Press Alt + R to read the document text or Alt + P to download or print.

No preview available

The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutOctober 2, 2007P AR �� GP t,IF 0 R,Vr Avon f, 19N NOTICE OF SPECIAL MEETING c ' mm anity Of IN ' As authorized by California Government Code Section 54956 and Arcadia City Charter Section 408, a Special Meeting of the Arcadia City Council is hereby City of called to be held at the City of Arcadia Council Chamber Conference Room, 240 W. Huntington Drive, Arcadia, California at 5:00 p.m. on Tuesday, October 2, 2007. A rcadia At this Special Meeting, the following matters will be discussed, considered and acted upon: Office of the 1. CLOSED SESSION City Clerk a. Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6 to confer with labor negotiators. City Negotiators: William W. Floyd, Tracey Hause and Mike Casalou. Jim Barrows Employee Organization: Arcadia Police Officers' Association. City Clerk �. STUDY SESSION a. Report, discussion and direction regarding the Parks and Recreation Master Plan and Park Facilities Impact Fee Report. b. Report, discussion and direction regarding Retiree Medical Insurance Program- GAS13 45 Actuarial Valuation. Report, discussion and direction regarding selection of Acting Mayor for October 16, 2007 City Council Meeting. Prior to going into closed session, there will be time reserved for those who wish to address the City Council regarding the above items. No further business other than the above will be considered at this meeting. Dated: September Z l , 2007 Mayor of thl City df Arcadia Pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act, persons with a disability who require a disability related modification or accommodation in order to participate in a meeting, including auxiliary aids or services, may request such modification or accommodation from the City Clerk at (626) 574 -5455. Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to assure accessibility to the meeting. 240 West Huntington Drive Post Office Box 60021 1\ Arcadia, CA 91066 -6021 626)5745455 (626) 447 -7524 Fax S STAFF REPORT Recreation and Community Services Department DATE: September 4, 2007 TO: Honorable Mayor and Member of the City Council FROM: William R. Kelly, City Manager Roberta White, Director of Recreation & Community Services Tom Tait, Deputy Public Works Services Director SUBJECT: Discussion and Direction regarding the Parks and Recreation Master Plan and Park Facilities Impact Fee Report INTRODUCTION: Following the adoption of the Recreation and Community Services Strategic Plan on April 4, 2006, the importance of parks and recreation services to community residents was affirmed. The Strategic Plan analyzed the Recreation and Community Services Department's programs, services and staffing. In addition, the Strategic Plan identified future priorities, for new activities and programs, as well as priorities for the development of new recreation facilities and suggested improvements needed to upgrade existing parks and facilities. The outcome of the Strategic Plan not only addressed issues affecting the Recreation and Community Services Department, but also directed projects that needed to be on the work program for the Public Works Services Department, as the department responsible for park maintenance and the development of Capital Improvements. Because the City had no formal parks and recreation master plan, information concerning parks and recreation facilities was located in a variety of sources. In an effort to consolidate information and to create a working document, the Public Works Services and Recreation and Community Services staffs saw the benefit of combining all of the City's studies and reports concerning parks and facilities into one master plan document. The decision was made to develop the document in -house with the assistance of an outside consultant to organize the information and develop text for the document. Sections from the City's General Plan Update concerning recreation and open space, the Playground Safety Audit and Parks Infrastructure Analysis, the Recreation and Community Services Strategic Plan, the Arcadia Youth Master Plan were summarized and included as part of the Parks and Recreation Master Plan. The public participation from the Strategic Plan process which included a community forum and the distribution and compilation of two survey questionnaires was used to provide input regarding the types of programs and facilities most wanted by the community. DISCUSSION OF EXTISTING FEE: As part of the initial process, staff and the consultant reviewed the existing park fee structure and the need to establish a park standard to ensure that future recreation needs are being met. This included review of the current Park and Recreational Facilities Fund, which was established by ordinance in 1963. These special funds were designated for the acquisition, improvement or maintenance of public parks or playgrounds and equipment. The current fee structure charges subdividers $25 per lot split and dwelling unit fees of $185 per unit. These fees have not been adjusted since the Ordinance was adopted in 1963, and are considered low for today's market cost to acquire land or develop facilities. Since the purpose of the fee is to sustain the standard of providing recreation facilities for the community for future growth, park fees should have been reviewed periodically and adjusted for inflation to keep pace with the cost to develop additional parks and facilities. A simple calculation using an inflation factor for the forty -four years shows that if the fee had been adjusted for inflation only the current fee would be $1,047 per unit. This figure would be higher if the inflated cost for acquiring land and installing improvements were also considered. As a result of this finding, staff entered into an agreement with MuniFinancial of Temecula to conduct a Park Impact Fee Study as part of the master plan process to establish a park standard and update the fees to reflect current costs for new facilities. MASTER PLAN /PARK FACILITIES IMPACT FEE STUDY: The proposed Parks and Recreation Master Plan provides the community with an up- to -date inventory that identifies all public recreation resources and schools located in Arcadia. The public process identified wanted and needed recreation programs and facilities for the community. One consistent theme throughout the process was the perception that adding new programs and activities was limited by the amount of recreation facilities available to host them. The community recognized that staff did a great job providing a high level of service. It was also noted that through the efforts of the City, County and School District limited resources were effectively used for recreation programs and facilities. The feedback noted that there were not enough lighted facilities for evening outdoor activities including sports fields. A community gymnasium, performing arts center and a youth center were also identified as needed. The Park Facilities Impact Fee Study, which is included in the Master Plan, identified that the City's current park standard is 2.43 acres of parkland for every one thousand residents. The study also notes that some development will continue, as outlined in the City's General Plan. In order to sustain the standard and not impact existing residents, a park impact fee is proposed for new residential development and expansion of existing residential properties so that new development pays the capital costs associated with that growth. The types of projects that could be funded with Park Facilities Impact Fees include the acquisition of parkland, adjacent street improvements, typical park improvements such as landscaping, irrigation and play structures, special use facilities and structures such as restrooms, sports complexes and buildings, and to expand facilities. These funds can only be used for "new" facilities or to "expand facilities ", not to update existing facilities. Possible projects, with costs estimated, that could be funded with Park Facilities Impact Fees are noted on the Proposed Future Capital Improvement Projects list (Attachment A.) Also included is a list of proposed renovation projects (Attachment B). The funding for renovation projects would need to be from the General Fund or other sources. Both of these project lists are also a part of the Master Plan. The proposed fee schedule was developed by establishing a park and facility standard based on current inventories within the community. The size of the population served was also part of the equation. Considered in identifying the per capita cost, was the current cost per acre to acquire land and the cost to improve the land. Those costs were then converted to a fee per unit of development based on densities (persons per dwelling unit). There is also a proposal to have a fee based on square footage of the proposed projects to cover increasing the size of existing homes. This is a one -time fee and can be charged only for an increase in size of the residence. For example if a 1,600 square foot house is demolished and -a -new residence that is 6,000 square feet is proposed, the impact fee for new development would be calculated based on the additional 4,400 square feet. The proposed fees for residential projects are as follows: Single Family Density 3.03 persons per unit $5,709 /unit $2.85 per s.f. Multi Family Density 2.18 persons per unit $4,103 /unit $3.73 per s.f. Single family is defined as "detached" dwelling unit versus multi - family, defined as . attached" units, eg. condominiums, townhouses and apartments. A table comparing Arcadia's existing and proposed Park Impact Fees with those of other cities is included with this report (Attachment C.) CONCLUSION: As is obvious from the information provided we are behind in adjusting our Park Facilities Impact Fee. With reduced revenue sources available for park development there is a need to raise our fees. The City Council has options on the actual amount to be increased. ALTERNATIVES: Accept the Parks and Recreation Master Plan and adopt the Park Facilities Fee Schedule as calculated. 2. Apply new Park Facilities Impact Fees only to new construction of Single Family and Multi Family residences at $5,709 for Single Family and $4,103 for Multi Family. (This example would apply to vacant property versus demolition of an existising single family dwelling unit replaced by a single family development.) 3. Apply new Park Facilities Impact Fees for home additions at $2.85 per square foot for Single Family and $3.73 per square foot for Multi Family for bedroom additions only. 4. Apply new Park Facilities Impact Fee on "net" versus "gross" development units. This example would apply to removing a single family dwelling unit and replacing with two or more single family dwelling units. (Example: 1 existing, 4 new = 3 net) 5. Apply new Park Facilities Impact Fees to Senior Citizen Housing Projects due to usage of facilities. (Some cities exempt this category of development.) 6. The fee could be incrementally adjusted upward annually, with a new base number. Approved: w ="°" William R. Kelly, City Manager `Attachment A PROPOSED FUTURE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS PROJECT COST 1. Foothills Middle School Joint Use Gymnasium (Design & Construction)" $1.5 Million 2. First Avenue Middle School Athletic Field Lighting" $ 150,000 3. Convert Civic Center Athletic Field to all weather surface $ 500,000 4. Longden Park Baseball Field Athletic Lighting $ 150,000 5. Civic Center Renovation Plan — Phase II Multi- Purpose Recreation & Meeting Center with designated areas for pre - school children and teenagers $8.0 Million 6. Windsor Baseball Field at Hugo Reid Park Athletic Lighting $ 150,000 7. Lojeski Baseball Field at Eisenhower Park Athletic Lighting $ 150,000 8. Central Computerized Field Lighting System $ 60,000 9. Wilderness Park Nature Center Expansion $ 450,000 10. Addition of Restrooms to Newcastle Park Utility Building $ 69,500 11.Addition of Restrooms to Tierra Verde Park Utility Building $ 69,500 12. Add Playground Equipment to Fairview Avenue Park $ 65,000 13.Add Playground Equipment to Forest Avenue Park $ 65,000 14. Add a Group Picnic Shelter to Eisenhower Park $ 25.700 Total $11,404,700 "Funds have been appropriated for these projects in the 2007 -2012 Capital Improvement Plan Budget Attachment B PROPOSED RENOVATION PROJECTS PROJECT COST 1. Longden Park Baseball Field New Backstop and other renovations" $ 70,000 2. Windsor Baseball Field at Hugo Reid Park Bleacher Replacement $ 70,000 3. Renovation of Restroom /Concession Building at Bonita Park Athletic Field $ 60,000 4. Newcastle Park New Fencing and other improvements $ 25,000 5. Holly Avenue School Tennis Court Resurfacing $ 20,000 6. Orange Grove Park miscellaneous improvements $ 25,000 7. Tripolis Friendship Park infrastructure improvements $ 25,000 8. Wilderness Park Bathrooms at Picnic Shelter ADA improvements 60,000 Total $ 355,000 "Currently pending City Council approval N N C M m M T 3 m 3 N p EL y, m n � m m c m N a m' � n � a m 3 " c � e m a m m y a a m 0 m J N m m N m � Q m � g n m � 6 N N �7 m o t0i N J r N m a . m m c 0 w 0 w /t; 3 S C _ m F �1 T d d 3 3 ,<. l< j9 69 C OD 00 7 (J ( fA - 0 d 3 a � o d W to m n EA es N W O W m m m 3 O C1 n fA fA O tl W W y � co v M f0 N CD N d � � in 3 � OD c71 W v a lu � N EA O W Z W O O W t» to T d C) rn n m rn m, OD N d C*) d 6 co O d O O � A n 3 A R :ti .� JldU�\ � STAFF REPORT DATE: October 2, 2007 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Tracey L. Hause, Administrative Services Dire SUBJECT: Retiree Medical Insurance Program Recommendation: Receive and File SUMMARY The Governmental Standards . Account Board (GASB) began reviewing post employment benefits other than pensions (OPEB) due to a growing concern for the potential magnitude of employer obligations. As a result, GASB Statement 45 was adopted to recognize the cost of benefits in the period when services are received and requires disclosure of information about the actuarial liabilities for the promised benefits. BACKGROUND GASB Statement 45 was issued to provide more complete, reliable, and decision - useful financial reporting regarding the costs and financial obligations that governments incur when they provide OPEB as part of the compensation for services rendered by their employees. Post employment health care benefits, the most common form of OPEB, are a very significant financial commitment for many governments. The standard results in reporting the estimated cost of the benefits as expense each year during the years those employees are providing services to the government and its constituents in exchange for those benefits. In addition, it provides users of a government's financial reports more accurate information about the total cost of the services that a government provides to its constituents, better information about a government's unfunded actuarial accrued liabilities and changes in the funded status of the benefits over time. Statement 45 establishes standards for accounting and financial reporting. How an entity finances the benefits is a policy decision made by the entity. The statement however requires disclosure of information about the funded status of the plan in the notes to the financial statements and the presentation of multi -year funding progress trend information as a required supplementary schedule. Mayor and City Council October 2, 2007 Page 2 of 2 DISCUSSION In order to determine the annual required contribution under GASB Statement 45, an actuarial evaluation must be completed. The City completed a valuation for the City's retiree medical insurance program for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2007. The actuarial valuation is based upon program provisions, employee data and financial information. A copy of the actuarial evaluation is attached. The City of Arcadia does not have to implement GASB 45 until the 2008 -09 fiscal year. As a result, the City is not required to disclose liability, funding status of the plan, or the multi - year funding progress trend information until the Comprehensive Annual Financial Statements (CAFR) as of June 30, 2009 are prepared. FISCAL IMPACT Recommended funding for this program will be addressed during the 2008 -09 fiscal year budget process in the spring of 2008. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended the City Council: Receive and file the actuarial valuation of Retiree Medical Insurance Program. APPROVED: William R. Kelly, City Manager >4, CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA RETIREE MEDICAL INSURANCE PROGRAM GASB 45 Actuarial Valuation — July 1, 2006 Prepared bv: Joseph D. Sintov, Consulting Actuary June 2007 C 11Y OF ARCADE Joseph D. Sintov, Consulting Actuary M.A.A.A., F.S.A., F.C.A., E.A. 1927 Highland Oaks Drive, Arcadia, California 91006 -1741 jsintov @earthlink.net (626) 355 -8995 June 15, 2007 Ms. Tracey L. Hause Administrative Services Director City of Arcadia, California Post Office Box 60021 Arcadia, CA 91066 -6021 Re: Valuation of Retiree Medical Proeram as of July 1, 2006 Dear Ms. Hause: We have performed an actuarial valuation to determine the annual required contribution under Statement No. 45 of the Government Accounting Standards Board, Accounting and Financial Reporting by Employers for Postemployment Benefits Other Than Pensions (GASB 45) for the City's retiree medical insurance program for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2007. The actuarial valuation was based upon the program provisions, employee data and financial information that you provided to us. This data was not audited but has been accepted as accurate for purposes of our calculations. The valuation was performed in accordance with GASB 45, using applicable actuarial principles and practices. In our opinion, the assumptions used represent reasonable expectations of anticipated experience. On the basis of the information and assumptions stated herein, we certify that, to the best of our knowledge, the information presented in this report is complete and accurate. We appreciate the opportunity to prepare this report. Respectfully submitted, Joseph D. Simov CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA RETIREE MEDICAL INSURANCE PROGRAM GASB 45 Actuarial Valuation — July 1, 2006 x' Table of Contents Summary of Valuation ........... ............................... Valuation Results ................... ............................... Participant Data .................... ............................... Glossary................................. ............................... Actuarial Assumptions and Methods .................... Summary of Principal Provisions ......................... Page CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA RETIREE MEDICAL INSURANCE PROGRAM GASB 45 Actuarial Valuation — July 1, 2006 Summary of Valuation The following are the highlights of the July 1, 2006 actuarial valuation. All Dollar Figures in Thousands Current Proposed Program Program Provisions Provisions A. Actuarial Accrued Liability (AAL) B. Plan Assets C. Unfunded AAL: AAL - Assets D. Annual Required contribution (ARC) E. Number of Participants - Active Employees - Safety Employees - Other Employees - Total Employees - Retirees - Total Participants $ 10,280 $ 15,039 0 0 $ 10,280 $ 15,039 $ 1,254 $ 1,869 90 90 188 188 278 278 51 51 329 329 - 1 - CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA RETIREE MEDICAL INSURANCE PROGRAM GASB 45 Aetuarial Valuation - July 1, 2006 Valuation Results The results of the July 1, 2006 actuarial valuation are outlined below. A. Actuarial Accrued Liability ($000) Actuarial Accrued Liability (AAL) Actives Retirees Total Plan Assets Unfunded AAL: AAL - Assets Covered Annual Payroll Unfunded AAL as Percent of Payroll Actuarial Accrued Liability (AAL) Actives Retirees Total Plan Assets Unfunded AAL: AAL - Assets Covered Annual Payroll Unfunded AAL as Percent of Payroll Current Program Provisions Exec Other ACEA APOA AFFA APWEA Memt Memt Total $ 1,134 $ 2,437 $ 2,628 $ 646 $ 241 $ 850 $ 7,936 151 512 1,076 181 0 424 2,344 $ 1,285 $ 2,949 $ 3,704 $ 827 $ 241 $ 1,274 $ 10,280 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $ 1,285 $ 2,949 $ 3,704 $ 827 $ 241 $ 1,274 $ 10,280 4,641 3,369 3,326 1,924 1,132 3,781 18,173 27.7% 87.5% 111.4% 43.0% 21.3% 33.7% 56.6% Proposed Program Provisions Exec Other ACEA APOA AFFA APWEA Memt Memt Total $ 2,632 $ 3,098 $ 3,546 $ 1,362 $ 593 $ 1,464 $ 12,695 151 512 1,076 181 0 424 2,344 $ 2,783 $ 3,610 $ 4,622 $ 1,543 $ 593 $ 1,888 $ 15,039 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $ 2,783 $ 3,610 $ 4,622 $ 1,543 $ 593 $' 1,888 $ 15,039 4,641 3,369 3,326 1,924 1,132 3,781 18,173 60.0% 107.2% 139.0% 80.2% 52.4% 49.9% 82.8% Notes: - Under the current program provisions, a retiree's benefits cease upon commencement of Medicare benefits (age 65), or if earlier, death. Spouse's benefits, if any, cease upon the earliest of the retiree's or spouse's commencement of Medicare benefits or the spouse's death. - Under the proposed program provisions, benefits are payable for 15 years for safety employees and 10 years for other employees. Benefits cease upon death. -2- CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA RETIREE MEDICAL INSURANCE PROGRAM GASB 45 Actuarial Valuation - July 1, 2006 Valuation Results (Cont'd) B. Annual Required Contribution (ARC, in $000) ARC as Dollar Amount Normal Cost at End of Year Amortization of Unfunded AAL Annual Required Contribution (ARC) Covered Annual Payroll ARC as Percent of Covered Payroll Normal Cost at End of Year Amortization of Unfunded AAL Annual Required Contribution (ARC) ARC as Dollar Amount Normal Cost at End of Year . Amortization of Unfunded AAL Annual Required Contribution (ARC) Covered Annual Payroll ARC as Percent of Payroll Normal Cost at End of Year Amortization of Unfunded AAL Annual Required Contribution (ARC) Notes: - Under the current program provisions, a retiree's benefits cease upon commencement of Medicare benefits (age 65), or if earlier, death. Spouse's benefits, if any, cease upon the earliest of the retiree's or spouse's commencement of Medicare benefits or the spouse's death. - Under the proposed program provisions, benefits are payable for 15 years for safety employees and 10 years for other employees. Benefits cease upon death. - The Uufunded Actuarial Accrued Liability as of July 1, 2006 is amortized over 30 years as a level dollar amount at 6.25% interest per annum. -3- Current Program Provisions Exec Other ACEA APOA AFFA APWEA Memt Memt Total $ 82 $ 158 $ 159 $ 28 $ 5 $ 55 $ 487 96 220 276 62 18 95 767 $ 178 $ 378 $ 435 $ 90 $ 23 $ 150 $ 1,254 4,641 3,369 3,326 1,924 1,132 3,781 18,173 1.8% 4.7% 4.8% 1.5% 0.4% 1.5% 2.7% 2.0% 6.5% 8.3% 3.2% 1.6% 2.5% 4.2% 3.8% 11.2% 13.1% 4.7% 2.0% 4.0% 6.9% Proposed Program Provisions Exec Other ACEA APOA AFFA APWEA Memt Memt Total $ 187 $ 187 $ 209 $ 47 $ 9 $ 108 $ 747 208 269 345 115 44 141 1,122 $ 395 .$ 456 $` 554 $ 162 $ 53 $ 249 $ 1,869 4,641 3,369 3,326 1,924 1,132 3,781 18,173 4.0% 5.6% 6.3% 2.4% 0.8% 2.9% 4.1% 4.5% 7.9% 10.4% 6.0% 3.9% 3.7% 6.2% 8.5% 13.5% 16.7% 8.4% 4.7% 6.6% 10.3% Notes: - Under the current program provisions, a retiree's benefits cease upon commencement of Medicare benefits (age 65), or if earlier, death. Spouse's benefits, if any, cease upon the earliest of the retiree's or spouse's commencement of Medicare benefits or the spouse's death. - Under the proposed program provisions, benefits are payable for 15 years for safety employees and 10 years for other employees. Benefits cease upon death. - The Uufunded Actuarial Accrued Liability as of July 1, 2006 is amortized over 30 years as a level dollar amount at 6.25% interest per annum. -3- CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA RETIREE MEDICAL INSURANCE PROGRAM GASB 45 Actuarial Valuation — July 1, 2006 Participant Data The participant data underlying the valuation are summarized in this section. A. Distribution of Active Participants 1. All Employees YEARS OF SERVICE Under 1 1 to 4 5 to 9 10 to 14 15 to 19 20 to 24 25 to 29 30 to 34 35 & un Total AGE Under 25 3 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 25 to 29 3 17 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 23 30 to 34 5 18 it 3 1 0 0 0 0 38 35 to 39 2 13 16 7 8 0 0 0 0 46 40 to 44 1 4 8 7 14 3 0 0 0 37 45 to 49 2 1 11 6 9 14 9 0 0 52 50 to 54 0 2 5 4 5 9 4 0 0 29 55 to 59 1 3 3 4 10 1 3 2 1 28 60 to 64 0 2 1 3 0 1 2 2 1 12 65 to 69 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 70 &up 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 Total 18 67 58 34 49 28 18 4 2 278 Average Age 42.5 Average Years of Service 11.0 2. Safety Employees YEARS OF SERVICE Under 1 1 to 4 5 to 9 10 to 14 15 to 19 20 to 24 25 to 29 30 to 34 35 & uD Total AGE Under 25 2 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 25 to 29 0 9 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 30 to 34 0 8 5 3 0 0 0 0 0 16 35 to 39 0 3 7 3 3 0 0 0 0 16 40 to 44 0 0 1 3 8 2 0 0 0 14 45 to 49 0 0 0 1 5 8 4 0 0 18 50 to 54 0 0 0 1 1 2 2 0 0 6 55 to 59 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 3 60 to 64 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 65 to 69 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 70 &up 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 2 24 15 11 19 12 7 0 0 90 Average Age 38.4 Average Years of Service 11.9 -4- CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA RETIREE MEDICAL INSURANCE PROGRAM GASB 45 Actuarial Valuation — July 1, 2006 Participant Data (Cont'd) 3. Other Employees YEARS OF SERVICE Average Age 44.5 Average Years of Service 10.6 B. Participant Statistics Under 1 1 to 4 5 to 9 10 to 14 15 to 19 20 to 24 25 to 29 30 to 34 35 & up Total AGE APWEA Memt Memt Total Actives Under 25 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 25 to 29 3 8 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 30 to 34 5 10 6 0 1 0 0 0 0 22 35 to 39 2 10 9 4 5 0 0 0 0 30 40 to 44 1 4 7 4 6 1 0 0 0 23 45 to 49 2 1 11 5 4 6 5 0 0 34 50 to 54 0 2 5 3 4 7 2 0 0 23 55 to 59 1 3 3 4 8 1 2 2 1 25 60 to 64 0 2 1 3 0 1 2 2 1 12 65 to 69 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 70 & up 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 Total 16 43 43 23 30 16 11 4 2 188 Average Age 44.5 Average Years of Service 10.6 B. Participant Statistics - 5 - Exec Other ACEA APOA AFFA APWEA Memt Memt Total Actives Count 92 46 44 40 8 48 278 Average Age 44.2 37.2 39.7 42.2 55.1 45.2 42.5 Average Service 9.3 11.3 12.5 11.4 16.3 11.3 11.0 Retirees Count 5 12 20 4 0 10 51 City's Annual Pmts in $000 $ 21 $ 71 $ 109 $ 20 $ 0 $ 54 $ 275 Average Age 58.8 55.4 56.7 60.0 N/A 58.4 57.2 Average Retirement Age 57.3 51.9 52.6 57.2 N/A 55.5 53.8 - 5 - CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA RETIREE MEDICAL INSURANCE PROGRAM GASB 45 Actuarial Valuation — July 1, 2006 Participant Data (Cont C. Participant Coverage RE 5inele 2 -Party Family Total Medical Plan for Actives Blue Shield 33 8 34 75 Kaiser 26 11 25 62 PERS Choice 18 18 27 63 PERSCARE 1 0 0 1 PORAC 3 4 19 26 Waived Coverage N/A N/A N/A 51 Total 81 41 105 278 5inele 2 -P t Family Total Medical Plan for Retirees Blue Shield 7 0 0 7 Kaiser 10 0 0 10 PERS Choice 19 2 0 21 PERSCARE 6 0 0 6 PORAC 7 0 0 7 Total 49 2 0 51 RE CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA RETIREE MEDICAL INSURANCE PROGRAM GASB 45 Actuarial Valuation — July 1, 2006 Glossary The following is a glossary of terms used in this report. Actuarial Accrued Liability. The portion of the Actuarial Present Value of medical plan benefits, which is considered accrued, as determined by the Actuarial Cost Method. Actuarial Cost Method. A procedure for determining the Actuarial Present Value of medical plan benefits and assigning this value to past and future time periods, usually in the form of a Normal Cost and Actuarial Accrued Liability. Amortization Payment. That portion of the Annual Required Contribution that is assigned to pay interest on and to amortize the Unfunded Actuarial Accrued Liability. Actuarial Present Value. The value of a benefit or series of benefits payable or receivable at various times, determined as of a given date using a particular set of actuarial assumptions. Annual Required Contribution of the Employer (ARC). The employer's periodic required contributions to a Defined Benefit OPEB Plan, calculated in accordance with the parameters of GASB 45. Defined Benefit OPEB Plan. An OPEB plan that provides specific benefits after retirement or other termination of employment. The amount of the benefit is usually a function of one or more factors such as the participant's age, years of service and medical insurance plans offered by the employer. Healthcare Cost Trend Rate. The rate of change in per capita health claims cost over time as a result of such factors as medical inflation, utilization of healthcare services, plan design and technological developments. Normal Cost. The portion of the Actuarial Present Value of OPEB plan benefits that is assigned to a particular fiscal year by the Actuarial Cost Method. Other Postemployment Benefits (OPEB). Postemployment benefits other than pension benefits. Other postemployment benefits (OPEB) include Postemployment Healthcare Benefits, regardless of the type of plan that provides them, and all postemployment benefits other than those provided from a pension plan, excluding benefits defined as termination offers and benefits. Postemployment Healthcare Benefits. Medical, dental, vision and other health - related benefits provided to terminated or retired employees and their dependents and beneficiaries. -7- CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA RETIREE MEDICAL INSURANCE PROGRAM GASB 45 Actuarial Valuation - July 1, 2006 Glossary (Cont'd) Substantive Plan. The terms of the OPEB plan as understood by the employer and plan members, taking into account past administrative practices. Unfunded Actuarial Accrued Liability. The excess, if any, of the Actuarial Accrued Liability over the assets of the plan. RE CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA RETIREE MEDICAL INSURANCE PROGRAM GASB 45 Actuarial Valuation — July 1 2006 Actuarial Assumptions and Methods The following are the actuarial assumptions and methods used to determine the actuarial accrued liability and normal cost. It is important to keep in mind that, while these assumptions represent best estimates of future events, the assumptions are not guaranteed. The ultimate expense of the retiree medical insurance program is the net of: 1. The sum of the benefits paid plus the cost of administration; less, 2. The investment income earned, if any, from cash contributions to the program. For purposes of valuing the provisions of the substantive plan, it is assumed that the current provisions of the program will remain in effect into the indefinite future. However, this assumption does not imply an obligation to continue the program. Actuarial Assumntions A. Economic Assumptions Discount Rate 6.25% per annum, net of expenses. (The City has not yet determined whether it will pre -fund with annual contributions equal to at least the ARC). Claims Costs The premiums for the medical insurance plans provided by the City to its employees and retirees, increased by the trend assumption. All plans for all employees and retirees are insured with Ca1PERS through the Public Employees Medical and Hospital Care Act (PEMHCA). Premiums are developed by CalPERS for its contracting agencies, based on regional pricing. These insurance plans are considered community rated for purposes of GASB 45, paragraphs 13a(2) and 95 through 112, and thus are not adjusted to reflect an implied subsidy based.on employees' and retirees' ages. Medical Cost Trend The expected annual rate of increase in claim costs (premium rates) is as follows: Fiscal Year Annual Beginning July 1 Rate 2006 11.0% 2007 10.0% 2008 9.0% 2009 8.0% 2010 7.0% 2011 6.0% 2012+ 5.0% CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA RETIREE MEDICAL INSURANCE PROGRAM GASB 45 Actuarial Valuation — July 1, 2006 Actuarial Assumptions and Methods (Cont'd) B. Demographic Assumptions Marital Status - Active participants. 90% of APOA and AFFA employees, and 85% of other employees, are assumed married. Male spouses are assumed to be three years older than female spouses. - Retired participants. Marital status and spouse ages are based on actual census data. Mortality Rates - Employee Mortality Prior to Retirement. - APOA and AFFA employees. Male and female mortality rates for CalPERS Public Agency Police and Fire employees. (Note: The CalPERS rates are identical for the police and fire employee groups.) - Other employees. Male and female mortality rates for CalPERS Public Agency Miscellaneous Employees. - Sample rates are as follows: - Healthy Retiree Mortality During Service Retirement - Post - retirement mortality rates for healthy recipients, as reported by CalPERS for male and female Public Agency employees. (Note: The CalPERS rates are identical for all employee groups.) -10- Male Rates Female Rates APOA/ Other APOA1 Other Age AFFA Employ AFFA Employees 30 0.048% 0.038% 0.031% 0.021% 35 0.067% 0.054% 0.044% 0.031% 40 0.094% 0.077% 0.063% 0.046% 45 0.130% 0.110% 0.088% 0.068% 50 0.179% 0.156% 0.125% 0.102% 55 0.248% 0.221% 0.178% 0.151% 60 0.344% 0.314% 0.256% 0.226% - Healthy Retiree Mortality During Service Retirement - Post - retirement mortality rates for healthy recipients, as reported by CalPERS for male and female Public Agency employees. (Note: The CalPERS rates are identical for all employee groups.) -10- CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA RETIREE MEDICAL INSURANCE PROGRAM GASB 45 Actuarial Valuation — July 1, 2006 Actuarial Assumptions and Methods (Cont'd) - Sample rates are as follows: Age - Males - Females 50 0.245% 0.136% 55 0.429% 0.253% 60 0.721% 0.442% 65 1.302% 0.795% 70 2.135% 1.276% 75 3.716% 2.156% 80 6.256% 3.883% 85 10.195% 7.219% 90 17.379% 12.592% Disabled Retiree Mortality During Disability Retirement - APOA and AFFA employees. Post - retirement mortality rates for disabled recipients, as reported by CalPERS for male and female Public Agency Police and Fire employees. The CalPERS disabled mortality rates are reported separately for industrial disability and non - industrial disability. These rates were weighted 95% for industrial disability and 5% for non - industrial disability, based on the respective magnitude of the CalPERS incidence rates of industrial and non - industrial disability. The CalPERS rates are identical for police and fire employees. Other employees. Post - retirement mortality rates for disabled recipients, as reported by CalPERS for male and female Miscellaneous Public Agency employees. The CalPERS disabled mortality rates are reported separately for industrial disability and non- industrial disability. These rates were weighted 0% for industrial disability and 100% for non - industrial disability, based on the respective magnitude of incidence rates of industrial and non - industrial disability. (Note: CalPERS industrial disability incidence rates are zero.) -11- CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA RETIREE MEDICAL INSURANCE PROGRAM GASB 45 Actuarial Valuation - July 1, 2006 Actuarial Assumptions and Methods (Cont'd) Sample rates are as follows: Agee 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 Male Rates APOA/ Other AFFA Employees 0.245% 0.796% 0.260% 0.865% 0.394% 1.059% 0.592% 1.459% 0.691% 2.115% 1.109% 2.870% 1.941% 3.617% 3.434% 4.673% 5.807% 6.552% 8.711% 9.481% 13.082% 14.041% 19.648% 20.793% Female Rates APOA/ Other AFFA Employees 0.208% 0.607% 0.233% 0.637% 0.311% 0.846% 0.425% 1.129% 0.614% 1.481% 0.871% 1.884% 1.271% 2.356% 1.823% 3.020% 2.850% 4.298% 4.781% 6.514% 8.362% 10.269% 14.094% 16.189% - Emplovee and Retiree Spouse Mortality Mortality rates for healthy recipients during service retirement, as reported by CalPERS for male and female Public Agency employees. Sample rates are shown above. Termination Rates - APOA employees. Sum of Terminated Refund Rates and Terminated Vested Rates at 10 years of service for Ca1PERS Public Agency Police employees. - AFFA employees. Sum of Terminated Refund Rates and Terminated Vested Rates at 10 years of service for Ca1PERS Public Agency Fire employees. - Other employees. Sum of Terminated Refund Rates and Terminated Vested Rates at 10 years of service for CalPERS Public Agency Miscellaneous employees. -12- Other Age APOA AFFA Employees 30 2.130% 0.900% 5.740% 35 2.130% 0.900% 5.040% 40 2.130% 0.900% 4.350% 45 1130% 0.900% 3.660% -12- CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA RETIREE MEDICAL INSURANCE PROGRAM GASB 45 Actuarial Valuation - July 1, 2006 Actuarial Assumptions and Methods (Cont'd) Disability Retirement Rates - APOA employees. Sum of Industrial Disability Male Rates and Non - industrial Disability Male Rates for CalPERS Public Agency Police employees. (Note: CalPERS disability rates are identical for males and females.) - AFFA employees. Sum of Industrial Disability Male Rates and Non - industrial Disability Male Rates for CalPERS Public Agency Fire employees. (Note: CalPERS disability rates are identical for males and females.) - Other employees. Industrial Disability Male Rates for CalPERS Public Agency Miscellaneous employees. (Note: CalPERS disability rates are nearly identical for males and females. Non - Industrial Disability rates are zero.) - Sample rates are as follows: Service Retirement Rates - APOA employees. Retirement Rates at 25 years of service for Public Agency Police employees on CalPERS 3% @ 50 pension formula. - AFFA employees. Retirement Rates at 25 years of service for Public Agency Fire employees on CalPERS 3% @ 50 pension formula. - Other employees. Retirement Rates at 25 years of service for Public Agency Miscellaneous employees on CalPERS 2% @ 55 pension formula. Employees over age 65 are assumed to retire immediately. 13- Other Age APOA AFFA Emnlovees 35 0.870% 0.320% 0.100% 40 1.160% 0.420% 0.160% 45 1.450% 0.530% 0.230% 50 1.750% 0.670% 0.350% 55 5.940% 6.110% 0.410% 60 6.010% 6.160% 0.390% 65 6.010% 6.160% 0.330% Service Retirement Rates - APOA employees. Retirement Rates at 25 years of service for Public Agency Police employees on CalPERS 3% @ 50 pension formula. - AFFA employees. Retirement Rates at 25 years of service for Public Agency Fire employees on CalPERS 3% @ 50 pension formula. - Other employees. Retirement Rates at 25 years of service for Public Agency Miscellaneous employees on CalPERS 2% @ 55 pension formula. Employees over age 65 are assumed to retire immediately. 13- CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA RETIREE MEDICAL INSURANCE PROGRAM GASB 45 Actuarial Valuation - July 1, 2006 Actuarial Assumptions and Methods (Cont'd) Sample rates are as follows: Participation at Retirement - Employees currently covered by a medical plan: 100% of employees and 100% of their spouses are assumed to participate upon retirement. - Employees not currently covered by a medical plan (declined coverage): 80% of employees and 80% of their spouses are assumed to participate upon retirement. Particination During Retirement 100% of retirees and 100% of their spouses who survive to each future year are assumed to elect to continue coverage during retirement. (Note: The program is non - contributory during retirement.) Assumed Medical Plan at Retirement - Employees currently covered by a medical plan: The current medical plan is assumed to be elected at retirement. If coverage continues after eligibility for Medicare, the managed Medicare supplement version of the current medical plan is assumed to be elected. (Note: Under the current program provisions, coverage ends upon eligibility for Medicare.) - Employees not currently covered by a medical plan (declined coverage): The PERS Choice plan is assumed to be elected if the employee participates in the program at retirement. If coverage continues after eligibility for Medicare, the PERS Choice managed Medicare supplement plan is assumed to be elected. (Note: Under the current program provisions, coverage ends upon eligibility for Medicare.) Eligibility for Medicare 100% of employees and retirees are assumed to be eligible for Medicare. (Note: Under the current program provisions, coverage ends upon eligibility for Medicare.) Accumulation and Purchase of Sick Leave Accumulation of sick leave. 30% of the annual sick leave credit is used, with the remaining 70% accumulated toward the required number of hours required to qualify for the service retirement or disability retirement benefit. 14- Other Other Age APOA AFFA Employees Age APOA AFFA Emplovees 50 12.080% 6.790% 3.070% 58 21.980% 23.540% 10.030% 51 10.710% 9.220% 2.260% 59 22.790% 19.930% 10.820% 52 17.050% 13.770% 2.410% 60 100.000% 100.000% 15.160% 53 19.160% 16.610% 3.180% 61 100.000% 100.000% 15.160% 54 19.740% 20.380% 4.210% 62 100.000% 100.000% 27.040% 55 24.970% 25.160% 10.080% 63 100.000% 100.000% 27.310% 56 19.100% 24.070% 8.380% 64 100.000% 100.000% 19.740% 57 22.320% 20.100% 9.050% 65 100.000% 100.000% 100.000% Participation at Retirement - Employees currently covered by a medical plan: 100% of employees and 100% of their spouses are assumed to participate upon retirement. - Employees not currently covered by a medical plan (declined coverage): 80% of employees and 80% of their spouses are assumed to participate upon retirement. Particination During Retirement 100% of retirees and 100% of their spouses who survive to each future year are assumed to elect to continue coverage during retirement. (Note: The program is non - contributory during retirement.) Assumed Medical Plan at Retirement - Employees currently covered by a medical plan: The current medical plan is assumed to be elected at retirement. If coverage continues after eligibility for Medicare, the managed Medicare supplement version of the current medical plan is assumed to be elected. (Note: Under the current program provisions, coverage ends upon eligibility for Medicare.) - Employees not currently covered by a medical plan (declined coverage): The PERS Choice plan is assumed to be elected if the employee participates in the program at retirement. If coverage continues after eligibility for Medicare, the PERS Choice managed Medicare supplement plan is assumed to be elected. (Note: Under the current program provisions, coverage ends upon eligibility for Medicare.) Eligibility for Medicare 100% of employees and retirees are assumed to be eligible for Medicare. (Note: Under the current program provisions, coverage ends upon eligibility for Medicare.) Accumulation and Purchase of Sick Leave Accumulation of sick leave. 30% of the annual sick leave credit is used, with the remaining 70% accumulated toward the required number of hours required to qualify for the service retirement or disability retirement benefit. 14- CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA RETIREE MEDICAL INSURANCE PROGRAM GASB 45 Actuarial Valuation - July 1, 2006 Actuarial Assumptions and Methods (Cont'd) Purchase of Sick Leave. If an employee needs 100 or fewer hours of sick leave credit to qualify for a service retirement or disability retirement benefit, he or she is assumed to purchase these additional hours. An employee who needs more than 100 hours of sick leave credit to qualify for a service retirement or disability retirement benefit is assumed not to purchase these hours. Out - migration after retirement The actuarial accrued liability and normal cost are loaded 2% for higher premiums in geographic areas outside of the Los Angeles Region, to account for those retirees who move out of the local area. Family Coverage Only an employee and his or her spouse are assumed eligible to participate in the retiree medical insurance program. Additional insurance coverages Retiree medical insurance is the only benefit assumed offered. Future New Participants None. A closed group is assumed for purposes of the valuation. Actuarial Methods A. Actuarial Cost Method The actuarial cost method used in this actuarial valuation is the projected unit credit method. Under this method, the actuarial accrued liability is the present value of projected benefits, multiplied by the ratio of service as of the valuation date to projected service as of the date of service retirement or disability retirement. The normal cost is equal to the expected increase in actuarial accrued liability during the fiscal year. For retirees and active employees who are already eligible for service retirement, the actuarial accrued liability is equal to the present value of projected benefits and the normal cost is zero. B. Amortization of Unfunded Actuarial Accrued Liability The unfunded actuarial accrued liability is being amortized over 30 years as a level annual dollar amount. - 15 - CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA RETIREE MEDICAL INSURANCE PROGRAM GASB 45 Actuarial Valuation - July 1, 2006 Summary of Principal Provisions The City of Arcadia provides health insurance during retirement for certain retirees and their eligible spouses. Retirees and their spouses remain in the City's health insurance plans and may be elect to be covered under any of the medical plans that the City offers to its employees. To be eligible for retiree medical benefits, the employee must be (i) a member of the City's management or (ii) a member of an employee association covered under the terms of a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) entered into by the City. The employee must pay any required contribution as may be required by the applicable memorandum. Retiree medical benefits are based on the program provisions in effect at date of retirement. The following summarizes the provisions of the program. This information was gathered from the applicable MOU's, Retiree Medical Program summaries on the City's website, and discussions and other correspondence with the City. Although the City has reviewed this summary for accuracy, it is not intended as a legal document from which to administer the retiree medical insurance program. For purposes of valuing the provisions of the substantive plan, it is assumed that the current provisions of the program will remain in effect into the indefinite future. Eli ibili . The following employee groups are eligible: 1. Executive management employees. These employees are identified by the City. 2. Other management employees. These employees are identified by the City. 3. Arcadia City Employees Association (ACEA). Employees covered under the terms of the MOU effective July 1, 2005 through June 30, 2007. 4. Arcadia Police Officers Association (APOA). Employees covered under the terms of the MOU effective July 1, 2005 through June 30, 2007. 5. Arcadia Firefighters Association (AFFA). Employees covered under the terms of the MOU effective July 1, 2005 through June 30, 2007. 6. Arcadia Public Works Employees Association (APWEA). Employees covered under the terms of the MOU effective July 1, 2005 through June 30, 2007. Fiscal Year July 1 through June 30. -16- CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA RETIREE MEDICAL INSURANCE PROGRAM GASB 45 Actuarial Valuation - July 1, 2006 Summary of Principal Provisions (Cont'd) Eligibility for Service Retirement Benefit In order to be eligible for the Program's service retirement benefit, an employee must satisfy the following requirements upon retirement: 1. Attain age 50. 2. Be vested in the CalPERS Pension Plan. An employee is vested upon attainment of five years of overall service in CalPERS contracting agencies. An executive management employee must complete 10 years of overall public service. 3. Be enrolled in a City- sponsored health plan as of the employee's last day of work and maintain eligibility to continue in the CalPERS Health Program as stipulated by that program. 4. Have the following number of hours of accumulated sick leave at the date of retirement: a. Executive management employees: There is no sick leave requirement. b. Other management employees and members of APWEA: 125 days (accrue 12 days per year). Since a workday equals eight hours, the accumulated sick leave requirement is thus 1,000 hours with an accrual of 96 hours per year. c. Members of ACEA and APOA: 1,000 hours (accrue 96 hours per year). d. Members of AFFA: 1,500 hours (accrue 144 hours per year). Eligibility for Disability Retirement Benefit. In order to be eligible for the Program's disability retirement benefit, an employee must satisfy the following minimum requirements: 1. Meet the definition of service disability or industrial disability as defined in the CalPERS Pension Plan. 2. For service disability, be vested in the CalPERS Pension Plan as described in the eligibility for the service retirement benefit. An executive management employee must complete 10 years of overall public service to qualify for service disability. An employee need not be vested in the CalPERS Retirement Program in order to qualify for industrial disability. 3. Be enrolled in a City- sponsored health plan as of the employee's last day of work and maintain eligibility to continue in the CalPERS Health Program as stipulated by that program. 4. Have the required number of hours of accumulated sick leave upon disability. The number of hours is the same as required for the service retirement benefit. 17- CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA RETIREE MEDICAL INSURANCE PROGRAM GASB 45 Actuarial Valuation — July 1, 2006 Summary of Principal Provisions (Cont'd) Sick Leave Purchase Option. An employee may purchase hours of sick leave credit, up to certain limits, in order to meet the accumulated sick leave requirement for the service retirement benefit and disability retirement benefit, provided the employee has met specified age and service requirements upon the date of such purchase. The cost is equal to the employee's hourly pay rate times the number of hours needed to meet the accumulated sick leave requirement: 1. Executive management employees: Not applicable, as there is no sick leave requirement. 2. Other management employees and members of ACEA: May purchase up to 480 hours upon attainment of age 55 with 15 years of service. 3. Members of APOA and APWEA: May purchase up to 1,000 hours at any time. 4. Members of AFFA: May purchase up to 760 hours upon attainment of age 50 with 15 years of service. Retiree Medical Insurance Benefits The City will pay the monthly health insurance premiums for the employee and spouse (but not for other family members) for the following periods: 1. Current Program provision: The retiree's benefit is provided until the earlier of (i) the starting date for Medicare coverage or (ii) the retiree's death. A spouse's benefit is provided until the earliest of (i) the retiree's starting date for Medicare coverage, (ii) the spouse's starting date for Medicare coverage or (iii) the spouse's death. 2. Proposed Program provision: a. Executive management employees, other management employees and members of ACEA and APWEA: The retiree's benefit is provided for 10 years following the date of service retirement or disability retirement, or until the retiree's death, if sooner. A spouse's benefit is provided for 10 years following the retiree's date of service retirement or disability retirement, or until the spouse's death, if sooner. b. Members of APOA and AFFA: The retiree's benefit is provided for 15 years following the date of service retirement or disability retirement, or until the retiree's death, if sooner. A spouse's benefit is provided for 15 years following the retiree's date of service retirement or disability retirement, or until the spouse's death, if sooner. 18- CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA RETIREE MEDICAL INSURANCE PROGRAM GASB 45 Actuarial Valuation - July 1, 2006 Summary of Principal Provisions (Cont'd) Retiree Medical Insurance Plans and Premiums The following are the medical insurance plans provided by the City to employees and retirees, along with the monthly 2007 premiums for the Los Angeles Area. All plans for all employees and retirees are,insured with Ca1PERS through the Public Employees Medical and Hospital Care Act (PEMHCA): Premiums are developed by Ca1PERS for its contracting agencies, based on regional pricing. These insurance plans are considered community rated for purposes of GASB 45, paragraphs 13a(2) and 95 through 112, and thus are not adjusted to reflect an implied subsidy based on employees' and retirees' ages. Different premium rates apply for participants who do not reside in the Los Angeles Area. Benefits Prior to Retirement There is no benefit provided upon death or other termination of employment prior to attaining the necessary age and service required in order to qualify for the service retirement benefit or disability retirement benefit. Additional Insurance Coverages No coverages are provided beyond retiree medical insurance. -19- Non - Medicare Eligible Sin le 2 -Party Blue Shield $ 356.17 $ 712.34 Kaiser $ 329.14 $ 658.28 PERS Choice $ 423.63 $ 847.26 PERSCARE $ 716.17 $ 1,432.34 PORAC $ 439:00 $ 822.00 Medicare Eligible Sin le 2-Party Blue Shield $ 318.95 $ 637.90 Kaiser $ 289.68 $ 579.36 PERS Choice $ 341.75 $ 683.50 PERSCARE $ 371.68 $ 743.36 PORAC $ 351.00 $ 701.00 Premiums are developed by Ca1PERS for its contracting agencies, based on regional pricing. These insurance plans are considered community rated for purposes of GASB 45, paragraphs 13a(2) and 95 through 112, and thus are not adjusted to reflect an implied subsidy based on employees' and retirees' ages. Different premium rates apply for participants who do not reside in the Los Angeles Area. Benefits Prior to Retirement There is no benefit provided upon death or other termination of employment prior to attaining the necessary age and service required in order to qualify for the service retirement benefit or disability retirement benefit. Additional Insurance Coverages No coverages are provided beyond retiree medical insurance. -19- n Fp, CITY OF ARCADIA CITY COUNCIUREDEVELOPMENT AGENCY �* REGULAR MEETING TUESDAY, OCTOBER 2, 2007 AGENDA 7:00 p.m. Location: City Council Chamber, 240 W. Huntington Drive CALL TO ORDER INVOCATION Reverend Thomas Shriver, Emmanuel Assembly of God PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL OF CITY COUNCIL /REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEMBERS: Mickey Segal, Mayor /Agency Chair Robert Harbicht, Mayor Pro Tem /Agency Vice Chair Peter Amundson, Council /Agency Member Roger Chandler, Council /Agency Member John Wuo, Council /Agency Member REPORT FROM CITY ATTORNEY /AGENCY COUNSEL ON CLOSED SESSION /STUDY SESSION ITEMS SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION FROM CITY MANAGERIEXECUTIVE DIRECTOR REGARDING AGENDA ITEMS MOTION TO READ ALL ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS BY TITLE ONLY AND WAIVE THE READING IN FULL PRESENTATIONS Presentation of Proclamation Designating October as Fire Prevention Month. PUBLIC HEARING All interested persons are invited to appear at the Public Hearing and to provide evidence or testimony concerning the proposed items of consideration. You are hereby advised that should you desire to legally challenge any action taken by the City Council with respect to any Public Hearing item on this agenda, you may be limited to raising only those issues and objections which you or someone else raised at or prior to the time of the Public Hearing. CITY COUNCIL ITEMS: =i Recommended Action: Approve 83 AND PICK -UP. Recommended Action: Denial of the Conditional Use Permit PUBLIC COMMENTS (5 minutes per person) Any person wishing to address the City Council /Redevelopment Agency during the Public Comments period is asked to complete a "Public Comments" card available in the Council Chamber Lobby. The completed form should be submitted to the City Clerk/Agency Secretary prior to the start of the 7:00 p.m. Open Session. In order to conduct a timely meeting, there will be a five (5) minute time limit per person. All comments are to be directed to the City Council /Redevelopment Agency and we ask that proper decorum be practiced during the meeting. State law prohibits the City Council /Redevelopment Agency from discussing topics or issues unless they appear on the posted Agenda. REPORTS FROM MAYOR, CITY COUNCIL AND CITY CLERK 2. CONSENT CALENDAR All matters listed under the Consent Calendar are considered to be routine and all will be enacted by one roll call vote. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless members of the City Council /Redevelopment Agency request specific items be removed from the Consent Calendar for separate action. REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ITEMS: a. REGULAR MEETING MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 18. 2007 Recommended Action: Approve CITY COUNCIL ITEMS: b. REGULAR MEETING MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 18 2007 Recommended Action: Approve C. H APPROXIMATELY 3.780 SQUARE FEET TO ACCOMMODATE A TOTAL OF Recommended Action: Approve AMOUNT OF $61,760. Recommended Action: Approve e. TO STOP NOTICES. Recommended Action: Approve 3. CITY MANAGER AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO A CONTRACT EXTENSION WITH MUNIFINANCIAL INC. FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF FUND'S UNAPPROPRIATED FUND BALANCE TO PROCEED WITH THE PROJECT. Recommended Action: Approve b. EISENHOWER MEMORIAL PARK RECREATION USAGE. Recommended Action: Provide Direction C. PARTIES. Recommended Action: Approve ADJOURNMENT The City Council /Redevelopment Agency will adjourn this meeting to October 16, 2007, 6:00 p.m. in the City Council Chamber Conference Room located at 240 W. Huntington Drive, Arcadia. PURSUANT TO THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT, PERSONS WITH A DISABILITY WHO REQUIRE A DISABILITY - RELATED MODIFICATION OR ACCOMODATION IN ORDER TO PARTICIPATE IN A MEETING, INCLUDING AUXILIARY AIDS OR SERVICES, MAY REQUEST SUCH MODIFICATION OR ACCOMODATION FROM THE CITY CLERK AT (626) 574 -5455. NOTIFICATION 48 HOURS PRIOR TO THE MEETING WILL ENABLE THE CITY TO MAKE REASONABLE ARRANGEMENTS TO ASSURE ACCESSIBILITY TO THE MEETING. CITY COUNCIL /REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY REGULAR MEETING ANNOTATED AGENDA OCTOBER 2, 2007 CLOSED SESSION — SPECIAL MEETING a. Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6 to confer with labor negotiators. City Negotiators William W. Floyd, Tracey Hause and Mike Casalou. Employee Organization Arcadia Police Officers' Association NO REPORTABLE ACTION STUDY SESSION — SPECIAL MEETING 4 a. Report, discussion and direction regarding the Parks and Recreation Master Plan and Park Facilities Impact Fee Report. b. Report, discussion and direction regarding Retiree Medical Insurance Program -GASB 45 Actuarial Valuation. C. Report, discussion and direction regarding selection of Acting Mayor for October 16, 2007 City Council Meeting. CITY COUNCIL DIRECTED THE PROPOSED REPORT BE FORWARDED TO THE RECREATION AND PARKS COMMISSION FOR INPUT AND BRING BACK TO THE COUNCIL AT A FUTURE DATE RECEIVED AND FILED COUNCIL MEMBER CHANDLER APPOINTED AS ACTING MAYOR FOR THE OCTOBER 16, 2007 CITY COUNCIL MEETING PUBLIC HEARING a. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING CONCERNING APPEAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2007 -07 AND ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN REVIEW 2006 -23 FOR A PROPOSED L.A. FITNESS HEALTH CLUB AND RELATED PARKING MODIFICATION AT 1325 S. BALDWIN AVENUE. b. CONSIDERATION OF AN APPEAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. CUP 07 -05 (PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 1764) TO EXPAND THE EXISTING 2,280 SQUARE -FOOT TUTORIAL CENTER (NOBEL EDUCATION INSTITUTE) BY AN ADDITIONAL 1,500 SQUARE FEET FOR A TOTAL OF APPROXIMATELY 3,780 SQUARE FEET TO ACCOMMODATE A TOTAL OF 75 STUDENTS, AND TO HAVE AT LEAST 60 STUDENTS TRANSPORTED TO HOLLY AVENUE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL FOR RECREATIONAL ACTIVITIES AND PICK -UP. APPEAL DENIED 3 -2 RESOLUTON NO, 6592 ADOPTED 3 -2 APPEAL WITHDRAWN BY APPLICANT 2. CONSENT CALENDAR REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ITEMS: a. REGULAR MEETING MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 18, 2007. APPROVED 4 -0 (Harbicht Abstained) AS AMENDED CITY COUNCIL ITEMS b. REGULAR MEETING MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 18, 2007. APPROVED 4 -0 (Harbicht Abstained) AS AMENDED C. AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO A CONTRACT APPROVED WITH ALL AMERICAN ASPHALT FOR THE DUARTE ROAD 5 -0 REHABILITATION PROJECT IN THE AMOUNT OF $997,200. d. AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO A CONTRACT APPROVED WITH D &J FOOTHILL ELECTRICAL CONTRACTORS, INC. FOR 5 -0 THE REPLACEMENT OF THE LONGDEN AVENUE PARK BASEBALL FIELD BACKSTOP IN THE AMOUNT OF $61,760. e. ACCEPT ALL WORK PERFORMED BY INSPECTION ENGINEERING APPROVED CONSTRUCTION FOR THE 2006/2007 ANNUAL CONCRETE 5 -0 REPAIR PROJECT AS COMPLETE AND AUTHORIZE THE FINAL PAYMENT TO BE MADE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS. SUBJECT TO STOP NOTICES. 3. CITY MANAGER a. AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO A CONTRACT APPROVED EXTENSION WITH MUNIFINANCIAL INC. FOR THE 5 -0 ESTABLISHMENT OF CITYWIDE STREET LIGHTING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT AND AREA 8 IN THE AMOUNT OF $143,230 AND APPROPRIATE $157,230 FROM THE GENERAL FUND'S UNAPPROPRIATED FUND BALANCE TO PROCEED WITH THE PROJECT. b. EISENHOWER MEMORIAL PARK RECREATION USAGE. THE CITY COUNCIL DIRECTED STAFF TO SUSPEND FUTURE ORGANIZED BASKETBALL TOURNAMENTS IN CITY PARKS AND FORWARD REPORT TO THE RECREATION AND PARKS COMMISSION FOR THEIR REVIEW AND INPUT AND BRING BACK TO THE COUNCIL AT A 49:0125 CITY COUNCIL /REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY REGULAR MEETING MINUTES TUESDAY, OCTOBER 2, 2007 CALL TO ORDER Mayor Segal called the Special Meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. ROLL CALL OF CITY COUNCIL /REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEMBERS: PRESENT: Council /Agency Member Amundson, Chandler, Harbicht, Wuo and Segal ABSENT: None CLOSED SESSION /STUDY SESSION PUBLIC COMMENTS (5 minutes per person) None. CLOSED SESSION a. Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6 to confer with labor negotiators. City Negotiators: William W. Floyd, Tracey Hause and Mike Casalou. Employee Organization: Arcadia Police Officers' Association. STUDY SESSION a. Report, discussion and direction regarding Retiree Medical Insurance Program - GASB 45 Actuarial Valuation. City Manager Bill Kelly provided an overview of GASB 45 regarding retiree medical insurance. He explained the new public reporting and disclosure obligations of local governments regarding unfunded post employment benefit programs for employees; he noted that the City completed its valuation for the City's retiree medical insurance program for fiscal year ending June 30, 2007 and that the actuarial valuation is based upon program provisions, employee data and financial information. Mr. Kelly noted that the City does not have to implement GASB 45 until the 2008 -2009 fiscal years. b. Report, discussion and direction regarding the Parks and Recreation Master Plan and Park Facilities Impact Fee Report. City Manager Bill Kelly discussed the purpose and intent of the Parks and Recreation Master Plan. Susan Jones of M.I.G, Inc. (Fullerton Office) provided background on the Strategic Plan which prompted the Parks and Recreation Master Plan; she noted that the City had information concerning parks and recreation facilities in a variety of sources and worked with the Public Works Services and Recreation and Community Services staff to consolidate information and combine all of the City's studies and reports concerning parks and facilities into one master plan document. She explained that sections from the City's General Plan Update concerning Recreation and Open Space, the Playgrounds Safety Audit and Parks Infrastructure Analysis, the Recreation and Community Services Strategic Plan, and the Arcadia Youth Master Plan are summarized and included as part of the Parks and Recreation Master Plan. She noted that the 10 -02 -2007 49:0126 existing park fee structure was reviewed to establish a park standard to ensure that future recreation needs are being met and further noted that park fees have not been adjusted since 1963 and were considered low for today's market cost to acquire land or develop facilities, and noted that the park fee is designed to provide recreation facilities for the community for future growth and should have been reviewed periodically and adjusted for inflation to keep pace with the cost to develop additional parks and facilities. Marshall Eyerman of MuniFinancial (Temecula Office) provided an overview of the proposed Park Facilities Impact Fee Study and explained the need for a park impact fee for new residential development and the expansion of existing residential properties so that new development pays the capital costs associated with growth. He noted that the types of projects that could be funded with park facilities impact fees are the acquisition of parkland, adjacent street improvements, and typical park improvements such as landscaping, irrigation and play structures, special use facilities and structures such as restrooms, sports complexes and buildings and to expand facilities. He explained that park impact fees can only be used for "new" facilities or to "expand facilities" and cannot be used to update existing facilities. He further explained how the proposed park impact fees were developed and how the fee is based on square footage of proposed projects to cover increasing the size of existing homes. He discussed the proposed fees for single family and multi family residential projects. It was the consensus of the City Council that a public hearing be set regarding the park facilities impact fee by the end of the year and that the appropriate resolution be prepared for adoption of the Parks and Recreation Master Plan. It was also the consensus that the proposed Parks and Recreation Master Plan be forwarded to the Recreation and Parks Commission for their input. C. Report, discussion and direction regarding selection of Acting Mayor for October 16, 2007 City Council Meeting. It was the consensus of the City Council that Council Member Chandler be appointed Acting Mayor at the October 16, 2007 due to the absence of Mayor Segal and Mayor Pro Tern Bob Harbicht. RECONVENE CITY COUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING TO OPEN SESSION Mayor Segal convened the Regular Meeting at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber. INVOCATION Reverend Thomas Shriver, Emmanuel Assembly of God PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Janet Sporleder, Director of Library & Museum Services ROLL CALL OF CITY COUNCIL /REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEMBERS: PRESENT: Council /Agency Member Amundson, Chandler, Harbicht, Wuo and Segal ABSENT: None REPORT FROM CITY ATTORNEY /AGENCY COUNSEL ON CLOSED SESSION /STUDY SESSION ITEMS 10 -02 -2007 49:0127 City Attorney Steve Deitsch reported that the City Council /Redevelopment Agency Board met in closed session to consider the one (1) item listed on the posted agenda under closed session for the Special Meeting. No reportable action was taken. The City Attorney also reported that the City Council conducted a study session and (1) received a draft report concerning a Parks and Recreation Master Plan and provided direction to staff to forward the Master Plan to the Parks & Recreation Commission for its consideration and recommendation; and also directed staff to bring back to a future City Council public hearing, the Park Facilities Impact Fee for consideration; (2) received a report regarding the retiree medical insurance program GASB 45 actuarial valuation and explained the new public reporting and disclosure obligations of local governments regarding unfunded post employment benefit programs for employees, no action was taken. He explained the funding decision regarding this program will be made at the time of adoption of the 2008 -09 budget; and (3) the City Council appointed Council Member Roger Chandler as Acting Mayor to preside over the October 16`" City Council meeting. SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION FROM CITY MANAGER/EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR REGARDING AGENDA ITEMS City Manager Bill Kelly announced that Public Hearing Item 1 b was withdrawn by the applicant MOTION TO READ ALL ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS BY TITLE ONLY AND WAIVE THE READING IN FULL A motion was made by Council /Agency Member Amundson, seconded by Council /Agency Member Chandler and carried on roll call vote to read all ordinances and resolutions by title only and waive the reading in full. PRESENTATIONS a. Presentation of Proclamation Designating October as Fire Prevention Month. PUBLIC HEARING a. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING CONCERNING APPEAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2007 -07 AND ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN REVIEW 2006 -23 FOR A PROPOSED L.A. FITNESS HEALTH CLUB AND RELATED PARKING MODIFICATION AT 1325 S. BALDWIN AVENUE. Recommended Action: Approve City Attorney Steve Deitsch explained the purpose of the continued public hearing item and the tie vote at the last City Council meeting. In response to a question by Mr. Deitsch, Council Member Harbicht responded that he read the minutes of the September 18, 2007 City Council meeting and viewed the video tape regarding the public hearing appeal of Conditional Use Permit 2007 -07 and Architectural Design Review 2006 -23 for a proposed L. A. Fitness Club and related parking modification at 1325 S. Baldwin Avenue. Mr. Deitsch commented that due process was accorded the appellant, the project applicant and all interested parties that commented at the public hearing on September 18, 2007 and the 10 -02 -2007 49:0128 public hearing can proceed as a continued public hearing with Council Member Harbicht participating. Mr. Deitsch advised that the Mayor reopen the public hearing and proceed with or without a staff report presentation since a full staff report was made at the last City Council meeting. He advised the Mayor that once the public hearing is reopened he should inquire if the City Council has questions or comments for the applicant or staff. Mayor Segal reopened the continued public hearing. Michael Pashaie, owner Arcadia Hub Shopping Center appeared and spoke in favor of the L.A. Fitness Health Club; he provided the City Council with a brief history of L.A. Fitness; he commented on the traffic and parking studies conducted the proposed design of the entire shopping center, a proposed 24 hour security guard at the center and additional parking. Tiffany Ti, a resident, appeared and spoke in opposition of the proposed 24 hour of operation of the L.A. Fitness Health Club; she shared concerns regarding crime, the safety of surrounding neighborhoods, the increase in traffic and shortage of parking spaces. Mike Callahan of L.A. Fitness International appeared and spoke regarding the parking and traffic studies conducted. Pat Amus, a resident, appeared and spoke in opposition of the L.A. Fitness Health Club; she shared concerns regarding traffic and parking issues, the peace and quiet of the neighborhood and the 24 hours of noise. Ron Hirsch, traffic consultant for the owners of the Shopping Center appeared and commented in favor of the traffic and parking studies conducted. Tom Pashaie, owner of the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center appeared and spoke regarding the parking issues, traffic concerns and commented on employee parking; he noted that 31 tenants of the Shopping Center signed the petition submitted to the City support L.A. Fitness in the center. Catherine Kim, a resident appeared and spoke in opposition of the L.A. Fitness Health Club and expressed concerns regarding the 24 hours of operation, parking and an increase in traffic in the area. Marco Oliveros, employee of Goldenwest Properties (Owners of Arcadia Hub Shopping Center) appeared and spoke regarding the parking issues and employee parking situation at the center. Hector Lucero, a resident appeared and spoke in favor of the L.A. Fitness Health Club. Mayor Segal noted for the record that a Petition was received by City signed by tenants of the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center in support of the proposed L.A. Fitness Health Club. A motion to close the public hearing was made by Council /Agency Member Chandler, seconded by Council /Agency Member Wuo and seeing no further objection, the Mayor closed the public hearing. 10 -02 -2007 49:0129 Mr. Wuo commented that if the project is approved, he would like to see the driveway west at of Baldwin Avenue become a `right in and right out' exit only; and also commented that he would like to see the hours changed from 24 hours operation consistent with the other L.A. Fitness Center hours for the benefit of the residents who live in the area of the proposed project. In response to the "right in and right out' exist only question by Council Member Wuo, City Engineer Phil Wray responded that staff can look into how that can be achieved. Mr. Deitsch asked if a change as proposed by the applicant regarding the number of parking spaces that would be restricted to 45 minute parking. In response to the question by Mr. Deitsch, Mr. Kruckeberg responded that it would be up to the City Council. A motion was made by Council /Agency Member Chandler, seconded by Council /Agency Member Harbicht and carried on roll call vote to deny the appeal and approve Resolution No. 6592 approving Conditional Use Permit 2007 -07 and Architectural Design Review 2006 -23 to convert the existing 43,544 square foot Ross Dress for Less Store to a new L.A. Fitness Health Club with a parking modification at the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center at 1325 S. Baldwin Avenue. AYES: Council /Agency Member Chandler, Harbicht and Segal NOES: Council Member Amundson and Wuo ABSENT: None b. CONSIDERATION OF AN APPEAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. CUP (PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 1b WAS WITHDRAWN BY THE APPLICANT) Zheng Quo appeared and spoke regarding vital organ sales in China and urged the City to issue a statement and advise City residents not to travel to China for organ transplantation. Flora Ge appeared and spoke regarding her different illnesses throughout her life, removal of organs for profit, issues concerning concentration camps in China and the release of Fallen Gun practitioners by the Chinese Communist Party. Bin Li appeared and spoke regarding the prosecution and the removal of organs from Fallen Gun practitioners for profit by the Chinese Community Party in China. The Mayor announced that the Brown Act allows public speakers to address the City Council on matters affecting the City of Arcadia and noted that no further speakers regarding the subject of organ transplantation and prosecution of Fallen Gun practitioners in China will be allowed. 10 -02 -2007 APPROXIMATELY 3,780 SQUARE FEET TO ACCOMMODATE A TOTAL OF 75 STUDENTS, AND TO HAVE AT LEAST 60 STUDENTS TRANSPORTED TO HOLLY AVENUE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL FOR RECREATIONAL ACTIVITIES AND PICK -UP. Recommended Action: Denial of the Conditional Use Permit 49:0130 Mario Duron appeared and spoke regarding a speeding ticket he received and requested that a speed limit sign be posted on Goldenwest. Mr. Kelly advised Mr. Duron of the California Vehicle Code regarding the speed limit in residential areas and the process for appealing his speeding ticket through the Court. Alene Scwenskowski appeared and thanked the City Council for addressing the Eisenhower Park issue. REPORTS FROM THE MAYOR, CITY COUNCIL AND CITY CLERK Council Member Wuo thanked City staff for taking care of the Eisenhower Park issue; and congratulated the Chamber of Commerce, sponsors and restaurants that participated in the Taste of Arcadia event which was a great success and well attended. Council Member Harbicht noted that he brought back a tube of mustard from his trip to Germany for each City Council Member; he commented that 1,874 kids signed up for the summer reading program and read 38,904 hours during the summer, 45,896 calls were made to the Library reference section; and there are 59 public computers at the library for use to the public at no cost; he noted that the Friends of the Library donated $60,000 to the Library and that there are 280 volunteers at the Library who volunteered over 11,000 hours during the year. He commended Janet Sporleder, Director of Library and Museum Services and her staff for a terrific report and job. Council Member Amundson noted that he attended a workshop on Planning Commissioner Training and noted some of the sessions he attended; he noted that he went on a tour with Mr. Malloy, the Director of Public Works Services to take sediment out of Santa Fe Damn; he also noted that Mr. Malloy provided him with an update on the County keeping trucks off the highway; he commended the Police and Recreation and Community Services departments for their actions in handling the Eisenhower Park issue and he also thanked the Mrs. Scwenskowski for coming out and thanking the staff. He noted that he and his family attended the Taste of Arcadia which was a great event. Council Member Chandler had nothing to report. Mayor Segal congratulated the Chamber of Commerce on a terrific event and evening. 2. CONSENT CALENDAR REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ITEMS: a. REGULAR MEETING MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 18, 2007. Recommended Action: Approve CITY COUNCIL ITEMS: b. REGULAR MEETING MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 18. 2007. Recommended Action: Approve 10 -02 -2007 49:0131 C. AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO A CONTRACT WITH ALL AMERICAN ASPHALT FOR THE DUARTE ROAD REHABILITATION PROJECT IN THE AMOUNT OF $997.200. Recommended Action: Approve AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO A CONTRACT WITH D &J FOOTHILL ELECTRICAL CONTRACTORS, INC. FOR THE REPLACEMENT Recommended Action: Approve e. ACCEPT ALL WORK PERFORMED BY INSPECTION ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION FOR THE 2006/2007 ANNUAL CONCRETE REPAIR PROJECT AS COMPLETE AND AUTHORIZE THE FINAL PAYMENT TO BE MADE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS SUBJECT TO STOP NOTICES. Recommended Action: Approve A motion was made by Council /Agency Member Chandler, seconded by Council /Agency Member Harbicht and carried on roll call vote to approve items 2.a through 2.e on the City Council /Agency Consent Calendars with the recommended revised language in items 2a and b. AYES: Council /Agency Members Chandler, Harbicht, Amundson, Wuo and Segal NOES: None ABSENT None ABSTAIN: Council /Agency Member Harbicht (Consent items 2a and b). 3. CITY MANAGER ti CITYWIDE STREET LIGHTING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT AND AREA 8 IN THE AMOUNT OF $143,230 AND APPROPRIATE $157.230 FROM THE GENERAL FUND'S UNAPPROPRIATED FUND BALANCE TO PROCEED WITH THE PROJECT. Recommended Action: Approved Public Works Services Director Pat Malloy provided a brief summary and background on the potential formation of a citywide and Area 8 (Santa Anita Oaks Homeowner's Association) street lighting assessment districts. Deputy Public Works Services Director Tom Tait provided an overview on the current street lighting districts and provided information on the different zones including the process of the formation of the street lighting assessment district via the Landscape and Lighting Act of 1972 documents. He discussed the request received from the Santa Anita Oaks Homeowner Association to upgrade their lights to a more decorative street lighting pole and fixture. Management Analyst Maria Aquino Management Analyst discussed MuniFinancial's proposal in assisting the City with the process of forming the proposed citywide street lighting assessment district including preparation of the required assessment documents, timelines to meet County Tax role deadlines, assist with the balloting process and public outreach efforts. 