Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutJanuary 19, 1993, ,.- ~ ~ U • Pre-meetinq - 6s30 p.m. ~ Presentation on Assembly Bill 939 (The Bottle Bill) A G E N D A ARCADZA CITY COIIDTCIL MEETINQ JANQARY 19~ 1993 7230 P.M. 1-CTION IDNOCATION 8L8D(iB O8 ALLEdIANCE ROLL CALLt Council Members Ciraulo, Harbicht, t,ojeski, Margett and Fasching Al1 Present MINIIT88 of the Adjourned and Regular Meetings of Janualy 5, 1993 Approved MOTION: Read all ordinances and resolutions by title only and waive.reading in full. Adopted PRE88NTATION to James Bryant, President of the Arcadia School Board 1. PQHLIC HBARING Consideration of Text Amendment 93-002 adding trip Public Hearing Closed; raduction and travel demand measures to the Arcadia Approved 5-0 Municipal Code. 2. PIIHLIC BEARIN(i Considaration of a Buildinq Code Varianca to allow an E-2 occupancy in a type V non-rated buildinq Public Hearin; Closed; for the operation of a tutorial school at 1135 W. Denied 5-0 Huntington Drive (Raymond Floyd rapresenting AIE Group, applicant). A68NDA 1/19/93 ~ ~ ACTION Ed Barrett 3. Time reserved for those in tha audience who Frank Massiola wish to address tha City Council (five-minute Bob Caldwell time limit per person). Steve Granite 4. RECEBB CITY COIINCIL S. MESTINC3 OF T88 ARCADIA REDEVELOPMBNT A(iENCY a. ROLL CALL: Agency Members Ciraulo, Harbicht, Lojeski, Margett and Fasching Al1 Present b. Request for approval of contract with Freadman Tung and Bottomley (Downtown Revitalization Plan) . Approved 5-0 c. Design Review for 600 and 604 N. Santa Anita (Stephen Lojeski, applicant). Approved 4-0-1 d. Approval of partial reimbursement of holiday bannars. Approved 3-2 e. PUBLIC HEARING Adoption of proposed usa and design requirements and guidelinas for the Central Redesielopment Project Area. Public Hearing Closed: Adopted 5=0 RESOLUTION N0. ARA 172, establishing Use and Design Requirements and Guidelines. f. ADJOURN to 7:00 p.m., February 2, 1993 6. RECONVBNE CITY CODNCIL 7. CONSENT ITEMS a. Consideration of Text Amendment 93-001 addinq regulations to the R-0 and R-1 zonas prohibitinq below grade and subterranean qarages (PUBLIC HEARING TO BE SCHEDULED) . Publ i c Heari ng 2/2/93 -a- ACiENDA 1/19/93 ~ ~ 7. CONSENT ITEMB (aontinuefl) ACTION b. Consideration of an appeal of the Planning Commission's denial of MC 92-073, a request for a 6'-0" high decorative wall/wrought iron fence with light fixtures, located at 1320 S. Second Avenue (American Lombard Corporation, applicant/appellant - PUBLIC HEARING TO BE SCHEDULED) . Publ ic Heari ng 2/2/93 c. Racommendation for award of contract for tha coating of six steel water tanks and instal- lation of stiffaner beams'in Work Order 695. Approved 5-0 d. Raquest for authorization to axpend $22,000 in Proposition A funds to enter into an agreement with the cities of Duarte, Irwindale, Monrovia and Pasadena to promote the extension ~••_ of a light rail transportation system and to approve the establishment of a Proposition A and C Rail Reserve Account.. Approved 5-0 ~ e. Request from Arcadia High School for donation to Constitution Compatition team. Approved 5-0 8. CITY MANA4ER Recommendations reqarding Nordstrom addition and mall expansion: a. Acquire easement for 15 years for 2.8 acre City parking lot adjacent to Santa Anita Fashion Park Mall by approval of Easament Purchasa Agreemant between Anita Associates and the City of Arcadia. Aooroved ~-0 b. Approval of Desiqn Review for Santa Anita Fashion Park improvementa. Approved 5-0 c. Approval of Subordination Agreement batween the City of Arcadia and Anita Associates. AanrovPd 5-0 9. CITY ATTORNEY a. RESOLUTION NO. 5611, caeting votes for Council Member Robert G. Margett to represent cities with pumpinq rights on the Board of the San Gabriel Basin Water Quality Authority. p~„~tp,~ ~ ~ k,~~ ~ a~G.e.~. ~ ~>-_ ~3- A4ENDA 1/19/93 ~ ~ ~ 9. CITY ATTORNBY (ooatiAUed) ACTION b. RESOLUTION NO. 5612, consenting to establishment of the portion of Huntington Drive from Michillinda Avenue to Fifth Avenue within said City as a part of the system of highways of Adopted 5-0 of the County of Los Angeles. c. Consideration of proposed Resolution 5708, amending the City's procedures for the evalua- tion of impacts of land use decisions on the qdopted 5-0 Congestion Management Program System. 10. MATTERB FROM 8TAB8 li. MATTERS BROM ELECTED OFBICIALB 12. ADJOIIRN to 5:30 p.m., January 26, 1993, in memory of Claire A. Lotz -a- ACiENDA 1/19/93 ,I � 0 -2-0 ` wpm v. em m Minot u l• r-.; :re DATE: January 13, 1993 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: ;: `- David Feinberg, Administrative Assistant SUBJECT: Light Rail Transit In Arcadia The Los Angeles County Transportation Commission is moving closer to a decision on the rail corridor selection process. The City needs to act aggressively if it is going to compete for the limited public funds. Background The cities of Arcadia, Duarte, Irwindale, Monrovia and Pasadena have been meeting over the past three years to bring a light rail extension east from Pasadena to Irwindale. The cities were successful in adding this light rail extension as part of LACTC's 30-Year Transportation Plan. This means that there is funding available to build the project within the next 30 years. Unfortunately, there is only money available to build one of the eight potential extensions this decade. In recent months, the cities have met on almost a weekly basis to work to improve our chances of the Irwindale extension. LACTC pledged to make the corridor selection decision in March. This coincides with the merger of the LACTC and SCRTD to form the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority or MTA. While it is possible that the new MTA Board will uphold the LACTC's promise, it is also likely that they will delay the rail corridor decision. Nonetheless, the cities must be prepared to show the necessity of the line before the March 1993 MTA board meeting. Previously, the Arcadia City Council has gone on record as committing to the light rail extension when it allocated funds for the preparation of a Preliminary Planning Study and Environmental Impact Report (EIR) . In fact, the cities have just hired the consultant to prepare the EIR which should be completed in August. LASER IMAGE D DI 78 Light Rail Transit January 13, 1993 Page Two Analysis Each of the cities is committed to bringing light rail transportation to the Northern San Gabriel Valley. However, one real weakness of the group is its lack of a project manager. The group needs someone who can work closely with a group of diverse cities, is extremely familiar with Los Angeles County transportation issues, and can dedicate a great deal of time to the assignment. The group has asked Forsythe & Associates to fill the project manager role. Forsythe & Associates was successful in its role in organizing the start up of Foothill Transit and the San Gabriel Valley Transportation Coalition. The other weakness of the group is its inability to creatively find funds to pay for the project. Currently, the LACTC is asking each of the candidate corridors to provide a 25% local match of the cost of their light rail extension. The group does not have the necessary expertise in municipal transportation finance to resolve the shortfall. Thus, the cities interviewed firms with extensive expertise in this area. It found Public Financial Management (PFM) Inc. to have nationwide experience working with organizations in similar funding situations. The cost of the two consultants will be split equitably among the five cities. Arcadia's portion of the costs for Forsythe & Associates and PFM plus a small contingency would be $22, 000. The City of Duarte would serve as the signatory for the group. (see Attachment) Also, it is recommended that the City Council place most of its uncommitted Propusition A and all of its Proposition C dollars in a rail reserve account. The expenditure of Proposition A and C funds are limited to transportation purposes. This type of reserve account would show the LACTC that the City is extremely serious about the expansion of light rail transit to Arcadia. The City. Council would maintain the ability to uncommit the funds at some point in the future. It is recommended that the City Council consider allocating $2.5 million of our $3 . 1 million in reserves to this account. These funds would only be spent toward acquiring the extension. The remaining $600,000 would be used as a contingency on the City's existing Dial-A- Ride, Bus Stop Improvement program and other small discretionary programs. LASER 1 y' Light Rail Transit January 13, 1993 Page Three Recommendation It is recommended that the City Council authorize the expenditure of $22,000 in Proposition A funds to enter into an agreement with the cities of Duarte, Irwindale, Monrovia, and Pasadena to hire Forsythe & Associates and Public Financial Management as transportation consultants. It is further recommended that the City Council establish a Rail Reserve Account. Attachment Approved: Dona d R. Duckwor , City Manager LASER IMP.G: 80 AGREEMENT BY AND AMONG THE CITY OF DUARTE AND THE CALIFORNIA CITIES SIGNATORY HERETO FOR THE FORMATION OF THE FOOTHILL CITIES ALLIANCE TO EXTEND THE BLUE LINE THIS AGREEMENT (the "Agreement") is made and entered into this day of , 1993 , by and among the City of Duarte, California ( "Duarte") and the Cities Signatory hereto (each individual city a "SIGNATORY" , the cities together, collectively, the "SIGNATORIES" ) (DUARTE, together with the SIGNATORIES cities of PASADENA, ARCADIA, MONROVIA, and IRWINDALE, collectively, the "ALLIANCE") . WITNESSETH WHEREAS, the ALLIANCE has determined that it is a matter of public convenience and necessity to develop a unified approach to extending the Blue Line from Pasadena to Irwindale; and WHEREAS, the ALLIANCE lacks employees with the professional, expert, and technical knowledge capable, of performing such a service; and WHEREAS, the ALLIANCE has determined that it is a matter of public convenience and necessity to form an alliance among the cities and business interests in the cities of Pasadena, Arcadia, Monrovia, Duarte, and Irwindale in the County of Los Angeles, California; and WHEREAS, the ALLIANCE has determined that it is a matter of public convenience and necessity that DUARTE act as lead agency of the ALLIANCE with respect to the administration of the Agreements; and WHEREAS, the ALLIANCE has determined that it is a matter of public convenience and necessity to engage the specialized professional services of a management firm with expertise in the area bf transit planning and administration to assist the ALLIANCE in the general management of the ALLIANCE campaign; and WHEREAS, Forsythe & Associates, Inc. , a California corporation possesses recognized and professional and technical expertise with extensive experience and training in the field of transit planning and, administration (Exhibit "A") ; and WHEREAS, the ALLIANCE has determined that it is a matter of public convenience and necessity to engage the specialized professional services of a public finance firm with expertise in the area of transportation finance to assist the ALLIANCE in financing the matching funds required by LACTC; and -1- _ to �,Ari 8 WHEREAS, Public Financial Management, Inc. possesses recognized professional and technical expertise with extensive experience and training in the field of transportation finance (Exhibit "B") ; WHEREAS, the ALLIANCE has included a $10,000 contingency fund in the funding formula to cover items that may be required to conduct a successful campaign. NOW, THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THE TERMS OF THE AGREEMENT, THE PARTIES HERETO DO MUTUALLY AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1. The parties hereto do hereby form an alliance for the development of a unified approach to extending the Blue Line from Pasadena to Irwindale to serve the foothill cities of Pasadena, Arcadia, Monrovia, Duarte, and Irwindale. 