Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-13-09PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL MOTION: To read the Resolutions by title only and waive reading the full text of the Resolutions. SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION FROM STAFF REGARDING AGENDA ITEMS TIME RESERVED FOR THOSE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO WISH TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON NON PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS 5 minute time limit per person. All interested persons are invited to appear at the Public Hearing and to provide evidence or testimony concerning any of the proposed items set forth below for consideration. You are hereby advised that should you desire to legally challenge any action taken by the Planning Commission with respect to the proposed item for consideration, you may be limited to raising only those issues and objections, which you or someone else raises at or prior to the time of the Public Hearing. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. RESIDENTIAL MOUNTAINOUS PERMIT NO. RM 09-01 AND MODIFICATION NO. MC 09 -23 310 Whispering Pines Drive Bluth Development (Property Owners' Representative) The applicant is requesting the following modifications and an R -M Zone Development Permit for a proposed new cut- and -fill driveway, motor court, swimming pool, a fence, and a driveway gate: 1. A 15.3% driveway slope in lieu of the maximum 10% allowed; 2. A fence height of 5' -0" to 8'-4" in lieu of the maximum 4' -0" allowed; 3. A fence with zero (0) to 2' -11" setback from the front property line in lieu of the minimum 3' -0" required; and 4. A 10' -0" high driveway gate in lieu of the maximum 5' -0" allowed. RECOMMENDATION: Conditional approval ARCADIA PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA Tuesday, October 13, 2009, 7:00 P.M. Arcadia City Council Chambers RESOLUTION NO. 1806 A Resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Arcadia, California, approving Residential Mountainous Development Permit No. RM 09 -01 for a new hillside cut and -fill driveway, motor court, and swimming pool at 310 Whispering Pines Drive. There is a five working day appeal period after the adoption of the Resolution. Appeals are to be filed by 5:30 p.m. on Tuesday, October 20, 2009. Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the Planning Commission members regarding any item on this agenda will be made available for public inspection in the Planning Services office at City Hall, 240 W. Huntington Dr., Arcadia, CA 91007, (626) 574 -5423. PC AGENDA 10 -13-09 2. MODIFICATION NO. MP 09 -04, OAK TREE ENCROACHMENT PERMIT NO. 09 -13 AND SINGLE- FAMILY ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. SFADR 09-47 2 West Pamela Road Sanyao International, Inc. (Designer) The applicant is requesting the following permits for a new, two -story, 4,124 square -foot, "Tuscan" style residence: 1. Modification for an 80' -0" street side yard setback as measured to the centerline of Santa Anita Avenue in lieu of the minimum 100' -0" special setback; 2. Oak Tree Encroachment Permit for the encroachment into the dripline of one (1) oak tree; and 3. Single Family Architectural Design Review. RECOMMENDATION: Conditional approval There is a five working day appeal period from the date of the decision. Appeals are to be filed by 5:30 p.m. on Tuesday, October 20, 2009. 3. MODIFICATION NO. MP 09 -05 AND OAK TREE ENCROACHMENT PERMIT NO. TR 09 -18 1235 Rodeo Road Jack Lynch The applicant is requesting the following permits: 1. A 67' -0" front yard setback in lieu of the 97' -6" average of the two adjacent properties; and 2. An Oak Tree Encroachment Permit to encroach upon 15 oak trees. RECOMMENDATION: Conditional approval There is a five working day appeal period from the date of the decision. Appeals are to be filed by 5:30 p.m. on Tuesday, October 20, 2009. 4. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. CUP 09 -11 AND ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. ADR 09 -09 5150 Fama Avenue Kare Youth League (Property Owner) The applicant is requesting a Conditional Use Permit and Architectural Design Review for a 22,090 square -foot gymnasium, a below -grade 750 square -foot locker facility addition, and a revised parking layout at an existing K -12 private school and youth program facility. RECOM MENDATION: Conditional approval RESOLUTION NO. 1805 A Resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Arcadia, California, granting Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 09 -11 and Architectural Design Review Application No. ADR 09-09 for a new 22,090 square -foot Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the Planning Commission members regarding any item on this agenda will be made available for public inspection in the Planning Services office at City Hall, 240 W. Huntington Dr., Arcadia, CA 91007, (626) 574 -5423. PC AGENDA 10 -13-09 athletics building and a 750 square -foot locker facility addition at an existing youth facility located at 5150 Farna Avenue. There is a five working day appeal period after the adoption of the Resolution. Appeals are to be filed by 5:30 p.m. on Tuesday, October 20, 2009. CONSENT ITEMS 5. MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 22, 2009 RECOM MENDATION: Approval MATTERS FROM CITY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMISSION MODIFICATION COMMITTEE AGENDA MATTERS FROM STAFF UPCOMING AGENDA ITEMS ADJOURNMENT Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the Planning Commission members regarding any item on this agenda will be made available for public inspection in the Planning Services office at City Hall, 240 W. Huntington Dr., Arcadia, CA 91007, (626) 574 -5423. PC AGENDA 10 -13-09 PLANNING COMMISSION Pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act, persons with a disability who require a disability related modification or accommodation in order to participate in a meeting, including auxiliary aids or services, may request such modification or accommodation from the City Clerk at (626) 574 -5423. Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to assure accessibility to the meeting. Public Hearing Procedure 1. The public hearing is opened by the Chairman of the Planning Commission. 2. The Planning staff report is presented by staff. 3. Commissioners' questions relating to the Planning staff report may be asked and answered at this time. 4. The applicant is afforded the opportunity to address the Commission. 5. Others in favor of the proposal are afforded the opportunity to address the Commission. (LIMITED TO 5 MINUTES) 6. Those in opposition to the proposal are afforded the opportunity to address the Commission. (LIMITED TO 5 MINUTES) 7. The applicant may be afforded the opportunity for a brief rebuttal. (LIMITED TO 5 MINUTES) 8. The Commission closes the public hearing. 9. The Commission members may discuss the proposal at this time. 10. The Commission then makes a motion and acts on the proposal to either approve, approve with conditions or modifications, deny, or continue it to a specific date. 11. Following the Commission's action on Conditional Use Permits and Variances, a resolution reflecting the decision of the Planning Commission is prepared for adoption by the Commission. This is usually presented at the next Planning Commission meeting. There is a five (5) working day appeal period after the adoption of the resolution. 12. Following the Commission's action on Modifications and Design Reviews, there is a five (5) working day appeal period. 13. Following the Commission's review of Zone Changes, Text Amendments and General Plan Amendments, the Commission's comments and recommendations are forwarded to the City Council for the Council's consideration at a scheduled public hearing. 14. Following the Commission's action on Tentative Tract Maps and Tentative Parcel Maps (subdivisions) there is a ten (10) calendar day appeal period. Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the Planning Commission members regarding any item on this agenda will be made available for public inspection in the Planning Services office at City Hall, 240 W. Huntington Dr., Arcadia, CA 91007, (626) 574 -5423. PC AGENDA 10 -13-09 October 13, 2009 TO: Arcadia Planning Commission Development Services Department FROM: Jim Kasama, Community Development Administrator By: Thomas Li, Associate Planner SUBJECT: Residential Mountainous Development Permit Application No. RM 09 -01 and Modification Application No. MC 09 -23 for a hillside cut and -fill driveway, a motor court, a swimming pool, a fence and a gate at 310 Whispering Pines Drive SUMMARY This application was submitted by the property owner to construct a cut and -fill driveway, a motor court, a swimming pool, and a new fence and gate in the front yard of the residence at 310 Whispering Pines Drive. It is staff's opinion that the cut and -fill driveway, motor court, and swimming pool comply with the R -M development criteria, and approval of the modifications would secure an appropriate improvement of the lot and promote uniformity of development. Therefore, the Development Services Department is recommending approval of the applicant's requests, subject to the conditions listed in this report. GENERAL INFORMATION APPLICANT: Patrick Bluth of Bluth Development (Contractor) LOCATION: 310 Whispering Pines Drive REQUESTS: The following modifications and an R -M Zone Development Permit for a proposed new cut and -fill driveway, motor court, swimming pool, a fence, and a driveway gate: A. A 15.3% driveway slope for an approximately 20 -foot long section in lieu of the maximum 10% allowed (Sec. 9250.3.7); B. A fence height of 5' -0" to 8'-4" in lieu of the maximum 4' -0" allowed (Sec. 9250.3.16); C. A fence with a zero (0) to 2' -11" setback from the front property line in lieu of the minimum 3' -0" required (Sec. 9250.3.16); D. A 10' -0" high driveway gate in lieu of the maximum 5' -0" allowed (Sec. 9250.3.16). LOT AREA: 76,478 square feet (1.76 acre) FRONTAGE: 294.69 feet along Whispering Pines Drive EXISTING LAND USE ZONING: The property is improved with a two -story, 9,614 square -foot, single family residence with a four -car garage and motor court that was constructed in 2002. The property is zoned R -M. SURROUNDING LAND USES ZONING: With the exception of the City's water pump that is situated at the southwest portion of the subject site, the surrounding properties are developed with similar single family residences and are zoned R -M. GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Single Family Residential 0 to 6 dwelling units per acre. PUBLIC HEARING NOTIFICATION Public hearing notices for application nos. RM 09 -01 and MC 09 -23 were mailed on September 23, 2009 to the property owners, tenants and occupants of those