Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout0993 / , -, , "',':" . . . .- / -. . RESOLUTION NO. 993 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA RECOMMENDING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENTS FOR THE AREA BOUNDED ON THE NORTH AND EAST BY THE FOOTHILL FREEWAY, ON THE SOUTH BY LA PORTE, AND ON THE WEST BY SANTA ANITA AVENUE. WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on June 28, 1977, for the purpose of considering changing the General Plan map designations for the area bounded on the north and east by the Foothill Freeway, on the south by La Porte Street, and on the west by Santa Anita Avenue; and WHEREAS, all interested persons were given full opportunity to be heard and to present evidence; . NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION MAKES THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION: SECTION 1. The Planning Commission finds that the General Plan land use designations illustrated on Exhibit "A", attached hereto and made a part hereof, would provide for designations consis- tent with the majority of the existing land uses within the area; that the alley between Colorado Boulevard and La Porte Street will provide for the appropriate separation between the proposed Industrial designation to the south and the Multiple- Family R~sidential designation to the north; and that the public convenience, necessity and welfare justify the proposed changes. SECTION 2. That the General Plan designations for said area be amended as shown on attached Exhibit "A". . -1- . 993 . . . \ . . . SECTION 3. 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 of the City of Arcadia held on the 12th day of July, 1977, by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners Clark, !luddy, Kuyper, Reiter, Sargis NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Commissioner Perlis Commissioner Hegg None Chairman ATTEST: scfr~J~d ' -2- 993 . . . ~r? AYe.. ~X\--\\~rr A '. 1/ I l..- ~ ~ - '"\ .., ~ .;.... "" :r . 7~ ~ } I. i u.. :z ~ '-3 ~D D , I~~ -!; ~ ~~ "'-....J l""tL \ .:; ~~ ~ . J ~ ~ ,- flF27T AV'r ~ ~ ff i I(~\ '\ ?3 ~ - \'\ ~ ;1/ \ \ '\ ri ~ /zf \ \ '\ ~ I~ ~ \ \ \ cl. 'l. \!J ..... z / \ \: ~~ '" ~ \j\ \ \ - ~ . I \ \ ;1- ". . c:; -- '- ~ ~ :6:- ~ ""'"-J. \ ~'\ ........ r.. :E ~ - \ \, ~ - ~ t- ~ .. ~ ~ ~ l ~ ~ ~ MlM AYE.. ~ ~~ V) ~ 12 ~ [7 . . . June 28, 1977 TO: PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT SUBJECT: G.P. 77-2 NEWMAN AVENUE GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT LOCATION The subject area is bounded on the north and east by the Foothill Freeway, on the south by La Porte Street, and on the west by Santa Anita Avenue (see Map No.1). . BACKGROUND On October 28, 1976, the City Council held a study session for the consideration of the appropriateness of the existing zoning classifications and General Plan designations of the subject area. After reviewing the data and listening to the concerns expressed by area residents, the Council directed staff to initiate formal proceedings for the consideration of amending the existing General Plan designations to designations which would be more consistent with existing land uses. An inconsistency currently exists between the General Plan designations and zoning classifications within the subject area. The General Plan designates the area as Multiple-Family Residential 7+ dwelling units per acre (du/ac) and as Commercial, while the area is entirely zoned M-l for Light Industrial uses. . The zoning dates back to 1964 and the Central Area Plan of 1963 prepared by the consulting firm of Wilsey, Ham & Blair. The M-l zoning was adopted to promote the development of Research and Development uses within the area as a component of an overall revitalization plan for the Town Center area. However, the lack of ancilliary implementation tools and the growth of Research and Development uses in other areas outside of Arcadia acted to discourage any such development within the subject area. Conse- quently, the subject area has experienced only a scattered development consisting primarily of auto-related uses. . . . Newman Avenue General Plan Amendment June 28, 1977 Page 2 The General Plan designations were adopted in 1972 along with the City-wide General Plan. Several factors may be cited as being influential in the selection of the designations: The desirability of providing for land uses which could economically be developed utilizing several nonconforming, substandard excess right-of-way parcels which had been acquired by the City. The strategic location of the subject area to the Foothill Freeway and downtown Arcadia, and the absence of any other freeway-oriented commercial land use location within the City. LAND USE ~~D ZONING . The existing land use of the subject area is predominantly older, single-family residential units mixed with some commer- cial, light industrial and multiple family units (see Map