Loading...
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