Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 1b: Resolution 6727, 6729: Senior Citizen Apartment Project at 16 Campus DriveDATE: July 6, 2010 TO: Mayor and City Council BACKGROUND DISCUSSION STAFF REPORT Development Services Department FROM: Jason Kruckeberg, Assistant City Manager /Development Services Director By: Jerry Schwartz, Economic Development Manager j SUBJECT: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICATION NO. GP 10 -01, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION NO. CUP 10 -03, AND ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. ADR 10 -05 FOR A 43 -UNIT, AFFORDABLE, SENIOR CITIZEN APARTMENT PROJECT AT 16 CAMPUS DRIVE — THE "CAMPUS COMMONS" PROJECT Recommendation: Adopt a Negative Declaration for the Project, Adopt Resolution No. 6727 and Resolution No. 6729 The Campus Commons Senior Housing Project is a proposed 43 unit senior apartment project to be located at 16 Campus Drive. The project has been proposed by Davila Properties, which put together the Heritage Park senior project, and Ashwood Construction, which will build, own, and manage the project. Campus Commons would target low and very low income seniors, and would have a 55 -year affordability covenant as is required for affordable rental projects under California Redevelopment Law. On May 11, the Planning Commission reviewed the requested entitlements for the project, and recommended that the project be forwarded to the Council with its support. This project was discussed with the Council /Agency in Study Session on February 2, 2010 and March 2, 2010. At the March 2 meeting, the Agency directed staff to work with the developer on the proposed project. As part of that process, Ashwood Construction submitted applications for General Plan Amendment No. GP 10 -01, Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 10 -03, and Architectural Design Review No. ADR 10- 05. The development team is pursuing its entitlements as part of an expected July application for tax credits to fund the project. The Planning Commission reviewed the project and entitlements on May 11 and forwarded it to the Council with its recommendation for approval. Campus Commons July 6, 2010 Page 2 of 8 Project Description The project will be 43 units and will include nine, two- bedroom units, and 33, one - bedroom units that will be occupied by seniors aged 62 and older. The project will include a ground -floor parking structure with 39 parking spaces, a community room with kitchen, a two- bedroom manager's unit above the community room, a swimming pool, and ample landscaped areas with lit walkways throughout the property. Proiect Location The Applicant has indicated that the proposed project site was selected based on certain criteria that will allow maximum points in the financing applications for affordable housing projects. The site is located in close proximity to commercial services, the Arcadia Community Center, Methodist Hospital, Arcadia County Park, the Santa Anita Golf Course, and the Arcadia Public Library. It is close to Fire Station 105, and offers access to regional transit services. The Applicant looked throughout the community in its search for a suitable senior housing site. There are very few sites in Arcadia that are the right size or proximate to services and amenities for the proposed type of project. The Applicant made contact with the owners of other potential sites, and they were either too expensive or not for sale. It should be noted that none of the other sites that were pursued were as well - situated for seniors as this site on Campus Drive. Proiect Design and Landscaping The project is set back 20 feet from the front property line, which is at the back of the sidewalk. The narrower side of the building will face Campus Drive with the longer sides facing east and west. The building is designed to make the most of the site and to take advantage of opportunities for natural heating and cooling as part of making the project more energy efficient. The project includes large roof overhangs to provide shade and heat relief for the residents. The light color roofing and stucco colors are designed to reduce the building temperature which could lower the overall energy consumption levels. The main stucco colors will be Plantation Beige and Moose Point, which is a light to medium brown. The stucco trim color will be Pampas White and will be applied on the fascia, windows, and some portions of the building. The combination of the main building colors, recesses and pop -outs in the building facade, and the windows with the Pampas White color trim, will provide an appealing appearance with variation and articulation in the building. The 43 apartments proposed in the project will be located on three floors and will include: 33 one - bedroom /one- bathroom units of 625 square feet; nine two - bedroom /one- bathroom units of 777 square feet; and one two- bedroom /one- bathroom unit of 1,000 square feet for the resident - manager. The project will provide 39 covered, surface level parking spaces in a ground floor structure for the residents with access to the senior apartments from the parking area by an elevator. The four guest parking spaces are designed to be accessed via an existing driveway along the eastern side of Campus Commons July 6, 2010 Page 3 of 8 Amenities the project site that is shared by the neighboring office building to the east. The Applicant believes that there is an existing easement for the shared -use of that driveway, but documentation was not provided as part of this application. It will be a condition of approval that the existence and ability to use the easement for the visitor parking be documented. Plans were distributed to the City's various departments for review and comment, and a meeting was held on April 6, 2010 with the project development team for the City's staff to be able to directly ask questions of the developer. Comments that created requirements of the development are included among the conditions of approval. Certain changes that were suggested at the April 6 meeting have already been incorporated into the plans that accompany this staff report. The project will provide several amenities to enhance the living environment for the residents. There will be a 1,000 square -foot community room with an open kitchen that can be used for a variety of social activities and events. There will be a swimming pool and a patio area for outdoor comfort, plus landscaped walking paths on the site. There will be lighting throughout the site for mobility and safety after dark. The building will include extra insulation, sound proofing, and light screening to minimize the impacts on the project by its location next to the Arcadia High School athletic field. Every unit will include washers and dryers along with such features as easily accessible faucets and door handles and low entry door thresholds, and there will be a resident manager. The project will provide abundant landscaping along the perimeter and in the common areas of the property. There are currently ten (10) large mature trees on the west side of the property that screen the site from the athletic field at Arcadia High School. In order to maximize the use of the site, the developers will be removing four (4) of the trees. The plans call for planting three (3) new trees along with the six (6) remaining trees to maintain adequate screening for the residents. The Arcadia Unified School District was contacted about having the proposed project located just east of the athletic field. While District personnel would be concerned about any potential use adjacent to Arcadia High School, it should be apparent that senior housing would have Tess of an impact on the school than a commercial use; particularly in that a commercial use would generate more traffic during peak school drop off and pick up times than would a senior housing project. District personnel did express concern about the activities, lights, and noise from the athletic field adversely impacting the senior residents, and then having complaints about those activities from the residents. But, as discussed earlier in this report, the Applicant has incorporated design elements to ameliorate the impacts of the activities at the Arcadia High School on the senior residents. In addition, the Planning Commission conditioned its support for the project on the agreement by the development team that there will be a waiver regarding noise and light from Arcadia High School that will be prepared by the City Attorney and signed by all future residents as part of their rental agreement (Condition No. 18 below). Campus Commons July 6, 2010 Page 4 of 8 General Plan Amendment — Density As a C -2 site, the Arcadia General Plan has a specific density allowance for senior citizen affordable housing of 63 units per acre. The applicant is requesting to build 43 units which would be a density of 81 units per acre. The developer has indicated that it needs to build at least 40 rental units to make the project attractive to lenders and tax credit investors, and to make it financially feasible from development and operational perspectives. This issue has been reviewed by the City's financial consultant, Kathe Head of Keyser Marston, who agrees with this conclusion. There is indication that there is sufficient demand for a project of this size. There is a waiting list of over 200 seniors for an apartment in the Heritage Park project. But, a General Plan Amendment is necessary for the density of this project. Given the location of the project site, adjacent to the high school athletic field, across from the Arcadia County Park, and next to commercial and office uses, there are no surrounding property owners that will be adversely impacted by the proposed density. Additionally, the project will have a high quality design that is intended to minimize the appearance of its mass and bulk from the street. It is important to note that density in a project does not create any visual impact. The design of the project creates the impact, and as discussed above, this project has includes both building design and landscape elements that will give the project an appealing appearance. Additionally, senior citizen housing does not create a large number of vehicle