HomeMy WebLinkAboutOctober 24, 1995A -G E N D A �00,
Arcadia City Council
and
" ° °•_ °' Redevelopment Agency
Meeting
October 24, 1995
Regular Meeting: 7:00 p.m.
INVOCATION Father Joseph Kosevic, Serbian Eastern Orthodox ACTION
Church of Christ the Saviour
r
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Kent Ross, City Librarian
ROLL CALL: Council Members Chang, Kuhn, Ulrich, Young, Excused absence
and Lojeskl of Dr. Chang
1. PRESENTATION
a. Presentation of Proclamation to the Arcadia Festival of Bands by the City Council.
b. Presentation to Arcadia Resident, Thomas Carr, L.A.P.D. Medal of Valor Recipient.
2. SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION FROM STAFF REGARDING AGENDA ITEMS -
REPORTS /ANNOUNCEMENTS /STATEMENTS City Manager Kelly re Downtown 2000 Projec,
3. QUESTIONS FROM CITY COUNCIL /REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY REGARDING
CLARIFICATION OF AGENDA ITEMS None
MOTION: Read all Ordinances and Resolutions by title only and waive reading in full. Adopted 4 -0
4. PUBLIC HEARING
a. Consideration of a Boundary Adjustment of Approximately 3 Acres, Approved 4 -0
(Including Two Lots) Along the Northeast City Line Between the
Cities of Monrovia and Arcadia and approval of Pre - Annexation
Agreement with Charles R. Bluth and the City of Monrovia.
b. Consideration of the 1994 Code Adoptions and Amendments to the Adopted 4 -0
Fire and Building, Electrical, Plumbing, Mechanical, Swimming Pool,
Housing and Conservation Sections fo the Arcadia Municipal Code.
_1_' AGENDA 10124/95
0
0
ACTION
5. TIME RESERVED FOR THOSE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO WISH TO ADDRESS JoAnn Scott
THE CITY COUNCIL (NON- PUBLIC HEARING) - FIVE MINUTE TIME LIMIT Bob Harbicht
PER PERSON
6. MATTERS FROM ELECTED OFFICIALS
City Council Reports/ Announcements /Statements /Future Agenda Items see minutes
RECESS CITY COUNCIL
7. MEETING OF THE ARCADIA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
ROLL CALL: Agency Members Chang, Kuhn, Ulrich, Young Excused absence
and Lojeski o Dr. ang
CONSENT ITEMS
a. Minutes of the September 26, 1995 Adjourned Regular Meeting Approved 4-0'
(Study Session) and October 3, 1995 Regular Meeting.
b. Report and recommendation for appropriation of additional Approved 4 -0
funds for completion of emergency work on the Downtown
2000 Streetscape Project for ASL Consulting Engineers, Inc.,
Lawrence R. Moss & Associates, and Willdan and Associates.
C. Report and recommendation to approve an Exclusive Right to Approved 4 -0
Negotiate (E.R.N.) with Gateway Associates for property located
Huntington Drive at Fifth Avenue.
ADJOURN REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY to November 7, 1995 at RXp.m. 5:30 p.m.
RECONVENE CITY COUNCIL
8. CONSENT ITEMS
a. Minutes of the September 26, 1995 Adjourned Regular Meeting Approved 4 -0
(Study Session) and the October 3, 1995 Regular Meeting.
b. Report and recommendation regarding Delegation of Authority Approved 4 -0
/ hearing for substitution of- sub - contractor by Bernards Bros.
/ Construction -City of Arcadia Library Expansion and Remodel
Project
-2- AGENDA 10/24/95
ACTION
C. Report and recommendation to adopt Resolution 5881 establishing Adopted 4 -0
fees for specific plans and specific plan amendments.
RESOLUTION 5881 - A Resolution of the City Council of
the City of Arcadia, California establishing fees for specific
plans and specific plan amendments per Section 9296.4.1
of the Arcadia Municipal Code.
d. port and recommendation to approve an alternate use Approved 4 -0
permit for above ground storage tanks (Arcadia County Park).
e. Report and recommendation to authorize the purchase of a Approved 4 -0
1/2 ton pickup truck with tool box for the Maintenance Services
Department.
f. Report and recommendation to authorize the purchase of a Approved 4 -0
3/4 ton truck with electronic arrow board for the Maintenance
Services Department.
g. Report and recommendation to approve an agreement with Approved 4 -0
Los Angeles County for reimbursement of $400,000 to the
City of Arcadia for Downtown 2000 storm drain costs, and
authorization to transfer these funds to the Arcadia
Redevelopment Agency.
h. Report and recommendation to authorize the purchase of five Approved 4 -0
police patrol vehicles for the Police Department.
/ i. Report and recommendation for authorization to advertise for bids Approved 4 -0
for the renovation and upgrade of Eisenhower and Bonita Parks.
Report and recommendation to reject all bids and authorize the Redject all bids
City Clerk to re- advertise for bids for the 1995 -1996 Water Services 4 -0 & re- advertise
Division Street Cut Repaving .
k. Report and recommendation to advance the installation of the Approved 4 -0
telephone system at the library from the 1996 -97 to the 1995 -96
Capital Improvement Program.
-3- AGENDA 10/24/95
Report and recommendation for appropriation of additional
funds for completion of emergency work on the Downtown
2000 Streetscape Project for ASL Consulting Engineers, Inc.
Lawrence R. Moss &Associates, and Willdan and Associates.p
M. Report and recommendation to purchase voting booths and
lights for City elections.
n. Report and recommendation to adopt Resolution 5884
authorizing the Southern California Gas Company to refund
over - collected utility users' taxes.
RESOLUTION 5884 - A Resolution of the City Council of
the City of Arcadia authorizing Southern California Gas
Company to refund the utility users' tax collected pursuant
to Ordinance No. 1415 as such tax corresponds with
Southern California Gas refund amount by a credit to
customer bills.
11. CLOSED SESSION
a. Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(a) to confer with
legal counsel regarding the existing workers compensation cases
of J. Clark and L. McDonald vs. City of Arcadia.
b. Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6 for conference
with labor negotiators regarding the Arcadia Firefighters'
Association, Teamsters, Management and non - represented
employees.
ACTION
Approved 4 -0
Approved 4 -0
Closed Session
8-5 P. m.
C. Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.(a) to confer with
legal counsel regarding existing litigation for damages = Disclosure
of the specific case could jeapordize existing settlement negotiation.
ADJOURN In Memory of George H. Margett to November 7, 1995 @ TM p.m. 10:25 p.m. adjourn
5:30 ment
-4- AGENDA 10/24/95
,MOORoi{wtt9'•' STAFF REPORT
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
October 24, 1995
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Rick Gomez, Deputy City Manager/ Development Services
By: Donna L. Butler, Community Development Adminish
SUBJECT: Resolution 5881 - Establishing fees for Specific Plans and Sp
Amendments
SUMMARY
The attached Resolution 5881 has been prepared for the purpose of establishing
minimum fees and deposits for specific plans and specific plan amendments per
Section 9296.4.1 of the Arcadia Municipal Code.
The Development Services Department is proposing that fees be based on staff time
and materials, including all public notices. The minimum fee to be deposited will
be based on an amount equal to the estimated cost of preparing the plan or
amendment.
DISCUSSION
The City Council on October 3, 1995 adopted Ordinance 2040 adding procedures to
the Arcadia Municipal for adopting and amending specific plans. The Development
Services Department is proposing the following fees relative to specific plans:
• A deposit with the City in an amount equal to the estimated cost of preparing the
plan. The Community Development Division would specify the amount to be
deposited within ten (10) working days from the date the application is deemed
complete.
• A deposit for fees associated with subsequent City approvals which are required
to be consistent with or related to a the specific plan (i.e., zone changes, text
amendments, etc.).
USIF ? 1!./'R "F-,,
Appeal Fees
October 24, 1995
Page 1
• A fee for the purchase of the documents adopting or amending a specific plan by
the general public.
All of the above fees have been established for the purpose of defraying the cost of
time and materials in processing the applications and requests for copies. The
proposed fees will guarantee that the City recovers all cost associated with specific
plan applications and /or amendments.
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
The proposed fees are exempt from the requirements of the California
Environmental Quality Act as specified in Title 14 Section 15079.1 of the California
Administrative Code.
CITY COUNCIL ACTION
If the City Council concurs with staff's recommendation, the Council should move
to adopt Resolution 5881:
A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Arcadia, California,
establishing fees for specific plans and specific plan amendments per Section
9296.4.1 of the Arcadia Municipal Code.
Attachment: Resolution 5881
APPROVED:
Anw__1�
William R. Kelly, City Manager
Appeal Fees
October 24,1995
Page 2
r
~ ° °RP °R• =t° STAFF REPORT
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DEPARTMENT
October 24, 1995
TO: Mayor & City Council
FROM: James S. Dale, Administrative Services Director
SUBJECT: Utility Tax Refund
SUMMARY
In a decision by the California Public Utilities Commission, Southern
California Gas Company has been ordered to refund certain amounts
collected from its customers relating to an over collection of gas costs. This
decision will impact the amount of utility tax that has been collected for the
City of Arcadia and staff is requesting authorization to refund the
corresponding over collection of utility taxes.
BACKGROUND
In Decision 95 -09 -075, the California Public Utilities Commission ordered
Southern California Gas Company (SoCalGas) to refund certain amounts to
its customers relating to over collection of gas costs billed for the period
January 1995 through June 1995. SoCalGas has requested Commission
approval to make this refund by credit to customer bills in November, 1995
based upon January 1995 gas consumption, to customers of record as of
August 31, 1995.
Because the Utility Users' Tax of the City of Arcadia was billed and collected
on over collected gas costs, the customers who will receive a refund from
SoCalGas should also expect a refund of taxes paid on these amount.
LASER IMAGED
1
��
DISCUSSION
SoCalGas has notified the City that if the City of Arcadia determines that a
tax refund and corresponding offsets are appropriate, they will assist the City
by refunding the tax to eligible City residents by including it with the Gas
company's refund during its regular billing operations in November 1995.
SoCalGas will assist the City in making utility users' tax refunds only if the
City agrees that (1) the amount of the tax refund will be calculated and
distributed uniformly by SoCalGas and (2) SoCalGas is expressly authorized
by the City to offset the total for refunds through a one -time credit against
current collections. The Utility Users' Tax refund calculations would be
based upon the amount of SoCalGas refunds and the City's Utility Users' Tax
rate.
To authorize SoCalGas to process the tax refunds, the City is required to
complete the attached Utility Users' Tax refund agreement and to submit a
resolution formally authorizing said refunds.
FISCAL IMPACT
Based on discussions with SoCalGas, it is estimated the City's Utility User's
Tax refund will amount to approximately $23,000.
RECOMMENDATION
1.) It is recommended that the City Council authorized the City Manager
sign the Utility Users' Tax Refund Agreement authorizing SoCalGas
to refund over collected utility user's taxes and,
2.) That the City Council adopt Resolution No. 5884 formally authorizing
the Agreements set forth in one above.
Approved: —�
William R. Kelly
City Manager
.. 2
_ � .
,'5 •moo �-
Aro, ,
'NC°R\ o0
`°1 STAFF REPORT
-- DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
October 24, 1995
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Rick Gomez, Deputy City Manager/Development Services Direct. Li
eiBy: Donna L. Butler, Community Development Administrator
SUBJECT: Reorganization of Easterly City Boundary Adjacent to the
Whispering Pines Development (Bluth Property)
SUMMARY
A request was filed by Bluth Development for a City Boundary Reorganization
between the City of Monrovia and -the City of Arcadia. The boundary
reorganization includes the daylighted portions of lots 15, 16 and 17 of Tract 42936
(Whispering Pines Phase II) referred to as the "Sliver" lots or Area 1, and two new
lots referred to as the "Point" lot (Area 2) and the "New" lot (Area 3). (See attached
Exhibit A)
The Planning Commission at its September 26 meeting recommended that the City
Council approve the proposed boundary reorganization and zoning of the property
to R-M (Residential Mountainous).
DISCUSSION
The proposed boundary line reorganization consists of approximately 2.56 acres
located east and south of Tract 42936 (Whispering Pines Phase II in the City of
Arcadia). The reorganization is comprised of three distinct areas as follows.
Sliver Lots (Area 1) .
Area 1 is referred to as the "sliver" lots, a narrow parcel located on the east side of
the existing City boundary. This area was graded (daylighted) by Mr. Bluth, with
approval of the City of Monrovia (in 1989) as part of Tract 42936. There are three
distinct graded areas which are part of the vacant adjacent lots 15, 16 and 17 of Tract
42936. These "sliver" lots are not buildable areas.
Monrovia approved the daylighting of this area in 1989 subject to specific.
conditions of approval including the requirement for backdrop landscaping, specific
Reorganization
` 1 r i 9 October 24, 1995
4/9p re ,;(' t II/ Ar
Page 1
. •
fencing requirements and recordation of a final parcel map after the property was
annexed to Arcadia.
Point Lot (Area 2)._
Area 2 is referred to as the "Point" lot. This lot was graded after the Monrovia
Planning Commission approval in 1989 and is currently vacant. Access to the lot is
through Lot 20 of Tract 42936 in Arcadia. There is no available access in Monrovia.
Because any development of the site would be visible from Monrovia, approval of
the lot by the City of Monrovia was subject to specific conditions of approval.
New Lot (Area 3) .
The "New" lot was graded as part of the Whispering Pines Phase II subdivision in
Arcadia. This parcel is located in the Womble Tract located in Monrovia and is part
of an existing lot which has two distinct pads at different. elevations. The lower
building pad will remain in Monrovia and be accessed from Terrace View Avenue.
The upper building pad, referred to as the "new" lot contains approximately 0.92
acres and has access through an easement on Lot 22 of Tract 36895 (Whispering
Pines Phase I development in Arcadia). As part of the proposed boundary
readjustment, this lot is proposed to be annexed to the City of Arcadia.
ANALYSIS
The property included in the boundary reorganization will potentially result in the
construction of two (2) new dwellings (Areas 2 and 3). Prior. to approving the
boundary reorganization, the City of Monrovia required that Mr. Bluth sign a pre-
annexation agreement (Exhibit B) which would insure that any potential impacts
from the construction of these dwellings would be mitigated. The point lot (Area 2)
due to its visibility has been conditioned with respect to building height, setback
from top of slope and landscaping. The second lot (Area 3) is silhouetted- against a
hill, any new dwelling on this lot would not be as prominent, therefore, conditions
have been added relating only to landscaping and berming. The sliver lots will be
open space and attached to the rear of the lots in Arcadia.