2. DUARTE shall be the lead agency in the ALLIANCE with respect to the administration of the Agreements, and shall act as treasurer for the ALLIANCE, responsible for the collection of fees from ALLIANCE members and the payment of FIRMS. DUARTE shall hold the funds of ALLIANCE in trust for the benefit of ALLIANCE. 3. To facilitate the development of a unified campaign to bring light rail transit to the Foothill cities, it is agreed that DUARTE shall have full cooperation from the Signatories, their officers, agents, and employees. 4. The ALLIANCE shall not be called upon to assume any liability for the direct payment of any salary, wages, vacation, sick leave, retirement, or other compensation to any FIRMS personnel performing services for the ALLIANCE or any liability other than that provided for in the Agreement. 5. In order to achieve the objectives of the Agreement, each SIGNATORY agrees to pay a portion of the total expenses of the ALLIANCE which shall not exceed $95,000 as set forth in Exhibit "C". All population figures shall be based upon the 1990 census. Funds shall be payable by a SIGNATORY within fifteen (15) days of its execution of the Agreement. 6. THE AGREEMENT SHALL HAVE FULL FORCE AND EFFECT ONLY UPON EXECUTION AND PAYMENT OF THE FUNDS BY ALL FIVE (5) SIGNATORIES. Each ALLIANCE member may, at its sole option and discretion, terminate the Agreement at any time without any liability except as provided herein, by giving ten (10) days prior written notice to DUARTE. No SIGNATORY tendering such termination shall be entitled to any refund of any amounts paid hereunder. -2- LPS Cr' • • I 7. The Agreement is by and among DUARTE and the SIGNATORIES and is not intended, and shall not be construed, to create the relationship of agent, servant, employee, partnership, joint venture, or association, as between DUARTE and the SIGNATORIES. 8. No SIGNATORY which fails to pay the entire amounts required by paragraph 5 of this Agreement shall be entitled to any of the reports, data, or other results of the efforts of ALLIANCE. 9. DUARTE shall have no liability for the debts of ALLIANCE beyond the contribution required in paragraph 5 of this Agreement. 10. The Agreement may be simultaneously executed in several counterparts, each of which shall be an original and all of which shall constitute but one and the same instrument. 11. The Agreement constitutes the entire Agreement among DUARTE and each SIGNATORY and may be modified only by further written agreement between the parties hereto. 12. The effect and meaning of the Agreement and the rights of all parties hereunder shall be governed by, and construed according to, the laws of the State of California. 13. Nothing in the Agreement expressed or implied is intended or shall be construed to confer upon, or give to, any person, other than the ALLIANCE, any right, remedy, or claim under or by reason of the Agreement or any covenant, condition, or stipulation thereof; any and all covenants, stipulations, promises, and agreements in the Agreement shall be for the 'sole and exclusive benefit of the ALLIANCE. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused the Agreement to be executed by their respective officers, duly authorized, the day, month, and year first above written. CITY OF DUARTE . CITY MANAGER ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY CLERK CITY ATTORNEY WGrO -3- LASER In 4 -� , i CITY OF PASADENA CITY MANAGER ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY CLERK CITY ATTORNEY CITY OF ARCADIA CITY MANAGER ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY CLERK CITY ATTORNEY CITY OF MONROVIA CITY MANAGER ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY CLERK CITY ATTORNEY CITY OF IRWINDALE CITY MANAGER ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY CLERK CITY ATTORNEY (NOTE: The signature pages will be duplicated for each city that joins the ALLIANCE) -4- . r� LA-J L,y: 84 J 1, _ _ ° JANUARY 19, 15'93 ci m P TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: WILLIAM WOOLARD, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING SUBJECT: PROPOSED RESOLUTION NO. 5708 - AMENDING THE CITYS PROCEDURES FOR THE EVALUATION OF IMPACTS OF LAND USE DECISIONS ON THE CONGESTION MANAGEMENT PROGRAM SYSTEM BACKGROUND The Congestion Management Porgram (CMP) is a new program enacted by the State Legislature. The requirements of the CMP became effective with voter approval of Proposition 111 in June 1990. In passing CMP statute, the legislature noted increasing concern that urban congestion was impacting the economic vitality of the state and diminishing the quality of life in many communities. The legislature also noted that the current planning process was not well suited to addressing congestion relief. A Congestion Management Agency was designated in each county that includes an urbanized area. The Los Angeles County Transportation Commission (LACTC) was designated the Congestion Management Agency (CMA) for Los Angeles County, and this authority will transfer to the Metropolitian Transportation Authority (MTA) on February 1, 1993. As required by statute, the CMP has the following five elements: 1. A system of highways and roadways with minimum level of service performance standards designed for highwayb segments and key roadway intersections on this system. 2. Transit standards for frequency and routing of transit services and coordination between transit operators. 3. A trip reduction and travel demand management element promoting alternative transportation methods during peak travel periods. 4. A program to analyze the impacts of local land use decisions on the regional transportation system, including an estimate of the costs of mitigating those impacts. 1 CMP TIA CC COVER 01 1/19/93 LASER IMAGED 1O/3 5. A Lin-year capital improvement progain of projects that benefit the CMP system. While many levels of government are involved in developing and implementing the CMP, local jurisdictions have significant implementation responsibilities. These responsibilities include assisting in monitoring the CMP system; adopting and implementing a trip reduction and travel demand ordinance; analyzing the impacts of local land use decisions on the regional transportation system; and preparing annual deficiency plans for portions of the CMP system where level of service standards are not maintained. The Land Use Analysis Program (LUAP) focuses soley on what local governments must do to comply with CMP land use analysis requirements. Statute requires that the CMP require local jurisdiction adoption of a program to analyze the impacts of land use decisions on the regional transportation system, including an estimate of the cost of mitigating associated impacts. The purpose of the CMP LUAP is to ensure that local jurisdictions consider the regional transportation impact of new development through the land use approval process. All development projects which are required to prepare an EIR will be subject to the LUAP and shall incorporate into the EIR a CMP Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA). Projects which do not require an EIR will not be effected by the adoption of this resolution. Since the Land Use Analysis Program (LUAP) applies only to development projects which are subject to an EIR, an amendment to the City's existing Resolution 5157 (which adopted amended regulations for environmental documents pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act), will suffice for the purpose of adopting the LUAP. The MTA will annually review the performance of local jurisdictions. Those agencies which are not complying will have a portion of their gas tax funds withheld by the State Controller. Local jurisdictions are responsible for adopting and implementing the Land Use Analysis Program by April 1, 1993. The attached resolution is based on the model TIA, and is intended to provide the program required by number 4 above. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that staff read the title of Resolution No. 5708 and that the City Council adopt the resolution. 2 CMP TIA CC COVER LASER i v 913 104 emoia4 :turn j, 4 ..: . tip Date 1/19/93 TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: 16.-- PETER KINNAHAN, ASST. CITY MANAGER/ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT SUBJECT: O'fl1MICHAEL MILLER, CITY ATTORNEY RECOMMENDATION TO: NORDSTROM ADDITION & MALL EXPANSION: RECOMMENDATION TO: 1) ACQUIRE EASEMENT FOR FIFTEEN YEARS FOR 2.8 ACRE CITY PARKING LOT ADJACENT TO SANTA ANITA FASHION PARK MALL BY APPROVAL OF EASEMENT PURCHASE AGREEMENT BETWEEN ANITA ASSOCIATES AND THE CITY OF ARCADIA; 2) APPROVE DESIGN REVIEW OF FASHION PARK IMPROVEMENTS; 3) APPROVE SUBORDINATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND ANITA ASSOCIATES .e. Summary of Mall Expansion Project Anita Associates (Anita) , leasehold owners of the Santa Anita Fashion Park Mall, have submitted plans for a $26 million expansion of the Mall (see Site Map) . Anita Associates is composed of the Hahn Company/UPI (Hahn) as General Partner and Santa Anita Realty Enterprises, Inc. (SARE) as limited partner. Under their plans, the former Buffum's building will be substantially demolished. A new 146,000 sq. ft. Nordstrom store will be built in its place, and the intervening 40, 000 sq. ft. space between the existing Mall and the new Nordstrom store will be converted into additional retail shops. The parking area on the west side of the Mall will be excavated and lowered one floor so that pedestrians can enter Nordstrom on the first floor. Anita will construct a food court area at the northwest entry by J.C. Penney's and remodel the mall office area. Robinson's will eliminate their 45,000 sq. ft. third floor for any use, and will construct an 89,000 sq. ft. two-etory expansion to the east, a net increase of 44,000 sq. ft. . Anita will also construct a new parking lot on 8.2 acres of land toE the east of the Mall. This land will be leased to the Mall by Santa Anita Realty Enterprises, Inc. , owner of the race track. In total, the Mall will increase from 1, 102, 100 to 1,345,600 sq. ft. and from 5,090 to 5, 638 parking spaces. The Mall proposes to begin excavation and construction of the western parking lot, the eastern 8.2 acre parking lot and the food court in late January, 1993, with completion of all of this work scheduled for September, 1993. LASER IN1, ' b c. 86 Igt City Council January 19, 1993 Page 2 Nordstrom plans to begin construction in late summer, 1993 and be open by mid August, 1994. Robinson's hopes to open their expansion by November, 1994. City Financial Commitment The City has negotiated to acquire through an Easement Purchase Agreement (EPA) summarized below, a fifteen year easement for public parking purposes over 2 .8 acres of the new 8.2 acre ea tern parking lot (see Site Map) for a total cost of $3 million. The fifteen year term and the $3 million cost were based respectively upon an appraisal of the proposed 2.8 acre Ciq lot by the City's appraiser, Brown, Chudleigh, Schuler & Associates, and a financial analysis prepared by Keyser Marston & Associates (KMA) , an experienced financial consulting firm. The City Council has adopted Resolution 5710 declaring its intention to reimburse these funds out of a possible future bond issue. Easement Purchase Agreement The Easement Purchase Agreement between Anita Associates and the City is Attachment 1 to this report. Both Anita Associates (the Hahn Co. ) and Santa Anita Realty Enterprises have stated they will sign the EPA. We anticipate receipt of the executed EPA prior to the Council meeting. The major terms of the EPA are: - Anita shall build the western and eastern parking lots, the new retail shop space, the food court, the required offsite median and traffic improvements on Huntington and Baldwin; and use its best faith efforts to get Nordstrom to construct and open its 146„ 000 sq. ft. store by September 30, 1994. dNote - if for some reason Nordstrom does not proceed with their building, Anita is not required to construct these improvements. ) - The City shall place $3 million into escrow within one month after approval of the EPA (with interest accruing to the City) . Upon completion and opening of at least 123,500 sq. ft. of Nordstrom, the City shall authorize the release of the $3 million to Anita Associates. This is expected to occur in September, 1994. 