properties that are within 300 feet of the subject property as shown on the attached aerial map. This mailing satisfies the notification requirement set forth by the California Environmental Quality Act for the adoption of a Negative Declaration. Therefore, the notice was not published on the Arcadia Weekly. BACKGROUND The subject property is improved with a two -story, 9,614 square -foot, single family residence with a four -car garage and motor court. These improvements were completed in 2002. RM 09 -01 and MC 09 -23 310 Whispering Pines Drive October 13, 2009 Page 2 of 8 Currently, the subject property shares a driveway entrance from Whispering Pines Drive with the neighboring property at 312 Whispering Pines Drive, which is a flag lot to the rear /east of the subject site. The applicant is proposing to construct a separate driveway with a fence and gate, a new motor court, and a new swimming pool for the subject property. According to Arcadia Municipal Code Section 9250.5, a project within the R -M zone is required to obtain an R -M Zone Development Permit if the project includes excavation, fill, or a combination thereof in excess of fifteen (15) cubic meters (11.5 cubic yards) and /or any other excavation or fill which requires a grading permit. This proposal qualifies under these criteria and is therefore subject to review and approval by the Planning Commission. Typically, modifications for fences, gates, and driveways are reviewed by the Modification Committee. These requests are being presented to the Planning Commission because they are part of the project that requires an R -M Zone Development Permit. EVALUATION CRITERIA Section 9250.5.9 of the R -M Zoning Regulations lists the following criteria for the evaluation of R -M Zone Development Permit applications: A. The following criteria shall be considered in assessing the application for a development permit: 1. Extent of grading required for the reasonable use of the property. 2. Visual impact of the proposed project. 3. Relationship of the proposed project to adjoining properties and /or structures. 4. Adequacy of proposed landscaped areas, drainage facilities, erosion control devices and other protective devices. 5. Adequacy of fire equipment access. 6. Extent of preservation of existing ridge and crestlines. 7. Extent of attempt to have roads follow existing contours. 8. Developability of sites. B. An application shall be denied if, in the judgment of the City, based upon the purpose of this Division, the proposed work or design of the lots and streets in the development would: RM 09 -01 and MC 09 -23 310 Whispering Pines Drive October 13, 2009 Page 3 of 8 1. Cause excessive or unnecessary scarring of the natural terrain and landscape through grading or removal of vegetation; or 2. Cause unnecessary alteration of a ridge or crestline; or 3. Unnecessarily affect the view from neighboring sites; or 4. Would adversely affect existing development or retard future development in this zone; or 5. Be inconsistent with the provisions of this Division. C. In granting a development permit, the City may impose conditions which may be reasonably necessary to prevent danger to public or private property or to prevent the operation from being conducted in a manner likely to create a nuisance. No person shall violate any conditions so imposed in said permit by the City of Arcadia. Such conditions may include, but not be limited to any of the aforementioned requirements of this Division. The City Engineer or a designated alternate may issue a permit for any emergency hillside work that may be necessary to prevent danger to public or private property. PROPOSAL AND ANALYSIS The applicant is requesting to construct a cut and -fill driveway, a motor court, a swimming pool, and a fence and gate for the subject property at 310 Whispering Pines Drive. Due to the topography of the site, excavation and fill will be necessary for the construction of the driveway, motor court, and swimming pool. An R -M Zone Development Permit is required because the amount of excavation exceeds 15 cubic meters (11.5 cubic yards). A Modification Application is necessary for the slope of the driveway, and for the height and location of the front yard fence and gate. R -M Zone Development Permit The proposed driveway, motor court and swimming pool require excavation and fill that necessitates an R -M Zone Development Permit. It is staffs opinion that the proposal satisfies all the aforementioned criteria for the approval of this permit. A total of 1,250 cubic yards of earth will be exported, and 90 cubic yards will be fill. Most of the grading will occur at the motor court in front of the main entrance of the existing residence. The proposed motor court area will be approximately four feet (4') below the existing grade. The lowering of the grade is to enable an overall driveway slope of approximately one to three percent. The proposed driveway will run parallel to the existing contours of the slope and will consist mostly of cut -and- fill construction. A small portion of the swimming pool will require grading to maintain the same level as the rest of back yard, as shown on the submitted plans. RM 09 -01 and MC 09 -23 310 Whispering Pines Drive October 13, 2009 Page 4 of 8 It is staffs opinion that the grading of the subject site is reasonable to accommodate the proposal. The driveway, motor court and swimming pool will not have a significant visual impact on the surrounding sites since they will be at areas that are screened from view from the street and surrounding properties. The driveway and motor court will be between the existing residence and mature be in landscaping that is along Whispering Pines h ubsDThe proposal was alsoo�ev reviewed by the rear yard area screened by dense the Fire Marshal to ensure proper fire equipment access, and he expressed no concerns regarding the project. Modification Request A A 15.3% driveway slope for an approximately 20 -foot long section in lieu of the maximum 10% allowed (Sec. 9250.3.7) The purpose of a maximum 10% slope limitation is to prevent steep driveways that may be difficult to navigate and aesthetically unappealing. The new driveway is mostly comprised of a slope of approximately one to three percent. The portion that will exceed the maximum slope limitation will be the transition from the new driveway to the existing motor court and will be approximately 20 feet long. To facilitate the negotiating of this transition, this portion of the driveway will be 16 feet wide and the outer curved area will have a slope of 7.5 This transition portion of the driveway will be screened from street view by existing dense landscaping. It is staff's opinion that the proposed driveway design will allow adequate access, and will not negatively impact the aesthetics of the property. Modification Requests B, C, D A fence height of 5' -0" to 8'-4" in lieu of the maximum 4' -0" allowed (Sec. 9250.3.16). A fence with a zero (0) to 2' -11" setback from the front property line in lieu of the minimum 3' -0" required (Sec. 9250.3.16); A 10' -0" high driveway gate in lieu of the maximum 5' -0" allowed (Sec. 9250.3.16). These modifications are for the front yard fence and gate to exceed the maximum height, and to locate a portion of the fence adjacent to the front property line. The proposed fence height of 5' -0" to 8' -4" will be along the west side of the new driveway and consists of a retaining wall ranging from 2' -0" to 5'-4 with a 3' -0" high wrought iron fence. The portion of the fence that encroaches into the 3' -0" setback requirement is a 3' -0" high solid decorative block wall by the driveway in front of the 10' -0" high driveway entry gate with two (2) pilasters. RM 09 and MC 09 -23 310 Whispering Pines Drive October 13, 2009 Page 5 of 8 It is staffs opinion that approval of these modifications would secure an appropriate improvement of the lot, and promote uniformity of development. Many properties in the Whispering Pines Estates Area have already received modifications for similar fences and gates based on findings that the increased heights are proportional to the large properties in this area, and promote uniformity with neighboring properties. At one time, the Modification Committee suggested to the Whispering Pines Estate Architectural Committee to apply for a text amendment to change the code to permit higher fences in this area because of the unique nature of these properties. The Whispering Pines Homeowners Association has not applied for such an amendment, and therefore each fence must obtain separate approvals for front yard fence height and location modifications. CODE REQUIREMENTS The proposal is subject to permits and inspections and is required to be in compliance with all applicable Code requirements and policies as determined to be necessary by the Building Official, Fire Marshal, City Engineer, Community Development Administrator, and Public Works Services Director. Compliance requirements are to be determined by having fully detailed construction plans submitted for plan check review and approval. CEQA Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act, the Development Services Department prepared an Initial Study for the proposed project. Said Initial Study did not disclose any substantial or potentially substantial adverse change in any of the physical conditions within the area affected by the project, including land, air, water, minerals, flora, fauna, ambient noise and objects of historical or aesthetic significance. Therefore, the attached Negative Declaration was prepared for this project. RECOMMENDATION The Development Services Department recommends approval of Residential Mountainous Development Permit No. RM 09 -01 and Modification Application No. MC 09 -23, subject to the following conditions: 1. The cut and -fill driveway shall be constructed and maintained in a manner that is consistent with the plans and materials submitted and approved by application no. RM 09 -01 to the satisfaction of the Building Official, City Engineer, Fire Marshal and Community Development Administrator. RM 09 -01 and MC 09 -23 310 Whispering Pines Drive October 13, 2009 Page 6of8 2. All proposed slopes as shown on the grading drainage plan for the project shall not exceed 2:1 (max. slope) per 2007 CBC requirements. 3. Provide an updated Soils Report indicating the geotechnical engineer's recommendations for the proposed retaining wall and driveway prior to permit issuance. 4. The proposed driveway shall be constructed per City of Arcadia Standards and shall not have less than ten (10) feet of unobstructed vertical clearance. 