No.2). The commercial consists of three service stations, a cleaning establishment, a real estate office, liquor store, glass shop, offices and a dog groomer. These uses are generally located along the First Avenue and the Santa Anita Avenue frontages. There are six industrial uses, which are predominantly auto- related, located south of Colorado Boulevard. The apartments, for the most part, are clustered near the intersection of Santa Anita Avenue and Colorado Boulevard, and on a portion of the south side of Colorado Boulevard east of First Avenue. The existing zoning of the entire subject area is M-I Planned Industrial District (see Map No.2). This zone classification contains performance standards regulating the types of permitted industrial uses. GENERAL PLAN Land Use Designation The existing General Plan land use designation for the subject area calls for Multiple-Family Residential 7+ dulac, with Commercial north of Newman Avenue, along Santa Anita Avenue and on First Avenue north of Colorado Boulevard (see Map No.3). . . . . Newman Avenue General Plan Amendment June 28, 1977 Page 3 Circulation Santa Anita Avenue is designated as a major arterial. Colorado Boulevard, First Avenue and Second Avenue are designated as secondary arterials and have been recently widened to facilitate traffic movement. However, some circulation problems remain. Newman Avenue was made into a cul-de-sac as a result of the Foot- hill Freeway construction. The only access to this cul-de-sac is on Santa Anita Avenue. The volumes of traffic on Santa Anita Avenue, the proximity to the Freeway on-ramp and the extremely heavy traffic volumes at peak perio~ during the race track operations make this intersection hazardous at times. The three most northerly properties north of Newman Avenue, fronting on Santa Anita Avenue, have their driveways exiting directly onto the Freeway turning lane, and the cars from the single-family houses must back into the Santa Anita traffic to exit from their driveways. Noise . The location of the subject area adjacent to the Foothill Free- way subjects the properties to generally higher noise levels than other parts of the community. Staff's monitoring of noise levels in the subject area found the CNEL (Community Noise Equivalent Level) to be between 63 and 66 dB(A). This noise level is within the range of conditionally acceptable noise levels for low density residential uses as determined by the California Office of Planning and Research. Public Safety The subject area is approximately 1/8 of a mile southeast of the Raymond Hill fault. None of the properties are within the Special Studies Zone. . Open Space/Conservation With respect to open space/conservation, the subject area contains no land that is designated as open space or conservation lands. The proposed General Plan amendment will not reduce or impact the City's open space/conservation land inventory. . . . Newman Avenue General Plan Amendment June 28, 1977 Page 4 Recreation There are no recreational lands within the subject area, however, it is in close proximity to parks: the Los Angeles County Regional Park, Eisenhower Park, and the proposed park on Colorado Boulevard west of the railroad. . Housing Due to the older nature of the housing stock, the subject area provides housing opportunities within a market range that is not available in many other parts of the City. During the past thirteen years, since the M-l zoning was placed on the area, the willingness of lending institutions to make money available for the expansion or remodeling of nonconforming residential uses has steadily decreased. Consequently, the market value of these residential properties has not been subject to the same drastic increases found in other residential areas of the City. If the proposed General Plan amendment is adopted, a subsequent, consistent zone change would tend to be supportive of most of the existing land uses and, therefore, would relieve lending institu- tions of their hesitancy to invest in the area. The proposed General Plan amendment and subsequent zone change would facilitate the opportunity for property owners to make improvements to their residential units which the current M-l zoning has restricted. The proposed General Plan amendment and the subsequent zoning could have a possible negative effect on some of the owners and renters in the subject area. A zoning supportive of the residen- tial land uses could augment the market potential of these properties as investment capital is more readily available. This change could result in higher assessed values assigned to these properties which would result in higher property taxes. Owners and renters on fixed incomes could be adversely affected. RELATIONSHIP TO REDEVELOPMENT . The subject area is within the Arcadia Redevelopment Agency's Project Area (see Map No.1). The Redevelopment Plan for the subject area is identical with the current General Plan designation calling for Commercial and Multiple-Family Residential. It is suggested that if this General Plan amendment is approved, the Redevelopment Plan be appropriately changed to reflect the new General Plan designation for the future land use of the area. . . . Newman Avenue General Plan Amendment June 28, 1977 Page 5 Currently, the Redevelopment Agency is preparing a Concept Plan for the Redevelopment Project Area. The preparation of the Concept Plan is being coordinated with the Newman Avenue ~eneral Plan amendment. ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The recommended General Plan land use designations will provide encouragement for the continuation of most of the existing land uses of the area. Intensification of land uses along Santa Anita Avenue and alteration of the circulation pattern are proposed (see Map No.4). Land Use Element . 1. Most of the properties facing Newman Avenue and along the north side of Colorado Boulevard which face Colorado Boulevard are recommended to be placed in the Single-Family Residential 0- 6 du/ ac. land use des ignation on the General Plan Map. Within this area there are two vacant parcels which would probably be developed with single-family dwelling units within the next one to two years. There are four properties containing more than one dwelling unit. These developments were constructed many years ago under less restrictive zoning regulations and would remain non- conforming under any subsequent zoning classification. The Single-Family Residential land use designation would be followed by the adoption of a consistent zone classification. This would facilitate property owners of a lot with one single-family dwelling to undertake additions to their dwell- ings which they have been unable to do since the M-l zoning was applied to the area. . It is possible that because of the relatively good condition of the structures, lot configuration and present ownership, that the retention of the single-family neighborhood may continue for some years to come. However, in time, some deterioration in the structural condition of the improvements and maintenance of the properties will occur, and increased economic pressure for additional commercial/multi-family property will reach the point at which some property owners will seek economic gain from more intensive development of thei r property. . . . Newman Avenue General Plan Amendment June 28, 1977 Page 6 In the absence of any hard or current economic data, the Planning Department estimates single-family residential stability for only five to ten years. The owners of the existing multiple-family developments would be allowed only continued maintenance and repair activities. 2. All of the properties 4long Santa Anita Avenue- north of Colorado Boulevard (including one lot on Colorado Boulevard and one lot on both th~ north and south sides of Newman Avenue) are recommended to be placed in the mixed Multiple- Family Residential 7+ d~/ac and Commercial land use designation. . The portion of the mixed Multiple-Family Residential and Commer- cial southeast of the intersection of Santa Anita Avenue and Newman Avenue is curxently developed with 22 dwelling units and a gas station.i, It is highly unlikely that the economics of development \would justify any change within the next ten years. If this ~rea is so designated on the General Plan, subsequent consistent zoning of either Multiple- Family or Commercial could be applied to the properties depending upon the particular existing land usage. It should be noted that an R-3 zoning of the existing multiple-family developments would not alter the existing nonconforming nature of said developments nor would the R-3 zoning allow for as many units as currently exists on some lots. The portion of the mixed Multiple-Family Residential and Commercial northeast of the intersection of Santa Anita Avenue and Newman Avenue is currently developed with nine dwelling units. The area's location and development economics would not seem to encourage the development of multiple-family residential units. However, such a development is not impossible. Based upon prior development interest in this area, it is probable that there would be substantial p~essure for the commercial development of all or a portion of the area. Any piecemeal commercial or multiple-family development of the area could lead to inappropriate development of the remainder of the area. The entire area should be developed as a unit to insure proper ingress and egress. . A subsequent commercial zoning, if applied to the entire area north of Newman Avenue which is shown as mixed Multiple- Family and Commercial on the General Plan land use map, could pos s ibly' faci Ii tate the pi ecemeal development of the area. Any subsequent zone change should not be undertaken which would allow for such piecemeal development. . . . Newman Avenue General Plan Amendment June 28, 1977 Page 7 The development of the area with either commercial or multiple-family projects will add to the existing traffic circulation problems in the area, particularly along Santa Anita Avenue. . 