10 -02 -2007 49:0132 A motion was made by Council /Agency Member Harbicht, seconded by Council /Agency Member Chandler and carried on roll call to enter into a contract extension with Munifinancial Inc. for the establishment of a Citywide Street Lighting Assessment District and Area 8 in the amount of $143,230 and appropriate $157,230 from the general fund's unappropriated fund balance to proceed with the project. AYES: Council /Agency Members Harbicht, Chandler, Amundson, Wuo and Segal NOES: None ABSENT: None b. EISENHOWER MEMORIAL PARK RECREATION USAGE. Recommended Action: Provide Direction Mr. Kelly provided the staff report regarding the recent basketball tournaments at Eisenhower Park and provided an outline of alternatives for consideration. Mr. Kelly noted that at this time, staff recommends suspension of organized basketball tournaments in City parks. A motion was made by Council /Agency Member Amundson, seconded by Council /Agency Member Wuo and carried on roll call to suspend organized basketball tournaments in City Parks. AYES: Council /Agency Members Amundson, Wuo, Chandler, Harbicht and Segal NOES: None ABSENT: None After discussion, Council Member Wuo suggested, with the consensus of the City Council, that the Recreation and Parks Commission review uses and regulations at all city parks and report back to the City Council. C. PARTIES. Recommended Action: Approve City Manager Bill Kelly provided the staff report regarding an amendment to the Best Best & Krieger Agreement for certain legal services reimbursed to the City by third parties. He noted that the amendment would allow Best Best & Krieger to bill the City at "private law" billing rates less 10% for services reimbursed to the City by third parties. Mr. Kelly noted that this amendment does not affect the rates the City pays for City Attorney services. A motion was made by Council /Agency Member Harbicht, seconded by Council /Agency Member Chandler and carried on roll call to approve and amendment to the Best Best & Krieger Agreement for certain legal services reimbursed to the City by third parties. AYES: Council /Agency Members Harbicht, Chandler, Amundson, Wu and Segal NOES: None ABSENT: None 10 -02 -2007 49:0133 ADJOURNMENT The City Council Redevelopment Agency adjourned this meeting at 9:35 p.m. to October 16, 2007 in the City Council Chamber Conference Room. James H. Barrows, City Clerk i r Lisa Mussenden, Chief Deputy City Clerk 10 -02 -2007 A . C \. MIM RE POR T Development Services Department DATE: October 2, 2007 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Don Penman, Assistant City Manager /Development Services Director By: Jason Kruckeberg, Community Development Administrator 51 le Prepared. By: Lisa L. Flores, Senior Planner o* SUBJECT: SUMMARY The subject applications were filed by Michael Pashaie on behalf of L.A. Fitness to convert the existing 43,544 square foot Ross Dress - for -Less store to a new L.A. Fitness health club at the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center, and approve the architectural design of the building. The proposed business hours will be 24- hours everyday. The Development Services Department is recommending approval of the applications, and adoption of Resolution No. 6592 approving the health club and related parking modification, subject to the conditions of approval outlined in this staff report. BACKGROUND On July 24, 2007, the Planning Commission approved Conditional Use Permit 2007 -07 and Architectural Design Review 2006 -03 to permit a new L.A. Fitness healthy club, and related parking modification at the subject location. On August 14, 2007, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 1760. Within the Mayor and City Council October 2, 2007 Page 2 prescribed five working day appeal period, Mr. Mack, property owner at 748 Colleta Street, raised concerns regarding parking and traffic at the August 21, 2007 City Council meeting, and requested the City Council to appeal the project to reconsider the proposed use. As a result, Councilmember Wuo appealed the project for reconsideration in order to have a full review of the facts and circumstances prior to a final decision by the City. On September 18, 2007, the City Council held a public hearing to consider the appeal. After further discussion regarding traffic and parking, the City Council continued the proposed project due to a split vote of 2 -2 (favor vs. opposed). A full quorum is expected at the October 2, 2007 regular City Council meeting. PROJECT SITE The majority of the buildings that exist on the site were originally constructed in 1957. Although the shopping center consists of two separate parcels, the center is joined together through a recorded reciprocal parking and driveway easement with the neighboring Von's Pavilions shopping center to utilize the parking areas in common (see attached site plan). On April 10, 1987, the City required the property owner to record a covenant that restricts the property owner from leasing the basement area of the Ross Dress for Less store for retail and non - retail uses including storage of goods and merchandise. Since retail uses are permitted in the C -2 zone without any discretionary review, a covenant was used as a mechanism to ensure that a business license would not be issued for additional retail space without having the property owner apply for a parking modification. However, if the City Council approves the proposed project then the covenant shall be released since the parking modification has been analyzed through the Conditional Use Permit. In 1995, the Planning Commission approved Conditional Use Permit No. 1995 -11 with a parking modification to permit a 25,000 square foot L.A. Fitness health club on the second floor, directly above the Burlington Coat Factory (currently occupied by Joann Fabrics). However, the applicant chose not to occupy that unit since they needed a larger facility. DISCUSSION Project The applicant is requesting to convert the existing 43,544 square foot Ross Dress for Less store that is located at the corner of Baldwin Avenue and Naomi Avenue to a new L.A. Fitness health club, as shown on the submitted site plan. Mayor and City Council October 2, 2007 Page 3 The new business would occupy the basement and first level of the retail space, and would consist of several work -out areas totaling 38,844 square feet (i.e. aerobics, fitness, gymnasium, indoor swimming pool, and basketball court), 1,900 square feet of non - workout areas (i.e. locker rooms and kids club), and 2,800 square feet of office area. The fitness health club will be open 24 -hours everyday with a maximum of 15 employees during each shift. Parking The site originally. had 1,182 parking spaces, which met the minimum parking requirements when the site was developed. However, in 1984, the on -site parking areas were redesigned to provide 18 less parking spaces. In May of 1999, an additional 13 parking spaces were eliminated due to seismic retrofit within the parking structure, to accommodate a new trash enclosure, and provide additional handicapped parking spaces. Since then several parking modifications were approved for the shopping center (i.e. Starbucks Coffee Shop, Subway, Osaka, Kids Island, Vons Pavilions, and China Trust Bank). The site currently has 1,151 parking spaces that are located in a large surface parking lot on the south side of the center, a smaller surface lot along Duarte Road behind Pavilions market, and within a single -level parking structure (399 parking spaces). The Arcadia Municipal Code requires that a health club provide 1 parking space per 35 square feet of gross floor area in all workout areas, and 1 space for every 250 square feet of sales /office area. As such, the number of parking spaces does not comply with the current code requirement of 1,151 spaces for the pre- existing shopping center. With the proposed addition of the L.A. Fitness health club, the total number of on -site spaces required for the shopping center would be 2,335 spaces. Although the City's parking requirements were amended in 2004, an amendment was not considered to the health club parking requirements since prior to 2004 most of the health clubs occupied existing buildings that were approximately 10,000 square feet or less and could comply with this requirement. It was not until 2005 when a 38,990 square foot, 24 -hour Fitness health club was proposed at 125 N. First Avenue that staff determined the current requirement could not reasonably be applied to a facility of this size because the parking requirement does not anticipate this type of facility, In addition, the City Engineer and Traffic Engineer determined that a parking study was necessary for projects like this to better review parking impacts (a parking modification was approved for 24 -hour Fitness - 280 parking spaces in lieu of 791 spaces). Mayor and City Council October 2, 2007 Page 4 Due to the current site parking deficit as compared to the City's parking requirements and the fact that the City's parking requirements (1 space for every 35 square feet of gross floor area) for a health club was not intended for a facility of this size, a parking and traffic study was prepared by Hirsch /Green Transportation consulting to provide a detailed comparison between the City's parking requirements and the observed parking demand of other L.A. Fitness facilities that are of similar size, a forecast of parking demand for the proposed project, as well as a shared parking analysis. Also, a survey of the existing parking demand was conducted to provide actual data of current parking utilization, and to provide a baseline to evaluate the potential parking impacts from the proposed L.A. Fitness facility. Based on the results, the shopping center with the proposed L.A. Fitness will not fully utilize the parking supply provided since the proposed health club does not exhibit the same parking profile as general retail or commercial uses in that parking demand during peak periods does not overlap. In fact, during the peak period when all uses are in full operation the site will be approximately 62% occupied, leaving a minimum of 454 available spaces. The site's parking demand was also adjusted to account for the year -end holiday shopping periods. Even adjusting for 'a maximum anticipated usage during seasonal parking demands, the site would be at maximum capacity of 85 %, leaving a minimum of 176 spaces available beyond the anticipated need. Therefore, according to the parking study there will always be additional parking spaces available on -site. A traffic report was also prepared by Hirsch /Green Transportation consulting to determine if the proposed project would have any traffic impacts to the major four intersections in the area: • Baldwin Avenue and Duarte Road • Baldwin Avenue and Naomi Avenue • Naomi Avenue and Golden West Avenue • Golden West Avenue and Duarte Road The City Engineer and Traffic Engineer have reviewed the reports and determined the proposed project will not create any significant impacts on -site or to any of the major intersections, nor will it create any impacts to the Los Angeles County Congestion Management Program (CMP) which monitors the major intersections and freeway segments in the project vicinity. While some parking areas within the site may experience high utilizations throughout the day and week, the City Engineer and Traffic. Engineer determined that no significant parking impacts and no parking "overflow" is expected onto the site adjacent streets or parking areas. Mayor and City Council October 2, 2007 Page 5 The primary issue with regard to parking at this location is proximity to active uses. As a whole, the parking is adequate for all uses. However, the area in front of the proposed LA Fitness is the most impacted portion of the parking lot. To provide additional available parking for the patrons of the stores and businesses adjacent to the proposed L.A. Fitness health club, the property owner has volunteered to restrict the 37 parking spaces that face the store frontage to 45- minute parking (refer to the site plan), and required that the employees park within the under utilized parking areas along the frontages of Duarte Road and Naomi Avenue from 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m., everyday, as suggested in the parking study. This will be enforced. by the lease agreement and a condition was imposed by the Planning Commission there shall be one (1) uniformed security guard on -duty 24 -hours every day to enforce the 45- minute parking requirements, the employee area, and to ensure the L.A. Fitness customers do not park across the street at the CVS parking lot, located at 1401 S. Baldwin Avenue (refer to condition of approval' no. 6). Therefore, by relocating employee parking away from the more highly utilized parking areas, this will simply provide additional available parking for the patrons, and minimize any on -site parking congestion. In addition, the uniformed security guard ensures the safety and security of the site and justifies the 24 -hour a day operation schedule. Architectural Design Review Staff has worked diligently with the applicant's architect for several months on the proposed architectural style of the building to create an attractive physical image with detailed elevations that will hopefully set the new architectural style for any future remodel to this shopping center. As a result, two grand towers are proposed to develop a new focal point at the corner of Baldwin /Naomi Avenue. Also, the building was designed to include non - continuous facades, metal awnings, tall storefront windows, landscaping over the metal trellises to break -up the blank fagade, and cultured stones at the base of the building and on the towers. The proposed wall signs are also shown to ensure the sign colors complement the colors of the structure and architectural design, and not applied as an afterthought. ANALYSIS Uses such as health clubs require conditional use permits, and traffic concerns can be addressed as part of the consideration of such applications. Generally, staff does not encourage uses that are deficient in parking. However, based on the applicant's proposal and the parking and traffic reports, the existing on -site parking is expected to adequately accommodate the parking demand for the Mayor and City Council October 2, 2007 Page, 6 existing and proposed uses. Despite the fact that the City parking code requirements suggests a parking deficit for the site, and the L.A. Fitness would result in an increase in the parking demands at the site, the City Engineer and Traffic Engineer determined that the center is not anticipated to result in any on- site parking shortages when the center is fully occupied. Also, staff believes that the applicant's proposal meets the intent of the design criteria set forth in the City's Architectural Design Review Guidelines. The new design elements of the subject building, the towers, tall'storefront windows, and signage would be visually harmonious with the surrounding 'commercial developments (see the attached building elevations). It is staffs opinion that the proposed health club is also the highest and most appropriate use for this shopping center since the peak parking demand for this use and retail /commercial uses does not overlap, therefore minimizing parking impacts. Also, the offset of peak parking demands allows for "shared parking ", where parking spaces designated for one land use are not fully utilized at all times of the day, and are available for use by the other uses on this property. The proposed project will keep the mix of uses at this center active, and would meet the goals of the City's General Plan which is to provide new recreational activities to the existing residences and local employment opportunities.' As for the facility proposed to be open 24 -hours a day, the City's Police Department recommends that a surveillance camera'be placed in the parking area that faces the west entrance, within the pool area since there will no lifeguard on duty, and at the main reception area to deter any disturbance and /or robberies. A condition of approval to this effect has been imposed (refer to condition of approval no. 7). Therefore, it is staffs opinion that the proposed use would be an appropriate addition to the shopping center and the general area since it would revitalize this center, provided that the operation of such uses remains consistent with this application. Code Requirements All City requirements regarding disabled access and facilities, occupancy limits, building safety, health code compliance, parking and site design shall be complied . to meet the satisfaction of the Building Official, Community Development Administrator, Fire Marshall, and the Public Works Services Director. Mayor and City Council October 2, 2007 Page 7 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act, the Development Services Department has prepared an initial study for the proposed project. Said initial study did not disclose any substantial or potentially substantial adverse change that cannot be mitigated to a level that is less than significant in any of the physical conditions within the area affected by the project including land, air, water, minerals, flora, fauna, ambient noise and objects of historical or aesthetic significance. When considering the record as a whole, there is no evidence that the proposed project will have any potential for an adverse effect on wildlife resources or the habitat upon which the wildlife depends. Therefore, a Negative Declaration has been prepared for this project. FISCAL IMPACT None CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. The Applicant shall comply with Resolution No. 6592, which approves Conditional Use Permit 2007 -07 with the related parking modification and Architectural Design Review 2006 -23. 2. The Applicant shall comply with all conditions set forth by the Planning Commission. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council deny the appeal, and approve Resolution No. 6592, thereby adopting the Negative Declaration and approve Conditional Use Permit 2007 -07 with the related parking modification and Architectural Design Review 2006 -23 for a new 43,544 square foot L.A. Fitness health club at 1325 S. Baldwin Avenue. Approved: WrAA William R. Kelly, City Manager Attachments: Resolution No. 6592 City Council Staff Report, dated September 18, 2007 Mayor and City Council October 2, 2007 Page 8 Appeal Letter from Councilmember Wuo, dated August 19, 2007 Planning Commission Minutes, dated July 24, 2007 and August 14, 2007 P.C. Resolution No. 1760 P.C. Staff Reports dated July 24, 2007 and August 14, 2007 Negative Declaration Memos from City Traffic Engineer, dated May 1; 2006, May 4, 2006, and August 7, 2006 Parking and Traffic Impact Analysis Reports, dated July 2006 Vicinity and Aerial Maps Full size and reduced copies of the plans Color Renderings RESOLUTION NO. 6592 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2007 -07 AND ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN REVIEW 2006 -23 TO CONVERT THE EXISTING 43,544 SQUARE FOOT ROSS DRESS FOR LESS STORE TO A NEW L.A. FITNESS HEALTH CLUB WITH A PARKING MODIFICATION AT THE ARCADIA HUB SHOPPING CENTER AT 1325 S. BALDWIN AVENUE WHEREAS, the City of Arcadia on August 3, 2006, received an Architectural Design Review application followed by a Conditional Use Permit application on May 16, 2007 by Michael Pashaie on behalf of L.A. Fitness to convert the existing 43,544 square foot Ross Dress For Less store to a new L.A. Fitness health club with a parking modification at 1325 S. Baldwin Avenue; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act, Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq. ( "CEQA "), and the State's CEQA Guidelines, the City of Arcadia prepared an Initial Study and determined, there is no substantial evidence that the approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 07 -07 and Architectural Design Review No. 06 -23 would result in a significant adverse effect on the environment. Accordingly, a Negative Declaration has been prepared and notice of that fact was given in the manner required by law; and 1 WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the Planning Commission on July 24, 2007, at which time the Planning Commission approved the project and adopted the Resolution on September 14, 2007; and WHEREAS, within the prescribed five -day appeal period, Councilmember Wuo appealed the project for reconsideration in order to have a full review of the facts and circumstances prior to a final decision by the City; and WHEREAS, a public hearing was held .by the City Council on September 18, 2007, at which time all interested persons were given full opportunity to be heard and present evidence. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. That the factual data submitted by the Development Services Department in the attached report is true and correct. SECTION 2. This City Council finds: 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 because the proposed use will be compatible with the surrounding uses, and it will be an appropriate use for the subject site, and the 2 proposed project will provide adequate parking for the new health club and existing restaurant. 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, 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 1. Arcadia Municipal Code. 4. That the site abuts three streets that are 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 because the land use and current zoning are 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. 3 SECTION 3. That for the foregoing reasons this City Council grants Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 07 -07 and Architectural Design Review No. 06 -23 to permit a L.A. Fitness health club with a parking modification at 1325 S. Baldwin Avenue, upon the following conditions: 1. The 37 parking spaces that face the store frontage shall be restricted to 45- minute parking, written on grade to indicate this restriction. 2. The employee parking shall be restricted to, and employees shall be directed to, park at all the parking spaces along the frontages of Duarte Road and Naomi Avenue, as shown on Figure 5 of the Parking Study, dated July 2006. 3. All exterior light fixtures shall be hooded and arranged to reflect away from the adjoining properties and streets. 4. The City Council shall have approved the release of the Covenant and Agreement that restricted the property owner from leasing the basement area for retail and non - retail space, dated April 10, 1987. 5. Landscaping material shall be planted on the five metal wall trellises. 6. The health club shall be permitted to be open 24 -hours every day. 7. There shall be one (1) uniformed security guard on -duty 24 -hours every day to enforce the 45- minute parking requirements, the employee parking area, 4 and to ensure the L.A. Fitness customers do not park across the street at the CVS parking lot, located at 1401 S. Baldwin Avenue. 8. A parking study shall be required for any new and existing uses within this shopping center that is subject to a parking modification. 9. The applicant shall install and maintain in good working order at all times a surveillance camera outside the facility, within the swimming pool area, and at the main reception area for security purposes. 10. Approval of CUP 2007 -07 and ADR No. 2006 -23 shall not take effect until the property owner(s) and applicants have executed and filed the Acceptance Form available from the Development Services Department to indicate awareness and acceptance of these conditions of approval. 11. 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. 5 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. SECTION 3. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. Passed, approved and adopted this day of , 2007. Mayor of the City of Arcadia ATTEST: City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: 44 41 b Stephen P. Deitsch City Attorney Cel STAFF • 1' open /'1. 11'1 DATE: September 18, 2007 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Don Penman, Assistant City Manager /Development Services Director By: Jason Kruckeberg, Community Development Administrator j Le Prepared By: Lisa L. Flores, Senior Planner elf SUBJECT: SUMMARY The subject applications were filed by Michael Pashaie on behalf of L.A. Fitness to convert the existing 43,544 square foot Ross Dress - for -Less store to a new L.A. Fitness health club at the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center, and approve the architectural design of the building. The proposed business hours will be 24- hours everyday. The Development Services Department is recommending approval of the applications, and adoption of Resolution No. 6592 approving the health club and related parking modification, subject to the conditions of approval outlined in this staff report. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION AND APPEAL On July 24, 2007, the Planning Commission approved Conditional Use Permit 2007 -07 and Architectural Design Review 2006 -03 to permit a new L.A. Fitness healthy club, and related parking modification at the subject location. On August 14, 2007, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 1760. Within the Mayor and City COL...;il September 18, 2007 Page 2 prescribed five working day appeal period, Mr. Mack, property owner at 748 Colleta Street, raised concerns regarding parking and traffic at the August 21, 2007 City Council meeting, and requested the City Council to appeal the project to reconsider the proposed use. As a result, Councilmember Wuo appealed the project for reconsideration in order to have a full review of the facts and circumstances prior to a final decision by the City. BACKGROUND The majority of the buildings that exist on the site were originally constructed in 1957. Although the shopping center consists of two separate parcels, the center is joined together through a recorded reciprocal parking and driveway easement with the neighboring Von's Pavilions shopping center to utilize the parking areas in common (see attached site plan). On April 10, 1987, the City required the property owner to record a covenant that restricts the property owner from leasing the basement area of the Ross Dress for Less store for retail and non - retail uses including storage of goods and merchandise. Since retail uses are permitted in the C -2 zone without any discretionary review, a covenant was used as a mechanism to ensure that a business license would not be issued for additional retail space without having the property owner apply for a parking modification. However, if the City Council approves the proposed project then the covenant shall be released since the parking modification has been analyzed through the Conditional Use Permit. In 1995, the Planning Commission approved Conditional Use Permit No. 1995 -11 with a parking modification to permit a 25,000 square foot L.A. Fitness health club on the second floor, directly above the Burlington Coat Factory (currently occupied by Joann Fabrics). However, the applicant chose not to occupy that unit since they needed a larger facility. DISCUSSION Project The applicant is requesting to convert the existing 43,544 square foot Ross Dress for Less store that is located at the corner of Baldwin Avenue and Naomi Avenue to a new L.A. Fitness health club, as shown on the submitted site plan. The new business would occupy the basement and first level of the retail space, and would consist of several work -out areas totaling 38,844 square feet (i.e. aerobics, fitness, gymnasium, indoor swimming pool, and basketball court), 1,900 square feet of non - workout areas (i.e. locker rooms and kids club), and Mayor and City CoL..JI September 18, 2007 Page 3 2,800 square feet of office area. The fitness health club will be open 24 -hours everyday with a maximum of 15 employees during each shift. Parking The site originally had 1,182 parking spaces, which met the minimum parking requirements when the site was developed. However, in 1984, the on -site parking areas were redesigned to provide 18 less parking spaces. In May of 1999, an additional 13 parking spaces were eliminated due to seismic retrofit within the parking structure, to accommodate a new trash enclosure, and provide additional handicapped parking spaces. Since then several parking. modifications were approved for the shopping center (i.e. Starbucks Coffee Shop, Subway, Osaka, Kids Island, Vons Pavilions, and China Trust Bank). The site currently has 1,151 parking spaces that are located in a large surface parking lot on the south side of the center, a smaller surface, lot along Duarte Road behind Pavilions market, and within a single -level parking structure (399 parking spaces). The Arcadia Municipal Code requires that a health club provide 1 parking space per 35 square feet of gross floor area in all workout areas, and 1 space for every 250 square feet of sales /office area. As such, the number of parking spaces does not comply with the current code requirement of 1,151 spaces for the pre- existing shopping center. With the proposed addition of the L.A. Fitness health club, the total number of on -site spaces required for the shopping center would be 2,335 spaces. Although the City's parking requirements were amended in 2004, an amendment was not considered to the health club parking requirements since prior to 2004 most of the health clubs occupied existing buildings that were approximately 10,000 square feet or less and could comply with this requirement. It was not until 2005 when a 38,990 square foot, 24 -hour Fitness health club was proposed at 125 N. First Avenue that staff determined the current requirement could not reasonably be applied to a facility of this size because the parking requirement does not anticipate this type of facility, In addition, the City Engineer and Traffic Engineer determined that a parking study was necessary for projects like this to better review parking impacts (a parking modification was approved for 24 -hour Fitness - 280 parking spaces in lieu of 791 spaces). Due to the current site parking deficit as compared to the City's parking requirements and the fact that the City's parking requirements (1 space for every 35 square feet of gross floor area) for a health club was not intended for a facility of this size, a parking and traffic study was prepared by Hirsch /Green Transportation consulting to provide a detailed comparison between the City's Mayor and City Cou.. ,d September 18, 2007 Page 4 parking requirements and the observed parking demand of other L.A. Fitness facilities that are of similar size, a forecast of parking demand for the proposed project, as well as a shared parking analysis. Also, a survey of the existing parking demand was conducted to provide actual data of current parking utilization, and to provide a baseline to evaluate the potential parking impacts from the proposed L.A. Fitness facility. Based on the results, the shopping center with the proposed L.A. Fitness will not fully utilize the parking supply provided since the proposed health club does not exhibit the same parking profile as general retail or commercial uses in that parking demand during peak periods does not overlap. In fact, during the peak period when all uses are in full operation the site will be approximately 62% occupied, leaving a minimum of 454 available spaces. The site's parking demand was also adjusted to account for the year -end holiday shopping periods. Even adjusting for a maximum anticipated usage during seasonal parking demands, the site would be at maximum capacity of 85 %, leaving a minimum of 176 spaces available beyond the anticipated need. Therefore, according to the parking study there will always be additional parking spaces available on -site. A traffic report was also prepared by Hirsch /Green Transportation consulting to determine if the proposed project would have any traffic impacts to the major four intersections in the area: • Baldwin Avenue and Duarte Road • Baldwin Avenue and Naomi Avenue • Naomi Avenue and Golden West Avenue • Golden West Avenue and Duarte Road The City Engineer and Traffic Engineer have reviewed the reports and determined the proposed project will not create any significant impacts on -site or to any of the major intersections, nor will it create any impacts to the Los Angeles County Congestion Management Program (CMP) which monitors the major intersections and freeway segments in the project vicinity. While some parking areas within the site may experience high utilizations throughout the day and week, the City .Engineer and Traffic Engineer determined that no significant parking impacts and no parking "overflow" is expected onto the site adjacent streets or parking areas. The primary issue with regard to parking at this location is proximity to active uses. As a whole, the parking is adequate for all uses. However, the area in front of the proposed LA Fitness is the most impacted portion of the parking lot. To provide additional available parking for the patrons of the stores and businesses adjacent to the proposed L.A. Fitness health club, the property owner has Mayor and City Cou —ii September 18, 2007 Page 5 volunteered to restrict the 37 parking spaces that face the store frontage to 45- minute parking (refer to the site plan), and required that the employees park within the under utilized parking areas along the frontages of Duarte Road and Naomi Avenue from 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m., everyday, as suggested in the parking study. This will be enforced by the lease agreement and a condition was imposed by the Planning Commission there shall be one (1) uniformed security guard on -duty 24 -hours every day to enforce the 45- minute parking requirements, the employee area, and to ensure the L.A. Fitness customers do not park across the street at the CVS parking lot, located at 1401 S. Baldwin Avenue (refer to condition of approval no. 6). Therefore, by relocating employee parking away from the more highly utilized parking areas, this will simply provide additional available parking for the patrons, and minimize any on -site parking congestion. In addition, the uniformed security guard ensures the safety and security of the site and justifies the 24 -hour a day operation schedule. Architectural Design Review Staff has worked diligently with the applicant's architect for several months on the proposed architectural style of the building to create an attractive physical image with detailed elevations that will hopefully set the new architectural style for any future remodel to this shopping center. As a result, two grand towers are proposed to develop a new focal point at the corner of Baldwin /Naomi Avenue. Also, the building was designed to include non - continuous facades, metal awnings, tall storefront windows, landscaping over the metal trellises to break -up the blank fagade, and cultured stones at the base of the building and on the towers. The proposed wall signs are also shown to ensure the sign colors complement the colors of the structure and architectural design, and not applied as an afterthought. ANALYSIS Uses such as health clubs require conditional use permits, and traffic concerns can be addressed as part of the consideration of such applications. Generally, staff does not encourage uses that are deficient in parking. However, based on the applicant's proposal and the parking and traffic reports, the existing on -site parking is expected to adequately accommodate the parking demand for the existing and proposed uses. Despite the fact that the City parking code requirements suggests a parking deficit for the site, and the L.A. Fitness would result in an increase in the parking demands at the site, the City Engineer and Traffic Engineer determined that the center is not anticipated to result in any on- site parking shortages when the center is fully occupied. Mayor and City Cou..jl September 18, 2007 Page 6 Also, staff believes that the applicant's proposal meets the intent of the design criteria set forth in the City's Architectural Design Review Guidelines. The new design elements of the subject building, the towers, tall storefront windows, and signage would be visually harmonious with the surrounding commercial developments (see the attached building elevations). It is staff's opinion that the proposed health club is also the highest and most appropriate use for this shopping center since the peak parking demand for this use and retail /commercial uses does not overlap, therefore minimizing parking impacts. Also, the offset of peak parking demands allows for "shared parking ", where parking spaces designated for one land use are not fully utilized at all times of the day, and are available for use by the other uses on this property. The proposed project will keep the mix of uses at this center active, and would meet the goals of the City's General Plan which is to provide new recreational activities to the existing residences and local employment opportunities. As for the facility proposed to be open 24 -hours a day, the City's Police Department recommends that a surveillance camera be placed in the parking area . that faces the west entrance, within the pool area since there will no lifeguard on duty, and at the main reception area to deter any disturbance and /or robberies. A condition of approval to this effect has been imposed (refer to condition of approval no. 7). Therefore, it is staffs opinion that the proposed use would be an appropriate addition to the shopping center and the general area since it would revitalize this center, provided that the operation of such uses remains consistent with this application. Code Requirements All City requirements regarding disabled access and facilities, occupancy limits, building safety, health code compliance, parking and site design shall be complied to meet the satisfaction of the Building Official, Community Development Administrator, Fire Marshall, and the Public Works Services Director. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act, the Development Services Department has prepared an initial study for the proposed project. Said initial study did not disclose any substantial or potentially substantial adverse change that cannot be mitigated to a level that is less than Mayor and City COL.. -il September 18, 2007 Page 7 significant in any of the physical conditions within the area affected by the project including land, air, water, minerals, flora, fauna, ambient noise and objects of historical or aesthetic significance. When considering the record as a whole, there is no evidence that the proposed project will have any potential for an adverse effect on wildlife resources or the habitat upon which the wildlife depends. Therefore, a Negative Declaration has been prepared for this project. FISCAL IMPACT None CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. The Applicant shall comply with Resolution No. 6592, which approves Conditional Use Permit 2007 -07 with the related parking modification and Architectural Design Review 2006 -23. 2. The Applicant shall comply with all conditions set forth by the Planning Commission. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 6592, and approve Conditional Use Permit 2007 -07 with the related parking modification and Architectural Design Review 2006 -23 for a new 43,544 square foot L.A. Fitness health club at 1325 S. Baldwin Avenue. Approved: i n m _� William R. Kelly, City Manager Attachments: Resolution No. 6592 Appeal Letter from Councilmember Wuo, dated August 19, 2007 Planning Commission Minutes, dated July 24, 2007 and August 14, 2007 P.C. Resolution No. 1760 P.C. Staff Reports, dated July 24, 2007 and August 14, 2007 Negative Declaration Memos from City Traffic Engineer, dated May 1, 2006, Mayor and City Cou,. -il September 18, 2007 Page 8 May 4, 2006, and August 7, 2006 Parking and Traffic Impact Analysis Reports, dated July 2006 Vicinity and Aerial Maps Full size and reduced copies of the plans Color Renderings RESOLUTION NO. 6592 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2007 -07 AND ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN REVIEW 2006 -23 TO CONVERT THE EXISTING 43,544 SQUARE FOOT ROSS DRESS FOR LESS STORE TO A NEW L.A. FITNESS HEALTH CLUB WITH A PARKING MODIFICATION AT 'THE ARCADIA HUB SHOPPING CENTER AT 1325 S. BALDWIN AVENUE. WHEREAS, the City of Arcadia on August 3, 2006, received an Architectural Design Review application followed by a Conditional Use Permit application on May 16, 2007 by Michael Pashaie on behalf of L.A. Fitness to convert the existing 43,544 square foot Ross Dress For Less store to a new L.A. Fitness health club with a parking modification at 1325 S. Baldwin Avenue; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act, Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq. ( "CEQA "), and the State's CEQA Guidelines, the City of Arcadia prepared an Initial Study and determined, there is no substantial evidence that the approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 07 -07 and Architectural Design Review No. 06 -23 would result in a significant adverse effect on the environment. Accordingly, a Negative Declaration has been prepared and notice of that fact was given in the mariner required by law; and WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the Planning Commission on July 24, 2007, at which time the Planning Commission approved the project and adopted the Resolution on September 14, 2007; and, WHEREAS, within the prescribed five -day appeal period, Councilmember Wuo appealed the project.for reconsideration in order to have a full review of the facts and circumstances prior to a final decision by the City; and, WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the City Council on September 18, 2007, at which time all interested persons were given full opportunity to be heard and present evidence. 'NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. That the factual data submitted by the Development Services Department in the attached report is true and correct. SECTION 2. This City Council finds: 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 because the proposed use will be compatible with the surrounding uses, and it will be an appropriate use for the subject site, and the proposed project will provide adequate parking for the new health club and existing restaurant. 2 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, 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 three streets that are 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 because the land use and current zoning are 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. SECTION 3. That for the foregoing reasons this City Council grants Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 07 -07 and Architectural Design Review No. 06- 23 to permit a L.A. Fitness health club with a parking modification at 1325 S. Baldwin Avenue, upon the following conditions: c 1. The 37 parking spaces that face the store frontage shall be restricted to 45- minute parking, written on grade to indicate this restriction. 2. The employee parking shall be restricted to, and employees shall be directed to, park at all the parking spaces along the frontages of Duarte Road and Naomi Avenue, as shown on Figure 5 of the Parking Study, dated July 2006. 3. All exterior light fixtures shall be hooded and arranged to reflect away from the adjoining properties and streets. 4. The City Council shall have approved the release of the Covenant and Agreement that restricted the property owner from leasing the basement area for retail and non - retail space, dated April 10, 1987. 5. Landscaping material shall be planted on the five metal wall trellises. 6. The health club shall be permitted to be open 24 -hours every day. 7. There shall be one (1) uniformed security guard on -duty 24 -hours every day to enforce the 45- minute parking requirements, the employee parking area, and to ensure the L.A. Fitness customers do not park across the street at the CVS parking lot, located at 1401 S. Baldwin Avenue. 8. A parking study shall be required for any new and existing uses within this shopping center that is subject to a parking modification. 9. The applicant shall install and maintain in good working order at all times a surveillance camera outside the facility, within the swimming pool area, and at the main reception area for security purposes. 10. Approval of CUP 2007 -07 and ADR No. 2006 -23 shall not take effect until the property owner(s) and applicants have executed and filed the Acceptance Form available from the Development Services Department to indicate awareness and acceptance of these conditions of approval. 11. 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. 5 SECTION 4. The decision, findings and conditions contained in this Resolution reflect the City Council's action of September 18, 2007, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: SECTION 5. The Secretary shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. Mayor of the City of Arcadia ATTEST: City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: � P. Stephen P. Deitsch, City Attorney Col AUG.22.2007 11 :39AM ALDWIN MGMT City of Ar cadia John Wuo Council Member August 22, 2007 Bill Kelly City Managor Re: CUP 07 -07 LA Fitness Center M Bill: NO. 198 P.1 RECEIVED AU6 2 2 2007 CITY OF ARCAOIA CITY CLERK I would like to appeal CUP 07 -07 to the City Council, Thank you. Sincerely, / mber n Wuo uncil Me 240 West Huntington Drive Post Office Box 60021 Atradia, CA 91066.6021 (626) 57¢5403 (626) 446.5729 Pax MINUTES i1 ARCADIA CITY PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, July 24, 2007, 7:00 P.M. Arcadia City Council Chambers The Planning Commission of the City of Arcadia met in regular session on Tuesday, July 24, at 7:00 p.m., in the Arcadia Council Chambers of the City of Arcadia, at 240 W. Huntington Drive, with Chairman Baderian presiding. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL: PRESENT: Commissioners Baderian, Baerg, Beranek, Hsu and Parrille ABSENT: None Chairman Baderian welcomed Commissioner Baerg to the Planning Commission. MOTION: It was moved by Commissioner Hsu, seconded by Commissioner Parrille, to read all Resolutions by title only and waive reading the full body of the resolution. AYES: Commissioners Baderian, Baerg, Beranek, Hsu and Parrille NOES: None OTHERS ATTENDING Community Development Administrator Jason Kruckeberg Senior Planner Lisa Flores Associate Planner Tom Li Assistant Planner Steven Lee Senior Administrative Assistant Billie Tone SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION FROM STAFF REGARDING AGENDA ITEMS Mr. Lee distributed a copy of an email message from Ms. Jill Hopper regarding Agenda Item 1, CUP 06-16, TIME RESERVED FOR THOSE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO WISH TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON NON - PUBLIC HEARING MATTERS — Five - minute time limit per person None PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS 1. PUBLIC HEARING CUP 06 -16 12336 Lower Azusa Road William Chan and Scott Chan The applicant is requesting a Conditional Use Permit and a Parking Modification to allow the conversion of an existing 36,283 square -foot warehouse facility into a badminton club. No floor space will be added to the existing building. Assistant Planner Steven Lee presented the staff report. Commissioner Parrille asked if events other than tournaments would be permitted at this location and, if so, wouldn't those events require more parking. Mr. Lee said that other types of events were not prohibited and Mr. Kruckeberg suggested that a condition of approval could be added prohibiting events other than tournaments. Commissioner Beranek asked if the city's new parking enforcement contractor would oversee parking at the site or would there be too much confusion as to whom to ticket. Mr. Kruckeberg said that the parking spaces are not currently designated for each particular business so we would rely on existing parking enforcement efforts to enforce the covenants. The public hearing was opened Applicants William Chan, 2875 Westburn Place, Rowland Heights, CA 91748, and Scott Chen, 1301 Bentley Court, West Covina, CA 91791, described the benefits of badminton. They said they want to create a first class club and, if successful, it will be the largest in North America. Commissioner Beranek asked the applicants if they had read the staff report and conditions of approval for the project and if they were in agreement with the conditions. W. Chan replied that they had. Commissioner Parrille asked if the applicants planned to hold other social events at this location and Mr. Chen assured him that they would only hold badminton tournaments. Chairman Baderian told Mr. Chan that the letter distributed to the Commissioners at the beginning of the meeting was from a neighbor of the proposed badminton club who claimed that he had made no effort to contact the nearby property owners regarding parking. Mr. Chan said that he was able to contact only two of the four property owners. Commissioner Baerg noted that ping pong tables were mentioned in the presentation and asked if there were plans for ping pong tables at the badminton club. Mr. Chan said that originally ping pong tables were included in the proposal but they were eliminated because they would have required more parking. Pc nnxvres 7 -2407 Page 2 Mr. Dwight Russell, 1348 N. Stanford Way, Upland, CA 91786, said that he feels the badminton club would be a great asset to the community because it would provide a friendly, healthy, nurturing atmosphere for families. MOTION: It was moved by Commissioner Hsu, seconded by Commissioner Parrille, to close the public hearing. Without objection public hearing was closed. Commissioner Beranek said that he supports this project because it is a good asset for the community. Commissioner Parrille said that since no other social events will be held to impact parking the badminton club would be a good use of the property. Commissioner Beranek said he would like to more clearly define the parking plan for the club. Mr. Kruckeberg suggested adding a condition requiring the applicant to pay for restrictive signs or stenciling of parking spaces as determined by the City Engineer. MOTION: It was moved by Commissioner Beranek, seconded by Commissioner Parrille to approve Conditional Use Permit 06 -16 as recommended by staff, subject to the conditions in the staff report with the added condition regarding parking. AYES: Commissioners Baderian, Baerg, Beranek, Hsu and Parrille NOES: None There is a five working day appeal period after adoption of the Resolution which will be brought back to the Commission. 2. PUBLIC HEARING CUP 07 -07 and ADR 06 -23 1325 S. Baldwin Avenue Michael Pashaie The applicant is requesting a Conditional Use Permit and a parking modification to convert the existing 43,544 square foot Ross Dress for Less store to a new L.A. Fitness health club at the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center, and approve the architectural design of the building. The proposed business hours will be 24 -hours every day. RESOLUTION NO. 1760 A Resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Arcadia, California, approving Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 07 -07 and Architectural Design Review 06 -23 to convert the existing 43,544 square foot Ross Dress for Less store to a new L.A. Fitness health club with a parking modification at the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center at 1325 South Baldwin Avenue. PC Mngms 7 -24-07 Page 3 Senior Planner Lisa Flores presented the staff report Commissioner Beranek asked for clarification on the parking plan for the center. Ms. Flores reviewed the restrictions for employees, time limits on parking and security guard scheduling. Commissioner Beranek asked if the parking was shared by all the tenants of the center and Mr. Kruckeberg told him that it was. The public hearing was opened. Mr. Michael Pashaie, 11028 Hillcrest Road, Beverly Hills, CA 90210, said he has owned the center since 1984. He said he wanted to make it a,f unily oriented center and that he thinks LA Fitness will be a good addition and will benefit the community. He displayed pictures showing the parking area 25% to 45% vacant and he stated that even at Christmas there are usually about 200 spaces available. Mr. Pashaie said parking has never been a problem and he does not anticipate any. Mr. Pashaie said there will be one security guard from 5:00 pm to 12 midnight and three employees from 7:00 am to 5:00 pm to monitor employee parking. Commissioner Parrille said that he has noticed parking congestion in the lot in the evening, particularly around the Blockbuster store. Mr. Pashaie said that Blockbuster will be closing soon because they do not have enough business. Commissioner Beranek questioned the number of security guards planned for the center and Mr. Pashaie confirmed that presently he is planning to use one uniformed security guard but if necessary he will add more. Commissioner Beranek asked the applicant if he had read and understood the conditions of approval and Mr. Pashaie said that he had. Mr. Mike Callahan, 22022 Oak Grove, Mission Viejo, Senior Vice President for Development, LA Fitness, Int., said that convenient parking is just as important to his organization as it is to the city. He further noted that they would not consider a location that did not offer enough parking. Mr. Callahan said that studies of the parking demand at the center and at the LA Fitness LaVerne location confirm that the center offers sufficient parking. He said that they have a lease at this location and are very committed to the project. Chairman Baderian noted that when LA Fitness initially applied for a permit in 1995, there was no 24 Hour Fitness in the city. He was wondering if the market could support two such similar operations. He also asked for examples of other cities where both LA Fitness and 24 Hour Fitness coexist successfully. Mr. Callahan said that their studies have shown that the population density will support another club. Pc MINUTES 7 -24.07 Page 4 W. Ken Cassiuy of LA Fitness said that LA Fitness ana Z4 Hour Fitness have locations in Portland, Anaheim, Orange, Irvine, Lake Forest, Alhambra and Pasadena. Commissioner Hsu asked what the projected membership was. Mr. Cassidy said they expect about 5000. He reminded the Commission that the members would be arriving at different times with the peak time from 5:00 am to 8:00 am and 5:00 pm to 9:00 pm, Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday Commissioner Baderian asked if anyone wanted to speak in opposition to the project. Mr. Bill Mack, 748 Colleta St., said he lives about two blocks south of the project and his main concerns are the hours of operation and parking. He said that parking is already a problem at the center and he felt that several businesses have left the center because of this. He said he was concerned about security because of the hours of operation and he asked for an explanation of the appeal process. MOTION: It was moved by Commissioner Beranek, seconded by Commissioner Hsu, to close the public hearing. Without objection the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Hsu said he is in favor of the project. He said he has observed underutilization of parking in some areas of the lot so he doesn't see parking as a problem and he is in support of the project. Commissioner Parrille said that although he has observed a shortage of parking in the lot and congestion at the intersection of Naomi and Baldwin he feels that this project will generate benefits to the community. Commissioner Beranek asked who will be responsible for enforcement of the 45 minute parking regulation and Mr. Kruckeberg advised that it will be privately enforced. Chairman Baderian asked if it would be advisable to add a condition requiring additional uniformed security personnel. Ms. Flores reviewed the security guard schedule and noted that the applicant has stated that he would add more security if needed. The applicant, W. Pashaie, said that initially the club will not be open 24 hours but if they decide to expand their hours of operation they would certainly add more security. Commissioner Beranek asked if the 45 minute parking restriction would be painted on the asphalt and Mr. Pashaie said it would. Chairman Baderian said he was concerned that additional security might be needed. Commissioner Beranek noted that the applicant has agreed to add security if the need arises. Mr. Kruckeberg asked for a clarification of the security plan. The applicant, Mr. Pashaie, said that they plan to have three employees who roam the facility and grounds to insure PC MINUTES 7 -2407 Page 5 safety until 5:,,., pm every day. From 5:00 pm until miwaght they will employ one uniformed security guard and if the facility is open after midnight they will employ another security guard to cover that period. Commissioner Parrille suggested adding a condition requiring a security guard from midnight to 5:00 am if they are open. Mr. Kruckeberg read a draft condition as follows: "This will be condition number 10. There will be three shopping center staff available from 7:00 am to 5:00 pm. There will be a uniformed security guard on the premises from 5:00 pm until 7:00 am." MOTION: It was moved by Commissioner Beranek, seconded by Commissioner Hsu, to approve Conditional Use Permit 07 -07 and Architectural Design Review 06 -23 as recommended by staff, subject to the conditions in the staff report. Resolution 1760 will be modified and presented at the next meeting of the Planning Commission. AYES: Commissioners Baderian, Baerg, Beranek, Hsu and Parrille NOES: None There is a five working day appeal period after the adoption of the Resolution, which will be brought back to the Commission. 3. PUBLIC HEARING MP 07-03 810 Monte Verde Road Twen Ma (Architect) The applicant is requesting the following rear yard setback modifications for a proposed new 3,968 square -foot, two -story single- family residence: 1. A 23' -6" first floor setback in lieu of the required 35' -0" minimum; 2. A 27' -6" second floor setback in lieu of the required 35' -0" minimum; and 3. A 24' -0" second floor setback in lieu of the required 35' -0" minimum for a balcony area. There is a five working day appeal period from the date of the decision. Appeals are to be filed by July 31. Associate Planner Tom Li presented the staff report. The public hearing was opened. Mr. Eric Lee, the applicant, said that the Architectural Review Board approved the project and he hoped the Planning Commission would grant their approval. Commissioner Beranek asked Mr. Lee if he had read and understood the conditions of approval and he said he had. Pc ?,CNrrrEs 7.24.07 Page 6 MOTION: It was moved by Commissioner Beranek, seconded by Commissioner Parrille, to close the public hearing. Without objection the public hearing was closed. MOTION: It was moved by Commissioner Parrille, seconded by Commissioner Beranek, to approve Modification Application MP 07 -03 as recommended by staff subject to the conditions in the staff report AYES: Commissioners Baderian, Baerg, Beranek, Hsu and Parrille NOES: None There is a five working day appeal period after the adoption of the Resolution, which will be brought back to the Commission. CONSENT ITEMS 4. RESOLUTION NO. 1761 A Resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Arcadia, California, granting Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 07 -04 and approving Architectural Design Review No, ADR 07 -05 to expand and remodel the restaurant at 21 East Huntington Drive. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt MOTION: It was moved by Commissioner Beranek; seconded by Commissioner Hsu to adopt Resolution No. 1761, as submitted. AYES: Commissioners Baderian, Baerg, Beranek and Hsu NOES: Parrille There is a five working day appeal period after the adoption of the Resolution. Appeals are to be filed by July 31 e MATTERS FROM CITY COUNCIL AND PLANNING COMMISSION Commissioner Baderian asked if the Commissioners had any vacation plans for the summer. Commissioner Parrille said he would not be available for the Modification Committee meeting on August 14 and Commissioner Beranek volunteered to attend in his place. PC MINUTES 7 -24-07 Page 7 Commissioner arrille said that he expected to return ii. _.,ne for the Planning Commission meeting that evening. MODIFICATION COMMITTEE MEETING ACTIONS Commissioner Parrille reported that the Modification Committee approved MC 07- 21 /SFADR 07 -31 and MC 07 -23/TR 07 -08. MATTERS FROM STAFF Mr. Kruckeberg reported that the Nobel Institute project and the Wireless Facility project that were continued from July 10 will be on the next agenda. He told the Commissioners that on July 26 the parties involved in the Caruso litigation will attend a settlement meeting. He also said that a Planning Commission tour of the city had been suggested. The tour would probably be conducted on a Saturday or on a Tuesday when there is no Planning Commission meeting and would give the Commissioners an opportunity to see' the many new projects in the city. He noted that the tour would probably have to be noticed as a special meeting. Commissioner Beranek asked if there was any news from Rusnak. Mr. Kruckeberg said that a letter was being prepared asking Rusnak for an update. ADJOURNMENT 8:39 p.m. /s/Jason Kruckeberg Secretary, Arcadia Planning Commission PC MWIMS 7 -24-07 Page 8 MINUTES r ARCADIA CITY PLANNING COMMISSION a Tuesday, August 14, 2007, 7:00 p.m. Arcadia City Council Chambers The Planning Commission of the City of Arcadia met in regular session on Tuesday, August 14, at 7:00 p.m., in the Arcadia Council Chambers of the City of Arcadia, at 240 W. Huntington Drive, with Chairman Baderian presiding. YLEDUE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL: PRESENT: Commissioners Baderian, Baerg, Beranek, Hsu and Parrille ABSENT: None MOTION: It was moved by Commissioner Beranek, seconded by Commissioner Parrille, to read all Resolutions by title only and waive reading the full body of the resolution. AYES: Commissioners Baderian, Baerg, Beranek, Hsu and Parrille NOES: None OTHERS ATTENDING Community Development Administrator Jason Kruckeberg Senior Planner Jim Kasama Associate Planner Tom Li Assistant Planner Steven Lee Senior Administrative Assistant Billie Tone SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION FROM STAFF REGARDING AGENDA ITEMS Mr. Kruckeberg told the Commissioners that a page was missing from the minutes of July 10, 2007, and that a complete set of the minutes was left at each place for them. TIME RESERVED FOR THOSE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO WISH TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON NON - PUBLIC HEARING MATTERS — Five - minute time limit per person None PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS 1. PUBLIC HEARING CUP 07 -03 AND ADR 07 -04 Orange Grove Park Royal Street Communictions, LLC (Representative of MetroPCS) Continued from 7 -10 -07 This item has been modified and will be re- noticed to be heard at the August 28, 2007, public hearing. 2. PUBLIC HEARING CUP 07 -05 1 W. Duarte Road Jonathan Li Nobel Education Institute Continued from 7 -10 -07 The applicant has requested a Conditional Use Permit to expand the existing 2,280 square -foot tutorial center (Nobel Education Institute) by an additional 1,500 square feet for a total of approximately 3,780 square feet to accommodate a total of 75 students, and to have at least 60 students transported to Holly Avenue School for recreational activities and pick -up. Senior Planner Jim Kasama presented the staff report. Commissioner Parrille said he was concerned about student traffic generated by Nobel Institute on Campus Drive, particularly when Arcadia High School was in session. Mr. Kasama said that traffic congestion was not expected to be a problem except in the case of major special events at the high school. Commissioner Baerg asked for verification of the number of students and Mr. Kasama said that the applicant wanted to increase enrollment from 30 to 75 students at the Duarte location. Commissioner Beranek noted that the owner of the restaurant in the center said the applicant was a good neighbor. He asked Mr. Kasama for clarification of the determination that the site is not adequate. Mr. Kasama explained that "not adequate" means that the site cannot accommodate expansion without the transportation of students to other sites. The public hearing was opened. Ms. Michelle Wong, Director of Education at Nobel Institute, 136 San Miguel Drive, Arcadia, representing the applicant, offered to answer questions about the project. Commissioner Hsu asked if Nobel has a written agreement with Holly Avenue School. Ms. Wong explained that Nobel has a facility usage agreement form on file with the PC MINUTES 8 -14 -07 Page 2 school and tha..ne agreement expires on June 30, 2006 _..d is renewable on a yearly basis. Chairman Baderian asked for clarification of the number of students currently enrolled and where they are picked up and dropped off. Ms. Wong said the total enrollment is 80 students but they are at different locations. She further stated that there are less than 30 students at the Duarte Road location. Other locations they use are 1012 S. Baldwin Avenue and Holly Avenue School campus. Chairman Baderian asked how many students are at the Holly Avenue location at one time and Ms. Wong said there are 10 to 30. Chairman Baderian asked Ms. Wong if Nobel Institute wanted to increase the number of students at the Duarte Road location to a maximum of 75 at one time. Ms. Wong said that most of them arrive from 3:00 pm to 6:00 pm. Again Chairman Baderian asked if Nobel Institute wanted to increase the number of students at the Duarte Road location to a maximum of 75 at one time. Ms. Wong said they do. Commissioner Baerg asked if all the students are dropped off at the Duarte Road location and then transported to the other locations. Ms. Wong said that they are dropped off at the Duarte Road, Baldwin Avenue or Holly Avenue location where they will be attending sessions. MOTION: It was moved by Commissioner Beranek, seconded by Commissioner Hsu, to close the public hearing. Without objection the public hearing was closed Commissioner Hsu said that he frequents the center and never noticed a parking problem but that he is concerned about gridlock at the busy intersection. He noted that the impact of Nobel Institute on the other businesses in the center seems positive. Commissioner Beranek said he disagrees with staff's conclusion that because the Institute is open only a few hours each day it is detrimental to the surrounding businesses. Chairman Baderian asked how the number of students and transporting of students could be monitored. Mr. Kruckeberg said that monitoring would be difficult but could be accomplished on a sporadic basis by Code Services observation. Chairman Baderian asked how many units are vacant at the center and has there been any interest in them. Mr. Kasama said there are currently two units vacant, one for about two years and the other for a little less. Further, the applicant had been cited for occupying the vacant units but Mr. Kasama was not aware of any other interest in the units. PC MINUTES 8 -14 -07 Page 3 Commissioner Hsu asked if staff could report back to the Commission in six months regarding the traffic situation at Nobel Institute. Mr. Kruckeberg agreed to provide a report to the Commission of monitoring and Code Enforcement activity in six months. Don Penman, Development Services Manager, suggested requiring proof that all parents are notified of the pick up and drop off arrangements at each location. MOTION: It was moved by Commissioner Beranek, seconded by Commissioner Hsu, to approve Conditional Use Permit 07 -05 as recommended by staff, subject to the conditions in the staff report with additional conditions regarding egress on Duarte Road only and required monitoring of transport of students. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Baderian, Baerg, Beranek, Hsu and Parrille NOES: None A Resolution reflecting the decision of the Planning Commission will be presented for adoption at the next Commission meeting. There is a five working day appeal period after the adoption of the Resolution. 3. PUBLIC HEARING ADMIN. SFADR 07 -22 531 W. Camino Real Ave. Peter Chao The applicant has filed an appeal of an Administrative Single - Family Design Review denial for new exterior red paint on the doors, dormers, and garage doors of an existing single - family residence. Assistant Planner Steven Lee presented the staff report. The public hearing was opened. Mr. Peter Chao, 531 Camino Real, the applicant, said his wife was not available to attend the meeting but will'retum next month. He said that she chose the colors for the house and should be the one to respond to the Commissioners questions. He further noted that his wife had taken a paint sample to city hall and it was approved. He also said that there are many houses of this color in Arcadia and he will bring pictures to the next meeting to show the Commissioners. Chairman Baderian noted that he will not be available for the September 25 meeting. MOTION: It was moved by Commissioner Beranek, seconded by Commissioner Parrille, to continue Item 3, Administrative Single Family Architectural Design Review 07 -22, to the September 25, 2007 meeting. PC MINUTES 8 -14 -07 Page 4 ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Baerg, Beranek, Hsu and Parrille NOES: None ABSTAIN: Baderian 4. PUBLIC HEARING MP 07 -02 AND SF ADR 07 -40 25 W. Rodell Place Doug Huls The applicant is requesting approval of the following Modifications and Architectural Design Review for a garage remodel and a 540 square -foot second story addition to an existing single - family residence: 1. A 23' -0" easterly side yard setback in lieu of 25' -0" required for the proposed second story addition; and 2. A 32' -0" rear yard setback in lieu of 35' -0" required for the proposed second story addition. Assistant Planner Steven Lee presented the staff report. The public hearing was opened. Mr. Doug Huls, 25 W. Rodell Place, the applicant, said that he felt his requests were within reason because of the unusual size of the lot. MOTION: It was moved by Commissioner Beranek, seconded by Commissioner Hsu, to close the public hearing. Without objection the public hearing was closed. MOTION: It was moved by Commissioner Hsu, seconded by Commissioner Parrille, to approve Modification No. MP 07 -02 and Single Family Administrative Design Review 07 -40 as recommended by staff, subject to the conditions in the staff report ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Baderian, Baerg, Beranek, Hsu and Parrille NOES: None There is a five working day appeal period from the date of the decision. Appeals are to be filed by August 22. PC MINUTES 8 -14 -07 Page 5 5. PUBLIC HEAk._NG MP 07 -04 AND ADR 06-30 120 S. Second Ave. Sam Yum The applicant is requesting approval of the following Modifications and Architectural Design Review for a proposed two -unit residential condominium project on an R -3 multiple - family zoned property: 1. A 13' -0" to 15' -0" street side yard setback in lieu of the required 25' -0" minimum; and 2. A 23' -0" front yard setback in lieu of the required 25' -0" minimum for a covered porch. Associate Planner Tom Li presented the staff report. Commissioner Beranek asked if this property was appropriate for the R -3 area. Mr. Li said that the lot is surrounded by R -3 lots and the style matches the neighboring properties. Mr. Kruckeberg pointed out that although the square footage of the lot would allow for three units, the development standards limit it to two units even with the requested modifications. Commissioner Hsu asked if the proposed metal gates will present a visibility problem on the street. Mr. Li said that the fence is three feet high which is the maximum height permitted by standards and no visibility restriction is anticipated. The public hearing was opened. Mr. Sam Yum, the designer, 120 S. Second Street, offered to answer any questions the Commissioners might have. There were none. MOTION: It was moved by Commissioner Beranek, seconded by Commissioner Hsu, to close the public hearing. Without objection the public hearing was closed. MOTION: It was moved by Commissioner Beranek, seconded by Commissioner Hsu, to approve Modification No. MP 07 -04 and Architectural Design Review 06 -30 as recommended by staff, subject to the conditions in the staff report. PC MINUTES 8 -14 -07 Page 6 ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Baderian, Baerg, Beranek, Hsu and Parrille NOES: None There is a five working day appeal period from the date of the decision. Appeals are to be filed by August 22. 6. PUBLIC HEARING MP 07 -05 AND ADR 07 -01 15 & 15 %2 Lucile Street Javier Cortez The applicant is requesting various setback and landscaping Modifications and Architectural Design Review for a proposed addition and remodel of two existing units on an R -3 multiple- family zoned property. Associate Planner Tom Li presented the staff report. The public hearing was opened. Mr. Javier Cortez, 15 and 15 %2 Lucile Street, said he represents the owner of the property. He said that the property is difficult to rent because there is only one bedroom and the existing garage is falling apart. He said the modifications are necessary because of the configuration of the lot. Commissioner Parrille asked Mr. Cortez if he had considered tearing down the existing structure and rebuilding to gain a more intense usage. Mr. Cortez said that budget constraints do not allow for this option. Commissioner Beranek said that this seems like a patchwork approach to the budget and lot configuration restrictions. He asked if the project can go forward within the scope of staff's recommendations. Mr. Cortez said that the project cannot proceed without approval of the modifications requested. Chairman Baderian said that it appears that staff's recommendations are not acceptable to the applicant and he suggested that the applicant meet with staff to explore alternatives. MOTION: It was moved by Commissioner Parrille, seconded by Commissioner Beranek, to close the public hearing. Without objection the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Parrille said that it appears that the applicant does not have the funds to make the best use of the property. PC MINUTES 8-14-07 Page 7 Chairman Ba,- -.ian noted that the Commission wants .. upport the rehabilitation of a structure but it must be done in conformance with codes. Commissioner Parrille suggested a continuance to allow the applicant and staff further opportunity to review the project and seek financing for more intense use of the property. Mr. Kruckeberg said that work has begun on the project, walls removed, etc., and something must be done soon for the sake of the neighborhood. He said the project requires significant redesign and although it is not impossible to bring it to conformance it will be difficult. Mr. Cortez said he will discuss the situation with the owner. MOTION: It was moved by Commissioner Beranek, seconded by Commissioner Parrille, to continue Modification No. MP 07 -05 and Architectural Design Review 07 -01 to September 11, 2007. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Baderian, Baerg, Beranek, Hsu and Parrille NOES: None CONSENT ITEMS 7. RESOLUTION NO. 1760 A Resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Arcadia, California, approving Conditional Use Permit No. 07 -07 and Architectural Design Review 06 -23 to convert the existing 43,544 square foot Ross Dress for Less store to a new L.A. Fitness Health club with a parking Modification at the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center at 1325 S. Baldwin Avenue. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Mr. Kruckeberg said that after the July 27 meeting the LA Fitness applicant told staff he realized that a better alternative for security would be to provide a uniformed guard 24 hours per day. Condition 6 of the Resolution has been modified to reflect this decision. MOTION: It was moved by Commissioner Beranek, seconded by Commissioner Hsu to adopt Resolution No. 1760, as submitted. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Baderian, Baerg, Beranek, Hsu and Parrille NOES: None PC MINUTES 8 -14 -07 Page 8 There is a five working day appeal period after the adop...m of the Resolution. Appeals are to be filed by August 22. 8. RESOLUTION NO. 1762 A Resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Arcadia, California, approving Conditional Use Permit application No. CUP 06 -16 to allow the conversion of an existing warehouse facility into a Badminton Club, and the corresponding Parking Modification, at 12336 Lower Azusa Road. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt MOTION: It was moved by Commissioner Beranek, seconded by Commissioner Hsu to adopt Resolution No. 1762, as submitted. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Baderian, Baerg, Beranek and Hsu NOES: Parrille There is a five working day appeal period after the adoption of the Resolution. Appeals are to be filed by August 22. 9. MINUTES OF 7 -10 -07 AND MINUTES OF 7 -24 -07 RECOMMENDATION: Approve MOTION: It was moved by Commissioner Beranek, seconded by Commissioner Hsu to recommend approval of the Minutes of July 10, and July 24, 2007 as submitted. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Baderian, Baerg, Beranek, Hsu and Parrille NOES: None MATTERS FROM CITY COUNCIL AND PLANNING COMMISSION Commissioner Beranek asked about a study session. Mr. Kruckeberg said that he will provide options for dates, venues and other details at the next meeting. Commissioner Beranek asked if there was any news from Rusnak and Mr. Kruckeberg said that he would provide Commissioner Beranek with a copy of a letter from the City Council to Rusnak. PC MINUTES B-14-07 Page 9 MODIFICATION COMMITTEE MEETING ACTIONS Commissioner Beranek reported that the Modification Committee had four items on the agenda this morning and all items were approved. MATTERS FROM STAFF Mr. Kruckeberg asked the Commissioners to review the information on a training opportunity at UCLA on Thursday, September 20, that was included in their notebooks. Mr. Kruckeberg said he attended a workshop on the housing element of the General Plan. He said that most of the state legislation is leaning toward requiring multiple housing at high densities, allowing less opportunity for discretion. He told the Commissioners to expect challenges in this area and that he will keep them apprised. Mr. Kruckeberg said that there were seven responses to the RFQ for the City Hall project. Prospective architects will be interviewed a week from Friday. Lastly, Mr. Kruckeberg reported that there will be another community meeting in the Council Chambers on August 30 regarding the County sediment removal project at Santa Anita dam. ADJOURNMENT 8:35 p.m. /s /Jason Kruckeberg Secretary, Arcadia Planning Commission PC MINUTES 8 -14-07 Page 10 RESOLUTION NO. 1760 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2007 -07 AND ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN REVIEW 2006 -23 TO CONVERT THE EXISTING 43,544 SQUARE FOOT ROSS DRESS FOR LESS STORE TO A NEW L.A. FITNESS HEALTH CLUB WITH A PARKING MODIFICATION AT THE ARCADIA HUB SHOPPING CENTER AT 1325 S. BALDWIN AVENUE WHEREAS, the City of Arcadia on August 3, 2006, received an Architectural Design Review application followed by a Conditional Use Permit application on May 16, 2007 by Michael Pashaie on behalf of L.A. Fitness Fitness to convert the existing 43,544 square foot Ross Dress For Less store to a new L.A. Fitness health club with a parking modification at 1325 S. Baldwin Avenue; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act, Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq. ( "CEQA "), and the State's CEQA Guidelines, the City of Arcadia prepared an Initial Study and determined, there is no substantial evidence that the approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 07 -07 and Architectural Design Review No. 06 -23 would result in a significant adverse effect on the environment. Accordingly, a Negative Declaration has been prepared and notice of that fact was given in the manner required by law; and 1 WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the Planning Commission on July 24, 2007, at which time all interested persons were given full opportunity to be heard and present evidence. NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. That the factual data submitted by the Development Services Department in the attached report is true and correct. SECTION 2. This Commission fmds: 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 because the proposed use will be compatible with the surrounding uses, and it will be an appropriate use for the subject site, and the proposed project will provide adequate parking for the new health club and existing restaurant. 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, 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. FA 4. That the site abuts three streets that are 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 because the land use and current zoning are 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. SECTION 3. That for the foregoing reasons this Commission grants Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 07 -07 and Architectural Design Review No. 06- 23 to permit a L.A. Fitness health club with a parking modification at 1325 S. Baldwin Avenue, upon the following conditions: 1. The 37 parking spaces that face the store frontage shall be restricted to 45- minute parking, written on grade to indicate this restriction. 2. The employee parking shall be restricted to, and employees shall be directed to, park at all the parking spaces along the frontages of Duarte Road and Naomi Avenue, as shown on Figure 5 of the Parking Study, dated July 2006. 3. All exterior light fixtures shall be hooded and arranged to reflect away from the adjoining properties and streets. 3 4. Landscaping material shall be planted on the five metal wall trellises. 5. The health club shall be permitted to be open 24 -hours every day. 6. There shall be one (1) uniformed security guard on -duty 24 -hours every day to enforce the 45- minute parking requirements, the employee parking area, and to ensure the L.A. Fitness customers do not park across the street at the CVS parking lot, located at 1401 S. Baldwin Avenue. 7. A parking study shall be required for any new and existing uses within this shopping center that is subject to a parking modification. 8. The applicant shall install and maintain in good working order at all times a surveillance camera outside the facility, within the swimming pool area, and at the main reception area for security purposes. 9. Approval of CUP 2007 -07 and ADR No. 2006 -23 shall not take effect until the property owner(s) and applicants have executed and filed the Acceptance Form available from the Development Services Department to indicate awareness and acceptance of these conditions of approval. 10. 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 2 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. SECTION 4. The decision, findings and conditions contained in this Resolution reflect the Commission's action of August 14, 2007, by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners Baderian, Baerg, Beranek, Hsu, Parrille NOES: None ABSENT: None SECTION 5. The Secretary shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution and shall cause a copy to be forwarded to the City Council of the City of Arcadia. I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 10 day of August 2007, by the following votes: g AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ATTEST: r / Secretary, P anning Co Sion City of Arcadia APPROVED AS TO FORM: Stephen P. Deitsch, City Attorney Chairman, Planning Commission City of Arcadia ` * °0RpORATSO STAFF REPORT Development Services Department July 24, 2007 TO: Arcadia Planning Commission FROM: Jason Kruckeberg, Community Development Administrator By: Lisa L. Flores, Senior Planner SUBJECT: Conditional Use Permit 2007 -07 and Architectural Design Review 2006 -23 for a proposed L.A. Fitness health club and related parking modification at 1325 S. Baldwin Avenue. SUMMARY The subject applications were filed. by Michael Pashaie on behalf of L.A. Fitness to convert the existing 43,544 square foot Ross store to a new L.A. Fitness health club at the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center, and approve the architectural design of the building. The proposed business hours will be 24 -hours everyday. The Development Services Department is recommending approval of the applications, and adoption of Resolution No. 1760 approving the health club and related parking modification, subject to the conditions of approval outlined in this staff report. GENERAL INFORMATION APPLICANT: Michael Pashaie, property owner and representative of L.A. Fitness health club LOCATION: 1325 S. Baldwin Avenue REQUESTS: A Conditional Use Permit and Architectural Design Review to allow a new L.A. Fitness health club and related parking modification. LOT AREA: 772,134 square feet (17.73 acres) FRONTAGES: Approximately 679' along Baldwin Avenue Approximately 1,064' along Duarte Road Approximately 1;047' along Naomi Avenue EXISTING LAND USE & ZONING: The site is developed with Burlington Coat Factory/Baby Depot, Joann Fabrics, Ross Dress for Less store, Vons Pavilions market, and three multi- tenant strip commercial buildings. The property is zoned C -2, and C -2 & H4 (4 -story height overlay) along Baldwin Avenue. SURROUNDING LAND USES & ZONING: North: General Office Use and Commercial; zoned C -2 and C -2 & H -4 South: Sav -on Drug store center; zoned C -2 East: General Commercial Use; zoned C -2 West: General Retail Shops (Presidents Square); zoned C -2 GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Commercial BACKGROUND The majority of the buildings that exist on the site were originally constructed in 1957. Although the shopping center consists of two separate parcels, the center is joined together through a recorded reciprocal parking and driveway easement with the neighboring Von's Pavilions shopping center to utilize the parking areas in common (see attached site plan). In 1995, the Planning Commission approved Conditional Use Permit No. 1995 -11 with a parking modification to permit a 25,000 square foot L.A. Fitness health club on the second floor, directly above the Burlington Coat Factory (currently occupied by Joann Fabrics). However, the applicant chose not to occupy that unit since they needed a larger facility. CUP No. 2007 -07 and ADR No. 2006 -23 July 24, 2007 Page 2 PROPOSAL The applicant is requesting to convert the existing 43,544 square foot Ross Dress for Less store that.is located at the corner of Baldwin Avenue and Naomi Avenue to a new L.A. Fitness health club, as shown on the submitted site plan. The new business would occupy the basement and first level of the retail space, and would consists of several work -out areas totaling 38,844 square feet (i.e. aerobics, fitness, gymnasium, indoor swimming pool, and basketball court), 1,900 square feet of non - workout areas (i.e. locker rooms and kids club), and 2,800 square feet of office area. The fitness health club will be open 24 -hours everyday with a maximum of 15 employees during each shift. Parking The site originally had 1,182 parking spaces, which met the minimum parking requirements when the site was developed. However, in 1984, the on -site parking areas were redesigned to provide 18 less parking spaces. In May of 1999, an additional 13 parking spaces were eliminated due to seismic retrofit within the parking structure, to accommodate a new trash enclosure, and provide additional handicapped parking spaces. Since then several parking modifications were approved for the shopping center (i.e. Starbucks Coffee Shop, Subway, Osaka, Kids Island, Vons Pavilions, and China Trust Bank). The site currently has 1,151 parking spaces that are located in a large surface parking lot on the south side of the center, a smaller surface lot along Duarte Road behind Pavilions market, and within a single -level parking structure (399 parking spaces). The Arcadia Municipal Code requires that a health club provide 1 parking space per 35 square feet of gross floor area in all workout areas, and 1 space for every 250 square feet of sales /office area. As such, the number of parking spaces does not comply with the current code requirement of 1,151 spaces for the pre- existing shopping center. With the proposed addition of the L.A. Fitness health club, the total number of on -site spaces required for.the shopping center would be 2,335 spaces. Although the City's parking requirements were amended in 2004, an amendment was not considered to the health club parking requirements since prior to 2004 most of the health clubs occupied existing buildings that were approximately 10,000 square feet or less and could comply with this. requirement. It was not until 2005 when a 38,990 square foot, 24 -hour Fitness health club was proposed at 125 N. First Avenue that staff determined the current requirement could not be applied to a facility of this size because the parking requirement does not anticipate this type of facility, In addition, the City Engineer and Traffic Engineer determined that a parking study was necessary for projects like this to better CUP No. 2007 -07 and ADR No. 2006 -23 July 24, 2007 Page 3 review parking impacts (a parking modification was approved for 24 -hour Fitness - 280 parking spaces in lieu of 791 spaces). Due to. the current site parking deficit as compared to the City's parking requirements and the fact that the City's parking requirements (1 space for every 35 square feet of gross floor area) for a health club was not intended for a facility Of this size, a parking and traffic study was prepared by Hirsch /Green Transportation consulting to provide a detailed comparison between the City's parking requirements and the observed parking demand of other L.A. Fitness facilities that are of similar size, a forecast of parking demand for the proposed project, as well as a shared parking analysis. Also, a survey of the existing parking demand was conducted to provide actual data of current parking utilization, and to provide a baseline to evaluate the potential parking impacts from the proposed L.A. Fitness facility. Based on the results, the shopping center with the proposed L.A. Fitness will not fully utilize the parking supply provided since the proposed health club does not exhibit the same parking profile as general retail or commercial uses, and the parking demand during peak periods does not overlap. In fact, during the peak period when all uses are in full operation the site will be approximately 62% occupied, leaving a minimum of 454 available spaces. The site's parking demand was also adjusted to account for the year -end holiday shopping periods. Even adjusting for a maximum anticipated usage during seasonal parking demands, the site would be at maximum capacity of 85 %, leaving a minimum of 176 spaces available beyond the anticipated need. Therefore, according to the parking study there will always be additional parking spaces available on -site. A traffic report was also prepared by Hirsch /Green Transportation consulting to determine if the proposed project would have any traffic impacts to the major four intersections in the area: • Baldwin Avenue and Duarte Road • Baldwin Avenue and Naomi Avenue • Naomi Avenue and Golden West Avenue • Golden West Avenue and Duarte Road The City Engineer and Traffic Engineer has reviewed the reports and determined the proposed project will not create any significant impacts on -site or to any of the major intersections, nor will it create any impacts to the Los Angeles County Congestion Management Program (CMP) which monitors the major intersections and freeway segments in the project vicinity. While some parking areas may experience high utilizations throughout the day and week, the City Engineer and Traffic Engineer determined that no significant parking impacts and no parking "overflow" is expected onto the site adjacent streets or parking areas. CUP No. 2007 -07 and ADR No. 2006 -23 July 24, 2007 Page 4 To provide additional available parking for the patrons of the stores and businesses adjacent to the proposed L.A. Fitness health club, the property owner has volunteered to restrict the 37 parking spaces that face the store frontage to 45- minute parking (refer to the site plan), and required that the employees park within the under utilized parking areas along the frontages of Duarte Road and Naomi Avenue from 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m., everyday, as suggested in the parking study. This will be enforced by the lease agreement and on -site security guard. Therefore, by relocating employee parking away from the more highly utilized parking areas, this will simply provide additional available parking for the patrons, and minimize any on -site parking congestion. Architectural Design Review Staff has worked diligently with the applicant's architect for several months on the Proposed architectural style of the building to create an attractive physical image with detailed elevations that will hopefully set the new architectural style for any future remodel'to this shopping center. As a result, two grand towers are proposed to develop a new focal point at the comer of Baldwin /Naomi Avenue. Also, the building was designed to include non - continuous facades, metal awnings, tall storefront windows, landscaping over the metal trellises to break -up the blank fagade, and cultured stones at the base of the building and on the towers. The proposed wall signs are also shown to ensure the sign colors complement the colors of the structure and architectural design, and not applied as an afterthought. ANALYSIS Uses such as health clubs require conditional use permits, and traffic concerns can be addressed as part of the consideration of such applications. Generally, staff does not encourage uses that are deficient in parking. However, based on the applicant's proposal and the parking and traffic reports, the existing on -site parking is expected to adequately accommodate the parking demand for the existing and proposed uses. Despite the fact that the City parking code requirements suggests a parking deficit for the site, and the L.A. Fitness would result in an increase in the parking demands at the site, the City Engineer and Traffic Engineer determined that the center is not anticipated to result in any on- site parking shortages when the center is fully occupied. Also, staff believes that the applicant's proposal meets the intent of the design criteria set forth in the City's Architectural Design Review Guidelines. The new design elements of the subject building, the towers, tall storefront windows, and CUP No. 2007 -07 and ADR No. 2006 -23 July 24, 2007 Page 5 signage would be visually harmonious with the surrounding commercial developments (see the attached building elevations). It is staff's opinion that the proposed health club is also the highest and most appropriate use for this shopping center since the peak parking demand for this use and retail /commercial uses does not overlap, therefore minimizing parking impacts. Also, the offset of peak parking demands allows for "shared parking ", where parking spaces designated for one land use are not fully utilized at all times of the day, and are available for use by the other uses on this property. The proposed project will keep the activities at this center active, and would meet the goals of the City's General Plan which is to provide new recreational activities to the existing residences and local employment opportunities. As for the facility proposed to be open 24 -hours a day, the City's Police Captain recommends that.a surveillance camera be placed in the parking area that faces the west entrance, within the pool area since there will no lifeguard on duty, and at the main reception area to deter any disturbance and /or robberies. A condition of approval to this effect has been imposed (refer to condition of approval no. 7). Therefore, it is staffs opinion that the proposed use would be an appropriate addition to the shopping center and the general area since it would revitalize this center, provided that the operation of such uses remains consistent with this application. CODE REQUIREMENTS All City requirements regarding disabled access and facilities, occupancy limits, building safety, health code compliance, parking and site design shall be complied to meet the satisfaction of the Building Official, Community Development Administrator, Fire Marshall, and the Public Works Services Director. CEQA Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act, the Development Services Department has prepared an initial study for the proposed project. Said initial study did not disclose any substantial or potentially substantial adverse change that cannot be mitigated to a level that is less than significant in any of the physical conditions within the area affected by the project including land, air, water, minerals, flora, fauna, ambient noise and objects of historical or aesthetic significance. When considering the record as a whole, there is no evidence that the proposed project will have any potential for an adverse effect on wildlife resources or the habitat upon which the wildlife depends. Therefore, a Negative Declaration has been prepared for this project. CUP No. 2007 -07 and ADR No. 2006 -23 July 24, 2007 Page 6 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. 