Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMarch 2, 1999r a fi.� E�►y %A • A N N O T A T E D A G E N D A Arcadia City Council and Redevelopment Agency Meeting March 2, 1999 6:00 p.m. Council Chambers Conference Room ROLL CALL: Council Members Chandler, Harbicht, Marshall, Roncelli and Kovacic ■1■ i f W iii ArTMN All present 1. TIME RESERVED FOR THOSE INTHE AUDIENCE WHO WISH TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL (NON- PUBLIC HEARING/ FIVE MINUTE TIME LIMIT PER PERSON).RE: 6:00 P.M. SESSION. No one spoke. 2. STUDY SESSION a. Report and discussion of portable signs in the public- right -of -way (Commercial Businesses). Tabled for 3 3. CLOSED SESSION months. a. Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8 to discuss potential acquisition (terms re purchase) with City negotiator and Ms. H. Barner of the First Church of Christ Scientist concerning real property at 100 W. Duarte Road, Arcadia. RECESSED to Closed Session at 6:32 p.m. RECONVENED in Council 7:00 p.m. Chambers at 7:05 p.m. Council Chambers INVOCATION Father Gene Wallace, Episcopal Church of the Transfiguration, Arcadia Police Department Chaplain PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Fandi Rashed, Arcadia Police Dept.. Explores Scout ROLL CALL: Council Members Chandler, Harbicht, Marshall, Roncelli and Kovacic Alli present The City Attorney announced the subject discussed at the earlier Closed Session. 4. PRESENTATION of Mayor's Senior Service Award to Bill and Marilyn Bochte. 5. PRESENTATION of Mayor's Youth Service Award to Jeanne Leohnard. 6. PRESENTATION of Mayor's Employee Recognition Award to Chris Campbell. 7. PRESENTATION of Arbor Day Proclamation. 8. PRESENTATION of Certificate of Commendation to Lupe Swartzbaugh. 4 ill 11 PRESENTATION of Proclamation declaring March as Arcadia Red Cross Month SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION FROM STAFF REGARDING AGENDA ITEMS. QUESTIONS FROM CITY COUNCIL /REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY REGARDING AGENDA ITEMS. MOTION: Read all Ordinances and Resolutions by title only and waive reading in full. 12.. PUBLIC HEARING Report and recommendation to approve TA 99 -002, amending the S -1 (Special Use Race Track site) zoning regulations by deleting the following permitted uses: Section 9273. 1.1 -Any use permitted in zones R -O & R -1 Section 9273.1.7 - Gasoline Service Stations Section 9273.1.17 - Outdoor Entertainment Events b. Report and recommendation to approve TA 99 -001 amending Section 9262.1.14 of the Arcadia Municipal Code to add window signs to the ACTION Joann Scott Father Wallace None None Adopted 5 -0 Pub.Hrg. opened Continued to M yMy 5 -0 Pub. Hrg. cldsed Approved 5 -0 "Allowable Area for Identification"; i.e., no more than one -third of the sign area may contain a non - English translation of the business identification. 13. TIME RESERVED FOR THOSE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO WISH TO L. Nelson ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL /REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY R. Hoherd (NON- PUBLIC HEARING /FIVE MINUTE TIME LIMIT PER PERSON). 14. MATTERS FROM ELECTED OFFICIALS City Council Reports/ Announcements /Statements /Future Agenda Items See Minutes 15. MEETING OF THE ARCADIA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND CITY COUNCIL ROLL CALL: Council /Agency Members Chandler, Harbicht, Marshall, Roncelli and Kovacic All present a. Report on the Farmer's Market questionnaire and recommendation that Alloctite balance the Arcadia Redevelopment Agency approve an agreement between the of 1998 -99 tunds to Mkt; execute Agency and the Arcadia Business Association (ABA) reimbursing up to agrmnt to continue $15,000.00 to the ABA for downtown Farmer's Market expenses in 1999, Mkt, for 6 months & street closure and authorize the Agency's executive director to implement the agreement, 3 -2 yes vote. subject to minor revisions as to form by the Agency attorney, and that the City Council approve the revised Farmer's Market street closure regulations. 2 A.R.A. and City Council meeting continued ACTION b. Report and recommendation to expand the Agency's Commercial Fagade A a a5 Rehabilitation Program to include the C -1, C -2 and C -M zones in the modifie central redevelopment project area. C. Report and recommendation to contribute up to $8,000.00 for a shared Approved 4 -1 Arcadia /Monrovia sign marketing the Huntington Drive Hotel /Restaurant Row. ADJOURN Redevelopment Agency to March 16, 1999 at 6:00 p.m. MEETING OF THE ARCADIA CITY COUNCIL 16. CONSENT a. Minutes of the February 16, 1999 Regular meeting. AAprnved s -n b. Report and recommendation to waive expenses related to traffic control Approved s -n services for the Fifth Annual Santa Anita Derby Day 5K Run & Walk to be held on Saturday, April 3, 1999. C. Report and recommendation to enter into a Professional Services Approved 5 -0 Agreement with the Warner Group in the amount not to exceed $55,000.00 for the development of a dispatch and emergency communications plan and to provide technical assistance. d. Report and recommendation to enter into Professional Services Approved 5 -0 Agreements with Scott Fazekas & Associates, Inc., Esgil Corporation and Van Dorpe Chou Associates for plan check services ($250,000.00 for each consultant). e. Report and recommendation to cooperatively purchase, with the State of Approved 5 -0 California, General Services Department, two (2) 1999 Ford Crown Victoria 4 -door sedans from Downtown Ford at a cost of $50,352.38 and one (1) 1999 Chevrolet Malibu 4 -door sedan, from Good Chevrolet, at a cost of $16,899.17 for a total cost of $67,251.55 and appropriate an additional $19,050.33 from the equipment replacement fund to complete this purchase. f. Report and recommendation to authorize an additional appropriation of Approved 5 -0 $63,000.00 from the Water Reserve Fund for repairs to water mains and to continue operations through fiscal year 1998/99. Report and recommendation to approve a one -year extension for CUP 92-003-Approved 5 -( the Rodeffer Inert Landfill at 12321 Lower Azusa Road. 3 consent continued ACTION h. Report and recommendation to award a Professional Services Agreement Approved 5 -n to Sparano +Mooney Architecture Inc. for architectural services for the Arcadia Historical Museum. 17. CITY MANAGER a. Report requesting direction regarding Soundwalls along State Route 210-Approved 5 -0 18. CLOSED SESSION a. Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957 — City Manager annual Continued to performance evaluation. arc b. Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957 — City Attorney annual Continued to performance evaluation. March 16 ADJOURN City Council to March 16, 1999 at 6:00 p.m. Mayor Kovacic adjourned the meeting at 11:20 p.m. in honor of the marriage of .Till Harbicht and Jeff Crowell rd Cis O -!O * �y nom; r%q ♦rn1 t .o..,S9 STAFF REPORT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT DATE: March 2, 1999 TO: Mayor and City Council Chairman and Members, Redevelopment Agency FROM: TgDon Penman, Deputy Executive Director /Deputy City Manager De I pment Services Director By.TPeter Kinnahan, Economic Development Administrator SUBJECT:. REPORT ON _,THE FARMERS MARKET QUESTIONNAIRE AND RECOMMENDATION THAT THE ARCADIA REDEVELOPMENT _AGENCY APPROVE AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE AGENCY AND THE ARCADIA BUSINESS ASSOCIATION (ABA) REIMBURSING UP TO $15,000 `'TO THE'-',AW'. FOR DOWNTOWN FARMERS MARKET EXPENSES IN 1999;'AND`AUTHORIZING THE'AGENCY'S EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO IMPLEMENT-THE AGREEMENT;- SUBJECT- TO MINOR REVISIONS AS TO` FORM BY THE .AGENCY ATTORNEY; AND THAT "THE CITY COUNCIL _APPROVE' THE REVISED . FARMERS ;MARKET STREET CLOSURE REGULATIONS: SUMMARY--,,-,. _ As part of the City's" effort to assess the Farmers Market after one year of operation, and due to questions /concerns raised by "some businesses concerning "negative impacts on merchants open ontSaturday during the hours of the Farmers Market, the City Council directed that. a .-stamped "addressed questionnaire be provided to all downtown businesses - asking" for their comments oh: the` ABA Farmers Market •(Attachment 1). With a forty -five" percent (45 %)"response;- the business` owners supported by an overall 4 =1 margin the continuation of the Farmer's Market:j 'On South First-Avenue, the support was by a 2.5 -1 margin (See Attachment 2). The Arcadia Business Association" (ABA) has also requested $15,000 from the Redevelopment Agency as "seed-money" for the second calendar year of the Farmers Market (Attachment 3). Funds are available in the Agency's adopted budget for FY 1998 -99 and can be provided in FY 99 -00 upon Agency approval. Since the Market operates on a calendar year basis, funds from two fiscal years would be provided as the Agency's contribution. Staff recommends that the Agency approve the contract with the ABA (Attachment 4) for one more year, and that the City Council approve the revised Fan`EAS Ri keW r3tD Closure Regulations (Attachment 5). n ABA Staff Report March 2, 1999 Page 3 n When the Farmers Market was first started a maximum two (2) years of assistance was discussed. After that point, by the year 2000, the market should be self - supporting. The proposed contract between the Agency and the ABA is Attachment 4 and it is almost identical to the 1998 contract. The City Council is being asked to approve the "Street Closure Regulations" (Attachment 5). All affected departments have been asked about possible revisions to these regulations. Staff recommends that the City's Street Closure Regulations be clarified as to the type of vendor and merchandise that can be sold or displayed at the market. The changes from the 1998 contract and the previously approved Regulations are shown underlined. The current market hours close First Avenue from 7:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m.. (7, hours). Other markets close the public street for shorter periods of time, i.e., 4-6 hours. The Council /Agency may wish to consider reduction of the market hours. Issues The ABA has requested financial assistance for the Farmers Market for the second year. at its current location on First Avenue south of Huntington. The Agency Board and City Council need to address the following questions relative to this request: 1. Should the Farmers Market be approved for a second year at its current location? 2. If approved (at its current or another location), what level of financial support should be provided? 3. If approved again on First Avenue, does the City wish to reduce the hours of operation to minimize the impact on existing businesses? (Current hours - street closed; 7 a.m. - 2 p.m.; Farmers Market operates - 8:00 a.m. -1 p.m.) ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT The Farmers Market operation was environmentally assessed and included as part of the Downtown 2000 Phase 2 Business Incentive Program, and a Negative Declaration was adopted in March 1996. FISCAL IMPACT Expenditure of up to $15,000 in Redevelopment Agency funds is requested by the ABA. This amount would represent three - quarters of the total cost of approved invoices up to a maximum of $15,000. There is approximately $11,800 remaining in FY 1998 -99 Agency budget for the Farmers Market. If approved by the City Agency, the balance of the $15,000 would be appropriated in the FY 1999 -00 budget. 3 F, 3. 4. En CITY OF ARCADIA FARMERS MARKET Would you personally like to see the Farmers Market on First Avenue continued or discontinued? Continued ❑ Discontinued ❑ Don't Care ❑ Do you feel the Farmers Market has had a positive effect on your business, a negative effect, or no effect? Positive effect on my business ❑ Negative effect on my business ❑ No effect on my business ❑ ,What, if anything, do you like about the Farmers Market on First Avenue? What, if anything, do you dislike about the Farmers Market on First Avenue? What suggestions do you have for improvement? - Where is your business located? First Ave., North of Huntington Dr. - ,D First Ave., Huntington Dr. to California St. ❑ Huntington Dr. - North side ❑ Huntington Dr. - South side ❑ 6. Is your business open on Saturdays? 7: Is your business retail, a service . business (restaurant, coffee shop, etc) or an office ?:, Open Saturdays ❑ - _ _ _:_.._ . Not open Saturdays ❑ - Retail ❑ _ Service Business ❑ Office ❑ Other ❑ B. Do you have any other comments on the Farmers Market or on downtown? Please return this questionnaire in the envelope provided. No Postage is Needed. Thank you. Development Services Department, City Hall (626)574 -5408 ATTACHMENT 1 5 1*AW Date: 1/8/99 Farmer's Market Questionnaire Comnts Question #l3: What, if anything, do you like about the Farmers Market on First Avenue? First Ave., North of Huntington Dr.: • Vegetables are fresh and the prices are great. • Community interaction. • Do not use. • Brings life to our Downtown. • Publicity about existing businesses. First Ave., Huntington Dr, to California St.: • It brings foot traffic and exposure. • Brings a lot of new people to area. It would be dead on Saturday without it. • 1 shop at the Farmers Market most Saturdays, would like to see it grow. • People pass by, will notice some retail store on the. street for future reference. • none • The fresh produce, the flow of people it brings to the street. • We do not open our business on Saturdays - we only want our area kept clean. • More foot traffic, and some extra business. • Brings more people to our store. • the food! -- .. • Merchants are nice. • The foot traffic that would not otherwise be there. • It afforded Arcadia residents the opportunity to get fresh produce without going to Victory Park in Pasadena. • Brings attention to First Ave. • It gives a community atmosphere to the city, It gives a chance to make downtown a place to go to. • a nice community activity on Sat. morning. • Brings the city together. • Community Atmosphere/ encourages people to come to First Ave. and stay a while/ fresh and unique products available/ increases number of people who come to my shop. 7 Question #4: What, if an ,,;ng, do you dislike about the Farmer. arket on First Avenue? What suggestions do you have forimprovement? First Ave., North of Huntington Dr.: • Established businesses. • Need more advertising, Need more things to display. (Nothing to shop) • Continue expansion, more advertising. • Publicity about existing businesses. First Ave., Huntington Dr, to California St.: • 1 dislike having it directly in front of my business. • One thing is that I wish they don't hock walkways and the front of businesses with their trucks. • Do not like the fact that the market has moved South on First. It was better for my business and better for the market when it started at Alta. • Decreased the customer base on Saturdays. • Relocate it south of California, where it has less impact on congesting local shops. • The fact that decisions are made without the approval/disapproval of ABA members. • Customer complain about no parking - merchants do not clean up trash left by Farmers Market so us business owners have to clean it up - ridiculousl • It is too small, hours are too short, and the variety of booths should not be limited, and food (fast) representation is very poor and perhaps it should be moved to Thur. & Fri. nights. • need more farmers and other things.to sell like crafts. • Do not like not having access to my business on Sat. which is a full working day for us usually - customers have difficult access. If it were run after hours might be OK. • Block entrance to my business. • Prices are high, & variety are less. • more interesting venders. possible crafts would be nice. • Needs more booths - but that will come with time. • I'm discouraged by how small it has become and unhappy that it is now held between California and Bonita (my shop is between Alta and Bonita) Huntington Dr. - North side: • Too small. • Too small. 9 Question #8: Do you haNwwny other comments on the Farmers,icet or on downtown? First Ave. North of Huntington Dr.: • Average monthly sales up $80041,200 in new business through out the week due to exposure created by market traffic. • I enjoy going to the Farmers Market & I usually visit one or more of the businesses there on First. First Ave. Huntington Dr. to California St.: • We rented our building, in part, because we felt the Farmers Market would grow, along with us. • 1 love Downtownl • During the season the parking might be a problem however not yet sure. • We need to give it a chance to grow. Right now it is expected to stay small until winter is gone. • We have heard that the Market was held too frequently - every Saturday is over Mill = • It has to be exciting and inviting for the public. • Keep it! • Given time I believe it should grow stronger and attract more people. More vendors are needed. • Less non- produce booths! . • More market back up to Alta. Get more and better vendors. Aggressive advertising. • Could use other type of merchants besides food. • My suggestion is to hang in there for a while longer, we had a lot of support for the market when it`opened. I would also like to suggest more activities be held - we had a great turnout for the Halloween activities. It needs to be more strongly promoted and advertised (newspapers, signs, 'poster in shops all around town) Huntington Dr. -'North side: • Please continue. It may take a couple years to make it work. I have heard only positive comments. • Has no effect on our business net here on Saturday • Keep it going. • Parking is a hazard on First Ave. below Huntington Dr. - I avoid driving there. 11 Business location not reL ,led: • We should fire all council members and staffs that had any input to the downtown area business improvement planning. They did a terrible job. We should have a team of professional city planners to manage the city. PS This is a waste of city or tax money to print this letter with heavy grade paper and fancy letterhead. 13 M E5 Arcadia Business Association Annual Budget Farmers Market costs * Advertising 1998 (Actual) 1999 (Projected) Receipts 18,000 Permits and Licenses $ Membership $ 3,050 $ 3,750 Farmers Market * $ 12,960 $ 21,000 Arcadia Redevelopment Agency $ 15,000 $ 15,000 Other Contributions $ 170 $ 3.000 Total receipts $ 31,180 $ 42,750 Farmers Market costs * Advertising $ 12,781 $ 18,000 Permits and Licenses $ 2,637 $ 900 Supplies $ 865 $ 1,000 Contract Labor $ 5,000 $ 21,000 Certified Association $ 513 $ - Portable Sink $ 2,693 $ - Entertainment $ 450 $ - Banner Removal $ 200 $ 1,000 Restroom Rental $ 925 $ 1,300 Market Promotions $ 814 $ - Total Farmers Market Costs $ 26,878 .. $ -43,200 ABA Expenses Bank Charges $ 15 $ - 15 Printing '� `'= • $ ... 264 $ 264' Insurance $ 875 875 - Lights $ 859 $ 859 Seminar $ 375 $ 375 - P.O. Box/Postage $ 92 $ 92 Promotion $ 92. $ 92.. Dues and Fees - - - $ 85- $ 85 Total ABA Expenses $ 2,657 $ 2,657 Total Income $ 31,180 $ 42,750 ... Total Expenses $ 29,535 $ 45,857 . Total Net Revenue $ 1,645 $ . (3,107) * Farmers Market revenues and expenses represent only from April to December of 1998 and the entire year for 1999 15 n M All communications sent to Association shall be sent to: Arcadia Business Association Von Raees, President c/o Arcadia Weekly P.O. Box 660674 Arcadia CA 91006 Any such notices and written communications by mail shall be conclusively deemed to have been received by the addressee five (5) days after the deposit thereof in the U.S. Mail, first class postage and properly addressed as noted above, or upon actual receipt thereof if delivered by personal service. The Association shall provide written notice of any change in the President and in the annual election of the Board of Directors within fourteen (14) calendar days of such event. 