A parcel map will be required to be processed for Area 1 to separate the "daylighted"
area from the remainder of Bluth's property in Monrovia and Area 3 to split. the
"new" lot from the existing lot in Monrovia. The "point" lot is an existing legal lot. •
No new grading is being proposed for any of the lots.
The proposed annexation will create a logical reorganization of the easterly City
boundary. The "sliver" lots are already an extension of the properties located in
Tract 42936 and the two new lots can only be accessed through Arcadia. Although
the boundary line will be irregular, it more closely parallels the topography as
opposed to the existing straight north-south boundary line.
Reorganization
October 24, 1995
Page 2
' I
Section 9294.5 of the Municipal Code notes that concurrent with the annexation,
the City Council shall classify the property for zoning purposes. This property is
adjacent to the Whispering Pines Phases I and II development. Based upon the
zoning and general plan designation of the adjacent property, the Development
Services Department is recommending that the General Plan designation for this
area be "Single-Family 0-6 du/ac" and that the zoning designation be "R-M
(Residential Mountainous)".
MISCELLANEOUS
The request for boundary reorganization has been reviewed by the Fire
Department, Engineering Division and Water Division. In discussing this matter
with both the Fire Chief and Water Manager, the City can provide the necessary fire
and water services to the two new lots. Their conditions of approval have been
incorporated in the recommendation set forth below.
The City Attorney and Development Services Department staff have also reviewed
and approved the content of the Pre-Annexation Agreement (Exhibit B) signed by
Mr. Bluth.
BOUNDARY REORGANIZATION PROCESS
A boundary readjustment requires several actions; the first two actions have been
completed:
1. Resolution of Detachment from the City of Monrovia. On August 15, the
Monrovia City Council adopted Resolution 95-45 consenting to the detachment
of certain property from the City of Monrovia. Monrovia also approved a Pre-
annexation Agreement signed by Mr. Bluth and setting forth specific conditions
of approval for the detachment.
2. Report from the Planning Commission as to the desirability of the annexation
and the zoning classification to be placed thereon.
3. Arcadia approval of the Pre-Annexation Agreement.
4. Adoption of a Resolution by the City Council consenting to the annexation!
5. Concurrent with the annexation of the property the City Council shall classify
the property for zoning purposes.
6. Upon receipt of the resolution from the City of Arcadia, the Local Agency
Formation Commission (LAFCO) will process the reorganization.
Reorganization
October 24, 1995
Page 3
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act, the
Community Development Division has prepared an initial study for the proposed
annexation and property rezoning. Said initial study did not disclose any
substantial or potentially substantial adverse change in any of the physical
conditions within the area affected by the project including land, air, water,
minerals, flora, fauna, ambient noise and objects of historical or aesthetic
significance. When considering the record as a whole, there is no evidence that the
proposed annexation and property rezoning will have any potential adverse effect
on wildlife resources or the habitat\ upon which the wildlife depends. Therefore, a
Negative Declaration has been prepared for this project.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff is recommending approval of the proposed boundary reorganization and
property rezoning with the following conditions:
1. That the City Council approve the Pre-Annexation Agreement. (Exhibit B)
2. Compliance with all conditions set forth in the Pre-Annexation Agreement
if approved by the Arcadia City Council.
3. That the General Plan designation for Areas 1, 2 and 3 as shown on the
attached map shall be Single-Family Residential 0-6 du/ac.
4. That the Zoning Designation for Areas 1, 2 and 3 shall be R-M (Residential
Mountainous). '
•
5. That fire safety requirements shall be complied with to the satisfaction of the
Fire Chief including but not limited to: "
a) GPM Fire Flow at 20 psi.
b) A hydrant shall be located within 300' of proposed structures on the two
new lots.
c) Each new lot shall be accessed by a 20'-0" wide access road with turn
around or hammerhead Or other similar_ access approved by the Fire
Chief.
d) There" shall be a 200' greenbelt around all structures or other fuel
modification as approved by the Fire Chief.
Reorganization
October 24, 1995
Page 4
� I
•
6. Arrangements must be made with the Water Division for new water service
to the two new lots and the developer must pay all costs associated with
installation of new water service.
•
7. That the property owner(s) shall be responsible for submitting all documents
and pay all related fees for the boundary reorganization with LAFCO.
8. That upon approval of the annexation by LAFCO, the property owner shall
file a lot split (parcel map) for Areas 1 and 3 with the City of Arcadia and hat
an access easement shall be provided and subject to approval by the City of
Arcadia and utility services (including sewer) must be in accordance with
utility companies and City of Arcadia requirements.
CITY COUNCIL FINDINGS AND ACTION
If the City Council determines that the request for boundary reorganization is
appropriate, the City Council should authorize the Mayor to enter into a pre-
annexation agreement with Charles R. Bluth and the City of Monrovia and direct
staff to prepare the appropriate resolution consenting to the annexation and the
appropriate ordinance zoning the property R-M (Residential Mountainous).
7Y
Approved by:
William R. Kelly, City Manager
Enclosures: Map of Proposed Annexation (Exhibit A)
Pre-Annexation Agreement (Exhibit B)
Area Wide - Annexation Map (Exhibit C)
City of Monrovia Resolution 95-45
Memos from Fire, Engineering and Water Divisions
Environmental Documents
Reorganization
October 24 1995
Page 5
TITO .- '
.ARCADLA i - ' _
°R"°RAT 6 MEMORANDUM
DEVELOPMENT SERA ES DEPARTMENT
August 23, 1995 t" :
g /
6'Qi e1OP+nen J 1995
TO: ,ferry Gardner, Fire Chief ry�BV e�0p'-e vB d,.?
Eldon Davidson, Water Manager e
Mohammad Mostahkami, Assistant City Engineer
FROM: Donna L. Butler
Community Development Administrator ' /
SUBJECT: Proposed City Boundary Adjustment - Bluth Property
Attached for your review and comment is the proposed City Boundary
Adjustment requested by Bluth Development. The Monrovia City Council
approved the boundary adjustment on August 15 subject to some very
specific conditions (see attached agreement).
•
I have scheduled this matter for consideration by the Planning Commission
on September 26. I would appreciate your comments regarding the impact of
this annexation on your. Department0Division by.Septembe05i.f .
If you have any questions, please give me a call.
Attachment: Map
..-D...."-1,4-11--0... - S;&,_o_aa,1 . D. .
,0C-0, a ___ (31,__ dzi_ (--- _,9-c± .
on-00 Glom f IL_•,,r--. 0,32D /
. C, ,3) 049 tue_252 g...e-e.ecuti„ /Li-44.. 4..u.,64 , :-.,---.
idef.i/
dA - Cat, 47- 1 ,
7.
MEMORANDUM
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
Date: September 14 . 1995
' S
TO: Donna Butler, Community Development Administrator
FROM: Mohammad R. Mostahkami , Assistant City M
Engineer/Engineering
SUBJECT: City Boundary' Adjustment - Bluth Property
In response to your August 23 , 1995 request the Engineering
Division of the Development Services Department has reviewed the
proposed City of Arcadia-City of Monrovia boundary adjustment
(Bluth Property) and has no comments.
For your information, a review of the Grading Plan for Tract No.
42936 indicates portions of lots 15, 16, 17, 18, and 20 were graded
into Monrovia. That is, the final grading of these lots extended .
to a "daylight" line in Monrovia. This was approved in. 1989 by the
Cities of Arcadia and Monrovia and the owner of the affected
Monrovia property,. Nick Pokrajac. The plan also noted that grading
the lots in this manner would necessitate future lot line
adjustments and an annexation.
Regarding that portion of Lot 9 , any future application for a lot
split with access easement must be approved by the City of Arcadia
and utility services (e.g. sewer) must be in accordance with
utility companies and City of Arcadia requirements.
Please advise us when the lot lines are adjusted so we can update
our records.. If you have any questions, please contact me or David
Spargo.
MRM:DAS:mlo
cc: Rick Gomez, Deputy City Manager/Development Services Director
•
tea.
} 6 V\gl)
. .. 41AD0
MEMORANDUM
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
August 23, 1995 RECEIVED
AUG 2 4 1995
TO: Jerry Gardner, Fire Chief Development fT1 ldon Davidson, Water Manager p ent Services
,/nohammad Mostahkami, Assistant City EngingP 9ineering Division
FROM: Donna L. Butler
Community Development Administrator �/
•
SUBJECT: Proposed City Boundary Adjustment - Bluth Property I
SEP 1 4 1995
Attached for your review and comment is the proposed City Boundary
Adjustment requested by Bluth Development. The Monrovia City Council
approved the boundary adjustment on August 15 subject to some very
specific conditions (see attached agreement).
I have scheduled this matter for consideration by the Planning Commission
on September 26. I would appreciate your comments regarding the impact of
this annexation on your Department/Division by September 15.
If you have any questions, please give.me a call.
Attachment: Map
ov" v`C(
OLA^Li h Cv--e q- 4 Lc& c
nt tS 4
ON.ckLf-e
ca_v. sA_ w�
Scv UL-ca co c �-s
q1L314c
•
•
c-* CITY OF ARCADIA
240.WEST HUNTINGTON DRIVE
cl'Poiitso'' ARCADIA, CA 91007
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
A. Title and Description of Project:
A boundary adjustment of approximately 3 acres (including two lots) along the
northeast City line between the cities of Monrovia and Arcadia and prezonng of
property to R-M residential/mountainous.
B. Location of Project: •
An area located along the northeast City boundary adjacent to Tract 42936 and
36895 in the City of Arcadia.
C Name of Applicant or Sponsor:
City of Arcadia
D. Finding:
This project will have no significant effect upon the environment within the
meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 for the reasons set
forth in the attached Initial Study.
E. Mitigation measures, if any, included in the project to avoid potentially
significant effects:
Date: 8/30/95 :�/�iJ�✓%: . ��»i
Date Posted: 8/30/95 Corn. Develop �e Administrator
. //kW.
000, CITY OF ARCADIA
�ros.TSO' 240 WEST HUNTINGTON DRIVE
ARCADIA, CA 91007
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
1. Project Title:
A boundary adjustment of approximately 3 acres (including two lots) along the
northeast City line between the cities of Monrovia and Arcadia. Including the
prezoning of the area to R-M residential mountanious.
2. Project Address:
Not applicable
3. Project Sponsor's Name, Address and Telephone Number:
City of Arcadia •
•
4. Lead Agency Name and Address:
City of Arcadia
240 W. Huntington Dr.
Arcadia, CA 91007
5. Contact Person and Phone Number:
Donna L. Butler
(818) 574-5423
6. General Plan Designation:
Not applicable
7. Zone Classification:
Not applicable
•
•
8. Description of Project:. (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited
to later phases of the project and any secondary, support, or off-site features necessary for
its implementation. Attach additional sheets if necessary.)
A boundary reorganization between the City of Monrovia and City of Arcadia.
9. Other public.agencies whose approval is required. (e.g., permits, financing approval, or
participation agreement.)
LAFCO and City Council
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially 'affected by this project,
involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the
checklist on the following pages.
❑ Land Use & Planning ❑ Transportation/Circulation ❑ Public Services
❑ Population & Housing ❑ Biological Resources ❑ Utilities & Service Systems
❑ Geological Problems ❑ Energy & Mineral Resources ❑ Aesthetics.
❑ Water ❑ Hazards ❑ Cultural Resources
❑ Air Quality ❑ Noise • ❑ Recreation
❑ Mandatory Findings of Signficance. .
•
•
E.I.R. Checklist
7/95
-2-
•
DETERMINATION
(To be completed by the Lead Agency.)
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the
environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. f�
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the
environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation
measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A
NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. ❑
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the
environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. ❑
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the
environment, but at least one effect (1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier
document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and (2) has been addressed by .
mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets,
if the effect is a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless
mitigated." mitigated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required,
but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. ❑
_ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the
environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because
all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an
earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or
mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures
that are imposed upon the proposed project. ❑
: lily i•__ 2e7A.5'
Signature - Date
Printed Name For
E.I.R. Checklist
7/95
-3
•
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS:
1. A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are
adequately supported by the informationsources a lead agency cites in the parentheses
following each question. A "No Impact", answer is adequately supported if the
referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects
like the one involved (e.g. the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact"
answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general
standards (e.g. the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a
project-specific screening analysis).
2. All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well
as on-site, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction
as well as operational impacts.
3. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropiriate if there is substantial evidence that an
effect is significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entires
when the determination is made, an EIR is required.
4. "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the
incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced 'an effect, from "Potentially
Significant Impact" to a "Less than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe
the mitigation measures, 'and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than
significant level (mitigation measures from Section XVII. "ealier Analyses." may be
cross-referenced.)
5. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other
CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative
declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). Earlier analyses are discussed in Section XVII at the
end of the checklist.
6. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information
sources for potential impacts (e.g. general plans, zoning ordinances). Refernce to a
previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a
reference to the page orr pages where the statement is substantiated.
E.I.R. Checklist
7/95
-4-
• • F. tially
'� 5 � ficant
Potentially Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
Would the proposal result in potential
impacts involving:
1. LAND USE AND PLANNING.
Would the proposal:
a) Conflict with general plan designation ❑ ❑ ❑ IN
or zoning?(source#(s) )
b) Conflict with applicable environmental ❑ ❑ ❑ Le
plans or policies adopted by agencies
with jurisdiction over the project? ( )
c) Be compatible with existing land use in ❑ ❑ ❑
the vicinity? ( )
d) Affect agricultural resources or operations ❑ ❑ ❑
(e.g. impacts to soils or farmlands, or
impacts from incompatible land uses?) ( ) •
,
e) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement ❑ ❑ ❑ Ll!'
of an established community(including a
low-income or minority community)? ( )
2. POPULATION AND HOUSING.
•
a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or ❑ ❑ ❑
local population projections? ( )
b) Induce substantial growth in an area either ❑ ❑ ❑
directly or indirectly (e.g. through projects
in an undeveloped area or extension of
major infrastructure)? ( )
c) .Displace existing housing, especially ❑ ❑ ❑
affordable housing? ( ) •
3. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS.