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. RECOMMENDATIONS The Development Services Department recommends approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 2007 -07 and Architectural Design Review No. 2006 -23 to permit a L.A. Fitness health club and related parking modification, subject to the following conditions of approval: 1. The 37 parking spaces that face the store frontage shall be restricted to 45- minutes, written on grade to indicate this restriction 2. The employees shall be restricted to, and employees shall be directed to, park at all the parking spaces along the frontages of Duarte Road and Naomi Avenue from 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m., as shown on Figure'5 of the Parking Study, dated July 2006. 3. All exterior light fixtures shall be hooded and arranged to reflect away from the adjoining properties and streets. 4. Landscaping material shall be planted on the five metal wall trellises. 5. The health club shall be permitted to be open 24 -hours every day. CUP No. 200707 and ADR No. 2006 -23 July 24, 2007 Page 7 6. A parking study shall be required for any new and existing uses within this shopping center that is subject to a parking modification. 7. The applicant shall install and maintain in good working order at all times a surveillance camera outside the facility, within the swimming pool area, and at the main reception area for security purposes. 8. Approval of CUP 2007 -07 and ADR No. 2006 -23 shall not take effect until the property owner(s) and applicants have executed and filed the Acceptance Form available from the Development Services Department to indicate awareness and acceptance of these conditions of approval. 9. 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. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION Approval The Planning Commission should move to adopt the Negative Declaration, approve Conditional Use Permit Application No. 2007 -07 and Architectural Design Review No. 2006 -23, and adopt Resolution No. 1760 to permit a L.A. Fitness health club and related parking modification at 1325 S. Baldwin Avenue. Denial If the Planning Commission intends to deny this Conditional Use Permit and Architectural Design Review, the Commission should state the specific reasons for denial and direct staff to prepare the appropriate resolution incorporating the Commission's decision and specific findings. If any Planning Commissioner, or other interested party has any questions regarding this matter prior to the July 24, 2007 public hearing, please contact Lisa Flores at (626) 574 -5445. CUP No. 2007 -07 and ADR No. 2006 -23 July 24, 2007 Page 8 Approved By: Jason Kr(ckeberg Community Development Attachments: Resolution No. 1760 Negative Declaration Parking and Traffic Impact Analysis Reports, dated July 2006 Memo from City Traffic Engineer, dated May 4, 2006 and August 7, 2006 Vicinity and Aerial Maps Full size and reduced copies of the plans Color Renderings CUP No. 2007 -07 and ADR No. 2006 -23 July 24, 2007 Page 9 r *OO 011ARB �+0o® STAFF REPORT Development Services Department August 14, 2007 TO: Arcadia Planning Commission FROM: Jason Kruckeberg, Community Development Administrator By: Lisa L. Flores, Senior Planner SUBJECT: Resolution No. 1760 regarding Conditional Use Permit 2007 -07 and Architectural Design Review 2006 -23 for a proposed L.A Fitness health club and related parking modification at 1325 S. Baldwin Avenue. BACKGROUND On July 24, 2007, the Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider the subject applications regarding the applicant's proposal to convert the existing 43,544 square foot Ross Dress For Less store to a new L.A. Fitness health club, and related parking modification at the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center at 1325 S. Baldwin Avenue. At the July 27, 2007 Planning Commission meeting, the applicant and property owner, Mr. Michael Pashaie proposed to provide additional security by utilizing two (2) of shopping center staff to police and serve as security guards from 7:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. For night -time security, the applicant proposed providing one (1) uniformed security guard from 5:00 p.m. to midnight, everyday. Both the staff and the night -time security would be responsible for enforcing the 45- minute parking requirements, the employee parking, and to ensure that the L.A. Fitness customers do not park across the street at the CVS parking lot. The Planning Commission agreed to this proposal, and approved Conditional Use Permit 2007- 07 and Architectural Design Review 2006 -23, subject that the Resolution be revised to include the applicant's security proposal as a condition of approval. Shortly after the Planning Commission meeting ended, the property owner approached staff stating that he recognizes that it would too difficult to have the shopping center staff police the parking spaces and enforce it since they will not RESOLUTION NO. 1760 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2007 -07 AND ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN REVIEW 2006 -23 TO CONVERT THE EXISTING 43,544 SQUARE FOOT ROSS DRESS FOR LESS STORE TO A NEW L.A. FITNESS HEALTH CLUB WITH A PARKING MODIFICATION AT THE ARCADIA HUB SHOPPING CENTER AT 1325 S. BALDWIN AVENUE. WHEREAS, the City of Arcadia on August 3, 2006, received an Architectural Design Review application followed by a Conditional Use Permit application on May 16, 2007 by Michael Pashaie on behalf of L.A. Fitness to convert the existing 43,544 square foot Ross Dress For Less store to a new L.A. Fitness health club with a parking modification at 1325 S. Baldwin Avenue; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act, Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq. ( "CEQA "), and the State's CEQA Guidelines, the City of Arcadia prepared an Initial Study and determined, there is no substantial evidence that the approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 07 -07 and Architectural Design Review No. 06 -23 would result in a significant adverse effect on the environment. Accordingly, a Negative Declaration has been prepared and notice of that fact was given in the manner required by law; and 1 be in a security uniform. As a result, staff recommended that the applicant not use the shopping center staff for security, but instead hire one (1) uniformed security guard solely for the purpose of policing the parking situation 24 -hours a day. The property owner agreed to staffs recommendation and accepted the revised condition of approval (refer to condition of approval no. 6), and the revised Resolution which has been reviewed by the City Attorney. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION Approval The Planning Commission should move to adopt Resolution No. 1760 to permit a new L.A. Fitness health club and related parking modification. If any member of the Planning Commission, or other interested party has any questions regarding this matter prior to the August 14, 2007 public hearing, please contact, Senior Planner Lisa Flores at (626) 574 -5445. Approved By: Jason Kruckeberg Community Development Administrator Attachment: Resolution No. 1760 CUP No. 07 -07 and ADR No. 06 -23 Page 2 CITY OF ARCADIA 240 WEST HUNTINGTON DRIVE ARCADIA, CA 91007 1. Project Title: CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM Conditional Use Permit No. 2007 -07 and Architectural Design Review No. 06 -23 2. Project Address (Location): 1325 S. Baldwin Avenue 3. Project Sponsor's Name, Address & Telephone Number: Michael Pashaie, Property Owner 9255 Sunset Blvd., Suite 320 West Hollywood, CA 90069 (310) 858 -6797 4. Lead Agency Name & Address: City of Arcadia -- Development Services Department Community Development Division — Planning Services 240 W. Huntington Drive Post Office Box 60021 Arcadia, CA 91066 -6021 5. Lead Agency Contact Person & Telephone Number: Lisa Flores, Senior Planner (626) 574 -5445 6. General Plan Designation: Commercial 7. Zoning Classification: C -2, and C -2 & H -4 8. Description of Project: A Conditional Use Permit and parking modification to convert the existing 43,544 square foot Ross Dress for Less department Store to a new L.A. Fitness health club at the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center, and approve the architectural design of the building. The proposed business hours will be 24 -hours everyday. 9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: (Briefly describe the project's surroundings.) North: General Office Use and Commercial South: Sav -on Drug store center — mast - -- general Commercial Use - - -- - File No. CUP 07 -07 and ADR No. 06 -23 West: General Retail Shops (Presidents Square) 10. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement): lil!_l ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. ] Aesthetics [ ] Air Quality ] Biological Resources [ ] Cultural Resources ] Geology /Soils [ ] Hazards & Hazardous Materials ] Hydrology/Water Quality [ ] Land Use & Planning J Mineral Resources [ J Noise ] Population & Housing [ ] Public Services ] Recreation [ ] Transportation / Circulation ] Utilities and Service Systems j Mandatory Findings of Significance DETERMINATION (To be completed by the Lead Agency) On the basis of this initial evaluation: [X] I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. [ ] 1 find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. [ ] I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. [ ] I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, but that at least one effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards and has been addressed by mitigation measures based on that earlier analysis as described on attached sheets, and if any remaining effect is a 'Potentially Significant Impact' or 'Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated," an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required but i t only needs to analyze the -2- CEQA Env. Checklist Part 1 File No. CUP 07 -07 and ADR No. 06.23 [ ] I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects have been analyzed adequately in an earlier Environmental Impact Report pursuant to applicable standards and have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. By: Jason Kruckeberg, Community Development Administrator For: The City of Arcadia -- Development Services Department -S loll��o�- Signature Date Lisa Flores Jason Kruckeber Printed Name For EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact' answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact' answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects such as the one involved (e.g., the project is not within a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact' answer should be explained where it is based on project - specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project - specific screening analysis). 2. All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off -site as well as on- site, cumulative as well as project - level, indirect as well as direct, and construction related as well as operational impacts. 3. 'Potentially Significant Impact' is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is significant. If there are one or more, "Potentially Significant Impact' entries when the determination is made, an Environmental Impact Report is required. 4. 'Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from 'Potentially Significant Impact' to a "Less Than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section 17 "Earlier Analyses" may be cross - referenced). 5. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program Environmental Impact Report, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an -3- CEQA Env. Checklist Part 1 File No. CUP 07 -07 and ADR No. 06 -23 earlier EIR or Negative Declaration {Section 15063(c)(3)(D)). Earlier analyses are discussed in Section 17 at the end of the checklist. 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 that were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site - specific conditions for the project. 6. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist, references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. 7. Supporting Information Sources. A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 8. 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. -4- CEQA Env. Checklist Part 1 File No.: CUP 07 -07 and ADR No. 06 -23 b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited ❑ ❑ ❑ to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? C) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or 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 proposed project will not affect any scenic vista since the proposed project will not be located near a scenic vista or highway. Also, the proposed design has been conceptually approved through design review to ensure the architectural style complies with the City's Architectural Design Guidelines. Therefore, the proposed project will not create a significant adverse impact in terms of aesthetic to the adjacent land uses. 2. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES - In determining whether impacts to agriculture 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. 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? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson ❑ ❑ ❑ Act contract? c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to ❑ ❑ ❑ their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non - agricultural use? CEQA Checklist 4 Less Than Potentially Significant Impact Significant With Mitigation Incorporation Less Than Signifimnl Impact No Impact 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? C) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or 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 proposed project will not affect any scenic vista since the proposed project will not be located near a scenic vista or highway. Also, the proposed design has been conceptually approved through design review to ensure the architectural style complies with the City's Architectural Design Guidelines. Therefore, the proposed project will not create a significant adverse impact in terms of aesthetic to the adjacent land uses. 2. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES - In determining whether impacts to agriculture 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. 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? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson ❑ ❑ ❑ Act contract? c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to ❑ ❑ ❑ their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non - agricultural use? CEQA Checklist 4 File No.: CUP 07 -07 and ADR No. 06 -23 Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than Significant With Significant No Impact Mitigation Impact Impact Incorporation The proposed project is consistent with the Commercial land use designation of the General Plan and with the height overlay of H4 since it is required to comply with the regulations of any other jurisdictional agency environmental regulations. As such, the proposed project will have no impacts on agricultural resources. 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: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air ❑ ❑ ❑ quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially 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 applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? e) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant ❑ ❑ ❑ concentrations? f) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of ❑ ❑ ❑ people? The proposed project is consistent with the South Coast Air Quality Management District Air Quality Management Plan (SCAQMD) based on the discussion below. 4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES - Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse impact, either directly or through ❑ ❑ ❑ habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse impact on any riparian habitat or ❑ ❑ ❑ other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional - -- plans, - policies„ and - regulations -or- by-the- California Department -of---- - - - - -_ - -- - - -.. Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? CEQA Checklist 5 File No.: CUP 07 -07 and ADR No. 06 -23 Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than Significant With Significant No Impact Mitigation Impact Impact Incorporation 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, vemal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption or other means? 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? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological ❑ ❑ ❑ resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation ❑ ❑ ❑ ID Plan, Natural Conservation Community Plan, or other approved local, regional or state habitat conservation plan? There will be no elimination or reduction in the numbers of unique, rare, or endangered species of plants since the subject site does not contain any known populations of rare or endangered species, only non - native plant species. The project will not introduce any new species into the area, or result in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species since the proposed project will only remove annual, non - native, or ornamental plantings. Therefore, the project will not reduce the acreage of any agricultural crop since the subject site is not an agricultural use. As for the De Minimis Impact Finding, there is no evidence before the City that the proposed project will have any potential adverse effect on wildlife resources. 5. CULTURAL RESOURCES - Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in § 15064.5? ❑ ❑ 1:1 b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource ❑ ❑ ❑ pursuant to § 15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or ❑ ❑ site or unique geologic feature? ❑ d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of form ❑ ❑ __ cemeteries ? El CEQA Checklist 6 File No.: CUP 07 -07 and ADR No. 06 -23 6. Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than Significant With Significant No Impact Mitigation Impact Impact Incorporation There are no paleontological resources on the project site and the existing building and site is not a potential cultural resource. Also, the site is not located in a sensitive area for these resources. As such, there is no significant impact to cultural resources. GEOLOGY AND SOILS - Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse ❑ ❑ ® ❑ effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the ❑ most recent Alquist - Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ❑ ❑ ►5 ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? ❑ iii) Seismic- related ground failure, including liquefaction? ❑ v) Landslides? ❑ b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? ❑ 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? El 9 ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ I d) Be located on expansive soil as defined in Table 18 -1 -B of the ❑ ❑ ❑ IR Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? 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? CEQA Checklist 7 File No.: CUP 07 -07 and ADR No. 06 -23 Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than Significant With Significant No Impact Mitigation Impact Impact Incorporation According to the City's General Plan there are two local faults: Raymond Hill Fault and the Sierra Madre Fault. The closet active fault to the subject site is the Raymond Hill Fault, which underlies to the north of the subject site. However, all tentative improvements will be required to conform to the most current local, state, and federal building standards for the foundation design, bearing values, continuous wall footings, footings, settlement, earth pressures, slab on grade, and grading. VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS - Would the protect: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment ❑ ❑ ❑ through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? 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? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely ❑ ❑ ❑ hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one- quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous ❑ ❑ ® ❑ materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? 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? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted ❑ ❑ ❑ emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? -- h)-- Expose- people- or- etructure64o-a significant- raskof- los"njury- or - - ❑— ❑ _ death involving wild land fires, including where wild lands are - - - -� adjacent to to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed CEQA Checklist 8 File No.: CUP 07 -07 and ADR No. 06 -23 Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than Significant With Significant No Impact Mitigation Impact Impact Incorporation with wild lands? There are no hazardous substances or waste on the subject site. However, prior to any demolition, the property owner shall conduct a comprehensive, EPA/HUD-level Lead Based Paint Survey and a complete AHERA level pre - demolition Asbestos Survey prior to any demolition activities since it may disturb any lead paint present 8. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY - Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge ❑ requirements? b) 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 (i.e., 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)? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or ❑ area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltration on or off -site? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or ❑ area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off -site? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ // 70 ►7/ ►Z/ e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the ❑ ❑ ❑ capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality ❑ ❑ ❑ g) Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area, as mapped ❑ ❑ ❑ ED on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a 100 -year floodplain structures which would impede ❑ ❑ ❑ ID or redirect flood flows? CEQA Checklist 9 File No.: CUP 07 -07 and ADR No. 06 -23 Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than Significant With Significant No Impact Mitigation Impact Impact Incorporation 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? j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami or mudflow? ❑ ❑ ❑ k) Potential impact of project construction on storm water runoff? ❑ ❑ ❑ 1) Potential impact of project post- construction activity on storm runoff? ❑ ❑ El m Potential for discharge of storm water from areas from material ❑ ❑ ❑ storage, vehicle or equipment maintenance (including washing), waste handling, hazardous materials handling or storage, delivery areas or loading docks, or other outdoor work areas? n) Potential for discharge of storm water to cause significant harm ❑ ❑ ❑ on the biological integrity of the waterways and water bodies? o) Potential for discharge of storm water to impair the beneficial ❑ ❑ ❑ uses of the receiving waters or areas that provide water quality benefit? P) Potential for significant changes in the flow velocity or volume of ❑ ❑ ❑ storm water runoff that can use environmental harm? q) Potential for significant increases in erosion of the project site or ❑ ❑ ❑ surrounding areas? The proposed project will not change the currents, or the course of direction of water movements in either marine or fresh waters, as the project is not located in marine or fresh water setting. Also, the entire City is located In Flood Zone D, which has no mandatory flood insurance purchase requirements. As such, there are no floodplain regulations. The proposed project must also comply with all the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) requirements. CEQA Checklist 10 File No.: CUP 07 -07 and ADR No. 06 -23 9. 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? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural ❑ ❑ ❑ community conservation plan? The proposal is consistent with the Commercial land use designation of the General Plan, and it will be required to comply with the regulations of any other jurisdictional agency with applicable environmental regulations. As such, staff there will be no impact to the land use since the underlying zone and land use will remain the same. 10. 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? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally - important mineral ❑ ❑ ❑ resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? Due to the nature of the proposed project, the project may increase the demand of energy sources or require new sources of energy or impact natural resources the new health club will be significantly larger than the existing bank building. As a result, the proposed project will be required to comply with the energy and water conservation requirements contained In the Uniform Building Code. As such, the project would not result in the use of water and energy in a wasteful manner, resulting in no significant impact to energy and mineral resources. 11 NOISE - Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of ❑ ❑ ® ❑ standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne ❑ ❑ ❑ vibration or groundborne noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the ❑ ❑ project vicinity above levels existing without the project? CEQA Checklist 11 Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than Significant With Significant No Impact Mitigation Impact Impact Incorporation LAND USE AND PLANNING - Would the project: a) 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? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural ❑ ❑ ❑ community conservation plan? The proposal is consistent with the Commercial land use designation of the General Plan, and it will be required to comply with the regulations of any other jurisdictional agency with applicable environmental regulations. As such, staff there will be no impact to the land use since the underlying zone and land use will remain the same. 10. 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? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally - important mineral ❑ ❑ ❑ resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? Due to the nature of the proposed project, the project may increase the demand of energy sources or require new sources of energy or impact natural resources the new health club will be significantly larger than the existing bank building. As a result, the proposed project will be required to comply with the energy and water conservation requirements contained In the Uniform Building Code. As such, the project would not result in the use of water and energy in a wasteful manner, resulting in no significant impact to energy and mineral resources. 11 NOISE - Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of ❑ ❑ ® ❑ standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne ❑ ❑ ❑ vibration or groundborne noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the ❑ ❑ project vicinity above levels existing without the project? CEQA Checklist 11 File No.: CUP 07 -07 and ADR No. 06 -23 Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than Significant With Significant No Impact Mitigation Impact Impact Incorporation 12. 13. d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise ❑ ❑ ® ❑ levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? 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? f) For, a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the ❑ ❑ ❑ Project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? The proposed project is subject to Planning Commission's review and the Commission may impose conditions to ensure that the noise impacts are minimized to the abutting tenants. Conditions may include, but not limited to restricting the hours of operation. As mitigated, there will be no significant impact to the noise as a result of this project. 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)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating ❑ E ❑ the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the ❑ ❑ ❑ construction of replacement housing elsewhere? The proposed project will have no significant impact to population and will not cause substantial impacts to the local population projections, Induce substantial growth, or displace existing house since no housing is proposed with this project. As .such, there will be no significant impact to population and housing as a result of this project. PUBLIC SERVICES — Would the project: a) Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, .construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response CEQA Checklist 12 File No.: CUP 07 -07 and ADR No. 06 -23 14. 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? 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 proposed project will not result in an increase in the demand for recreational facilities since the proposed use does not consist of housing. Therefore, the proposed project will not increase the demand for housing or regional parks or other recreational facilities. 15. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC - Would the project: a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the ❑ ❑ ® ❑ existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service ❑ ❑ ❑ standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an ❑ ❑ ® ❑ — iacr i aS raffic- lavels-or-a-cbanga _in_.location-thaLlesults-in -- - -- substantial safety risks? CEQA Checklist 13 Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than Significant With Significant No Impact Mitigation Impact Impact Incorporation times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection? ❑ ❑ ❑ Police protection? ❑ ❑ ❑ Schools? ❑ ❑ ❑ Parks? ❑ ❑ ❑ Other public facilities? ❑ ❑ ❑ The proposed project would not result in a new or altered the government services. Therefore, there are no significant impacts to public services as a result of this project. 14. 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? 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 proposed project will not result in an increase in the demand for recreational facilities since the proposed use does not consist of housing. Therefore, the proposed project will not increase the demand for housing or regional parks or other recreational facilities. 15. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC - Would the project: a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the ❑ ❑ ® ❑ existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service ❑ ❑ ❑ standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an ❑ ❑ ® ❑ — iacr i aS raffic- lavels-or-a-cbanga _in_.location-thaLlesults-in -- - -- substantial safety risks? CEQA Checklist 13 File No.: CUP 07 -07 and ADR No. 06 -23 Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than Significant With Significant No Impact Mitigation Impact Impact Incorporation 16. d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., ❑ ❑ ❑ sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? ❑ ❑ ❑ f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? ❑ ❑ ® ❑ g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? ❑ ❑ ❑, A traffic and parking study were prepared by Hirsch/Green Transportation Consultant to provide a detail comparison between the City's parking requirements and the observed parking demand of other L.A. Fitness facilities that are of similar size, a forecast of parking demand for the proposed project, as well as a summary of the shared parking analysis. Also, a survey of the existing parking demands were conducted to provide actual data of the current parking utilization, and to provide a baseline to evaluate the potential parking impacts from the proposed L.A. Fitness health club. Based on the results, the shopping center with the proposed L.A. Fitness will not be fully utilize during the peak periods with the site only be occupied approximately 62 %, and 85% during seasonal parking demands. The four major intersections were also analyzed: 1. Baldwin Avenue and Duarte Road 2. Baldwin Avenue and Naomi Avenue 3. Naomi Avenue and Golden West Avenue 4. Golden West Avenue and Duarte Road The City's Engineer and Traffic Engineer has reviewed the reports, and determined the proposed Project will not create any significant impacts on -site or to any of the major intersections, nor will it create any impacts to the Los Angeles County Congestion Management Program (CMP) which monitors the major intersections and freeway segments in the project vicinity. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS - Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable ❑ ❑ ❑ Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the effects? CEQA Checklist 14 File No.: CUP 07 -07 and ADR No. 06 -23 Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than Significant With Significant No Impact Mitigation Impact Impact Incorporation 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? 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, at seq. (SB 610), and the requirements of Government Code Section 664737 (SB221). e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provide ❑ ❑ ❑ 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? Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to ❑ ❑ ❑ accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state and local statues and regulations ❑ ❑ ❑ related to solid waste? It is anticipated that the project would connect to existing power and natural gas infrastructure in the vicinity of the project site. The City of Arcadia and County Sanitation District of Los Angeles (CSDLAC) will provide wastewater service to the project area, and Southern California Gas Company (SCGC) would provide natural gas to the proposed project. Therefore, the proposed project is not anticipated to result in a significant impact related to power and natural gas. 17 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�aliforwia- history- oc�rehisforY�. — CEQA Checklist 15 File No.: CUP 07 -07 and ADR No. 06 -23 Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than Significant With Significant No Impact Mitigation Impact Impact Incorporation The proposed project will not potentially 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 period of California history or prehistory. As such, there are no significant impacts to this mandatory finding of significance as a result of this project. 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 proposed project will not have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable since it will be compatible with the surrounding uses. C) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause ❑ ❑ ❑ substantial adverse effects on human beings, elther directly or indirectly? CEQA Checklist 16 CAUFOANI'/II ��= �IlSllf lb4t[ E State of California -The Resources Agency ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER. Govemor DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME http://www.dfg.ca.gov Environmental Review and Permitting 1416 Ninth Street, Suite 1260 Sacramento, Callfornia 95814 CEQA Filing Fee No Effect Determination Form Applicant Name: Michael Pashaie Date Submitted: June 15, 2007 Applicant Address: 9255 Sunset Boulevard, Suite 320, West Hollywood, CA 90089 Project Name: Conditional Use Permit No. 07 -07 CEQA Lead Agency: City of Arcadia - Development Services Department, Community Development Division / Planning Services, 240 W. Huntington Dr., P.O. Box 60021, Arcadia, CA 91066 -6021 CEQA Document Type: Mitigated Negative Declaration SCH Number and /or local agency ID number: Project Location: 1325 S. Baldwin Avenue, Arcadia, CA 91007 in Los Angeles County Brief Project Description: To convert the existing 43,544 square foot, two -story retail store into a new L.A. Fitness health club, and permit a parking modification to allow 1,151 parking spaces in lieu of 2,237 spaces required for the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center. The business hours will be from 5:30 a.m. to 11:00 p.m., everyday. Determination: Based on a review of the Project as proposed, the Department of Fish and Game has determined that for purposes of the assessment of CEQA filing fees [F &G Code 711.4(c)] the project has no potential effect on fish, wildlife and habitat and the project as described does not require payment of a CEQA filing fee. This determin4ition does not in any way imply that the project is exempt from CEQA and does not determine the significance of any potential project effects evaluated pursuant to CEQA. Please retain this original determination for your records; you are required to file a copy of this determination with the County Clerk after your project is approved and at the time of filing of the CEQA lead agency's Notice of Determination (NOD). If you do not file a copy of this determination with the County Clerk at the time of filing of the NOD, the appropriate CEQA filing fee will be due and payable. Without a valid No Effect Determination Form or proof of fee payment, the project will not be operative, vested, or final and any local permits issued for the project will be invalid, pursuant to Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(c)(3). DFG Approval By: i° / Leslec /thew n --k:cd Date: (o - 24-0 Conserving Cafifornia's'Wif ffife Since 1870 MEMORANDUM Development DATE: May 1, 2006 TO: Lisa Flores, Senior Planner FROM: Ed Cline, Traffic Engineer SUBJECT: PROPOSED L.A. FITNESS CENTER PROJECT As requested, I reviewed the initial study prepared for the proposed L.A.. Fitness Center located at Baldwin Avenue and Naomi Avenue. The study indicated that the fitness center is proposed to replace the Ross Dress for Less retail store. The data indicates that the fitness center is proposed at 43,544 square feet. The retail store (Ross) that is being replaced is reported to be 21,544 square feet. Based on standard trip generation data, the fitness center can be expected to generate about 172 vehicle trips per hour during the afternoon peak travel period. The retail store is forecasted to generate 58 trips per hour in the afternoon. The fitness center is, therefore; expected to add 114 vehicle trips per hour during the afternoon period. As a result of this evaluation, I recommend that a traffic impact study be conducted involving the' proposed fitness center. I suggest that the following intersections be included in the study: • Baldwin Avenue and Duarte Road • Baldwin Avenue and Naomi Avenue • Naomi Avenue and Golden West Avenue • Golden West Avenue and Duarte Road I will provide a detailed evaluation of the project parking study. I will advise you of the technical aspects of the parking study as soon as the review is complete. cc: Philip A. Wray, City Engineer Development p. ttu DATE: May 4, 2006 TO: Lisa Flores, Senior Planner FROM: Ed Cline, Traffic Engineer SUBJECT: PROPOSED L.A. FITNESS CENTER PROJECT As requested, I reviewed the initial parking study prepared for the proposed L.A. Fitness Center located at Baldwin Avenue and Naomi Avenue. The study indicated that the fitness center is proposed to replace the Ross Dress for Less retail store. The data indicates that the fitness center is proposed at 43,544 square feet. The retail store (Ross) that is being replaced is reported to be 21,544 square feet. The parking study involves a significant number of on -site parking surveys. The surveys were conducted from 6:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. on every day of the week including Saturday and Sunday. The study added a reasonable number of parked vehicles for the 14,475 square feet of vacant stores in the shopping center. It also provided seasonal adjustment assuming that parking demands in December would be higher than the period that the actual study was conducted in February 2006. The study conducted an actual field evaluation of the parking demand at a similar fitness center in Laverne. Table 8 of the report indicates the amount of parking that would be needed for the proposed fitness center in Arcadia. The fitness center in Laverne was reported at 39,670 square feet. The report included information from the Urban Land Institute involving the average parking data for fitness centers. The Urban Land Institute (ULI) indicated that the average number of parking spaces for fitness centers is seven (7) spaces for each 1,000 square feet of building. The results of the ULI data are shown on Table 9 (page 22) of the report. Based on the various field surveys and information provided for the fitness center, the report indicates that the anticipated peak parking demand for the future Arcadia Hub Shopping Center including the fitness center is 681 spaces. The study indicates that there are 740 available parking spaces in the area adjacent to the proposed fitness center. Therefore, the ultimate usage of the parking area is anticipated to be using 92 — -- percent -of- the- avaitable-spat:es— Lisa Flores Proposed L.A. Fitness Center Project May 4, 2006 Page Two The report evaluated the parking issues involving the area adjacent to the proposed project. The report referred to the study area as Phase 1. Phase 1 was shown on Figure 3 of the report as the parking area adjacent to the retail center and proposed fitness center on Baldwin Avenue. The report also conducted surveys in an area referred to Phase 2. Phase 2 was referred to Sub -Area 5 on Figure 3. The report indicated that the available parking in Phase 2 is 115 spaces. The report combined Phase 1 and 2 parking demands and concluded that a total of 975 parking spaces will be needed. Since there are 1,151 available spaces, there would be 176 available spaces beyond the anticipated need for the entire shopping area including the proposed fitness center. The report suggests that various employees for the center be encouraged to park in:the lesser utilized area in order to provide more convenient parking for customers and visitors. Based on my review of the report, I believe the study was very well conducted. I agree with the results of the study and recommendations. The only situation that I believe should be reviewed by the preparer is the blank data on Page i of the report as well as Pages 6, 11, and 14. Also, there is a typographical error on Page 6 involving the total amount of parking on the entire center. The blank data on Pages i, 6, 11 and 14 appears to involve the City's parking codes. EC:pa cc: Philip A. Wray, City Engineer Development p, u DATE: August 7, 2006 TO: Corky Nicholson, Planning Services Manager FROM: Ed Cline, Traffic Engineer SUBJECT: PROPOSED L.A. FITNESS CENTER PROJECT I have reviewed the Traffic Impact Analysis Report prepared for the proposed L.A. Fitness Center at the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center. The report also analyzed the parking issues associated with the project. According to the report, the fitness center is expected to generate 172 vehicle trips during the afternoon peak hour. The study also evaluated the amount of traffic that is forecasted to be currently generated by the Ross Dress - for -Less store, which is being replaced by the fitness center. The report indicates that the Ross store would have generated 67 vehicle trips per hour during the afternoon peak period. Consequently, the fitness project is expected to add 105 vehicle trips per hour during the afternoon peak period. The study evaluated the potential traffic impact at the four intersections that were recommended in the May 1, 2006 memorandum provided for Lisa Flores. A copy of the May 1 st memo is attached for your review. Based on the trip generation forecasted for the project, the study indicates that the fitness center is not expected to create a significant impact at any of the intersections. The data is shown on Table 8 of the report. A copy of the table is also attached. As a result of my review of the study, I recommend that the traffic impact report be accepted. The report also analyzed the proposed parking impact associated with the project. My May 4, 2006 memorandum indicated the results of the parking study. I continue to agree with the parking issues outlined by the report. A copy of the May 4 memo is also attached. cc: Philip A. Wray, City Engineer Attachments 1 1 1 1 Table 8 Critical Movement Analysis Summary Future (2007) PM Peak Hour Without and With Project Conditions " ` indicates significant impact per City of Arcadia /Los Angeles County CMP criteria Impact Significance Criteria The City of Arcadia uses the Los Angeles CMP definition for a significant traffic impact attributable to a project. As identified in Appendix D of the 2004 CMP, (Guidelines for CMP Transportation impact Analysis), "[for] 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)." No significant impacts are deemed to occur at LOS A through E, as these operating conditions exhibit sufficient surplus capacities to accommodate traffic increases with little effect on traffic delays, or are within accepted operating levels for urban intersections. Using the impact evaluation criteria shown in the preceding table, the project's incremental traffic impacts summarized in Table 8 are not considered to be "significant". Therefore, no off site project traffic mitigation measures or roadway improvements are necessary or warranted. Project Impacts on Regional Transportation System To address the increasing public concern that traffic congestion was impacting the quality of life and economic vitality of the State of California, the Los Angeles County Congestion Management Program (CMP)" was enacted to provide the analytical basis for transportation decisions through the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) process. A countywide approach has been — ---- - - - - -- 2004 Congestion Management Program for Los Angeles County, Los Angeles County Me'ropolitanTreiisportatiorr - -- -- -- - - Authority, Los Angeles, 2004, ARCADIA HU62A FITNESS 31 JULY 2008 HIRSCH/GREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC. Without Int. Project With Project No. Intersection CMA LOS CMA LOS Impact 1 Baldwin Avenue and Duarte Road 0.853 D 0.861 D 0.008 2 Baldwin Avenue and Naomi Avenue 0.737 C 0.756 C 0.019 3 Golden West Avenue and Duarte Road 0.588 A 0.596 A 0.008 4 Golden West Avenue and Naomi Avenue 0.691 B 0.709 C 0.018 " ` indicates significant impact per City of Arcadia /Los Angeles County CMP criteria Impact Significance Criteria The City of Arcadia uses the Los Angeles CMP definition for a significant traffic impact attributable to a project. As identified in Appendix D of the 2004 CMP, (Guidelines for CMP Transportation impact Analysis), "[for] 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)." No significant impacts are deemed to occur at LOS A through E, as these operating conditions exhibit sufficient surplus capacities to accommodate traffic increases with little effect on traffic delays, or are within accepted operating levels for urban intersections. Using the impact evaluation criteria shown in the preceding table, the project's incremental traffic impacts summarized in Table 8 are not considered to be "significant". Therefore, no off site project traffic mitigation measures or roadway improvements are necessary or warranted. Project Impacts on Regional Transportation System To address the increasing public concern that traffic congestion was impacting the quality of life and economic vitality of the State of California, the Los Angeles County Congestion Management Program (CMP)" was enacted to provide the analytical basis for transportation decisions through the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) process. A countywide approach has been — ---- - - - - -- 2004 Congestion Management Program for Los Angeles County, Los Angeles County Me'ropolitanTreiisportatiorr - -- -- -- - - Authority, Los Angeles, 2004, ARCADIA HU62A FITNESS 31 JULY 2008 HIRSCH/GREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC. Based on information provided by LA Fitness and summarized in the following table, the La Verne LA Fitness facility contains a total of approximately 39,670 total square feet of floor area, including approximately 11,124 square feet of "cardio" and "circuit" training area, 4,255 square feet of "aerobics" instruction and training, 4,255 square feet of "spin" and boxing training classrooms, 5,497 square feet of pool and support space, 7,448 square feet basketball and racquetball courts and support area, a 1,703 square foot "Kids Klub" area, plus an 1,800 square foot salesAobby, and locker /shower facilities. Table E -1 LA Fitness, La Verne, CA 1276 Foothill Boulevard, La Verne, CA Building Areas Main Floor: 36,605 sq. ft. Mezzanine: 3,065 sq. ft. Total Building: 39,670 sq. ft. Total Parking Required (per Lease): 275 spaces Buildino Area Breakd Mezzanine 3,065 E -1 ARCADIA HUBILA FITNESS HIRSCHIGREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC. JULY 2006 AREA USE (CSF) REMARKS Main Floor Entry 1,236 Sales Area 565 Cardio /circuit Area 11,124 Spinning & Boxing 4,255 Kids Klub 1,703 Not a daycare center, maximum stay of 1 -1/2 hour Basketball Court 4,065 Racquetball Court(s) 3,383 Aerobics 4,255 Men's Lockers 774 Women's Lockers 785 Wet Area (Men & Women) 1,409 Lap Pool & Spa 1,962 Pool Deck 3,535 Misc. /Utilities 1,809 Mezzanine 3,065 E -1 ARCADIA HUBILA FITNESS HIRSCHIGREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC. JULY 2006 ( 1q.ILry '°°L6 YIxxOATrJ MOpx w t�N• Nx(N 9xWO1xIM l Ny - j Y(LV xlrxm axx AM YOKL �S r a uw F-dEf II tyt j � r §r§r§r§ p6�1 psy ( 1q.ILry '°°L6 YIxxOATrJ MOpx w t�N• Nx(N 9xWO1xIM l Ny - j Y(LV xlrxm axx AM YOKL a uw F-dEf i,11 i N I ° I 1 I 4 N I !P U I I I I I I I I U I I I I I I I I I I I I IJ � I► ° amnnnnlmnnnn I�, umd 4 �R I I I I $ I� t 1 , i,11 i N I ° I 1 I 4 N I !P U I I I I I I I I U I I I I I I I I I I I I IJ � I► ° amnnnnlmnnnn I�, umd 4 �R I I I I $ I� 'Dw Y+PpDOWpWQpIP1yY �� LDD N MYM'111O YI m m Y'a•• OL Im 9AY •9mY MWm1Y OMY oT�m •m OiCI wl W �•' a�tl ""�°"�� •id..il� r7 � wu w1 .w Al 2 m n a n !''° if 11 if if Al J! if Ill Oil 11 �•■ :000000000 00 o b fir I rar W-711 ON IL I I r\-L. I ;"M-- , I i I A��a *MV HWG� OMN in, z wn re. 00 000000000 130 sla ° y ! FY qty+ F{ I VY b Fh Vf A 1 , v F v v° y r w: t 6 d�� i91 ` h�� +� iS r ifs i� a ? J� �{ s �4 Y y � y eP O 8R y@ E rw�....e 8 88 H - " bN ("Me or N " ICNI •V8. '� IlYl .11 l ll ames.mnw IN�Ne or eNOr OMIA M o Areldleele And AwHaes, 6N. MCRp1 CILLIlORNN HnCT ^ RESOLUTION NO. 6592 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2007 -07 AND ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN REVIEW 2006 -23 TO CONVERT THE EXISTING 43,544 SQUARE FOOT ROSS DRESS FOR LESS STORE TO A NEW L.A. FITNESS HEALTH CLUB WITH A PARKING MODIFICATION AT THE ARCADIA HUB SHOPPING CENTER AT 1325 S. BALDWIN AVENUE WHEREAS, the City of Arcadia on August 3, 2006, received an Architectural Design Review application followed by a Conditional Use Permit application on May 16, 2007 by Michael Pashaie on behalf of L.A. Fitness to convert the existing 43,544 square foot Ross Dress For Less store to a new L.A. Fitness health club with a parking modification at 1325 S. Baldwin Avenue; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act, Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq. ( "CEQA "), and the State's CEQA Guidelines, the City of Arcadia prepared an Initial Study and determined, there is no substantial evidence that the approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 07 -07 and Architectural Design Review No. 06 -23 would result in a significant adverse effect on the environment. Accordingly, a Negative Declaration has been prepared and notice of that fact was given in the manner required by law; and 1 WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the Planning Commission on July 24, 2007, at which time the Planning Commission approved the project and adopted the Resolution on September 14, 2007; and WHEREAS, within the prescribed five -day appeal period, Councilmember Wuo appealed the project for reconsideration in order to have a full review of the facts and circumstances prior to a final decision by the City; and WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the City Council on September 18, 2007, at which time all interested persons were given full opportunity to be heard and present evidence. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. That the factual data submitted by the Development Services Department in the attached report is true and correct. SECTION 2. This City Council finds: 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 because the proposed use will be compatible with the surrounding uses, and it will be an appropriate use for the subject site, and the 2 6592 proposed project will provide adequate parking for the new health club and existing restaurant. 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, 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 three streets that are 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 because the land use and current zoning are 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. 3 6592 SECTION 3. That for the foregoing reasons this City Council grants Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 07 -07 and Architectural Design Review No. 06 -23 to permit a L.A. Fitness health club with a parking modification at 1325 S. Baldwin Avenue, upon the following conditions: 1. The 37 parking spaces that face the store frontage shall be restricted to 45- minute parking, written on grade to indicate this restriction. 2. The employee parking shall be restricted to, and employees shall be directed to, park at all the parking spaces along the frontages of Duarte Road and Naomi Avenue, as shown on Figure 5 of the Parking Study, dated July 2006. 3. All exterior light fixtures shall be hooded and arranged to reflect away from the adjoining properties and streets. 4. The City Council shall have approved the release of the Covenant and Agreement that restricted the property owner from leasing the basement area for retail and non - retail space, dated April 10, 1987. 5. Landscaping material shall be planted on the five metal wall trellises. 6. The health club shall be permitted to be open 24 -hours every day. 7. There shall be one (1) uniformed security guard on -duty 24 -hours every day to enforce the 45- minute parking requirements, the employee parking area, 4 6592 and to ensure the L.A. Fitness customers do not park across the street at the CVS parking lot, located at 1401 S. Baldwin Avenue. S. A parking study shall be required for any new and existing uses within this shopping center that is subject to a parking modification. 9. The applicant shall install and maintain in good working order at all times a surveillance camera outside the facility, within the swimming pool area, and at the main reception area for security purposes. 10. Approval of CUP 2007 -07 and ADR No. 2006 -23 shall not take effect until the property owner(s) and applicants have executed and filed the Acceptance Form available from the Development Services Department to indicate awareness and acceptance of these conditions of approval. 11. 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. 5 6592 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. SECTION 3. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. Passed, approved and adopted this 2rd ATTEST: s "�o City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Stephen P. Deitsch City Attorney day of October 5 2007. Mayor of the City of Arcadia 6 6592 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES) SS: CITY OF ARCADIA ) I, JAMES H. BARROWS, City Clerk of the City of Arcadia, hereby certifies that the foregoing Resolution No. 6592 was passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Arcadia, signed by the Mayor and attested to by the City Clerk at a regular meeting of said Council held on the 2nd day of October, 2007 and that said Resolution was adopted by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Council Member Chandler, Harbicht and Segal NOES: Council Member Amundson and Wuo ABSENT: None City Clerk of the City of Arcadia 7 6592 IS, I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The applicant, Arcadia Hub Shopping Center, LP proposes to convert of a portion of the existing Arcadia Hub Shopping Center to a new LA Fitness facility. The existing Arcadia Hub Shopping Center is located on the west side of Baldwin Avenue, between Duarte Road and Naomi Avenue in the City of Arcadia. This shopping center contains a total of approximately 346,844 leaseable square feet (including basement and storage areas), consisting of a Pavilions supermarket, Burlington Coat Factory and Baby Depot, Joann Fabrics, Ross Dress for Less, and numerous smaller retail and commercial stores. It is currently approximately 96 percent leased, with about 14,475 square feet vacant. The shopping center is divided into two "phases ", with the proposed LA Fitness facility to occupy a portion of "Phase 1 ". The "Phase 2" portion of the site, containing the Pavilions supermarket and other retail and commercial uses located generally along the westerly side of the site, is not included in this parking analysis except by reference. The Phase 1 portion of the site is the focus of this study, and it provides a total of approximately 740 parking spaces, located in a large 341 -space surface parking lot on the south side of the center, a smaller approximately 217 -space surface lot along Duarte Road, and a single -level parking structure containing approximately 182 spaces located beneath the Duarte Road parking lot, accessible at the same level as the primary surface lot. This amount of parking is 591 spaces less than the approximately 1,331 Phase 1 parking spaces required by the City of Arcadia parking code. The proposed project would remove the Ross store and replace it with an approximately 42,400 square foot LA Fitness center, utilizing both floors to provide the various typical "workout" areas, training classrooms, swimming pool and basketball court facilities, and ancillary showerllocker room uses. City of Arcadia code parking requirements for the future configuration of the shopping center, including the new health club, would increase to approximately 1,804 spaces, or 1,064 spaces more than are currently provided. It should be noted, however, that the City is currently in the process of reevaluating the parking requirements for health club uses, although no definitive revisions have been approved at the time of this report. Due to the current site parking deficit as compared to the City parking code requirements, a detailed evaluation of both the existing and forecast future parking demands following the development of the LA Fitness project was conducted. Parking demands for the existing Arcadia Hub Shopping Center were surveyed in order to provide actual data on the site's current parking utilization, and to provide a baseline from which to evaluate the potential parking impacts of the proposed LA Fitness facility. ARCADIA HU&2A FITNESS HIRSCH /GREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC. JULY2006 The results of the parking demand survey of the existing conditions within the Phase 1 portion of the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center indicate that it does not fully utilize the parking supply provided, with a maximum of approximately 460 of the 740 Phase 1 spaces (approximately 62 percent) occupied during peak activity (on Saturday). When adjusted to account for full occupancy of the site, the peak parking demand for the current configuration of the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center increases to approximately 487 spaces, still well within the parking supply for Phase 1. Development of the proposed LA Fitness facility will include the removal of the existing Ross Dress for Less store. In order not to "double count" the existing parking demands for this store, its parking use was estimated and removed from the existing parking survey data. This process produced an estimate of the pre -LA Fitness conditions for Phase 1 of the site. Additionally, the site's parking demand was also adjusted to account for year -end holiday shopping periods. During this time, parking for the shopping center's retail components could be as much as 25 percent higher than during the survey period for this analysis. Based on these adjustments, the peak parking demand for the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center, including the removal of the Ross Dress for Less parking demands and adjustment for seasonal activity, was estimated to be approximately 510 spaces. This is the "baseline" parking value used to assess the potential parking impacts for the proposed LA Fitness facility. Parking demand for the proposed LA Fitness facility was calculated using two separate methodologies, and the "worst case" estimate derived from these methodologies was used to gauge the potential impacts of the project on the parking supply for the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center. The first methodology utilized actual parking utilization obtained from surveys of an existing LA Fitness facility in the nearby City of La Verne. Based on a comparison of the existing surveyed site versus the proposed Arcadia Hub facility, it was estimated that the proposed facility would produce a maximum parking demand of approximately 190 spaces. The second methodology involved the use of parking demand data provided by the Urban Land Institute (ULI) in their Shared Parking publication. This data is based on numerous surveys of existing sites across the country, and provides both parking ratios (number of spaces per unit of size) and parking "accumulation" profiles (amount of parking needed on an hourly basis) for general "health club" uses. Using this data resulted in a peak parking demand for the proposed LA Fitness facility of approximately 297 parking spaces. As a result, this method was selected as the "worst case" parking demand assessment for the proposed facility, and was used to determine the parking impacts of the proposed LA Fitness. ii ARCADIA HUa2A FITNESS HIRSCHIGREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC. JULY2006 Based on these calculations, the peak seasonal parking demand forecasts for the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center, including the proposed LA Fitness, are expected to be approximately 681 parking spaces, or about 92 percent of the existing 740 -space parking supply. Thus, although some localized short-term parking shortages could occur internal to the Phase 1 portion of the shopping center site, with specific parking areas showing high parking demands, overall, the parking supply for the site will be more than adequate to accommodate the maximum foreseeable parking demands for the shopping center. No significant Phase 1 parking lot operations or parking supply problems are anticipated, and while the shopping center parking will not meet the current City of Arcadia parking code requirements, the proposed development of a new LA Fitness facility in place of the existing Ross Dress for Less store at the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center is not anticipated to result in parking shortages for the site as a whole, and no parking 'overflow' is expected onto the site adjacent streets or parking areas. Therefore, the proposed project is not expected to result in significant parking impacts. Although the analysis focused on the Phase 1 area of the site, it is also important to note that the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center is actually composed of both the Phase 1 and Phase 2 areas. The parking for the shopping center is not strictly segregated between the two phases, and it is likely that parking interactions and "spillover" between the Phase 1 and Phase 2 parking areas occurs on a regular basis. The parking surveys for the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center also included data for the Subarea 5 (Phase 2) parking lot. The results indicate that, like Phase 1, parking within Subarea 5 is substantially less than the total parking supply for existing conditions, with a maximum of 237 of the 411 spaces (about 58 percent) occupied. Even adjusting for maximum anticipated seasonal parking demands, Subarea 5 is expected to use 296 of the 411 spaces available (about 72 percent), leaving a minimum of approximately 115 parking spaces available at all times of the day. When the peak parking demands for both Phase 1 and Phase 2 are combined, the peak parking activity for the shopping center as a whole occurs at approximately 6:00 PM on Saturday (the forecast peak demand time for Phase 1 with the LA Fitness facility), with a total of approximately 975 spaces needed. This amount is still substantially less (175 spaces) than the 1,151 spaces provided within Phases 1 plus 2, further reinforcing the conclusion that the implementation of the proposed LA Fitness facility will not result in significant parking impacts at the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center. ARCADIA HUa/LA FITNESS HIRSCH/GREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC. JULY2006 However, the parking demand analyses and forecasts do indicate that parking within localized areas (primarily Subareas 2, 3 and 4) of the parking facilities for Phase 1 of the shopping center currently experience, or are anticipated to experience high parking demands that approach or may exceed the parking supplies in these areas. Therefore, to provide additional available parking for patrons of the stores and businesses located adjacent to or in close proximity to these parking areas, it is recommended that the management of the shopping center voluntarily relocate all employee parking to lesser utilized spaces in parking Subareas 1, 4, and 5, along the frontages of Duarte Road and Naomi Avenue. It is important to note that this measure is not a requirement as "mitigation" for any anticipated parking shortages, since the results of this analysis indicate that more than adequate on site parking exists at all times. Relocating employee parking away from the more highly utilized parking subareas will simply provide additional parking availability for patrons of the stores and businesses near higher demand parking locations, and minimize the localized on site parking congestion identified in this report. iv ARCADIA HUa2A FITNESS HIRSCH/GREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC. JULY2006 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page EXISTING PARKING CONDITIONS ...... ............................................. I.............. I............... 7 Existing Parking Requirements ......................................................... ............................... 7 ExistingParking Demand .................................................................. ............................... 7 FUTURE PARKING CONDITIONS .......... ............................... Code Parking Requirements .................. ............................... Parking Demand Estimates ................... ............................... Estimated Parking Demand — LA Fitness ............................. Future Parking Demand — Arcadia Hub with LA Fitness....... Parking Utilizations — Subarea 5 ............ ............................... CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ......... . ............................... 30 APPENDICES A — Existing Parking Requirement Calculations B — Parking Demand Calculations and Forecasts C — Parking Surveys — Arcadia Hub Shopping Center D — Parking Surveys — LA Fitness Center— La Verne, California E — Component Use and Size Summary — LA Fitness Center— LA Verne, California v ARCADIA HUH/LA FITNESS HIRSCH /GREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC. JULY 2006 LIST OF FIGURES Figure No. 1 Arcadia Hub Shopping Center Site Vicinity Map ................... ............................... 2 Arcadia Hub Shopping Center Layout and Tenant Locations .............................. 3 Arcadia Hub Shopping Center Parking Subareas ................. ............................... 4 Proposed Arcadia Hub LA Fitness Layout ............................ ............................... 5 Recommended Employee Parking Areas ............................. ............................... LIST OF TABLES Table No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 A M 10 11 12 Arcadia Hub Shopping Center Tenant Roll ........................... ............................... Arcadia Hub — Existing Parking Demand .............................. ............................... Arcadia Hub — Full Occupancy Parking Demand .................. ............................... Arcadia Hub — Project - Related Parking Code Changes ........ ............................... Estimated Parking Demand — Ross Dress for Less .............. ............................... Arcadia Hub — Full Occupancy Parking Demand Without Ross., ......................... Arcadia Hub — Full Occupancy Parking Demand Without Ross — Adjusted for SeasonalUtilization .............................................................. ............................... Proposed Arcadia Hub LA Fitness Center Parking Demand (based on La Verne LA Fitness Facility Data ........................................ ............................... Proposed Arcadia Hub LA Fitness Center Parking Demand (based on ULIParking Data ................................................................... ............................... Future Arcadia Hub Parking Demand With LA Fitness ......... ............................... Arcadia Hub Phase 2 Area Parking Demand ........................ ............................... Arcadia Hub Phase 2 Existing Parking Demand —Adjusted for SeasonalUtilization .............................................................. ............................... vi Page 2 5 8 13 32 Page 3 10 11 15 16 17 f[ll W11A 24 26 28 29 ARCADIA HUaILA FITNESS HIRSCH /GREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC. JULY 2006 OVERVIEW This document summarizes the results of an analysis of the existing parking utilization at the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center, and identifies the forecast future parking demands of the conversion of a portion of the existing shopping center to a new LA Fitness facility. The following report identifies and discusses the analysis assumptions, methodologies, results, and conclusions of the parking demand for the current conditions at the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center, the anticipated parking needs for the proposed LA Fitness facility, and the resulting parking forecasts for the future Arcadia Hub Shopping Center including the LA Fitness center. Background The Arcadia Hub Shopping Center is located on the west side of Baldwin Avenue between Duarte Road and Naomi Avenue in the City of Arcadia, as shown in Figure 1. The shopping center contains a total of approximately 346,844 leaseable square feet (including basement and storage areas), consisting of a Pavilions supermarket, Burlington Coat Factory and Baby Depot, Joann Fabrics, Ross Dress for Less, and numerous smaller retail and commercial stores. It is currently approximately 96 percent leased, with about 14,475 square feet of vacant floor space. For purposes of this analysis, and based on direction from the City of Arcadia Planning Department staff, the shopping center is identified as consisting of two separate "phases ". Phase 1 consists of the development generally along the eastern portion of the site, and contains the location of the proposed LA Fitness facility. The Phase 2 portion of the shopping center includes the Pavilions supermarket and the retail and commercial uses located generally within the western portion of the site. The existing tenant roll and store sizes, identified by phase, are summarized in Table 1, and shown graphically in Figure 2. The shopping center provides a total of approximately 1,151 parking spaces, located in a large 752 -space surface parking lot on the south side of the center, a smaller approximately 217 - space surface lot along Duarte Road, and a single -level parking structure containing approximately 182 spaces located beneath the Duarte Road parking lot, accessible at the same level as the primary surface lot. Parking for the Phase 1 portion of the site consists of a total of approximately 740 spaces, including approximately 341 of the 752 spaces in the southern surface lot, plus the 217 -space Duarte Road surface lot and the 182 -space "lower" Duarte Road lot. The Phase 2 parking area of the shopping center contains the remaining 411 spaces surrounding and south of the Pavilions supermarket. 1 ARCADIA HUB/LA FITNESS HIRSCH /GREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC. JULY2006 I P'1 rtr ef. 4 *2V AV T f; I.V � I r KL 6 111, A , It o UV , + Y m t ¢ �� I�� {' yyFy � ' IT! fv. Table 1 Arcadia Hub Shopping Center Current Tenant Roll and Store Sizes Unit No. Tenant Sq. Ft. Phase 1 (Subareas 1 - 4) 1200.00 Alexia Flowers 500 1201.00 Burlington Coat Factory 100,491 1201.01 Burlington Coat Factory (Baby Depot) 26,000 1215.00 Ann Karen Inc & Day Spa 12,500 1201.03 Jo -Ann Fabric 15,000 1225.00 Vacant 10,475 1265.00 Blockbuster 5,857 1271.01 Waltrip's Music 7,800 Basement 13,000 1309.00 First Commercial Bank 4,083 13111. OA Nic Computer, Inc. 2,800 1311.OB Young Dong Tofu 2,000 1311.00 Arcadia Travel Connection 750 1313.00 Kids Island, Inc. 4,814 1317.00 Vacant 4,000 1325.00 Ross Dress for Less 21,544 Ross Basement 6,000 Unused Basement and Storage 16,000 733A.00 Pat Huey, Inc. 600 7338.00 Starbucks Coffee 950 733C.01 PCS Store 665 733D.00 Smoke Shop, Inc. 760 733E.00 Walter Dorn Jewelers 564 733F.00 Naomi ShoeNacuum Rep 940 733G.00 Subway Submarine 760 733H.00 Beauty Salon 760 7331.00 H & R Block 760 733J.00 Vivi Hair 760 733K/L.00 I Sold It On Ebay 1,520 733M.00 JC Herb 740 733N.00 Morning Glory 741 Total Phase 1 264,134 Vacant Phase 1 14,475 Percent Vacant 5.5% ARCADIA HUH'LA FITNESS HIRSCH /GREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC. JULY 2006 Table 1 (continued) Arcadia Hub Shopping Center Current Tenant Roll and Store Sizes Unit No. Tenant Sq. Ft. Phase 2 (Subarea 5) 815A.00 Osaka Restaurant 1,550 8158.00 China Trust Bank 2,280 815C.00 Jenny Craig 2,400 815E.00 California Beauty Supply 1,550 815F.00 Game X 1,550 815G.00 A -U 79 1,550 815H.00 Haircreation 1,550 8151.00 American Life (Books & Accessories) 1,550 815J.00 Adelphia (Payment Center) 1,550 Adelphia (TCI Transmission Site) 140 815K.00 Young Optometry 1,550 815L.00 Score 1,550 Tomra Pacific, Inc 0 815M.00 Mission Renaissance 1,550 Von's 00 Von's Pavilions 62,390 Total Phase 2 82,710 Total Arcadia Hub Shopping Center 346,844 3 ARCADIA HUBM FITNESS HIRSCH /GREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC. JULY 2006 - -Id NZIdQ ? �' Y T 9} p Q a E 4 m 4 I I i flI(IIIIIIIIIIIf� t A+oio euwav . tueaeA I I o WRI MHIW11 a "aaW pII } I ' I � - I rt � �� Iillll ' � l '' l r � llll � � � O ueISSWWS J11y 11111111 I1 I1U tupmWeSAerMnS daa w + val"W Qilllllllllll!01I LI IIIIII IIn eiaxa� woo wed uiRM roue do4e -x-3 Ulit 111!11 [[Ila�ll llllll lfu elms Sid F aa�oManyel3 I I I I I I o U L tlllllll IIII�IIILILlIJIIi(1 i t I IiI l IU I�I I I I I I,IU § (t 11111111111 � 11 W W1WJl . J ITffI�ITf I tlU it I I f I Wll I'J g �I E� a D Z tt H O 2 FIGURE 2 ARCADIA HUB SHOPPING CENTER Me IR IRSC H TENANT OCCUPANCY LOCATIONS Hir ,.hH;rnwn Transportation CpnSWtlpp. IpC. c a 5 Project Proposal The applicant, Arcadia Hub Shopping Center, LP, desires to replace the existing Ross Dress for Less store, located at the southwest corner of the site, with a similarly sized LA Fitness health club facility. The Ross Dress for Less store currently occupies two floors (main level and basement) with a total of approximately 43,544 square feet of sales floor, basement, and storage space. The proposed project would remove the Ross store and replace it with an approximately 42,400 square foot LA Fitness center, utilizing both floors to provide the various typical "workout" areas, training classrooms, swimming pool and basketball court facilities, and ancillary shower /locker room uses. Parking Demand Determination Methodology The estimates of future parking demand for the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center, following the development of the proposed LA Fitness facility, were calculated in three basic steps. First, the existing parking utilization for the current occupancy of the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center was determined, and these values were then adjusted to approximate parking usage for the shopping center at full (100 percent) occupancy. Next, the amount of parking demand currently generated by the Ross Dress for Less store was calculated, and removed from the total shopping center parking demands, since the Ross facility will be removed to develop the proposed LA Fitness facility, and the associated Ross parking needs will no longer occur. Finally, the anticipated parking demand for the proposed LA Fitness facility was determined, and added to the "full occupancy' (without Ross) shopping center parking demands to arrive at the estimated future parking demands for the modified "With LA Fitness" shopping center site. To provide the decision makers with all pertinent information regarding the effects of the proposed project, potential parking demands for the proposed LA Fitness facility were examined based on several sources, in order to provide a "worst case" assessment of the anticipated parking needs of this new facility. Parking requirements based on the existing City code parking ratios were first identified as a 'baseline" value for assessing parking needs for the LA Fitness facility. However, these values provide only a static, maximum parking value for the facility which must be maintained at all times, and do not recognize the fluctuation of parking "demands" (actual parking utilizations) of the facility throughout the day. Therefore, two additional assessments were investigated; the "shared parking" methodologies identified by the Urban Land Institute (ULI), and a survey of actual parking use based on empirical parking data collected from an existing LA Fitness facility in nearby La Verne, California. Both of these additional methodologies provided data on parking 'variability" by hour of the day, in order to more accurately identify actual parking needs for the proposed LA Fitness. 