2. DESCRIPTION OF WORK Agency hereby engages, Association, and Association accepts such._ engagement, to perform the services necessary to plan, organize, administer, pay for and manage a farmers market on South First Avenue on Saturday mornings from approximately 7:00 a.m. till 2:00 p.m., January 1 through December 31, 1999 as further set forth in the attached Exhibit W incorporated as part of this Agreement. Agency's principal 'representative, or designee; shall have the right-to review and monitor.-the work during the course of its performance at such times as may be.specified, by the representative. 3. COMMENCEMENT AND COMPLETION OF WORK A: The execution of this Agreement by the parties, constitutes an . authorization to proceed, unless otherwise provided by the terms of this Agreement. Association acknowledges that the farmers market will be located on public streets and right -of -way, that the farmers market may require other City support services (e.g., Police, Fire, Maintenance Services, Attorney, etc.)." If the Association wishes to sponsor other events outside the approved Farmers Market location and hours, the Association shall apply for a Street Closure permit or Special Event permit in a timely manner and shall cooperate at all times with.City.of Arcadia representatives. 17 NOW copies or verification of all work performed for which Agency is being invoiced. In reviewing and approving such invoice, Agency may consider, in addition to other facts and circumstances, the relationship of the work completed to the work remaining to be done. The Agency may in its discretion request additional information on any invoice within thirty (30) days after recei t of Association's invoice. The Agency shall pay to Association three quarters of the amount of the invoice after deducting therefrom all prior payments and any disputed amount. In the event of a disputed amount, the Agency shall forward a letter to Association explaining the reasons for the deduction. The Agency shall not be responsible to pay any costs above $15,000. The City of Arcadia shall not be responsible for any costs under this Agreement. 8. MANAGEMENT The Agency Executive Director or his designee shall represent Agency in all matters pertaining to the administration of this Agreement, including without limitation, attendance at all necessary meetings and conferences, and review and approval of all street layouts, schedules and advertising submitted or planned by the Association. Authority to enlarge the scope of services or change the compensation due to Association is subject to the written approval of the Agency. 9. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR Association is and shaJfat all times be'deemed to be an independent contractor and shall be solely responsible for the manner in which it performs the�"`services' required by *the terms of this Agreement.: Nothing herein contained shall be construed as creating a relationship of employer and employee, or principal and'agent, between"the'Agency and Association or any'of the'Association's employees, agents, members; volunteers, farmers, crafters, vendors or any subconsultants. Association assumes sole responsibility for the acts, of its employees, agents, members; volunteers, farmers, crafters, vendors or any'subconsultants as related to the services to be' provided during the course and scope of their employment. Neither the Association, it's members, employees or agents along with all participants in the Farmers Market program are agents or employees of the City of Arcadia or the Agency. The Association shall provide a_ statement (Exhibit "B ") executed by all farmers, crafters and vendors (participants) acknowledging that their relationship is with the Association, not the City of Arcadia or Agency, .and agree.to hold harmless and indemnify the City of Arcadia and Agency. 19 M M B. If any action at law or in equity is brought to enforce or interpret any provisions of this Agreement, the prevailing party in such action shall be entitled to reasonable attorney's fees, costs and necessary disbursements, in addition to such other relief as may be sought and awarded. 14. MODIFICATION OF AGREEMENT The terms are subject to modification by mutual agreement between Agency and Association. Such changes shall be incorporated by authorized written amendments to this Agreement. The parties agree that the requirements for prior written changes, amendments, or modifications to this Agreement may not be waived and any attempted waiver shall be void. 15. TERMINATION A. Agency or Association may terminate this Agreement without cause upon sixty (60) days written notice to the Agency or Association, as appropriate, to the address specified in this Agreement. Should_ Agency or Association terminate this Agreement, Association agrees to discontinue performance, i.e., cease operations of the Farmers Market and deliver -to Agency a written report on the work which he has completed, along with a final invoice, if any. B. Agency may terminate this Agreement with cause effective immediately upon written notice of such termination to Association, based upon the occurrence of any*of the following events::; (1)'" Material breach of this Agreement by Association;_ (2) Cessation of Association to be a non - profit association registered as such in the- State of California; _ (3) ' Failure of Association to substantially comply with any applicable federal, state or local law or regulation; - (4) Filing by or against Association of any petition under any law for the relief of debtors; and (5) Filing of a criminal complaint against Association, its Board of Directors, collectively or as individuals for any crime of relevance to the operation of the Farmers Market other than minor traffic offenses. 21 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed and attested by respective officers thereunto duly authorized. ARCADIA- REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY "AGENCY" Dated: By William R. Kelly, Executive Director ARCADIA BUSINESS ASSOCIATION "ASSOCIATION" 23 M M Association shall utilize Arcadia businesses, particularly downtown Arcadia businesses, in the provision of goods and services to the operation of the Farmers Market. 7. Plan, coordinate and pay for an effective marketing campaign to advertise the market and downtown shopping opportunities. 8. Provide liability insurance in a form and amount satisfactory to Agency Counsel ($1 Million). 9. Provide written report to Agency at end of Farmers Market (Nov., 1999), of estimated weekly attendance, number of participating farmers, weather, other amenities, problemsrssues, detailed statement of total costs by category with recommendations for a 2000 Farmers Market. The Association shall provide at least 1/4 ($5,000) of the cost of these services, but may provide additional funding at its discretion. The Agency however shall provide as reimbursement to the Association up to $15,000 of the cost of these services or 3/4 of the costs (not to exceed $15,000). The City of Arcadia shall not be responsible for any costs under this agreement. Task Schedule Due Date 1. Conduct marketing/advartising plan - Monthlv 2. Manage Farmers Market, pay all bills; invoice Agency Monthly monthly for- Agency'share with supporting documehtation; -_ - assess success/problems.., 3. Manage weekly Farmers Market; advertise as appropriate; On- going/ resolve problems; pay bills, invoice Agency monthly weekly 4. Mid -year review - conduct meeting of merchants to review _ July 31, 1999 success of market; make budget projections on Farmers Market through end of December 5. Submit detailed written report to Agency, with Jan. 31, 2000 invoice, summarizing the year, and showing expenditures and revenue for the Farmers Market through December 31, 1999 25 M CITY OF ARCADIA FARMERS MARKET STREET CLOSURE REGULATIONS Orig. 2/98 Rev. 7/21/98 Rev. 312/99 1) South First Avenue shall be closed by the use of barricades as shown on the site map, Attachment 1 to the Street Closure Regulations. a) Barricades on South First Avenue shall be located immediately south of the crosswalk at Alta Street immediately north and south of the crosswalk at Bonita Street, and immediately north of the crosswalk at California Street. b) Barricades in the alleys between Alta/Bonita and Bonita/California both east and west of First Avenue shall be placed near the rear of the buildings fronting on south First, such that cars can gain access to the rear parking lot of these stores. c) In the event Bonita Street is closed in the future, barricades shall be placed on Bonita immediately east or west of the driveway at the rear of the stores fronting on South First Avenue, such that cars can turn into the driveway in order to gain access to the rear parking lot of these stores. d) In the event Bonita Street is closed in the future, a sign shall be placed in the center of Bonita near South Santa Anita and near South Second warning drivers that First Avenue is closed to thru- traffic. - 2) Closure shall not occur before the hour of 7:00 a.m. nor after the ho_ ur.of 2:00 p.m., on - Saturday mornings. — . - - - - `: : % _ Y'" .. _ 3) The Arcadia Business Association'shall place barricades weekly in position as shown on Exhibit 1;- subjed to Police Department approval, and shall remove and store them in a safe; unobtrusive location' out'of the public right -of -way during the week while not in use. The, ABA. shall' maintain ' the' barricades in good condition and- shall replace any barricades damaged beyond repair or missing. 4) ThePABA''shall erisure'that farmers display tables; tents; trucks or merchandise -do not block: a) access_for an emergency vehicle on First Avenue; b) pedestrian traffic on the adjacent_sidewalks on South First Avenue; c) access to alleys: d) to the maximum extent possible, farrier /vendor trucks and service vehicles shall not be narkedtow S. First Avenue blocking adiacent store fronts within the Market area or adjacent to the Market area. 5) Any refuse "collection bins 'or boxes shall be stored at curbside in a parking space on Alta, Bonita or Califomia Streets, pending pick -up by the servicing company no later than the following Monday. The'area around the bins and around city refuse barrels shall be free of debris acid litter. At the conclusion of the Farmers Market (before 2:00 p.m.), South First Avenue, Alta, Bonita and California Streets shall be cleaned up with all debris, food product and litter deposited in refuse bins provided by the ABA. Neither the ABA nor farmers shall use the garbage bins of the private businesses in the area, nor overly utilize the City barrels on the sidewalk. ATTAC@ M 5 27 N a a n r 0 T N TH t NO SCALE Los Angolas County Park (PARKING) FARMER'S MARKET AREA 3 3 Parking District No.1 �- Parking District No. 2 d HUNTINGTON DRIVE w HUNTINGTON DRIVE d d Z �� 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 w I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 I 1 1 11 11 I 1 1 1 1 1 I I I 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 t 1 1 1 I I 1 I 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 I I I 1 I 1 I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 arkin , - - - - -- g; I Z I 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 r- - - -- -- 1 /� V/ N 1 - - - - - -- 1 l 1 1 1 1 I Lot 1 I I 1 1 1 r-- -- - --- I 1 I 1 I 1 1 W1 1 1 1 I 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 I 2l 1 I 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 i ALTA STREET _ u- ALTA STREET D Q 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 , Bonita I 1 I I 1 I I 1 1 r I r- - - - - -- 1 --- - - - --% I 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 I 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 W 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 I I 1 1 I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 L r- - -- - - -- - - - --- 1 -- - - - - -1 1 t I 1 I I 1 I 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 I 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 I PARKING 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 -------- --- --- -- I 1 I 1 1- - I 1 I 1 1 I 1 1 I I 1 1 I -1 I r - -1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I 1 1 I 1 1 1 I I 1) 1 I I 1 I 1 1 1 -- - - - - -- z S BONITA STREET = = BONITA STREET S O -- - - - - -- Q 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 I I 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 -- -' - - -- ZI 1 1 1 I ( 1 1 I I I I I I 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 r^ 1 1 1 I 1 1 -- - - -- -- ' A v,1 1 1 I I 1 1 1 I 1 1 I I 1 I 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 � 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 I 1 1 I 1 I - �-- - - -- 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I 1-- - - + - -- 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 - - - - -- 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I 1 1 d 1 1 1 1 I 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 CALIFORNIA ST CALIFORNIA STREET Barricade Locations "w'" THXHFirstavenuaschooi H Possible Barricade Locations S Possible "No Exit" Sign Locations d Directional Signs 3 3 7-, °d STAFF REPORT POLICE DEPARTMENT DATE: March 2, 1999 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Ronnie D. Garner, Assistant City Manager/Qhief of PoliceZD By: Nancy Chik, Management Analyst SUBJECT: Report and Recommendation to Waive Expenses Related to Traffic Control Services for the Fifth Annual Santa Anita Derby Day 5K Run & Walk to be Held on Saturday, April 3, 1999. SUMMARY The City was contacted by the Los Angeles Turf Club (Santa Anita) regarding the Fifth Annual Santa Anita Derby Day 5K Run & Walk to be held on Saturday, April 3, 1999. Typically, when City services or personnel are required for coordination of special events, the cost of these services is bome by the event organizer. In this instance, like years past, Santa Anita is requesting that the City waive the cost of traffic control services because of the charitable nature of this event. DISCUSSION The race is one of several special events that will be held in conjunction with the Santa Anita Derby and will be coordinated by Kathy Loper Events. This year the Derby Day 5K Run & Walk is again co- sponsored by the Methodist Hospital of Southern California. Participation of contestants has increased each year, and it is anticipated that about 5,000 runners/walkers will join in this year's event. Any profits from the race will be donated to focal beneficiaries including the Arcadia High School Boosters Club, Arcadia D.A.R.E. Program, and California Thoroughbred Trainers Recreation Program. If the race operates at a loss, Santa Anita will give all organizations a check for a fixed amount. The same course will be used in this year's Derby Day 5K. The race will begin in the south parking lot (adjacent to gate #1) of the race track, and runnerstwalkers will proceed through the mall parking lot and across Baldwin Avenue. The participants will go through the interior of the Arboretum, cross back over Baldwin Avenue, and enter the race track through gate #7. Finally, the racers will proceed through the turf tunnel and infield, and wind up on the training track for the last quarter mile of the race. CO /J, iG Z. fir✓ *40 The Police Department will provide intermittent traffic control to facilitate the running of the race and to ensure the safety of the participants. The traffic control unit will be headed by Arcadia Police Chief Ronnie Garner and his Command Staff, who will donate their time and efforts for this community event. The saving to Santa Anita is estimated at approximately $1,500.00. It is anticipated that traffic flow on Baldwin Avenue will be diverted between 8:00 a.m. and 8:30 a.m. Police personnel will use the same type of traffic flow pattern as in previous years with very minimal effect on any businesses or local residents. As part of hosting an event of this type, Santa Anita is also required to provide a certificate of insurance designating the City of Arcadia as an additional insured. They have provided this certificate and it has been approved by the City Attorney. FISCAL IMPACT None. The $1,500.00 associated with traffic control services will be absorbed by the Police Department utilizing the donation of staff time by Chief Garner and his Command Staff. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council move to approve Santa Anita's request to waive the cost of traffic control services for the Fifth Annual Santa Anita Derby Day SK Run & Walk to be held on April 3,1999. Approved: William R. Kelly, City Manager t, 3Ni) -.3v °"' ° °•t� STAFF REPORT MAINTENANCE SERVICES DEPARTMENT March 2, 1999 TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: PAT MALLOY, MAINTENANCE SERVICES DIRECTOR &/jfA- PREPARED BY: BRYAN E. BOESKIN, MANAGEMENT YS REVIEWED BY: JAN STEESE, PURCHASING OFFICER SUBJECT: REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION TO COOPERATIVELY PURCHASE, WITH THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, GENERAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT, TWO (2) 1999 FORD CROWN VICTORIA 4 -DOOR SEDANS FROM DOWNTOWN FORD AT A COST OF $50,352.38 AND ONE (1) 1999 CHEVROLET MALIBU 4 -DOOR SEDAN, FROM GOOD CHEVROLET, AT A COST OF $16,899.17 FOR A TOTAL COST OF $67,251.55 AND APPROPRIATE AN ADDITIONAL $19,050.33 FROM THE EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT FUND TO COMPLETE THIS PURCHASE SUMMARY It is recommended that the City Council award a purchase contract for two (2) 1999 Ford Crown Victoria 4 -Door Sedans to Downtown Ford in the amount of $50,532.38. Staff is also recommending the award of a purchase contract to Good Chevrolet in the amount of $16,899.17 for one (1) 1999 Chevrolet Malibu 4- Door Sedan. Adequate funds have been budgeted for the Chevrolet Malibu. Also an additional appropriation of $19,050.33 is necessary to allow for the replacement of prisoner cages for the police vehicles for this fiscal year and to make up a shortfall in funding for the Fire Department vehicle. DISCUSSION One (1) 1999 Ford Crown Victoria 4 -Door Sedan will replace one (1) 1987 Chevrolet Sedan in the Police Department. The other 1999 Crown Victoria will replace one (1) 1991 Buick Regal in the Fire Department. The 1999 Chevrolet Malibu is being purchased for the Development Service Department and will replace a 1986 Chevrolet Caprice. All of the existing cars are high - mileage vehicles that are in marginal condition and require frequent service and repair. Current maintenance costs for these vehicles are excessive and merit replacement. There is an unanticipated under - appropriation for the Police Department vehicles' for this fiscal year due to a change in vehicle model from Chevrolet Caprice patrol cars to Ford Crown Victoria patrol cars. The change in the vehicle model has not allowed for the transfer of certain vehicle accessory equipment, i.e. prisoner separation shield, from old vehicles to new. This has resulted in the purchase and installation of new accessory equipment that fits properly into the new Crown Victoria's. The expense related to the accessory equipment on previously purchased patrol vehicles was not anticipated and has resulted in a shortfall of $15,050.33 toward the purchase of this vehicle. Staff investigated the possibility of a cooperative purchase, commonly known as "piggy- backing ", with another larger public agency for the purchase of vehicles with specifications equal to or greater than the City of Arcadia's. The State of California, General Services Department, in cooperation with Downtown Ford of Sacramento, CA and Good Chevrolet of Alameda, CA has authorized the City to "piggy- back" on their purchase order at a significant savings to the City. Delivery costs of $200 per vehicle are included in the total price. Downtown Ford has agreed to discount the price of each 1999 Crown Victoria by $500 (total of $1,000) if payment in full is received within 20 days of delivery. LASER IMAGED C vn/. / W/ --e.;, M Mayor and City Council March 2, 1999 Page 2 0 Public agencies often utilize other agencies formal bidding results (known as a cooperative purchase or piggy- backing on the contract) when the agreement between the agency and the vendor meets the specifications of the using agency. Staff has determined that Downtown Ford and Good Chevrolet are qualified dealerships and that the 1999 Ford Crown Victoria's and the 1999 Chevrolet Malibu meet the City's specifications. FISCAL IMPACT The cost to purchase the 1999 Ford Crown Victoria for the Police Department is $25,430.20. Funds in the amount of $25,000 were carried over from the 1997/98 Capital Budget to fund this purchase. Funds in the amount of $15,050.33 have already been expended to purchase the vehicle accessories, subsequently requiring an additional appropriation in this amount. The cost to purchase the 1999 Ford Crown Victoria for the Fire Department is $24,922.18. Funds in the amount of $21,000 are budgeted in the 1998/99 Capital Budget for this purchase. Therefore an additional $4,000 in Equipment Replacement Funds will be required to make this purchase. The cost to purchase the 1999 Chevrolet Malibu for the Development Services Department is $16,899.17. Proposition C funds in the amount of $20,000 are budgeted in the 1998/99 Capital Budget for this purchase. The total additional appropriation being requested for these purchases is $19,050.33. The total cost for the purchase of all three vehicles is $67,251.55 RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council: 1. Waive the Competitive Bidding process and piggy -back on the State of California, General Services Department's bid and award a contract for the purchase of two (2) 1999 Ford Crown Victoria Police Interceptor 4 -Door Sedans to Downtown Ford in the amount of $50,352.38 and one (1) 1999 Chevrolet Malibu 4 -Door Sedan to Good Chevrolet in the amount of $16,899.17 for a total purchase cost of $67,251.55. 