Would the proposal result in or expose people to ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
potential impacts involving:
a) Fault rupture? ( ) ❑ ❑ ❑
b) Seismic ground shaking? (' ) ❑ ❑ ❑
lid-
E.I.R. Checklist
7/95
-5-
Po Tally
• SigWcant •
Potentially Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
c) Seismic ground failure,including ❑ ❑ ❑
liquefaction? ( )
d) Landslides or mudflows? ( ) ❑ ❑ ❑ �d
e) Erosion,changes in topography or unstable ❑ ❑ ❑ 41'
soil conditions from excavation, grading,
or fill? ( )
f) Subsidence of the land? ( ) ❑ ❑ ❑
g) Expansive soils? ( ) ❑ ❑ ❑
h) Unique geologic or physical features? ( ) ❑ ❑ ❑ It
4. WATER
Would the proposal result in:
a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns ❑ ❑ ❑
or the rate and amount of surface runoff? ( )
•
b) Exposure of people or property to water related ❑ ❑ ❑
hazards such as flooding? ( )
c) Discharge into surface waters or other alteration ❑ ❑ ❑ Q�
of surface water quality (e.g. temperature,
dissolved oxygen or turbidity)? ( )
d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any ❑ ❑ ❑ r;
water body? ( )
e) Changes in currents,or the course or direction ❑ ❑ ❑
of water movements? ( )
• f) Change in the quantity of ground waters,either ❑ ❑ ❑ LV
through direct additions or withdrawals, or •
through interception of any aquifer by cuts
or excavations or through substantial loss of
ground water recharge capability? ( )
g) Altered direction or rate of flow of ❑ ❑ ❑ l�
ground water? ( )
h) Impacts to ground water quality? ( ) ❑ ❑ ❑
E.I.R. Checklist
• 7/95
-6-
. - Pi Atially
S�b� ficant
Potentially Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
i) Substantial reduction in the amount of ❑ ❑ ❑ (�
ground water otherwise available for
public water supplies? ( )
5. AIR QUALITY.
Would the proposal:
a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute ❑ ❑ ❑
to an existing or projected air quality
violation? ( )
b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? ( ) ❑ ❑ ❑
c) Alter air movement,moisture, or temperature ❑ ❑ ❑
or cause any change in climate? ( )
d) Create objectionable odors? ( ) ❑ ❑ ❑
6. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION
•
Would the proposal result in:
a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? ( ) ❑ ❑ ❑
b) Hazards to safety from design features (e.g. ❑ ❑ ❑
sharp curves or dangerous intersections)or
incompatible uses(e.g.farm equipment)? ( )
c) Inadequate emergency access or access to ❑ ❑ ❑
nearby uses? ( )
d) Insufficient parking capacity on-site or ❑ ❑ ❑
• off-site? ( ) —/
• e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or ❑ ❑ ❑ Lid
bicyclists? ( )
f) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting ❑ ❑ ❑
alternative transportation (e.g.bus turnouts,
bicycle racks)? ( )
g) Rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts? ( ) ❑ ❑ ❑ l�
E.I.R. Checklist
7/95
-7-
Pot Tally
• Siggcant
•
Potentially Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
7. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Would the proposal result in impacts to:
a) Endangered, threatened or rare species or their ❑ ❑ ❑
habitats (including but not limited to plants,
fish, insects,animals and birds)? ( ) —/
b) Locally designated species (e.g. heritage ❑ ❑ ❑ lld
•
trees)? ( )
c) Locally designated natural communities ❑ ❑ ❑
(e.g. oak forest, coastal habitat, etc.)? (
d) Wetland habitat (e.g. marsh, riparian and ❑ ❑ ❑
vernal pool)? ( )
e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? ( ) ❑ ❑ ❑
8. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES
Would the proposal:
a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation ❑ ❑ ❑ U'
ply? ( )
b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful ❑ ❑ ❑ . C�
and inefficient manner? ( )
c) Result in the loss of availability of a known ❑ ❑ ❑
mineral resource that would be of future value
to the region and the residents of the State? ( )
9. HAZARDS
Would the proposal involve:
a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of ❑ ❑ ❑ L7
hazardous substances(including,but not limited
to: oil,pesticides,chemicals or radiation)? ( )
b) Possible interference with an emergency ❑ ❑ ❑ Er-
response plan or emergency evacuation plan? ( )
c) The creation of any health hazard or ❑ ❑ ❑
potential health hazard? (
E.I.R. Checklist
7/95
-8-
• T ntially
Significant
Potentially Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
d) Exposure of people tQ.existing sources of ❑ ❑ ❑
potential health hazards? ( )
e) Increased fire hazard in areas with flammable ❑ ❑ ❑ 41'
brush,grass,or trees? ( )
10. NOISE
Would the proposal result in:
a) Increases in existing noise levels? ( ) ❑ ❑ ❑ Zr.
b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? ( ) ❑ ❑ ❑
11. PUBLIC SERVICES
Would the proposal have an effect upon,or result in
a need for new or altered government services in any
of the following areas:
a) Fire protection? ( ) ❑ ❑ U" ❑
b) Police protection? ( ) ❑ ❑ ❑
c) Schools? ( ) ❑ ❑ ❑
d) Maintenance of public facilities, including ❑ ❑ ❑ a/
roads? ( )
e) Other governmental services? ( ) ❑ ❑ ❑ I1d
12. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Would the proposal result in a need for new systems
or supplies, or substantial alterations to the
following utilities:
a) Power or natural gas? ( ) ❑. ❑ ❑ C"
b) Communications systems? ( ) ❑ ❑ ❑ �V
c) Local or regional water treatment or ❑ ❑ ❑
distribution facilities? ( )
d) Sewer or septic tanks? ( ) ❑ ❑ ❑
I /
e) Storm water drainage? ( ) ❑ ❑ ❑ Q'
Checklist
7/95
•
-9-
. Poially
Sig scant
Potentially Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
f) Solid waste disposal? ( ) ❑ ❑ ❑
g) Local or regional water supplies? ( ) ❑ ❑ ❑ l�
13. AESTHETICS
Would the proposal: .,/
a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? ( ) ❑ ❑ Ud ❑
b) Have a demonstrable negative aesthetics ❑ ❑ ❑
effect? ( )
c) Create light or glare? ( ) ❑ ❑ ❑
14. CULTURAL RESOURCES
Would the proposal:
a) Disturb paleontological resources? ( ) ❑ ❑ ❑ �'
b) Disturb archaeological resources? ( ) ❑ ❑ ❑
c) Affect historical resources? ( ) ❑ ❑ ❑ Er
d) Have the potential to cause a physical change ❑ ❑ ❑
which would affect unique ethnic cultural
values? ( )
e) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses ❑ ❑ ❑
within the potential impact area? ( )
15. RECREATION
• Would the proposal:
a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or ❑ ❑ ❑ L
regional parks or other recreational
•
facilities? ( ) /
b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? ( ) ❑ ❑ ❑ E
E.I.R. Checklist
7/95
-10-
. P\ - tially
Sibs,r icant
Potentially Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
16. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade ❑ ❑ 12" ❑
the quality of the environment, substantially
reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species,
cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below
self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a
•
plant or animal community,reduce the number
or restrict the range of a rare or endangered
plant or animal or eliminate important examples
of the major periods of California history or
prehistory? ( )
b) Does the project have the potential to achieve ❑ ❑ ❑ car
short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term,
environmental goals? ( )
c) Does the project have impacts that are ❑ ❑ ❑ 4Y
individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable"
means that the incremental effects of a
project are considerable when viewed in
connection with the effects of past projects,
the effects of other current projects, and the
effects of probable future projects).
d) Does the project have environmental effects ❑ ❑ ❑ ld'
which will cause substantial adverse effects
on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
•
E.I.R. Checklist
7/95
-11-
ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION FORM
BLUTH ANNEXATION
la-e. Land Use and Planning.
Areas 1. and 2 are currently zoned in the Madison Avenue Specific Plan
which allows only single-family with a maximum density of 1 du/2
acres. Area 3.is zoned R-F, Residential-Foothill in the City of
Monrovia. As part of the boundary reorganization, Arcadia is
proposing to prezone the property to R-M Residential Mountainous
which is consistent with the adjoining property in the City of Arcadia.
The proposed zoning would be consistent with the current General
Plan designation for the adjoining property of single-family residential
0-6 du/ac.
The proposal includes three areas; one area includes the daylighted
areas to be added to the existing lots in adjoining subdivision in the
City of Arcadia. Area 2 is an existing vacant lot in the City of Monrovia
which only has access through the City of Arcadia and Area 3 is an
existing pad which when subdivided will have access only through the
City of Arcadia.
The surrounding properties to the east in the City of Monrovia area
vacant. Property to the south in Monrovia and Arcadia are
development with single-family dwellings. Property to the west and
north are developed with single-family dwellings. The proposed
• boundary reorganization would be consistent with development in the
area.
2. POPULATION AND HOUSING
The annexation will not have any impact on existing housing or the
population. The two lots to be annexed to the City are existing and will
not impact regional or local population or housing projects.
3. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS
There will be no geologic impacts as a result of the annexation and pre-
zoning. The property is currently zoned and the sites have been
improved for residential and there will be no changes to the site.
4. WATER
The proposed annexation/pre-zoning will have no impact on water. ,
The existing areas have been graded and no changes are proposed.
1
• •
5. AIR QUALITY
The proposed annexation/pre-zoning will have no impact on air
quality. The areas are currently zoned residential and any resulting
development must comply with AQMD standards.
6. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION
The annexation itself will not impact transportation or circulation
corridors or increase traffic in the area. The two existing lots to be
annexed have access only through Arcadia and this situation will not
change with the annexation to the City.
7. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
There will be no impacts to biological resources since no changes are
proposed on the sites.
8. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES
The annexation/pre-zoning will not impact energy or minezal
resources. Any future development of the site must comply with all
code requirements including State mandated energy requirements.
9. HAZARDS
The annexation/pre-zoning will not have the potential for accidental
explosion or release of hazardous substances nor have any impact on
emergency response plans or health hazards.
10. NOISE
The annexation/pre-zoning will not create an increase in noise levels
or exposure of people to severe noise levels. At such time as homes
are built on.the two existing lots, there could be the potential for short-
term noise problems.
11. PUBLIC SERVICES
The proposed annexation/pre-zoning will not have an impact on any
public services. The requested annexation has been reviewed by all
departments and no additional governmental services will be required.
2
12. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
The proposed annexation/pre-zoning will not require any new
systems;supplies or alterations to utilities. All services can be
provided to the sites without necessitating new services.
13. AESTHETICS
•
The applicant, Bluth Development has entered into a pre-annexation
agreement with the City of Monrovia and the City of Arcadia which
will minimize any potential impacts as a result of new homes being
constructed on the two existing lots.
14. CULTURAL RESOURCES
There are no cultural resources in the,existing areas.
15. RECREATION
The proposed annexation/pre-zoning will not result in an increased
demand for parks or other recreational facilities.
•
•
•
3
`)
,iy
• �� CITY OF ARCADIA
A '. _ ;,;��� 240 WEST HUNTINGTON DRIVE
ARCADIA, CA. 91007
f.\ �ja• ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION FORM
•ro=�tso"
Date Filed: August 30, 1995
General Information
1. Applicant's Name and Address:
City of Arcadia
240 W. Huntington Dr. .
Arcadia, CA 91007
2. Property Address (Location) and Assessor's Number:
An area located along the northeast City boundary adjacent to Tract 42936 and 36895 in
the City of Arcadia.
I
3. Name, address and telephone number of person to be contacted concerning this project:
Donna L. Butler
City of Arcadia •
240 W. Huntington Dr.
Arcadia, CA 91007
(818) 574-5423
4. List and describe any other related permits and other public approvals required for this
•
project,including those required by city,regional,state and federal agencies:
Approved will be required from the Local Agency Formation Commission.
5. Zone Classification: Not applicable
6. General Plan Designation: Not applicable
Project Description
7. Proposed use of site (project description):
A boundary adjustment of approximatley 3 acres (including two lots) along the
northeast City line between the cities of Monrovia and Arcadia and prezoning of
property to R-M residential/mountainous.
8. Site size: Approximately 3 acres
9. Square footage per building: Not applicable
1
•
10. Number of floors-of construction: Not applicable
11. Amount of off-street parking provided: Not applicable
12. Proposed scheduling of project: Not applicable
13. Anticipated incremental development: Not applicable
14. If residential, include the number of units, schedule of unit sizes, range of sale prices or
rents, and type of household sizes expected:
Not at this time
15. If commercial, indicate the type, i.e. neighborhood, city or regionally oriented,square
footage of sales area, and loading facilities,hours of operation:
Not applicable
16. If industrial, indicate type, estimated employment per shift, and loading facilities:
Not applicable
17. If institutional, indicate the major function, estimated employment per shift, estimated
occupancy, loading facilities, and community benefits to be derived from the project:
Not applicable
18. If the project involves a variance, conditional use permit or zoning application, state
this and indicate clearly why the application is required:
Application includes prezoning of the areas to R-M, consistent with the zoning on the
adjoining property in Arcadia.
Are the following items applicable to the project or its effects? Discuss below all items checked
yes (attach additional sheets as necessary).
YES NO
19. Change in existing features of arty hills, or substantial alteratin of ground
❑
g g Y g
contours.
20. Change in scenic views or vistas from existing residential areas or public ❑ Cif
lands or roads.
21. Change in pattern, scale or character of general area of project. ❑
E.I.R.
3/95
-2-
YES NO
22. Significant amounts of solid waste or litter. ❑
23. Change in dust,--ash, smoke, fumes or odors in vicinity. ❑ a
24. Change in.ground water quality or quantity, or alteration of existing. ❑ a '
drainage patterns.
25. Substantial change in existing noise or vibration levels in the vicinity. ❑ Zr
26. Is site on filled land or on any slopes of 10 percent or more. ❑ a
•
27. Use or disposal of potentially hazardous materials, such as toxic substances, ❑
flammable or explosives.
28. Substantial change in demand for municipal services (police, fire, water, ❑
sewage, etc.).
29. Substantial increase in fossil fuel consumption (electricity, oil, natural gas, ❑ l
• etc.).
30. Relationship to a larger project or series of projects. ❑ U"
Environmental Setting
31. Describe (on a separate sheet) the project site as it exists before the project including
information on topography, soil stability, plants and animals, any cultural, historical or
scenic aspects, any existing structures on the site, and the use of the structures. Attach
photographs of the site. Snapshots or Polaroid photos will be accepted.
