Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
January 16, 2001
. , ~ ~ ~ A N N 0 T A T E D . A~G E N D A Arcadia City Council and Redevelopment Agency Meeting January 16, 2001 6:00 p.m. Administrative Conference Room ACTION ROLL CALL: Council Members Chandler, Chang, Marshall, Segal and Kovacic All present (Combr. Chang TIME RESERVED FOR THOSE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO WISH TO ADDRESS THE CITYarrived-6:10) COUNCIUREDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (NON-PUBLIC HEARING/FIVE-MINUTE TIME LIMIT PER PERSON) tvone 1. CLOSED SESSION a. Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957 - City Manager Annual Performance EVdIUB-IOfI. Council RECESSED to Closed Session at 6:04. RECONVEVEl ia the Couacil Chambr.rs at 6:30 p.m. 6:40 p.m. Council Chambers INVOCATION Reverend Terry Keenan, The Santa Anita Church PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Michael Rider ROLL CALL: Council Members Chandler, Chang, Marshall, Segal and Kovacic nii present 2. PRESENTATION of Holiday Home Decoration Awards RECESS ~~~o P•~• RECONVENE ~:16 ~.,,. 7:OOp.m. Council Chambers 3. SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION FROM STAFF REGARDING AGENDA ITEMS None MOTION: Read all Ordinances and Resolutions by title only and waive reading in full Adopted 5-0 4. PRESENTATION to the 2001 Rose Court Princesses Nini Jiang and Cyrstal Uribe. 5. PRESENTATION of Mayor's Community Service Award to Dave and Keppie Sullivan. 6. PRESENTATION of Mayor's Employee Recognition Award to Esther Reynoso. coNTZtv~uFD fot 2 weeks Gary A. Kovacic, Mayor • Mickey Segal, MayorProtempore • Roger Chandler, Dr. Sheng Chang, Gail A. Marshall, Council Members William R, Kelly, Cify Manager June D. Alfard. Cifv Clerk ~ v, " -,`_ .. ~ ~ 7. PRESENTATION of Mayor's Business Recognition Award to Jerry Mascott. ACTION 8. PRESENTATION of Mayor's Youth Service Award to the Arcadia Educational Foundation. Michael Hawkins 9. PUBLIC HEARING All interested persons are invited to appear at ~he Public Hearing and to provide evrdence or testrmony concerning the proposed item of consideration. You are hereby advised that should you desire to legaHy challenge any action taken by the Ciry Council with respect to the proposed item 9a. you may be limrted to raising only fhose issues and objections which you or someone else raised at or prior to the time of the publrc hearrng. Pub. Hrg. Closed a. Consideration of Zone Change No. Z 00-002 and introduction of In[roduced Ordinance No. 2133, an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of ~ora. 2i33 s-o Arcadia, California, changing the zoning of a 3.81 foot wide strip of property between 201-221 E. Duarte Road and 810 S. Second Avenue from C-1/Cimited Commercial to R-2/Medium Density Multiple Family Residential and to remove a P/Automobile Parking Overlay from 810 S. Second Avenue. 10. TIME RESERVED FOR THOSE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO WISH TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL (NON-PUBLIC HEARING/FIVE-MINUTE TIME LIMIT PER PERSON) None 11. MATTERS FROM ELECTED OFFICIALS City Council Reports/Announcements/Statements/Future Agenda Items sPP Miniitac RECESS CITY COUNCIL 12. MEETING OF THE ARCADIA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ROLL CALL: Agency Members Chandler, Chang, Marshall, Segal and Kovacic All presen[ TIME RESERVED FOR THOSE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO WISH TO ADDRESS THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (NON-PUBLIC HEARING/FIVE-MINUTE TIME LIMIT PER PERSON) None 13. CONSENT a. Minutes of the January 2, 2001 regular meeting ~g.proved S-0 ADJOURN to January 30, 2001 at 6:00 p.m. for a.joint meeting with the Arcadia School Board at the Arcadia Community Center, 365 Campus Drive RECONVENE CITY COUNCIL 14. CONSENT a. Minutes of the January 2, 2001 regular meeting Apnroved 5-0 2 .. .: _ ~ Consent continued ~ b. Recommendation to approve Final Map 53151 for an S-unit residential condominium qroiect located at 141-145 California Street. ACTION A,pproved 5-0 Recommendation to accept all work performed by RVC Roadway Approved 5-0 Construction, Inc. for the rehabilitation of Second Avenue from Longden Avenue to the south City limit as complete and to authorize final payment of $7,831.41 to be made in accordance with contract documents. Recommendation to appropriate $27,000.00 from the General Fund ~ro„e~ s-n Reserve and to enter into a Professional Services Agreement in the amount of $24,262.00 with ATC for extended soil remediation services at the Police Department. e. Recommendation to award a contract in the amount of $238,031.00 to Anoroved 5-0 Nobest, Inc. for intersection improvements at Live Oak/EI Monte Avenues and the Canyon Road sedimentation basin. Recommendation to award purchase contracts in the amount of $59,200.00 Approved 5-0 to Los Angeles County Department of Public Works for bridge repairs at various locations. Recommendation to purchase one Chevrolet Tahoe for the Police Approved 5-0 Department from Wondries Chevrolet for $33,482.16. Recommendation to authorize the City Manager to enter into a Professional nuaro~ea s-o Services Agreement for interim Human Resources and Risk Management consulting services. ADJOURN to January 30, 2001 at 6:00 p.m. for a joint meeting with the Arcadia School Board at the Arcadia Community Center, 365 Campus Drive nnJOU~En ac s: 06 p.,~. in memory.of Stephanie Craig, Police Department Dispatcher 3 O L O -60 YOp yin z • ARCADIA x7 `*\ STAFF REPORT Rf'ORAS�� DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT January 16, A©© TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Don Penman, Assistant City Manager/Development Services Dir cto By: Donna L. Butler, Community Development Administrator SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF FINAL MAP NO. 53151 FOR AN 8-UNIT RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM PROJECT LOCATED AT 141-145 CALIFORNIA STREET. SUMMARY Tentative maps and final maps are required for all subdivisions that result in five or more parcels or condominiums. The City Council shall approve a final map if it conforms to all the requirements of the subdivision regulations of the Municipal Code and the State Subdivision Map Act. It is recommended that the City Council approve Final Map No. 53151 for an 8-unit residential condominium project located at 141- 145 California Street. • DISCUSSION Final Map No. 53151 has been reviewed by the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works and the appropriate City Departments. Said map has been found to be in substantial compliance with the tentative map, as approved by the Planning Commission on May 9, 2000, and is in compliance with the subdivision regulations of the Municipal Code and the State Subdivision Map Act. RECOMMENDATION.. The City Council should move to approve Final Map No. 53151. Attachments: 1. Letter of compliance from Los Angeles County 2. Final Map No. 53151 Approved: , (0,16-44 William R. Kelly, City Manager LASER IMAGED c � y .