5. The applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Arcadia and its officers, employees, and agents from and against any claim, action, or proceeding against the City of Arcadia, its officers, employees or agents to attack, set aside, void, or annul any approval or condition of approval of the City of Arcadia concerning this project and /or land use decision, including but not limited to any approval or condition of approval of the City Council, Planning Commission, or City Staff, which action is brought within the time period provided for in Government Code Section 66499.37 or other provision of law applicable to this project or decision. The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim, action, or proceeding concerning the project and /or land use decision and the City shall cooperate fully in the defense of the matter. The City reserves the right, at its own option, to choose its own attorney to represent the City, its officers, employees, and agents in the defense of the matter. 6. The approval of application nos. RM 09 -01 and MC 09 -23 shall not take effect until the owner and applicant have executed the Acceptance Form available from Planning Services to indicate awareness and acceptance of the conditions of approval. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION Approval If the Planning Commission intends to approve this proposal, the Commission should move to approve Application Nos. RM 09 -01 and MC 09 -23, state the supporting findings, including the acceptance of the Negative Declaration, and adopt Resolution No. 1806, which incorporates the Commission's decision, specific determinations and findings, and the conditions of approval. Denial If the Planning Commission intends to deny this proposal, the Planning Commission should move to deny Application Nos. RM 09 -01 and MC 09 -23, and direct staff to prepare a resolution for adoption at the next meeting that RM 09 -01 and MC 09 -23 310 Whispering Pines Drive October 13, 2009 Page 7 of 8 incorporates the Commission's decision and the specific determinations, reasons, and findings in support of the decision. If any Planning Commissioner, or other interested party has any questions or comments regarding this matter prior to the October 13 public hearing, please contact Associate Planner, Thomas Li at (626) 574 -5447, or tli@ci.arcadia.ca.us. Approved by: Ji .f'sa a munity Development Administrator Attachments: Aerial Photo Vicinity Map with Zoning Information 300 -foot Radius Map Proposed Plans Photos of Subject Property Environmental Documents Resolution No. 1806 RM 09 -01 and MC 09 -23 310 Whispering Pines Drive October 13, 2009 Page 8of8 Development Services Department Engineering Division P►epared by: R.S.Gonzalez, October2009 310 Whispering Pines Drive RM 09-01 MC 09 -23 100 0 Development Services Department Engineering Division Prepared by RSGonzalez, October 2009 100 Feet 'ING PINES SUMMIT (332) (338) (388) 310 Whispering Pines Drive RM 09 -01 MC 09.23 OM ORM INT AA b a� a f 4 a 1, Name or description of project: Residential Mountainous Development Permit No. RM 09 -01 and Modification Application No. MC 09 -23 for a new hillside cut and -fill driveway, a motor court, a swimming pool, a fence, and a gate. 2. Project Location Identify street address and cross streets or attach a map showing project site (preferably a USGS 15' or 7 1/2' topographical map identified by quadrangle name): 310 Whispering Pines Drive 3. Entity or Person undertaking project: A. B. Other (Private) (1) Name: Patrick Bluth of Bluth Development (2) Address: 122 -A E. Foothill Blvd., Arcadia, CA 91006 The City Council /Planning Commission, having reviewed the Initial Study of this proposed project and having reviewed the written comments received during the comment period and the recommendation of the City's Staff, does hereby find and declare that the proposed project will not have a significant effect on the environment. A brief statement of the reasons supporting the findings are as follows: The City Council /Planning Commission hereby finds that the Negative Declaration reflects its independent judgment. A copy of the Initial Study may be obtained at: City of Arcadia Development Services Department Community Development Division Planning Services 240 West Huntington Drive Arcadia, CA 91007 (626) 574 -5423 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: Jim Kasama, Community Development Adminstrator City of Arcadia Development Services Department Community Development Division Planning Services 240 West Huntington Drive Arcadia, CA 91007 (626) 574 -5423 Date Received for Filing: Negative Declaration \City\2009 CITY OF ARCADIA 240 W. HUNTINGTON DRIVE ARCADIA, CA 91007 NEGATIVE DECLARATION File No.: RM 09 -01 MC 09 -23 Staff 1 L I FORM "E" CITY OF ARCADIA 240 WEST HUNTINGTON DRIVE ARCADIA, CA 91007 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM 1. Project Title: Residential Mountainous Development Permit Application No. RM 09 -01 and Modification Application No. MC 09 -23 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Arcadia Development Services Department 240 West Huntington Drive Post Office Box 60021 Arcadia, CA 91066 -6021 3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Name: Thomas Li, Associate Planner Phone: (626) 574 -5447 Fax (626) 447 -9173 Email: tli @ci. arcadia. ca. us 4. Project Location: 310 Whispering Pines Drive 5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Patrick Bluth of Bluth Development 122 -A E. Foothill Blvd. Arcadia, CA 91006 6. General Plan Designation: Single Family Residential, up to 6 dwelling units per acre 7. Zoning Classification: R -M Residential Mountainous Single- Family Zone File Nos. RM 09 -01 MC 09 -23 8. Description of Project: (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to later phases of the project, and any secondary, support, or off -site features necessary for its implementation. Attach additional sheet(s) if necessary.) The proposal involves a hillside cut and -fill driveway, a motor court, a swimming pool, a fence, and gate at the subject property. CEQA Env. Checklist (Form "J Part 1 -1- 6/06 9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: (Briefly describe the project's surroundings.) With the exception of the City's water pump that is situated at the southwest portion of the subject site, the surrounding properties are developed with similar single- family residences. 10. Other public agencies whose approval is required: (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement) None ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. Aesthetics Agriculture Resources Air Quality Biological Resources Cultural Resources Geology Soils Hazards Hazardous Materials Hydrology Water Quality Land Use Planning Mineral Resources Noise Population Housing Public Services Recreation Transportation Traffic Utilities Service Systems Mandatory Findings of Significance DETERMINATION (To be completed by the Lead Agency) On the basis of this initial evaluation: [X] I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. [l File Nos. RM 09 -01 MC 09 -23 I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. CEQA Env. Checklist (Form "J Part 1 -2- 6/06 Signature I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. Thomas Li, Associate Planner For: Jim Kasama Community Development Administrator Printed Name Title EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: glc —07 Date File Nos. RM 09 -01 MC 09 -23 1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g. the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project specific factors as well as general standards (e.g. the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project- specific screening analysis). 2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off -site as well as on -site, cumulative as well as project level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. 4) "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section XVII, "Earlier Analyses," may be cross referenced). 5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following: a) Earlier Analyses Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site specific conditions for the project. CEQA Env. Checklist (Form "J Part 1 -3- 6/06 File Nos. RM 09 -01 MC 09 -23 6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g. general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. 7) Supporting Information Sources. A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 8) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project's environmental effects in whatever format is selected. 9) The explanation of each issue should identify: a) the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significant. CEQA Env. Checklist (Form "J Part 1 -4- 6/06 1. AESTHETICS Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? 2. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES In determining whether impacts to agriculture resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland) to non agricultural use? (The Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program in the California Resources Agency to non agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? File Nos.: RM 09 -01 and MC 09 -23 Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact El The subject site is surrounded by single- family development. The proposal is to construct a cut and -fill driveway, a motor court, a swimming pool, a fence and a gate for an existing single- family residence. There are no structures proposed. Furthermore, there are no adjacent properties where a potential scenic vista would be obstructed. Therefore, there will be no impact to any scenic vistas. b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? There are no designated scenic highways within the City of Arcadia. The nearest designated state scenic highway is the Angeles Crest Highway approximately 15 miles away. Therefore, there will be no impacts to state scenic highways or scenic roadway corridors. c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? El The project is to construct a hillside cut- and -fill driveway, a motor court, a swimming pool, a fence, and a gate on the subject site. The area where grading will occur is screened from view of the neighbors and the street. The visual character and quality of the site and its surroundings will be maintained. IZI d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? The Arcadia Municipal Code has a provision to prohibit glare upon any neighboring properties; the proposal is for The project is to accommodate a hillside cut and -fill driveway, motor court, swimming pool, fence, and gate for an existing residence on the subject site, and would not create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area. There is no farmland in the City of Arcadia. Therefore, the project would not convert farmland to non agricultural use. CEQA Checklist -5- 4 -03 c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non agricultural use? There is no farmland in the City of Arcadia, and the