32. Describe (on a separate sheet) the surrounding properties, including information on
plants, animals, any cultural, historical or scenic aspects. Indicate the type ollf land uses
(residential, commercial, etc.), intensity of land use (one-family, apartment houses,
shops, department stores, etc.), and scale of development (height, frontage! set-backs,
rear yards, etc.). Attach photographs of the vicinity. Snapshots or Polaroid photos will
be accepted.
Certification •
I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the
data and information required for this initial evaluation to the best of my ability, and that the
facts, statements, and information presented are true and correct to the best of my knowledge
and belief. -
Date ignature
E.I.R.
3/95
-3-
i •
ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION FORM
BLUTH ANNEXATION
Project Description
Request from Bluth Development for a City Boundary Reorganization
between the City of Monrovia and the City of Arcadia. The boundary
reorganization is comprised of three acres with approximately 3± acres. The
reorganizations include daylighted parcels to be added to lots 15, 16 and 17 in
Tract 42936 and two undeveloped lots currently located in the City of
Monrovia.
The proposal also includes pre-zoning the property to R-M, Residential
Mountainous zone consistent with the adjoining zoning in the City of
Arcadia.
•
•
. . . . •
. • n • "
\. __., .
______
,,,•,...,---- .
, . .
. . ,2 , , r.„.„,--------
REORGANIZATION
•
\ TRANSFER OF T!RRITORY FROM
\\ s C: OF MONRO�to TO CITY OF ARCA:;
•
o t.s„-
.. . wi •� _?i/ -
//::‘, -. EtP..3/.11/97 a
/ cr {u vGt t.!L1./RA.4. :All .
i • %%7.'3'42'45-.4
1 _^ 5 r 4 ;. v. 9ART STRIVER, R.C.. '3195 ,•
� : v-,I l6 'Z ' ) �4p.EA a 19.587 SF
.. >-, _
1 1 . sag-t1.45-x/ �j .
-j f /?,/ a
/4/.. f 17 • 7 i . -..∎••• - ,.. _
\\. e' . '
'." s935
.8 • ag'43'45-N, ',.
OAK ='�:".�,?8 =• -• ?CATION OF
`\ ;OT 38
% / • of F O. �OwEZ;.'S • 5.;
)� SueOIvS�ON�
r 'AO,,
OM 3817/.36-337 .II
r il IS r4G FINES —� j/� .el I
5JMWT - _---� �� - / ACS'S ■RE.•1 • J'-
'.. /51.398 g/ I
20 //////
�, .vE AEp, ' ./,•
�t I .c,,,.--.•:, / 'V.v'93 X
1. z•+`5.13' , ,Nt' An.'
IS-
r.RA,3' NO. =5843// nR-+:N OF
913.5/46-49 /•.343 Sr/—/./ 'a 'S?43-r4R
/-"J /
//// / / //AP'_ , uR :85/46-49
•. k i i; /731
'4
_.• EXHIBIT
.
Si ) 1 )
A,w `ue/ Sera 7.1(i /c"
�cO RATL° MEMORANDUM
FIRE DEPARTMENT
DATE: OCTOBER 24, 1995
TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: GERALD R. GARDNER, ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER/FIRE
CHIEF
BY: WAYNE A. CRABB, FIRE MARSHALL fr .
SUBJECT: RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE AN ALTERNATE USE
PERMIT FOR ABOVE GROUND STORAGE TANKS
SUMMARY
This application is for City Council consideration of an Alternate Use Permit for above
ground fuel storage tanks at the Los Angeles County Park maintenance facility,
adjacent to the west entrance of the park on Huntington Drive.
DISCUSSION
Section 3131 of the Arcadia Municipal Code states that there is a restriction on the use
of above ground flammable liquid storage tanks. The applicant (Los Angeles County
Parks and Recreation Department) desires to construct/place an alternate means of
storing and dispensing fuel in conflict with this section of the Municipal Code.
The above ground storage tanks proposed on the attached exhibits meet all current
Uniform Fire Code, Uniform Building Code and Underwriters requirements and should
result in a more favorable environmental condition.
The Fire Department has reviewed this proposal for compliance with all codes and
ordinances and feels the proposal as indicated does not present any additional
problems for our department. Due to the fact that access to the specified area is
limited to County personnel only and there are no adjacent life or structure safety
problems, the Department has no public safety objections and approves of this
installation.
LASFR
Mayor and Members of the City Council
October 24, 1995
Page 2
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact to the City of Arcadia.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council approve this application for above ground fuel
storage tanks as indicated in this report.
Approved:
William R. Kelly, City Manager
Attachment
•
•
•
!a r*>
STAFF REPORT
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
October 24, 1995
TO: Arcadia Redevelopment Agency
FROM: Rick Gomez, Deputy Executive Director
By: eter P. Kinnahan, Economic Development Administrator
,Pre ared by: Dale R. Connors, Redevelopment Project Manager
RE: Request to Approve an Exclusive Right to Negotiate (ERN) with the
Gateway Associates (Huntington Drive at Fifth Avenue)
SUMMARY:
Attached to this staff report is a "Draft" Exclusive Right to Negotiate (ERN) between
the Agency and Gateway Associates, a development company composed of MHI and
the Oak Knoll Group from Pasadena for possible development of property on Fifth
Avenue north of Huntington Drive (Location Map, Attachment No. 1). The ERN
(Attachment No. 2) sets aside a 235 day period of time (7+ months) within which
Gateway and the Agency will study the feasibility of developing the Fifth Avenue
Properties. Staff and Gateway are still in negotiations on the ERN. A final draft will
be provided at the meeting for Agency consideration and approval.
DISCUSSION:
The Arcadia and Monrovia Redevelopment Agencies have been jointly marketing a
development site which straddles the municipal border between the two cities at Fifth
Avenue north of Huntington Drive since the Spring of 1994. The relocation of World
Vision (a major property owner at Fifth and Huntington) to the State of Washington
and economies of scale afforded by a large development site have provided an
outstanding opportunity to pursue a joint project.
In September, 1995, Gateway secured an option to buy the World Vision Property in
Monrovia immediately east of Fifth Avenue adjacent to the City of Arcadia. Gateway
is one of several development groups who have been working toward acquiring and
developing the World Vision and surrounding properties into a commercial/retail
shopping center. Gateway's option allows them until January 15, 1996 to complete
site investigation work and close escrow no later than April 30, 1996.
,��d_/ rd tl e LASER IMAGED
4R 4 7 c
s y
Gateway, having secured an option on the most prominent parcel in the proposed
development site, has approached the Agency staff and requested an opportunity to
develop the properties on the Arcadia side of the border. In response, staff has
•
prepared Attachment No. 2 for Agency consideration. The ERN governs the
relationship between the Agency and Gateway as they work jointly toward a
Disposition and Development Agreement (DDA) and ultimately development of the
site.
If approved by the Agency, the ERN will last 235 days. This time period is divided
into three phases; each of which have tasks to be completed, goals to be met and
provide an opportunity for the Agency or Gateway to terminate the ERN with no
additional obligation to the other party.
Phase One will last up to 95 days during which time preliminary site plans and
elevations will be developed, property owners will be contacted concerning the project
and owner participation opportunities will be extended and a Phase I Environmental
Assessment (Hazardous Waste) will be initiated. Additionally, potential tenants will be
contacted, preliminary title reports obtained and a proforma developed.
Phase Two will run up to 80 days and features development of more detailed site
plans, building elevations and financial proforma. During this phase, the
environmental evaluation will begin, a topographic and boundary survey will be
initiated and property appraisal will be obtained. Additional letters of interest from
potential tenants will also be secured and proof of financing evidenced.
Phase Three is devoted primarily to the finalization of the DDA and is scheduled to last
up to 60 days. At the end of Phase Three, the ERN is automatically extended an
additional 60 days if the developer signs the Agency-prepared ERN. This extended
period provides Agency staff time to prepare and publish the necessary reports and
notices required by State law and for the required public hearings to take place.
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS:
None necessary to adopt the ERN.
•
An environmental evaluation including a traffic study will be prepared during the ERN
period to assess in the impact of the proposed development.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The Agency's expenses take the form of staff time and attorney's fees incurred in
document review, negotiations and DDA drafting. These will be paid by the Gateway
as part of the ERN Fee ($10,000).
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the Arcadia Redevelopment Agency authorize the Executive
Director to execute an Exclusive Right to Negotiate with the Gateway for the
Huntington Drive at Fifth Avenue Project subject to approval by the Agency Attorney
as to form.
•
Attachments: Attachment No. 1 - Location Map
Attachment No. 2 - Proposed ERN
Approved:
William R. Kelly, Executive Director
DRC:dc
0 (-- A 0 \ VA P
..
..
a_
a >
FOO U Z c,
,'/ a L
{,/ 0 0
<< F/4-A, UI
ry U� •
1 . I
NAY PROPERTY (2)
w
Q 1.11111.1k I
I
.. I
o E . SANTA CLARA STREET I
, z r .
0
c) TELEDYNE PROPERTY
w
--7
\
- \\ RICHTER PROPERTY Ld
ALF IEIRI �'
�/,y rROPER\ '' a
RTH '�9 \\
\ WORLD VISION PROPERTY
s
NO SCALE `�
a ti
frg w z ---1
UST ICE EPOTIFERS
..o. RTY 1
E . HUNT I NGTON DRIVE I
1 •
7 i 1 I
BOU\DAR I ES OF PROPOSED GATEWAY ASSOC 1ATES PROJECT
ATTACHMENT NO . 1
EXCLUSIVE NEGOTIATION AGREEMENT
DRA,„f
THIS EXCLUSIVE RIGHT TO NEGOTIATE AGREEMENT ("Agreement") is
entered into this 24th day of October, 1995 by and between the Arcadia
Redevelopment Agency, a public body ("Agency") and Gateway Associates, a
California Limited Liability Company, operating at 1400 Wentworth Ave., Suite L,
Pasadena, CA 91106, ("Developer").
In consideration of the mutual covenants provided herein, the parties hereto
agree to negotiate based upon the following concepts:
I .
RECITALS
A. The Developer desires and intends to acquire and redevelop certain
real property (the "Property" or "Site") located within Agency's Central
Redevelopment Project Area ("Project Area") The Property is shown on the map
set forth on Exhibit "A", attached hereto and incorporated by this reference, and is
described on Exhibit "B", attached hereto and incorporated by this reference. The
Property is approximately 7.93 acres in size (8.64 acres including street rights-of -
way) as well as a portion of the flood control easement (Santa Anita Wash) which
Developer intends to use for service and parking, if feasible and is located
generally on Fifth Avenue between Huntington Drive and the Foothill (210)
Freeway. The Site is owned by four parties as set forth in Exhibit "A". .
B. The Agency received a proposal from the Developer, dated
September 27, 1995, to develop the Property. A copy of Developer's proposal
showing their conceptual site plan is attached hereto as Exhibit "C".and
incorporated by this reference.
•
DRAFT
Attachment No. 2
II.
REPORTS AND NEGOTIATIONS
A. Good Faith Negotiations
Agency and Developer agree (for the time period set forth below and
subject to the exceptions set forth in this Agreement) to negotiate exclusively and
in good faith, pursuant to the terms hereof, to prepare a Disposition and
Development Agreement (DDA) to be entered into by Agency and Developer
concerning the Developer's acquisition and improvement of the Property. The
terms "good faith negotiations" and "negotiated in good faith" shall mean that
Agency and Developer shall use their reasonable best efforts to communicate with
each other on a regular basis and to follow reasonable negotiation procedures with
the objective of drafting a DDA mutually acceptable to Agency and Developer.
Developer and Agency acknowledge and agree that negotiations may not result in
a mutually satisfactory agreement and that the parties may, therefore, not approve
a DDA. Developer and Agency further acknowledge and agree that all
negotiations must comply with all applicable federal, state and municipal laws.
• Nothing herein shall be deemed a covenant, promise or commitment by Agency,
the City of Arcadia ("City"), or any agency of City, to enter into a DDA with
Developer. The execution of this Agreement by the parties hereto is merely an
agreement to enter into a period of exclusive negotiations (subject to the
exceptions set forth in this Agreement) according to the concepts presented
herein. Nothing herein shall limit the absolute discretion of Agency, City and other
agencies of city as to any approval of the DDA or as to any other actions required
of them. Agency agrees (for the period set forth below and subject to the
exceptions set forth in this Agreement) not to negotiate with any other person or
entity regarding development of the Property without the consent of Developer,
unless otherwise required to do so pursuant to a judgment or order of a court of
249
competent jurisdiction; provided, however that nothing herein shall prohibit
Agency from - - -• - - - - - - - - - - • : - . : • _ • '.
. _ . _ - - - . . - _ - - . •- . - . - _ - - - _ . _ discussing
with and considering the development proposals of the owners or any tenant of
the Property (pursuant to Section 11181.
B. Exclusive Negotiating Fee
Prior to any Agency action to consider approval of this Agreement,
Developer shall pay Agency the sum of Ten Thousand Dollars ($10,000) ("Fee") in
consideration for Agency's covenant to negotiate exclusively with Developer as
set forth in this Agreement. This Fee shall be in addition to all other deposits and
fees required of Developer under this Agreement.
If negotiations between Agency and Developer are conducted in good faith
as defined in Section IIA and Developer or Agency nonetheless elects to terminate
this Agreement as provided for in Section IID, then Agency and Developer agree
that part of the Fee shall be refundable based upon the following time schedule;
provided, however, that if Agency fails to approve this Agreement, then the entire
Fee shall promptly be refunded to Developer.
• Partial refund of the Fee is based upon the date the Agency receives notice
from Developer that Developer has terminated this Agreement or the date that the
Agency notified the Developer that Agency is terminating this Agreement. If said
notice is received on or before the dates cited in the table below and Developer
has negotiated in good faith during the time period this Agreement has been in
effect, then the indicated refund amount is due the Developer.
Time From ERN Execution by Agency
Phase as defined in Section IID Amount of Refund
I Execution to end of Phase I $ 7,500.00
II End of Phase I to end of Phase II $ 2,500.00
III End of Phase II to DDA Hearing $ 0.00
34.9
Payment of refundable amounts to cithcr the Developer or Agency shall be made
within 14 calendar days of receiving notice of termination of this Agreement.