3. The far corners of the intersection of Colorado Boulevard and First Avenue are recommended to be placed in the Commercial land use designation. Commercial development exists on three of the four corners and commercial uses in this area are generally consistent with the commercial and industrial use pattern emerging on First Avenue to the south. The five lots located at the southwest corner of this proposed use area are vacant. If combined into a single development unit, the size (approxi- mately 35,000 square feet) is sufficient to accommodate a variety of commercial uses which could strengthen the commercial viability of this area. 4. The remaining properties on the south side of Colorado Boulevard which front on Colorado Boulevard are recommended to be placed in the Multiple-Family Residential 7+ du/ac land use designation. This designation is reflective of most of the existing development of the area. Intensification of the existing four single-family developments is anticipated. . 5. The properties which are south of Colorado Boulevard facing Santa Anita Avenue are recommended to be placed in the Commercial land use designation. This designation is reflective of the existing development of the area. 6. The properties facing La Porte Street, First Avenue (south of the alley) and Second Avenue are recommended to be placed in the Industrial land use designation. The properties on the north side of La Porte recommended for industrial use are suggested to be placed in this classification for two principal reasons. One, properties in this area are already developed with commercial and industrial uses. Secondly, the south side of La Porte Street is developed or developing with industrial uses which produce industrial traffic and activity. Assuming no change will be made to the zoning on the south side of La Porte, the alley north of this street is recommended as the most appropriate place for a zoning boundary. This will avoid mixing commercial and industrial traffic and activity with residential uses. The properties along First and Second Avenues are already developed for the most part with industrial uses. . . . Newman Avenue General Plan Amendment June 28, 1977 Page 8 The Industrial designation is reflective of most of the existing development of the area, and consistent with the General Plan designations for properties to the east, west and south. 7. The property at the southwest corner of Colorado Boulevard and Second Avenue, which is partially under the elevated Foothill Freeway and owned by ~tate, is designated as Indus- trial. The potential development of this property is limited due to its location, ownership, proximity to Eisenhower Park and existing single-family and multiple-family residential developments. . A number of uses in the industrial category with low levels of activity such as warehouses and supply houses could fit here and, with development controls, be adjusted to the surrounding uses. With respect to development controls, when zoning is applied to this property, measures should be taken to buffer any use from the residential properties to the east and west and Eisenhower Park to the north. Because the property is State-owned, our control over the development may be limited. Circulation Element A new north-south street linking Colorado Boulevard and Newman Avenue is recommended. This new street would lessen the impact of traffic on Santa Anita Avenue and would facilitate traffic to and from the single-family residential area. If the Santa Anita Avenue properties are developed with more intensive residential uses, access from such development should be provided to Newman Avenue as well as to Santa Anita Avenue. If the Santa Anita Avenue properties are developed with commercial uses, access from such development should not be provided to Newman Avenue. The City Council and/or Redevelopment Agency should utilize what- ever means are available to implement such traffic controls as are necessary to protect the integrity of the single-family residential area. . In order to create the new street linking Newman Avenue and Colorado Boulevard, at least two properties with one dwelling unit would have to be acquired. . . . Newman Avenue General Plan Amendment June 28, 1977 Page 9 The new street would have a right-of-way of 50 feet, which is generally adequate for travel, parking lane and sidewalk purposes. It is highly likely that the setbacks from the new street to the existing dwelling units on each side would be less than the ten feet normally required for side yards on corner lots (i.e., existing dwelling units may be located as close as five feet to the sidewalk; ten feet from the street itself. See Drawing