Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1556 . . . RESOLUTION NO. 1556 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. CUP 97-012 AND ADR 97-026 TO PERMIT AN 18,000 SQ. FT. RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT BUILDING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SANTA CLARA STREET AND FIFTH AVENUE. WHEREAS, on September 29, 1997, an application was filed by Integrated Circuit Development Corp. for an 18,000 sq. ft. research and development building; Development Services Department Case No. CUP 97-012, to be located at the northwest comer of Santa Clara Street and Fifth Avenue, more particularly described as.follows: Parcel 2 of Parcel Map No. 24755 in the City of Arcadia, County of Los Angeles, State of California as recorded in the Office of the Recorder of Said County. WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on November 12, 1997, at which time all interested persons were given full opportunity to be heard and to present evidence; NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. That the factual data submitted by the Development Services Department in the attached report is true and correct. SECTION 2. This Commission finds: l. That the granting of the Conditional Use Permit will not be detrimental to the public health or welfare, nor injurious to the property or improvements in the zone or vicinity. 2. That the use applied for at the location indicated is properly one for which a Conditional Use Permit is. authorized. 3. That the site for the proposed use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate said use, and all yards, spaces, walls, fences, parking, loading, landscaping,. and other features required to adjust said use with the land and uses in the neighborhood. 4. That the site abuts streets and highways adequate in width and pavement type to carry the kind of traffic ,generated by the proposed use. . . . 5. That the subject property is designated for commercial use in the General Plan, that the proposed use is consistent with that designation, and that the granting of the Conditional Use Permit will not adversely affect the comprehensive general plan. 6. That the evaluation of the environmental impacts as set forth in the initial study are appropriate and that the project will have no significant effect upon the environment within the meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, and, when considering the project as a whole, there was no evidence before the City that the proposed project would have any potentially adverse effect on wildlife resources or the habitat upon which wildlife depends, and therefore, a Negative Declaration should be approved. SECTION 3. That for the foregoing reasons this Commission approves Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 97-012 to permit an 18,000 sq. ft. research and development building at the northwest comer of Santa Clara Street and Fifth Avenue subject to the following conditions: I. The property shall be developed, used and maintained as a research and development facility in a manner consistent with the plans and materials presented and approved by CUP 97-012 and ADR 97-026, and shall include the following: a. Fencing and other enclosures on the property shall be wrought iron or masonry, decoratively finished to match the building, except for the fencing along the freeway right-of- way. b. A detailed landscaping and irrigation plan shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect and shall be subject to approval by the Development Services Department. 2. All local code requirements regarding accessibility, construction, fire protection and sprinklers, occupancy, and safety shall be complied with to the satisfaction of Building Services and the Fire Department. 3. The items listed in the October 27, 1997 memorandum from the Associate Civil Engineer are to be complied with to the satisfaction of the Development Services Department including the widening of the easterly driveway to thirty (30) feet. 4. Water services are to be provided to the satisfaction of the Arcadia Water Division. 5. Approval of CUP 97-012 and ADR 97-026 shall not take effect until the property owner and applicant have executed and filed the Acceptance Form available from the Development Services Department to indicate acceptance of the conditions of approval. - 2- 1556 . . . 6. All conditions of approval shall be complied with prior to completion of construction and occupancy of the new building. Noncompliance with the plans, provisions and conditions of CUP 97-012 and ADR 97-026 shall constitute grounds for immediate suspension and/or revocation of any approvals which could result in reconstruction and/or cessation of operations. SECTION 4. The decision, findings, and conditions of approval contained in this Resolution reflect the Planning Commission's action of November 12, 1997 by the following vote: A YES: Commissioners Bell, Bruckner, Huang, Sleeter and Kalemkiarian NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Murphy 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. 1556 was adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held. on November 12, 1997 by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners Bell, Bruckner, Huang, Sleeter and Kalemkiarian NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Murphy ATIES1]: / '7 /.// ~~~~ ..