6 ARCADIA HU82A FITNESS HIRSCH /GREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC. JULY 2006 EXISTING PARKING CONDITIONS — ARCADIA HUB SHOPPING CENTER Existing Parking Requirements The current City of Arcadia parking code requires that retail developments, such as the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center, generally provide off street parking at a ratio of 5.0 spaces for each 1,000 square feet of floor area. However, the existing Arcadia Hub Shopping Center contains a number of uses which have been assessed specific parking requirements by the City as part of their approvals that are different from this general requirement (Starbucks, Subway, and Kid's Island). Based on current City information, the Phase 1 portion of the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center requires a total of 1,331 parking spaces, while the Phase 2 portion requires a total of 422 spaces, for a total site parking requirement of 1,753 spaces. As described earlier, Phase 1 provides a total of 740 spaces, or 591 fewer (44 percent) than required, while Phase 2 provides a total of 411 spaces, or 11 less (3 percent) than required. Overall, the shopping center provides a total of 1,151 spaces, 602 fewer (34 percent) than required. Therefore, the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center site currently exhibits a parking deficit with respect to the Code requirements, both in Phases 1 and 2 individually and for the site as a whole, raising concerns that the proposed LA Fitness facility will exacerbate this condition. Existing Parking Demand Despite the current City Code parking requirements noted above, anecdotal assessments of the shopping center for more than 20 years have suggested that the parking demands for this site are not accurately represented by the general "retail" conditions assumed in the City's parking code. Actual parking utilization at the site has been consistently observed to be substantially less than both the City's parking code assumptions and the existing parking supply, with much of the existing parking supply unutilized. Therefore, an investigation was undertaken to quantify the actual parking usage ( "parking demand ") for the shopping center under typical conditions, and to document the existing parking needs of the shopping center. For purposes of this parking analysis, the Phase 1 portion of the existing Arcadia Hub Shopping Center parking supply was divided into four individual sections, so that parking utilizations for the shopping center could be identified beyond a simple numerical parking total. For informational purposes, the Phase 2 parking area was also identified, and parking utilization surveys performed, although the parking usage for the Phase 2 portion of the site was not included in the analysis of Phase 1 parking demands or assessments of Phase 1 parking adequacy. The Phase 1 and Phase 2 parking subareas of the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center parking facilities are shown in Figure 3. 7 ARCADIA HUahA FITNESS HIRSCH /GREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC. JULY 2006 d „ I � 3A IS ' �f'' tstf` .e, a y'� Y F •• �4 F l Ir _L.O ..- 5 5 y II•� � FIL° • Ra ��s , u- ti� , . , .3',. Spbces � l '' zSubarea �1= � ,itt s •y +, (Upo tlLevef) 11 ;.;?,Subarea 4 ; t 111 2.17 Spaces, 241 Spaces: f ,\� : Subarea 2 (Lowed Level)' r = 182 Spaces r 1 1 1 I 447t 4 �. 1' , z 34- This subdivision of parking utilization within the overall Phase 1 parking use for the shopping center was done to determine whether parking "hot spots" occur within the overall parking layout. These are localzed areas within the larger parking supply where parking demand is higher than the overall parking activity due to more popular tenants, insufficient localized parking supply, or other factors. This information was also of use in determining whether any parking shortages or, conversely, any unutilized or underutilized parking occurs or is likely to occur in areas that would likely be used by employees and visitors to the proposed LA Fitness facility. These four Phase 1 parking subareas are: 1) the surface parking lot off Duarte Road (217 spaces); 2) the parking structure beneath the Duarte Road surface lot (182 parking spaces); 3) the eastern parking area of the main (southern) parking lot (100 parking spaces); and 4) the "center' section of the primary surface lot (241 parking spaces). As noted earlier, Subarea 5 contains all of the Phase 2 parking supply, and is located on the western portion of the primary surface lot, serving Pavilions and the western retail shops (411 parking spaces). The parking demand for the existing conditions at the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center was determined through physical counts of the actual number of vehicles parking at the site. The parking "sweeps" were conducted hourly, between the hours of 6:00 AM and 10:00 PM over seven consecutive days from February 10' through W, 2006. The seven -day period represented typical weekday and weekend conditions with no holidays. Weather was clear and seasonably warm throughout the count period. The results of the parking demand surveys for the existing Phase 1 Arcadia Hub Shopping Center are summarized in Table 2. As shown in this table, the maximum parking demand for the existing Phase 1 portion of the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center occurs between approximately 2:00 PM and 3:00 PM on a Saturday, with a total of approximately 460 parking spaces, or about 62 percent of the total 740 -space parking supply occupied, with approximately 280 spaces unutilized. Parking utilizations for the Phase 1 portion of the shopping center during other times of the week are substantially less than the peaks described above, with maximum utilizations of less than 50 percent of the total available parking during Friday and Sunday, and of 40 percent or less peak parking occupancy throughout the rest of the week. 9 ARCADIA HUaILA FITNESS HIRSCH/GREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC. JULY 2006 Table 2 Arcadia Hub Shopping Center Existing Phase 1 Parking Demand Hour Day of Week Beginning Mon Tues Wed Thur Fri Sat Sun 6:00 AM 11 13 14 11 14 10 11 7:00 AM 18 28 25 23 25 14 16 8:00 AM 55 44 36 47 40 31 23 9:00 AM 96 85 67 73 89 127 33 10:00 AM 139 161 187 167 150 231 59 11:00 AM 189 228 200 211 216 357 210 12:00 PM 204 292 225 253 258 419 252 1:00 PM 243 276 231 249 293 403 294 2:00 PM 251 269 248 255 279 460 .338 3:00 PM 252 279 238 239 255 417 327 4:00 PM 266 270 262 258 311 414 346 5:00 PM 280 265 299 248 303 376 309 6:00 PM 268 263 245 251 251 341 286 7:00 PM 247 203 229 226 226 259 200 8:00 PM 210 195 148 181 206 243 113 9:00 PM 130 115 137 150 175 148 62 10:00 PM 73 94 57 73 118 84 47 Note: Values in red indicate maximum daily parking demand Full Occupancy Parking Demand Estimates As noted earlier in this report, portions of Phase 1 of the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center are currently vacant; a total of approximately 14,475 square feet of space (approximately 5.5 percent of the total Phase 1 area) in the eastern portion of the site adjacent to parking Subarea 3 was unoccupied at the time of the survey. Therefore, in order to present the potential "worst case" parking utilization estimates for the current configuration of the shopping center, the parking utilizations summarized in Table 2 were adjusted upward by approximately 5.8 percent (100% forecast occupancy / 94.5% current occupancy) in order to approximate the "full occupancy' parking conditions of the shopping center. The estimated 100 percent occupancy" parking demands for Phase 1 are shown in Table 3. 10 ARCADIA HUa FITNESS HIRSCH /GREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC. JULY 2006 Table 3 Arcadia Hub Shopping Center Existing Phase 1 Parking Demand - Factored to Full Occupancy Hour Day of Week Beginning Mon Tues Wed Thur Fri Sat Sun 6:00 AM 11 13 14 11 14 10 11 7:00 AM 18 30 26 24 26 14 17 8:00 AM 57 46 37 49 41 32 24 9:00 AM 102 91 72 77 95 134 34 10:00 AM 146 170 198 176 158 245 63 11:00 AM 200 242 211 223 229 379 222 12:00 PM 216 308 238 267 273 444 267 1:00 PM 256 292 244 264 309 427 312 2:00 PM 266 306 263 270 295 487 357 3:00 PM 267 295 251 253 270 442 346 4:00 PM 282 285 278 272 329 438 366 5:00 PM 297 280 317 262 321 398 327 6:00 PM 284 279 259 265 266 361 303 7:00 PM 261 215 242 239 239 274 211 8:00 PM 222 207 156 192 218 257 119 9:00 PM 137 122 145 158 186 157 66 10:00 PM 77 99 60 77 124 88 49 Note: Values in red indicate maximum daily parking demand As indicated in the table, the adjustments for full occupancy of the shopping center do not materially effect the conclusions of the parking demand survey. While the total maximum parking demand (again on Saturday) could be expected to increase by approximately 27 spaces to about 487 spaces (about 66 percent of the total parking available), overall, the shopping center parking supply would continue to significantly exceed the forecast parking demand, and the site would provide a minimum of approximately 253 unutilized parking spaces at all times. Details of the existing parking demand surveys, including the "full occupancy" factored parking demand estimates, are contained in the appendix of this report. 11 ARCADIA HU62A FITNESS HIRSCH/GREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC. JULY2006 FUTURE PARKING FORECASTS Code Parking Requirements The proposed project will remove the existing Ross Dress for Less store, located at the southeast corner of the site and consisting of total of approximately 43,544 square feet of existing retail sales floor area, basement, and storage space, and replace it with an approximately 42,400 square foot LA Fitness health club facility. As a result, the current City Code parking requirement of 1,331 parking spaces for Phase 1 of the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center will be modified, removing of the requirement for the existing Ross store, and adding the parking requirement for the proposed LA Fitness facility The parking requirement for the existing Ross Dress for Less use is based on the current City "retail" parking ratio of 5.0 spaces per 1,000 square feet of floor area, and equates to a total of approximately 218 spaces for the 43,544 square foot store. Thus, the removal of the Ross facility (prior to its replacement with the LA Fitness facility) would reduce the parking requirement for the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center Phase 1 area by this amount, from 1,331 spaces to a total of approximately 1,113 spaces. Current City of Arcadia parking requirements for "health club" facilities are significantly higher than for "retail" uses, at 1.0 space for each 35 square feet (approximately 28.6 spaces per 1,000 square feet) of "workout" and instruction classroom floor area, 1.0 space for each 70 square feet of basketball or other playing court and pool areas, excluding shower and locker room areas, plus 4.0 spaces per 1,000 square feet for sales area. (Note: technically, the City parking code identifies parking ratios of 1.0 space for each 35 square feet for one -half the basketballlplaying court and pool areas.) It should be noted that at the time of this analysis, the City of Arcadia was reviewing the parking requirements described above for "health club" facilities. However, no determination has yet been made regarding if or when any such revisions to health club parking requirements may take effect. The proposed Arcadia Hub LA Fitness facility includes a total of approximately 6,400 square feet of "circuit" training area, 3,100 square feet of "cardio" workout space, 3,000 square feet of "aerobics" instruction and training, 4,700 square feet of "free weights" area, a 900 square foot "spin" classroom, 4,810 square feet of pool and support space, a 3,452 square foot basketball court and support area, and an 1,800 square foot "Kids Klub" area. The layout of the proposed facility is shown in Figures 4(a) and 4(b) for the ground floor and basement levels, respectively. 12 ARCADIA HUfl2A FITNESS HIRSCH/GREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC. JULY 2006 (D U) 0 < > 0 IRSCH C REEN wimnhir,pAn Trnn%notati,n Clll.ffilq, Inc. z .1-1 Il- rL 14 j FIGURE 4(a) � I PROPOSED LA FITNESS FACILITY LAYOUT MAIN LEVEL 13 N 2 5 a w t N N N W C LL 5 m a a N O N mm N N CV Q m a¢ N N W Z H LL a FIGURE 4(b) H e IRSCH PROPOSED LA FITNESS FACILITY LAYOUT REEN BASEMENT LEVEL Hirsch/Green Transportadon Consulting, Inc. 14 3 � N N m Q N O N mm N N CV Q m a¢ N N W Z H LL a FIGURE 4(b) H e IRSCH PROPOSED LA FITNESS FACILITY LAYOUT REEN BASEMENT LEVEL Hirsch/Green Transportadon Consulting, Inc. 14 As shown in Figures 4(a) and 4(b), the proposed site houses a total of approximately 19,900 square feet applicable to the "workout' area parking requirement of 1.0 space per 35 square feet, resulting in a parking requirement of approximately 569 parking spaces. Additionally, the proposed LA Fitness facility includes a total of approximately 8,262 square feet of pool and basketball court area, requiring an additional 118 spaces (8,262 square feet divided by 2, times 1.0 space per 35 square feet). Finally, the proposed facility provides a small 1,000 square foot sales area, resulting in an additional four (4) parking spaces (at the code requirement of 4.0 spaces per 1,000 square feet), for a total parking requirement for the proposed LA Fitness facility of approximately 691 spaces. Based on these requirements, summarized in Table 4, the proposed modification to the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center, including the removal of the existing Ross Dress for Less (218 spaces) and its replacement with a new LA Fitness facility (691 spaces), would result in a net increase in Code parking requirements for the site of approximately 473 spaces. The total revised code parking requirement of 1,804 spaces will be 1,064 spaces more than the 740 spaces currently provided at the site. Table 4 Arcadia Hub Shopping Center Phase 1 Code Parking Changes Current Phase 1 Code Parking Requirement (Total) 1,331 Code Parking Removed Parking Size Rate Use Category (sq. ft.) (per ksf) Spaces Ross Dress for Less Retail 43,544 5.0 218 Code Parkins Added 691 Total Future Parking Code Requirement (Phase 1 Only) 1,804 Phase 1 Parking Provided 740 Future Phase 1 Parking Surplust(Deficit) (1,064) See Appendix A. 15 ARCADIA HUfl2A FITNESS HIRSCH /GREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC. JULY 2006 Size Parking Use Category (sq. ft.) Rate Spaces LA Fitness Workout 19,900 1/35 sq. ft. 569 Pool /Courts 8,262 1/70 sq. ft. 118 Office 1,000 4.0 4 691 Total Future Parking Code Requirement (Phase 1 Only) 1,804 Phase 1 Parking Provided 740 Future Phase 1 Parking Surplust(Deficit) (1,064) See Appendix A. 15 ARCADIA HUfl2A FITNESS HIRSCH /GREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC. JULY 2006 Parking Demand Estimates Arcadia Hub Shopping Center Parking Demand Without Ross Dress for Less The actual parking demands for the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center shown earlier in Table 3 include the operations of the existing Ross Dress for Less store, which will be removed to accommodate the proposed LA Fitness facility. In order not to "double count" the parking demands for the removed Ross store, and subsequently over - estimate the amount of parking needed for the shopping center with the introduction of the LA Fitness facility, it is necessary to identify the amount of parking currently used by the Ross store, so that it can be subtracted from the forecast Phase 1 parking demands. Using the actual surveyed Phase 1 parking utilizations, adjusted for "full occupancy' as shown earlier in Table 3, the total Phase 1 parking demand rates (per 1,000 square feet) were calculated. These actual parking ratios (shown in Table A -3 of the appendix) were then applied to the 43,544 square foot Ross store (including basement and storage areas). The resulting parking estimates are shown in Table 5. Table 5 Arcadia Hub Shopping Center Estimated Phase 1 Existing Parking Demand - Ross Dress for Less Hour Estimated Total Ross Parking Beginning Weekday Friday Saturday Sunday 6:00 AM 2 2 2 2 7:00 AM 4 4 2 3 8:00 AM 8 7 5 4 9:00 AM 14 16 22 6 10:00 AM 29 26 40 10 11:00 AM 36 38 62 37 12:00 PM 42 45 73 44 1:00 PM 44 51 70 51 2:00 PM 46 49 80 59 3:00 PM 44 45 73 57 4:00 PM 46 54 72 60 5:00 PM 48 53 66 54 6:00 PM 45 44 60 50 7:00 PM 39 39 45 35 8:00 PM 32 36 42 20 9:00 PM 23 31 26 11 10:00 PM 13 20 15 8 Note: Values in red indicate maximum dairy packing demand. 16 ARCADIA HUfl2A FITNESS HIRSCH /GREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC. JULY 2006 The parking values summarized in Table 5 reflect the estimated hourly Ross - related parking demands at the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center throughout the week. As shown, the peak parking demand estimate for the existing Ross store is approximately 91 spaces (on Saturday). The values shown in Table 5 were then subtracted from the "full occupancy" parking conditions summarized previously in Table 3 to estimate the future "baseline" parking conditions for the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center, following removal of the existing Ross store and its associated parking demands and pending the addition of the LA Fitness facility and its new parking needs. The resulting 'Phase 1 Full Occupancy Parking Demand Without Ross" parking estimates are shown in Table 6. Table 6 Arcadia Hub Shopping Center Phase 1 "Full Occupancy" Parking Demand Without Ross Hour Beginning Mon Tues Wed Thur Fri Sat Sun 6:00 AM 9 11 12 9 12 8 9 7:00 AM 14 26 22 22 22 12 14 8:00 AM 49 38 29 44 34 27 20 9:00 AM 88 77 58 68 79 112 28 10:00 AM 117 141 169 147 132 205 53 11:00 AM 164 206 175 187 191 317 185 12:00 PM 174 266 196 225 228 371 223 1:00 PM 212 248 200 220 258 357 261 2:00 PM 220 260 217 224 246 407 298 3:00 PM 223 251 207 209 225 369 289 4:00 PM 236 239 232 226 275 366 306 5:00 PM 249 232 269 214 268 332 273 6:00 PM 239 234 214 220 222 301 253 7:00 PM 222 176 203 200 200 229 176 8:00 PM 190 175 124 160 182 215 99 9:00 PM 114 99 122 135 155 131 55 10:00 PM 64 86 47 64 104 73 41 Note: Values in red indicate maximum daily parking demand Seasonal Parking Variability Many land uses experience variability in parking demands throughout the course of the year. Shopping centers and other retail facilities are generally characterized by maximum parking demands during the year -end holiday season, from late November through the end of 17 ARCADIA HUH2A FITNESS HIRSCH /GREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC. JULY2006 December. According to the current data, contained in the ULI Shared Parking, 2" Edition (2005)', parking demand during January through October is approximately 80 percent of the peak December parking demand; November parking demand at approximately 90 percent of the peak. As described previously in this report, the parking surveys for the existing Arcadia Hub Shopping Center occurred during a typical week in mid- February, and as a result, the surveyed parking demands may be lower than those experienced during the late year shopping activity. Therefore, an analysis of the seasonal parking variation for the shopping center was conducted. The future December parking demands for the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center were calculated in the same basic manner as described earlier for the February conditions, with the exception that all parking values were growth factored upward by 25 percent (80 percent assumed demand divided by 100 percent December demand) to account for the seasonal variability of retail shopping center parking demand. The results of that analysis are shown in Table 7. Table 7 Arcadia Hub Shopping Center Phase 1 "Full Occupancy" Parking Demand Without Ross - Adjusted for Seasonal Utilization Hour Beginning Mon Tues Wed Thur Fri Sat Sun 6:00 AM 12 14 15 11 15 10 11 7:00 AM 18 34 28 28 28 15 17 8:00 AM 62 48 38 56 42 33 26 9:00 AM 109 96 73 86 100 140 35 10:00 AM 147 176 212 184 166 256 66 11:00 AM 205 258 220 235 240 397 232 12:00 PM 218 332 245 281 286 465 279 1:00 PM 265 310 251 275 323 446 327 2:00 PM 275 325 271 280 309 510 373 3:00 PM 279 315 260 261 282 463 362 4:00 PM 296 300 289 282 343 458 383 5:00 PM 312 290 337 269 336 416 341 6:00 PM 299 294 268 275 278 377 315 7:00 PM 278 220 254 249 250 286 221 8:00 PM 237 219 155 201 227 269 124 9:00 PM 143 124 152 169 194 163 70 10:00 PM 81 108 60 80 130 91 51 Note: Values in red indicate maximum daily parking demand Shared Parking, Second Edition, Urban Land Institute, Washington, D.C., 2005. 18 ARCADIA HUfl4A FITNESS HIRSCH /GREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC. JULY2006 As summarized in Table 7, the adjustments for peak seasonal parking demand result in overall Phase 1 parking demands for the future "baseline" configuration (without the Ross Dress for Less store) of the shopping center of approximately 510 spaces, or approximately 69 percent of the total 740 -space parking supply, still on Saturday. The parking utilizations shown in Table 7 were used to develop the future "With LA Fitness" parking demand estimates for the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center, based on the anticipated parking demands for the proposed health club, which were calculated using methodologies and assumptions described in the following section. Estimated Parking Demand — LA Fitness Next, the potential parking demand for the proposed LA Fitness facility was estimated. Parking demands for the proposed LA Fitness facility were calculated using two separate methodologies, in order to assure that the "worst case" parking demand potential for the new fitness center were identified. The two methodologies used were 1) calculation of the parking demand based on actual parking use at a similar facility, and 2) use of current Urban Land Institute (ULI) parking demand estimates. Both of these methodologies provide a "dynamic" rather than "static" assessment of the potential parking demands for the proposed use, recognizing that site activity, and hence parking demands, varies over time throughout the day, and are not fully reflected by the single, maximum value identified through the use of code parking requirements. This is of particular importance, since all available data indicates that health clubs do not exhibit the same parking activity profiles as general retail or commercial uses, and the parking demand "peaking" characteristics of these two types of uses generally do not overlap. This offset of peak parking demands allows for a phenomenon known as "shared parking ", where parking spaces designated for one land use are not fully utilized at all times of the day, and are available for use by other land uses on the same or adjacent sites. This parking interaction is well documented, and is recognized as an appropriate parking assessment tool by many jurisdictions throughout the region. Method 1 — Empirical Parking Counts The first method for estimating the potential parking demands for the proposed Arcadia Hub LA Fitness facility was based on actual surveys of parking activity at an existing health club in the area. Consultation with City of Arcadia staff identified an appropriate LA Fitness facility located in the existing Gateway Pointe Shopping Center, located at 1275 Foothill Boulevard in the City 19 ARCADIA HUSILA FITNESS HIRSCH /GREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING. INC. JULY2006 of La Verne. The LA Fitness facility at this location provides services similar to those of the proposed Arcadia Hub facility, and, more importantly, exhibits a parking layout that allows for easy and accurate identification of the parking utilizations of the LA Fitness center separate from parking for the remainder of the Gateway Pointe Shopping Center's uses. Parking surveys at the La Verne site were conducted during the same days and times as those described earlier for the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center, so that any variability with regard to weather or other conditions were minimized. A review of the hours of operation of the La Verne LA Fitness reveals that that facility opens one and one -half hours prior to the beginning of the parking surveys (Monday through Friday), and continues in operation approximately one hour after the surveys ended (Monday through Thursday). While parking utilizations at the LA Fitness center were already high at the 6:00 AM survey start time (approximately 80 to over 100 vehicles), and remained high through the 10:00 PM survey end time (over 100 vehicles on three weekdays), parking demands during the non - surveyed times were not considered to be critical to the calculation of parking supply adequacy for the future Arcadia Hub Shopping Center conditions. These time periods occur before opening or after closing times of most of the Arcadia Hub stores, when parking at the Arcadia Hub site is less than 20 percent occupied, and substantial available unused parking is evident. Comparison of Hours of Operation vs. Parking Survey Times LA Fitness Center -1257 Foothill Boulevard, La Verne LA Fitness - Hours of Operation Parking Survey Hours Monday - Thursday 4:30 AM to 11:00 PM 6:00 AM to 10:00 PM Friday 4:30 AM to 10:00 PM 6:00 AM to 10:00 PM Saturday, Sunday 7:00 AM to 8:00 PM 6:00 AM to 10:00 PM The results of the parking survey for the LA Fitness facility in La Verne are shown in Table A -6 in the appendix, and show that this facility utilized a maximum of 178 parking spaces (between 5:00 and 6:00 PM on Monday), although peak use was generally above 150 spaces throughout the week. The weekday (Monday through Thursday) peak parking usage occurred between 5:00 and 8:00 PM, while peak demands for Friday, Saturday, and Sunday occurred in the mornings between 9:00 and 11:00 AM. To assess the parking demands of the proposed Arcadia Hub LA Fitness facility based upon the parking surveys conducted at the La Verne site, a comparison of the two facilities was made. As described earlier, the proposed Arcadia Hub facility is comprised of a total of approximately 20 ARCADIA HUBILA FITNESS HIRSCH/GREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC. JULY2006 42,000 square feet, including a total of approximately 19,900 square feet of "workout" area, approximately 8,242 square feet of basketball court and pool area, and a small 1,000 square foot sales area, plus ancillary locker /shower facilities. The existing La Verne facility contains a total of approximately 39,670 square feet, including a total of approximately 21,337 square feet of "workout' area, 12,945 square feet of basketball /racquetball courts and pool area, and 1,800 square feet of sales /lobby area, and ancillary locker /shower facilities. A comparison of both the total size the sum of the individual workout and office component sizes for the proposed Arcadia Hub and existing La Verne facilities was conducted, and the most conservative (e.g., 'closest') comparison ratio was used. These comparisons showed that, based on total size, the proposed Arcadia Hub facility is approximately seven (7) percent larger than the La Verne facility, while based on the total component sizes (not including shower /locker and circulation areas), the Arcadia Hub facility is approximately 19 percent smaller than the La Verne site. The "workout' area comparisons alone show that the Arcadia Hub facility is about seven (7) percent smaller than the existing La Verne site. Based on these comparisons, it was determined that the 'overall size" ratio should used to estimate the potential parking demands for the Arcadia Hub facility, since it will result in the highest assessment of parking demands for the Arcadia Hub site, and as such, the parking demands surveyed at the La Verne site were factored upward by approximately seven percent to estimate the parking demands for the proposed Arcadia Hub facility. The results are summarized in Table 8, which indicates that the proposed LA Fitness facility could produce a peak parking demand of approximately 190 spaces. Method 2 — Urban Land Institute Data The second parking demand estimation methodology involved the use of published parking utilization profile data based on studies conducted under the auspices of the Urban Land Institute. The ULI data is based on surveys of various land uses throughout California and across the country, and provides detailed information regarding peak parking demands for these uses. However, the ULI data also provides data on the variability of the parking activity of each use throughout the day. This data allows for the determination of "actual' parking needs for a particular use at any given time of the week, similar to the empirical -based parking estimates derived in Table 8. 21 ARCADIA HU8/LA FITNESS HIRSCH /GREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC. JULY 2006 Table 8 Proposed LA Fitness - Arcadia Hub Shopping Center Estimated Hourly Parking Demands (Based on La Verne Data) Hour Beginning Mon Tue Wed Thur Fri Sat Sun 6:00 AM 99 88 110 89 102 0 2 7:00 AM 111 98 112 92 106 33 30 8:00 AM 144 105 123 110 147 155 105 9:00 AM 185 153 178 173 181 182 137 10:00 AM 171 142 165 145 154 176 164 11:00 AM 149 139 124 108 108 144 131 12:00 PM 149 114 128 126 99 109 117 1:00 PM 142 80 104 107 107 109 93 2:00 PM 112 72 98 96 90 102 75 3:00 PM 112 114 125 114 121 93 88 4:00 PM 152 111 170 155 137 95 97 5:00 PM 190 141 187 166 164 76 88 6:00 PM 175 151 181 176 153 77 103 7:00 PM 182 156 185 186 139 105 99 8:00 PM 177 134 159 184 95 34 33 9:00 PM 154 111 149 143 75 1 2 10:00 PM 121 60 121 113 50 1 1 Note: Values in red indicate maximum daily parking demand For "health club" uses, the ULI data indicates a recommended weekday parking ratio of 7.0 spaces for each 1,000 square feet of gross floor area, with 6.6 spaces per 1,000 square feet for patrons /visitors, and 0.4 spaces per 1,000 square feet for employees. Weekend parking ratio recommendations are somewhat lower, with a total of 6.25 spaces per 1,000 square feet, with patron /visitor and employee parking at approximately 5.5 spaces and 0.75 spaces per 1,000 square feet, respectively. These parking ratios represent the maximum anticipated parking demands for health club uses during the weekday and weekend. However, the ULI data also provides additional detail about the hourly parking demands for this use, identified as a percentage of the peak use. These hourly utilization percentages recognize that activity at the health club is not constant throughout the day, and also exhibits different characteristics between weekday and weekends. These hourly parking "accumulation" profiles are used to calculate the anticipated parking needs during the various times of the day. It should be noted that the ULI data also provides data on "seasonal" activity levels for the various land uses, or how parking activity for each month 22 ARCADIA HUB/LA FITNESS HIRSCH/GREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC. JULY 2006 compares to the activity during the annual peak month. This data identifies that during the February count period for the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center, health club activity is not at a maximum. Based on the ULI data, January is the peak activity month, with February utilization down by approximately five (5) percent from the January utilizations. However, in order to provide "worst case' parking scenario evaluations for the proposed project, these seasonal adjustment factors were not applied to the health club use, so that the maximum parking demands could be computed. The resulting hourly parking demands for the proposed LA Fitness facility based on the ULI methodology are summarized in Table 9. As shown, the anticipated maximum parking activity occurs during a weekday, with approximately 297 spaces needed between about 6:00 and 7:00 PM. Weekend parking demands are also high, with a maximum of 265 spaces demanded between about 5:00 and 6:00 PM. Determination of LA Fitness Parking Demand The anticipated parking demands calculated for the proposed LA Fitness facility using both the empirical LA Verne data and the ULI data, as summarized in Tables 8 and 9, respectively, indicate significant differences. The ULI forecasts are nearly 60 percent higher for weekdays (297 spaces versus 190 spaces), while the weekend parking demands were approximately 45 percent higher using the ULI data as compared to the empirical City of La Verne data (265 spaces versus 182 spaces). It should be recognized that these are not necessarily directly applicable comparisons, as the empirical data is intrinsically subject to the seasonal variability described earlier, while the ULI data was calculated assuming maximum annual utilization. However, in order to provide the most conservative analysis of the potential parking effects of development of the LA Fitness facility on the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center, the ULI data shown in Table 9 was assumed to be representative of the activity levels for the proposed health club, and was selected as the parking demand values for the project. 23 ARCADIA HUBILA FITNESS HIRSCH /GREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC. JULY2006 Table 9 LA Fitness - Arcadia Hub Shopping Center ULI Parking Demand Calculations Baseline Proposed Development Weekend Baseline Seasonal Maximum Proposed Development Weekday Parking Adjustment Parking Use and Size Size Parking Ratio Spaces Factor Demand Health Club /Gym 42,400 sq. ft. 265 1:00 PM 70% Visitors 6.60 11,000 sq. ft. 280 100% 280 Employees 0.40 /1,000 sq. ft. 17 100% 17 7:00 PM 90% 297 80% 297 Baseline Proposed Development Weekend Parking Use and Size Size Parking Ratio Spaces Health Club /Gym 42,400 sq. ft. 8:00 AM Visitors 5.50 11,000 sq. ft. 233 Employees 0.75 !1,000 sq. ft. 32 80% 12:00 PM 265 UL Time Wr of Day Visitors 6:00 AM 70% 7:00 AM 40% 8:00 AM 40% 9:00 AM 70% 10:00 AM 70% 11:00 AM 80% 12:00 PM 60% 1:00 PM 70% 2:00 PM 70% 3:00 PM 70% 4:00 PM 80% 5:00 PM 90% 6:00 PM 100% 7:00 PM 90% 8:00 PM 80% 9:00 PM 70% 10:00 PM 35% 11:00 PM 10% 12:00 AM 0% LA Fitness Center - Anticipated ULI 11% of Daily Maximum! rrkina Accumulation Est 1p r o yees visnors employees visitors Empl. Total jJ Visitors Empl. Total 75% 80% 50% 196 13 209 186 16 202 75% 45% 50% 112 13 125 105 16 121 75% 35% 50% 112 13 125 82 16 98 75% 50% 50% 196 13 209 117 16 133 75% 35% 50% 196 13 209 82 16 98 75% 50% 50% 224 13 237 117 16 133 75% 50% 50% 168 13 181 117 16 133 75% 30% 50% 196 13 209 70 16 86 75% 25% 50% 196 13 209 58 16 74 75% 30% 50% 196 13 209 70 16 86 75% 55% 75% 224 13 237 128 24 152 100% 100% 100% 252 17 269 233 32 265 ' 100% 95% 100% 280 17 297 ' 221 32 253 75% 60% 75% 252 13 265 140 24 164 50% 30% 50% 224 9 233 70 16 86 20% 10% 20% 196 3 199 23 6 29 20% 1% 20% 98 3 101 2 6 8 20% 1% 20% 28 3 31 2 6 8 0% 0% 0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 '°" indicates ma)dmum parking demand. Seasonal Maximum Adjustment Parking Factor Demand 100% 233 100% 32 265 ations 24 ARCADIA HUMA FITNESS HIRSCH /GREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC. JULY 2006 Future Parking Demand — Arcadia Hub Phase 1 with LA Fitness Based on the parking demand estimate calculations contained in the preceding sections, the "worst case" parking demands for the proposed LA Fitness facility identified using the ULI methodology. Therefore, these anticipated parking demands were then added to the "Full Occupancy Without Ross — Adjusted for Seasonal Utilization" parking demands calculated for the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center (shown earlier in Table 7) to determine the total forecast future parking demands for Phase 1 of the shopping center, including the proposed LA Fitness. The results of this exercise are shown in Table 10. As summarized in Table 10, the anticipated peak parking demands for the future Arcadia Hub Shopping Center, adjusted to reflect peak seasonal parking utilizations and including the new LA Fitness facility, continue to occur on Saturday, with a total of approximately 681 spaces needed to accommodate the needs of the entire Phase 1 portion of the site. However, the overall parking demands for the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center will continue to be substantially below the current parking supply. During the peak Saturday parking utilizations, the forecast demand of 681 spaces is 59 spaces less than the total of 740 Phase 1 parking spaces, or an occupancy rate of approximately 92 percent. Therefore, implementation of the proposed LA Fitness facility is not anticipated to create significant parking impacts at the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center, and no "overflow" parking is expected onto adjacent streets or into nearby residential or commercial areas. 25 ARCADIA HUB/LA FITNESS HIRSCH /GREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC. JULY 2006 P Mrrn�nrr N W o�n �n u�oM r y rnu>�nrnrnr rnrnrnrrnru m 0 E J O N N O O M m O O O M O O O M T O N N N N N N N N N N N N � O LL = r " 0 _ C C� �[I a�NO (0Ot0 MO�NM�O aD0 r P O I � NN M MNfhMNN N � w a r C OM M MNN P TOOT �DN P OGD A � N � 9 N m � m .-. rn u>�n m rnn� rnrnrnr rnnu� M01 C J O N N O O M GO O O O M O O O M O O 0 3 0 LL 7 N d � ag � p N N N N N N N N N N w a C .N. N u7 f0 W N N N c0 aD [O N O (O N� f0 0 O N� N P PPPPP000��if MM.- r m c U y y O OO OOO MAO Of (O MOO T y 0 � J N N N - N — N N N N N N C 9 9 O LL 7 a� 3 ag =03 C _C `_ �O OWN M NO N �-OO eD P SON O 2 c L u a m F m w C LL � M 01 M O Y'1 YS M O P n Of �O N M OJ 9 y m N y Of u7 �O 01 rnn rn rnrn n O] n �OMO)� E '° -' o o M m o o o M�orncoMrno 0 9 a .� C . � N NNN. - - NNNNNNN C F O` LL Y , g S'. IT C C P c p m� m M- N- O m N N 0 3 N r y N M M M M M N N N N y L W d a A m a NCa �a t epm MPONM ra N i E y � rnv>v�rnrnr rnrnrnnrnn�nMrn� v E m y O N N O O M E p 0 0 0 M[ O m O M T O N C a V - � N— - N N N - N N N N N N N E� O O LL 0 O C L g y d _ C � C C N 00 NO) n X000 �O 10 Q� 1pN OaD r M� 4p cooco <onnrn�rnrM�ao a¢ W d 0 0 ~ Y { d 6 6 p c ¢¢¢¢¢¢aaaaaaaaaaa o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C? 2 2 J y O U O 0 N F- W i co N N W ti gq� j Q O OR Q ). U ¢i L O . N 7 A O A N O a d CI Q c r V 9 r c O U U O 9 d d d N3 �a a F O d S .c. A y LL u g a v c E O rn Y a d N A L a. a A d 0 0 LL �R. M MN( M C C M Of m�� H 9 N d H � N N M GO M M t0 Q t0 N M M Q t0 O aD 9 O C ? NNOMOMMeD N tDNN a g n N `.9 �n�n�i c °mo v�imrn 9 pO ja J N! O M O M M CO r RJ N N M m N O co LL g o C C Ou7MO[O �n �OOmap fD r�pOM� �m� urn �o co v�� rmo�o0 y� 49 O w a r C < < < < CL � Q Q Q Q Q Q O. 0 c p c 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 S m <o r oio — a n.aaaaaaaa 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 cormoio V A E a Y N n t Y 3 E E N C d O u iO _ .tl c a �^ c C N d A > E v E A p a o � a d A � o a T Q 1 ° u v c m a a � a O u � v LL S y Ci 2 Z ti h Z O U 2 O ti K O a m Z F- W p �l h K 2 r N h N W Z F- LL = b Q O ON ttj Parking Utilizations — Subarea 5 As described in the previous analyses, the existing and forecast parking utilizations for the Phase 1 portion of the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center provide a more than adequate parking supply for the center, including the proposed LA Fitness facility. Although the analysis focused on the Phase 1 area of the site, it is important to note that the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center is actually composed of both the Phase 1 and Phase 2 areas. The parking for the shopping center is not strictly segregated between the two phases, and it is likely that parking interactions and ., spillover" between the Phase 1 and Phase 2 parking areas occurs on a regular basis. The parking surveys described earlier in this report also included a survey of the Subarea 5 (Phase 2) parking lot. The results of that survey are shown in Table 11, and indicate that, like Phase 1, parking within Phase 2 (Subarea 5) of the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center is substantially less than the total parking supply for existing conditions, with a maximum of 237 of the 411 spaces (about 58 percent) occupied. Table 11 Arcadia Hub Shopping Center Existing Phase 2 (Subarea 5) Parking Demand Hour Beginning Mon Tues Wed Thur Fri Sat Sun 6:00 AM 52 59 52 48 46 51 43 7:00 AM 65 85 67 53 68 64 47 8:00 AM 107 104 93 65 72 80 74 9:00 AM 120 117 118 84 120 154 101 10:00 AM 133 165 117 108 159 185 103 11:00 AM 155 177 139 140 184 229 154 12:00 PM 181 219 152 158 203 228 171 1:00 PM 195 222 176 150 193 237 178 2:00 PM 190 189 170 157 166 235 168 3:00 PM 192 194 161 153 200 225 208 4:00 PM 213 219 172 159 178 229 200 5:00 PM 198 221 214 193 187 235 210 6:00 PM 192 209 233 191 216 194 186 7:00 PM 189 164 166 168 149 169 145 8:00 PM 185 128 131 125 114 128 126 9:00 PM 119 110 102 97 104 117 78 10:00 PM 95 75 74 71 79 103 81 Note: Values in red indicate maximum daily parking demand PI:1 ARCADIA HUfl2A FITNESS HIRSCH /GREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC. JULY2006 However, in to provide a "worst case" parking assessment compatible with the Phase 1 parking analysis, the existing Subarea 5 parking demands shown in Table 11 were also adjusted upward by 25 percent to reflect the effects of seasonal utilization and approximate the peak year -end parking demands for this portion of the site. The results are shown in Table 12. Table 12 Arcadia Hub Shopping Center Phase 2 (Subarea 5) Parking Demand - Adjusted for Seasonal Utilization Hour Beginning Mon Tues Wed Thur Fri Sat Sun 6:00 AM 65 74 65 60 58 64 54 7:00 AM 81 106 84 66 85 80 59 8:00 AM 134 130 116 81 90 100 93 9:00 AM 150 146 148 105 150 193 126 10:00 AM 166 206 146 135 199 231 129 11:00 AM 194 221 174 175 230 286 193 12:00 PM 226 274 190 198 254 285 214 1:00 PM 244 278 220 188 241 296 223 2:00 PM 238 236 213 196 208 294 210 3:00 PM 240 243 201 191 250 281 260 4:00 PM 266 274 215 199 223 286 250 5:00 PM 248 276 268 241 234 294 263 6:00 PM 240 261 291 239 270 243 233 7:00 PM 236 205 208 210 186 211 181 8:00 PM 231 160 164 156 143 160 158 9:00 PM 149 138 128 121 130 146 98 10:00 PM 119 94 93 89 99 129 101 Note: Values in red indicate maximum daily parking demand As shown in Table 12, even adjusting for maximum anticipated seasonal parking demands, the Phase 2 (Subarea 5) portion of the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center is expected to use 296 of the 411 spaces available (about 72 percent), leaving a minimum of approximately 115 parking spaces available at all times of the day. When the peak parking demands for both Phase 1 and Phase 2 are combined, the peak parking activity for the shopping center as a whole occurs at approximately 6:00 PM on Saturday (the forecast peak demand time for Phase 1 with the LA Fitness facility), with a total of approximately 975 spaces needed. This amount is still substantially less (175 spaces) than the 1,151 spaces provided within Phases 1 plus 2, further reinforcing the conclusion that the implementation of the proposed LA Fitness facility will not result in significant parking impacts at the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center. 29 ARCADIA HUBA-A FITNESS HIRSCH /GREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC. JULY 2006 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The results of the parking demand analyses indicate that the Phase 1 portion of the existing Arcadia Hub Shopping Center does not fully utilize the parking supply provided, with a maximum of approximately 460 of the 740 spaces (approximately 62 percent) occupied during peak activity (on Saturday). As such, despite the fact that the current City parking code requirements suggest a parking deficit for the site, minimum of approximately 280 spaces are unused at any time of the week. Even adjusted to approximate full occupancy of the shopping center, over 250 parking spaces go unused. Development of the proposed LA Fitness facility, including the removal of the existing Ross Dress for Less store, would ultimately result in increases in the parking demands at the site, although overall peak parking is still anticipated to be well below the parking supply. During the expected peak parking periods (late afternoon on Saturday), adjusted to account for higher parking demands during the winter holiday shopping season, the Phase 1 portion of the shopping center would need a total of approximately 681 spaces (about 92 percent of the supply), leaving a minimum of approximately 59 parking spaces unoccupied. While some Phase 1 parking subareas would experience high utilizations throughout the day and week under the forecast future conditions, no significant parking operational or overall site parking supply problems are anticipated. Based on the analyses conducted for the existing and proposed future configuration of the site, the shopping center parking supply will not meet the current City of Arcadia parking code requirements. However, based on forecast parking demands, the proposed development of a new LA Fitness facility in place of the existing Ross Dress for Less store within the Phase 1 portion of the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center is not anticipated to result in any on site parking shortages. Therefore, the proposed project will not result in significant parking impacts and no parking "overflow" is expected onto the site adjacent streets or parking areas. Additionally, although not included directly in the analysis for the Phase 1 parking demand calculations, it is important to recognize that the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center is composed of both Phase 1 (as indicated) and Phase 2, which provides an additional 411 parking spaces. The parking areas for the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center as a whole are not segregated, and parking activity is free to flow between these two parking areas. Similar to Phase 1, parking within the Phase 2 portion of the site is also underutilized. Examining the utilization of the shopping center as a single entity indicates that the forecast maximum seasonal parking demands for the site will be approximately 975 spaces, leaving approximately 176 spaces available even during the peak annual parking conditions. 30 ARCADIA HUBILA FITNESS HIRSCH/GREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC. JULY2006 f However, the parking demand analyses and forecasts do indicate that parking within localized areas (primarily Subareas 2, 3 and 4) of the parking facilities for Phase 1 of the shopping center currently experience, or are anticipated to experience high parking demands that approach or may exceed the parking supplies in these areas. Therefore, to provide additional available parking for patrons of the stores and businesses located adjacent to or in close proximity to these parking areas, it is recommended that the management of the shopping center voluntarily relocate all employee parking to lesser utilized spaces in parking Subareas 1, 4, and 5, along the frontages of Duarte Road and Naomi Avenue, as shown in Figure 5. It is important to note that this measure is not a requirement as "mitigation" for any anticipated parking shortages, since the results of this analysis indicate that more than adequate on site parking exists at all times. Relocating employee parking away from the more highly utilized parking subareas will simply provide additional parking availability for patrons of the stores and businesses near higher demand parking locations, and minimize the localized on site parking congestion identified in this report. 31 ARCADIA HUa2A FITNESS HIRSCH /GREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC. JULY 2006 l I q 1 _ Subaroa'3, ( t s "1 y t ma nl I r E I_ 1 Subare a.7- afar' ;.,;.Subarea 4 •t � !. bi I aE �t t ,1 �ubarea 1 r II 1111. ,�3 -v j� t � --• -- � � 'i:'^� c P: 't 5 6 c • rta�L�' /� 1 ", ' �I I M � ��'�n ��t(C'j�� {`trK � y..: t ti i APPENDICES A — Existing Arcadia Hub Parking Requirement Calculations — Phase 1 and Phase 2 B — Parking Demand Calculations and Forecasts — Arcadia Hub Shopping Center C — Parking Surveys — Arcadia Hub Shopping Center D — Parking Surveys — La Verne LA Fitness Facility E — Summary of LA Verne LA Fitness Component Uses Table A -1 Arcadia Hub Shopping Center Current Tenant Roll, Store Sizes and Code Parking Requirements Unit No. Tenant Phase 1 (Subareas 1 -4) 1200.00 Alexia Flowers 1201.00 Burlington Coat Factory 1201.01 Burlington Coat Factory (Baby Depot) 1215.00 Ann Karen Inc & Day Spa 1201.03 Jo-Ann Fabric 1225.00 Vacant 1265.00 Blockbuster 1271.01 Waltrip's Music 5,857 Basement 1309.00 First Commercial Bank 1311.OA Nic Computer, Inc. 1311.06 Young Dong Tofu 1311.00 Arcadia Travel Connection 1313.00 Kids Island, Inc. 1317.00 Vacant 1325.00 Ross Dress for Less 5.0 Ross Basement 750 Unused Basement and Storage 733A.00 Pat Huey, Inc. 7338.00 Starbucks Coffee 733C.01 PCS Store 733D.00 Smoke Shop, Inc. 733E.00 Walter Dorn Jewelers 733F.00 Naomi ShoeNacuum Rep 733G.00 Subway Submarine 733H.00 Beauty Salon 7331.00 H & R Block 733J.00 Vivi Hair 733K/L.00 I Sold It On Ebay 733M.00 JC Herb 733N.00 Morning Glory Total Phase 1 Vacant Phase 1 Percent Vacant Parking Spaces Sq. F t. Req'mt Req'd Comments 500 5.0 3 100,491 5.0 502 26,000 5.0 130 12,500 5.0 63 15,000 5.0 75 10,475 5.0 52 5,857 5.0 29 7,800 5.0 39 13,000 5.0 65 4,083 5.0 20 2,800 5.0 14 2,000 5.0 10 750 5.0 4 4,814 n/a 7 4,000 5.0 20 21,544 5.0 108 6,000 5.0 30 16,000 5.0 80 600 5.0 3 950 n/a 16 665 5.0 3 760 5.0 4 564 5.0 3 940 5.0 5 760 n/a 18 760 5.0 4 760 5.0 4 760 5.0 4 1,520 5.0 8 740 5.0 4 741 5.0 4 264,134 1,331 14,475 5.5% A -2 (per CUP) (per CUP) (per CUP) ARCADIA HUfl2A FITNESS HIRSCH/GREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC JULY2006 Table A -1 (continued) Arcadia Hub Shopping Center Current Tenant Roll, Store Sizes and Code Parking Requirements Unit 10.0 No. Tenant Phase 2 (Subarea 5) 815A.00 Osaka Restaurant 815B.00 China Trust Bank 815C.00 Jenny Craig 815E.00 California Beauty Supply 815F.00 Game X 815G.00 A -U 79 815H.00 Haircreation 8151.00 American Life (Books & Accessories) 815J.00 Adelphia (Payment Center) 1,550 Adelphia (TCI Transmission Site) 815K.00 Young Optometry 815L.00 Score 1,550 Tomra Pacific, Inc 815M.00 Mission Renaissance Von's 00 Von's Pavilions Total Phase 2 Total Arcadia Hub Shopping Center Total Percent Vacant Parking Spaces Sq. Ft. Req'mt Req'd Comments 1,550 10.0 16 2,280 5.0 11 2,400 5.0 12 1,550 5.0 8 1,550 5.0 8 1,550 5.0 8 1,550 5.0 8 1,550 5.0 8 1,550 4.0 6 140 4.0 1 1,550 5.0 8 1,550 5.0 8 0 5.0 0 1,550 5.0 8 62,390 5.0 312 82,710 422 346,844 1,753 4.2% A -2 ARCADIA HUBILA FITNESS HIRSCH/GREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC. JULY 2006 Existina Parking Demand The results of the parking demand surveys for the existing Phase 1 (Subareas 1 through 4) portion of the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center are summarized in Table B -1. As shown in this table, the maximum parking demand for the existing Phase 1 portion of the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center occurred at approximately 2:00 PM on a Saturday, with a total of approximately 460 parking spaces, or about 62 percent of the total 740 -space parking supply, occupied, with approximately 280 spaces unutilized. During this overall peak parking demand period, 42 of the 217 spaces in Subarea 1 (about 19 percent) were occupied, 169 if the 182 spaces in Subarea 2 (about 93 percent) were occupied, 96 of the 100 spaces in Subarea 3 (about 96 percent) were occupied, and 153 of the 271 Spaces in Subarea 4 (about 57 percent) were occupied. Table B -1 also shows that the individual subareas generally operate acceptably, that the maximum parking utilizations for each of the subareas also occur on Saturday, but that the peak individual subarea parking demands did not generally overlap each other, resulting in an overall Phase 1 peak parking demand that is less than the sum of the individual subarea peak parking demands. Individual peak parking use in Subarea 1 occurred at 3:00 PM, at 47 spaces (less than 22 percent occupancy), while peak demand in Subarea 4 occurred at 12:00 noon, at 174 spaces (about 72 percent). Peak demand within Subarea 2 did overlap the overall peak parking (described above, 169 spaces or 93 percent). The peak parking utilization in Subarea 3 occurred at 4:00 PM, and actually exceeded the striped capacity by about six (6) spaces, primarily due to vehicles temporarily parked in unmarked spaces or along the curb while waiting for a space to be vacated, or from patrons parking illegally to "run in" to one of the adjacent stores. This was a transient condition, however, and not indicative of the general operations of this subarea. Even if all of the individual peak parking demands were to occur simultaneously, the total parking utilization for Phase 1 would be 496 spaces, or about 67 percent of the total supply. A total of approximately 244 parking spaces would continue to be unutilized under this scenario. Phase 1 parking use during other times of the week was substantially less than the peaks described above, with maximum occupancies of less than 50 percent of the available parking spaces on Friday and Sunday, and of 40 percent or less throughout the rest of the week. B -1 ARCADIA HUBA.A FITNESS HIRSCH /GREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC. JULY 2006 N O a 0 0 V a � R + Y C U � �3 C cc m L d as rn F c = Y R � 1 5 a Q H a CL m C N �X W V F r N N N N N M M N N N a CO N O) O O W V M a to M O W W r W� LL R N W d' r R r O O— W f W V N a y O N M W N M M M M M M N CD N O W CD Y O r N `7 r CO N N N N N N N N N M r R a O O M iO r r r W r W r r r W M H RR G N a M W M W N r n r W t to '- O r M O r W W O) N N O W W r N M N M M N M N O M u+ `.9° a�nWrro�n W WNrn�nrnWr of 0� V r r N N N N N N N N N R CL U) N W (D CO W O) i0 O) N O C O M O V V �O O W IT CO W O W R O O N d R 3 N a N N W <O M W r Co M O Co O a fn r r W O) oM — to r W o CO M W O �e N N N— M N N M M N N R° M W V CO N W O M O W M M N W N O n N V W CO N N NNNNN N N m O) CL A ~ >, r 0 0 y O Z M co O) O m N N co r N W co p N M O O O a '- M r r 0) D) W N O W N W N ONO N N N N N N N M 0 d O n i!) O � W O st 47 tO W W WV M� R D. N N M r 01 N W W W V W N a Q N r N M sf W W W W W W r r r co M A 0 N 9 0 O M _O C O W N W N o W O M W M m r rn r o Z V E N �O W co co W W r W M N R N W M M V co 00 CO M M W W W M CO 0 � M co a O r N C' V W V M M W N W 0) W N N N � CO W N N M M N N N N W N Q¢ McLa.a.E 3 C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O C o p o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 _ m r a d C_ R V E E X E a C N C_ N U! N O Z 2 O 2 j 0 O 0 O ti 0 O RD h Q Z W RD U K 2 q y W Z LL 2 Q O O ry 0 Ci 2 O z J h 2 O U 2 O 0 O d m 2 2 W W K U 2 U h 0 2 w z LL 2 , Q N U� J Q� V c CL v CO 00 m °rn�v m m .7 L C R C Z C1 O M M M 10 0 (O O N 0 0 CO 1 O M M V 1L1 I� 0 O ao ao 0 O� M N N U 7 N to a N a a 0 C 4) 0 y O N V OO M M M CO V O O a CD N M M M cN'1 @ Im I—V V7 d' 00 CL A m 0 E v~ a d H d R V 1� V 0 M M W N r M N to 0) M V CO - - -- r w V N T y N C v 0C� O m � O(D m� to T ap O Q1 (O M X E °a H co ( t0+) t U d � C L N M V M V V V M M N V w a N C C N Ma _C w o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 v = y i0 taco aio�i�i�i.i c�v�ri ip loco aio 0 0 Ci 2 O z J h 2 O U 2 O 0 O d m 2 2 W W K U 2 U h 0 2 w z LL 2 , Q N U� J Q� Thus, the existing parking utilization for Phase 1 of the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center is substantially below the existing parking supply at all times. While Subareas 2 and 3 are utilized at higher rates than other subareas, this is generally due to their smaller relative sizes compared to the other subareas, and their closer proximity to the shopping center store fronts and it is logical to expect this outcome. Overall, however, the current Phase 1 parking supply of 740 spaces exceeds the maximum observed site parking demand by a minimum of 280 spaces. Full Occupancy Parking Demand Estimates Portions of Phase 1 of the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center are currently vacant; a total of approximately 14,475 square feet of space (approximately 5.5 percent of the total Phase 1 area) in the eastern portion of the site adjacent to parking Subarea 3 was unoccupied at the time of the survey. Therefore, in order to present the potential "worst case" parking utilization estimates for the current configuration of the shopping center, the parking utilizations summarized in Table B -1 were adjusted upward by approximately 5.8 percent (100% forecast occupancy / 94.5% current occupancy) in order to approximate the "full occupancy' parking conditions of the shopping center. The estimated 100 percent occupancy" parking demand for Phase 1 of the existing Arcadia Hub Shopping Center is shown in Table B -2. The adjustments for full occupancy of the shopping center do not materially effect the conclusions of the parking demand survey, although the total maximum parking demand (Saturday) would be expected to increase by approximately 27 spaces to about 487 spaces, or about 66 percent of the total parking available. Parking demands for each of the individual parking subareas would also increase incrementally, but again, the results are similar to those noted previously for the "existing" (unadjusted) parking demands, with Subareas 2 and 3 experiencing the highest individual relative parking use. Due to the existing high utilization of Subarea 3 parking on Saturday, the factored "full occupancy" values are expected to exceed the Subarea 3 parking supply during several hours of the day. As shown in Table B -2, the factored parking demand values for Subarea 3 range between 102 and 112 spaces between 12:00 noon and 5:00 PM, exceeding the striped capacity of this subarea by between two (2) and 12 spaces. However, this data is presented as calculated, and it is assumed that the excess Subarea 3 parking demands, should they occur, will utilize the closest adjacent parking area within Phase 1. Overall, however, the Phase 1 Arcadia Hub Shopping Center parking supply would continue to significantly exceed the forecast parking demand, and the site would provide a minimum of approximately 253 unutilized parking spaces at all times, even assuming full occupancy of the currently vacant retail areas. B-4 ARCADIA HUBQA FITNESS HIRSCH/GREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC. JULY 2006 mo �o �aDmMm(nom (DmaD(Dv M N N (D M M CL _ H q. N O m M W W O O O CO M N M M N R O (O O w mr- O CO LL N O M Cl') O CD a N N N N O N co M C` O M N N CO m N CD d e r N N N N N N N N N W R a _ a a< Cl') m MO CD W R r r r C O CO V 'IT N D N 9 0 Lo O O M N CO (("1 M O O N G Z M O N a M (D CD ( M M N d' � L `o a d y 7 0 CD r N M M N m M O m O O O M C N N M N M M N M M N . C R d O C0 d � C A O M N O m O M O N I- M CO t` CO M a d O M O V V •O O m t` O m N M (O m M M M C d Z O O CO O (D O m m O O O N N O' me N N N O OD I� O N M O ap N ((') M M V' ((� t w � a N r r n W N N M M N M t N N O 04 O M = d N N 'p Om C A O M O C DN O (O Cci O m O N O CL ¢ a m C W M LL N N M r N N N N N N N M r CD O N O O CO CO CO I� N r` V R r W O 0 N N N N N N N N N N n L a CL _ y m O O � N W M M a to N NC c '-T c v c � c N c N c N N C M G M C M c M c N C N C � C O C N C C G L C C L G C m G G G M G M m � ¢¢¢¢¢¢o_aaaaaaaaa c O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a O o 0 _ m 0 0 0 0 0 m 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 � t0 I� a0 m O � (V � N M v iii co t` c0 m O in r r r c @ E d 'O C Y tO f1 U E E E a c d C N d d O Z Cn CD 2 U' z J 2 O z O ti CC d 2 z W 0 U K i W 2 2 b Q O ON Q l R 'A N J w M M d N R Y . C O a+ V C m U U � _ OI N CL d � a3 m L C d N E 2 0 R tm c_ R Y C) OL � R a a i, C) C R CL 3 V O 0 LL r m tl! R L a v v, 0 s a O ^ V V M N 1� N n co co r M m t0 m Iq N M (O N N M M t M M M N O V V f0 T (/� N N O r � N 0 4'1 M V C> CD O M Y7 (O CO O O O O V N N R C Z N R R N C N CO W O m C� O n M V m y s N O N V W m M V m M M m O V O O C R 'gyp C) � A N V N M V r co .M- N cV W V co E M y CN M M O N M u7 M V V M V N N c N C �•� ¢ ¢¢¢¢ao_aaaaaaaao_ C c 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 SCM o (P 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o y N CO I O 0) O N N t+i V iA CO f M O O p m . r Z R U 2 2 ti J N 2 O U 2 O ti F W O d 2 2 W U 2 N N W F LL 2 b Q O ON U � J Q l The estimated parking demands for the existing Ross Dress for Less store were then calculated based on the average "retail" parking demands for the Phase 1 full occupancy scenario, as shown in Table B -3. These empirical average parking rates were applied to the Ross Dress for Less store area to estimate the amount of parking currently used by the store, since specific parking activity for this use could not be directly identified from the parking sweep data. The results of this calculation are summarized in Table B -4. Finally, the estimated Ross parking demand was subtracted from the adjusted "Full Occupancy" Phase 1 parking demands (Table B -2) to estimate the parking demands for Phase 1 of the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center without the Ross store and prior to the development of the proposed LA Fitness facility. Where the calculations (Arcadia Hub Phase 1 "Full Occupancy" minus estimated Ross parking demand) resulted in negative parking demand estimates for individual parking subareas (generally very early in the morning, when overall parking demand is reduced), the effected subarea parking demand was adjusted to zero. This methodology results in slight overestimations of the parking demands for the site during some non - critical hours, and produces a "worst case" parking condition for the Phase 1 portion of the shopping center (since negative numbers which would reduce the overall parking demand were "rounded" up to zero). Due to the high parking utilizations that occur throughout the day within parking Subarea 3, which is closest to the Ross store, it is likely that all of the estimated existing parking activity for the Ross store is not fully accommodated within the Subarea 3 parking area. Consequently, the Ross parking demand estimates shown in Table B -4 were divided between the two closest parking subareas to more accurately assess on site parking needs for the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center. Because it is difficult to determine parking usage for any individual store within a larger shopping center, it was assumed that the parking activity for the existing Ross facility occurred primarily within Subarea 3 (approximately 65 percent closest to the store), with the remaining (35 percent) parking using Subarea 4, adjacent to the store on the west. The resulting Phase 1 "Full Occupancy without Ross Dress for Less" values are shown in Table B -5. B -7 ARCADIA HUB/LA FITNESS HIRSCH/GREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC. JULY2006 >. Ol y w C` N C Y Y (O 5 m O (n 0 N O O y O O O '- N 00 O � M (h M N � CO V N — O (p 00006 6 .- r- 0 00 6 �wao: c (A ( c 'O �� R M N W t` V (D " C) � O CO M c Y O m m O N O 7 W F N M O N N N M M M M M M N (O (n a T w N d 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 N 3 (n O C tv 'O V (1') Of V r n N r m 0) r n Y O N ^ M V N O R M M M 1- (n n) CL H M N M� V qt � R M M N N DO O � W A c Y (O O O M O W M I N N (n N O M O n c p` y O �� MO oOO��" O N N O41 W f- v CD c d 000000��.=- =�0000 to LL U LL IM _ c tO c _ aD O M O N O M CO O M O V' m 1 0 V f0 M N n O O I� N N (O M =" CL LL 0 a N V m N N M N N M M N N N = u d V 00 d N I — I C M . IL ` O O, M (O M M C0 o O O n N M ( (p R 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 d L ¢ O. K M U) c 0 M N m O pp C4 a0 M O^ r A E 3 a Q N N N N N N N N N Q Q C N A tm _ Im c 'O c (S R O f _ CO M 1� a O M N N (A M N M r R O 12 -E O �-N? r� N O(OrNr- O CO MO r D. w 7 (p r N N N N N N N N N 'p F O- C y d O V T (L 9 rn ' d o V co r N O 00 Y M Wpm N O M O d o O — N M t` O M< O a 3 d d ~ N N. N N N M N N O 3 a � N Y (..� O O O N w N (O (n N 0 0 (tJ n N O d m O M O- N M N M N N N N N N O tea r c 0 W n N -M a to O to (D O r N M N m c 0 (O O^ O (O O O M O NON CL ~ N N N N N N N N N N cm c ¢¢¢¢¢¢o_ao_ao_ao_o _ o_o_o_ a c o 6 o o O O 6 O O o 0 0 o O o O O o 0 0 _ O o O o O o o O o o O o O o d O h m Oi 6 N — N th v (A tf1 1�-: GO Oi C z 2 ti N O U 2 O ti O y [e ti W h 2 i m y y w LL g 2 Qo � N U� Q� d N J O w N d � 0 C O d � U Im c 'a m in c E d L 0 a N rn H a c 7 Y S � -° a V C Q y X W Y R E . W N N N N O< O O N M CO N N N N N N N N N W u7 N N M M N M M N N N N T m N N N M N M M N N N d N 3 C C to E Y W � T � CL O N a Q (n T ~ T � R LL W U T U W Y N V W O] t0 N V (O V [O 00 O N M M � 3 � N ¢¢Q¢¢¢aaaaaaaaaaa " 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o S Co � W M O N r- N M C CO W Ql O p m I Z U _2 2 ti J 2 O U 2 O ti K a z z w w 2 U h K 2 y 2 LL g 2 , Q ON a� O N N V (A CV W W t0 �O CO N N O N (D V V � to N�� N r CO N O O� O d H r N M n N N N N N N N N 0 CL R CO O M N V N N O N r O O N N U) a cVV S O N M R O O W 1� �� CD N W •C p O CO M CO V M O CO V cO 00 •` Z M O N O V N M V M M c0 V LL A CD d N M r R M O W 00 ( V co 7 � ea O N V CO f� W CO O V CA O V O O O M V V (D � a N N N O N N O O � CO d H � N N N N N N N N U V V cc a y CL N r M N CO V (p N CO N O (O CD M M L •a L" 6M °o 7 O L N V O CO M tp I� O a0 M V O () � N LO � M CO �.•� cD (D � QD W � OD � f[) I� LL9 M � ' r Y y C-4 Coln r N M N M M N M M� N O M 3 aS O N N M W A D O O n ` N m V M V N r t0 ^ O O M CO O O N (D N N N N N N N v C ��r t p a O N c0 m W m c0 w c0 M M v m w W J •O y N � � � V V Cn V iD �0 V I� Ln V V N .— U O O p m_ C Z M O M O O V O c0 N cC] N r V N W N O N M CO M N N D M M V M L N t0 N N CO N c0 CA CO (P M (p t0 M M W d y S O A C _ Y O O W E CO 0 O O M N V CO CD M c0 R r V O fD V (O c0 M M M a- T O O (A N O (D V V M N O 0p N M M V c0 O O O CO CO M N � 9 7 N Z N eh O c0 t• r N N W a0 O t` r N W M T V 7 N CO (D co c0 (O M M M M M V V r y 04 d N M qt It IL O f A CL O O V O V W (D N N N M V M N M C M CD O M o0 V M CO OO O M V CO V V CO � y V N � (D N N t'7 V u'l cD h u� CO c0 cD c0 ul N p C 2 M O M M tD V V N V aD (n (T 4•f O I� r g N M M M (n O (P co O 0) V� t0 r Om O O CO M 7 y n N V V O O V I� V O a0 M W N c V N N N N M M M M N N rn l <� < < < <cLa.a.cLa.cLa-a.gEE ¢a¢a¢aaaaaa 00 p o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 S •� o c O M 6 0 0 0 0 M C. 0 CO 0 0 M 0 N O� W O O � N � N t`•) V� CO 1� GO (Ji O '(J N W C Y [l V E E M E d C_ a N _C N N 0 O Z 2 2 ti O U 2 O ti K O y W u U K O CO w LL Qo On H C O p N 0 m N N W'1 m N N N N M U � H c m a a o lmr�m�o�n �nvoovc0v d T N N M O m r O V M N CD Y m O d q O O A N m N f0 n O r M V A d 7 VJ r N O N V ap M M V M M M M m O V O7 $_ O. W n M T O. 'O �• V F m 0 I� O (p (O M O N m L c A 'O E a s d > CL y 0 d O N M N - - O O R N G N -- - ih E co <o co <OV p ` m 6 N U ¢ r 6 C fq M M iA n M N {p N N M o V V M V N Q c V 07 < < 2 << r L CL CL CL iL m M M m M ¢¢¢¢¢¢ o a a a o a a a a a a < C G C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 _ O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O Qj d CO a0 m 0 N N M V N O r W m 0 p d N A L a C6 U 2 U' 2 ti h 2 O U 2 O ti ti K O a N ti 2 W W K O 2 U K y b w LL Q = b Q O ON Kj Many land uses experience variability in parking demands throughout the course of the year. Shopping centers and other retail facilities are generally characterized by maximum parking demands during the year -end holiday season, from late November through the end of December. According to the current data, contained in the ULI Shared Parking, 2" Edition (2005), parking demand during January through October is approximately 80 percent of the peak December parking demand, with November parking utilizations at approximately 90 percent of this peak. The parking surveys for the existing Arcadia Hub Shopping Center occurred during a typical week in mid - February, and as a result, the surveyed parking demands, may be lower than those experienced during the late year shopping activity. Therefore, in order to account for parking variations due to seasonal activity at the shopping center, the values shown in Table B -5 were growth factored upward by 25 percent (80 percent assumed demand divided by 100 percent December demand) to account for the seasonal variability of retail shopping center parking demand. The results of that analysis produced the 'baseline" Phase 1 parking utilizations, without the Ross Dress for Less store, that were used to assess the potential impacts of the development of the proposed LA Fitness facility. These values are shown in Table B -6. Finally, although not included in the discussion and presentation of the data in the main body of the report, the "empirical' LA Fitness parking demand forecasts were added to the forecast "baseline" Phase 1 full occupancy, without Ross, seasonally adjusted values in Table B -6. These values were not contained in the report itself, since the empirical parking generation derived for the proposed Arcadia Hub facility, based on data obtained from the La Verne LA Fitness facility was less than the "worst case" parking estimates identified using the ULI methodology. The results of the "empirical" parking demand analysis are shown in Table B -7. However, a comparison of the values derived using the empirical parking generation methodology indicates that they are not substantially different from those obtained using the ULI methodology. As described earlier, the ULI data produced a peak Phase 1 parking demand of approximately 681 spaces, while a review of Table B -7 results in a maximum parking demand of approximately 612 spaces. This result is primarily due to differences in the parking accumulation profiles for the two methodologies, and their interactions with the "non- peak" parking estimates for the "baseline" Arcadia Hub Shopping Center (without Ross). Thus, although the ULI data does give the "worst case" parking demand results, the use of the empirical data obtained from the La Verne site provides a 'real world" verification that the parking demands derived using the ULI methodology are not underestimated. B -12 ARCADIA HUa4_A FITNESS HIRSCHIGREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC. JULY 2006 O M N O (O O f0 M W N Cl) c0 m A N N r N c0 M M M O N N r M O to a � 0 •C Z M O M O N M V M V M (O (D t0 N CO a0 c0 LL N N V t0 O N w 9 R N a0 (O 01 ^ O O M m C4 N 7 O O� �f'1 O N O 47 01 O C V O N _ M T V< LL9 O a0 V N N t0 CO V O n O r O O W W r O O N O r L N � d ~ R N a r •p O M O M 00 Q D fD T W O aD O� (p N C O � O v d t 'O N N O N N O O r (O n O O r to M N W N Q> CO M O aD 1� V N M O O U w W Q/ C i C 3 9 A r d m N W M M aD M O W N .N- W< m L N O L L O y 0 0 0! 0 a0 O W W O O O Z 0 a O Q V v Z_ M O (O a0 N OD CO �A CO I� u7 CO 1� W N N� aD 00 I� r r R a M� C l0 C a e V O` O O n O O r M a0 O O N N N N N N M N N N .— C R 10 O �[J CO m O 7 � ¢¢¢¢¢¢aadaaaaaaaa _� O g o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 y c0 1� eD m O � (V � <V N) 'C � co I� W m O C N d O m Y m T X c� C_ V N C_ N d ui Z m 2 2 J O U O F O N ti W N K 2 ul W ti LL 2 O Q O Oti V� C O i� 7 A C O N R d fq O w 9 r W 7 Q N C O 'v . o U a U y OI Y C y a •a 3 �Q o. m t ao d N O H � w tp O 9 Q C A d C m CL T d C Q 7 V d 7 LL d N R L CL O ` O O N O r M N r O v 0 N M O N N M M M M M M N C 10 O. T w N O 7 Z M O N co O r O O r (O t0 M N N y m EN N w C M a0 m C ` C M CD V N a E d N � � o�M u�o �nrnoaooMMO��oo rn Y A y) O O M O (O M CD O O M a0 tD I� fO O) M a d OY M V � rnm Y CO CO cD CD� ,? CL m ~ a R W N O M W< n co m m co ^ w m m W O< N E V O x CD O M M O V V M O O M m ate+ = M O N V N M oD 1� n O O r m O r aD O M E M � fdp Y7 M N M M 00 O (O M tO N N O N M v O V O V M N C_ C c c c c c C c c c C C c C G c c N L C G L G C L C C C G C C G G G C ¢¢¢ ¢ ? ¢aaaaanaanaa CD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O •- 0 0000000000000000 d = d co r 00 m o N N M R to cc; 01 O p m I I Z U 2 2 ti y 2 O U 2 O F ti O y 2 2 W W i U K 2 v t� N W 2 LL Q m 2� N U� Kj � o warn oao �nornMOO rnNrno d CL -e N O N A 9 C O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O Z t+f O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 tJ 7 y N V 00 (O N V a V V V V O A C O y M (0 p r LL9 N M A V O N (0 V O G1 1� r M M M aO O .- f1 w Cl) N u) O N- r M N V O W N N m C O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O Ch Z M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 y d ¢ ~ W N 00 V O M f0 M c0 (0 p O O c0 O co C ' V OD O) a) m W (D V O Vl a C O a d C ` a V~ N M M M M M M V M V V M M r d N C d t0 y d N N V .M- N N N O O V d C O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C y Z M O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O m CL M N N m M M aO M O oO N N W V V M 4 LL 7 '_ d J y mo N W N _ •O 6 W O � ` a V N M O V O] O V N r 3 W N V N M N M O m co M �� r.- N � aD M cc O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C N Z M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 H 9 N O M (0 V (0 OI . O M W o V N � 7 N V O O N M M N M N N N V O a j V C d H N N M M M V M M V (0 V V V N N R � r Q ' (V 0J QJ N V f� r M N V CO O M a0 V T fA a N N N r r N N N N Y C Z M O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LL � N V O V u7 O O V u7 W 6J O M N a0 V V N I� a0 01 I� V N d O a y N M M N M N M V V M M N N O M C < < << M CL M •� ¢¢¢¢¢adao_aaaadaa 0 o C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 = y C0 I� CO O) O N N (`•) V (0 1� W CA O m — — — U E d a G s `m n a E E E � U a C a d N N 7 ai Z 2 2 1= j O U O ti O ° a y 2 K W K U K 2 m W ti LL Q m z 2 b Q_ N U � J Q l c O N a m c 0 w R m N w m M m 7 Q C O w 9 C O U 9 c � Y m d 3 U rn� a � w R a5 m O LL Z m N g A •6 F 0 A a tea` Q L 3 V C A E c rn c Y l0 IL T v C A 6 7 v V Jill 3 W m N A L a O N O M COO w O O m w O r� M M M O M N V �[] M N N N W N v F r � A O . T w V N `- N M -- - - -- m- N N m O 9 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 cli 0) C O M O � �;.�000OOOOOOOOO�MN N - d N w M 00 p N (^ N R E N co C ' 4 a O• NN rnMOMO CO<oM E W M w W f0 M N V W •O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O Z M O N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 E N W V V f0 tO+J O N N N OOi Co V N N r V V to N N M V f0 V� fD �fI V �O M N C N �� <� < < <iLa.gga-iLCLMMM( O c 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m M O— N N M V 4 CO I� W O) O p m Z O m U 2 2 F J N 2 0 z 0 z 0 a y ¢ 2 2 W W U K 2 y w 2 LL = b a Q 0 N U� Cj PARKING OCCUPANCY SUMMARY - RESULTS CLIENT: HIRSCH i GREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC. PROJECT: ARCADIA HUB SHOPPING CENTER DATE: TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 14, 2006 PERIOD: 06:00 AM TO 10:00 PM R — PE 10 '00T 001 I rO'6 .07 OTRUCTURE�-',L'�: -ST RUCj AREA1 S. CES*. 217 SPACE 3 P'J(kV U ' RE ;AR — 2 — spAc E s lrioorsM ria A 182 SP 1 C U PA ��-290F�FXCEICG ACES 6 CYWAA ES 3 MAMA I 11 qPArFq 59 ,,O 0CCUPIEDl L11 . 72 6% jr0700 7 2 9 10 85 113 10% Iffro 7 5 11 21 1D4 148 13% ffo 00011 9 31 10 35 117 2702 111 19 46 39 57 165 326 2 18% 8% 28 K1710 26 75 63 64 177 405 35% 35 MW170O 24 102 F 91 75 219 511 44 44% TOMO�0-0200 1 20 83 92 81 222 498 4_ 4 3% 2001 1 = 26 101 86 76 189 478 42% 22 98 85 74 194 473 41% I rO 400 18 93 85 74 219 489 42% 22 106 64 73 221 486 42% jro'6o'o 30 101 62 70 209 472 41 N0'70'0. 12 62 1 54 75 164 367 32% 0800 0900 10 83 56 46 128 323 28% flro . ,100021 5 36 45 29 110 225 20% Zr,jb'00TPMW 4 18 54 18 75 169 NOTE: *2 SPACES BLOCKED BY TRASH BINS THE TRAFFIC SOLUTION 329 DIAMOND STREET ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA 91006 626,446.7978 PHONE PARKING OCCUPANCY SUMMARY - RESULTS CLIENT: HIRSCH / GREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC. PROJECT: ARCADIA HUB SHOPPING CENTER DATE: WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 15,2006 PERIOD: 06:00 AM TO 10:00 PM BARKINGYO'CCUBANCY t 1PERIOD._� 4800_07,00 ' STRUCTUREI__;.. �"I_,'��.�;y;'iSURF.ACE!LOTL —'- ��.=J' C P ,:CCCUPANCV p 1 19 66 ' ,_. 6 _ OCCUP,IED L ES 6% AREA 1 217 SP.ACE Si 7 AREA 2 182,SP,ACES 2 AREA 3 100 SPACES 4 "SPACES 241 SPACES 1 AREA 6 41,1 SPACES 52 07700800 7 2 4 12 67 92 8% IF o ' 8 ' oo 7 o ' g ' o7ol 8 6 5 17 93 129 11% w o " q " oo v %l " oM0vl 9 26 9 23 118 185 16% 10041800 1 23 63 46 55 117 304 26% E 171 - 00 V � 1 - 20 - 0 11 21 66 54 59 139 339 29% lMEE100 16 87 55 1 67 152 377 33% 0/040200 1 37 78 56 60 176 407 35% W O - 2 - 00 7 0 - 30 - 01 1 28 91 61 68 170 418 36% jF ( ' )3 ' 00 V 0 ' 4 ' 0 " 0l 21 93 58 66 161 399 35% 04040600 31 95 80 56 172 434 38% l rO ' 50 " 0 9 0 ' 60 ' 02 30 96 88 85 214 513 1 45% 080407,00 26 59 91 69 233 478 42% 07,040800 19 61 21 55 166 395 34% 0800:0900 8 31 60 49 131 279 24% KOT00 11 31 60 35 102 239 1 21% t 0:00 P,M 0 13 22 22 74 131 1 11% NOTE: '2 SPACES BLOCKED BY TRASH BINS THE TRAFFIC SOLUTION 329 DIAMOND STREET ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA 91006 626.446.7978 PHONE PARKING OCCUPANCY SUMMARY - RESULTS CLIENT: HIRSCH / GREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC. PROJECT: ARCADIA HUB SHOPPING CENTER DATE: THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 16, 2006 PERIOD: 06:00 AM TO 10:00 PM 'l-pLu-tiox'L-1 f 080 0 : 0 70 0 ' 0 1 Ht —'�ElKRUCTtfRlE Ir UP CY, 59 -CURIEDL 5% "217ASPAGES-i 4 AREA2 P18"2SPACSS 1 AREA ' a SPAC =S 1 UKRE 92MII F , CES S �Nj SPACES 1,241P 5 i 1 01,1 S P, E 'It 48 jff0'7'0'0"0'80"0 6 3 1 13 53 76 7% lro800 6 8 2 31 65 112 10% 0900 -;1 000 7 32 4 30 84 157 14% jfj0 1 21 58 31 57 108 275 24% Off1 VI 31 62 59 59 140 351 30% 1 23 1 74 77 1 79 158 411 36% F107 ' 00 f : O ' 2 ' 002 1 31 78 72 68 150 399 35% WOM070�300 1 30 81 71 73 157 412 36% Z030007501 27 73 69 70 153 392 34% M0407 31 77 75 75 159 417 36% ;- 050070800 28 75 86 59 193 441 38% jr0 18 83 73 77 191 442 38% 07,0 0:0800 '"' ' M 21 19 1 69 73 65 168 394 34% mro8007000om 14 51 70 46 125 306 27% 0 90 0 .1000 6 37 68 39 97 247 21'% .0 0 10, P .M ,MV r 3 1 12 39 19 71 144 NOTE: *2 SPACES BLOCKED BY TRASH BINS THE TRAFFIC SOLUTION 329 DIAMOND STREET ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA 91006 626.446.7978 PHONE PARKING OCCUPANCY SUMMARY - RESULTS CLIENT: HIRSCH I GREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC. PROJECT: ARCADIA HUB SHOPPING CENTER DATE: FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 10, 2006 PERIOD: 06:00 AM TO 10:00 PM NOTE: *2 SPACES BLOCKED BY TRASH BINS THE TRAFFIC SOLUTION 329 DIAMOND STREET ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA 91006 626.446.7978 PHONE f f(OTAL" -06dUPANCY -l'i0d6UF-?IED-',- - AT— �Rtfflllil P %w' r E =7-1 I Ao'l e 'i A 21ASI? C 6182�SPACES]IglDO:SPACESI]1241[ERACESI S i SPA99 N56�00-0700 3 4 5 2 46 60 5% t Z070 6 5 5 9 68 93 8% gro 00 1 5 7 5 23 72 112 10% Iffro 14 44 13 18 120 209 18% 1 rl 00 1 22 55 32 41 159 309 27% '.1 0 MTN 1 36 78 47 55 184 400 35% Url 200 30 1 95 59 1 74 203 461 40% W 1 37 106 74 76 193 486 42% JrM20�0,0300 1 36 107 62 74 166 445 39% IrO3 37 99 57 62 200 455 40% j077005001 31 110 94 86 178 489 42% jr070000002 45 104 82 72 187 490 43% Fj0 26 81 75 69 216 46 % IrO7,000�800 26 60 69 71 149 375 33% d0800 12 61 73 60 114 320 28% wo90 45 1 80 41 104 279 24 ' 10:00 PM 1 5 25 1 58 30 79 197 NOTE: *2 SPACES BLOCKED BY TRASH BINS THE TRAFFIC SOLUTION 329 DIAMOND STREET ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA 91006 626.446.7978 PHONE PARKING OCCUPANCY SUMMARY - RESULTS CLIENT: HIRSCH /GREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC. PROJECT: ARCADIA HUB SHOPPING CENTER DATE: SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 11, 2006 PERIOD: 06:00 AM TO 10:00 PM W0600 7,01 '�,L�Fku "I 1 SPACES ', 3 aT, Uf tEL-LNv WX 0 E P182 SNACS1 3 L —5 �su A L o WWA01 1 t�� Lk::i- TOT AL N61 OCCUPANCY 61 5% ARMYE'l 1001TSPACE9� looiSpAi 3 4,11W r 51 3 3 5 3 64 78 7% W0 5 5 5 16 80 ill 10% gro 16 29 40 42 154 281 24% NrJMOO��1100 1 26 49 87 69 185 416 36% 9 r1j'0'0Vi"2'0'0j 33 81 96 147 229 586 51% 1200 U "10 47 96 102 174 228 647 56% 5 '010 0 V :O 2 �OO 31 116 91 165 237 640 56% �2000300;Z 42 169 96 153 235 695 60% 47 130 97 143 225 642 56% ,M0400 40 120 106 148 229 643 56% 305 36 119 96 125 235 611 53% P;0'00'0 .0,001 38 96 85 122 194 535 46% 9?0'7�00-' �0800 27 73 82 77 169 428 37% ,'4,6800 17 52 21 83 128 371 32% 065655'66'xi 12 33 61 42 117 265 23% 4 16 39 25 103 187 16% NOTE: *2 SPACES BLOCKED BY TRASH BINS THE TRAFFIC SOLUTION 329 DIAMOND STREET ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA 91006 626,446.7978 PHONE PARKING OCCUPANCY SUMMARY - RESULTS CLIENT: HIRSCH / GREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC. PROJECT: ARCADIA HUB SHOPPING CENTER DATE: SUNDAY, FEBRUARY 12, 2006 PERIOD: 06:00 AM TO 10:00 PM {` PERIOD _ ; j 0800 :07,00 =,_!._` 'STRUCTURE._ AREA1 217 /SPACESG 0 PARKINCi�OCCUPANCY ., AREA2 182,SPAGE3 1 L'L c-SURFACELOT_....._'.,z._ AREA4 24,1 SPACES 7 AREA6 411 SPACES 43 tOCCUPANCV A BP9 . 54 1 5% AREA3 100 SPACES 3 7770708MM 1 1 3 11 47 63 5% 08000900 2 2 3 16 74 97 8% 0900.1000 4 6 5 18 101 134 12% mi 8 11 10 30 103 162 14% 1"100.1200 34 73 56 47 154 364 32% 120070100 37 94 70 61 171 423 37% 0,10070200 38 96 82 78 178 472 41% 020070300 36 102 90 110 168 506 44% W 73 3 00 7 07MON 30 128 80 89 208 535 46% j r070 7 0050 ' 01 32 110 86 118 200 546 47% 05000600 32 106 87 84 210 519 45% 0800-0700 30 99 80 77 186 472 41% 07,000800 6 68 71 55 145 345 30% 08000900 4 32 1 38 39 126 239 21% 0900,1000 0 9 1 28 25 78 140 12°/ 10:00 P,M 0 4 24 19 81 128 11% NOTE: '2 SPACES BLOCKED BY TRASH BINS TEH TRAFFIC SOLUTION 329 DIAMOND STREET ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA 91006 626.446.7978 PHONE PARKING OCCUPANCY SUMMARY - RESULTS CLIENT: HIRSCH /GREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC. PROJECT: LA VERNE - LA FITNESS, GATEWAY POINTE SHOPPING CENTER DATE: MONDAY, FEBRUARY 13, 2006 PERIOD: 06:00 AM TO 10:00 PM NOTE: HOURS OF OPERATION SUN - 07:00 AM TO 08:00 PM MON - THURS - 04:30 AM TO 11:00 PM FRI - 04:30 AM TO 10:00 PM SAT - 07:00 AM TO 08:00 PM THE TRAFFIC SOLUTION 329 DIAMOND STREET ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA 91006 626.446.7978 PHONE PARKING OCCUPANO K. � °LOT f .'4ai ,.+.z �,�OCCU91ED» L : = PERIO 060407.00 93 52% 07,00.0800 104 58% 0800.0900 135 75% 0900x1000 8 173 97% 1000-.1100 160 89% N 1,104,1200 139 78% 1200:0100 139 78% 0100.0200 133 74% a 105 59% 0300:0400 105 1 59% 0400.0500 142 79% 05040800 178 99% 080407,00 - 164 92% j 07,000800 a 170 95% 4 0%' 166 93% W0 144 80 T W17500 ' 21 1 113 63% NOTE: HOURS OF OPERATION SUN - 07:00 AM TO 08:00 PM MON - THURS - 04:30 AM TO 11:00 PM FRI - 04:30 AM TO 10:00 PM SAT - 07:00 AM TO 08:00 PM THE TRAFFIC SOLUTION 329 DIAMOND STREET ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA 91006 626.446.7978 PHONE PARKING OCCUPANCY SUMMARY - RESULTS CLIENT: HIRSCH ! GREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC. PROJECT: LA VERNE - LA FITNESS, GATEWAY POINTE SHOPPING CENTER DATE: TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 14,2006 PERIOD: 06:00 AM TO 10:00 PM PERIOD '�L P.ARKINO _ CCUP.A ay eSPACES ;� CCUPIED 080407,00 82 46% 07,000800 92 51% 0800:0900 98 55% 0900x1000 1 143 80% 1000:1100 1 1.3.3 74% ^ 1100.1200 1 130 73% 12000100 107 60% 01000200 75 42% 02000.0300 67 37% 03000.0.400 107 1 60% 0.40,0500 104 58% 06000800 132 74% 0600.07,00 141 79% 07.040800 2 146 82% 08040900 125 70% 090011000 104 58% 10:00.P,M 56 1 31% NOTE: HOURS OF OPERATION SUN - 07:00 AM TO 08:00 PM MON - THURS - 04:30 AM TO 11:00 PM FRI - 04:30 AM TO 10:00 PM SAT - 07:00 AM TO 08:00 PM THE TRAFFIC SOLUTION 329 DIAMOND STREET ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA 91006 626.446.7978 PHONE PARKING OCCUPANCY SUMMARY - RESULTS CLIENT: HIRSCH I GREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC. PROJECT: LA VERNE - LA FITNESS, GATEWAY POINTE SHOPPING CENTER DATE: WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 15,2006 PERIOD: 06:00 AM TO 10:00 PM NOTE: HOURS OF OPERATION SUN - 07:00 AM TO 08:00 PM MON - THURS - 04:30 AM TO 11:00 PM FRI - 04:30 AM TO 10:00 PM SAT - 07:00 AM TO 08:00 PM THE TRAFFIC SOLUTION 329 DIAMOND STREET ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA 91006 626.446.7978 PHONE .ARKINO O t"TOTALf { 4 LOT' -000RA Cy a96A ^. X11 OCCUPIED,,:; 0800:07.00 103 58% 07.00.0800 105 59% 08000900 115 64% 090011000 167 93% 1000:.1100 154 86% id00a1200 116 65% 1200_0100 120 57% 0,100:0200 1 97 54 0200;0300 1 92 51% 0300;0400 1 117 65% 0,400 0011 159 89% - 0500:0800 175 98% 0800:07.00 169 94% 07,000800 173 97% 0800:0900 149 83% _ 09001000 139 78% Ii, 1000 P,M : 113 63% NOTE: HOURS OF OPERATION SUN - 07:00 AM TO 08:00 PM MON - THURS - 04:30 AM TO 11:00 PM FRI - 04:30 AM TO 10:00 PM SAT - 07:00 AM TO 08:00 PM THE TRAFFIC SOLUTION 329 DIAMOND STREET ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA 91006 626.446.7978 PHONE PARKING OCCUPANCY SUMMARY - RESULTS CLIENT: HIRSCH / GREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC. PROJECT: LA VERNE - LA FITNESS, GATEWAY POINTE SHOPPING CENTER DATE: THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 16, 2006 PERIOD: 06:00 AM TO 10:00 PM NOTE: HOURS OF OPERATION SUN - 07:00 AM TO 08:00 PM MON - THURS - 04:30 AM TO 11:00 PM FRI -04:30 AM TO 10:00 PM SAT - 07:00 AM TO 08:00 PM THE TRAFFIC SOLUTION 329 DIAMOND STREET ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA 91006 626.446.7978 PHONE P OG.C.UP.9NCY iY � `- 51L0T1 ^a`. ,,,1 Sze PACES =� ., Via...- c:.s. G�OCCU @IEDL; WiQm 0800-07,00 83 46% 07,00.0800 86 48% O8000900 103 58% D900:4000 162 91% 1000.1100 136 76% 1,N .rl00.12006„ 101 56% '' ,:120o-0100 a 118 66% "oaoo:ozoo 1Da ss% jff 0 ' 20 ' 0 " 0 " 30 ' 0l 90 1 50% 0300.0400 107 60% 0400.0500 145 81% 0500.0800 155 87% 080007.00 165 92% 07,00.0800 1 174 97% 0800:0900 172 96% 0900:1000 134 75% 1000 P,M 106 59% NOTE: HOURS OF OPERATION SUN - 07:00 AM TO 08:00 PM MON - THURS - 04:30 AM TO 11:00 PM FRI -04:30 AM TO 10:00 PM SAT - 07:00 AM TO 08:00 PM THE TRAFFIC SOLUTION 329 DIAMOND STREET ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA 91006 626.446.7978 PHONE PARKING OCCUPANCY SUMMARY - RESULTS CLIENT: HIRSCH I GREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC. PROJECT: LA VERNE - LA FITNESS, GATEWAY POINTE SHOPPING CENTER DATE: FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 10, 2006 PERIOD: 06:00 AM TO 10:00 PM PERIOD $� P.ARKI 0 QROMP NNOY r + z 4L �LOT � 78 SPACES � OCCUPIED uj 0800 -0700 95 53% 0700:0800 99 55% 0800:0900 138 77% 0900.1000 169 94% 1000.1,1 00 144 80% K 1/047200 101 56% 1200.0100 , 93 52% 2 " 0170M ' 20 ' 09 1 100 56% N 02040300: 84 47% . 