No.1). A~ALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVE PLAN . An alternative plan for the portion of the area along Santa Anita Avenue north of Colorado Boulevard was given serious considera- tion by staff (see Map No.5). The alternative plan provides for the continuation of the existing land uses and circulation patterns of the area north of Colorado Boulevard. All of the properties facing Santa Anita Avenue have been designated as Multiple-Family Residential 7+ dulac, with the exception of the northeast corner of Santa Anita Avenue and Colorado Boulevard which has been designated as Commercial. The portion of the area designated as Multiple-Family Residential, southeast of the intersection of Santa Anita Avenue and Newman Avenue, is currently developed with twelve dwelling units. Economics of development probably would not result in any change in the existing status of development. Because no significant intensification of land uses is recommended, no alteration to the existing circulation system was considered. The portion of the area designated as Multiple-Family Residential, northeast of the intersection of Santa Anita Avenue and Newman Avenue, is currently developed with eight dwelling units. Additional intensification of approximately 21 additional dwelling units is possible. . The area's location and development economics does not encourage the development of multiple-family residential units. The retention of the existing uses and development of this area by placing it in a Multiple-Family designation might not result in stability for the area. Because of the nature and condition of the existing development, proximity to the Foothill Freeway, impact of traffic, and ownership patterns of the area, continual pressure from developers for a change to a Commercial designation could be expected. . . . Newman Avenue General Plan Amendment June 28, 1977 Page 10 It is considered by the Planning Department to be more appropriate in the long-range interest of the existing and future property owners and tenants of the adjoining residential area to make clear at this time that the potential for cpmmercial development exists in this area. Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act, the Planning 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. Therefore, a Negative Declaration has been prepared for this project. . Before the City Council takes action on this project, the Council should "move to approve and file the Negative Declaration and find that the project will not have a significant effect on the environment." PLANNING DEPARTMENT WILLIAM WOOLARD DIRECTOR OF PLANNING WW/at Attachments .~. MA\Fei ~ r . .~~~ .! CALlfOR~ \ 1 .c. " -- r~Ht;fIi,l I' . ,'}' .~, i' & ! I. \". ~'.'.' . . ' . i ~!) ,u" I.!-.~!l.;~j.' -.. .-- -- '\ . ~", (:~ L1_ .~-1 )';: ~'i.', J, ' 1 IU I ,) lfur' L_~~~l ,'f' --r....,O'-I-.~. '.""T _~hc,:~~:, j ~ i r~"-"" .--f' ,~~-: '\ II', <; L' t. ---~-~' ,~.~:.-. ~,Jt=r f\~~J ~ v,':-' \!= ~1~--.:--'\,' !H' ~l . f, 1P1 ....,r=-=.'-.M 1;\' ... " ~. ~i I v .r l' ~ ,J \r. .!.. \ \, \. - >'- \ . \ '~'l 1..1 .J. ,! : ''i'-'----=-i'--=/ .~ ~\ L .~;;-~-~~ , ,,"-"'~(''''FT'''''' I ,', . ~ I~.r<,,~,- \ \ \\ L :, i" ' .,~ fi~~7 ','~"cc =-.-~'-~m;")nf:1'; n."I~}, / .;,,' ;~:::':-:, ::;t,J~' ~~I~~~t11: . -.1':'.J':'.J::...c.1.' , '-... -' ~,\i).lt 8 '~.~-i.A~ ==:'., t~ 'l..~ ' .. -j! , .-3\ '- 1'1 ..........-: I ~ i \ ' ",. !'=-~_o"'-,'_=- >>--J',' l~;;'<:~':'" .:.~... '~ ~ K ~--J~ '. ~!" ~ ' . ,I.r " ') -:! E= .. ~L[,~ "'; "'" -""t ",,:; .., , ,I r t ~ III -t=.~ '3~ ~ '':--.. --"0 ~I ~.. ' ' · I ~ ~ ~ ./~ '~,_ l .. . ,~ . ~. i ,~ \' r : "''0- ~~\.. ....' :: ,,~ -;;- ~#-~~. ~'-=;,-'~-'~ ~- " .. "" ' .' . .~. \i. ""(";r...."*' ~" ?2'""""1 . ~ :..... ~~'1- ,,' " . }. "'. .~~jL-: c:::r =:~ --";-~ ,~, , . I' ~ ,,--, \, '.~Y .,' ;,.. ;..."...' r: ~ n ~.'"~. .:' , ~.---~i~~._ " ~ ~' /'" {~~I ~,-.--'=o~cc'L':::... "" ,-..: ,\ I 't I,("~J.>" .. - .IJI- i~ ' ~ '-__ '''",' , /-' / . ,. ~-~.:.:::....:.:::. I I ,~ C~Jtj' ,- ,. ".., _r::::=: I ~ ~\C)~~lt ,. . J/' ~. -;;.o=;'~~ar'~~ , ~! _=-\'OJ==~~~.==-L./.(," 'C.-..-;::=c-r.=c '= ~' 5<=_= -~ ;f:~-- i ... -.. --""s;; . ' ,,-~ ....' ~==-="J -'--, ~ i ~ '-'O--~-" - ~_O.-' I 1~~lr" II .- I '. I ~';.;,' - .. - .....-==i -~ --';.P'i . +-=-, ,J.' _J,---=..~\~, '.\ ..... .' '0. '''~~[$:' ... r ~ . =.~-='-'1r-~ . - ,-=' ---J- .i ~--'-\1,-=,,"--=-=--~C-. !' 1'" il . ~ .. I 'K" '\ .. L,_.=~ =1 · --=,---. I-'? , ,-' I I ":"'-'-'1_ --'~~~~"--:::[- ..J'l ,-i........t~ . ~___. ,~... " ..~. ~~, r 1 · . ...,--...-- - . . -~-.- j....~. I'~, . ' I' ,J tj~ff'" ~~=~~! "'- c~;c.~ I , '.., ~I 'J7" ..~. ~. i . ----= i - i_ ','J;U'_. . ~, -;;em -~ -~ ~l I ~ -J,",. 1'i!"_[' 1 ___- _...., ~~I . '" ' .-. -,... L' ~l ~,'...J %l!O' "--=-=8- ~~.,....:;-~Jl:""'~=-""~--"C'~i~ - O' -C~~l::-~.;:"::::':~II! If'''''';;''!'.(r>' I 'i~>-:'- ~ . -- , ;. J~ =,.~'~-='. .,.......;101\:<::. .~~,__ I ~I .'......' "'l, ~. ~ I __ ~~_"'~ I~ ..........