(-c:;&YA0(':Z---~r~ ' Secretary, Planning Commission City of Arcadia Chai ,PlanningCommission City of Arcadia APPROVED AS TO FO~ 71/ifrI )/ m~ Michael . Miller, City Attorney City of Arcadia - 3 - 1556 STAFF REPORT DIDffiLOPMrnNTSER~CESDEPARTMENT November 12,1997 TO: Chairman and Members of the Arcadia City Planning Commission FROM: Donna Butler, Community Development Administrator By: James M. Kasama, Associate Planner SUBJECT: CUP 97-012 & ADR 97-026 -- An 18,000 sq. ft. research & development building at the northwest comer of Santa Clara St. and Fifth Ave. SUMMARY - This application was submitted by ICDIHeatflex (Integrated Circuit Development Corporation) for an 18,000 sq. ft. research and development, office and warehouse building at the northwest comer of Santa Clara Street and Fifth Avenue. The Development Services Department is recommending approval subject to the conditions listed in this report. GENERAL INFORMATION APPLICANT: ICDIHeatflex (Integrated Circuit Development Corporation) LOCATION: Northwest comer of Santa Clara Street and Fifth Avenue -- This is a triangular site bounded on the northeast by the Foothill Freeway, on the northwest by the Extended Stay America Hotel site, and on the south by Santa Clara Street. REQUEST: A Conditional Use Permit for an 18,000 sq. ft. research and development, office and warehouse building. SITE AREA: 41,573 sq. ft. (0.954 acre) FRONTAGES: 435.42 feet along Santa Clara Street 371.28 feet along the Foothill Freeway right-of-way GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Commercial - EXISTING LAND USE & ZONING: The site is vacant, and is zoned CPD-l/Commercial Planned Development-l -- SURROUNDING LAND USES & ZONING: North: Foothill Freeway -- Not zoned South: Vacantlot -- zoned CPD-l East: Foothill Freeway -- Not zoned West: Hotel (under construction) - zoned CPD-l PROPOSAL AND ANAI.YSIS The applicant is proposing to build an 18,000 sq. ft., two-story office and warehouse facility for their research and development company. There will be 4,000 sq. ft. of office space and 14,000 sq. ft. of warehouse area.. Approximately 6,000 sq. ft.. of the warehouse area will be utilized for "clean, room" testing and assembly. There will be 44 surface parking spaces provided along with a loading dock. The building will be set back in the north corner of the triangular site against the Foothill Freeway right-of- way, with the loading facilities also along the freeway. The proposed layout complies with the CPD-1 zoning development standards. - ICDlHeatflex develops, manufactures, and markets "Ultra Pure" fluid and gas heating systems. These systems are used in precision industrial processes where temperature control and purity are essential to the manufacturing process. The proposed use is allowed in the CPD-l zone with an approved Conditional Use Permit. Section 9260.1.12(8) allows for light industrial and manufacturing uses which are compatible with pennitted uses in the zone. The applicant's use meets this requirement. Because of the precision and purity necessary'in their design and manufacturing processes, their facility will not generate the nuisances; such as emissions, odors, vibrations, dust or dirt, that are associated with other industrial uses. SPRc.{AL INFORMATION ICDfHeatflex, Emkay Development Company, Inc. (the current property owner) and the Arcadia Redevelopment Agency are entering into a Disposition and Development Agreement (DDA) for the subject property. The proposed research and development project was presented to the Agency on October 7, 1997. The Agency considers the proposed use conceptually acceptable, however, it was mentioned that the west elevation was lacking in --. CUP 97.012 & ADR 97"026 November ]2,1997 Page 2 -- ., '" architectural relief. The Agency directed staff to begin the DDA process, and to have the applicant secure the necessary land .use approvals (i.e., CUP & ADR). ARCillTECTl.1RAL DESIGN REVIEW Concurrent with this Conditional Use Permit application, the Planning Commission is to approve, conditionally approve, or deny the applicant's architectural design concept plans. The building will be constructed of natural color, split-face concrete block accented with a turquoise colored copper fascia along the top edge, and matching, structural solar or store- front glass vertical windows. These windows will not be included on the north wall that will be against the freeway right-of-way. The building shape is basically rectangular except for the southerly comer which will be curved to highlight the main entrance. This curved front fa~ade will be constructed of turquoise tinted, structural solar or store-front glass windows. The preliminary landscape plan exceeds the Code requirements, and includes palm trees close to the building to provide additional vertical accenting. However, specific ground cover is not indicated and shrubbery should be added to provide color and texture, especially to the benned planter along the street. Staff finds the proposed design to be consistent with the intent of the design criteria set forth in the City's Architectural Design Review Regulations, and the CPD-l Zone's Architectural Considerations, provided that all accessory items, such as backflow screens, perimeter and retaining walls, loading facilities, etc., are decoratively finished to match the building. and that shrubbery be included in the landscaping plan to provide additional color and texture. CEOA Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act, the Development Services Department has prepared an initial study for the