0300.0400 1 113 63% 0400.0500 - 128 72% 0500.0800 A 153 85% 080007.00 143 80% Iff 130 73% y 0800.0900 �, 89 50% 0900.1000 70 1 39% 1000PM V .; 11 47 26 °h NOTE: HOURS OF OPERATION SUN - 07:00 AM TO 08:00 PM MON - THURS - 04:30 AM TO 11:00 PM FRI - 04:30 AM TO 10:00 PM SAT - 07:00 AM TO 08:00 PM THE TRAFFIC SOLUTION 329 DIAMOND STREET ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA 91006 626.446.7978 PHONE PARKING OCCUPANCY SUMMARY - RESULTS CLIENT: HIRSCH / GREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC. PROJECT: LA VERNE - LA FITNESS, GATEWAY POINTE SHOPPING CENTER DATE: SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 11, 2006 PERIOD: 06:00 AM TO 10:00 PM f`" rl P,ERIOD;" d .ARK N0 0_ CUP•p. 4V OTAL i;,179,SPACE6 .J 08000.07,00 0 0% 0700_0800 31 17% 080041900 145 81% 0900_1000 1 170 95% 1000dr100 165 92% 1i100s1200 135 75% 12000.0]00 102 57% 0900:0200 102 57% 0200:0300 95 53% 0300.0900 87 49% 0900:0500 89 50% 05000.0600 71 40% oeoo 0700 72 40% 07.00.0800 98 55% 0600:0900 32 18% 09001000 i 1 % 10:00 FM 1 1% NOTE: HOURS OF OPERATION SUN - 07:00 AM TO 08:00 PM MON - THURS - 04:30 AM TO 11:00 PM FRI -04:30 AM TO 10:00 PM SAT - 07:00 AM TO 08:00 PM THE TRAFFIC SOLUTION 329 DIAMOND STREET ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA 91006 626.446.7978 PHONE PARKING OCCUPANCY SUMMARY - RESULTS CLIENT: HIRSCH / GREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC. PROJECT: LA VERNE - LA FITNESS, GATEWAY POINTE SHOPPING CENTER DATE: SUNDAY, FEBRUARY 12,2006 PERIOD: 06:00 AM TO 10:00 PM P, R I O CIOCUP.ANFX We RIOD iOCCUP,IED! =, 0600 Z00 2 1% 07,00:0800 28 16% OBOD -0900 98 55% 0900a1D00 128 72% 1000.1"100 153 85% 11100.7200 123 69% 1200A100 109 61% 0;100:0200 87 49% 0200c0300 70 39% 0300.0400 4 82 46% 0-400-0500 91 51% 0600.0800 82 46% 0800:07,00 96 54% 07,00.0800 93 52% 0800.0900 'I 31 17% ., 0900.1000 t• 2 1 °/n 10:00P,M .. t t% NOTE: HOURS OF OPERATION SUN - 07:00 AM TO 08:00 PM MON - THURS - 04:30 AM TO 11:00 PM FRI - 04:30 AM TO 10:00 PM SAT - 07:00 AM TO 08:00 PM THE TRAFFIC SOLUTION 329 DIAMOND STREET ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA 91006 626.446.7978 PHONE 6 } Based on information provided by LA Fitness and summarized in the following table, the La Verne LA Fitness facility contains a total of approximately 39,670 total square feet of floor area, including approximately 11,124 square feet of "cardio" and "circuit" training area, 4,255 square feet of "aerobics' instruction and training, 4,255 square feet of "spin" and boxing training classrooms, 5,497 square feet of pool and support space, 7,448 square feet basketball and racquetball courts and support area, a 1,703 square foot "Kids Klub" area, plus an 1,800 square foot sales /lobby, and locker /shower facilities. Table E -1 LA Fitness, La Verne, CA 1275 Foothill Boulevard, La Verne, CA Building Areas Main Floor: 36,605 sq. ft. Mezzanine: 3,065 sq. ft. Total Building: 39,670 sq. ft. Total Parking Required (per Lease): 275 spaces Building Area Breakdown AREA REMARKS Main Floor Entry 1,236 Sales Area 565 Cardio /circuit Area 11,124 Spinning & Boxing 4,255 Kids Klub 1,703 Basketball Court 4,065 Racquetball Court(s) 3,383 Aerobics 4,255 Men's Lockers 774 Women's Lockers 785 Wet Area (Men & Women) 1,409 Lap Pool & Spa 1,962 Pool Deck 3,535 Misc. /Utilities 1,809 Not a daycare center, maximum stay of 1 -1/2 hour Mezzanine 3,065 ARCADIA HUaILA FITNESS JULY2006 E -1 HIRSCH/GREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC �, EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The applicant, Arcadia Hub Shopping Center, LP proposes to convert of a portion of the existing Arcadia Hub Shopping Center to a new LA Fitness facility. The existing Arcadia Hub Shopping Center is located on the west side of Baldwin Avenue, between Duarte Road and Naomi Avenue in the City of Arcadia. The existing shopping center contains a total of approximately 346,844 leaseable square feet (including basement and storage areas), consisting of a Pavilions supermarket, Burlington Coat Factory and Baby Depot, Joann Fabrics, Ross Dress for Less, and numerous smaller retail and commercial stores. It is currently approximately 96 percent leased, with about 14,475 square feet vacant. The proposed project will remove the existing 43,544 square foot Ross store (including a total of approximately 22,000 square feet of basement and storage area) and replace it with an approximately 42,400 square foot LA Fitness center, utilizing both the at grade and basement levels to provide the various typical "workout" areas, training classrooms, swimming pool and basketball court facilities, and ancillary shower /locker room uses. The shopping center is divided into two "phases ", with the proposed LA Fitness facility to occupy a portion of "Phase 1 ". The proposed project is located within the Phase 1 portion of the site, which provides a total of approximately 740 parking spaces within an approximately 341 -space surface parking lot on the south side of the center and a two -level parking structure containing approximately 217 - spaces on the "roof' of the structure along Duarte Road, and approximately 182 spaces located beneath the Duarte Road parking lot, at the same level as the primary surface lot, for a total Phase I parking supply of 740 spaces. The "Phase 2" portion of the site, containing the Pavilions supermarket and other retail and commercial uses located generally along the westerly side of the site, provides a total of approximately 411 spaces surrounding and south of the Pavilions supermarket, for a total shopping center parking supply of approximately 1,151 spaces. Access to these parking areas is provided via various driveways located along both Duarte Road and Naomi Avenue. Once completed and occupied (anticipated by the end of 2007), the project is expected to result in approximately 687 net new daily trips, including approximately 37 (13 inbound and 24 outbound) net new AM peak hour trips, and 105 (55 inbound and 50 outbound) net new PM peak hour trips. These calculations are based on "trip credits' applied against the gross project trip generation, to account for the removal of existing trips associated with the existing Ross Dress for Less store. ARCADIA HU62A FITNESS HIRSCH /GREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC. JULY 2006 The applicant retained Hirsch /Green Transportation Consulting, Inc. ( "Hirsch /Green ") to prepare a traffic impact analysis to examine the potential effects of the proposed project on the PM peak hour conditions. Based on discussions with the City staff, it was concluded that the amount of traffic generated by the project during the AM peak hour is not sufficient to warrant a detailed traffic study. However, the projected increase of approximately 105 PM peak hour trips will exceed the City's threshold for requiring a traffic impact analysis, and as a result, this study includes a detailed traffic impact analysis for four intersections adjacent to or in close proximity to the project site during the PM peak hour only, as recommended by the City. The results of the analyses contained in this report indicate that the proposed project will not significantly impact any of the study intersections, nor will it create sufficient traffic generation to cause significant site access impacts. Further, the project is not expected to significantly impact any of the Los Angeles County Congestion Management Program (CMP) arterial monitoring intersections or freeway segments in the project vicinity. As a result, no traffic mitigation measures are warranted. A separate parking demand analysis report has been prepared for the proposed project, and the results of that analysis are included in this traffic report by reference. That report indicates that the development of the proposed project will increase the amount of parking required for the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center complex, although overall parking supply will be more than adequate to accommodate the expected additional parking demand, and no significant parking impacts are expected. However, the parking impact analysis report recommended that the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center undertake a series of minor parking modifications, including relocating employee parking to the outer reaches of the parking areas, to provide additional convenient parking for the center's customers to minimize any effects of the conversion of the Ross Dress for Less store to the new LA Fitness facility. ARCADIA HU62A FITNESS HIRSCH/GREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC. JULY 2006 TABLE OF CONTENTS Passe INTRODUCTION................................................................................. ............................... 1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION .................................................................. ............................... 4 Project Traffic Generation ................................................................. ............................... 4 Project Geographic Trip Distribution ................................................. ............................... 6 ProjectTraffic Assignment ................................................................ ............................... 8 Project Parking and Access .............................................................. ............................... 8 PROJECT IMPACT ANALYSIS STUDY AREA .................................. ............................... 13 EnvironmentalSetting ....................................................................... ............................... 13 Area Transportation Facilities ........................................................... ............................... 13 Freeways........................................................................................ ............................... 13 Streets Highways .................................................................... ............................... 13 Public Transportation ..................................................................... ............................... 14 ANALYSIS OF AREA TRAFFIC CONDITIONS .................................. ............................... 18 Existing (Year 2006) Traffic Volumes ................................................ ............................... 18 Analysis of Existing (Year 2006) Traffic Conditions .......................... ............................... 18 Future (Year 2007) Traffic Volumes .................................................. ............................... 22 Without Project Traffic Forecasts ............. :........................................... ......................... 23 Ambient Traffic Growth .................................................................. ............................... 23 RelatedProjects ............................................................................. ............................... 23 Highway System Improvements ........................................................ ............................... 24 Analysis of Future (2007) Traffic Conditions ..................................... ............................... 30 Impact Significance Criteria .............................................................. ............................... 31 Project Impacts on Regional Transportation System ........................ ............................... 31 CMP Monitoring Intersection Impacts ............................................ ............................... 32 CMP Freeway Segment Impacts ................................................... ............................... 33 MITIGATION MEASURES .................................................................. ............................... 34 APPENDICES Trip Generation Calculations — Removal of Existing Ross Dress for Less Related Projects Trip Generation Rates /Equations Intersection Traffic Count Data Sheets and Geometric Configurations and Controls CMA Calculation Worksheets ARCADIA HU82A FITNESS HIRSCH/GREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC. JULY2006 LIST OF FIGURES Figure No. 1 Site Vicinity Map ............................................... ............................... 2 Study Intersection Locations ............................ ............................... 3 Project Site Plan ............................................... ............................... 4 Project Traffic Distribution Percentages ........... ............................... 5 Project Traffic Volumes .................................... ............................... 6 Project Area Transit Service Map ..................... ............................... 7 Existing (2006) Peak Hour Traffic Volumes ..... ............................... 8 Related Projects Locations Map ....................... ............................... 9 Related Projects Traffic Volumes ..................... ............................... 10 Future (2007) Peak Hour "Without Project" Traffic Volumes........... 11 Future (2007) Peak Hour "With Project' Traffic Volumes ................ LIST OF TABLES Table No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Project Trip Generation Rates ..................................... ............................... Project Trip Generation ............................................... ............................... Geometric Project Directional Trip Distribution ........... ............................... Critical Movement Analysis Volume Ranges per Level of Service ............. Level of Service as a Function of CMA Value ............. ............................... Critical Movement Analysis Summary — Existing (2006) Conditions.......... Related Projects Descriptions and Trip Generation .... ............................... Critical Movement Analysis Summary — Future (2007) Conditions............ Page 2 3 5 8 10 16 19 25 27 28 29 Page 4 7 8 ..... 20 ..... 21 ..... 22 ..... 26 ..... 31 iv ARCADIA HUHQA FITNESS HIRSCHIGREEN TRANSFORTA TION CONSULTING, INC. JULY 2006. INTRODUCTION This report summarizes the results of a traffic impact analysis for the proposed conversion of a portion of the existing Arcadia Hub Shopping Center to a new LA Fitness health club facility. The Arcadia Hub Shopping Center is located on the west side of Baldwin Avenue, between Duarte Road and Naomi Avenue in the City of Arcadia, and currently contains a total of approximately 346,844 leaseable square feet (including basement and storage areas), consisting of a Pavilions supermarket, Burlington Coat Factory and Baby Depot, Joann Fabrics, Ross Dress for Less, and numerous smaller retail and commercial stores. The proposed project will remove the existing 43,544 square foot Ross store (including a total of approximately 22,000 square feet of basement and storage area) and replace it with an approximately 42,400 square foot LA Fitness center, utilizing both the at grade and basement levels to provide the various typical "workout' areas, training classrooms, swimming pool and basketball court facilities, and ancillary shower /locker room uses. The project site and surrounding vicinity are shown in Figure 1. Hirsch /Green Transportation Consulting, Inc. ( "Hirsch /Green ") was retained to study the potential impact of the proposed development on the surrounding street system. A review of the anticipated trip generation for the proposed project with the City of Arcadia engineering department staff indicated that a detailed traffic analysis should be prepared. The parameters of the study were scoped with the City to ensure that appropriate analysis methodologies and assumptions were utilized. Based on those scoping discussions, this study evaluates the existing (year 2006) and forecast future (year 2007) conditions at the four intersections listed below during the PM peak hour. These intersections are adjacent to or in close proximity to the project site, and represent the locations most likely to be affected by the proposed project. 1. Baldwin Avenue and Duarte Road 2. Baldwin Avenue and Naomi Avenue 3. Golden West Avenue and Duarte Road 4. Golden West Avenue and Naomi Avenue The locations of the four study intersections are shown in relation to the project site in Figure 2. 1 ARCADIA HUa4A FITNESS HIRSCH /GREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC. JULY 2006 mr L t MM 1 'J s t ',a C ORONAOO 4. I f t,A y r: JR v f F.S RD G - FAIRtiID 'Ay n <C , t; ARC _ -_ A,D i A ARC SDI A AG' "�' r =. po 0 U �jJ AN 4 .. O ., PROJECT - ry SITE j 0 - 1 { > r' l ...... L 1 "ti po� 7'EMPL rr1 I RD a CI Ty 4 i �igO1d - HS V, t _ P,v I FIGURE 2 1 M s IRSCH REEN HirschfGreen Transportation Consulting, Inc. STUDY INTERSECTION LOCATIONS 19 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The project under consideration is the proposed conversion of an existing 43,544 square foot Ross store (including a total of approximately 22,000 square feet of basement and storage area) within the existing Arcadia Hub Shopping Center to an approximately 42,400 square foot LA Fitness center, utilizing both the at grade and basement levels to provide the various typical "workout" areas, training classrooms, swimming pool and basketball court facilities, and ancillary shower /locker room uses. The project site plan is shown in Figures 3(a) and 3(b). Project Traffic Generation Traffic- generating characteristics of many land uses, including both shopping centers and health club facilities such as those involved in the proposed project, have been extensively surveyed and documented in studies conducted under the auspices of the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). The most recent information is available in the ITE 7th Edition Trip Generation manual.' The trip generation equations utilized to estimate the potential traffic resulting from the proposed LA Fitness facility, and from the existing Ross Dress for Less store to be removed, are summarized in Table 1. Table 1 Project Trip Generation Rates* Proposed Use Health Club (per 1,000 square feet) Daily: T = 32.93 (A) AM Peak Hour: T = 1.21 (A); I/B = 42 %, O/B = 58% PM Peak Hour: T = 4.05 (A); I/B = 51 %, 016 = 49% Existing Use Removed Shopping Center (Retail) (per 1.000 square feet) Daily: Ln(T) = 0.65 Ln(A) + 5.83 AM Peak Hour: Ln(T) = 0.60 Ln(A) + 2.29; 1/B = 61 %, 0/B = 39% PM Peak Hour: Ln(T) = 0.66 Ln(A) + 3.40; I/B = 48 %, O/B = 52% Where: A= Building Area in 1,000 sq. ft. VB = Inbound Trip Percent Ln = Natural Logarithm (mathematical function) O/B = Outbound Trip Percent * Note: Trip generation rates per 7th Ed. ITE Trip Generation. Trip Generation, 7 Edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers, Washington, D.C., 2004. 4 ARCADIA HUMA FITNESS HIRSCH /GREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC JULY 2006 o l ow m (4) (n Q,!o 1 m 0 NN c j i 0 lies IL to o FIGURE 3(a) PROPOSED LA FITNESS FACILITY LAYOUT IRSCH MAIN LEVEL HGREEN Himch/Gre-.. Transportation .. m Inc CA) a) cQ E ca < tm rD 0) N I 'y - L- - - cm 7 -1 ®R FIGURE 3(b) PROPOSED LA FITNESS FACILITY LAYOUT Me IRSCH BASEMENT LEVEL REEN HirschlGreen Transportation Consulting, Inc. Based on the trip generation rates shown in Table 1, projections of the amount of new traffic expected to be generated by the proposed project were derived, and are shown in Table 2. As Indicated in this table, once completed and occupied, the project is expected to generate approximately 687 net new daily trips, including approximately 37 (13 inbound and 24 outbound) net new AM peak hour trips and 105 (55 inbound and 50 outbound) net new PM peak hour trips. Table 2 Project Trip Generation Size/Use Proposed Use 42,400 sq. ft. Health Club"' Less Existing Uses (Removed) 21,544 sq. ft. Retail E Net Project Traffic AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Daily In Out To In Out Total 1,396 21 30 51 88 84 172 709 8 6 1 4 33 34 67 687 13 24 37 55 50 105 Notes: I'I "Health Club" includes 19,900 sq. ft.'Workouf and classroom area; a 3,452 sq. ft. basketball court; a 4,810 sq. ft. poolldeck area; and 1,000 sq. ft.of salesloffice space , plus ancillary locker roomishower facilities. 121 Net retail trip generation calculated based on reduction in total Phase i area, from 242,134 sq. ft. to 220,590 sq. ft. Does not include approximately 22,000 sq. ft. Ross basemenl/storage area. See Appendix A. Based on the anticipated net project trip generation shown in Table 2, the City determined that the AM peak hour trip generation (37 net new trips) is not sufficient to warrant a detailed traffic study. However, the projected increase of approximately 105 PM peak hour trips will exceed the City's threshold for requiring a traffic impact analysis, and as a result, this study is focused on the potential for project traffic impacts during that time period only. Project Geographic Trip Distribution Next, general geographic distribution of the project trips was identified, based primarily on a review of local and regional demographic information, although existing traffic patterns and land uses in the project area were also analyzed to identify likely origin locations for the patrons of the proposed project. This information was used to estimate the overall geographic distribution of project trips throughout the local area and surrounding region. The resulting general geographic distribution of project - related trips, by direction, is shown in Table 3. 7 ARCADIA HUE4A FITNESS HIRSCH/GREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC. JULY 2006 Table 3 Geographic Project Trip Distribution Percentages Direction Total North 25% South 30% East 25% West 20% Totals 100% Project Traffic Assignment The assignment of project traffic to the street and highway systems was accomplished in two steps. Using the directional distribution percentages shown in Table 3, the number of trips in each direction was calculated. The second step was to assign these trips to specific routes serving the project area. This step considered many factors influencing the project traffic's access routes to and from the site, including turn restrictions at various intersections and the locations of the project's driveways. The resulting project trip distribution percentages at the four study intersections and through the study area are shown in Figure 4. The results of the project traffic assignment process provide the necessary level of detail to conduct the traffic analysis and to identify incremental project traffic impacts at the study intersections. The net PM peak hour project trips added to the area street system and study intersections are shown in Figure 5. Project Parking and Access The existing Arcadia hub Shopping Center containing the proposed project is divided into two "phases ", with the proposed LA Fitness facility to occupy a portion of "Phase 1 ". The "Phase 2" portion of the site, containing the Pavilions supermarket and other retail and commercial uses located generally along the westerly side of the site, is not included in this parking analysis except by reference. The Phase 1 portion of the site is the focus of this study, and it provides a total of approximately 740 parking spaces, located in a large 341 -space surface parking lot on the south side of the center, a smaller approximately 217 -space surface lot along Duarte Road, and a single -level parking structure containing approximately 182 spaces located beneath the Duarte Road parking lot, accessible at the same level as the primary surface lot. 8 ARCADIA HUflQA FITNESS HIRSCHIGREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC JULY 2006 ' L 13 0 \'�O CoRONADO DR Po CORO0 DR Po VC/vIl"ll 0 ht"ll CENTEP I F-VI 0 2 PROJECT SITE U-� p Ul" Al RV v 0. AV ED r MYNE 01 u) HS M A"DIA Po VC/vIl"ll 0 ht"ll CENTEP W AV uji > t5— uu Lu AV T' FIGURE 4 M IRSCH C REEN Hirsch/Green Transportation Consultinq, Inc, PROJECT TRIP DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES I 2 PROJECT SITE p Ul" v 0. ED r MYNE 01 CITY HS M W AV uji > t5— uu Lu AV T' FIGURE 4 M IRSCH C REEN Hirsch/Green Transportation Consultinq, Inc, PROJECT TRIP DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES I 11 ra fl Ci N LEGEND vo XX INBOUND XX OUTBOUND� FIGURE 5 NET PROJECT VOLUMES IRSCH PM PEAK HOUR C s Hirsch/Green TranSDortab 10 Po 3 Nn L2 1,16, —5 0 ARCAPIA PROJECT Hop SITE IV T F-R CE r. 5 1 2 ,1 -:L, 3 2b 2 A3 fl Ci N LEGEND vo XX INBOUND XX OUTBOUND� FIGURE 5 NET PROJECT VOLUMES IRSCH PM PEAK HOUR C s Hirsch/Green TranSDortab 10 A detailed parking demand analysis was conducted for the proposed project under separate cover, and is incorporated into this analysis by reference 2 . Based on that analysis, the peak seasonal parking demand forecasts for the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center, including the proposed LA Fitness, are expected to be approximately 681 parking spaces, or about 92 percent of the existing 740 -space Phase 1 parking supply. Additionally, although the parking demand analysis focused on the Phase 1 area of the site, it is important to note that parking for the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center is actually provided in both the Phase 1 and Phase 2 areas, and the analyses also included data for the Phase 2 parking areas of the site. The parking for the shopping center is not strictly segregated between the two phases, and it is likely that parking interactions and "spillover' between the Phase 1 and Phase 2 parking areas occurs on a regular basis. The results indicate that, like Phase 1, parking within the Phase 2 area is substantially less than the total parking supply for existing conditions, with a maximum adjusted anticipated seasonal parking demand of 296 spaces (about 72 percent of the 411 spaces available). When the peak parking demands for both Phase 1 and Phase 2 were combined, the peak parking activity for the shopping center as a whole (including the proposed LA Fitness facility) is expected to be approximately 975 spaces. This amount is still substantially less (175 spaces) than the 1,151 spaces provided within Phases 1 plus 2. Based on these results, the existing parking supply for the site will be more than adequate to accommodate the maximum foreseeable parking demands for the shopping center. No significant Phase 1 parking lot operations or parking supply problems are anticipated. However, the parking demand analyses and forecasts do indicate that parking within localized areas of the parking facilities for Phase 1 of the shopping center currently experience, or are anticipated to experience high parking demands that approach or may exceed the parking supplies in these areas. Therefore, to provide additional available parking for patrons of the stores and businesses located adjacent to or in close proximity to these parking areas, it is recommended that the management of the shopping center voluntarily relocate all employee parking to lesser utilized spaces within the parking lot along the frontages of Duarte Road and Naomi Avenue. This measure is not a requirement as "mitigation" for any anticipated parking shortages, since the results of this analysis indicate that more than adequate on site parking exists at all times; relocating employee parking away from the more highly utilized parking subareas will simply minimize the localized on site parking congestion identified in the parking analyses. 2 Packing Impact Analysis Report for the Proposed LA Fitness Facility in the Existing Arcadia Hub Shopping Center, Hirsch /Green Transportation Consulting, Inc., Revised July 2006. 11 ARCADIA HUa4.A FITNESS HIRSCHIGREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC. JULY2006 It is also important to note that the existing shopping center parking supply does not meet the current City of Arcadia parking code requirements, and is deficient of the current code requirements by several hundred spaces, as noted in the parking demand analysis report. However, despite this "technical' parking shortage, the demand analysis indicated that the center is adequately parked, and the proposed development of a new LA Fitness facility in place of the existing Ross Dress for Less store at the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center is not anticipated to result in parking shortages for the site as a whole. Therefore, the proposed project is not expected to result in significant parking impacts, and no parking `overflow" is expected onto the site adjacent streets or parking areas. 12 ARCADIA HULA FITNESS HIRSCHIGREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC. JULY2008 TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS STUDY AREA Environmental Setting The project site is located within the existing Arcadia Hub Shopping Center, situated on the west side of Baldwin Avenue, between Duarte Road and Naomi Avenue in the western portion of the City of Arcadia. Much of the area west of the project site is unincorporated Los Angeles County. The project vicinity surrounding the site is developed predominantly with single and multi - family residential uses, although the Baldwin Avenue corridor along the east side of the site contains primarily commercial uses including retail, restaurant, fast food, and office space. Area Transportation Facilities The project area is served by both local and regional transportation facilities. The Foothill Freeway (1 -210) is located approximately one and one -half miles directly north of the project site, and provides ramp connections to the surface street network in the immediate project vicinity. In addition to the regional freeway facilities, several major and secondary arterials serve the study area, as does a well - developed local street grid. The key transportation facilities in the project vicinity are identified in the following pages. Freeways Foothill Freeway (1 -210) — The Foothill Freeway is the primary east -west transportation facility in the region, providing service between the Sylmar area some 30 miles north and west of the City of Arcadia and the Ontario Freeway (1 -15) interchange located about 25 miles to the east. The Foothill Freeway interchanges with the Pasadena Freeway (US -134) in Pasadena, becoming the eastward extension of that facility. In the project vicinity, the Foothill Freeway is generally an eight -lane facility, providing four through travel lanes in each direction, plus additional auxiliary lanes near ramp or interchange locations. Surface street ramp connections are provided to Baldwin Avenue via Foothill Boulevard and Colorado Boulevard, as well as a dirent westbound on -ramp at Baldwin Avenue. Streets and Highways Baldwin Avenue — This north -south oriented major highway facility is located along the east side of the project site. Baldwin Avenue provides access through the City of Arcadia from the Foothill Freeway southward through Temple City and El Monte, terminating at the San Bernardino Freeway (1 -10) approximately three and one -half miles south of the project site. 13 ARCADIA HUBILA FITNESS HIRSCH /GREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC. JULY2006 Through the project vicinity, Baldwin Avenue is striped to provide two through lanes in each direction plus left -turn channelization and right -turn only channelization at key intersections. On street parking is permitted along both sides of the street on various segments of Baldwin Avenue in and around the project vicinity. Duarte Road — Duarte Road is another major highway facility, running east -west through the City of Arcadia and forming the northern boundary of the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center containing the proposed project. Duarte Road connects San Gabriel Boulevard in San Marina approximately two miles west of the project site to Highland Avenue in Duarte, approximately six miles to the east. Through the study area, this roadway generally provides two travel lanes in each direction, plus left -turn channelization and on- street parking. Golden West Avenue — This north -south oriented local street is located to the west of the project site, and provides access through the southwestern portion of the City of Arcadia into Temple City to the south. This roadway is striped to provide a single travel lane in each direction plus on street parking along most of its length. Naomi Avenue — This east -west roadway is located immediately south of the project site, and provides local access between Santa Anita Avenue to the east and Temple City Boulevard to the west. West of Temple City Boulevard, Naomi Avenue continues for several blocks, but is discontinuous at several points in this area. In the project vicinity, Naomi Avenue generally provides a single travel lane in each direction plus on street parking, although at intersections with key roadways (such as Baldwin Avenue), parking on Naomi Avenue is restricted to allow for additional left -turn and/or right -turn lanes. Although not included in this report for detailed analysis of potential project impacts due to their distances from the project site, several other important roadways also serve the project vicinity, including Huntington Drive, California Boulevard /Sunset Boulevard/Temple City Boulevard, Rosemead Boulevard, Santa Anita Avenue, and Las Tunas Drive /Live Oak Avenue. These roadways provide additional regional- oriented transportation facilities throughout the study area and beyond, and are used to access the immediate project area via the more proximate roadways described in detail above. Public Transportation There are several bus routes operating within convenient walking distance of the project site (i.e., one - quarter to one -third mile) that can provide an alternative means of travel to employees 14 ARCADIA HUaILA FITNESS HIRSCH /GREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC. JULY2006 and patrons of the proposed LA Fitness facility. These lines are provided primarily by the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) and offer multiple connection opportunities to regional transit services offered by MTA and other transit providers. Together, these bus routes provide access to the project from the larger regional area, including other areas of the City of Arcadia and destinations within the surrounding cities and communities. The key bus routes serving the project site directly are described in detail below, and a map of the bus and rail transit service in the project vicinity, including those not directly serving the project site but available via transfers, is shown in Figure 6. MTA Line 264 -- This bus line provides weekday service between approximately Altadena Drive and Lake Avenue in the unincorporated area of Los Angeles County north of Pasadena and Highland Avenue in the City of Duarte. Line 264 runs along Allen Avenue, New York Drive, Altadena Drive, Foothill Boulevard, Michillinda Avenue /Sunset Boulevard and Huntington Drive to Baldwin Avenue and Duarte Road adjacent to the project site, and then continues along Duarte Road to its terminus at Highland Avenue. Line 264 is in service through the project area between approximately 5:30 AM and 8:00 PM on non - holiday weekdays, with peak period headways of approximately one hour in each direction. Weekend and holiday service is available during approximately the same periods with approximately the same headway times. In addition to the project site (Arcadia Hub Shopping Center), Line 264 serves the Sierra Madre Villa Transportation Center and Gold Line Station at Foothill Boulevard and Sierra Madre Villa Avenue, and the Westfield Shoppingtown at Santa Anita. MTA Line 267 — Line 267 provides weekday service between approximately Altadena Drive and Lake Avenue in the unincorporated area of Los Angeles County north of Pasadena and the El Monte and Lower El Monte Bus Stations in El Monte. Line 267 runs along Altadena Drive, Lincoln Avenue, Orange Grove Boulevard, Foothill Boulevard, Los Robles Avenue, Del Mar Boulevard, Sierra Madre Villa Avenue and Rosemead Boulevard, then travels near the project site along Huntington Drive and Sunset Boulevard/Temple City Boulevard to Valley Boulevard before terminating in El Monte. Line 267 also serves the Sierra Madre Villa Transportation Center and Gold Line Station at Foothill Boulevard and Sierra Madre Villa Avenue. This line does not serve the project site directly, but provides service within approximately one -third mile to the west along Sunset Boulevard/Temple City Boulevard. Line 267 is in service through the project area between approximately 6:00 AM and 8:00 PM on non - holiday weekdays, with peak period headways of approximately 30 minutes in each direction. Weekend and holiday service is available from approximately 6:30 AM to 7:30 PM, with approximately one -hour headways. 15 ARCADIA HUa2A FITNESS HIRSCH /GREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC. JULY 2006 FIGURE 6 IM PROJECT AREA TRANSIT SERVICE Is REEN Hirsch /Green Transportation Consulting, Inc. 16 MTA Line 268 — This bus line provides weekday service between the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) in Pasadena and the El Monte and Lower El Monte Bus Stations in El Monte. Line 268 runs along Oak Grove Drive, Lincoln Avenue, Washington Boulevard, Altadena Drive, Orange Grove Boulevard, Sierra Madre Boulevard, and Foothill Boulevard, then travels past the project site along Baldwin Avenue to Lower Azusa Road and Tyler Avenue before reaching its terminus at the El Monte bus stations. Along its route, Line 268 serves St. Luke's Hospital, the Hastings Ranch Shopping Center, the Westfield Shoppingtown at Santa Anita, and the El Monte MetroLink Station. Line 268 is in service through the project area between approximately 6:00 AM and 8:30 PM on non - holiday weekdays, with peak period headways of approximately 30 minutes in each direction. Weekend and holiday service is available during approximately 7:30 AM and 7:30 PM, with approximately one -hour headways. MTA Line 79 — Line 79 provides limited stop express weekday service between approximately St. Joseph's Street and 2 otl Avenue in Arcadia along Huntington Drive through Temple City, San Gabriel, San Marino, South Pasadena and Lincoln Heights to downtown Los Angeles. This line does not serve the project site directly, but provides service within approximately one -third mile to the north along Huntington Drive at Baldwin Avenue. Line 79 is in service through the project area between approximately 6:30 AM and 12:00 midnight on non - holiday weekdays, with peak period headways of approximately 30 minutes in each direction. Weekend and holiday service is available during approximately 7:00 AM and 12:00 midnight PM, with approximately 35 to 45- minute headways. Foothill Transit Line 184 — Foothill Transit Line 184 provides limited stop express weekday service between the project site and Highland Avenue and Duarte Boulevard in Duarte. This line runs along Rosemead Boulevard, Duarte Road, Sunset Boulevard, and Huntington Drive in the project area, continuing eastward along Huntington Drive to Santa Anita Avenue, Colorado Boulevard, and Mountain Avenue before returning to Huntington Drive to make a loop on Highland Avenue, Duarte Road, and Buena Vista Street. This line does not serve the project site directly, but provides service within approximately one -third mile to the west along Sunset Boulevard /Temple City Boulevard. Line 184 is in service through the project area between approximately 5:15 AM and 6:30 PM on non - holiday weekdays, with peak period headways of approximately one hour in each direction. No weekend or holiday service is available. 17 ARCADIA HUH2A FITNESS HIRSCH/GREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC. JULY 2006 ANALYSIS OF AREA TRAFFIC CONDITIONS Existing (Year 2006) Traffic Volumes Traffic volume count data for the study intersections were obtained from recent counts performed for this study for Hirsch /Green in early April 2006. The "existing" (year 2006) PM peak hour traffic volumes at the four study intersections are shown in Figure 7. Analysis of Existing (Year 2006) Traffic Conditions Detailed traffic analyses of existing conditions were performed at the following four intersections: 1. Baldwin Avenue and Duarte Road 2. Baldwin Avenue and Naomi Avenue 3. Golden West Avenue and Duarte Road 4. Golden West Avenue and Naomi Avenue Three of the study intersections are currently signalized; the intersection of Golden West Avenue and Naomi Avenue is four -way STOP sign controlled. This study uses the Critical Movement Analysis methodology for the analysis and evaluation of traffic operations at signalized intersections, as detailed in Circular Number 212 published by the Transportation Research Board. This methodology describes the operating characteristics of an intersection in terms of the "Level of Service', based on intersection traffic volume and other variables such as number and type of signal phasing, lane geometries, and other factors which determine both the quantity of traffic that can move through an intersection ( "Capacity') and the quality of that traffic flow ('level of Service'). "Capacity" represents the maximum total hourly volume of vehicles in the critical lanes which has a reasonable expectation of passing through an intersection under prevailing roadway and traffic conditions. Critical lanes are defined generally as those intersection movement or groups of movements which exhibit the highest "per lane" volumes, thus defining the maximum amount of vehicles attempting to negotiate through the intersection during a specific time period. The capacity of an intersection also varies based on the number of signal phases for the location; more signal phases generally result in more "lost' or "start up" time, as vehicles exhibit slight 3 Interim Materials on Highway Capacity Circular Number 212, Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 1980. 18 ARCADIA HUa2A FITNESS HIRSCH /GREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC. JULY2006 ^- �i� } z I"f i f 6 �t E 0 J_ p a_ a K a N 73 .-1 106 Ai 22J Jr 12� 5� t'). r 5" 1:,ma� Br r 1 IRSCH REEN lirschlGreen Transportation Consultinq, Inc. i:4. SITE 130 P C.� � 446 L 46 3 } 30 aN 64 1 Z ARC } " 31 I � / A D IA �1VD 759 y � 94 � CENTER rt 73 .-1 106 Ai 22J Jr 12� 5� t'). r 5" 1:,ma� Br r 1 IRSCH REEN lirschlGreen Transportation Consultinq, Inc. i:4. SITE C 54 116 � 91 79 13 N �v FIGURE 7 EXISTING (2006) TRAFFIC VOLUMES PM PEAK HOUR 19 130 446 vi� 3 } 197 667 aN 64 1 C 54 116 � 91 79 13 N �v FIGURE 7 EXISTING (2006) TRAFFIC VOLUMES PM PEAK HOUR 19 driver reaction delays when signal indications change from "red" to `green ". Additional signal phases introduce more signal indication changes, creating more opportunities for lost time during the signal cycle, and reducing the efficiency and thus the capacity of an intersection. The intersection capacities for various levels of service, based on the number of traffic signal phases, are shown in Table 4. For intersection evaluation and planning purposes, the capacity of an intersection equates to the value of Level of Service (LOS) E, which represents the highest level of traffic through urban area intersections that can be adequately accommodated without a breakdown in operation resulting in stop- and -go conditions. Table 4 Critical Movement Analysis Volume Ranges per Level of Service The "Critical Movement' indices at an intersection are determined by first identifying the sum of all critical movement volumes at that intersection. This value is then divided by the appropriate capacity value for the type of signal control at the study intersection to arrive at the "CMA value" for the intersection, which is roughly equivalent to the volume -to- capacity ratio for the location. "Level of Service" describes the quality of traffic flow through the intersection. LOS A through LOS C provide good traffic flow characteristics, with little or no congestion or vehicle delay. LOS D typically is the level for which a metropolitan area street system is designed, and represents the highest level of smooth traffic flow. LOS E represents volumes at or near the capacity of the intersection and can result in stoppages of momentary duration and unstable traffic flow at the upper reaches of this condition. LOS F occurs when a facility is overloaded 20 ARCADIA HUE2A FITNESS HIRSCH /GREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC. JULY 2006 Maximum Sum of Critical Volumes (VPH) vs. Number of Signal Phases Level of Two Three Four or More Serv Phases Phase Phases A 900 855 825 B 1,050 1,000 965 C 1,200 1,140 1,100 D 1,350 1,275 1,225 E 1,500 1,425 1,375 F --- - - - - -- -Not Applicable ----- - - - -- ' For planning applications only. Not appropriate for operations /design applications. The "Critical Movement' indices at an intersection are determined by first identifying the sum of all critical movement volumes at that intersection. This value is then divided by the appropriate capacity value for the type of signal control at the study intersection to arrive at the "CMA value" for the intersection, which is roughly equivalent to the volume -to- capacity ratio for the location. "Level of Service" describes the quality of traffic flow through the intersection. LOS A through LOS C provide good traffic flow characteristics, with little or no congestion or vehicle delay. LOS D typically is the level for which a metropolitan area street system is designed, and represents the highest level of smooth traffic flow. LOS E represents volumes at or near the capacity of the intersection and can result in stoppages of momentary duration and unstable traffic flow at the upper reaches of this condition. LOS F occurs when a facility is overloaded 20 ARCADIA HUE2A FITNESS HIRSCH /GREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC. JULY 2006 and is characterized by stop- and -go traffic with stoppages of long duration. The LOS definitions do not represent a single intersection operation condition, but rather correspond to a range of CMA values, as shown in Table 5. Table 5 Level of Service as a Function of CMA Value substantial queues form By applying the analysis procedures described above to the study intersections, the CMA value and the corresponding LOS for existing traffic conditions were calculated. Although designed for use with signalized intersections, the CMA methodology can also be useful in the analysis of unsignalized locations, and for purposes of this analysis, a modified CMA analysis assuming reduced capacity to adjust for STOP sign control was used to examine the unsignalized (four- way STOP sign controlled) intersection of Golden West Avenue and Duarte Road. The existing (2006) PM peak hour intersection conditions are shown in Table 6. As indicated in this table, all of the study intersections are currently operating at acceptable levels of service for urban conditions, with levels of service ranging from LOS A at Golden West Avenue and Duarte Road, to LOS C at Baldwin Avenue and Duarte Road. Typically, in urbanized settings, intersection operations of up to LOS D are considered appropriate and acceptable. The signalized intersection of Baldwin Avenue and Naomi Avenue, and the four -way STOP sign controlled intersection of Golden West Avenue and Naomi Avenue both operate at LOS B. No significant traffic congestion conditions or delays were apparent during the intersection count periods, and the CMA analyses confirm that all of the study intersections are currently capable of accommodating the existing traffic volumes in the area. 21 ARCADIA HUfl2A FITNESS HIRSCH /GREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC. JULY 2006 Level of CMA Value Service Intersection Operation/Traf Fl Characteristics < 0.600 A No congestion; all vehicles clear in a single cycle. > 0.600 < 0.700 B Minimal congestion; all vehicles still clear in a single cycle. > 0.700 < 0.800 C No major congestion; most vehicles clear in a single cycle. > 0.800 < 0.900 D Generally uncongested, but vehicles may wait through more than one cycle; no short duration queues form on critical >0.900 < 1.000 E Increased congestion on critical approaches; long duration queues form at higher end of range. > 1.000 F Over capacity; forced flow with long periods of congestion; substantial queues form By applying the analysis procedures described above to the study intersections, the CMA value and the corresponding LOS for existing traffic conditions were calculated. Although designed for use with signalized intersections, the CMA methodology can also be useful in the analysis of unsignalized locations, and for purposes of this analysis, a modified CMA analysis assuming reduced capacity to adjust for STOP sign control was used to examine the unsignalized (four- way STOP sign controlled) intersection of Golden West Avenue and Duarte Road. The existing (2006) PM peak hour intersection conditions are shown in Table 6. As indicated in this table, all of the study intersections are currently operating at acceptable levels of service for urban conditions, with levels of service ranging from LOS A at Golden West Avenue and Duarte Road, to LOS C at Baldwin Avenue and Duarte Road. Typically, in urbanized settings, intersection operations of up to LOS D are considered appropriate and acceptable. The signalized intersection of Baldwin Avenue and Naomi Avenue, and the four -way STOP sign controlled intersection of Golden West Avenue and Naomi Avenue both operate at LOS B. No significant traffic congestion conditions or delays were apparent during the intersection count periods, and the CMA analyses confirm that all of the study intersections are currently capable of accommodating the existing traffic volumes in the area. 21 ARCADIA HUfl2A FITNESS HIRSCH /GREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC. JULY 2006 Future (Year 2007) Traffic Conditions Future (year 2007) traffic volumes in the project vicinity, and indeed throughout the region, are anticipated to increase as a result of a number of factors, although two factors contribute most significantly to area traffic growth. The first of these factors is simply ambient increases in the number of vehicles on the roadway system. Ambient traffic growth can occur for a number of reasons; increasing population (not tied to development), additional vehicles for existing households (as children become driving age, or new multi - vehicle status for current single - vehicle families), economic factors such as new jobs creating new worker trips, and other factors. The second factor is new traffic resulting from on going and continued development. A number of other projects are currently either under construction or planned for development in the project vicinity which will likely contribute to future traffic volumes in the study area. Therefore, since the project is not expected to be built and occupied immediately, its traffic, and consequently, the impacts of that traffic, will occur on a roadway system that is accommodating more traffic than indicated in the discussion of "Existing (2006)" conditions. For this reason, the analysis of future traffic conditions has been expanded to include potential traffic volume increases expected from both ambient growth and from traffic generated by projects that have not yet been developed. These "Future (2007) Without Project" volumes represent the forecast traffic conditions in the study area at the time the project is expected to be completed, but prior to its occupancy, and form the "baseline' conditions against which the project's incremental traffic additions (calculated earlier) are assessed. 22 ARCADIA HUa2A FITNESS HIRSCH /GREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC. JULY2006 Table 6 Critical Movement Analysis Summary Existing (2006) PM Peak Hour Conditions Int. No. Intersection CMA LOS 1 Baldwin Avenue and Duarte Road 0.776 C 2 Baldwin Avenue and Naomi Avenue 0.671 B 3 Golden West Avenue and Duarte Road 0.576 A 4 Golden West Avenue and Naomi Avenue 0.679 B Future (Year 2007) Traffic Conditions Future (year 2007) traffic volumes in the project vicinity, and indeed throughout the region, are anticipated to increase as a result of a number of factors, although two factors contribute most significantly to area traffic growth. The first of these factors is simply ambient increases in the number of vehicles on the roadway system. Ambient traffic growth can occur for a number of reasons; increasing population (not tied to development), additional vehicles for existing households (as children become driving age, or new multi - vehicle status for current single - vehicle families), economic factors such as new jobs creating new worker trips, and other factors. The second factor is new traffic resulting from on going and continued development. A number of other projects are currently either under construction or planned for development in the project vicinity which will likely contribute to future traffic volumes in the study area. Therefore, since the project is not expected to be built and occupied immediately, its traffic, and consequently, the impacts of that traffic, will occur on a roadway system that is accommodating more traffic than indicated in the discussion of "Existing (2006)" conditions. For this reason, the analysis of future traffic conditions has been expanded to include potential traffic volume increases expected from both ambient growth and from traffic generated by projects that have not yet been developed. These "Future (2007) Without Project" volumes represent the forecast traffic conditions in the study area at the time the project is expected to be completed, but prior to its occupancy, and form the "baseline' conditions against which the project's incremental traffic additions (calculated earlier) are assessed. 22 ARCADIA HUa2A FITNESS HIRSCH /GREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC. JULY2006 Without Project Traffic Forecasts Briefly, the methodology for estimating future traffic volumes was as follows: First, as described in a preceding section of this report, the current (year 2006) traffic volumes were determined by traffic counts. These existing volumes were then used to estimate future conditions (year 2007) through the application of an "ambient traffic growth factor". This growth factor, compounded annually, was applied to all of the turning movement volumes at the study intersections to form the "baseline" traffic volume conditions for the future study year 2007. Although the annual growth factor is expected to fully represent all potential area traffic increases, for the purposes of conservative analysis, traffic generated from nearby "related projects" was also added to these future baseline traffic volumes, to form the basis for the "Without Project' conditions. Ambient Traffic Growth Based on analyses of the trends in traffic growth in the study area over the last several years, as documented in the Los Angeles County Congestion Management Program (CMP), it is estimated that an annual traffic growth factor of approximately 1.0 percent is reasonable. This growth factor is used to account for increases in traffic resulting from general ambient traffic growth in the study vicinity due to ongoing growth, or potential development projects not yet proposed or outside of the study area. This growth factor, compounded annually, was applied to the 2006 traffic volumes to develop an estimate of the future year 2007 baseline volumes. Related Projects In addition to the 1.0 percent annual traffic growth rate used for this study, a listing of specific projects located within the study area was obtained from the City of Arcadia Planning Department. As noted previously, the 1.0 percent annual ambient traffic growth factor is expected to accurately represent all area traffic growth within the study period, and as such, the inclusion of additional traffic due to specific projects in the study area in addition to the assumed ambient background traffic growth may tend to overstate cumulative conditions. However, to ensure that all potential traffic issues are identified, traffic generation resulting from the related projects identified by the City of Arcadia were included in their entirety in addition to the 1.0 annual ambient traffic growth factor. A review of the City related projects list indicated that a total of five individual projects near the study site might produce additional traffic at study intersections. Potential traffic from these prospective area developments was added to the 1.0 percent annual ambient traffic growth to 23 ARCADIA HUB LA FITNESS HIRSCHIGREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC. JULY 2006 produce the estimates of the future 2007 study year traffic volumes. The locations of the five identified related projects assumed in this analysis are shown in Figure 8, and each project is individually listed and described in Table 7. Estimates of the traffic expected to be generated by these related projects were determined by applying the appropriate trip generation rates and equations from the same ITE Trip Generation publication used to estimate project traffic, or were obtained from City of Arcadia Planning Department project records, and are also summarized in Table 7. The related project trip generation rates and equations used in the calculations contained in Table 7 (where City of Arcadia sources were not available) are contained in the appendix. The related projects' traffic volumes shown in Table 7 were then distributed through the study area and assigned to the area roadway and freeway network using assumptions and methodologies similar to those used to assign the trips generated by the proposed project. The results of the related projects' trip assignments are shown in Figure 9 for the PM peak hour. The "Future (2007) Without Project" condition traffic volumes for the analysis were developed by combining the assumed ambient traffic growth in the area with new traffic generated by the potential cumulative development in the vicinity of the project site. The resulting PM peak hour traffic estimates for the "Future (2007) Without Project" conditions are shown in Figure 10. These traffic estimates form the "benchmark" values for determining project traffic impacts on the street system. The net traffic volumes generated by the proposed project (calculated earlier in this report) were then combined with these benchmark volumes to produce the "Future (2007) With Project" traffic volume estimates, shown Figure 11. The analysis results of the "With Project" condition were then compared to the analysis results of the "Without Project" condition to determine the incremental traffic impacts directly attributable to the proposed development. Highway System Improvements No significant highway improvements within the study area were identified, and as such, the analysis of "Future (2007)" conditions assumed that the future roadway network geometries and capacities would remain unchanged from the current conditions. It should be noted that some or all of the related projects identified for this analysis may be required to implement localized roadway improvements to mitigate specific impacts from those projects, although no such "mitigation" improvements are included in this analysis. 24 ARCADIA HUB/LA FITNESS HIRSCWGREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC. JULY2006 FIGURE 8 H e IRSCH RELATED PROJECT LOCATIONS MAP REEN HirschlGreen Transportation Consulting, Inc. 25 Table 7 Related Projects Descriptions and Trip Generation Estimates Map No. Size /Use 1 Westfield Shoppingtown Expansion' 2 Kohl's I 3 Santa Anita Specific Plan [21 804,250 sq. ft. Retail /Commercial 25,000 sq, ft. Office 4 78 -unit Senior Housing I 5 76 -unit Senior Housing 121 Address /Location 400 S. Baldwin Avenue Michillinda Avenue/ Rosemead Boulevard Santa Anita Park 161 Colorado Place 650 W. Huntington Drive PM Peak Hour Daily In Out Total 4,250 186 201 387 3,476 157 144 301 26,329 1,189 1,289 2,478 459 18 89 107 26,788 1,207 1,378 2,585 290 39 21 60 264 5 3 8 Notes: [1] Trip generation values provided by City of Arcadia Planning Department. [2] Trip generation per ITE 7th Edition. 26 ARCADIA HUB/LA FITNESS HIRSCH /GREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC. JULY2006 FIGURE 9 m IRSCH RELATED PROJECTS VOLUMES e IRSC AM PEAK HOUR Hirsph /Green Transportation Consulting, Inc. 27 PI 1 9 IRSCH GREEN Consulting. Inc. ARCADIA HUG CENTER PROJECT S1 SITE 4 '37 22 174 rN 96 —) 15 1 9 IRSCH GREEN Consulting. Inc. ARCADIA HUG CENTER PROJECT S1 SITE 4 22 2(01 680 rN 1 9 IRSCH GREEN Consulting. Inc. ARCADIA HUG CENTER PROJECT S1 SITE 0 JAB --or FIGURE 10 FUTURE (2007) TRAFFIC VOLUMES WITHOUT PROJECT PM PEAK HOUR 28 45 2(01 680 rN 66 0 JAB --or FIGURE 10 FUTURE (2007) TRAFFIC VOLUMES WITHOUT PROJECT PM PEAK HOUR 28 FIGURE 11 m m FUTURE (2007) TRAFFIC VOLUMES IRSCH WITH PROJECT e REEN PM PEAK HOUR iirschlGreen Transporta0on Consulting, Inc, Analysis of Future (Year 2007) Traffic Conditions Using the same CMA procedures used to analyze the existing traffic conditions, the analysis of the "Future (2007) Without Project' traffic volumes shown in Figure 10, and the "Future (2007) With Project' traffic volumes shown in Figure 11 was conducted. These analyses identified the future levels of service at the study intersections for both the without project and with project scenarios, as well as the potential incremental project traffic impacts at each location. The results of these analyses are summarized in Table 8. As indicated in this table, ambient traffic growth and traffic increases from other development in and around the study area will result in worsening traffic conditions at all of the study intersections by the year 2007. The operations at the signalized intersection of Baldwin Avenue and Duarte Road are anticipated to continue to deteriorate in the future, with PM peak hour conditions worsening to LOS D levels, and conditions at Baldwin Avenue and Naomi Avenue becoming LOS C. However, the intersection of Golden West Avenue and Duarte Avenue and the STOP sign controlled intersection of Golden West Avenue and Naomi Avenue are forecast to continue to operate at their existing LOS A and LOS B, respectively, in the future. This deterioration in level of service will occur as a result of on going and /or proposed development within and near the study area, and is expected to occur whether or not the proposed project is built. However, these intersection conditions are still within acceptable parameters for urban locations, and the key transportation corridors near the project site will, in general, operate adequately during the PM peak hour in the future. Traffic generated by the proposed project will also have an effect on the operations of the study intersections. Project traffic will generally result in nominal incremental increases in the CMA values at all of the study intersections. However, although the total net project trip generation for the proposed LA Fitness facility conversion will exceed the City's threshold for detailed traffic impact analyses, as shown earlier in Table 2, these net new trips are almost evenly divided into "inbound" and 'outbound" trips, lessening the impacts on any individual intersection approach. Additionally, the project site is easily accessible from all four directions, further reducing potential trip additions to any individual intersection. Therefore, the additional (net new) project traffic volumes at each of the study intersections are expected to be relatively light, and as shown in Table 8, the addition of project - related trips is not expected to result in changes to the forecast future intersection levels of service at three of the study intersections, and only slightly reduce the operations at Golden West Avenue and Naomi Avenue from LOS B to LOS C. 30 ARCADIA HUMA FITNESS HIRSCH/GREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, HNC. JULY2006 Table 8 Critical Movement Analysis Summary Future (2007) PM Peak Hour Without and With Project Conditions Without Int. Project With Project No. Intersection CMA LOS CM LOS Impact 1 Baldwin Avenue and Duarte Road 0.853 D 0.861 D 0.008 2 Baldwin Avenue and Naomi Avenue 0.737 C 0.756 C 0.019 3 Golden West Avenue and Duarte Road 0.588 A 0.596 A 0.008 4 Golden West Avenue and Naomi Avenue 0.691 B 0.709 C 0.018 "'indicates indicates significant impact per City of Arcadia /Los Angeles County CMP criteria. Impact Significance Criteria The City of Arcadia uses the Los Angeles CMP definition for a significant traffic impact attributable to a project. As identified in Appendix D of the 2004 CMP, (Guidelines for CMP Transportation Impact Analysis), "[for] 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)." No significant impacts are deemed to occur at LOS A through E, as these operating conditions exhibit sufficient surplus capacities to accommodate traffic increases with little effect on traffic delays, or are within accepted operating levels for urban intersections. Using the impact evaluation criteria shown in the preceding table, the project's incremental traffic impacts summarized in Table 8 are not considered to be "significant ". Therefore, no off site project traffic mitigation measures or roadway improvements are necessary or warranted. Project Impacts on Regional Transportation System To address the increasing public concern that traffic congestion was impacting the quality of life and economic vitality of the State of California, the Los Angeles County Congestion Management Program (CMP) was enacted to provide the analytical basis for transportation decisions through the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) process. A countywide approach has been 2004 Congestion Management Program for Los Angeles County, Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority, Los Angeles, 2004. 31 ARCADIA HUe/LA FITNESS HIRSCH/GREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC. JULY 2006 established by the Metropolitan Transportation Authority, the local CMP agency, to implement the statutory requirements of the CMP. The countywide approach includes designating a highway network that includes all state highways and principal arterials within the County and monitoring the network's Level of Service standards. The CMP project traffic impact analysis (TIA) guidelines require analyses of all CMP monitoring intersections where the project could add a total of 50 or more trips during either peak hour. Additionally, all freeway segments where a project could add 150 or more trips in either direction during the peak hours must be analyzed. CMP Monitoring Intersection Impacts The current CMP (2004) identifies four arterial monitoring intersections within an approximately three -mile radius of the project site. All of these CMP monitoring intersection locations are outside the immediate study area, and are expected to be beyond the range of identifiable project traffic impacts. The CMP intersections are located within unincorporated Los Angeles County, the City of Pasadena, and the City of Rosemead, as listed below. o Rosemead Boulevard and Huntington Drive (Los Angeles County) o Rosemead Boulevard and San Gabriel Boulevard (Los Angeles County) o Rosemead Boulevard and Foothill Boulevard (Pasadena) o Rosemead Boulevard and Valley Boulevard (Rosemead) The CMP requires that detailed analyses be conducted for any of these locations where the proposed project is anticipated to add 50 or more total trips during either the AM or PM peak hours. A review of the net project traffic additions to the study vicinity, as identified earlier in Table 2 and shown graphically in previous Figure 5, indicates that net new project traffic at the site adjacent intersections are expected to be substantially below these thresholds, with the exception of the intersection of Baldwin Avenue and Naomi Avenue, which will exhibit a project - related trip increase of approximately 52 trips. However, project traffic will disperse through the area roadway network outside the study area, and total project volume additions to any intersection (including any of the CMP locations identified above) would not be expected to exceed approximately 27 total vehicles per hour (locations south of Naomi Avenue on Baldwin Avenue). Therefore, the project will not (and cannot) meet the CMP "50 -trip addition" criteria requiring more detailed analyses at any of the nearby CMP arterial monitoring intersections, and as such, no additional analysis was conducted. 32 ARCAOIA HUH2A FITNESS HIRSCHIGREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC. JULY 2006 CMP Freeway Segment Impacts An examination was also made of the potential for project- related freeway impacts within the project study area. As identified previously in Table 2, the project will generate substantially fewer than 150 directional vehicles per hour only during both the AM and PM peak hours, with a maximum of 55 outbound and 50 inbound directional trips during the PM peak hour. As a result, even if all of this traffic were assigned to the area freeways, the project incremental trip additions will be well below the 150 -trip thresholds, with actual directional project traffic additions to any freeway segment expected to be fewer than 10 trips. This nominal amount of additional freeway traffic will not produce any measurable effects on any of the regional transportation facilities, and no further analysis is warranted. 33 ARCADIA HVa LA FITNESS HIRSCH /GREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC. JULY 2006 MITIGATION MEASURES As indicated in this project traffic analysis, the proposed conversion of the existing Ross Dress for Less store at the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center to a new LA Fitness health club facility is not expected to result in significant traffic impacts at any of the nearby study intersections, nor will it create significant impacts to CMP arterial roadways, intersections, or freeway segments in the vicinity. As a result, no offsite traffic mitigation measures are warranted. 0 ARCADIA HUBILA FITNESS HIRSCH /GREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC. JULY 2006 INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNT SUMMARY CLIENT: HIRSCHIGREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC. PROJECT: ARCADIA HUB SHOPPING CENTERILA FITNESS PROJECT DATE: WEDNESDAY, MAY 31, 2006 PERIOD: 04:00 PM TO 06:00 PM INTERSECTION NIS BALDWIN AVENUE 10 ENV DUARTE ROAD FILE NUMBER: 1 -PM 15 MINUTE TOTALS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 SBRT I SETH I SBLT I WBRT I WBTH I WBLT I NBRT I NBTH I NBLT I EBRT I EBTH I SBLT 400 -415 415 -430 430 -445 445 -500 500515 515 -530 530 -545 545 -600 36 158 41 39 103 40 37 186 45 37 103 31 26 187 41 20 109 24 20 205 44 36 108 39 30 254 50 38 117 37 18 171 44 25 93 23 18 239 60 31 130 33 21 180 43 40 127 34 34 158 22 18 154 54 33 191 23 27 175 50 37 151 20 15 173 37 22 196 30 18 163 53 39 196 20 12 156 54 23 162 14 17 161 46 39 188 25 17 187 44 28 150 14 20 178 49 1 HOUR 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 TOTALS SBRT SBTH SBLT WBRT WBTH WELT NBRT NBTH I NBLT E 123 121 400 -500 119 736 171 132 423 134 126 696 95 415.515 113 832 180 131 437 131 131 734 93 430.530 94 817 179 119 427 123 121 705 84 445 -545 86 869 198 130 448 132 123 742 89 500600 87 844 197 134 467 127 129 696 73 BRT EBTH EBLT TOTALS 78 665 194 3,569 72 667 194 3,715 62 653 190 3,574 64 667 197 3,745 66 682 193 3,695 P.M. PEAK HOUR 86 869 198 0445 -0545 I L 197 +I t 130 667 0 448 DUARTE ROAD 64 132 � r �rTr 89 742 123 BALDWIN AVENUE THE TRAFFIC SOLUTION 329 DIAMOND STREET ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA 91006 626.4463978 INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNT SUMMARY CLIENT: HIRSCH /GREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC. PROJECT: ARCADIA HUB SHOPPING CENTER/LA FITNESS PROJECT DATE: WEDNESDAY, MAY 31, 2006 PERIOD: 04:00 PM TO 06:00 PM INTERSECTION N/S BALDWIN AVENUE 10 E/W NAOMIAVENUE FILE NUMBER: 2 -PM 15 MINUTE TOTALS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 B 9 10 11 12 SBRT I SBTH I SBL7 I WBRT I WBTH I WBLT I NBRT I NBTH I NBLT I EBRT EBTH EBLT 400415 415 -430 430445 445 -500 500 -515 515 -530 530 -545 545 -600 17 151 9 9 28 18 28 193 13 14 26 11 31 194 11 10 28 17 30 198 12 15 31 25 31 222 11 16 33 25 23 203 10 10 31 22 21 221 8 13 21 19 22 196 11 17 28 18 18 190 44 45 41 26 10 159 39 39 24 23 6 202 32 36 24 24 9 240 40 42 42 27 7 171 48 38 35 21 5 186 47 45 31 17 5 191 46 50 29 14 5 183 37 42 23 19 1 HOUR 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 1 10 1 11 1 12 TOTALS 400 -500 415 -515 430530 445 -545 500 -600 SBRT SBTH BELT WBRT WBTH WBLT NBRT NBTH NBLT EBRT EBTH EBLT TOTALS 106 736 45 48 113 71 43 791 155 162 131 100 2,501 120 807 47 55 118 78 32 772 159 155 125 95 2,563 115 817 44 51 123 89 27 799 167 161 132 89 2,614 105 844 41 54 116 91 27 788 181 175 137 79 2,638 97 842 40 56 113 94 23 731 178 175 118 71 2,528 P.M. PEAK HOUR 105 844 41 0445 -0545 J L 79 t + t 54 137 S 4 _ 116 NAOMIAVENUE 175 91 � T r 181 788 27 BALDWIN AVENUE THE TRAFFIC SOLUTION 329 DIAMOND STREET ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA 91006 626.446.7978 P.M. PEAK HOUR 105 844 41 0445 -0545 J L 79 t + t 54 137 S 4 _ 116 NAOMIAVENUE 175 91 � T r 181 788 27 BALDWIN AVENUE THE TRAFFIC SOLUTION 329 DIAMOND STREET ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA 91006 626.446.7978 INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNT SUMMARY CLIENT: HIRSCH /GREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC. PROJECT: ARCADIA HUB SHOPPING CENTERILA FITNESS PROJECT DATE: WEDNESDAY, MAY 31, 2006 PERIOD: 04:00 PM TO 06:00 PM INTERSECTION NIS GOLDEN WEST AVENUE 1 10 ENV DUARTE ROAD FILE NUMBER: 3 -PM 15 MINUTE 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 1 10 1 11 1 12 TOTALS SBRT I SBTH I SBLT I WBRT I WBTH I WBLT I NBRT I NBTH I NBL7 I EBRT I EBTH I SBLT 400 -415 6 35 3 18 108 7 11 23 17 21 184 2 415 -430 10 29 6 15 104 10 9 16 19 24 192 5 430 -445 10 26 8 17 113 17 12 21 17 20 165 4 445 -500 16 35 12 12 146 11 9 33 25 25 170 5 500 -515 19 38 9 9 111 6 11 35 17 19 181 5 515 -530 16 32 10 10 128 10 11 29 24 27 213 10 530.545 17 49 13 15 116 9 12 41 27 23 195 11 545 -600 14 33 15 14 121 6 8 28 26 27 180 12 1 HOUR 1 2 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 1 10 1 11 12 TOTALS SBRT I SBTH I SBLT I WBRT I WBTH I WBLT I NBRT I NBTH I NBLT I E 44 43 400 -500 42 125 29 62 471 45 41 93 78 415 -515 55 128 35 53 474 44 41 105 78 430 -530 61 131 39 48 498 44 43 118 83 445 -545 68 154 44 46 501 36 43 138 93 500 -600 66 152 47 48 476 31 42 133 94 BRT EBTH EBLT TOTALS 90 711 16 1,803 88 708 19 1,828 91 729 24 1,909 94 759 31 2,007 96 769 38 1,992 P.M. PEAK HOUR 68 154 44 0445.0545 I L 31 46 759 0 4 501 DUARTE ROAD 94 36 � T r 93 138 43 GOLDEN WEST AVENUE THE TRAFFIC SOLUTION 329 DIAMOND STREET ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA 91006 626.446.7978 INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNT SUMMARY CLIENT: HIRSCH /GREEN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, INC. PROJECT: ARCADIA HUB SHOPPING CENTER/LA FITNESS PROJECT DATE: WEDNESDAY, MAY 31, 2006 PERIOD: 04:00 PM TO 06:00 PM INTERSECTION N/S GOLDEN WEST AVENUE 10 ENV NAOMIAVENUE FILE NUMBER: 4 -PM 15 MINUTE TOTALS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 SBRT SBTH SBLT WBRT I WBTH I WBLT I NBRT I NBTH I NBLT I EBRT I EBTH I SBLT 400 -415 2 43 21 25 36 30 23 25 0 3 23 4 415 -430 5 32 18 16 25 23 23 33 1 3 22 4 430.445 6 42 14 18 31 26 30 31 2 3 18 4 445.600 4 43 23 17 36 37 20 28 4 3 16 2 500 -515 2 30 21 10 30 27 12 26 2 0 13 5 515 -530 3 40 24 17 32 20 17 35 1 1 19 7 530 -545 3 51 22 24 45 35 22 59 1 2 19 6 545 -600 2 43 23 22 39 24 22 44 1 2 21 4 1 HOUR TOTALS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 SBRT SBTH SBLT WBRT I WBTH I WBLT I NBRT I NBTH I NBLT I EBRT I E 62 400 -500 17 160 76 76 128 116 96 117 7 12 415 -515 17 147 76 61 122 113 85 118 9 9 430 -530 15 155 82 62 129 110 79 120 9 7 445.545 12 164 90 68 143 119 71 148 8 6 500 -600 10 164 90 73 146 106 73 164 5 5 P.M. PEAK HOUR 10 164 90 0500 -0600 I L 22 1 73 72 10 4 146 NAOMIAVENUE 5 106 � r � r r 5 164 73 GOLDEN WEST AVENUE BTH EBLT TOTALS 79 14 898 69 15 841 66 18 852 67 20 916 72 22 930 THE TRAFFIC SOLUTION 329 DIAMOND STREET ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA 91006 626.446.7976 Hirsch /Green Transportation Consulting, Inc. Critical Movement Analysis (CMA) Worksheet Intersection Number 1 Base CMA 0.776 Project Arcadia Hub /LA Fitness Intersection Name North /South: Baldwin Avenue Level of Service (LOS) C East/West: Duarte Road Analysis Scenario Existing (2006) Intersection Control Signalized Analysis Period PM Peak Hour Analysis Date July 5, 2006 Assigned Approach No. of Approach Right -Turn Lane Critical Directi Lane Ty Lanes Volu on Red Volumes Moves Left 1 89 89 Left/Through 0 N 0 Northbound Through 2 742 371 371 Through /Right 0_ -'sLR" Y 0 Right 1 123 60 63 Total Lanes 4 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Left 1 198 198 198 Left/Through 0 z r 41 0 Southbound Through 2 869 435 Through /Right 0 �_4 a ; 0 Right 1 86 86 0 Total Lanes 4 Sum of North /South Critical Volumes 569 Left 1 197 197 Left/Through 0 OEM& 0 Eastbound Through 1 667 366 366 Through /Right 1`b 366 Right 0 64 0 0 Total Lanes 3 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Left 1 132 132 132 Left/Through 0I` 0 Westbound Through 1 448 289 Through /Right 1 IN +r 289 Right 0 130 0 0 Total Lanes 3 Sum of EastlWest Critical Volumes 4 Total Intersection Critical Volumes 1,067 Number of Clearance Intervals 4 Signal Coordination None Assumed Capacity 1,3 75 Base CMA 0.776 Signal Coordination Adjustment 0.000 Final CMA 0.776 Level of Service (LOS) C Hirsch/Green Transportation Consulting, Inc. Critical Movement Analysis (CMA) Worksheet Intersection Number 2 Project Arcadia Hub /LA Fitness Intersection Name North /South: Baldwin Avenue East/West: Naomi Avenue Analysis Scenario Existing (2006) Intersection Control Signalized Analysis Period PM Peak Hour Analysis Date July 5, 2006 Assigned Approach No. of Approach Right -Turn Lane Critical Direction Lane Type Lan Volum on Red Volumes Moves Left 1 181 181 181 Left/Through 0 '; 11 M 0 Northbound Through 1 788 408 Through /Right 1 _. "-�7` 408 Right 0 27 0 0 Total Lanes 3 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Left 1 41 41 Left/Through 0 `$ _ 0 Southbound Through 2 844 422 422 Through /Right 0 ,. {� `• T 0 Right 1 105 40 66 Total Lanes 4 Sum of North /South Critical Volumes 603 Left 1 79 79 Left/Through 0 MIUMN 0 Eastbound Through 0 137 0 Through /Right 1 I NWIR-01 312 312 Right 0 175 0 0 Total Lanes 2 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Left 1 91 91 91 Left/Through 0 a :'" 0 Westbound Through 0 116 0 Through /Right 1 H "'"- 170 Right 0 54 0 0 Total Lanes 2 Sum of East/West Critical Volumes 403 Total Intersection Critical Volumes 1,006 Number of Clearance Intervals 2 Assumed Capacity 1,500 Base CMA 0.671 Signal Coordination None Signal Coordination Adjustment 0.000 Final CMA 0.671 Level of Service (LOS) B Hirsch /Green Transportation Consulting, Inc. Critical Movement Analysis (CMA) Worksheet Intersection Number 3 Project Arcadia Hub /LA Fitness Intersection Name North /South: Golden West Avenue East/West: Duarte Road Analysis Scenario Existing (2006) Intersection Control Signalized Analysis Period PM Peak Hour Analysis Date July 5, 2006 Assigned Approach No. of Approach Right -Turn Lane Critical Dire ction Lane Type Lanes Volu on Red Volumes M oves Left 0 93 0 93 LeftlThrou h 0 l a ti� 0 Northbound Left/Through /Right 1 138 274 Through /Right 0 3�s E 0 Right 0 43 0 0 Total Lanes 1 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Left 0 44 0 Left/Through 0 - a i r 0 Southbound Left/Through /Right 1 154 266 266 Through /Right 0 rd �;,'` 0 Right 0 68 0 0 Total Lanes 1 Sum of North /South Critical Volumes 359 Left 1 31 31 Left/Through 0w,`tI 0 Eastbound Through 1 759 427 427 Through /Right 1 ,R' 427 Right 0 94 0 0 Total Lanes 3 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Left 1 36 36 36 Left/Through 0 P IN 0 Westbound Through 1 501 274 Through /Right 1 n �_ag 274 Right 0 46 0 0 Total Lanes 3 Sum of EastlWest Critical Volumes 46 Total Intersection Critical Volumes 822 Number of Clearance Intervals 3 Assumed Capacity 1 ,4 2 5 Base CMA 0.576 Signal Coordination None Signal Coordination Adjustment 0.000 Final CMA 0.576 Level of Service (LOS) A Left Left/Through Westbound Left/Through /Right Through /Right Right Total Lanes 0 106 0 ! ,`.:' R 1 146 0 0 73 1 0 0 325 325 0 0 0 Sum of East/West Critical Volumes Hirsch /Green Transportation Consulting, Inc. Total Intersection Critical Volumes 679 Number of Clearance Intervals 0 Assumed Capacity Critical Movement Analysis (CMA) Worksheet Base CMA 0.679 Intersection Number 4 Final CMA Project Arcadia Hub /LA Fitness Intersection Name North /South: Golden West Avenue East/West: Naomi Avenue Analysis Scenario Existing (2006) Intersection Control Four -Way STOP Analysis Period PM Peak Hour Analysis Date July 5, 2006 Assigned Approach No. of Approach Right -Turn Lane Critical Direction Lane Type Lanes Volum on Red Volumes Mo ves Left 0 5 0 Left/Through 0 r Ta ', 0 Northbound Left/Through /Right 1 164 242 242 Through /Right 0 e 0 Right 0 73 0 0 Total Lanes 1 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Left 0 90 0 90 Left/Through 0 I 0 Southbound Left/Through /Right 1 164 264 Through /Right 0 s 0 Right 0 10 0 0 Total Lanes 1 Sum of North /South Critical Volumes 332 Left 0 22 0 22 Left/Through 0 - 0 1 0 Eastbound Left/Through /Right 1 72 99 Through /Right 0 � � ggl 0 Right 0 5 0 0 Total Lanes 1 Left Left/Through Westbound Left/Through /Right Through /Right Right Total Lanes 0 106 0 ! ,`.:' R 1 146 0 0 73 1 0 0 325 325 0 0 0 Sum of East/West Critical Volumes 3 47 Total Intersection Critical Volumes 679 Number of Clearance Intervals 0 Assumed Capacity 1 , 00 0 Base CMA 0.679 Signal Coordination None Signal Coordination Adjustment 0.000 Final CMA 0.679 Level of Service (LOS) B Hirsch /Green Transportation Consulting, Inc. Critical Movement Analysis (CMA) Worksheet Intersection Number 2 0 i.. Project Arcadia Hub /LA Fitness Intersection Name North /South: Baldwin Avenue 0 Eastbound Through 0 East/West: Naomi Avenue 4 1 Analysis Scenario Future (2007) Without Project Intersection Control Signalized Analysis Period PM Peak Hour 2 Analysis Date July 5, 2006 Assigned Approach No. of Approach Right -Turn Lane Critical Directi Lane T ype Lanes Volumes on R ed Volumes Moves Left 1 185 185 185 Left/Through 0 f r l l 0 Northbound Through 1 983 506 Through /Right 1 506 Right 0 28 0 0 Total Lanes 3 Left Left/Through Southbound Through Through /Right Right Total Lanes 1 42 42 0 i.. 0 2 1,017 509 509 r 0 Eastbound Through 0 1 107 41 67 4 1 Sum of North /South Critical Volumes 694 Left 1 81 81 Left/Through 0 r 0 Eastbound Through 0 140 0 Through /Right 1 ry, 319 Right 0 179 0 0 Total Lanes 2 Left 1 93 93 Left/Through 0� Final CMA 0 Westbound Through 0 118 0 Through /Right 1 ,,° "' 'i ,- .,� 173 Right 0 55 0 0 Total Lanes 2 QW IN Sum of East/West Critical Volumes 412 Total Intersection Critical Volumes 1,106 Number of Clearance Intervals 2 Signal Coordination None Assumed Capacity 1,500 Base CMA 0.737 Signal Coordination Adjustment 0.000 Final CMA 0.737 Level of Service (LOS) C Hirsch /Green Transportation Consulting, Inc. Critical Movement Analysis (CMA) Worksheet Intersection Number Intersection Name Analysis Scenario Analysis Period 3 North /South: Golden West Avenue East/West: Duarte Road Future (2007) Without Project PM Peak Hour Approach Direction Lane Type Left Left/Through Northbound LefUThrough /Right Through /Right Right Total Lanes Left Left/Through Southbound Left/Through /Right Through /Right Right Total Lanes Project Arcadia Hub /LA Fitness Intersection Control Signalized Analysis Date July 5, 2006 Sum of North /South Critical Volumes 366 Left 1 32 Assigned Left/Through No. of Approach Right -Turn Lane Critical Lanes Volu on Red Volum Moves 0 95 0 0 95 0 e�:�'E 0 ----------------------------- ---- --- -------- - - - - -- Left 1 141 37 280 0 I =''�` 0 Westbound Through 1 519 0 44 0 0 283 1 0 47 0 0 Total Lanes ------ ------------- 0 --------------------------------------------------------- 45 0 M®RO p 1 157 271 271 5FD 0 69 0 0 1 Sum of North /South Critical Volumes 366 Left 1 32 32 Left/Through 0 4 0 Eastbound Through 1 774 435 Through /Right 1 435 Right 0 96 0 0 Total Lanes 3 ----------------------------- ---- --- -------- - - - - -- Left ------------------------------------------------------------ 1 37 37 Left/Through 0 I =''�` 0 Westbound Through 1 519 283 Through /Right 11 283 Right 0 47 0 0 Total Lanes 3 Number of Clearance Intervals 3 Signal Coordination None 435 37 Sum of East/West Critical Volumes 47 Total Intersection Critical Volumes 838 Assumed Capacity 1,425 Base CMA 0.588 Signal Coordination Adjustment 0.000 Final CMA 0.588 Level of Service (LOS) A Hirsch /Green Transportation Consulting, Inc. Critical Movement Analysis (CMA) Worksheet Intersection Number Intersection Name Analysis Scenario Analysis Period 4 North /South: Golden West Avenue East/West: Naomi Avenue Future (2007) Without Project PM Peak Hour 0 92 0 92 C Assigned 1 167 269 0 , TEA D 0 10 0 0 1 Volu Moves Sum of North /South Critical Volumes 338 Left Left/Through Southbound Left/Through /Right Through /Right Right Total Lanes Left Left/Through Eastbound Left/Through /Right Through /Right Right Total Lanes Left Left/Through Westbound Left/Through /Right Through /Right Right Total Lanes Number of Clearance Intervals 0 Signal Coordination None 0 0 1 0 0 22 s 3. '.< i.��`,'` ' a�d4 -pa's 73 5 Project Arcadia Hub /LA Fitness Intersection Control Four -Way STOP Analysis Date July 5, 2006 G 1 0 0 1 0 0 108 149 74 - 0 0 100 0 0 22 0 0 331 331 0 0 0 1 Sum of Eastf West Critical Volumes 353 Total Intersection Critical Volumes 691 Assumed Capacity 1,000 Base CMA Assigned Approach No. of Approach Right -Turn Lane Critical Dire ction Lane Type Lanes Volumes on Red Volu Moves Left 0 5 0 Left/Through 0 `ws', , 0 Northbound Left/Through /Right 1 167 246 246 Through /Right 0 0 Right 0 74 0 0 Total Lanes 1 Left Left/Through Southbound Left/Through /Right Through /Right Right Total Lanes Left Left/Through Eastbound Left/Through /Right Through /Right Right Total Lanes Left Left/Through Westbound Left/Through /Right Through /Right Right Total Lanes Number of Clearance Intervals 0 Signal Coordination None 0 0 1 0 0 22 s 3. '.