project will not convert farmland to non agricultural use. 3. AIR QUALITY Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? Potentially Significant Impact quality plan? c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? CEQA Checklist File Nos.: RM 09-01 and MC 09 -23 Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporation Less Than Significant No Impact Impact There is no agricultural use zoning or a Williamson Act contract in the City of Arcadia. Therefore, the proposed project would not have the above impacts. El 1.1 The City of Arcadia is located within the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB), which includes Los Angeles and Orange Counties, and portions of Riverside and San Bernardino Counties. The air quality in the SCAB is managed by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), which funded the development of the West San Gabriel Valley Air Quality Plan. In 1993, the City of Arcadia adopted Resolution 5725, accepting the principles of the plan and agreeing to use the plan in the development of a local air quality program. Such a program is promoted through different approaches as outlined in the City's General Plan under Public Information and Community Involvement, Regional Coordination, Transportation Improvements and Systems Management, Transportation Demand Management, Land Use, Particulate Emissions Reduction, Energy Conservation, and Waste Recycling. El The South Coast Air Basin (SCAB) continued the trend of long -term improvement in air quality; however, air quality measurements within this region exceed both the State and Federal air quality standards on a regular basis. In Arcadia, local air quality problems are larg -ely the result of pollutants upwind of the city. The project will accommodate a proposed hillside cut and -fill driveway, motor court, swimming pool, fence, and gate for an existing residence on the subject site., and would not violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation. El The South Coast Air Basin (SCAB) is a non attainment area for Ozone (0 Fine Particulate Matter (PM Respirable Particulate Matter (PM and Carbon Monoxide (CO), and is in a maintenance area for Nitrogen Dioxide (NO The project will not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant as the project will not increase the intensity of the existing and approved uses. -6- 4 -03 The project will not result in a significant net increase in density from existing and approved developments and uses. Furthermore, the uses on the subject properties are not listed as uses that emit odors and dust under the SCAQMD Air Quality Guidance Document. The allowable uses on subject site will remain consistent with the growth expectations for the region, and will not have an impact that conflicts with or obstructs implementation of the applicable air quality plan. e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? The subject properties do not contain uses that are listed as uses that emit odor and dust under the SCAQMD Air Quality Guidance Document. Therefore, the project will not create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people. 4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse impact, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? File Nos.: RM 09-01 and MC 09-23 Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact El In Arcadia, biological sensitive areas occur along existing creeks, upper watershed areas, existing flood control and infiltration facilities, and in natural hillside areas within the northerly portion of the city. These areas have generally been preserved as open space for public safety purposes or as wildlife habitat areas. The subject properties are located within a fully developed area that is not within close proximity to these biological resources, and is known to not contain any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species. Therefore, the project will not have the above impacts. b) Have a substantial adverse impact on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, and regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? There are no designated riparian habitats or other sensitive natural communities within the City of Arcadia. The subject properties are located within a fully developed area that is not close proximity to sensitive biological resources. Therefore, the project will not have the above impacts. c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption or other means? There are no federally protected wetlands within the City of Arcadia. The subject properties are located within a fully developed area that is not close proximity to sensitive biological resources. Therefore, the project will not have the above impacts. d) Interfere substantially_ with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of wildlife nursery sites? There are no known native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species within the City of Arcadia. The project will accommodate a hillside cut and -fill driveway, a motor court, a swimming pool, a fence, and a gate on the subject site. Therefore, the project will not have the above impacts. CEQA Checklist -7- 4 -03 e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? The City of Arcadia has an ordinance to protect oak trees within the city. The project will not conflict with that ordinance as it does not interfere with the enforcement of the ordinance. Therefore, the project will not have the above impacts. f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Conservation Community Plan, or other approved local, regional or state habitat conservation plan? There are no adopted Habitat Conservation Plans, Natural Conservation Community Plans, or other approved habitat conservation plan within the City of Arcadia. Therefore, the project will not have the above impacts. 5. CULTURAL RESOURCES Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in 15064.5? There are no known historical resources on or adjacent to the site. If previously unknown cultural resources are discovered during construction on the subject property, all work in the area would cease, and a qualified historian, archaeologist or paleontologist shall be retained by the development sponsor to assess the significance of the find, make recommendations, and prepare appropriate field documentation. b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to 15064.5? File Nos.: RM 09 -01 and MC 09 -23 Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact El The subject properties are within a fully developed area and are not known to contain any archaeological resources. Should any construction activity encounter any unrecorded archaeological resources, all work in the area would cease and a qualified archaeologist shall be retained by the development sponsor to assess the significance of the find, make recommendations, and prepare appropriate field documentation. c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? El The subject properties are within a fully- developed area and are not known to contain any paleontological or unique geological resources. Should any construction activity encounter any such unrecorded paleontological resources, all work in the area would cease and a qualified paleontologist or geologist shall be retained by the development sponsor to assess the significance of the find, make recommendations, and prepare appropriate field documentation. d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? El There are no known human remains on the subject property. State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 requires that development be halt. Should any remain be encountered, the County Coroner shall be contacted and has made the necessary findings as to the origin and disposition of the remains pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. Compliance with these regulations would ensure the project would not result in impacts in disturbing human remains. 6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: CEQA Checklist -8- El 4 -03 b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the Toss of topsoil? d) Be located on expansive soil as defined in Table 18 -1 -B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? 7. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Would the project: CEQA Checklist File Nos.: RM 09-01 and MC 09 -23 Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? iii) Seismic related ground failure, including liquefaction? iv) Landslides? The City of Arcadia contains two local fault zones: the Raymond Hill Fault and the Sierra Madre Fault. The extremely thick alluvial deposits which underlie the seismic study area are subject to differential settlement during any intense shaking associated with seismic events. This type of seismic hazard results in damage to property when an area settles to different degrees over a relatively short distance, and almost all properties in this region are subject to this hazard, but building design standards do significantly reduce the potential for harm. The subject property is not located within an Alquist Priolo Study Zone area, or any other earthquake hazard zone. Nor is it located on a hillside where landslides may occur. Since the subject property is located in a fully- developed area, the project will not have a significant impact or expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects involving fault rupture, strong seismic ground shaking, ground failure, and landslides. The project will not involve any activity to create unstable earth conditions. Prior to any construction, soil studies are required to evaluate the potential impacts of the construction upon the soil. c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off -site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? The City of Arcadia is located on an alluvial plain that is relatively flat and expected to be stable. The project will not result in on- or off -site landslide as it does not include any excavation, grading or filling. The subject site consists of alluvial soil that is in the low to moderate range for expansion potential as defined in Table 18-1 B of the Uniform Building Code. The project will not have the above impact. e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? The subject properties are in a fully- developed area that utilizes the local sewer system. Soil suitability for septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems is not applicable to this project. -9- 4 -03 g File Nos.: RM 09 -01 and MC 09 -23 Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact incorporation Impact Impact a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment El through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? The proposed hillside cut and -fill driveway, motor court, swimming pool, fence, and gate will not have the above