87 City Council January 19, 1993 Page 3 The escrow agent (Chicago Title Co. ) will simultaneously record the fifteen year Easement Grant Deed granting an easement for a City public parking lot on the southerly 2.8 acres of the new eastern 8.2 acre parking lot. (Under 'Elie projected schedule the City will own the easement from September, 1994 until September, 2009. ) While the City parking lot is subordinate to the Mall Reciprocal Easement Agreements, it is a public lot availaiDle to the general public including Mall patrons and employees. If Nordstrom does not construct and open at least a 123,500 sq. ft. store by November 1, 1996 the Agreement is terminated and the City can recover its $3 million. Once open, Nordstrom must keep at least 100, 000 sq. ft. of selling floor open or the City can recover its pro-rata share of the $3 million. If Nordstrom closes prior to ten years after their initial opening, and the Mall is unable to secure a comparable hligh fashion retail store to replace it within eighteen mont'is, Anita must repay a pro-rata amount of the $3 million from `the date Nordstrom closed to the tenth year plus 7% simple interest on the unpaid principal balance by the end of ten year operating period. Anita will execute a Quitclaim Deed to a 32,496 sq. ft. pa el south of the existing fire station 2 on Baldwin and use�its best faith efforts to have all other parties with interests in that property execute the appropriate deeds so that the land is dedicated to the City and the City can construct a new 11,750 sq. ft. fire station thereon. Should this not occur, and the City be required to pay additional monies to acgi4ire all rights to this property, Anita shall share all c sts equally with the City up to a $25,000 maximum payment by Anita. The EPA was prepared by Agency Special Counsel Steve Deitsch and Kevin Randolph of Best, Best & Krieger, in conjunction with the City Attorney, Michael Miller. Projected Sales Tax Revenues In 1991 the City received $1,463, 000 in sales tax from the Mall. Keyser Marston & Associates (KMA) estimates that the Mall, including the expansion, will generate projected sales taxes of $1,993,000 in 1994, an increase of $530,000 over 1991. KMA projects that sales tax revenue from Nordstrom and the Mall shops will stabilize in 1996 at $2,682,000, and increase thereafter at 4% due to inflation. 88 -f' City Council January 19, 1993 Page 4 By 2003 , nine years after opening, KMA projects annual revenues from the Mall to be $3,530,000, an increase over 1991 Mall revenues of $2,067, 000 annually. Using this straight line calculation, the City's $3 million "cost" will be paid back from increased sales taxes at the Mall by September, 1997, three years after Nordstrom opens. However, if the City's 1991 sales tax receipts from the Mall (i.e. , $1,463, 000) are compounded at 3% annually for inflation, the "true" discounted net value of the sales tax revenues from the Mall expansion are $394,300 in 1994, $986, 000 in 1996, and $1,44,400 in 2003. When the sales tax revenues are discounted as shown above, the City's $3 million "cost" will be repaid by September 1998, only four years after Nordstrom opens. Design Review Approval The Mall elevations for Anita's proposed improvements for the new Mall shops between the existing Mall and Nordstrom are shown on Attachment 2. By approval of the EPA, the Council is also approving these concept plans, elevations, colors and materials. (Colored elevations will be displayed in the Council Conference Room at the meeting. ) Nordstrom elevations have not been submitted as yet and will require a future design review. Subordination Agreement Anita has requested that the City subordinate its fifteen year easement for the parking lot to the Reciprocal Easement Agreement (REA) governing the Mall and its common areas in the attached Subordination Agreement. A proposed Amendment No. 3 to the REA adds Nordstrom as one of the REA's major parties and binds them and the other major department stores to the changes created by the expansion, including the addition of the eastern 8.2 acre pa king lot of which the City is a part. The City Attorney has reviewed and approved the Subordination Agreement. Environmental Review This project, including parking and the Easement Purchase Agreement, has been reviewed by staff, by Barton-Aschman & Associates (traffic) , and by The Planning Center who completed an Initial Study (September, 1992) as part of a zone change andltext amendment (ZC-92-002 and TA 92-005) request by Anita. A Negative Declaration was approved by the City Council on November 15, 1992. The specific Mitigation Monitoring Plan was approved by the Clity Council on December 15, 1992. • 89 City Council January 19, 1993 Page 5 Estimated Future Costs Chicago Title's 1993 escrow costs are $3, 600 of which the City would pay one half, or $1,800. Costs can be assumed to increase by 1994, the scheduled date for close of escrow, to approximately $2,200. Investment fees are $50 per investment. Total estimated future costs are $2,500. Recommendation That the City Council approve: 1) The Easement Purchase Agreement (Attachment 1) 2) The Concept Plans and Elevations for the Mall expansion (Attachment 2) • 3) The Subordination Agreement (Attachment 3) and authorize the City Manager to execute all documents including minor modifications to any of the above when approved by the City Attorney as to form. That the City Council authorize the expenditure of $3,000, 000 from the General Fund Balance for. the purchase of a fifteen year easement for public parking purposes over 2.8 acres as set forth in •e E. -eme•t Purchase Agreement, and such other incidental costs as -y • - ne• -ssary to implement the Agreement (est. $2,500) J J._111' Appr• ed Attachments 90 oSzi — 7d . - w � January 19, 1993 TO: ARCADIA CITY COUNCIL FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT WILLIAM E. STOKES, ASSISTANT CITY PLANNER SUBJECT: BUILDING CODE VARIANCE TO PERMIT THE SECOND FL.•R OCCUPANCY OF A TUTORIAL SCHOOL WITHIN THE 0 CE SPACE OF TYPE 5 NON-RATED BUILDING AT 1135 W. HUNTINGTON DR / HUGHES EL RANCHO CENTER SUMMARY The Planning Department has received a request from Raymond C. Floyd, representing the A.I.E. Group, for a building code variance to allow a tutor al school to occupy a portion of the second floor at 1135 W. Huntington Drive witho t providing the sprinkler system which is required for such an occupancy. BACKGROUND INFORMATION On December 8, 1992, the Planning Commission approved Conditional Us Permit 92-013, submitted by the A.I.E. Group, for a proposed tutorial school to be c nducted within the second floor office space at the Hughes El Rancho Shopping Ce ter. The proposed school will provide general eduction seminars and tutoring to j for high and senior high school students, seven days a week, Monday through Frid , 9 a.m. to 10 p.m. and Saturday through Sunday, 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. No more than 30 students will be on-site during those hours of operation. ✓the Planning Commission approved the proposed use subject to the cond'tions outlined in the staff report, subject to compliance with the Building and Fi e Department conditions of approval. GENERAL INFORMATION The Uniform Building Code establishes specific requirements for occupanc and different dassifications for types of schools (e.g., day-care, elementary schools, etc.). Based upon the number of students who will be in attendance and the hours of operation daily and weekly, the proposed tutorial school is an E-2 occupancy as classified by the Uniform Building Code. 1135 W. Huntington pr. January 19, 1993 Page 1 c)? LASER IMAGED 24 An E-2 Occupancy is defined as "Any building used for educational purpo es through the 12th grade by less than 50 persons for more than 12 hours per eek or four hours in any one day". REQUEST The applicant is requesting a building code variance to waive Sections 802 . d 507 of the Uniform Building Code, which are as follows: Section 802: restricts schools to the first floor with a proposed E-2 o cupancy, in a Type 5 building, unless the building is sprinklered. The proposed tutorial school cannot occupy the second floor unless; Section 507: An approved automatic sprinkler system is installed throughout the first and second floor. ANALYSIS The Planning Commission approved the C.U.P. for the proposed tutorial School based upon the site's compatibility for such a use and subject to the condi 'Ions set forth in the staff's report including the Building and Fire Department's co ditions of approval. The existing retail/office building, is a Type 5 non-rated build g. Type 5 refers to the building's construction type. Because the building does not ave an automatic sprinkler system, the proposed use cannot be located above the irst floor. The Building Department and Fire Department have reviewed the reques ed building code variance (see attached memos). The following is a summa of their comments. Building Department If the building is upgraded with an automatic sprinkler system, the classifi ation of the building would change to Type 5 "sprinldered". This would be accepta le for second floor, E-2 occupancies; i.e. the proposed school. Fire Department Wayne Crabb of the Fire Department has indicated that, in reference to "E' occupancies as per Uniform Fire Code (UFC) Section 10.507 (e)2., an autom tic sprinkler system shall be installed in enclosed usable space below or above la stairway. The existing second floor has two stairway entrance/exits, one to the north and one to the south. The Fire Department will require sprinklering of these access areas. 1135 W. Huntington Dr. January 19, 993 Pa e 2 LASER IMAGED 2 ■ In addition, the existing fire alarm shall be modified and tested as necessary according to UFC Section 14.108., Article 14. A sign shall also be placed at the south entrance above the touch pad, indicating the boundaries of each zone. RECOMMENDATION The Planning Department recommends denial of the applicant's request d concurs with the Building Department's conditions and requirements for occupancy. The installation of an automatic sprinkler system would be an appropriate improvement to the retail/office center, irrespective of the pr posed school. ACTION The City Council should open the public hearing and,receive all testimon regarding the requested building code variance. Based upon the testimon received and the evidence presented at tonight's meeting, the Council may: 1. Deny the building code variance for the waiver of the Building Dep rtment and Fire Department's conditions of occupancy. This would require the applicant to sprinkler the entire building or move the school to the irst floor. 2. Approve the variance subject to the Fire Department's requirement . This would require providing sprinklers in the stairway areas, and comp iance with the other conditions set forth in their report. 3. Approve the variance as requested. This would allow the school to •ccupy the second floor without any changes to the building. 