trips and will have a lower impact on traffic than a commercial use at this location. As a result, the requested density will not adversely affect the surrounding properties and will create a comfortable living environment for the seniors. This project will amend the City's General Plan by allowing a density bonus of up to 30% to the existing maximum density of 63 dwelling units per acre for affordable senior housing if the project is for residents with low- income (50 % -60% of median) and very- low income (less than 50% of median) as opposed to moderate - income (60% -120% of median) residents. Conditional Use Permit The Commercial zoning allows residential uses with an approved Conditional Use Permit, and it is staffs opinion that the proposed project is an appropriate use at this site. There is a need for senior housing and affordable housing within the community and the proposed project will address these needs. The location is advantageous for seniors because it is proximate to many necessary services as well as amenities. The allowable height in the C -2 zone is 3 stories and 40 feet. The proposed project has a height of 42' -9 ", and is proposed to be 3 stories over a ground level parking structure, which creates a four -story project. The site cannot accommodate the placing of apartment units on the ground level without having underground parking, which is cost - prohibitive for this type of project. The development team has worked on the design to limit the height and has reduced the height from their initial proposal of 48 feet that was shown to the Agency Board during their March 2nd Study Session to the 42' -9" that is currently proposed. This Campus Commons July 6, 2010 Page 5 of 8 reduction in height has lessened the massing, which reduces the visual impact of the project. Affordable housing law allows developers to claim "concessions" from development standards to facilitate the development of affordable housing. The location of the project, away from single - family neighborhoods and in a commercial zone, essentially eliminates any impact based on the height of the project. Concessions were granted for the Alta Street Classics project for guest parking and setbacks, which allowed that project to proceed. It would be a concession to allow the project at four stories and 42' -9" in height and these are important concessions to make the project financially feasible. Residents of affordable senior housing projects tend to not utilize a car to get around as much as other residents. The seniors are usually retired and are not required to drive daily as part of the workforce. One of the benefits of this site is its proximity to many of the locations that will be desirable for seniors. The property is close to the Arcadia Community Center, the Arcadia County Park, Methodist Hospital, and the Arcadia Public Library. The site is close to regional transit routes, and can be served by Arcadia Transit. This easy access will allow seniors to travel throughout Arcadia without utilizing a car. The proposed parking for the Campus Commons project is provided at a rate of 0.9 spaces per unit. There is not a specific parking requirement for senior housing in the Arcadia Municipal Code. A parking ratio of 0.9 spaces per unit is based on the development team's experience in similar projects, such as Heritage Park, and the proximity to services and amenities as discussed above. Due to the heavy use of street parking during school days, the proposal is not relying on any street parking to serve this project. Staff agrees that this parking ratio is acceptable for this development. The project includes four guest parking spaces which will be accessible through the neighboring lot. Condition No. 1 below requires the applicant to provide proof of an access agreement before receiving its building permit. The Planning Commission did express concern about the number of guest parking spaces (4) and whether first come, first served is the best method for tenant parking. FINDINGS Section 9275.1.2 of the Arcadia Municipal Code requires that for a Conditional Use Permit to be granted, it must be found that all of the following prerequisite conditions can be satisfied: 1. That the granting of such Conditional Use Permit will not be detrimental to the public health or welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in such zone or vicinity. 2. That the use applied for at the location indicated is properly one for which a Conditional Use Permit is authorized. 3. That the site for the proposed use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate said use, and all yards, spaces, walls, fences, parking, loading, landscaping, and other features required to adjust said use with the land and uses in the neighborhood. Campus Commons July 6, 2010 Page 6 of 8 4. That the site abuts streets and highways adequate in width and pavement type to carry the kind of traffic generated by the proposed use. 5. That the granting of such Conditional Use Permit will not adversely affect the comprehensive General Plan. It is staffs opinion that each of these findings can be made for this project. CEQA Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act, the Development Services Department completed an Initial Study for the proposed project. The 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. Staff has determined that 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 wildlife depends. Therefore, a Negative Declaration has been prepared for this project. RECOMMENDATION That the City Council adopt a Negative Declaration for the Project, Resolution No. 6727 approving General Plan Amendment No. GP 10 -01, adopt Resolution No. 6729 approving Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 10 -03, and approve Architectural Design Review No. ADR 10 -05, subject to the conditions listed below. Conditions of Approval 1. A shared - access easement/agreement with the neighboring property owner must be reached, executed and recorded in the County Recorder's Office to provide access to the guest parking spaces prior to the issuance of building permits. The shared - access easement/agreement must be provided to the Development Services Director for his approval prior to recordation, and proof or recordation shall thereafter be promptly provided to the Development Services Director. 2. That as a buffer between the project and the Arcadia High School, all reasonable measures shall be taken to preserve as many as possible of the mature trees along the west side of the property, with the plans indicating that six trees will be preserved and four removed, and that there shall be three 36 -inch box, nursery- grown replacement trees of similar species provided as replacements for which plans must be submitted to and receive the approval of the Development Services Director. 3. A fire hydrant shall be provided on Campus Drive at a location to be approved by the Fire Marshal. 4. An automatic fire sprinkler system per the Fire Department's standard for Single & Multiple Family Dwellings shall be installed and monitored by a UL listed central station facility. Campus Commons July 6, 2010 Page 7of8 5. A Knox box switch for the front sliding gate and a Knox box with keys for access to restricted areas shall be provided at location(s) approved by the Fire Marshal. 6. Class I standpipes shall be provided within all stairwells as required by and to the satisfaction of the Fire Marshal. 7. All interior corridors shall be a minimum of 1 -hour rated and the doors into the corridors shall be a minimum of 20- minute ratings with self - closers to the satisfaction of the Fire Marshal. 8. Audible /visual appliances activated by the fire alarm system shall be provided in all common areas, including corridors, meeting rooms, etc., and living units deemed accessible by the City shall be provided with interior notification devices to the satisfaction of the Fire Marshal. 9. The project shall adhere to the City's visibility standard for vehicle exiting to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 10. The parking shall be designed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, including, but not limited to, parking space dimensions, distance between parking stalls, and distances from parking structure walls and columns. 11. The developer shall submit three (3) sets of a Standard Urban Stormwater Mitigation Plan in a report format with plans, and such report and plans are subject to approval by the City Engineer or designee. 12. If the stormwater treatment process includes infiltration, a geotechnical letter shall be submitted to the City Engineer that adequately deals with instability issues as reflected in the comments from the Stormwater Plan Check Correction Sheet and is subject to approval by the City Engineer or designee. 13. The stormwater treatment shall include a filter if deemed necessary by the City's Public Works Director or designee, to meet the requirements of the Regional Water Quality Control Board. 14. A Double -Check Detector Assembly shall be installed as a separate service for the fire sprinkler system subject to approval by the Public Works Services Director or designee. 15. The developer shall install a single compound water meter, properly sized to ensure adequate water volume and pressure to each unit in keeping with the requirements of the Public Works Services Department and subject to approval by the Public Works Services Director or designee. 16. Backflow protection utilizing a reduced pressure backflow preventer shall be installed and must be approved by the Public Works Services Director or designee. 17. Water services and water meters shall be installed in the right -of -way, near the curb or as determined by the Public Works Services Director or designee, and Campus Commons July 6, 2010 Page 8 of 8 any deviation must be approved in writing in advance by the Public Works Services Director or designee. 18. All residents shall sign an affidavit as part of their agreement for occupation of their residential unit affirming that they are aware their unit is adjacent to an active use (Arcadia High School) which may lead to noise, Tight and glare. The form of the affidavit shall be prepared by the City Attorney and a copy of all signed affidavits shall be submitted by the developer and its successors in interest, and shall be kept on file in the Planning Division. 