� OF LOS 44,C � ►`mss. CO,I�TY OF LOS ANGELL. - t. 1DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS .74 900 SOUTH FREMONT AVENUE OAUFORN�P ALHAMBRA, CALIFORNIA 91803-1331 Telephone:(626)458-5100 • HARRY W.STONE,Director ADDRESS ALL CORRESPONDENCE TO: P.O.BOX 1460 December 12, 2000 ALHAMBRA,CALIFORNIA 91802-1460 IN REPLY PLEASE p REFER TO FILE: LD-8 Mr. Terry Hagen City Engineer City of Arcadia 240 West Huntington Drive Arcadia, CA 91006-6021 Dear Mr. Hagen: TRACT NO. 53151 The enclosed subject tract map has been reviewed by our Department for mathematical accuracy, survey analysis, title information, and for compliance with the State Subdivision Map Act. The map is now ready for your examination and certification as to compliance with the conditional approval and applicable City Ordinances. The City Council or Advisory Agency should make the findings required by the California Environmental Quality Act and the State Subdivision Map Act. After your approval and the approval of the City Council or Advisory Agency, the map should be returned to Land Development Division, Subdivision Mapping Section for filing with the County Recorder. If you have any questions, please contact Mr.Armando Aguilar of our Subdivision Mapping • Section at (626) 458-4915. Very truly yours, HARRY W. STONE Director of Public Works ai ,z l ; #7 PHIL K. DOUDAR Assistant Division Engineer Land Development Division RS:ca P:\MAP P IN G\TRACT.LTR End.. L0T 1 .-- SHEET 1 OF 2 SHEETS 16,015 SQ. FT. TRACT • \ 0 . 55151 IN THE CITY OF ARCADIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA BEING A SUBDIVISION OF LOT 11 AND 12 OF BLOCK 65, A PART OF ARCADIA SANTA ANITA TRACT PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 15, PAGES 89 AND 90 OF MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY. FOR CONDOMINIUM PURPOSES OWNER'S STATEMENT: SURVEYOR'S STATEMENT: I HEREBY STATE THAT I AM A LICENSED LAND SURVEYOR OF THE STATE OF WE HEREBY STATE THAT WE ARE THE OWNERS OF OR ARE INTERESTED IN THE CAUFORNIA: THAT THIS FINAL MAP,CONSISTING OF 2 SHEETS,IS A TRUE LANDS INCLUDED WITHIN THE SUBDIVISION SHOWN ON THIS MAP WITHIN THE AND COMPLETE SURVEY AS SHOWN.AND WAS MADE BY ME OR UNDER MY DISTINCTIVE BORDER LINES.AND WE CONSENT TO THE PREPARATION AND RUNG OF DIRECTION ON.11LY 2000: THAT THE MONUMENTS OF THE CHARACTER AND SAID MAP AND SUBDIVISON. LOCATIONS SHOWN HEREON ARE IN PLACE: THAT SAID MONUMENTS ARE SUFFICIENT TO ENABLE THE SURVEY TO BE RETRACED. UPTOWN DEVELOPMENT.LLC(OWNER) ALFRED-THFIWELL LS 8999 • G STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) • EXPIRES: 9/30/01 m'.6*'m-m COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES )SS ON BEFORE ME.THE UNDERSIGNED.A NOTARY • ..�;. PUBUC IN AND FOR SAID STATE,PERSONALLY APPEARED KNOWN TO ME OR CITY ENGINEER'S CERTIFICATE: PROVED TO ME ON THE BASS OF SATISFACTORY EVIDENCE TO BE THE PERSON WHOSE NAME IS SUBSCRIBED TO THE WITHIN INSTRUMENT AND ACKNOWLEDGED I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT I HAVE EXAMINED THIS MAP:THAT IT CONFORMS TO ME THAT HE/SHE EXECUTED THE SAME IN HIS/HER AUDIORI2ED CAPACITY SUBSTANTIALLY TO THE TENTATIVE MAP AND ALL APPROVED ALTERATIONS AND THAT BY HIS/HER SIGNATURE ON THE INSTRUMENT.THE PERSON.OR THE THEREOF; THAT ALL PROVISIONS OF SIBDMSON ORDINANCES OF THE CITY ENTITY UPON BEHALF OF WHICH THE PERSON ACTED.EXECUTED THE INSTRUMENT. OF ARCADIA APPLICABLE AT THE TIME OF APPROVAL OF THE TENTATIVE WITNESS MY HAND MAP HAVE BEEN COMPLIED WITH AND THAT I AM SATISFIED THAT THIS MAP IS TECHNICALLY CORRECT WITH RESPECT TO CITY RECORDS. NOTARY PUBUC NAME PRINTED MY COMMISSON EXPIRES: MY PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS IS IN LOS ANGELES COUNTY FOR TAIWAN CAUFORNIA BANK.BENEFICIARY UNDER A DEED OF TRUST DATE CITY EN0INEER,C STEPHEN BUCKNA JR. RECORDED SEPTEMBER 28.2000 AS INSTRUMENT NO.00-1527735 OF R.C.E.20903 EXPIRES 9/30/2D07 1 OFFICIAL RECORDS. CITY TREASURER'S CERTIFICATE: I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT ALL SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS LEVIED UNDER THE JURISDICTION OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA TO WHICH THE LAND INCLUDED IN THE WITHIN SUBDIVISION OR ANY PART THEREOF IS SUBJECT.AND WHICH MAY STATE OF CAUFORNIA ) BE PAID IN FULL,HAVE BEEN PAID IN FULL COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES )SS ON BEFORE ME,THE UNDERSIGNED.A NOTARY FUBUC IN AND FOR SAID STATE,PERSONALLY APPEARED PERSONALLY KNOWN TO ME OR DATE CITY TREASURER-CITY OF ARCADIA PROVED TO ME ON THE BASS OF SATISFACTORY EVIDENCE TO BE THE PERSONS WHOSE NAMES ARE SUBSCRIBED TO THE WITHIN INSTRUMENT AND ACKNOWLEDGED TO ME THAT THEY EXECUTED THE SAME IN THEIR AUTHORIZED CAPACITIES AND THAT BY THEIR SIGNATURES ON DIE INSTRUMENT,THE PERSONS OR THE ENTITY PLANNING COMMISSION CERTIFICATE: UPON BEHALF OF WHICH THE PERSONS ACTED,EXECUTED THE INSTRUMENT. THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE TENTATIVE MAP OF TRACT NO.53151 WAS WITNESS MY HAND APPROVED AT A MEETING HEED ON THE 9TH DAY OF MAY,2000.I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS MAP SUBSTANTIALLY COMPLIES WITH THE PREVIOUSLY NOTARY PUBUC APPROVED TENTATIVE MAP. NAME PRINTED MY COMMISSION EXPIRES: MY PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS IS IN LOS ANGELES COUNTY DATE SECRETARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION -CITY OF ARCADIA CONDOMINIUM NOTE: THIS SUBDIVISION IS APPROVED AS A CONDOMINIUM PROJECT,FOR SIX UNITS FINANCE DIRECTOR'S CERTIFICATE: WHEREBY THE OWNERS OF THE UNITS OF AIR SPACE WILL HOLD AN UNDIVIDED , I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE FEE REQUIRED BY SECTION 9118.4 OF THE INTEREST IN THE COMMON AREAS MICH WILL,IN TURN.PROVIDE THE MUNICIPAL CODE HAS BEEN PAID TO THE CITY OF ARCADIA. NECESSARY ACCESS AND UTILITY EASEMENTS FOR THE UNITS. BASIS OF BEARINGS: THE BEARINGS SHOWN HEREON ARE BASED ON THE CENTERLINE OF CALIFORNIA STREET SHOWN AS N8959'32'W ON TRACT MAP NO.45902,M.B.1121-92-93. DATE FINANCE DIRECTOR-CITY OF ARCADIA CITY CLERK'S CERTIFICATE: I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE OTY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA BY MOTION PASSED ON APPROVED THE ATTACHED MAP. DATE CITY CLERK-CITY OF ARCADIA • T SCALE: 1"= 20' IEET 2 OF 2 SHEETS ' ' ■,` TRACT \ O • 53151 IN THE CITY OF ARCADIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA (iis FOR CONDOMINIUM PURPOSES • ALLEY FTC/PK NAIL PER NC 46003. —-—-—- 11.11 1037-7-8 • I NI END SIRE NAMES §I COC.L.T(5 .CPN FB 1677-465 BONITA STREET I t END NAT LS 2569 NO REF I . m AS PROPERTY a UNE PROD N00'00.3YE 5.93 FR N0119N9,SET NOTHING 0/S FROM PROP CORNEA I ESTABLISHED SY PRORATION ARCADIA SANTA AIWA b ALLEY ° —_ AO BY PRORATION' N°T"'"° TRACT Y.R.15-69-90 _a 950.20 ------ S8B5046E - �— PEA�ARCADIA SANTA-—-575.15' — 01 its SET N&T 104N- - - 400 —N 325.1°' I TRACT 11A 15-89-90 _ S.BY aar 60429' 569Ti6'a6Y: 5. O _I9Sr • • • •100.03'. - 235.10' I Qa 6, ■ 30' I1A r 30' E I .1 ELY UNE OF LOT 10 ` WO'LINE LOT 13 BILOI BLOCK 65 A PART LL.I OF ARCADIA SANTA 65 A PART OF ARCAOA ANITA-C TRACT YA-y SANTA 15-BB-MO ESTABYBYY Z D LLJ 15-89-90 9 ESTAS PER L.L.I 'v BY PRORATION 11.R. • PRORATION TI PER SAID Y.R. • z MATCHES FD.HMS. O O I w z q■ •0 I- > I Q ci I ; z Q Z • ^Q 0 10 L O 1 L m 1 II— r. O cn > 16,015 SQ. FT. Q o w ILA Q o d - cn � _ g8 o b Z � m 11 I 1 d ■ • S - I— m I 0 1 8■ 6 t h ELY LINE OF nk LOTS 79 TRRM k 16•11X 65 A ■ • PART OF ARCADIA---...A I SANTA ANITA I TRACT M.R. 1 NILY LINE E OF(O.5 • • 10-DO-BO 30 �..--A PART OF ARCADIA SANd ANRA TRACT I 1 30' WI.15-59-54 ■ • 1I 493.10 100.04' 295.11' 1 F-' SETS IP 890.34' NB939'3YM i 7 I L5 6099 12'� I MD NAT LS 2569 NO REF ACCEPTED AS PROPERTY LINE "o PROD S0O30f33^Y 203 tl M I I 1I I^' 0/S FROM PRO'CORNER ^I 25.19' - C0 - - 1o0.04' -_-— ' ]75.11' _ _ 1 - / 8'4'4' °CALIFORNIA STREETN8�°'72'" '° RD SPIKE MATCHES END MC NAIL NO TIES LA.CO. ACCEPT AS CL MB 1627-463 M ,�'1 INTERSECTION INDICATES THE BOUNDARY OF THE LAND BEING SIBDINDED BY THIS MAP. G .6"-ED -70 Q Z ov -00 z- c � 4w$ t r°RPOS£9 g STAFF REPORT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT January 16, 2001 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Don Penman, Assistant City Manager/Development Services Director By: Donna Butler, Community Development Administrator -- SUBJECT: Public hearing and consideration of Zone Change No. Z 00-002, and introduction of Ordinance No. 2133: An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Arcadia, California, changing the zoning of a 3.81 foot wide strip of property between 201-221 East Duarte Road and 810 South Second Avenue from C-1/Limited Commercial to R-2/Medium Density Multiple Family Residential, and removing a P/Automobile Parking Overlay from 810 South Second Avenue. SUMMARY Zone Change Application No. Z 00-002 was submitted by Mr. Hank Jong of EGL Associates, Inc. to rezone a 3.81 foot wide strip of land between 201-221 E. Duarte Road and 810 S. Second Avenue from C-1/Limited Commercial to R-2/Medium Density Multiple Family Residential, and to remove a P/Automobile Parking Overlay from 810 S. Second Avenue. The Planning Commission at its December 12, 2000 meeting voted 4-0 with one Commissioner absent, to recommend approval of the requested Zone Change. The minutes of the Planning Commission meeting are attached. The Development Services Department is also recommending approval of Zone Change Application No. Z 00-002. BACKGROUND The subject property is located at the northeast corner of Duarte Road and Second Avenue. The current situation was created by Zone Change No. Z-77-2 and Parcel • Map No. 8342 in 1977. The Zone Change added the P/Automobile Parking Overlay and the Parcel Map consolidated several small lots, including a vacated portion of an alley, into two lots (see the diagram of Parcel Map No. 8342, on the following page). The residential zoning existed on the property bounded on the south by the southerly line of the vacated alley. However, in creating Lot 2 of Parcel Map No. 8342, the northerly lot line was not aligned with the southerly line of vacated alley, thereby leaving a 3.81 foot wide strip of land that is zoned C-1/Limited Commercial, but is attached to residentially zoned property to the north. LASER IMAGED Y r This Zone Change is the P' second step in aligning the l A'-! CE ST ` residential zoning of 810 S. Second Avenue i. - _ . _ y 50 lal .0 1 50 o is.v i a l c-2/0) a-Etl (2 lc"1 with the north lot line of u.i n , 744 F ' c 201 E. Duarte Road. The Q 17 i. 7 ` 1 eventual goal is to develop ' ,� �' 810 S. Second Avenue � IG ' :n 1`} ' '41'4 13 � ►� `�'l with a five-unit residential 270'.53 - condominium project. It:(13 P. M . 8342 t4 ..,1/4- The General Plan Land r :0, r .-c , .' Use Designation of the `3 w �abe, • �c as a rom- ' subject 3.81 foot wide strip c� © • 1, t R-��: of land was changed from o 2 �, Commercial to Multiple 0, (1.14 di Family Residential by kn ���� (xo3'z°6)�:6.L - General Plan Amendment a i _10 .5.-- No. GP 00-002 that the 4-'- g>7• City Council approved on November 21, 2000. pU� le V DISCUSSION I PARCEL MAP NO. 8342 I This Zone Change is to rezone a 3.81 foot wide strip of land between 201-221 E. Duarte Road and 810 S. Second Avenue from C-1/Limited Commercial to R-2/Medium Density Multiple Family Residential, and to remove a P/Automobile Parking Overlay from 810 S. Second Avenue. The 3.81 foot wide strip of land extends from Second Avenue eastward to the easterly property line of Lot 1 of Parcel Map No. 8342 (see the above diagram of Parcel Map No. 8342). This zone change is necessary to enable the property at 81.0 S. Second Avenue to be developed with a five-unit residential condominium project. The project could not be subdivided into condominiums unless there is consistency between the General Plan and Zoning. ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION ' Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act, the Development Services Department has prepared an Initial Study for the proposed project. Said Initial Study did not disclose any substantial or potentially substantial adverse change in any of the physical conditions within the area affected by the project including land, air, water, minerals, flora, fauna, ambient noise and objects of historical or aesthetic significance. When considering the record as a whole, there is no evidence that the proposed project will have any potential for adverse effect on wildlife Z 00-002 January 16, 2001 - Page 2 of 3 resources or the habitat upon which the wildlife depends. Therefore, a Negative Declaration has been drafted for this Zone Change. RECOMMENDATION This Zone Change will not have an affect on the eventual development of the subject property and the land uses will be consistent with the surrounding uses. The Planning Commission and Development Services Department recommend approval of Zone Change Application No. Z 00-002. CITY COUNCIL ACTION The City Council should open the public hearing, and based on the evidence presented, the Council should move to adopt and file the Negative Declaration and introduce Ordinance No. 2133: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, CHANGING THE ZONING OF A 3.81 FOOT WIDE STRIP OF PROPERTY BETWEEN 201-221 EAST DUARTE ROAD AND 810 SOUTH SECOND AVENUE FROM C-1/LIMITED COMMERCIAL TO R-2/MEDIUM DENSITY MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, AND REMOVING A P/AUTOMOBILE PARKING OVERLAY FROM 810 SOUTH SECOND AVENUE. Attachments: CC Ordinance No. 2133. PC Minutes of December 12, 2000 Land Use-and Zoning Map Draft Negative Declaration & Initial Study Ufria\ Approved by: William R. Kelly, City Manager Z 00-002 January 16, 2001 • Page 3 of 3 ORDINANCE NO. 2133 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, CHANGING THE ZONING OF A 3.81 FOOT WIDE STRIP OF PROPERTY BETWEEN 201-221 EAST DUARTE ROAD AND 810 SOUTH SECOND AVENUE FROM C-1/LIMITED COMMERCIAL TO R-2/MEDIUM DENSITY MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, AND REMOVING A P/AUTOMOBILE PARKING OVERLAY FROM 810 SOUTH SECOND AVENUE. WHEREAS, on September 7, 2000, Mr. Hank Jong of EGL Associates, Inc., filed an application to change the zoning of a 3.81 foot wide strip of property along the south edge of 810 South Second Avenue from C-1/Limited Commercial to R-2/Medium Density Multiple.Family Residential, and to remove a P/Automobile Parking Overlay from 810 South Second Avenue. The two properties are more particularly described as follows: 3.81 foot wide strip The southerly 3.81 feet of the northerly 68.81 feet of Parcel 1 of Parcel Map 8342, in the City of Arcadia, County of Los Angeles, State of California, as per Map recorded in Book 98, Page 35 of Parcel Maps, in the Office of the County Recorder of Said County. 810 S. Second Ave. The northerly 65.00 feet of Parcel 1 of Parcel Map 8342, in the City of Arcadia, County of Los Angeles, State of California, as per Map recorded in Book 98, Page 35 of Parcel Maps, in the Office of the County Recorder of Said County. WHEREAS, a public hearing was held before the Planning Commission of - the City of Arcadia on December 12, 2000, at which time all interested persons were given full opportunity to be heard and to present evidence; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the requested zone changes to the City Council of the City of Arcadia; and WHEREAS, a public hearing was held before the City Council on January 16, 2001, at which time all interested persons were given full opportunity to be heard and to present evidence; and WHEREAS, the City Council determines that based upon the evidence presented, the public necessity, convenience, general welfare and good zoning practice, justify the requested zone changes. NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the two subject properties are to be rezoned as follows, and from and after the effective date of this Ordinance, said real properties shall be so zoned and subject to the restrictions imposed by the provisions of the zoning regulations of the City of Arcadia: a. The 3.81 foot wide strip of property along the south edge of 810 South Second Avenue, which is presently zoned C-1/Limited Commercial, is hereby rezoned R-2/Medium Density Multiple Family Residential, and the Zoning Boundaries and Zoning Map (Sheet No. 11) of the Arcadia Municipal Code are hereby amended to rezone and classify the aforementioned property as R-2/Medium Density Multiple Family Residential. b. The property described as 810 South Second Avenue, which is currently zoned R-2/Medium Density Multiple Family Residential with a P/Automobile Parking Overlay, is hereby rezoned to remove the P/Automobile Parking Overlay, and the Zoning Boundaries and Zoning Map (Sheet No. 11) of the Arcadia Municipal Code are hereby amended to remove the P/Automobile Parking Overlay and classify the aforementioned property as R-2/Medium Density Multiple Family Residential. Section 2. The City Council finds and determines that the requested zone changes are consistent with the City's General Plan and that the public health, safety, general welfare, and good zoning practice require the above zone changes and amendments. Section 3. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause a copy of the same to be published in the official newspaper of the City of Arcadia within fifteen (15) days after its adoption. -2- Ord. 2133 Passed, approved and adopted this day of , 2001. Mayor of the City of Arcadia ATTEST: City Clerk of the City of Arcadia APPROVED AS TO FORM: /Cr e Stephen.P. Deitsch, City Attorney STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) § CITY OF ARCADIA ) I, JUNE D. ALFORD, City Clerk of the City of Arcadia, hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance,No. 2133 was passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Arcadia, signed by the Mayor and attested to by the City Clerk at a regular meeting of said Council held on the day of , 2001, and that said Ordinance was adopted by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: • City Clerk of the City of Arcadia -3- Ord. 2133 2. PUBLIC HEARING Z-00-002 203-221 E. Duarte Rd. & 810 S. Second Ave. Hank Jong Consideration of a zone change to rezone a 3.81' wide strip of property between the above properties from C-1/Limited Commercial to R-2/Multiple-Family Residential, and to delete a P/Automobile Parking Overlay from 810 S. Second Ave. The staff report was presented and the public hearing was opened. Scott Cheng, 11823 Slauson, Santa Fe Springs was present to answer any questions. No one else spoke in favor of or in opposition to this item. Chairman Murphy closed the public hearing. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Bruckner, seconded by Commissioner Olson to recommend approval of Z 00-002 to the City Council subject to the conditions listed in the staff report ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioner Bruckner, Huang, Olson, Murphy NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Kalemkiarian r.! R-2 000 0 o r� O 0 ALICE ST. I 3 o O o Ili 0 R-2 -R-2 8 DETACHED ?O 3 RESIDENTIAL . a UNITS O ., UNDER m v M . CONSTRUCTION P.M.®. s�-3~5 q C 120.51 Q Ce :I C-2 zo 40 ° 1 FAST FOOD O O WITH )W DRIVE THRU CO 01?? 4_ � ��I ■ ,f i ct ill 0 re 0 0 UJ z z.4 BANK J N 0 u 0 � � d Z = aNQ �a0 w Lu- �:-� anti a wzZa R-1. • a 0 I- w R-2 O a0 C-2 > o 0 • I LAND USE & ZONING MAP GP 00-002 / Z 00-002 / MP 00-024 /ADR 00-025 / TM 53330 T NORTH 201-221 E. Duarte Rd. & 810 S. Second Ave. Scale: 1 inch = 100 feet A:�oF . - ; File No.: Z 00-002 w &TM 53330 CITY OF ARCADIA ARCAD A 240 WEST HUNTINGTON DRIVE "%ipoRAT1.9" ARCADIA, CA 91007 CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT NEGATIVE DECLARATION Adopted: --DRAFT-- Title and Description of Project: Zone Change No. Z 00-002 and Tentative Tract Map No. TM 53330 — A Zone Change for a 3.81 foot southward adjustment of the Zoning Designation boundary between the Commercial designation of 201-221 E. Duarte Road and the Multiple Family Residential (12 DU/AC Max.) designation of 810 S. Second Avenue to align with the existing northerly lot line of 201 E. Duarte Road, which is a vacant corner lot. The Zone Change is to bring the zoning into consistency with the General Plan to accommodate a proposed 5-unit residential condominium development of 810 S. Second Avenue. The Tentative Tract Map will follow the Zone Change to split 203-221 E. Duarte Road from 810 S. Second Avenue with a new lot line that will align with the existing northerly lot line of 201 E. Duarte Road, and for the condominium subdivision of the proposed 5-unit residential development of 810 S. Second Avenue. Location of Project: 203-221 E. Duarte Road & 810 S. Second Avenue. An 'U-shaped parcel that wraps around a vacant corner lot at 201 E. Duarte Road in the City of Arcadia, County of Los Angeles. Name of Applicant or Project Sponsor: EGL Associates, Inc. —Civil Engineers for Sunny Development 11823 Slauson Avenue, Unit#18 Santa Fe Springs, CA 90670 Contact: Hank Jong — (562) 945-0689 /fax (562) 945-0364 Finding: The Planning Commission/City Council, having reviewed the Initial Study of this proposed project and having reviewed the written comments received prior to the public hearing(s) of the Planning Commission and City Council, including the recommendation of the City's staff, does hereby find and declare that the proposed project will not have a significant effect on the environment based on the results of the Initial Study, and the consistency of the proposed project with the City's General Plan and Zoning Ordinance. The Planning Commission/City Council hereby finds that this Negative Declaration reflects its independent judgment. A copy of the Initial Study may be obtained at the location listed below. The location and custodian of the documents and any other material which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the City based its decision to adopt this Negative Declaration are as follows: City of Arcadia—Development Services Dept./Community Development Division/Planning Services Attention staff member: James M. Kasama, Associate Planner (626)574-5445 240 West Huntington Drive Arcadia, CA 91007 Date Received for Filing By Los Angeles County: (County Clerk Stamp Here) Name of Los Angeles County Staffperson Title File Nos.: GP 00-002; • • Z 00-002; • ` 1Ty • �.� &TM 53330 R81 A9e•••°IcFa..,�i CITY OF ARCADIA rr\ /09 240 WEST HUNTINGTON DRIVE RrOReTS9 ARCADIA, CA 91007 CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM 1. Project Title: General Plan Amendment No. GP 00-002; Zone Change No. Z 00-002; &Tentative Tract Map No. TM 53330 2. Lead Agency Name & Address: City of Arcadia Development Services Dept. / Community Development Div. / Planning Services 240 W. Huntington Drive Post Office Box 60021 Arcadia, CA 91066-6021 3. Lead Agency Contact Person & Phone Number: James M. Kasama, Associate Planner— (626) 574-5445 /fax (626) 447-9173 4. Project Location (address): 201-221 E. Duarte Road & 810 S. Second Avenue Northeast corner of East Duarte Road & South Second Avenue In the City of Arcadia, County of Los Angeles 5. Project Sponsor's Name, Address & Phone Number: EGL Associates, Inc. — Civil Engineers for Sunny Development 11823 Slauson Avenue, Unit#18 Santa Fe Springs, CA 90670 Contact: Hank Jong — (562) 945-0689 /fax (562) 945-0364 6. General Plan Designation: The northerly portion of the property is designated "Multiple Family Residential with a 12 Dwelling Units Per Acre Maximum Density" and the southerly portion is designated "Commercial". Form"J" -1- CEQA Checklist 4/99 File Nos.: GP 00-002; • • � 1 i 1 Z 00-002; &TM 53330 7. Zoning Classification: The northerly portion of the property (810 S. Second Ave.) is zoned PR-2 for transient automobile parking use in conjunction with a nearby commercially zoned property or for multiple family residential use at a density of one unit per 3,750 square feet of lot area. The southerly portion of the property (201-221 E. Duarte Rd.) is zoned C-1 for limited commercial use. 