Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
April 7, 1998
4% _ F.,�. INVOCATION Arcadia City Council and Redevelopment Agency Meeting April 7, 1998 7:00 p.m. Council Chamber ACTION Rev.Gene Wallace, Episcopal Church of the Transfiguration PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE James Dale, Director of Administrative Services ROLL CALL: Council Members Chang, Kovacic, Kuhn, Young and Harbicht All Present 1. PRESENTATION to outgoing Chamber of Commerce President and CEO, Jana Costuma. 2. PRESENTATION from Expansion Management Magazine. 3. SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION FROM STAFF REGARDING AGENDA ITEMS. 4. QUESTIONS FROM CITY COUNCIUREDEVELOPMENT AGENCY REGARDING AGENDA ITEMS., MOTION: Read all Ordinances and Resolutions by title only and waive reading in full. 5. PUBLIC HEARING Gold Metal Award to AUSD None None a. Report and recommendation to approve the renewal of the Cable Continued to 4/21 Television Franchise Agreement with Cablevision of Arcadia /Sierra Madre, Inc. 5 -0 Ordinance No. 2084, An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Arcadia, California, awarding to Cablevision of Arcadia /Sierra Madre, Inc. (DBA TCI Cablevision of Los Angeles County) a seven (7) year non - exclusive franchise with conditional three (3) year extension to construct, own, operate and maintain a cable system within the City of Arcadia, California; setting forth conditions accompanying the granting of said franchise; providing for City regulation and use of the City's Public Rights of Way; providing for other lawful regulation of the cable system; and prescribing procedures and liquidated damages for violation of the ordinance. b. Report and recommendation to amend the CDBG program funding for Pub. Closed p 9 9 Approved 5 -0 Fiscal Year 1998 -1998 adding an additional $58,088.00 from prior year's funds. 1 Public Hearing continued ACTION C. Report and recommendation to allow the Arcadia Chinese Association Pub. Hrg. Closed Approved 5 -0 to conduct bingo games as a fund - raising event on May 2, 1998 at the Community Center. d. Report and recommendation to introduce Ordinance No. 2088, An Pub. Hrg. Closed Intro. Ord. 2088 Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Arcadia, California, amending 5 -0 Section 8130.35 of the Arcadia Municipal Code to reduce sound attenuation standards for hotels and motels from STC -58 to STC -52. 6. TIME RESERVED FOR THOSE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO WISH TO G. Roberson ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL /REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY Wanda Cox D Krynicki (NON- PUBLIC HEARING /FIVE MINUTE TIME LIMIT PER PERSON). G.. .Marshall D. Denne 7. MATTERS FROM ELECTED OFFICIALS City Council Reports /Announcements /Statements /Future Agenda Items RECESS CITY COUNCIL 8. MEETING OF THE ARCADIA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ROLL CALL: Agency Members Chang, Kovacic, Kuhn, Young and Harbicht CONSENT a. Minutes of the March 17, 1998 Regular Meeting. ADJOURN Redevelopment Agency to April 21, 1997 at 7:00 p.m. RECONVENE CITY COUNCIL 9. CONSENT See Minutes Approved 4 -0 . with 1 abstention a. Minutes of the March 17, 1998 Regular Meeting. Approved 4 -0 with 1 abstention b. Report and recommendation to adopt Resolution No. 6039, A Resolution Adopted _5 -O— of the City Council of the City of Arcadia, California, approving the application for Proposition A funds from the County of Los Angeles for rehabilitation of the Civic Center Athletic Field. C Consent continued ACTION C. Report and recommendation to reject the bid submitted for fuel system Approved 5 -0 removal and replacement of the underground storage tank at the Arcadia Police Station and Fire Station # 3. d. Report and recommendation to award a contract in the amount of Approved 5 -0 $39,580.00 to General Pump Company for the rehabilitation of Orange Grove Well #6. e. Report and recommendation to adopt Resolution No. 6044, A Resolution Adopted 5 -0 of the City Council of the City of Arcadia, California, approving program supplement No. M001 to encumber Federal Aid Funds for the pavement rehabilitation of El Monte Avenue from Longley Way to Live Oak Avenue. Report and recommendation to award a contract to E.C. Construction Co. Approved 5 -0 in the amount of $86,478.42 for the rehabilitation of El Monte Avenue from Longley Way to Live Oak Avenue. Federal Aid Project STPL - 5131 (003). 10. CITY MANAGER a. Report and recommendation to introduce Ordinance No.2087, An Introduced -0 Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Arcadia, California, amending Staff to incorp. Section 4912.6.1 of the Arcadia Municipal Code providing for a temporary appeal process special event exception from the City prohibition of posting on public property. b. Report and recommendation to approve a Cost Compensation Approved 5 -0 Agreement with Meditrust /Santa Anita for environmental, land use, fiscal and legal processing; and to authorize consultant agreements regarding a Meditrust /Santa Anita application. Report and recommendation to adopt Resolution No. 6043, A Resolution Adopted 5 -0 of the City Council of the City of Arcadia, California, approving a Utilities Conversion Plan prioritizing potential projects for implementation of an active undergrounding program. Report and recommendation to authorize staff to fill the positions of: Public Approved 5 -0 Works Foreman, Equipment Operators (2), and other possible vacancies in the Maintenance Services Department, 11. CLOSED SESSION - Closed Session canceled Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6 to confer with City labor negotiators Dan Cassidy and William Kelly regarding Teamsters Local 911, AFSCME Local 2264, AFFA, APOA, Management and non - represented Employees. ADJOURN City Council to April 21, 1998 at 7:00 p.m. Adjournment at 9:53 p.m. • n � � jj Y' / f °4 °R•T= STAFF REPORT OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER DATE: APRIL 7, 1998 TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: WILLIAM R. KELLY, CITY MANAGER BY: LINDA GARCIA ADMINISTRATIVE COORDINATOR 621- SUBJECT: RECOMMENDATION TO INTRODUCE ORDINANCE NO. 2087 AMENDING SECTION 4912.6.1 OF THE ARCADIA MUNICIPAL CODE PROVIDING FOR ATEMPORARY SPECIAL EVENT EXCEPTION FROM THE CITY PROHIBITION OF POSTING ON PUBLIC PROPERTY SUMMARY The California Arboretum Foundation has asked the City to consider revising the regulations associated with the display of banners on City light poles. Specifically, they would like to see the approval process made more convenient and faster for applicants. Staff has reviewed their request and recommends that the City Council introduce Ordinance No. 2087 which amends the Municipal Code to allow staff (rather than the City Council) to approve requests to install banners on public property. BACKGROUND Sections 4912.6 and 4912.6.1 of the Arcadia Municipal Code authorize an exception to the prohibition of posting on public property to allow for the temporary posting of signs and banners for special events. The City Council may grant an exception for special events provided they meet the following general criteria: • The signs and banners commemorate a singular event of a nature that merits special consideration because of its unique character, public interest or other similar factors. • The applicant pays all applicable permit and inspection fees and shall submit, in advance, information about the size, location, materials, color and number of proposed signs /banners. • The applicant provides insurance and hold harmless protection to the City and submits an installation and removal plan. As a point of reference, the City receives approximately one to three requests per year for banner installations of this type. LASER IMAGED 05 Mayor and City Council April 7, 1998 Page 2 DISCUSSION M For several years, the California Arboretum Foundation has used temporary banners as a means to promote the annual Garden Show. These banners are mounted on City light poles. Because of sponsor involvement with the Garden Show and certain other factors, every year there is a relatively short period of time between when the art for the banners is finalized and the date the banners need to be installed. As a consequence, the Foundation has asked the City (both verbally and with the attached letter) to expedite the permit approval process by granting them a "blanket" permit to install Garden Show banners each year. Currently, the Municipal Code does not authorize blanket permits of this type, nor does staff recommend changing the Code to allow for such. However, it is possible to accommodate the Foundation's needs, and simplify the process, by revising the Municipal Code to allow staff to approve banner applications rather than having to take each request to the City Council for approval. This would shorten the processing time considerably and yet would still provide for City review of the specific elements of each request. If the City Council adopts Ordinance No. 2087, Section 4912.6.1 of the Municipal Code will be revised to allow the City Manager or his designee, rather than the City Council, approve requests for a temporary special event exception from the prohibition of posting on public property. The change in who grants the approval is the only revision to the Code; all other criteria to allow the posting of banners will remain in effect. Moreover, Ordinance No. 2087 does not affect the system for processing City holiday banners, the allowance of signs on the Huntington Drive Pedestrian Bridge, or the over - the- street banners that are currently allowed pursuant to business license regulations. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council introduce Ordinance No. 2087 amending Section 4912.6.1 of the Arcadia Municipal Code providing for a temporary special event exception from the City prohibition of posting on public property and direct staff to place the Ordinance on the May 5, 1998 City Council meeting agenda for adoption. Attachment: Ordinance No. 2087 Copy of Sections 4912.6 and 4912.6.1 of the Arcadia Municipal Code Letter from the California Arboretum Foundation '4a�TSp STAFF REPORT MAINTENANCE SERVICES DEPARTMENT April 7, 1998 TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: PAT MALLOY, MAINTENANCE SERVICES DIRECTOR J CAROL PRZYBYCIEN, HUMAN RESOURCES MANAGER PREPARED BY: BRYAN E. BOESKIN, MANAGEMENT AN YST�C� SUBJECT: REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION TO AUTHORIZE STAFF TO FILL THE POSITIONS OF: PUBLIC WORKS FOREMAN, EQUIPMENT OPERATORS (2), AND OTHER POSSIBLE VACANCIES IN THE MAINTENANCE SERVICES DEPARTMENT RMOV] The Maintenance Services Department is requesting authorization to fill a Public Works Foreman- Sewer Unit position and two (2) Equipment Operator positions. Staff is also requesting that the City Council authorize the Maintenance Services Director to fill vacancies that may result from possible promotions. All positions discussed are fully funded through appropriations in the 1997/98 Operating Budget. The Public Works Foreman position is wholly funded through the Sewer Enterprise Fund. iY For the last four years, the Maintenance Service Department has continued to restructure and reorganize to maintain optimum levels of service while responding to increasingly rigorous fiscal constraints. The Department has reduced its staffing level from 73 full -time employees (FTE) in 1994 to the present level of 55 FIE (see attached organizational chart). The loss of 18 employees in a span of four years represents a 25 percent reduction in the original workforce. Beyond permanent reductions in staffing, the Department has attempted to further reduce operational costs by consolidation of various positions and leaving existing positions vacant for an extended time to monitor whether the position is in fact critical to department operations. Based on staffs ongoing evaluation of department output and efficiency, it has been determined that the current work force has reached a critical level. Any further reductions will result in diminishing returns with respect to operational productivity and level of service provided to the community. Staff has concluded that leaving positions within the department vacant results in constant shuffling of the remaining employees to perform duties and functions that they may not be completely familiar with. It further necessitates that affected employees neglect some of the 0 MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL April 7, 1998 PAGE 2 duties of their own position in order to fulfill critical tasks associated with vacant positions. The net result of these factors is an overall decrease in department productivity and employee morale. In addition to positions that have been vacant for an extended time, the Department has also experienced several other position vacancies resulting from employee retirement and pending internal promotions. Staff is requesting consideration and City Council approval of each item listed below. Current job descriptions for each position discussed are attached. 1) Fill Public Works Foreman - Sewer Unit (1) Vacancy This position was vacated when the incumbent requested to voluntarily step down to the position of Equipment Operator. This position is responsible for the first line supervision of the Sewer Unit. The Foreman position is directly accountable for establishing technical procedures, work standards and field level quality control of sewer maintenance functions. This position has been vacant for approximately four (4) months. Staff is proposing to fill this position through an internal/promotional recruitment process. 2) Fill Equipment Operator (2) Vacancies The Equipment Operator -Sewer Unit position was recently vacated through internal promotion of the incumbent to Building Maintenance Foreman. The second position in the Grounds Maintenance Unit was recently vacated through retirement. These positions are responsible for the operation of small, medium and heavy maintenance equipment such as; tractors, graders, skiploaders, backhoes and a variety of hand -held power tools. This position also is required to perform heavy and semi - skilled construction and day -to -day maintenance tasks associated with the City's infrastructure complex. Staff is proposing to fill both of these positions through an internal/ promotional recruitment process. 3) Provide Authorization to Fill Vacancies if Filled by Internal Promotions Due to the fact that several current and pending vacancies are classes in a promotional series, each time a higher position is filled internally a subordinate position is vacated. Staff is anticipating that positions may be vacated as a result of two promotional opportunities; Assistant Pump Mechanic (previously approved by the City Council) and the Public Works Foreman-Sewer Unit position noted in Item 1. Staff is requesting that the Maintenance Services Director be authorized to fill these two possible vacancies should they occur. It is proposed that the Director's authority will only be extended to include these two positions which meet the following criteria: 1) the positions will be filled through internal recruitment; 2) the positions will not negatively impact the Department's General Fund Expenditures; and 3) the positions will not result in changes to the existing job descriptions or the Department's organizational structure. r � `4110 MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL April 7,1998 PAGE 3 Funds for all proposed position changes have been appropriated in the 1997/98 Operating Budget. The Public Works Foreman-Sewer Unit position is funded wholly through the Sewer Enterprise Fund and will have no fiscal impact on General Fund Expenditures. It is recommended that the City Council authorize staff to fill the positions of: Public Works Foreman-Sewer Unit, two (2) Equipment Operators,and authorize the Maintenance Services Director to fill two (2) other pending vacancies in the Maintenance Services Department. PM:BB:ds Attachments APPROVED. William R. Kelly, City Manager CITY OF ARCADIA APPROVED BY pERSONNEL BOARD 8/11/66 APPROVED BY Y COUNCIL 9/06/66 AMENDED BY PERSONNEL BOARD 9/14/89 AMENDED BY CITY COUNCIL 1/16/90 PUBLIC WORKS FOREMAN nonrw�rmTnwi Under general supervision, directs and assists an assigned crew in any of the following Public Works assignments: Paving of utility cuts, resurfacing of streets, patching streets and earth moving; Building orms ' g pouring and finishing concrete for curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streets and other structures; Maintaining and repairing sewers, clearing sewer and storm drain stoppages; trimming, shaping and caring for city trees, including basic tree surgery; Street cleaning and maintenance; Layout and painting of traffic regulatory and directional pavement markings and street signs; Maintenance of grounds, parks and parkways. RESPONSIBILITIES Directs and assists a crew of unskilled, semi - skilled and skilled workers in carrying out Public Works assignments. EXAMPLES OF DUTIES To direct and assist in the work of: A patch crew, directing the proper operation of truck, compressor, crack filling unit, air tools and rollers; assigns work of back filling, compacting, pouring and rolling surface in patching holes in the street, and preparation of streets for rehabilitation; A cement crew which may chop out tree roots, pour cement to install, repair or replace concrete structures such as sidewalks, curbs and gutters, sewers and street components; break out old concrete, set forms; tie reinforcing rod;, build up sewer manhole frames by cement work; A sewer crew engaged in clearing sewer and storm drain stoppages, using sewer jet equipment, manual sewer rods or motor with steel rods possibly requiring digging to main and breaking it to clear obstruction, also using vaporooting foam equipment; A tree crew involved in trimming, removing, maintaining and inspecting all types of trees, using and training workers in the use of Hi- Rangers, climbing gear, rigging and other related equipment; A street cleaning crew involved in cleaning City streets and public parking areas; required to run Butler loader, run sweeper when required by supervisor in absence of operator and other sweeping as required; CLTY OF ARCADIA VOW .TnR gTIMMARV APPROVED BY P- `nNNEL BOARD 10/77 APPROVED BY C*O COUNCIL 11/77 AMENDED BY PERSONNEL BOARD 9/14/89 AMENDED BY CITY COUNCIL 1/16/90 EQUIPMENT OPERATOR Under general supervision, performs work in construction, maintenance, repair, modification and replacement of Public Works facilities; performs related work as assigned; may be required to supervise a crew in the absence of a Foreman. EXAMPLES OF DUTIES 1 General Services Division - Operates and makes minor adjustments and emergency repairs to power- driven equipment such as tractors, rollers, trucks, shovels, graders, skiploaders, back hoes, and other equipment as required; performs heavy and semi - skilled construction, maintenance and labor work when the nature of the job does not require constant operation of the equipment; assists in resurfacing, oiling and patching roads, removing trees, brush and undergrowth from right -of -way, cleaning ditches and other street repair and maintenance, and related heavy work; may be required to perform the duties of a sweeper operator; washes and cleans equipment; advises supervisor on operating conditions, reporting need for mechanical adjustment and repair; may keep simple records of mileage and work performed. Water Division - Operates pick -up trucks, dump trucks, back hoes, hydro- hammers, crane trucks, skiploaders, heavy and light tapping machines, boring machines, jackhammers and various power tools, both portable and bench - mounted; maintains and repairs tools and equipment; cuts, threads and assembles copper pipe installations; cuts, caulks or otherwise assembles ductile iron water mains, fittings, and appurtenances; cuts, welds and assembles steel pipe installations; cuts, welds, brazes or otherwise fabricates special pipe fittings, meter box lids or special tools; installs, modifies and repairs pumping plant and well piping and appurtenances; constructs, maintains and repairs concrete block, concrete or wooden structures; cleans and paints buildings, reservoirs and other structures; installs, maintains and repairs fences and gates. Overtime Assignments /Standby Duty: The purveyance of water is a vital service to the community and as such requires the availability of Division personnel at all times. Consequently, employees will be required to respond to emergency calls, accept periodic overtime assignments and perform any and all duties deemed necessary by the Division. DESIRABLE QUALIFICATIONS Training and Experience Two years of experience in public works construction and maintenance, or water and gas pipeline construction, involving operation of heavy power- driven equipment. Possession of a valid California Motor Vehicle Operator's Licenses Class C and Class B is required. Equipment Operator in Water Division must possess State of California Department of Health Water Treatment Operator's Certificate - Grade I or higher. Knowledge and Abilities Knowledge of the operation and basic maintenance of power- driven equipment used in Public Works; ability to read, write and understand directions; ability to operate and maintain power- driven equipment used in Public works; ability to adjust equipment for operation; and ability to establish and maintain effective working relationships with other employees and the public. MAINTENANCE SERVICES DEPARTMENT 61 COUNT OF PERSONNEL (55 FULL TIME EMPLOYEES) (6 PART TIME EMPLOYEES) ENMTEN[NCd EEI1VItFa ATE PAT MALLJW NCIETMVJMINRMNNX taMM�aEeMFWYN NIINC[f pEMlIMNV wvNlfOEtRN NEW IERMEI Wf" FEID EER[ICEE QVMid 7/•EME01'� N.E7lR0'7EB mullfs NCO f[enw NEW NIMCIf ww eaty l[v! It.EMIT[! A rarlam nuN11VElINR1a1F NC�EIry -lNtIK 1[11 lIfNt[t OI(IC MIQCOM 1[RTIII(MIN1E OM1111fg1 IUCNLL lTIIMMM MR ww OM:[ER a NFW IMCNROW NIIT IMNECtOI 11- EaRtatB rn f•E1Il01EH if•MlpFE9 ttRiM \OY M01YY -F Ov[" - 1r101Eq 1Q1f1 ftal 1101111 [�OIIM MR fC11A H(�nNO alOUV[lfM N tMNCI ltnW INO11l1w1lEtIW Wneuvcawcs\q a.[aR� pt1�1101 �[ OOUt11Q1 NI1111111 NML OWnnNM IEIMT UFAMt LL alNrlllw t 1"110•[" t•FaROKf) f -EYIlO ••Ea/lTE9 MrM[Ma11K 1ltNOT.It wm It I-E— 'MR1l1MR aEffJWEC [OWlNTO IOI [OUIMMM O(Ulllal EOM(NENI O(Ew1q 011 EOrMEA OEMTAq RNNCif lCnO1 WI ft• —MLJ [I(MEENII1n1[ MND[CMT91 JOIIaIMNI lMWOtlllfl MTMMMIOQ Ill atW lalil l•l/VIEI — Emm—IM 1lIVCN1111 11111 [aowE 1. [rlonn woErwml -M 1101161P MNMRNI[C[TWI11g1 !M[K (MTnY[CIEMCK IMI(IINi AtMITaNt [MOIN[EFI EMY[Nl t[E1/110111 "IlMM[tl JC ativt WHIM N1MCQ tert[lN1[NI[r 01111 R•Ta"Wft JMt•E rluM O>A WCNIT MI lnE MYE1 IIaN1 O1MElIM NRNWCE NUIII[11 TTalYF" OOII� avtMr NNIIa[ am u" O +K Nt KV �A MANN T0.1IMOIM rIM MOWI (i IIE[11011M !10110 EIOUEI P t\I 11•rRNNIT) lW 1TaMT [MOIM[nl IWlpNO [r1tNEM COMMKIt PTR9t OM MfO NRN111C1 Y101R1 aMMnNtrr1 NM[CII ECnon w•w Tlol.IaN NFMtT IalNOo IIlN1 •- taNao.tEa •- [raoK[t rNET[IM cONn1Kl NMCFf EttlNT E �NO RIMNtE pnaMM rarrw vaeW1• vKw1 1IONEREt[1 CPIMTIWI NIMCEI 1A (En1MNONNt prta(MI E Y[CNV1C Al RcplelMcwl wc-, o [1NR "HEIR 1Ut11 Ex. 1aMFT PQ ' let 1IC tuw W.XkI E wM141 N110MOlt1tllf[ tM l0T 110!11 llvNl H—clNK o1MaM IaIMI ooatKll 11[[MI0FEE 17.1"1 1U111l Et11 OFq OV Nre em e-5 ass n �wr✓ WI' '`COA ►OMT•' ° STAFF REPORT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT April 7, 1998 TO: Mayor and Members of City Council FROM: Don Penman, Deputy City Manager /Development Services Director W By: Donna Butler, Community Development AdministratoraO SUBJECT: Request Approval for a Bingo Permit for the Arcadia Chinese Association SUMMARY On March 18, the City received an application from the Arcadia Chinese Association to conduct bingo games as a fund raising event for their organization. Bingo would be limited to not more than three (3) events per year. The first event will be held on May 2 at their annual Fund Raising Dinner Party to be held at the Arcadia Community Center. There are no dates for future events. The Development Services Department is recommending approval of this application. DISCUSSION Section 4216 et. al. of the Arcadia Municipal Code establishes the requirements for the application and conduct of bingo games by charitable organizations. Per Section 4216.3.3, the City Council must approve all applications for bingo game activities by charitable organizations and must set a public hearing on the application within 45 days from the date of filing (Section 4216.2.7.1). The Arcadia Chinese Association has been in existence in Arcadia for 14 years. It is a non - profit organization that holds meetings once a month at the Arcadia Chamber of Commerce. Their annual fund raising dinner party will be held at the Arcadia Community Center. Their attached application along with the required information meets all the requirements as set forth in the Municipal Code, including the $150 filing fee. LASER IMAGED CcrpU4- 7bingo CC Report — Bingo April 7, 1998 Page 1 O? 17: c , v6' The Code allows a maximum of one (1) fund raising event per week; the applicant has requested only one specific date, May 2, but would like the option to conduct two (2) additional fund raising events during the year. In order to avoid the additional filing fee of $159, the public hearing notice includes notice for up to three (3) "charitable fund raising bingo' events per year. ACTION The Development Services Department recommends that the City Council open the public hearing to receive testimony and then, if appropriate based upon public testimony and the application, approve the request to hold Bingo as a fundraiser for the Arcadia Chinese Association and allow up to three (3) events per year. Attachments: Bingo Application Approved by: William H. Kelly, City Manager Capt/4- 7bingo CC Report — Bingo April 7, 1998 Page 2 CITY OF ARCADIA APPLICATION TO CONDUCT BINGO GAMES (Municipal Code Section 4216) DATE j (—q q DATE RECEIVED BY CITY Name of organization: Address of organization: _ _ %�. y . ID oZ d,-Lc.e, -. -M r La- Cf 10 07 Address of meeting location: Ct,It�� � Cc)- �a-c-c� Date of last meeting held: P-46 Iq V Number of years meeting have been held in Arcadia: Submit membership list and meeting program or agenda with applicati n.