C. Exclusive Right to Negotiate Period
This Agreement shall terminate automatically 190 days following its
execution by Agency, except as otherwise provided for in Section 1 -B//D below.
The Agency and Developer agree that the work to be performed during this period
shall be done in 3 phases so as to minimize costs and expedite the overall process.
Both parties acknowledge that this schedule is aggressive and fast track in
an effort to accomodate the Developer. Some of the tasks to be accomplished are
outside the control of the parties. Both parties agree to not act unreasonably to
requests for extensions of time.
D. Responsibilities of the Parties
Both parties acknowledge their intention that Developer shall design and
construct a quality, attractive first class, high sales tax volume, retail promotional•
development on the Site (Project")., •- - - - - - - - - - - • -
Phase I:
Developer agrees that within seventy-five (75) thirty (30) days following
Agency's execution of this Agreement, Developer will prepare an initial
development feasibility report ("Preliminary Report"), suitable for review by
Agency, addressing the potential for development of the Project. The Preliminary
Report shall include the following: •
a) concept site map with building pads shown dimensioned and to scale
(also including the parking lot), showing traffic access to the Site and to
surrounding developments, or alternative site maps; and
r rl
b) representative concept elevations of the Project as shown on Exhibit
D and incorporated herein by this reference (all four sides of all buildings,
excluding any restaurants) to scale showing the architectural style and
theme , colored as the Project is proposed to be when constructed, with a
written description of the pavement, sidewalk, lighting, loading and
landscaping areas; and
c) the schedule and phasing of development from Preliminary Report
submittal through opening of the Project; and
d) an initial proforma of projected Agency, City, and Developer
acquisition and improvement costs (onsite and offsite) and projected
Developer, Agency, and City expenditures/revenues (eg. sales tax, tax
increment, etc.), including the amount of any proposed Agency or City
financial contribution or other assistance to the Project. When preparing its
proforma projections with respect to Agency's, City's and Developer's
acquisition and on-site and off-site improvement costs, Developer shall take
into account that any and all public improvements for which City or Agency
provides any financial contribution or other assistance shall be subject to the
payment of prevailing wages, to the extent required by law; and
e) proof of Developer's personal contact with the four Property owners
as set forth in Exhibit "A" regarding Developer's acquisition of the Property
and/or owners' possible participation in the Project; and
f) a signed letter of interest, dated following Developer's execution of
this Agreement, from one or more at lest two "Category Killer" typo
specialty promotional commercial/retail tenants for at least 40,000 square
feet of space. This letter of interest need not be a firm commitment to
occupy space in the Project, but rather indicate the user's desire to be at
this location and that the proposed Project is consistent with corporate
development criteria. - - • - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
proposed tenants for the project. Uses shall be consistent with Agency
544
Resolution No. ARA-172, A Resolution of the Arcadia Redevelopment
Agency Establishing Use and Design Requirements and Guidelines, which is
attached as'Exhibit E and incorporated herein by this reference.
g) a preliminary title report on all four of the parcels comprising the
Property and including the street right-of-way at least to the center line of
the adjacent street as appropriate, i.e., East Santa Clara Street and North
Second Avenue as shown on Exhibit A and drawn within the previous 60
days, showing all ownership or other interests in the site, upon which
Agency and Developer can rely; and
h) preliminary contingencies, conditions, limitations, or concerns of
Developer.
i) an environmental information statement prepared and executed by
Developer, on a form provided by Agency; and
j) Phase I ESA Scc Scction F below.
Agency agrees to cooperate with Developer to provide publicly available
information in Agency's or City's possession which Agency may reasonably be
able to provide to Developer and which would assist Developer in assembling the
Preliminary Report for review by Agency.
Agency staff shall review the Preliminary Report and, if it is adequate and
complete as determined in the Golc reasonable discretion'of Agency staff, shall
forward it to Agency's governing board with a written recommendation not more
than 14 days following Agency staff's determination that the Preliminary Report is
accurate and complete. If the site plan and concept elevations submitted as part
of the Preliminary Report are generally consistent with the concept plans (Exhibit
Cl and concept elevations (Exhibit El, they shall be deemed approved. If the
Preliminary Report is not approved in writing by Agency staff as adequate or
complete, Developer shall reasonably attempt to revise the Preliminary Report to
respond in writing to Agency staff's objections or concerns and to secure Agency
staff's acceptance as soon as possible. Notwithstanding Section II C above, the
Agency governing board, after review of the Preliminary Report, may elect in its
sole and absolute-discretion to terminate this Agreement without cost or liability to
City or Agency subject to Developer's right to a partial refund of the Fee, as
described in Section IIB.
The Phase I period is projected to take approximately 95 50-days (7530 +
14 +6 = 95 60 days)
Before or at the time of submission of the Preliminary Report, Developer
may terminate this Agreement upon written notice to Agency explaining its
reasons therefor. The Agency however, may retain that portion of the Fee as set
forth in Section IIB above.
Phase II:
If the Agency's governing board approves the Preliminary Report, Developer
agrees that within sixty (60) days of Agency's approval of the Preliminary Report,
Developer will complete Phase II tasks of this ERN by providing the following
"Final Report" to Agency staff.
a) a refined Site plan dimensioned and to scale; and
b) refined concept elevations of the Project (all four sides of all buildings)
to scale, colored as the Project is proposed to be when constructed showing
architectural style and theme, with landscaping elements detailed; and
c) a refined proforma of Developer, Agency, and City expenditures and
revenues and Project operating costs/revenues for five 4E41-years-ft-am
c. al; and
d) a letter of interest from one or more promotional at lest four to six
"Category Killer" type specialty commercial/retail tenants accounting for at
least 60,000 square feet of space and 50% of the gross leasable floor area
74J
in the Arcadia Project. The Agency reserves the right to approve the
. _ _ _ _ - . . - - . - . Uses shall be consistent with Agency
Resolution No. ARA-172, A Resolution of the Arcadia Redevelopment
Agency Establishing Use.and Design Requirements and Guidelines, which is
attached as Exhibit E and incorporated herein by this reference.
e) a letter of interest, with respect to the financing necessary to acquire
the Property and to construct and operate the Project, from a reputable and
qualified commercial lender with at least 10 years satisfactory lending
experience on similar commercial projects in Southern California (reasonable
and standard underwriting conditions are acceptable); and
f) a statement that Developer, within 14 days after approval of the DDA
(if any) by Agency and City, is willing to pay to Agency (i) a disposition and
development fee = - - - - - - - - = ' - - - - - - - - - in the
amount of $10,000, and (ii) a good faith deposit (cash or letter of credit) to
secure Developer's performance under the DDA in the amount of $50,000 if
the Agency participates financially.
g) the proposed type or concept of security interest to protect any
Agency or City subsidy, loan, bond or investment.
h) a boundary and topographic survey ("Survey") of the Site which ties
the Site together with adjacent land in the City of Monrovia being
considered by Developer for incorporation into the Project. Said Survey
shall be undertaken to establish a data base to be used to prepare a parcel
or tract map of the Site during a subsequent DDA period. The Survey shall
be paid for by Developer and performed by a certified/licensed surveyor or
engineer.
I) Environmental Assessment - See Section IIE below.
j) Real Estate Appraisals - See Section IIG below.
844
Agency agrees to cooperate with Developer to provide publicly available
information in Agency's or City's possession which Agency may reasonably be
able to provide to-Developer and which would assist Developer in assembling the
Final Report for review by Agency. Agency staff shall review the Final Report
and, if it is adequate and complete as determined in the sole reasonable discretion
of Agency staff, shall forward it to Agency's governing board with a written
recommendation not more than 14 days following Agency staff's determination
that the Final Report is accurate and complete. If the Final Report is not approved
in writing by Agency staff as adequate or complete, Developer shall reasonably
attempt to revise the FinalReport to respond in writing to Agency staff's objections
or concerns and to secure Agency staff's acceptance as soon as possible.
Notwithstanding Section II C above, the Agency governing board, after review of
the Final Report, may elect in its sole and absolute discretion to terminate this
Agreement without cost or liability to City or Agency, subject to Developer's right
to a partial refund of the Fee, as described in Section IIB.
The Phase II period is projected to take approximately eighty days (60 +
14 + 6 = 90 days)
Before or at the time of submission of the FinalReport, Developer may
terminate this Agreement upon written notice to Agency explaining its reasons
therefor. The Agency however, may retain that portion of the Fee as set forth in
Section IIB above.
The Agency, at its expense, shall by the end of the Phase II term obtain
from qualified, experienced consultants, estimates for budget purposes only of the
potential cost of relocating the business and residential tenants, possible purchase
of business inventory, and possible goodwill claims, and to include these estimates
in the Agency's analysis of the economic return of this proposed Project.
Phase III:
•
Within 14 days after Agency approval of the Final Report, the Agency shall
prepare a draft Disposition and Development Agreement (DDA) including exhibits
available at the time and including, to the extent reasonable, information gathered
during Phases I and II and provide this to the developer. The Developer shall
meet to negotiate the draft DDA within 14 daysafter receipt and thereafter work
diligently to effectuate a mutually agreeable DDA.
The Phase III period is expected to take 2 months (14 + 14 + +32 = 60
days), not including the noticed public hearing time period as set forth immediately
above.
If Developer executes the DDA, as prepared and submitted in final form by
Agency staff to Developer, prior to the expiration of Phase III and/or this
Agreement as set forth in Section II C , this Agreement shall be automatically
extended for a period of sixty (60) days following Developer's execution of the
DDA in order for the appropriate notices and reports to be prepared and published
by Agency as required by State law and for the required public hearing(s) on the
environmental documents and on the proposed DDA to take place.
The ERN Schedule is shown on Exhibit F Exhibit D.
E. Environmental Compliance.
Within forty-five (45) days following Agency's approval (if any) of this
Agreement, Agency shall select an environmental consultant ("Environmental
Consultant") to prepare an environmental assessment of the Project. The
Environmental Consultant shall be responsible for preparing the environmental
documents related to the Project during Phase II of the ERN (once the
Environmental Information Statement is received from Developer as part of the
Preliminary Report). These environmental documents may include, if and as
required by law (as determined solely by the Agency) , a negative declaration, or a
mitigated negative declaration, or an environmental impact report and a
corresponding mitigation and monitoring plan. The selection and retention of the
109
Environmental Consultant shall be in Agency's sole and absolute discretion;
provided, however, that Agency will engage in reasonable consultations with
Developer as to the selection of the Environmental Consultant prior to Agency's
retention of said consultant. The Developer shall reimburse Agency, up to
$20,000, for 100% of all costs incurred by Agency with respect to the
Environmental Consultant and the preparation of, and reply to comments on, or
defense of the environmental documents. Should the costs to prepare and/or
reply to, or defend the environmental documents exceed $20,000, the Developer
shall 50% of all costs between $20,001 and $25,000. If aggregate costs exceed
$25,001 , the Developer shall pay those costs which in the aggregate are less than
$25,001 in the manner set forth in the two immediately preceding sentences and
Agency and Developer shall negotiate in good faith the payment of those costs
which in the aggregate exceed $25,001 to a reasonable maximum payment. If the
parties are unable to agree within 30 days, this Agreement can be terminated by
either party.
To secure its obligations under this Section II G, within ten (10) days
following written notice from the Agency requesting payment, Developer shall
deposit with Agency the sum of $22,500 which Agency may use to reimburse
itself for costs incurred by Agency in the manner set forth in this Section IIE. Any
unused portion of Developer's deposit shall be promptly returned to Developer
upon certification of any EIR or Negative Declaration, or Mitigated Negative
Declaration, or upon termination of this Agreement, or Agency's disapproval of the
DDA, whichever occurs first. Developer agrees to provide documentation, maps,
charts, graphs, materials and information as may be reasonably required by the
Environmental Consultant and/or Agency during the environmental assessment of
the Project or the preparation of the environmental documents.
The Agency will cooperate with the Developer and the City and Redevelopment
Agency of Monrovia on coordination of the environmental assessment, including
the traffic analysis of the proposed Monrovia and Arcadia projects.
1149
F. Dangerous Materials Inspection.
Within twenty-one (21 ) days after Agency's approval (if any) of this
Agreement, Developer shall, at its sole cost, liability and expense, undertake, or
cause to be undertaken, a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment ("Phase I ESA)
as such is defined in the standards and practices of the industry of the four
parcels comprising the Property (See Exhibit "A"). The Phase I ESA shall be
prepared by reputable licensed consultants and in accordance with the laws of the
State of California. The Phase I ESA shall be in a form such that Agency and
Developer may rely upon it should the Agency and Developer agree to proceed
with the Project through construction. At a minimum, and without limiting any
other requirements which may be applicable to the preparation of the Phase I ESA,
the Phase I ESA shall evaluate the condition of the Properties for the presence of
underground storage tanks, asbestos, lead paint, and all other hazardous materials,
hazardous substances or toxics, as defined by applicable provisions of local, state
or federal law. To the extent possible the Phase I ESA shall be submitted to
Agency as part of the. Preliminary Report, or as soon thereafter as practicable.
If the Developer is unable to obtain the consent of the current owners of the
• Property to enter upon their respective parcels to perform the work described in
this Section IIF, then the Agency agrees to use reasonable good faith efforts to
consider and, if legally appropriate as determined by the Agency in its sole and
absolute discretion, take whatever actions are available to the Agency, including
the seeking of court orders and the like, as would permit the Agency or Developer
in its stead to enter upon the Properties for purposes of conducting the work
•
described in this Section IIF. The Developer agrees to advance to the Agency all
estimated third party out-of-pocket expenses incurred by Agency, or to reimburse
said costs, if the advance deposit is insufficient..
•
124-9
If the Agency is unsuccessful in obtaining a Court Order, the parties shall
meet promptly to negotiate a reasonable course of action in order to complete the
• Project. -
G. Real Estate Appraisals.
Within fifteen (15) days following the end of Phase I and Agency's approval
of the Preliminary Report, and upon Developer's submission to Agency of an
$8,000 deposit for the costs Agency may reasonably incur for the fair market
value appraisal described in the immediately following paragraph, Agency shall
cause to be prepared a fair market appraisal (executive or letter opinion) of value
of the four parcels comprising the Site. Nothing in this Agreement shall be in any
way construed to require Agency to make an offer for or to acquire any or all of
these parcels through the exercise of its eminent domain powers. Nothing herein
shall be construed to mean that Agency is agreeing to acquire any or all of these
parcels or has agreed to exercise the rights of eminent domain, which rights shall
be exercised only in the sole discretion of Agency and in accordance with law.