1135 W. Huntington Dr. January 19, 993 Par 3 LASER IMAGED 26 • 1991 UNIFORM BUILDING CODE 501_503 Part III REQUIREMENTS BASED ON OCCUPANCY Chapter 5 CLASSIFICATION OF ALL BUILDINGS BY USE OR O'CC UPA NCY AND.GENERAL REQUIREMENTS FOR ALL OCCUPANCIES -`-- NOTE:For the scope and authority of each state agency,refer to Chapter I,Section 110. C Refer to the "Introduction"for directions on the use of the matrix adoption tables. Occupancy Classified ':, -Sec.501.Every building,whether existing or hereafter erected,shall be classi- feed by the building official,according to its use or the character of its occupancy, as a building of Group A,B,E.H,I,Mor R as defined in Chapters 6,7.8,9, I0,, 11 and 12.(See Table No.5-A.) Any occupancy not mentioned specifically or about which there is any question shall be classified by the building official and included in the group which its use most nearly resembles,based on the existing or proposed life and fire hazard. Change In Use Sec.502.No change shall be made in the character of occupancies or use of any building which would place the building in a different division of the same group of occupancy or in a different group of occupancies,unless such building is made to comply with the requirements of this code for such division or group of occupan- cy. EXCEPTION:The character of the occupancy of existing buildings may be changed subject to the approval of the building official,and the building may be occu- pied for purposes in other groups without conforming to all the requirements of this code for those groups,provided the new or proposed use is less hazardous,based on life and fire risk,than the existing use. No change in the character of occupancy of a building shall be made without a Certificate of Occupancy,as required in Section 308 of this code.The building offi- cial may issue a Certificate of Occupancy pursuant to the intent of the above excep- tion without certifying that the building complies with all provisions of this code. Mixed Occupancy Sec.503.(a)General.When a building is used for more than one occupancy purpose,each part of the building comprising adistinct"occupancy,"as described in Chapters 5 through 12,shall be separated from any other occupancy as specified in Section 503(d). • EXCEPTIONS: I. Where an approved spray booth constructed in accordance with the Fire Code is installed,such booth need not be separated from other Group H Occupancies or from Group B Occupancies. 35 LASER IMA ED 0ri rd cn s.- TABLEN0.5-A—Continued y' NI NI TYP_ES_ll=ONE-HOUR,II-N AND V ONLY 1. FIRE RESISTANCE OF OPENINGS IN GROUP DESCRIPTION OF OCCUPANCY EXTERIOR WALLS EXTERIOR WALLS I 3—Aircraft hangars where no repair work is done except exchange of parts Not permitted less than B and maintenance requiring no open flame,welding,or the use of Class I lx or II liquids I hour less than 20 feet 5 feet (Coot.) Open parking garages(For requirements,see Section 709) Protected less than Helistops 20 feet 4—Ice plants,power plants,pumping plants,cold storage and creameries Factories and workshops using noncombustible and nonexplosive material I hour less than 5 feet Not pe 5ttfatless han Storage and sales rooms of noncombustible and nonexplosive materials that are not packaged or crated in or supported by combustible material . • 1—Any building used for educational purposes through the 12 grade by 50 or more persons for more than 12 hours per week or four hours in any one �,E day 2 hours less than 5 feet, Not permitted less than See also 2 —Any°building usedlorr educational purposes through the 12th grade by- )• 1 hour less than 5 feet Section t ;less than 50 persons for more than 12 hours per week or four hours in and 10 feet2 Protected less than _ 402.1 .one day----- --— ----- - -— — __ _ 10 feet2 -- 3—Any building or portion thereof used for day-care purposes for more than C six persons Z H See Table No.9-C O xi I I.1—Nurseries for the full-time care of children under the age of six(each Not permitted less than ; See also accommodating more than five persons) 2 hours less than 5 feet, 5 feet m C Section Hospitals,sanitariums,nursing homes with nonambulatory patients and I hour elsewhere Protected less than 1002 similar buildings(each accommodating more than five persons) 10 feet 0 O v M • • • • LASER lTM i\GED v • 1991 UNIFORM.BUILDING CODE 801-802 Chapter 8 REQUIREMENTS FOR—GROUP E OCCUPANCIES NOTE:For the scope and authority of each state agency,refer to Chapter 1.Section 110. Refer to the "Introduction"for directions on the use of the matrix adoption tables. C Group E Occupancies Defined - -Sec:801.Group E Occupancies shall be: Division 1.Any building used for educational purposes through the 12th grade by 50 or more persons for more than 12 hours per week or four hours in any one day. Division 2.Anybuilding used'foreducational purposes-through the 12th-grade . by-less-than 50t persois_for more than 12 hours per week or four hours in any one ;day- -------- -- - - EXCEPTION:A residence used as a home school for the children who normally L reside at the residence.Such residences shall remain classified as Group R.Division c L II I or 3 Occupancies. A L Division 3.Any nonresidential building used for day-care purposes for more A L than six children/persons.Any residential building used for day-care purposesfor A L more than 12 persons. C L For occupancy separations,see Table No.5-B. For occupant load,see Section 3302. A L • 'Constructlon,{Height and Allowable-Area zr:. Sec802ra~General.Buildings or parts of buildings classed in-Group E causeiof the useor character of the.occupancyshall be limited to the types of con= struction,set'forth in Tables Nos. 5-C and 5-D,and shall not exceed, in area or height,the limits specified in Sections 505,506 and 507,except that the area may be increased by 50 percent when the maximum travel distance specified in Section 3303(d)is reduced by 50 percent. (b)Atmospheric Separation Requirements. 1.Definitions.For the purpose of this chapter and Section 3318,the following definitions are applicable: COMMON ATMOSPHERE.A common atmosphere exists between rooms, spaces or areas within a building which are not separated by an approved smoke- and draft-stop barrier. SEPARATE ATMOSPHERE.A separate atmosphere exists between rooms, spaces or areas that are separated by an approved smoke-and draft-stop barrier. SMOKE AND DRAFT BARRIER. A smoke and draft barrier consists of walls,partitions,floors and openings therein of such construction as will prevent • the transmission of smoke or gases through the construction. 2.General provisions.The provisions of this subsection apply when a separate • exit system is required in accordance with Section 3318. Walls,partitions and floors forming all of,or part of,an atmospheric separation shall be of materials consistent with the requirements for the type of construction. but of construction not less effective than a smoke-or draft-stop barrier. Glass • 69 • R 1iS 0r <. 1991 UNIFORM BUILDING CODE 506-507 2.Separation on three sides.Where public ways or yards more than 20 feet in width extend along and adjoin three sides of the building,floor areas may be in- creased at a rate of 21/2 percent for each foot by which the minimum width exceeds 20 feet.but the increase shall not exceed 100 percent. 3. Separation on all sides.Where public ways or yards more than 20 feet in width extend on all sides of a building and adjoin the entire perimeter,floor areas may be increased at a rate of 5 percent for each foot by which the minimum ex- ceeds 20 feet.Such increases shall not exceed 100 percent,except that greater in- creases shall be permitted for the following occupancies: A. Group B, Division 3 aircraft storage hangars not exceeding one story in height. B. Group B,Division 4 Occupancies not exceeding two stories in height. C. Group H, Division 5 aircraft repair hangars not exceeding one story in height.Area increases shall not exceed 500 percent for aircraft repair han- gars except as provided in Section 506(b). (b)Unlimited Area.The area of any one-or two-story building of Group B and Group H,Division 5 Occupancies shall not be limited if the building is provided with an approved automatic sprinkler system throughout as specified in Chapter 38,and entirely surrounded and adjoined by public ways or yards not less than 60 feet in width. The area of a Group B,Division 4 Occupancy in a one-story Type II,Type III One-hour or Type IV building shall not be limited if the building is entirely sur- rounded and adjoined by public ways or yards not less than 60 feet in width. (c) Automatic Sprinkler Systems.The areas specified in Table No.5-C and Section 505(b)may be tripled in one-story buildings and doubled in buildings of more than one story if the building is provided with an approved automatic sprin- kler system throughout.The area increases permitted in this subsection may be compounded with that specified in Item 1,2 or 3 of Subsection(a)of this section. The increases permitted in this subsection shall not apply when automatic sprink- ler systems are installed under the following provisions: I.Section 507 for an increase in allowable number of stones. 2.Section 3802(f)for Group H.Divisions 1,2,3 and 8 Occupancies. A Ell 3.Substitution for one-hour fire-resistive construction pursuant to Section 508. 4.Section 1716,Atria. Maximum Height of Buildings and increases _Sec.•507.The maximum height and number of stories of buildings shall be de. pendent omthekchara cter of the occupancy and the type of construction and shall not exceed the limits set forth in Table No.5-D;except as provided in this section and as specified in Section 503(a)for mixed occupancy buildings. EXCEPTIONS: 1. Towers,spires and steeples erected as a part of a building and not used for habitation or storage are limited as to height only by structural design if completely of noncombustible materials,or may extend not to exceed 20 feet above the height limit in Table No.5-D if of combustible materials. 41 LASER IMAGED 30 . . ( ) -.___,, ... g i 4TABLKNO.5-0—MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF BUILDINGS ----------— -TYPES OF CONSTRUCTION - a in OCCUPANCY F.IR. 11 FR. 1 ONE-HOUR 1 N 1 ONE-HOUR 1 N F Hiv.T. I--ONE-HOUR -1-11------N---- MAXIMUM HEIGHT IN FEET - Unlimited j 160 I 65 I 55 I 65 1 55 1 65 1 50 I 40. MAXIMUM HEIGHT IN STORIES A-1 Unlimited 4 Not Permitted A-2-2.I • Unlimited 4 i 2 i Not j 2 Not 2 2 I NOt Permitted Permitted 1 Penllitted-A-3-41 Unlimited 12 2 1 2 I 2 2 . B-1-2-32 Unlimited 12 4 • 2 4 2 4 3 8-4 Unlimited 12 4 2 4 2 4 3 . , ,, • E3 Unlimited 4 2 I 2 I 2 2 MaAt" Ar\ H-I4 I I I I Not Permitted -....,:.....-.-.9-......,..__ H-24 Unlimited 2 I 1 1 1 1 1 CIII C H-3-4-54 Unlimited 5 2 I 2 I 2 2 - - • H-6-7 3 3 3 2 3 2 3 3 H-8 /0 3 3 1 2 I 3 2 3 3 C 1-1.15-1.2 Unlimited 3. I Not 1 Not I I rot Permitted Permitted _ Per7litted •• Type.- 5 N De in 04e_s MA,( 1 s-i-ory For r__. oc.e-L4 •et l'IC 1 es , ;f no+ spri I< le_red LASER 1M - GED 3 1 _,.. DEC 3 0 1992 crry OF nrlcaCl.