2. Appropriate an additional $4,000 needed for the purchase of the 1999 Ford Crown Victoria for the Fire Department. 3. Appropriate an additional $15,050 needed for the purchase of the 1999 Ford Crown Victoria for the Police Department. 4. Authorize the City Manager to execute a purchase contract in a form approved by the City Attorney. PM:GFL:BEB:ds Approved by: —"=_h WILLIAM R. KELLY, CITY MANAGER at - STAFF REPORT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT March 2, 1999 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Don Penman, Deputy City Manager /Development Services Director*0 By: Donna Butler, Community Development Administrator`s i SUBJECT: RECOMMENDATION TO ENTER INTO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENTS WITH SCOTT FAZEKAS & ASSOCIATES, INC., ESGIL CORPORATION AND VAN DORPE CHOU ASSOCIATES FOR PLAN CHECK SERVICES Sl1MMARY The Development - Services Department is requesting authorization to execute contracts with the following firms for Plan Check Services and other related services as necessary: Scott Fazekas and Associates, Inc. EsGil Corporation Van Dorpe Chou Associates, Inc. DISCUSSION During the past five years the Development Services Department has contracted with two firms, Van Dorpe Chou Associates, Inc. (VCA) and Melad and Associates to provide professional plan check services for all types of construction. Plan check services involve reviewing plans for compliance with: • All building, plumbing, mechanical and electrical codes (structural engineering) • Residential and non - residential energy conservation • State of California CAC Title 24 requirements (including handicap requirements, energy and all other state mandated codes) Cc re port-3/2pl an check March 2, 1999 Page 1 LASER The costs for the plan check consultant is paid for by the applicant through the plan check fees. There are no direct costs to the City. In fact, the plan check fees also pay for City staff costs and overhead involved in the building process. As part of staffs ongoing review of the various planning and building services provided to the public, staff recently solicited proposals for plan check services from six firms. This allowed staff the opportunity to assess the services and costs of other firms and determine which firm(s) might provide the most cost effective services for the City and developers. The firms contacted were ones that contract with other local cities and can provide full plan checking services. The City received proposals from the following companies: Scott Fazekas and Associates, Inc., (located in Irinve) Berryman and Henigar, (located in Santa Ana) EsGil Corporation (located in San Diego) Vandorpe Chou Associates, Inc. (located in Orange) Melad and Associates (located in Huntington Beach) Willdan Associates (located in City of Industry) It should be noted that the fee is not the only consideration in selecting a plan check firm and that the following criteria was used to determine which firm(s) would most effectively fulfill the City's needs. • Firm's experience and knowledge • Quality of plan check • Professional representation on behalf of the City for consultation purposes • Customer Service • Plan check turn - around time • Plan check fee schedule The following is a comparison table of the plan check services offered by each firm, including plan check fees and processing time. Cc report- 3 /2plancheck March 2, 1999 t Page 2 PROCESSING PLAN REVIEW FEE ENERGY PLAN COMPANY TIME REVIEW EsGil 5 -20 workdays 45% of building permit None — inc. in plan fee set forth in UBC check Table 1 -A* Fazekas 7 -10 workdays 60% of plan check None — inc. in plan check VCA 10 workdays" 65% of plan check None — inc. in plan check Melad 10 -15 workdays 70% of plan check 70% of energy fee Willdan 10 -15 workdays 70% of plan check 70% of energy fee Berryman 5 -10 workdays 74% of plan check 15% of building permit fee Cc report- 3 /2plancheck March 2, 1999 t Page 2 M 'EsGil's fees are based on UBC Table 1 -A which is approximately 10% higher than the City's Building Permit fees (which equates to approximately 50 -55% of the City's plan review fee). ` "Our experience shows that most plans are returned within one week. Because of the significant increase in building activity and amount of projects being submitted for construction, staff is recommending that the City enter into professional services agreements with the following three (3) plan check firms: Vandorpe Chou Associates, Inc., (VCA) — located in Orange Scott Fazekas and Associates, Inc. — located in the City of Irvine EsGil Corporation — located in San Diego VCA has been in business for approximately 20 years. They currently provide plan check services to the City. Although their fees are higher than EsGil's and Fazekas', the quality of their plan check services is outstanding. The City has been very satisfied with their turnaround time in processing plans and their responsiveness in assisting developers to resolve problems. Scott Fazekas and Associates, Inc. has been in business for approximately 2 Y2 years, however, Mr. Fazekas has had 35 years in managing municipal building safety consulting services and working in building and safety divisions. They are located in Irvine and received very good recommendations from some of their current city clients regarding the quality of their plan checks, turnaround time, code knowledge and customer service. EsGil Corporation has been in business located in San Diego and in checking thei r both their plan review turnaround time an contacted indicated that EsGil's location problem. FISCAL IMPACT approximately 20 years. They are references they received praise for I plan check quality. The cities we in San Diego has not presented a There are no direct costs to the City. Last fiscal year the City paid $343,000 in plan check services; this fiscal year to date, the City has already paid $285,265 for plan check services. The plan check fee is a percentage of the building permit fee based on the value as calculated in the ICBO (International Conference of Building Officials) schedule. VCA and Scott Fazekas and Associates charge a certain percent of the plan check fee collected by the City. EsGil's fee is based on the building permit fee. The fees for the three firms that staff is recommending range from approximately 55% to 65% of the plan check fee collected by the City. Currently, Melad and Associates, one of the firms we currently contract with, charges 70 %. Cc report- 3 /2plancheck March 2, 1999 Page 3 E1 111iiew Based on the fees of the three firms, there should be a net increase in plan check revenues to the City. Staff Summary All of the above firms have expertise in all types of plan checks, i.e., residential, commercial and industrial. Because of their close proximity in Orange County, both Scott Fazekas and Associates and VCA are available for consultation with both developers and the City at any time. Because of EsGil's location in San Diego, they have indicated that most of their contacts with developers and the cities they service are by phone. When absolutely necessary, they will meet in person. Although VCA's costs are higher than both Scott Fazekas and Associates and EsGil, the City has had a good working relationship with them during the past five years. They provide quality performance and have worked well with developers. Their offices in Orange make it convenient for developers to meet with them to review corrections, make changes and discuss the plans. In addition, continuing with their services provides continuity while staff has the opportunity to evaluate the services of the other two plan check firms. It is staffs opinion that contracting with all three firms will maintain a competitive balance in providing quality service to both the City and developers. Staff is recommending that the City enter into agreements with all firms in an amount not to exceed $250,000 each. This amount is based on estimated plan check fees for this fiscal year. RECOMMENDATION Authorize the City Manager to enter into professional service agreements subject to review and approval by the City Attorney, with Vandorpe Chou Associates, Scott Fazekas and Associates, Inc., and EsGil Corporation in an amount not to exceed $250,000 each. APPROVED: tu1� William R. Kelly, City Manager Cc report- 3 /2plancheck March 2, 1999 Page 4 A /&)el eff(?).- • �� ''cif •r °RPOnAss°" STAFF REPORT March 2, 1999 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Don Penman, Development Services Director By: Donna Butler, Community Development Administrator`s>� ��. SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF TIME EXTENSION FOR CUP 92-003 THE RODEFFER INERT LANDFILL AT 12321 LOWER AZUSA RD. SUMMARY The City received the attached letter from Phyllis Rodeffer, requesting a time extension for Conditional Use Permit 92-003, the proposed inert landfill at 12321 Lower Azusa Rd. This application was approved by the City Council on April 5, 1994. The Development Services Department is recommending approval of a one-year time extension to April 5, 2000. • DISCUSSION Since the original approval of CUP 92-003 (Resolution 5785), the City Council has • granted the following time extensions: • May 2, 1995 • April 5, 1996 • February 4, 1997 • February 17, 1998 • Section 9275.2.14 of the Arcadia Municipal Code states that an extension for a conditional use permit may be granted upon written request filed prior to the expiration of the CUP. The request should set forth reasons supported by factual data why the CUP has been unused, abandoned or discontinued or compliance with the conditions has not been achieved. No extension shall be granted unless the Council finds justifiable cause for such extension. The applicant has now received all the necessary permits from the other responsible agencies. Monitoring wells both upstream and downstream from the project site have been installed as required by the Regional Water Control Board. The applicant's letter sets forth the additional work that must be completed prior to beginning preliminary grading on the site for roadways leading to the fill area. - LASER IMAdED Because of the complexity of this project, the applicant is requesting additional time to complete the mitigation monitoring programs prior to commencement of landfill activity. RECOMMENDATION The Development Services Department recommends a one-year time extension for CUP 92-003 to April 5, 2000. The City Council should move to approve a one-year time extension as recommended by Development Services Department. Attachment: February 10, 1999 letter from Mrs. Rodeffer Approved by: William R. Kelly, City Manager 1 b ,. R E C E E V E D FEB .1 6 1999 DeWM4411em burricon Community D.velopment Division PHYLLIS M. RODEFFER, TRUSTEE 11770 E. WARNER, SUITE 129 FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CA 92708 FEBRUARY 10, 1999 Ms. Donna L. Butler Community Development Administrator City of Arcadia 240 W. Huntington Drive Arcadia, CA 91007 Re: CUP No. 92-003 (Rodeffer Site) - Request for Extension of CUP and Continuance of Project Dear Ms. Butler: Pursuant to the provisions of Arcadia Municipal Code No. 9275.2.14, we are hereby applying for an additional extension of the Conditional Use Permit No. 92-003 which was granted on April 5, 1994 and extended to April 5, 1999, pursuant to Arcadia City Council Resolution No. 5785. The reason for this request is due to the complexity of the mitigation requirements which necessitate additional time to complete. At this time we have completed all the necessary permitting and have completed the mitigation requirements of the Regional Water Control Board by installing the required monitoring well system. This was just completed two months ago and we are presently working on creating a suitable landscape and irrigation plan. We have had one conceptional meeting and are in the process of setting up a meeting with the City Traffic Engineer to see that we are in compliance with the City exiting requirements. At the request of our geologist we had the bottom of the pit surveyed by a diver to evaluate the integrity of the bottom prior to placing fill. We have also had an evaluation by a geological engineer certifying this is suitable for fill. Later on this summer we will attempt to determine the approximate water level of the quarry in order to generate a preliminary grading plan since any plan that is generated will be subject to the water level. • .j Ms. Donna Butler Page 2 February 10, 1999 We, therefore, request to have this item on the City Council agenda as soon as possible, and are enclosing our check in the amount of $100.00 made payable to the City of Arcadia. Should you require any other information or documents please notify our office as soon as possible. Thanking you in advance for your co-operastion and courtesy in this matter, we remain Very7ruly yours, P LIS M. RDDEH,ER' PMR:wIl • 5 "�'• 01:75-e, -6a ''°..5,'•• MEMORANDUM DEVELOPMENT SERVICES D NT DATE: March 2, 1999 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: nwDon Penman, Deputy City Manager/Development Services Director �By: Michael Busch, Transportation Services Officer SUBJECT: Report & Recommendation Regarding Soundwalls Along State Route 210 SUMMARY The purpose of this report is to update the City Council regarding the status of various soundwall projects along State Route 210 through the City of Arcadia and to request direction regarding City financial participation. Staff has been working with the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation • Authority (LACMTA) and Caltrans District 7 in efforts to develop and present a Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) Call for Projects grant application for partial funding of a soundwall along Route 210. Specifically, staff is interested in pursuing potential grant funding opportunities for the design and construction of a . freeway soundwall along the Route 210 Freeway starting at 2nd Avenue runnin westbound to Santa Anita Avenue. Per Section 215.6 of the Streets and Highway Code, any soundwall project for which the City contributes at least 33% of the estimated cost is to be given priority over all other soundwall projects included !n that State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) cycle. Staff is requesti g for this segment to be studied with design and construction to occur in conjunction with a previously approved soundwall from 5th to 2 Avenues scheduled for construction in FY 00-01. BACKGROUND On March 2, 1993, the City Council approved Resolution No. 5716 (attached) allocating $264,000 of Gas Tax funds or 33% of the total estimated cost for the • design and construction of a soundwall on the westbound Route 210 Freeway from 5th Avenue to 2nd Avenue. This Resolution was approved for the purpose of moving the project up on the priority list. The 5th Avenue to 2"d Avenue segment will be in the design phase during FY 99-00 followed by construction in FY 00-01. /g©erau LASER iMA ED Staff is seeking to have the adjacent segment, 2nd Avenue to Santa Anita Avenue, designed and constructed in conjunction with the segment from 5th to 2nd Avenues project. The soundwall segment from 2nd Avenue to Santa Anita Avenue is currently number fifty-seven (57) on the soundwall priority list with over $40.5 million in projects ranked in a higher priority position. Providing local funds would move the project up to receive funding during this STIP cycle. With former Governor Wilson's veto of recent soundwall legislation (AB 1686), the City could expect this segment of soundwall to be built in roughly 10 to 15 years from today without the 33% local contribution unless other legislation is drafted and signed by the Governor. DISCUSSION Working with the MTA and Caltrans, a Call for Projects application has been drafted and submitted to the MTA for evaluation on behalf of the City for possible grant funding. The subject application proposes to design and construct a freeway soundwall along Route 210 from 2nd Avenue to Santa Anita Avenue westbound. The proposed project if approved for funding by the MTA is scheduled for design in FY 99-00 and construction in FY 00-01. This project will be designed and constructed in conjunction with the previously programmed segment from 5th to 2nd Avenues mentioned above. Staff believes that constructing this project with the previously programmed project will demonstrate cost efficiencies, reducing the overall cost of the project as well as the local contribution of the City. Moreover, as soundwall projects become increasing more coveted by local agencies staff believes that providing the necessary 33% contribution would ensure the construction of this soundwall segment in a reasonable timeframe. Over the next four (4) months, Caltrans staff will perform a required Noise Barrier • Scoping Study Report (NBSSR) of the subject soundwall project area. Information gleaned from the Study will be used to determine project scope and cost estimates. Cost estimates identified in the Study will be used as the basis for the City's 33% local contribution. Based on those findings, staff will conduct a cost/benefit analysis to determine the proposed projects' cost effectiveness. In the interim, a Council Resolution allocating 33% of the total project cost (estimated at $550,000) has been requested by Caltrans before March 31, 1999 to formalize the City's contribution. FISCAL IMPACT The City is not obligated to provide any match to this project with the submittal of • the application. However, Caltrans has requested a Resolution approved by the City Council by March 31, 1999 to formalize the City's contribution. The exact cost :t. of the project is not known at this time. Upon completion of the NBSSR Caltrans staff will determine the City's actual contribution based on the 33% of the total cost per Streets and Highways Code 215.6. Caltrans estimates as included in the grant application assume a City contribution of$550,000 to the project. Funds allocated for this project would come from Proposition C Local Return funds. Staff also recommends that the previously approved soundwall project from 5th Avenue to 2"d Avenue westbound also receive funding from Proposition C Local Return. Currently, the City has approximately $2 million of Proposition C Local Return funds in reserve. As Proposition C Local Return funds are restricted to transportation related projects and have a timely use clause of 3 years from date of allocation, staff believes this to be an appropriate and effective use of those ft,nds. Listed below is a brief financial plan for funding both segment number one, 5th Avenue to 2"d Avenue and segment number two, 2"d Avenue to Santa Anita . Avenue westbound. Soundwall F inancial Plan Segment Design Construction Total 33% Local Funding Phase Phase Cost Contribution Sour*e 5th Avenue FY 99 - 00 FY 00 - 01 $800,000 *$264,000 Prop. C to 2nd Local Avenue Return westbound 2"d Avenue FY 99— 00 FY 00 - 01 $1.679 M *$550,000 Prop. C to Santa Local Anita Returi Avenue westbound *Local contributions for both soundwall segments are budgeted in FY 00-01. