Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1609 . . . RESOLUTION NO. 1609 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CllY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, DENYING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. CUP 00-006, AS REVISED TO ALLOW UP TO 25% OF A PROPOSED 20,772 SQUARE FOOT, THREE-STORY OFFICE BUILDING TO BE AVAILABLE FOR MULTIPLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL USE AT 255 E. SANTA CLARA STREET. WHEREAS, on April 4, 2000, an application was filed by Gary W. Morris, A California LLC; Development Services Department Case No. CUP 00-006 for a 1,343 square foot building owner's private residence in the southwesterly portion of the 6,712 square foot third floor of a proposed 20,772 square'foot, three-story office building to be developed at 255 E. Santa Clara Street, more particularly described as follows: Lot 2 of Parcel Map 21841 in the City of Arcadia, County of Los Angeles, State of California, as recorded in Book 241, Pages 2 & 3 of Parcel Maps in the Office of the Recorder ofsaid County. WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on May 9, 2000 and continued at the request of the applicant to July 11, 2000, and prior to the continuance of the hearing on July 11, 2000, the applicant gave notice that the application was to be revised to request that up to 25% of the 20,772 square foot, three-story office building be allowed to be available for multiple-family residential use, and therefore another continuance was granted to August 22, 2000, at which time all interested persons were given full opportunity to be heard and to present evidence; NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CllY OF ARCADIA HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. That the factual data submitted by the Development Services Department in the atta.ched report dated August 22, 2000 is true and correct. . . . SECTION 2. This Commission finds: t. That the project as submitted by the applicant is inconsistent with and inadequately addresses the City's multiple-family residential standards; and 2. That the applicant, in his testimony at the public hearing described the multiple-family residential portion of the project as being developed incrementally, subject to the interest of future tenants. This is inconsistent with the General Plan designation of Mixed Use - CommerciaUMultiple Family, which notes as "Appropriate Uses", medium to high density residential. In addition, the applicant did not indicate an ability to comply with the conditions of approval necessary to make the project consistent with the General Plan and the Zoning Regulations as noted in the staff report. SECTION 3. That for the foregoing reasons this Commission denies Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 00-006, as revised to allow up to 25% of a proposed 20,772 square foot, three-story office building to be available for multiple- family residential use at 255 E. Santa Clara Street. SECTION 4. The decision and findings contained in this Resolution reflect the Planning Commission's action of August 22, 2000 to deny Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 00-006 as revised, by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners Kalemkiarian, Murphy and Sleeter NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioners Bruckner and Huang ABSTAIN: None -2- 1609 . . . 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 No. 1609 was adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on September 12, 2000, by the following vote: , AYES: Commissioners Bruckner, Kalemkiarian and Murphy NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Huang ABSTAIN: None Secretary, Plann City of Arcadia APPROVED AS TO FORM: , ~R~ Stephen P. Deitsch, City Attorney City of Arcadia airman, Planning C City of Arcadia -3- 1609 '~ . . STAFF REPORT DEVELOPMENTSER~CESDEPARTMENT August 22, 2000 TO: Arcadia City Planning Commission FROM: Donna Butler, Community Development Administrator By: James M. Kasama, Associate Planner SUBJECT: Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 00-006 (revised) to allow up to 25% of a proposed 20,772 square foot, three-story office building to be available for multiple-family residential use at 255 E. Santa Clara S1. SUMMARY . This Conditional Use Permit application was submitted by Gary W. Morris for a residential use within a proposed 20,772 square foot, three-story office building at 255 E. Santa Clara Street. The initial request was to use 1,343 square feet of the third floor as the owner's private residence. The Development Services Department recommended denial of that request. Mr. Morris has revised the proposal to request that up 10 25% of the proposed office building be allowed to be available for multiple- family resideniial use. The Development Services Department is recommending denial of this revised application. GENERAL INFORMATION APPLICANT: Gary W. Morris, A California LLC LOCATION: 255 E. Santa Clara Street Northeast corner of Santa Clara Street and Second Avenue REQUEST: A Conditional Use Permit to allow up to 25% of a proposed 20,772 square foot, three-story office building to be available for multiple- family residential use. . SITE AREA: 39,657' square feet (0.91 acr:e) FRONTAGE: Approximately 375 feet along E. Santa Clara St.' EXISTING LAND USE & ZONING: The, site is currently being graded for two, three-story, 20,772 square foot office buildings with sam i-subterranean parking. The zoning is CPD-1: Commereial Planned Development-1. " , After a proposed 101 line adjustment. See application no. TPM 2000-017. . . SURROUNDING LAND USES & ZONING: . North: City water facility - zoned CPD-1 South: Residence Inn Hotel- zoned CPD-1 East: Extended Stay America Hotel- zoned CPD-1 West: Garage door manufacturer - zoned M-1 GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: . Mixed Use - CommerciallMultiple Family BACKGROUND . This Conditional Use Permit application was initially submitted on April 4, 2000 to request use of 1,343 square feet on the third floor of the proposed 20,772 square foot, three-story office building as the building owner's private residence. Because a single residential unit is inconsistent with the Mixed Use-CommerciallMultiple Family designation in the General Plan, the Development Services Department recommended denial of that request. At the May 9, 2000 Planning Commission meeting, a continuance was granted to the July 11, 2000 meeting at the applicant's request. Prior to the July 11, 2000 meeting, the applicant notified staff that he wished to revise the request to allow up to 25% of the proposed office building to be available for multiple-family residential use. The Planning Commission granted a continuance to August 22nd to allow for new public hearing notices based on the revised proposal. PROPOSAL & ANALYSIS The subject property is being developed with a three-story, 20,772 square foot office building with semi-subterranean parking. A twin office building is concurrently being developed on the adjacent lot. The revised proposal is to use up to 25% of the proposed building (4,395 sq. ft.') for multiple-family residential use. A preliminary conceptual floor plan indicates that 4,337 square feet of the 5,717 square foot third floor will be used to provide three, two-bedroom units; and one, one-bedroom ,unit. Each unit will have only one bathroom. The remainder of the third floor is devoted to a common lounge, corridors, stairways, elevator and common restrooms, The applicant states that there is a trend among business owners to live close to work and