- _______ :~l - ., I L I I! ,~ I ! . l,~ ~ 1 .~ 14;__... l_-7--_~--- ------' '----- -.-.J'--...........~~_----....J L.....J.: -::=;:=: \ \.'0. "', .....-- [I ~ ~. ~ ,'----.(1 r-r \ ~"i~-...-ri'; - ~--- -- I .=____-~ II . I ".-" . '~--~n .'- ~~- -"'p.;;r-~' "1, '~e;::-- ~i' I ~~, ...-~===---=--..~~ ----::-..---, - ----v -. ~ l;' r:- ~\. ~"'..- - .~fli ;r~~-3:E"~-~ - <-1C -=."-~~-~ .. -" =~, "" I ,~ ~: II ,. .. ~. ~~.,~ _-cn~ -",--_ - . - .' v__. F -11 ,'" . ;= ....,',-0 l ~ :' i~_n_'. ..::JL-. . ;'1, " i'-i~~ <<,1 I · .!....J' ------;r' ~::J:'""i~~1 ~ ;.& ~~I-- ","~C='1)1~['-"--;-"-_ "~'~c_c..', ~=u-C'"":~ / . 'J!'~ ""' ,'bl --"""---", ~ f... r : --, . \ ~ _"--___----' _ ---..!l.-.-.__ ___.."'-... (:._5:\ ~~=~~--=~~, ~ l':.r' I: ill mUJ:,"'" I 'L . " , . "Fij" ~ " ,\ i ---r='-~r-=;-""" ---c---=u-----' .','~' ; ,.,' , '\'. ~-=;~ b /;-''''ii~'' ,:'q; ;. I~ t, "d.J __, ~'-.....:L_,u_ ._i'.__~G~~L,cL4'-~.), ,f. ,~~ '4 .tiL-.." . . />:. ~(~ ' v 'y ALL- M-\ <DOO~v voooo v \\: ~-:. @ ~ r-JrJ<D 0 0 .~- 9 c \) ~ ~ ~N CD '1'-/1 p p ~ 0FI"1Ge- ~ ~ avo ~ :::l (j,P6 _I i 0 v:2: J" 61&>o.1loe-.l b 0 (j)OIO CD v v v ill ~ I : 0 v m CLl!6,.IJ li!It o V \' (]) p o V 1tJ'oDwt<<. + LA~ ST ~ . . - - - - - - -\ ___J ~ ,----, \J ,~ V : Mol=(;. J:> . ;,:::: o ru LN--lD ~ t Za--l1 Nei w..P "-10. 1- t .\ I I",UJO -" ~ I~:;~" /.:::,(.-0"'''' ~Q 6'- Vt? 6~1ol0Ail-"< -. ;- r-r"'--' ~A.\... ~ ]~[ .(.~- .' dr m ~UlI iRttL~ Ulh~ ~ f, r. i +' ~\ . . ~ Jll i ? I t::o- 'CO 7)...'/ '/~ f::>-. ,""'-- -..... ~;-i'''A ~ tA..;, , .y !-R L } . . LAfb~ ::::>\. - \ ~t+ . R-M - MLlLTt-FAMILY C - COMM~tAL- . U untlll - - - - - - --1 \ \\\ 1 ~\\ :b~. - - - - -. ;... ~--,~\j r~~ 1- ~ .\ I I ,,-1.XJ '. _~~?1J.~. 6EN~ PlAN ~ NO, :? . . . . I I - /5::. ~(~ 'y . So. ~ J1 CoMMo y , ~ : B~l1:r-'~ ~ ~"""Uffm]l~~:><~:.-l ~ m ~Co_~[Iffiffi[] ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ :...A Fb;z:n::: Sf 1: .f I I.,y:;o A20~ GaJ~ R..Jo.N ~No.4 . . . f5;::. ~tZz '~y MIJI,.-rl _0- . I ~ ~E1 ~~ y . ~ : rBI~~ ~~ ~~IDtfm]1=~~~~-1~. m ~ IITI8HEIlJ CEEBffiIIJk3 ~ . ..~ N ~ ~ ~ . ~ i . N eN. 'J ~ ~ :....A fb~ 5\. N..~ 6a.lEf2/l.L Ft..#JI W\N? No. S f J I"VV . . I I NCI<'.J'^AL- 3(".( "'3T12~f 'Nt1'\! P. !.or-' F21~.f-r OFWA'( . I 30 { .--------------, i I . I I ! I I I I~ " J) .., I )t- 1 r-~ ! , E;llcP....s;i ~ ~ III 11.1 r\\ 'J ~ ~ ~ 1'1 i~ L~ ~() :J ,I. ~ "'~ l" -< \\1 .. \\\ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r > ~ - f'\ V \- ~ r' ~ \\I -- --- I '2.5 / 1-----'-- '1 I i I , !~I I II I Y r6-ft3 . I ' , I t~ Z'" ~~ ",~-r1Z.6eT" ~ ~ '.}. "is ~ ~ rn ,,1. ~ ~ ~ ~r '" V i)>:.- \\' "Z ~ ~I,\\ ~ r Z f' -\ I ~ I 3~ WIn! p.. "SC F2-l~-r ~fC- 'N'A'( ~o . r:f2.I::-WI N6 t-Jo, I . . File No. --"2.'f' T7-Z . CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT NEGATIVE DECLARATION CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA A. Description of project: ';."al e:K.:AL- P L-A 1\\ AM E" N C' M e.J..J l B. Location of project: <;I')UTI-\-- +- YV PI,T of F'oolH 11--'- r~\N'1. , ) fJOIZ..TI-\ OF J..-A potZflO- -S-r" p-~<.:,\ Ov .s~J1A /C. N ITi-, AVE...) . C. Name of applicant or sponsor: c::::;..i1'<: or=: AlUADiA D. Finding: This project will have no significant effect upon the environment within the meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 for the reasons set forth in the attached Initial Study. E. Mitigation measures, if any, included in the project to avoid potentially significant effects: O!ZOPO';'~D AL-T~RNAT& AL'_-C-~ TO f-.l.F_\NV\AI"-l AV~ r=:r?1'Z. AtoJ'{ i~le:Nhl>=ICAnO~ of 1--At-.1D ,)se::.. Date: ~\()NE:-- ;/) '(71--'7 I ~ I ~~~ Signature . Date Posted: -:Ju/.JE.. 14-1 1'\11 Pl-AN 1'-\ I W (;,.- 11,l'TE::.RN Title . . . A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of Proponent 2. . . File No. G.P. 77-2 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM City of Arcadia 240 West Huntington Drive Address and Phone Number of Proponent Arcadia, California 446-4471 B. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS (Explanations of all .yes. and "maybe" answers are required on attached sheets.) 1. ~. W111 tM p~.l ,...lIlt in, ... Onnabl. _rUl con"! UOCUI O~ ill c:hanq.. in 9_10910: .ublotl'~\I.I'..1 b. Dhrupt.1ons. diaplac_llta, COla- p,,:UOII Or _...~rln'l' of the IOU? c:.~1ntopooJraphyor9nlUl1d I,urfan "Hd tenura.? d. The deatr-urti... e(\'WIri~ or ~ifll;aU_ of ...y uniq.... 9_1091<: Or physical tauIlnl11 e. Any h..=n.... ia _11M! or ".tar .~1_ of 1.0118. either on or ot! tM a1td f. Cll&afea in .Utat1on, depolllUotl Or .roa1on "ll.1ctl _y -.dify t.be ellannalof II d'l'eror at..._. 9. &xpc.1lI'1. of people or property to '.010910: ha....rcU .uch .. ..rt.hquak... lanuU.... _.uti4... "round Idllln. ord.ailarhu~1 1. M,!:. Will tlM p~a1 n.ult in, .. IC.UDt1al all' eat..l_. or Ihtarionti_ of .-blent ail' ~.l1ty1 b. ".. ereaUon of objectionable o6on7 c. AltlU'at.ionofair_nt. .:;Ii.tur. 0.. t.....r..t.ur., Dr any dl&D9. i.. <:li_~. aiu.... locally 01'1'..,1-..11y7 1. !!!!!. 