� PLANNING DEPT. T H E F L O Y D C O M P A N Y C O M M E R C I A L REAL ESTATE SERVICES December 30, 1992 William Stokes Arcadia Planning Department City of Arcadia 240 W. Huntington Dr. Arcadia, CA. 91007 Re: A. I.E. Group El Rancho Shopping Center Arcadia, CA. Dear Mr. Stokes: I am writing to you-on behalf of A. I.E. group. It has come to my attention that the planning department can not approve the proposed conditional use permit (C.U.P. ) application submitted by A. I.E. group for the operation of a tutorial center at the El Rancho shopping center. It is my understanding that While the planning commission has approved the use unanimously the final approval is being withheld pending compliance with the building departments comments. These comments pertain to the U.B.C. standards for the proposed use. The U.B.C. stipulates that the proposed use, as it is defined within the code book, can not be located in a building that does not meet the standards for a "class A" structure. I am told this rating relates to the buildings fire rating e.g. "1 hr. " building. As the proposed building does not meet the exact letter o the U.C.B. guidelines the building department, which is charged with enforcing the U.C.B. guidelines, is not at liberty to approve the use. At this time A. I.E. group would like to appeal the building departments decision and ask for a variance to the U.B.C. guidelines. LASER 1 ; GED 2675 IRVINE AVENUE SUITE 1B 3500 COSTA MESA CA 92627 1 714 54B-5792 1 800 400-9066 32 t f 7 Pg. 2 A. I. E. asks for this variance based on the following: a) The U.B.C. guidelines are designed for "schools" with students ages k -12 ; the proposed tutorial center will not have clients under the age of 13 years. b) The building has been up-rated within the past year with the installation of a state of the art fire alarm system that is linked to the fire department switch board, the hallways and exit corridors have been made "one hour" corridors, all exits are clearly marked and have "panic hardware" at the doors. c) The total number of students that will attend the seminar at any one time will not exceed (15) fifteen. d) The proposed use will have an exit corridor immediately adjacent to the occupied suites. It is our sincere belief that because of these above stated circumstances that the proposed use does not pose any greater risk to the occupants than that of a traditional office use. We hope you will carefully evaluate the proposal and give this use a favorable recommendation to the appeal board. I am at your service to provide access to the building and will gladly offer any additional information you deem necessary to make your decision. Very Truly Yours, Raymond C. loyd THE FLOYD COMPANY • c.c. James Ng A. I. E. group Bernard A. Orsi LASER IMyi E 33 sibp. rnernoaum tip Date 1/7/93 TO: William Stokes - Planning Dept. FROM: Roy Streeter - Building SUBJECT: 1135 W. HUNTINGTON DRIVE Bill: As required by the Uniform Building Code (UBC) Section 501 and Table No. 5-A, the character of the proposed occupancy as described is classified as an E-2, "Any building used for educational purposes through the 12th grade by less than 50 persons for more than 12 hours per week, or 4 hours in any one day. " Referring to UBC Chap. 8, outlining requirements for Group E Occupancies, Sec. 802 restricts the building height to one story per UBC Chap. 5, Sec. 507 as set forth in Table No. 5-D for a Type V non-rated building. The building at 1135 W. Huntington Dr. , as it exists, was constructed and is maintained as a Type V non-rated building. Consequently, an E-2 Occupancy is not permitted in this building unless an approved automatic fire sprinkler system is installed throughout the first and second floors per UBC Sec. 507. AGt: Roy S eeter • RES:gf LASER 1 MAL - d,L: 34 v . Qp, .„ aRCAD 494_24,4A, ORt'ORATL'�''0 FIRE DEPARTMENT 710 S. Santa Anita Avenue GERALD R.GARDNER FIRE CHIEF Arcadia, California 91006 )81H) 574-5100 REC i VED January 6, 1993 JAN 7 103 Mr. William Stokes CITY OF ARCA IA Planning Department PLANNING DEPT. 240 W. Huntington Drive Arcadia, Ca 91007 RE: 1135 W. Huntington Drive Dear Bill, I am writing you in reference to the appeal to the City Council for a variance to the Building Code and any Fire Department requirements for 1135 W. Huntington Drive. There are a few issues that have to be addressed by the Floyd Company. In "E", Occupancies according to UFC Section 10.507 (e) . 2 . Stairs - an automatic sprinkler system shall be ins-alled in enclosed usable space below or above a..stairway in Group E Occupancies. The existing fire alarm system shall be modified and tested as necessary according to Article 14 of the UFC, Section 1 . 108. 3 .; On the original installation, Mr. Floyd was required by this department to place a sign above the touch pad at the south entrance to show and identify the boundaries of each zone covered. This has still not, been done. This item mast be corrected before any other consideration can be granted. Thank you for your attention to these items. Sincerely, Wayne �i. Crabb Deputy Fire Marshal Arcadia Fire Department LASER AGE 3J . d �SD - T-® January 19, 1993 TO: ARCADIA CITY COUNCIL FROM: PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT JOSEPH R. LOPEZ, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS (-2:;) SUBJECT: RECOMMENDATION TO CONSENT TO LOS ANGELES COUNTY JURISDICTION FOR HUNTINGTON DRIVE TRAFFIC SIGNAL SYNCHRONIZATION PROJECT RESOLUTION NO. 5‘12 BACKGROUND As part of its Traffic Signal Synchronization Program (TSSP) , Los Angeles County has developed a project which would synchronize traffic signals along the Huntington Drive —Foothill Boulevard - Alosta Avenue corridor through the cities of Arcadia, Monrovia, Duarte, Irwindale, Azusa, Glendora, and La Verne. Within the City of Arcadia, the project would provide traffic signal synchronization by installation of new traffic signal control ers, detector loops, miscellaneous traffic signal heads and signs, and appurtenant equipment at the intersections of Huntington Drive with Michillinda, Sunset, Golden West, Baldwin, Gate 1, La Ca ena, Holly, Colorado P1. , Santa Clara, Santa Anita, First, Second and Gateway. Similar work would be performed within the bove mentioned cities easterly of Arcadia. The County has received a special allocation of State Tr ffic Systems Management (TSM) monies to fund the project entiiely. Accordingly, the improvement would be installed at no cost to the City. The project is tentatively scheduled to be advertised for construction bids in February 1993 . Project construction is scheduled for the latter half of 1993 . Attached Resolution No. 5612, when adopted by the City Council, declares the portion of Huntington Drive within the jurisdiction of the City of Arcadia to be a County highway for the purpose of synchronizing traffic signals. This jurisdiction would be relinquished back to the City after the completion of the project.. The resolution also provides that any change in signal timing for any of the intersections within the City of Arcadia shall beldone only upon mutual agreement between the City and Los Angeles Coil nty. However, manual control of the traffic signals by the Arcadia Police Department for the Santa Anita Race Track would still be available to the City. LASER IMAG 0,a6 97 , r y RECOMMENDATION A It is recommended that the City Council adopt Resolution No. t.12 establishing a portion of Huntington Drive as a County highwa for the purpose of administering a project to synchronize tra. fic signals. I I j APPROVED: m ...J h...am...1 DONALD R. D CKWORTH CITY MANAGER JRL:DAS:mlo Attachment LASER 1MAGa0 98 44- . 1�__i G L7 a -30 l '�;q um • • Date 1/19/93 TO: ARCADIA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY P FROM ,, PETER P. KINNAHAN, ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER I FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING TO ADOPT PROPOSED USE AND DESIGN REQUIREMENTS AND GUIDELINES FOR THE CENTRAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA RESOLUTION NO. ARA 172 - A RESOLUTION OF THE ARCADIA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ESTABLISHING USE AND DESIGN REQUIREMENTS AND GUIDELINES The Agency's Use and Design Standards were originally established by the Redevelopment Plan and ARA Resolution 13 (June 18, 1974) . This Resolution simply makes the Agency's standards the same as the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance of the City of Arcadia. Under our Redevelopment Plan, and existing case law, a Redevelopment Agency may adopt more restrictive use and design standards for a project area in order to address and eliminate blighting conditions existing in the project area. Over the last ten years the Agency spent over $30 million, predominantly in the east end of the Central Downtown Project Area. The City has spent over $1 million and proposes to spend another $1 million in this area. Despite the improvements resulting from the combined efforts of the City and the Agency, there still exist certain land uses and architectural styles which, while appropriate in other business districts in the City, are inappropriate for the Central Project Area. These uses may be inappropriate for a variety of reasons, including but not limited to: low or poor market acceptance; the use caters to potentially illegal or nuisance-type activities; the use is an activity or business requiring special security or public safety arrangements; or trash clean-up, or which generally results in increased parking and/or traffic violations and accidents; is a use which conflicts with or negatively impacts the business reputation, image, or attractiveness of the downtown; is a use which requires unique or special building size, mass, layout, height, access, parking, landscaping, signage, lighting, special controls on noise, smell and/or glare, and other architectural treatment which is incompatible with the Zoning Ordinance, Redevelopment Plan, and existing buildings and styles in the downtown; or is a use which does not generate sales taxes or transit occupancy taxes to the City. The proposed list of such inappropriate uses and styles is LASER IMAGED S 55 • • Arcadia Redevelopment Agency January 19, 1993 Page 2 contained in the attached "Use and Design Requirements and Guidelines for the Central Redevelopment Project Area" (exhibit to ARA Resolution 172) . The list has been prepared following review of similar guidelines from other redevelopment agencies, discussion with the City Planning Director, and review of the Resolution and "Requirements and Guidelines" by Agency Special Counsel Stephen Deitsch and Agency General Counsel Michael Miller. Although staff has been working on this for some time, a recent call from a broker about a possible development on the Foulger site, e.g. , two-story restaurant with single story adjacent convenience store type retail shops, has caused staff to expedite this for your consideration. If approved, this will encourage more attractive compatible uses and development in the downtown. More to the point, it will immediately prevent the spread of uses that are not desirable but are currently permitted. The Agency will be considering a revitalization plan for the entire downtown (including market economic uses, and architectural design) as proposed by Michael Freedman at your January 12 Study Session. Following his analysis, estimated to take three to six months, there may be further refinements and revisions to this Resolution. Staff has conducted an initial environmental study and determined that the project will have no significant impact on the environment. A Negative Declaration has therefore been prepared. The Redevelopment Plan requires that amendments to the Agency's Design Standards can be made only at a Public Hearing following two weeks notice. Notice was published in the San Gabriel Valley Star Tribune on December 29, 1992, January 3, 10, and 17, 1993. Recommendation That the Agency open the Public Hearing; That the Agency adopt or amend and adopt as appropriate, the Negative Declaration (Attachment 1) ; That the Agency adopt or amend and adopt as appropriate, Resolution ARA 172 - A Resolution of the Arcadia Redevelopment Agency est- 6lis 'ng Use and Design Requirements and Guidelines (Attachment 2) . 