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council direct staff to prepare a resolutio for Council consideration and approval earmarking $550,000 in Proposition monies for the 2"d Avenue.to Santa Anita Avenue soundwall segment. Approved: "", William R. Kelly, City Manager A N ores ve HOV Sound Wall _ Santa Anita to Second 1 200 0 0 400 600 800 Feet Q PI- \ Scale: tin = 1,000 ft .I �, HOV Sound Wall Q ■ Second to Fifth co N,Alle ■ to oora.o '41‘q4 1 ■ La Porte St h‘4111= d � I > ` C •//� osep lc° u 1J4 a) '4411414114111 .• \ r, i /,,, ,----------------T Santa Clara ' t 1 s0., Nki Iwo. , . n-----1 „ or / iiiii i 1 N , __. e -\ \. . Huntington Dr \N . \' • ' Development Services Department \ I: a ` HOV Sound Wall Construction Engineering Division •�� . �, �s• fc ' ,o; Foothill Freeway Prepared y. RS Gonza'ez February 2z 1999 °RPORATE� 9111 - if- STAFF REPORT March 2, 1999 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Don Penman, Deputy City Manager/Development Services Director By: Donna Butler, Community Development Administrator��� SUBJECT: Portable Signs for Commercial Businesses SUMMARY • ' In September, 1998 the City Council requested: the Development Services Department to prepare a brief report on a request from tenants in the Arcadia Landmark Center (411 E:.Huntington Drive) to place-_portable signs:-in the public right of way..,On October 12, a memorandum was distributed_to the;,City Council - that recommended that the existing code be enforced- and that,no:changes are instituted at that time The City Council concurred with this recommendation. • This report is a follow-up to the October-12th memo to further_discu ss.the display • and design of portable signs.::_:-. - ..- . BACKGROUND Prior to adoption of the City's CBD (Central Business District) zoning _regulations in 1996, the Arcadia Municipal Code= prohibited portable, or what -are-more commonly called "Sidewalk's signs throughout the .City:: F - � -- ;. _ - .-_ r . - �.. In:order:to .encourage and promote the pedestrian character -of-_thteel downtown area,the-new,CBD zone included..specific regulations to,permit portabletsigns for businesses along.Huntington Drive and First.Avenue.: .At;this=time,"A" frame-type signs;-were prohibited. ;, In May 1998, in response to interest expressed by businesses in other commercial,:areas and in•an_attempt:to be more "Business Friendly", the-City Council amended the commercial sign regulations by allowing portable signs for businesses with street frontage in all the commercial areas. .In addition the new regulations permitted "A" frame signs. The basic requirements. relating to size, area, location, design requirements and insurance requirements'did not change. • cc Report-2-231-99 portable signs CC Report- Portable Signs :.- - March 2,_1999 Page 1 tic There have been several code problems with portable signs since adoption of the ordinance in 1996: • None of the signs displayed have been approved through the design review process. • Some signs have not been professionally designed. • Some of the signs exceed the width, height and/or allowable area (maximum 8) square feet in area with a maximum height of 4'-O" and a maximum width of 2'-0"). • Businesses which do not have frontage on a street, but are located in commercial retail centers were placing signs in the sidewalk area, creating sidewalk clutter and detracting from the overall appearance of a building and a site. (This problem is less prevalent as a result of active code enforcement and the City Council's action in October.) • 'No'' business displaying a sign has provided 'the appropriate certificate of insurance. It may be`that the insurance is too expensive for a sign which is relative inexpensive to be made. The revised code allows-the City..Attorney flexibility infthe amount of insurance required.- --. During'tlie"past few months, as a result of.more active code enforcement,,Code Services has encountered fewer problems with portable signs and," in.fact; has 'seen a reduction in the number of portable signs displayed by businesses throughout the City DESIGN OF PORTABLE SIGNS . At an earlier meeting, Council Member Harbicht suggested-'that'.the City'might want to consider developing a "generic" sidewalk/portable-type. .sign for 'businesses throughout- the 'City: :. None of-the'; cities surveyed--have, generic portable-signs;"however, this is' a fairly: common'=practice: in the real ,estate industry:-° ln=°`-communities experiencing c:significant::=growth)) with multiple development projects underway, a generic-type sign with a listing of all housing projects in the area is often used. . -Application_of generic signs for commercial projects may not be appropriate in a retail/office environment:The following are two examples of°generic" type signs. Cc Report-z-23\-99 portable signs CC Report- Portable Signs March 2, 1999 Page 2 � cm or.vunw• YOM Sign Sign Content Content u u u u Although a "generic" type of sign might resolve the design review issue by creating unity in design, it significantly stifles creativity in sign design. Generally, the purpose of a sign is to create a visual image and to "identify" a particular business. A generic design for all portable.signs is contradictory to the concept of creating an individual "identity" for the business. Many sidewalk/portable signs use pictographic images to quickly illustrate the type of business occupied by a shop, Dahl's golf shop is a good example. Well-designed signs can compliment a building's architecture and contribute to the business' image. In addition, there are a number of businesses that currently have portable:signs with designs that appearto comply with code. If the-City established a generic" design standard, there could be additional costs to the business to replace an already existing sign. • . .The Development Services Department recommends that no further action be taken relative to a generic design. CONCLUSION AND ALTERNATIVES Since adoption of the portable sign regulations staff has encountered the problems with code compliance, especially in commercial centers because (1) the number of signs displayed are excessive; (2) there has been a lack of compliance with the City's code requirements regarding size, design and approvals; and (3) the businesses displaying the signs have not sec ured the appropriate insurance. t. However, as noted above, since more strict enforcement of the regulations there have been a lot fewer'problems in the commercial centers. Also, there seems to be a reduction in the number of businesses displaying portable signs, resulting in a decrease in code enforcement issues relating to these signs. - CC Report.-2-231-99 portable signs-- CC Report- Portable,Signs March 2, 1999 Page 3 T. Portable signs when professionally designed can enhance the pedestrian atmosphere of commercial areas; however, they can also detract from the overall appearance and result in excessive sidewalk clutter. The following are some options that the City Council may wish to consider: 1. Take no action and direct staff to pursue enforcement of the existing codes. 2. Allow signs subject to current codes and waive the insurance requirement. 3. Design a "generic" portable sign and direct staff to amend the code by allowing only portable signs that meet a specific generic design. 4. If enforcement efforts do not eliminate this problem, modifications to the Code to prohibit portable signs may be necessary. Approved by: ;-. .William R. Kelly, City Manager Photos of some of the portable signs in the City will be available for review at the City Council meeting. CC Report"-2-23\-99 portable signs CC Report Portable Signs March 2, 1999 Page 4 a-0 6CJ • •AR tie kr,„„A .° STAFF REPORT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT March 2, 1999 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Don Penman, Deputy City Manager/Development Services Director By: Donna Butler, Community Development Administrate SUBJECT: REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE TEXT AMENDMENT 99-001 A PROPOSAL TO AMEND SECTIONS 9260.3.11, 9261.4.5, 9262.4.14 AND 9266.2.8.7 (ALLOWABLE AREA FOR IDENTIFICATION) TO INCLUDE WINDOW SIGNS . -. . SUMMARY This text amendment was initiated by. the"Development Services Department at the direction of the City Council for-the purpose of amending Sections 9260.3.11,. 9261.4.5, 9262.4.14 and .9266.2.8.7. by adding window signs to the "Allowable area for Identification". These sections allow no more than one-third of the sign area to contain a non-English translation of the business identification. The:Planning Commission at.its_ January, 12 meeting_ voted 4 to. 0 with one _. member: absent., to,recommend approval -of this: text. amendment to. the City` Council.:.::.. DISCUSSION ° . In 1985, Sections 9260.3.1.1.,9261..4.5,,9262.4.14.and 9266.2.8.7 were added to the City's sign regulations requiring that a minimum of two-thirds (2/3) of;the sign area 'for: the:signs identified below..must,be,.in. the English language. The following is the specific text wording: 'With regard to any business in the City, applicable to the signs listed. .. here, no more than one-third (1/3) of the allowable sign area of each such sign(s) may--contain a non-English - translation., of the , business identification; the.remaining_sign area identification-shall be set forth in the Roman alphabet, English language and include Arabic numerals. The sign(s) must be clearly readable from a distance of one hundred -feet' (100'): _ : _ _. = ` ' TAfrA99-1 ccrpt • Text Amendment 99-001 MarcLht, g_S9iikfi r.cD • 4 • A. Free-standing signs; B. Wall signs (mounted); C. Wall signs (painted); D. Mounted letter signs; E. Projecting signs; F. Marquee signs" The purpose of this regulation was to provide for readable and understandable signs that provide safety personnel and the public with quick business/building identification. When these sections were adopted, window signs were not included in the lists. Throughout the past few years there has been a proliferation of both permanent. and temporary window signs. Pedestrians often rely on window signs to identify a business because wall signs are often not visible from the sidewalk, especially when there are awnings on a building. In some cases window signs are the only kind of business identification. Some businesses do not have an English translation of the business identification or their product in a window, making it difficult to identify what the business is or what is being sold. In order,to provide adequate building and product identification,.the Planning • Commission' and 'Development Services Department are recommending_:.that window signs be included in the "Allowable Area for Identification". • CEQA . . ._ ,.- - _ Pursuant"to the provisions Of'the California Environmental Quafity.-Act;-=the-" Development Services Department has prepared an initial study for the=proposed text amendment. Said initial study did not-disclose any substantial or potentially substantial adverse change in any of the physical conditions within the area affected by the project including land, air, water, minerals, flora, fauna, ambient - noise and ,objects.tof historical or aesthetic significance. When considering the record as a whole, there is no evidence that-the proposed project will have any potential for adverse effect on wildlife resources'or the habitat upon which the:: wildlife depends:°`Therefore ,a Negative' Declaration has been prepared for this-.:-. text amendment. RECOMMENDATION The: Development Services` Department recornmends that Sections 9260.3.11, 9281:45,'.9262:4.14 and ' 9266.2.8J "Allowable Area`} for Identification" be amended to read: ■ "With regard to any business in the City, applicable to the signs'listed here, no more than one-third (1/3) of the allowable sign area of each such t ;:sign(s) . ,,may;... contain a non-English translation of the business fr - ._. .. : : TA/TA99ccct_' - Text Amendment 99-001 March 2, 1999 Page 2 identification; the remaining sign area identification shall be set forth in the Roman alphabet, English language and include Arabic numerals. The sign(s) must be clearly readable from a distance of one hundred feet (100'): G. Free-standing signs; - H. Wall signs (mounted); I. Wall signs (painted); J. Mounted letter signs; K. Projecting signs; L. Marquee signs M. Window Signs" The above code has been amended to include "window signs" and delete the wording "allowable" in the text. Deleting the term "allowable" clarifies the intent of the code so that regardless of the size of the sign a minimum of two-thirds (2/3) of the sign text must be in the English language. CITY COUNCIL ACTION The City Council should move to approve this text amendment, and direct staff to prepare the appropriate ordinance for adoption at a later meeting. • Attachments: Environmental Documents • Approved by William R. Kelly, City Manager • • • Text Amendment 99-001 TA/TA991ccrpt March 2, 1999 Page 3 >e File No.: TA-99-001 * CITY OFARCADIA R. . 240 WEST HUNTINGTON DRIVE . ARCADIA, CA 91007 �R�onnsRV' CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT NEGATIVE DECLARATION A. Title and Description of Project: Text Amendment 99-001 amending Sections 9260.3.11, 9261.4.5, 9262.4.14 and 9262.8.7 of the Arcadia Municipal Code relating to allowable area for sign identification _ B. Location of Project: Throughout the City C. Name of Applicant or Sponsor: - City of Arcadia: .., 240 West Huntington Drive Arcadia, Ca 91007 D. Finding: This project will have no significant effect upon the environment within the meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 for the reasons set forth in the attached Initial Study. E. Mitigation measures,if any,included in the project to avoid potentially significant effects: No impact Date Prepared: 12/14/98 B Date Posted: 12/14/98 Donna But = , '.mmunity Development Adminis ,ator File No.: TA 99-001 ,. ko CITY OF ARCADIA• 240 WEST HUNTINGTON DRIVE kr°HArvv- ARCADIA,CA 91007 CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL'QUALITY ACT ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM 1. Project Title: T.A. 99-001. 2. Project Address: NA 3. Project Sponsor's Name,Address & Telephone Number: City of Arcadia - 240 West Huntington Drive Arcadia, Ca 91007 (626) 574-5442 • 4. Lead Agency Name&Address: City of Arcadia—Development Services Department. Community Development Division--Planning Services= 240 W. Huntington Drive - Post Office Box 60021 = - Arcadia, CA 91066-6021 . _ _ . 5. Lead Agency Contact Person & Telephone Number:- Donna Butler, Community-Development Administrator (626) 574-5442 6. General Plan Designation: N/A " - 7. Zoning Classification:: ; N/A - - 8. Description of Project: (Describe the whole action involved,including but not limited to later phases of the project and any secondary, support,or off-site features necessary for its implementation..Attach additional sheets if necessary.) '; Proposal amend Sections 9260.3.11, 9261.4.5, 9262.1.14 and 9266 2.8.7 of the Arcadia Municipal_Code relating-to-"Allowable Area for identification" on signs,_i.e., no more -1- CEQA Checklist 7/95 • File No.: TA 99-001 than one-third of the sign area may contain a non-English translation of the business identification. 9. Other public agencies whose approval is required: None 10. • ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. [ ] . Land Use & Planning [ ] Hazards [ ] Population &Housing [ ] Noise • [ ] Geological Problems [ ] Public Services • [ ] Water ,[ ] Utilities and Service Systems. [ ] Air Quality [ ] Aesthetics [ ] Transportation/Circulation [ ] Cultural Resources • [ ] Biological Resources [ ] Resources `- [ ] Energy and Mineral Resources [ ] Mandatory Finding of Significance, DETERMINATION (To be completed by the Lead Agency) • On the basis of this initial evaluation: . [X] I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared., [ ] I find that although the proposed project could have a significant_effect, on the environment, there• will not be.a..,significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to'the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. [ ] I fmd that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. [ ] I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, but that at least one effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable' legal standards and.has.,been addressed. by.Y mitigation • •' measures based on that earlier analysis as described on attached sheets, and if any •• remaining effect is a"Potentially • Significant Impact" or"Potentially Significant • • -2- CEQA Checklist 7/95 File No.: TA 99-001 Unless Mitigated," an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it only needs to analyze the effects that have not yet been addressed. [ ] I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects have been analyzed adequately in an earlier Environmental Impact Report pursuant to applicable standards and have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. By: Donna Butler, Community Development Administrator For: The Ci .f Arcadia--Development Services Department AL./ f AfirTr .. Date: December 14, 1998 Signature • EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: 1. A brief explanation is required for all answers except"No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A"No Impact"answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects such as the one involved(e.g.,the project is not within a fault rupture zone). A"No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g.,the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants,based on a project-specific screening analysis). 2. All answers must take account of the whole action involved,including off-site as well as on-site,cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct,and construction related as well as operational impacts. 3. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is significant. If there are one or more, "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an Environmental Impact Report is required. • 4. "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less Than Significant Impact" The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level(mitigation measures from Section 17"Earlier Analyses"may be crass-referenced). 5. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program Environmental Impact Report, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration {Section , 15063(c)(3)(D)}. Earlier analyses are discussed in Section 17 at the end of the checklist. • 6. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist,references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should,where appropriate,include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. -3- CEQA Checklist 7/95 File No.: TA-99-O01 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Would the proposal result in potential impacts involving: Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 1. LAND USE & PLANNING—Would the proposal: a) Conflict with general plan designations or zoning? [ ] [ ] [ ] [A] The proposed text amendment has no impact on the general plan or zoning—it specifically addresses sign regulations. b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project? [ ] [ ] [ ] [A] The text amendment is not inconsistent with any environmental plans or policies adopted by the City c) Be compatible with existing land uses in the vicinity? [ ] [ ] [ ] [A] The text amendment does not any land use. d) Affect agricultural resources or operations(e.g., impacts to soils or farmlands,or impacts from incompatible land uses)? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] There are no agricultural resources or operations in the City or the adjoining area. e) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community(including a low-income or minority community)? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] The text amendment is a change in the code, and does not affect • land use 2. POPULATION&HOUSING—Would the proposal: a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population • projections? [ ] [ l [ ] [A] The text amendment is a change in the code, and will not affect regional or local population projections. b) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or indirectly (e.g., through projects in an undeveloped area or extension of major infrastructure)? [ ] [ l [ l [X] The text amendment is an amendment to the sign regulations only and has NO affect on growth. c) Displace existing housing,especially affordable housing? [ ] [ ] [.. ] [XJ The text amendment is an amendment to the sign regulations and has no affect on any existing housing. 3. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS—Would the proposal result in or expose people to potential impacts involving: a) Fault rupture? [ ] [ l [ ] [A] The text amendment is an amendment to the sign ordinance and has no direct affect on land use. b) Seismic ground shaking? [ l [ ] [ l [X] The text amendment is an amendment to the sign ordinance and has no direct affect on land use. - c) Seismic ground failure,including liquefaction? [. ] - [.: ] ; . [ ] [X] The text amendment is an amendment to the sign ordinance and has no direct affect on land use. d) Landslides or mudflows? [ ] [ l [ ] [X] -5- CEQA Checklist 7/95 File No.: TA-99-001 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Would the proposal result in potential impacts involving: Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact The text amendment is an amendment to the sign ordinance and has no direct affect on land use. c) Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from 'excavation,grading,or fill? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] The text amendment is an amendment to the sign ordinance and has no direct affect on land use. • f) Subsidence of the land? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] The text amendment is an amendment to the sign ordinance and has no direct affect on land use. g) Expansive soils? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] The text amendment is an amendment to the sign ordinance and has no direct affect on land use. h) Unique geologic or physical features? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] The text amendment is an amendment to the sign ordinance and has no direct affect on land use. • 4. WATER—Would the proposal result in: a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, of the rate and • amount of surface runoff? - [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] The text amendment is an amendment to the sign ordinance and has no direct affect on land use. • b) Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] The text amendment is an amendment to the sign ordinance and has no direct affect on land use. c) Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of surface water quality(e.g.,temperature,dissolved oxygen,or turbidity)? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] The text amendment is an amendment to the sign ordinance and has no direct affect on land use. d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any water body? - [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] • The text amendment is an amendment to the sign ordinance and has no direct affect on land use. • . e) Changes in currents,or the course or direction of water movements? • [ ]• [ ] [ ] [X] The text amendment is an amendment to the sign ordinance and • has no direct affect on land use. ' • f) Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of any aquifer by cuts or excavations or through substantial loss of ground water recharge capability? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] The text amendment is an amendment to the sign ordinance and - • has no direct affect on land use. - g) Altered direction or rate of flow of ground water? [ ] [ ] [- ] . [X] The text amendment is an amendment to the sign ordinance and • h a s no d i r e c t a f f e c t on land use.- - h) Impacts to ground water quality? [V.] [ ] [ ] [X] -6- CEQA Checklist 7/95 , File No.: TA-994)O I . Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Would the proposal result in potential impacts involving: Impact Incorporated Impact Impact The text amendment is an amendment to the sign ordinance and has no direct affect on land use. 1) Substantial reduction in the amount of ground water otherwise [ ] [ ] [ ] [Al available for public water supplies? The text amendment is an amendment to the sign ordinance and has no direct affect on land use. • 5. AIR QUALITY--Would the proposal: a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] The text amendment is an amendment to the sign ordinance and has no direct affect on land use. b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] The text amendment is an amendment to the sign ordinance and has no direct affect on land use. • c) Alter air movement,moisture,or temp. or cause any change in climate? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] The text amendment is an amendment to the sign ordinance and • has no direct affect on land use. - d) Create objectionable odors? [ ] [ ] [ ] [Al • The text amendment is an amendment to the sign ordinance and has no direct affect on land use. 6. . TRANSPORTATION& CIRCULATION- • Would the proposal result in: a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? [ ] _ [ ] [ ] [X] The text amendment is an amendment to the sign ordinance and has no direct affect on land use. b) Hazards to safety from design features (e.g., ' sharp curves or dangerous intersections)or incompatible uses(e.g.,farm equipment)? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X} • The text amendment is an amendment to the sign ordinance and . has no direct affect an land use. . . '-".c) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses? [ ] ' [ ] [ ] [X7 ' The text amendment is an amendment to the sign ordinance and" - • has no direct affect on land use. - d) Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] The text amendment is an amendment to the sign ordinance and has no direct affect on land use. e) Ha7nrds or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? [ ] [ ] [ ] [Al • The text amendment is an amendment to the sign ordinance and has no direct affect on land use. f) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation . - . (e.g.,bus turnouts,bicycle racks)? • -. [ ], [ ] [ ] [Ai ' The text amendment is an amendment to the sign ordinance and. has no direct affect on land use. • g) Rail,waterborne or air traffic impacts? [ ] [ ] [ ] [A] -7- CEQA Checklist 7/95 • File No.: TA-99-001 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Would the proposal result in potential impacts involving: Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact The text amendment is an amendment to the sign ordinance and has no direct affect on land use. 7. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES— Would the proposal result in impacts to: a) Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats (including but not limited to plants,fish, insects,animals and birds)? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] The text amendment is an amendment to the sign ordinance and has no direct affect on land use. b) Locally designated species(e.g.,heritage trees)? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] The text amendment is an amendment to the sign ordinance and has no direct affect on land use. c) Locally designated natural communities (e.g., oak forest, coastal habitat,etc.)? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X The text amendment is an amendment to the sign ordinance and has no direct affect on land use. d) Wetland habitat(e.g.,marsh,riparian and vernal pool)? [ ] [ ] [ ] [Al The text amendment is an amendment to the sign ordinance and 'hay no direct affect on land use. e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X1 The text amendment is an amendment to the sign ordinance and has no direct affect on land use. 8. ENERGY&MINERAL RESOURCES—Would the proposal: a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? . . - . [ ] [ ] ; [ ] [X] The text amendment is an amendment to the sign ordinance and . has no direct affect on land use. b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient [ ] [ ] [ ] [Al The text amendment is an amendment to the sign ordinance and has no direct affect on land use. c) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that. would be of future value to the region and the residents of the State? - [ ] . [ ] - [ ] [X] The text amendment is an amendment to the sign ordinance and - _ _ - has no direct affect on land use. _ 9. HAZARDS—Would the proposal involve: a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to: oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation)? ; , - [ ] [ ] [ ] [X7 The text amendment is an amendment to the sign ordinance and has no direct affect on land use. - b) Possible interference with an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] The text amendment is an amendment to the sign ordinance and has no direct affect on land use. c) The creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] -8- CEQA Checklist 7/95 File No.: TA-99-001' - Potentially Significant • Potentially Unless Less Than Would the proposal result in potential impacts involving: Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact The text amendment is an amendment to the sign ordinance and has no direct affect on land use. . d) Exposure of people to existing sources of potential health hazards? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] The text amendment is an amendment to the sign ordinance and has no direct affect on land use. e) Increased fire hazard in areas with flammable brush,grass or trees? [ ] [ ] [ ] [A] The text amendment is an amendment to the sign ordinance and has no direct affect on land use. 10. NOISE,--Would the proposal result in: a) Increases in existing noise levels? [ ] [ ] [ ] [A] The text amendment is an amendment to the sign ordinance and ._, , . _ has no direct affect on land use. b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? [ ] [ ] - [ ] [Al The text amendment is an amendment to the sign ordinance and has no direct affect on land use. . • • 11. PUBLIC SERVICES — Would the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered government services in any of the following areas: a) Fire protection? [ ] [ ] _ [ ] [Al The text amendment is an amendmt to the sign ordinance and has no direct affect on land use. b) Police protection? [ ] [ ]. ( ] [A'] The text amendment is-an amendnt to the sign ordinance and .. . has no direct affect on land use. . . _ c) Schools? [ ] [_ ] (. ] [A� • The text amendment is an amendmnt to the sign ordinance and ' • . ' .- . . _ has no direct affect on land use. ' - . • - d) Maintenance of public facilities,inding roads? .- [ ] ' [,. ] , : [ ] [The text amendment is an_amendmnt to the sign ordinance and.h a s no d i r e c t a f f e c t on l a n d u s e. ..- _ ' ;.. , ' ' - e) Other governmental services? . ' . ': ',-..1'- - [.. ] • _ _. '[-:] . .. [.,] [A] The text amendment is.an amendment to the sign ordinance and has no direct of fct on land use. 12. UTILITIES &-SERVICE SYSTEMS—Would the proposal result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations to the following utilities: . a) Power or natural gas? [ l [ ] [ ] [A7 The text amendment is an amendment to the sign ordinance and s - has no direct affect on land use. b) Communications systems?. '' - ' • • [ ] - : [A' ";1-[ ] [A7 The text amendment is an amendment to the sign ordinance and - " has no direct affect on land use.' c) Local or regional water treatment or distribution facilities? [ ] [ ] [ ] [Al -9- CEQA Checklist 7/95 Pile No.: TA-99-001 • Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Would the proposal result in potential impacts involving: Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact The text amendment is an amendment to the sign ordinance and has 17o direct affect on land use. . d) Sewer or septic tanks? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] The text amendment is an amendment to the sign ordinance and has no direct affect on land use. e) Storm water drainage? [ ] [ ] [ ] [Al The text amendment is an amendment to the sign ordinance and has no direct affect on land use. f) Solid waste disposal? { ] [ ] [ ] [A] The text amendment is an amendment to the sign ordinance and has no direct affect on land use. g) Local or regional water supplies? [ ] [ ] [ ] [Al The text amendment is an amendment to the sign ordinance and has no direct affect on land use. 13. AESTHETICS—Would the proposal: _ ' a) 'Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? . - . [ ] [ ] [ ] [A] The'text amendment is an amendment to the sign ordinance and .• has no direct affect on land use. . b) Have a demonstrable negative aesthetics effect? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] The text amendment is an amendment to the sign ordinance and . • _ - • • has no direct affect on land use.. • . •- c) Create light or glare? ] ] ] [X] • The text amendment is an amendment to the sign ordinance and•• • has no direct affect on land use. ., - - ' - . - . ' ' -• 14. CULTURAL RESOURCES—Would the proposal: '- ' - a) Disturb paleontological resources? - [ ] ' [ ] [ ] [X] The text amendment is an amendment to the sign ordinance and . -has no direct affect on land use. _ .b) Disturb archaeological resources? [ ] [_ ] [ ] .[A] • The text amendment is an amendment to the sign ordinance and . .- has no direct affect on land use. c) Affect historical resources? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] The text amendment is an amendment to the sign ordinance and has no direct affect on land use. • d) Have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect [ . [ ,] [ ] [X] ethnic cultural values? The text amendment is an amendment to the sign ordinance and • has no direct affect on land use. • e) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]impact area? The text amendment is an amendment to the sign ordinance and 1- has no direct affect on land use. 1 -10- CEQA Checklist 7/95 7. File No.: TA-99-00 I Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Would the proposal result in potential impacts involving: Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 15. RECREATION-- Would the proposal: a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities? [ ] [ ] [ ] [a] The text amendment is an amendment to the sign ordinance and has no direct affect on land use. b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] • The text amendment is an amendment to the sign ordinance and has no direct affect on land use. 16. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? [ ] [ ] [ ] [Ai The text amendment is an amendment to the sign ordinance and has no direct affect on land use. b) Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term,environmental goals? [ ] - [ ] [ ] [X] " The text amendment is an amendment to the sign ordinance and has no direct affect on land use. c) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but , cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects,the effects of other current projects,and the effects of probable future project.) [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] The text amendment is an amendment to the sign ordinance and has no direct affect on land use. d)• Does the project have environmental effects which will cause - substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? [ ]" [ ] [ ] [X] The text amendment is an amendment to the sign ordinance and has no direct affect on land use. 17. EARLIER ANALYSES—N/A -11- CEQA Checklist 7/95 QTY File No. TA 99-001 • 14,',.",,,.- t CITY OF ARCADIA AR°"'• 1 240 WEST HUNTINGTON DRIVE /,YC\AS LP..`o� ARCADIA, CA 91007 ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION FORM Date Filed: 11/12/98 General Information 1. Applicant's Name: City of Arcadia Address: 240 W. Huntington Dr. , Arcadia, CA 91007 2. Property Address (Location): city of Arcadia - Assessor's Number: N/A 3. Name, address and telephone number of person to be contacted concerning this project: Donna L. Butler, City of Arcadia, 240 W. Huntington Dr., Arcadia, CA 91007 626-574-5442 4. List and describe.any other related permits and other public approvals required for this project, including those required by city,regional,state and federal agencies: - 5. Zone Classification: N/A . 6. General Plan Designation: N/A Project Description 7. Proposed use of site (project description): N/A - 8. - Site size: N/A 9. Square footage per building: N/A 10. Number of floors of construction: N/A 11. Amount of off-street parking provided: N/A 12. Proposed scheduling of project: N/A 13. Anticipated incremental development: N/A 14. If residential, include the number of units, schedule of unit sizes, range of sale prices or rents, and type of household sizes expected: N/A 15. If commercial, indicate the type, i.e. neighborhood, city or regionally oriented, square footage of sales area, and loading facilities, hours of operation: N/A 16. If industrial, indicate type, estimated employment per shift, and loading facilities: N/A 17. If institutional, indicate the major function, estimated employment per shift, estimated occupancy,loading facilities, and community benefits to be derived from the project: N/A • 18. If the project involves a variance, conditional use permit or zoning application, state this and indicate clearly why the application is required: - N/A __ _ Are the following items applicable to the project or its effects? Discuss below all items checked yes (attach additional sheets as necessary). YES NO 19. Change in existing features of any hills, or substantial alteratin of ground - .-_ [] 0/ contours. 20. _ Change in scenic views or vistas from existing residential areas or public ® [� lands or roads. 21. Change in pattern, scale or character of general area of project. ® Q' 22.- - Significant amounts of solid waste or litter. ® [t 23. Change in dust, ash, smoke, fumes or odors in vicinity. LI Cr E.I.R. 3/95 YES NO 24. Change in ground water quality or quantity, or alteration of existing ❑ ❑r drainage patterns. 