proposed project. Said initial study did not disclose any substantial or potentially substantial adverse change in any of the physical conditions within the area affected by the project including land, air, water, minerals, flora, fauna, ambient noise and objects of historical or aesthetic significance. When considering the record as a whole, there is no evidence that the proposed project will have any potential for adverse effect on wildlife resources or the habitat upon which the wildlife depends. Therefore, a Negative Declaration has been prepared for this project. CUP 97-012 & ADR 97-026 November 12, 1997 Page 3 RECGMMENDA TION III The Development Services Department recommends approval of CUP 97-012 and ADR 97-026 subjectto the following conditions: 1. The property shall be developed, used and maintained as a research and development facility in a manner consistent with the plans and materi!lls presented and approved by CUP 97-012 and ADR 97-026, and shall include the following: a. Fencing and other enclosures on the property shall be wrought iron or masonry, decoratively finished to match the building, except for the fencing along the freeway right-of-way. b. A detailed landscaping and. irrigation plan shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect and shall be subject to approval by the Development Services Department. 2. All local code requirements regarding accessibility, construction, fire protection and sprinklers, occupancy, and safety shall be complied with to the satisfaction of Building Services and the Fire Department. 3, The items listed in the attached October 27, 1997 memorandum from the Associate Civil Engineer are to be complied with to the satisfaction of the Development Services Department including the widening of the easterly driveway to thirty (30) feet. - 4. Water services are to be provided to the satisfaction of the Arcadia Water Division. 5. Approval of CUP 97-012 and ADR 97-026 shall not take effect until the property owner and applicant have executed and filed the Acceptance Form available from the Development Services Department to indicate acceptance of the conditions of approval. 6. All conditions of approval shall be complied wi~ prior to completion of construction and occupancy of the new building. Noncompliance with the plans, provisions and conditions of CUP 97-012 and ADR 97-026 shall constitUte grounds for immediate suspension and/or revocation of any approvals which could result in reconstruction and/or cessation of operations. FINDINGS AND MOTIONS In order to expedite the processing of this project, resolutions for approval and denial have been prepared for adoption. --. CUP 97-012 & ADR 97-026 November 12, 1997 Page 4 ", - ", Approval lfthe Planning Commission intends to approve this application, the Commission should move to approve, direct staff to file the Negative Declaration and adopt the resolution which incorporates the Commission's decision, findings and conditions of approval as drafted, or as modified by the Commission. Denial If the Planning Commission intends to deny this application, the Commission should move to deny and adopt the resolution which incorporates the Commission's decision and findings as drafted, or as modified by the,Commission. If any Planning Commissioner, or other interested party has any questions or comments regarding this matter prior to the November 12th public hearing, please contact Associate Planner, Jim KasllIna at (626) 574-5445. Approved by: Donna L. Butler Commwrity Development Administrator Attachments: Plans Vicinity Map October 27,1997 memo from the Associate Civil Engineer Negative Declaration & Initial Study CUP 97-012 & ADR 97-026 November 12, 1997 Page 5 , .' ' .rt1lHOIIon...T.......-e" ...,.........otto,..,..,. "- ..... .......... ,~.............., /> ; .- I I 1 ::I nORY eUlLOlNG 1-...- IN'''__,,-,,, -- ,__ II I I :...: . , - -- - .,r .' _ .. -.wa "14"__ _._ al.. 'Ofm&L ,.......T nTUnAn .., ~.._~ ... -- --- - - - - .- .... I r I PREl.IMINARY SiTe Pl.AN ...... -......, KORfH BIOI!. 0" I!. SANTA. CLARA 8TR!.!.T AT "OOTJ.n1.L PR!!!aJ"y AA:CADI.... CALI,.ORHlA . - t1lEl U!.GIMO IW1KARY - .--.--- _11D..,., -....,..QWl. n'NkI'U!l:l -..- 00 ,.,.,M'Aflf'\Nll ......."011 ....... mlNTItOl,..... 1IlTI~ e.."~. ..... ..... IIIIUlIIlO ,"OOT""", .' lolJUlIWf..eoe~AIfVw e.u "MUIlI lilItINIlIIIIrJ. ".oOct'J'.CII'Off'Ie!I"~"T(IlOOO . I4",ocI '.P. 0Il"....14IlUIiI ....o\CI; AT tIlOOO "te.w:tWlClUltl:D 44 CAIlI",~ ... <<.lieu.... Q '~"f'~1'M:Il' -...... ta.- .... reM ~ _.1100.00 ." ll.oooM',.. 1l>6ct.oo '.Po r- . ---... "" ..-.. ..... I iJD6. &- .. .... .-_____"_"oa.__...._..".... ,. -.... .... , ............_, ,..-..- - .,.--- SOUTH ELEVATION EAST ELEVATION ~- ~- ~ <. ~)....; I".. wi..Jo.,.,..> have Ioee.. addu( .j., Hoe. we..t Ilk.". --> WEST ELEVATION NORTH ELEVATION' , "if I1DIlIIRr B. llItc1ARDI ","LA. 6; Q:9OC1lUS ..-..- ~,.. r::.::r---=. -..: r ::: - ...... .--..-- -...- --- ...-- --- IOU .....-........-....,..- ~DEJ -- - - :=- I;~ - ~ ~ . "I ...." '''"$ OLIVE AV( .::::..>'~~........."-....... ~ ....". <- ~'''''' ................. .... ...........~ '''-....... '"...... ......,.............." I '~~............................ '" " ~'<0.......... ...... "~~' , ....." '.,~t..,.... .................... "-....... ............:::.......... ...... ........."-...........,...~...~...... '..... ............ .'.... ............... """'.......'..,.,. ......,. ., IS''' , ~ . . . w..... IlMslon R~iftl VIAIZ ..cant IoL (3aI) /J$D,", .