avoid long commutes, and that those business people without young . . Based on Modified Gross Floor Area which Is measured from the Inside finished surface of the building walls and excludes appurtenant features such as stairways, elevator shafts, pennanent lobbies, restrooms, etc. (AMC Sec. 9220.25.2). CUP 00-006 (Revised) August 22, 2000 Page 2 . . . . . children prefer not having to worry about maintaining a single-family house. Mlxed- use developments address this housing trend. The applicant is interested in availing himself of such a .development. He will move into one of the units as his private residence, and his law offices will be relocated to the building. The applicanfs letter regarding the revised proposal is attached. General Plan The General Plan designation for this site is Mixed Use - CommerciallMultiple Family and is described as follows: CommerciaVMultiple Family (MU-C1MF) - Provides opportunities for development of commercial and residential mixed-use projects close to local services and facilities and which foster the use of altemative modes of circulation such as pedestrian or bicycles. Commercial uses allowed within this designation are intended to serve the needs of the local residents as well as promote community interaction. Appropriate uses include medium to high-density residential, medical and professional offices, retail commercial, and personal services. Additionally, for mixed-use projects, the MU-CIMF designation has maximum land use intensity limits of 0.40 Floor-Area-Ratio (FAR) based on Modified Gross Floor Area for commercial uses and a maximum density of 24 dwelling units per acre (1 unit per 1,815 sq. ft. of lot area) for residential uses. The entire third floor is proposed to be devmted to residential use, and the proposed concept shows four units. The maximum density of 24 units per acre would allow for a total of 21 units on this 39,657' square foot site. The first and second floors will be available for commercial uses with iii total of 11,864 modified gross square feet of commercial space, which equals a FAR of 0.30. The applicant's proposal is consistent with the MU-CIMF general plan designation and land use intenSity limits. ZoninQ The Commercial Planned Development zoning (CPO-i) allows for residential uses which are al"l integral part of a commercial development with an approved Conditional Use Permit. There are no specific regulations for the design and development of residential units in a mixed-use project, and most of the R-3 zoning regulations do not apply to thiS type of mixed-use proposal wherein the dwelling units are within a commercial building. If a mixed-use project has residential uses separate from the commercial uses, regulations such as building height, setbacks, driveways, etc. would be applicable. . After a proposed lot line adjustment. See application no. TPM 2000-017. CUP 00-006 (Revised) August 22, 2000 Page 3 . . . . . This proposal lacks several features and amenities normally associated with multiple-family residences and required by the City's R-3 regulations. In this regard, the following deficiencies need to be addressed: . Floor Area - The R-3 'regulations require that exclusive of porches, garages, entries, patios and, basements" a one-bedroom dwelling unit shall contain not less than 800 square feet; and a two-bedroom dwelling unit not less than 1,100 square feet (Sec. 9255.2.8). Proposed unit nos. 2 and 3 do not meet these minimums, but it does not appear that it would be difficult to adjust the proposal to comply with these standards. ' The applicant's proposal devotes the entire third floor to residential uses. A sizeable portion of the third floor is shown as a common lounge, and the plan still includes the handicap accessible restrooms by the elevator. For private residential purposes, staff does not think that the common lounge area is appropriate, nor are the handicap accessible restrooms. These areas should be incorporated into the residential units or used for purposes that would better serve the residence. Because the entire third floor is to be used for residential purposes, staff's opinion is that this Conditional Use Permit should be for the use of the entire third floor (Le., 7,049 gross square feet) and not only up to 25% as stated in the revised application. Also, the floor plans of the proposed units are rather awkward. The one bathroom that is provided for eac/':l unit is accessible only through the main bedroom. There is no other bathroom for the occupant of the second bedroom. The architect has stated that if this CUP is approved, this situation will be resolved. . >, . Parking - Most of the various requirements under this heading, such as location, width, depth, guest parking, and landscaping do not apply to this proposal. However, the R-3 requirement that each unit have a garage with at least two parking spaces (Sec. 9255.2.9.A) needs to be addressed for this project. An individual garage for each unit is required for multiple-family projects even when fully subterranean parking is provided, and should be included in this project. There should be at least a two-car garage provided for each unit, and all of them should be together and located conveniently near the elevator. The garages should be securely separated from the rest of the parking area and should be accessible only to the residents. In addition, private storage cabinets of 60 cubic feet per parking space should be provided in each garage (Sec. 9255.9.G). . Open Space - Each of the proposed units has a 100 square foot balcony and thereby complies with the R-3 open space requirement for dwelling units without CUP 00-006 (Revised) August22,2000 Page 4 . . . . . ground floor living space. However, in the three, two-bedroom units, the balconies are accessible only through the second bedroom. The architect has stated that if this CUP is approved, this situation will be resolved, as will the balcony door for Unit No.3, which is erroneously shown as being outside the unit. . Trash Area - A large trash room- is provided in the basemehUparking level. This satisfies the R-3 requirement for a ~rash area. However, having to cerry household trash down to the basement in an elevator shared with commercial tenants is not a desirable situation. A trash chute would be the most convenient method to deliver trash to tha basement, however this may not be feasible based on the building layout. Alternatively, a common trash room could be provided on the third floor that could be emptied daily by the building's janitorial service. Staff is. concerned by the several abovementioned deficiencies, but finds that this revised proposal would be consistent with the Mixed Use - CommerciallMultiple Family General Plan designation, provided that the entire residential component is developed and "built-out" all at one time and maintained in such a manner, and provided that the numerous zoning related inconsistencies and inadequacies as discussed above are resolved. CEQA Pursuant to the prOVISions of th~ California Environmental Quality Act, the Development Services Department has prepared an . Initial Study for the proposed project. Said Initial Study did not dLsclose 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, to facilitate the consideration of an approval of this project, a Negative Declaration has been drafted for the project. . RECOMMENDATION The Development Services Department recommends denial of Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 00-006, as revised because the proposal is inconsistent with, and inadeq':!ately addresses the City's multiple-family residential standards. CUP 00-006 (Revised) August 22,2000 Page 5 . . . If the Planning Commission determines that this proposal can be made consistent with the General Plan designation of Mixed Use - CommerciallMultiple Family by adequately adjusting it to satisfy the City's multiple-family residential standards, staff recommends the following conditions of approval: 1. The multiple-family residential units on the third floor are all to be developed and "built-out" at one time and maintained in such a manner. If the third floor is to accommodate commercial uses, the entire third floor must be converted to commercial use all at one time. Any configuration that would combine residential and commercial uses on the third floor must be approved through a new Conditional Use Permit. . 