Agency and Developer agree that the selection of this person who shall
prepare the fair market appraisal of this Site ("Appraiser") shall be in Agency's
• sole and absolute discretion; provided, however, that Agency shall engage in
reasonable consultations with Developer prior to Agency's selection of the
Appraiser. Developer shall reimburse Agency for all costs incurred by Agency
with respect to the executive or letter opinion real estate appraisal both during the
term of this Agreement and subsequently pursuant to a DDA if such is ultimately
adopted by the Agency and City Council. Developer acknowledges and agrees
that the deposit referenced in the immediately preceding paragraph may be used
by Agency to reimburse itself for all costs incurred by Agency with respect to the
Appraiser.
134-9
r \
The Developer shall pay costs of upgrading these executive or letter opinion
appraisals to court ready, full eminent domain appraisals, as and if necessary, and
to pay for appraisal updates.
H. Disposition and Development Agreement:
The obligation of Developer to pay Agency for all costs incurred by Agency
as set forth in this Agreement under Sections IIE, F and G described hereinabove,
shall survive Agency's subsequent decision (if any) to (i) terminate this
Agreement; (ii) not adopt a resolution of necessity; (iii) not proceed with this
Agreement; or (iv) disapprove or not proceed with a DDA.
It is understood and agreed between Agency and Developer that the
Agency's governing board shall conduct a public hearing with respect to the
Agency's consideration of the DDA. If such DDA is approved by the Agency's
governing board, then upon or following such approval the Agency's governing
board shall set just compensation for the Property in accordance with law and
upon consideration of the fair market appraisal prepared by the Appraiser. Any
agreement that may be reached between Agency and Developer with respect to
the acquisition of the Property through the Agency's possible use (subject to the
limitations and conditions set forth by law and in Section IIG) of the Agency's
eminent domain power shall be set forth in the DDA. The Developer
acknowledges that they will be required as part of any DDA and in the event of
condemnation to provide the negotiated purchase price to the Agency upon the
written request of the Agency. ..
I. City and Agency Approvals
Agency and Developer acknowledge that all terms and conditions of the
proposed DDA other than those specified in this Agreement are subject to
negotiation and that no agreements of any kind other than those contained in this
Agreement have been reached between Agency and Developer as of this date.
1449
f,
Prior to the construction of any improvements on the Property, Developer shall be
required to obtain all necessary permits and approvals from the appropriate
governmental authorities and pay all fees and charges including, without limitation,
those established by City, Agency and the Arcadia School District for all on and
offsite requirements. This Agreement shall not be deemed to constitute a
prejudgment or commitment on the part of Agency or City to grant any such
approval(s).
III.
MISCELLANEOUS
A. Real Estate Assembly, Acquisition and Commission Fees, Relocation
Costs, and Consultant's Fees
Developer acknowledges that Agency shall not be liable for any real estate
commission or brokerage fees which may arise from Developer's actions pursuant
to this Agreement (or the DDA, if any), and Developer agrees to hold Agency
harmless from any and all claims made by any brokerage agent or finder retained
by Developer or the Property owner concerning the Property and concerning the
matters containedin this Agreement. Developer acknowledges that, except as
otherwise expressly provided by this Agreement, Agency shall not be liable for the
fees of any consultants or experts retained by Developer to enable Developer to
comply with the terms of this Agreement or to enter into a DDA with Agency.
This Section IIIA shall survive the expiration or termination of this Agreement.
B. Owner Participation
Notwithstanding anything in this Agreement to the contrary, Developer
acknowledges that Agency may have certain obligations pursuant to the owner
and tenant participation provisions of the Redevelopment Plan for the Project Area
("Plan") or the Community Redevelopment Law, Health and Safety Code Sections
15-19
33000, et. sec. Developer covenants and agrees that Agency shall have the
absolute right, to the extent that Agency deems necessary or appropriate in its
sole and absolute discretion, to take certain actions to comply with the provisions
of the owner and tenant participation provisions set forth in the Plan or the
Community Redevelopment Law. Developer further acknowledges and agrees that
Agency's actions in this regard may include, without limitation, as determined by
Agency in its sole and absolute discretion, negotiations and agreements with
owners of the Properties and/or any tenants located thereon with respect to the
development of the Property by said owners and/or tenants. The exercise of
Agency of its rights or obligations set forth in this Section III B shall not, in any set
of circumstances, be deemed to be a breach of this Agreement or entitle
Developer to any rights or remedies whatsoever against Agency or City or their
respective elected officials, officers, agents, employees, attorneys or contractors.
Developer represents, covenants and agrees that it shall not, at any time or place,
contend that any actions taken by Agency with respect to those rights granted to
Agency pursuant to this Section III B constitute a breach of this Agreement or
entitle Developer to any rights or remedies whatsoever against City or Agency or
their respective elected officials, officers, agents, employees, attorneys or
contractors. Agency agrees that it shall, within fourteen (14) days following
Agency approval of this Agreement, forward correspondence to the current
owners of the Property to solicit that owner's interest in participating in the Project
or in some other development project for the Property.
C. Calculation of Days.
•
Unless otherwise expressly provided to the contrary herein, the term "days"
shall mean calendar days.
D. Attorney's fees.
1 649
In the event that any action or proceeding is commenced with respect to
this Agreement, the prevailing party in such action or proceeding shall be entitled
to recover from the other, in addition to all other relief to which it may be entitled,
its reasonable attorney's fees and costs of suit, including costs and fees on
appeal.
E. Integration.
This Agreement represents the entire agreement of the parties with respect
to the matters herein contained. It supersedes all prior written or oral agreements
between the parties with respect to the matters herein contained. This Agreement
may be modified only by a writing subscribed by the party to be charged.
F. Interpretation and Venue.
Agency and Developer acknowledge and agree that this Agreement is the
product of mutual arms length negotiations and drafting. Accordingly, the
equitable rule that ambiguities in a document shall be construed against the drafter
shall not apply to this Agreement. In the event of any interpretation dispute with
respect to this Agreement, the fact finder may refer to extrinsic evidence not in
conflict herewith to ascertain the intent of Agency and Developer.
This Agreement shall be governed by, and its interpretation subject to, the
laws of the State of California. Any action or proceeding brought pursuant or
relating to this Agreement shall be initiated in the appropriate court in the County
of Los Angeles, State of California. Each party hereto consents to the personal
jurisdiction of the court in such action or proceeding.
G. Notices.
Notices under this Agreement shall be delivered as follows:
If to the Agency:
Arcadia Redevelopment Agency
Attention: Executive Director
174-9
240 West Huntington Drive
Arcadia, CA 91066
With a copy to:
Best, Best & Krieger
Attention: Stephen P. Deitsch, Esq.
800 N. Haven, Suite 120
Ontario, CA 91764,
If to Developer:
Mr.Dennis Alfieri
Oak Knoll Group
1400 Wentworth Avenue
Pasadena, CA 91106
With a copy to:
Notices given pursuant to this Agreement shall be deemed
received three days after their deposit in the United States Mail,
first class postage pre-paid, or upon actual receipt if the method
of delivery is messenger or commercial delivery service.
H. Agency Cooperation
The Agency agrees to use its best efforts to have the City of Arcadia and
other governmental agencies process requests for information and applications
184
expeditiously, and to cooperate with the developer and the City and
Redevelopment Agency of the City of Monrovia on the proposed development of
the World Vision/Justice Brothers properties.
V.
EXECUTION
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto execute this Agreement
on the date first above mentioned.
AGENCY
4404;)
By:
Executive Directa' '
ATTEST:
By:
Agency Secretary
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Agency Special Counsel
By:
•
Best, Best and Kri
By: irz4w •
Agency Attorney
DEVELOPER
1944
•
By:
Its:
ern4.doce3-fee
-1/47
10/19/9510112/96
•
204-9
...•c••a,• -
--- /CT ..
O
f."4 1
\- L ,
`I
•77 0 ) 1` A.P.No. 5773-008-010
.
n1 „y _ i Emkay Development Co.
SANTA CLARA STREET !.—.--.1.• _n,...,.,, _ _ 2.— .,_ __ — _,,,
•• —'''..i.... ..::.,z_ , A.P. No. 5773-009-012 : �•
."4,--,. .. ® D.B. Milliken Co. I s
u, 4
�'� A.P. No. 5773-009-009
^' '1\ a . Ce, Richter Trust
i.4..(A.P• No. 5773-009-037 f i .
1 Alfieri Family Trust * 1 SS
I °` - I A.P. No. 5773-009-010i
,./ �� N , Richter Trust
�, Z
MI M i. II r c O W
f 14 IC id
O I. •I W \ • LLI
i • 12a14ala17 �•
.7[ro $_a • a J _Ws II
L��O
HUNTINGTON DRIVE
NO SCALE
LOCATION MAP •
.---- FIFTH AVENUE DEVELOPMENT SITE
EXHIBIT 'A'
EXHIBIT
DESCRIPTION OF FIFTH AVENUE PROJECT
The proposed development site is composed of the following assessors parcels, and that
portion of E. Santa Clara Street abutting the parcel to the centerline of the street.
APN 5773-008-101 (Emkay)
and abutting E. Santa Clara Street
APN 5773-009-012 (Milliken/Teledyne)
and abutting E. Santa Clara Street
APN 5773-009-009 (Richter)
APN 5773-009-010 (Richter)
APN 5773-009-037 (Alfieri)
EXHIBIT B
gateway Associates
/1nU '.�rnr.,,r:it rrt:rr. Stare r'1 P.:saaena. C.i 'al106 Tri. 713, 56a-111rl • Fax K i
•
RECEIVED
• SEA
September 27. 1995 Oevaioma„t Zones
Economic Defolownent L YII.OA
Mr. Peter P. Kinnahan
Economic Development Administrator
City Of Arcadia
240 W. Huntington Drive
P.O. Box 60021
•
Arcadia. CA 91066-6021
•
Re: Gateway Plaza - Arcadia/Monrovia
Dear Peter:
We wish to confirm with you that we have reached an agreement with World Vision to
•purchase their site. We have until January 15, 1996 to do our site investigations and must
close no later than April 30, 1996.
It is important that we now proceed with the completion of the Exclusive Right to Negotiate
(ERN) for the above referenced property. We will probably need the help of the Agency to
secure some of the parcels located within Arcadia.
We understand we should receive a revised draft of the ERN shortly. We look forward to
working together on this project.
Very truly yours,
7 .
L cig/
Lary
ielke
LEM/ch
•
EXHIBIT C
•
•
•56/0/6
• 0001/z
s-nyLr 69L + �°� saw possv nvmaivS .
�s 99l'z81 }
.4'clzsc# el \ ,�� ,�ri"� / ' S
� 001,3 b b
.0 / N " III Ill.I"11.3 N '41:I li '.•"4 glt.17 1111.1111111111.11111111111111111111.1 --------
4,,Cra:7
<k% 1'4
it ii, jr._ ,..s----__ ______,__ ,, , Ak--...1101
\)4.1 / '4.' - -. 4 It 1 q I 1 i ,_„,. r,_, Igi,.....,
__ _ ,,,. ._ . 1
, \ 4 aft --'\.____ '''''''' kt, •/(7114 '---,. . _., a"sown 1 .
Ilit // iiirttf 4 . -- 4041.1111.111111.111"1 ---k
0,244s idoos cz
1-
C" - I
1 in I
If
•m,__-, i , • - ' . ,- -,.• ..
•
•
' 1
` i 1 .` I ifiw 1 51 �/ ' 'ih ,� ,* 1 I' f'•
,43.....„,.,....„.„,....7...,...1,.... .,r.. ... if j .r '- irl.f ca, l ar_ YY33^f^i 'f+ '�t
_ _ t 111 , -• �V �i i 1.1.e' .,-'T 'tr -
f _ _ !•11;4 is ! 'i 1.a.-. 7.4.:,.4-72: taitrv'&r� i' y„:�i
fir, �1, �` 1r � (?�*T+�_ . ' t `f sa i,b. , ti i• �_. 9 r.i
tom' t _ - .„ r , „. '. L• . . rt*'. 1 '., "I'::.1 - .... I 1r_•, - y�.' 1 S tj std..-
fy S" `
le ••'• _�{ a J.� lot• 1
1 "`JJJ ,\• . 1 r.1".:..1:1 k,ic..,.4 N,‘.•
•
.. . _ •77:I i •!,_..,. ')...1111:7.. ... '1,v11..ttli. .11\‘.• , ,..- ,i.•, '....,..._„<..- 1,.:r...,..,,:c,...,,.. . :1<•-:,. -- -.a
, : 0-...-.:...,.._.,..:...•f-... --J. i v,.---.
I ......-__... .'"..---i.
iik .\ 's.k. ih"„X :‘ t.. \, %.,11tIL -
.�_ ,{t , �� airy • a'' `TL' .�+ic: ��•• q �`.- F"`:-.,14�
/' 1 '���, t�_ "„���1� ( ' 'tDII• i` lri'. �,,.. �+ 4. '. 1 1? \�' .�i °'' A"J....,.. .; i.,.. ti ii h
•:.•• ?tr..,..t_ „,... .. ,71 .le 1.-4'-'• 'Ili le•t;'''‘‘. -%'-''• ..%•I tt.:. Vile.,1 t,:tie. /-••••'.-$.-•iiiiii„ji : r:-_, n3„„. - • , r....1tAz, . ..sa.w........: ,
■ (-IT'- i / Ilk " ''' i x 'a-i t;,..: wPw : . • • 4 - .t.--- 5 .°- ••i " 1.7ffrie ...
• hiS/k.■� • '! `+ s
- L
! i' ' �t fay .