~ lU.'" ,,,.,1. ..- lot Rc:sideoc:ellUl Hotd -------.:;;.-----------------------, ~ > < , , .- @ . . :; . lit lcoL7tl' <4LClO 111 ." Ramp.. Ian Hold ~\ ;: }.)..__-,._ ~k"'"___ _ \ '- ..... .. , , CAnol. " \".rd , '"":-. ~-' (.. - , , ISO. < " C , ~ ~ " i 0."", RabU"*bt > < ~ " ... ~ '0.. Souplantalion Rerbantnl Ton,.' Rom.'J RtslIIa,..a1 Tokyo W.ko Rc:daun.nl VICINlTY MAP NW Comer of Santa Clara St. & Fifth Ave. CuP 97-012 & ADR 97-026 t NORTH Scale: 1 inch = 200 feet ---, MEMORANDUM DEVELOPMENTSER~CESDEPARTMENT Date: October 27.1997 TO: Jim Kasama, Associate Planner FROM: Tom Shahbazi, Associate Civil Engineer P CUP 97-012 NIW Corner of Santa Clara St. and Fifth Ave. (Lot 2 of Parcel 24755) SUBJECT: In response to your memorandum, the items which this division has concern or special knowledge of are listed below: 1. The existing parkway width is nine feet (9') on the north side of Santa Clara St. Of which six feet (6') is the existing parkway and three feet (3') has been dedicated per Parcel Map 24755. flje proposed project is anticipated to generate fewer than 200 vehicle trips per day according to generally accepted (lTE) trip rates. Of these 200 daily trips, approximately 25 trips per hour are expected during either the morning or aftemoon peak commuter period. These forecasted volumes are not expected to create significant traffic related impacts to the surrounding street system. Therefore, a focused traffic impact analysis would not be required. The on-site circulation appears to be adequate. It may be desirable to widen the easterly driveway to thirty feet (30'). This wider driveway would better accommodate an occasional small semi-truck and trailer (WB-40 design vehicle) without beginning its tum on the wrong side of Santa Clara St. The following tentative conditions of approval are recommended: 1. Submit a grading, drainage, and erosion control plan prepared by a Registered Civi I Engineer for the City Engineer's approval. NOTE: Show all existing and proposed pull boxes, meters, power poles, street lights, driveways, sidewalks and handicapped ramps on grading/drainage plan. "" 2. The developer shall construct a six inch (6") VCP sewer lateral to services the proposed lot. 1 -, - 3. Plant parkway trees at locations determined by the Maintenance Services Director and per Arcadia City Standard Drawing 5-13-1. Contact the Maintenance Services Department at (626) 821-4317 for type and size. 4. Obtain off-site construction permit(s) from the Development Services-Engineering Division for all work performed in public right-of-way. 5. Remove and replace deficient or damaged curb, gutter, sidewalk and/or pavement to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Contact the Maintenance Services Departmentat (626) 574-5440 for exact locations of removal and replacement. 6. No portion of the existing gutter and AC pavement shall be removed unless prior approval is obtained from the Maintenance Services Director. 7. Construct pec driveway aprons according to the Arcadia Standard Drawing No. S- 11. No driveway shall be constructed closer than three feet (3') from any fire hydrant, light standard, telephone or electrical pole, meter box, underground vault, manhole, or tree. tit 8. Gravity drainage outlets shall be constructed in conformance with Arcadia City Standard Drawing No. 5-11. 9. Obtain approval from the Building Division for assigned address(es) to be used for the subject development (including all units). 10. Paint building address numbers on curb face per Arcadia City Standard Drawing No. 5-24. 11. Arrange for underground utility service and dedicate easements to utility companies. 12. Contact the City Inspector at least 24 hours prior to the construction of off-site improvements. 15. All survey monuments, centerline ties, and survey reference points shall be protected in place or re-established where disturbed in accordance with Section 8771 of the land Surveyors Act, prior to issuance of certificate of completion of the project. This work will be the responsibility of the permittee and shall be at the permittee's expense. .. 2 ", - ". ~\ 16. Contractor shall comply with all requirements of Federal, State, and local laws; and regulations pertaining to the CLEAN AIR AND CLEAN WATER ACT and NPDES. 17. All off-site improvement plan checking, inspection charges, and other miscellaneous costs associated with the proposed development shall be reimbursed to the City. 18. All construction in the public right-of-way shall be in accordance with all applicable sections and/or provisions of the latest edition of the 'Standard Specification for Public Works Construction' (Greenbook). The above items are to be complied with to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Arcadia Municipal Code. Upon receipt of the proposed development.detailed construction drawings, this division will review and provide additional comments/revisions if necessary. CSB:TAS:mlo c: Building Division Maintenance Services Department 3 -, .- - --- File No.: CUP 97-012 CITY OF ARCADIA 240 WEST HUNTINGTON DRIVE ARCADIA, CA 91007 CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT NEGATIVE DECLARATION A. Title and Description of Project: Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 97-012: A Conditional Use Permit for an 18.000 sq. ft. research & development office and warehouse building in the CPD-l (Commercial Planned Development) zone. B. Location of Project: The subject property is at the northwest corner of the intersection of E. Santa Clara Street and N Fifth Avenue. C. Name of Applicant or Sponsor: Integrated Circuit Development Corp. 3731 Park Place Montrose, CA 91020 Contact: Jorge Ramirez- (818) 957-2442 D. Finding: This project will have no significanI 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 measnres, if any, included in tbe project to avoid potentially significant effects: None Date Prepared: October 9. 