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