1 Appro ed Attachments L1� - •. , 56 '6'6 O-19'6 9 .4 5c4 emo'cat um r, °4roe�sso'' Date 1/-19/93 - — TO: Arcadia Redevelopment Agency. FROM: Joyce Friedmann, Economic Development Assistant SUBJECT: Design Review for 600 and 604 N. Santa Anita (Lojeski/Wu) Work Proposed: The applicant proposes to develop two single-story medical office buildings (2, 500 square feet and 1, 800 square feet) (see Site Plan and Elevations, Attachment 1) . Applicant: Dr. Stephen Lojeski, 1035 Woodacre. Lane, Arcadia, CA 91006, (818) 574-7020, and Charles and Ming Wu, 122 S. First Avenue, Arcadia, CA 91006, (818) 445-2510 (Owners' representative - G.E. Busse, Architect, 140 W. Olive Avenue, Monrovia, CA 91016-3405, (818) 358-2413) . Location: 600 and 604 N. Santa Anita (combined) (see Vicinity Map, Attachment 2) . Existing Land Use: Residential Existing Zoning: C-O (Commercial Office) General Plan Designation: Mixed Use Commercial/Multiple Family Redevelopment Plan Designation: CO (Commercial Office) Surrounding Land Uses: North: Office South: Multi-family Residential East: Single-family. Residential West: Multi-family Residential 1 "L) LASER IMAGED t 9 Building Area: Two buildings - 2, 500 square feet and 1,800 square feet; total building area is 4, 300 square feet. Frontage: 100 feet on Santa Anita Avenue Parking: 19 spaces provided (21 spaces required) (Modification request to be considered January 26, 1993) . PURPOSE OF DESIGN REVIEW Actions by the Arcadia Redevelopment Agency do not supersede Building or Zoning regulations. These regulations must be complied with unless they are modified in accordance with the procedures set forth in the Arcadia Municipal Code. The purpose of the Agency Design Review is as follows: 1. To give the Agency the opportunity to determine if the use and design elements of new private projects are in conflict with those of any Agency projects which are either being considered or already developed in the same area. 2 . To give the Agency the opportunity to incorporate the design elements of private projects with those of Agency projects and/or to eliminate or to mitigate any design conflicts at the earliest stage of the design process. 3 . To give the Agency the opportunity to review the preliminary architectural plans of private projects to insure that they are not out of character with the area and a hinderance to future development. ANALYSIS A. Design Features: The applicants propose to develop two single-story residential-style medical office buildings. (A colored rendering of these buildings and color board are available for viewing in the Economic Development Department and will be in the City Council Chambers Conference Room at the Redevelopment Agency Meeting. ) The buildings' facades feature grey horizontal wood siding with dark blue accent trim and a grey shingle roof. Other prominent features include french windows, brick wainscoting and brick columns. White stucco siding will be used only on the north facade of the 604 N. Santa Anita building. 2 LASER IMAGED 49 1 B. Department Requirements: Planning Modifications are required for the following and requests for such are scheduled to be considered by the Planning Commission on January 26, 1993 : 1. A 10 foot setback along Santa Anita Avenue (in lieu of the required 35 foot setback) for the sign and buildings at 600 and 604 N. Santa Anita Avenue, 2. A 15 foot setback along Newman Avenue (in lieu of the required 25 foot setback) for the building at 600 N. Santa Anita Avenue, 3 . A free standing ground sign with a 6 foot setback in a C-O Zone, and - 4. 19 parking spaces (in lieu of 21 spaces required) . Public Works 1. Submit grading and drainage plans prepared by a registered civil engineer subject to the approval of the Director of Public Works. Provide calculations for the gravity drainage system. Computations shall show hydrology, hydraulics, and elevations. Note: Show all existing and proposed parkway trees, pull boxes, meters, power poles, street lights, driveways, sidewalks and handicapped ramps on grading/drainage plan. 2 . Show the exact location of the backflow prevention devices for water services on the site plan for review and approval if installation of backflow prevention devices are warranted. 3 . Dedicate a 15 foot radius' corner cut-off for street purposes. 4. Close existing driveways not to be used and reconstruct curb, gutter and sidewalk to match existing. 5. Construct five foot wide P.C.C. sidewalk along Newman Avenue, as per Arcadia City Standard S-17. 6. Obtain permit for all work performed in the Public right- of-way. 3 LASER IMAGED 50 I ' 7 . Remove and replace deficient or damaged curb, gutter, sidewalk and/or pavement to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Contact Public Works Department for exact locations of removal and replacement. 8. Construct P.C.C. driveway apron according to Arcadia Standard Drawing No. S-11. No driveway shall be constructed closer than three feet from any curb return, fire hydrant, ornamental light standard, telephone or electrical pole, meter box, underground vault, manhole or tree. Note: No portions of existing gutter and A.C. pavement shall be removed unless prior approval is obtained from the Director of Public Works. 9. Paint address on curb face per Arcadia City Standard Drawing No. S-24 . 10. Arrange for underground utility service and dedicate easements to utility companies. 11. The Public Works Inspector must be contacted at (818) 574-5400, extension 289, at least 24 hours prior to construction of offsite improvements. All Public Works improvements must be completed to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works prior to final acceptance by the Building and Safety Department, and prior to occupancy. 12 . All survey monuments, centerline ties and survey reference points shall be protected in place or re- established where disturbed. This work will be the responsibility of the permittee and shall be at the permittee's expense. 13 . All of the above items shall be complied with to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Arcadia Municipal Code. 4 LASER IMAGED 51 - I ) J RECOMMENDATION: That the Arcadia Redevelopment Agency approve this Design Review under the following conditions: 1. That the project comply with all Zoning and Building Codes, as established or modified by the City; 2 . That final approval is subject to compliance with requirements of the City Departments as listed above; and 3 . That the Design Review be in effect for one year, as per ARA-126. Approved: 1j E ecu ive Dir- tor Attachments 5 LASER IMAGED i S ■ 1. 11 • - . ' •:2717.........................7\-- lot' Ab- . . NO 9 48 4,4. M.O.IT-21 . -.4.• Yr 5 • - ; tKAGr. • ,. .. . • . -------------,,,,,...... ... . oedo • . .. 8 " :: i'ci ; Q- ib, - 0. 2,:, . 4 71 . CC '''" 140 " ros 1:: 4i::::::::::':.,:.* 41 t2 2 9 43 _ „,, -.277. i9 . 'R. 4 ,„, 7,16:: Au ..,.,4 3 72 41,11 too' ,: if::::;:;:;:i§:.::::.:::::::' ,„:! -- . ,..,, ,, ,_____ ,L. 125 44:.:.:.:•:.1,..::.::;:: .. .. 1. 7.•1, e"./W". 2 bp ::i2 ql. .., 5.ce eso ' 3 NEWMAN .. A/E . o : 40: s s i, c....) .,. ,4-7-71,,,, , —,-,, 4 7.3,9 4, •Pg , 49 2.1" TRACT s .., 2 2 ,, 31—• 2 a Z ilg: caer3, 14..;-E) .soli:Cm‘l ;2234 ss, ..x. , 00. , t 4 .■ <<4 '' .2 L.3 \\ z „ .. c., ,, ,; IN i .Rig 4 e.."14.1•ir '25 47 46 45 44 43 12 41 1421 . 7i.t. 50 a •M, . 19- 22 al al 53 54 55 i—ch s8 59 . N • - DR. " .,P- 2 5i 2 N. ;`t - 26 WI _ '" Z 1 ... - •'.:1°3.*- 3 ri. . .Let 19•P"r49% tir) 51 \ •• VAC.ORD.1173 ,. 4N ,11,i 57 3 ev Ins/ 1.141 (2,4111 at.... 00;1510 etr c,% us- 10 50 SO X X N b ''. - BLVD -i, N .. , •-• r- 1•••• I 07.50 43‘.%4•11.7 N.,<. 37.1.00 1,:'' 11111MIEIN SO (34) % . N TRACT 948 , .b. N \.. % a •..' ‘..S` PA.B.1 -21 A ..' _ 1110 , N, •A\ BERRA i 1 • lil so?:. N 42'4— ‘• . ...„ PART OF 5 A L3 ‘N L 0 1 G * G194. ao O IAS. •''' ... AI ot N . , , , 1 10071 v /0 • Cli liat \ X In•■• X •X I'*a 0 lis, - \• N a , ''' At• MEC:. '.8 3: . 1 t. to v r - . • . , . sl la --.' ME IG TRACT 9 4 9 N ..„ ..,„ 3 LA PORTE ST e W we.17-13 N W 9 G illEk PART OF LOT 2 #:. N. - 441 le fAl.; .:• • ' ' ' I ..... . e in ii , •-• 78 , 77:, ... 1:: • • N . K1 P.M. 1 7 5 1 5 ' N3° ' -. 11 N il. w % P M.B.193-64€G5 .14• N Al . N. • - . - ' (.601.400,4841L16.4) te ..N. . w .2 SI—. 79 N 4. % 0 Len- e N -4 . 7 8 7 (() r2 ' • • I 14 0 • 2 3 . 7 X • • VA"-IF gi L•T i ;1. • ht % . 2 21... ., N.. ri 4 -- i * lOrlf I, YA.GII . . • N. * ... ST 3 JOSEPH ST -8 • 4 10, ' N . . • -- , . . v . 0. i "77 ' wan N : ij • ST JOSEPH ... N sr .. .. ... .... SITE VICINITY SCALE . 1 ' : 200' ■ , . 101111hit,.... PROJECT LOCATION LAS' 60 ft..A‘GED Attachmen UIG0 DZ • 7..; einoit a.. _ 1um ii; ..: . :x, �' : 'I ' r n .,fit z,o O+POLSf9. DATE: 1/19/93 TO: Arcadia Redevelopment Agency 1/, FROM: Dale R. Connors;/ Economic Development Associate SUBJECT: Request for Approval of Contract with Freedman Tung and Bottomley (Downtown Revitalization Strategy) On October 27, 1992 , Michael Freedman of Freedman Tung and Bottomley conducted a downtown revitalization workshop for Council/Agency and staff. Subsequently, Mr. Freedman submitted a proposal for consulting services (Attachment No. 1) in which his firm would develop a downtown development strategy for the City of Arcadia including an economic and marketing analysis by Mundie and Associates for approximately $80, 000 plus time and materials for work ordered by the Agency beyond the proposed Scope of • Services. On January 12 , Michael Freedman formally presented his proposal and responded to Agency Members questions. RECOMMENDATION That the Agency approve entering into a contract, in a form and content approved by Agency General Counsel, with Freedman Tung and Bottomley for the purpose of developing a Downtown Revitalization Strategy pursuant to their proposal (Attachment No. 1) , in an amount of $80, 000, plus time and materials for additional work. Approved: . L - A._._.`/ Executive Direct°. attachment DRC:dc Rb1.93m LASER IMP. ..5' L / . : EflEEDMAN T U N G DOTTOMLEY Urban Design & Planning District Revitalization Street & Plaza Design • CITY OF ARCADIA DOWNTOWN REVITALIZATION STRATEGY SCOPE OF SERVICES Project Summary Assist the Arcadia community. to develop a shared vision for the future of the historic Downtown district. Work with the public, a citizens Task Force, elected officials, and City Staff to develop a strategy to achieve economic and physical revitalization, and define an action plan that serves as a "road map" for a focused revitalization effort. The project will be organized around a series of three Task Force/City Staff workshops. The final products will be: a) . a Market Assessment that identifies Downtown Arcadia's competitive strengths and weaknesses, and market-based recommendations for development types that can form • the backbone of a revitalization strategy; b) a Revitalization Strategy diagram that illustrates policy-level economic and physical • improvement recommendations for Downtown and_its subareas; c) an Urban Design Concept that illustrates the possible physical form of a revitalized .Downtown district, including buildings, streets, and/or special development sites, and; d) a Street Design Concept that can help catalyze new investment along Huntington Drive, Arcadia's central spine. These products will be prepared as free-standing policy and design recommendations. However, the graphic Revitalization Strategy products and portions of the Market Assessment could also be compiled and used as part of a Downtown marketing package. Work Tasks Task 1: Collect and Review Background Information. For the area bounded by Foothill • Freeway, Fifth Avenue, California Street, and the eastern edge of Santa Anita Race Track, . collect and review the following: • 47 Kearny Street • Suite 500 • San Francisco,CA • 94108-5522 LASER I 415.291.9455 Attachment o. 1 Arcadia Downtown Revitalization Strategy Scope of Services, Page 2 A. Land use and development information - assess patterns of parcelization, ownership, businesses, and vacancies; review and assess existing general plan and zoning designations, and the redevelopment plan . B. Circulation, traffic, transit, and