2. The proposal shall be revised as follows to satisfy the zoning related requirements and to provide certain residential amenities. These revisions shall be subject to the approval of the Community Development Administrator: a. The floor area of all units shall meet or exceed the minimum requirements as set forth in Section 9255.2.8 of the Arcadia Municipal Code. The common lounge and handicap accessi,ble restrooms ,shall be deleted, and these floor areas shall be incorporated into the residential units or used for purposes that would better serve the residents. In order to facilitate these revisions, and since the entire third floor is to be devoted to residential use, the portion of the building to be available for residential use is to be the entire third floor. b. The floor plans of the units shall be revised to resolve the awkward bathroom and balcony access situations. c. A two-car garage shall be provided for each unit in accordance with Section 9255.2.9.A of the Arcadia !v1unicipal Code and all the garages shall be together, located conveniently near the elevator, and securely separated from the rest .of the parking area so as to be accessible only to the residents. . d. Private storage cabinets of 60 cubic feet per parking space should be provided in each' garage as set forth in Section 9255.2.9. G of the Arcadia Municipal Code. e. A trash chute or a common trash room shall be provided for the third floor. If a trash room is provided, it shall be emptied on a daily basis and vented to the exterior of the building. 3. All local code requirements regarding accessibility, construction, multiple-family residential development, fire protection, occupancy, safety, and water services shall be complied with to the satisfaction of the Building Official, Community . CUP 00-006 (Revised) August 22, 2000 Page 6 . . . .. . Development Administrator, Fire Marshall, and Public Works Services Director, including, but not limited to the following: . ' a. Installation of an NFPA 13 (1996 Edition) Automatic Fire Sprinkler System by a State Licensed C-16 contractor with all sprinkler heads to be quick response type heads and any and all underground work to be in accordance with NFPA 24. . b. . A fire hydrant must be located on the same side of the street and within 150 feet of the on-site fire department connection for the subject building. c. The automatic fire sprinkler system must be monitored by a central station with all fire- alarm transmissions to be fully addressable to the central station, and a certified copy of the central station monitoring contract shall be provided before final inspection sign-off and occupancy. d. Fire alarm room must be marked and the sign. on the door must indicate Fire Alarm Room. e. Install a NFPA 72 Fully Automatic and Fully Addressable fire alarm system that provides a complete life safety system for the entire structure with all components reporting to a central station. f. Provide Knox Boxes for access to the residential areas and any other restricted areas. 4. Approval of CUP 00-006, as revised sh~1I 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 conditions of approval shall be complied with prior to completion and availability of the residential.units for occupancy. Noncompliance with the plans, provisions and conditions of CUP 00-006, as revised, shall constitute grounds for immediate suspension and/or revocation of any approvals. FINDINGS AND MOTIONS Denial The planning Commission should move to deny Conditional Use Pennit application, as revised, based on the Inadequacies and Inconsistencies of the proposed multiple-family residential use with the City's multiple.family residential standards, and direct staff to prepare a resolution Incorporating the Commission's decision and specific findings. . CUP 00-006 (Revised) August 22, 2000 Page 7 . . . . . Approval. If the Planning Commission intends to approve this Conditional Use Permil application, the Commission sh~uld move to adopt the Negative Declaration, state the supporting findings, and .direct staff to, prepare a resolution incorporating the Commission's decision, specific findings, and any conditions of approval. If a Planning Commissioner, or any other interested party has any questions 01 comments regarding this matter prior to the August 22nd public hearing, please contact Associate Planner, Jim Kasama at (626) 574-5445. Appro~ by: // r / ~~ Donna L. Butler -Community Development Administrator Attachments: Letter from applicant Land Use and Zoning Map . Draft Negative Declaration & Initial Study Plans I, CUP 00-006 (Revised) August 22, 2000 Page 8 . . . HART, MIERAS, MORRIS & PEALE .OWARO-P HART Il'lltTlRltO - 18851 . We:SL.t!:v MII!:F!AS (lliU7-19731 GARY W. MORRIS '. DAVIO E. PltALlt . . A:rTORNEYS_AT LAW rea61 677~6353 l"'AX C5261 577-96101: 135 NORTH LOS FtO_BLES AVENUE: SUIT_~ '850 PASAOENA, CALIF'ORNIA 91101 f'r ," .. '.', ' , ;-... . Jut 1 7 lOOO CITY OF ARCADIA DEVELOPMENT SERVICE DEPARTMENT 240 W. HUNTINGTON DRIVE ARCADIA, CA 91006-6021 "-.,-...- RE: CUP 00-006 Dear Planning Commission: As the applicant in the above identified CUP application, I would request the use be modified to allow up to 25% of the proposed project be available for Multiple use of Multiple Family. I am the Senior Partner of the Law Offices of Hart, Mieras, Morris & Peale, LLP. The law :linn , until our recent move to temporary space in Arcadia, was a tenant in tlte Maguire Partners building next to the Doubletree Hotel located in Pasadena, California. Maguire Partners is one of the major property owners in Los Angeles, including tlte largest building in Los Angeles. Maguire Partners is developing a new project in Pasadena on Colorado Boulevard just south of tlteir present Plaza las Fuentes building on Los Robles Avenue. They intend to develop Pasadena's .first.modem multi-use building which will include commercial, retail and residential space. Maguire Partners believes that future developments must incorporate all three in order to meet tlte requirementsoftlte changing business community. Corporate and business owners want to live close to work and avoid the long commutes. Since the work day is longer, tltey want to spend non-working hours in entertainment, rather than travel to or from work. Many developers and cities ,are Starting to believe this is the way of tlte future for modem commercial development. This is particularty true in high-tech and do\.com business and we would like to be a part in encouraging this new industry to move to Arcadia. We are attempting to construct our building in a way that will make this project attractive to that industry. As tlte developer of this project, I personally would like the opportunity to downsize our home in Bradury. Three of my children have graduated from universities and one is presently a Freshman in college. Ian and I would like to have more flexibility in our time commitment. We also would like to have a chance to do some traveling and not worry about maintaining an expensive home. We lived in Arcadia before moving to Bradbury in 1980 and are looking forward to returning to Arcadia. . . . . . Arcadia's General Plan calls for a mixed use with it's many advantages and we are looking forward to be one of the first developments in Arcadia to provide this much needed option. ~~11)~ t. CUP 2000-006 (Revised) 255 E. Santa Clara Street . I I I -----, ----I I LIGHT INDUSTRIAL 00 LA PORTE ST. EDISON SUBSTATION M-1 ST. JOSEPH ST. . M-1 R&D GARAGE . 