19. All conditions of approval shall be complied with prior to the issuance of a final inspection and/or certificate of occupancy. Noncompliance with the plans, provisions and conditions of approval for CUP 10 -03 and ADR 10 -05 shall be grounds for immediate suspension or revocation of any approvals, which could result in a delay of the certificate of occupancy or the closing of the subject building. 20. The applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Arcadia and its officers, employees, and agents from and against any claim, action, or proceeding against the City of Arcadia, its officers, employees or agents to attack, set aside, void, or annul any approval or condition of approval of the City of Arcadia concerning, this project and /or land use decision, including but not limited to any approval or condition of approval of the City Council, Planning Commission, or City Staff, which action is brought within the time period provided for in Government Code Section 66499.37 or other provision of law applicable to this project or decision. The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim, action, or proceeding concerning the project and /or land use decision and the City shall cooperate fully in the defense of the matter. The City reserves the right, at its own option, to choose its own attorney to represent the City, its officers, employees, and agents in the defense of the matter. Approved by: Donald Penman, City Manager /Executive Director Attachments: Resolution 6727 Approving General Plan Application No. GP 10 -01 Resolution 6729 Approving Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 10 -03 and Architectural Design Review No. ADR 10 -05 Initial Study and Negative Declaration Campus Commons Project Plans (six sheets) RESOLUTION NO. 6727 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. GP 10- 01 TO MODIFY THE DENSITY BONUS ALLOWED FOR LOW AND VERY LOW SENIOR CITIZEN HOUSING IN THE COMMERCIAL ZONES. WHEREAS, on March 10, 2010, Ashwood Construction filed an application for a General Plan Amendment to adjust the density bonus allowed for low and very low income senior housing in the C -2 zone; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on May 11, 2010 at which time all interested persons were given full opportunity to be heard and to present evidence; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission referred the application for a General Plan Amendment to the City Council with its recommendation; and WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing on July 6, 2010, which was duly noticed in the newspaper and mailed to all property owners and tenants within a 300 foot radius. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. That the factual data submitted by the Development Services Department in the attached report dated July 6, 2010 are true and correct. SECTION 2. The City Council finds: a. That the request to modify the density bonus allowed for low and very low income senior citizen housing in the Commercial Zones does not conflict with the General Plan Land Use Designation of any surrounding or nearby properties. b. That the General Plan is proposed to be amended to allow for a density bonus of up to 30% above the existing maximum density of 63 dwelling units per acre in Commercial Zones for affordable senior housing if all of the residential units in the project are limited to low- income (50 % -60% of median income) and very-low income (less than 50% of median income) units. c. That the evaluation of the environmental impacts as set forth in the initial study .are appropriate and that the project will have no significant effect upon the environment within the meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, and, when considering the project as a whole, there is no evidence before the City that the proposed project would have any potentially adverse effect on wildlife resources or the habitat upon which wildlife depends, and therefore, a Negative Declaration has been approved. SECTION 3. That for the foregoing reasons the City Council approves General Plan Amendment No. GP 10 -01 based upon the information submitted by the Applicant to the City as of date of this Resolution. SECTION 4. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. ATTEST: Passed, approved and adopted this day of City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: St phen P. Deitsch City Attorney 2 , 2010. Mayor of the City of Arcadia RESOLUTION NO. 6729 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION NO. CUP 10 -03 AND ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION NO. ADR 10 -05 FOR A NEW 43 -UNIT SENIOR CITIZEN HOUSING PROJECT LOCATED AT 16 CAMPUS DRIVE (THE "CAMPUS COMMONS" PROJECT) WHEREAS, on March 10, 2010 the Development Services Department received Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 10 -03 and Architectural Design Review Application No. ADR 10 -05, submitted by Ashwood Construction for a 43 unit senior citizen apartment complex on a 23,100 square -foot site at 16 Campus Drive known as the "Campus Commons" project; and WHEREAS, on May 11, 2010, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the proposed project and referred it to the City Council with its recommendations and the addition of Condition No. 18; and WHEREAS, notice of the public hearing before the City Council on these entitlements was published in a newspaper of general circulation and mailed to all property owners and tenants within a 300 foot radius of the project site, and the City Council conducted the duly noticed public hearing on July 6, 2010. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. That the factual data provided by the Development Services *Department in the staff report dated July 6, 2010 are true and correct. SECTION 2. The City Council finds: 1. That the granting of Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 10 -03 will not be detrimental to the public health or welfare, or injurious to the property or improvements in such zone or vicinity. 2. That the use applied for at the location indicated is a proper one for which a Conditional Use Permit is authorized. 3. That the site for the proposed use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate said use. All yards, spaces, walls, fences, loading, landscaping, parking, and other features are adequate to adjust said use with the land and uses in the neighborhood. The proposed project complies with all related zoning requirements as set forth in the Arcadia Municipal Code. 4. That the site abuts streets and highways adequate in width and pavement type to carry the kind of traffic generated by the proposed use. 5. That the granting of Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 10 -03 will not adversely affect the comprehensive General Plan because a General Plan Amendment was approved by Resolution No. 6727 to make the land use consistent with the General Plan and the current zoning is consistent with the General Plan. 6. That the use applied for will not have a substantial adverse impact on the environment, and that based upon the record as a whole there is no evidence that the proposed project will have any potential for an adverse effect on wildlife resources or the habitat upon which the wildlife depends, and that the evaluation of the environmental impacts as set forth in the initial study are appropriate within the meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, and therefore, a Negative Declaration has been approved. 2 SECTION 3. That for the foregoing reasons this City Council grants Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 10 -03 and Architectural Design Review No. ADR 10 -05 for a 43 unit senior citizen apartment development at 16 Campus Drive, subject to the following conditions: 1. A shared - access easement/agreement with the neighboring property owner must be reached, executed and recorded in the County Recorder's Office to provide access to the guest parking spaces prior the issuance of building permits. The shared - access easement/agreement must be provided to the Development Services Director for his approval prior to recordation and proof of recordation shall thereafter be promptly provided to the Development Services Director. 2. That as a buffer between the project and the Arcadia High School, all reasonable measures shall be taken to preserve as many as possible of the mature trees along the west side of the property, with the plans indicating that six trees will be preserved and four removed, and that there shall be three 36 -inch box, nursery- grown replacement trees of similar species provided as replacement for which plans must be submitted to and receive the approval of the Development Services Director. 3. A fire hydrant shall be provided on Campus Drive at a location to be approved by the Fire Marshal. 4. An automatic fire sprinkler system per the Fire Department's standard for Single & Multiple Family Dwellings shall be installed and monitored by a UL listed central station facility. 5. A Knox box switch for the front sliding gate and a Knox box with keys for access to restricted areas shall be provided at location(s) approved by the Fire Marshal. 6. Class I standpipes shall be provided within all stairwells as required by and to the satisfaction of the Fire Marshal. 7. All interior corridors shall be a minimum of 1 -hour rated and the doors into the corridors shall be a minimum of 20- minute ratings with self - closers to the satisfaction of the Fire Marshal. 8. Audible /visual appliances activated by the fire alarm system shall be provided in all common areas, including corridors, meeting rooms, etc., and living units deemed accessible by the City shall be provided with interior notification devices to the satisfaction of the Fire Marshal. 9. The project shall adhere to the City's visibility standard for vehicle exiting, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 3 10. The parking shall be designed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, including, but not limited to, parking space dimensions, distance between parking stalls, and distances from parking structure walls and columns. 