25. Substantial change in existing noise or vibration levels in the vicinity. ❑ ❑� 26. Is site on filled land or on any slopes of 10 percent or more. ❑ LI- 27. Use or disposal of potentially hazardous materials, such as toxic substances, ❑ L flammable or explosives. 28. Substantial change in demand for municipal services (police,fire, water, ❑ sewage, etc.). 29. Substantial increase in fossil fuel consumption (electricity, oil, natural gas, ❑ Er etc.). 30. Relationship to a larger project or series of projects. ❑ La/ Environmental Setting 31. Describe (on a separate sheet) the project site as it exists before the project, including information on topography, soil stability, plants and animals, any cultural, historical or scenic aspects, any existing structures on the site, and the use of the structures. Attach photographs of the site. Snapshots or Polaroid photos will be accepted. 32. Describe (on a separate sheet) the surrounding properties, including information on plants, animals, any cultural,historical or scenic aspects. Indicate the type of land uses (residential, commercial, etc.), intensity of land use (one-family, apartment houses, shops, department stores, etc.), and scale of development (height, frontage, set-backs, rear yards, etc.). Attach photographs of the vicinity. Snapshots or Polaroid photos will be accepted. Certification I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the data and information required for this initial evaluation to the b of my ability, and that the facts, statements, and information presented are true and correc o ye best of my knoed =nd belief. Date `S`ignature ✓ E.I.R. 3/95 -3- • • NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE ARCADIA CITY COUNCIL NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a PUBLIC HEARING will 'be held by and before the ARCADIA CITY COUNCIL to determine whether or not the following TEXT AMENDMENT to the ARCADIA MUNICIPAL CODE should be approved, conditionally approved or denied. APPLICATION: Text Amendment 99-001 APPLICANT: City of Arcadia REQUEST: Proposal to amend Sections 9260.3. 11, 9261.4.5, 9262. 1.14- and 9266.2.8.7 of the Arcadia Municipal Code to add window signs to the "Allowable Area for Identification", i.e. , no more than one-third of the sign area may contain a non- English translation of the business identification. ENVIRONMENTAL Negative Declaration - This document may be reviewed in DOCUMENT: the Community Development Division at the Arcadia City Hall, February 4 through March 2, 1999. DATE AND HOUR • OF HEARING: TUESDAY, MARCH 2, 1999 at 7:00 p.m. PLACE OF HEARING: City Council Chambers at the Arcadia City Hall 240 West Huntington Drive, Arcadia, California Persons wishing to comment on the proposed text amendment or Negative Declaration may do so at the public hearing or in writing to the Community Development Division prior to the March_2,:.1999_,meeting. For further information regarding this text amendment, please contact Donna L. Butler in the Community Development Division at (626) 574-5442, 240 West Huntington Drive, Arcadia, Monday through Thursday, between the hours of 7:30 a.m. and 5:30 p.m. and Friday between 7:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. City Hall will be closed on Friday, February 11 and Friday, February 26, 1999. A.)) une D. Alford City Clerk Dated: February 1, 1999 Publish: February 4, 1999 • U s.' � •''c STAFF REPORT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT March 2, 1999 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Don Penman, Deputy City Manager/Development Services Director By: Donna Butler, Community Development Administrator .7 — SUBJECT: REPORT- AND RECOMMENDATION. . TO APPROVE TEXT AMENDMENT 99-002, A PROPOSAL TO . AMEND THE "PERMITTED USES".IN THE S-1 ZONE _ SUMMARY - • ._.. This text amendment was initiated by. the Development Services Department at the direction of.the City Council.for the purpose of deleting,certain uses currently permitted in the. S-1 (Special. Use). Zone, the zoning of the. race track. The proposed text amendment does._;not: change the zoning, of the race track but amends the list of permitted uses allowed in the S-1 zone. The Development;-Services, Department recommends approval of this text amendment to the City Council. The Planning Commission at its January 12 meeting.voted 4 to.0 with one member:absent-to recommend to..the City Council that this text amendment be tabled._ DISCUSSION : . - The-{current zoning of.the;.race track site is S-1_ (Special Use Zone) and R-1 • • (Second One-Family.Residential). The R-1 .zoning is located,along the northerly, southerly and westerly property,;lines.::.'.Most. of_;.this.area is .developed- with parking, stables and ancillary uses. The S-1 zoning is the predominant zoning on.the-site, primarily located in the center of the property where the;race.track:- and grandstands are located (see,attached Zoning map). The following is a list of permitted uses in the S-1 zone: 9273:1.1=T. Any use permitted in Zones R-0 and R-1:- 9273.1.2. . . Barbecues _ 9273.1.3 Conventions 9273.1.4 Dancing _ TAITA99-2ccrpt Text Amendment,99-002 - Mar _ . .. , _ . . ... _ ., cfi^2, 1999 _ :: t - Page 1 4ASE& GED ea A/7//1)047-D --1-V shV7 9273.1.5 Daytime baseball and football games and track meets 9273.1.6 Dog shows 9273.1.7 Gasoline service stations 9273.1.8 Horsebreeding, raising, training and sale 9273.1.9 Horse shows 9273.1.10 Daytime horse racing with or without pari-mutuel wagering 9273.1.10.1 Horse racing via satellite feed on Friday and Saturday nights only until no later than 1:30 a.m. with or without pari-mutuel wagering 9273.1.11 Motion picture production • 9273.1.12 Picnics 9273.1.13 Turf clubs, including retail on sale of liquor 9273.1.14 Any use by an organization, association or corporation which is organized and carried on wholly for the benefit of religious, charitable, education, recreational or scientific purposes and from which no individual person other than bona fide employees and assistants necessarily employed receives any gain, remuneration or profit, including veterans' associations and corporation and including any City, County, State, Federal, Governmental,Political, public or quasi public unit, body, - agency~and entity for periods not to exceed five (5) consecutive, °`- • days orle total of ten (10) days in any one-calendar year. 9273.1.15 Accessory buildings and uses customarily incident to any of-the' permitted uses in this zone:',--:; :_. . _ . • 9273.1.16 Any similar enterprise or business not here enumerated when • so determined as provided in Division 1 of Part 9 of this .. . Chapter z :r.. 9273.1:17 '- Outdoor Entertainment Events. Any outdoor entertainment event including but not limited to single or multi-day events such as fairs, concerts, rodeos, festivals and similar entertainment oriented activity as further defined and described in Division_7_, Part 1, Chapter 4 of Article VI of the Arcadia Municipal Code (Sections 6417 through 6417.9— Outdoor Entertainment Event Permits); subject to compliance with the referred to-Code Sections and permit requirements. - __ The''General-Plan designation for the race track property is "Horse Racing"- With- the exception of 85 acres located in the southerly parking lot which'is designated • commercial. The S-1 zoning designation is consistent with the "Horse Racing" General Plan designation. • With the exception of and outdoor entertainment events=(9273.1.17); the uses listed above are typical of the types of activities that take_place at the Race Track throughout the year This''partic ularode section had a sunset clause effective 10/1/95, and is not legally in effect'. TArrAss-2cc.pt } Text Amendment 99-002 March 2, 1999 ,. „ Page 2 In reviewing the above list, with the exception of horse racing and its related ancillary uses, most of the permitted uses are temporary in nature, i.e., barbecues, dog shows, motion picture production. These types of activities are typical of activities that take place within the race track grounds throughout the year. It is staffs opinion that these uses are consistent with the General Plan designation of"Horse Racing". Gasoline service stations (9273.1.7) and residential uses (9273.1.1) are generally considered permanent in nature and are not typical race track uses. In addition, it is staffs opinion that these uses are inconsistent with the "Horse Racing" General Plan designation. Section 9273.1.17 - Outdoor entertainment events was added in 1994 when the race track was proposing to host certain entertainment events subject to very specific regulations set forth in Sections 6417 et al. of the Arcadia Municipal Code. As of October 1, 1995, Sections.6417 et al. and.9273.1.17 were no longer in effect and recommendation for removal is a formality. CEQA • Pursuant to the provisions of the California' Environmental Quality Act, the Development Services Department has prepared an initial study for the proposed text amendment. Said initial study did not disclose any substantial or potentially substantial adverse change in any of the physical conditions within the area 'affected by the project including land, air, water, minerals, flora, fauna, ambient noise and objects of historical or aesthetic significance. :;W hen considering the _ record as a whole, there is no evidence that the proposed project will have any potential for adverse effect on wildlife resources or the habitat upon which the wildlife depends. Therefore, a Negative Declaration has been prepared for this text amendment. RECOMMENDATION The Development Services Department recommends that the following sections be deleted from the permitted uses in-the S-1 zone: - • Section 9273.1.1 Any use permitted in Zones R-0 and R-1 Section 9273.1.7 Gasoline service station Section 9273.1.17 Outdoor entertainment events Amending the permitted,uses in the S-1 zone does.not change the zoning of the property. _ The Planning Commission in its consideration thought that this text amendment was premature and they did not see any reason to take action at this time. The TairA99==2cerpt : - - . Text Amendment 99_-002 -- . March 2; 1999 .�. ; Page 3 commission voted 4-0 with one member absent to recommend to the City Council that this item be tabled until the new owner comes in with a proposal and the City has had an opportunity to review it. At that time the Commission and Council would be able to determine whether this text amendment was appropriate. • CITY COUNCIL ACTION If the City Council determines that this text amendment is appropriate, the Council should move to approve this text amendment,' and direct staff to prepare the appropriate ordinance for adoption at a later meeting. If the City Council decides not to proceed with this text amendment, no further action is necessary. Attachments: Environmental Documents Atria( Approved by: William R. Kelly, City Manager Enclosures: : Zoning Map of the Race Track site Environmental Documents • TA/TA99-2ccrpi Text Amendment 99-002 - March 2, 1999 Page 4 CTICL RD.lc. .., 77,,... • :� aD• •� � ► • .R• t. ROOD :• • 1 G • R 0 O D R ' J� R-1• i, ��• �\%� ./ ��a D� +�, V c:,_rig _•..._ —_• ;-ln�R-0•©D• •, •R-I .R"t 40, • • • �i }.' ./- 911 .vI�D. • co ....1 D..• •. ,. .,,, N. . •• X.gt - . is.-- = II•1 . / .• O I� 5 O s t o , ►� P, , • • • • 5 . R-1 i • • V I s-1 - • • ' R-D. F1'of 7 . • /5„‹ .:.. .: . . . . a D'.-.apt . • R----s— 7; S 1 N r 5-I R-IBD 7 R-IBD C'Z. a D /1. • ilefi-C- — . •c>s. • / R_I r: R_I "" R"I - r 4 BD ? BD DD '®O • R-IaD (---.•�\ • G-2 a D Ha :R-IBD R-t ' i. BD --- 7.\-. �o/ / /• R-IBD I IIISLLyVV/ll/ /134%1' - u.=wtD •_ , • 1J BD _ R_I G -:_jR-IBp.J I Rat e2 ,� I. o-.. i '� BC Z R=1BD R 3 _ it • _ -. . wawa \ /` R�7 c.0 50 DA. - rte-- R-; 'O j •($ R-3 .6.+r R-S ?.. ��t s Z \' • i i R-3 i G-Z _ :).I RI t 1 R7 -r1 PR-3 R•3 Tr>-. R"; R_3 -.111.1 c R-D R-0 a.3 1)Ci2 i E! ' 650 o f ,.. u• _ •a:a A•3 A-3 < S I al G 2.D - k . c _r C-0 R-3 i i s �• (I <I-11— • C:A • • ,-• .211ii• ,...., ./w. ; ?4tgliS4k Il& Ak-.-------; ..t'" ..% i � C I , _C 111t4&c+x•x+R1 t f( I [ File No.: TA-99-002 CITY OF ARCADIA x ,. � 240 WEST HUNTINGTON DRIVE ARCADIA, CA 91007 pRPpAATKp-e . CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT NEGATIVE DECLARATION A. Title and Description of Project: Text Amendment 99-002 to delete Sections 9273.1.1, 9273.1.7 and 9273.1.17 from the list of permitted uses in the S-1 (Special Use Zone). B. Location of Project: S-1 zoned property C. Name of Applicant or Sponsor: • City of Arcadia 240 West Huntington Drive Arcadia, Ca 91007 D. Finding: This project will have no significant effect upon the environment within the meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 for the reasons set forth in the attached Initial Study. - - _ • _- E. Mitigation measures,if any,included in the project to avoid potentially significant effects: - No impact :. .- . Date Prepared: 12/14/98 ; By. Date Posted: 12/14/98 Donna Butler, Co Development Administrator • File No.: TA 99-002 , CITY OF ARCADIA �R yin .ti 90T 240 WEST HUNTINGTON DRIVE °4,0HATf9' ARCADIA,CA 91007 CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM 1. Project Title: T.A. 99-002. 2. Project Address: NA 3. Project Sponsor's Name,Address & Telephone Number: City ofArcadia 240 West Huntington Drive Arcadia, Ca 91007 (626) 574-5442 4. Lead Agency Name &Address: - City ofArcadia--Development Services Department Community Development Division—Planning Services- _ 240 W. Huntington Drive Post Office Box 60021 . Arcadia, CA 91066-6021_ _ 5. Lead Agency Contact Person & Telephone Number: Donna Butler, Community Development Administrator (626) 574-5442 6. General Plan Designation: - N/A - 7. Zoning Classification: N/A :. _ 8. Description of Project: (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to later phases of the project and any secondary, support,or off-site features necessary for its implementation. Attach additional sheets if necessary.) - = Proposal to'delete Sections-9273.1.1-Any Use Permitted in Zones R-O and R-1, 9273.1.7 Gasoline Service Station and 9273.1.17 Outdoor entertainment events from the permitted uses in the S-1 (Special Use Zone). -1- CEQA Checklist 7/95 File No.: TA 99-002 • 9. Other public agencies whose approval is required: None 10. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. [ ] Land Use & Planning [ ] Hazards [ ] Population & Housing [ ] Noise [ ] Geological Problems [ ] Public Services [ ] Water [ ] Utilities and Service Systems [ ] Air Quality [ ] Aesthetics [ ] Transportation/Circulation [ ] Cultural Resources [ ] Biological Resources [ ] Resources [ ] Energy and Mineral Resources [ ] Mandatory Finding of Significance DETERMINATION (To be completed by the Lead Agency) On the basis of this initial evaluation: [X] I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. [ ] I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case, because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.. [ ] I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the-environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. [ ] I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, but that at least one effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards and has been addressed by"mitigation measures based on that earlier analysis as described on attached sheets, and if any remaining effect is a"Potentially Significant Impact" or"Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated," an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it only needs to analyze the effects that have not yet been addressed.._,.. -2- CEQA Checklist 7/95 Filc No.: TA 99-002 [ ] I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects have been analyzed adequately in an earlier Environmental Impact Report pursuant to applicable standards and have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. By: Donna Butler, Community Development Administrator For: The City of Arcadia-- Development Services Department Date: December 14, 1998 Signature - EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: 1. A brief explanation is required for all answers except"No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A"No Impact"answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to - projects such as the one involved(e.g.,the project is not within a fault rupture zone). A"No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g.,the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants,based on a project-specific screening analysis). 2. : All answers must take account of the whole action involved,including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as project-level,indirect as well as direct,and construction related as well as operational impacts:` 3. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is significant: If there are one or more, "Potentially--Significant Impact" when the determination is made, an Environmental Impact Report is required. 4. "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less Than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level(mitigation measures from Section 17"Earlier Analyses"may be cross-referenced). 5. ' Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering,program Environmental Impact Report, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an e_arlier EIR or Negative Declaration {Section 15063(c)(3)(D)}. Earlier analyses are discussed in Section 17 at the end of the checklist. 6. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist,references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). -Reference to a previously prepared or outside_document should,where appropriate,include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. -3- CEQA Checklist 7/95 File No.: TA-99-002 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Would the proposal result in potential impacts involving: Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 1. LAND USE & PLANNING—Would the proposal: a) Conflict with general plan designations or zoning? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] The proposed text amendment has 170 direct impact on the general plan and makes the S-I zoning more restrictive b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project? [ ] [ ] [ ] [Xj The text amendment•is not inconsistent with any environmental plans or policies adopted by the City c) Be compatible with existing land uses in the vicinity? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] The text amendment does not affect the existing land uses within the area and establishes more restrictive standards for the S-1 zone.. . d) Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g., impacts to soils or farmlands,or impacts from incompatible land uses)? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] There are no agricultural resources or operations in the City or the adjoining area. • e) Disrupt`or divide' the physical arrangement of an established • • community(including a low-income or'minority community)? [ ] [ ] [• ]• [X] The text amendment is a change in the code, and does not affect land use • • 2. POPULATION&HOUSING—Would the proposal:. , • a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population • projections? [ ] - [ ]• [.1] : [X] The text amendment is a change in the code, and will not affect regional or local population projections. b)..: Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or indirectly (e.g., through projects in an undeveloped area or extension of . major.infrastructure)?- , [ ]. . [ ] [ ] [Al • The text amendment is a change in the code; and will not induce substantial growth. —` 'Displace existing housing especially affordable housing? . The text amendment is a change in'the code; and has no affect on existing housing since the site is developed with the race track - 3. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS—Would the proposal result in or expose people to potential impacts involving: a) Fault rupture? ' [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] The text amendment is a change in the code, and does not directly affect land use b) Seismic ground shaking? [ ] _ [ ] [ ] [X] The text amendment is a change in the code, and does not directly affect land use c) Seismic ground failure,including liquefaction? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] The text amendment is a change in the code, and does not directly affect land use -5- CEQA Checklist 7/95 File No.: TA-99-002 • Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than \Voiild the proposal result in potential impacts involving: Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact d) Landslides or mudilows? [ l [ l [ l [1] The text amendment is a change in the code, and does not directly affect land use e) Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from excavation,grading, or fill? [ l [ l [ l [X] The text amendment is a change in the code, and does not directly affect land use f) Subsidence of the land? [ l [ l [ l [A] The text amendment is a change in the code, and does not directly affect land use . g) Expansive soils? [ l [ l [ l [X] The text amendment is a change in the code, and does not directly affect land use h) Unique geologic or physical features? • [ l [ ] [ ] [X] The text amendment is a change in the code, and does not directly affect land use - • - • - --- . 4. WATER—Would the proposal result in: a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and - - - amount of surface runoff? - - [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] The text amendment is a change in the code, and does not directly : affect land use b) Exposure of people or property to water related hazards'such as • - - - flooding? [ ] [-] _. [ ] - [X7 The text amendment is a change in the code, and does not directly affect land use . . . . - . - c) Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of surface water - quality(e.g.,temperature,dissolved oxygen,or turbidity)? - [ ] ,- [ ] [ ] [X] The text amendment is a change in.the code, and does not directly affect land use _- _ : . - _ - d).Changes in the amount of surface water in any water body? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] - . The text amendment is a change in the code, and does.not directly. ., affect land use e) Changes in currents,or the course or direction of water movements? [ ] [- ] [-.] [X] The text amendment is a change in the code, and does not directly - - affect land use : . : . - . _ - f) Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct • additions or withdrawals, or through interception of any.aquifer by - cuts or excavations or through substantial loss of ground water recharge capability? [ ] [ '1.-: -- •[ ] [X] The text amendment is a change,in the code, and does not directly affect land use . • - -• - se - g) Altered direction or rate of flow of ground water? . [ ] [ l L. ] [X] The text amendment is a change in the code, and does not directly ` - affect land use _ . - --- -6- CEQA Checklist 7/95 File No.: TA-99-002 - Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Would the proposal result in potential impacts involving: Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact incorporated Impact Impact h) Impacts to ground water quality? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] The text amendment is a change in the code, and does not directly affect land use i) Substantial reduction in the amount of ground water-.otherwise available for public water supplies? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] The text amendment is a change in the code, and does not directly affect land use 5. AIR QUALITY-- Would the proposal: a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] The text amendment is a change in the code, and does not directly • affect land use b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] . The text amendment is a change in the code, and does not directly affect land use , . c) Alter air movement,moisture,or temp. or cause any change in climate? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] The text amendment is a change in the code, and does not directly • affect land use , d) Create objectionable odors? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] The text amendment is a change in the code, and does not directly affect land use - 6. TRANSPORTATION& CIRCULATION— • : Would the proposal result in: a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? .. [ ] -. [ i-. . [ ] [X] The text amendment is a change in the code, and does not directly affect land use, . -- b) Ha72rds to safety from •design features (e.g., sharp curves or - : ' ' - dangerous intersections)or incompatible uses(e.g.,farm equipment)? [ ] • [ ] . [' ] [X] The text amendment is a change in the code, and does not directly V .. affect land use: _ c) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses? =- [ ] [. ] - [ ] [Al The text amendment is a change in the code, and does not directly affect land use _ . d) Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site? - -- - • [ ] • [. ] [ ] [X] The text amendment is a change in the code, and does not directly - affect land use . .. - . - e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists?. [ ] • [ ] [ ]• [X] The_text amendment is a change in the code, and does not directly ' affect land use • f) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation (e.g.;bus turnouts,bicycle racks)? [ ] [ ]' [ ] [X] The text amendment is a change in the code, and does not directly '- affect land use -- '" _ - • -7- CEQA Checklist 7/95 File No.: TA-99-002 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Would the proposal result in potential impacts involving: Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact g) Rail,waterborne or air traffic impacts? [ ] [ ] [ ] [A'] The text amendment is a change in the code, and does not directly affect land use 7. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES—Would the proposal result in impacts to: a) Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats (including but not limited to plants,fish, insects,animals and birds)? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] The text amendment is a change in the code, and does not directly affect land use b) Locally designated species(e.g.,heritage trees)? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] The text amendment is a change in the code, and does not directly affect land use c) Locally designated natural communities (e.g., oak forest, coastal habitat,etc.)? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] The text amendment is a change in the code, and does not directly affect land use d) Wetland habitat(e.g.,marsh,riparian and vernal pool)? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] The text amendment is a change in,the code, and does not directly affect land use e) .Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] The text amendment is a change in the code, and does not directly • affect land use 8. ENERGY&MINERAL RESOURCES—Would the proposal: a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] The text amendment is a change in the code, and does not directly affect land use - b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient [ ] [ ] - [ ] [X] The text amendment is a change in the code, and does not directly affect land use c) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of future value to the region and the residents of the State? [ ] [ ] [ -]-' [X] The text amendment is a change in the code, and does not directly - affect land use 9. HAZARDS—Would the proposal involve: a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to: oil, pesticides, chemicals or • radiation)? [-] [ ] - [ ] . [A'] The text amendment is a change in the code, and does not directly - affect land use b) Possible interference with an emergency response 'plan or " emergency evacuation plan? [ ] [: ]- ; [ :_] [A'] The text amendment is a change in the code, and does not directly - affect land use _ -8- CEQA Checklist 7/95 File No.: TA-99-002 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than • Would the proposal result in potential impacts involving: Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact c) The creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard? [ ] • [ ] [ ] [Ai The text amendment is a change in the code, and does not directly affect land use d) Exposure of people to existing sources of potential health hazards? [ ] [ ] [ ] [Al The text amendment is a change in the code, and does not directly affect land use e) Increased fire hazard in areas with flammable brush, grass or trees? ' [ ] [ ] [ ] [Ai The text amendment is a change in the code, and does not directly affect land use 10. NOISE—Would the proposal result in: a) Increases in existing noise levels? [ ] [ ] [ ] [Ai The text amendment is a change in the code, and does not directly affect land use b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? [ ] [ ] • [ ] [X] The text amendment is a change in the code, and does not directly affect land use 11. PUBLIC SERVICES — Would the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered government services in any of the following areas: . • a) Fire protection? [ ] [ ] - [ ] [Xi . The text amendment is a change in the code, and does not directly affect land use •• b) Police protection? [ ] • [ ] • [ ] . [A] The text amendment is a change in the code, and does not directly affect land use c) Schools? - [ ] [ ] `--`-" E. ] [Al • The text amendment is a change in the code, and does not directly -' affect land use • d) Maintenance of public facilities,including roads?. [ ] [ ] ['`] ' [Ai • The text amendment is a change in the code, and"does not directly th affect land use - _ e) Other governmental services? [ ] [ ] ' [ ] [Ai• The text amendment is a change in the code, and does not directly . affect land use _ . 12. UTILITIES & SERVICE SYSTEMS—Would the proposal result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations to the following utilities:. . a) Power or natural gas? [ ] [ ] . [..] [a7 The text amendment is a change in the code, and does not directly affect land use • . b) Communications systems? -. • :.. , . _ . . [ ] , . .. [ ] [ ] [A] The text amendment is a change in the code, and does not directly affect land use -9- CEQA Checklist 7195 File No.: TA-99-002 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Would the proposal result in potential impacts involving: Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact c) Local or regional water treatment or distribution facilities? [ ] [ ] [ ] [A] The text amendment is a change in the code, and dots not directly affect land use d) Sewer or septic tanks? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] The text amendment is a change in the code, and does not directly affect land use e) Storm water drainage? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] The text amendment is a change in the code, and does not directly affect land use 0 Solid waste disposal? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] The text amendment is a change in the code, and does not directly affect land use g) Local or regional water supplies? - [ ] [ ] [ ] [Al The text amendment is a change in the code, and does_not directly . . affect land use - . • , • 13. AESTHETICS—Would the proposal: • a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? - [ ] ' [ ] [ ] [X] The text amendment is a change in the code, and does not directly affect land use - • b) Have a demonstrable negative aesthetics effect? [ ] [ ] [ ] [Xi The text amendment is a change in the code, and does not directly • affect land use , ; , -_ - . . c) Create Iight or glare? - [ ]. - [ ] .. [ ] [A'] The text amendment is a change in the code, and does not directly affect land use • 14. CULTURAL RESOURCES—Would the proposal:` -• - ._ . a) Disturb paleontological resources? _ [ ] [ I. '° - [ ] [X] . The text amendment is a change in the code, and does not.directly affect land use • • b) Disturb archaeological resources? [ ] [- ] ' ` [ ] [X] The text amendment is a change in the code, and does not directly , affect land use c) Affect historical resources? [ ]_ [ ] [ ] [X] • The text amendment is a change in the code, and does not directly affect land use d) Have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect , unique ethnic cultural values? [ ] [ ] [ ] • [X] The text amendment is a change in the code, and does not directly affect land use e) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] -10- CEQA Checklist 7/95 File No.: TA-99-002 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Would the proposal result in potential impacts involving: Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact The tact amendment is a change in the code, and does not direct affect land use 15. RECREATION-- Would the proposal: a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] The text amendment is a change in the code, and does not directly affect land use b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? [ ] [ ] [ ] [Ai The text amendment is a change in the code, and does not directly affect land use 16. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal • community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or • endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the : • major periods of California history or prehistory? • ' - [ ] [ ] [ ] [A'] The text amendment is a change in the code, and does not directly affect land use b) Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the - - disadvantage of long-term,environmental goals? [ ] [ ] [ ] [Ai The text amendment is a change in the code, and does not directly - i .. affect land use • • - - - c) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but . • cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when , . viewed in connection with the effects of past projects,the effects of other current projects,and the effects of probable future project.) ' [ ] [ ] [ ] [Al The text amendment is a change in the code, and does not directly - affect land use d) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly` or indirectly? [ ] [ ] [ ] [Al • • The text amendment is a change in the code, and does not directly - affect land use • 17. EARLIER ANALYSES—N/A -11- CEQA Checklist 7/95 File No- TA 99-002 CITY OF ARCADIA \r ARn !IA •' 'y� 240 WEST HUNTINGTON DRIVE ARCADIA, CA 91007 eroReTSO' ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION FORM Date Filed: 11/19/98 General Information 1. Applicant's Name: City of Arcadia Address: 240 W. Huntington Dr. , Arcadia, CA 91007 2. Property Address (Location): City of Arcadia Assessor's Number: N/A 3. Name, address and telephone number of person to be contacted concerning this project: Donna Butler, City of Arcadia, 240 W. Huntington Dr. , Arcadia, 91007 - (626) 574-5423 - - 4. List and describe any other related permits and other public approvals required for this project,including those required by city,regional,state and federal agencies: 5. Zone Classification: s-i 6. . , General Plan Designation: Project Description • NSA --_ 7. Proposed use of site (project description): 8. Site size: N/A 9. Square footage per building: N/A 10. Number of floors of construction: N/A 11' -. Amount of off-street parking provided: N/A 12. Proposed scheduling of project: N/A 13. Anticipated incremental development: N/A • 14. If residential, include the number of units, schedule of unit sizes, range of sale prices or rents, and type of household sizes expected: N/A 15. If commercial, indicate the type, i.e. neighborhood, city or regionally oriented, square footage of sales area, and loading facilities, hours of operation: ITV A 16. If industrial, indicate type, estimated employment per shift, and loading facilities: N/A 17. If institutional, indicate the major function, estimated employment per shift, estimated occupancy, loading facilities, and community benefits to be derived from the project: N/A 18. If the project involves a variance, conditional use permit or zoning application,-estate this - and indicate clearly why the application is required: - . .--- N/A Are the following items applicable to the project or its effects? Discuss below all items checked yes (attach additional sheets as necessary). "YES NO 19. Change in existing features of any hills, or substantial alteratin of ground ❑ Li _. contours. .._.._.. 20. Change in scenic views or vistas from existing residential areas or public 1_1 Lav lands or roads. . -- - 21. Change in pattern, scale or character of general area of project. ❑ Er 22. Significant amounts of solid waste or litter. ❑ Ur • 23. _,_ _Change in dust, ash,smoke, fumes or odors in vicinity. , ... . La ca. E.I.R. 3/95 _7_ YES NO 24. Change in ground water quality or quantity, or alteration of existing ❑ [L]� drainage patterns. 25. Substantial change in existing noise or vibration levels in the vicinity. ❑ .❑• 26. Is site on filled land or on any slopes of 10 percent or more. ❑ 0� 27. Use or disposal of potentially hazardous materials, such as toxic substances, ❑ 1,..1 flammable or explosives. 28. Substantial change in demand for municipal services (police,fire, water, ® Er sewage, etc.). 29. Substantial increase in fossil fuel consumption (electricity, oil, natural gas, ❑ [] etc.). 30. Relationship to a larger project or series of projects. ❑ Ell Environmental Setting 31. Describe (on a separate sheet) the project site as it exists before the project, including information on topography, soil stability, plants and animals, any cultural, historical or scenic aspects, any existing structures on the site, and the use of the structures. Attach photographs of the site. Snapshots or Polaroid photos will be accepted. 