'OooR MFR. M-1 HOTEL C-2 . . ,~ ~ _; . ~- ~. l J ~,,~; ~o ;,,:1..., I Y . I 't'" I '-.., , . . - 1 R ,\ ,.., 6 0 l[ 10 ~.a. Ug+tlUt Il 10 /:: 00):: . ~{{ A'.cr~' ~l1-"'1 y J1k f=# I , .s 6 O. t:!. 14. 15 $ t """.1'" ."n . w '> 0( PROPOSED PUBLIC STORAGE CPD-1 CITY WATER FACILITY I" SANTA CLARA ST. HOTEL ' a 2: o o .UJ 'm HOTEL CPD-1 HOTEL LAND USE & ZONING MAP t NORTH, Scale; 1cinch = 200-feet . CITY OF ARCADIA 240WEST HUNTINGTON DRIVE ARCADIA, CA 91007 . ~Ile No.: CUP QO..OO6 (Revised) . CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT NEGATIVE DECLARATION Adopted: -- DR AFT-- Title and Description of Project: Conditional use Permit No. CUP 00-006 (Revised): A Conditional Use Permit to allow 25% of a proposed 20,772 square foot, three-story office building to be available for multi-family residential use. Location of Project: 255 E. Santa Clara Street Northeast comer of Santa Clara Street and Second Avenue In the City of Arcadia, County of Los Angeles Name of Applicant or Project Sponsor: Gary W. Morris, A California LLC 55 E. Huntington Drive, Suite 200 Arcadia, CA 91006 . Contact Ron Busante of WF Construction, Inc. (909) 599-4262 ext. 240 . Finding: The Planning Commission, having reviewed the Initial Study of this proposed project and having reviewed the written comments received prior to the public hearing of the Planning Commission, including the recommendation of the City's staff, does hereby find and declare that the proposed project will not hav4il a significant effect on the environment because the proposed project is less intense than the approved uses for the subject property. . . The Planning Commission hereby finds that this Negative Declaration reflects its independent judgment. A copy of the Initial Study may be obtained at the location listed below. The location and custodian of the documents and any other material which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the City based its decision to adopt this Negative Declaration are as follows: City of Arcadia Development Services Dept./Community Development Division/Planning Services 240 West' Huntington Drive Arcadia, CA 91007 Staff member: James M.Kasama, Associate Planner (626) 574-5445 . Date Received for Filing: . . . . '. No.: CUP O~06 (Revised) CITY OF ARCADIA 240 WEST HUNTINGTON DRIVE ARCADIA, CA 91007 CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM 1. Project Title: Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 00-006 (Revised) 2. Lead Agency Name & Address: City of Arcadia Development Services Dept.lCommunity Development Div.lPlanning Services 240 W. Huntington Drive Post Office Box 60021 Arcadia, CA 91066-6021 3. Lead Agency Contact Person & Phone Number: James M. Kasama, Associate Planner - (626) 574-5445/ fax (626) 447-9173 4. Project Location (address): 255 E. Santa Clara Street Northeast comer of Santa Clara Street and Second Avenue In'the City of Arcadia, County of Los Angeles t. 5. Project Sponsor's Name, Address & Phone Number: Gary W. Morris, A California LLC 55 E. Huntington Drive, Suite 200 Arcadia, CA 91006 Contact: Ron Busante (909) 599-4262 ext. 240 6. General Plan Designation: Mixed Use - CommerciallMultiple Family 7. Zoning Classification: CPD-1: Commercial Planned Development Form "J' -1- CEOA Checklist 4199 . . . . ,-No:: CUP 00-006 (Revised) 8. Description of Project: (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to later phases of the project, and any secondary, support, or off-site features necessary for Its implementation.) A Conditional Use Permit to allow 25% of a proposed 20,772 square foot, three story office building to be available for multi-family residential use. 9. Surrounding land uses and setting: (Briefly describe the project's surroundings.) The area is developed with light industrial and commercial uses. City water reservoirs and a pump facility are to the north. To the east is a flood control channel and an extended stay hotel. To the south and southwest are hotels, and to the west are light industrial uses. 10. Other public agencies whose approval is required: (e.g., permits, financing approval, participation agreement) The City Building Services, Engineering Division, Fire Marshall, Public Works Services, and Water Services will review the construction plans for compliance with all applicable construction codes and will oversee construction and installation of any necessary infrastructure or improvements within the public right-of-way, 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: I. [ ] Aesthetics [ ] Agricultural Resources [ ] Air Quality [ ] Biological Resources [ ] Cultural Resourqes [ ] Geology I Soils [ ] Hazards & Hazardous Materials [ ] Hydrology I Water Quality [ ] Land Use I Planning [ ] Mineral Resources [ J Noise [ J Population I Housing [ J Public Services [ ] Recreation [ ] Transportation I Traffic [ J Utilities I Service Systems [ ] Mandatory Findings of Significance Form"J" -2- CEQA Checklist 4/99 . . . . . No.: CUP 00.006 (Revised) DETERMINATION: (To be completed by the Lead Agency) On the basis of this initial evaluation: [X] I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. [] I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the applicant. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. [] I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. [] I find that the proposed project MAY have a .potentially significant impact. or .potentially significant unless mitigated impact. on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. [] I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, but because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. By: James M. Kasama, Associate Planner For: City of Arcadia ".fl-~?5 Date: Julv 25. 2000 Form IIJ" -3- CEQA Checkl.lst 4/99 . . . . .. No.: CUP 00-006 (Revised) EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: 1. A brief explanation Is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the Infonnation sources a lead agency cites In the responses following each question. A "No Impact" answer Is adequately supported If the referenced Infonnatlon sources show that the Impact simply does not apply to projects like the one Involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be e~lained where It Is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g.. the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis). 2. All answers must take account of the whole action Involved, Including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as project-level, Indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational Impacts. 3. Once the lead agency has detennined that a particular physical Impact may occur, then the checklist answers must Indicate whether the Impact Is potentially significant, less than s1gnftlcant with mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" Is appropriate If there Is substantial evidence that an effect Is significant. If thera are one or more, "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the detennlnallon Is made, an EIR Is required. 