11. The developer shall submit three (3) sets of a Standard Urban Stormwater Mitigation Plan in a report format with plans, and such report and plans are subject to approval by the City Engineer or designee. 12. If the stormwater treatment process includes infiltration, a geotechnical letter shall be submitted to the City Engineer that adequately deals with instability issues as reflected in the comments from the Stormwater Plan Check Correction Sheet and is subject to approval by the City Engineer or designee. 13. The stormwater treatment shall include a filter if deemed necessary by the City Public Works Services Director or designee, to meet the requirements of the Regional Water Quality Control Board. 14. A Double -Check Detector Assembly shall be installed as a separate service for the fire sprinkler system subject to approval by the Public Works Services Director or designee. 15. The developer shall install a single compound water meter, properly sized to ensure adequate water volume and pressure to each unit in keeping with the requirements of the Public Works Services Department and subject to approval by the Public Works Services Director or designee. 16. Backflow protection utilizing a reduced pressure backflow preventer shall be installed and must be approved by the Public Works Services Director or designee. 17. Water services and water meters shall be installed in the right -of -way, near the curb or as determined by the Public Works Services Director or designee, and any deviation must be approved in writing in advance by the Public Works Services Director or designee. 18. All residents shall sign an affidavit as part of their agreement for occupation of their residential unit affirming that they are aware their unit is adjacent to an active use (Arcadia High School) which may lead to noise, light and glare. The form of the affidavit shall be prepared by the City Attorney and a copy of all signed affidavits shall be submitted by the developer and its successors in interest to, and shall be kept on file in, the Planning Division. 19. All conditions of approval shall be complied with prior to the issuance of a final inspection and /or certificate of occupancy. Noncompliance with the plans, provisions and conditions of approval for CUP 10 -03 and ADR 10 -05 shall be grounds for immediate suspension or revocation of any approvals, which could result in a delay of the certificate of occupancy or the closing of the subject building. 4 20. The applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Arcadia and its officers, employees, and agents from and against any claim, action, or proceeding against the City of Arcadia, its officers, employees or agents to attack, set aside, void, or annul any approval or condition of approval of the City of Arcadia concerning this project and /or land use decision, including but not limited to any approval or condition of approval of the City Council, Planning Commission, or City Staff, which action is brought within the time period provided for in Government Code Section 66499.37 or other provision of law applicable to this project or decision. The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim, action, or proceeding concerning the project and /or land use decision and the City shall cooperate fully in the defense of the matter. The City reserves the right, at its own option, to choose its own attorney to represent the City, its officers, employees, and agents in the defense of the matter. ATTEST: City Clerk SECTION 4. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. Passed, approved and adopted this 6 day of July, 2010. APPROVED AS TO FORM: St ohen P. Deitsch St ph en P. Deitsch City Attorney 5 Mayor of the City of Arcadia 1. Project Title: General Plan Amendment No. GP 10 -01, Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 10 -03, and Architectural Design Review No. ADR 10 -05. 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Arcadia Development Services Department 240 West Huntington Drive — Post Office Box 60021 Arcadia, CA 91066 -6021 3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Name: Jerry Schwartz, Economic Development Manager Phone: (626) 574 -5409 / Fax — (626) 447 -3309 Email: Schwartz ©ci. arcadia. ca. us 4. Project Location: 16 Campus Drive 5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Ashwood Construction /Davila Properties 5755 E. Kings Canyon Road, Suite 110 Fresno, CA 93727 6. General Plan Designation: Commercial 7. Zoning Classification: C -2 CITY OF ARCADIA 240 WEST HUNTINGTON DRIVE ARCADIA, CA 91007 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM File Nos.: GP 10 -01, CUP 10 -03, & ADR 10 -05 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 sheet(s) if necessary.) A General Plan Amendment, Conditional Use Permit, and Architectural Design Review for a 43 -unit senior apartment complex with an on -grade parking structure on a 23,000 square -foot lot. It will require the removal of an existing seven -unit apartment on the property. CEQA Checklist -1- 4 -03 9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: (Briefly describe the project's surroundings.) North: Santa Anita Golf Course /Arcadia County Park; zoned Public Facility & Grounds South: Tutoring Centers and a Dental Office; zoned C -2 East: Medical and General Office Building; zoned C -2 West: Arcadia High School; zoned Public Facility & Grounds 10. Other public agencies whose approval is required: (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement) None 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. On the basis of this initial evaluation: [Xj Aesthetics Biological Resources Hazards & Hazardous Materials Mineral Resources Public Services Utilities / Service Systems CEQA Checklist DETERMINATION (To be completed by the Lead Agency) Agriculture Resources Cultural Resources Hydrology / Water Quality Noise Recreation Mandatory Findings of Significance File Nos.: GP 10 -01, CUP 10 -03, & ADR 10 -05 Air Quality Geology / Soils Land Use / Planning Population / Housing Transportation / Traffic 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 project proponent. 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" 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. -2- 4 -03 [ ] I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, 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. JI Signature Date Thomas Li, Associate Planner For: Jerry Schwartz Printed Name & Title Economic Development Manager EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: CEQA Checklist File Nos.: GP 10 -01, CUP 10 -03, & ADR 10 -05 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 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 XVII, "Earlier Analyses," may be cross - referenced). 5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). 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. -3- 4 -03 File Nos.: GP 10 -01, CUP 10 -03, & ADR 10 -05 7) Supporting Information Sources. A source list should be attached, and other sources used 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 significance 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. CEQA Checklist -4- 4 -03 1. AESTHETICS — Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? CEQA Checklist File Nos.: GP 10 -01, CUP 10 -03, & ADR 10 -05 Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact El Z The subject site is bordered by a golf course to the north, medical and general office to the east, tutoring center and dental office to the south, and an Arcadia High School sports field to the west. There are no adjacent properties where a potential scenic vista would be obstructed. Furthermore, the project will be consistent with the existing developments. Therefore, there will be no impacts to any scenic vistas. ❑ ❑ ❑ There are no designated scenic highways within the City of Arcadia. The nearest designated state scenic highway is the Angeles Crest Highway approximately 15 miles away. Therefore, there will be no impacts to state scenic highways or scenic roadway corridors. c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of ❑ ❑ ❑ the site and its surroundings? The project is to construct a 43 -unit senior apartment building. This building is subject to the City's Architectural Design Review procedure to assure that the changes complement the visual character and quality of the site and its surroundings. d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would ❑ ❑ ❑ adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? The subject senior apartment building is surrounded by commercial uses and a high school sports field. The project must comply with all applicable light and glare restrictions as set forth by the Arcadia Municipal Code and therefore would not create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area. 2. AGRICULTURE AND FOREST 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 Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state's inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project; and forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board. Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of ❑ ❑ ❑ Statewide Importance (Farmland) to non - agricultural use? (The Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program in the California Resources Agency to non - agricultural use? -5- 4 -03 CEQA Checklist b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non - agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non - forest use? File Nos.: GP 10 -01, CUP 10 -03, & ADR 10 -05 Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporation Potentially Significant Impact There is no farmland in the City of Arcadia. Therefore, the project would not convert farmland to non - agricultural use. There is no agricultural use zoning or a Williamson Act contract in the City of Arcadia. Therefore, the proposed project would not have the above impacts. c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g))? d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non - forest use? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ There is no farmland in the City of Arcadia, and the project will not convert farmland to non - agricultural use. Less Than Significant No Impact Impact ❑ ❑ ❑ El 3. AIR QUALITY - Where available, the significance criteria ❑ ❑ ❑ established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air ❑ El ❑ quality plan? The City of Arcadia is located within the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB), which includes Los Angeles and Orange Counties, and portions of Riverside and San Bernardino Counties. The air quality in the SCAB is managed by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), which funded the development of the West San Gabriel Valley Air Quality Plan. In 1993, the City of Arcadia adopted Resolution 5725, accepting the principles of the plan and agreeing to use the plan in the development of a local air quality program. Such a program is promoted through different approaches as outlined in the City's General Plan under Public Information and Community Involvement, Regional Coordination, Transportation Improvements and Systems Management, Transportation Demand Management, Land Use, Particulate Emissions Reduction, Energy Conservation, and Waste Recycling. b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? The South Coast Air Basin (SCAB) continued the trend of long -term improvement in air quality; however, air quality measurements within this region exceed both the State and Federal air quality standards on a regular basis. In Arcadia, local air quality problems are largely the result of pollutants upwind of the city. The project will accommodate a proposed senior apartment building on the subject site, replacing the existing apartment building, and would not violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation. c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non - attainment under an -6- 4 -03 CEQA Checklist applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? 4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES - Would the project: File Nos.: GP 10 -01, CUP 10 -03, & ADR 10 -05 Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact The South Coast Air Basin (SCAB) is a non - attainment area for Ozone (0 Fine Particulate Matter (PM Respirable Particulate Matter (PM and Carbon Monoxide (CO), and is in a maintenance area for Nitrogen Dioxide (NO The project will not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant as the project will not increase the intensity of the existing and approved uses. d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant ❑ ❑ ❑ El concentrations? The uses on the subject properties are not listed as uses that emit odors and dust under the SCAQMD Air Quality Guidance Document. The allowable uses on subject site will remain consistent with the growth expectations for the region, and will not have an impact that conflicts with or obstructs implementation of the applicable air quality plan. e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of ❑ ❑ ❑ people? The subject properties do not contain uses that are listed as uses that emit odor and dust under the SCAQMD Air Quality Guidance Document. Therefore, the project will not create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people. a) Have a substantial adverse impact, either directly or through ❑ ❑ ❑ El 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 Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? In Arcadia, biological sensitive areas occur along existing creeks, upper watershed areas, existing flood control and infiltration facilities, and in natural hillside areas within the northerly portion of the city. These areas have generally been preserved as open space for public safety purposes or as wildlife habitat areas. The subject properties are located within a fully- developed area that is not within close proximity to these biological resources, and is known to not contain any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species. Furthermore, the project replacing an existing apartment building. Therefore, the project will not have the above impacts. b) Have a substantial adverse impact on any riparian habitat or other ❑ ❑ ❑ El sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, and regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? There are no designated riparian habitats or other sensitive natural communities within the City of Arcadia. The subject properties are located within a fully - developed area that is not close proximity to sensitive biological resources. Therefore, the project will not have the above impacts. c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands ❑ ❑ ❑ El 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? -7- 4 - 03 File Nos.: GP 10 -01, CUP 10 -03, & ADR 10 -05 Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact There are no federally protected wetlands within the City of Arcadia. The subject properties are located within a fully - developed area that is not close proximity to sensitive biological resources. Therefore, the project will not have the above impacts. CEQA Checklist d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of wildlife nursery sites? El Z There are no known native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species within the City of Arcadia. The project will accommodate a senior apartment building on the subject site, replacing the existing apartment building at a fully -deve loped site. Therefore, the project will not have the above impacts. e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? The City of Arcadia has an ordinance to protect oak trees within the city. The project will not conflict with that ordinance as it does not interfere with the enforcement of the ordinance. Therefore, the project will not have the above impacts. ❑ ❑ ❑ 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? There are no adopted Habitat Conservation Plans, Natural Conservation Community Plans, or other approved habitat conservation plan within the City of Arcadia. Therefore, the project will not have the above impacts. 5. CULTURAL RESOURCES - Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a ❑ ❑ ❑ historical resource as defined in § 15064.5? There are no known historical resources on or adjacent to the site. If previously unknown cultural resources are discovered during construction on the subject property, all work in the area would cease, and a qualified historian, archaeologist or paleontologist shall be retained by the development sponsor to assess the significance of the find, make recommendations, and prepare appropriate field documentation. b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an ❑ ❑ ❑ archaeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5? The subject properties are within a fully- developed area and are not known to contain any archaeological resources. Should any construction activity encounter any unrecorded archaeological resources, all work in the area would cease and a qualified archaeologist shall be retained by the development sponsor to assess the significance of the find, make recommendations, and prepare appropriate field documentation. c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or ❑ ❑ ❑ site or unique geologic feature? The subject properties are within a fully- developed area and are not known to contain any paleontological or unique geological resources. Should any construction activity encounter any such unrecorded paleontological resources, all work in the area would cease and a qualified paleontologist or geologist shall be retained by the development sponsor to assess the significance of the find, make recommendations, and prepare appropriate field documentation. d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of ❑ ❑ ❑ -8- 4 -03 CEQA Checklist formal cemeteries? 6. 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: b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? File Nos.: GP 10 -01, CUP 10 -03, & ADR 10 -05 Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact There are no known human remains on the subject property. State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 requires that development be halted should any remain be encountered; the County Coroner shall be contacted whose responsibility is to make the necessary findings as to the origin and disposition of the remains pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. Compliance with these regulations would ensure that the project would not result in unacceptable impacts to human remains. ❑ ❑ ❑ 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. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? ❑ ❑ ❑ iii) Seismic - related ground failure, including liquefaction? ❑ ❑ ❑ iv) Landslides? ❑ ❑ ❑ The City of Arcadia contains two local fault zones: the Raymond Hill Fault and the Sierra Madre Fault. The extremely thick alluvial deposits which underlie the seismic study area are subject to differential settlement during any intense shaking associated with seismic events. This type of seismic hazard results in damage to property when an area settles to different degrees over a relatively short distance, and almost all properties in this region are subject to this hazard, but building design standards do significantly reduce the potential for harm. The subject properties are not located within an Alquist Priolo Study Zone area, or any other earthquake hazard zone. Nor are they located on a hillside where landslides may occur. Since the subject properties are located in a fully- developed area, the project will not have a significant impact or expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects involving fault rupture, strong seismic ground shaking, ground failure, and landslides. ❑ ❑ ❑ The project will not involve any activity to create unstable earth conditions. Prior to any construction, soil studies are required to evaluate the potential impacts of the construction upon the soil. 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? The City of Arcadia is located on an alluvial plain that is relatively flat and expected to be stable. The proposed structures will be constructed on a pad where there are existing structures. Furthermore, these structures will be built to current building and safety standards. 