< i.��`,'` ' a�d4 -pa's 73 5 Project Arcadia Hub /LA Fitness Intersection Control Four -Way STOP Analysis Date July 5, 2006 G 1 0 0 1 0 0 108 149 74 - 0 0 100 0 0 22 0 0 331 331 0 0 0 1 Sum of Eastf West Critical Volumes 353 Total Intersection Critical Volumes 691 Assumed Capacity 1,000 Base CMA 0.691 Signal Coordination Adjustment 0.000 Final CMA 0.691 Level of Service (LOS) B Hirsch /Green Transportation Consulting, Inc. Critical Movement Analysis (CMA) Worksheet Intersection Number 1 Project Arcadia Hub /LA Fitness Intersection Name North /South: Baldwin Avenue East/West: Duarte Road Analysis Scenario Future (2007) With Project Intersection Control Signalized Analysis Period PM Peak Hour Analysis Date July 5, 2006 Assigned Approach No. of Approach Right -Turn Lane Critical Direction Lane Type Lanes Volumes on Red Volumes Moves Left 1 99 99 Left/Through 0 :.a+tr v rr f3 �5�',n�i "i�;a 0 Northbound Through 2 933 467 467 Through /Right 0 = "a? 0 Right 1 130 64 67 Total Lanes 4 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Left 1 202 202 202 Left/Through 0 - , 0 Southbound Through 2 1,048 524 Through /Right 0 'Le- 0 Right 1 90 90 0 Total Lanes 4 Sum of North /South Critical Volumes 669 Left 1 204 204 Left/Through 0,4 4 'i 0 Eastbound Through 1 685 375 375 Through /Right 1 Amam 375 Right 0 65 0 0 Total Lanes 3 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Left 1 140 140 140 Left/Through 0fa b9, 0 Westbound Through 1 463 298 Through /Right 1 `/ 298 Right 0 133 0 0 Total Lanes 3 Sum of East/West Critical Volumes 515 Total Intersection Critical Volumes 1,184 Number of Clearance Intervals 4 Assumed Capacity 1,3 75 Base CMA 0.861 Signal Coordination None Signal Coordination Adjustment 0.000 Final CMA 0.861 Level of Service (LOS) D Hirsch /Green Transportation Consulting, Inc. Critical Movement Analysis (CMA) Worksheet Intersection Number 2 Project Arcadia Hub /LA Fitness Intersection Name North /South: Baldwin Avenue East/West: Naomi Avenue Analysis Scenario Future (2007) With Project Intersection Control Signalized Analysis Period PM Peak Hour Analysis Date July 5, 2006 Assigned Approach No. of Approach Right -Turn Lane Critical Direction Lane Type Lanes Volumes on Red Volumes Moves Left 1 199 199 199 Left/Through 0 MIE 0 Northbound Through 1 983 506 Through/Right 1 a , ' " ;. ;r 506 Right 0 28 0 0 Total Lanes 3 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Left 1 42 42 Left/Through 0 2IM -MM3 0 Southbound Through 2 1,017 509 509 Through /Right 0 1 +1 0 Right 1 118 46 73 Total Lanes 4 Sum of North /South Critical Volumes 708 Left 1 91 91 Left/Through 0 0 Eastbound Through 0 142 0 Through /Right 1" 1101 334 334 Right 0 192 0 0 Total Lanes 2 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Left 1 93 93 93 Left/Through 0 ;;'�? 0 Westbound Through 0 121 0 Through /Right 1" 176 Right 0 55 0 0 Total Lanes 2 Sum of EastlWest Critical Volumes 427 Total Intersection Critical Volumes 1,135 Number of Clearance Intervals 2 Assumed Capacity 1,500 Base CMA 0.756 Signal Coordination None Signal Coordination Adjustment 0.000 Final CMA 0.756 Level of Service (LOS) C Hirsch /Green Transportation Consulting, Inc. Critical Movement Analysis (CMA) Worksheet Intersection Number 3 Project Arcadia Hub /LA Fitness Intersection Name North /South: Golden West Avenue East/West: Duarte Road Analysis Scenario Future (2007) With Project Intersection Control Signalized Analysis Period PM Peak Hour Analysis Date July 5, 2006 Assigned Approach No. of Approach Right -Turn Lane Critical Direction Lane Type Lanes Volumes on Red Volumes Moves Left 0 98 0 98 Left/Through 0,` <- 0 Northbound Leftffhrough /Right 1 143 285 Through /Right 0 0 Right 0 44 0 0 Total Lanes 1 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Left 0 48 0 Left/Through 0 IY% m 0 Southbound Leftffhrough /Right 1 159 276 276 Through /Right 0 ;,�,' 0 Right 0 69 0 0 Total Lanes 1 Sum of North /South Critical Volumes 374 Left 1 32 32 Left/Through 0 k - _a 0 Eastbound Through 1 779 439 439 Through /Right 1 N. Z 'vW p g 439 Right 0 99 0 0 Total Lanes 3 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Left 1 37 37 37 Leftffhrough 0 $ y01: 0 Westbound Through 1 524 287 Through /Right 1 PA611; �r 4v 287 Right 0 49 0 0 Total Lanes 3 Sum of East/West Critical Volumes 476 Total Intersection Critical Volumes 850 Number of Clearance Intervals 3 Assumed Capacity 1,425 Base CMA 0.596 Signal Coordination None Signal Coordination Adjustment 0.000 Final CMA 0.596 Level of Service (LOS) A HirschlGreen Transportation Consulting, Inc. Critical Movement Analysis (CMA) Worksheet Intersection Number 4 Project Arcadia Hub /LA Fitness Intersection Name North /South: Golden West Avenue 346 Left East/West: Naomi Avenue 22 Analysis Scenario Future (2007) With Project Intersection Control Analysis Period PM Peak Hour Through /Right Analysis Date Right 0 Assigned Approach Total Lanes No. of Approach Right -Turn Lane Direction Lane Type Lanes Volumes on Red Volumes 0 Left 0 5 0 152 341 Left/Through 0 2 "``.?_ 0 Northbound Left/Through/Right 1 167 249 Total Lanes Through /Right 0 I 0 Right 0 77 0 0 Total Intersection Critical Volumes Total Lanes 1 Assumed Capacity Left Left/Through Southbound LeftlThrough /Right Through /Right Right Total Lanes 0 97 & 0 1 120 7 2 1 ] 1 167 0 a �"'L 0 10 1 (J Four -Way STOP July 5, 2006 Critical Moves 249 0 97 0 274 0 0 Sum of North /South Critical Volumes 346 Left 0 22 0 22 Left/Through 0 � � c t` K 0 Eastbound Left/Through /Right 1 76 103 Through /Right 0''`t Right 0 5 0 0 Total Lanes 1 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Left 0 110 0 Left/Through 0 0 Westbound Left/Through /Right 1 152 341 341 Through /Right 0 a' ' ' ' 1 0 Right 0 79 0 0 Total Lanes 1 Sum of East/West Critical Volumes 363 Total Intersection Critical Volumes 709 Number of Clearance Intervals 0 Assumed Capacity 1,000 Base CMA 0.709 Signal Coordination None Signal Coordination Adjustment 0.000 Final CMA 0.709 Level of Service (LOS) C RECEIVED PETITION OCT 9 1 2007 ARCADIA HUB SHOPPING CENTEWc°v cRE K The tenants of Arcadia Hub Shopping Center listed below fully support the addition of LA Fitness at the Center. LA Fitness will revitalize the Center and positively impact our businesses. LA Fitness will complement the Center in many ways including remodeling of the Center, increasing adjacent business sales, and permitting us to expand our businesses and employment in the City. As long time tenants, we have always observed hundreds of empty and unused parking spaces during the day and evening. We believe the City will benefit from increased taxes and employment created by LA Fitness. As tenants we have eagerly anticipated LA Fitness' arrival for over 1 year and the opening of the business can not happen soon enough. By signing below, we hope that you will consider the needs of the business people in Arcadia and quickly approve LA Fitness as a tenant of the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center. ,¢ r (�liGf ✓� TIJ,4t P•u1SiYu , l L-:AJ :� Q .t1�1it. C- /��' ! �t r'J f - crsZ Ur-E . Y puNL t 'S QY 7Gl� /- ip- Ana DD 1 7q 7�� l „v 5- PETITION ARCADIA HUB SHOPPING CENTER The tenants of Arcadia Hub Shopping Center listed below fully support the addition of LA Fitness at the Center. LA Fitness will revitalize the Center and positively impact our businesses. LA Fitness will complement the Center in many ways including remodeling of the Center, increasing adjacent business sales, and permitting us to expand our businessesAndcmpioyment in the City. As long time tenants, we have always observed hundreds of empty and unused parking spaces during the day and evening. We believe the City will benefit from increased taxes and employment created by LA Fitness. As tenants we have eagerly anticipated LA Fitness' arrival for over 1 year and the opening of the business can not happen soon enough. By signing below, we hope that you will consider the needs of the business people in Arcadia and quickly approve LA Fitness as a tenant of the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center. a L � J IAC v wt4 o no $ Ct §4 NOBEL EDUCATI INSTITUTE SAT, PSAT, AP, ACH, CBAT, ESL, TOEPL, GRE, GMAT. t T� 'ty October 1, 2007 Dear Council Members, At this moment, we decide to withdraw CUP application No. 07 -05. Thank you for your attention on this matter. acZ -1200 1 W. Duarte Rd. # D. E. F. Arcadia, CA 91007 Tel : ( 818) 446 - 5533 Pax : ( 818) 446 - 3111 Sincerely, Lisa Mussenden From: Jason Kruckeberg Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2007 9:15 AM To: Bill Kelly; Lisa Mussenden; Linda Garcia ;'stephen.dietsch @bbklaw.com' Subject: Withdrawal of Nobel Institute CUP Importance: High Attachments: SKMBT_C45007100109070.pdf Yesterday, we received the attached withdrawal letter from Nobel Education Institute on their Conditional Use Permit. There is no need for a public hearing on this matter tonight and I would guess we simply need to state that it has been withdrawn. Thanks, Jason P.S: First time I have seen the withdrawal of an approved CUP. - - - -- Original Message---- - From: DSD- Konika @d.arcadia.ca.us [mailto :DSD- Konika @d.arcadia.ca.us] Sent: Monday, October 01, 2007 9:08 AM To: Jason Kruckeberg Subject: Message from KMBT_C450 Im SKMBT_C45007100 109070.pdf (130... �w..pwe FO °'�0d a,tio {N�m STAFF REPORT Development Services Department DATE: October 2, 2007 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Don Penman, Assistant City Manager /Development Services Directorst -ra-cP By: Jason Kruckeberg, Community Development Administrator aW- Prepared by: Jim Kasama, Acting Senior Planner SUBJECT: SUMMARY Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 07-05 was submitted by Mr. Jonathan Li to expand the Nobel Education Institute tutorial center at 1 W. Duarte Road. The proposal is to extend the tutorial center into the adjacent two (2) commercial spaces to increase the size of the center from 2,280 square feet to 3,790 square feet and increase the number of students allowed from a maximum of 30 students to a maximum of 75 students with at least 60 students to be transported to Holly Avenue Elementary School at approximately 4:45 p.m. for recreational activities and pick -up to relieve the parking and 'traffic congestion at 1 W. Duarte Road. The proposed tutoring hours are 3:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. daily. The Planning Commi4on opened a public hearing on Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 07 -05 at their July 10, 2007 regular meeting. At the hearing, the applicant presented a large amount of add itional.information and the Commission chose to continue the hearing to their August 14, 2007 regular meeting to provide time to review the new material. At the Commission's August 14, 2007 regular meeting the Commission voted 5-0 to conditionally approve the application. Subsequently, at the Commission's August 28, 2007 regular meeting, the Commission adopted Resolution No. 1764 to formalize the conditional approval. Attached are the following materials from the Planning Commission's consideration of Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 07 -05: activities and Dick -up. Appeal of CUP 07 -05 October 2, 2007 Page 2 Exhibit No. 11 Minutes excerpt from July 10, 2007 Planning Commission meeting Exhibit No. 12 August 2007 Planning Commission Staff Report, which includes as an attachment a full copy of the July 10, 2007 Planning Commission Staff Report Exhibit No. 13 Minutes excerpt from August 14, 2007 Planning Commission meeting (draft) Exhibit No. 14 Planning Commission Resolution No. 1764 for approval of CUP 07 -05 On September 3,, 2007, Councilman Peter Amundson appealed the Planning Commission's action. The Development Services Department's recommendation to the Planning Commission was for denial of Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 07- 05. The .Development .Services ,Department is recommending that the City Council overturn the Planning Commission's action and deny Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 07 -05. Attached•are drafts of City Council Resolution No. 6589 for both an approval of CUP 07- 05 (Exhibit No. 1) and,for denial of CUP 07.05 (Exhibit No. 2). BACKGROUND The retail center aY1 W. Duarte Road was built in 1987.. The center has a total of 9;200 square feet of .retail space in two (2)' buildings. There are currently 54 on -site parking spaces and one (1) ;loading zone. The center can be accessed from either direction on Duarte Road and from southbound Santa Anita Avenue. Exiting from the property is limited to right -tuns only. Exhibit No. 3 is 'an. aerial photograph of the site and adjacent properties, and Exhibit No.'4, includes,, photographs of the subject - property. Then: are currently thiee (3),Conditionai,Use Permits in effect at this center: • Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 88- 04'(PC Reso. 1362) was granted in February of 1988 with an eight (8) space Parking Modification for the 1,150 square -foot eating establishment (Cherry Lips) in unit A. • Nobel Education Institute's 2,280 square -foot tutorial center was approved in 1993 through -,CUP 93-04 for units D, E & F: Attendance is limited to a maximum of 30 students of "elementary through high school age with operating hours of 9;00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m., Monday through" Friday, "and 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m..'on Saturdays. Included was a 21 space Parking Modification. o In December of 1996,.CUP 96 -10 (CC Reso. 5967) was granted with a 30 space Parking Modification for the 2;016 square -foot El Pollo Loco in unit I.' Appeal of CUP 07 -05 October 2, 2007 Page 3 Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 07 -05 is to expand the Nobel Education Institute tutorial center at 1 W. Duarte Road. The proposal is to extend the existing 2,280 square -foot tutorial center into the adjacent 1,510 square feet of commercial space, units G & H (Exhibit No. 5 is the proposed plans), add recreational activities by providing transportation for at least 60 students to Holly Avenue Elementary School, and have those students picked -up at Holly Avenue Elementary School to relieve the parking and traffic congestion at 1 W. Duarte Road. Exhibit No. 6 is a copy of the applicant's approved Application for Use of School Facilities; Exhibit No. 7 is an aerial photograph of the transportation area at Holly Avenue Elementary School; and Exhibit No. 8 is a map of the preliminarily approved transportation route between 1 W. Duarte Road and Holly Avenue Elementary School. Based on building and fire occupancy regulations, the expanded tutorial center could accommodate a maximum of 122 people; however this proposal is for a total of 75 students; 30 students from the original CUP for the existing 2,280 square -foot space, plus 45 students for the proposed additional 1,510 square -foot expansion area. The original 2,280 square -foot tutorial center could have accommodated a maximum occupancy of 63 people, but was limited to 30 students of elementary through high school age as a condition of approval to limit parking and traffic problems. The ages of the students to be enrolled are not proposed to be changed, but currently the students are first- to-eighth grade age. The proposed tutoring hours are 3:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. daily with a minimum of 60 students to be transported to Holly Avenue Elementary School beginning at approximately 4:45 p.m. Parkins and Traffic Drop -off and pick -up parking and traffic are major concerns for tutorial centers because they occur at peak traffic times. The existing tutorial center is limited to 30 students for this reason. The applicant is voluntarily providing transportation to the tutorial center to alleviate the after school parking and traffic protilem, and is proposing to transport at least 60 students to Holly Avenue Elementary School for recreational activities and pick up to relieve the after work parking and traffic situation at this center. The transportation proposal was reviewed by the City's Traffic Engineer. It was determined that the use of the transportation loop at Holly Avenue Elementary School for evening pick up of 60 students should not be a problem, and a transportation route that uses mostly non - residential streets has been preliminarily approved. It should be noted that the Holly Avenue Elementary School transportation area must be accessed from the south because left -tums into the transportation area are not allowed. Appeal of CUP 07 -05 October 2, 2007 Page 4 The parking requirements for tutorial centers are one (1) space per employee plus one (1) space for every five (5) students under high school age and one (1) space for every three (3) students of high'schooi age or older. lCon Use Permit Application No. CUP 07 -05 does not propose to change the elementary through high 'school ages of the students to be enrolled at the tutorial center. But, based on the under, school age of the current students, the parking requirement for the proposed expaded tutorial center is 24 spaces; nine (9) for employees and 15 for the 75 students. A 9,200'square =foot retail center is required to have at least 46 on -site parking spaces (5 spaces per 1 gross square feet) The subject center was developed with 55 on -site parking spaces; and one (1) space has since been deleted to accommodate a van - accessible handicap parking space as required by State regulations. There are three (3) Parking Modifications in effect for the uses at this center. Based on current parking requirements, the cumulative Parking Modification is 54 parking spaces in lieu of 84 spaces required. The proposed' expanded tutorial center would have a parking requirement of 24 spaces, which results in a Parking Modification of 19 spaces in lieu of 24 spaces. This decreases the cumulative Parking Modification for 1 W. Duarte Road to 54 spaces in lieu of 82 "spaces: Findings Required for Conditional. Use Permits Section .9275.1.2'of the Arcadia Municipal Code requires that for a Conditional Use Permit to be granted it must -be `found than all five (5) 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. 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. The applicant's explanations as to ,the - satisfaction „of these required findings are presented as Exhibit No. 9, an excerpt from the application materials. Appeal of CUP 07 -05 October 2, 2007 Page 5 With the reduced cumulative Parking Modification and the proposed transportation to Holly Avenue Elementary School, the proposed tutorial center expansion could benefit the retail center at 1 W. Duarte Road by reducing the parking and traffic problems. The owner of 1 W. Duarte Road submitted a letter of support (Exhibit No. 10) citing the improvements to the parking and traffic conditions. It is extreme; however, to transport 80% of the students to an alternative location for pick up by their parents to accommodate the proposed expansion. Nobel Education Institute is a successful business that is simply not in a suitable location. It is not sound land use planning, in staffs estimation, to approve a use that requires off -site busing to succeed. Additionally, the expanded tutorial center would occupy a total of 3,790 square feet, which is over 40% of the 9,200 total square feet of commercial space at the center. Educational services are a desirable use and tutorial centers are very popular. Nevertheless, staffs opinion is that a non -retail use should not be the major tenant in a retail center. Having as much as 40% of the space in a retail center inactive for most of the day is injurious to the other tenants and precludes the center from providing other retail opportunities to the neighborhood. These two issues; the need to provide transportation to a remote pick up location to relieve the parking and traffic situation, and having a non - retail tenant occupy over 40% of a retail center are the bases for staff having made the following two findings and determining that the proposal to expand the tutorial center is inappropriate, and does not satisfy all of the aforementioned findings required for approval of a Conditional Use Permit: That the site is not adequate to accommodate the expanded tutorial center because the parking lot and adjacent roadways could be significantly impacted unless 86% of the students are transported to on off -site location for pick up due to the parking and traffic problems; and That having a large non - retail use that is active for only three (3) hours per day (3:00 P.M. to 6:00 p.m.) occupying a substantial portion (41 %) of a retail center is injurious to the other tenants and to the retail opportunities that should be provided by a neighborhood retail center. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION The Planning Commission opened a public hearing on Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 07 -05 at the Commission's July 10, 2007 regular meeting. At that hearing, the applicant presented the following five (5) documents: • Written Argument against the Development Services Department's Denial for CUP Application 07 -05 (2 pp.) Appeal of CUP 07 -05 October 2, 2007 Page 6 • Planning Commission Resolution No. 1528 and the staff report for CUP 95 -008 for a tutorial center at 524 S. First Avenue (15 pp.) • Planning Commission Resolution No. 1552 and the staff report for CUP 97 -009 for a tutorial center at 62 -66 W. Las Tunas Drive (11 pp.) • Information regarding the two (2) vans to be used to: transport the students (2 pp.) • A form:. "Parents' Support for Nobel Education Institute's Expansion & Modification of CUP 93 -04," signed by 37 parents. Exhibit No. 11 is a Minutes excerpt of the July 10, 2007 Planning Commission hearing. The above five (5) documents are attached to Exhibit.No. 12. The Planning Commission continued the hearing to the Commission's August 14, 2007 regular meeting to allow foe time to_ review the new material, and for the applicant to respond to the Commission's requests for additional information. Exhibit No. 12 is a copy of the August 14, 2007 Planning Commission staff report and Exhibit No. 13 is an excerpt from the draft minutes for that meeting. At the Planning Commission's August 14, 2007 regular meeting, the Commission voted 5 -0 to conditionally approve Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 07 -05. The Commission did not agree with staffs determination that the proposed expansion would not satisfy all of the required prerequisite conditions for approval of a Conditional Use Permit. The Planning Commission found that the proposal to transport at least 60 students to Holly Avenue Elementary School will' adequately prevent the parking ,lot and adjacent roadways from being significantly impacted, and that a tutorial center that occupies a substantial portion of the subject retail center would not be injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity. At its regular meeting on August 28, 2007, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 1764 (Exhibit No. 14) to formally approve Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 07 -05. APPEAL REQUEST On September ..3, 2007, Councilman Peter Amundson appealed the Planning Commission's, approval of Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 07 -05. Councilman Amundson, who is the City Council Liaison to the Planning Commission, was not able to attend the August 14,' 2007 Planning Commission meeting, at which CUP 07 -05 was approved. The Councilman felt that the City Council may not be adequately informed of the Planning Commission's action, and therefore submitted an, appeal so that all of the City Council could review the proposed expansion of the tutorial center. Appeal of CUP 07 -05 October 2, 2007 Page 7 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) the Development Services Department has prepared a Preliminary Exemption Assessment (Exhibit No. 15) finding that.the proposed project is a ,Class 1 Categorical Exemption under CEQA Guidelines Section 15301: Interior alterations to an existing structure. A Notice of Exemption is not required to be filed [Section 15062(a)] and has not been prepared for this project. FISCAL IMPACT None RECOMMENDATION The Development Services Department recommends denial of Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 07 -05 based on the following two (2) findings: That the site is not adequate to accommodate the expanded tutorial center because the parking lot and adjacent roadways could be significantly impacted unless 80% of the students are transported to on off -site location for pick up due to the parking and traffic problems; and That having a large non - retail use that is active for only three (3) hours per day (3:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m.) occupying a substantial portion (41%) of a retail center is injurious to the other tenants and to the retail opportunities that should be provided by a neighborhood retail center. If the City Council wishes to approve Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 07 -05, the Development Services Department recommends the same conditions as those imposed by the Planning Commission. These conditions are listed in Section 3 of the approval draft of City Council Resolution No. 6589 — Exhibit No. 1. CITY COUNCIL ACTION Approval If the City Council intends to approve Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 07 -05 to expand the Nobel Education Institute tutorial center to a total of 3,780 square feet with a maximum attendance of 75 students with at least 60 students to be transported to Holly Avenue Elementary School at about 4:45 p.m. for recreational activities and pick -up, the Council should move to accept staffs determination of a Categorical Exemption, approve Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 07 -05, and adopt Resolution No. 6589 (Exhibit No. 1) that includes the Council's decision, speck findings and the conditions of approval. Appeal of CUP 07 -05 October 2, 2007 Page 8 Denial if the City Council intends to deny Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 07 -05, the Council should move for denial, and adopt Resolution No. 6589 (Exhibit No. 2) that includes the Council's decision and states the specific finding(s) that the proposal does not satisfy. Approved: William R. Kelly, City Manager Exhibit Nos.: 1. Draft of City Council Resolution No. 6589 for approval-of CUP 07 -05 2. Draft of City Council Resolution No. 6589 for denial of CUP 07 -05 3.. Aerial Photograph of Site and Adjacent Properties 4. Photos of Subject Property 5. Proposed Plans 6. AUSD — Application for Use of School Facilities 7. Aerial Photograph of Transportation Area'at Holly Ave. Elem. School 8. Preliminarily approved Transportation Route Map 9, Applicant's Explanations of Required CUP Findings 10.. Letter of support from the owner of 1 W. Duarte Road 11. Minutes excerpt from July 10, 2007 Planning Commission meeting 12. August 14, 2007 Planning Commission Staff Report, which includes as an attachment a full copy of the July 10, 2007 Planning Commission Staff Report 13. Minutes excerpt from August 14, 2007 Planning Commission meeting (draft) 14. Planning Commission Resolution No. 1764 for approval of CUP 07 -05 15. ' CEQA Document = Preliminary Exemption Assessment RESOLUTION NO. 6589 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION NO. CUP 07 -05 TO EXPAND THE TUTORIAL CENTER (NOBEL EDUCATION INSTITUTE) AT 1 WEST DUARTE ROAD WHEREAS, on May 5, 2007, a Conditional Use Permit application was filed by Mr. Jonathan Li to expand the tutorial center at 1 W. Duarte Road; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act, Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq. ( "CEQA "), and the State's CEQA Guidelines, the City of Arcadia prepared a Preliminary Exemption Assessment and determined that the proposed project qualifies as a Class 1 Categorical Exemption under Section 15301 of the CEQA Guidelines as interior alterations to an existing structure; and WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the Planning Commission on July 10, 2007 and August 14, 2007, at which times all interested persons were given full opportunity to be heard and to present evidence; and WHEREAS, on August 28, 2007, the Planning Commission voted 5 to 0 to adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 1764 approving Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 07 -05; and WHEREAS, on September 3, 2007, Planning Commission Resolution No. 1764 was appealed to the City Council; and -1- 6589 Exhibit No. 1—Approval 8 pp. WHEREAS, a duly noticed public hearing was held before the City Council on October 2, 2007, at which time all interested persons were given full opportunity to be heard and to present evidence; and WHEREAS, on October 2, 2007, the City Council determined that the proposed project qualifies as a Class 1 Categorical Exemption under Section 15301 of the CEQA Guidelines concurrently with the approval of Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 07 -05. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The factual data submitted by the Development Services Department in the attached report dated October 2, 2007 is true and correct. SECTION 2. This City Council finds: A. The granting of the Conditional Use Permit would not be detrimental to the public, health or welfare, or injurious to the property or improvements in the zone or vicinity because the proposed use will be compatible with the surrounding uses and is an appropriate use for the subject site. B. The use applied for at the location indicated is properly one for which a Conditional Use Permit is authorized. C. 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. -2- 6589 D. The site abuts streets and highways adequate in width and pavement type to carry the kind of traffic generated by the proposed use. E. The granting of the Conditional Use Permit will not adversely affect the comprehensive General Plan because the land use and zoning are consistent with the General Plan. F. The determination that the project qualifies as a Class 1 Categorical Exemption is appropriate, 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. SECTION 3. For the foregoing reasons, the City Council approves Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 07 -05 to expand the tutorial center at 1 W. Duarte Road, subject to the following conditions: 1. The tutorial center and the site shall be operated, improved and maintained in a manner that is consistent with this proposal and those certain plans submitted to the Development Services Department for the purposes of this application. That is, the tutorial center may expand into the two (2) adjacent commercial spaces, units G & H; offer tutoring services from 3:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday; afnd shall offer after school transportation service ` from.the students' schools to the tutorial center and from the tutorial center to an alternative location for pick up by parents. The tutorial center and the site must be in compliance with all of the conditions of approval prior to occupancy of the expansion area. Noncompliance with the plans, provisions, requirements of all City departments, and the conditions of approval for CUP 07 -05 shall be grounds -3- 6589 for immediate suspension and /or revocation of any approvals, which may result in the loss of use of the expansion area. 2. The existing tutorial center and the proposed expansion area shall be subject to inspection by the Building Official, Community' Development Administrator and Fire Marshall and the use and property shall be brought into compliance with all current measures, policies and requirements determined to be necessary by the Building Official, City Engineer, City Traffic Engineer, Community Development Administrator, Fire Marshall, Public . Works Services Director, and any service districts and utility providers that will serve the subject. 3. The maximum attendance at any one time is limited to 75 students of elementary school age (up to eighth grade) in the westerly 3,790 square feet of commercial space (units D, E, F, G & H) in the northerly building of the 1 W. Duarte Road commercial center. 4. The "Arcadia Resource" sign shall be removed and any damage to the wall shall be promptly repaired such that it will not be noticeable from the nearest pedestrian and /or vehicular way, or if the sign is to remain, the permit for the sign, which expired on July 18, 2006, shall be renewed and the sign inspected to verify that it was properly installed; and if necessary, the installation shall be corrected so that the sign complies with all applicable building and safety codes. A new sign is not included with this Conditional Use Permit. 5. A Parking Modification for 19 on -site spaces in lieu of 24 spaces is granted for the tutorial center. This Parking Modification does not constitute an approval for., a general reduction of the parking requirements for the subject -4- 6589 property, but rather only for the tutorial center that is herein conditionally approved. Changes to uses within the area occupied by the tutorial center may be subject to a new CUP and /or Parking Modification. 6. A minimum of 60 students shall be transported to Holly Avenue Elementary School or other alternative location for recreational activities and pick up by parents beginning at approximately 4:45 p.m. with adjustments in the time for the effects of daylight savings. The ability to transport at least 60 students to an acceptable alternative location for pick up by parents (e.g., the Holly Avenue Elementary School transportation area for which a permit from the Arcadia Unified School District must be secured annually) must be in effect at all times for the approval of this Conditional Use Permit to remain effective and written proof of the ability to utilize an alternative location for pick up by parents must be filed by the applicant with the Community Development Division and shall be continuously updated and re -filed if any facts or circumstances change pertaining to the transport of students to or from the alternative location. 7. The transportation route to- and -from the tutorial center and Holly Avenue Elementary School shall be as follows: 1 W. Duarte Road shall be exited by the southerly driveway with a right -turn onto Duarte Road, a left -tum shall be made onto El Monte Avenue, a right -turn shall be made onto Le Roy Avenue, a right -turn shall be made onto Holly Avenue, a right -turn shall be made into the Holly Avenue Elementary School transportation area using the southerly entrance driveway, the Holly Avenue Elementary School transportation area shall be exited by the northerly driveway with a right -turn onto Holly Avenue, a right- -5- 6589 turn shall be made onto" Campus Drive a right -turn shall be' made onto Santa Anita:Avenue, and a tight-turn shall be made off of Santa Anita Avenue info 9 W. Duarte Road. 8. Any changes to the location 'for pick up by parents and /or the transportation route shall be subject to review and approval by the Community Development Administrator and City Engineer, either of whom may refer the change in location and /or route to the Planning Commission for consideration at a public hearing. For the public hearing, the applicant shall provide and pay for a mailing list and labels of all th'e property owners, residents and tenants of all the properties within a 300 -foot radius of 1 W. Duarte Road. Ownership shall be based on the latest available assessment roll of the .Office of the Assessor of Los Angeles County. 9. Notwithstanding any term, provision or condition herein to the contrary; ,the number of students in attendance at the tutorial center and the number of students being transported to an alternative location for pick up by parents are subject to periodic monitoring and verification by City staff. A report is to be presented to the' Planning Commission in approximately six (6) months on the operational efficacy of the transporting of at least 60 students to an alternative pick up location:. If ti, is determined that the public' health, safety and welfare require a modification of the requirement concerning transportation of students. or the termination of. this Conditional. Use Permit, then any such modification or termination shall be considered' at a public. hearing by the Planning Commission. -6- 6589 10. All of the parents of the students enrolled at the tutorial center shall be notified in writing of the requirement that at least 60 of the maximum 75 students authorized to be in attendance at 1 W. Duarte Road at any time must be transported to an alternative location for pick up. The notification shall explain the transportation times, route, and rules for use of the alternative pick up location (e.g., that access to the Holly Avenue Elementary School transportation area is only by right -turns into the southerly driveway) and shall include a method for the parents to acknowledge the notification. The applicant shall provide to the City in a form and substance approved by the City, written verification of having provided the notification and of the parents' acknowledgement and acceptance of the transportation times, route, and rules for use of the alternative pick up location. 11. 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 -7- 6589 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. 12. The approval of CUP 07 -05 shall not take effect until'the property owner, business owner, and applicant have executed and filed the Acceptance Form from the Development Services Department to indicate awareness and acceptance of these conditions of approval. SECTION 4. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. Passed, approved, and adopted this day of 2007. ATTEST: City Clerk of.the City of Arcadia APPROVED AS TO FORM: E P, ? Stephen P. Deitsch, City Attorney City of Arcadia Mayor of the City of Arcadia -8- 6589 RESOLUTION NO. 6589 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, DENYING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION NO. CUP 07 -05 TO EXPAND THE TUTORIAL CENTER (NOBEL EDUCATION INSTITUTE) AT 1 WEST DUARTE ROAD WHEREAS, on May 5, 2007, a Conditional Use Permit application was filed by Mr. Jonathan Li to expand the tutorial center at 1 W. Duarte Road; and WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the Planning Commission on July 10, 2007 and August 14, 2007, at which times all interested persons were given full opportunity to be heard and to present evidence; and WHEREAS, on August 28, 2007, the Planning Commission voted 5 to 0 to adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 1764 approving Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 07 -05; and WHEREAS, on September 3, 2007, Planning Commission Resolution No. 1764 was appealed to the City Council; and WHEREAS, a duly noticed public hearing was held before the City Council on October 2, 2007, at which time all interested persons were given full opportunity to be heard and to present evidence. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The factual data submitted by the Development Services Department in the attached report dated October 2, 2007 is true and correct. SECTION 2. This City Council finds: -1- 6589 Exhibit No. 2 — Denial 3 pp. A. The granting of the Conditional Use Permit would be detrimental to the public health or welfare, or injurious to the property or improvements in the zone or vicinity because the proposed use would not be compatible with the other uses on the site and is not an appropriate use for the subject site. B. The use applied for at the location indicated is properly one for which a Conditional. Use Permit is authorized; however, the parking requirements for the requested Conditional Use Permit as specified in Arcadia Municipal Code Section 9269.5 et seq. are not satisfied. C. The site for the proposed use is not adequate in size and shape to accommodate said use due to inadequate parking and vehicular circulation. D. The site abuts streets and highways adequate in width and pavement type to carry the kind of traffic generated by the proposed' use, but the on -site parking and circulation are not sufficient to accommodate the proposed n34 E. The granting of the Conditional Use Permit will have an adverse effect on the comprehensive General Plan because there are insufficient on -site parking and vehicular circulation to accommodate the proposed use, which would be detrimental to the public welfare. F. The determination that the project qualifies as a Class t Categorical Exemption is appropriate, 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. -2- 6589 SECTION 3. For the foregoing reasons this Council denies Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 07 -05 to expand the tutorial center at 1 W. Duarte Road. SECTION 4. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. Passed, approved, and adopted this day of 2007. ATTEST: City Clerk of the City of Arcadia APPROVED AS TO FORM: &, (? k)�A� Stephen P. Deitsch, City Attorney City of Arcadia Mayor of the City of Arcadia -3- 6589 IV '4' 1 JIM 'A":. i Nf IT -00 47 yi � � �,'' � ��^ v � " �_ , � �;. tit° 1. % ' a MlW arte Rd IM' A ia F"2 7tra r. Duarte Rc 'UP 07=05 x eft N �°+' i r �K Q 121222 Am r i l l r, n ri € i �a �o 1 k 7 cteuuna 1 H _ ! .n s >i � 5• i15. � f y .,. ;.2 ,� , l�^ S � ,�. (` f 's'� _ ^-• -,. e�. -=ems y �� La 0.v.iI �.Y �)..c I Y✓If .,�� x, � e r ..� .1.,._ Exhibit No. 4 - p. 2 of 2 1 W. Duarte Road '= View of subject spaces D -H z � rp . I Q am "D W- 0- Lu F- mj 0-, a. 10, CS z iz� I ,I Z 10, ,I I , l A r ` it �h A , 'Ia y V J f li ��h � 1�`i ✓ Y �"� %, N i p �/�• .y '^1 .T lP� ✓.ry JJ) d 3 ? 9l 4 ` � wt Y i U� tF #f* 1 �1 p �4 9l 4 ` � wt Y i U� tF #f* PREREQUISITE CONDITIONS: (The law requires that the conditions set forth below be clearly established before a conditional use permit can be granted.) EXPLAIN IN DETAIL WHEREIN YOUR CASE CONFORMS TO THE FOLLOWING FIVE CONDITIONS: 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. Yom + 4c tu 94y the sen 4t e-r COW S,W StrAW6/e/&y �eLPe )t.r by Sup- eruTS`� a nd teacfrin9 their cI„ /�r�n [I tl_rr a{i`f+r- m�roa� . 0; f�T(k eS LMC C almmun;ty 6v rodarind t ePN ��YO Glptit s ,m -eMw S' n Qts tiOINE 2. That the use applied for at the location indicated is 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, including all yards, spaces, walls, fences, parking, loading, land- scaping and other features required to adjust said use with the land and uses in the neighborhood. 1 'r J>v COyrKrn4 Ut;Wj r7OWf e46 We are Aerblitte'L& IS'e' 'Glee - � e�I� ..� n % rr�un daily GTtr�b^ S`_�-{er �Jc�tdaor at�ii`itiPS t�GrP, + ;f a+ iif Nitkcy e/' -t- , ,r, a P Min dim plcrzct PkAf -e se e fx i b,'t; g .8 G � b �t- C '' 4. That the site abuts streets and hi ways adequate m wr th and pavement type to carry the kind of traffic generated by the proposed use. YeS Pleak refer 'ty 3 C A L D We EChr b - b e <Fxl7rbit G 5. That the granting of such conditional use permit will not adversely affect the com- prehensive General Plan. Yes. Plew4e refei- to 3, CAlso !�e Exkkt, RA cxh b( C ) NOTE: The Planning Commission is required by law to make a written finding of facts, based upon the information presented at the time of the public hearing, that beyond a reasonable doubt the five above enumerated conditions apply. -2- 01/08/07 Exhibit No. 8 Applicant's Explanations of Required CUP Findings 8 pp. Exhibit B This is to clearly and completely answer question 3, 4, and 5 in the Prerequisite Conditions in the conditional use permit application on.page 2. The proposed expansion units are adequate in size and shape to accommodate the proposed use. However, we understand the planning's concerns are the deficient parking spaces and the traffic conditions in and out of the proposed property. In order to resolve the planning's concerns, we do have a solution to that. This solution will not only prevent any future parking and traffic problems but also substantially reduce any current parking and traffic problems. As you've probably well known that El Pollo Loco does also create significant parking and traffic at their peak time, (dinner at about 6pm). As you examine our solution, it actually helps resolve the whole'plaza's current parking and traffic problems at the peak time. Our solution is to arrange outdoor activities in our after - school program. Many our parents actually support this activities. Since we provide youth-bus transportation service to pick up students from their public schools at 2:30pm everyday, after assisting their homework and teaching them enrichment at the current location, we can transport them to Holly Ave.'Elenientary School for outdoor activities after 4:45pm. The parents then can pick up their children from Holly Ave. Elementary School between 5pm and 6:15pm. This ends up just like the Chinese schools that are renting the public schools for their after- school programs. The difference is that we use our own private building and then send them to public school for sport activities. We have been working with Holly Ave. Elementary School's Principle Ms. Blackstock about renting the playground for sport activities; she is very supportive to our after - school program that now includes outdoor activities. Thus, we are even more confident now to provide such an after- school program that benefits our children and working parents, at the same time reduces parking and traffic problems in our plaza. We will transport a minimum number of 60 students to Holly Ave. Elementary School for outdoor activities after 4' :45pm Monday through Friday. The students will stay there for outdoor sport activities, and at the same time will wait for their parents to pick them up. For raining days or during raining season, we will also rent the gymnasium or auditorium so that students can stay indoors while playing. The other good thing is that the School's drive- through at Holly Avenue has a long, wide and roofed corridor (see picture 1 & 2) so the students can wait safely under the roof while waiting for pickup. And there is a parking lot light on the drive- through. During the winter season from December to February when it gets dark at about 5:30pm, we could go there earlier so that students still have ample time to play outdoors. In conclusion by adjusting our current after- school program to have outdoor activities or physical activities at Holly Ave. Elementary School, it creates all the benefits listed below: 1. Substantially reduce the parking need and traffic flow caused by our after- school program at the plaza now and in the future 2. Better and healthier after = school program that covers both academic and physical needs for the youth. 3. Easier and safer for the parents to pick up their children at Holly Ave. Elementary School's drive- through. As the city just passed the gigantic Caruso Project, a project that creates much, much, much more traffic problems for the city, I deeply wish the planning can examine Exhibit B — Page 1 our expansion project as fair as the planning did to the Caruso Project since both present positive solution to the potential problem. The followings show more information about our expansion project. * Operation hours: Office hours: From 10am to 7pm Monday through Friday Class schedule: between 3pm and 6pm Monday through Friday * Proposed number of students at the expanding units: 45 students * Picture 1 & Picture 2: Holly Ave. Elementary School's drive- through at Holly Avenue. Picture 1 Picture 2 Exhibit B — Page 2 �b I b - � �� d:�� eZ �`i\ ' �� ' Playground Use Contract with Holly Ave. Elementary School As we applied for the playground use at Holly Ave. Elementary School in February, it . took a very long time for the school district to process it. Not until April, the school district finally gave us a contract starting April 23 and ending June 29, 2007. Mr. Mike Cooper, the school district's maintenance supervisor, told us that the new contract starting July 1, 2007 and ending June 30, 2008 will be provided to us in June 2007 as this is quite standard when the school district provides contract to outside organization annually. We will continue to renew the contract annually. When we have the new contract for the coming school year (2007- 2008), we should forward it to the planning department immediately as part of our CUP application document. Mr. Mike Cooper can be reached at 626 - 821 -1435 ext. 224. 'C Exhibit B — Page 4 3 S7 `n +t U' y . ... i K✓ 4 3 Y4t, y 9 'r1 77 t 1 y a ff y ) y 5 , ; 'y,.r) ' L4 )• 1 f ` _ a`J�..i EO I �,} , . � ',. ac apt b ::. �� bbsl]� b�ik : �` : "•r t �� y ..I1* o ]9t°.. os )y nrYl! P183'g*pun A ' pPUn': � Isis is od # r3: ; Pdt 74ww r $ai'!,, TgDn1 @'Coutfs . ' FArt@blp l: is © er T ww a rB (?tliei::. ; ICfilrtclan,'.: IAgfclessroomnum prs ]Top ery aes Employee iifred _.'. -,� .gyp dgys Prygr approva] rquitGd ►w; 15A3M1y }ww pIT $otindGeH'Fonpreflyited. 1 f p uddmg'to p'gpcnedst ' Closed di ; E3timated sttbn once t5pfn to pdblic7 [ ]'Y: N , Ends at: - - Will.ap adlmWon �'ee co. d pn,'oR sohbitanon be [ ]Y N yip Ca q mfE mg " D of funds collected- ibtylhSufanceCarrier! ernfia are e#' Insurance Attached 'Yes [ ] No comments {l ES5'VI t zAns H Tdie undersigned agrees to nuetraify end hol, harmless District i o cars agents zn emPloyeGS ern and against any and •all claims 1pfvJQs, Yof � f16 'et)se cost] qr iabili lry of any n¢or npl indre vvhtch:111e D isnrct Its officers a�egts; and employees may sustain or3n 11 Ac or which may 6e imposed -upen 14 [at m) lry`;o otdeatlF of personsdr A ru ge to Prupetty as a result of ansigg out A or is any manner conneded With my organization s performance adder 11 z .' thy. :terinsoftlu@'C,ontrectaXCejiung only liability out pfthe nagligencg:ofYhe Drstrrct. '. gfR� QP ttrPOna'rtnox The undersigned states tht}C', W the best of his 1ulowlcdge the school 'property for use ofahich eppbcafron is hereby made aVitl not be ' L ilb of qay. ad Which ss prohibited by law, or for the commission of any crime me udmg, but not limited to, the enmespecified in Sections 11400 siB+' [$¢lof[l3eCplifonaraY4iiaf_Co�e ICertlfy{ ordaclare) ynderthepenalryof' perjurythptlhef4regoingtsWeendco7rect - - r `SI+I o 114Oi10nd d lAOJ of tae Caltfamia Penal Code speciocally referryd to are the California Ctimiriel Syndication Act #hich prohibits end penalizes advocacy of riding dr abetfing se s mmnded to accomplish change m industrial ownership, 4r government hY nwaus ofrltdawful force, violepa or terrorism. $'1'A7EiNRN'I' OP'tiEBPONSIBtI 7'Y The Undersigned herobv eelUf ea 4a6t.he Its$ mad the imldelines fO use of Ugahid'FeCil ies on ipverse sidtof.noalrcafion and'shell. bppeiaonally le, tk hcha,if of his orgamzeno'h 'for cc demmege 6r ugrieegssarj' abuse of school buddmgs :grounds, 13 egmpment gro . o ac occ upancy of cdiJLprstnises :bp'agagrganirati6a fie eg[2es:to abide by and enforce the.iutes and re @olanons governing ihenotl sah l use ao'afbuild s ounds or- eq utg s gruipmeeiL $iCNnryRE Oi omncen xtAiciNa,iPPt } L r1oN �s - — TrrL.n IN oRG . I MA CUET'97*07E J$�' 1 :` FRUI ACE:1'1'f CHrtROES :PEEL ATTAiIfIEp EE FSCFIEDUL$ Jwor OURS, RATE/HOIJR ; pRER, 'QIRECTCO. FAlit TOTAL... - tialan : ")'f ' pt RY1Ata(8) C RAO C J. . =FOp'Stnvire;EmP4oyee:?'r At e#tc Me3: Yha Total hmtviM paymentReg d 7 •i 7 pees pays le to thq IStrlot by '' Per Fd,Nae.'Seer 38131 38,134 .4.Af1SD Board Policy dung Gtodp[perso[183fame' a H ( �`� _Fax, ( "tiJy Billing Address Street City A�r%D Zip Cod APPLLCATIQNAPPROVED B�'SQ1O0L ADMlHISTRAa'QR. `- + - fetena PWK -A tggt - - Rev.S/01 - 10- OD049. �wurrc _en1,r.�1'l34F..1r�- ( GRReM- BusmessOffiec YELLOW- f3perogion5 ELVli—ta pp7 s. _ ._. 1;4 "uY fW L F AL ti e 1 q c Gsr n y l r { i is w tull r ' N It r • ,�,',� y j r� { .. xt i r�,�' u ..�i l S n r r � £ S d w t - VYi 9 4 Zq. ............ August b, 2007 Dear CaauWssioners, As the landlord of Santa Duarte Plain. I sincerely 03 F= my fill suPPort on the exPWWGD of Nobel Education lastitnte, Nobel Bdttcatian butjh to has been one of our tenants since 1993. Among all cumt to mitts, it is the business that stays dw longest period of time in our plaza. Its outstanding stability cansisteatly promotes the ihme ofour location m d, continuously brings Masi' customers to eta plaza, W property tsa mpmew agency and I have never seen NW nogsdve WPact of rsc dved any cosnpbtint regarding NobePs operation. On the other band, I do bolisve that baving a tutorial cow in our plate will benefit all ttnernts is era plaza because the tutorial water draws many ptaoats Vho tan the potential cuswmcrs to all otbor tensors. I am also pleased by Nobel's Proposal of relocatieg student's piolt -up to other location. With its own totpensW Nobel wUlkagly hWovas tine amd paint condiaan in our plea. Nobel is cua+adly occupying an ism comer of our- pieta, wbich is not the desirable spot fm today scull bsrsioeeses, which highly demand visibiUtyy from the owts. According to thtdr proposal, NOW is able to u tU= the additional 1500 sq R without taping Wdra Pdlift SPAM for their oushnhers. 1 believe dw it wlil be a "win -win" situation. to Nobel and our pleas if Nobel's exoMion is approved. I do value Nobel's itttefttktm to improve the ironic ad parking con MM Of the wbole Plsas at its own expenses- Sincerely, chin -rung Tsai Landlord of Santa Duarte Plaza ^p01 puG o q j 4 G Exhibit No. 10 Letter of support from the owner of 1 W. Duarte Rd. 4. PUBLIC HEARING CUP 07 -05 1 W. Duarte Road Jonathan Li Nobel Education Institute The applicant has requested a Conditional Use Permit to expand the existing 2,280 square -foot tutorial center (Nobel Education Institute) by an additional 1,500 square feet for a total of approximately 3,780 square feet to accommodate a total of 75 students, and to have at least 60 students transported to Holly Avenue School for recreational activities and pick -up. Associate Planner Jim Kasama presented the staff report. Commissioner Beranek asked for clarification of the table of parking spaces in the Staff Report and Mr. Kasama reviewed the table for him. Commissioner Hsu asked if any other similar type of establishment uses shuttle service to convey people from one location to another as a solution to their parking limitations. Mr. Kasama said that he was not aware of any. Commissioner Baderian noted that when the original application was approved the conditions of approval limited the school to a maximum of 30 students. Commissioner Beranek pointed out that Unit I, a retail fast food operation, has a Conditional Use Permit allowing less than the minimum number of parking spaces required by the code. Mr. Kasama said that the Conditional Use Permit was denied by the Planning Commission and the applicant appealed to the City Council. The City Council granted the Conditional Use Permit based on information provided by the applicant's traffic consultants. The public hearing was opened. The applicant, Mr. Jonathan Li, 1367 York Drive, Arcadia, provided a document for distribution to the Commissioners. He stated that the hours of operation for his business are from 10:00 am to 7:00 pm unlike restaurants, for example, that only do business in the evening. He feels this is not a good reason to deny his application and stated that he cannot understand the Planning Department concern with the parking code. Mr. Lee further stated that the Planners feel that his business is injurious to the other tenants of the plaza but that he is sure his clients will bring more business to the plaza. He reminded the Commission that before his business moved into their unit, it was vacant for two years. He noted that they are transporting a large number of students to Holly Avenue School for after school activities and that he cannot understand why the Planning Department is recommending denial of his application. Commissioner Parrille asked Mr. Li for the number of trips anticipated per day and if they are using an approved route. Exhibit No. 11 July 10, 2007 PC Minutes Excerpt — Page 1 of 4 Mr. Lee said they have obtained two used buses which can each carry fourteen students for the five minute trip to Holly Avenue School. He said the City Engineering Department has already approved the route. They plan to make two to four trips per day and will stop after 4:45 pm in the summer and earlier when Daylight Savings Time has passed. Commissioner Hsurasked when the written agreement with Holly Avenue School for pick up and drop off of students expires: Mr. Li said the contract is renewable yearly. Commissioner Baderian asked Mr. Li how many students are currently enrolled and Mr. Li said there are about 80.. Commissioner Baderian pointed out that the original Conditional Use Permit stated that the school was not to exceed 30 students. Mr. Li agreed that was correct. Ms. Michelle Wong, Arcadia, Director of the Nobel Institute said that they have been providing a beneficial service to the community for over fourteen years. The children at the Nobel Institute are first to eighth grade students and they are offered snacks and help with homework. She noted that the school also provides tutoring in reading, math and foreign languages and that they are proud to support public schools and teachers. The goal of the school is to provide a caring, loving environment and to help the students develop a strong work ethic. They feel fortunate to be able to provide an outdoor program by renting space at Holly Avenue School. Ms. Wong said that since the Nobel Institute doesn't produce any negative impacts on the area and since there is a great need for their service in the community she feels the application should be approved. Ms. Wong stressed that 'the Nobel try to meet all code requirements. Ms. Christy Trieu, 521 E. Longden Avenue, said that she works at the Nobel Institute and that there is a need to expand the tutorial center so that the older children can be separate from the younger students. 'Ms. Trieu said that after school a lot of children come to the Nobel Institute and they are excited to be there. She also said that the outdoor program at Holly Avenue, is helpful because a lot of students are off site and parking is reduced. She believes they bring clot of business to the plaza. Ms. Carrie Glover, 5926 Camilla Avenue, Temple City, said she has been teaching fifth grade at the Nobel Institute for over five years and she has seen a lot of improvement in students both academically and socially. She said the Institute is committed to academic achievement and provides a good service to the community. Ms..Carmen Lung, 164 Delta Lane, is a Registered Nurse and works long hours and she is the mother of two students at the Nobel Institute. She said the Institute offers a great after school program and that her children are doing very well there. She said her eighth grader goes to a location next to the, bowling alley and her second grader stays at the Duarte Road location. Allowing the Institute to expand will mean that both her children will be able to stay at the same place and she won't have to drive around as much. Exhibit No. 11 July 10, 2007 PC Minutes Excerpt— Page 2 of 4 Mr. Hector Samilla, 2615 Sunnydale Rd., said he owns that business next to the Nobel Institute and has been there for six years. He said that traffic has not been an issue for him and he has no complaints. Mr. John Hibler, 713 Park Ave., South Pasadena, said he used to live in Arcadia and he hoped that his perspective as a parent would be helpful. His son has been a student at Nobel from kindergarten to fifth grade and he feels the school is wonderful and it would be a shame for them to become the victims of their own success. He feels that the Nobel Institute brings more business to the center. Mr. Hibler said that his family moved from Arcadia to South Pasadena but he wanted his son to stay in school in Arcadia partly because he would be able to attend the Nobel Institute which he enjoyed. Mr. Hibler expressed the hope that the situation could be worked out to accommodate the families who participate in the Nobel Institute. Ms. Angel Huang, 410 Los Altos Avenue, said that her two sons have attended the Nobel Institute for the last two years. Her son had an academic problem which was identified and addressed with tutoring. She also said that her sons enjoy going to Holly Avenue too. Ms. Cara Si, 528 Columbia Road, said her son and her cousin's son attend the Nobel Institute and they are very happy there. She asked the Commissioners to give the Institute a chance and allow the expansion. She has not had any trouble with traffic. Ms. Katherine Tsu, 1122 Ninth Avenue, said her son has had a good experience at the Nobel Institute and she never encountered any traffic problem. She hopes the expansion will be approved and feels that it would be beneficial to the community. Ms. Way Tai, 415 Genoa Street, said she has never had any trouble with traffic when picking up or dropping off her children at the Nobel Institute. Commissioner Baderian asked Mr. Lee if there has been a new Conditional Use Permit allowing more than 30 students since the resolution dated 1993. Mr. Lee admitted that they are exceeding the limit. He said they tried to apply for a new permit but it was not granted because of the parking situation. He reported that they have been renting Arcadia Congregational Church and two other buildings and also use some other locations temporarily. ` MOTION: It was moved by Commissioner Parrille, seconded by Commissioner Hsu, to close the public hearing. Without objection the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Beranek suggested that staff' review the additional material presented by the applicant. Exhibit No. 11 July 10, 2007 PC Minutes Excerpt— Page 3 of 4 Commissioner Hsu asked for the maximum occupancy for the facility. Mr. Kasama replied that the current space has a maximum occupancy per building and safety codes of 63 persons. Commissioner Baderian expressed concern about the current operation. He requested that staff look into the current uses of.the facility particularly in regard to occupancy and compliance with city codes. MOTION: It was moved by Commissioner Beranek„ seconded by. Commissioner Parrille, to continue Conditional Use Permit 07 -05 to August, 14, 2007. AYES: Commissioners Baderian, Beranek, Hsu and Parrille NOES: None Exhibit No. 11 July 10, 2007 PC Minutes. Excerpt —Page 4 of 4 ^g N'rnM °0meefcyofN STAFF REPORT August 14, 2007 Development Services Department TO: Arcadia Planning Commission FROM: Jason Kruckeberg, Community Development Administrator By: Jim Kasama, Acting Senior Planner SUBJECT: Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 07 -05 to expand a tutorial center at 1 W. Duarte Road SUMMARY This item was continued from the July 10, 2007 Planning Commission meeting to allow the Commission and staff time to review the following attached documents presented by the applicant at the meeting: • Written Argument against the Development Services Department's Denial for CUP Application 07 -05 (2 pp.) • Exhibit 1 — Resolution 1528 and the staff report for CUP 95 -008 for a tutorial center at 524 S. First Avenue (15 pp.) • Exhibit 2 — Resolution 1552 and the staff report for CUP 97 -009 for a tutoring center at 62-66 W. Las Tunas Drive (11 pp.) • Exhibit 3 — Applicant's information regarding the two (2) vans to be used to transport the students (2 pp.) • Exhibit 4 — 37 signed forms: Parents' Support for Nobel Education Institute's Expansion & Modification of CUP 93 -04 The continuance was also to allow the applicant time to provide the following information requested by the Planning Commission: o Clarification of how Nobel Education Institute is accommodating 80 students while their current Conditional Use Permit provides for a maximum of 30 students. The applicant was asked to provide a list of all facilities associated with. Nobel Education Institute along with copies of their business licenses and conditional use permits. o Documents verifying the certification of the two (2) 15- passenger vans. The applicant's response to these requests is attached, and includes the following: Exhibit No. 12 August 14, 2007 PC Staff Report w /attachments 87 pp. • A memorandum dated August 7, 2007. • A revised transportation route between the tutorial center and Holly Avenue Elementary School • Copies of-the Inspection Approval, Certificates for the two (2) vans. • Copies of the.Business License Certificate and Resolution No. 1490 (CUP 93 -04) for the applicant's tutorial center at 1 W. Duarte Road. • Copies of the Business License Certificate and Resolution No. 1723 (CUP 04 -15) for the applicant's tutorial center at 1012 S. Baldwin Avenue, unit B. The Conditional Use Pennits.for 1 W. Duarte Road and 1012 S. Baldwin Avenue, unit B, limit each location to a maximum of 30 students.. Staff followed up with the applicant about the August 7, 2007 memorandum. The applicant explained. that he meant to indicate that there are about 80 students enrolled with Nobel Education Institute, but because of the schedules for the different classes at the two (2) locations, there are not more than 30 students at either location at any time, if this is the case, then the two (2) tutorial centers are in compliance with their respective Conditional Use Permits. The Commission had expressed concerns about the numerous trips necessary to transport at least 60 students from the tutoring center to Holly Avenue Elementary School via Le Roy °Avenue. Staff inquired about relaxing the "No Left -Tum" restriction into the Holly Avenue Elementary School transportation loop so that.Duarte Road could be used to travel to- and -from the tutorial center and Holly Avenue Elementary School, but it was determined that because the parents of 60 students will be accessing the Holly Avenue Elementary School transportation loop during rush hour, the restriction needs to remain as it is. The City's Engineering Services recommended an alternate transportation route, which is consistent with the . °applicant's ; proposed" revised transportation route. This route eliminates the use of the easterly portion of Le Roy Avenue," and uses Campus Drive for the return trip to the tutoring center. The City does not have jurisdiction over the cert� cation of the two (2) vans. The copies of the Inspection Approval Certificates by the California Highway Patrol indicate that the two (2) vans can each carry up to 14 passengers, and must be inspected at least every 13 months. The two (2) vans are not certtfied.to transport passengers in wheelchairs. Additionally, the drivers must possess certain license certifications and endorsements from the Department of Motor Vehicles. Also attached is the July 10,2007 staff report , an excerpt of..the minutes of th e July 10, 2007 meeting for this application, and a letter dated August 6, 2007 from.the owner of 1 W. Duarte Road in support of the proposed expansion. RECOMMENDATION The Development. Services Department is recommending denial of Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 07 -05 based on two (2) findings: CUP 07-05 — Continued August 14, 2007 Page 2 of 5 1. That having a large non - retail use that is active for only three (3) hours per day (3 :00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m.) occupy a substantial portion (41 %) of a retail center is injurious to the other tenants and to the retail opportunities that should be provided by a neighborhood retail center; and 2. That the site is not adequate to accommodate the expanded tutorial center because the parking lot and adjacent roadways could be significantly impacted unless 80% of the students are transported to an off -site location for pick up due to the parking and traffic problems. If the Planning Commission is to consider approval of Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 07-05, the Development Services Department recommends the following conditions: 1. The tutorial center and the site shall be operated, improved and maintained in a manner that is consistent with this proposal and plans. The final plans shall be subject to review, revision and approval by the Building Official, Community Development Administrator and Fire Marshall. The tutorial center and the site must be in compliance with all of the conditions of approval prior to occupancy of the expansion area. Noncompliance with the plans, provisions, requirements of various City departments, and the conditions of approval for CUP 07 -05 shall be grounds for immediate suspension and /or revocation of any approvals, which may result in the loss of use of the expansion area. 2. The existing tutorial center and the proposed expansion area shall be subject to inspection by the Building Official, Community Development Administrator and Fire Marshall and the use and property shall be brought into compliance with all current measures, policies and requirements. determined to be necessary by the Building Official, City Engineer, City Traffic Engineer, Community Development Administrator, Fire Marshall, Public Works Services Director, and any service districts and utility providers that will serve the subject. 3. Maximum occupancy, access and exiting, including disabled accessibility for the tutorial center shall be determined by the Building Official and Fire Marshal, except that the maximum enrollment is limited to 75 students of elementary school age (up to eighth grade) in the westerly 3,790 square feet of commercial space in the northerly building of 1 W. Duarte Road. 4. A Parking Modification for 19 on -site spaces in lieu of 24 spaces is granted for the tutorial center. This Parking, Modification does not constitute an approval for a general reduction of the parking requirements for the subject property, but rather only for the tutorial center that is herein conditionally approved. Changes to uses within the area occupied by the tutorial center may be subject to a new CUP and/or Parking Modification. 5. A minimum of 60 students shall be transported to Holly Avenue Elementary School for recreational activities and pick up by parents by 5:00 p.m. during daylight savings time, and by 4:30 p.m. during standard time. The ability to transport at least 60 students to an acceptable alternative location for pick up by parents must be in effect for the approval of this Conditional Use Permit to be effective and proof CUP 07-05 — Continued August 14, 2007 Page 3 of 5 of such ability to utilize an alternative location for pick up by parents must be filed with the Community;'-Development Division. The acceptability of the alternative location - and the method and route, of transportation shalk be subject to, review and approval by the Community Development Administrator and City Traffic Engineer, 6. The "Arcadia Resource" sign shall be removed and.any damage to the wall shall be repaired such that it will not be noticeable from the nearest pedestrian and /or vehicular way. 7. 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' of Arcadia, its officers, employees or agents to attack, set aside, void, or annul any appro val 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 approvalofthe City Council, Planning Corrimission, 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:attomey to represent the. City, its officers, employees, and agents in the defense of the matter. 8. The approval of CUP 07- 05shall not take effect until the property owner, business owner, and applicant have executed and returned the Acceptance Form from the Development% Services. Department to document acknowledgement and acceptance of the conditions of approval, and all ;conditions of approval shall" be satisfied prior to the issuance of , a building permit and /or occupancy of the expansion area. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION Apo roval If the , Planning Commission intends to, the proposed; expansion, the Commission should move to approve Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 07 -05, accept staffs determination of a categorical exemption;' state the supporting findings, and direct staff to prepare a resolution for adoption at the next meeting.that incorporates the Commission's decision, specific determinations and findings, and the conditions of approval as listed in this report or as modified by the Commission. Denial If the Planning Commission intends to deny this proposal, the Commission should move to deny Conditional Use Permit Application No, CUP 07 -05; state the finding(s) that the: proposal does not satisfy, and direct staff to prepare a resolution for adoption at the next meeting that incorporates the Commission's decision and speck findings. . CUP 07 -05 — Continued August 14, 2007 Page 4 of 5 If any Planning Commissioner, or other interested party has any questions or comments regarding this matter prior to the August 14th public hearing, please contact Jim Kasama at (626) 8214334 or (626) 574 -5423. Approved by: Community Development Attachments: • Applicant's response dated August 7, 2007 with revised transportation route and copies of requested documents • Applicant's documents presented at the July 10, 2007 meeting with four (4) Exhibits • July 10, 2007 Staff Report with attachments • Excerpt from July 10, 2007 Minutes • Letter of support from owner of 1 W. Duarte Road dated August 6, 2007 CUP 07 -05 — Continued August 14, 2007 Page 5 of 5 August 7, 2007 To: Arcadia planning commission From: Jonathan Li + ''l 1 W. Duarte Rd., #D Arcadia, CA 91007 AUG 0 6 7007 Re: Additional information regarding application no. CUP 07 -05 ;ERiJIC %:i Dear commissioners: I sincerely appreciate your attention on my proposal. There are some information and documents I'd like to submit for your review. First of all, I'd like to clarify the misunderstanding made in the previous hearing. Currently, in addition to the location at 1 W. Duarte Rd., we rent 1012 S. Baldwin Ave., #B in Arcadia, and we also rent Holly Ave. Elementary school. Attached are the CUP and business license of the location. Also, when I mentioned we had 80 students that meant at that moment we had about 80 valid students who then were joining Nobel for different class schedule. By no means I meant at any time or all the time we have 80 students at one location at all locations combined. Due to the current limitation, we put different classes at different locations. Our current students consist of several types. Some of them take 1 hour of lesson for one -on -one tutoring; some of them attend 1.5 hours of class for specific subjects; some of them take 3 hours of lesson as a combination of two subjects, and some of them attend more than 3 hours of lessons. Thus, the number of students at each location varies from time to time during the day. Regarding the usage of youth buses, I attach a copy of our youth bus certificate issued by Department of California Highway Patrol. Annually, we are required to be approved by CHP's inspection Jn order to operate our youth buses. Every year, we always get approved. In order to eliminate our bus trips in residential areas, I propose a modified route that can minimize the usage of Le Roy Ave. (Please refer to the map attached) Our buses aren't the big orange school buses. The size of our bus is only a little bigger than a SUV. *From Nobel to Holly Ave. Elementary School: Exit at Duarte Rd., take Duarte Rd. then left turn at El Monte Ave., then right turn at Le Roy Ave., then right turn at Holly Ave. to the school drive - through. *From Holly Ave. Elementary School'to Nobel: Exit at Holly Ave., take Holly Ave. north, then right turn at Campus Dr., then right turn at Santa Anita Ave. and back to Nobel. Further more, I 'd like to address that when arrived at Nobel, our students are consistently under our staffs supervision. We keep them in our premises and provide a structured youth program." : ® ® f f . \ kzG \ \ } } ||& 7 7 { { |§/ / / ) ) tE t ¢ } } t El ¢ / k k\ \ � �r 0 � § §/ U') �o Eu \ � � S B ! =e2 k# .k Z Z &; w / LL = 2 7, R R ¥) Lu |> C -) 50 § -ILE E ff » < / -j £a. LU [E7 %( |§� || §_. �j m It °) �§B §C.0§ 9 1 _ /\ k 0 \ {�� }.§ . § E 2, / § { . o o { \ \/ \ o \ § § ;22!® 0 7§ } \ - \\ )� \ -Cc k )E§ ( .;._ } \\v { / m "Hal ;5 /./ - ;I- . / A �k S� .; ; � ;� m #! ,O ;t 1! ( off(! E /\ k 0 \ {�� }.§ . § E 2, / § { . o o { \ \/ \ o \ § § ;22!® 0 7§ } \ - \\ )� \ -Cc k )E§ ( .;._ } \\v { / m "Hal ;5 /./ - ;I- . / A �k S� .; ; � ;� m #! ,O ;t 1! ( off(! E E A > Y a r A ; J C C IL A a u a a m' o � a m o L L � Y O N � al � A m L o Y o y u E OF W H Q O V � LL F CLU }W ;v a J Q (0 o rc� a nd O �a QQ m °z LL 00 > d w U �W m p a N. L x o Z c=i I I I 7 I a c� a c A n e I O] A I L U. d I A L 3 n m I L O � I d u I K I A Y a I w w I 0 � I 4 � N 7 I i 4 BUSINESS wCENSE CERTIFICATE CITY OF A The person, firm or corporation named below is ranted this. RCADIA 9 certificate pursuant to the . provisions of the City Business Tax Ordinance to engage in, carry on or conduct the business, trade, calling, profession, exhibition or occupation described below, n at the proposed use is in conformance with th endorsement, nor certification of compliance with other ordinances or laws, nor an assurance th Issuance of certifipte is not an zoning regulations. This certificate is issued without verification that the taxpayer is subject to or exempt from licensing by the State of with the city Business Name: Nobel,Edueabon Institute Business Location: 1 W Duarte Rd, #D Arcadia, CA 91007 Business Owner(s): Jonathon Li NO EDUCATION INSTITUTE W DUARTE RD #D CA 91007 70 BE POSTED PN ea i:OMSt''1.^s,'UQU$i PLACE ACE Business Type: 82 Description: EDUCATIONAL SERVICES Business License Number. 030292 Account Number: 030292 License Fee: $ 358.90 Effective Date: 07/18/2007 Expiration Date: 07131/2008 RESOLUTION 1499 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. CUP 93 -004 FOR A TUTORIAL CENTER IN 2,280 SQ. FT. OF RETAIL SPACE AT 1 W. DUARTE ROAD. WHEREAS, on February 4, 1993, a Conditional Use Permit application was filed by Mr. Jeng -Chang Li for a tutorial center in a 2,280 square foot retail space, Planning Department Case No. CUP 93 -004, at property commonly known as 1 W. Duarte Road, more particularly described in the attached Exhibit "A ". WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on May 11, 1993, at which time all interested persons were given full opportunity to be heard and to present evidence; NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1 . That the factual data submitted by the Planning Department in the attached report is true and correct. SECTION 2 . This Commission finds: 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. 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. 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 adverse effect on wildlife resources or the habitat upon which the wildlife depends. SECTION <3 . That for the foregoing reasons this Commission grants a Conditional Use Permit for a tutorial center for up to 30 students of elementary through high school age in the existing 2,280 square foot retail space at 1 W. Duarte Road with the operating hours of 9:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, and 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays upon the following conditions: 1. Building occupancy, accessibility, and safety features shall be provided and maintained to the satisfaction of the Building Division. Such shall include, but not be limited to, the following: a. Adequate access (i.e. handicap access) to the restroom facilities and throughout all parts of the tutorial center. - b. All corridors and common areas shall have 20 minute labeled door and frame assemblies. c. All corridors shall be a minimum of 44 inches clear in width. No fixtures or appurtenances shall encroach into the 44 inch clear width. d. Panic exiting hardware shall be provided on exterior exit doors. e. Corridor ventilation ducts that penetrate the required one -hour wall or ceiling assemblies shall have fire dampers. 2. Fire protection, water supply, and building occupancy shall be provided and maintained to the satisfaction of the Arcadia Fire Department. Such shall include, but not be limited to, the following: a. A minimum of two exits as specified by the Uniform Building Code. b. The occupancy of this facility shall be classified as an E -1 Occupancy and the maximum occupant load shall not exceed 62 persons. c. An automatic fire alarm system must be installed per Uniform Building Code Section 809, and Uniform Fire Code Section 14.104(d). d. Fire sprinklers shall be installed as necessary due to the addition of any wall or partitions. e. A Knox Box with keys shall be installed per Uniform Fire Code Sec. 10.302. f. Plans for these and any other fire safety installations shall be reviewed and approved by the Fire Department prior to installation. 3. Any changes in the existing water service(s) (i.e. size or location) will be made by the Arcadia Water Division at the developer's expense. 4. Bicycle rack(s) shall be provided and installed to the satisfaction of the Planning Director. 5. A Modification for 55 parking spaces in lieu of 67 spaces is granted for CUP 93 -004 and is in addition to the parking modification granted for CUP 88- 004. These parking modifications do not constitute an approval for a general reduction of the parking requirements for the entire retail center, but only for - 2- 1499 the specific uses approved by CUP 88 =004 and CLIP 93 -004. 6. The subject site and interior layout of units D, EA F shall be improved and maintained in a manner that is consistent with the plans approved for the original construction of this retail buildings and with the plans filed with the Planning Department for CUP 93 =004. 7. All of the conditions of approval shall be complied with concurrently with the installation of the tenant improvements for the tutorial center. Noncompliance with the provisions and conditions of CUP 93 -004 shall consti- tute grounds for its immediate suspension or revocation which may result in closure of the subject establishment. 8. , Approval of CUP 93 -004 shall not take effect until the property owner and applicant have executed and filed the Acceptance Form available from the Planning Department to indicate their awareness and acceptance of the conditions of approval. SECTION 4 . The decision, findings and conditions contained in this Resolution reflect the Commission's action of May 11, 1993 and the following vote: AYES: Hedlund, Huang and Clarke NOES: None ABSENT: Amato and Daggett SECTION 5 . The Secretary shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution and shall cause a copy to be forwarded to the City Council of the City of Arcadia. I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the eleventh day of May, 1993 by the following vote: AYES: Hedlund, Huang and Clark NOES: None ABSENT: Amato and Daggett Chairman Planning Corrimission City of Arcadia ATTEST: Secretary, Planning Commission City of Arcadia -3- 1499 RESOLUTION NO: 1723 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2004 -015 `FOR A 1,200 SQ.FT. TUTORING CENTER WITH UP TO 30 STUDENTS AT 1012 S. BALDWIN AVENUE, UNIT B WHEREAS, on October 18, 2004, a: conditional 'use permit application was filed by Cheyenne Chen, business owner, for. a. tutoring center for up to 30 students (Development Services Department Case No. CUP 2004 -015) at property commonly lmown as 1012 S. Baldwin Avenue, Unit B; and WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on March 8, 2005, at which time all interested persons were given full opportunity to be heard and to present evidence. NOW THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. That the factual data submitted by the Development Services Department in the attached report is true and correct. SECTION 2. This Commission fmds: 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 because .the initial study did not disclose any substantial adverse effects to the area affected by the proposed prod ect. 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 and other features including the shared parking with the neighboring business, 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 such Conditional Use Permit will not adversely affect the comprehensive General Plan because the land use and current zoning are 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. 2 1723 SECTION3. That for the foregoing reasons this Commission grants Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 2004 -015, for a tutoring center with up to 30 students at 1012 S. Baldwin Avenue, Unit B, upon the following conditions: 1. There shall be no more than thirty (30) students and two (2) employees at any one time 2. The hours of operation shall be 10:30 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, 10:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. on Saturdays, and 10:30 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. on Sundays. 3. The parking lot shall be.restriped and landscaped per the Arcadia Municipal Code, subject to the approval of the Development Services Department. 4. The use approved by CUP 2004 -015 is limited to the tutoring center. The tutoring center shall be operated and maintained in 'a manner that is consistent with the proposal and plans submitted and approved for CUP 2004 -015, 5. A separate sign design review application shall be submitted for all new signs on the premises. 6. Any exterior alteration to. the building requires the filing and approval of a design review application. 3 . 