impact. b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment EJ through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? The proposed hillside cut- and -fill driveway, motor court, swimming pool, fence, and gate will not have the above impact. c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely IZI hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? The proposed hillside cut and -fill driveway, motor court, swimming pool, fence, and gate will not have the above impact. d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? The subject property is not included on a list of hazardous material sites and will not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment. e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? The subject property is not located within an airport land use plan or within two miles of a public airport or public use airport. Therefore, there would not be any airport related safety hazards for people residing or working at the subject properties. El El 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? The subject property is not within the vicinity of a private airstrip. Therefore, the project will not result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area. El Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? The project is to accommodate the a proposed hillside cut and -fill driveway, motor court, swimming pool, fence, and gate on the subject site with an existing residence, and will not interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or evacuation plan. El h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are CEQA Checklist -10- 4 -03 adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? File Nos.: RM 09 -01 and MC 09 -23 Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact The subject property is not located near wildlands where there is a high fire hazard and will not have the above impact. 8. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY Would the project: a) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (i.e., the production rate of pre- existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? The project is to accommodate a proposed hillside cut and -fill driveway, motor court, swimming pool, fence, and gate on the subject site. It will not deplete groundwater supplies or interfere with groundwater recharge as there will be no substantial increase in the intensity of the uses on the subject properties as a result of the project. b) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off -site? El El The project is to accommodate a proposed hillside cut and -fill driveway, motor court, swimming pool, fence, and gate on the subject site. The project does not involve alteration of existing drainage patterns and will not result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off -site. c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off -site? The project is to accommodate a proposed hillside cut and -fill driveway, motor court, swimming pool, fence, and gate on the subject site. The project does not involve alteration of existing drainage patterns and will not result in flooding on- or off site. El d) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? The project is to accommodate a proposed hillside cut and -fill driveway, motor court, swimming pool, fence, and gate on the subject site. The project will not intensify the use of the subject properties and will not create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff. e) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? CEQA Checklist El -11- 4 -03 File Nos.: RM 09 -01 and MC 09-23 Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact Runoff from streets, parking areas, and other developed lands often carries various levels of water pollutants. However, the project is to accommodate a hillside cut and -fill driveway, motor court, swimming pool, fence, and gate on the subject site, and will not intensify the use of the subject properties. Any future development proposals for the subject properties will be subject to all NPDES requirements to ensure protection of groundwater quality. f) Violate any other water quality standards or waste discharge El requirements? The project would not significantly increase the intensity of uses on the subject property and will not have the above impact. g) Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area, as mapped on El a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? A series of flood control channels within the city convey storm water to regional facilities to the south. Due to this system, there are currently no areas within the City that are within a 100 -year floodplain. The City of Arcadia was located within flood Zone D as identified by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) map Community Number 065014. Under this zone, no floodplain management regulations have been required. A small portion on the northeast corner of the subject properties is within the Santa Anita Dam Inundation Area. Dam failure may be caused by a seismic event or an unprecedented intense storm that lasts over an extended period of time. Such an event could lead to the inundation of that portion of the subject properties but is highly unlikely to occur. The project will not allow housing on the subject properties and therefore will not have the above impact. h) Place within a 100 -year floodplain structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? j) Expose people or structures to Inundation by seiche, tsunami or mudflow? As discussed above, there are currently no areas within the City that are within a 100 year floodplain. Therefore, the project will not have the above impact. i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of Toss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? As mentioned, a small portion at the northeast portion of the subject properties is within the Santa Anita Dam Inundation Area. Dam failure could be caused by a seismic event or intense storm that lasts over an extended period of time. Such an event could lead to the inundation of that portion of the subject properties, but is highly unlikely to occur. Therefore, the proposal will not expose people to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding. The City of Arcadia is not located within close proximity to any large inland bodies of water or the Pacific Ocean to be inundated by a seiche or tsunami. The subject properties are on a relatively flat alluvial plain that is highly porous and is unlikely to generate mudflow. k) During project construction, will it create or contribute runoff water that would violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements, including the terms of the City's municipal separate stormwater sewer system permit? The proposed hillside cut- and -fill driveway, motor court, swimming pool, fence, and gate would be subject to NPDES requirements to ensure compliance with the water quality standards and waste discharge requirements. CEQA Checklist -12- 4 -03 I) After the project is completed, will it create or contribute runoff water that would violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements, including the terms of the City's municipal separate stormwater sewer system permit? Potentially Significant Impact File Nos.: RM 09 -01 and MC 09 -23 Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporation El The proposed hillside cut and -fill driveway, motor court, swimming pool, fence, and gate would be subject to NPDES requirements to ensure compliance with the water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. m) Allow polluted stormwater runoff from delivery areas or loading docks or other areas where materials are stored, vehicles or equipment are fueled or maintained, waste is handled, or hazardous materials are handled or delivered, or other outdoor work areas, to impair other waters? The proposed hillside cut and -fill driveway, motor court, swimming pool, fence, and gate would be subject to NPDES requirements to ensure compliance with the water quality standards and waste discharge requirements. n) Potential for discharge of stormwater to cause significant harm on the biological integrity of the waterways and water bodies including municipal and domestic supply, water contact or non contact recreation and groundwater recharge? The proposed hillside cut and -fill driveway, motor court, swimming pool, fence, and gate would be subject to NPDES requirements to ensure compliance with the water quality standards and waste discharge requirements. o) Discharge stormwater so that significant harm is caused to the biological integrity of waterways or water bodies? p) Significantly alter the flow velocity or volume of storm water runoff that can cause environmental harm? El El The proposed hillside cut and -fill driveway, motor court, swimming pool, fence, and gate would be subject to NPDES requirements to ensure that stormwater discharge causes no significant harm to the biological integrity of waterways or water bodies. El The proposed hillside cut and -fill driveway, motor court, swimming pool, fence, and gate would be subject to NPDES requirements so as not to cause significant alteration of the flow velocity or volume of storm water runoff that can cause environmental harm. q) Significantly increase erosion, either on or off -site? The subject properties are located in a fully- developed area; the project will not increase erosion. 9. LAND USE AND PLANNING Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or CEQA Checklist The subject site is located in a fully- developed area and would not physically divide an established community. Less Than Significant No Impact Impact -13- 4 -03 zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? The project is consistent with the existing development on the subject property and will not conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulations. c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? There is no habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan on the subject properties. Therefore, the project could not conflict with such plans. 10. MINERAL RESOURCES Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? There are no known mineral resources on the subject properties that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state. b) Result in the Toss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? The subject property is not designated in the General Plan as a mineral resource recovery site. Therefore, the proposal would not have the above impact. 