-. •:. _ ,. fly .. 1 t- 1
1 i '11:;,-y r� 'o'- } f• Et, '•L' -�II`'_1 I rti..'tw T_ :.14T..�. ', E :',. A �'' •'.' �' "•-• t i ..�•
i . 'il..44.111/4 • ...7.-i1,4) ii*Jij wirViiiiii.iltik•'''' till a•I''
4 silik t!,,,I,,..,9 .--....:-2'211:1:'.....e.: I,1 - •s'I'il • ."" '.1. .t�: `�4* Exhibit D E1
•
--1 _ . 1
January 13 1993
RESOLUTION NO. ARA 172
A RESOLUTION OF THE ARCADIA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
ESTABLISHING USE AND DESIGN REQUIREMENTS AND GUIDELINES
WHEREAS, the Arcadia Redevelopment Agency (the "Agency") has
expended over $30, 000, 000 to redevelop the area (the "Project
Area") subject to the Redevelopment Plan for the Central
Redevelopment Project (the "Redevelopment Plan") ; and
WHEREAS, the City of Arcadia (the "City") has expended over
$1, 000, 000 in Community Development Block Grant, Gas Tax, Lighting
Maintenance District, Sewer Fund, Proposition A, SE 821 and General
Fund monies and proposes to spend an additional $1, 100,000 over the
next three years to revitalize the downtown Project Area; and
WHEREAS, in order to eliminate blight and to meet the policies
and objectives of the Community Redevelopment Law of the State of
California (the "Redevelopment Law") within the Project Area, both
the Agency and the City desire to encourage and facilitate the
establishment and growth of high quality retail outlets, stores and
restaurants, professional office uses and industrial uses in the
Project Area, and to discourage unattractive, incompatible and non-
harmonious uses, materials, colors, lights, signs, landscaping,
architectural designs and treatment; and
WHEREAS, certain inappropriate uses exist or might otherwise
be permitted in the Project Area which cause blight or detract from
the reputation, market acceptance, security, attractiveness and
image of the Project Area, and are not consistent with the policies
and objectives of the Redevelopment Law; and
Exhibit E
WHEREAS, certain unattractive and non-harmonious architectural
design styles, materials and colors exist or might otherwise be
permitted in the Project Area which detract from or conflict with
existing, new or rehabilitated buildings, the policies and
objectives of the Redevelopment Law, and standards set forth in the
City' s Design Review Ordinance; and
WHEREAS, in accordance and consistent with Sections 301 ( 6) ,
410 through 413 , 416 through 420, 424 , 427, and 600 of the
Redevelopment Plan, and in order to eliminate blight, to enable the
Agency to concentrate and develop signific _ redevelopment
projects and uses which are needed in the- Project Area and in the
City, and to facilitate the achievement of adequate revenue for the
City, the Agency now desires to establish and adopt requirements
and guidelines pertinent to uses and development standards within
the Project Area; and
WHEREAS, the Agency has published notice of, and has conducted
a public hearing concerning the adoption of such requirements and
guidelines, pursuant to section 424 of the Redevelopment Plan, and
has duly considered all evidence and testimony submitted to the
Agency at the public hearing; and
WHEREAS, the Arcadia Redevelopment Agency has adopted a
program Environmental Impact Report ("URN) on November 20, 1973 a
the time of the establishment of the project area, and has adopted
a program EIR on May 5, 1981 at the time of the amendment of land
uses east of Second Avenue to (Commercial) Planned Development, and
the City Council has adopted a Negative Declaration on June 17,
1986 for Ordinance No. 1883, a zone change adopting architectural
•
and land use standards for a portion of the Central Redevelopment
Project Area, and an initial study has been prepared on the
proposed adoption of this Resolution and a. Negative Declaration
prepared.
NOW THEREFORE, THE ARCADIA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF
ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The Agency finds that the Use and Design
Requirements and Guidelines (the "Guidelines") attached hereto as
Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by reference, are reasonable
and necessary in order to eliminate blight and to facilitate and
encourage the policies and objectives of the Redevelopment Law. In
particular, the Agency finds that without the Guidelines, there
will likely be developed in the Project Area uses incompatible with
high quality office, restaurant and retail centers and industrial .
facilities, and structures which create a haphazard and
inconsistent mix of architectural design, all of which promote
blight and discourage investment in real property and redevelopment
activities. The Agency further finds that the needs of the
community would be adequately served by the location of certain
uses, described in the Guidelines as inappropriate for the Project
Area, in other more suitable areas within the .City, since (a) the
Project Area constitutes merely a small area within the City, (b)
other areas within the City generally do not contain the blighted
conditions which caused the need for adoption of the Redevelopment
Plan for the Project Area, and (c) there is sufficient demand from
' residents, businesses and community organizations in other areas of
the City for such uses to be located in those areas. The Agency
further finds that the uses described in the Guidelines as
inappropriate for the Project Area do not constitute uses which
would facilitate development of integrated, high quality office
complexes and retail centers, and that many of such uses would be
incompatible with existing structures and desired redevelopment
projects due to the appearance, traffic, noise, glare, smoke, or
similar factors typically associated with such uses.
SECTION 2. The Agency hereby approves and adopts the
Guidelines, and requires that any and all development,
redevelopment, and rehabilitation, repair, alteration, construction
or reconstruction of structures within the Project Area be
undertaken and completed in conformity with the Guidelines. A copy
of the Guidelines shall be forwarded by the Agency Secretary to the
City' s Planning Department and Business License office in the
Finance Department for their reference and use in considering
applications for permits and approvals pertinent to the Project
Area.
SECTION 3 . This Resolution shall take effect upon adoption.
Passed, approved and adopted this 1.9th day of January , 1993 .
/S/ GEORGE FASCHING
• Chairman
Arcadia Redevelopment Agency
ATTEST:
/S/ JUNE D. ALFORD
Secretary
Arcadia Redevelopment Agency
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS :
CITY OF ARCADIA
•
I , JUNE D. ALFORD, Secretary, Arcadia Redevelopment Agency of
the City of Arcadia, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution
No. ARA-172 was passed and adopted by the Arcadia Redevelopment
Agency of the City of Arcadia, signed by the Chairman and attested
to by the Secretary at a regular meeting of said City
Council/Agency meeting held on the 19th day of January, 1993 and
that said Resolution ARA-172 was adopted by the following vote, to
wit:
AYES: Agency Members Ciraulo, Harbicht, Lojeski, Margett
and Fasching
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
/S/ JUNE D. ALFORD
Secretary
Arcadia Redevelopment Agency
•
buTttel aunlao= 'ital!TwTtd -
seTouebe buTtepom -
sttey ao s.ieq sxoeatx -
. sttey/s0TPnzs eoutp -
seoTiio spuoq TTeq -
sa.ols 3;72u4 -
slemoapuntT -
PTo saetA OOT ulna; see" sT esTpueyoaam =T 'sasogs snbTlus -
meaols esTpueyozem peen 20 puey puooas -
sasogs snidans .o „leas de,'su puny puooas so ;exam set; -
sdoys used -
:ialoezeyo uT aetTmTs eq of seuTmaelsp Aouaby
au; yaTyw buTTAJtue put buTmotto= sul epntouT 'snoaddt lou Atteieueb
TTTA Aoueby aul WPM 'seas loacoad em; uT seen aleTadoaddeuI
•
•buTxaed tebatTT put cluapTooe 'suoTletoTA oT;;v:l
uT buT3Tnsea oTiieal aetnoTyan peseeaouT 'AlTATloe TeuTmTao
. 'smslsics RaT3noes Tensnun 'assn teuTbaem Art eoTmouooe 'ebsubTs
eAT30e24leun so/pus TtbeTTT uT eseasout UP Aq uMoys St
PM au; uT eouent;uT buTlybTtq a aonpuT of pull zo buTlybTTq
ao anT3ot2lleun saATasmayq 3o sae gpTgA •ola 'sluamleaal
ao eeTAls Itan3oaaT432t 's•Taossaaot 'ssem 20 arTg buTPTTnq
'BTttaelem 'saotoo 'abeubTs snoTuomseq-uou ao 'e vTadoaddeuT
'aTgTledmoouT se eons sluemate tt2n3oe;Tgoat pup.
sasn 40ece2 pus sbeanoosTp ol. spue uT put saaTsap Aoueby eta • E •
• (alvTadoadde se) buTlyhTt PePTCTys
pup eaot3 eanlem Angels=lad buTsn buTdeospueT stdwe K3Tt
'urolu.P op •ul mlTm snotuomaty pus atgTledmoo eq oa pelonalsuoo
pus peubTsep ktTeanloelTUoae 'sTVTaelem .Tgeanp 'AaTTtnb
'ant;oe=33p =o palonalsuoo eq pTnous seTITTToe= put sbuTPTTnq
asa4Z •sbuTPTTnq TvT=3snpuT put saoT;;o TtuoTsas3oad SP TTen
se 's;ueanelsaa pup ssaols TT2492 Pue ybTL A TTenb •AT3ota33p
apnTouT of sbutpjtnq buT;QTxe Jo uoTlelTTTgeyea put Aeu
3o uoTlottalsuoo ebeanooue of spue ut pup saatsep Jtouaby et;y * Z
' WT uotlntose
YUY) suoTltTnbe. Aatnag ubTsaQ seAoueby et;Z put ®mT3
oZ a T4 moa; pepuemt eq Atw yose tt ' oatoad luamdotenepag
TEaauaD et ao; uttd luamdoTanepe a 'eoueuTPaO
buTuoz - XI etoT31K attnoTgatd uT 'epoO TedTOTunN sTprDzY eL
'utid TtaaueD eTpto.y go A3T0 eu3 A;tatTo put 3uamaTddns oz
papua4ut eat seuTTapTnO pus s4uamaatnbali ubTsaO put, osn esauy •T
noTTod go -lualuaaE�S
•
(wYa Y 1.O3rO2idu) Yd3ZvY 1.O3rO2id 1.N3wdO'I3A3a32i 7112i1.N30
3H1 Boa
S3NI'I3QIn0 ONY SZNBauinO3L' NOIS30 0NY 3Sn
•
•
•owl Put AgTunmmoo • •west uroquAop
0q gT=sueq so s'TgTuemt enbTun. emos sae;;o
buTPTTnq ao quemdotenep pesodoad eqq =T .oueby eqq Aq peggTmaed
aq Arm saotoo put queagteaq ttangoagTqaat 'squemete ubTsep aag40
'eoueuTP.20
uoTzezTTQ;TA,H UA0 UAoa eqq ggTA quegsTsuoo saotoo quaoot
put estq MITA pooh ao XaTsq u. oaq 20 pea 3o eon eqq :squemete
ubTsep buTwotto= eqq . tuo enoaddt • Att*aeueb ttTA £ ueby eqy
IatA4s uDTsea ittan4ospioay etgtaTcaQ
ttquea Aseupp Rntaq -
dogs unb -
JCettQ buTTAOq -
seoTnses eouttngmt g -
'4; •bs 000 '0ti Este seaos eou9Tuenuoo -
t qe 3o uetd quemdotenep enTsuegeadmoa a =o
gatd se gdeoxe 'uoTgdmnsuoo esTmead-==o ao; aonbTT buTttes seaogs -
saotawd ebtssem -
suotts TTtu -
voTAsas buTgsto Xoago -
uotlsaedo buTuTm 20 TtangtnoTabe 'buTgtems 'buTuT=ea 'buTttTgsTP
t st peen AtTatmTad (sweat TITagsnpuT 203) uoTgtaedo Aue -
sesTmeid uo esn t buTA;TquepT qou sgonpoad buTsTq=enpt spatogttTq -
seTmeptow so soTpngs east TwTgawm -
stItq PatTttTg 20 wood -
patA ttquea Xonaq put aeTTtaq cgTtTgn -
dogs Aaegstogdri -
ebtatb ebtaogs -
segstA Ito oTgtmognt put paataedo-uToo -
segoango -
exTt eqq Put gBTxanq - ggeg -
smnTaegTues -
seTatngaom -
aexoot spoon uezoaz
seuTgowm buTutato dap eDTnaas-=tee 'pegtaedo-uToo -
aPT3 suo t ausanegsea esnogaeuuTp
q ggTA uoTgouncuoo uT gdaoxa 'sebunot TTegx000 put satq -
siogeegq uT-entap -
aoTnaes gbnoagq-eATap utluoo qou op g3TgA Pup
pup papntouT ,butptTnq e0T33o u72 uTggtA TequapTouT
g
eaegA gdsoxa 'slutanegsea poo; qst; -
ebtatb ebtaogs aTTgomolnt -
sdous sat;;nm -
sdogs /1eltq pug earl -
BuOTtIB web ao 80TAa95 olnt sit) ABU 30 OTts euI VITA uoTloeuuoo
UT s.ipo peen ao 'ABU 30 sits gdaoxa sasn paltTaa AtTgomolnp _
seTITITot usluns/qnI Io14 -
Beptoae TTequTd 'sepsoae emsb oeptn io/put oTuoaloaTa -
saTZTItDt; ao BoTPnIs sansseadnop _
ebeTT00 Azntaq -
0TuDAsd 'I~bo1oa.4sp -
• •.
Inaoorooriate Architectural Design styles
Inappropriate design, which the Agency will not permit, includes
without limitation domes, minarets, windmills, exterior stairways
or hotel room access, intermixed and incompatible or non-harmonious
architectural styles/designs on one building or one site, buildings
predominantly of reflective glass, buildings out of character and
inconsistent with other buildings in the downtown, including
landscaping.
Exception
Notwithstanding the above, the Agency in its reasonable discretion
may, for a building or project of unusual economic significance or
potential positive architectural impact, approve a variation for,
waive or modify the above Use and Design Guidelines.
Existing non-conforming uses will generally continue to be
permitted subject to the Arcadia Municipal Code and the
Redevelopment Plan. If any existing inappropriate use is abandoned
or discontinued for a period of 90 days, any rights under these
Guidelines shall terminate.
Increased Intensity of Uses
The land in the areas bounded by W. Huntington, Santa Anita and
Santa Clara, and the land bounded by E. Huntington, the AT & SF .
railroad tracks, N. Second and Santa Clara is in the heart of the
redevelopment project area. As such, they have high visibility
from surface, freeway and rail traffic and therefore have an
unusual impact on the future development of their immediate area,
the entire downtown project area, and the City's overall image and
reputation. Therefore, the Agency desires and intends this land be
developed for more intense and attractive commercial uses than
permitted under the existing zoning, including but not limited to
• greater height, e.g. , 3-6 stories with subterranean parking vs. 3
stories. The Agency generally will not permit less intense uses
than that stated herein, including but not limited to single story
"mini-mall" retail, one or two story office, retail, hotel, or such
mixed uses.
•
•
DRAFT Schedule
Assume October 25, 1995 Start Date
Note: Calendar dates have been shifted slightly due to holidays, weekends, and City
Council meeting dates.