11111 tlM! p~.l nault in, a. Ch&D9.1 in currant. Dr tn. COllr.e OfdlJ'01etloftof"at.r_t.in ftHn watan? b. 01....,.. in u-orptlO1l rat.., dralnaqe patteml. or the ntl IIId ..-nt of lurfac. ..at..r runoff? c. Alter.tlonl to tM COlU'le or n_ of flood "Iten? d. Ch&ft<ie in the. -..t of IIl.d!._ ".ter ln any ".ter body? e. DlICn..rqe lnto llU'face ..ater., or in lilY .It.ration of .llrfaCtl ..ater quality, laeludln<j' but not l1a1t..! to tftlllP"rltllta, dl..01...itd 0JrY9'" or tu.rbidity? f. Jolt.ntion of the dlrl~ioDor r.tl of flow of qroWld ".t.n? '1'. Chaft91 in!;.bl qlllfttity of '1rGllnd ".t.n, litblr thro"'ih dir.ct Iddition. or "itbclr_III. or throu'Ih interCtlption of lilY aquiflr by C'\I.tI or ..clvltion.? !!! !!ill!. .!2.. !!! ~ ..!!!2.. h. SublUntill redllction ill thl .......t of ..It.r othervl.. I".nlble for pgbl1c "It.r luppH..? ,/ .it! -1/ .JL 1. bpoaun of people or property to ..Inr r.llted i')a,ln1I l\len II floodin9? 4. Pllllt Lif.. 1f1I1 the propoall r..ult tn: I. CM1l9. 1ft the di_ni.t,. of .pe<:i... Or lll111ber of lilY .pe<:1.. ot pllllte I1ncllld1n9 tr.l, Ihnlb.. 9U.... eros>", aiCl'Oflon and aquatic plllln)? b. b4IIction of the n......n of &flY uniqu., urn or eed.llgered lpaci.. ot plante? / JL y' ,/ y' ,/ c. Introd.ue101C1r1 of n_ lpecl.. of pllnt.into an .na, or r..ult in. boIrri.r to thl nOrNI l'e'Phni.'-t of es.tltlnq .ped..? v v ~. ""i_l Lif.. 1f111 the p~d "".lI.lt 11'1: V .JL a. Ch....,. hi the di_nit,. of I,.ci.., Or n.-.n of lilY Ip.ci.. of a..l..lI lbirdl, Ilhd lai_lI tncbdUo'l' rllptll.. fllb -.nd. .hdlti.h, benthic of'9Ull_, l~_tI or Il1crohunal? L b. bdQCtion of tlM lI......n of &Jlf \mlqu., rare or .nd.&n9.rad apael.. ot ani_h? c. Introd.uctlonof_lpe<:i..of 11I1_11 ill.to ... area, or r..1I1t ln lbarri.r to the a1<;lr.Uonor_- _ntoflll~lI? d. Det.rior.tion to ..t.U..., ..lldUf. bG1Ut? L k ~ .c x- 6. MOl... Ifl11 t.bI propoaal r"1I1t 11'1: I. Iact..... in .d.U..., noil. il"u? ,/ x- V b. IxpoIIur. of peopl. to ......... noh. lev.h? v 7. ~:_an:;l~;ht :~l~l~~?pt'OpOIf.1 I. Land u... Will the propotlf.1 "".lIlt in ~nthlalt.nUO>Ioftb. pr...nt or planned land Ue of III.....? L ,/ x V IC. t. M.tunl "IOlU'CU. Ifill tn. prQpOeal r111l.1t1n. I. Incr.... in tn. rite of III. of &ny n.tur.l r..OllrCH? v ..J/ b. S~tant1al depl.UQn of....,. nonr.n_&.bl. n.tllr.l r..ourC<l? L -1- . . . n. Rhk of UP'lt. Doe. thl prope...l lnVOlve . rUk at ..n .xpID.ion Dr the ...1..... of hla.~ .ub.t__. (lncludinq, but not Ii.it.., to. 011. peltJ.d4el. c"-icolll. or n4htiOll) ill the event Of ... .cc:ll1ll1t or UPltlt con41tJ.on.? 11. ~:U~:;:i;...If~~~t:~g~~~II:~~;~ or 9r<1Vth rIIU of tlw hWl.II popu1oll- UOIlottlll,r.a? 12. :~~l:~ ~~tn:~tlo~r~:~~ :fftlct .....4 lor ,d41t1ond bQu.(nq7 u, Tl'atI'POcUtJon/Clrcu1olltlon. Wl11 tile propos'l ....ua In. oil. GoIn.utlOftot .ublIU.nthl.cSdl- Uon.l ..-.hlcul.r .,g_nU b. Efflct. on exllt1rl9 ~ck1"'1 f.ciliu.. 01' d-...d for II.... parkh.q? c. Sublt.nt-hl 11ap.et IIPDn ll<iIUn.q tc'nlpoct.tion IYlt_? d. Alt.ratiolll (.() pCI..llt patt.ml at clrcu1olltion or __t ot people oIIDd/or 9004.? .. Alt.c.Uon. to ....t.rbom.. ...U or dc tedHe? t. IlIcr.... 111 tufUe h...rd. to _torv.hielel, bicyell.t. p."ie.tcl'"11 ". Public IInlc'l. W111 the pr090lal 11'" .n .n.et upon. or .......It in .. ....dlorn_or.lt.r.d90v.c,...lIt.l .enle" 111"'Y of the follovlnq ......., .. rir. protletloll? b. PoUc. prot.ction? C. Schooh? d. Parka or otl\et r'.:lnl.t.ion.l ~acLLiti..? .. ...ll1tllll.nc. of publiC hciU- th., Includ1n9c_eta? t. Oth.c '!I'_~IIt.al ..nolc..? 1!l. ~. "'ill tM prGpDIal r..lllt In' .. tI.. at .lIb.tAllti..l _W'lta of t_loc.nlr9Y? b. lubetllltial Incr.... In 41D411d 1IpOIl.aJ..tll19 .Ollree. of _r'N. Or ~1... tM &I_~t at .._ 'olll'ee. of In.:f9Y? ll. UUUU... lf11l the propolal ....Illa ~forll_':r.t_,Oc .ubnantial .ltlraUon. tel the follow- ilI911tlliU.., ., PooNc ~ Htural ."..? ,. C~caUana: ay.t_? ,. W..ter? .. S_c<loC_ptlc tUlU? .. S~"At.lc4r.1naql? t. SoUd .,..tl and &'90..11 17. SlIIU.n Health. Wl11 the propoaal "'\lit u\, .. Cc..tlon of any htldtb "...cd DC potentl.1 he.lth II.&...~ taaclud.lll'" ....talh..ltl'1l? b. bpoIllr. of paoph to pot.nthl he.lth b&&arda? Date May 2 1977 ..! ~ 1!!l. ./ ./ ,/ ,/ ./ ,/ /' ~ ~ - v ...i/ v .L' L v/ L x x ,/ ,/ .x- .x- L L ...JC v x -2- . !!! !!A!!! ..!2.. U. .....th.t.._.. Wl11 the pcopcll.l rl.u~t ill tile oto.tcIlCU_ of any .cenlc d.u or vi.., opan to th. public, or "111 tll.& proposAl ....glt 11>. the "c...tlon ot ... ...thetloal1y off_siva .1t. open to pllbl1e vil.,7 U. h<::r..tlon. Wll1 tM p.....d .......It 1JI.nll1p.etllpOllthaq\lo&l1tyor 'fllIlIlUtygt.xtatillCJcl'C'c..tl011111 ClPPOctwuti..7 ...1/ ,/ ". ~=~f;~:~{~i~~O~":~~.C:~~~ ~~ '- 1l9n1~le.nt .rcheol091cal or /'Iutanc.l .ita. .tl'llCtur1l. obj.ct "rbuilding? v .'- ~n,,=:v ~;n:;:l:e:f ..:;:"~~e:::~d.l ~o d..",..dI tile q_lity of the .nvl..