1997 Date Posted: October 15,1997 -. ", FileNo. r LiP 9.'1 - 0 I;::L CIIY OF ARCADIA 240 WEST HUNTINGTON DRIVE ARCADIA. CA 91007 ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION FORM Date Filed: General Information 1. Applicant's Name: INTEGRATED CIRCUIT DEVELOPMENT CORP. Address: 3731 PARK PLACE, MONTROSE, CALIFORNIA 91020 2. Property Address (Location): N.W. CORNER OF SANTA CLARA ST., & FIFTH AVE. Assessor's Number: 5n3-008~ 0(7.. 3. Name, address and telephone number of person to be contacted concerning this project: JORGE RAMIREZ 818/957-2442 3731 PARK PLACE, MONTROSE, CA 91020 4. List and describe any other related permits and other public approvals required for this project, including those required by city, regional, state and federal agencies: rT~V n~ ARCADIA ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD RE-DEVELOl'MENT AGENCY; PLANNING COMMISSION; - CITY COUNCIL; CITY BUILDING DEPARTMENT 5. Zone Classification: CPD-/ 6. General Plan Designation: CP9- Co/I""~rc;D.1 Project Description 7. Proposed use of site (project description): 18 THOU. S.F. OFFICE INDUSTRIAL BUILDING 8. Site size: .954 ACRES = 41,556.24 S.F. (41.'3TJ,~ I'" I<PM.,.) 9. Square footage per building: 18: 000 10. Number of floors of construction: 2 "'1. 12. Amount of off-street parking provided: 44 Proposed scheduling of project: CONSTRUCTION TO START EARLY 1998 13. Anticipated incremental development: 1 INCREMENT ONLY 15. 16. 17. 18. If residential, include the number of units, schedule of unit sizes, range of sale prices or rents, and type of household sizes expected: N/A 14. III If commercial, indicate the type, i.e. neighborhood, city or regionally oriented, square footage of sales area, and loading facilities, hours of operation: N/A , If industrial, indicate type, estimated employment per shift, and loading facilities: 14 If institutional, indicate the major function, estimated employment per shift, estimated occupancy, loading facilities, and community benefits to be derived 'from the project: N/A If the project involves a variance, conditional use permit or zoning application, state this and indicate clearly why the application is required: YT':~, WF: AllT': PlI'1'TTNr. AN INDUSTRIAL BUILDING IN A COMMERCIAL ZONE _ 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 scenic views or vistas from existing residential areas or public lands or roads. 21. Change in pattern, scale or character of general area of project. 22. Significant amounts of solid waste or litter. 23. Change in dust, ash, smoke, fumes or odors'in vicinity. -2- YES NO 0 )( 0 )::l 0 :g( 0 ;& 0 ;& .. E.I.R. 3/95 ",24. 28. 29, 30. -. YES NO Change in ground water quality or quantity, or alteration of existing drainage patterns, D;gt 25. Substantial change in existing noise or vibration levels in the vicinity. D)8f D)8f o ;g( 26. Is site on filled land or on any slopes of 10 percent or more. 27. Use or disposal of potentially hazardous materials, such as toxic substances, flammable or explosives. Substantial change in demand for municipal services (police, fire, water, sewage, etc.). o .:ei. Substantial increase in fossil fuel consumption (electricity, oil, natural gas, etc.). o .a Relationship to a larger project or series of projects. D~ Environmental Setting _31. 32. Describe (on a separate sheet) the project site as it exists before the project, including information on topography, soil stability, plants and animals, any cultural, historical or scenic aspects, any existing structures on the site, and the use of the structures. Attach photographs of the site. Snapshots or Polaroid photos will be accepted. Describe (on a separate sheet) the surrounding properties, including information on plants, animals, any cultural, historical or scenic aspects. Indicate the type of land uses (residential, commercial, etc.), intensity of land use (one-family, apartment houses, shops, department stores, etc.), and scale of development (height, frontage, set-backs, rear yards, etc.). Attach photographs of the vicinity. Snapshots or Polaroid photos will be accepted. Certification I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the data and information required for this initial evaluation.to the best of my ability, and that the facts, statements, and information presented are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. . }a:/~~i~ Date Signature ". . E.l.R. 3/95 -3- - - '" File No.: CUP 97-012 CITY OF ARCADIA 240 WEST HUNTINGTON DRIVE ARCADIA. CA 91007 CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM 1. Pl"oject Title: Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 97-012 2. Pl"oject Address: . The subject property is at the northwest corner of the intersection of E. Santa Clara Street and N. Fifth Avenue. An address number has not yet been assigned 3. Project Sponsor's Name, Address & Telephone Number: Integrated Circuit Development Corp. 3731 Park Place Montrose. CA 91020 Contact: Jorge Ramirez - (818) 957-2442 4. Lead Agency Name & Address: City of Arcadia - Development Services Department