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? -9- 4 -03 CEQA Checklist File Nos.: GP 10 -01, CUP 10 -03, & ADR 10 -05 Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact The subject site consists of alluvial soil that is in the low to moderate range for expansion potential as defined in Table 18 -1- B of the Uniform Building Code. The project will not have the above impact. e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? The subject site is in a fully- developed area that utilizes the local sewer system. Soil suitability for septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems is not applicable to this project. 7. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS - Would the project: a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, . that may have a significant impact on the environment? The project is a senior apartment building on a commercially zoned property. This residential project would not generate more greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, than a commercial building that this property is zoned for and /or is allowed to build. b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for ❑ ❑ ® ❑ the purpose of reducing the emission of greenhouse gases? The project is a high - density, 43 -unit senior apartment building that is within close proximity of services (community center, library, hospital, county park, fire station, bus stops), thus reducing the number of vehicles miles traveled. This type of development is consistent with the applicable plan, policy or regulation for the region. 8. 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? The project does not include the routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials, and will not have the above impact. 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? The project does not involve hazardous materials and will not create a significant hazard to the public or release hazardous materials into the environment. c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely ❑ ❑ ❑ hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one - quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? The project does not involve hazardous materials and would not emit hazardous materials, substances, or waste. 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 -10- 4 -03 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? 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? 9. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY - Would the project: CEQA Checklist - File Nos.: GP 10 -01, CUP 10 -03, & ADR 10 -05 Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact the public or the environment? The subject properties are not included on a list of hazardous material sites and will not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment. 0 El The nearest airport to the subject site is the El Monte Airport, which is located approximately three miles away. The proposal would not contribute to any airport related safety hazards for people residing or working at the subject properties. There are no known private airstrips in the area. Since the uses on the subject properties will not be changed, the project will not result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area. g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted ❑ ❑ ❑ emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? The project is to accommodate a senior apartment building on the subject site. The proposed plans are subject to review by the emergency response units, and will not interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or evacuation plan. 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? The subject properties are not located near wildlands where there is a high fire hazard and will not have the above impact. a) During project construction, will it create or contribute runoff water ❑ ❑ ❑ that would violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements, including the terms of the City's municipal separate stormwater sewer system permit? The project is to accommodate a proposed senior apartment building would be subject to NPDES requirements to ensure compliance with the water quality standards and waste discharge requirements. b) After the project is completed, will it create or contribute runoff ❑ ❑ ❑ water that would violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements, including the terms of the City's municipal separate stormwater sewer system permit? The project is to accommodate a proposed senior apartment building would be subject to NPDES requirements to ensure compliance with the water quality standards and waste discharge requirements. 4 -03 c) Provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff from delivery areas; loading docks; other areas where materials are stored, vehicles or equipment are fueled or maintained, waste is handled, or hazardous materials are handled or delivered; other outdoor work areas; or other sources? d) Discharge stormwater so that one or more beneficial uses of receiving waters or areas that provide water quality benefit are impaired? Beneficial uses include commercial and sportfishing; shellfish harvesting; provision of freshwater, estuarine, wetland, marine, wildlife or biological habitat; water contact or non - contact recreation; municipal and domestic supply; agricultural supply; and groundwater recharge. File Nos.: GP 10 -01, CUP 10 -03, & ADR 10 -05 Potentially Significant Impact El Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporation Less Than Significant No Impact Impact The project is to accommodate a proposed senior apartment building would be subject to NPDES requirements to ensure compliance with the water quality standards and waste discharge requirements. ❑ ❑ ❑ The project is to accommodate a proposed senior apartment building on the subject site, replacing an existing apartment building. The project will not discharge stormwater so that one or more beneficial uses of receiving waters or areas that provide water quality benefit are impaired. e) Discharge stormwater so that significant harm is caused to the ❑ ❑ ❑ biological integrity of waterways or water bodies? The proposed senior apartment building would be subject to NPDES requirements to ensure that stormwater discharge causes no significant harm to the biological integrity of waterways or water bodies. f) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge ❑ ❑ ❑ requirements? The proposal is subject to all NPDES requirements and will not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. g) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there 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)? El Z The project is to accommodate a proposed senior apartment building on the subject site, replacing the existing apartment. Although it has a greater capacity than the existing use, the proposal will not deplete groundwater supplies or interfere with groundwater recharge as there will be no substantial increase in the intensity of the uses on the subject property with a commercial land use designation. h) 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? The proposed senior apartment development would be subject to the review and approval by the City Engineer so as not to substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area. CEQA Checklist -12- ❑ ❑ ❑ 4 -03 i) 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? j) Significantly increase erosion, either on or off -site? m) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? CEQA Checklist -13- File Nos.: GP 10 -01, CUP 10 -03, & ADR 10 -05 Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact 0 El The proposed senior apartment development would be subject to the review and approval by the City Engineer so as not to substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area. ❑ ❑ ❑ The subject properties are located in a fully- developed area; the project will not increase erosion. k) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity ❑ ❑ ® ❑ of existing or planned storm water drainage systems? The proposed senior apartment development would be subject to NPDES requirements to ensure compliance with the water quality standards and waste discharge requirements. I) Significantly alter the flow velocity or volume of stormwater runoff ❑ ❑ ® ❑ in a manner that results in environmental harm? The proposed senior apartment development would be subject to the review and approval by the City Engineer so as not to cause significant alteration of the flow velocity or volume of storm water runoff that can cause environmental harm. The proposed senior apartment development would be subject to NPDES requirements to ensure compliance with the water quality standards and waste discharge requirements. n) 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? A series of flood control channels within the city convey storm water to regional facilities to the south. Due to this system, there are currently no areas within the City that are within a 100 -year floodplain. The City of Arcadia was located within flood Zone X as identified by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) map Community Number 065014. Zone X is the area determined to be outside the 500 -year flood and protected by levee from 100 -year flood. Under this zone, no floodplain management regulations have been required. Therefore, the project will not have the above impact. o) Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area structures which would ❑ ❑ ® ❑ impede or redirect flood flows? As discussed above, there are currently no areas within the City that are within a 100 -year floodplain. Therefore, the project will not have the above impact. p) 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? There are no levees or dams in the vicinity of the subject site. Therefore, the proposal will not expose people to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding. 4 -03 q) Expose people or structures to inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? 10. LAND USE AND PLANNING - Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? 12. NOISE - Would the project result in: CEQA Checklist -14- File Nos.: GP 10 -01, CUP 10 -03, & ADR 10 -05 Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact ❑ ❑ ❑ The City of Arcadia is not located within close proximity to any large inland bodies of water or the Pacific Ocean to be inundated by a seiche or tsunami. The subject properties are on a relatively flat alluvial plain that is highly porous and is unlikely to generate mudflow. El The subject site is bordered by a golf course to the north, medical and general office to the east, tutoring center and dental office to the south, and an Arcadia High School sports field to the west. The proposed senior apartment development .would not physically divide an established community. 