4. "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the Incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less Than SignifICant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefiy e~laln how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section XVIII, "Eariler Analyses," must be cross-referenced). 5. Eariier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CECA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed In an eariler EIR or Negative Declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(O). In this case, a brief discussion should Identify the following: a) Eariler 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 eariier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addresspd by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis c) Mlllgatlon Measures. For effects that are "Less Than SignifiCant With Mitigation Measures Incorporated," describe the millgatlon measures which were Incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to whlctl they address site-specific conditions for the project. 6. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate Into the checklist, references to Infonnatlon 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 substanllated. 7. Supporting Infonnation Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources, uses or Individuals contacted should be cited In the discussion. 8. This Is only a suggested fonn, and lead agencles are free to use different fonnats; however, lead agencies should nonnally address the questions from this checklist that ara relevant to a project's environmental effects in whatever fonnat Is selected. 9. The explanation of each Issue should Identify: a) The s1gnftlcant criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and b) The mitigation measure identified, If any, to reduce the impact to less than significant. Form "J' -4- CeQACheckllst 4/99 . . . . ... No.: CUP 00-006 (Revised) Less Than S1gnlllcant PolenlIaIly With Less Than Slgnlflcanl MilIgaIIcn SlgnlfIc8nl No Impact IllCOIpoI8IIon Impact Impact I. AESTHETICS - Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? [ ) [ I [I (X] b) Substantially damage scenic resources, Including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? [ I [ I [I [XI c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? [ ) [ ) [I [XI d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare, which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? ( ) [ I (I (X] The project Is for private residences In conjunctlon with general commercial offices In a proposed office building and will not have any of the above impacts. II. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES - (In detennlnlng whether Impacts to agricultural resources are slgnlficent environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the Callfomla Agricultural Land Evaluation and SlteAssessment Model (1997) prepared by the Callfomla Department of Conservation as an optional model to use In assessing impacts on agriculture and fannland.) Would the project: a) Convert Prime Fannland, Unique Fannland; or Fannland of Statewide Importance (Fannland) as shown oil the maps prepared pursuant to the Fannland Mapping and Monitoring Program of lhe CaHfomia Resources Agency, to non- agticultural use? [ ) [ ) [I [XI b) Conflict with existing zoning for agticultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? [ I [ I [I [Xl c) Involve other changes In the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Fannland to non-agticultural use? [ ) [ I [] [XI The project is for private residences In conjunction wlth general commercial offices In a proposed office building In an area that Is developed with coml'!lerclal uses and will not have any of the above Impacts. " III. AIR QUAUTY - (Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or pollution co.ntrol disttict may be relied upon to make the following detennlnatlons.) Would the proposal: a) Conflict with or obstruct Implementation of the applicable Air Quality Plan? [ ) [ ] [] (X] b) Violate any air quality standard or conttibute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? [ ] [ ] [] [XI 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 releeslng emissions, which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? [ ] [ ] [I (X] d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? [ I [ ] [I [XI e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? [ I [] [I [XI The project is for ptivate residences In conjunctlon with general commercial offices In a proposed office building and will not have any of the above Impacts. FOfTIl"J" .5- CEOA ChecIcI1sl _ . . . . . No.: CUP 00-006 (Revised) Less Than Slgniflcant PolentIaIJy Wdh Less Than SIgnlflcant MitIgaIlon Slgnlllcanl No Impact Incorpora1Ion Impact Impact IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES - Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse impact, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identifiad as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species In local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the Callfomia Department of Fish and Game or U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service? [ ] [ ] [) [Xl b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified In local or regional plans, policies, and regulations, or by the Callfomla Department of Fish and Game or U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service? [ ] [ ] [) [Xl c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as ciafined 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? [ ) [ ] [] [Xl d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or mlgretory fISh or wildlife species, or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or Impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? [ ) [ ] [] [Xl e) Conflict With any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservatlon policy or ordinance? ' [ ] [ ] [] [Xl f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservallon Plan, Natural Conservation Community Plan, or other approved local, regional or state habitat conservation plan? [ ) [ ] [] [Xl The project Is for private residences in conjunction with general commercial offices in a proposed office building in an area that is developed with com~erclal uses and will not have any of the above Impacts. V. CULTURAL RESOURCES - Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change In the significance of a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5? [ ] [ ] [] [X] b) Cause a substantial adverse change In the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5? [ ] [ ] [) [Xl c) Directly or Indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? [ ) [ ) [] [Xl d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of fonnal cemeteries? [ ] [ ) [) [Xl The project is for private residences in conjunction with general commercial offices in a proposed office .bullding and will not have any of the above impacts. None of the above resources have been Identified In the area or atthe subject site, and none of the above impacts have been associated with the project. VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS - Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, Including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: I) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delinel!ted on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map Issued by the State Geologist for the area or based Form"r -6- CECA ChecklIst <1199 . . . . , No.: CUP 00-006 (Revised) Less Than Slgnlllcant PolentlaIIy WIth Less Than SlgnlfIcanl M1lIgaIIon Slgniflcanl No Impact IncorpcnIlIan Impact Impact on other substanllal evidence of a known fault? (Referto :DMslon of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42). [ I [ I [I [Xl Ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? [ I [ I [I [XI Ill) SeiSmic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? [ I [ I [I [Xl Iv) landslides [ I [ I [I [XI b) Result In substantial soli erosion or the loss oftopsoll? [ I [ I [I [XI c) Be loceted on a geologic unit or soli that is unstable, or that would lleCOme unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result In on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreadlllg, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? [ I [ I [I [Xl d) Be located on expansive soli, as defined In Table 1~1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994) creating substanllal risks to life or property? [ I [ I [I [XI e) Have solis Incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or altematlve wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? [ I [ I [I [X] The project Is for private residences In conjunction with general commercial offices In a proposed office building, and none of the above Impacts are associated with the subject site. VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS - Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? [ I [ I [I [XI 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? [ I [ I [I [XI c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle ,hazardous or acutely hazardoUS materials, substances, or waste within one- quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? [ I [ I [I [XI d) Be located on a site which is Included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Govemment C,ede Section 85962.5 and, as a result, would It create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? [ I [ I [I [XI 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 rasult In a safety hazard for people residing or working In the project area? [ I [ I [I [XI 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? [ I [ ] [] [XI g) Impair Implementation of, or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? [ I [ ] [I [XI h) Expose people or structures ~o a significant risk Of loss, injury, Of death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are Intermixed with wildlands? [ I [ I [I [XI The project Is for private residences in conjunction with general commerCial offices In a proposed office building and will not have any of the above impacts. Form " J- -7- CEQA CheclcIIst 4'99 . VIII, HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUAUTY - Would the project: 8) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requIrements? b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or Interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that thera would be a net deficit In aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existlng nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? 0) Substanllally alter the existing drainage pattem 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 orslllatlon on- or off-site? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattem 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 resuJi In flooding on or off-site? e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantlal additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality g) Place houslng within a '100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineallon map? h) Place structures within a 100-year flood hazard area, which would Impede Of redirect flood flows? i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, Injury or death Involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of e levee or dam? [ I [ I [I [XI D Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or muClflow? [ I [ I [] [XI The project Is' for private residences In conjunction with general commercial offices in a proposed office building and will not have any of the above Impacts. . . . ... No.: CUP 00-006 (Revised) L.esa Than Slgnlllcant PolenIIsIIy WIth Less Than SIgnitlcant M1lIgaIIon SIgniflcant No Impact l"""pora\lOl, Impact Impact [ ] [ I [ ] [XI [ ] [ I [ ] [XI [ I [ I [ I [XI [ ] [ I [ I [XI [ l [ J I l [ ] [ ] [ ] [Xl [XI [ I [ I I I [XI [ I I ) [ ] [X] IX. LAND USE & PLANNING - Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? [ I [ ] [] [XI b) Conflict ~th 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? [ I [ I [I [XI c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservallon plan or natural community conservation plan? I I [ I [I [XI The project Is for private residences In conjunction with general commercial offices In a proposed office building. The proposal Is conceptually consistent with the General Plan deslgnallon for the site. but the proposal does not fully comply with the City's multiple-family zoning regulations. However, the applicability of those regulations to a mixed-use project has not been fully analyzed. Form -.... -8- CEOA Chocldisl 4'99 . . . . eu- No.: CUP OG-006 (Revised) Less Than Significant Pdentlally WIth Less Than SlgnlfIcanl MltlQatIon Slgniflcanl No Impact InCOlpolatJ.. , Impact Impact X. MINERAL RESOURCES - Would the project: a) Result III the loss of availability of a known minerai resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? [) [I [I [XI b) Result In the loss of availability of a locally Important minerai resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? [ I [ ] [] [XI The project Is fOf private residences In conjunction with general commercial offices In a proposed office building, and none of the above resources have been idenllfied at the subject site. XI. NOISE - Wo'!ld 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? [ ] [ I [I [XI b) Exposure of persons to, or generation of excessive groundbome vibration or groundbome noise levels? [ I [ I [] [X] c) A substantial permanent Increase in ambient noise levels In the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? [] [ I [I [XI d) A substantial temporary or periodic Increase In amblent noise levels In the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? [ ] [ I [I [X] e) For a project located within an airport land usa 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? [ ] [ ] [] [X] f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working In the project area to excessive nolsa levels? [ ] [ I [I [XI The project Is for private residences in conjunction with general commercial offices In a proposed office building and will not have any of the above Impacts. XII. POPULATION & HOUSING - Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth In an area, elthef directly (for example. by proposing new homes and businesses) or Indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other Infrastru~ure)? [ ) [ I [I [XI b) Displace substantial numbers of exlstlng housing, necessitallng the construction of replacement hOusing elsewhere? [ I [ I [I [XI c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? [ ] [ ] [] [XI The project Is for private residences In conjunction with general commercial offices in a proposed office building and will not have any of the above Impacts. XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES - Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered govemmental facilities, need for new or physically altered govemmental facilities, the construction of which would cause significant envIronmental Impacts, In ordef to maintain acceptable seNIce ratios, response times Of other performance