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.) A General Plan Amendment and Zone Change for a 3.81 foot southward adjustment of the General Plan Land Use Designation boundary and Zoning Designation boundary between the Commercial designation of 201-221 E. Duarte Road and the Multiple Family Residential (12 DU/AC Max.) designation of 810 S. Second Avenue to align with the existing northerly lot line of 201 E. Duarte Road, which is a vacant lot. These are to accommodate a proposed 5-unit residential condominium development of 810 S. Second Avenue. A Tentative Tract Map will follow the General Plan Amendment and Zone Change to split 203-221 E. Duarte Road from 810 S. Second Avenue with a new lot line that will align with the existing northerly lot line of 201 E. Duarte Road, and for the condominium subdivision of the proposed 5-unit residential development of 810 S. Second Avenue. 9. Surrounding land uses and setting: (Briefly describe the project's surroundings.) The 3 lots to the north are developed with single family residences. The property to the east is being developed with 8 multiple family residences. The areas to the south and west are developed with commercial uses. 10. Other public agencies whose approval is required: (e.g., permits, financing approval, participation agreement) The City Building Services, Engineering Division, Fire Prevention Bureau, Public Works Services, and Water Services will review the construction plans and subdivision map for compliance with all applicable construction codes, dedication of public rights-of-ways and easements, and compliance with the Subdivision Map Act,. and will oversee construction and installation of any necessary infrastructure or improvements within the public rights-of-ways. Form"J" -2- CEQA Checklist 4/99 File Nos.: GP 00-002; . Z 00-002; &TM 53330 • 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: [ ] Aesthetics [ ] Mineral Resources [ ] Agricultural Resources [ ] Noise [ ] Air Quality [ ] Population / Housing [ ] Biological Resources [ ] Public Services [ ] Cultural Resources [ ] Recreation [ ] Geology/ Soils [ ] Transportation /Traffic [ ] Hazards & Hazardous Materials [ ] Utilities/ Service Systems [ ] Hydrology /Water Quality [ ] Mandatory Findings of Significance [ ] Land Use / Planning - 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 revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the applicant. A MITIGATED 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 "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated impact" on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. [ ] I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, but because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. By: James M. Kasama, Associate Planner For: City of Arcadia Date: September 27, 2000 Sign re Form"J" -3- CEQA Checklist 4/99 File Nos.:. GP 00-002; • Z 00-002; &TM 53330 - 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 responses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A"No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis). 2. All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. 3. Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. "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 EIR is required. 4. "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With 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 XVIII, "Earlier Analyses," must be cross-referenced). 5. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following: a) Earlier Analyses Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less Than Significant With Mitigation Measures Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project. 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. 7. Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources, uses or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 8. This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project's environmental effects in whatever format is selected. 9. The explanation of each issue should identify: a) The significant criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and b) The mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significant. Form"J" ,-4- CEQA Checklist 4/99 File No.: GP 00-002; Z 00-002; • &TM 53330 Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact I. AESTHETICS—Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? [ ] [ •] [ ] [X] c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare, which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] The project and the eventual development of the proposed 5 residential units will be a new source of light, but will not adversely affect views in the area. II. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES — (In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland.) Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of - Statewide Importance (Farmland) as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non- , agricultural use? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] There is no agricultural or farmland on the subject property or in the vicinity. III. AIR QUALITY— (Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations.) Would the proposal: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable Air Quality Plan? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non- attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions, which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? [ ] [ ] [ ], [X] d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial . pollutant concentrations? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] The project and the eventual development of the proposed 5 residential units will not result in any of the above impacts. IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES —Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse impact, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Form"J" -5- CEQA Checklist 4/99 • ' '_ File No.: GP 00-002; Z 00-002; &TM 53330 Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact Department of Fish and Game or U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, and regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species, or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Conservation Community Plan, or other approved local, regional or state habitat conservation plan? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] The project and the eventual development of the proposed 5 residential units will not result in any of the above impacts. V. CULTURAL RESOURCES —Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5? [ ] [ ] [ . ] [X] c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] The project and the eventual development of the proposed 5 residential units will not result in any of the above impacts. VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS —Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? (Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42). [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? [ ] [ ]. [X] [ ] iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? [ ] [ ] .[ ] [X] iv) Landslides [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] Form"J" -6- CEQA Checklist 4/99 File No.: GP 00-002; • • Z 00-002; ' &TM 53330 • Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994) creating substantial risks to life or property? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] e) -Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] The project and the eventual development of the proposed 5 residential units will not result in any of the above impacts. VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS—Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one- quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] e) For a 'project located within an airport land use plan, or where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] g) Impair implementation of, or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? [ l [ l [ l [X] h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] The project and the eventual development of the proposed 5 residential units will not result in any of the above impacts. VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY—Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there Form"J" -7- CEQA Checklist 4/99 File No.: GP 00-002; • Z 00-002; &TM 53330 Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on or off-site?' [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] h) Place structures within a 100-year flood hazard area, which would impede or redirect flood flows? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] The subject properties are within the Santa Anita Dam Inundation Area, but the project and the eventual development of the proposed 5 residential units will not result in a significant increase in the potential for the exposure of people or property to flooding hazards. IX. LAND USE & PLANNING—Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to, the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] The project and the eventual development of the proposed 5 residential units will not result in any of the above impacts. X. MINERAL RESOURCES —Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] The project and the eventual development of the proposed 5 residential units will not result in any of the above impacts. Form"J" -8- CEQA Checklist 4/99 File No.: GP 00-002; Z 00-002; • &TM 53330 Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact Xl. NOISE-Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to, or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? [ ] [ ] [X] [ b) Exposure of persons to, or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? [ ] [ ] [X] [ c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] e) For a project located within an airport land use plan, or where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? [ I [ ] [ ] [X] f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] The project itself will not result in any of the above impacts, but the eventual development of the proposed 5 residential units will result in additional noise during construction, but such should not be substantially above existing ambient noise levels. XII. POPULATION & HOUSING—Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? [ ] [ ] [X] [ c) Displace substantial.numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? [ I [ ] [ ] [X] The project and the eventual development of the proposed 5 residential units will not result in any of the above impacts. XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES — Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which would cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: a) Fire protection? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] b) Police protection? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] c) Schools? [ ] I ] [X] [ ] d) Parks? [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] e) Other public facilities? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] The project and the eventual development of the proposed 5 residential units will not result in any of the above impacts. XIV. RECREATION—Would the project: a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial Form"J" -9- CEQA Checklist 4/99 ' File No.: GP 00-002; Z 00-002; &TM 53330 Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] The project and the eventual development of the proposed 5 residential units will not result in any of the above impacts. XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC—Would the project: a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? [ ] [ ] [X] [ b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] e) Result in inadequate emergency access? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] The project and the eventual development of the proposed 5 residential units will not result in any significant impacts. • XVI. UTILITIES & SERVICE SYSTEMS —Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the providers existing commitments? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] Form"J" -10- CEQA Checklist 4/99 File No.: GP 00-002; - Z 00-002; ' &TM 53330 Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact g) Comply with federal, state and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] The project and the eventual development of the proposed 5 residential units will not result in any of the above impacts. XVII. 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? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] b) 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 projects.) [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] c) Does the project have environmental effects, which will • cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] The project and the eventual development of the proposed 5 residential units will not result in any of the above impacts. XVIII. EARLIER ANALYSES No earlier analyses, and no additional documents were referenced pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA processes to analyze the project. • Form"J" -11- CEQA Checklist 4/99 � File No. _' _ £ P06-002- DO-00z) 4- VI 53330 CITY OF ARCADIA 240 WEST HUNTINGTON DRIVE r,¢\ ioe o$Pa$®TAD-�° ARCADIA, CA 91007 ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION FORM Date Filed: 9- 7-oo General Information 1. Applicant's Name: Hank Jong Address: 11823 Slauson Ave. , #18 , Santa Fe Springs, CA 90670 2. Property Address (Location): 201 E. Duarte Rd. , Arcadia, CA 91 007 Assessor's Number: 5 7 7 9—1 8—41 3. Name, address and telephone number of person to be contacted concerning this project: Hank Jong, 11823 Slauson Ave. , #18, Santa Fe Springs , CA 90670 562-945-0689 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: General Plan Change; Zone Change & Tract Map -al 5. Zone Classification: R-2 ; C-1 6. General Plan Designation: parcel 1 : Resident parcel 2 : commercial Project Description 7. Proposed use of site (project description): Building 5 unit condominium s 8. Site size: 32 ,432 S.F. 9. Square footage per building: Type A: 2, 61 6 S.F. , Type B: 2 , 451 S .F. , Type C: 2 , 41 5 S.F. 10. Number of floors of construction: 2 11. Amount of off-street parking provided: parcel 1 : 1 0 ( residential) + 3 (guest) parcel 2 : 17 (office) 12. Proposed scheduling of project: 8 months 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: 5 unit condominiums, average size = 2, 477 S.F. , sale prices depend on market condition/ for single family use only. 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: parcel 1 : R2 with southerly 15 ' zone change C1 to R2 Make it a better design of a 5 unit condominium 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 contours. ❑ 20. Change in scenic views or vistas from existing residential areas or publiclands or roads ❑ ] 21. Change in pattern, scale or character of general area of project. ❑ �❑ 22. Significant amounts of solid waste or litter. 23. Change in dust, ash, smoke, fumes or odors in vicinity. 24. Change in ground water quality or quantity, or alteration of existing drainage pattersn. ❑ 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. 27. Use or disposal of potentially hazardous materials, such as toxic substances, flammable ❑ or explosives. E.I.R. 04/12/00 Page 2 • YES NO 28. Substantial change in demand for municipal services (police, fire, water, sewage, etc.) ® ❑ • 29. Substantial increase in fossil fuel consumption(electricity, oil, natural gas, etc. ❑ ❑ 30. Relationship to a larger project or series of projects. ❑ 31. Storm water system discharges from areas for materials storage, vehicle or equipment fueling, vehicle or equipment maintenance (including washing), waste handling, hazardous materials handling or storage delivery or loading docks, or other outdoor work areas? 32. A significantly environmentally harmful increase in the flow rate or volume of storm water ❑ runoff? 33. A significantly environmentally harmful increase in erosion of the project site or surrounding areas? 34. Storm water discharges that would significantly impair the beneficial uses of receiving waters or areas that provide water quality benefits (e.g. riparian corridors, wetlands, etc.)? 35. Harm to the biological integrity of drainage systems and water bodies? Environmental Setting 36. 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. 37. 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 correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. Date Signature E.I.R. 04/12/00 Page 3 • l. ' TENTATIVE TRACT MAP �I._ 13330 201 E. DUARTE ROAD, ARCADIA SITE PHOTOGRAPHS V s :�.1, r -__N, r Z 4 r� dt Photo 1:Subject site—(viewing east across 2nd Ave.) Photo 2:Subject site — (viewing north across E.Duarte Rd.) 75> zt x J J s•A +rte y Fns [~ ti. AP - _ r{. i- . j1it Photo 3: Single family house located northwest of subject Photo 4:Store located west of subject property —(viewing property—(viewing northwest across 2nd Ave.) southwest across 2nd Ave.) at 4,.•_-___a. r , — — - • r F I. A t s , �n a'lt - .,I '?_,$R -MlitilititillnY 111.411114 lift fill liilllilli"'firii' S:' • _ - 1 Photo 5:Single-family house located west of subject Photo 6:Single-family house located north of subject property Property acrossing 2nd Ave. (viewing west from 2nd Ave.) (viewing northeast from 2nd Ave.) TENTATIVE TRACT MAP ►.�::�3330 201 E. DUARTE ROAD, ARCADIA SITE PHOTOGRAPHS #✓, .. YJ " t • ''iii r t,',.1.4fShy.' "�:7-7-- V..; Mak 1- r -e . 3 r�'s S ,, „*i I• , .`.,1 , 1 ,,,,,,, . ,.� k If ..,Ks • - E• ,.�3"-•y,. c..j '^S"' F < 1 rrfW1 1 j 1, - s. .t"=;i i.6 .k`} ..,+,, i '^y^ rh••- ,G, _ -%-'.s y • { • .. -....,3• § = :a t i .a^ Photo 7:,-tore located south of subject site—(viewing south Photo 8: Store located south of subject site— (viewing south across E.Duarte Rd.) across E.Duarte Rd.) • ,:1, 7.7:27":;!. s a i— .. +b 4 7' yr,..r+ F+ �� _"' _ Vri > a . " - - - '` - - Photo 9: Single family house located southeast of subject Photo 10:Adjacency located southwest of subject property — property—(viewing southeast across Duarte Ave.) (viewing north across Duarte Rd.)