Community Development Division - Planning Services 240 W. Huntington Drive Arcadia. CA 91007 5. Lead Agency Contact Person & Telephone Number: James M Kasama. Associate Planner - (626) ~74-5445 6. General Plan Designation: Commercial 7. Zoning Classification: CPD-l: Commercial Planned Development -1- CEQA Checklist 7/95 " File No.: CUP 97-012 8. Description of Project: (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to later phases of the project and any secondary, support, or off-site features necessary for its implementation. Attach additional sheets if necessary.) - A Conditional Use Permit for an 18,000 sq. fl. research & development office and warehouse building in the CPD-1 (Commercial Planned Development) zone. 9. Other public agencies whose approval is required: (e.g., pennits,.fmancing, development or participation agreements) The Arcadia Redevelopment Agency must approve and execute a Disposition and Development Agreement for the subject property. The City Building Services, Engineering Division & Fire Prevention Bureau must review and approve the construction plans for the structure, the on-site improvements, and the off-site improvements. 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~ tit [ ] Land Use & Planning [ J Hazards [ ] PopulatiOn & Housing [ ] Noise [ ] Geological Problems [ ] Public Services [ ] Water [ ] Utilities and Service Systems [ ] Air Quality [ ] Aesthetics [ ] Transportation / Circulation [ ] Cultural ResourCes [ ] Biological Resources [ ] Resources [ ] Energy and Mineral Resources [ ] Mandatory Finding of Significance .. -2- CEQA Checklist 7/95 ", - - FileNo.: CUP 97-012 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 the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. [] I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMP ACT REPORT is required. [] I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, but that at least one effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards and has been addressed by mitigation measures based on that earlier analysis as described on attached sheets, and if any remaining effect is a "Potentially Significant Impact" or "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated," an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it only needs to analyze the effects thathave not yet been addressed. [] I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects have been analyzed adequately in an earlier Environmental Impact Report pursuant to applicable standards and have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. By: James M. Kasama, Associate Planner For: The City of Arcadia -- Development Ser:vicesDepartment ~.~1~ Si lure ; - Date: October 9, ] 997 -3. CEQA Checklist 7/95 File No:: CUP 97-012 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: I. A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A ''No Impact" answer is adeqUlltelysupported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects such as the one involved (e.g., the project is not within a fault rupture zone). A ''No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptc;lrs to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis). tit 2. All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on- site, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction related as well as operational impacts. 3. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial. evidence that an effect is significant. If there are one or more, "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an Environmental Impact Report is required. 4. "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less Than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section 17 "Earlier Analyses" may be cross-referenced). - 5. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program Environmental Impact Report, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration {Section 15063(c)(3)(D)}. Earlier analyses are discussed in Section 17 at the end of the checklist. 6. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist,references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should; where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substimtiated. - -4- CEQA Checklist 7/95 ", - ", " File No,: CUP 97-012 Wciuld the proposal result in potential impacts involving: Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 1. LAN]) USE & PLANNING - Would the proposal: a) Conflict with general plan designations or zoning? [ ] I ] [] [X] b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project? [ ] [ ] [] [~1 c) Be compatible with existing land uses in the vicinity? [ ] [ ] [] [,\1 d) Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g., impacts to soils or farmlands, or impacts from incompatible land uses)? [ ] I ] [] [X] e) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community (including a low-income or minority community)? [ ] [ ] [] [X] The proposed office and warehouse building is consistent with the general plan and zaning designations for the area, and will complement surrounding uses, The construction of the building, and the operation of the propO$ed business will be subje<:t to all other environmental plans or policies adopted by the agencies with jurisdiction over this area There are no agricul1ural resources or operOlions in the vicinity. 