32. Describe (on a separate sheet) the surrounding properties, including information on plants, animals, any cultural, historical or scenic aspects. Indicate the type of land uses (residential, commercial, etc.), intensity of land use (one-family, apartment houses, shops, department stores, etc.), and scale of development (height, frontage, set-backs, rear yards, etc.). Attach photographs of the vicinity. Snapshots or Polaroid photos will be accepted. Certification I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the data and information required for this initial evaluation to the best of my ability, and that the facts, statements, and information presented are true and correc o the best of my kno -• :e and belief. �� 11/19/98 AL Date Signature E.I.R. 3/95 • -3- • GGyo _ 3d lt. , ca/c ,n,,,I 1 , Pr PI PI Memorandum iii iki iii arcadia redevelopment agency DATE: March 2, 1999 TO: Chamber and Board Members ��eI FROM: ID on Penman, Deputy Executive Director By: Pete Kinnahan, Economic Development Administrator SUBJECT: REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION TO CONTRIBUTE UP TO $8,000 (50% OF COST) FOR A SHARED ARCADIA/MONROVIA SIGN MARKETING THE HUNTINGTON DRIVE HOTEURESTAURANT ROW SUMMARY The City of Monrovia has requested $7,923.46 (50% of the total cost) in Arcadia Redevelopment Agency financial assistance for the design and installation of the_name "Huntington Crossing" on the top of a large pole sign near the 210 Freeway (See site map, Attachment 1). The name was selected by the Arcadia-Monrovia Hotel Restaurant Entertainment Association (AMHREA), to identify the unique commercial attributes of the Huntington Drive/210 Freeway corridor. The sign will be placed at the top of the 60-foot pole at the southeast corner of Chestnut (Santa Clara) and North Fifth in Monrovia (See sign details, Attachment 2 and color design, Attachment 3). Staff recommends that the Agency commit $8,000 for this purpose and authorize the Executive Director to pay up to this amount to the Monrovia Redevelopment Agency as our 50% share of the cost of the sign. DISCUSSION Since 1997 the cities of Arcadia and Monrovia have been working jointly with our respective Chambers of Commerce to create an association of hotels, restaurants and entertainment venues to market the unique concentration of these uses along our common border on Huntington Drive. There are over 50 restaurants/dinner houses/food establishments on Huntington Drive between the racetrack and Myrtle Avenue in Monrovia. There are four hotels (500 rooms) in Monrovia and seven hotels (935 rooms) in Arcadia, with two more hotels (188 rooms) now under construction. Monrovia is constructing a multi screen theater downtown and has discussed a large indoor skating facility on south Fifth Street. Arcadia has the Racetrack, the Mall, the Arboretum, a revitalizing downtown and a proposed major commercial development at the Track. This concentration of commercial uses is not well known outside the local area. The cities, their chambers, and the local hotels and restaurants have determined to create a place name like "Spectrum," "Citywalk," "Third Street Promenade," or "Oldtown." An Association, the Arcadia-Monrovia Hotel Restaurant Entertainment Association co- chaired by the former General Manager of the Arcadia Hampton I ancljheMeetr r ITU LA/ i4i pp ro u ec/ • Arcadia Redevelopment Agency March 2, 1999 Page2of2 Manager of the Monrovia Homestead Village, began operation last fall. After discussing possible names for the area the Association selected "Huntington Crossing." The Monrovia Redevelopment Agency staff asked the developer of the Homestead Village/Macaroni Grill/Koo Koo Roo site to design and construct his 60-foot project sign with space at the top for such an area name. He has agreed as long as others paid the installation cost of that part of the sign. Monrovia has obtained the cost of fabricating and installing the sign from Ad Art of Carson, California ($13,046.92). Design of the style and color of the sign was done by Creative Response Company Inc. (CRCI) of Glendale ($2,800.00) (see Attachment 4). The Managing Director of CRCI prepared numerous designs, styles and colors for review by the Association. Both the Association and the City of Monrovia have approved the pattern shown on Attachment 3. The sign background will be white/beige, "Huntington" "Crossing"Huntington will be in green; Crossing will be in orange. The total estimated cost is $15,846.92 and Arcadia's 50% share would be $7,923.46 or$8,000. The Association hopes to follow installation of the large sign with street level directional signs using the same font and colors as the large sign and with the publication of other marketing materials, e.g. maps, brochures, etc. They propose to solicit funds from their membership for these costs. FISCAL IMPACT Total cost to the Arcadia Redevelopment Agency is $8,000.00. Funds are available in the Downtown 2000 Business Incentive Component of the adopted FY 1998-99 Agency budget. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Arcadia Redevelopment Agency approve the design of the proposed "Huntington Crossing" area sign as set forth in this report, authorize the Executive Director to reimburse up to $8,000.00 to the Monrovia Redevelopment Agency for the costs of designing, manufacturing and installing the sign. Approved By: William R. Kelly, Executive Director . . Map of the Proposed Sig n Addition it% a; 0 ?, a Q Walnut Ave. Santa Clara St. Chestnut -o C Ii. . ci • HUNTINGTO DR. 111L ta-) , la ' . *Fa) E t" \ 41 ZN •— Alta St. y r "PROPOSED SIGN". E , , „,. rp. ti,--we,., q . Nil N .••M 11■1 h i..a. 24'-8' 8'-8' 20'-0" - 1 6" PAINTED FRAZEE 8794M "FIRE STEEL" 1 7 315" _ % FACE TO BE ROUT-OUT ALUM. INT. ILIUM 4 BACKED W/ WHITE PLEX /_ '`�8g= "HUNTINGTON" COPY TO BE GREEN �fC 4'-6" 3.15" (/Q�US� 'CROSSING' COPY TO BE ORANGE K U M PAINTED FRAZEE 8723M "DESERT TUMBLEWEED" ililemeatead El 5'-6 ❑ MI i c1 5 e : ❑- ACCENT TILES: CROWN TILESHOP / RUSTICA SERIES WEEKLY Sg111®IIQIS COLOR: 'EGGPLANT' 20" X 20" FIELD 25 TILES EACH (� i 1 5'-6 RET' lL SHOPS 2" REVEAL PAINTED FRAZEE 8794M "FIRE STEEL' • D/F INT. ILIUM CABINET • 5'-0" o • FACES TO BE WHITE LEXAN W/ FILM CEMOLtig APPLIED 1ST SURFACE 4'-O" l ESTA U1 I[TS - 4' RETAINERS PNT. FRAZEE 8794M "FIRE STEEL" 3" 60'-0" 4' O. � .�% Cellular J 1 -0 &War Obi 1'_6•N N _ PAINTED FRAZEE 8794M "FIRE STEEL" 1'-6• PAINTED FRAZEE 8723M 'DESERT TUMBLEWEED" 4•-0" ~ 12'-4" G PAINTED FRAZEE 8721W "CLAY BEIGE' I ITU% SYNTHETIC STONE VENEER • EASTERN LEDGESTONE PATTERN • COLOR TO BE CARMEL MOUNTAIN • —� i1� CONCRETE PLANTER BY OTHERS I I , [A 4.-6" 1-_-•:.-1 • TION " PYLON ELEVATION • . scAi /e'=1'-o' SCALE: 1/8'=1'-0• ATTACHMENT 2 -- ,��.i PROPOSED AREA MARKETING SIGN • FOR ARCADIA-MONROVIA HOTEL RESTAURANT ENTERTAINMENT ROW • r4° n4;. I . ;. +,IF I .Y. ; Y r r t `tJ` y '''%:•••••:'.'.r.,:;.;:-,' RA',. Ji1• • • (To be installed on top of existing 60 ft. sign Southeast corner-E.Santa Clara and N. Fifth) ATTACHMENT 3 CityofMONRV1A trftd All-Amuicactty 11 111, Monrovia Redevelopment Agency January 14, 1999 ` Mr. Peter P. Kinnahan City of Arcadia 240 W. Huntington Drive Arcadia, CA 91066 RE: Huntington Crossing Sign Dear Pete: Pursuant to our telephone conversation this morning, the costs for placing the "Huntington Crossing" sign at Huntington and Fifth break down as follows: Design Fee $ 2,800.00 Manufacture & Install $13,046.92 Total $15,846.92 In addition, I am enclosing an elevation indicating color and dimension. Please call me if you have any questions. Si c= ely, (// • Glenn W. Cox, Jr. MRA Assistant Executive Director ATTACHMENT 4 415 South Ivy Avenue • Monrovia, California 91016-2888 • (626) 359-3231 • FAX (626) 359-8507 . • ) nZ; aD aRT • • • • ••• .• ELECTRONIC SIGN CORPORATION January 12, 1999 Mr. Jeff Kugel CITY OF MONROVIA 415 So. Ivy Ave. Monrovia, CA 91016-2888 RE: CENTER IDENTIFICATION PANELS Dear Jeff, Per your request we are pleased to furnish our proposal for your approval as follows: CENTER IDENTIFICATION PANELS Manufacture and install two (2) each 4'6"x 14'0"fabricated aluminum fascia panels. All copy/graphics to be routed-out for fabricated acrylic to be in-laid and pushed through. Name of development to be "Hunting Crossing". Price FOB $ 8,690.00 Install 3,640.00 Tax 716.92 TOTAL $ 13,046.92 Above per AD ART Design No. TGP98C01 (attached). AD ART/ELECTRONIC SIGN CORPORATION •19603 FIGUEROA STREET,CARSON,CA 90745 •PHONE(310)523-9500 FAX(310)538-1215 AD ART/E.S.C. OF NEVADA,INC. •2880 W.MEADE AVENUE,SUITE 105,LAS VEGAS,NV 89102•PHONE(702)251-3170 FAX(702)251-3052 • THECREATIVE RESPONSECO., INC. December 21, 1998 MR.JEFF KUGEL CITY OF MONROVIA 415 S. Ivy Ave. Monrovia, CA 91016-2888 Re: Logo Design Dear Jeff: We are pleased to submit our fee for the design of the 'Huntington Crossing' logo: DESIGN FEE: $2,800.00 Production Fee, which consists mainly of computer manhours for the preparation of final artwork, will be submitted as soon as we determine the required filing specifications by sign maker. This fee is usually based on per a hour cost. Jeff, please note that we have greatly discounted the design fee considering that you have unlimited use of this logo. The industry normally charge based on usage of logo. Also, as you are aware, we have done numerous revisions after the design concept was approved. Normally, this is an added cost billed to the Client. However, we want to work with you and the 'Restaurant and Hotel Association' in developing future promo collaterals thus, we gave you a special fee. I would truly appreciate it if your office can facilitate the payment for the design fee. The production fee is not due unit we turnover the final artwork/electronic file to the printer/sign maker. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call me. Thank you. Sincerely, 614.44/-7--.—e- Charisse Abello Managing Director 2949 PIEDMONT AVENUE GLENDALE, CA 91214 PHONE (818) 236-2128 • FAX (818) 236-2165 email: cresponse @earthlink.net • .,Gity of MONK ^j CIA 1887 All-Arne:Ica 11111! Monrovia Redevelopment Agency RECEIVED .I0N271999 Development Services January 25, 1999 Economic Development Division Mr. Peter P. Kinnahan City of Arcadia 240 W. Huntington Drive Arcadia, CA 91066 RE: Hotel/Restaurant Association — Signage Dear Pete: Regarding the "Huntington Crossing" sign, our Design Review Committee approved the proposed design and color scheme last Wednesday. Consequently, we are ready to put • this panel up as soon as we can arrange funding. Posting the sign is a step in the right direction and should generate additional interest in the Association. I believe that if we continue supporting the Association, our efforts will pay off in the long run. Please let me know if you need any additional information before you bring this matter to your Agency Board. S� erely, I lennW. Cox, Jr. MRA Assistant Executive Director 415 South Ivy Avenue • Monrovia, California 91016-2888 • (626) 359-3231 • FAX (626) 359-8507 GL fro-Q '- PM !!! Memorandum imam arcadia redevelopment agency - DATE: March 2, 1999 TO: Chairman and Board Members FROM: iDon Penman, Deputy Executive Director 3y: Pete Kinnahan, Economic Development Administrator SUBJECT: REQUEST TO EXPAND THE AGENCY'S COMMERCIAL FACADE REHABILITATION PROGRAM TO INCLUDE THE C-1, C-2 AND C-M ZONES IN THE CENTRAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA SUMMARY Mr. Virgil Anderson owns the 4-unit commercial building at 29-39 E. Santa Clara and 32 Front Street. Sjnce his property is not in the Central Business District Zone (CBD - See Zoning and Redevelopment Area Map, Attachment 1), he is not eligible for the Agency's Commercial Facade Rehabilitation Program (CFRP). Therefore, he has requested that his property be permitted to participate in the program (See Attachment 2). Because of the success of the CFRP, staff is recommending that his request be granted and further that the boundaries be amended to include the C-1, C-2, and C-M zones in the project area (See Attachment 3), with some exceptions. DISCUSSION The Agency adopted the CFRP in March 1996 as one-of several components of the Downtown 2000 Phase 2 Business Incentive Program. The CFRP is focused on the Central Business District (CBD) zone. The program has enjoyed success, reimbursing $203,000 to fourteen (14) merchant owners. The buildings which have been improved are listed on Attachment 4 and located on Attachment 5. At least two owners (representing 3 properties) have informed staff that the CFRP was a significant reason why they chose to come to downtown Arcadia. The owners of Matt Denny's Alehouse stated they came to Arcadia because of the success of Outback Steakhouse, the Downtown 2000 Streetscape Improvements, the two new hotels to be opening on North Second at Huntington, and the CFRP. The availability of the CFRP is a major marketing tool used to encourage new business in the downtown. The Agency budgeted $326,000 in the FY 1999 budget for the Downtown 2000 Phase Two Business Incentive Program. The CFRP, a major component of this comprehensive program is budgeted for$160,000 this year. Over the last three years LASER 1MAr" ,q- ee ✓'o 0•2.o/ P/� /,s2- Ai a , Arcadia Redevelopment Agency March 2, 1999 Page 2 the Agency has spent the following on the CFRP Program: FY 1996-97 $48,298 FY 1997-98 $85,868 FY 1998-99 (to date) $69,495 TOTAL $203,661 Four applications totaling an estimated rebate of $101,200 are in process. Three other downtown merchants are currently reviewing the guideline package and may apply. If approved, it is possible that their reimbursement will occur in the next fiscal year (FY 99- 00). Mr. Anderson is requesting that his property be included in the CFRP area. He states that he will then be able to do additional architectural work to make his building more compatible with the REI project immediately adjacent to his property. It is probable that reimbursement to.Mr. Anderson, if his request is approved by the Agency, would occur next fiscal year. Based on current participation in the program, there is sufficient money available to expand the eligible area to include the other commercial zones (C-1, C-2, and C-M). This would further help to make the downtown more attractive for business. Staff recommends that the CPD-1 and C-0 areas, which are predominantly new construction, and the northwest corner of Second and Huntington (C-2) where the two new hotels will be constructed, not be included. Staff would also anticipate that seven to ten commercial owners/tenants in the C-1, C-2 and C-M zones may apply for the CFRP. over the next 1-2 years, at an average estimated reimbursement of $17,000. This would cost between $120,000 - $170,000 (the maximum possible reimbursement under the Guidelines is $38,500 per property). FISCAL IMPACT If the Agency approves the expansion of the program boundaries to include only Mr. Anderson's property, the cost to the Agency could range from $17,000 (average rebate) to $38,500 (the maximum possible under the Guidelines). However, if the Agency approves the expansion of the program boundaries to include all eligible properties in the C-1, C-2, and C-M zones (with the exception of those cited above), the estimated cost for seven to ten merchants would range from $120,000- $170,000 (based on past average rebate) to $269,500 - $385,000 (maximum rebate amount) probably spread over two years. • Arcadia Redevelopment Agency March 2, 1999 Page 3 Funds are available to expand the program whether limited to the Anderson property or to all C-1, C-2 and C-M zones in the project area. Staff will include the appropriate amount in the FY 1999-00 budget based upon the Board's direction. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Redevelopment Agency approve Amendment No. Two to the Guidelines, expanding the eligible area to the C-1, C-2, and C-M zones (Attachment 3) as set forth above. Approved By: JIM&William R. Kelly, Executive Director 1 DOWNTOWN ARCADIA • CENTRAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA PROJECT AREA BOUNDARY _, 29-39 E. SANTA CLARA AVE 32 FRONT ST hiL \ , COLORADO 40S A.CVNR� I [ J (� CBD ZONE BOUNDARY \ { i ' 1‘.i SAi / ,,°' , 1 ""*". 1 R:::.. ), ..:_ . <jt:Ag,ismihk_,_ � - -IA ,__ , 1_744111111111 4 .:_.„..... .,.!, i r 1 , L.,_______ii i i , Nss%.1 ,t,....„ f • 1 OD 4 0 11 F I r ...•. _ AI.,./2 1 ` i 1 NORTH _ 1 M CALIFORNIA UTMOST Z SCALE 1"=750' . • December 28, 1998 Mr. Virgil E. Anderson 1733 S. Third Ave. Arcadia, CA 91006 RE: Commercial Facade Rehabilitation Program RECEIVED .IAN 7 MCI Honorable Mayor and City Council/ Agency Chairman and Members: Development Services I am the owner of the property located at 29 - 39 Santa Clara Street and 32 Front Street, directly adjacent to the new REI store retail development. For some time now I have been considering `fixing up' my property in conjunction with the new development going in next door to me. Naturally, the cost of doing so is somewhat expensive, especially in light of the monies I have just expended in order to comply with the City's earthquake ordinance retrofit. I have contacted the Development Services Department staff about the Redevelopment Agency's Commercial Facade Rehabilitation Program. Mr. Kinnahan informed me that I am not in the Central Business District (CBD) zone and am therefore not eligible for the Program's funds. The boundary line is along the south side of Santa Clara Street. I would respectfully request that an exception be made so that I am able to utilize the program. While I had originally intended to simply repaint the buildings and do minor repairs, with the CFRP program rebate, I would be able to include more attractive architectural features in order to tie in with the REI project. As a long time commercial property owner and resident of the City since 1961, my wife ( now deceased) and I have been very active in the Downtown Business Association over the years and now respectfully ask that some of the property taxes that we have paid be put to use upgrading our property and continuing to improve the downtown area. Thank you for your consideration. Sinc ely, .. Virgil . Anderson cc: Don Penman, Deputy City Manager/Development Services Director ATTACHMENT 2 i 8 JD l `t I I L I Hr_ii. I RI. r \ ( U I ( _ •-:. H Rl) R1 _ ■ Rl� s•. \t1 , �•• Rl Rl Rl ,/ •• Rl — Rl Rl •• 7 70,AZ n J ` Ri \ ewman Ave Rl i//� Ii Rl Rl Rl Rl '► r R3 ril R3 / dy� Rl a.Ri a j Fill % R3 '4- (� Rl ° -,�I . � ® ® R • R1U °� R3 �' Porte St ee _a ti R1 R1 i R1 R1 1,1123 0� Milli �••� P c f Q oseP reef ) CPD .�., N ��io ... °/ �f M1 v r, .., _ -9„. > IR. " Santa Clara Stree io 0 Ift.nni N1 • , * S2 o ` I��■ CPD Rl Rl rr seer•la■Ni �_ : Conmercial Zone � L �� ""N` """` Central Business District / \ • • eao CPD k Project Area Boundary �/ �,, [DI I e $2 'tie } CBD Zone Boundary ® y �� `.f w • C. Rstre-t---k �-1 3 0°` `�c • �Qa Li R3 R3 ELI �J� G°JC / [Li -12.3j 1:=1 Calif°r r-• R3 r-- 1 1 I = Development Services Department �• City 4�� r�� Engineering Division j:; . � � of Arcadia 4 Prepared by.R.S.Gortzalez,Frtivary 10,1999 ` Downtown Project Area Zoning Map COMMERCIAL FACADE REHABILITATION PROGRAM STATUS REPORT SUMMARY 2/1/99 PROJECTS FUNDED FROM JAN 1997 TO DATE BEE.zaa\�: �'N', ®a3-:$S as '< \SI RE • A$(lDQ..Y . N ti� A �#{y: � $$ii$• ;:;is'• ii 's ,<�-,F.;\\\\,i-. I Palermo/Arreola 129 S.First Ave. Off Beach Tanning $2,395 $1,14 2 David Ercolanl 49 E.Huntington Drive Leonard's Guide $38,347 $23,008 3 Garland Robertson 134 E.Huntington Drive Sullivan's Paints $20,907 $13,861 4 William Kuyper 24 N.First Ave. Hobson's Saddlery $3,502 $2,801 5 Joseph DeFrancisco 6/8/10 N.First Ave. Arcadia Tribune Building $61,281 $32,94 6 George Dunaians 117 E.Huntington Drive Western Medical Supply $31,180 $16,080 7 David Abernathy 225 S.First Ave. Abernathy Building $9,349 $7,480 • 8 Jesse Saenz 219/221/223 S.First Ave. Flashback/Dental Office $39,601 $24,248 9 Mary Ann Messier 48 E.Huntington Dr. Rumors Bar and Grill $5,485 $4,29• 10 John K.Waken 200/202/204 S.First Ave. Hortense Florist/Nurturing Touch $4,445 $3,477 11 Vincent Markese 137 E.Huntington Dr. Vacant"Tudor"Office Bldg./BH&GN $56,155 $29,649 12 Doolittle/Owen 206 S.First Ave. Mid-City Sandwich Shop $6,156 $4,8 13 Richard Sayegh 131 E.Huntington Dr. Sports Chiropractic $6,890 $4,856 14 Vincent Markese/Matt 143 E.Huntington Dr. Matt Dennis Alehouse $73,363 $34,991 McSweeny Total Rebate Paid by A.R.A. $203,661 PROJECTS ACTIVELY BEING PROCESSED •OR: iJ ' tI51 :`:;::EST '`lt+E1t..,,:.::a:..,,z..: :.:;::.:;.:;;;........ IA£fC1RES5::zz:::..�.,,.:..•RfJ�R::: >� `::':``;:•:';•: ... ?........ •`•... .. ............ ,..r:.....,......,,..,,.,.,,.:...,.::...:.,..,,,,.:......:::::.,.::.::.....,...., -:.:;:•:;z::z::;:.;:;«;;•:;;;.:;:«.;:.::.::::>.z;::.::... \:iii 1 William M.Chenowith 16 N.First Ave. All Quality Trophies/Frame House $35,422 $22,584 2 WF Construction 38 E.Huntington Dr. Arcade Bldg. $84,105 $35,500 3 Keith Brown 125 Wheeler Ave. Brown/Kuhn Building $19,000 $12,100 • 4 Torn Harmon 141 E.Huntington Dr. Smart Draperies $50,000 $30,904 Total Estimated Future A.R.A.Rebates $101,088 ATTACHMENT 4 DOWNTOWN ARCADIA . CENTRAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA ROJECT AREA BOUNDARY . ■ . \---IQIIITJ.".. , CBD ZONE BOUNDARY N NA Projects Funded / Complete _ " `• ]_—_1 Mai (` ,.. / ` -- - COLORADO BOULEVARD COLO-•I• BOUL MD �1 Numbers shown correspond ` to the CFRP projects .NT•YNCZ pill - _ "' a listed on Aft.4. ` i 0 LA PORTE STREET '• LA ••' E STREET ,,� I �lO . ; �RFF�gY •�p� Q SAI OSEPH 6 E SAINT JOStPN S tEi H:1■U-�'1E11111111w_ a SANTA CLARA STREET 1z1 SANTA STREET 17 I "^� wKe a IIME1, Nd . \., , ` — n. r Q WHEELE'\UE lr 4 FFF�i N © .z.o O (© ED \ r� 1 S. HUNTINGTON •�' HUNTINGTON DRIVE a HUNTINGTON DRIVE HUNTINGTON DRIVE 0 © m y •� / N TH aI : 1 % ■ .0 a • SCALE 1":750' ON 'O ; BONITA STREET eft ce CALIFORNIA STREET —CALIFORNIA STREET w _Y • 02/19/99 t,