11. NOISE Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? File Nos.: RM 09 -01 and MC 09 -23 Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact The project is to accommodate the proposed hillside cut and -fill driveway, motor court, swimming pool, fence, and gate on the subject site, and will be subject to the same noise levels limitations. The development of the site could create short term noise impacts resulting from construction. Construction hours are limited to the hours between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday. b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? The project is to accommodate a proposed hillside cut- and -fill driveway, motor court, swimming pool, fence, and gate on the subject site, and will be subject to the same noise level limitations, and do not include uses that would generate excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels. There may be a temporary increase in groundbourne vibration or groundbourne noise levels during the construction phase of the project where grading will occur. However, the construction will be monitored for compliance with construction hours and noise limitations. c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? CEQA Checklist -14- 4 -03 File Nos.: RM 09 -01 and MC 09 -23 Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact The project is to accommodate a proposed hillside cut and -fill driveway, motor court, swimming pool, fence, and gate on the subject site, and will be subject to the same noise level limitations. Therefore, there is no substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project. d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? The project is to accommodate a proposed hillside cut and -fill driveway, motor court, swimming pool, fence, and gate on the subject site, and will be subject to the same noise level limitations. Therefore, there is no substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project. There may be a temporary increase in noise levels during the construction phase of the project where grading will occur. However, the construction will be monitored for compliance with construction hours and noise limitations. e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? The project site is not within an airport land use plan, nor located within two miles of a public airport or public use airport. f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? The project site is not within the vicinity of a private airstrip. 12. POPULATION AND HOUSING Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? 13. PUBLIC SERVICES Would the project: a) Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the CEQA Checklist The project is to accommodate a proposed hillside cut and -fill driveway, motor court, swimming pool, fence, and gate on the subject site, which do not induce substantial population growth. b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? The project is to accommodate a proposed hillside cut and -fill driveway, motor court, swimming pool, fence, and gate for an existing residence on the subject site, and would not have the above impact. c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the El construction of replacement housing elsewhere? The project is to accommodate a proposed hillside cut and -fill driveway, motor court, swimming pool, fence, and gate for an existing residence on the subject site, and would not have the above impact. El -15- 4 -03 File Nos.: RM 09 -01 and MC 09 -23 provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection? Police protection? Schools? IZ Parks? Other public facilities? El The project is to accommodate a proposed hillside cut and -fill driveway, motor court, swimming pool, fence, and gate on the subject site, and will not affect the above public services. 14. RECREATION Would the project: 15. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC Would the project: b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact El a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? The project is to accommodate a proposed hillside cut and -fill driveway, motor court, swimming pool, fence, and gate on the subject site. The proposal will not adversely impact recreational facilities. b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which have an adverse physical effect on the environment? The project is to accommodate a proposed hillside cut and -fill driveway, motor court, swimming pool, fence, and gate on the subject site. The swimming pool will require some grading or the property, but would not have a significant adverse physical effect on the environment. a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? Arcadia's roadway network is nearly built out, consisting of the Foothill Freeway (I -210), regional arterial roadways, collectors and local streets. The subject properties are bordered by a Modified One -Way Primary Arterial with 3 lanes in each direction. Based on the Highway Capacity Manual, the capacity of a given street and the amount of traffic each street actually carries is expressed in terms of levels of service (LOS), ranging from level A (Free Flowing) to F "Jammed'). El CEQA Checklist -16- 4 -03 d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? CEQA Checklist File Nos.: RM 09 -01 and MC 09-23 Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact agency for designated roads or highways? The Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) adopted their most recent Congestion Management Program (CMP) in 2004. For the purposes of the CMP, a significant impact occurs when the proposed project increases traffic demand on a CMP facility by 2% of capacity (V /C z 0.02), causing LOS F (V /C 1.00). If the facility is already at LOS F, a significant impact occurs when the proposed project increases traffic demand on a CMP facility by 2% of capacity (V /C z 0.02). The lead agency may apply more stringent criteria if desired. c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? The project is to accommodate a proposed hillside cut and -fill driveway, motor court, swimming pool, fence, and gate on the subject site. The project does not change any air traffic patterns or result in substantial safety risks. The project is to accommodate a proposed hillside cut and -fill driveway, motor court, swimming pool, fence, and gate on the subject site. The project does not significantly change the density of the uses and does not include new design features or incompatible uses. El The project is to accommodate a proposed hillside cut and -fill driveway, motor court, swimming pool, fence, and gate on the subject site. The project will not obstruct or reduce access to emergency services. f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? The project is to accommodate a proposed hillside cut-and-fill driveway, motor court, swimming pool, fence, and gate on the subject site. The project does not significantly change the density of the uses, and there is more than adequate parking capacity. g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans or programs supporting El alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? The project is to accommodate a proposed hillside cut-and-fill driveway, motor court, swimming pool, fence, and gate on the subject site. The project does not significantly change the density of the uses and will not conflict with alternative transportation opportunities. 16. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? -17- 4 -03 b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? In making this determination, the City shall consider whether the project is subject to the water supply assessment requirements of Water Code Section 10910, et seq. (SB 610), and the requirements of Government Code Section 664737 (SB221). File Nos.: RM 09-01 and MC 09 -23 Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact The California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Los Angeles Region, is the local board with jurisdiction over Arcadia. This board has established the Basin Plan which (1) designates beneficial uses for surface and ground waters, (ii) sets narrative and numerical objectives that must be attained or maintained to protect the designated beneficial uses and conform to the state's antidegradation policy, and (iii) describes implementation programs to protect all waters in the region. The project is to accommodate a proposed hillside cut and -fill driveway, motor court, swimming pool, fence, and gate on the subject site. The project will not change the density of the uses and will not exceed the wastewater treatment requirements. Any future development is also subject to the requirements as set forth in the Basin Plan. The project is to accommodate a proposed hillside cut and -fill driveway, motor court, swimming pool, fence, and gate on the subject site. The project will not significantly change the density of the uses and will not result in the need for new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities. Local Stormwater management facilities, such as the storm drains within the area roadways, are the City's responsibility, while regional facilities are the responsibility of the Los Angeles Department of Public Works (DPW). The City municipal storm drain facilities will be maintained and improved in conformance with the City of Arcadia Drainage System Technical Memorandum. The project is to accommodate a proposed hillside cut- and -fill driveway, motor court, swimming pool, fence, and gate on the subject site. The project will not change the density of the uses and will not result in the need for new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities. El CEQA Checklist -18- 4 -03 CEQA Checklist File Nos.: RM 09 -01 and MC 09 -23 Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact For the purposes of compliance with Senate Bill 610 and Senate Bill 221, the subject proposal does not qualify as a "project" A `project" means any of the following: 1) A proposed residential development of more than 500 dwelling units. 2) A proposed shopping center or business establishment employing more than 1,000 persons or having more than 500,000 square feet of floor space. 3) A proposed commercial office building employing more than 1,000 persons or having more than 250,000 square feet of floor space. 4) A proposed hotel or motel, or both, having more than 500 rooms. 5) A proposed industrial, manufacturing, or processing plant, or industrial park planned to house more than 1,000 persons, occupying more than 40 acres of land, or having more than 650,000 square feet of floor area. 6) A mixed -use project that includes one or more of the projects specified in this subdivision. 