1723 7. All conditions of approval shall be complied with prior to opening the tutoring center. Noncompliance with the plans, provisions and conditions of approval for CUP 2004 -015 shall be grounds for immediate suspension or revocation of any approvals, which could result in the closing of the school and office. 8. All City code requirements regarding accessibility, fire protection, occupancy, and safety shall be complied with to the satisfaction of Building Services and the Fire Department. 9. Approval of CUP 2004 -015 shall not take effect until the property owner(s), and applicants have executed and filed the Acceptance Form available from the Development Services Department to indicate awareness and acceptance of these conditions of approval. 10. 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 4 1723 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. SECTION 4. The decision, findings and conditions contained in this Resolution reflect the Commission's action of March ,8, 2005, by the following votes: AYES: Commissioners Hsu, Lucas, Wen NOES: Commissioners Baderian, Olson SECTION 5. The Secretary shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution and shall cause a copy to be forwarded to the City Council of the City of Arcadia. I HEREBY CERTIFY that the forgoing Resolution was adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the March 22, 2005,` by the following votes: AYES: Commissioners Baderian, Hsu, Lucas, Olson, Wen NOES: None 5 1723 Chairman, Planning Commission City of Arcadia n Secretary, Planning Comm City of Arcadia - APPROVED AS TO FORM: s P Stephen P. Deitsch, City Attorney G 1723 WRITTEN ARGUMENT FOR THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT'S DENIAL FOR CUP APPLICATION 07 =05 Chairman; planning commission members, ladies and gentlemen, good evening! My name is Jonathan Li; I am the applicant for CUP 07 -05 application. First of all, I want to thank you for giving me this opportunity to present my project. It has been a very long and very hard process for me for the past few years, especially for the past'3 months. Surprisingly, I have encountered many hard times with the planning department when comparing with other applicants who actually got help and guidance from the planning department (Two resolution samples are provided in the back shown as exhibit 1 and exhibit 2). 1 though the planning department is there to guide the regular citizens and business people for the application. But my,experience is just opposite: I was guarded strictly step after step. In the beginning, when" I applied to expand a few years ago, Mr. Corkran Nicholson told me: "Impossible, because you don't have enough parking. It is all about parking." Later on, I realized that I could rent some parking across the street just like some other projects when the parking is not enough. They told me: "The traffic is.the major concern. That intersection is the worst intersection in the whole Arcadia." So I got stuck. Finally, I found a feasible solution that is to transport our students to Holly Ave. Elementary School, which is about 0.5 miles from Nobel. - Once we have the permission from the school principle, we started doing that. We have done that in May and in June before the school was over. As we tested this solution, it has been proved that it works to reduce parking need and improve traffic in the plaza. I brought this fact into this CUP application on May 4, 2007 with confidence knowing that I not only comply with the parking code but also act positively to reduce the traffic for that intersection. On June 7, 2007, in response to the planning's further questions, I supplied some more information with a letter (see exhibit 3 page 1 & 2) specifically requesting the planning to combine the expansion project with the modification -of CUP 93 -04, Mr. Jim Kasama; the associate planner, over the counter told me: "That's what he is going to do." There is no further question or discussion from the planning after that day. On -June 30, 2007, when I received the public hearing notice, I realized that the planning only put the expansion into this application. When I went to talk to Mr. Jim Kasama why he didn't put the modification of CUP 93 -04 into one application, he gave me no answer to my question and said if I want to do that he has to cancel the hearing for me and reprocess the application again. I won't get the public hearing until the other month later. I told Mr. Kasama that now I have no choice to go for this hearing first, and then I will submit a new application later. At the same time, I asked, "What is the staffs recommendation ?" He told me it's not ready yet, he wanted me to come back to �f,4f ii"^1T T ^.7-� get it on July 5 after 3pm. r t 4' 'Ll At 4pm on July 5, 1 got a copy of staffs report. It recommends denial. !JUL 10 7007 ,,- Fi,t�,aNit.. �O e"L pgec -�ln� The denial is based on two findings (refer to staff report exhibit 4 page 6): Our argument for finding 1: 1. Our operating hour is from 10am to 7pm Monday through Friday just like any other similar establishment, not 3pm to 6pm. There are some types of businesses are inactive during the day, their major business activities are in the afternoon and in the evening like a lot of restaurants, coffee shops and video rental stores. It is inappropriate to use the operating hour as the reason to deny a business's expansion. 2. By law, the planning's first concern and obligation is supposed to apply the parking codes and check the environmental impact including traffic. Without really putting more value on our solution to reduce parking and traffic for the plaza and the intersection, the planning actually put more value on one planner's personal "opinion" in which he points out without objective proof that our expansion will be injurious to the existing tenants. All our parents know all the other shops in the plaza; this brings business and benefit to other tenants. 3. The planner's opinion said: The expansion, which results in our occupancy of 41 % of the building, is injurious to the other tenants. If we refer to resolution 1528 for CUP 95 -008 for current tenant, Montecito Fine Art School, located at 524 S. First Ave., they occupy 80% of the whole building. At the same time, their parking and traffic condition are worse than our location. But the planning department recommended approval. 4. The planner's opinion also points out that our expansion takes away other retail shop's opportunity to do business in the plaza. Before the landlord could lease the space to us, one unit has been vacant for more than two years. During that time, a few restaurants tried to use that space. Unfortunately, there is not enough parking for the other restaurant. None of any retail shop tried to take that space. That's why the landlord preferred to lease the space to us. The planner's opinion of having a retail shop in the 2 -year vacant space harms the landlord as well as is injurious to the plaza for not utilizing the space over a long period of time. Argument for finding 2: 1. I have been very specific in my application that our solution is to transport students to Holly Ave. Elementary School for outdoor activities and parent's pick -up. We not only say it but we really did it for one and half months (May & June). It has proved so well that the solution works. Some of our teachers and parents can testify. Unfortunately, in the staff report, the planning's "subjective opinion" completely ignores the fact. However, the planning's opinion is very opposite in other same CUP applications if one reads them (refer to exhibit 1 & exhibit 2). RESOLUTION 1528 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. CUP 95 -008 FOR A TUTORIAL CENTER AT 524 SOUTH FIRST AVENUE. WHEREAS, o�i #" ` f rt ' `#konditional Use Permit application was filed by Dennis G. Schrader (dba Am erican Resource Education Center) for a tutorial center in : cpuyjej,,�j:pgyl Development Services Department Case No. CUP 95 -008, at property commonly known as 524 South First Avenue, more particularly described in Exhibit "A ". WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on wlffi 0?. which time all interested persons were given full opportunity to be heard and to present evidence; NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1 . That the factual data submitted by the Development Services Department in the attached report is true and correct. SECTION 2 . This Commission finds: 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 accommtfdate 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. 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. 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 adverse effect on wildlife resources or the habitat upon which the wildlife depends. . SECTION 3 . That for the foregoing reasons this Commission grants a Conditional Use Permit for a tutorial center in a 5,000 square foot commercial building at 524 South First Avenue upon the following conditions: 1. The tutorial center and the site shall be maintained and operated in a manner that is consistent with the proposal dated August 21, 1995 and the Supplementary Information and plans that were submitted with the application for CUP 95 -008. This shall include, but not be limited to, oreventi n,,g.Lh„g y tt. dexits - from disturb ing„„1„hg residepts and businesses,, and providing a trash enclosure, wheel stops, a van accessible parking space and bicycle racks to the satisfaction of the Community Development Division. ��'w y th no landscaping 2. A Modification fo ' ��"'j�� ' �g;';�, �,� P g in r " five percent landscaping is ranted for CUP 95 -008 P P g g 3. CUP 95 -008 shall be monitored by staff and, if there are problems, referred to the Planning Commission for reevaluation at a public hearing. If the Commission's reevaluation determines that there are detrimental or injurious affects, the Commission may amend the approval and impose additional conditions of approval to mitigate such affects. 4. CUP 95 -008 shall not take effect until the property owner and applicant have executed and filed the Acceptance Form available from the Development Services Department to indicate awareness and acceptance of the conditions of approval. 5. All local code requirements regarding building occupancy, fire protection and safety features shall be complied with to the satisfaction of Building Services and the Fire Department. 6. All of the conditions of approval shall be complied with prior to occupancy of the tutorial center. Noncompliance with the plans, provisions and conditions of CUP 95 -008 shall constitute grounds for its immediate suspension or revocation which may result in closure of the tutorial center. SECTION 4 . The decision, findings and conditions contained in this Resolution reflect the.Commission's action of September 26, 1995 and the following vote: AYES: Commissioners Bell, Huang, Kalemkiarian, Murphy and Sleeter O ABSENT: F1 ABSENT: Commissioner Kovacic SECTION 5 . The Secretary shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution and shall cause a copy to be forwarded to the City Council of the City of Arcadia. 2- 1528 I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 26th day of September, 1995 by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners Bell, Huang, Kalemkiarian, Murphy and Sleeter NOES: Commissioner Daggett ABSENT: Commissioner Kovacic ATTEST: Secretary, Planning Commission City of Arcadia APPROVED AS TO FORM: Michael H. Miller, City Attorney 3- 1528 Exhibit "A" Legal Description 524 South First Avenue Lot land the South 51 feet of Lot 2, Block 63 -1/2, Tract 866, in the City of Arcadia, County of Los Angeles, State of California, as per Map recorded in Book 16, Pages 198 and 199 inclusive of Maps, in the office of the County Recorder of said County. Exhibit "A" 1528 M1c STAFF REPORT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT September 26, 1995 TO: Chairman and Members of the Arcadia City Planning Commission FROM: Donna Butler, Community Development Administrator By: James M. Kasama, Associate Planne SUBJECT: Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 95 -008 A 5,000 square foot tutorial center at 524 S. First Avenue SUMMARY Conditional Use P Schrader to overat rent is I � I I to the conditions in this report. CUP 95 -008 was submitted by Dennis G center for a maximum of awl aat " Tt°Vili The Development Services ;f this Conditional Use Permit application GENERAL INFORMATION APPLICANT: Dennis G. Schrader (dba: American Resource Education Center) LOCATIQN: 524 S. First Avenue REQUEST: A Conditional Use Permit with parking modifications for an a celerated . academic tutorial center that will be limited to a d.',•e.� r N c� SITE AREA: 13,635 square feet (0.31 acre) FRONTAGES: 101 feet along S. First Avenue 135 feet along Fano Street EXISTING LAND USE & ZONING: The site is developed with a vacant 5,000 square foot commercial building, and another 1,900 square foot commercial budding that Ls ,, occupied by a tailor and beauty salon ='1 5t�`ktsard bn =§ tu;pai'lrng space .. -'. fie site is zoned C -2 (General Commercial). GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Commercial SURROUNDING LAND USES & ZONING: North: Insurance offices and a nonconforming residence zoned C -2 South: Florist and nonconforming residences zoned C -2 E a s t: Condominiums zoned R -3 West: Accountant's offices and a beauty salon zoned C -2 PROPOSAL AND ANALYSIS The proposal is to operate a tutorial center in an existing 5,000 square foot commercial building at the northeast corner of First Avenue and Fano Street. The tutorial center will offer accelerated academic programs to Junior High and High School students. (grades 7 to 12) with minimum 3.0 grade point averages. There will be four classrooms with approximately 12 students in each classroom, and a computer lab for six students at a time. The maximum number being taught at any one time will not exceed 60 students. There will be four instructors and one clerical staff person. Classes will be scheduled as follows: Regular Academic Sessions Details of the Summer Sessions Monday' Pr`rday 3 OO pTp to 9 QD p m ;> r Saturday: 10:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. WAda Saturday: 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. are outlined in the "I"s The subject building was previously occupied by a retail interior design center. The site fs also improved with another 1,900 square foot commercial building that is occupied by a tailor and a beauty salon, as shown on the attached site plan The site needs a trash enclosure which the applicant will provide. The existing parking does not comply with the zoning regulations and there is no landscaping in the parking CUP 95 -008 September 26, 1995 Page 2 area Further issues to be addressed ar t " w ae W, «�?aPUM axes x; 5 � r 7 ii 9 Y •aM:x e ,,. s, �el ,°ri Automobile Access and Parkin Access to the site is from Fano Street. The existing parking layout of the subject site enables through access to the alley. This through access would facilitate the pick -up and drop -off of the students, however, the access to the alley exists only at the convenience of the property owners to the north. The access to the alley is not secured by an easement. Without the through access to the alley, pick -ups and drop - offs would have to take place at curb side, or in the rear parking area which is not large enough to provide a good turnaround area, and the existing driveway is not wide enough to accommodate two -way traffic. There are 15 on -site parking spaces, none of which comply with the City's parking design regulations, and the parking area lacks the required five percent landscaping. There are eight parking spaces in a tandem arrangement directly behind the tailor shop and beauty salon. The applicant has stated that there is an agreement that these eight spaces are exclusively for the use of the tailor and beauty salon, and that he will honor this agreement. J1,,gpSgArs that t1 � 9,. —Fark< g .situation has Sexvd the y subect + roer a,eguatel. 4Y The iemainin a & 40, e available for the proposed tutorial center. There are three at the rear entrance to the proposed tutorial center, one parallel to the east wall of the garage, and three parallel to the block wall along the east property line. One of the spaces at the rear entrance will be eliminated to provide a 17 foot wide van accessible parking space. This will result inr grk site spaces being available for the tutorial center. According to the applicant's Supplementary Information, six parking spaces are all that is rweded. However, based on a maximum of 60 students, the zoning regulations require twelve spaces (one space for each five classroom seats). The tailor and beauty salon should have ten spaces (one space per 1,000 gross square feet). Therefore, there should be 22 on -site parking ' ",,.. spaces. x Kiwuii UAMMrs AW4R ft W QF-W ti' °v V Observations of other tutorial centers support the applicant's statement that on -site parking for the students is not necessary. Almost all of the students are dropped -off and picked -up in carpools or by Arcadia Transit, or use bicycles, or walk. The parents rarely need a parking space to wait for the children. Staff recommends that CUP 95 -008 September 26, 1995 Page 3 with the exception of providing a trash enclosure, wheel stops, and a van accessible parking space, the existing parking area improvements be allowed to remain as is. The applicant will install racks in a portion of the existing garage for bicycle parking. The situation should be monitored and if parking or traffic problems arise either on -site or off -site, this application should be reevaluated to determine if conditions of approval can be added to control the situation, or if the intensity of the use should be reduced. Compatibility With Surrounding Uses In this case, the amount of traffic and the number of students will be greater than the traffic generated by the former interior design center.MR.�' Provided that the access and parking situations do not cause problems, and if the students do not disturb the adjacent residences and businesses as stated in the applicant's Supplementary Information, the proposed tutorial center will be compatible with the surrounding uses. The situation should be monitored and if problems arise, this application should be reevaluated to determine if additional conditions of approval can be added to control the situation, or if the intensity of the use should be reduced. CE OA Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act, the Developrk,ent Services Department has prepared an initial study for the proposed project. Said initial study did not disclose any substantial or potentially substantial adverse change in any of the physical conditions within the' area affected by the project including land, air, water, minerals, flora, fauna, ambient noise and objects of historical or aesthetic significance.. When considering the record as a whole, there is no evidence that the proposed project will have any potential for adverse effect on wildlife resources or the habitat upon which the wildlife depends. Therefore, a Negative Declaration has been prepared for this project. CUP 95 -008 September 26, 1995 Page 4 RECOMMENDATION The Development Services Department orjuner d- :a r E O o additional Use Permit No. CUP 95 -008 subject to the following conditions: 1. The tutorial center and the site shall be maintained and operated in a manner that is consistent with the proposal dated August 21, 1995 and the Supplementary Information and plans that were submitted with the application for CUP 95 -008. This shall include, but not be limited to, preventing the students from disturbing the adjacent residents and businesses, and providing a trash enclosure, wheel stops, a van accessible parking space and bicycle racks to the satisfaction of the Community Development Division. 2. A Modification for 14 substandard parking spaces with no landscaping in lieu of 22 spaces with five percent landscaping is granted for CUP 95 -008. 3. CUP 95 -008 shall be monitored by staff and, if there are problems, referred to the Planning Commission for reevaluation at a public hearing. If the Commission's reevaluation determines that there are detrimental or injurious affects, the Commission may amend the approval and impose additional conditions of approval to mitigate such affects. 4. CUP 95 -008 shall not take effect until the property owner and applicant have executed and filed the Acceptance Form available from the Development Services Department to indicate awareness and acceptance of the conditions of approval. 5. All of the conditions of approval shall be complied with prior to occupancy of the tutorial center. Noncompliance with the plans, provisions and conditions of CUP 95 -008 shall constitute grounds for its immediate suspension or revocation which may result in closure of the tutorial center. FINDINGS AND MOTIONS Approval If the Planning Commission intends to approve of this Conditional Use Permit application, the Commission should move to approve and file the Negative Declaration and adopt a resolution which incorporates the Commission's decision, specific findings and conditions of approval as set forth in the staff report, or as modified by the Commission. CUP 95 -008 September 26, 1995 Page 5 Denial If the Planning Commission intends to deny this Conditional Use Permit application, the Commission should move for denial and adopt a resolution which incorporates the Commission's decision and specific findings. Note: Because there will not be an October 10, 1995 Planning Commission meeting, resolutions of approval and denial. have been prepared for adoption so that there will not be an inordinate delay in the processing of this application. If any Planning Commissioner, or other interested party has any questions regarding this matter prior to the September 26th public hearing, please contact Associate Planner, Jim Kasama at (818) 574 -5445. Approved by: Donna L. Butler Community Development Administrator Attachments: Applicant's proposal letter and Supplementary Information Site Plan and Floor Plan Land Use & Zoning Map Negative Declaration & Initial Study CUP 95 -008 September 26, 1995 Page 6 AMERICA RESOURCE 141 E. Duarte Road. Suite 103, Arcadia, CA 91006 August 21, 1995 Re: Conditional Use Permit American Resource Education Center Dear Sir or Madam: EDUCATION CENTER Tel: (918) 445-6112 Fax: (818) 821 -9057 American Resource Education Center will offer accelerated academic programs to Middle School and High School students who qualify with a 3.0 G.P.A. As the owner and director of American Resource, I have more than 25 years experience in classroom instruction and curriculum design. Needless to say our educational program at American Resource is far more than a "business" it is a commitment. ; Briefly, our curriculum will include the following: 1) Honors and Advanced Placement math and science classes: All designed around existing Arcadia High School textbooks and taught exclusively by distinguished Cal -Tech instructors, 2) English Grammar and Composition, 3) ESL, featuring systematic vocabulary and grammar "groupings ": All materials developed "in house" for publication by American Resource, 4) SAT Math and Verbal, SAT -2 Achievement Tests, 5) Rapid Reading: State -of -the -art technique and equipment to teach efficient eye movement We will in addition build a computer lab with both Intel Pentium -90 and Apple Power Macintosh computers - Internet connected and open free of charge to all of our students. It is our sincere goal to graduate students equipped with real "job skills" and logical reasoning ability. In this increasingly complex world, we believe American Resource has a responsibility to do more than raise grades and SAT scores. If I can provide any further information regarding our program at American Resource Education Center, please do not hesitate to contact me at your convenience. We very much appreciate your considering us for the Conditional Use Permit. Sincerely yours, Dennis G. Schrader AMERICAN, RESOURCE. EDUCATION CENTER 141 B. Duarte Road. Suite 103; Arcadia, CA 91006 Tel: (BIB) 445 -6112 Fax: (818) 921 -9057 Supplementary Infonnation a) Schedule: Regular Academic Session (September 10 - June 3): Monday - Friday: 3:00 7:00 p.m. Saturday: 10:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. Summer Session (June 19 - August 19). Monday - Friday: 1:00 - 7:00 p.m. Saturday: 10:00 - 6:00 p.m. Note: Our regular academic session is coordinated with Arcadia High School's quarterly system. b) Rooms: 4 classrooms, 1 computer lab, a student lounge and a parent- teacher conference room. c) Number of employees: 4 instructors and 1 clerical staff d) Number of students per classroom: 12 maximum per classroom and 6 maximum in computer lab. Length of classes: 1.5 - 2.0 hrs. e) Parking and Access: Most of our students walk or bike from Arcadia High School, Dana Middle School and First Avenue Middle School. Any vehicular traffic consists mostly of "pick-ups" and "drop -offs" between classes. In addition, many of our students whose parents are quite busy already have carpooling agreements amongst themselves or use "Dial -a- Ride ". It has been my observation at past facilities that even when we have ' the maximum number of students on site, we do not need more than six (6) parking spaces. For those students riding bicycles, we will provide a secured bicycle parking area near the rear access. f) Handicapped facilities will be provided: including classroom spaces, restrooms and access to computers for homework and independent study. All classrooms and facilities in this complex will be accessible. Corridors are proposed to be 7 feet wide. g) Students will not be permitted to congregate, loiter or create any disturbances in or near any portion of the premises, but most especially in the rear parking area to assure that the adjacent residents will not be disturbed. A sign will be posted at the rear door to inform the students of this restriction. More than adequate lobby and lounge spaces are proposed to be provided for the students inside the tutoring center should they arrive early for their sessions, or need to wait for Dial -A -Ride or their carpool. MEDICAL OFFICES PAST FOOD ( / / 50 50 ELDORADO ST. so )aa.7 /.S6J 0 50 so s0 so (i /6J ( /z7J /i7Gl l /3vi MO ETU Al2Y0 0 OFFICES om � �� 0 0 0 O o n U o INS. OFFICE \N S < CONFECTIONER ,IQ NAIL SALON 135 s0 -2 u h w a CC -2 R-3 141.7 ✓ 1 ° - �ww O n� E NAIL SALON INSURANCE r OFFICE L9 ACCT. Lr) O 9 � OFFICES ``� �✓i iQ� `0 9 BEAUTY C C (4 Ij O SALON H� 1x1.7 h 0 /0 rriz/J <ns7 (7291 !00.06 50 /m.a FANO ST. 50 I41.7 135 50 50 SO 50 7M. <ssJ BOARD , o FLORIST 0 7izvJ /2<U 0 0 `0 0 OF t25 000�� o ,/�� V REALTORS �� O � 2, r /'� ' 00 s VACANT DENTAL OFFICE EARTY RENTALS s0 I A I.7 `. 135 IL C - 6 N N -� R-3 O BEAUTY SALON n L OFFICES LAND USE & ZONING MAP 524 S. First Avenue CUP No. 95 -008 ® North Tutorial Center Scale: 1 100' S b l i i L • iif `.4 4... GG . ` � � � L . /�MERICN'I �QE50JfiCi. ce��Tert ''Stk IiMT rv� N¢GP:DV' I. �o�FE Lr�CL GoM/'vrE2 �= 20or� LA — LoBBY S 1 . y � CLASI�OC�� a� I YZ 0 w 62 GLA S S2 UOr-� ,L I� _i s�vb E ✓7" ��Arc Lo6BY b h LUV s- ti'q " I � r I o RESOLUTION 1552 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 97 -009 TO OPERATE A TUTORING CENTER AT 62 -66 W. LAS TUNAS DRIVE. WHEREAS, on June 10, 1997, applications were filed Little Harvard Academy to operate a tutoring center, to be located on a C -M zoned property that is commonly known 62 -66 W. Las Tunas Drive, and more particularly described as Lot 69, Santa Anita Colony. WHEREAS, A public hearing was held on July 22, 1997, at which time all interested persons were given full opportunity to be heard and to present evidence; NOW THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1 That the factual data submitted by the Development Services Department in the attached report is true and correct. SECTION 2 This Commission finds: 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 because the initial study did not disclose any substantial adverse affects to the area affected by the proposed project. 2. That the use applied for at the location indicated is a proper use 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, parking, loading, landscaping 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 such Conditional Use Permit will not adversely affect the comprehensive General Plan because the land use and current zoning are consistent with the General Plan. 6. That the new exterior design elements for the subject building are in compliance with the design criteria set forth in the City's Architectural Design Review Regulations. 7. 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. SECTION 3. That for the foregoing reasons this Commission grants a Conditional Use Permit, to operate a tutoring center upon the following conditions: 1. Fire safety shall be provided to the satisfaction of the Fire Department. 2. Building code compliance and conditions of approval must be met to the complete satisfaction of the Inspection Services Manager. 3. That the tutoring center provide transportation to the site. 4. That a modification be granted for 58 on -site parking spaces in lieu of 146 for the addition of a tutoring center in the retail development. This parking) modification does not constitute an approval of a general reduction of the parking requirement for the entire site, but rather only for the specific use approved by this CUP. 5. C.U.P. 97 -009 shall not take effect until the property owner and applicant have executed and filed the Acceptance Form that is available from the' Services Department to indicate awareness and acceptance of the conditions, of approval. 6. Noncompliance with the provisions and conditions of this conditional use permit shall constitute grounds for its immediate suspension or revocation. SECT[ON 4. The decision, findings and conditions contained in ,this Resolution reflect the Commission's action of July 22, 1997, and the following vote: AYES: Commissioners Bell, Bruckner, Huang, Kalemkiarian , Sleeter and Murphy NOES: None 2 1552 ABSENT: None SECTION 5. The Secretary shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution and shall cause a copy to be forwarded to the City Council of the City of Arcadia. I HEREBY CERTIFY that the forgoing Resolution was adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 12th day of August, 1997, by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners Bell, Huang, Kalemkiarian, Sleeter, Murphy ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: Commissioner Bruckner Chairman, Planning Commission City of Arcadia ATTPT: i Secretary, Planning Commission City of Arcadia APPROVED AS TO FORM: Michael H. Mi ler, City Attorney 3 1552 STAFF REPORT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT July 22, 1997 TO: Chairman and Members of the Arcadia Planning Commission FROM: Donna L. Butler, Community Development Administrator By: John Halminski, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 97 -009 A tutoring center at 62 -66 W. Las Tunas Drive This Conditional Use Permit application was submitted by Grace Tan to operate a tutoring center at 62 -66 Las Tunas Drive. The Development Services Department is recommending approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 97 -009 subject to the conditions that are outlined in this staff report. GENERAL . INFORMATION APPLICANT: Grace Tan LOCATION: 62 -66 W. Las Tunas Drive REQUEST: A conditional use permit to operate a tutorial center for 80 students with a related parking modification. LOT AREA: Approximately 40,150 square feet (:922 acres) FRONTAGE: 342.83 feet along Las Tunas and 334.69 feet along Live Oak. I EXISTING LAND USE & ZONING: The site is currently developed with a mixed use retail shopping center, and is zoned C -M. GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Commercial SURROUNDING LAND USES & ZONING: North: Developed with offices and a restaurant; zoned C -O and C -2 South: Mixed Commercial and Light Industrial; zoned C -M. East: Mixed commercial and restaurants; zoned C -M. West: Developed with a Burger King fast food eating establishment; zoned C -M. The applicant is requesting a conditional use permit to operate a tutoring center for 80 students which would occupy approximately 2,600 square feet within the sites existing commercial center, as shown on the submitted site plan (copy attached). Business hours would be from 9:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Monday through Friday, and 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Saturdays. .1716. The applicant has indicated that the majority of the students are under 18 years old, and that they will more than likely be dropped off in the parking lot by their guardians. The facility has an entrance into the building in the front and rear. Also, the center will be providing transportation to the site. Access to the on -site parking is from Las Tunas Drive and Live Oak Avenue. The site currently provides for through traffic circulation by the use of two existing driveways, as shown on the submitted site plan. In staffs opinion, this through access provides safe on -site pick -up and drop -off of the students, and a convenient access through the site which mitigates the possibility of congestion on the public right -of -ways. Tutoring centers /schools require 1 parking space for each 35 sq.ft. of gross floor area that is within a non - permanent seating area (classrooms). Within the proposed tutoring center there , is approximately 1,868 sq.ft. of classroom area, which amounts to a parking requirement of 54 on -site spaces for the school. The existing on -site parking ratio of 5 spaces per 1,000 sq.ft. of gross floor area for the original retail space results in a net parking space requirement of 41 spaces for the proposed tutoring center. The site has a total of 58 on -site parking spaces, including two handicap .spaces. When the center was constructed, code required 63 parking spaces (based upon general retail uses), a modification was granted to allow 58 spaces in lieu of the 63 required. This existing amount of on -site parking does not comply with the current code requirement of 105 spaces, due to CUP 97 -009 July 22, 1997 Page 2 the addition of the non - retail uses in the center (i.e. a medical clinic per MC 91 -084, an eating establishment per CUP 88 -016 and a donut shop pet CUP 86 -013). With the addition of the ! proposed tutoring center the total number of on -site spaces required for', the retail center would be 146. Staff has made random on -site vehicle counts.and,noted that approximately 75% of the on- site parking is available during normal business hours, which indicates! that the existing parking would be sufficient for the proposed tutoring center. In addition, the applicant has submitted a parking survey which indicates a maximum number of 21 spaces are used at any given time. The parking survey was conducted during the proposed hours of operation for a one week period. Staffs observations of other tutoring centers within the City supports the applicant's statement that they do not anticipate a packing burden to the site. Almost all of the students are dropped -off and picked-up by carpools, private transportation, or. walk. The parents rarely wait in a parking space for the children because the classes are on a strict schedule. A maximum of 80 students will attend classes during any given session. M .- Uses such as tutoring centers require conditional use permits and traffic concerns can be addressed as part of the consideration of such applications. Generally, staff does not encourage uses which are deficient in parking; however, based upon the applicant's proposal and the random parking counts by staff and the applicant, it is staffs . opinion that the proposed use is an appropriate addition to the site. �= Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act; I the Development Services Department has prepared an initial study for the proposed project.{, Said initial study did not disclose any substantial adverse change in any of the physical conditions within the area affected by the project including land, air, water, minerals, flora, fauna, ambient noise and objects of historical or aesthetic significance. When considering the record as a whole, there is no evidence that the proposed project will have any potential for an adverse effect on wildlife resources. Therefore, a Negative Declaration has been prepared for this proj ect. The Development Services Department recommends approval No.97 -009, subject to the following conditions of approval: 1.. Building code compliance and conditions of approval satisfaction of the Inspection Services Officer. of Conditional Use Permit i must be met to the complete CUP 97 -009 July 22, 1997 Page 3 2. Fire safety shall be provided to the complete satisfaction of the Fire Department. 3. That the tutoring center provide transportation to the site, as stipulated in the proposal. 4. A modification be granted for 58 on -site parking spaces in lieu of 146 for the addition of a tutoring center on the retail development. This parking Modification does not constitute an approval of a general reduction of the parking requirement for the entire site, but rather only for the specific use approved by this CUP. 5. That CUP 97 -009 shall not take affect until the owner and applicant have executed a form available at the Planning Office indicating awareness and acceptance of the conditions of approval. 6. Noncompliance with the provisions and conditions of this conditional use permit shall constitute grounds for its immediate suspension or revocation. If the Planning Commission intends to approve this conditional use permit application, the Commission should move to approve and file the Negative Declaration and direct staff to prepare a resolution which incorporated the Commission's decision, specific findings and conditions of approval as set forth in the staff report, or as modified by the Commission. 03 If the Planning Commission intends to deny this conditional use permit application, the Commission should move for denial and direct staff to prepare a resolution which incorporates the Commission's decision and specific findings. Should the Planning Commission have any questions regarding this matter prior to the scheduled public hearing, please contact John Halminski at your earliest convenience. Ag ov d By: Donna L. Butler Community Development Administrator Attachments: Land Use and Zoning Map, site plan, floor plan, parking survey, and environmental documentation CUP 97 -009 July 22, 1997 Page 4 8�az -4L5 -918 �`POJ ^� °�!yh o�vnS 69 :7 Sarilli��9 }YL n.p 'Q svvr/1 sn7 'M 99 9 z9 NV V -5115 WD 7 *—a Ol ail Z gEn aI Sf Z7S•fI � CO♦Vf JrVr O I �A� .J�� y. 1 O V . IM• �� o —� ♦ LL 4 0 G 4 - 1 . J Live Oak Ave Er -uhf �nierhr�scs - _ i6z & 66 cJ.IaS Twws D� Arcodta bra -5�/f 20($ IL <t 65 An'tk Col., i I d H A d a d P; A N d y F 6 a S .d N F 6 z O H H d U ° a 3 W z t. W A d U d A a 6 d x w a H F H a P. W O O z 7.. N d W 0. O rn O O n N co O co e a o 00 o O rl ri rl N ri rl r-1 O n a of n O �o a v1 n �+1 O h ✓1 O O N a O a 0 M oa N ri N u1 �T O O O N E C1 �T n CO r- c+l rl N O �-1 rl O 6 a o N rl N O �O u'1 �T co ✓1 n co O H T-I ttl O H N (�1 ✓1 N u1 G1 O H 6 N ✓1 tl N �D t/'1 n n O O Q� xx y H 3 F w t h r n n n n n \ \ \ \ \ \ \ N In co \ \ \ \ \ \ \ ID ID EXHIBIT 3 NOBEL EDUCATION INSTITUTE I W. DUARTE ROAD, #D ARCADIA, CA 91007 TEL: 626-446-5533 FAX:626- 446 -3111 Date: June 7, 2007 To: Jim Kasama, Associate Planner Developmental Services Department City of Arcadia Re: Application No. CUP 07- 05/Request of modification of CUP 93 -04 Mr. Kasama: The followings are the additional information you have requested. 1. The type of buses being used: two 15- passenger vans. Models: Ford Clubwagon & Dodge Ram 3500 Length: 18.5' Width: 6.5' Weight: about 7000 to 80001b Seating Capacity: 15 Please be advised that these two 15- passenger vans have been categorized as "Youth Bus" (carrier no. CA 207101) by California Highway Patrol (CHP) and are subject to annual on -site inspection and certification by CHP in order to legally and safely operate them. Some photographs are shown below. 2. Two buses as described above will be used to transport - students. 3. As you can see from the specifications of the buses and the photographs, they are really not "over- sized" vehicles to operate in the parking lot of I W. Duarte Rd. As a matter of fact, a lot of vehicles visiting El Pollo Loco restaurant are longer, and/or wider than these two buses like Arcadia Transit (Dial -A- Ride), Arcadia Fire Department's Paramedic, utility company's engineering vehicles... etc. The operation of these two buses is almost the same as the operation of a minivan except they are longer and taller. 4. Again, two buses. The buses will use the exit on Duarte Rd. (much easy to get out) and go west - bound, then turn south at Holly Ave. They will drop students at the drive - through. The buses will take Le Roy Ave. back to Santa Anita Ave. and come back to the plaza from the Duarte entrance to pick up more students. Please see the attached map. The time calculation for each trip is: 5 minutes from Nobel to Holly Ave: Elementary School; 5 minutes to drop off; 5 minutes to travel back from Holly Ave. Elementary School to Nobel. It takes a total of about 15 minutes for each round trip. At this moment, we plan to make three (3) trips to transport students respectively at 4:45pm, 5pm and 5:15pm. That timing is perfectly fitted into our three different class schedules. Thus, we can easily transport up to 84 students to Holly Ave. Elementary School for outdoor activities and for parent's pick -up. However, if it is needed, we can add one more trip so that 28 more students can be moved out from the plaza: Regarding the CUP.93 -04 we have at unit D, E and F, since now we have a feasible solution to resolve the potential parking.and traffic problems caused by our operation we would like to use this opportunity to ask for'modification of CUP 93 -04 so we can have the maximum occupancy load of students in unit D; E and F. This is based on our capability of, "moving out students as described in the above paragraph, In fact, we have been doing (testing) this way for a while. All students love to go out for outdoor activitie ,s. It is safer and easier for parents to pick up their children (Be advised that the parent's arrival time scatters from 5pm to 6:15pm in comparison with that parents have to pick up their children within 20 minutes when Holly Ave. Elementary School or other public schools regularly ( dismiss at 2:35pm). It has completely eliminated the parking and Traffic problems in the plaza. { If you still need anymore information or have any, question, please call me, at 626 - 230 - 4130. Thanks for your assistance in this application. Sincerely, Jonathan Li - L- July 10, 2007 STAFF REPORT Development Services Department TO: Arcadia Planning Commission FROM: Jason Kruckeberg, Community Development Administrator By: Jim Kasama, Associate Planner SUBJECT: Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 07 -05 to expand a tutorial center at 1 W. Duarte Road SUMMARY Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 07 -05 was submitted by Mr. Jonathan Li to expand the Nobel Education Institute tutorial center at 1 W. Duarte Road. The proposal is to extend the tutorial center into the adjacent commercial space to increase the number of students allowed to a maximum of 75 students with at least 60 students being transported to Holly Avenue Elementary School at approximately 4:45 p.m. for recreational activities and pick -up to relieve the parking'and traffic congestion at 1 W. Duarte Road. The proposed tutoring hours are 3:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. daily. The Development Services Department is recommending denial of the expansion. GENERAL INFORMATION APPLICANT: Mr. Jonathan Li LOCATION: 1 W. Duarte Road REQUEST: A Conditional Use Permit to expand the existing 2,280 square -foot tutorial center (Nobel Education Institute) by an additional 1,500 square feet for a total of approximately 3,780 square feet to accommodate a total of 75 students, and to have at least 60 students transported to Holly Avenue Elementary School for recreational activities and pick -up. SITE AREA: 28,390 square feet (0.65 acre) FRONTAGES: 99.045 feet along W. Duarte Road 225.615 feet along S. Santa Anita Avenue EXISTING LAND USE: Two (2) retail buildings totaling 9,200 square feet with 54 on -site parking spaces and one (1) loading zone. ZONING CLASSIFICATION: C — General Commercial GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Commercial — Provides for general commercial and professional office needs. Appropriate uses include a range of common retail and personal service uses, specialty retail, offices, auto - related uses, financial institutions, and hotels and motels.- There is a 0.50 Floor - Area -Ratio (FAR) for commercial' development, a density of up to 50 dwelling units per acre for market =rate senior housing projects, and up to 63 dwelling units per acre for affordable senior housing projects. SURROUNDING LAND USES & ZONING: North: A one -story office building & seven (7) one -story apartments — Zoned C -2 South: City Library — Unzoned East: Mixed commercial —Zoned C -2 West: Mixed commercial —Zoned. C -2 BACKGROUND The 9,200 square -foot retail center was built in 1987. There are currently 54 on -site parking spaces and one (1) loading zone. The center can be accessed from Duarte Road and from southbound Santa Anita Avenue. Exiting from the property is by right - turns only. In February of 1988, Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 88 -04 (Reso. 1362) was granted fora 1,150 square -foot fast food eatery (Cherry Lips) in unit A. ` The existing 2,280 square -foot tutorial center, Nobel Education Institute was approved in 1993 through Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 93 -04 (Reso. 1499) for units D, E & F, and allows, for up . to 30 students of elementary through high school age with operating hours of 9:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, and 9 :00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays. Included was a Parking Modification for 55 on -site spaces in lieu of 67 required. One (1) parking space has been deleted to accommodate a van - accessible handicap space. In December of 1996, Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 96 -10 (CC Reso. 5967) was approved for the fast food eatery (El Polio Loco) in unit I. CUP 07 -05 July 10, 2007 Page 2 of 8 PROP OSAL AND ANALYSIS Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 07 -05 is to expand the Nobel Education Institute tutorial center at 1 W. Duarte Road. The proposal is to extend the existing 2,280 square -foot tutorial center into the adjacent 1,510 square feet of commercial space, units G & H (see attached plans) add recreational activities by providing transportation for at least 60 students to Holly Avenue Elementary School, and have those students picked -up at the school to relieve the parking and traffic congestion at 1 W. Duarte Road. Attached are a copy of the applicant's approved Application for Use of School Facilities, and maps of the transportation route to/from Holly Avenue Elementary School and the drop - off /pick -up loop at the school. The expanded tutorial center could accommodate a maximum occupancy of 122 people; however this proposal is only for a total of 75 students; 30 students'from the original CUP for the existing 2,280 square -foot space, plus 45 students for the proposed additional 1,510 square -foot expansion area. The original 2,280 square -foot tutorial center could have accommodated a maximum occupancy of 63 people, but was limited to 30 students of elementary through high school age as a condition of approval to limit parking and traffic problems. The ages of the students to be enrolled are not proposed to be changed, but currently the students are first -to- eighth grade age. The proposed tutoring hours are 3:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. daily with a minimum of 60 students to be transported to Holly Avenue Elementary School beginning at approximately 4:45 p.m. Drop -off and pick -up parking and traffic are major concerns because they occur at peak traffic times and can cause significant problems. The existing tutorial center is limited to 30 students for this reason. The applicant is providing transportation to the tutorial center to alleviate the after school parking and traffic problem, and is proposing to transport at least 60 students to Holly Avenue Elementary School for pick up to relieve the after work parking and traffic problem. The transportation proposal has been reviewed by the City's Traffic Engineer. Use of the transportation loop at Holly Avenue Elementary School for evening pick up of 60 students should not be a problem, and an acceptable transportation route has been delineated on the attached map. It should be noted that the Holly Avenue Elementary School transportation loop must be accessed from the south because left-tums into the transportation loop are not allowed. The parking requirements for tutorial centers are one (1) space per employee plus one (1) space for every five (5) students under high school age and one (1) space for every three (3) students of high school age or older. The proposal does not change the elementary through high school ages of the students to be enrolled at the tutorial center. But, based on the under high school age of the current students, the parking requirement for the proposed expanded tutorial center is 24.spaces; nine (9) for employees and 15 for the 75 students. CUP 07 -05 July 10, 2007 Page 3 of 8 The applicant has been providing transportation to the tutorial center, which alleviates parking and traffic during the after - school traffic peak, and is proposing to provide transportation 'for at 'least 60 students to. Holly Avenue Elementary School for recreational activities and' pick -up by the parents to relieve the after work parking and traffic congestion at the'shopping center, which is significant because of the two (2) eating establishments also located in this center. A`9;200 square -foot retail center is required to have at least 46 on -site parking spaces (5'spaces per 1,000 gross square feet) The subject center was developed with 55 on- site parking spaces. One (1) space has been deleted to accommodate a van - accessible handicap parking space, and there are three (3) Parking Modifications in effect for the uses at this center. The cumulative Parking Modification is currently 54 parking spaces in lieu of 114 spaces 'required. The current uses and parking requirements are as follows: 1 W. Duarte Road — Uses & Parking Requirements Parking Unit Use Size . Spaces Required Notes A Cafe 1,150 sq. ft. 5.8 in Iieu of 2&0. CUP 88 -04 B Cleaners 1,120 sq. ft. 5.6 C Clothing Shop 1,120 sq. ft. 5.6 D -F Tutorial Center 2,280 sq. ft. 11.4 in lieu of 32.1 CUP 93-04 G ' retail (vacant) 755 sq. ft. 3.8 H retail (vacant) 755 sq. ft. 3.8 I _ :Retail Fast Food 2.020 sq. ft: 10.1 in lieu of 40.4 CUP 96-10 Totals 9,200 sq. ft. 46.1 -in lieu of 114.3 32.1 spaces is the requirement based on the former regulation of one (1) space for every 35 square feet of the 1,125 square feet of instructions[ area in the 2,280 square -foot commercial space. Currently, the parking requirement for tutorial centers is based on the,number of employees and the ages and number of students. The proposed expanded tutorial center would have a parking requirement of only, 24 spaces, compared to the'requirenient of 32 spaces for the existing tutorial center. This is because�the parking requirement for tutorial centers used to be one (1) space per 35 square feet of instructional area, instead of being based on the number of employees and students' expanded tutorial center would require a modification of 19 spaces in lieu of 24 spaces, which would decrease the cumulative Parking Modification to 54 spaces in lieu of 99 spaces. With the reduced cumulative Parking Modification and the proposed transportation to Holly Avenue Elementary School, the proposed tutorial center expansion could benefit the' retail center at 1 W. Duarte Road by reducing the parking and traffic problems. However, having to transport 80% of the students to an alternative location to be picked up`by their parents is an extreme measure to accommodate'theproposed expansion at this'center. Additionally, the expanded tutorial center would occupy a total of 3,790 CUP 07 -05 July 10, 2007 Page 4 of 8 square feet, which is over 40% of the total 9,200 square feet of commercial space at the center. Educational services are a desirable use and tutorial centers are very popular. Nevertheless, staff's opinion is that a non - retail use should not be the major tenant in a retail center. Having as much as 40% of the space in a retail center inactive for most of the day is injurious to the other tenants and precludes the center from providing other retail opportunities to the neighborhood. This, combined with the need to provide transportation to a remote pick up location to relieve parking and traffic problems, are the bases for staffs determination that the proposed expanded tutorial center is inappropriate. Other Reauirements Expansion of the tutorial center will require that the use be brought into compliance with all current building and safety measures as determined to be necessary by the Building Official and Fire Marshall. Furthermore, the applicant is required to comply with all development and operational requirements and policies determined to be necessary by the City Engineer, City Traffic Engineer, Community Development Administrator, Public Works Services Director, and any service districts and utility providers that will serve the tutorial center. 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 five (5) of the following prerequisite conditions can be satisfied: 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. ` 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. The applicant's explanations as to the satisfaction of these required findings are presented in the attached excerpt from the application materials. CUP 07 -05 July 10, 2007 Page 5 of 8 CEQA Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) the Development Services Department has prepared a Preliminary Exemption Assessment finding that the proposed project'`is a Class 1 Categorical Exemption under CEQA Guidelines 'Section 15301: Interior, alterations to an existing structure. A Notice of Exemption is not required to be filed [Section'15062(6)] and has not been prepared for this a project. The Development Services" Department will not be filing a Notice of Determination unless requested and paid for by the applicant. The filing of a Notice of Exemption starts a 35-day statute of limitations on legal challenges to the City's determination that the project is exempt from CEQA. If a Notice of Exemption is not filed, a 180 -day statute of limitations will apply [Section 15062(d)]. These statutes of limitations do not preclude the City from processing the project, nor do they preclude they applicant from proceeding'with'the project once the necessary permits have been granted [Section °15112(b)]. RECOMMENDATION The Development Services Department recommends denial of Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 07 -05 based on two (2) findings: That chaving a large non - retail use that is active for only three (3) hours per day (3:00 psi. to 6:00 p.m.) occupy a substantial portion (41 %) of a retail center is injurious to the other tenants and to the retail opportunities that should be provided by a neighborhood retail center, and That is not adequate to, accommodate the expanded- tutorial center because the parking lot and adjacent roadways could be significantly impacted unless 80% of the students are transported to on off -site location for pick up due to the parking and traffic problems. If the Planning Commission is to consider approval of Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 07 -05, the Development Services Department recommends the following conditions: 1. The tutorial center and the site shall be operated, improved and maintained in a manner that is consistent with this proposal and plans. The final, plans shall be subject to review, revision and approval by the Building Official, Community Development Administrator and Fire Marshall. The tutorial center and the site must be in compliance with all of;the conditions of approval prior to -occupancy of the expansion area. Noncompliance with the plans, provisions, requirements of various City departments, and`the conditions of approval for CUP 07-05 shall be grounds for. immediate suspension and /or revocation of any approvals, which may result in the loss of use of the expansion area. 2. The existing tutorial center and the proposed expansion area shall bei subject to inspection by the Building Official, Community Development Administrator and Fire Marshall and the use and property shall be brought into compliance with all current CUP 07 -05 July 10, 2007 Page 6 of 8 measures, policies and requirements determined to be necessary by the Building Official, City Engineer, City Traffic Engineer, . Community Development Administrator, Fire Marshall, Public Works Services Director, and any service districts and utility providers that will serve the subject. 3. Maximum occupancy, access and exiting, including disabled accessibility for the tutorial center shall be determined by the Building Official and Fire Marshal, except that the maximum enrollment is limited to 75 students of elementary school age (up to eighth grade) in the westerly 3,790 square feet of commercial space in the northerly building of 1 W. Duarte Road. 4. A Parking Modification for 19 on -site spaces in lieu of 24 spaces is granted for the tutorial center. This Parking Modification does not constitute an approval for a general reduction of the parking requirements for the subject property, but rather only for the tutorial center that is herein conditionally approved. Changes to uses within the area occupied by the tutorial center may be subject to a new CUP and /or Parking Modification. 5. A minimum of 60 students shall be transported to Holly Avenue Elementary School for recreational activities and pick up by parents by 5:00 p.m. during daylight savings time, and by 4:30 p.m. during standard time. The ability to transport at least 60 students to an acceptable alternative location for pick up by parents must be in effect for the approval of this Conditional Use Permit to be effective and proof of such ability to utilize an alternative location for pick up by parents must be.filed with the Community Development Division. The acceptability of the alternative location and the method and route of transportation shall subject to review and approval by the Community Development Administrator and City Traffic Engineer. 6. The "Arcadia Resource" sign shall be removed and any damage to the wall shall be repaired such that it will not be noticeable from the nearest pedestrian and /or vehicular way. 7. 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. CUP 07 -05 July 10, 2007 Page 7 of 8 -8. The °approval ?of CUP 07 -05 shall not take effect , until the'property owner, business `owner; and applicant have executed and returned the Acceptance Form from the Development Services Department to document acknowledgement and acceptance of the conditions of approval, and all conditions of approval shall be satisfied prior to the issuance of a building permit and /or occupancy of the expansion area. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION AAporoval If the Planning Commission intends to approve this proposal, or any part thereof, the Commission should move to approve Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 07- 05, or those specific 2 parts thereof, accept staffs determination of a categorical exemption, state the.:supporting' findings, and direct staff to prepare a resolution for adoption at the next meeting that incorporates the Commission's decision, specific determinations and findings, and the conditions of approval as listed in this report or as modified by the Commission. Denial If r the Planning Commission intends to, deny this proposal,. the Commission should move to deny; Conditional Use Permit Application, No: CUP 07 -05; state the finding(s) that the proposal does not satisfy, and direct staff to prepare a resolution for adoption at the next meeting that•incorporates the Commission's decision and speck findings. If any Planning Commissioner, or other interested party has any questions or comments regarding this matter prior to the July 10th public hearing, please contact Jim Kasama at,(626) 821A334 or (626) 574 -5423. Approved by:' lllllllp�w Jason Kruck "'erg, Attachments: Vicinity Map Aerial Photo Photos of Subject Property Proposed Plans Application for, Use of School Facilities Transportation Route Map Map of Drop- Off/Pick -up Loop Applicant's Explanations of Required Findings Preliminary Exemption Assessment CUP 07 -05 July 10, 2007 Page 8 of 8 CAMPUS DR H 100 o 100 200 Feet (18) (12) C-2 LUCILE ST Q (eoo) C-2; Q Q C-2 y rys) (3J (21) DUARTE RD rya) (f W) Om) C - 2 Q UNZONED y Z Q , 4 Z (foie) Q 1 W Duarte Road Development Services Departmentf ^ / _ UP � / 7�®5 Engineering Division V V VV Pmpsdby:R.&Gmzdez, Alm 2007 0a.nttr 1° =, t r C N 100 _0 too 40 0 Feet IS is z y� Y Y in z } �, : t! ^ ♦'� .d?"i J (te.., �$ 1 Id s y t s4 r ._ a T;wfi r eia r i h F,z Properly�� y e gyp. r f- u q4 IiA rr � 4 : p x ,y b, �7�, a ky�,. v wu vA k i W Duarte Rd �', r a k -.[ d r� � � a R r r �rnlp'�m ' Z 't n�� _ [ u'� xA • x �`1 �. Arcadia Y. Zone I W Duarte Road CUP O7 05 Development Services Department m` Engineering Division ' m�ear o1 ° Prepered by' R.SGonzefez, June 2107 ' 0.Y fM14 G A 2` �; _ 1 W. Duarte Road — View of northerly building 1 W. Duarte Road — View of subject spaces D -H Ron Rossiter Aeol Estwe Development Coinmerticl — industrlol p-O. 6=1 humdi� C"hmw 91066 . n a 1 � o► . S cS - Sn'E NLEA . 73,sa2 4 eolwuI; AFZ& a9 t ' - SN11'A ANIT,, wva.et>= r rr L J V 0 1 - �7w vlel^ = Tc) PMat% e -7 (6 6)2.3 0 —q- 13 a Vl\ li ti 1 fi S' �z cliq AZI 5 - :5 f` NJ d7i fy% z _j CLI I I , 0 0 LL' IL .0.1-- cr. < (L cliq AZI 5 - :5 -u sed upontgtem {'of mjivy`to or deiali of person's:ordamage.to pmperty as: aiesult a(' arising out of, or in any manner connec&d'with my.orgenization's peifonbarim under - 9hetenns6l'ihiscontract, eXce0t14 only liability out 0f tho negligence of the District, . .,.,: $rATEMENTOPINFORat.it7py , The imdergjgned states thaq,to the'best.of his knowledge, the school propertyfor' use of which applicationis.heroby made will not be u¢4d far.theootnjnissron of any em which is,cenlf acl prohibimd by law, or for the oommission of any erime�including, but not limited to, the primospecifiad in Sections 11400 diTd't7 of the:- Cglifomie Penal Code. I y,(or dare).under the penalty of perjury that the foregoing ia.true and comet - . i '$� tiolrs 11400 end 11401 . of the California Penn] Code specifically referred to areghe Caiiforpia Criminal Syndication Act which prohibits and'penalizes'advocacy of 'tgey¢mg aiding nr:abeuing acts intentlW to accomplish change in industrial ownership, or goyemment by means of tinlawful'foree, vidlencE, or terrorism. Si'k7atite,N't of :RESPONSI69LM The undersigned hereby certifies tbat he has roadmad.the guidelines for use of District facilities unreverse side of sonlicatidn and shall. 'bs:ppetsonallyresponsible, on:behalf ofbis prgantmtioh,:tor ahydamage dr'unneeessary'ebuse of school buildings, grounds, or equipment'growing oat of occupancy of aejtl.�prpmrsesbylhisergaaizaii6 : W agraes to abide by and eaiforce:'theniles and mip lations governing the nod - school usepf building $)CNATt1RE OF OFFICc�ERyMA 'KIpN�yG.yPPL1CA4TONs R TFrt>a IN OkG • /r /J C2�`" ima m - *1S1SAC0STESrrn4trs } ►', , > ( 4 ..... Illts .' . R'A3EJHOlJR:' .::TREfi US DIIMT Ms ': �FAIA TOTAL ,. ,. ACII;p]''Y lII3ARGES PER ATTAi3f FEE stfjgD= W OFHO Epia.tyRbom(s) 'yn'd38ci`pr EleCtriii:Ctew : ; : .. . '.,p' 'SerHiueEmployee: ;,: : Qiher . ' r04yMcnt,Reg!4 � Y'V1 N, .Feegpayehle "fothoDistrictloy. T'oml:Estimate: 'Per Ed dung Grcup/PelSOaxSName "i li: ��_- , yy; =y w ��(:odets. 38131; 38134 &.ttJSD }� °-•- F ax: 4° ,,{ $riling Address; Street -i it ,oe!SM•d ,&4 Zip Code � - APYLICATIONAPPROVED :By'SCkI00L AD1itIN1SfRATOR: DATE 'WHITE - School ORice/ee Custodiga UGRE61 Business Office,: 'YELLOW- Operations BLUE+ Cafeteria PINK,Appiicsnt Rev. 5M] 10.00049 - i �u]idlpg {4,tigopened at:• , C Closed at: E Estimated attendance a aspen to.ptiblic? [. ] ;Y; N' tviEeting at: E Ends at: W Will an admission ttie, cOlTe4fion , Or solicitation be in e? [ :].'Y N' burp Sc Otiiet ting D k. '' �lFUh s to .. •,.y_, vas_... uatr ,4 � �k �. L. i, : . 4 _ '� t P V.:. d. > Via• (�] 1 4 E' H, RS, CLAD • The undersigned agrees m indemnify and hold harmless, District its o _ _ c i ti.: x h ;:• y . , fi sebal .gyp liitli' .:ltatrg. '. &i.$?i,Posts. _tip tpobeRoom' . , Fbb_:ell AvF3]tead.p0j . $ti}ge/Platfomt ". 4s) ) `Idu a_ iuldjilg'* .:,' yin North * *::: y5tem' + *• Ta it t at fa _ 1 ghpol " P . . g J pY/Lswn:. :.- Cryta; South**- ... ones T,a9p[e. Size:: o (1 3Jos " IyCtiurt"* T),ayground Piano ',. ' - � � "IXrJNCR ' tttt .. ', 1)AH . , • #..`.. _' . J;.� • apms,;. .:.� � ,.Pod *+ .. .. *,� ta'! < •• ep, ar** , rannis Courts' Aoit9tle LlgNts. Other: tt}C, .mow': ;Fldf6pay -Caro T ** ", $s prs`. O(Jtpe :. , .... .. .. :Other: :....., -. - . Sdceen. ' :.., offer : �: I'Ele*cian I . 7 List 'classroom numbers: : _ *yt Fflo Setelc Employcef4uked' pmor Toggirfti *".;yS - :; : *'* AI3$ $ountl Criw.Fnrtp required ... ;9risCUetron6i ` sed upontgtem {'of mjivy`to or deiali of person's:ordamage.to pmperty as: aiesult a(' arising out of, or in any manner connec&d'with my.orgenization's peifonbarim under - 9hetenns6l'ihiscontract, eXce0t14 only liability out 0f tho negligence of the District, . .,.,: $rATEMENTOPINFORat.it7py , The imdergjgned states thaq,to the'best.of his knowledge, the school propertyfor' use of which applicationis.heroby made will not be u¢4d far.theootnjnissron of any em which is,cenlf acl prohibimd by law, or for the oommission of any erime�including, but not limited to, the primospecifiad in Sections 11400 diTd't7 of the:- Cglifomie Penal Code. I y,(or dare).under the penalty of perjury that the foregoing ia.true and comet - . i '$� tiolrs 11400 end 11401 . of the California Penn] Code specifically referred to areghe Caiiforpia Criminal Syndication Act which prohibits and'penalizes'advocacy of 'tgey¢mg aiding nr:abeuing acts intentlW to accomplish change in industrial ownership, or goyemment by means of tinlawful'foree, vidlencE, or terrorism. Si'k7atite,N't of :RESPONSI69LM The undersigned hereby certifies tbat he has roadmad.the guidelines for use of District facilities unreverse side of sonlicatidn and shall. 'bs:ppetsonallyresponsible, on:behalf ofbis prgantmtioh,:tor ahydamage dr'unneeessary'ebuse of school buildings, grounds, or equipment'growing oat of occupancy of aejtl.�prpmrsesbylhisergaaizaii6 : W agraes to abide by and eaiforce:'theniles and mip lations governing the nod - school usepf building $)CNATt1RE OF OFFICc�ERyMA 'KIpN�yG.yPPL1CA4TONs R TFrt>a IN OkG • /r /J C2�`" ima m - *1S1SAC0STESrrn4trs } ►', , > ( 4 ..... Illts .' . R'A3EJHOlJR:' .::TREfi US DIIMT Ms ': �FAIA TOTAL ,. ,. ACII;p]''Y lII3ARGES PER ATTAi3f FEE stfjgD= W OFHO Epia.tyRbom(s) 'yn'd38ci`pr EleCtriii:Ctew : ; : .. . '.,p' 'SerHiueEmployee: ;,: : Qiher . ' r04yMcnt,Reg!4 � Y'V1 N, .Feegpayehle "fothoDistrictloy. T'oml:Estimate: 'Per Ed dung Grcup/PelSOaxSName "i li: ��_- , yy; =y w ��(:odets. 38131; 38134 &.ttJSD }� °-•- F ax: 4° ,,{ $riling Address; Street -i it ,oe!SM•d ,&4 Zip Code � - APYLICATIONAPPROVED :By'SCkI00L AD1itIN1SfRATOR: DATE 'WHITE - School ORice/ee Custodiga UGRE61 Business Office,: 'YELLOW- Operations BLUE+ Cafeteria PINK,Appiicsnt Rev. 5M] 10.00049 - i �u]idlpg {4,tigopened at:• , C Closed at: E Estimated attendance a aspen to.ptiblic? [. ] ;Y; N' tviEeting at: E Ends at: W Will an admission ttie, cOlTe4fion , Or solicitation be in e? [ :].'Y N' burp Sc Otiiet ting D Dispoa[tion of. funds.iaollected ahilt9y urAnce Comer: C e rtificat e of Insurano8 Attached : Yes [ ] No dd74ss , t t omments: H, RS, CLAD • The undersigned agrees m indemnify and hold harmless, District its o _ _ c upontgtem {'of mjivy`to or deiali of person's:ordamage.to pmperty as: aiesult a(' arising out of, or in any manner connec&d'with my.orgenization's peifonbarim under - 9hetenns6l'ihiscontract, eXce0t14 only liability out 0f tho negligence of the District, . .,.,: $rATEMENTOPINFORat.it7py , The imdergjgned states thaq,to the'best.of his knowledge, the school propertyfor' use of which applicationis.heroby made will not be u¢4d far.theootnjnissron of any em which is,cenlf acl prohibimd by law, or for the oommission of any erime�including, but not limited to, the primospecifiad in Sections 11400 diTd't7 of the:- Cglifomie Penal Code. I y,(or dare).under the penalty of perjury that the foregoing ia.true and comet - . i '$� tiolrs 11400 end 11401 . of the California Penn] Code specifically referred to areghe Caiiforpia Criminal Syndication Act which prohibits and'penalizes'advocacy of 'tgey¢mg aiding nr:abeuing acts intentlW to accomplish change in industrial ownership, or goyemment by means of tinlawful'foree, vidlencE, or terrorism. Si'k7atite,N't of :RESPONSI69LM The undersigned hereby certifies tbat he has roadmad.the guidelines for use of District facilities unreverse side of sonlicatidn and shall. 'bs:ppetsonallyresponsible, on:behalf ofbis prgantmtioh,:tor ahydamage dr'unneeessary'ebuse of school buildings, grounds, or equipment'growing oat of occupancy of aejtl.�prpmrsesbylhisergaaizaii6 : W agraes to abide by and eaiforce:'theniles and mip lations governing the nod - school usepf building $)CNATt1RE OF OFFICc�ERyMA 'KIpN�yG.yPPL1CA4TONs R TFrt>a IN OkG • /r /J C2�`" ima m - *1S1SAC0STESrrn4trs } ►', , > ( 4 ..... Illts .' . R'A3EJHOlJR:' .::TREfi US DIIMT Ms ': �FAIA TOTAL ,. ,. ACII;p]''Y lII3ARGES PER ATTAi3f FEE stfjgD= W OFHO Epia.tyRbom(s) 'yn'd38ci`pr EleCtriii:Ctew : ; : .. . '.,p' 'SerHiueEmployee: ;,: : Qiher . ' r04yMcnt,Reg!4 � Y'V1 N, .Feegpayehle "fothoDistrictloy. T'oml:Estimate: 'Per Ed dung Grcup/PelSOaxSName "i li: ��_- , yy; =y w ��(:odets. 38131; 38134 &.ttJSD }� °-•- F ax: 4° ,,{ $riling Address; Street -i it ,oe!SM•d ,&4 Zip Code � - APYLICATIONAPPROVED :By'SCkI00L AD1itIN1SfRATOR: DATE 'WHITE - School ORice/ee Custodiga UGRE61 Business Office,: 'YELLOW- Operations BLUE+ Cafeteria PINK,Appiicsnt Rev. 5M] 10.00049 - t' ci' jA. PREREQUISITE 'CONDITIONS: (The law requires that the conditions set forth below be clearly established before. a conditional, use "permit can be granted.) EXPLAIN IN DETAIL WHEREIN YOUR CASE : CONFORMS TO THE FOLLOWING FIVE CONDITIONS: 1. That the granting: of such conditional use peimit�will not be detrimental sto the public health or y welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in such zone�or vicinity. J . / t e SFF vi PS toil/ SUds`�"uu iia 44p4n xrrenfS by S tp�rbisii a nd ZiLgc%intheireA'/di:ii ter' af` �r- MoeJ&,trc 4y, stcah %jz rbe, CO}miv, ;n:fv k, rPalueind teein A 1D� / ?•L1C ifYl" EIIP Sty -QP, nr CTf/ fJem 2. That the use applied for at the location indicated is one for which a conditional use pewit is authorized. Ye s 3. Th the site for the proposed use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate said use, including all yards „•spaces, walls fences, parking loading; land - soaping and other features required to adjust said use with the land and uses in the neighborhood. � e5 ' u nrkina w' h Nolk Ave.. FIP men tG+tY' choo4 we ay Der /1oityd & use tht ch ldm. d i YPCL ` Y i Aii,Yk Vewf 5 Co;•rrn.�r 2/7 Y r 9 J11 1 dlf P�Ci7C( P, ash' Se 'c '6914( G, t+ , 4. That the site abuts streets "and hig�iways quate m with and pavement type to carry the kind of traffic generated by the proposed use: "'/ piea4� rel � 3 (Ako me E (W 6 -b R . ,S c xh lit G ) 5. That the granting of such conditional use permit will not adversely affect the com- prehensive General Plan:. . Yes PIP ,64e refer - t0 3 CA( see Ex,k f, fs `8 Cxhibi ) NOTE: The Planning Commission,is required by law to make a written finding of facts, based upon the infortnation presented at the time of the public hearing, that beyond a reasonable doubt the five above enumerated conditions apply, Or /08 /o7 Exhibit B This is to clearly and completely answer question 3, 4, and 5 in the Prerequisite Conditions in the conditional use permit application on page 2. The proposed expansion units are adequate in size and shape to accommodate the proposed use. However, we understand the planning's concerns are the deficient parking spaces and the traffic conditions in and out of the proposed property. In order to resolve the planning's concerns, we do have a solution to that. This solution will not only prevent any future parking and traffic problems but also substantially reduce any current parking and traffic problems. As you've probably well known that El Pollo Loco does also create significant parking and traffic at their peak time (dinner at about 6pm). As you examine our solution, it actually helps resolve the whole plaza's current parking and traffic problems at the peak time. Our solution is to arrange outdoor activities in our after- school program. Many our parents actually support this activities. Since we provide youth -bus transportation service to pick up students from their public schools at 2:30pm everyday, after assisting their homework and teaching them enrichment at the current location, we can transport them to Holly Ave. Elementary School for outdoor activities after 4:45pm. The parents then can pick up their children from Holly Ave. Elementary School between 5pm and 6:15pm. This ends up just like the Chinese schools that are renting the public schools for their after- school programs. The difference is that we use our own private building and then send them to public school for sport activities. We have been working with Holly Ave. Elementary School's Principle Ms. Blackstock about renting the playground for sport activities; she is very supportive to our after - school program that now includes outdoor activities. Thus; we are even more confident now to provide such an after- school program that benefits our children and working parents, at the same time reduces parking and traffic problems in our plaza. We will transport a minimum number of 60 students to Holly Ave. Elementary School for outdoor activities after 4:45pm Monday through Friday. The students will stay there for outdoor sport activities, and at the same time will wait for their parents to pick them up. For raining days or during raining season, we will also rent the gymnasium or auditorium so that students can stay indoors while playing. The other good thing is that the School's drive- through at Holly Avenue has a long, wide and roofed corridor (see picture l & 2) so the students can wait safely under the.roof while waiting for pickup. And there is a parking lot light on the drive- through. During the winter season from December to February when it gets dark at about 5:30pm, we could go there earlier so that students still have ample time to play outdoors. In conclusion, by adjusting our current after - school program to have outdoor activities or physical activities at Holly Ave. Elementary School, it creates all the benefits listed below: 1. Substantially reduce the parking need and traffic flow caused by our after - school program at the plaza now and in the future 2. Better and healthier after- school program that covers both academic and physical needs for the youth. 3. Easier and safer for the parents to pick up their children at Holly Ave. Elementary School's drive- through. As the city just passed the gigantic Caruso Project, a project that creates much, much, much more traffic problems for the city, I deeply wish the planning can examine Exhibit B — Page 1 our expansion project as fair as the planning did to the Caruso Project since both present positive solution to the potential p : roblem' The, followings show more information about our expansion project. * Operation hours: Office hours: From 10am to 7pm Monday through' Friday Class schedule: between 3pm and 6pm Monday through Friday * Proposed number of students at the expanding units:, 45 students *' Picture 1 & Picture 2: Holly Ave. Elementary School's drive- through at Holly Avenue. .Picture 1 ' Picture 2 s ilzzz f . } .Picture 1 ' Picture 2 Playground Use Contract with Holly Ave. Elementary School As we applied for the playground use at Holly Ave. Elementary School in February, it took a very long time for the school district to process it. Not *1 April, the school district finally gave us a contract starting April 23 and ending June 29, 2007. Mr: Mike Cooper, the school district's maintenance supervisor, told us that the new contract starting July 1, 2007 and . ending June 30, 2008:will.be provided to us in June 2007 as this is'quite standard when the school district provides contract to outside organization annually. We. will continue to renew 'the contract annually. , When we have the new contract for the'coming school year (2007- 2008), we should forward itto the planning department immediately as part of our CUP application document. 'Mr. Mike Cooper can be reached at 626 - 821 -1435 ext. 224: r e \ Exhibit B — Page 4 C•:' fvl.l4patlioseRdtlm '.. `Fedtiiell Ovei1<ead:Proj. S,tagelPlatfotrn ' �r3`A[95) lsf tp i[d;rtgt* Gyiry'Northtt ASgBtem * ** '. " . Tables aY na gtbrr setwol ., .:.; , klfig']"Ot(JAwn . G South'!:: Mtp uphpnes , Tagle. Size: r Q mom (I St'' os y Coact Playgrountl Ptann : . kNCR' m a r{in', str opts . Potl }!w. , PbatudUNSIC Othor: dW. ae art *' - `T'ei%ais Courts Portatile;LY,ghts Other: tka;Hrit/payCaro Track ** RlsprS Other: Q[her:, o "," rva £itipl.* .Electrician: Listclassroomndmhera: - - rCOSt{id111R . ::: ; j;ound,CrewtFt. . roP Serv)eds'Ealploy4e.reijurred pnprapproval rCCjPI a+ $'On)y ; • +* AH5'$mttid Cr @w Portp required' " r auji$tng to by opened at: Closed at:: Estimated et[endana. 6pen.to public? [ ] .Y N ) 3viOptid at: . Enda Will an admission fee, co' ea Pn, or solicitanon be made? [ ] Y N I urpdse 4f mettingi Disppsition of funds.colaectddr 'ability Insurance Carrier: - .�, ' q Certificate of Insurance Attached: Yes j ] No Comments: .HgLtr' tcAasE The u ersigned egiasto.indemnify srid hold handles District, its officers, agents, •and employees from and against any grid gall claims,, :dtpipaads, Io }ilefegse costs; :or liability of•any kind or nixie which the District,�its officers, agents, and employees may sustain or incor'or which may be imposed :,upon them jof'ipjliiy'to ordeiitlf of persons or �damageto property as.a,result of, arising nut of, or in any manner connected With organization's performance udder tbp terms ofthrs'convact; ekeelning only liability out of negligence ofthe District: $T4TEMENTOF1NFoRNGT1oNi The underSigned states that to the best,of his knowledge, the School property for use ofwhitih application is hereby made avill not.be' - li ,for rtlercortiiidilsron of any act wh)efi is,prohibiled bylaw, or for the commission of any crimaincWding, b04not limited to, the cnmexspecified in Sections 11400 ` . `d'dI�01 of tbe:California Penal Code. ,1 cei (or declare) under the penalty of perjury that the foregoing is We and c6M&. e = .. - SPEtrops 1 Id00 slid 11401 of the California Penal Code specifically referred to are the California Criminal Syndication Act which prohibits and penalizes advocacy of ap etdiijg pr abening acts intended to eccomphsh•change tnindustrial ownership, or govemmen(by means ofanlawful forts, violence, orterrorism. $7'A7EMENTOF - RESPONSta1L iV The undersigned. hereby certifies that he has read the up idelines for use of bistrict facilities .on revs a side'ofaonlicafion and shall . bp,personelly: responsible pn behilf,of.his ;orgamzatidn,'forartyxiamsge or unnecessary all* of school buildings, grounds, nr. equipment'$rowing out Of occupancy of sefld prCmises :by hisorganization, Ile agreEs to atirde by and anforoe the rules and regulations governing the nan- school use ofbaildings, grounds, orequipment. - SI6NtiTVRE OF OFFiCER W0aN6d1PPL1CA - � t TITLE II-N� r ORG.:' tKarR !.�iRZtfi�lt'(1,(;.1dP+Ri�. ''THIS ISACb37 `BSTIMATE1;{,if''d.F:85r•M'._ .,.•� . : $ERNICP/FACILFIY: CHI+ AGE$ PER ATTACEIED FEE SC}IEDW. I .. OFHOURS . RATE/HOUR JTM USE DIRECT IYI . .!ARft AVBTOTAL . ;:.. ) i:.- c:,gru)d"BrYor Eleetnc C3ew:. ' , '� ,eod.'Serrrice;Employea: ? pthlFtrc r tepayer eof;Req Y . ] N Fees payablt:(o the DrStrict by Total:: Estimate: $' Per Bdhode'Secs 38131; 3813! &.dUSD'BoardBolity, illinp Group6persofi's'Name'h: Fax: BjII n Address SB of " City �yrA i p .. Z'10 Code y y t 'APPLICATiON-APP.ROVE119Y 8CHOOL ADMiN1/STRATOR. DATE' ,ei,u rrP _c"..au nw i e rjwmia YIRR D Basiness.Offi6e :YELLOWOperalions SLUE= Cafeteria PINK- Applicant N _ - _ Rev.5101 10.00049 rl. Lj L y y' 1 t1f kt er� �i ,J i y :F ti 2.xds,ar�.ur rl I u, pp t M r �' c,, � p � i y • , `' r t l 1, �' ,� I d PRELIMINARY,EXEMPTION ASSESSMENT` (Certificate of Determination When.Attached to Notice of Exemption) 1. ,'Name or description of Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 07-05 to expand an existing tutoring center into the two (2) :adjacent commercial units. , .I , 2. Pro Location - Identify street eddreas and cross streets or attach a map showing project site (preferably a USGS`15 or T ,4' topographical map identified by quadrangle name): Y W. Duarte Road, Units D-H — Northwest Comerof Santa Anita Avenue. and Duarte Road 3. 'Entity or person undertaking project. .' =A. B. Dther,(Private): (1)` Name: Mr. Jonathan Li- Nobel Education Institute (2) Address: i W.