-nt;. .Ilbnanti.lly rllduoa the h.ablt..t of' filb. or wildlife .pael... c... .. U.h "I' wil1lih popuhtiCIII to dcep ~lCJ01 telf-.ustainlIl9 I.-II. tl'Ir...tea to .lillin"te..pl&lltoclAl_1_ity. (edllceth.n.-Dt!corr..trlc:tt".r....9. of. r"'ceor.lld.nqaradpllAtoc afti_l or .Hlndte h.port..ot ,ulllpl.. of th. "']Or periods 01 CdUoc"h history 01' prabhtor')'? b. Dou the proj.ct h."" th. potenthl to ..chhva.hort-t...... to th.dh.dv..llt.ge ot lon9-t.... .nvlr~ul qod..? (A short-t.,..l,sp11ctonth.lnvic_nt i. an. wlI.lch ocC'Ur. 111 .. r.l.tl...ly brhf, d.UniUve period of tl_ ..hU' 10Ilq-t....ll1f'.cu...l11...duu....ll into th.tutllre.l ./ v e. 0oll th.projecth.VI1"".cta ...hich ..r.lndlvldll.lly Ulliud. but cWluhtlvely COlIl1d.r.lbl.~ fA projeC't ....1' llllp&ct all two or ..u sep..nt. r..allcces whar. thl 1II1p.C't 011 ..ch reaource la rahtiftly ....11. but .,h.n the .ttlC'tO( the totd of tho.. i"P'C'U on the enviro'-"t i. .l/j1111t1eant.) ,/' 4. DOe. the proJ.ct h.v. .nvicon_IIt.. .ff.eta "hiC'h w111 e...... .ub.t.."Ud .dv.c.eeff.et.allh.....nba.lnq...ith.r 41nctly Or Indir..,tly~ v C. DISCUSSION or ENVIIlONMENTU !VM.llATIOll See attached sheet, D. DenI:KlNATICII (ta be cOlll'I.tl<l by Ut. l.....d """.lIcyl CIrI the but. at thh init1a1 .valll&t1on, ~ tiftd the prQ90led proi.et COULD ~ ha.,.. .. dqftiUeallt effect on the .nvh_nt. and .. WECA'tlVE DEC:UltATIOII .,ill be prep..r.d. o I find th.t althouqh th.. propoa'" proj.et _ld h...... . .1'11'1l1c&lIt.ffactonth..llvlr_nt.th.......illnot be . l19J1ific.nt .ttact 1n thb c... beeawo. the altl."atloa _...uc.. de.erlbed "In aft ..ttac:bad .h..t h.... bean .6dad to th.project. ANEG1o'UVE~tOlllnI.LaE"IlI:PAltEO. OlUnd the propo..d pcojact AAY h..,. a a19"iUc:ant .ffect onth.."....lrOll_nt, .n4..n&lfVtJlllCllQe!n'Utl'lP~g"OllTi' requlced. fZ~~~-<~ ( gnature) For City of Arcadia . . . Addendum to Environmental Checklist Form G,P, 77-2 8. Though this General Plan amendment could eventually result in a zoning that is significantly different than the existing zoning, this change of the planned use of the area will ultimately yield a zoning that is more consistent with the present and future uses of the area, 12, The proposal could have an effect on existing housing and its occupants in the subject area. If this General Plan amendment eventually causes the existing zoning of M,l to be changed to residential zoning districts supportive of the existing uses, higher market values may impact owners and tenants on fixed income, l3d, A proposal for an alternative access to Newman Avenue, a residential cul-de-sac, could cause some rearrangement of existing transportation/circulation in the subject area, . . . . . . . File NO. G,P, 77-2 ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION FORM A. Applicant's Name: City of Arcadia Address: 240 W, Huntington Drive, Arcadia B. Property Address (Location): South and west of Foothill Freeway. east of Santa Anita Avenue and north of La Porte Street C. General Plan Designation: Under consideration D. Zone Classification: M-l E. Proposed Use (State exactly what use is intended for the property, i.e., type, activities, employment): N.A. F. Square Footage of Site: N.A, G. Square Footage of Existing Buildings: l. To Remain: N.A, 2. To Be Removed: N ,A. H. Square Footage of New Buildings: N,A, I. Square Footage of Buildings to be Used for: l. COllllllercial Activities: N.A, 2, Industrial Activities: N.A, 3, Residential Activities: ;.J,A, Number of Units: N.A. J. On a separate sheet, describe the following: 1. The environmental setting of the project site as it exists, 2, The proposed alterations to the project site, 3, The use and development of the surrounding properties. -1- . . . . . Environmental Information Form K. Check the appropriate answers to the following questions: Yes No 1, will the proposed project result in a substantial alteration of ground contours and/or alteration of existing drainage pattern? x 2. Will the proposed project result in a change in groundwater quality and/or quantity? x 3. Will the proposed project result in an increase in noise, vibration, dust, dirt, smoke, fumes, odor or solid waste? x 4. Will the proposed project result in the use or disposal of potentially hazardous materials? x 5. Will the proposed project result in a substantial increase in demand for municipal services and/or energy consumption: x Explain in detail any "YES" answers to the above questions on additional sheets. L. Provide any additional information which would elaborate on the potential environmental consequences resultant from the proposed project. M. Certification: I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the data and information required for this initial evaluation to the best of my ability, and that the facts, statements and information presented are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. Date: May 3, 1977 Q I I -L_'< J_ / i '7 1"7( '''~ ,~_Q Signature/of Applicant -..-,,/ -2-