRNI11MKgr 11.47.2
?NW 9iwa Md10Hd- OM11aVd IflM
7
i
$@ah
$ t 91 i
g 1 g 1 1
T
Y
W
1
1
.u"
1 . ;.:
maw wan
112cnoo� t 07 p 2w 7n1a2rw w
011 01tEXI P J1IMdO d OA
wave Row° reiastradatld, aanimus
ON61Wd'SOMa7IneIwIddo woiaaM
2 J 7 3
2 1 2 2 2
1 2 2 2
2 2 2 1 2
2 2 2 2
2 J 2 2
3 l 7 1
3 2 t 2
1 3 1 1
1 2 7
1 5 2 7
2 S 1 f
2 2 t 7
3 1 7 7
3 l 3 7
2 2 7 2
1 1 2 J
3 3 2 2
2 2 3 2
2 2 2 1
3 1 2 3
3 3 2 1
2 2 2 2
3 2 3 2
7 7 t 3
2 7 2 3
2 7 1 1
*28
7 3 2
1 i 2 3
3 3 t A
. 3 1
7 2 3
1 1
22
24
! 1±
1 3 i
22
• St"A.i._j2 f 2 5 3 2 2 3 3 3 3 5 1 t i l t
2 2 2 1 2 3 2 t t 2 t 3 2 3 2 t t 22 t t
```"��•,�1 t a t s 2• 13 2N3Ytn3t2 1N4VT S 1 2
87
51
57
31
•
2 3
2 .
2
1
7 3
S
74
7
71
71
12
22
Si
22
22
s s 2
3 7 7 2 1 7 2 7 1
25J 3: 2 2
2 2 2 2 . 1 2 2
wml rl..gownpae7 vr�fw.roar..•.wuirlVl h.IWwurcee4.Ixlwwrlmeu C*1IW2l'I4 t9I Wewwniwuoliil awrw..rmnrru+^'+2l,4. 4*m'Irta.rau.mmw'rlmprtia riAIS1I mik.Mni r
g11NAMW PMMRNI11MKgr 11.47.2
o
n
0 y)
oe
osr
e ®Q
IF
3RD MECHANICAL 51-
/
\j\
n co to
vib
hzp
e?e
ep 4+iFr• t,s.r
4,44.44;44g4;44,,,4;.:::
6"5" irks
Rao
Nbj
50\
300-foot Radius Map
Exhibit G