7) A project that would demand an amount of water equivalent to, or greater than, the amount of water required by a 500 dwelling unit project. if a public water system has fewer than 5,000 service connections, then "project" means any proposed residential, business, commercial, hotel or motel, or industrial development that would account for an increase of 10 percent or more in the number of the public water system's existing service connections, or a mixed -use project that would demand an amount of water equivalent to, or greater than, the amount of water required by residential development that would represent an increase of 10 percent or more in the number of the public water system's existing service connections. The project is consistent with the existing development on the subject properties, and will not conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation. e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project determined that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? The project is to accommodate a proposed hillside cut and -fill driveway, motor court, swimming pool, fence, and gate on the subject site. The project will not change the density of the uses and will not increase the wastewater treatment demand. Any future development shall also be subject to the requirements as set forth in the Basin Plan. f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to El accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? The project is to accommodate a proposed hillside cut and -fill driveway, motor court, swimming pool, fence, and gate on the subject site. The project will not change the density of the uses and will not increase the need for landfill capacity. g) Comply with federal, state and local statues and regulations El related to solid waste? The project is to accommodate a proposed hillside cut and -fill driveway, motor court, swimming pool, fence, and gate on the subject site. The project will not change the density of the uses and will not violate any federal, state or local statues and regulations relating to solid waste. Any future development shall also be subject to the requirements as set forth in the Basin Plan. 17. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife -19- 4 -03 species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? File Nos.: RM 09 -01 and MC 09-23 Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact The project is consistent with the existing use of the subject property, and does not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment. It will not reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species since it is located in a fully- developed area. b) Does the project have the potential to achieve short -term environmental goals to the disadvantage of Tong -term environmental goals? The project is consistent with the existing use of the subject property, and would not affect the short -term or long -term environmental goals. It will not reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species since it is located in a fully- developed area. c) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? "Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? d) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? The project is consistent with the existing use of the subject property, and will not have negative impacts on the environment; neither individually limited, nor cumulatively considerable since it is located in a fully- developed area. The project is consistent with the existing use of the subject property. The project is to accommodate a proposed hillside cut-and-fill driveway, motor court, swimming pool, fence, and gate on the subject site and will not have environmental effects that will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings. It is located in a fully- developed area. CEQA Checklist -20- 4 -03 RESOLUTION NO. 1806 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING RESIDENTIAL MOUNTAINOUS DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. RM 09 -01 FOR A NEW HILLSIDE CUT AND -FILL DRIVEWAY, MOTOR COURT, AND SWIMMING POOL AT 310 WHISPERING PINES DRIVE. WHEREAS, on July 8, 2009, a Residential- Mountainous Development Permit application was filed by Mr. Patrick Bluth of Bluth Development for approval of a new hillside cut and -fill driveway, motor court, and swimming pool; Development Services Department Case No. RM 09 -01, at property commonly known as 310 Whispering Pines Drive; and WHEREAS, a duly noticed public hearing was held by the Planning Commission on October 13, 2009, at which time all interested persons were given full opportunity to be heard and to present evidence. NOW THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. That the factual data submitted by the Development Services Department in the staff report dated October 13, 2009 are true and correct. SECTION 2. This Commission finds: 1. That the granting of such Residential- Mountainous Development Permit will not result in any of the following: a. Excessive or unnecessary scarring of the natural terrain and landscape through grading or removal of vegetation; or b. Unnecessary alteration of a ridge or crestline; or c. Unnecessarily affect the view from neighboring sites; or d. Adversely affect existing development or retard future development in this zone; or e. Be inconsistent with the provisions of Division 0 of Part 5 of Chapter 2 of Article IX of the Arcadia Municipal Code. 2. That the use applied for will not have a substantial adverse impact on the environment, and that the evaluation of the environmental impacts as set forth in the initial study are appropriate within the meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, and therefore, a Negative Declaration was approved. SECTION 3. That for the foregoing reasons this Commission approves Residential- Mountainous Development Permit No. RM 09 -01 for a new hillside cut and -fill driveway, motor court, and swimming pool at 310 Whispering Pines Drive, subject to the following conditions: 1. The cut and -fill driveway shall be constructed and maintained in a manner that is consistent with the plans and materials submitted and approved by application no. RM 09 -01 to the satisfaction of the Building Official, City Engineer, Fire Marshal and Community Development Administrator. 2. All proposed slopes as shown on the grading drainage plan for the project shall not exceed 2:1 (max. slope) per 2007 CBC requirements. 3. Provide an updated Soils Report indicating the geotechrrical engineer's recommendations for the proposed retaining wall and driveway prior to permit issuance. -2- 1806 4. The proposed driveway shall be constructed per City of Arcadia Standards and shall not have less than ten (10) feet of unobstructed vertical clearance. 5. The applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Arcadia and its officers, employees, and agents from and against any claim, action, or proceeding against the City of Arcadia, its officers, employees or agents to attack, set aside, void, or annul any approval or condition of approval of the City of Arcadia concerning this project and /or land use decision, including but not limited to any approval or condition of approval of the City Council, Planning Commission, or City Staff, which action is brought within the time period provided for in Government Code Section 66499.37 or other provision of law applicable to this project or decision. The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim, action, or proceeding concerning the project and /or land use decision and the City shall cooperate fully in the defense of the matter. The City reserves the right, at its own option, to choose its own attorney to represent the City, its officers, employees, and agents in the defense of the matter. 6. The approval of application nos. RM 09 -01 and MC 09 -23 shall not take effect until the owner and applicant have executed the Acceptance Form available from Planning Services to indicate awareness and acceptance of the conditions of approval. -3- 1806 SECTION 4. The Secretary shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. Passed, approved and adopted this 13th day of October, 2009. ATTEST: Secretary, Planning Commission APPROVED AS TO FORM: Stephen P. Deitsch, City Attorney Chairman, Planning Commission logorporaled autrva s, tvus October 13, 2009 STAFF REPORT Development Services Department TO: Arcadia Planning Commission FROM: Jim Kasama, Community Development Administrator By: Thomas Li, Associate Planner SUBJECT: Modification Application No. MP 09 -04, Oak Tree Application No. TR 09- 13 and Single Family Architectural Design Review Application No. SFADR 09 -47 for a new two -story, 4,124 square -foot, "Tuscan" style residence at 2 W. Pamela Road SUMMARY The applicant is requesting a Modification for an 80' -0" street side yard setback as measured to the centerline of Santa Anita Avenue in lieu of the minimum 100' -0" special setback required for a new, two -story, 4,124 square -foot single family residence. Concurrent with the Modification, the applicant is requesting an oak tree encroachment permit and architectural design review approval for the proposed "Tuscan" style residence. The Development Services Department is recommending approval of MP 09 -04, TR 09 -13, and SFADR 09 -47 subject to the conditions listed in this staff report. GENERAL INFORMATION APPLICANT: Robert Tong of Sanyao International Inc. (Designer) LOCATION: 2 W. Pamela Road REQUEST: A new, two -story, 4,124 square -foot, "Tuscan" style residence that requires the following applications: 1. Modification for an 80' -0" street side yard setback as measured to the centerline of Santa Anita Avenue in lieu of the minimum 100' -0" special setback (Sec. 9320.65.7). 