* '! Name of person submitting application: Title in organization: Attach to the application a letter of Good Standing from the Exemption Division of the Franchise Tax Board showing exemption under Section 23701d for the above named organization.* *Bona fide senior citizen organizations shall be exempt from this requirement unless otherwise required by the City Council. Attach written statement describing organization, membership and purpose. If Bingo is to be conducted for fund raising purposes attach a statement of the charitable work of the organization. If Bingo is played for recreation purposes attach a signed statement to this effect. _ PROPOSED BINGO GAMES: Location where Bingo Games will be held: ,-, �? If there is a separate room where bingo games will be held please indicate the location of the room and the occupancy capacity. written permission that the organization has authorization from the owner or leaser of the property to conduct Bingo Games. Inspections by the Fire Department an"' Building Department will be conducted by the City. n En Dates and time Bingo Games will be held: a If occasional Bingo Games are proposed ive approximate number of times during a calendar year. ( (Bingo Games may not be held more than once a week and within forty -five days of the acceptance of the application for filing.) No intoxicating liquors or beverages are to be sold, given away, dispensed, consumed or permitted in the room'in which bingo is to be played. This application will be considered by the City Council only after a full investigation and report have been made by the City of Police, Fire Chief and Building Official. All Bingo Games will be conducted within all the laws of the State and regulations of the City applicable thereto, any violation of any of the Bingo regulations shall render any license therefor subject to immediate suspension or revocation. The applicant has read and received a copy of the Arcadia Municipal Code Sections 4216.1 to 4216.20. Financial statements may be requested by the City Council. The applicant shall not use proceeds from bingo games except for charitable purposes. Filing fee ? /J7, C� This filing fee is not refundable. Do not submit this application unless complete and accompanied by all requested attachments. If the application is submitted by a corporation complete the following on the officers of the organization. President: Name HomePhone HomeAddress Business BusinessAddress BusinessPhone Date of Birth Driver's License # Secretary: Name HomePhone HomeAddress Business BusinessPhone 'too *AO( BusinessAddress Date of Birth Signatures of President: Secretary: Corporate Seal affixed: Driver's License # If organization is an association complete the following information for the Director of this l'as'sociation: Name � /J-a- (- HomePhone (6 ,�� )4 4E- -7 d HomeAddress q 7L c� ����l -c'Z ez � L ( U () 7 - Business D71J BusinessPhone (�Z, ) �Cl 3 - 6 L I BusinessAddress Date of Birth Driver's License it IU l 4 b /d d-,� Signature of Director: Copy of application sent to: Police Department, date Fire Department, date Building Department, date City Attorney Public Hearing date set. by City Council ��.. - 4�D NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE ARCADIA CITY COUNCIL NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a PUBLIC HEARING will be held by and before the ARCAIDA CITY COUNCIL to determine whether or not the following Permit should be approved, conditionally approved or denied. APPLICATION: Business License Permit 98 -001 APPLICANT: Arcadia Chinese Association REQUEST: Arcadia Chinese Association is requesting a permit from the City of Arcadia to hold Bingo as a fundraiser for their organization. The Bingo games would be held at regular fund raising events conducted by the organization. Bingo would be limited to three events per year. DOCUMENT: The application may be reviewed in the Community Development Division at the Arcadia City Hall through April 7, 1998. DATE AND HOUR OF HEARING: TUESDAY, APRIL 7, 1998 AT 7:00 PM PLACE OF HEARING: Arcadia City Hall council Chambers 240 W. Huntington Dr., Arcadia, California Persons wishing to comment on the submitted application may do so at the public hearing or in writing to the Community Development division prior to the April 7, 1998 meeting. For further information regarding this request, please contact Becky Pike, Business License Officer at (626) 574 -5430, 240 W. Huntington Dr., Arcadia, Monday through Thursday between 7:30 AM and 4:30 PM. Hall w,�ll be CLOSED Friday, March 27, 1998. e D. Alford City Clerk Date Published: March 26, 1998 Date: March 19, 1998 f�C0RP�EAtf�, c STAFF REPORT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT April 7, 1998 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: 6(Don Penman, Deputy City Manager/ Development Services Director 40,,-C. Stephen Bucknam Jr. City Engineer .Prepared By: Tim Kelleher, Senior Engineering Aide SUBJECT: REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION TO ADOPT RESOLUTION No. 6043 APPROVING A UTILITIES CONVERSION PLAN PRIORITIZING POTENTIAL PROJECTS FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF AN ACTIVE UNDERGROUNDING PROGRAM Summary It is recommended that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 6043 approving a Utilities Conversion Plan. The Utilities Conversion Plan prioritizes potential projects eligible to have existing overhead utilities converted to underground facilities. Underground projects will be funded by Southern California Edison Rule 20 funds. Background On September 19, 1968 the Public Utilities Commission ruled that public electric utility companies must budget funds to convert their existing overhead facilities to underground facilities. The Public Utility Commissions' goal was to significantly reduce overhead cables and equipment for aesthetic and safety purposes. The funds are allocated annually to the cities and counties in proportion to the number of electric customers. The funds are eligible for expenditure at the discretion of the City Council provided certain criteria are met. A city or county's annual allocation is allowed to accumulate for a reasonable period of time, however are subject to reallocation elsewhere if that city or county has no active undergrounding program. In Arcadia, past undergound projects have included sections of Live Oak Avenue, Huntington Drive, Wheeler Avenue, Campus Drive, Santa Clara Street, Baldwin Avenue, and Second Avenue. The latest project completed was Second Avenue in 1992. Currently the City's annual allocation is $302,000. Since 1992 the City has accumulated $1,372,000 Rule 20 funds. These funds are currently available for an undergounding project. Mayor and Council April 7, 1998 Page 2 Recently Edison has indicated there is concern that the City's existing Rule 20 funds could be reallocated to another entity that has an active underground program. Edison has also indicated concerns about discontinuation of future funding due to deregulation. However Edison has also indicated that the City's establishment of an active underground program will help preserve the City's accumulated funds as well as future annual allocations. Discussion This past December, 1997, staff established the Underground Utility Coordination Committee. The committee consists of utility company and City representatives. The committee was formed to coordinate underground projects and related issues. As a result of staff's concern regarding the preservation of Rule 20 funds the committee and staff are recommending a Utilities Conversion Plan. A Utility Conversion Plan is a short-range plan prioritizing projects. The plan also gives cost estimates and construction dates. A Utilities Conversion Plan is one method of establishing an active underground program. The Utilities Conversion Plan submitted for Council's review and approval is recommended due to its' impact, timing and funding. The timing between projects matches the time needed to accumulate adequate funds to complete the projects. Also, the time between projects provides just enough lead -time for the utility companies to budget for projects and prepare plans. The projects prioritized are either of significant economic importance to the City or have a high density of overhead facilities. The proposed plan would encumber the City's Rule 20 funds into the year 2004. Maps of the proposed project areas are attached for reference. Fiscal Impact Adoption of the resolution will have no fiscal impact to the City. Southern California Edison Company Rule 20 A funds primarily provides the funds for individual underground projects. However, individual electric meter conversions are not eligible for Rule 20 A funds. For projects in the Redevelopment Project Area, Agency funds could be used to finance this expense. The highest priority project on the list is in the Project area, though use of Agency funds for this purpose can be addressed at the time the specific project is to be considered by Council. Mayor and City Council April 7, 1998 Page 3 Recommendation It is recommended that Council adopt Resolution No. 6043 approving the Utilities Conversion Plan and authorize staff to proceed with the first project. Approved Sy: --im" William R. Kelly City Manager Attachments: Project Area Maps Resolution No. 6043 Utilities Conversion Plan Exhibit' A' ENGINEERING DIVISION DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT Underground Utility District Project 1 Santa Anita Ave between Huntington Drive and Colorado Blvd. Santa Clara St. Between Huntington Dr. and Santa Anita Ave. Morlan Place between Huntingtion Dr. and Santa Anita Ave. 0 U -J H AVET� W -J U W AV z z N f Al I AVE NEWMAIN z 8100( o BLVD ICOLORADO U CJ SAFITA (Y D S 0 DR. U S T W z ST D < V1 Y) C) —5 ST SANTA /X, 0, 500' U) SAN P FL L AV L�-�—AL—E -1 LL WHEELER HuZNG HUNTINGTON , � 77 T =Ot, J 0 F A�—L—TA A E== ST /// / FB =Or I I T=,A F----=J F1 Legend Proposed Underground Utility 4A V ENGINEERING DIVISION DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT Underground Utility District I Project 2 First AvellUe between Alley north of Foothill Blvd. and Floral Ave. ISM s 0 C) AVff- 0 2 z 0 11 I'j- -I w LH 0 z L_ > <( w < 1. > 0 < z OBE_ 0 SYC A A Z Z 0 500'w 0 1 z _j u Z BLVD 131-VI) _F I I_ -_ i___ -- i_ -- - AVE F r-I.CMA AVF W j LFU!21 RAL AVE AVE 1-FI-ORAI f - -- _ S FORIES] AVE- Z (S) 11111 -F.? 0 AVE [EOREST � __AVE Cl —61 is z 0 0 A r AV 'A [--171 111 J AVEN LAVI_ V) z z W 0Q z W i z I IIAFJW, A�l I AVE IlFWM-41 z < V) 0 n-) r Legend # Proposed Underground Utility ENGINEERING DIVISION DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT f Underground Utility it District ���� g Y Project 3 Second Avenue between Huntington Drive and Duarte Road � P 11 WHEELER AV a[H UIJTIN TON I ALTA S BONITA S DIAMOND lL� I FAIJO ST ILE IJOA 0 U W A V) V Q ST LL ROAD DUARTE R GREEN Legend Proposed Underground Utility VSS \ HUNTINGTON \\ JfT.JL T N H F A 7 W r R T 11 D(r 0� Cam' 00 ❑ ILN O > 40 Q W O' 500' SCALE I LJ i ii P RESOLUTION NO. 6043 AM%, A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA APPROVING A UTILITIES CONVERSION PLAN PRIORITIZING POTENTIAL PROJECTS FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF AN ACTIVE UNDERGROUNDING PROGRAM WHEREAS, the Joint Utilities Conversion". C-6m m ittee consisting of utility company and City representatives has identified and prioritize areas for potential projects to have existing overhead utility lines, poles and overhead structures converted to underground facilities pui76ant to the California Public Utility Commission Rule 20 and WHEREAS said committee has established a Utility Conversion Plan that identifies, prioritizes, estimates constr _.ion costs and target dates for construction of eligible projects to be converted to nderground facilities and WHEREAS adoption of said Utility Conversion Plan confirms the City's resolve to convert existing overhead utilities to underground facilities pursuant to the California Public Utilities Commi ion Decision 73078, Case No. 8209 and WHEREAS adopted Utilities C nversion Plan will be reevaluated annually by " the Committee for updates of cons ruction costs,, /time frame and priority and presented to the Council for adoption. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITA COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY FIND, D TERMCNE AND RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Approves and a cots the said Utility Conversion Plan established by the Joint Underground Ut ity Conversion Committee attached hereto shown as exhibit ' A '. ;, SECTION 2. The City Clerk hall d�rtify to the adoption of this Resolution. Passed, approved and adopted th' 7 Th da* of April 1998. Mayor of the City of Arcadia ATTEST: City Clerk of the City of Arcadia APPROVED AS TO FORM: -)�avf XC&I Michael H. Miller, City Attorney ,s, .WMI, City of Arcadia UTILITIES CONVERSION PLAN The planned conversion of overhead utility distribution to underground corridors has long been a part of the improvement program of this City. In general, priority is assigned to proposed conversion projects within the budgetary limitations of participating agencies and utility companies on the biases of: 1. Conversion in conjunction with a street improvement program. 2. Conversion in conjunction with major public development. 3. Conversion in conjunction with major private development. 4. Conversion in the interests of improved traffic safety, urban environmental quality and general public welfare. The following projects are approved as part of this program for accomplishment in the general order of priority indicated by their ranking. Priority Target Date Cost 1. Santa Anita Ave (Huntington Dr to Colorado BI) Santa Clara St (Huntington Dr to First Ave) Morlan PI (Huntington Dr to Railroad) 2000 $1,823,000 2. First Ave ( Floral St. to Alley N/o Foothill BI) 2001 $265,000 3. Second Ave(Huntington Dr to Duarte Rd) 2004 $1,160,000 ADOPTED BY CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. ON EXHIBIT' A' Proposed Underground Utility Districts for Utility Conversion Plan Uncommited Allocations (As of 12/98) $1,372,000.00 Annual Allocation Budget (1998) $302,000.00 Annual Allocation Budget (1999) $302,000.00 Accumulated Allocations (1st qtr. Of 2000) $1,976,000.00 Proj. No. 1 ( target date 2000) Santa Anita from Huntington Dr to Colorado BI Santa Clara St from Huntington to First Ave Morlan Place from Huntingtom Dr to Santa Anita Ave $1,823,000.00 Balance $153,000.00 Annual Allocated Budget (2000) $302,000.00 Accumulated Allocations(1 st qtr of 2001) $455,000.00 Proj. No. 2 (target date 2001) * First Ave from FloralSt to Alley N/o Foothill $265,000.00 Balance $190,000.00 Annual Allocated Budget (2001) $302,000.00 Annual Allocated Budget (2002) $302,000.00 Annual Allocated Budget (2003) $302,000.00 Accumulated Al locations(l st qtr of 2003) $1,096,000.00 Proj. No. 3 (target date 2004) Second Ave from Huntington Dr to Daurte Rd $1,160,000.00 Balance - $64,000.00 a -7 4d-190 s•► ,+C0_0oRATtO_a STAFF REPORT MAINTENANCE SERVICES DEPARTMENT April 7, 1998 TO: WILLIAM R. KELLY, CITY MANAGER FROM: PAT MALLOY, MAINTENANCE SERVICES DIIRLECTPR P BY: GUY B. JAMES, ASSISTANT ENGINEER v REVIEWED BY: TRACEY L. WILLIAMS, PUR ING OFFI SUBJECT: REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION TO REJECT THE BID SUBMITTED FOR FUEL SYSTEM REMOVAL AND REPLACEMENT OF THE UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANK (UST) AT THE ARCADIA POLICE STATION AND FIRE STATION #3 SUMMARY The California Code of Regulations, Title 23, Division 3, Chapter 16, requires that all single -wall steel underground storage tanks (UST) be either retrofitted, or removed and replaced with approved fuel tanks before December 22, 1998. Failure to comply with the law can result in a fine of not less than $500.00, or no more than $5,000.00 per day for each underground storage tank in violation. The City has been moving forward with compliance, however there are two (2) remaining locations with single wall tanks. The Police Station has three (3) UST's. The Fire Department has two (2) UST's at Fire Station #3. These five tanks are all of single -wall design and require replacement in accordance with the state mandate. Staff solicited seven (7) potential bidders and only one (1) was received for this project on March 24. Staff recommends the rejection of the single bid submitted due to cost considerations and inadequate competition. It is further recommended that staff be directed to rebid the project and return to the City Council with a contract award request following the rebid process. DISCUSSION: This project consists of the removal of the UST's at both the Police Station and Fire Station #3 with the performance of soil remediation measures in the event that contaminated soils are encountered. A single twenty- thousand (20,000) gallon UST will be installed at the Police Department and a two - thousand (2,000) gallon above ground storage tank will be installed at the Orange Grove Water Plant for joint use by the Fire Department and the Maintenance Services Department. LASER IMAGED Ann ..., MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL April 7, 1998 Page 2 Notices inviting bids were sent to seven pre- approved contractors that were provided by the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works - Materials Engineering Division. The City received one (1) bid response for the project on March 24, 1998 from A. E. Schmidt Environmental, Inc. of Van Nuys in the amount of $248,680.00. This bid amount was 55 percent above the cost estimate prepared for the City by the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works. Due to an insufficient bid response and because of the high bid received, staff recommends that City Council reject the single bid received and direct staff to rebid the project. Staff was informed by several contractors that the short turn- around time (14 calendar days) for the bid packages was insufficient to secure the appropriate bonding required for this type of project. The contractors indicated that bonding agents typically require seven (7) to ten (10) working days alone, to process the class of bonds necessary for UST removal and replacement projects. Staff proposes to rebid this project with a 28 -day response period. This extended bid time should increase contractors participation in the bidding process by allowing for more than adequate time to secure appropriate bonding for this type of project. FISCAL IMPACT: Funds for this project are provided in the 1997 -1998 Capital Improvement Program Budget in the amount of $163,000.00. The estimated cost breakdown of the project is 86 percent for design and construction, and 14% for inspection and soil sample testing. RECOMMENDATIONS: It is the recommended that the City Council reject the bid submitted by A. E. Schmidt Environmental, Inc., and authorize staff to rebid the underground storage tank removal and replacement project. PM:GBJ:BB:ds Approved: William R. Kelly, City Manager MAINTENANCE SERVICES DEPARTMENT February 18, 1998 TO: June Alford, City Clerk FROM: Kathy uckle Secretary, Division y �'Y, SUBJECT: Notice Inviting Bids Design -Build Fuel Storage Tank Removal and Installation at Fire Station #3 and Police Station - Work Order 97 -526 Please advertise the above referenced project in the newspaper on Wednesday, March 11 and Wednesday, March 18, 1998. kb Enclosure FEB 2 4 7998 QfC �+ CITY OFARCADIA C T FRK �hpOHI.TRn - MEMORANDUM MAINTENANCE SERVICES DEPARTMENT February 18, 1998 TO: June Alford, City Clerk FROM: Kathy uckle Secretary, Division y �'Y, SUBJECT: Notice Inviting Bids Design -Build Fuel Storage Tank Removal and Installation at Fire Station #3 and Police Station - Work Order 97 -526 Please advertise the above referenced project in the newspaper on Wednesday, March 11 and Wednesday, March 18, 1998. kb Enclosure AW -Ink CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA NOTICE INVITING BIDS SEALED BIDS will be received in the Office of the City Clerk, City Hall, City of Arcadia, 240 W. Huntington Dr., Arcadia, California, up to 11:00 a.m. on March 24, 1998, at which time they will be publicly opened and read for the following project: DESIGN -BUILD FUEL STORAGE TANK REMOVAL AND INSTALLATION AT FIRE STATION #3 AND POLICE STATION WORK ORDER 97 -526 The work consists of the removal of underground fuel storage tanks at two (2) facilities, and the installation of a 2,000 gallon above - ground storage tank (AST) at one facility and a 10,000 gallon above - ground storage tank at the other facility. Bid Documents may be obtained from the Arcadia Maintenance Services Department at 11800 Goldring Rd., Arcadia, CA for a non - refundable fee of $25.00 ($30.00 if mailed). Bid submittals must be returned to the attention of the City Clerk's Office, City Hall, City of Arcadia, 240 W. Huntington Dr., Arcadia, California in a sealed envelope. The words "Fuel Storage Tank Removal and Installation at Fire Station #3 and Police Station" must appear on the envelope. Each bid must be accompanied by cashier's check payable to or bidder's bond on the City's bond form in favor of the City of Arcadia by a surety company authorized to do business in the State of California, and subject to approval of the City Attorney, in an amount equal to at least ten percent (100) of the amount of the bid, such guarantee to be forfeited should the bidder to whom the contract is awarded fail to timely execute the contract and deliver the necessary bonds and insurance certificates as specified in the contract documents. The City of Arcadia complies with the American Disabilities Act. If you require a reasonable accommodation to participate in the bid opening, please contact Guy James, Assistant Engineer, at (626) 574 -5456, at least 48 hours prior to the starting time of the meeting. Bidders are hereby notified that pursuant to Sections 1770 et seq. of the Labor Code of the State of California, the City Council of the City of Arcadia incorporates herein by reference the general prevailing rate of per diem wages as determined by the Director of Industrial Relations of the State of California. Copies of the prevailing wages are on file in the office of the Maintenance Services Director and will be made available to any interested party on request. In accordance with the Labor Code, no worker employed upon work under contract to the City shall be paid less than the above - referenced prevailing wage rate. 1 Ank -40*A Any classification omitted therein shall be paiu not less than the prevailing wage scale as established for similar work in the particular area. Sunday and holiday time shall be paid at the wage rates determined by the Director of Industrial Relations. All bids are to be compared on the basis of the Maintenance Services Director's estimate of the