parking information - review current proposals affecting Downtown, existing levels and problems. C. Public facilities and improvements - collect information from Public Works department describing existing and planned improvements to water, sewer, and storm drainage systems. Task 2. Prepare Base Maps. Composite and reformat City maps as necessary to prepare subsequent planning and design work products. product - formatted base maps. Task.3. Site Reconnaissance and Photography. Assess and-document the existing character of Downtown Arcadia and surrounding areas; e.g. existing development, views from roadways, adjacent and/or competing developments and districts. product- slide inventory of Downtown conditions. Task 4. Prepare Market Analysis and Recommendations. Identify Downtown Arcadia's competitive environment and development possibilities; see attached Scope of Services by Economist. product - Market Analysis and Recommendations Memorandum. Task 5. Define Downtown Context, Opportunities and Constraints. A. Assess potential for change based on the existing land use, parcelization, and economics information gathered previously, and the findings and recommendations of the Market Analysis, assess the potential for positive or negative short-and long-term change in the Downtown Arcadia study area. B. Identify Downtown's physical characteristics and those of surrounding areas that contribute to Downtown Arcadia's form and character. These include areas of consistent building forms or styles,special buildings, shopping, office, and residential streets, open spaces, landmarks, district gateways, and/or other elements that could establish a design context for new development. Focus on links between Downtown and surrounding potential market groups. • C. Illustrate patterns of existing development, form and character, and potential for change in a graphic diagram. product- annotated "Existing Conditions" diagram; "Architectural Context" summary graphic. LASER IMAGED 38 3 Arcadia Downtown Revitalization Strategy Scope of Services, Page 3 Task 6: Staff Meeting and Task Force Workshop #1. A. Attend orientation meeting with City Staff (day). Review Downtown Arcadia study area boundaries, format of workshops and work products, and any modifications regarding the Scope of Services. Review initial findings of Market Analysis and existing conditions inventory and evaluation. B Conduct Task Force/Staff Workshop #1 (evening). The Workshop will contain the following: 1) Introductory slide presentation: "What makes the best downtowns successful?" 2) Discussion/Question-Answer: Focus discussion on Downtown Arcadia's strengths and weaknesses, and a preliminary "wish list" for elements of a revitalized district. Record Workshop participants comments. Task 7; Develop Recommended Downtown Revitalization Strategy. A. Review input from previous City Council Study Session, input from Task Force Workshop #1, the findings of the Economics Consultant, and the evaluation of . Downtown conditions.Identify the "broad brush" elements of a recommended Revitalization Strategy — policies for types and locations of land uses, potential development opportunities, "catalyst" public improvement efforts — that would promote investment and reinvestment in Downtown Arcadia. B. Prepare a Revitalization Strategy diagram illustrating recommendations, their interrelationships, and how they would be applied "on the ground" in Downtown Arcadia. Task 8: Develop Recommended Downtown Urban Design Concept. A. Identify "soft" and/or opportunity sites for new development or improvements that would promote the objectives of the Revitalization Strategy. B. Prepare a plan drawing that illustrates one "potential future" for a revitalized Downtown Arcadia, indicating new and existing buildings, streets, parking areas, and development opportunity sites. Task 9: City Staff/Task Force Workshop (#2). Present the analysis of the current state of Downtown Arcadia - opportunities, constraints, and elements that the City can build upon to revitalize the district. Present initial Revitalization Strategy and Urban Design Concept, and focus review and discussion on modifications necessary for consensus. Record comments. Task 10: Modify Revitalization Strategy and Urban Design Concept as directed. Task 11: Joint City Council and Planning Commission Study Session. Present the analysis of current conditions in Downtown and the recommended Revitalization Strategy and Urban • LASER IMAGED 39 . • Arcadia Downtown Revitalization Strategy Scope of Services, Page 4 Design Concept. Report on comments received at Workshop #2 and resulting modifications. Review questions with Councilmembers and Commissioner and record comments. • Task 12: Develop Huntington Drive Design Concept. A. Develop recommendations to improve the visual quality of Hamilton Drive from the city's eastern gateway to Santa Anita Fashion Park Mall. Identify a design approach that will create a powerful and memorable identity for the thoroughfare overall, and strong connections between Downtown, Santa Anita Race Track, the Civic Center, Arcadia County Park, the Medical Services district and Santa Anita Fashion Park Mall. B. Prepare street design concept sketches, as follows: 1) Concept diagram for entire thoroughfare; 2) Plan view illustration of typical improvement recommendations; ""3) _,Cross-section illustration of typical improvement recommendations; 4) Design for thematic architectural element(s), such as district gateways or landmarks; 5) Perspective sketch illustration of proposed street improvements and revitalized building frontage. Task 13: City Staff/Task Force Workshop (#3). Present recommended street design concept. Discuss and record Task Force and City Staff direction regarding modifications. Task 14: Modify Huntington Drive Design Concept as directed. Task 15: Joint City Council and Planning Commission Study Session. Present Huntington Drive Improvement Concept. Report on comments received at Workshop #3 and resulting modifications. Respond to questions and record Councilmember & Commissioner comments. • • r LASER IMAGED 40 Arcadia Downtown Revitalization Strategy Scope of Services, Page 5 Staffing & Budget Staffing:Michael Freedman will be the Principal-in-Charge, directing the existing conditions analysis, development of revitalization strategies, and meetings and presentations. Terence Bottomley will assist with urban design concepts. Anne Burns, Associate, will assist on all aspects and coordinate day-to-day work tasks. Roberta Mundie will be the Principal-in-Charge for Mundie & Associates, overseeing the Market Analysis and recommendations. Suzanne Lampert, Associate, will provide project management,.ongoing advice regarding district development potential, and performing technical aspects of the analysis. Budget:Our estimate to complete the project is $78,467; this includes an allowance of$15,000 for Mundie & Associates, Economics, to prepare the Market Analysis. Hourly costs and travel expenses for attendance at meetings and workshops are included. Direct/project costs include items such as photography, telephone, blueprinting,_and photo-reproduction. Terms:This is a time and materials project with a guaranteed maximum fee for completion of the Work Tasks outlined above. Invoicing shall be monthly, based on time and materials costs accrued during the preceding month. The list of task-by-task costs on the attached spreadsheet is provided to indicate the relative proportion of budgeted resources that each task is likely to require. It is provided for informational purposes only and is not intended as a basis for task-by-task contract provisions or invoicing. • Professional Services $ 62,220 Freedman Tung & Bottomley $ 47,220 Mundie & Associates, Economics $ 15,000 Data Base, Archives and Project Administration $ 6,222 Project Costs $ 10,025 TOTAL COST NOT TO EXCEED $ 78,467 Additional Meetings & Tasks Q TIME + MATERIALS LASER IMAGED 41 E £110 £k2S • • 17-Nov-92 • CITY Arcadia PROJECT Downtown Revitalization Strategy P P GA A WORK TASKS FTB Only FIRS $130 HRS DD Total Total Subconsltnt Grand $105 HAS $70 HRS ; $70 HRS $60 HRS FTB $ Subtotal $ Total $ lA Review use £ development 2 $260 0 $0 0 $0 1 '$70 0 $0 3 $330 $0 $330 1B Review circulation 6 prkng 2 $260 0 • $0 0 2 P Review repare public Base facilities 2 $130 0 $0 0 $0 1 $70 0 $0 3 $330 $0 $200 : $260 0 $0 0 40 2 ,840 $0 ,840 ' % . 3 Site Reconn/Photography 16 $2,080 0 $0 2 51$0 24 $1,440 28 $1,840 $0 $1,840 j 4 Prepare Market Analysis � $520 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 16 $2,080 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 4 00 $2,080 5A Assess potential for change . 8 $1,040 0 $0 0 ¢0' 0 ,040 $15,000 $15,520 58 Identify physical character 2 $260 0 $ S0 0 $0 0 00 7 $1,040 $0 0 $0 5 4300 7 $560 $0 $1,040 5C Must exist development 2 $260 0 $0 0 $0 2 $0 $1,840 6A Staff orientation mtg (day) 6 $780 0 $420 20 $1,4$0 12 $1,840 $0 $1,200 6B Workshop #1 (evening) 10 $1,300 0 $0 0 $0 6 $420 0 $0 12 $1,200 • $0 0 $0 6 $420 0 $0 $1,200 $0 10 $1,180 $0 $1,720 7A Review and develop Strategy 8 $1,040 0 $0 0 7B Prepare Strategy Diagram 4 $520 0 $0 2 $140 0 $0 10 $1,180 $0 $1,180 8A Identify development opps 8 $1,040 0 • $0 0 $0 1 $70 24 $1,440 29 $2,030 $0 0 60 2 $140 0 $0 $2,030 8B Prepare OD Concept 8 $1,040 0 $0 0 $0 2 00 . 50 $3,580 $0 $1,180 9 Workshop #2 12 $1,560 .0 5140 40 $2,400 50 $3,580 10 Modify Strategy/Concept 4 10 0 $0 12 $840 0 $0 24 $2,400 $0 $3,580 $520 0 $0 0 $0 1 $70 32 $1,920 37 $2,510 $0 $2,510 11 Joint CC/PC Session 12 ' $1,560 0 $0 0 $0 $2,400 '12k Develop Hunt Drive Imp Recs 16 $2,080 0 $0 0 $0 10 58$0 0 $0 24 $2,"080 $0 $2,400 128 Prepare design sketches _ 12 $1,560 40 $0 0 $0 0 $2,400 16 $2,080 $4,200 36 $2,520 2 $140 40 $2,400 130 $0 $2,080 13 Workshop #3 12 $1,560 0 $0 0 $$2,400 $0 $10,820 $0 12 $140 0 $0 24 $2,400 $0 $2,400 14 Modify Hunt Dr Is Recs 4 $520 0 $0 0 15 Joint CC/PC Session 12 $0 2 $840 32 $1,920 38 $2,580 $0 $2,580 $1,560 0 $0 • 0 $0 12 $840 0 $0 24 $2,400 $0 $2,400 Sub-total 167 $21,710 40 $4,200 36 $2,520 79 (��` 55,330 221 $13,260 543 $47,220 $15,000 $62,220 I I i• FTB Subtotal $47,220 Consultant Subtotal $15,000 Total Professional Services $62,220 r Database and Administration $6,222 Project Expenses $10,025 TOTAL PROJECT BUDGET $78,467 ni • • 6a1 • FREEDMAN I U N G � :FIT; P BOTTOMIEY0 �� Urban Design & Planning &11‘X • District Revitalization Street & Plaza Design • VIA FED EX January 7, 1992 Mr. Don Duckworth City Manager City of Arcadia 240 West Huntington Drive Arcadia, California 91007 RE: Downtown Revitalization Strategy and Huntington Drive Design Concept Dear Mr. Duckworth: - Enclosed is a proposed scope of services from Mundie & Associates for the market study portion of the Revitalization Strategy. The services defined will be performed within the $15,000 allowance established for supporting economics work. M&A's tasks will focus on: 1) defining a supportive mix of feasible uses for downtown, and; 2) identifying the types of uses that should be permitted or limited elsewhere in the City in order to support downtown. As you and Michael have discussed, they will rely on studies prepared by adjacent cities for the background and market context information needed. We hope the scope of services is clear and what you had in mind. Please don't hesitate to call either Michael or myself with any questions or comments. Very truly yours, �!v r Gkitt444, • erence-B ttomley Enclosure • 47 Kearny Street • Suite 500 San Francisco,CA - 94108-5522 415.291.9455 LASER IMAGE .MU ND I E & ASSOCIA I ;In Il 1 it r:;, •l !_.:9.! I,:.! .. ..r... 5.rn Fr :411.`;•!-t P h.,ne 1!5.44!.'