obJec:t/ves for any of the publiC seNlces: a) Fire protection? [ I [ ] [) [X] Form-J" -9- CEQA ChecldJst 4'99 . . . . . FUe No.: CUP 00-008 (Revised) Less Than Slgnlflcanl PclentIaIIy WIth Less Than SlgnlfIcanl MItIgalkln SlgnlfIcanl No Impact IncorpcndIon Impact Impact b) Police protection? [ ] [ I [I [XI c) Scliools? [ I [ I [I [XI d) Parks? [I [I [] [XI e) other public facilities? [ ] I ] [] [XI The project Is for private residences In conjunction with general commercial offices In a proposed office building and will not.have any of the above impacts. XIV. RECREATION - Would the project: a) Incre8sa the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facllltles such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? [ ] [ I [I [XI b) Does the project Include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? I I [ I [I [Xl The project Is for private residences -In conjunction with general commercial offices in a proposed office building and will not have any of the above impacts. XV. TRANSPORTATION I 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 O.e., ~ult In a substantial increase In either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at Intersections)? [ I [ I [I [Xl b) Exceed, either Individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? [ I [ I [] [XI c) Result In a change in air traffic paltems, Inc/u.ding either an increase In traffic levels or a change In location that results In substantial safety risks? [ I [ I [I [XI I, d) Substantially Increase hazards due to' a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous Intersections) or Incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? [ I [ I [I [XI e) Result In Inadequate emergency access? [ ] [ J [I [XI f) Result in inadequate pal1ling capacity? [ ] [ ] [] [XI g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting . altemalive transportation (e.g., bus tumouts, bicycle racks)? [I [ ] [I [XI The proje~ Is for private residences In conjunction with general commercial offices in a proposed office building and will not have 'any of the above Impacts. XVI. UnLlTIES & SERVICE SYSTEMS - Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater Watment requirements of the appilcable Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment. facilities or expansion of exlstlng facUlties, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result In the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilllles, the [ I [ I [ I [XI [ I [ ] [ ] [XI Fonn OJ" -10- CEQA CheclcIIst 4'99 . . . . .1Ie No.: CUP 00-006 (Revised) Less Than Slgnlflcanl Palen\taJ1y With Less Than Slgnlflcanl Mitigation SlgnlfIcanl No Impact IncorpcnIlIan Impact Impact construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? [ ] [ I [I [XI d) Have sufflclent water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded enlltlements needed? [ I [ J [I [XI e) Result in a datermlnatlon by the wastewater treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project that It has adequate capacity. to serve the project's projected demand In addition to the providers existlng commitments? [ I [ ] [] [XI f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? [ I [ .) [I [XI g) Comply with federal, state and local statutes and regulations relate<! to solid waste?' [ I [ I [I [XI The project Is for private residences In conjunction with general commercial offices in a proposed office building and will not have any of the above Impacts. XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment. substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or . wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate Important examples of the major periods of Califomla history or prehistory? [ ] [ ] [) [XI b) Ooes the project have impacts that are Individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? rCumulatively 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.) [ I [ I [I [XI c) Does' the project have envlronmenlal effects, which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? [ I [ I [) [XI The project Is for private residences In conjunction with general commercial offices In a proposed office building and will riot have any of the above impacts. XVIII. EARUER ANALYSES No earlier analyses, and no additional documents were referenced pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA processes to analyze the project. Fonn'J" -11- CEQA CheclcIIst 4'99 .1u1 12 00 0214Sp Date Filed: COI1i'1. DEV. DIV. . 626....79173 p.2 . Gt/jO t1D - 006 &e~~) FileNo. 8-2.-00 CITY OF .4.RCWL4 240 WEST HUNTINGTON DRIVE ARCADIA. CA 91007 ENVIRONMENT At INFORMATION f.O~ Geoeratlnfonnatioo 1. Applicanl'sName: Mr. Gary Morris Allurc:ss: 55 E. Huntington Dr. Suite 200, Arcadia, CA 91006 . 4. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. . 13. 14. 2. Property Address (Location): 255 E. Santa Clara st. Arcadia, CA Assessor's Number: 5773 - 008 - 009 3. Name, address and telephone number of person to be comacttd concerning this pr'!iect: Ron Busante 635 W. Allen Ave., San Dimas, CA 91773 (909) 599-4262 ext.240 LillL "lid dcsmbe any other related pennits and other public approvals required for this project, including those required by city, regional"state and federal agencies: Building Permit 5. Zone Classification: CPO - 1 Mixed use commercial! mulL~ family 6. General Plan Designdioll: l'rolcet Descriution >, 7. Proposed use of site (project descriptloll): Re.rn~~ a~ ~ '3".,/ ..PId6r "t a.. 3-~ ~ce- .61~. Site size: 74,550 SF Square footage per building: 20 , 772 Number oftloors of construction: 3 stories Amount of off-street parking. provided: 187 PropOSed schedulinll ofproj~ ~ ~~ Anticipated incremental development: None If residential. include the number of 1IIIits. schedule of unit sizes, range of sale prices or rents. and type of household sizes lllCPected: make available up to 25% of the floor area for residential use. Jul 12 00 02:48p CONN. DEli. DIV. . 6264479173 . '. - p.3 15. If COll1ll1~ciill. indicate the type, i.e. neighborhood, cilY Dr regionally oriented, squaro fOOlBllo of aBle" 8I'Cll, and loading f~ilities.J1", of operation: 16. If industrial, indicate type, estimated employment per shift, and loading facilities: N/A 17 . If iPstltutional, indicate the major function. estimated employment per shift, estimated occupancy, loading facilities, and conunUllity benefits 10 be derived from the project: N/A 18. If the project involves a variance, conditional use permit or zoning application, slate this and indicate clearly why the Ilpplicalion is req1/ired: Proje~t rquiresdCUP for up to 25% residential use in a 3 story . office b~ilding. Are the following items applicable to the project or its effects? Discuss below all items checked yes (attach additional sheets as necessary). 19. Change in existing features of any hills, or .substantial alteratin of ground contours. 20. Change in sccnic views or vistas from exIsting residential areas or publiC:lands or roads 21. Change in pattern, sea/eor character of general area of project. 22. Significant amounts of solid waste or titter. 23. l..'hange in dust, ash, smoke, fwncs or odon in vicinity. 24. Change in gr<l\lJld _ter quality or quantilY. or alteration of existing drainalle pattersn. 25. Substantia) change in existing noise or vibration levels in the vicinity. . 26. Is sile on filled land or on any slopes of 10 percent or more. 27. Use or disposal of potentially hazardous JllJ\terials. such as tOllie substances flammable . . or explOSIVes. -. YES NO Q ;.l 0 Ji a ,n 0 tJ 0 fQ a ~ a J8l a Ji a ;& E.I.R. 04/12100 'l'ag. 2 . . ~Ul 12 00 02:49p COMM. DEV. DIV. . 6264479173 . . 