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? The project is consistent with the existing development on the subject property but is not consistent with the land use designation of the subject property, and is therefore seeking a General Plan Amendment for a multiple- family land use designation for the subject property. It will not conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulations. c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural ❑ ❑ ❑ community conservation plan? There is no habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan on the subject properties. Therefore, the project could not conflict with such plans. 11. 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? There are no known mineral resources on the subject properties that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state. b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally - important mineral ❑ ❑ ❑ IZ resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? The subject properties are not designated in the General Plan as a mineral resource recovery site. Therefore, the proposal would not have the above impact. a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of ❑ ❑ ❑ 4 -03 CEQA Checklist File Nos.: GP 10 -01, CUP 10 -03, & ADR 10 -05 Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? The project is to accommodate a proposed senior apartment building on the subject site, replacing the existing apartment building and will not increase noise levels as the uses are to remain the same. The development of the site could create short term noise impacts resulting from construction. Construction hours are limited to the hours between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday. b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne ❑ ❑ ® ❑ vibration or groundborne noise levels? The project is to accommodate the a proposed senior apartment building on the subject site, replacing the existing apartment building and will not increase noise levels as the uses and activities are to remain the same as indicated by the submitted schedule, and do not include uses that would generate excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels. There may be a temporary increase in groundborne vibration or goundborne noise levels during the construction phase of the project. However, the construction will be monitored to comply with noise and time limitations. The current limitation on construction hours is from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday. No construction shall take place on Sunday. c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the ❑ ❑ ❑ El project vicinity above levels existing without the project? The project is to accommodate a proposed senior apartment building on the subject site, replacing the existing apartment building and will not increase noise levels. Therefore, there is no substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project. Furthermore, the senior apartment is subject to the City's noise regulations. d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise ❑ ❑ ® ❑ levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? The project is to accommodate a proposed senior apartment building on the subject site, replacing the existing apartment building and will not increase noise levels beyond those permitted by code requirements. Therefore, there is no substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project. There may be a temporary increase in groundborne vibration or goundborne noise levels during the construction phase of the project. However, the construction will be monitored to comply with noise and time limitations. The current limitation on construction hours is from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday. No construction shall take place on Sunday. 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? The project is located approximately three miles from the El Monte Airport. The proposed senior apartment building replaces the existing senior apartment on the subject site. Therefore, the proposal would not have the above impact. f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the ❑ ❑ ❑ El project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? There are no known private airstrips in the vicinity of the project. Therefore, there will not be any impact on the noise levels for people residing or working in the project area. -15- 4 -03 14. PUBLIC SERVICES — Would the project: a) 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 could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: File Nos.: GP 10 -01, CUP 10 -03, & ADR 10 -05 Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact 13. POPULATION AND 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)? The project is to accommodate a proposed senior apartment building on the subject site, replacing the existing apartment, which will not induce substantial population growth. b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? The subject proposal is a senior apartment building on the subject site, and will not necessitate the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. ❑ ❑ ❑ El c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the ❑ ❑ ❑ construction of replacement housing elsewhere? The subject proposal is a senior apartment building on the subject site, and will not necessitate the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. Fire protection? ❑ ❑ ❑ Police protection? ❑ ❑ ❑ Schools? ❑ ❑ ❑ Parks? ❑ ❑ ❑ El Other public facilities? ❑ ❑ ❑ The project is to accommodate a proposed senior apartment building on the subject site, replacing the existing apartment, and will not affect the above public services. Each of these City departments has reviewed the subject proposal and has concluded that it will not result in substantial adverse impacts. 15. RECREATION — Would the project: a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or ❑ ❑ ❑ other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? CEQA Checklist -16- 4 -03 File Nos.: GP 10 - 01, CUP 10 -03, & ADR 10 - Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact The project is a senior apartment building with an open space recreation area and will not increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities. The proposed senior apartment will not adversely impact recreational facilities. b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which have an adverse physical effect on the environment? The project is a senior apartment building with an open space recreation area and will not increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities. The open space recreation area on the subject property will not have an adverse physical effect on the environment. 16. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC - Would the project: a) Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing ❑ ❑ ❑ measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non - motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit? Arcadia's roadway network is nearly built out, consisting of the Foothill Freeway (1 -210), regional arterial roadways, collectors and local streets. The subject properties are bordered by a Modified One -Way Primary Arterial with 3 lanes in each direction. Based on the Highway Capacity Manual, the capacity of a given street and the amount of traffic each street actually carries is expressed in terms of levels of service (LOS), ranging from level A (Free Flowing) to F ( "Jammed'). Arcadia Engineering Services have reviewed the subject proposal and concluded that the levels of service of the surrounding streets will remain at an acceptable level after the completion of the project. b) Conflict with an applicable congestion management program, ❑ ❑ ❑ including, but not limited to, level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? The Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) adopted their most recent Congestion Management Program (CMP) in 2004. For the purposes of the CMP, a significant impact occurs when the proposed project increases traffic demand on a CMP facility by 2% of capacity (V /C __0.02), causing LOS F (V /C > 1.00). If the facility is already at LOS F, a significant impact occurs when the proposed project increases traffic demand on a CMP facility by 2% of capacity (V /C >_0.02). The lead agency may apply more stringent criteria if desired. A Traffic Impact Analysis Report was prepared for the project. This report indicates that the levels of service of the surrounding streets will remain at an acceptable level after the completion of the project. 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? The project is to accommodate a proposed senior apartment building on the subject site, replacing the existing apartment building. The project does not change any air traffic patterns or result in substantial safety risks. d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., ❑ ❑ ❑ sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses CEQA Checklist -17- 4 - (e.g., farm equipment)? File Nos.: GP 10 -01, CUP 10 -03, & ADR 10 -05 Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact The project is to accommodate a proposed senior apartment building on the subject site, replacing the existing apartment. The project does not include new design features or incompatible uses. e) Result in inadequate emergency access? ❑ ❑ ❑ The project is to accommodate a proposed senior apartment building on the subject site, replacing the existing apartment. The Fire Department has reviewed the plans and found that this project will not obstruct or reduce access to emergency services. f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public ❑ ❑ ❑ transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities? -The project is to accommodate a proposed senior apartment building on the subject site, replacing the existing apartment. The project does not significantly change the use and will not conflict with alternative transportation opportunities. 17. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS - Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable ❑ ❑ ❑ Regional Water Quality Control Board? The California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Los Angeles Region, is the local board with jurisdiction over Arcadia. This board has established the Basin Plan which (0 designates beneficial uses for surface and ground waters, (ii) sets narrative and numerical objectives that must be attained or maintained to protect the designated beneficial uses and conform to the state's antidegradation policy, and (iii) describes implementation programs to protect all waters in the region. The project is to accommodate a proposed senior apartment building on the subject site, replacing the existing apartment. The project will not exceed the wastewater treatment requirements, and it is also subject to the requirements as set forth in the Basin Plan. 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? The project is to accommodate a proposed senior apartment building on the subject site, replacing the existing apartment. The project was reviewed by the City's Public Works Services Department. They determined that the proposal will not result in the need for new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities. 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? CEQA Checklist -18- 4 -03 CEQA Checklist File Nos.: GP 10 -01, CUP 10 -03, & ADR 10 -05 Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact Local Stormwater management facilities, such as the storm drains within the area roadways, are the City's responsibility, while regional facilities are the responsibility of the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works (DPW). The City municipal storm drain facilities will be maintained and improved in conformance with the City of Arcadia Drainage System Technical Memorandum. The project is to accommodate a proposed senior apartment building on the subject site, replacing the existing apartment. The project was reviewed by the City's Public Works Services Department. They determined that the proposal will not result in the need for new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities. d) Have sufficient: water supplies available to serve the project from ❑ ❑ ❑ existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? In making this determination, the City shall consider whether the project is subject to the water supply assessment requirements of Water Code Section 10910, et seq. (SB 610), and the requirements of Government Code Section 664737 (SB221). For the purposes of compliance with Senate Bill 610 and Senate Bill 221, the subject proposal does not qualify as a "project ". A `project" means any of the following: 1) A proposed residential development of more than 500 dwelling units. 2) A proposed shopping center or business establishment employing more than 1,000 persons or having more than 500,000 square feet of floor space. 3) A proposed commercial office building employing more than 1,000 persons or having more than 250,000 square feet of floor space. 4) A proposed hotel or motel, or both, having more than 500 rooms. 5) A proposed industrial, manufacturing, or processing plant, or industrial park planned to house more than 1,000 persons, occupying more than 40 acres of land, or having more than 650,000 square feet of floor area. 6) A mixed -use project that includes one or more of the projects specified in this subdivision. 7) A project that would demand an amount of water equivalent to, or greater than, the amount of water required by a 500 dwelling unit project. If a public water system has fewer than 5,000 service connections, then "project" means any proposed residential, business, commercial, hotel or motel, or industrial development that would account for an increase of 10 percent or more in the number of the public water system's existing service connections, or a mixed -use project that would demand an amount of water equivalent to, or greater than, the amount of water required by residential development that would represent an increase of 10 percent or more in the number of the public water system's existing service connections. The project is consistent with the existing development on the subject properties, and will not conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation. e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider ❑ ❑ ❑ El which serves or may serve the project determined that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? The project is to accommodate a proposed senior apartment building on the subject site, replacing the existing apartment. The project was reviewed by the City's Public Works Services Department. They determined that the proposal will not increase the wastewater treatment demand. Any future development shall also be subject to the requirements as set forth in the Basin Plan. f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to ❑ ❑ ❑ El accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? -19- 4 -03 g) Comply with federal, state and local statues and regulations related to solid waste? 18. 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? CEQA Checklist File Nos.: GP 10 -01, CUP 10 -03, & ADR 10 -05 Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact The project is to accommodate a proposed senior apartment building on the subject site, replacing the existing apartment. It will not increase the need for landfill capacity. The project is to accommodate a proposed senior apartment building on the subject site, replacing the existing apartment. It will not violate any federal, state or local statues and regulations relating to solid waste. This project is also subject to the requirements as set forth in the Basin Plan. ❑ ❑ ❑ The project is consistent with the existing use of the subject properties, and does not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment. It will not reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species .since it is located in a fully- developed area. b) Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term ❑ ❑ ❑ environmental goals to the disadvantage of long -term environmental goals? The project is consistent with the existing use of the subject properties, and would not achieve short -term environmental goals to the disadvantage of long -term environmental goals. 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 projects)? The project is consistent with the existing use of the subject properties, and will not have negative impacts on the environment; neither individually limited, nor cumulatively considerable since it is located in a fully- developed area. d) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause ❑ ❑ ❑ substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? The project is consistent with the existing use of the subject properties. The project is to accommodate the existing and approved uses on the properties and will not have environmental effects that will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings. It is located in a fully- developed area and no physical changes are proposed by the project. -20- 4 -03 1. Name or description of project: T General Plan Amendment No. GP 10 -01, Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 10 -03, and Architectural Design Review No. ADR 10 -05. 2 . Project Location — Identify street 16 Campus Drive address and cross streets or attach a map showing project site (preferably a USGS 15' or 7 1/2' topographical map identified by quadrangle name): i 3 . Entity or Person undertaking project: L A. B. Other (Private) (1) Name: Ashwood Construction /D,avila Properties (2) Address: 5755 E. Kings Canyon Road, Suite 110 Fresno, CA 93727 The Lead Agency, having reviewed the Initial Study of this proposed project and having reviewed the written comments received prior to the public meeting of the Lead Agency, including the recommendation of the Lead Agency's Staff, does hereby find and declare that the proposed project will not have a significant effect on the environment. A brief statement of the reasons supporting the Lead Agency's findings are as follows: The Lead Agency hereby finds that the Negative Declaration reflects its independent judgment. A copy of the Initial Study may be obtained at: City of Arcadia Development Services Department 240 W. Huntington Drive, Arcadia, CA 91007 Phone No.: 626 - 574 -5415 The location and custodian of the documents and any other material which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the Lead Agency based its decision to adopt this Negative Declaration are as follows: Jerry Schwartz, Economic Development Manager 240 W. Huntington Drive, Arcadia, CA 91007 Phone No.: 1 626- 574 -5409 Date Received for Filing: Negative Declaration\2010 CITY OF ARCADIA 240 W. HUNTINGTON DRIVE ARCADIA, CA 91007 NEGATIVE DECLARATION Staff FORM "E" ■ • PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN for. Campus Commons Apartments A 43 tAW 1.1on Mnw (:o..nuNry 18 Campus Drive Amadla Celihma DEVELOPER /BUILDER; Ashwuod Constnctlrn 1 Davits properties Der '755 E. Ktnps Canyon Re.. 80e 110 Fresno, California • ,e 1 T 1 vaa.e a mcL____ _ evsm:� • • FLOOR PLAN LAYOUT for Campus Commons Apartments A a ufl O^Yw. by Cpe•eee, re campus OM, Ara6a. Cal kenlo DEVELOPER / BUILDER AarNVwU CwrsUU liOn r Davila Po: peNea De. 5755E Kmgs Canyon Rd.. Suite 170 F,w t . GJdun:a lo• FLOOR PLANS 10 Campus Commons Apartments A .0 Unk Sem en Ram.. Ca.., my ti.z Camp, 0/1 Arcadta. C51 DEVELOPER / BUILDER AVIWO011 Construction 110viln Propettoes Lan 5755 E Kings Canyon Rd . Stale 110 Fresno, Caifornis t ELEVATIONS lu' Campus Commons Apartments ' o Neon MrMY Commune, it C8.n * s Unve Art.tIIa. CeBknnw DEVELOPER / BUILDER: Ashweod Constr.*. / lat Prnpe.iw., IM v 5755 E Kings Canyon Rd Salts 110 Few., C.Id o, a • • r . ELEVATIONS res. Campus Commons Apartments u uns $_.al e..- cm..,,wty 16 Campus Days Art Cap4mis DEVELOPER /BUILDER: Aallaoo0 Constnuaal f Davila Propeeries Das 5756E War Canyon Rd Suss 110 Fresno Caabnsa • • COLOR & MATERIALS BOARD for Campus Commons Apartments A u LIM s.ron n.m 16 Campus Dnve Arcadia. California pEVELOPER /BUILDER: Ashwood Con,UUClion 7 Davila Propmues Oev 5765 E. Knyo Canyon Rd.. Sues 110 Frsano. CaIiNoraa •