� Duarte Rd., Unit D Arcadia, CA 4107 (3). Phone: (62 , 4. Staff Determma4on: The City's Staff having and completed a preliminary review of this: project in accordance with the City's "Local Guidelines for Implementing the California Environmental Quality Act - (CEGIA) has concluded that this project does not require further environmental, assessment because: a. ' [ ] The proposed action does not constitute aproie under CEQ ct A. b. [, j The project is `a Ministerial Project c [ ] The project is an Emergency Project.' d. [ ] The project constitutes a feasibility or planning . study. e. [X] The project is'categorically exempt.. Applicable Exemption Class: 1= 'Section No.: 15301 Interior altennhons'6 an existing structure. ` f. [ ] The project is statutorily exempt. Applicable Exemption: Section No.: _ g. [ ] The project is otherwise exempt on the following basis: In. [ ) The project involves another public agency which constitutes the Lead Agency. Name of Lead Agency: Date: June 1 2007 Staff: Ji Casarp , Alisociate Planner CEQA Preliminary . Exemption Assessment (Form W) 6/06 4. PUBLIC HEARIN CUP 07 -05 1 W. Duarte Road Jonathan Li Nobel Education Institute The applicant has requested a Conditional Use Permit to expand the existing 2,280 square -foot tutorial center (Nobel Education Institute) by an additional 1,500 square feet for a total of approximately 3,780 square feet to accommodate a total of 75 students, and to have at least 60 students transported to Holly Avenue School for recreational activities and pick -up. Associate Planner Jim Kasama presented the staff report. Commissioner Beranek asked for clarification of the table of parking spaces in the Staff Report and Mr. Kasama reviewed the table for him. Commissioner Hsu asked if any other similar type of establishment uses shuttle service to convey people from one location to another as a solution to their parking limitations. Mr. Kasama said that he was not aware of any. Commissioner Baderian noted that when the original application was approved the conditions of approval limited the school to a maximum of 30 students. Commissioner Beranek pointed out that Unit I, a retail fast food operation, has a Conditional Use Permit allowing less than the minim number of parking spaces required by the code. W. Kasama said that the Conditional Use Permit was denied by the Planning Commission and the applicant appealed to the City Council. The City Council granted the Conditional Use Permit based on information provided by the applicant's traffic consultants. The public hearing was opened. The applicant, Mr. Jonathan Li, 1367 York Drive, Arcadia, provided a document for distribution to the Commissioners. He stated that the hours of operation for his business are from 10:00 am to 7:00 pm unlike restaurants, for example, that only do business in the evening. He feels this is not a good reason to deny his application and stated that he cannot understand the Planning Department concern with the parking code. Mr. Lee further stated that the Planners feel that his business is injurious to the other tenants of the plaza but that he is sure his clients will bring more business to the plaza. He reminded the Commission that before his business moved into their unit, it was vacant for two years. He noted that they are transporting a large number of students to Holly Avenue School for after school activities and that he cannot understand why the Planning Department is recommending denial of his application. Commissioner Parrille asked Mr. Li for the number of trips anticipated per day and if they are using an approved route. Minutes Excerpt CUP 07 -05 —1 W. Duarte Rd. July 10, 2007 — Page 1 of 4 Mr. Lee said they have obtained two used buses which can each carry fourteen students for the five minute trip to Holly Avenue. School. He said the City Engineering Department has already approved the route. They plan to make two to, four trips per day and will stop after 4:45 pm in the summer and earlier when Daylight Savings Time has passed. Commissioner Hsu asked when the written agreement with Holly Avenue School for pick up and drop off of students expires. Mr. Li said the contract is renewable yearly. Co Baderian asked Mr. Li how many students are currently enrolled and Mr. Li said there are about 80. Commissioner Baderian pointed out that the original Conditional Use Permit stated that the school was not to exceed, 30 students. Mr. Li agreed that was correct. Ms. Michelle Wong, Arcadia, Director of the Nobel Institute said that they have been providing a beneficial service to the community for over fourteen years. The children at the 'Nobel Institute are fast to eighth grade students and they are offered snacks and help with homework. She noted that the school also provides tutoring in reading, math and foreign languages and that they are proud to support public schools and teachers. The goal of the school is to provide a caring, loving environment and to help the students develop a strong work ethic. They feel. fortunate to be able to provide an outdoor program by renting at Holly Avenue School. Ms. Wong said that since the Nobel Institute doesn't produce any negative impacts on the, area and since there is a great need for their service in the community she feels the application should be approved. Ms. Wong stressed that the Nobel Institute will try to meet all code requirements. Ms. Christy Trieu, 521 E. Longden Avenue, said that she works at the Nobel Institute and that there is a need to expand the tutorial center so that the older children can be separate from the younger students. Ms. Trieu said that after school a lot of children come to the Nobel Institute and they are excited to be there. She also said that the outdoor program at Holly Avenue is helpful because a lot of students are off site and parking is reduced. She believes they bring a lot of business to,the plaza. Ms. Carrie Glover, 5926 Camilla Avenue, Temple City, said she has been teaching fifth grade at the Nobel Institute for over five years and she has seen a lot of improvement in students both academically and socially. She said the Institute is committed to academic achievement and provides a good service to the community. Ms: Carmen Lung, 164 Delta Lane; is a Registered Nurse and works long hours and she is the mother of two students at the Nobel Institute: She said the Institute offers a great after school program and that her children. are doing very well there. She said her eighth grader goes to a location next to the bowling alley and her second grader stays at the . Duarte Road location. Allowing the Institute to; expand will mean that both her children will be able to stay at the same place and she won't have to drive around as much. Minutes Excerpt CUP 07-05 —1 W. Duarte Rd, July 10, 2007 — Page 2 of 4 Mr. Hector Santilla, 2615 Sunnydale Rd., said he owns that business next to the Nobel Institute and has been there for six years. He said that traffic has not been 'an issue for him and he has no complaints. Mr. John Hibler, 713 Park Ave., South Pasadena, said he used to live in Arcadia and he hoped that his perspective as a parent would be helpful. His son has been a student at Nobel from kindergarten to fifth grade and he feels the school is wonderful and it would be a shame for them to become the victims of their own success. He feels that the Nobel Institute brings more business to the center. Mr. Hibler said that his family moved from Arcadia to South Pasadena but he wanted his son to stay in school in Arcadia partly because he would be able to attend the Nobel Institute which he enjoyed. Mr. Hibler expressed the hope that the situation could be worked out to accommodate the families who participate in the Nobel Institute. Ms. Angel Huang, 410 Los Altos Avenue, said that her two sons have attended the Nobel Institute for the last two years. Her son had an academic problem which was identified and addressed with tutoring. She also said that her sons enjoy going to Holly Avenue too. Ms. Cara Si, 528 Columbia Road, said her son and her cousin's son attend the Nobel Institute and they are very happy there. She asked the Commissioners to give the Institute a chance and allow the expansion. She has not had any trouble with traffic. Ms. Katherine Tsu, 1122 Ninth Avenue, said her son has had a good experience at the Nobel Institute and she never encountered any traffic problem. She hopes the expansion will be approved and feels that it would be beneficial to the community. Ms. Way Tai, 415 Genoa Street, said she has never bad any trouble with traffic when picking up or dropping off her children at the Nobel Institute. Commissioner Baderian asked Mr. Lee if there has been a new Conditional Use Permit allowing more than 30 students since the resolution dated 1993. Mr. Lee admitted that they are exceeding the limit. He said they tried to apply for a new permit but it was not granted because of the parking situation. He reported that they have been renting Arcadia Congregational Church and two other buildings and also use some other locations temporarily. MOTION: It was moved by Commissioner Panrille, seconded by Commissioner Hsu, to close the public hearing. Without objection the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Beranek suggested that staff review the additional material presented by the applicant. Minutes Excerpt CUP 07 -05 —1 W. Duarte Rd. July 10, 2007 — Page 3 of 4 Commissioner Hsu asked for the maximum occupancy for the facility. Ivlr. Kasama replied that the current space has a maximum occupancy per building and safety codes of 63 persons. Commissioner Baderian expressed concern about the current operation. He requested that staff look into the current uses of the facility particularly in regard to occupancy and compliance with city codes.` MOTION: It was moved by Commissioner Beranek, seconded by Commissioner Parrille, to continue Conditional Use Permit 07 -05 to August 14, 2007. AYES: Commissioners Baderian, Beranek, Hsu and Parrille NOES: None Minutes Excerpt CUP 07 -05 —1 W. Duarte Rd. July 10, 2007 — Page 4 of 4 August 6 2007 pear Cotmaissim=s As the isodlord of Santa Duarte Plum I sinoeeely esprasa nV f11 m4V=t on the expattstoa of Nobel Education Institute. Nobel E&VAtion Institute bas been one of our tenants Mace 1993, Among all tm mt teas» ter, tt is the basioeas tbat stay$ the' longest period of time in ow plaea Its outstanding stability Coaslstm* promotes the ibme of ow location and coadnuously brings MMW castomers to Ow plaza. Ml' property management agency and I have never seen any ACS1gve impact or received goy complaint regarding Nobel's operation. on the odm hand, I do believe that baving a tutorial center in our plats will MOM All. ttarams to our plaza because the tutorial ouster draws many patents who are the poWUM wswmem to all other tenants. I am also pleased by Nobel's proposal of fdocatiag student's pick up to other l owfim. With its own mqmm, Nobel willingly improves t uf8c and patlting Condition in out pittsa, Nobel is wasndy occupying an kM comer of our plaza, which is not the desirable spot for many retail businesses, vvhlcb highly demand visiblilty from the sheets. A mm ding to dish proposal, Nobel is able to utUte the additional 1500 eq R without taking efdra parking sPam for thou Customers. I believe that it will be a "win -uric" sitwdun to Nobel and our place if Nobel's cq=ioA is approved. I do value Nobel's iatertlon to improve the t AMO and Parking ooaditlon of the wbole pk a at its owe etipenses. 3inoeiely, Gbin -Zvng That Landlord of Santa Duarte Plans p�GO41� Excerpt from Planning Commission Minutes of August 14, 2007 DRAFT 2. PUBLIC HEARING CUP 07 -05 1 W. Duarte Road Jonathan Li Nobel Education Institute Continued from 7 -10 -07 The applicant has requested a Conditional Use Permit to expand the existing 2,280 square -foot tutorial center (Nobel Education Institute) by an additional 1,500 square feet for a total of approximately 3,780 square feet to accommodate a total of 75 students, and to have at least 60 students transported to Holly Avenue School for recreational activities and pick -up. Senior Planner Jim Kasama presented the staff report. Commissioner Parrille said he was concerned about student traffic generated by Nobel Institute on Campus Drive, particularly when Arcadia High School was in session. Mr. Kasama said that traffic congestion was not expected to be a problem except in the case of major special events at the high school. Commissioner Baerg asked for verification of the number of students and Mr. Kasama said that the applicant wanted to increase enrollment from 30 to 75 students at the Duarte location. Commissioner Beranek noted that the owner of the restaurant in the center said the applicant was a good neighbor. He asked Mr. Kasama for clarification of the determination that the site is not adequate. Mr, Kasama explained that "not adequate" means that the site cannot accommodate expansion without the transportation of students to other sites. The public hearing was opened. Ms. Michelle Wong, Director of Education at Nobel Institute, 136 San Miguel Drive, Arcadia, representing the applicant, offered to answer questions about the project. Commissioner Hsu asked if Nobel has a written agreement with Holly Avenue School. Ms. Wong explained that Nobel has a facility usage agreement form on file with the school and that the agreement expires on June 30, 2008 and is renewable on a yearly basis. Chairman Baderian asked for clarification of the number of students currently enrolled and where they are picked up and dropped off. Exhibit No. 13 August 14, 2007 PC Minutes Excerpt (DRAFT) — Page 1 of 3 Excerpt from Planning Commission Minutes of August 14, 2007 DRAFT Ms. Wong said the total enrollment is, 80 students but they are at different locations. She further stated that there are less than 30 students at the Duarte Road location. Other locations they use are 1012 S. Baldwin Avenue and Holly Avenue School campus. Chairman Baderian asked how many students are at the Holly Avenue location at one time and Ms. Wong said there are 10 to 30. Chairman Baderian asked Ms. Wong if Nobel Institute. wanted to increase the number of students at the Duarte Road location to a maximum of 75 at one time. Ms. Wong said that most of them arrive from 3:00 pm to 6:00 pm. Again Chairman Baderian asked if Nobel Institute wanted to increase the number of students at the Duarte Road location to a maximum of 75 at one time. Ms. Wong said they do. Commissioner Baerg asked if, all the students are dropped off at the Duarte Road location L and then transported to the other locations. Ms. Wong said that they are dropped off at the Duarte Road, Baldwin Avenue or Holly Avenue location where they will be attending sessions. MOTION: It was moved by Commissioner Beranek, seconded by Commissioner Hsu, to close the public hearing. Without objection the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Hsu said that he frequents the center and never noticed a parking problem but that he is concerned about gridlock'at the busy intersection. He noted that the impact of Nobel Institute on the other businesses in the center seems positive. Commissioner Beranek said he disagrees with staff's conclusion that because the Institute is open only 'a few hours each day it is detrimental to the surrounding businesses. Chairman Baderian asked how the number of students and transporting of students could be monitored. Mr. Kruckeberg said that monitoring would be difficult but could be accomplished on a sporadic basis by Code Services observation. Exhibit No. 13 August 14, 2007 PC Minutes Excerpt (DRAFT) — Page 2 of 3 Excerpt from Planning Commission Minutes of August 14, 2007 DRAFT Chairman Baderian asked how many units are vacant at the center and has there been any interest in them. Mr. Kasama said there are currently two units vacant, one for about two years and the other for a little less. Further, the applicant had been cited for occupying the vacant units but Mr. Kasama was not aware of any other interest in the units. Commissioner Hsu asked if staff could report back to the Commission in six months regarding the traffic situation at Nobel Institute. Mr. Kruckeberg agreed to provide a report to the Commission of monitoring and Code Enforcement activity in six months. Don Penman, Development Services Manager, suggested requiring proof that all parents are notified of the pick up and drop off arrangements at each location. MOTION: It was moved by Commissioner Beranek, seconded by Commissioner Hsu, to approve Conditional Use Permit 07 -05 as recommended by staff, subject to the conditions in the staff report with additional conditions regarding egress on Duarte Road only and required monitoring of transport of students. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Baderian, Baerg, Beranek, Hsu and Parrille NOES: None A Resolution reflecting the decision of the Planning Commission will be presented for adoption at the next Commission meeting. There is a five working day appeal period after the adoption of the Resolution. / - Exhibit No. 13 August 14, 2007 PC Minutes Excerpt (DRAFT) — Page 3 of 3 RESOLUTION NO. 1764 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. CUP 07 -05 TO EXPAND THE TUTORIAL CENTER (NOBEL EDUCATION INSTITUTE) AT 1 WEST DUARTE ROAD WHEREAS, Conditional Use Permit application no. CUP 07 -05 was filed by Mr. Jonathan Li on May 5, 2007 to expand the tutorial center at 1 W. Duarte Road; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act, Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq. irCEQA °), and the State's CEQA Guidelines, the City of Arcadia prepared a Preliminary Exemption Assessment and determined that the proposed project qualifies as a Class 1 Categorical Exemption under Section 15301 of the CEQA Guidelines as interior alterations to an existing structure; and WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the Planning Commission on July 10, 2007 and August 14, 2007, at which times all interested persons were given full opportunity to be heard and to present evidence. NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. That the factual data submitted by the Development Services Department in the attached reports are true and correct. SECTION 2. This Commission finds: 1. That the approval of Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 07 -05 to expand the tutorial center will not be detrimental to the public health or welfare, or injurious to the property or improvements in the zone or vicinity. 2. That a tutorial center at the location indicated is properly one for which a Conditional Use Permit is authorized. 3. That the site for the expanded tutorial center is adequate in size and shape to accommodate said use, and all yards, spaces, walls, fences, parking, ExhlbR No. 14 PC Reso. No. 1764 for approval of CUP 07 -06 6 pp. loading, landscaping and other features required to adjust said use with the land and uses in the neighborhood. 4. That the site for the ,expanded tutorial center abuts streets and highways adequate in width and pavement type to carry the kind of traffic generated by the proposed use. 5. That the subject property is designated for commercial uses in the General Plan, that the expanded tutorial ce nter is consistent with that designation, and that the granting of the Conditional Use Permit will not adversely affect the comprehensive general plan. 6. That the determination that the project qualifies 88 ' a Class 1 Categorical Exemption is appropriate and that based upon the record as it whole, there is no evidence that the project will have any potentially adverse effect on wildlife resources or the habitat upon which wildlife depends. SECTION 3. That for the foregoing reasons this Commission grants Conditional Use Permit No CUP 07 -05 to expand the'tutorial 'center at 1 W. Duarte Road, subject to the following conditions: 1. The tutorial center and the site shall be operated, improved and maintained in a.manner that is consistent with this proposal and those certain plans submitted to the Development Services Department for the purposes of this application. That is, the tutorial center may expand into the two (2) adjacent commercial spaces, units G:& H; offer'tutoring, services from 3:00 P.M. to 6:00 P.m., Monday through Friday; and shall offer after school transportation service from the students' schools to the tutorial center and from the tutorial center to an alternative location for pick up by parents., The tutorial center and the site must be in compliance with all of the conditions of approval prior to occupancy of the expansion area. Noncompliance,whh the plans, provisions, requirements of all 1. City departments, and the conditions of approval for CUP 07 -05 shall be grounds for immediate suspension and /or revocation of any approvals, which may result in the loss of use of the expansion. area. -2- 1764 2. The existing tutorial center and the proposed expansion area shall be subject to inspection by the Building Official, Community Development Administrator and Fire Marshall and the use and property shall be brought into compliance with all current measures, policies and requirements determined to be necessary by the Building Official, City Engineer, City Traffic Engineer, Community Development Administrator, Fire Marshall, Public Works Services Director, and any service districts and utility providers that will serve the subject. 3. The maximum attendance at any one time is limited to 75 students of elementary school age (up to eighth grade) in the westerly 3,790 square .feet of commercial space (units D, E, F, G & H) in the northerly building of the 1 W. Duarte Road commercial center. 4. The "Arcadia Resource" sign shall be removed and any damage to the wall shall be promptly repaired such that it will not be noticeable from the nearest pedestrian and /or vehicular way, or if the sign is to remain, the permit for the sign, which expired on July 18, 2006, shall be renewed and the sign inspected to verify that it was properly installed, and if necessary, the installation shall be corrected so that the sign complies with all applicable building and safety codes. A new sign is not included with this Conditional Use Permit. 5. A Parking Modification for 19 on -site spaces in lieu of 24 spaces is granted for the tutorial center. This Parking Modification does not constitute an approval for a general reduction of the parking requirements for the subject property, but rather only for the tutorial center that is herein conditionally approved. Changes to uses within the area occupied by the tutorial center may be subject to a new CUP and /or Parking Modification. 6. A minimum of 60 students shall be transported to Holly Avenue Elementary School or other alternative location for recreational activities and pick up by parents beginning at approximately 4:45 p.m. with adjustments in the time for the effects of daylight savings. The ability to transport at least 60 students to an acceptable altemative location for pick up by parents (e.g., the Holly Avenue Elementary School transportation area for which a permit from the Arcadia Unified School District must be secured annually) must be in effect at all times for the -3- 1764 approval of this Conditional Use Permit to remain effective and written proof of the ability to utilize an alternative location for pick up by parents must be filed by the applicant with the Community Development Division and shall be continuously updated and re- filed if any facts or crcumstan'ces change pertaining to the transport of students to or from the alternative location. 7. The transportation route to- and -from the tutorial center and Holly. Avenue Elementary Schoo! shall be as follows: 1' W: Duarte Road shall be exited by -the southerly driveway with a right-tum onto Duarte Road, a left -turn shall be made. onto El Monte Avenue, a right-turn shall be made onto Le Roy Avenue, a right -turn shall, be made onto Holly Avenue,' a night -tum shall be made into the Holly Avenue Elementary School transportation area using the southerly entrance driveway, the Holly Avenue Elementary School transportation area shall be exited by 'the,,northerly'driveway with a right -tum onto Holly Avenue, a right -turn shall be made, onto Campus Drive,' a nght-tum` shall be made onto Santa Anita Avenue, and.a right- tum,shall be made off of Santa Anita Avenue into 1 W. Duarte Road. 8. Any changes to the location for pick up by parents and /or the transportation route shall be subject to review and approval by the Community Development Administrator and City Engineer, either of whom may refer the change in location and /or, route to the Planning Commission for consideration' at a public hearing. For the public hearing, the applicant shall provide J and pay for a mailing list and labels of all the property owners, residents and tenants of all the properties within a 300 -foot radius of 1 W. Duarte Road. Ownership shall be based on the latest available assessment roll of the Office of the Assessor of Los Angeles County. ` 9. Notwithstanding any term, provision or condition herein to the contrary, the. number of students in attendance at the tutorial center and th e number of students being transported to' an altemative location for pick up by parents are.subject:to periodic monitoring and verification by City staff. A report is to be presented to the Planning Commission in approximately 'six (6) months on the operational efficacy of the transporting of at least 60 students to an alternative pick up, location. If it is- 'determined that the public health, safety and welfare 4- 1764 require a modification of the requirement concerning transportation of students or the termination of this Conditional Use Permit, then any such modification or termination shall be considered at a public hearing by the Planning Commission. 10. All of the parents of the students enrolled at the tutorial center shall be notified in writing of the requirement that at least 60 of the maximum 75 students authorized to be in attendance at 1 W. Duarte Road at any time must be transported to an alternative location for pick up. The notification shall explain the transportation times, route, and rules for use of the alternative pick up location (e.g., that access to the Holly Avenue Elementary School transportation area is only by right turns into the southerly driveway) and shall include a method for the parents to acknowledge the notification. The applicant shall provide to the City in a form and substance approved by the City, written verification of having provided the notification and of the parents' acknowledgement and acceptance of the transportation times, route, and rules for use of the alternative pick up location. 11. 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. 12. The approval of CUP 07 -05 shall not take effect until the property owner, business owner, and applicant have executed and filed the Acceptance Form from the Development Services Department to indicate awareness and acceptance of these conditions of approval. -5- 1764 SECTION 4. The 'decision, findings, and conditions of approval contained in this Resolution reflect the Planning Commission's action of August 14, 2007,.by.the following vote:, AYES: Commissioners Baderian, Baerg, Beranek, Hsu and Parrille NOES: None SECTION 5.. The Secretary, shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution and shall Causer "a copy to be forwarded to the City Council of the City Of Arcadia. I HEREBY CERTIFY that this foregoing Resolution No. 1764 was adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on August 28, 2607, by the following vote: AYES: Baderian, Baerg, Beranek and Hsu NOES: None ABSENT: Parrille Chairman, Planning Commission ATTEST: ry Tanning Com ' ion APPROVED AS TO FORM: 1 � � Stephen P. Deitsch; City Attorney -6- 1764 PRELIMINARY EXEMPTION ASSESSMENT (Certificate of Determination When Attached to Notice of Exemption) 1. Name or description of project: Conditional Use Permit Application No CUP 07-05 to expend an existing tutormg center into the two (2) adjacent commenoal units. 2. Project Location — Identify street address and cross streets or attach a_map showing project site (preferably a USGS I& or 7W topographical map identified by quadrangle name): 1 W. Duarte Road, Units D-H — Northwest Comer of Santa Anita Avenue and Duarte Road 3. Entity or person undertaking project: A. B. Other (Private): (1) Name: Mr. Jonathan Lf —Nobel Education Institute (2) Address: 1 W. Duarte Rd., Unit D Arcadia, CA 91007 (3) Phone: (626) 446 -5533 4. Staff Determination: The City's Staff, having undertaken and comps a preliminary review of this project in accordance with the CiVs *Local Guidelines for Implementing the Calffomia Environmental Quality Act (CEQAr has concluded that this project does not require further environmental assessment because: a. [ ] The proposed action does not constitute a project under CEQA. b. { ] The project is a Ministerial Project. C. [ ] The project is an Emergency Project- d. [ ] The project constitutes a feasibility or planning study. e. (A The project is categorically exempt, Applicable Exemption Class: 1— Section No.: 15301 Interior afterefions to an existing stricture. f g. [ ] The project is otherwise exempt on the following basis: h. [ ] The project involves another public agency whir constitutes the Lead Agency. Name of Lead Agency: Date: June 1. 2007 CEQA Preliminary Exemption Assessment (Forth •A7) [ ] The project is statutorily exempt. Applicable Exemption: Section No.: Staff: c KasaNf Acting Senior Planner 6106 Exhibit No. 16 CEQA Document �9_ a-- b. 49:0117 CITY COUNCIL /REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY REGULAR MEETING MINUTES TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 18, 2007 CALL TO ORDER Mayor Segal called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. ROLL CALL OF CITY COUNCILIREDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEMBERS: PRESENT: Council /Agency Member Amundson, Chandler, Wuo and Segal ABSENT: Council /Agency Member Harbicht CLOSED SESSION /STUDY SESSION PUBLIC COMMENTS (5 minutes per person) None. CLOSED SESSION a. Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6 to confer with labor negotiators. City Negotiators: William W. Floyd, Tracey Hause and Mike Casalou. Employee Organization: Arcadia Police Officers' Association. RECONVENE CITY COUNCIL /REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING TO OPEN SESSION Mayor Segal convened the Open Session meeting at 7:10 p.m. in the Council Chamber. INVOCATION Douglas Rozsa, First Counselor of the California Arcadia Mission The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter -Day Saints PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Pat Malloy, Public Works Services Director ROLL CALL OF CITY COUNCIL /REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEMBERS: PRESENT: Council /Agency Member Amundson, Chandler, Wuo and Segal ABSENT: Council /Agency Member Harbicht A motion was made by Council Member Chandler, seconded by Council Amundson to excuse Council Member Harbicht from tonight's meeting. REPORT FROM CITY ATTORNEY /AGENCY COUNSEL ON CLOSED SESSION ITEM City Attorney Steve Deitsch reported that the City Council /Redevelopment Agency Board met in closed session to consider the one (1) item listed on the posted agenda under closed session. No reportable action was taken. 09 -18 -2007 49:0118 SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION FROM CITY MANAGER /EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR REGARDING AGENDA ITEMS Assistant City Manager /Development Services Director Don Penman announced that an e-mail regarding a public hearing item will be noted for the record by Jason Kruckeberg, Community Development Administrator as part of his staff presentation on that item. MOTION TO READ ALL ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS BY TITLE ONLY AND WAIVE THE READING IN FULL A motion was made by Council /Agency Member Amundson, seconded by Council /Agency Member Chandler and carried on roll call vote to read all ordinances and resolutions by title only and waive the reading in full. PUBLIC HEARING a. Community Development Administrator Jason Kruckeberg provided an overview of the appeal of the conversion of the existing warehouse facility into a badminton club and the parking modification at 12336 Lower Azusa Road. He noted that on July 24, 2007, the Planning Commission approved the Conditional Use Permit finding that the badminton club is an appropriate use for the site and compatible with surrounding uses; he also noted that the Planning Commission formally approved the Conditional Use Permit and adopted its resolution approving the project on August 14, 2007. He further noted that on August 21, 2007, the Lower Azusa Property Owners Association appealed the Planning Commission's decision due to traffic, parking and safety concerns. Mr. Kruckeberg provided the City Council with background information on the project, including parking and traffic concerns. He noted that the appellant is requesting the City Council reconsider the Conditional Use Permit and add conditions; he commented on the new conditions relating to security cameras, security guards, hours of operation, access to the building by patrons, signage, parking restrictions, and notices to customers regarding parking. Mr. Kruckeberg advised that staff recommends approval of the Conditional Use Permit with the new conditions in order to address issues raised by the appellant. Mr. Kruckeberg noted for the record that an e-mail was received by Christopher Beamer in support of the badminton club and a letter from Albert Salvo, President of the Lower Azusa Property Owners Association on behalf of the appellant was also received. Robert Lewis appeared and spoke in favor of the badminton club. Tom Wilmshurst appeared and spoke in favor of the badminton club. Joe Pazatto of All Star Fire representing the Lower Azusa Property Owners Association appeared and spoke in opposition of the badminton club. 09 -18 -2007 AT 12336 LOWER AZUSA ROAD. Recommended Action: Approve 49:0119 Linda Louie, representative of the badminton club appeared and spoke in favor of the badminton club; she also provided additional information regarding traffic and parking issues and distributed a map of the proposed area to the City Council. William Chan, Champion Badminton Player from Hong Kong appeared and spoke in favor of the badminton Club. John Linn appeared and spoke in favor of the badminton club. Rena Wang, student at Arcadia High School appeared and spoke in favor of the badminton club. Ray O'Young appeared and spoke in favor of the badminton club Jill Hopper, representing All Star Fire appeared and expressed issues regarding parking and hours of operation. A motion to close the public hearing was made by Council /Agency Member Chandler, seconded by Council /Agency Member Wuo and seeing no further objection, the Mayor closed the public hearing. In response to concerns expressed by Mayor Segal regarding condition #22, Mr. Kruckeberg responded that curbs for parking delineation would be approved prior to opening by the Engineering Division. It was also noted that agreements with the other tenants regarding shared parking must be obtained prior to use of the parking; and regarding condition #11 concerning lighting, Mr. Kruckeberg suggested revising the language to add "and throughout the Industrial center as deemed appropriate by the Police and Development Services Departments "; and also condition #20, Mr. Kruckeberg responded that language can be added that "security guards shall patrol the premises until all patrons and employees have vacated site ". Mr. Deitsch suggested that condition #4 regarding parking agreements be amended to read "parking agreements in a form and substance approved by the City Attorney shall be recorded prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy and shall remain in full effect at all times during the effectiveness of this CUP. The parking agreements shall contain enforceable provisions providing for the following:" and (a) and (b) would remain the same. He also noted that condition #20 be reworded to "uniform security guards shall patrol the premises from 5:00 p.m. until all patrons and employees have left the property, Monday through Friday, and on Saturdays and Sundays during all operating hours and until all patrons and employees have left the property" and the remainder of the provision shall remain the same. Mayor Segal noted that he would like a report back to the City Council 6 months after the badminton club opens to confirm that all conditions and operations are being met. Mr. Penman clarified that the condition relating to the security guard issue would not pertain to janitorial services cleaning after hours. A motion was made by Council /Agency Member Chandler, seconded by Council /Agency Member Amundson and carried on roll call vote to adopt the Negative Declaration, approve Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 06 -16, and adopt Resolution No. 6593 for the conversion of an existing warehouse facility into a badminton club, and the related parking modifications at 12336 Lower Azusa Road with revisions to conditions #4, 11, 20 and 22. 09 -18 -2007 49:0120 AYES: Council Member Chandler, Amundson, Wuo and Segal NOES: None ABSENT: Council Member Harbicht b. APPEAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2007 -07 AND ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN REVIEW 2006 -23 FOR A PROPOSED L.A. FITNESS HEALTH CLUB AND RELATED PARKING MODIFICATION AT 1325 S. BALDWIN AVENUE. Recommended Action: Approve Community Development Administrator Jason Kruckeberg provided the staff report regarding the appeal of a proposed L.A. Fitness Health Club and related parking modifications at 1325 S. Baldwin Avenue. He noted that on July 24, 2007, the Planning Commission approved the Conditional Use Permit and Architectural Design Review and on August 14, 2007 formally adopted its resolution approving the project. He further noted that a nearby property owner raised concerns regarding parking and traffic at the August 21, 2007 City Council meeting which lead to the appeal filed by Council Member John Wuo. Mr. Kruckeberg provided the City Council with additional background information on the project and further discussed parking, architectural design, and code requirements. Mr. Kruckeberg noted that traffic and parking studies were conducted and reviewed by City staff. He also noted that a condition of approval regarding surveillance cameras was added to be placed in the parking area and inside the building to assist with policing. Mr. Kruckeberg noted that this project is an appropriate addition to the shopping center and recommends adoption of Resolution No. 6592 that would uphold the Planning Commission's recommendation and conditions of approval. Catherine Ken appeared and spoke in opposition of the L.A. Fitness Health Club. Michael: Pashaie, owner of the property, appeared and provided an overview of the traffic and parking study conducted by an independent consultant which was reviewed by City staff regarding the L.A. Fitness Health Club. Mike Calahan, representative of L.A. Fitness appeared and provided additional information regarding the parking study; and provided an overview of the proposed project. Tom Pashaie, co -owner of the property appeared and provided information in support of the L.A. Fitness Club. Andrew Dodge appeared and spoke in opposition of the L.A. Fitness Club. Mr. Deitsch advised the City Council that the City Charter requires that an affirmative vote of 3 council members is required to adopt a resolution and that Arcadia Municipal Code Section 2123.7 requires that when a tie vote is present, the matter is deemed automatically continued to the next regular or adjourned regular meeting of the City Council for action. He recommended that the public hearing be reopened and continued to allow the fifth council member to ask questions of the applicant or staff. Mr. Deitsch noted that the fifth council member would be required to listen to the audio tape or view the video tape in order to participate in the continued public hearing. A motion to close the public hearing was made by Council /Agency Member Chandler, seconded by Council /Agency Member Wuo and seeing no further objection, the Mayor closed the public hearing. 09 -18 -2007 49:0121 A motion was made by Council /Agency Member Chandler, seconded by Council /Agency Member Segal and carried on roll call to deny the appeal and adopt Resolution 6592 approving Conditional Use Permit 2007 -07 and Architectural Design Review 2006 -23 to convert the existing 443,544 square foot Ross Dress for Less store to a new L.A. Fitness Health Club with a parking modification at the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center at 1325 S. Baldwin Avenue. AYES: Council Member Chandler and Segal NOES: Council Member Amundson, Wuo ABSENT: Council Member Harbicht (Based on a tie vote regarding the appeal of the L.A. Fitness Health Club, this item is scheduled to a continued public hearing on October 2, 2007 where all 5 members of the City Council will be present.) PUBLIC COMMENTS Rachel Kuo appeared and spoke concerning the basketball tournaments being held Eisenhower Park; she noted that this creates traffic, parking problems and loud music which causes a disturbance to the neighborhood. Allene E. Swienchowski appeared and spoke concerning the basketball tournaments being held at Eisenhower Park which attracts 200 -300 people; she noted that there is drinking and trash not being picked; she also noted that the City issued the permits to allow the basketball tournaments. Stan Swienchowski appeared and spoke concerning the basketball tournaments every weekend at Eisenhower Park which has caused a disturbance in the neighborhood. Mr. Penman commented that permits were issued in error for the basketball tournaments at Eisenhower Park for 4 consecutive weekends; he noted that staff recently discussed the process of imposing conditions to permits issued where large groups are involved. Police Chief Sanderson explained the process of what steps can be taken by the police department if violations are observed and what violations allow for the issuance of a citation. Director of Recreation and Community Services Roberta White explained that basketball groups just started showing up at Eisenhower Park since it is a public park and because of the large groups and explained what steps have been taken to date regarding future basketball tournaments at the park. City Attorney Deitsch reminded the City Council that under the Brown Act, the City Council cannot take action on an item not listed on the posted agenda; he recommended that the City Council refer the matter to staff to bring a report back to a future meeting as an agendized item. Council Member Wuo suggested that staff not issue any permits at Eisenhower Park until a report is brought back to the City Council discussion at the next meeting. 2. CITY CLERK'S REPORTS a. Appointment to Senior Citizen Commission (Friendship Club). Recommended Action: Make appointment to fill unexpired term. 09 -18 -2007 49:0122 City Clerk Jim Barrows presented the staff report regarding the appointment to the Senior Citizen Commission Friendship Club. Mr. Barrows noted that the Friendship Club recommends Jerry Vaught be appointed to fill the unexpired term of Frank Lee which expires June 30, 2009. A motion was made by Council /Agency Member Chandler to appoint Jerry Vaught to the Friendship Club to fill the unexpired term of Frank Lee which expires June 30, 2009. AYES: Council /Agency Member Chandler, Amundson, Wuo and Segal NOES: None ABSENT: Council /Agency Member Harbicht REPORTS FROM THE MAYOR, CITY COUNCIL AND CITY CLERK Council Member Amundson noted that he previously brought up the subject of trying to find a way for police and fire personnel to live in Arcadia; he commented on information he received on the Fannie Mae program from Congressman Drier's office on affordable housing which he gave to Mr. Penman to pass on to Mr. Kelly. In response to an inquiry by Council Member Amundson regarding design review, Mr. Penman responded that design review has been in place for many years and recently design review was adopted for single family neighborhoods; he noted that the Planning Commission has scheduled a tour for October 30 of the City to view results of single family design review. At the request of Mr. Penman, Mr. Kruckeberg explained the design review process and guidelines. In response to an inquiry by Council Member Amundson regarding guidelines set for subsidized housing and preference be given to citizens, Mr. Penman responded that the criteria for the Alta Street Project and the selection process was established and approved by the City Council and noted that Arcadia residents are given priority based on tenure in the community; he also explained the lottery process for the Alta Street Project selection process. In response to an ,inquiry by Council Member Amundson regarding citizenship status, Mr. Deitsch responded that under the Federal Fair Housing Act and the California Unruh Act, discrimination based on someone's nationality is prohibited; and noted that requiring someone to be a legal resident as opposed to a citizen is permissible. Economic Development Administrator Mary Cynar explained the current status and process of qualified employees and individuals for the Alta Street project and noted that most prequalified applicants are residents of the City. Council Member Chandler had nothing to report. Council Member Wuo announced that he recently represented Mayor Segal at an Eagle Scout Ceremony in honor of Gene Gaffney who is ill and wished him well; he also announced that next Monday is the Taste of Arcadia at the Arborteum; he noted that Methodist Hospital is hosting its annual Crystal Ball event on October 13; and noted that anyone interested in purchasing tickets should contact Methodist Hospital directly. City Clerk James Barrows had nothing to report 09 -18 -2007 49:0123 Mayor Segal discussed the use of masseuses at businesses where companies bring them in the business and provide massages to their employees as a benefit; he commented that the Code does not allow for this type of use and would like to have staff review it and bring it back to the City Council at a future meeting. 3. CONSENT CALENDAR REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ITEMS: a. REGULAR MEETING MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 4 2007 Recommended Action: Approve CITY COUNCIL ITEMS: REGULAR MEETING MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 4 2007. Recommended Action: Approve C. fej e. ADVOCACY SERVICES IN THE AMOUNT OF $36,000 BEGINNING OCTOBER 2007. Recommended Action: Approve A motion was made by Council /Agency Member Amundson, seconded by Council /Agency Member Chandler and carried on roll call vote to approve items 3.a through 3.e on the City Council /Agency Consent Calendars. AYES: Council /Agency Members Amundson, Chandler, Wuo and Segal NOES: None ABSENT Council /Agency Member Harbicht 4. CITY MANAGER a. NOT TO EXCEED $17,000. Recommended Action: Approve 09 -18 -2007 HAYMENI TO BE MADE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS. Recommended Action: Approve Recommended Action: Approve 49:0124 Acting Fire Chief Tony Trabbie provided the staff report and background information regarding the purchase of one (1) cardiac defibrillator /monitor from Medtronic in an amount not to exceed $17,000 for. the upgrade of Fire Department equipment; and noted that the City will be reimbursed for all costs associated with the purchase from Measure B funds as appropriated by the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors. A motion was made by Council /Agency Member Chandler, seconded by Council /Agency Wuo and carried on roll call to purchase one cardiac defibrillator /monitor from Medtronic in an amount not to exceed $17,000 for the upgrade of Fire Department equipment. AYES: Council /Agency Members Chandler, Wuo, Amundson and Segal NOES: None ABSENT: Council /Agency Member Harbicht ADJOURNMENT The City Council Redevelopment Agency adjourned this meeting at 10:25 p.m. to October 2, 2007 in-the City Council Chamber Conference Room. James H. Barrows, City Clerk VI By: Lisa Mussenden, Chief Deputy City Clerk 09 -18 -2007 r _ > Q--e G 9 STAFF REPORT Development Services Department DATE: October 2, 2007 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Don Penman, Assistant City Manager /Development Services Director Philip A. Wray, City Engineer /Engineering Services Administrator) Prepared By: Tim Kelleher, Senior Engineering Assistant SUBJECT: Award Contract — Street Rehabilitation of Duarte Road Recommendation: Authorize the City Manager to enter into a contract with All American Asphalt in the amount of $997,200 SUMMARY As part of the City's ongoing Pavement Maintenance Program, the City Council approved the Capital Improvement Project to reconstruct and rehabilitate the asphalt pavement on Duarte Road from the westerly City limit to El Monte Avenue. The project is funded by federal Surface Transportation Program, Local (STP -L) funds with a local match of Proposition C funds. The project was advertised and bids were opened on August 30, 2007. All American Asphalt submitted the successful low bid in the amount of $997,200. Staff recommends that the City Council award a contract for the street reconstruction and rehabilitation of Duarte Road from the westerly City limit to El Monte Avenue to All American Asphalt. DISCUSSION The City of Arcadia receives annual apportionments of Surface Transportation Program - Local (STP -L) funding from the Federal Highway Administration through the MTA for a variety of roadway and transit capital uses. With the most recent accrual of funds, the City has a budget for the street rehabilitation project of Duarte Road from the westerly City limit to El Monte Avenue. Roadway analysis conducted as a part of the City's Pavement Maintenance Program indicated that the section of Duarte Road identified above is in poor condition and was Staff Report Award Contract October 2, 2007 Page 2 rated as a priority for reconstruction and rehabilitation. The proposed street rehabilitation project includes removal and replacement of asphalt concrete pavement and portions of curb and gutter; cold milling of asphalt concrete and construction of asphalt concrete overlay; adjustment of sewer and storm drain manhole frames and covers to grade; adjustment of water valve covers to grade; application of pavement markers, legends and striping; construction of curb ramps; and reinstallation of traffic signal detector loops. Originally staff had projected that construction would occur this past August; however, due to required Federal approvals, construction will be delayed until November. Normally projects of this type are scheduled for summer months to lessen impacts on school traffic and avoid inclement weather. Unfortunately, the approval for this project was delayed in the Federal approval process which in turn delayed construction. Consequently, the activities of the contractor will be limited to avoid peak school traffic hours. The project was budgeted in the 2007/08 Fiscal Year Capital Improvement Program utilizing $1,435,000 from Federal STP -L funds with a local match of $185,000 from local Proposition C funds. Notices inviting bids were published in the adjudicated paper and 18 bid packages were purchased by area contractors. Eleven (11) bids were received and opened on August 30, 2007 with the following results: COMPANY ALL AMERICAN SULLY MILLER MOBASSALY GRIFFITH SILVIA SHAWNAN EXCEL SEQUEL IMPERIAL GENTRY HARDY & HARPER AMOUNT $ 997,200.00 $1,036,000.00 $1,069,062.00 $1,095,129.50 $1,101,880.00 $1,138,530.00 $1,156,310.00 $1,167,345.00 $1,173,495.00 $1,226,040.00 $1,500,000.00 Staff has reviewed the bid documents for content, and has investigated the contractor's background and recent projects for competency. Staff has determined that All American Asphalt can satisfactorily perform the required work. Staff Report Award Contract October 2, 2007 Page 3 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS The project is categorically exempt per Section 15301 class 1(c) from the requirements of California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). FISCAL IMPACT Surface Transportation Program —Local (STP -L) and Proposition C funds in the amount of $1,620,000 have been budgeted in the 2007/08 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) for the Rehabilitation of Duarte Road. The contract cost of the project is $997,200. The remaining funds are sufficient to cover design, materials, testing, inspection and contingencies. Unused STP -L funds will be carried over to the next STP -L project. RECOMMENDATION That the City Council authorize the City Manager to enter into a contract with All American Asphalt in the amount $997,200 for the Rehabilitation of Duarte Road from the westerly City limits to El Monte Avenue. Approved: "- William R. Kelly, City Manager DP:PAW:TOK:pa Attachment pu - I co D cl) PROJECT BOUNDARIES fi l Aiw-wiA OrOT '"Q'Nrr DUARTE ROAD REHABLITATION LOCATION MAP ; K-l'Nl 1% ZPA Z.. a.. DATE: October 2, 2007 STAFF REPORT Public Works Services Department TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Pat Malloy, Public Works Services Direc r Prepared by: Lubomir Tomaier, Principal Civil Engineer Tiffany Lee, Assistant Civil Engineer SUBJECT: SUMMARY At the October 11, 2006 Parks and Recreation Commission meeting, the replacement of the baseball field backstop at Longden Avenue Park was recommended. However, the project was inadvertently left out of the 2007 -08 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Budget. The existing backstop was not built to current standards and the backstop, in its entirety, is in disrepair, the posts have begun to sag and there are numerous holes in the fencing fabric. The Little League has asked the City to replace the backstop prior to the beginning of the new baseball season, which starts in January 2008. On September 4, 2007, the City Council authorized the appropriation of $70,000 for the replacement of the Longden Avenue Park Baseball Field Backstop. $6,900 was used to purchase the backstop and the remaining balance will be used for the construction work. Staff recommends that the City Council authorize the City Manager to enter into a contract with D & J Foothill Electrical Contractors, Inc. for the replacement of the Longden Avenue Park Baseball Field Backstop in the amount of $61,760. Page 1 of 3 Recommendation: Approve Mayor and City Council October 2, 2007 DISCUSSION Longden Avenue Park serves the community as the main location for Arcadia's National Little League baseball games. Over the course of one season, over sixty games are played on the field and on occasion, is the host field for baseball tournaments. The existing backstop is the original one that was built with the park. The dilapidated backstop has become a safety hazard and it is now necessary to replace the backstop before the beginning of the new baseball season. Replacement of the backstop will entail the following work: • Removal and replacement of the existing backstop, • Removal and replacement of the adjacent chain link fences along the first and third base lines up to the dugouts, • Demolition of the scoring booth structure, • Construction of concrete footings to support the new backstop and concrete slab to level the area where the scoring booth was located, and • Re- routing of the existing infield irrigation system and electrical conduits. Notice inviting bids were published in the adjudicated paper and bid packages were distributed to area contractors. Three contractors attended the pre -bid job walk, all of whom indicated intention to submit proposals. However only two contractors submitted sealed bids to the City Clerk. The City Clerk publicly opened two (2) sealed bids on August 28, 2007 with the following results: FIRM ' LOCATION BID AMOUNT D & J Foothill Electrical Contractors, Inc. La Verne, CA $64,260 Facility Operations Plus Monrovia, GA $112,500 The original contract amount of the low bid was $64,260. Staff has negotiated a reduction of the bid to the contract amount of $61,760 with the low bidder in order to complete the project within the available budgeted funds. Staff has reviewed the bid documents for content and investigated the contractors' background and recent projects for competency. It has been concluded that D & J Foothill Electrical Contractors, Inc. is the lowest responsible bidder to perform the construction of this project. Therefore, staff recommends that the City Council award a Contract in the amount of $61,760 to D & J Foothill Electrical Contractors, Inc. for the replacement of Longden Avenue Park baseball backstop. Page 2 of 3 Mayor and City Council October 2, 2007 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS This project involves the replacement of baseball backstop and therefore it is categorically exempt per 15302 (c) of the California Environmental Quality Act. FISCAL IMPACT At the September 4, 2007 City Council meeting, City Council has allocated $70,000 for the replacement of Longden Avenue Baseball Backstop to cover the cost of construction, inspection, project administration, and contingencies. RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Award a Contract in the amount of $61,760 to D & J Foothill Electrical Contractors, Inc. for the replacement of Longden Avenue Baseball Backstop. 2. Authorize the City Manager and City Clerk to execute a contract in a form approved by the City Attorney. 3. Waive any informality in the bid or bidding process. Approved: '""`^""`" W William R. Kelly, City Manager PM:TT:DM:df Page 3 of 3 ,�2. e. t STAFF REPORT Public Works Services Department DATE: October 2, 2007 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Pat Malloy, Public Works Services Directo Prepared by: Lubomir Tomaier, Principal Civil Engi eer Mark Rynkiewicz, Associate Civil Engineer SUBJECT: SUMMARY On December 5, 2006, the City Council awarded a contract to Inspection Engineering Construction Company in the amount of $245,270.00 based on the engineer's estimate of quantities for the construction of the 2006/2007 Annual Concrete Repair Project. The construction work has been completed for a total project cost of $235,752.25. Funds in the amount of $30,323.40 are being withheld pending resolution of Mechanic's Liens and Stop Notices filed by subcontractors in accordance with California Civil Code. Staff recommends that the City Council accept all construction work performed by Inspection Engineering Construction as complete and authorize the final payment and release of retention subject to the recommendation by the City Attorney concerning the resolution of Stop Notice Claims. DISCUSSION The Public Works Services Department is responsible for the maintenance and repair of approximately 147 miles of pavement within the community. In 1999, as part of the Pavement Management Program, staff prioritized the condition of all City streets and established a program to slurry seal streets within the City based on a pavement condition index. As part of the work, adjacent damaged concrete curbs and gutters are repaired to correct safety and drainage problems. The 2006/2007 Capital Improvement Program includes the Annual Asphalt and Concrete Program for this work. Page 1 of 3 Recommendation: Approve Mayor and City Council October 2, 2007 The construction work for this contract has been performed to staffs satisfaction. Concrete repairs were conducted on various streets as identified on the attached location map (Exhibit "A "). Numerous subcontractors have alleged the contractor has not paid them and filed Stop Notices with the City, which total approximately $73,402.70. At the time the City received the stop notices the City had approximately $30,323.40 in retention. The City has withheld and continues to withhold these funds as required by Civil Code Section 3186. The City Attorney recommends that after the project is accepted, the City interplead the remaining funds with the court so that the court can determine which Stop Notice claimants are entitled to the funds. The Stop Notice claimants may also make a claim on the contractor's payment bond for any amounts they are not able to recover from the retention funds. Staff recommends that the City Council accept all work performed by Inspection Engineering Construction Company as complete and authorize the final payment to be made in accordance with the City Attorney's recommendations concerning the Stop Notice claims. The final contract amount has been determined to be $235,752.25. This amount reflects the original contract amount of $245,270.00 minus quantity changes and assessed liquidated damages totaling $9,517.75 or 4% below the original contract amount. The Annual Concrete Repair Project is awarded in an amount based on the engineer's estimate of quantities and the low bidder's unit bid prices. The final contract amount is based on actual installed quantities based on specific field conditions; such as, subgrade quality, extent of unseen damage and level of compaction; therefore, the awarded contract amount and final contract amounts vary. Liquidated damages are penalties assessed to the contractor for untimely completion of the work. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS This project is categorically exempt per Section 15302 (c) replacement from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act. FISCAL IMPACT $625,000 is included in the 2006/2007 Capital Improvement Budget for the Annual Asphalt and Concrete Program, including concrete repairs, tree removal and replacement and slurry seal, and the ADA Sidewalk Access Program. Page 2 of 3 I '" Mayor and City Council October 2, 2007 RECOMMENDATION 1. Accept all work performed by Inspection Engineering Construction Company for the 2006/2007 Annual Concrete Repair Project as complete. 2. Authorize the final payment to be made in accordance with the contract documents, subject to the recommendations of the City Attorney concerning the resolution of the Stop Notice Claims. Approved by: J William R. Kelly, City Manager PM: LT: M R:df Attachment: Location Map - Exhibit "A" Page 3of3 2006-2007 ANNUAL r.nK]r.RFTF REPAIR 11 I MTA m I I a] 0 W,;kl • n L/. C` e °,Y °�N STAFF REPORT Public Works Services Department DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: SUMMARY October 2, 2007 Mayor and City Council Pat Malloy, Public Works Services Dire or Prepared by: Maria P. Aquino, Managc ant A alyst On August 21, 2007, the Council directed staff to proceed with the potential formation of Citywide and Area 8 (Santa Anita Oaks Homeowner's Association) street lighting assessment districts. Staff has been working closely with MuniFinancial for the initial study and evaluation of the City's street lighting system. Based on the excellent level of service and expertise provided by MuniFinancial, staff recommends that the City Council authorizes the City Manager to enter into a contract extension with MuniFinancial in the amount of $143,230 to establish the Citywide and Area 8 street lighting districts; and therefore, appropriate $157,230 to proceed with this project. BACKGROUND On September 5, 2006, the Council awarded a Professional Services Agreement with MuniFinancial to analyze the City's current street lighting issues, which included the inequity of assessments within the City and the Santa Anita Oaks Homeowner's Association's request to upgrade their lights. A total of approximately 16,500 parcels were reviewed and analyzed. This project was far more extensive than what was anticipated because of the substantial data that needed to be evaluated. Subsequently, on August 21, 2007, the Council directed staff to proceed with the potential formation of Citywide and Area 8 street lighting assessment districts. To Page 1 of 4 J Mayor and City Council October 2, 2007 continue with this process via the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972 (LLD 1972), staff will need further assistance from MuniFinancial's expertise in assessment - engineering services and their knowledge of our existing street lighting structure. DISCUSSION MuniFinancial has submitted a proposal to assist the City with the process of forming the proposed Citywide street lighting assessment district via the LLD 1972, including preparation of the required assessment documentation (Engineer's Report, Resolutions, Notice of Public Hearing and Ballots), and assisting the City with public outreach efforts which are essential to a successful district formation. The proposal outlines the following four (4) phases of this project: Phase 1: Finalize Proposed Assessments a. Review and refine the three -zoned districts. b. Ensure that the proposed budget and proposed assessments are representative of the actual maintenance of the City's street lighting system. c. Ensure that the original findings are reasonable and provide a defensible benefit nexus and cost allocation of the special and general benefits. d. Finalize the district structure, method of apportionment and proposed assessments for incorporation into the Engineer's Report. Phase 2: Formation Engineering Services Upon Council's approval of Phase 1, MuniFinancial will prepare the necessary Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972 documentation to form a single district (Citywide) including preparation of the required Engineer's Report and Resolutions. a. Prepare the Engineer's Report and associated documents b. Prepare Intent Meeting Resolutions to Initiate Proceedings, Adopt Engineer's Report (preliminary approval of the report and proposed assessments). Phase 3: Public Outreach Service Public outreach efforts involve a variety of approaches and tools. Communicating the issues and education of the property owners with the facts before they are asked to vote. Page 2 of 4 z . Mayor and City Council October 2, 2007 The following approach will be used in promoting outreach efforts to the city: a. Prepare and mail information pieces and assist staff with property owners' workshops. b. Provide technical support to staff to answer questions and provide information related to the calculation of the proposed district assessments and the balloting process. c. Provide property owners' workshops addressing each areas of concern (i.e. zones with lights, minimal lights or no lights). d. Prepare and mail Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) guides to each property owners as part of an overall education effort for the assessment. Phase 4: Property Owner Balloting a. Based on the Council's approval of the Engineer's Report, MuniFinancial will prepare and mail the required Notice of Public Hearing and assessment ballots pursuant to Proposition 218 requirements. b. Prepare resolutions for the Public Meeting — Resolution of Intention (sets the public Hearing and calls for mailed ballots) c. Prepare Public Hearing Resolutions — Resolution declaring results of the balloting; Resolution approving the Engineer's Report and Assessment Diagram; and Resolution Forming the District and Confirming the Levy and Collection of Assessments. Staff and MuniFinancial have prepared a fairly aggressive timeline to complete this project. The primary goal is to conduct the Public Hearing by July'15, 2008 and submit the assessments to the County tax roll by August 10, 2008. Again, this is a fairly aggressive timeline that does not account for any complications or issues that may occur within the schedule. Should any significant issues come up or additional public outreach be needed, the Public Hearing may have to be moved and we will not be able to meet the County Tax roll deadline of August 10 th . Similarly, Area 8 will undergo the same process as the Citywide street lighting district formation. In their case, their District will include annual operation and maintenance costs as well as costs to replace and add new decorative street lighting fixtures throughout their area. Since there are only approximately 213 residential properties to be assessed (versus the estimated 16,500 parcels for Citywide), Area 8's district formation process will be completed sooner with a Public Hearing date set for April 15, 2008 allowing their assessments to meet the August 10 County Tax role deadline. Page 3 of 4 Therefore, staff recommends that the City Council authorizes the City Manager to enter into a contract extension with MuniFinancial in the amount of $143,230 to establish the Mayor and City Council October 2, 2007 Citywide and Area 8 street lighting districts; and appropriate $157,230 to proceed with this project including $14,000 for the electrical design in Area B. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT The environmental impact study is not necessary for this evaluation. FISCAL IMPACT Appropriate $157,230 from the General Fund to proceed with this project. Upon a successful establishment of street lighting districts formation for both Citywide and Area 8,. the LLD 1972 will allow the City to include the contract cost as part of the special benefit assessment and will be collected from the property owners' annual property tax bill. RECOMMENDATION 1. Award a contract extension with MuniFinancial in the amount of $143,230 for the establishment of Citywide and Area 8 street lighting assessment districts. 2. Appropriate $157,230 from the General Fund to proceed with this project. 3. Authorize the City Manager and City Clerk to execute a contract in a form approved by the City Attorney. Approved by: William R. Kelly, City Manager PM:MA:df Page 4 of 4 c) - \ 4. `f STAFF REPORT Recreation and Community Services Department October 2, 2007 To: Mayor and City Council From: (3AP Roberta M. White, Director of Recreation and Community Services Subject: EISENHOWER MEMORIAL PARK RECREATION USAGE Recommendation: Provide Direction SU1VIl�iARY Eisenhower Park is a Neighborhood Park designed to provide for the daily recreational needs of the residents immediately surrounding the park. Because of the many recreational features provided at Eisenhower Park, it also functions as a Community Park for the citizens of Arcadia. During the last six months large groups of people have overcrowded Eisenhower Park on many Sundays by holding all -day basketball tournaments at the two park basketball courts. These crowds of 200 -300 people do not allow for other recreation activities and many cars also impact the surrounding neighborhood. This type of activity exceeds the physical limits of the park. BACKGROUND Eisenhower Memorial Park is a 3.9 acre park, with an adjacent .9 acre Dog Park. It is Arcadia's oldest public park. In 1945 an organization of neighbors called the Santa Anita Vista Association purchased the property to be used as a public park and playground. Originally called Vista Park, it was renamed in 1969 in honor of the former United States President Dwight D. Eisenhower. The fenced park with its picnic, playground and sports areas has been the center of recreation programs for the surrounding neighborhood and for Santa Anita Little League. The City of Arcadia develops and maintains parks and recreation facilities for the benefit of its citizens. In order to have the most facilities available to the residents of Arcadia, almost every city park including its courts and athletic fields is open to the public on a first -come, first -served basis. We generally only grant permits to organized non -profit sports groups, such as AYSO Soccer, Little League baseball or Junior All American Football, in order to allow for an equitable allocation of athletic facilities for the many youth who participate in Arcadia sports programs. Starting about six months ago large groups of families started gathering at Eisenhower Park on Sundays for all -day Basketball Tournaments. The players range in age from children through adults, and they play two different games at the same time using both basketball courts. These organized groups wear uniforms; use basketball officials and presents trophies to winners. Since there are many age levels most families come for the entire day and also have picnics at the park. Originally these large groups just arrived occasionally, but starting in June of this year they arrived at the park nearly every Sunday. They are not an organized non - profit organization like Little League baseball, but rather a group of families who grew up together, who like providing recreational activities for their families. As such they don't have a formal organizational structure with officers, with whom we could discuss our concerns. We attempted to call the phone numbers listed on flyers posted in the park but couldn't locate the group leaders. DISCUSSION Both the Recreation and Community Services Department and the Police Department have responded to complaints of overcrowding at Eisenhower Park since last spring. On July 1 two full -time Recreation Supervisors and a Police Sergeant (two of whom were bi- lingual) went to the park and once again attempted to communicate with the basketball organizers. City staff distributed business cards and told the people that their repetitive use of Eisenhower Park was monopolizing the facility to the exclusion of the community and therefore would not be allowed. In hopes of limiting the size of the groups, reducing the number of days that organized groups were allowed to play, specifying required conditions and getting information about organizers, we decided to issue permits on a trial basis. Our intent was to limit tournaments to once or twice a month. Our first permit was issued to an Arcadia resident for one Sunday in August and one Sunday in September. The group was well behaved, cleaned up after itself and did not appear to violate any laws, however 200 -250 people participated, which impacted both the park and the neighborhood. One of our supervisors issued another permit but unfortunately it was right after the first permit, which did not give the neighbors any time to enjoy the park. On September 16 this second permitted group also used a PA System, without asking permission, and they played music and made announcements throughout the day. Issuing permits did allow us to know who to contact regarding the tournaments, however it did not allow us to gain control of the park and neighborhood overcrowding. We had planned to evaluate the permit process after one month. Based on City Council reaction to neighbors concerns expressed at their September 18 meeting, the Recreation and Community Services Department and the Police Department decided to suspend any organized Basketball Tournaments immediately until the matter could be considered as a Council action item. Organizers had posted flyers about a major tournament with cash prizes to be held at Eisenhower Park on September 23 and 30 starting at 10 a.m., however they had not been granted a permit. We called all the people listed on the flyer and told them that the tournament would not be allowed and we posted signs at Eisenhower Park. As the group had already distributed many flyers, the Police Department assigned two Reserve Police Officers to beat the Park 8 -11:30 a.m. to turn away people as they arrived to play. In addition, we assigned an experienced Recreation Leader to be at the park from 10 a.m. -5 p.m. Things went smoothly. i CONCLUSION As noted Eisenhower Park is intended to be a neighborhood park. Unfortunately, the experiment to assist the referenced "basketball families" was not successful due to the large numbers of people using the whole park, as well as the secondary negative impacts upon the surrounding neighborhood and its residents. Staff has noted that over the years residents and/or other individuals use the basketball courts sporadically for drop in play and there have been no reported complaints or issues. There are numerous alternatives for consideration including: I) Suspend Organized Basketball Tournaments in City parks. (Currently Eisenhower Park is the is the only City facility with basketball courts. Other basketball courts in Arcadia are located on school campus sites and are under the jurisdiction of the school district.) 2) Leave the backboards and hoops in place, but use "the Club" (like on car steering wheels) which can be removed as needed by city employees to allow basketball activities. 3) Remove the backboards and hoops from the basketball courts, so they can't be used for basketball at the present time, but could be replaced at a later date. 4) Remove the poles, backboards and hoops, which eliminates basketball. 5) Modify the court(s) so they are only half court in size so that residents or other individuals can still shoot baskets and play some basketball, but not full games. 6) Take no action. RECOMMENDATION Provide direction. APPROVED: I" William R. Kelly, City Manager LM t ' 1'�' C:�.:� �, t , r t ". rp y • / �. l F +I R` :et i �:, 14 }I i '+ �II �? � j �W rt'. �� + i t+ i Y � � / m t , �� , � � i �� I µ )» ( d1 ! t i ; t L! k :+n N. . ., r e � 4�f } .. i� � � � I a �, � �d r�l� I �,'n ' I 8 v '�� F1 i cy l�'. !yh r +! °., r � I e` _ + M� T 1 +f � / N IH I f � y t a RYA 1 �' � y'f!{ � U'A" � ' `' I ' li ` #� + J i 1 l�YZ`i[ f ry. 1 �J j YF9�i }•: y ,. ' �' '�aG � i 1i n i 1 B��Y R �),' � "� LL+.� J.P y4 A+ J� r � ✓ � '� J F i C"N �'" Fi j,`1i y� If`',�� {� + j , l a t(' i r " �Xi i +�.�� tlt�y { ° +I «,14vd'i l .n •'�w '. ��- -�� _ -�,� - — __ — - e -� -° � _ .. _1� J �" �� a te. - r0. .r �� Z � � ) �\2} \� \ >�� - 9 m., I STAFF REPORT Office of the City Manager DATE: October 2, 2007 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: William R. Kelly, City Manager ll1 i By: Lisa Mussenden, Chief Depu y i y lerk/Records Manager SUBJECT: THE CITY BY THIRD PARTIES Recommendation: Approve SUMMARY The law firm providing City Attorney services to the City of Arcadia, Best Best & Krieger LLP ( "BBK "), has requested an amendment to its contract concerning rates for which reimbursement is made by third parties to the City. Staff recommends approval of this request. DISCUSSION Stephen P. Deitsch has served as City Attorney for the City of Arcadia since November 1999. The quality of service and responsiveness from BBK and Mr. Deitsch have been excellent. Occasionally, the City of Arcadia requires specialized legal services performed for the City by BBK for which fees are required to be reimbursed by third parties to the City, based upon agreements between the City and third parties, or due to conditions of land use or other approvals granted or imposed by the City. The costs for providing these types of legal services are passed through to developers, franchisees or land use applicants under the foregoing limited circumstances. Such reimbursable legal fees may cover, for example, preparation of development agreements, review of applications to the City under franchise agreements (e.g. rubbish or cable franchises), review and analysis of environmental documents for which a land use or other applicant agrees or is required to reimburse the City, and litigation costs incurred in defending City approvals of land use applications based upon conditions of Pagel of2 approval requiring the applicant to pay for costs of defense against challenges to such approvals. This request to amend the Agreement for Legal Services relates only to reimbursable third party fees and does not in any way affect the rates the City itself pays for City Attorney services.. The proposed amendment would allow BBK to bill for such limited services at the firm's ., private law" billing rates established and published by the firm from time to time, less 10 %, applicable to,all billing personnel in the firm who perform such work for the City. The firm's private billing rates presently range from $350 to $495 for partners and of counsel, $210 to $350 for associates, and $165 to $210 for paralegals and law clerks. Many cities that contract with private law firms to act as City Attorney have included in their legal services agreements provisions for billing at private law rates when firms provide legal services for which reimbursement will be made by third parties to the City, The following BBK clients allow for billing at private law rates minus 10% for legal services reimbursed by third parties to the city: Coachella, Colton Corona, Downey, Jackson, Lafayette, Los Banos, Ontario, San Jacinto and Woodland. The Cities of Clearlake, Fontana and Williams allow billing at private law rates without any discount, and the City of Indian Wells allows billing at specific "private law" rates which are significantly higher than BBK public law rates, but not expressed as private law rates minus a discount. In its request, BBK has asserted that establishment of a higher rate structure for legal services not paid by the City, but instead paid by third parties as reimbursement to the City, alleviates the financial strain on providing municipal law services at significantly lower "public law rates ", and thereby allows the law firm to continue to provide its services to the City at such lower rates. BBK has also suggested that third parties who are required to reimburse the City for such services pay their own legal counsel private law rates for similar work without any discount such as the 10% discount from such rates offered by BBK here. FISCAL IMPACT There is no fiscal impact to the City associated with this request. This rate increase applies only to limited circumstances where third parties would reimburse the City for legal services. RECOMMENDATON It is recommended that the City Council approve an amendment to the Agreement for Legal Services between the City of Arcadia and Best Best and Krieger LLP to provide for payment for legal services at "private 'law rates" established from time to time by BBK, less 10 %, for services reimbursed to the City by third parties. Page 2 of 2 INDIAN WELLS (760) 566 -2611 IRVINE (949) 263 -2600 LOS ANGELES (213) 617 -6100 ONTARIO (909) 989 -8584 Stephen P. Deitsch (951) 826 -8204 Stepher).Deitsch@bbklaw.com William R. Kelly City Manager City of Arcadia 240 West Huntington Drive Arcadia, California 910061 BEST BEST & KMEGER3 ATTORNEYS AT lAw 3750 University Avenue, Suite 400 Past Office Box 1028 Riverside, California 92502 -1028 (951) 686 -1450 (951) 686 -3083 Fax BBKlaw.com September 24, 2007 SACRAMENTO (916) 325 -4000 SAN DIEGO (619) 525 -1300 WALNUT CREEK (925) 977 -3300 Re: Proposed Amendment to City Attorney Legal Services Contract Concerning Payment by Third Parties of Legal Fees Reimbursed to the Dear Bill: For the reasons set forth hereafter, Best Best & Krieger LLP requests consideration and approval by the City of Arcadia (the "City ") of a limited rate increase applicable only to fees reimbursed to the City by third parties under particular circumstances. The City occasionally requires specialized legal services that are reimbursed to the City by third parties. Fees for such services are typically passed through to developers, franchisees or land use applicants, for example, by means of City adopted agreements, fees schedules and the like. Such fees often pertain to development agreement applications, environmental law services provided to land use applicants, and legal fees defending challenges to land use approvals which are imposed upon land use applicants based upon the City's standard conditions of land use approvals. This letter serves as our firm's request to amend our Agreement for Legal Services to designate the forgoing fees, which are reimbursed to the City by third parties (as described above), as matters excluded from our firm's billings for "Basic Services" under our current Legal Services Agreement. Furthermore, we request that our Agreement for Legal Services be amended to provide that our firm will bill for such limited services at our firm's "private law" billing rates, less ten percent (10 1 /o), applicable to all billing professionals in the firm who perform such work for the City. The firm's private billing rates currently range from $350 to $495 for partners and of counsel, $210 to $350 for associates, and $165 to $210 for paralegals and law clerks. Many of our municipal clients have included in our city attorney legal services RVPUBIS DEITSCH\738300. t BEST REST & 3MEGER ATCORNM AT XAW William R. Kelly September 24, 2007 Page 2 agreements provisions for billing at private law rates when our firm provides legal services for which reimbursement will be made to the city by third parties. The following municipal clients of our firm allow for billing at private law rates minus ten percent (10 %): Coachella, Calton, Corona, Downey, Jackson, Lafayette, Ontario, San Jacinto and Woodland. Furthermore, our contracts with the cities of Clearlake, Fontana and Williams allow us to bill at private law rates without a discount. Our contract with the City of Indian Wells similarly allows us to bill at specific rates which are significantly higher than our public law rates, but which are not expressed as "private law rates minus a discount ". The establishment of this proposed rate structure for legal fees not paid by the City, but instead paid by third parties as reimbursement to the City, alleviates the financial strain on providing municipal law services at low "public law rates ". Approving this limited rate adjustment for fees paid by third parties enables us to maintain our significantly lower rates for all other services provided to the City. We note that our private law rates, together with the proposed ten percent (10 %) discount, remain lower than what third parties typically pay their own private legal counsel for their own legal services. If this proposal meets with the approval of the City, I suggest that an amendment to the current Legal Services Agreement be approved in the form and substance enclosed herewith. Thank you for the City's consideration of this request. I shall remain available to discuss this with you further at your request. Very Truly Yours, Stephen P. Deitsch of BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP SPD:kb Enclosure RVPUB\SDE1TSCM738300. ] AMENDMENT NO.4 TO AGREEMENT FOR LEGAL SERVICES (City Attorney) This Amendment No. 4 ( "Amendment No. 4 ") is entered into this _ day of September, 2007, by and between the City of Arcadia, a municipal corporation ( "City") and Best Best & Krieger LLP, a Limited Liability Partnership engaged in the practice of law ( "BBK "), with respect to that certain Agreement for Legal Services ( "Agreement ") entered into by the City and BBK on June 28, 2000, as amended by Amendment No. 1 on June 1, 2002, and further amended by Amendment No. 2 on June 16, 2004, and as further amended by Amendment No. 3 on June 13, 2005. The City and BBK agree as follows: RECITALS The City and BBK desire and intend to amend the Agreement, as heretofore amended, in order to provide for billing rates for legal services provided by BBK where fees are reimbursed to the City by third parties based upon agreements between the City and such third parties, conditions of land use or other City approvals and the like. AGREEMENT 1. Amendment of Section 8 Compensatio n . Section 8 of the Agreement, as previously amended, is amended by adding thereto Subsection 8.d., to read as follows: " d. Fees for Legal Services Reimbursed by Third Parties The City and BBK understand and agree that from time to time, services are performed for the City by BBK for which fees are reimbursed by third parties to the City based upon agreements between the City and such third parties, conditions of land use or other approvals granted and imposed by the City, fee schedules which are based upon reimbursement to the City for actual legal fees billed by the City Attorney and the like ( "Reimbursable Fees "). Upon prior approval by the City Manager, or his/her designee, on a case by case basis that legal services provided by BBK are subject to Reimbursable Fees, then BBK shall bill the City for such services separate and apart from Basic Services at BBK's then current published standard private clients rates, minus ten percent (10 %). If BBK believes that a matter falls within Reimbursable Fees, then BBK shall seek prior written approval from the City Manager or his/her designee. The City Manager's (or his/her designee's) approval of such a request from BBK shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed. Upon execution of this Agreement, BBK shall provide to the City Manager a copy of its published private clients rate schedule, and shall provide to the City Manager, at least annually, updates to such schedule when changes are made thereto. Fees for such services shall not be subject to the Cap. Such reimbursable fees may cover, without limitation, preparation of development agreements, review of applications to the City under franchise agreements, review of and analysis of environmental documents for which a land use or other RVPUMSDETSCHM6229.1 applicant agrees to reimburse the City, and litigation costs incurred in defending City approvals of land use applications and the like based upon conditions of approval requiring the applicant to defend such approvals." 2. Effective Date of Amendment No. 4 . The City and BBK agree that this Amendment No. 4 shall become effective upon execution of both parties, and shall apply to all billings from BBK to the City on and after September 1, 2007. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City and BBK have executed this Amendment No. 4 as of the date first written above. CITY OF ARCADIA a municipal corporation Lo William R. Kelly City Manager DATED: 2007 ATTEST: City Clerk BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP a Limited Liability Partnership 0 Stephen P. Deitsch Partner DATED: 2007 RV PUB\SDEITSCH\736229.1