2. POPULATION & HOUSING - Would the proposal: a) ClImulatively exceed official regional or local population projections? [ ] [ ] [] [X] b) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or indirectly (e,g., through projects in an undeveloped area or extension of major infrastructure)? [ ] [ ] I] [X] c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable housing? [ I [ ] [] [X] The proposed office and warehouse building is consistent with the general plan and zoning designations for the area <>>1d will not impoctthe population or housing. 3. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS - Would the proposal result in or expose people to potential impacts involving: a) Fault rupture? [ ] [ ] [] [X] b) Seismic ground shaking? [ ] [ ] [] [X] c) Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? [ ] [ ] [] [~1 d) Landslides or mudflows? [ ] [ 1 [] [X] e) Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from eXcavation, grading, or fill? I ] I ] [] [Xl t) SUbsidence of the land? I ] I ] I] [Xl g) Expansive soils? [ ] [ ] [] [Xl h) Unique geologic or physical features? [ ] [ ] [] [Xl While this entire region is subject to the effe<:1S qfseismic activity, thesubje<:t location has not been determined to be especially susceptible to anyof the above gealogic problems. 4. WATER - Would the proposal result in: a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff'? b) Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding? c) Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of surface water quality (e.g., temperature, dissolved oxygen, or turbidity)? d) Changes in the amount of surface water in,any water body? [ ] I] [ ] [Xl [ ] [ ] [ ] [~1 I] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [~1 [~1 -5- CEQA Checklist 1195 , File No.: CUP 97'012 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than ~ Would the proposal result in potential impacts involving: Significant Mitigatinn Significant No ~ Impact Incorporated Impact Impact e) Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements? I] [ ] [] [Xl f) Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of any aquifer by cuts or excavations or through substantial loss of ground water recharge capability? [ ] I ] [] [Xl g) Altered direction or rate'offlow of ground water? [ ] [ ] [] [Xl h) Impacts to ground water quality? [ ] [ ] [] [Xl i) Substantial reduction in the amount of ground water otherwise available for public water. supplies? [ ] [ ] [] [Xl There are no proposed site alterations that would result in any of the above impacts. 5. AIR QUALITY - Would the proposal: a) Violate any' air quality standard or contribute to an eXisting or projected air quality violation? [ ] [ ] I] [Xl b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? [ ] [ ] [] [Xl c) Alter airmovemenl, moislUre, or temp. or cause any change in climate? [] I ] [] IXl d) Create objectionable odors? [ ] [ ] [] IXl The proposed office and warehouse building, and the operation of the business will be subject to local air quality regulatians as administered by the South Coast Air Quality Management District which should prevent any impacts relative to items (a) and/or (b) above. There are no exterior improvements proposed that would .... result in.alterations to air movement, moisture or temperature, or cause a change'in climate. No objectionable ~ odors have been associated withtheproposed business. 6. TRANSPORTATION & CIRCULATION - Would the. proposal result in: a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? [ ] [ ] I] [Xl b) Hazards to safety from design features (e,g" sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible Iises (e.g., farm equipment)? I] [ ] [] [Xl c) Inadequate emergency access or acceSs to nearby uses? [ ] [ ] [] [Xl d) Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site? [ ] I ] I] IXl e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians' or bicyclists? [ ] [ ] [I [Xl f) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative'transportation (e,g., bUs turnouts, bicycle racks)? [ ] [ ] [] [Xl g) Rail, Waterborne or air traffic impacts? I ] [ ] [] [Xl The proposedproject has been designed to avoid any of the above impacts. Furthermore, said subject location has been "'<amined by the City's Traffic Engineer with regard to the proposed improvements and business and it has been determined that there,should not be any traffic related impacts. 7. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES - Would the proposal result in impacts to: a) Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats (including but not limited to plants,flsh, insects"animals and birds)? [ ) b) Locally designated species (e.g., heritage trees)? I ] c) Locally designated natural communities (e.g.,. o;tk forest. coastal habitat, etc~)? . I ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [A1 .... [X] ~ I ] [ ] IXl -6- CEQAChecklist 7/95 - - ", File No.: CUP 97-012 Potentially .significant Potentially Unless Lcss Than Would the proposal resuh in potential impacts involving: Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact d) Wetland habitat (e.g., marsh, riparian and vernal pool)? [ ] [ ] [] P<1 e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? [ ] [ ] [] [X] The proposed office and warehouse will be consrructed on an existing commercial parcel. None of the above circumstances exist. 8. ENERGY & MINERAL RESOURCES - Would the proposal: a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? [ ] [ I I] [X] b) Use non-renewable resources. in a wasteful and inefficient manner? [] [ ] [] [X] c) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of future value to'the region and the residents of the State? [] [ ] [] [X] The proposed improveme/"llS will be required to comply with adopted energy conservation requirements. None of the above impacts have been associated with the proposed type of improvements or business. 