Agency Approval of ERN October 24, 1995
Agency Execution of ERN (Start) October 25, 1995
Phase I - 95 days
Dangerous Materials - ESA Phase 1 by Developer (DA) November 15, 1995
RFP - Environmental, Appraisal by ARA November 13, 1995
Agency Selection of Environmental Consultant (45) January 2, 1996
Submittal of Initial Report (75) by Developer January 8, 1996.
City/Agency Staff Review (14) January 18, 1996
Agency Consideration (6) (possible Study Session) January 23, 1996
(Actual - 90 days)
Phase II - 80 days
Real Estate Appraisal Deposit by Developer (15-Ph 1) February 7, 1996
Begin Preparation of Draft DDA by ARA March 1, 1996
Submittal of Final Report (60) by Developer March 25, 1996
City/Agency Staff Review (14) April 8, 1996
Agency Consideration (6) April 16, 1996
(Actual - 84 days)
Phase III - 60 days
DDA - Draft (14) from ARA to Developer April 30, 1996
Negotiations (14) -ARA and Developer May 15, 1996
Developer Signature (32) June 17, 1996 .
(Actual 61 days)
End = 235 days (7+ months) June 17, 1996
(Actual - 231 days)
Public Hearing (tentative) July, 1996
Exhibit F
DRAFT
1. 75.v -v2. 8
—^
111\ ,
*c /,, MEMORANDUM
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
DATE: October 24, 1995
TO: Mayor and City Council and
Arcadia Redevelopment Agency
FROM: Rick Gomez, Deputy City Manager/Dev. Services Director and v
Deputy Executive Director
By:k,_ Peter Kinnahan, Economic Development Administrator
Mohammad Mostahkami, Asst. City Engineer, Engineeri g
RE: REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL APPROPRIATION OF FUNDS
FOR COMPLETION OF EMERGENCY WORK AND
COMPLETION OF THE ORIGINAL DOWNTOWN 2000
STREETSCAPE PROJECT FOR ASL CONSULTING
ENGINEERS, INC., LAWRENCE R. MOSS & ASSOCIATES,
AND WILLDAN AND ASSOCIATES
SUMMARY
In early August, construction of the City's Downtown 2000 Streetscape project by Sully-
Miller Contracting Company stopped. Preparation of bids, plans, specifications, and
contract documents and monitoring of the emergency work done by the emergency
contractor, Sequel Contractors, Inc. caused three of the City's consultants to incur
additional costs and unanticipated expenses for which staff request City Council and
Redevelopment Agency approval. In addition, these consultants will incur future costs
for completing the remainder of the original contract. Funds will also be needed for
work related to claims and potential litigation.
1. Additional Construction Administration -ASL Consulting Engineers, Inc. $284,933
2. Additional Construction Survey&Staking Work-ASL Consulting Engineers, Inc. $ 11,350
3. Additional Inspection and Construction Observation -Wilidan &Associates $ 102,578
4. Additional Coordination Landscape Architect- Lawrence R. Moss &Associates $ 5,000
Sub Total: $403,861 •
15% Contingency (reimbursements, contingency): $ 60.579
Total: $464,440
5. Litigation and Related Expenses:
ASL Consulting Engineers, Inc., Lawrence R. Moss&Associates and
Wilidan &Associates $ 30,000
Grand Total: $494,440
LASER !MAT:D
10900i0 W 7b
Staff Report
Page Two
October 24, 1995
•
DESCRIPTION,
ASL Consulting Engineers, Inc. ASL's added services includes preparation of bid and
contract documents (with City staff), construction administration of the emergency
contract with Sequel Contractors, Inc. (emergency contractor), and completion of ARIA
construction management on the remaining work through March, 1996.
ASL is also requesting additional funds for emergency survey and staking operations,
• as well as any future survey and staking work necessary to complete the contract.
Lawrence R. Moss & Associates LMA will have minor increases due to additional
coordination meetings.
Willdan Associates Willdan's added services included assistance with preparation of
bid and contract documents for the emergency work and completing the remainder of
the work.
These consultant estimates above do not include reimbursable costs (eg. computer
time, postage, copies, messenger, etc.), unanticipated extra work or analysis. For that
reason staff requests the addition of 15% as contingency to provide for these expenses
and for any unforeseen tasks.
• FISCAL IMPACT
1. Additional Construction Administration -ASL Consulting Engineers, Inc. $284,933
2. Additional Construction Survey & Staking Work-ASL Consulting Engineers, Inc. $ 11,350
3. Additional Inspection and Construction Observation -Willdan &Associates $ 102,578
4. Additional Coordination, Landscape Architect- Lawrence R. Moss &Associates $ 5,000
Sub Total: $403,861
15% Contingency (reimbursements, contingency): $ 60,579
Total: $464,440
Due to the filing of a claim against the City by Sully-Miller Contracting Company related •
to the Downtown 2000 Streetscape project and the potential for related litigation,
additional funds may be needed to assist in preparation to assert the City's position.
These costs are estimated at:
ASL Consulting Engineers, Inc., Lawrence R. Moss &Associates and
Willdan &Associates $ 30,000
Grand Total: $494,440
.:
Staff Report
Page Three
October 24, 1995
Sufficient Agency funds will be available to pay these costs.
RECOMMENDATION
That the City Council authorize an amendment increasing the scope of services and
the related fees for the four (4) Downtown 2000 consultant agreements as set forth
above.
That the Redevelopment Agency appropriate the funds for and reimburse the City for
these additional consultant costs as set forth above.
Approved By: • Una?
William R. Kelly, City Manager and
Executive Director
•
5.70 rev) ,Dra/R
��oR ,gas
.o..t. MEMORANDUM
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
DATE: October 24, 1995
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Rick Gomez, Deputy City Manager/Development Services Director
p 4): Pete Kinnahan, Economic Development Administrator
RE: REQUEST TO APPROVE AGREEMENT WITH LOS
ANGELES COUNTY FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF $400,000
TO THE CITY OF ARCADIA FOR DOWNTOWN 2000
STORM DRAIN COSTS, AND TRANSFER OF THESE FUNDS
TO THE ARCADIA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
SUMMARY
The County of Los Angeles has informed the City of Arcadia that they will contribute
$400,000 toward the estimated $900,000 cost of a new Downtown 2000 storm drain
system on Huntington Drive and First Avenue. Staff recommends approval of the
attached agreement with the County, and, since the Redevelopment Agency is paying
the entire cost for the storm drain system, transfer of this money to the Agency.
DISCUSSION
Based upon the recommendation of the City's engineering Consultant, ASL Consulting
Engineers, Inc., a new storm drain system (catch basins, laterals, junction boxes, pipe)
for the Santa Anita Avenue/First AvenueM/heeler Avenue/Huntington Drive area was
designed by ASL and approved by both the City and the County Public Works
Departments. This system included a significant outlet storm drain pipe on Huntington
Drive from San Rafael Road to the Arcadia Wash by City Hall.
This work was included in the plans and specifications, and bid as part of the overall
Downtown 2000 Streetscape and Public Infrastructure Project. Sully-Miller who was
low bidder estimated the total costs at approximately $632,000 (this does not include
engineering design, survey and staking, construction administration, and inspection).
Staff requested that the County reimburse to the City some of the cost of the new
downtown storm drain since it was to be part of the County's regional system.
LASER IMAGED
95y
Staff Report
Page Two
October 24, 1995
In July, Supervisor Antonovich responded favorably on behalf of the County of Los
Angeles. The attached agreement summarizes the County's contribution of $400,000
to the project upon submittal of an invoice therefor.
The storm drain project was started by Sully-Miller and has been completed on the
northside of Huntington Drive by the City's emergency contractor, Sequel Construction.
The balance of the work on the southside of Huntington and south First Avenue will be
completed in the future.
Ultimately upon full completion and inspection of all work, the County will accept the
project as part of the County's flood control system. The Redevelopment Agency is
reimbursing the City for its share of the Downtown 2000 Streetscape project and 100%
of the storm drain system work is being paid by Agency funds. It is appropriate then
upon receipt of the County's funds that the City transfer the money to the Agency to
defray part of the storm drain cost.
The City Attorney has reviewed the attached Agreement and finds it acceptable as to
form.
FISCAL IMPACT
Revenue of$400,000 from the County would be passed through the City to the
Redevelopment Agency as reimbursement for Agency costs.
RECOMMENDATION
1. That the City Council authorize the Mayor to execute the attached Agreement,
subject to any minor modifications approved as to form by the City Attorney, and
2. Authorize the City Manager to accept the County's payment to the City and to
transfer$400,000 to the Redevelopment Agency for the Downtown 2000
Streetscape project as reimbursement for Agency costs.
Approved: f�I
William R. Kelly, City Manager
Attachment
•
A Q R E E M E N I
THIS AGREEMENT by and between the COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, a
political subdivision of the State of California, hereinafter
referred to as "COUNTY, " acting on behalf of the Los Angeles
County Flood Control District, a body corporate and. politic; and
the CITY OF ARCADIA, a political subdivision in the County. of
Los Angeles, hereinafter referred to as "CITY. "
KITNEEEEili
WHEREAS, COUNTY is administering all matters for the •
Los Angeles County Flood Control District pursuant to
Section 56-3/4 of the COUNTY'S Charter and in accordance with an
Agreement approved on December 26, 1984, between COUNTY and the
Los. Angeles County Flood Control District; and
WHEREAS, CITY is proposing a storm drain project along
Huntington Drive as part of a Redevelopment project, which work
is hereinafter referred to as "PROJECT" ; and
WHEREAS, PROJECT is entirely within the jurisdictional
limits of the CITY; 'and
WHEREAS, PROJECT is in the general interest of CITY and
COUNTY; and
11111
-2-
WHEREAS, CITY proposes to prepare plans, specifications,
cost estimates, and administer the construction contract for
PROJECT at CITY' S cost; and
WHEREAS; in order to expedite the construction of PROJECT,
COUNTY is willing to contribute a fixed sum of four hundred
thousand dollars ($400, 000) toward the construction contract cost
of PROJECT; and
WHEREAS, CITY proposes to finance the remaining costs to
construct PROJECT in excess of' COUNTY'S fixed contribution.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual benefits to
be derived by CITY and COUNTY and of the promises herein
contained, it is hereby agreed as follows:
(1) COUNTY AGREES:
a. To deposit with CITY four hundred thousand dollars
($400, 000) upon execution of this Agreement and within
thirty (30) days of receipt of the invoice thereof.
(2) CITY AGREES:
a. To prepare plans and specifications, and to administer
the construction contract for PROJECT at CITY'S cost.
--' — _ –
.�... ..� -7�7f■ - •.. nu�R11T PIIf nIoi�
-3 -
b . To advertise PROJECT for construction bids, to award
and to administer the construction contract , to do all
things necessary to complete PROJECT in accordance with
said plans and specifications .
c . To finance construction contract cost of PROJECT in
excess of COUNTY' S fixed contribution.
d. Upon completion of construction, to operate and
maintain PROJECT until PROJECT is accepted for transfer
to COUNTY.
e . To furnish COUNTY, within one hundred and twenty (120)
calendar days after the completion of PROJECT, a final
accounting of the construction contract costs of
PROJECT, including an itemization of actual unit costs
and actual quantities for project . If construction
contract cost of PROJECT is less than COUNTY' S fixed
contribution, CITY shall within sixty (60) days of
final accounting refund to COUNTY the difference
between construction contract cost of PROJECT and
COUNTY' S deposit .
-4 -
(3 ) IT IS MUTUALLY UNDERSTOOD AND AGREED AS FOLLOWS :
a . That the construction contract costs of PROJECT, as
referred to in this Agreement, shall consist of the
total of all payments to the construction contractor
for PROJECT. The construction contract cost of PROJECT
shall not include the cost of preliminary engineering,
contract administration, construction inspection and
engineering, materials testing, construction survey and
engineering for utility relocation.
b. That COUNTY authorizes CITY to use the deposits made in
Section (1) , paragraph a . , at its discretion to pay its
contractor for constructing PROJECT.
c . That CITY and COUNTY shall have no financial obligation
to each other under this Agreement except as herein
expressly provided.
d. That this Agreement can be amended or terminated by
mutual written consent of both CITY and COUNTY.
e . Neither COUNTY nor any officer or employee of COUNTY
shall be responsible for any damage or liability
occurring by reason of any acts or omissions on the
part of CITY under or in connection with any work,
authority or jurisdiction delegated to CITY under this
-5-
Agreement . It is also understood and agreed that ,
pursuant tc Government Code, Section 895 . 4 , CITY shall
fully indemnify, defend and hold COUNTY harmless from
any liability imposed for injury (as defined by
Government Code, Section 810 . 8) occurring by reason of
any acts or omissions on the part of CITY under or in
connection with any work, authority or jurisdiction
delegated to CITY under this Agreement .
f . Neither CITY nor any officer or employee of CITY shall
be responsible for any damage or liability occurring by
reason of any acts or omissions on the part of COUNTY
under or in connection with any work, authority or
jurisdiction delegated to COUNTY under this Agreement .
It is also understood and agreed that, pursuant to
Government Code, Section 895 .4 , COUNTY shall fully
indemnify, defend and hold CITY harmless from any
liability imposed for injury (as defined by Government
Code, Section 810 . 8) occurring by reason of any acts or
omissions on the part of COUNTY under or in connection •
with any work, authority or jurisdiction delegated to
COUNTY under this Agreement .
-6-
g . That the provisions of any previous Assumption of
Liability Agreement heretofore entered into between the
parties hereto are inapplicable to this Agreement .
e.�I11•111111 11�1�11 : 11E111 I II
• fir•
•
•
-7_
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this
Agreement to be executed by their respective officers, duly
authorized, . by the CITY OF ARCADIA on 1995 and by
the COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES on , 1995 .
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, acting
on behalf of the Los Angeles
County Flood Control District
•
BY
CHAIR, BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
ATTEST:
JOANNE STURGES
Executive Officer-Clerk
of the 13oard of Supervisors
BY •
DEPUTY
APPROVED AS TO FORM APPROVED AS TO FORM
DE WITT W. CLINTON 1 ' 1 f, 1995
County Counsel City Attorney •
BY BY t ! r7-
DEPUTY
ATTEST: CITY OF ARCADIA •
BY 'CITY�CLE ( B• /� : Jr MAYOR'
•
-- - --•--- ----