28. Subsmndal change in demand for municipal services (police, fire, water, sewage. etc.) 29. Sllh.~tantial increase in f05sl1 fuel conswnption (electricity, oil, natural gas, etC. 30. Relationship to a larger project or series of projects. 31. Storm water system discharges from areas for materials storag~ vehicle or equipment fueling, vehicle or equlprnen1l1uUlltenanco (il'lc1udinll washing), WBA!e handling, hazardous materials handling or storage delivel)' or loading docks, or other outdoor work areas? 32. A significantly onvironmentally harlllful increase in the flow rate or volwne of storm water runoffl 33. A significantly environmentally hamlfill.increase in erosion of the project site or surrounding areas? 34. SlOnn water di~charges that would significantly impair the beneficial uses of receiving waters or areas that provide water quality benefits (e.g. riparian corridors, wetlands, etc.)'! 35. Harm to the biological integrity of drainage systems and water bodil::S? EDvif,!nmcnbll Settlnll P,4 YES NO a ~ lJ " o 'rJ1 lJ ~ t:l ~ lJ ~ l:J ~ o (Xi 3.6. Describe (on a separate sheet) the project site as' it exists before the project, including information on topography, soU Slltbility, plants and anillJ;11s, any cultural, historical or scenic aspects. any existing structures on the site, and the use of the. structures. Attach photesrapl6 Gflt<<; site. ElllI!lollels at Polareid pRetes 'I.-ill be accepted. Attac!).ed 37. Describe (on a sepat'l!te sheet) the surrounding properties. including information on plants, animals, any cultural, hi5lOriCal or scenic aspects. Indicate the type of land uses (residential, commercial, etc.), intensity of land use (one.family, apartment houses, shops, department stores, etc.). and scale of development (heigh\" frontage, set- backs, rear yards,etc.). 1.110611 phel*aphs efthe -..aiRilY. Snapohe15 ar Polaroid pilote] will be ae..cptcd. Attached Certlficadon I hereby certify that the statementS furnished above and in the CLlto.ched exhibits preoeDt the data and informalion required for this initial evaluation to the best of myability,and that the facts, statements, and information presented are tnle and corr6!lt to the best of my knowledge and belief. 7/27/00 Date E.l.R. 04/12100 Page 3 . . . . . Environmental Settina 36) The site currently consists of a vacant lot with a level topography and several olive trees located at the West End of the property. Additionally, the property is fenced with a gate along Second Avenue and Santa Clara Street for access. The site has no historical significance or buildings. 37) The surrounding properties consist of a water tank owned by the City of Arcadia to the north, office building for Tektest, Inc. to the West, hotel to the South and hotel to the West. None of these properties appear to have any historical or cultural significance and are consistent with local zoning codes. 19) The entire site will be excavated up to 5' to allow for tuck under parking below the building. t. . . . " cr r I I f <? ...... ..~. ~... !li:',,' , 5....,. ~. ~"'" I~ "~. ~'-II' 1 11'.,- ,'-0- ..... G i. @ @ @ @ t . ~ ~ PROPOSED /?ROPO$ED Y . ~OENGE I RESIDENCE- Y ~TIlUU'Jlol$ClIl.T' I!."ST<ULOl~__1'J (r~?' "...'" Y . 0 , COMMON LIV'INlSo . ~ I I.OIJ>I<>2 l 0 , . .. BEPFWOM r SEE ~L ENLAR6ED PLAN I ~ @ ------- - ..0"., -- 0 . . . ~ @ ~ ~ .. BEDROOM . ) . 6-~' . .. 6'-0' FMPOSEO PROPOSED .. i RESoIDENGE RESIDENCE ~TI!I\ILDI_t:R4,." ~T~CINL."" . il.!lS<l9'J (I.,2i06'f"J Y ... . . i LIViNG LIVlp.l6 ~ ~ . , . E ""," ....... .'... "...,. l~-o" N. IT-o" a... ",..". .... ~<-O' .... liaI--6' eu p 00-00' (Revi!:eJ) RestDf.N1'%IIL. fu,o,. I't.II# - 3AO FLlJDR ZS'S' 1=. S~lI"lI Ct.ARA S-r. . . W-1 ~ i - i - i---1 I I I I I I I i i i i i i 1 ---i----+---'~--------i--------i----------' --i---i--L--.--i-----.J._-'_____i I I I I I I i i i i i i - ki - i -- i - i--W I I I I ! I I j i i I i i i , i i i I I i i i i i i i i i i i , I I i i i i - SANTA CLARA STREET PARKING DECK !is eGolUl: .......r..r , . I .j .' l' : I ~I I ~dl .'1" n I II I ,0;, ,..... - . FI~ DEPARTMENT NoTEs "'_A___..__ ..-::t.__..__.....oc.L_ -.".--- ~=--::..-..:=.":.=~-==:"~ ...-----.....-- ..==::':".:-_~..:::::::-..:-.=-... -------..----- ---"-Y. ....-------- ------ ..--------- --------- .._..._-~.......-..._--- _...__....__.~ ""-------...- .-----...... ~_=_=::::"e.:~ f:-.....- - ...~"='='=t;o.-:.~...:_ .....-------"-..-- -----"'---- =~ ---.:==--..--: ....------- ___40_._..__~ ..----...-.--- --------- 1..w_____JoO.__ FiRe. UFe SAFelY BUILDMs ~I~ --------------- .........---..- -.-...------- ...---..---...-...- -.....-....-.-- -=~-'I_..~_~ ........__--.._-_..~ =..~~~~.;:;'- ..-....--...-----...- ------------- . -..""---...~--.. ,..______M__ .._--~--- ------- -~- ....------..._.,ftUt ------ -----....----... -------.-..--- :"- , ....:=.::::=.-- ..-----....- --..-..----...--- ..----..-..-- ..._--~....._-- ----..--- ...._-----~ -- . 1'U.M5"'" MOre; - ~ ------...- ---_..._~.....- ----~--- -- &~~.._-- ;::::,c-.-.....----..-... ..-----....,,-......-- ----- ..~_._-- -~---- --- . ---.......-.- "....._--~- --..------ ------ -- ..;ou._~____ -"'___"'l___.-. -..-...- ..==--:::~===.~..=.- ..._.....~---I- ----- __11:1" -- -- -- "- ......... .,._fif ...-. ........ -- -_. _.;a. _--. ~~ ~-- --- --- -- --- ...,-"" -- -- --- ___.ou._ -.....,-.-- -- -- - -- -- -.- -- -- .- a_ --- .,.-....... --- . , .... , ~ GROUND LEVEL PW~ 0 . ~ ~ . . T - T ~. T ....,. f ~. T - 1 .- """ ~,. .... - - .~. ...,. T'" .,..."'" " , ~ k l . l ) ~ e i e i i I fi;;>o~ Ut-!~N' 8 I ,.,. J,..JIe;6T ~ '~... I -----...h----.-----.-- ------.-.---...i. 8 i i i i i j 8 8 El 8 ~ . . i ~ ~ t , 8 8 ~ @ @ ~ 8 8 "'"'" 12'.0" t2"-O' INI' ICl">d - ..- .- - '"'"' r -....,. r ..... i - J , I' I ~... ----, -..0" 'J/!!Jf-<' 2tJ'oO"l 2t)'.d' "'... ~ ~- I I .------ I ~- I I___J ~ I ) t FIRST FLOOR PLAN ~ IICW.a ......, ..., ,- r .. ... r """ i - r . -- I I I, "'... I I I 1 i' I , II I ,. I -..... , I I, I I i I, I, I I, ~ II " , BASEMENT PLAN ~ a.::.o.L.I! wo_, .. . '1' JI I ~ ,-I _il' I! '11 ~ ~ . ~ ; i ; ) . P~P"""'I5DF2-E?' ) (~ ~.). i i ; . t. " . T -- T f T ...... lI'4' ""2" T,..T ToO" .'od2<-O" "... ...... -- .- -. ...... ; k k t i i e i e e. e . I PI;<OP&'~l:":r- LlN I~IT"( i (l-Jer---r. .~U::>~) e! _L_____h_____L __..'}ll~ -----....-----------1 --- .::e e ! ~~-:--- I I , , I I O' I I I I o 's e e ~ i . i i ! t, -l~I;;"; ~,....! e ! 8 e r-o" Il>'<O" ."0" II",," ....... ~ -- '""" ... ~~ SECOND FLOOR PLAN is ~ w..,..r . "'" ..... ..... l~ ...... ...... N' ...... "'" e e @ 6 6 & ...... ..... ..... ""'" ...,. ...~ e s l>_ 1:a"O" 1r-6' ..... TlIIRO FLOOR PLAN is ~ .....1'... 7.. . .,. . i o '\ " I ' I ~ ~ \ , I i,1 J!i lItH . . t ' .... :& .L- ............ ~ SOUTH ELEVATION -.::.t.I.Jl "*"_,' ~ ~ ..... ~ - ~ l ~ """""-"'" NOR11I ELEVATION &e;.q.I:: lIr_r ., " ... . I I- I] , i I" 2.1,~' 8f! J uitU - ~ ....... ~ .! il " . . ~ EAST' ElEVATION ~"".r WEST ElEVATION ~IID"." . ....... .... !' Ii .. ~.' ; '! il , ., j I l : I ~. I , . i I , dl Iii M I"'. I ~ ~ . ~ ' '. ~ . . . i I ~ If' , If> If-l l!J If> Il' ~ I i ..... i - i -. j - j ...... ..... i ,.". . """ i --- j l I D~I i i i i i i I i ! i i i i i .Ii i i i I I! i i I I II i i i i i i i i i i i . I ! i i i i i i WEST BIIIUIINQ SECnON A . A ...... ow.. Il' cp <p -. . ..... 1 .."" i ! - .-' , I '- ~ ~ ! ~ ~ ~ ,..3 I: ~i ~_.... ~ ~ IIi Iii . ! . . EAST BIIIUIINQ SECnON A . A ...... ...... " lfl q> If' ~ If' i -"" i ,..... i "",. i ..... i i i i i i i i i i i I I i i i I i i i . I I i If' r ....,. <j> t - " ~ ~' li ~ Ii " . ~ . ~ ,. SECTION B - B tIC:AIZ W_I' .--- SECTION C - C ~"'...r !. l! . ...- !.. l! ...- .... ... '. '.