9. HAZARDS - Would the proposal involve: a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to: oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation)? [ ] [ ] I] [-\1 b) Possible interference with an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? [ ] [ ] [] [X] c) The creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard? [ ] [ ] [] [X] d) Exposure pfpeople to existing sources of potential health hazards? [] [ ) I] [-\1 e) Increased ftre hazard in areas with flammable brush, grass or trees? [J [ ) [] [-\1 The proposed improvements have been designed with consideration given to the above items (b) and (e). The proposed improvements. and operation of the business will be reviewed by the City Building Services, and the City Fire Department to prevent the above items (a) and (c). No existing sources of po/ential health hazards have been identified at the subject property. 10. NOISE - Would the proposal result in: a) Increases in existing noise levels? [ ) [ I [] [X] b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? [ ] [ ] [] [X] The site of the proposed office and warehouse is in an established commercial area and neither of the above imp4Cts have been associated with this location or thepropcisedbusiness. 11. PUBLIC SERVICES - Would the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered government services in any of the following areas: a) Fire protection? [ ] [ ] [] [-\1 b) Police protection? [ ] [ ] I] [-\1 c) Schools? [ ] [ ] [] [-\1 d) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? [ ] [ ] [] [-\1 e) Other governmental services? [ ] [ ] [] [X] The proposed office and warehouse building, and the business are consistent with the planned uses for the subject area and will therefore not result in any of the above impacts. 12. UTILITIES & SERVICE SYSTEMS - Would the proposal resuh in a need for new systems or supplies. or substantial aIterations to the following,utilities: a) Power or natural gas? [ I [ ] [] [X] -7- CEQA Checklist 7195 File No.: CUP 97-012 Potentiall)' Significant Potentially Unless Less Than ... Would the proposal result in potential impacts involving: Significant Mitigation Significant No ~ Impact Incorporated Impact Impact b) Communications systems? [ ] [ ] [] [X] c) Local orregional water treatment or distribution facilities? [ ] [ ] I] [X] d) Sewer or septic tanks? [ ] [ ] [] [X] e) Storm water drainage? [ ] [ ] [] [X] t) Solid waste disposal? [ ] [ ] [] [X] g) Local or regional water supplies? [ ] [ ] I] [X] Improvements to provide any of the above necessary services are incorporated in this project. It is not anticipated that any of the above utilities or service systems will be 'significantly impacted. Neveriheless, the proposed improvements will be reviewed for, and the developer will be required to provide, if necessary, any new systems or supplies necessary to mitigate any such impacts. 13. AESTHETICS - Would.the proposal: a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? I ] [ J [] [X] b) Have a demonstrable negative aesthetics effect? I ] [ ] [] [X] c) Create light or glare? I ] I ] [] [X] The subject property is in an established commercial area anti any exterior improvements wili be required to comply with local architectural standards anti illumination limits and will not result in any of the above impacts. 14. CULTURAL RESOURCES - Would the proposal: a) Disturb paleontological resources? [ ] I ]. [] [X] b) Disturb archaeological resources? [ ] [ ] [] [X) c) Affect historical resources? [ I [ ] [] [X] d) Have the potential to cause a physical change which would.affect unique ethnic cultural values? [ ] [ I I] [X] e) Restrict existing relIgious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? [ ] I ] [] [X] The subject property is in an established commercial area.. None of the above resources have been identified at the subject area, and none of the above impacts hove been associated with theproposed lISe. tit 15. RECREATION - Would the proposal: a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional_p~ or other recreational facilities? [ ] I ] [] [X] b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? [ ] [ ] I] [X] The subject property is in an established commercial area, and the proposed project will not result in any of the above impacts. 16. MANDA TORY 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 imponant examples of the major periods of California history or.prehistory? [ ] I] [ ] [X] -- -8- CEQA Checklist 7195 - - .- -, File No.: CUP 97-012 Would the proposal resull in potential impacts involving: Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact b) Does the project have the potentia] to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term. environmental goals? [ ] [ ] [] [X] c) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future project.) [ ] [ ] [] [.\1 d) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? [ ] [ ] [] [X] The subject pro perry is an established commercial site and will not result in any of the above impacts. 17. l:ARLIER ANALYSES No earlier analyses. and no additional documenls were referenced pursuant to the tiering, program EIR. or other CEQA processes to analyze the proposaL -9- CEQA Check list 7 i95