quantities of work to be done. No contract will be awarded other than to a contractor licensed in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 9, Division 3, of the Business and Professions Code. All bids shall be based on the content of the contract documents, which consist of the Notice Inviting Bids, Information Required of Bidder, Contract, Special Provisions, Construction Plans, Drawings and Details, the Bid, Technical Specifications, Faithful Performance and Labor and Materials Bonds, which are by this reference incorporated herein. Special attention of prospective bidders is called to the bid requirements and "Special Provisions" which contain the instructions to bidders. Said "Special Provisions" authorize the contractor to substitute securities in lieu of the loo retention in accordance with and pursuant to Government Code Section 4590. The City of Arcadia reserves the right to accept or reject bids, to waive any irregularity and informality in the bids and bid process, and to retain all bids and guarantees for a period of sixty (60) days for examination and comparison, all as specified in the contract documents. CITY OF ARCADIA By: ,.June D. Alfo d City Clerk 2 Dated: .... AVW �-- i /bra,4 '4 +� °�' °R•,� STAFF REPORT MAINTENANCE SERVICES DEPARTMENT April 7, 1998 TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: JEROME J. COLLINS, DIRECTOR OF RECREATION PAT MALLOY, MAINTENANCE SERVICE DIREC R BY: DAN LAZO, ASSISTANT ENGINEER v BRYAN E. BOESKIN, MANAGEMENT ANALYST SUBJECT: REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 6039 APPROVING THE APPLICATION FOR PROPOSITION "A" FUNDS FROM THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES FOR REHABILITATION OF CIVIC CENTER ATHLETIC FIELD SUMMARY The "Safe Neighborhood Parks and Open Space" Measure (Proposition A) was adopted in 1996. In accordance with the Specified Grant Program provision of Proposition A, the City of Arcadia is eligible for $200,000 in grant funds to be used specifically for the rehabilitation of the Civic Center Athletic Field. In order to receive the funds, the City Council is required to adopt the attached Resolution No. 6039, approving the attached application for funds from the County of Los Angeles Regional Park and Open Space District Specified Grant Program for the Civic Center Athletic Field proj ect. The grant funds are non - competitive and require no local matching funds. The Civic Center Athletic Field rehabilitation project is budgeted as part of the 1997/98 Capital Improvement Program. The grant funds will be used to reimburse the City for the cost of the project. A list of proposed improvements with applicable costs along with a map of the location site is attached for reference. DISCUSSION Proposition A, "Safe Neighborhood Parks and Open Space ", Grant Funds in the amount of $131,550,000 are available for distribution to incorporated cities within Los Angeles County based upon the per parcel discretionary grant program. These funds can be used for capital outlay projects to acquire, develop, improve, and/or restore real property for parks and recreational purposes. In accordance with the Specified Grant Program provided for in Proposition A, the City of Arcadia is entitled to $200,000 specifically for the Civic Center Athletic Field rehabilitation project. The City is required to apply for these funds before June 30, 2003. LAJER IA;�,L CON. 96 ,rte •r, MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL APRIL 7, 1998 PAGE 2 During the past four months, the Recreation and Parks Commission in cooperation with Maintenance Services and Recreation staff have gathered the appropriate information to move forward with the proposed improvements to the Civic Center Athletic Field. The key improvements identified in the application include: removal and replacement of existing fences, sod, lighting; upgrading of existing sprinkler system; installation of bleachers; and renovation of the existing storage building. A listing of each proposed improvement and applicable costs are attached for reference. This project is part of the 1997/98 Capital Improvement Budget and was intended to be constructed in this fiscal year. However, due to complications with the County concerning the grant application process, the project has been delayed and construction cannot begin prior to July of this year. The current application process that the City is following is based on "Draft Procedures ", yet to be adopted by the County. Based on field use requirements and the need to extend the turf establishment period following the initial seeding, staff is deferring the actual construction work until March of 1999. The attached application is for a grant in the amount of $200,000 from the County of Los Angeles Regional Park and Open Space District Specified Grant Program to complete the proposed rehabilitation of the Civic Center Athletic Field. FISCAL IMPACT The Civic Center Athletic Field rehabilitation project is budgeted as part of the 1997/98 Capital Improvement Program. The grant funds will be used to reimburse the City for the cost of the project. The rehabilitation of the Civic Center Athletic Field will be limited to the $200,000 amount applied for in the Proposition A - Specified Grant application. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council: 1. Adopt Resolution No. 6039, approving the application for Proposition A Funds from the County of Los Angeles Regional Park and Open Space District Specified Grant Program for the rehabilitation of the Civic Center Athletic Field. 2. Authorize staff to file the attached Proposition A application for $200,000 to the County of Los Angeles Regional Park and Open Space District. JC:PM:DL:BB:ds Attachments Approved: ivalial WILLIAM R. KELLY, CITY MANAGER RESOLUTION NO. 6039 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA, LOS ANGELES- COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE APPLICATION FOR GRANT FUNDS FROM THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES REGIONAL PARK AND OPEN SPACE DISTRICT SPECIFIED GRANT PROGRAM FOR REHABILITATION OF CIVIC CENTER ATHLETIC FIELD WHEREAS, the people of the County of Los Angeles on November 3, 1992 and on November 5, 1996, enacted Los Angeles County Proposition A, Safe Neighborhood Parks, Gang Prevention, Tree - Planting, Senior and Youth Recreation, Beaches and Wildlife Protection (the Proposition) , which, among other uses, provides funds to public agencies and nonprofit organizations in the County for the purposes of acquiring and /or developing facilities and open space for public recreation; and WHEREAS, the Proposition also created the County of Los Angeles Regional Park and Open Space District (the District) to administer said funds; and WHEREAS, the District has set forth the necessary procedures governing applications for grant funds under the Proposition; and WHEREAS, the District's procedures require the Applicant to certify, by resolution, the approval of the application(s) before submission of said application(s) to the District; and 1 .... Ad%% WHEREAS, the application form contains assurances that the Applicant must comply with; and WHEREAS, the Applicant certifies through this resolution; that the application is approved for submission to the District; and WHEREAS, the Applicant will enter into a Project Agreement with the District for the performance of the project as described in the application. 0 NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA DOES HEREBY FIND, DETERMINE AND RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Approves the filing of an application with the County of Los Angeles Regional Park and Open Space District for funds under Section 3 (a) (1) , 3(b) and 3 (c) (2) of the Proposition for the above -named Project. SECTION 2. Certifies that said Applicant understands the assurances and certifications in the application form. SECTION 3. Certifies that said Applicant understands its obligation to operate and maintain the property(s) in perpetuity. SECTION 4. Certifies that said Applicant will sign and return, within 30 days, both copies of the project agreement sent by the District for authorizing signature. 2 ,OMK AIM& SECTION S. Authorizes the Director of Recreation; or designee, as agent of the City of Arcadia to conduct. all negotiations, and to execute and submit all documents including, but not limited to, applications, agreements, amendments, payment requests and so forth, which may be necessary for the completion of the project as described in"the application. SECTION 6. That the City Clerk shall certify to to adoption of this Resolution. 0 Passed, approved and adopted this 7th day of April 1 1998 /s/ ROBERT C. HARBICHT Mayor of the City of Arcadia ATTEST: /S/ JUNE D. ALFORD City Clerk of the City of Arcadia APPROVED AS TO FORM: Michael H. Miller, City Attorney 9 ..... AW4 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES) SS: CITY OF ARCADIA ) I, JUNE D. ALFORD, City Clerk of the City of Arcadia, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 6039 was passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Arcadia, signed by the Mayor and attested to by the City Clerk at a regular meeting of said Council held on the 7th day of April, 1998 and that said Resolution was adopted by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Councilmember Chang, Kovacic, Kuhn, Young and Harbicht NOES: None ABSENT: None ISl JUNE D. ALFORD City Clerk of the City of Arcadia 4 ... EXHIBIT A .•t GRANT APPLICATION FORM This form and required attachments must be submitted for each project Project Name: Rehabilitation of Civic Center Athletic Field Project Applicant (Name of agency and mailing address): City of Arcadia 375 Campus Drive Arcadia, CA 91007 For District Use Only ' Grant;Number v till Program Manager: _ .._�....:....:,.::,�.°'� . Grant Amount Requested: $200,000 Proposition Section(s): Dron A: 'Section 3 (a) (1) , 3(b) and 3(c) (2) Total Project Cost: Source(s) of other funds: � I Project Address: 240 1'1-. Huntington Dr., Arcadia Grant Applicant's Representative Authorized in Resolution: Jerome J. Collins Name Director of Recreation Tide Person with day -to-day responsibility for project (if different from authorized representative): (626) 57A-5113 Phone (inc. area code) Dan A. Lazo Asst. Engineer (626) 574 -5483 Name Tide Phone (inc. area code) Brief Description of Project: Removal and replacement of existing fences, sod and lighting; upgrade of sprinkler system; installation of bleachers; and renovation of storage building. Document Submission Date (include enough time to complete the project and submit final documents): For Development Projects Land Tenure: For Acquisition Projects: Project is 2.20 acres: Acres owned by Applicant (fee simple) Acres available under a year lease Acres other interest (explain): Project land will be acres: Acquired in fee simple by Applicant Acquired in other than fee simple (explain): I certify that the information contained in this project application form, including required attachments, is accurate and that I have read and understand the important information and assurances on the reverse side of this form: /1% ., Signature of 's Representative as shown in resolution 3 -3/ - q� Date ARC"IA CIVIC CENTER ATHLETIC FIJP LD . LIST OF MOROYEMENTS - JANUARY 1998 - Revised Improvement Estimate 1 Repair and balance irrigation system $ 7,000 New controller, new heads, etc. New computer controller with rain and S 8,000 moisture meter Remote location control at City Maintenance Yard 2 Turf improvements, aerate hydroseed, $ 20,400 Kill existing turf, provide soil amendments, etc. Level field - Install french drain on City Hall side $ 3,000 3 Santa Anita Inn wall renovations Remove oleander $ 12,500 Move electrical vault $ 10,000 Move sprinkler /water controller $ 1,500 4 New fences Racetrack side - higher fence - S 3,500 12' high 260' long Santa Anita Inn side - new fence + vine* $ 7,000 12' high 396' long + planting of 24 five gallon Boston ivy County Park side - higher fence behind goal $ 4,500 20' high 236' long City Hall side - higher fence S 5,500 12' high 401' long * Note: Screen is not advised due to wind resistance, new heavy 4" poles would need to be installed if screen was used. 5 New lights Opt. "A" S 62,100 ** New lights and standards Opt. "B" S 95,300 6 New bleachers S 30,000 7 Replace rubber matting $ 5,000 Sub Total $180,000 Engineering & contingencies $ 20,000 ** 5200,000 • r e. r— -y- — — ON / may:, � — i ^\ ✓^ � north CITY OF ARCADIA Grandview Ave. - -J I I Sierr• Alad e B . j Orange Grove BI j rl d ¢ el a Footniiiei. N�,L CIVIC CENTER 210E ° °`r "'F`w° a F ATHL.ETIL FIELD A j oiora o ree � < Coiora ATE 1 LOCATION 3 Dr. 1 e Rnil i.. 4nc. Huntington Dr- i.- / i9 lj Campus — j t Rd DUDI- ', 11 C �� Longden A I m � • II i Las Tunas �`I Ale. 1 i1 4z //` \ i LOCATION MAP NOT TO SCALE 07�1D -2S STAFF REPORT MAINTENANCE SERVICES DEPARTMENT April 1, 1997 TO: MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: PAT MALLOY, MAINTENANCE SERVICES DI CTO f JEROME COLLINS, RECREATION DIRECTOR PREPARED BY: DAVID HARADON, ADMINISTRATIVE Al E4 SUBJECT: RECOMMENDATION TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 5987 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE APPLICATION FOR GRANT FUNDS FROM THE TIRE RECYCLING MANAGEMENT FUND UNDER THE TIRE RECYCLING ACT OF 1989 Summary Staff recently learned of an opportunity to apply for a competitive matching grant sponsored by the California Integrated Waste Management Board. The purpose of the grant is to encourage the development of a market for recycling used tires. The grant covers 50% of the cost for playground cover using recycled tires. Playground cover, a relatively new product, is the rubber matting used around playground equipment. Last year the City began renovating its parks to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). One of the ADA requirements is that the area around playground equipment must be level and accessible to handicapped children. The type of playground cover the City proposes to use complies fully with the Americans with Disabilities Act. The grant will fund up to 50% of the cost for preparation and installation of playground cover at Camino Grove and Fairview parks that are both scheduled for renovation next year. Discussion In an effort to develop a market for recycled tires, the California Integrated Waste Management Board is sponsoring a matching grant for agencies to use for installing playground cover made from recycled tires. The maximum grant award is $25,000.00. The City has requested $24,150.00 from the state which would cover almost 50% of the cost of installing the cover Camino Grove and Fairview parks. The project cost is summarized below: Grant Request $24,150.00 City's Contribution $24.350.00 TOTAL Project Cost $48,500.00 CO s,6 . Aom� ,..A MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL APRIL 1, 1997 PAGE 2 The City is contributing an additional $200.00 for signs to be posted promoting that the playground cover was made from recycled tires. The grant does not cover the expense for these signs. The total project cost was based on an installation cost of $12.00 per square foot. This would allow the City to cover approximately 4,025 square feet of playground area, which is the approximate area of the playgrounds at Camino Grove and Fairview. Staff believes this is an accurate assessment of the cost of the project since the City paid this amount for installing similar playground cover last year when renovating Eisenhower, Bonita and Bi- Centennial parks. The $12 per square foot cost includes all of the necessary work for preparing the area with an appropriate base and for the actual installation of the recycled rubber playground cover. Fiscal Impact The total cost of the project is estimated at $48,500.00. If the City receives the requested amount of $24,150.00, the City will only have to fund the remaining 50% of the project ($24,350.00). The cost of the cover at Fairview and Camino Grove Parks is already budgeted for as a capital improvement for FY 1997 -1998. Should the City receive the grant, the Council could use the $24,150.00 for other park upgrades or other projects as directed. Recommendation It is recommended that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 5987 approving the application for grant funds from the Tire Recycling Management Fund under the Tire Recycling Act of 1989. Approved:l William R. Kelly, City Manager Attachment: Resolution No. 5987 PM:dh C A0FFICE%W PW IMW PDOCS\PRKGRNT2. REP MEMORANDUM OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER April 7, 1998 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: William R. Kelly, City Mana er By: Cindy Rowe, Community Relations Officer SUBJECT: Report and Recommendation to Approve the Renewal of the Cable Television Franchise Agreement with Cablevision of Arcadia /Sierra Madre, Inc. BACKGROUND In 1978., the City entered into an agreement with Teleprompter to provide cable services to the entire foothill area of the City. The City then entered into a ten -year franchise agreement with Group W Cable which was amended in 1986 when Daniels and Associates took over the operation of the cable system. In 1988, Daniels was bought out by United Artists, and eventually, United Artists merged with Telecommunications, Inc. (TCI), the City's current cable television operator. In June 1995, the City Council approved a two -year extension of the franchise to July 5, 1997. The franchise was again extended for a six -month period to December 31, 1997, due to corporate changes taking place at TCI, and currently, we have been operating on a month -to -month basis during franchise negotiations. Congress enacted the Cable Communications Policy Act in 1984 and this Act set industry standards, removed local authority over cable rates.and programming, and capped franchise fees at 5 %. In 1992, Congress enacted the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act which re- regulated rates, set customer service standards, performance requirements for the cable industry, and franchise renewal requirements. More recently, in February 1996, Congress enacted the Telecommunications Act, which allows cable providers to compete in local communities, and removes from franchising agencies all rate regulation authority in January 1999, based on 2 L 7 LASE? I AGED Approval of Franchise with TO April 7, 1998 Page two BACKGROUND (continued) . the premise that increased competition will lower cable rates without government intervention. (Since April of 1994 Arcadia has regulated the "basic only" cable rates consistent with FCC regulations.) DISCUSSION Federal law provides the legal basis and framework for all cable television renewals. Specifically, a franchise authority may approve or deny a franchise renewal after considering four criteria in the renewal process: 1. The cable operator's compliance with the material terms of the existing franchise agreement and with applicable law; 2. . The quality of the operator's service in, light of present community needs; 3. Financial, legal and technical ability of the operator to provide the services, facilities and equipment as set forth in the proposed franchise agreement; and 4. The future cable - related community needs and interests, taking into account the cost of meeting such needs and interests. The .franchise renewal is a complex and lengthy process and the City hired a consultant, Communications Support Group, to provide assistance. Staff and CSG performed a number of tasks to assess franchise compliance, review customer service, assess community needs related to future services and determine reasonable needs related to governmental and educational access to the cable system. At this time, all documented issues of compliance have been corrected. The City's efforts to assess cable television - related needs brought forward a great deal of information regarding viewer satisfaction, customer service, additional channels and programming offerings, billing and rates, outreach and improved government access programming, technical quality of the cable system, facilities for municipal and educational programming, new Approval of Franchise with TO April 7, 1998 Page three DISCUSSION (continued) technologies and future services, origination capability and emergency services. Based on these findings, a new franchise was developed and has been amended through negotiations with TCI. Staff used the original 1985 franchise agreement as the framework for the new agreement with the following major changes: 1. A Witness section which summarizes legislative intent was added. 2. New definitions were added and existing definitions were updated and the entire section was relocated to the rear of the agreement as an attachment. Previous definitions have been updated as necessary to comply with new rules and regulations. 3. The term was changed from ten years to seven years with a conditional three -year extension option. 4. Language was added regarding design and capacity of the new system. 5. Language was added pertaining to upgrade and construction schedule. 6. Rate Regulation provisions were amended to reflect federal law. 7. The public access section was changed to reflect new needs associated with support for community programming. S. New sections were added to address the conditional three - year extension, termination, transfers and assignments, possessory interest, customer service standards, liquidated damages and high -speed Internet access. Under the Cable Act, a City can only deny a franchise if the incumbent company has failed to offer reasonable levels of service, has failed to comply Approval of Franchise with TCI April 7, 1998 Page four DISCUSSION (continued) with the terms of the franchise, or lacks the financial, legal or technical ability to provide services reasonable to satisfy community needs. Staff is of the opinion that no grounds exist for denying the renewal with TCI. Even if grounds for denial of a renewed franchise were to be documented, the cable company must be given an opportunity to cure whatever problems are the basis for that denial before a denial could take effect. In addition, the Federal Act gives the cable company extensive procedural protection and appeal rights in U.S. District Court. In the many years since passage of the Cable Act, only a few franchise renewals have ever been denied. The most prominent of these cases involved Morganton, North Carolina, Rolla, Illinois, and Sturgis, Kentucky, each after lengthy court tests. Through consultant studies and staff efforts, TCI has been found to satisfy all federal renewal provisions. Secondly, while any cable company can now request a franchise with the City to offer cable services in Arcadia, none have requested such, which means TCI is the only company currently interested in a non - exclusive cable franchise of this nature. TCI has a letter of intent to merge their operation with Century Communications. If that . merger becomes a reality and if Century is to become the managing partner of the Arcadia system, that change must come before the City Council for approval. Notice of this public hearing was advertised as legally required. In addition, press releases were sent to all area newspapers, a notice was placed on the Community Bulletin Board and interested individuals were contacted by telephone and given the date and time of the hearing. This agreement is the result of work by City staff (City Manager, City Attorney and Community Relations Officer), Special Counsel William Marticorena of Rutan & Tucker, and technical consultant, John Risk, of Communications Support Group. Approval of Franchise with TCI April 7, 1998 Page five FISCAL IMPACT If approved, the new franchise will include $393,000 as capital grant - revenue to the City for equipment needs as well as a $30,000 equipment maintenance grant. Staff expects franchise fees to increase as a result of new programming offerings such as pay - per -view and Internet access services which are made available due to the new franchise agreement. The FCC allows cable operators to pass through franchise - related costs to subscribers, and this capital grant will cost each Arcadia subscriber approximately $.35 per month over the upcoming ten -year period. TCI has agreed not to pass through the costs of the upgraded system and access provisions as line items on the bill. The rates, however, can be expected to be increased pursuant to FCC formulae to accommodate the cost of providing these services. This three -year renewal process has cost the City approximately $35,000. RECOMMENDATION With the concurrence of the City Attorney, Special Legal Counsel and Communications Support Group, it is recommended that the public hearing be opened and testimony received and that the City Council approve the Cable Television Franchise Agreement with Cablevision of Arcadia /Sierra Madre, Inc., and introduce Ordinance No. 2084 for first reading. Attachments: Ordinance No. 2084 Franchise Agreement Final revisions are still being made to the franchise document. We plan to deliver it to the City Council on Monday. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE ARCADIA CITY COUNCIL NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that on TUESDAY, MARCH 17, 1998, at 7:00 p.m. in the Arcadia City Hall Council Chamber, 240 West Huntington Drive, Arcadia, California, a public hearing will be held by and before the City Council to receive testimony relative to the granting of a:.non- exclusive Cable Television Franchise to Cablevision of Arcadia /Sierra Madre, Inc., DBA TCI Cablevision of Los Angeles County, as required by the rules and regulations of the Federal Communications Commission. At said time and place an opportunity will be afforded all those interested and the public in general to be heard. For additional information please contact Cindy Rowe, Community Relations Officer, at (626) 574 -5432, Monday through Thursday, between the hours of 7:30 a.m and 5:30 p.m., and alternate Fridays, 7:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. City Hall will be closed on Friday, March the 13th. June D. Alford City Clerk Dated: February 24, 1998 Publish: March 4, 1998 Medi 1 ra 8 -/ 54- l�ii� R` p r°RAT° STAFF REPORT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT DATE: April 7, 1998 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: William R. Kelly, City Mana Wl4 + Michael H. Miller, City Attorney in W Don Penman, Deputy City Manager/Development Svcs. Direct•r` ' SUBJECT: 1) RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE A COST COMPENSATION AGREEMENT WITH MEDITRUST/SANTA ANITA FOR ENVIRONMENTAL, LAND USE FISCAL AND LEGAL PROCESSING 2) RECOMMENDATION TO AUTHORIZE CONSULTANT AGREEMENTS REGARDING A MEDITRUST/SANTA ANITA APPLICATION BACKGROUND The scope and importance of the application to be submitted by Meditrust/Santa Anita to commercially develop approximately 85 acres of land in the southwest portion of Santa Anita Park property mandates significant City review and analysis. The purpose of such review is to ensure careful and appropriate analysis of the project and a meaningful public hearing and decision-making process before the Planning Commission and City Council. This report recommends that the City Council authorize staff to retain certain expert consultants to assist in processing of the application and to approve a Cost Compensation Agreement between the City and applicant that calls for payment to the City concerning all consultant services and staff costs incurred for this project. DISCUSSION To properly process the project, a Specific Plan (inclusive of a zone change and zoning code amendments), a Parcel Map, and related environmental analysis will be regi1ired. A Development Agreement has also been requested and is subject to negotiation. Staff is recommending that the City Council approve the attached Cost Compensation Agreement that calls for the City to be compensated for the costs applicable to processing the proposed land use entitlements. The purpose of the Agreement is to address project costs in 'advance and to obtain a contractual commitment from the applicant to pay for these costs. LASER IMAGED PPreuvE_D C- fl /b . 1 C z Mayor and City Council April 7, 1998 Page 2 A detailed scope of work to address the environmental, fiscal and legal issues is included in the attached Agreement which has been reviewed and approved by both parties. The estimated cost of consultant services is $125,040.00. The costs for City staff and City reimbursable expenses is estimated at $35,978. The,former are covered by a $30,000 deposit and the maintenance of a replenishable deposit account with the City. The latter is provided for by deposit of the entire amount as part of the Specific Plan fee. The applicant has agreed to hold the City harmless in the event litigation occurs to challenge the project, including certification of the Environmental Impact Report. Applicant shall bear all costs of defense. The proposed project is of a significant size relative to what has been developed in Arcadia in the last ten years. Because of the scope and complexity of the project, staff is recommending that three professional consultants be retained to facilitate the processing of the Environmental Impact Report, the Specific Plan, the fiscal analysis, and to provide legal assistance as necessary. These efforts, as managed by City staff, will enable the public, the Planning Commission and the City Council to make informed development decisions on the project. Staff recommends the retention of the following firms: Fee 1. LSA Associates $85,040,00 (environmental consultants) 2. Alfred Gobar &Associates $10,000.00 (fiscal consultant) 3. Kaufman, Fox & Sohagi (M. Sohagi) $30,000.00 (special legal consultant) Overall management of the project will be by the Deputy City Manager/Development Services Director. The Agreement provides that the City retain absolute discretion with regard to all final decision-making concerning the proposed project entitlements and related t Mayor and City Council April 7, 1998 Page 3 environmental review process. The public hearing process will go forward and the City is not in any way precluded from exercising its independent discretion with regard to the proposed project. The City and Santa Anita previously negotiated terms and conditions of a Cost Compensation Agreement, which the City Council approved on March 18, 997. However, Santa Anita did not execute that Agreement. This Agreement is simi ar in most respects though the consultant and staff costs have been refined based upon this project. FISCAL IMPACT The total cost of the consultant work on this project will be paid for by the applicant. The attached Cost Compensation Agreement between the City and Meditrust/Santa Anita requires the applicant to make payment to the City in accordance with a 'draw down reimbursement plan and Specific Plan fees. RECOMMENDATION THAT THE CITY COUNCIL MOVE TO: 1. AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE ATTACHED COST COMPENSATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ARCADIA AND MEDITRUST/SANTA ANITA; AND 2. AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AGREEMENTS WITH LISA ASSOCIATES; GOBAR & ASSOCIATES; AND KAUFMAN, FOX & SOHAGI; FOR A TOTAL AMOUNT OF $125,040, SUBJECT TO FINALIZATION OF THE CONTRACTS AND APPROVAL AS TO FORM BY THE CITY ATTORNEY. Attachment x . AGREEMENT (Cost Compensation) This Agreement is entered into this 7th day of April, 1998 by and among Santa Anita Enterprises, Inc. (hereinafter referred to as "Applicant") and the City of Arcadia(hereinafter referred to as "City"). RECITALS A. Applicant is the owner of approximately 85 acres of land generally described in Exhibit"A" attached hereto (the"Project Area"),which Property is located in that portion of the City planned for commercial development in accordance with City's 1996 General Plan. B. Applicant is contemplating development of the Property for the following uses, among others: theater/entertainment;retail and restaurant; so called"large box" commercial; and related commercial uses (the "Proposed Uses"). To implement the Proposed Uses, Applicant contemplates applying for the City's discretionary approval of a Specific Plan, which may include a corresponding zone change designation and zoning code amendment; approval of a tract map/and or lot split or lot line adjustment and the adoption of a Development Agreement between the City and Applicant. Each of the foregoing entitlements shall be supported by a project environmental impact report prepared pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") (collectively, all such approvals and reports are referred to hereinafter as the "Proposed Project Entitlements"). • 1 C. To provide the City with the environmental, land use planning, fiscal and legal advice necessary to the City's review process concerning the uses of the Property, it is necessary for the City to retain the services of an environmental and land use planning consultant, a fiscal consultant, and special legal counsel(legal support services) (collectively, "Consultants"). D. As a condition to the City's initiation of the review process, Applicant has agreed to reimburse the City for the Consultants costs and expenses related to the City's review process in the manner and amounts set forth in this Agreement. E. City shall have complete discretionary authority with regard to all land use and related decision-making concerning any proposal submitted by Applicant. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing and other good and valuable consideration, the sufficiency and adequacy of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows: 1. Submission and Processing of Applications - Land Use Planning Consultant. (a) The Proposed Project shall consist of the Proposed Uses and the Proposed Project Entitlements (collectively the "Proposed Project"). All applications, environmental documents and planning documents (including the Specific Plan), shall define the Proposed Project in a manner consistent with this Agreement. 2 (b) Applicant shall be responsible for preparing and submitting to the City applications for the approval of the Proposed Project Entitlements (the"Applications"). The Applications will propose development of the Proposed Project. The Applications shall be filed in a form which complies with City requirements. Subject to the express qualifications and caveats contained in Section 10 below, the City agrees to process the Proposed Project in accordance with this Agreement and applicable State and Local Laws. (c) Applicant and any consultant retained by Applicant shall be responsible for preparing the Specific Plan and other draft documents to be approved by the City pursuant to the Applications (the "Draft Project Documents"), all at Applicant's cost. The Applications and Draft Project Documents shall be submitted to City staff in accordance with the Proposed Project Entitlement Schedule attached hereto as Exhibit `B". 2. Preparation and Processing of Environmental Documentation. (a) The City shall serve as lead agency for purpose of processing the Proposed Project and complying with CEQA, but shall coordinate and cooperate with Applicant as provided below in a manner consistent with State and Local laws. (b) The parties agree that an Environmental Impact Report for the Proposed Project Entitlements ("EIR")will be prepared in accordance with the requirements of CEQA and other applicable laws. The EIR shall address all environmental impacts of the Proposed Project and is intended to address all development activities contemplated to implement the Proposed Project and the Proposed Project Entitlements. 3 (c) The City hereby approves in its sole and absolute discretion LSA Associates as the EIR Consultant. Upon receipt of the Deposit described in Section 6(b) herein, the City shall retain the EIR Consultant pursuant to a Professional Services Agreement("EIR Consultant Agreement"). The EIR Consultant Agreement shall reflect the EIR Scope of Work and EIR Budget attached hereto as Exhibit "C" and shall be consistent with the terms of this Agreement, but shall otherwise be subject to the City's approval in its sole and absolute discretion. The EIR Consultant shall cooperate with the Applicant and the City staff as provided in Section 9 herein. (d) The City shall not be bound by any recommendations or conclusions made or reached by the EIR Consultant, and the City may accept or reject, in whole or in part, any such recommendations or conclusions. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained herein, the City shall independently review, evaluate and exercise its independent judgment regarding the EIR and any studies and reports submitted, whether by the EIR Consultant or otherwise, in connection therewith, as well as any issues that those studies and reports raise and address. (e) The City hereby approves the scope of work for the EIR("EIR Scope of Work") as set forth in Exhibit "C" attached hereto, and directs the EIR Consultan t to process the EIR in accordance therewith. The EIR Scope of Work(and those portions of the EIR Consultant Agreement incorporating same) shall not be amended without the prior written consent of the Applicant; provided, however, that Applicant acknowledges that the 4 Applicant's failure to consent to amendments reasonably necessary to process the Proposed Project Entitlements in accordance with the requirements of CEQA and related laws could result in delays in or the suspension or termination of processing the EIR and the Applications. In the event material changes are proposed to the EIR Scope of Work, Applicant and City agree to meet and confer in good faith in an effort to determine to the extent of such changes; provided, however, that the failure to reach agreement shall not impair City's right to terminate or suspend the processing of the EIR and the Applications. (f) The EIR Consultant Agreement shall specifically acknowledge that the EIR Consultant is expected to perform each of the services identified in the EIR Budget at a cost no greater than itemized amounts identified therein, and that the EIR Budget, including individual line items, has been negotiated by and among the City, the EIR Consultant, and Applicant with the express understanding that such line items are intended as "not to exceed" dollar amounts which are anticipated as being fully adequate to cover the related scope of work, including reasonably anticipated contingencies associated therewith. 3. Preparation of Fiscal Report. (a) The City and Applicant acknowledge that although a substantial amount of fiscal impact information has already been collected concerning the Property in connection with prior applications submitted by Applicant it is necessary for the City to prepare additional fiscal impact studies in connection with the Proposed Project. The City hereby approves Alfred Gobar and Associates as the Fiscal Consultant responsible for preparing 5 • , such fiscal impact reports and advising City in connection with matters related thereto (the "Fiscal Reports"). (b) The City hereby approves the scope of work and budget for the iscal Reports (the"Fiscal Scope of Work and Budget") as set forth in Exhibit"D" attached hereto. Upon receipt of the Deposit described in Section 6(b)herein, the City shall retain the iscal Consultant pursuant to a Professional Services Agreement("Fiscal Consultant Agreement"). The Fiscal Consultant Agreement shall reflect the Fiscal Scope of Work and Budget(as those terms are hereinafter defined), and shall be consistent with the terms of this Agreement, but shall otherwise be subject to the City's approval in its sole and absolute discretion. The Fiscal Consultant shall cooperate with the Applicant and the City staff as provided in Section 9 herein. The Fiscal Scope of Work and Budget(and those portions of the Fiscal Consultant Agreement incorporating same) shall not be amended without the prior written consent of the Applicant;provided, however,that Applicant acknowledges that the Applicant's failure to consent to amendments reasonably necessary to respond to material changes in the Proposed Project Entitlements in accordance with applicable legal requirements could result in delays in processing the Applications. In the event such material changes occur,Applicant and the City agree to meet and confer in good faith in an effort to determine to what extent, if any, the Fiscal Scope of Work and Budget should be revised. 4. Legal Support Services. Pursuant to direction of the City Attorney, the City shall utilize the services of Margaret Moore Sohagi of the law offices of Kaufman, Fox & 6 Sohagi, LLP to assist with the environmental review process and related land use issues including negotiation and preparation of the proposed development agreement. These services shall be performed consistent with the legal support scope of work and budget attached hereto as Exhibit"E". Upon receipt of the Deposit described in Section 6(b)herein, the City shall retain the Legal Consultants pursuant to a Professional Services Agreement ("Legal Consultant Agreement"). The Legal Consultant Agreements shall reflect the Legal Support Scopes of Work and Budgets and shall be consistent with the terms of this Agreement. The Legal Support Scopes of Work and Budgets shall not be amended without the written consent of the Applicant; provided, however, that Applicant acknowledges that the Applicant's failure to consent to amendments reasonably necessary to respond to applicable legal requirements could result in delays in or the suspension of processing the Applications. In the event material changes in the Legal Support Scopes or Work and Budgets are proposed, Applicant and the City agree to meet and confer in good faith in an effort to determine to the extent of such changes. 5. City to Retain Consultants/City Rights. The Applicant agrees that, notwithstanding the Applicant's reimbursement obligations under this Agreement, the Consultants selected by the City shall be the contractors exclusively of the City and not of the Applicant. Except for those disclosures required by law including, without limitation, the Public Records Act, and as otherwise provided herein, all conversations, notes, memoranda, correspondence and other forms of communication by and between the City and 7 the Consultants shall be,to the extent permissible by law,privileged and confidential and not subject to disclosure to the Applicant. The Applicant agrees that it shall have no claim to nor shall it assert any right in any reports, correspondence, plans, maps, drawings, or any and all other documents or work product produced by the Consultants pursuant to the Cons ltant Contracts which are required to be maintained as public records pursuant to the Public Records Act and other applicable law. Applicant agrees that any proprietary information which it has provided to the Consultants and which do not reasonably need to be included in the City's public records, shall be identified as "Propriety" and to the extent legally permitted shall be excluded from the City's public records. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the City agrees that it will act reasonable in disclosing to and sharing with the Applicant information and reports from the Consultants relevant to the evaluation of the Proposed Project, except when such disclosure would be detrimental to the best interest of the City, as determined by the City in its reasonable discretion, or where such disclosure would constitute a waiver of privilege or defeat the City's right of confidentiality as to those matters which are not subject to public disclosure. 6. Reimbursement of City. (a) Applicant agrees to reimburse the City for the actual and reasonable costs and expenditures paid by the City to the Consultants in accordance with the terms of this Agreement and for specific application fees and "reimbursables" as set forth in Exl iibit "F" attached hereto. This includes a Specific Plan application fee pursuant to Arcadia 1 8 1 Municipal Code Section 9296.4.1 and Resolution No. 5881. This fee shall be paid before the City accepts any Specific Plan application. The fee deposit that shall be paid is $35,978. Additional amounts may be due and payable over the deposit amount as set forth in Exhibit "F" attached hereto. The totals set forth in that Exhibit are not subject to amendment without the prior written consent of the Applicant; provided, however, that Applicant acknowledges that its failure to consent to amendments reasonably necessary to respond to processing the proposed project could result in delays in processing the referred to application. If necessary, Applicant and City agree to meet and confer in good faith to determine the amount of the revisions to the Specific Plan application fee consistent with Resolution No. 5881 attached hereto as Exhibit"G". Applicant's agreement to pay for consultants as provided for in this Agreement shall be subject to the following conditions: (i) Subject to the terms of this Agreement, payments shall not be made to the Consultants in excess of the budgets as set forth in Exhibits "C", "D" and "E" - Fiscal Scope of Work and Budget, Legal Support Budget and EIR Scope of Work Budget (collectively, such budgets are referred to as the `Budgets"), as applicable,without the prior written consent of Applicant. The total for the budgets referred to herein is $125,040. (ii) The Consultants shall submit monthly invoices and reconciliation statements to City identifying in reasonable detail the services performed during the prior monthly billing period, the fees and reimbursable expenses, if any, incurred during such period, and the percentage of both the line item and aggregate Budgets expended through the 9 date of such statement, as applicable(the "Consultant Invoice"). After approval by the City, copies of all invoices and statements shall be provided to Applicant. (b) Prior to, and as a condition of the City processing the Applications, Applicant shall deposit the sum of $30,000 (the "Deposit") into either (1) a special segregated demand deposit account (the "Account") to be established by the City w''th a federally chartered bank for the sole purpose of receiving reimbursement funds from Applicant pursuant to this Agreement. No other City funds shall be commingled into the Account. The City shall be sole authorized signatory on the Account. The Account shall be interest bearing,with a rate of return equivalent to that of other City interest bearing accounts in similar institutions. Any interest earned upon the funds placed into the Account shall remain in the Account and shall be used solely for the purpose of reimbursing the City, and crediting such reimbursements to the benefit of Applicant, in accordance with the terms of this Agreement, OR (2) a separate trust account of the City in Applicant's name and maintained within the City's Trust Fund. Interest will be credited monthly to the account at the same rate, and manner, as other invested funds of the City based on the balance being held in the account. (c) If there are funds remaining in the above Account at the end of the term of this Agreement, then such remaining funds shall be returned to the Applicant; provided, however, that no such refunds shall be made until the City determines, in its reasonable direction, that all reimbursement obligations of the Applicant under this Agreement have 10 I I been satisfied. • (d) Immediately following the City's disbursement of funds to a Consultant pursuant to a Consultant Contract, the City shall be entitled to draw upon the funds in the Account in an amount sufficient to reimburse the City for the amount paid by the City to the Consultant. The right of the City to withdraw from the Account to reimburse itself for Consultant Costs shall not be contingent upon the Applicant's approval of the withdrawal; provided, however: (1) the City agrees that it shall take full advantage of any discounts offered by the Consultants prior to paying any Consultant Invoices to which such discount applies; and (2) that in the event Applicant objects to the sums incurred by any Consultant as reflected in any Consultant Invoice,prior to payment of any further Consultant Invoices, the City, the applicable Consultant and Applicant shall meet and confer in good faith in an effort to resolve such dispute. The City agrees to use reasonable and customary audit and verification procedures relative to the payment of City funds to any Consultant. The City shall provide reasonably detailed supporting documentation pertaining to any withdrawals from the Account upon written request therefor from the Applicant. The Applicant agrees to maintain a minimum balance of$5,000 in the Account at all times relative to the Consultant Costs. Following the City's withdrawal of amount from the Account to reimburse itself for expended Consultant Costs in accordance with this Agreement, the Applicant shall, within ten (10) days following receipt of written demand from the City, replenish the Account in the amount necessary to restore the account to the 11 minimum balances described above. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Applicant agrees that its obligations under this Agreement arise independently of the amount of funds, if any, in the Account. The Applicant's obligations to reimburse the City as set forth in this Agreement shall not be limited or reduced by the amount of funds, if any, in the Account but shall otherwise be subject to the cost control provisions set forth in Sections 1-4 above. 7. Development Agreement. The City and Applicant agree to act diligentl and use their good faith efforts to negotiate and prepare a Development Agreement which ould address but not necessarily be limited to the following: the vesting of zoning, density and intensity of development pursuant to the Specific Plan;the nature and adequacy of mitigation associated with Proposed Project implementation; the impact of the Proposed Project on the City and City facilities; and the parties' ongoing cooperation in implementing the Proposed Project. 8. Timing. The parties agree to use their best efforts to process the Applications and the Proposed Project Entitlements in accordance with the Proposed Project Entitlements Schedule attached hereto as Exhibit`B". City acknowledges that the expeditious processing of the Applicants is a material consideration for Applicant's decision to move forward with the Proposed Project and to incur substantial costs in connection therewith. Minor deviaf'ons from the Proposed Project Entitlements Schedule or adjustments agreed upon by the parties shall not be deemed inconsistent with this section. Delays that are attributable to Applicant's failure to provide written consent to the Consultant's scope of work shall not violate this I 12 Agreement and the Proposed Project Entitlements Schedule shall be tolled accordingly consistent with State and Local law. 9. Cooperation. All parties to this Agreement agree to cooperate in good faith in implementing the Agreement. This cooperation shall include: (a) The Deputy City Manager/Development Services Director shall be designated "Proposed Project Coordinator" on behalf of City and shall be responsible for coordinating, monitoring, and facilitating City staff review of the Applications, all environmental documentation, and all other submissions by Applicant and Applicant's consultants in connection with the Proposed Project. (b) Unless and until otherwise agreed by the parties, Applicant, the Applicant's consultants, the EIR Consultant, the Project Coordinator, and such other members of City staff as shall be necessary or appropriate shall participate in Proposed Project-Team Meetings every two weeks, or as appropriate, until the City Council has taken final action on the Applications. To the extent that Consultants are required to attend Proposed Project-Team Meetings in excess of those contemplated in the applicable Scopes of Work, applicant acknowledges that additional costs beyond those contemplated in the applicable Budgets may be incurred and, if so, Applicant shall be responsible for such additional costs. 13 (c) The City Manager shall be authorized to act on behalf of City in implementing this Agreement. The City Manager shall coordinate with the Proposed Project Coordinator and other members of the City staff as necessary or appropriate to ensure the expeditious implementation of this Agreement. (d) The Applicant, the Consultants, and the City staff agree to cooperate reasonably with each other in providing non-confidential information necessary or appropriate to preparing,reviewing, and processing the Applications,the Project Entitlement Documents, the EIR, the Fiscal Reports, and other information related to the public review of the Proposed Project. (e) Project Manager for Applicant shall be its Vice President of Development. He shall be authorized to act on behalf of Applicant and shall be available to coordinate and provide for all necessary communications, provision of information and other needs to ensure the expeditious implementation of this Agreement and review of the Proposed Project. 10. City to Retain Discretion. Nothing contained in this Agreement, including, without limitations, the City's agreement to process the Applications and Applicant's agreement to reimburse the City for Consultants' Costs in accordance with the terms he i eof, shall be deemed to commit or obligate the City in any way to approve the Proposed Project, any of the Proposed Project Entitlements, or any other proposed land uses or entitlements with respect to the Property, and the City expressly reserves its discretion to approve, reject, 14 • modify, or condition same and to determine the final Project objectives. All such decisions of the City shall be made only after full compliance with CEQA, and all other statutory and legal obligations, only after considering all appropriate information and evidence, including such evidence which may cause the City to disapprove any or all of the contemplated uses of the Property, and subject to the City's ability to make all findings required by applicable law. 11. Defense of Litigation. The Applicant shall defend and hold harmless the City against third party claims and suits challenging the Proposed Project including City's certification of the EIR and/or any actions relating to land use decisions arising from the Proposed Uses. The Applicant shall appear as real party in interest in any such third party action or proceeding and shall, at its cost, defend such action or proceeding. The relationship between City and Applicant in implementing the foregoing defense agreement shall be set forth in a Joint Defense Agreement to be mutually acceptable to City and Applicant. The Joint Defense Agreement shall address, without limitations, the City's right to retain such legal counsel as the City deems necessary and appropriate to participate as a party to the action; any budgets or cost controls applicable to such services; the Applicant's reimbursement of the City for any and all reasonable and actual attorneys' fees and costs incurred by the City in accordance with such cost controls;the control and settlement of such litigation;the maintenance of the confidentiality of communications between the parties; and the parties general joint cooperation in defending any legal action contemplated by this 15 Section. 12. • Term. The term of this Agreement shall commence on the date that this Agreement is signed on behalf of the Applicant and the City and approved by the City Council and, unless earlier terminated pursuant to Section 13, shall terminate when all work required by each Consultant Contract has been completed to the City's reasonable satisfaction and the Applicant has satisfied all of its obligations under this Agreement including, without limitation, the obligation to reimburse the City for Consultant Costs, whether or not paid by the City prior to the date of termination. The Applicant's obligation to reimburse the City for work performed up to the date of termination of this Agreement, as provided in this Agreement shall survive the termination of this Agreement pursuant to this Section 12 or Section 13. 13. Early Termination. The Applicant may terminate this Agreement prior to the term set forth in Section 12 upon prior written notice to the City. In the event the Applicant terminates this Agreement prior to the end of the term set forth above, the Applicant shall satisfy all of its obligations under this Agreement to date of termination regarding reimbursement to the City of Consultant Costs. Either party may also terminate this Agreement upon the default of the other party as set forth in Section 14 below. As soon as practical, but in no event later than five (5) business days following either the City's decision to terminate this Agreement or the City's receipt of written notice indicating the Applicant's decision to terminate this Agreement, the 16 I l City shall notify the Consultants in the most expeditious manner possible, including telephonic communication, and instruct them to cease work under the Consultant Contracts. The Consultants shall be instructed to bill the City for any work completed to the date of termination of the Consultant Contract. The City may draw upon the Account described in Section 6(b) of this Agreement to reimburse itself for payments made to the Consultants following receipt of termination billing from the Consultants. Consultant contracts shall not include provision for payment of any termination fee or costs attributable to reassignment, relocation, or termination of personnel, and all such contracts shall authorize termination at the convenience of City consistent with this Section 13. The Applicant shall reimburse the City for all Consultant Costs incurred up to and including the date that the Consultants cease work pursuant to the City's notification,provided City has notified Consultants to cease work consistent with this Section 13. The Applicant's obligation to reimburse the City as provided in this Agreement shall survive the termination of this Agreement pursuant to this Section 13. 14. Remedies Upon Default. An event of default shall be deemed to exist upon the occurrence of all three of the following: (i) Either the City or the Applicant has, without legal justification or excuse, breached any one or more of its obligations under this Agreement; and 17 (ii) The nondefaulting party has sent written notice to the party claimed to be in default; specifying the default and what actions the nondefaulting party asserts should be taken to remedy the default; and (iii) The party claimed to be in default has not,within ten (10) calendar days following receipt of the written notice described above, either corrected the default or taken actions reasonably satisfactory to the nondefaulting party, to remedy the default within a reasonable period of time, but in no event longer than thirty (30) calendar days after receipt of the written notice described above. Following an event of default, the nondefaulting party may exercise any and all remedies available to it pursuant to this Agreement, or at law or in equity, including, without limitation, instituting an action for damages, injunctive relief, or specific performance. 15. Nonwaiver of Rights or Remedies. The failure of a party to exercise an one or more of its rights or remedies under this Agreement shall not constitute a waiver of that party's right to enforce that right or seek that remedy in the future. No course of conduct or act of forbearance on any one or more occasions by any party to this Agreement shall preclude that party from asserting any right or remedy available to it in the future. No course of conduct or act of forbearance on any one or more occasions shall be deemed to be an implied modification of the terms of this Agreement. 16. Assignability. This Agreement may not be assigned by Applicant without the express written consent of the City, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. City 18 shall not withhold its consent to assignment of this Agreement in the event the following conditions have been satisfied: (a) the Assignee acquires more than sixty (60%) percent of the Property; (b) the Applicant and the Assignee are prepared to execute an Assignment and Assumption Agreement pursuant to which the Assignee will be subject to all of the terms and conditions of this Agreement; and (c) the City Attorney affirms in writing that the Assignment and Assumption Agreement has been reviewed by the City Attorney and is not inconsistent with the terms and conditions of this Agreement. Upon approval by the City Attorney, the Applicant and the Assignee shall execute the Assignment and Assumption Agreement and provide the City with a copy thereof. Any attempted assignment of this Agreement not in compliance with the terms of this Agreement shall be null and void and shall confer no rights or benefits upon the assignee. 17. No Oral Modifications. This Agreement represents the entire understanding of the City and the Applicant and supersedes all other prior or contemporaneous written or oral agreements pertaining to the subject matter of this Agreement. This Agreement may be modified, but only by a writing signed by both the City and the Applicant. All modifications to this Agreement must be approved by the City Council of the City of Arcadia. 18. Binding Upon Successors. This Agreement and each of its terms shall be binding upon the City, the Applicant and their respective officers, elected officials, employees, agents, contractors, and permitted successors and assigns. 19 19. Attorneys' Fees. In the event that any action or proceeding, including arbitration, is commenced by either the City or the Applicant against the other to establish the validity of this Agreement or to enforce any one or more of its terms, the prevailing party in any such action or proceeding shall be entitled to recover from the other, in addition to all other legal and equitable remedies available to it, its actual attorneys' fees and costs of litigation, including, without limitation, filing fees, service fees, deposition costs, arbitration costs and expert witness fees, including actual costs and attorneys' fees on appeal. 20. Jurisdiction and Venue. This Agreement is executed and is to be performed in the City of Arcadia,Los Angeles County, California, and any action or proceeding brought relative to this Agreement shall be heard in the appropriate court in the County of Los l� ty Angeles, California. The City and the Applicant each consent to the personal jurisdiction of the court in any such action or proceeding. 21. Time is of the Essence. Except as otherwise expressly stated, time is of the essence in the performance of every act required pursuant to this Agreement. 22. Covenant of Further Assurances. The City and the Applicant shall take all other actions and execute all other documents which are reasonably necessary to effectuate this Agreement. 23. Interpretation. The City and the Applicant agree that this Agreement is the product of mutual negotiations and is an arms-length transaction. Each party has negotiated this Agreement with the advice and assistance of legal counsel of its own choosing. ?0 It is further agreed that this document is a product of mutual drafting efforts by both the City and the Applicant and, accordingly, the rule that ambiguities in a document shall be construed against the drafter of the document shall have no application to this Agreement. In construing and interpreting this Agreement, the finder of fact shall give effect to the mutual intention of the City and the Applicant, notwithstanding such ambiguity, and may refer to the facts and circumstances under which this Agreement is made and such other extraneous evidence as may assist the finder of fact in ascertaining the intent of the City and the Applicant. 24. Severability. If any term or provision of this Agreement is found to be invalid or unenforceable, the City and the Applicant both agree that they would have executed this Agreement notwithstanding the invalidity of such term or provision. The invalid term or provision may be severed from the Agreement and the remainder of the Agreement may be enforced in its entirety. 25. Headings. The headings of each Section of this Agreement are for the purposes of convenience only and shall not be construed to either expand or limit the express terms and language of each Section. 26. Representations of Authority. Each party signing this Agreement on behalf of a party which is not a natural person hereby represents and warrants to the other party that all necessary legal prerequisites to that party's execution of this Agreement have been satisfied and that he or she has been authorized to sign this Agreement and bind the party on 21 whose behalf he or she signs. The Applicant acknowledges and affirms that it is the owner of the Property subject to the development (application) and/or the authorized agent and representative of the owner of the Property with full authority to do all acts necessary and related to the implementation, performance and enforcement of this Agreement. 27. Notices. Notices required under this Agreement shall be sent to the following: If to the City: City of Arcadia 240 West Huntington Drive P. 0. Box 60021 Arcadia, CA 91066-6021 Attention: William R. Kelly, City Manager Telephone No. (626) 574-5401 Facsimile No. (626) 445-5729 If to the Developer: Santa Anita Enterprises, Inc. 285 W. Huntington Drive Arcadia, CA 91007 Attn: T. D. Austin, Vice President Telephone No. (626) 574-6660 Facsimile No. (626) 821-1513 Notices given pursuant to this Agreement shall be deemed received as follows: (i) If sent by United States Mail -three (3) calendar days after deposit into the United States Mail, first class postage prepaid. - (ii) If by facsimile- upon transmission and actual receipt by the receiving party. (iii) If by express courier service or hand delivery- on the date of receipt by the receiving party. 22 The addresses for notices set forth in this Section may be changed upon written notice of such change to either the City or the Applicant, as appropriate. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties to this Agreement have executed it as of the date set forth below. Dated: , 1998 CITY OF ARCADIA a Municipal Corporation By: William R. Kelly City Manager ATTEST: By: City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: /27),:hv )11<,a"\-- Michael . Miller City Attorney SANTA ANITA ENTERPRISES, INC. Dated: , 1998 By. T. D. Austin Vice-President ATTEST: By: gA: Secretary of the Corpor ion 23 rooTwi aw. fj111 I wrn , 1 1 AI / .,-::.,f i la•ill 0 i I III II I.I I lirrft fi NIN ii • lirfill r r ne I rarwr _ E LOS ANGELES ' STATEXCLI i7 2—%--1 , ARBORETUI SANTA PARK �•+mo*w a. li _ bib._ Svc°� �- ARCAdA •. _ V PARK AREA . ' r+i�+w+ • SANTA ANTTA g .imam. GOLF COURSE a coti.ar II5 arL ^— • ARCADIA r I EXPIIBIT 1-2 SITE LOCATION- VICINITY MAP I SANTA ANITA C;c-.,,:fi„ 2 EXHIBIT A PAGE I-3 EXHIBIT B SANTA ANITA COMMERCIAL CENTER ENTITLEMENT PROCESSING SCHEDULE 1,1998 Qtr 2,1998 Qtr 3, 1998 Qtr 4,1998 Qtr 1, 1999 Q ID Name Scheduled Start Scheduled Finish Feb I Mar Apr I May Jun Jul I Aug I Sep Oct I Nov I Dec Jan I Feb Mar Apr 1 ENTITLEMENT PROCESS 2111/98 8:00am 10/8/98 5:00pm ' , , . - , ;, ,.., _ - , 2 File Specific Plan 2/11/98 8:00am 2/11/98 5:00pm + 3 City Acceptance 2/11/98 8:00am 3/11/98 5:00pm IBM 4 Signed Contract 2/18/98 8:00am 2/18/98 5:00pm 4 • 5 NOP Prepared, Issued and Circulated 2/18/98 8:00am 3/18/98 5:00pm Eli 6 Technical Studies Completed 2/18/98 8:00am 4/20/98 5:00pm .. - , 7 Screencheck EIR to City 5/4/98 8:00am 5/4/98 5:00pm 4' 8 Screencheck City Review 5/4/98 8:00am 5115/98 5:00pm 9 Revisions to Draft EIR 5/15/98 8:00am 6/1/98 5:00pm 10 Preliminary Draft Review 5/29/98 8:00am 6/12/98 5:00pm 11 Release Draft EIR 6/15/98 8:00am 6/15/98 5:00pm m >< 12 Public Review Draft EIR 6/15/98 8:00am 8/3/98 5:00pm = 13 Planning Commission Hearing(s) 6/15/98 8:00am 6/28/98 5:00pm ,--i 14 Response to Comments 8/3/98 8:00am 8/13/98 5:00pm . :Q7 15 Distribute Responses to Agencies 8/17/98 8:00am 8/27/98 5:00pm ■ 16 City Council Hearing(s) 9/1/98 8:00am 9/15/98 5:00pm 17 Certified EIR 9/15/98 8:00am 9115/98 5:00pm Project:SANTA ANITA PROJECT Critical v , ' • • -ti: .o Progress Summary Date:2/10/98 Noncritical Milestone 4 + Rolled Up Q Page 1 - EXHIBIT B JL1l Ul V VV • - •-2VL .i • L J :d •r LI Lt • REVISED PROPOSAL FOR THE SANTA ANITA COMMERCIAL CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT February 6 1998 Prepared for: City ofArcadia 240 W Huntington Drive Arcadia, CA 91066 Prepared by: LEA Associates, Inc. 1 Park Plaza, Suite 500 Irvine, California 92714 (714)553-0666 LSA Project #CA730 EXHIBIT C JG\l 151 ; 2- G-2J0 ; 4:40ri1: ; L J A - :7; 3/27 • 1.5.4 Associates,Inc. TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1 2.0 SCOPE OF WORK 2 2.1 PROJECT START UP 2 2.2 INITIAL STUDY AND NOTICE OF PREPARATION 2 2.3 ENVIRONMENTAL LMPACT REPORT 3 2.4 PREPARATION OF DRAFT EIR 12 2.5 PREPARATION OF FINAL EIR 13 2.6 PROJECT MANAGEMENT 14 2.7 DELIVERABLES SPECIFIED 14 2.8 MEETINGS SPECIFIED • 14 3.0 PROPOSED PROJECT SCHEDULE. 15 4.0 PROPOSED PROJECT BUDGET 16 ATTACHMENTS A- PROPOSED PROJECT SCHEDULE B -STANDARD CONTRACT PROVISIONS AND BILLING RATES C -PROPOSED PROJECT BUDGET 27a' s<TACTA730'31EvEiR.Pro» 11 SENT BY:. 2- 6-98 ; 4:47P1i ; L S_A -, ;t 4/97 LSA Associates,Inc. to INTRODUCTION This proposal is for preparation of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the proposed Santa Anita Commercial Center Specific Plan. LSA has structured the environmental review process to include early identification of potential issues and identification of mitigation measures. The EIR for the Santa Anita Commercial Center Specific Plan will he based on the project description and Specific Plan application package to be submitted to the City on February 11, 1998. We will prepare a Project EIR, providing project level environmental clearance under CEQA. We will make maximum use of the baseline informa- tion developed for the previous environmental analysis for the Santa Anita Entertainment Center to reduce repetitive research and analysis. The following scope.of work defines the tasks and requirements for all tasks through certification of the EIR. • • • • • • fit`I t57; 2- ti-1-.W ; 4:47111 ; L S A ;# 5/27 • I.SA Associates,Inc. • 2.0 SCOPE OF WORK The following is the scope of work proposed by LSA. • 2,1 PROJECT START UP Initial Team Meetings To Establish Approach At the outset of the project, three organizational meetings will be conducted to assure the efficient and successful completion of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR). LSA will nlcct with City of Arcadia staff and the applicant to develop a mutual understanding of the issues to be addressed in the 1;IR and the approach to be taken in preparing the EIR Three meetings are specified: January 16, 1997;January 6, 1998; and February 12, 1998. Project Description LSA will review the Specific Plan and submittal package and prepare a prelimi- nary project description based on the submittal package. The submittal pack- age and preliminary'project description shall be reviewed for completeness and use in the environmental analysis in the EIR The preliminary project descrip- tion shall contain fixed locations for vehicular/pedestrian access and major project components that will not change. LSA will utilize this preliminary project description to begin technical analysis and to prepare a project descrip- tion for the Initial Study and Notice of Preparation. • Project Initiation/Application Completeness Memo LSA will prepare a memo to the City indicating project application complete- ness, project consistency with the General Plan, and consistency with applica- ble City ordinances. LSA will also provide the City an internal management program for the tasks in the scope of work to complete the EIR process, includ- ing a detailed schedule. 