•-,_.2 SCOPE OF WORK DOWNTOWN ARCADIA MARKET STUDY AND STRATEGY OVERVIEW The market analysis for the Arcadia downtown planning effort must realistically assess the economic potential for commercial revitalization, recognizing the context in which that revitalization must occur. The City's downtown faces stiff competition not only from neighboring cities, including Pasadena and Monrovia, but also from the existing Santa Anita Fashion Center and extensive strip commercial devel- opment within the city itself. The analysis must estimate the level of market support that is available for various types of goods and services, assess the existing and planned competitive locations that offer (or will offer) those goods and services, and identify strategies that will-help downtown Arcadia to capture its fair share -or more -of commercial activity. :3ackground: Issues in Downtown Revitalization To achieve successful downtown revitalization, a city must have a clear vision of the functions that the downtown may serve and the pattern(s) of development - both within and outside the downtown area - that will best support that function. Typical downtown functions may include retail and/or financial center, focus of community identity, civic center, cultural center, meeting place. The functions that are appropriate for and achievable in any particular city are determined in part by the size of the city, its location relative to other cities with similar or competing functions, and the pattern of competition for those functions within the city itself. In smaller cities, downtowns typically serve as a focus of community identity and provide a range of civic functions, commercial and public services, and retail goods. Retail goods may be grouped generally into two types: convenience goods and comparison goods. Convenience goods are those which are available at many locations, are purchased frequently, and which individually do not consume a lot of disposable income; therefore, to a large degree, purchase locations for these items have much to do with convenience to the customer. Examples of convenience goods are food, drug store items, books, cards and gasoline. Comparison (or "shoppers") goods are purchased less frequently and cost more; therefore, consumers typically engage in comparison shopping before making a purchase. Clothes, fur- niture and automobiles are good examples of comparison goods. A robust small city downtown is likely to contain a wide range of convenience retail outlets, and may also contain some comparison goods outlets. To make the retail market work for them, smaller cities often consider carefully the types of supporting uses that should be located downtown that will support retail trade; at the same time, they also evaluate the competitive or complementary nature of land use patterns in the rest of the city for their potential effects on downtown. Both of these types of efforts - (1) defining and pursuing a supportive mix-of uses LASER A � Roberta Mundie.President David Clore.Vice President S ne.LSainpertr,Vice Pre.i,!cnr 44 1 downtown and (2) identifying the types of activities that should be permitted or limited elsewhere in the City to produce a land use pattern that supports downtown - will be included in our study effort. Downtown Arcadia Located within the extensive Los Angeles metropolitan area, Arcadia is part of an extensive urban con- centration in which patterns of commercial activity are not organized neatly into political units such as cities. In this context, defining and maintaining a vital downtown is a formidable challenge. Downtown Arcadia is a commercial center that must compete with a variety of other retail and service locations, both within and outside the city. Outside, Pasadena and Monrovia attract customers from the greater region; within the city, both Santa Anita Fashion Center and the strip commercial developments along major thoroughfares compete with downtown. In the face of such strong and varied competition, downtown must somehow distinguish itself in order to maintain viability. Because the city's government functions are located outside of downtown (near the racetrack), government activity cannot be counted upon to bring support to the commercial and potential civic identity functions of the downtown area. The market strategy for downtown Arcadia must recognize not only the obstacles to revitalization, such as those suggested in the preceding paragraph, but also the opportunities that the city may turn to its • advantage. If some percentage of the thousands of visitors drawn to the city by Santa Anita racetrack could be attracted to downtown, for example, they may provide significant support for some types of commercial activity (such as eating and drinking establishments, and possibly some casual shopping goods). Similarly, if there are opportunities for future land use choices either within or outside the downtown area, it may be possible to identify and select those choices that would support downtown vitality by concentrating activity downtown and/or limiting competitive activities elsewhere. For instance, encouraging development of offices or multi-family housing in or near downtown would be • likely to increase support for local-serving conunercial uses there; discouraging development of those uses and new retail stores in other locations would strengthen the competitive position of the downtown area. SCOPE OF WORK Phase 1: Market Reconnaissance Task 1: Review Other Studies. We understand that a comprehensive market analysis has recently been completed for the City of Mon- rovia, and that some market analysis may be available for the City of Pasadena as well. Mundie & Associates will rely on the City of Arcadia to obtain copies of these studies. We will then review the material they present to gain an understanding of the dimensions and characteristics of the markets for various types of land uses that could be located in downtown Arcadia. Our review will focus on the magnitude of demand for various types of land uses, the existing and planned supply of competitive uses, and the identification of any market niches that are not currently being served in the area. This task, as outlined, is a critical element of the scope of work proposed here. If the market study for Monrovia is not available, we will require additional time and budget to assemble market information for Arcadia and, to the extent relevant, the neighboring cities. LASER IMAGED 45 Task 2: Meet with City Staff and Tour Arcadia We will visit the city to become familiar with the physical nature and appearance of the conditions that are described in the market studies that we have reviewed in Task I. We will ask City staff first to meet with us and brief us on any issues that may not be fully identified/discussed in the existing market stud- ies, and then to conduct us on a tour of downtown Arcadia and the competing commercial locations. At our meeting with staff, we will also explore the City's visions for the future of downtown. Freedman Tung & Bottomley (FTB) should be included in this discussion, if possible, so that all members of the study team are working toward the same ends. This discussion of a future vision will be useful to us because it will provide the beginnings of a framework for organizing our analysis of the market data and disciplining our thinking about the goals toward which the market strategy should ultimately be directed. We anticipate that discussions about a future vision will continue, and that the vision will evolve, as the study continues. Task 3: Conduct Supplementary Interviews We will ask City staff to identify key players - potentially including.business people, realtors, Chamber of Commerce staff and similar sources - whom we should interview to obtain additional information about existing business conditions in the downtown area.' We will then meet with as many people as possible to discuss the existing market dynamics and physical conditions that affect the success of downtown, and to solicit ideas about changes in the existing conditions that would benefit downtown commercial activity. Task 4: Prepare Summary Report on Phase I Investigation We will summarize the findings of our investigation conducted in Tasks 1 through 3 into a report on existing conditions in downtown Arcadia. This report will focus on the obstacles currently faced by the downtown business community and latent opportunities that may be exploited to revitalize downtown. Phase iT: Market Strategy Task 5: Describe the Future Vision for Downtown Arcadia We will draw on our discussions with City staff and FTB in Task 2, along•with any continuing discussions and work completed by FTB, to prepare a clear description of the future downtown toward which the market strategy will be directed. This description will be effectively serve as the statement of goals to be addressed by the policies and actions of the market strategy. • Task 6: Formulate Market Strategy Based on the vision statement prepared in Task 5 and the discussion of market conditions, obstacles and opportunities presented in the Task 4 report, we will formulate a draft market strategy. The strategy will be directed toward removing or, at least, minimizing - known obstacles that would prevent Arcadia from achieving its desired downtown of the future and taking advantage of recognized (but latent) opportunities for achieving its goals. As suggested in the introduction to this scope of work, the strategy will address both the types of land uses that should be carefully considered for downtown as well as restrictions on land uses in other parts of the city that would benefit downtown (by limiting 3 LASER IMAGED 46 ( competitive supply). It will recognize that changes in any fully-developed city must take place incrementally; therefore, recommended actions will be organized both by priority level (most important to least important) and desirable time frame (short term vs. long range). Task 7: Meet to Discuss the Market Strategy We will meet with Freedman Tung & Bottomlev and City staff to discuss the preliminary market strat- egy outlined in Task 5. At this meeting, we will solicit comments on both the direction and the components of the strategy. Task 8: Finalize the Market Strategy • M&A will refine the preliminary market strategy consistent with the feedback received in our Task 7 meeting. We will present the strategy in a written report to FTB and the City as a stand-alone background document for the downtown plan. STAFF Suzanne Lampert, senior associate, will be in charge of this study for Mundie & Associates. Ms. Lampert,.a native of the Los Angeles area, is in charge of marketing and real estate analyses for M&A. Her recent work includes economic and market background studies for the West San Carlos and Alameda Neighborhood Business District Revitalization plans (with FTB),. Sacramento Central City Housing Strategy (with FTB), the Richards Boulevard (Sacramento) Redevelopment Implementation Strategy, the Hollister General Plan, the Clayton Town Center Specific Plan, the Susanville General Plan and the Newark Four Corners Area Plan. Roberta Mundie, principal, will be available as a resource person for this study. Ms. Mundie has over 20 years of experience in market analysis and the socioeconomic aspects of planning. SCHEDULE We are prepared to begin work within one week of signing a contract. We anticipate that the scope of work outlined above could be completed within six weeks of our receiving the Monrovia market analysis. BUDGET For the scope of work outlined above, we ask that you allocate a budget of$15,000. This budget would cover both professional time and expenses. Work in addition to the scope outlined above - including attendance at public meetings - would be charged at our standard hourly rates. Rates in effect for 1993 are: Suzanne Lampert $115 per hour • Roberta Mundie 125 per hour 4 LASER IMAGED 4.'�J