2.2 IIVIITAL STODY AND NOTICE OF PREPARATION Utilizing the City's standard checklist, LSA will prepare a draft Initial Study and Notice of Preparation (IS/NOP) for the proposed Specific Plan. The NOP will include a brief description of the Specific Plan, and will identify the process for completing the EIR. A discussion of each checklist item in the IS will help focus the environmental review included in the EIR The draft IS/NOP and distribution list will be based on the previously prepared Screencheck EIR IS/NOP. The IS/NOP will be provided to the City for review and comment. Upon approval by the City, LSA will distribute the IS/NOP for public review. LSA will assist the City to gather additional public input at a public scoping meeting. LSA will provide assistance at one scoping meeting', 7 SENT BY: 2- 6-98 ; 4:48PM : L S A -' 6/27 LCa Assodatrs,Inc. utilizing graphics, text, notices, and other support provided by the applicant and/or City staff. LSA will review all comments received on the NOP and at the scoping meeting. If any comments raise new environmental issues that are not already identified in the NOP, LSA will identify their implications, and provide a prompt report to the City. 2.3 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT Approach The Santa Anita Commercial Center Specific Plan EIR will include, to the extent possible, existing environmental information from the environmental docu- mentation from the previous entertainment center Specific Plan. However, new analysis of the proposed project is required based on the new project description. The following components will ensure that the Santa Anita Com- mercial Center FIR is completed efficiently. • LSA will review the preliminary EIR prepared for the previous Specific Plan submittal, and make necessary revisions to ensure that the new EIR will provide project level environmental clearance under CEQA. A nevv component called Project Features will be added to describe project components that mitigate or substantially lessen potential project im- pacts for each environmental topic. This component will identify pro- ject features that will mitigate potential impacts resulting from the pro'- posed project, obviating the need for additional mitigation. • LSA will complete technical studies, documents and environmental impact discussions based on the revised project description_ The revi sion of these documents and sections will require updated graphics t9 show the new project boundary, new site plan, circulation pattern and the revised land use mix. ▪ Maximum use of the baseline information developed for the previous environmental analysis for the Santa Anita Entertainment Center will reduce repetitive research and analysis. - Data Requirements LSA's proposal is based upon the following information being supplied to LSA by the project applicant or the City: 1_ Initial Study/NOP-Preliminary Santa Anita Commercial Center Specific Plan shall be submitted with sufficient project detail to prepare traffic, air, noise, and economic studies. Project details shall include a site plan, fixed access driveways and City approved drive aisles, a descrip- tion of land use types with square footage for each type, and final park- ing plans and counts, consistent with City code requircmenrs. 2.!6.•984(1 ACTA73(1,REVEIR.PH 0.” SE\T BY: 2- 6-D8 ; 4:49P1f L S A - ;= 7/27 • LSA Associates, • 2. EIR Preparation Phase-City approved Specific Plan application package, including final site plan, proposed project renderings and building elevations suitable for preparation of a visual impact analysis, concept landscaping plans, parcel maps,and other detailed plans as specified by the City. 3. Hydrology analysis and drainage plan. 4. On-site and off-site Infrastructure Improvement Program. 5. Two dimensional drawn or compiled perspective project renderings • with accurate background. 6. Final on-site circulation analysis and parking demand analysis. The following describes.the scope of work to update, revise and prepare the technical studies utilizing data received from the applicant as specified above. Technical Studies by LSA Traffic/Circulation Analysis LSA will update and revise the traffic and circulation analysis based on the new project description to determine the circulation system needs for future traffic demands and the potential circulation impacts associated with the development of the proposed Santa Anita Commercial Center(SACC) Specific Plan. Much of the baseline analysis has been prepared as part of the previous project applica- tion, and is still considered useful for this revised analysis. This includes the majority of the existing traffic volume and level of service calculations, the development of the future traffic conditions (consistent with the recently ap- proved General Plan conditions) and the foundation for the project trip distri- bution. Therefore, this scope of work identifies those tasks necessary to pre- pare the traffic impact analysis revision, using as much of the original work as possible. • Task 1 -Data Collection The majority of the data necessary to complete this revised analysis has been . collected as part of the original work effort. To comply with the Congestion Management Program requirements, however, LSA is required to use traffic counts collected within a one year period from the initiation of the analysis for all CMP intersections. Therefore, LSA will collect a.m. and p.m. peak hour traffic counts at the one CMP intersection within the study area, Rosemead Boulevard/Eluntington Avenue. In addition, and at the City's request, LSA will collect a.m. and p.m. peak hour turn movement counts and will analyze four additional intersections: ▪ Duarte Road/Las Tunas Boulevard • Langdon/Huntington Drive ▪ Baldwin Drive/I-210 Eastbound Ramps • • Baldwin Drive/I-210 Westbound Ramps 6.98;c1:`,CT..730\REVE R-PRQ., 4 SENT BY.: 2- 6-98 : 4:49PM ; L S A - ; 8;'27 ISA Associates, Inc. These intersection turn movement counts will be collected during the race season. The traffic data at Rosemead Boulevard/Huntington Drive will be collected according to CM? monitoring requirements, and will be compared to the count previously conducted at this location during the 1995 race season. For purposes of this scope of work, all other data necessary to prepare th revision have been collected. Task 2-Existing Condition The existing setting was prepared as part of the previous analysis, and will be used in this revision. The level of service at the CMP intersection of. Rosemead/Huntington will be revised based on the new traffic counts. Level of service will be determined and reported for the four additional.intersections! Task 3 -Future Cumulative Conditions Forecast future year traffic conditions were developed as part of both the Gen- eral Plan update and the previous SACC analysis. This future cumulative condi' tion will be used for the analysis revision. • Task 4-Project impacts Daily and peak hour trips will be generated for the proposed project for the average weekday and Saturday scenarios. Trip generation rates will be based on the ITE Trip Generation manual, Fifth Edition. Internal trip capture, due to the mix of uses, and potential pass-by trip activity, due to the intervening opt portunity the proposed project affords, will be estimated and accounted for at the project driveways. The resulting net effective--trip generation will provide the basis to determine project related circulation impacts. Project generated trips will be distributed through the project area to local and regional destinations based on the trip distribution patterns developed for the previous analysis. These trip distribution percentages will be adjusted fo reflect any changes in access as a result of the revised project description. The result- ing project trip assignments will be overlaid onto the existing and future traffic bases to determine the existing and future plus project scenarios, respectively. Project impacts will be determined for intersections within the project study area based on the ICU/HCM analysis methodologies for intersections. The study area will include key intersection locations within the City of Arcadia, as well as regional CMP facilities, such as the 1-210 freeway, as determined by the CMP criteria. Intersection levels of service and freeway volume to capacity ratios will be developed for the four analysis scenarios for all study area inter- sections. - • 216.^78«1:\CTA730`REvt:IR.PRr , 5 SE\T BY: 2- 6-98 : 4:5OPlM ; L S A -i 9/27 1-44 Associates,Inc. The project contribution to intersections and freeway mainlines will be deter- mined as a proportion of total new traffic at each location. This task will assist in the determination of fair share allocations to circulation improvements. For any intersection or freeway segment that is forecast to exhibit overcapacity operations, mitigation measures will be recommended. These mitigation mea- sures will be generally prioritized in terms of safety and level of service. In addition, improvements to transit service and implementation of TDM strate- gies will be evaluated as mitigation measures to reduce the volume of traffic generated by the proposed project. Task 5- On-Site Circulation and Parking Analysis LSA will review the on-site circulation and parking analysis provided by the project applicant to ensure that potential traffic generation and impacts are consistent between off-site and on-site analyses. Noise Analysis The Noise Analysis will be revised based on new traffic analysis results.•.This technical analysis will use the same methodology and the model will remain • virtually as it is,with the exception of new traffic noise levels. Task 1 will be to assess and update the baseline information. Tasks 2 and 3 will update model- ing results. Task 1 -Baseline Noise The existing baseline noise setting was prepared for the previous analysis, and will be used in this revision. This information will he reviewed and updated. Task 2-Short-Term Impacts Potential short-term impacts such as those associated with construction activi- ties will be qualitatively addressed for noise sensitive receptors in the vicinity of the construction area. Construction equipment, hours of operation, duration, and equipment use peaks, if provided by the project proponent,will be utilized to identify appropriate measures to reduce construction noise levels, as neces- sary. The application of City noise ordinances or other guidance to control construction noise will be discussed. Task 3 -Long-Term Impacts Long-term noise impacts generated by project related roadway traffic will be assessed in terms of potential noise increase at existing,sensitive receptors. The traffic volumes calculated for the proposed project will be utilized in deter- mining the potential noise impact of the project. Noise levels will he predicted 2.6,%<<1:\<°aa73u•,}.LV E1<.Yitc,» 6 SENT By: 2-, 6-88 T 4:51PM ; L 5 a :t-'10/27 . L5.4 Associates,Inc. • using the FI-[WA Noise Model for the existing condition, future with project (average weekday), future without project (average weekday), future with project (weekend), future without project (weekend), and up to three alter, native project scenarios. Noise impacts will be assessed in terms of the commu nity noise equivalent level (CNEL). Other project related noise issues, such as noise from parking lot activities and stationary equipment associated with the proposed project, will be addressed. Existing and future modeled noise exposures for the project and surrounding arca will be presented in tabular format and compared to noise standards outlined in the City's Noise Element. Any noise sensitive receptors that exceed acceptable limits will be identified, and mitigation will be recommended to minimize project related noise impacts. The EIR section will be updated, and input/output tables will be provided for the EIR appendix. No technical report will be provided, Air Quality Analysis The Air Quality Analysis will be updated based on the revised project dcscripl lion and the traffic generation resulting from the new traffic numbers in- SA's updated traffic/circulation report. This technical study will remain virtually as it is,with the exception of the modeled, updated emission levels. Task.1 -Baseline Air Quality The existing baseline air environment was prepared as part of the previous analysis, and will be used in this revision. This information will be reviewed and updated based on the new project description, any changes in air qualitt• monitoring, and any changes in emission factors. Task 2-Short-Term Impacts • Short-term construction related impacts, such as fugitive dust generated by grading and demolition activities, exhaust emissions associated with on-site construction equipment, and off-site import/export of materials, will be esti- mated. Amounts of grading, construction phasing, and types and numbers of construction/grading equipment shall be provided by the applicant. Task 3 - Opera tiona 1 Impacts The operational air quality impacts of the proposed project will be estimated using the most current emission factor program developed by GARB and com- pared to the significance threshold criteria suggested by the SCAQMD, for the proposed project, no project, and up to three alternative project scenarios. Emissions associated with motor vehicles, consumption of natural gas on site, 2 6,93,1:;crA73O JtEvELCt.PRo 7 SENT BY: 2- 6-98 ; 4:51P1i ; L S A --, ;f11/27 ISAAssociates,Inc. and off-site generation of electricity will be calculated. A determination of the significance of the emissions associated with the Specific Plan will be made. Task 4-Local Air Quality Impacts Local air quality impacts from carbon monoxide emissions for four sensitive receptors will be assessed. This analysis will utilize the CALINE4 dispersion model developed by the California Department of Transportation, and most current CARB emission factor program developed by CARB. Existing and future modeled air quality for the project and surrounding area will be compared to federal and State standards. Any air quality exceedances will be identified. To reduce potential project impacts,mitigation measures will be identified. Input/ output tables will be provided as an appendix to the EIR No technical report will be provided. Task 5- Consistency with Regional Plans An evaluation of the project's consistency with SCAG's Regional Comprehensive Plan and the SCAQMD's Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) will be updated for the revised project. Cultural Resources Assessment This Technical Report will be reviewed to determine whether there are any changes are necessary based on the revised project boundaries. In addition, the assessment evaluation will be reviewed to determine whether any impacts previously identified would change based on the new project description and revised project boundaries. Visual Assessment Existing Visual Character The existing visual character of the project site will be defined based on site reconnaissance and the definition of distance zones and descriptive visual characteristics for the project site. The location of representative existing views from the site and onto the project site from visual receptors will be determined jointly with the City and the applicant. Composite photographs, perspective drawings, sight line exhibits, cross section exhibits, and photographs with wire frame building envelopes shall be provided by the applicant, as directed by the City. These photographs and materials will be analyzed based on the following distance zones and de- scriptive visual characteristics. 21ti;9 C:TA7 0••REVEIR.PRO SENT 13y.: 2- 5=98 : 4:52PM ; L S A , ;r12/27 ISA Associates,Inc. • Distance Zones Views of the project site will be analyzed by establishing three basic viewing distance zones. These distance zones characterize the dominant visual characi ter from a vantage point, and describe the view in terms that can be quantified and compared. • Foreground. Foreground views include elements that can be seen at a close distance and that dominate the entire view. Middle Ground. Middle ground views include elements that can be seen at a moderate distance and that partially dominate the view. Background. Background views include elements that are seen at a long clis tance and typically do not dominate the view, but are part of the overall visual composition of the view. Descriptive Visual Characteristics The visual characteristics of the existing project area, the surrounding areas an landforms near the project site will he categorized based on descriptive visual characteristics. These visual characteristics are defined by topographic condi j tions,vegetative cover, development intensity and land uscs, as follows. Urban. This visual description will be refined after site reconnaissance an analysis of photographs. Semi-Urban. This visual description will be refined after site reconnaissance and analysis of photographs. Disturbed Inland Valley's and Foothills. This visual description will be refined after site reconnaissance and analysis of photographs. Threshold of 5itn/icance for Visual Analysis Appendix G of the Stale CF.QA Guidelines indicates that a project will normally have a significant effect on the environment if it will: • Conflict with adopted environmental plans and goals of the community where it is located; and/or • Have a substantial, demonstrable, negative aesthetic effect. :\c1-A73thiZL•'vEIIt.i'RQ» 9 SENT BY 2- 6-98 . 4:53PM . L S A ;f13/27 • 154 Associates,Inc. In addition, the relationships between the severity of the impacts to specific visual characteristics, the location of the visual impacts relative to sensitive land uses,and the direct viewing opportunities associated with these visual impacts will be used to determine substantial aesthetic effect. Visual Impact Analysis and Mitigation Measures The visual impact analysis will utilize the existing conditions described earlier in the report, and will allow an analysis of before and after conditions through the use of sight lines,cross sections, and photographs with wire frame building envelopes added indicating the positions of proposed structures. The photo- graphs will depict existing conditions in the study area. The goal of the wire frame views provided by the applicant is to allow an examination of the visual effects of the proposed project as viewed from key viewpoints selected by the City. The wire frame views submitted by the applicant shall be 11'x17' color reproducible, suitable for use in the EIR. Analysis of three of the wire frame views has been included in the budget: Screencheck EIR Tasks LSA will prepare a Screencheck EIR that incorporates the revised project and results of the revisions and updates to the technical studies identified above. Executive Summary This chapter will summarize the project description, impacts and mitigation measures for the project. A table summarizing the impacts of the project will be provided in the Preliminary Draft EIR(DEIR). Introduction This chapter will describe the environmental procedures that are being fol- lowed, as well as the major areas of concern and controversy. A description of the previous proposal will be included to differentiate the current proposal. In addition, the adoption of the City of Arcadia General Plan will be described, along with discussion of its relevance to the proposed project. Project Description This chapter describes text developed for the Specific Plan describing the pro- ject objectives and the components/characteristics of the proposed project. 2;6/98.1:\C:TA.730 REVi:1 .1'RO'; 10 SENT BY.: 9- M-98 . 4:.53Pii • L S A ;t14/27 ISAAssociate's,Inc. Setting, Impacts and Mitigation Measures The following sections will be provided (as described under the previous Santa Anita Entertainment Center EIR scope of work): Earth Resources Water Resources Land Use Aesthetics Hazardous Waste Public Services Traffic and Parking Noise Air Quality- Cultural Resources The setting, methodology, and threshold of significance will be based, in part, on the recently adopted General Plan.- For a detailed description of each of the previous environmental topics, please refer to the previous Santa Anita Entertainment Center EIR scope of work. Cumulative Impacts The cumulative impacts of the project will be described within the context of future development within the City of Arcadia or a cumulative study area deter- mined with the assistance of City staff. This analysis will be based on future anticipated development and redevelopment identified by the City within a defined study area, generally within the City itself. Analysis was not completed as part of the previous work for the partial EIR, and will have to be written. Alternatives No work on alternatives was performed for the previous Entertainment Center EIR. Three alternatives to the proposed Specific Plan will be assessed in the new work effort for this EIR. The description of each of the alternatives will be developed in conjunction with staff; preliminarily, we propose to consider the following alternatives for the project: 1. No build, i.e., existing development on site 2. Reduced intensity development. 3. Development of a mixed use concept within the project boundary. which includes residential, 4. Design alternative -same use and square footage, with different design_ 5. Office park. 216;98-<IAc't'A73O.'F 'F.fR.P12o' 1 SENT BY: 2- 6-98 ; 4:54PM ; L S A 41../27 lit Associates,Ina Alternatives will be broken into two categories: feasible alternatives, and alter- natives considered and rejected. Alternatives will be considered and rejected if they fail to achieve fundamental project objectives. Growth Inducing Impacts The potential growth inducing aspects of the project will be discussed. This assessment will take into consideration the developed nature of the surround- ing area and the decisions made by the City as part of the General Plan Update process completed in early 1996. CEQA Mandated Sections The following topics will be addressed. • 1. Irreversible and irretrievable commitment of resources 2. Unavoidable adverse impacts. 2.4 PREPARATION OF DRAFT FIR LSA will prepare a Screencheck Draft ElR that incorporates new analysis for the Specific Plan. Responses to the City's comments on the Screencheck EIR will be incorporated into a Preliminary Draft EIR. The mitigation monitoring program will be included in the Preliminary DEIR. We suggest that a working meeting be scheduled with City staff and LSA so that immediate closure can be reached on revisions required to the DEIR document. In LSA's experience, this process greatly reduces the requirement for time-consuming multiple revisions to the document. LSA will submit the preliminary DEIR to the City for review and comment. It is specified that the comments on the preliminary DEIR will be limited to clarifica- tion of the text, and that no new significant issues will be raised. ISA will incorporate these comments into a signature pre-print Draft EIR for the City's final approval before circulation. Upon authorized City signature, LSA will prepare the DEIR for circulation to the public, including preparation of the DEIR distribution list and reproduction of the document. Noticing in newspa- pers of availability of the DEIR is the responsibility of the City. LSA will prepare a mitigation monitoring program, pursuant to California Public Resources Code Section 21081.6. The monitoring program is intended to ensure that conditions are implemented during construction. The monitor- ing program will contain: 1) an inventory of mitigation measures, 2) timing for implementation (e.g., prior to issuance of grading permits), 3) responsible staff or agency assigned to monitor implementation, and 4) a check box showing compliance/non-compliance. 2/6,98"1,v.]•A73mitiiVrULPRO" 12 SE\T BY; 2- 6-98 ; 4:54P1f ; L S A - ;,tl6!27 I Assoc(afex,Inc. 2.5 PREPARATION OF FINAL EIR During the Final EIR (FEIR) process, LSA will prepare the following deliver- ables: 1. Responses to Comments on the DEIR 2. Draft Findings 3, Draft Statement of Overriding Considerations 4. FEIR Package. Response to Comments During the public review period, as comments on the DEIR are received LSA will prepare responses to those comments. LSA will prepare draft responses to all comments received during the public review process. Where comments refer to items prepared by other consultants, the project applicant, or the City, I SA will rely on those sources to prepare the draft response. The responses will be assembled into the Response to Comments component of the FEIR for review and comment by City staff. ISA will meet with City staff to review staff comments on the proposed response to comments document. We specify that one round of revisions to the Response to Comments document will lie-re- quired, and that total professional staff time spent on responses shall not ex- ceed 50 hours,and word processing and graphics time spent will not exceed 24 hours. Final EIR Following City review of responses to comments, LSA will prepare a proposed FEIR, which will consist of the Response to Comments and supporting techni- cal materials, as well as modifications, if any, that need to be made to the DEIR document in the form of an errata or addendum document. A revision to the DEIR that incorporates the Responses to Comments is not specified. . Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations LSA will prepare findings of fact supporting the conclusions of the proposed FEIR to be incorporated into a City resolution certifying the FEIR as adequate and complete. If the FEIR identifies significant unavoidable impacts, LSA will also prepare a Statement of Overriding Considerations. This document will meet the requirements contained in Sections 15091 through 15093 of the State CEQA Guidelines, and will fully address all facts and findings, project benefits, and the balancing required of a statement of overriding considerations by decision makers. • 2,0.98x1:,(:I:a730d:LVT R.PRO>% 13 SENT BY: 2- 6-98 : 4:55PM ; L S A - ;t17f27 ISAAssoclates,Inc. 2.6 PROJECT MANAGEMENT LSA proposes an active project management of the EIR effort, in coordination with City staff. LSA will follow our well defined and rigorous Quality Control Plan and Procedures adopted by our Principals in October, 1993. Of primary importance in this task are meetings required with City staff and representatives of the applicant to review work progress and identify concerns and issues throughout the process. The project management role provides a mechanism to ensure that there is adequate exchange of information developed during project start-up and throughout preparation of the EIR. Important elements of this task will be to maintain the project schedule, control the budget, coordi- nate subconsultants, and Facilitate the City's oversight of the preparation of the DEIR and FEIR. Since there is a substantial amount of information that is avail- able under the previous environmental work effort, the number of coordina- tion meetings that would be required is greatly reduced. LSA specifies no more than ten coordination meetings, averaging two hours duration. The Project Manager and Principal in Charge, Mr. Rob Balen, will attend one EIR scoping meeting, one Planning Commission workshop and up to two public hearings. Mr. Balen or Deborah Baer will attend three meetings as directed by the City. Mr. Ealen has a conflict on the second and fourth Tues- days of each month, and is not available on these days. 2.7 DELIVERABLES SPECIFIED We specify the following deliverables: Screencheck EIR (no color, no • 5 Lip $30 = $150 summary/MMP) Preliminary DEIR(full document) 5 Ca) $60 = $300 Signature DEIR(pre-print approval) -1 @ $60 = $60 DEIR 50 $55 = $2,750 DEIR Appendices 50 C4) $25 = $1,250 Draft Response to Comments 5 C $20 = $100 Final Response to Comments 50 @ $21 = $1,050 FEIR Package (excluding DEIR) 20 @ $20 = $400 Finding/Statement of Overriding 5 [n?$ 5 = $25 Considerations Total $6,085 2.8 MEETINGS SPECIFIED Initial Coordinating Meetings 3 • Scoping Meetings 1 Coordination Meetings 6 Public Hearings.Worksliops 3 2/6.9s«I:;CTA73f B-EVEIR.PRO" 14 SENT BY: _2- 6-98 ; 4:56PM ; L S__A :x18;27 ISA Associates,Inc. 3.0 PROPOSED PROJECT SCHEDULE The proposed project schedule is shown on Attachment A to this proposal. We recognize that timely completion of this project is a very important factor. • 2/6;984,1:'N .IA730'',REV'F.IR.PRO'> 15 SENT BY: 2- 6-98 4:56PM L S A : 1127 • I.SA Associates,Inc. 4.0 PROPOSED PROJECT BUDGET We propose to accomplish-these tasks on an hourly basis, consistent with the attached standard contract provisions and billing rates (Attachment B). We estimate that a budget of$85,040 (shown in Attachment C) will be required to accomplish the scope of work. This amount will not be exceeded without your authorization. • • • • • 2/6.198.<I:\c 1A73U'JCES'E1R.PRO"> 16 SENT BYE 2 7_6-98 ; 4:57f : L S A_- ;: 20/27 I A Associates,Inc. ATTACHMENT A PROPOSED PROJECT SCHEDULE • 216,98.,<J\CTA730\REV 1R.PRC»> SE\T BY: 1 2- 6-98 ; 4:57PM : L S A y ;x21/27 • • I SA Associates;vac. PROPOSED PROJECT SCHEDULE Task Dates - - 1. Signed Contract1 2/18 2. NOP Prepared, Issued and Circulated 3/18 3. Technical Studies Completed 4/20 4. Screcncheck EIR Distributed for Review by Team 5/4 5. Screencheck EIR Team Revicw 5/4-5/15 6. LSA Revise Draft EIR 5/15-6/1 7. Preliminary Draft EIR Team Review 6/1-6/12 8. Release Draft EIR 6/15 9. Public Review Period 6/15-8/3 10. Response to Public Comments Review by Team 8/3-8/13 11. Distribute Responses to Comments 8/17-8/27 12. Planning Commission Hearings2 6/15 & 628 13. City Council Hearings 9/1 &9/15 14. Certified EIR 9/15 The scheduled date for the signed contract is critical to allow for a certified document in September, 1998. Planning Commission Hearings to be held during public review period. 226/98'1:\CT730'ItEvEI R.PRO. SENT BY: 2- 6-98 : 4:58PM ; L S A -y ;122/27 IS4 Associates,Inc. ATTACHMENT B STANDARD CONTRACT PROVISIONS AND BILLING RATES • • 2/6,98u1?,CTA7301tEVVEIR.P1O> 1.11 Associates,Inc. • SCHEDULE OF STANDARD CONTRACT PROVISIONS AND BILLING RATES FEES FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES • Fixed-Fee Contracts • If a fixed-fee proposal, the professional services described in the Scope of Services section of the attached proposal shall be provided for the fixed fee noted in the Compensation and Terms section of the proposal. All other pro- fessional services are considered extra services. Extra services shall be provided on a time and expenses basis at the same rates specified for hourly contracts unless other arrangements are made in advance. Hourly Contracts If an hourly plus expenses proposal, the professional services described in the Scope of Services section of the attached proposal shall be provided on a time basis at current hourly rates. These rates are as shown on a Rate Schedule that is attached or can be made available. Hourly rates are subject to review at least annually on or about July 1 each year, and may be adjusted to reflect changing labor costs at our discretion at that time. Out of pocket expenses shall be reimbursed at cost plus 10%, unless other arrangements are made in advance, and arc not included in the hourly fee for professional services. Out of pocket expenses include, but are not limited to, costs of: 1) reproduction of reports and graphics furnished or prepared in connection with the work of the contract, 2) long distance telephone and telegraph charges, 3) laboratory services, 4) automobile travel at 31 cents/mile, 5) truck travel at 46 cents/mile, 6) other travel, subsistence, vehicle rental, and lodging in connection with the work of the contract, 7) fees of specialized con- sultants retained with the approval of the client and S) facsimile transmittals at one dollar per page. The total estimated amount of time and expenses noted in the Compensation and Terms section of this proposal will serve as a control on the services to be provided. The specified amount will not he exceeded without prior approval of the client. FREQUENCY OF BILLING Monthly invoices shall be submitted for progress payment based on work completed to date. Out of pocket expenses shall be billed on the same mon- thly invoice. and shall be identified as a separate item. 10.2u.97uL:;CORY'\CONi11 Cr.PRO)- SENT BY: 2- 6-98 ; 4:5f ; L S A ; 24/27 • 1S4 Associates,Inc. PAYMENT OF ACCOUNTS. Accounts are due and payable upon receipt of invoice. A service charge of 1 Vz% of the invoice amount (18% annual rate) may be applied to all accounts not paid within 30 days of invoice date. Any attorney's fees or other costs incurred in collecting any delinquent amount shall be paid by the Client. TERMINATION OF SERVICES These services may be terminated upon ten days written notice for good reason by either party. In this event, payment for all services and expenses incurred prior to the date of termination shall be due and payable upon receipt of final invoice in accordance with the provisions of the foregoing section. • REVOCATION If this Schedule of Standard Contract Provisions is attached to a proposal, said proposal shall be considered revoked if acceptance is not received within 90 days of the date thereof, unless otherwise specified in the proposal. °L:`,CORF,CONTACr.PRO>> 2 L5A Associates.Inc. HOURLY BILLING RATES - EFFECTIVE SEPTEMBER, 19971 ,job Classcatlon Hourly Rate2 PRINCIPAL $100-165 ASSOCIATE/PROJECT MANAGER $ 65-120 ASSISTANT PROJECT MANAGER $ 50-75 PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR/PROJECT SCIENTIST $ 45-80 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYST/ASST, PIANNER/ASS'I'. ENGINEER $ 40-60 FIELD DIRECTOR(ARCIIAEOIOGY/PALEONTOLOGY/BIOLOGY) $ 35-50 RESEARCH ASSISTANTT/I'ECHNICIAN $ 25-50 FIELD CREW $ 15-40 GRAPHICS $ 60 OFFICE ASSISTANT $ 35 WORD PROCESSING $ 55 Revised September, 1997 2 The hourly rate for work involving actual expenses in court, giving depositions or similar expert testimony, will be billed at $200 per hour rrgardless of job classification. SENT BY; 2- 6-88 ; 5:00PM ; L S A ;x26/27 LSA Associatcg,Inc ATTACHMENT C PROPOSED PROJECT BUDGET 2/6."33«1:\C1_a730•x�VELR rR0 6-IX:13;XLVIP. 1?Cf 7M0i'2V../:J1:U,Sso..)iZ I` (N _ r N' - • -PCS ads arc sdo4.1s)}lo4y138upcaq DIlgni]aanp put:a uitaalu.,iaAcuci uo)01141.:r-1 •palut.ut•.:n act non turimisnipu tJ8}mq c 't11-1q paWads s1 uatrla tug)woi .)ayip woo ilun tad to.aqutnu 391 Pings -4.R.) Jo x107$arlt Jo L•Z uoi)aas u{pa(fpads an;stuatotL�Op Jo 107 pattrupwa pct:Jactutttu 311L in 'saldo o>noq-ul s.ipiy.iui,u 01"(F`58$ I 04.5'01$ SLp'ZS I UlL'9S l OSZ'6$ OO1'J•TE 559'FS 0 £f ! ozeS2 OOZ48$ 08 LC 9'13 o8z' E • 001:'Z$ ;5F .ztl SSl 88r cy � 00'os ZS Z8 PI J'1'T SI Sb82 • SF'St saigtisnqu,ay•aSrlAi Pm..,cta.y1au r co 051.1 k OZ ZI OZ _-- BuN lrDg9ndrsJultaawssa.t9osm 590'£$ CO 545'11 91 9 Z U111 Iett1:1',1111C11 OZVI$ .8 — — -9 svol)uopli)cr)�tiltiittan(1:ayi,lVUla 091'9$ u)• OOL$ z•Z OU 91. .OZ —.. Fi. sliwmmcr}o) •sucxluy ,$) 00011 ;• 9 T '0} 91 091•`4$ 120 09£t 1 oi llt OF _ { —_ �i1_I)�i:l(1.iutxtiuilt:url L I 090`1$ Z 91 Z _ -utulmnS a-u)maKi 0£81 Z • 18 I - sL1OrIJ 4'b 1) OZ6'Tt lk •Z 9 OC — -- --— -- rauicul.rti� • OL9`13 lz -- — •91 -- ... 6 -- S- (JWj.)nlnintun,t'- 55L'1$ Z 9C 1 .....— — --.. •c P 1 c58t .1 - 7 • p saa)n,» ){lcanll7 ■ SP92 I •Z 11. j ,{ujr.nijirY_ Sgkt li z 08111 ? R Z 1 uuneltutlZ: OcJj. 0[42 - — Z 19j, I' saal,U;y align, — - _ 01£f Z J)st:r11 sti�t�ttrtt l ozz'zs k 9 8I — - I aanatitsay 550'12 Y _.. • Z 9 _ 0983 _ I, Z 9 ' . — — — S.-1J3flOiJi1 q)le,( 081''1$ cu 000'11 } ITIS)Pay�tizasay aacila; 0k#•`63 OZ11 --OZ -- 8 s Z sls,lplry.it!IeL O in, 00Z-1/1 0213 - OZ 8i, sls{Icu, .)siou OS£'cr3 008'17? i 5 OS - — s - uodau uont:in•,.n'laili�.L -- T--- _ s1c.Tp:uy iiarutlaay anx]a,,1!axl.wy SLS'T2 UOZ3 r 9 I 1{u it ,1,1s7ux10a5.:,1Ot.UnptUSleltiul 5(Via S 9 II I. 8 --ki ttratu3Sturtiti'd(1Liu)51.1.ifoii SL SS OS 1 SL 58 • 09 01I 001 UZI UZI 091 IM.L 'qtalaU tnO(1 uot1tlnS/1L ocip I Sumac/ tat:1T wpt111l.A 3unc10 , sots, no)pwelt•i uaicq pse7 -- --- - --- 2IIa ZIl.I.N13D 'IVID1I:11eVI TOD VILVV VLNVS • , , ALFRED GOBAR ASSOCIATES l W . December 29, 1997 _ _. Mr. William R. Kelly, City Manager DEC 3 0 1997 CITY OF ARCADIA 240 W. Huntington Drive Arcadia, CA 91066 Subject: Revised Proposal for Fiscal Analysis of Santa Anita Commercial Complex Dear Mr. Kelly: The analysis will address the fiscal implications associated with the entertainment- commercial complex currently being considered by the City for approval. Preliminary information suggests that the project scale totals approximately 500,000 square feet in size and consists of a large cinema complex, big-box retail anchors, and a mixture of in-line and pad locations serving community- and regional-oriented consumer demands. The proposed analysis is strictly limited to the defined project without consideration extended to project -- alternatives, including alternatives addressed in accordance with CEQA requirements. The project's anticipated fiscal impact is evaluated in terms of the continuing annual effect resulting upon project buildout. The analysis does not address fiscal implications associated with project phasing or interim development. A primary objective of the analysis is to identify the project's net fiscal effect with regard to two operating concerns of the City; namely, the ability to fund the cost of public services and the ability to fund the cost of capital improvements associated with project. The proposed fiscal analysis will utilize research information used to support pertinent findings of analysis previously prepared for the Santa Anita Entertainment Center Specific Plan (SAEC). Specific documents that represent the most probable data resources for this analysis include: • City of Arcadia -Two Year Operating Budget: Fiscal Years 1997-1998 • Fiscal Impact Handbook • Impact Assessment • Draft Screen check - SAEC Fiscal Impact Report • Draft Screen check - SAEC Economic Impact Report The City or its designated representative must provide specific information describing the project to Alfred Gobar Associates within one week after starting the fiscal analysis in order to avoid delays in completing the fiscal report. Required project information includes: • Description of the project, including site plan showing location and size of building improvements and proposed building uses (e.g. retail, cinema, lodging, etc.). If the project is to contain residential or lodging components, additional information is requested regarding anticipated value, rent rate, or room rate. EXHIBIT D 721 Kimberly Avenue, Placentia, CA 92870-6343 (714)524-1000 FAX(714) 524-0149 . , , O Mr. William R. Kelly ALFRED GOBAR ASSOCIATES December 29, 1997 Page 2 • Amount of public roadways included on-site (e.g. cross-section of each type and corresponding lineal footage). Supplemental information about number of additional signal heads, connector roads, etc., required off-site as a result of project. • Site assessor data including size of parcel(s), current 1997 assessed valuation (land, improvements, and personal property identified separately), and tax rate area corresponding to each parcel. • Estimate of total cost of required public infrastructure improvements needed to serve site. Once the above requested data is received, research and analysis leading to the preparation of a fiscal impact report is commenced. The fiscal impact analysis is prepared in accordance with our standard reporting format as follows: . . • Description of the proposed project and assumed levels of on-site economic performance reflecting proposed activities and normative levels of operating performance assigned to similar facilities in the Southern California region. • Identification of project-generated sources of fiscal revenue accruing to the General Fund Budget. • Identification of project-related public service responsibilities and fiscal expense accruing to the General Fund Budget. • Estimated cost of municipal infrastructure improvements as provided to Alfred Gobar Associates by the project engineer or City representative. • Identification of the net annual fiscal benefit/(burden) resulting from full development and occupancy of proposed on-site improvements and activities. • Description of project's ability to support debt service on the estimated cost of capital improvements based on project's ability to generate annual fiscal revenue in excess of corresponding fiscal expense. Three copies of the completed study document will be submitted for review by City Staff. One revision of the completed analysis, based on internal review by City Staff, is provided plus one informal presentation of critical findings by a senior member of Alfred Gobar Associates. Additional study meeting presentations or report revisions will be billed on a time-and-materials basis. The above-described analysis represents a rather straightforward approach with considerable emphasis placed on existing information resources to support critical findings and determinations. The analysis does not constitute a market feasibility study or address the probable marketaaiiity of activities proposed at the site location. Instead, the analysis identifies and discusses the proposed project in the context of the ongoing net annual fiscal effect that can be anticipated upon buildout of a normally competitive development consistent with the project proposal. The analysis also identifies residual funding capacity that remains to pay the cost of municipal infrastructure improvements after first satisfying fiscal (public service) responsibilities. It is expected that the entire analysis will require 6 weeks to complete and submit a report to City Staff for internal review. The total cost to complete the described analysis is $10,000, including one (1) style revision to the report text, one (1) informal presentation of findings, F S"ETTERIARCAD!A DOC Mr. William R. Kelly ALFRED GOBAR ASSOCIATES December 29, 1997 Page 3 • and five (5) copies of the final report. The cost does not include any revisions required in response to comments related to the environmental review or public hearing process. Additional report revisions, meetings or services not explicitly described in the above workscope will be billed on a time-and-material basis, including travel time. The standard rate for our Senior Associate assigned to this study effort is $80 per hour. We are prepared to commence the proposed analysis within one week of your formal and written authorization to proceed indicated by your signature in the space provided below. The above cost quote includes general liability ($1.0 Million), workers compensation ($1.0 Million) and auto insurance coverage ($1.0 Million) according to the standard limits of our endorsement policy. Our.terms require the City to pay the cost of any additional forms of insurance or coverage limits the City may require in connection with this study. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to give me a call. Sincerely, ALFRED GOBAR ASSOC • 'S •lonzo '-drin Senior •ssociate cc: Donna Butler Robert Balen - Authorized Scope Of Work (check box to indicate agreement) ❑Fiscal Analysis of Santa Anita Commercial Complex-$10,000 Legal Authorizing Signature Date" • F'V.PPSILETTER\ARCADIA.DOC I I O LAW OFFICES BENJAMIN KAUFMAN • TERRY P. KAUFMANN MACIAS DEBORAH J. FOX KAUFMAN, Fox & SOHAGI,. ILP PHILIP A. SEYMOUR MARGARET MOORE SOHAGI A REGISTERED LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP OF COUNSEL RICHARD P. LOPEZ 10960 WILSHIRE BOULEVARD. SUITE 1270 LIORA FORMAN LOS ANGELES. CALIFORNIA 90024-3702 g< FACSIMILE RECYCLED PAPER (310) 444-7813 TELEPHONE D ;'I �� ill(310) 444-7805 lUr L CITY ORdEY 19 Februa 9, 1998 I.JUJ_ _ i1jj: VIA FACSIMILE AND FIRST CLASS MAIL Michael H. Miller, City Attorney City of Arcadia 240 West Huntington Drive Arcadia, California 91006 • _. - . Re: Professional Services — Scope of Work Dear Mr. Miller: ". _ . . Kaufman, Fox & Sohagi is happy to provide legal services to the City of Arcadia ("City") relating to the Santa Anita Realty Enterprises, Inc. matter pursuant to the following scope of work. Task No. 1: Provide legal direction and review under direction and supervision of the City Attorney concerning potential general plan, zone change, specific plan applications and Development Agreement. • Task No. 2: Provide legal counsel and review at direction of City Attorney throughout environmental review process pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act. • • EXHIBIT .E KAUFMAN, Fox 8 SOHAGI, LLP Michael H. Miller, City Attorney February 9, 1998 Page 2 Task No. 3: Attend meetings and public hearings at the request of the City Attorney. As we discussed, my hourly rate is $195 plus costs and expenses and- I would estimate that our fees would be $30,000. We will prepare a formal engagement letter for your review and signature. In the meantime, if you have any questions or need additional information relating to this scope of work, please give me a call. Very truly yours, ----Y-YLzi-r-g-A- ±"f -\SC-kg-A: MARGARET MOORS SOHAGI of KAUFMAN, FOX & SOHAGI • m\-millr2.1tr 70147-009 SART COMMERCIAL CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN - CITY/CONSULTANT HOURLY BREAKDOWN 2/4/98 City Staff/Consultant Billing Rates* Specific Plan/EIR Dev.Agree. Total Costs William Kelly $80.00 40 40 $ 6,400.00 Donna Butler $53.00 40 20 $ 3,180.00 Mike Miller $79.00 12 40 $ 4,108.00 Ed Cline/Traffic $120.00 20 $ 2,400.00 Steve Bucknam/Engineering $140.00 30 8 $ 5,320.00 Don Penman $67.00 40 40 $ 5,360.00 Corky Nicholson $44.00 40 $ 1,760.00 Pete Kinnahan $58.00 20 10 $ 1,740.00 Total Staff Costs $ 30,268.00 This Includes hourly wage plus benefits Reimbursables Estimated Reimbursables, inc. mailing, notices, copies, etc. $ 5,710.00 Total City Costs $ 35,978.00 • H • H • S U RESOLUTION NO. 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 THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AND DETERMINE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. That the fee established is necessary for the purpose of defraying the City of expenditures and costs for the purposes set forth in this resolution, and that said fee does not exceed the estimated reasonable costs for providing the service. SECTION 2. Pursuant to Arcadia Municipal Code Section 9296.4.1, a person who requests adoption, amendment or repeal of a specific plan shall deposit with the Community Development Division an amount equal to the estimated cost of preparing the plan, amendment or repeal prior to its preparation by the Community Development Division. The Community Development Division shall specific the deposit required within ten (10) working days of the date a person's application for the adoption, amendment or repeal of a specific plan is deemed complete. SECTION 3. The City Council further directs that any specific plan presented for adoption may include a further fee for persons seeking subsequent City approvals which are required to be consistent with said specific plan. In such cases, the fees shall be established so that, in the aggregate, they defray, but as estimated do not exceed, the otherwise unreimbursed cost to the City of preparation, adoption and administration of said specific plan, including costs incurred pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, Public Resources Code Section 21000 et. seq. As nearly as can be estimated the fee charged shall be a prorated amount in accordance with the applicant's relative benefit derived from said specific plan. It is the intent of the City Council in providing for such fees to charge persons who benefit from specific plans for the costs of developing those specific plans which result in savings to them by reducing the cost of documenting environmental consequences and advocating changed land uses which may be authorized pursuant to the specific plan. -1- 5881 EXHIBIT G SECTION 4. Within two (2) working days after receipt of a request by a member of the general public for a copy of the documents adopting or amending a specific plan, accompanied by payment for the reasonable cost of copying, the City Clerk shall furnish the requested copy, including the diagrams and text, to the person making the request. The City Clerk shall charge a fee for a copy of a specific plan or an amendment to a specific plan in an amount that is reasonably related to the cost of providing that document. SECTION 5. The adoption of this resolution shall not in any manner be construed as affecting any such fee, nor effect the validity of any bond or cash deposit in lieu thereof, posted, filed or deposited therefore and all rights and obligations thereunder appertaining shall continue in full force and effect. SECTION 6. The City Council hereby finds that the fee specified in this resolution will not produce an amount in excess of that estimated to fund the operation of the City of Arcadia Development Services Department. Based on the foregoing, the City Council hereby finds this resolution is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act as specified in Title 14 Section 15079.1 of the California Administrative Code. SECTION 7. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. Passed, approved and adopted this 24th day of October, 1995. ISJ DENNIS LOJESKI Mayor of the City of Arcadia ATTEST: ISI JUNE D. ALFORD City Clerk of the City of Arcadia Approved as to Form: // )71 /e Michael H. Miller, City Attorney -2- 5881 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS: CITY OF ARCADIA I, JUNE D. ALFORD, City Clerk of the City of Arcadia, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 5881 was passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Arcadia, signed by the Mayor and attested to by the City Clerk at a regular meeting of said Council on the 24th day of October, 1995 and that said Resolution was adopted by the following vote, to-wit: AYES: Councilmember Kuhn, Ulrich, Young and Lojeski NOES: None ABSENT: Councilmember Chang /S/ JUNE D. ALFORD City Clerk of the City of Arcadia -3- 5881 'DTI' �) %Lc,�e/ in fK./5 U�!4 � °RpORASEO' rte s STAFF REPORT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT DATE: April 7, 1998 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Don nman, Deputy City Manager/Development Services Director By: Peter Kinnahan, Economic Development Administrator Donna Butler, Community Development Administrator R,6 �5 Roy Streeter, Chief Building Official / /A/T7 /C _ SUBJECT: REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION TO Al ^eT ORDINANCE NO. 2088, AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING SECTION 8130.35 OF THE ARCADIA MUNICIPAL CODE TO REDUCE SOUND ATTENUATION STANDARDS FOR HOTELS AND MOTELS FROM STC-58 TO STC-52 SUMMARY Over 21 years ago the Arcadia City Council adopted a sound attenuation standard of S IC -58 for R-1 occupancies including hotels and .motels. Stonebridge Companies, the proposed developer of the Hilton and Marriott hotels on the northwest corner site has requested this standard be reduced to STC-52 due to construction costs. Staff has researched and found that six large Los Angeles area cities have a standard of STC-50. Additionally, the Uniform Building Code (UBC) standard is STC-50, unless otherwise amended, as Arcadia has done. Staff has no objection to this request and recommends amending Section 8130.35 of the Arcadia Municipal Code to reduce sound attenuation standards for hotels and motels'from STC-58 to STC-52. • DESCRIPTION In 1977, the City Council adopted a sound wall standard for R-1 occupancies (i.e., hotels, guest quarters, apartments) of STC-58. This standard requires enhancing construction materials for walls, floors and ceilings in multi-story facilities, resulting in increased construction costs, but lowering noise levels in these types of occupancies. Stonebridge has requested that the City revise its building code standard of STC-58 to STC- 52 since Hilton and Marriott, both major national hotel chains, only require STC-52 (see Attachment 1). Stonebridge stated that the estimated cost to them of meeting the STC-58 standard will add almost$193,000 to their proposed project at the northwest corner site. Staff has contacted building departments of larger tourist cities in the area who have a significant number of hotels (Los Angeles, Long Beach, Anaheim, Pasadena, Buena Park), and all have a sound wall standard of STC-50. Additionally, the City of Monrovia also lias a standard of STC-50. The City's Planning and Building staff have no objections to the reduction to STC-52 based upon industry-wide standards. However, the Development Services L USER IMAGED /A./ ' a�S Staff Report Page Two 4/07/98 Department does recommend that the STC-58 standard be kept for other R-1 occupancies such as apartments and guest homes. This will insure continuing "quiet" apartments, which adds to the quality of life of the community, as well as to the economic value of the building. The Council should be aware that all other new hotels in downtown Arcadia have had to meet the current STC-58 standard. In fact, Extended Stay raised this issue but did not request a change in the standard. Staff has prepared Ordinance No. 2088, approved as to form by the City Attorney, for Council consideration and approval (see Attachment 2). ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT Categorically exempt. FISCAL IMPACT None. RECOMMENDATION THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 2088, AMENDING SECTION 8130.35 OF THE ARCADIA MUNICIPAL CODE TO REDUCE SOUND ATTENUATION STANDARDS FOR HOTELS AND MOTELS FROM STC-58 TO STC-52. Approved by: ----11-15rh William R. Kelly, City Manager Attachments: Attachment"1" - Stonebridge Request Attachment"2" - Ordinance No. 2088 • Stonebridge Companies March 2, 1998 Mr. Don Penman Development Services Director City of Arcadia 240 West Huntington Drive Arcadia, CA 91007 RE: Stonebridge Arcadia Hotels; STC Requirements Dear Don: Upon review of Arcadia's amended building code,there is an outstanding issue which requires resolution. Arcadia's code requires partitions within a hotel to achieve a Sound Transmission CIass, or STC, of 58. As previously discussed, Stonebridge believes this requirement to be excessive, and prohibitively expensive to construct. Hilton and Marriott hotel corporations each have established acoustic performance criteria that must be met in the construction of hotels that bear their names. They place a high priority on acoustic performance and privacy for guests, as does Stonebridge. Hilton and Marriott require that interior partitions typically achieve an STC of 52,which provides wholly satisfactory performance. This requirement is also typical of other prominent hotel brands, such as Hampton Inns, Comfort Suites, and Holiday Inns. Attached for your information are the acoustic specifications for Hilton and Marriott In our experience,the STC required by Arcadia is unique; Stonebridge has built hotels in a wide variety of locations, and we have not encountered any other municipality with such a requirement. Because of these factors, Stonebridge hereby requests a Waiver from Arcadia's code on this issue, or a change in the code to eliminate the STC requirement of 58. Time is critical in the resolution of this issue, and I appreciate your continued cooperation. Please distribute this request as required among City staff. Sincerely, 4111/4/—CC), E C P. V E Mark D. Lionberger, Director of Development MAR 0 3 8: ATTACHMENT "1" 10730 East Bethany Drive • Suite 209 • Aurora, Colorado 80014 • (303) 696-7700 • Fax (303) 696-7780 nAailinn eririrocc• 9n7F gniith I Inivarcity Rrnilevarri • Suite D-270 • Denver. Colorado 80210 600.01 SOUND TRANSMISSION CLASSIFICATION (STC) CRITERIA The following are the MINIMUM-sound transmission classifications-acceptable to Hilton for the relationships indicated: Guestroomto Guestroom: Minimum 52 STC �..+ Guestroomto Condor. Minimum 50 STC Meeting Room Perimeter. Minimum 52 STC Mechanical orLaundry Room to Guestroom: Minimum 60 STC Mechanical orLatmdry Room to Meeting Room: Minimum 52 STC Mechanical orLaundry Room to Corridor. Minimum 50 STC Exteriorto Guestroom: Minimum 52 STC** **Note: If proximity of hotel is close to highway,airport,or other high noise areas,it is recommended to engage an acousticalconsultantto analyze STC ratings of exteriorwall assembly design. 600.02 GYPSUM WALLBOARD SYSTEMS All partitions should be designed to meet the requirements of all governing authorities and codes with regard to fire and smoke separation requirements. 1: Metal framing shall be cold-rolled, galvanized steel studs and runners, stud gauge as required by manufacturer's products for heights and conditions of use; maximum deflection of L/240; sizes indicated. Provide double studs at all door and window jambs; double studs at all guestroom entry doors should be laterally braced at 1/4 points vertically to reduce the risk of forced entry by doorjamb spreading devices. 2. Provide fire-rated wallboard where required by code. 3. Moisture-resistantboard or cementitious backer board to be used as abase for all thin set tile. i7t 4. Regularboard: MeetingASTMC630, tapered edges. 5. Fire-retardant board: MeetingASTM C36,Type X or Type C,tapered edges 6. Moisture-resistantboard: MeetingASTM C630, tapered edges. * 7. Interior ceiling board:MeetingASTM C36,thickness indicated,Regular and Type C Grades,tapered edges. 8. Exteriorceilingand soffit board: MeetingASTM C931,thickness indicated,rounded edge,fire andmoisture- resistaniboard. 9. Gass-fiber-reinforced cement board: Minimum 7/16" thickness, water resistant, non-combustible, fiber- reinforced cement boards,manufacturer's standard sizes. 10. Joint treatment materials sha11 conform to ASTM C475. Laminating adhesives shall be of type recommended by wallboard manufacturer. 11. Suspended drywall furring system shall be heavy duty,meeting ASTM C635,galvanized,cold-rolled steel as manufactured by Chicago Metallic orUS G Interiors. 12. Special trim shapes shall be as manufactured by Fry Reglet,Gordon, MM Systems or Pittcon Industries,or other equivalentproduct acceptable to Hilton;materials and finishes to be selected by Architect. • 7C TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS 600 FOR Interior Building CONSTRUCTION, SYSTEMS,AND Finishes GARDEN INN TECHNOLOGY C Copyrght 1995.1998,1997,1998 Hilton Hotels Corporation 600-1 VERSION 2.0 ■ ADAPTATION AND EEFCLRE ``G'FOR- • CONSTRUCTION PERINI •••: • STIPULATION FOR REUSE. . . - ` • THIS DRAWING WAS PREPARED. •• • FOR USE ON A SPECIFIC SITE AT XXXXXXX,'XXxxxxx CONTEuPORANEOUSLY•1NTH ITS ISSUE • • .• . DATE ON? • > "AND'IT.IS•NOT:SUITABLE•• • . FOR USE ON A DIFFERENT PROJECT-SITE OR AT A LATER TIUE.. USE Of THIS DRAWING'FOR REFERENCE OR.EXAMPLE_ON ANOTfiE!!_PROJECT . . REOUIRES":THE.SERVICES•OF:.PROPERLY°:. .t •• • UCFNSED ARCHITECTS AND ENGINEERS' • - • • )ES REPRODUCTION OF THIS DRAWING FOR'REUSE ON • ANOTHER PROJECT IS-NOT AUTHORIZED• ' AND WAY BE CONTRARY TO THE-LAW. .,- . _, • • • • • . . A Fi '• � � .� ® ; • , Jrtott: SUITES ::;' • • •. PROTO 80/ 102/.1.20 • PARTITION - TYPES • AND RATED ASSEMBLIES . • • • • • XX • . ARCHITECT OF RECORD . • ' JOB NUMBER DESIGNED BY: • • • . . DRAWN BY: • •• • APPROVED BY: •• • • DATE: 2/12/97 • • • curer 1.n 11.0C17 •w ..-7" • • PARTITION TYPES , f �i FLOOR CEILING OR L s. �� ROOF/CEILING ASSEMBLY 1 re ACOUSTICAL SEALANT i GO TOP & BOTTOM -■-- 5/8" TYPE. X GYPSUM .4. BOARD ON RESILIENT CHANNELS 0 24" O.C. 4 ►. • I ►- . �� 3 1/2" SOUND ATTENUATION �� INSULATION I i ao 2X6 WOOD STUDS AT 16" O.C. (IN LIEU OF WOOD STUDS. USE ' • 6 LIGHT GAGE STRUCT. METAL STUDS ■ OP AT TYPE 1A. VERIFY WITH STRUCT. ENGINEER ►� • FOR BEARING CONDITIONS). ► 60 ►_= i t ►- • ►- -- 5/5" TYPE X GYPSUM • D� BOARD (MOISTURE RESISTANT f • ate 0 BATHROOMS AND POOL) ►. ►'s ►O . De CORRIDOR SIDE . or! . ►S . ►1 �� SEALANT BOTH SIDES U 1 HOUR RATED PARTITION 1A FIRE RATING: GYPSUM ASSOCIATION FILE NO. WP3230 'SOUND RATING: SIC 50-54 I �i FLOOR CEILING OR ROOF/CEILING ASSEMBLY a" ACOUSTICAL SEALANT 's 809 TOP & BOTTOM ►• 5/8" TYPE "X" 5/8" TYPE "X" GYPSUM GYPSUM BOARD % BOARD ON RESILIENT (MOISTURE RESISTANT CHANNELS © 24" O.C. BATHROOM AND POOL) ��. Ito (1,-* 3 1/2" SOUND' ATTENUATION ste INSULATION 2x4 WOOD STUDS ® 16" O.C. ste of 01.1 T . 'M sole G,UE 'T .rte-aril ►0 ►= st i�• ►o Di i• SEALANT BOTH SIDES 3 1 HOUR RATED PARTITION FIRE RATING: GYPSUM ASSOCIATION FILE NO. WP3232 SOUND RATING: STC 50-54 • � i facsimile - TRANSMITTAL INIMMEMENNi TO: Arcadia Economic Development, att:Pete Kinnahan FAX#: (626)447-3309 RE: Arcadia, CA Fairfield Suites;Hilton Garden Inn DATE: March 10, 1998 PAGES: 3, including this cover sheet. Pursuant to your discussion with Gary Rohr yesterday,please fmd attached a cost evaluation of the difference in cost between constructing STC 52 partitions and STC 59 partitions within the Fairfield Suites and Hilton Garden Inn. Based on the estimate developed by our general contractor,there is a differential cost of$1125 per linear foot of partition. Multiplied by the linear footage of partitions within each project,the total cost for upgrading to STC 59 partitions is$193,961. As mentioned,this is a significant cost increase which we feel is unnecessary,and we are most interested in resolving this issue. Please call with any questions you may have. • From the desk of._ Mark D.Lionberger Director of Development Stonebridge Companies 2075 So.Univex.iy Blvd.,Ste.D-270 • Denver.CO 800210 (303)696-7700 Fax(303)696-7780 STERLING CONSTRUCTION, INC. DE Dry vall I Metal Studs PROJECT C 09250 LOCATION EF SCOPE CHECKLIST ` STERLING BUDGET ESTIMATE I QUANTITY UNIT I RATE TOTAL 2 x 4 wood stud wails 100 Infi $ 24,00 $ 2,400,00 Horizontal channels(4ea) 900 sqft $ 1.75 $ 1,575,00 5/8 typo x(screwed) 900 _ sqft $ 0.80 $ 640.00 C 69 5/8 type x(laminated) 000 sgfl $ 0.75 $ 675.00 2"sound blankets 000 sqft .$ 0.25 ,_$ 225.00 _ 5/0 type x(nailed) 900 , sqft $ 0.80,$ 540.00 1/2 nailed (nailed) 900 I , sqft $ 0.50 $ 450.00 1/4 typo x(nailed) 000 . sqfl $ 0.50 $ 450.00 $ 6,855.00 • 2 x 4 wood stud walls 100 Intl $ 24.00 $ 2,400.00 Horizontal channels(4ea) 900 sgfl $ 1.75, $ 1,575.00 C 62 5/8 type x(screwed) 900 _ sqR $ 0.60 $ 540.00 2"sound blankets 900 sqft $ 0.25, $ 226.00 5/0 type x(walled) 900 sgfl $ 0.00 $ 540.00 1/2 nailed (nailed) 900 sqft $ 0.50 $ 450.00 $ 5,730.00 $ 11.25 - Hilton 7,968 Intl $ 11.25 $ 89,640.00 , - Fait field 9,273 ' Inn $ 1125 $ 104,321.00 . $ 193,981,00 f . LINE ITEM 09250 Page I of 1 • - r+ R!Fa!• 1 " ) 1 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. . 1. 2 x4 studs, 16" o_c_ 2. resilient channels,24"o.c. 3. 5/8"type x gypsum board screwed, 12"o.c. T�32��C�4:ac.+«::a.=:;.1'J:1L1,,S'Ta.::_:••-.'-,_..-.--.�.-•.�.:_� � 4. 5/8"type x gypsum board spot-laminated, 12"o_c_ �Ii1 i11111i'�I111111'��III� 5. 2"thick sound attenuation blanket ...�'i 41.1_.�tI�•__O 1O∎OA tl • 6. 5/8'type x gypsum board nailed with 5d nails,32"o.c. ik 7. 1/2"type x gypsum board nailed with Sd nails, 12"o.c. m.11...�.�.�,.-�...�.,�...MICA,.....-r����--� 8. 1/4"type x gypsum board spot-laminated, 12"o.c. California Office of Noise Co • of-STC 59-S-ction Number 1.2.2.5.5.3 1. 2. 1 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 1. 2 x4 studs, 16"o.c. / I I / / 2. resilient channels,24" o_c. 3. 5/8"type x gypsum board screwed, 12"o_c -. -,T Y=.,.,_..__�:;,,=,:_= _---___ 4. 5/8"type x gypsum board spot-laminated,12"o_c. �"Tit IiIiiIl�I1ii1111. I�j 5. 2"thick sound attenuation blanket. •r•,�� ,•IiI.�.I��.I.I�f.�:i.�.��:��(, 6. 5/8'type x gypsum board nailed with 5d nails, 32"o.c. �� 7. 1/2"type x gypsum board nailed with 8d nails, 12"o.c. 8. 318-type x gypsum board spot-laminated. 12'o.c_ California Office of Noise Control-STC 61 -Section Number 12.2.5.5.4 1. 2. 3. 4. / ! /I / • ■., ,• •• • 4 • • te• +r •$ • • + Ti 1. double row of 2 x 4 studs,16"o.c. on separate plates spaced 1"apart ��`� `�4��� `� �� �� 2. 5B"type x gypsum board screwed 12" o.c. ,., A ,��ak 1.�.1IK NA Of 3. 3"sound attenuation blanket 4. 6"sound attenuation blanket_ California Office of Noise Control -STC 59-Section Number 124.1.5.5 1 ACCEPTABLE SOUND WALL CONFIGURATIONS FOR COMPLIANCE WITH ARCADIA'S' ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS FOR MULTIPLE FAMILY BUILDINGS ms's W Re-set o=0,,,]D.:95; • ORDINANCE NO. 2088 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING SECTION 8130.35 OF THE ARCADIA MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO SECTION 1208 - SOUND TRANSMISSION CONTROL. WHEREAS, this text change was initiated by the City at the request of Stonebridge Companies, to amend Section 8130.35 of the Arcadia Municipal Code relating to Sound Transmission Control. WHEREAS, a public hearing was held before the City Council on April 7, 1998, at which time all interested persons were given full opportunity to be heard and to present evidence; and WHEREAS, the City Council hereby finds that the revision to the building code standard of STC-58 to STC-52 provides adequate sound transmission controls for hotels and motels and better sound attenuation than,the current Uniform Building Code Requirement of STC-50. WHEREAS, the City Council determines that based upon the evidence presented, the public necessity, convenience and general welfare justifies the proposed text change. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE.CITY OF ARCADIA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That Section 8130.35 is amended to read as follows: 8130.35 AMENDMENT Volume 1, Appendix Chapter 12, Division II. in the Uniform Building Code is amended to read as follows: SECTION 1208 - SOUND TRANSMISSION CONTROL 1208.1 General. In Group R, Division 1 Occupancies, other than Multi-Fainiiy Buildings as defined in Arcadia Municipal Code Section 8130.53, every wall, partition or floor-ceiling assembly, forming a separation between a hotel room, between a motel room, between a Nest room, between these rooms and garages or carports, or Zc/ordstc-52 Page 1 2088 ATTACHMENT "2n between these rooms and common corridors, stairways or service areas, shall be provided airborne sound insulation for walls and both airborne and impact sound insulation for floor-ceiling assemblies. 1208.2 Airborne Sound Insulation. All such walls and floor-ceiling assemblies shall provide an airborne sound insulation equal to that required to meet a Sound Transmission Class (STC) of 52. Any penetrations or openings for construction assemblies, electrical, mechanical or plumbing devices or equipment shall first be approved by the Building Official and if approved shall be seal lined, insulated or otherwise treated to maintain the required ratings. Entrance doors from interior corridors together with the perimeter seals shall have a laboratory tested Sound Transmission Class (STC) of not less than 30 and such perimeter seals shall be maintained in good operating conditions. 1208.3 Impact Sound Insulation. All such floor-ceiling assemblies shall provide impact sound insulation equal to that required to meet an Impact Insulation Class (ITC) rating of 52. Floor coverings may be included in the assembly to obtain the required ratings, and must be retained as a permanent part of the assembly and may only be replaced by other floor coverings that provide the same sound insulation required above. 1208.4 Tested Assemblies. Field or laboratory tested wall or floor-ceiling designs having a STC or ITC rating of 52 or more, may be used without additional field testing when in the opinion of the Building Official the tested design has not been compromised by flanking paths. Tests may be required by the Building Official when evidence of compromised separations is noted. 1208.5 Field Testing and Certification. Field testing, when approved by the Building Official, shall be done under the supervision of a professional acoustical who shall be experienced in the field of acoustical testing and engineering, who shall forward certified test results to the Building Official that minimum sound insulation requirements stated above have been met. Zclordstc-52 Page 2 2088 1208.6 Airborne Sound Insulation Field Test. When approved by the Building Official, airborne sound insulation shall be determined according to the applicable Field Airborne Sound Transmission Loss Test Procedures. All sound transmitted from the source room to the receiving room shall be considered to be transmitted through the test partition. 1208.7 Impact Sound Insulation Field Test. When approved by the Building Official, impact sound insulation shall be determined. 1208.8 Field Tests for Existing Buildings. Field tests on existing buildings to determine the STC or ITC values, may be accomplished only upon authorization of the Building Official. Wall and floor-ceiling tests must meet a Sound Transmission Class and Impact Insulation Class (IIC) of 52. Section 2. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause a copy of the same to be published in the official newspaper of said City within fifteen (15) days after its adoption. Passed, approved and adopted this day of , 1998. Mayor of the City of Arcadia ATTEST: • City Clerk of the City of Arcadia Approved as to Form: ?7)42.gi v Michael H. iller, City Attorney • Zclordstc-52 Page 3 2088 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE ARCADIA CITY COUNCIL NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that on TUESDAY, APRIL 7, 1998, at 7:00 p.m. in the City Hall Council Chambers, 240 West Huntington Drive, Arcadia, Californila, a public hearing will be held by and before the City Council to consider amending Section 8130.35 of the Arcadia Municipal code to reduce noise reduction standards in wall and floor ceiling assembles of hotels and motels (only) from STC-58 to STC-52. At said time and place an opportunity will be afforded all those interested and the public in general to be heard. For further information contact Roy Streeter, Chief Building Official, Arcadia City Hall, 240 West Huntington Drive, Arcadia, California, 91007, Monday through Thursday, between the hours of 7:30 a.m. and 5:30 p.m. , and alternate Fridays between the hours of 7:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. "„ \ AgOr une D. Alford City Clerk Dated: March 23, 1998 Publish: April 1, 1998 IFS : 4 �9 C� 61...)e9 3/110/98 F' DRAFT NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING , Tuesday, April 7, 1998, 7:00 p.m., City of Arcadia City Council Chambers, 240 West Huntington Drive, Arcadia, California, 91007 To consider amending Section 8130.35 of the Arcadia Municipal Code to reduce noise reduction standards in wall and floor ceiling assembles of hotels and motels (only) from STC- 58 to STC-52. For further information, contact Roy Streeter, Chief Building Official, Arcadia City Hall, 240 West Huntington Drive, Arcadia, California, 91007; Phone (626) 574-5418; Fax (626) 447- 9173. Publication Dates: Taesclap; Mare13 1 ^Maroll-24.anei Mare °98Vor- Thursday,. March 26 and April 2, 1998 r al Op'. •:;4r.v rvii OS3o 2O /' i 4co4p0R„,,,o-s ' STAFF REPORT April 7, 1998 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: (g Don Penman, Deputy City Manager/Development Services Director By: Donna L. Butler, Community Development Administrator Prepared By: John D. Halminski, Assistant Planner jk SUBJECT: Public Hearing— 1998-1999 Statement of Objectives and Project Use of Prior Years Unallocated CDBG Funds SUMMARY The Community Development Commission (CDC) has advised staff that the City will receive an additional $58,088 in prior years unallocated funds bringing the total of Community De 1 elopment Block Grant(CDBG)Funds for fiscal year 1998-99 to $464,063. The Development Services Department is recommending that these funds be allocated t the ADA retrofit of City Hall. DISCUSSION On February 17, 1998, the City Council approved the use of the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds for fiscal year 1998-99 in the amount of $405,975. Since the date of approval, the City has received notice of an additional $58,088 allocation in CDBG funds. These additional funds are unallocated funds from prior year's projects. The City is required to use the funds for Fiscal Year 1998-99. The following is a summary of the previously approved projects for fiscal year 98-99: Fiscal Year 98-99 Housing Rehabilitation $315,975 Congregate Meals Program, $15,000 Senior Citizens Social Services $35,000 Administration $25,000 ADA Retrofit of City Hall $15,000 Subtotal: $405,975 *Additional Unallocated Funds $58,088 TOTAL: $464,063 • 1 93 i , r rands 1 1 � , 6-2 , 1 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE ARCADIA CITY COUNCIL A PUBLIC HEARING will be held before the City Council on Tuesday, April 7, 1998 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers at Arcadia City Hall, 240 West Huntington Drive, Arcadia. The purpose of the public hearing will be to obtain the views of citizens on the amended allocation of Community Development Block Grant(CDBG)prior year's funds totaling$58,088 for fiscal year 1998-99. In 1998-99 the City will receive approximately $464,063 in Community Development Block Grant Funds (CDBG), including prior year's funds. The City will be reviewing the possibility of allocating the additional $58,088 of CDBG funds to the previously approved ADA(Americans with Disabilities Act)program to retrofit City Hall. Further details regarding the use of CDBG funds are available in the Community Development Division of the Development Services Department located at 240 West Huntington Drive, Arcadia. If you have any questions, you may contact John Halminski at(626) 574-5423 between the hours of 7:30 a.m. and 5:30 p.m., Monday through Thursday and 7:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. on alternative Fridays. City Hall will be closed March 13th and 27"'. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIVISION Donna L. Butler Community Development Administrator 11 PUBLISH DATE: March 2 , 1998 DATED: March 2, 1998 • 1001„.:„.....„ ARCH D RI'ORA9 S CERTIFICATION City of Arcadia I, June D. -Alford, the duly elected, qualified and acting City • Clerk of the City of Arcadia, California, do hereby CERTIFY City Clerk that the following is a full, true and correct copy of a MINUTE MOTION adopted by the Arcadia City Council at its Regular Meet- ing held on April 7, 1998, in consideration of Agenda Item 5b. , Junc D.Alford The 1998-1999 Statement of Objectives and Project Use of Prior City Clerk Years Unallocated CDBG Funds: "It was MOVED by Councilmember Chang, seconded -by Councilmember Kuhn and CARRIED on roll call vote as follows to APPROVE the allocation of $58,088 in prior year's Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds towards the ADA retrofit of City Hall; and AUTHORIZE the City Manager to EXECUTE the Memorandums of Under- standing which :.are submitted to the County at a later date." AYES: Councilmembers Chang, Kovacic, Kuhn, Young and Harbicht NOES: None ABSENT: None IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I HAVE HEREUNTO SET MY HAND AND AFFIXED THE SEAL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA THIS 9TH DAY OF APRIL, 1998 June D. Alf o d_ City Cler_ - City of Arcadia, California 240%V st Huntington Drier Post Ofiicc Box 60021 Arcadia,CA 91 066-6021 1 818 157'4-5455 1 818 44--7524 1-a%