2. Oak Tree Permit for the encroachment into the dripline of one (1) oak tree. 3. Single Family Architectural Design Review. SITE AREA: 10,540 square feet (0.24 acres) FRONTAGES: 125 feet along S. Santa Anita Avenue 85 feet along W. Pamela Road EXISTING LAND USE ZONING: The site is a new lot in a 2 -lot subdivision approved on July 14, 2009 under TPM 09 -04. The existing 1,207 square -foot single family residence, which will be demolished, was constructed in 1946 and is situated on both lots in the subdivision. The site is zoned R -1 -7,500 Single- Family Residential with a minimum lot size of 7,500 square feet. GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Single- Family Residential at 0 -6 dwelling units per acre SURROUNDING LAND USES ZONING: The surrounding properties are developed with single family residences and are zoned R -1 -7,500 and R -0- 15,000. PUBLIC HEARING NOTIFICATION Public hearing notices for MP 09 -04, TR 09 -13, and SFADR 09 -47 were mailed on October 1, 2009 to the property owners, tenants and occupants of those properties that are within 100 feet of the subject property (see attached radius map). Because Modification applications are categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as minor alterations in land use limitations under Section 15305 of the CEQA Guidelines, the public hearing notice was not published in the Arcadia Weekly newspaper. BACKGROUND On July 14, 2009, the Planning Commission approved a 2 -lot subdivision at 1431 S. Santa Anita Avenue under Tentative Parcel Map Application No. TPM 09 -04. The subject property is the new corner lot of that subdivision at the southwest corner of S. Santa Anita Avenue and W. Pamela Road. The applicant and the property owner were made aware of the special setback requirement during the subdivision process, and it was explained that a modification request would be necessary for a new house on the new corner lot. PROPOSAL AND ANALYSIS The applicant is proposing to demolish the existing single family residence to make way for a new single family development on each lot in a 2 -lot subdivision. This proposal is before the Planning Commission because Section 9252.2.11 of the Arcadia Municipal Code requires that any side, front, or rear yard setback Modification request for a new dwelling and /or rebuild shall be subject to approval by the Planning Commission. And, because the Modification is subject to the Planning Commission's consideration, the attendant Oak Tree Permit Application and Single Family Architectural Design Review are also subject to the Commission's review and approval. Modification The proposed new house for the new corner lot requires a Modification because the proposed residence is set back only 80' -0" from the centerline of Santa Anita Avenue rather than the required 100' -0" special setback (Arcadia Municipal Code Section 9320.65.7). There is no special setback for Pamela Road and the project complies with all other zoning regulations. Special setbacks were established to allow for future street widening dedications and to ensure consistent setbacks in neighborhoods. The City Engineer has reviewed the proposal and has no objections to the requested setback Modification as there are no plans to widen Santa Anita Avenue. To show that the proposal is compatible with the neighborhood, the project's civil engineer, Hank Jong of EGL Associates, Inc. provided the setback measurements of 47 homes along the west side of Santa Anita Avenue between Duarte Road and Bishop Court. The setbacks, as measured from the centerline of Santa Anita Avenue, range from 59' -0" to 125' -1" with most homes having street side yards along Santa Anita Avenue having setbacks of 75' -0" to 80' -0" from the centerline. The requested 80' -0" setback as measured to the centerline of the street results in a 30' -0" setback when measured to the street side property line. Therefore, the setback request is compatible with the neighborhood. Additionally, the proposed residence complies with the regular street side yard setback requirement of 25' -0" for a reverse corner lot in the R -1 zone. Given that the proposed setback complies with the R -1 street side yard setback requirement for a reverse corner lot and is consistent with the surrounding neighborhood, staff believes approval of this Modification would secure an appropriate improvement of the lot. Oak Tree Encroachment There is one (1) healthy oak tree with a trunk diameter of 32 inches located in the Pamela Road parkway area adjacent to the northwesterly portion of the lot. For the subject proposal, a driveway is to be installed approximately 10' -0" from the trunk of this oak tree and will encroach into the dripline /protected zone of the tree. A certified arborist, Michael Crane, has reviewed the subject proposal and prepared the attached report to address the potential impacts of the proposed project on the tree. The arborist concluded that the tree will remain in good condition if proper measures are taken for the pruning of the roots and the construction of the project. Therefore, staff recommends conditional approval of the oak tree encroachment. MP 09 -04, TR 09 -13 SFADR 09 -47 2 W. Pamela Road October 13, 2009 page 3 Architectural Design Concurrent with this Modification application, the Planning Commission may approve, conditionally approve, or deny the architectural design of this proposal. The applicant describes the proposed architectural style as "Tuscan It will be finished with a "Bourdeaux" base color smooth stucco, stone veneer wainscoting, and concrete tile roof in a gray, taupe, and brown color blend. The elevations will be modulated to reduce the massive appearance of the building. The existing mature trees will be maintained wherever possible to further soften the appearance of the building. Also, the adjacent property that was part of the 2 -lot subdivision at 6 W. Pamela Road will be developed with a similar new home with a compatible earth -tone color scheme. In staffs opinion, the design of the proposed residence meets the City's Single Family Residential Design Guidelines and is compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. CODE REQUIREMENTS The proposed project is required to comply with all other code requirements and policies as determined to be necessary by the Building Official, Fire Marshal, City Engineer, Development Services Director, and Public Works Services Director, which are to be determined by having fully detailed construction plans submitted for plan check review and approval. CEQA Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the Development Services Department has determined that the proposed project is categorically exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section No. 15305 of the CEQA Guidelines as a Class 5 Categorical Exemption for Minor Alterations of Land Use Limitations. A Preliminary Exemption Assessment is attached. RECOMMENDATION The Development Services Department recommends approval of Modification Application No. MP 09 -04, Oak Tree Application No. TR 09 -13, and Single Family Architectural Design Review Application No. SFADR 09 -47, subject to the following conditions: 1. The project shall comply with all of the City's Standard Conditions of Approval as applicable. 2. The subject property shall be maintained to comply with the City's vehicle visibility requirements. 3. No driveway approaches shall be allowed along S. Santa Anita Avenue for the subject property. MP 09 -04, TR 09 -13 SFADR 09 -47 2 W. Pamela Road October 13, 2009 page 4 4. The proposed driveway approach on Pamela Road shall be constructed per City standards. 5. The project shall comply with all of the following tree protection measures: A. All root pruning shall be done professionally and supervised by a certified arborist, and decisions regarding the minimum distance from the trunk and the extent/percentage of root removal shall be determined by a certified arborist. B. A protective fence shall be installed around the oak tree and any other tree to be preserved before beginning demolition at locations to be determined by a certified arborist and the protective fences shall be maintained through completion of the construction of the new house. C. No staging or storage of equipment or materials shall occur within the driplines /protected zones of the oak tree and any other tree to be preserved. D. Root disruption and soil compaction are to be avoided during demolition and construction by employing the following measures: i. Prior to demolition, the contractor and a certified arborist shall meet on site to ensure that protective fences have been properly installed and to review the goals for the protection of the oak tree. ii. Demolition and construction shall be done without moving vehicles or heavy equipment onto the bare soil within the driplines /protected zones of the oak tree and any other tree that is to be preserved. iii. All demolition, excavation and /or construction within driplines/ protected zones of the oak tree and any other tree to be preserved shall be done by hand and monitored by a certified arborist. E. All work shall adhere to the following guidelines to the satisfaction of a certified arborist to avoid and /or minimize impacts to the health and stability of the oak tree and any other tree to be preserved: i. Roots within three times the trunk diameter (dbh) shall not be cut. ii. Roots, when cut, shall not be ripped, split or torn; a clean cut shall be made using a sharp hand tool (saw or pruner) and any wound dressing shall be at the discretion of a certified arborist. iii. All cut and exposed roots shall be covered with moistened burlap, black plastic tarp, etc. or fill soil to avoid desiccation. MP 09 -04, TR 09 -13 SFADR 09 -47 2 W. Pamela Road October 13, 2009 page 5 iv. Supplemental irrigation and /or pest control shall not be applied except at the direction and supervision of a certified arborist. v. Any pruning of the oak tree as well as pruning and /or removal of any other tree in the vicinity of the oak tree or any other tree to be preserved shall be done professionally and supervised by a certified arborist. vi. A certified arborist shall be notified of any injury whatsoever to the oak tree and /or any other tree to be preserved and shall be allowed to apply whatever remedial measures deemed necessary by a certified arborist. 6. All City requirements regarding building safety, fire prevention, fire detection, fire suppression, emergency access, parking, water supply and water facilities, sewer facilities, trash reduction and recycling requirements, and National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) measures shall be complied with to the satisfaction of the Building Official, City Engineer, Fire Marshal, Public Works Services Director and Development Services Director. Compliance with these requirements is to be determined by having fully detailed construction plans submitted for plan check review and approval. 7. The applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Arcadia and its officers, employees, and agents from and against any claim, action, or proceeding against the City of Arcadia, its officers, employees or agents to attack, set aside, void, or annul any approval or condition of approval of the City of Arcadia concerning this project and /or land use decision, including but not limited to any approval or condition of approval of the City Council, Planning Commission, or City Staff, which action is brought within the time period provided for in Government Code Section 66499.37 or other provision of law applicable to this project or decision. The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim, action, or proceeding concerning the project and /or land use decision and the City shall cooperate fully in the defense of the matter. The City reserves the right, at its own option, to choose its own attorney to represent the City, its officers, employees, and agents in the defense of the matter. 8. Approval of MP 09 -04, TR 09 -13 and SFADR 09 -47 shall not take effect until the applicant, property owner and contractor have executed and filed an Acceptance Form available from the Development Services Department to indicate awareness and acceptance of the conditions of approval, and that all conditions of approval shall be satisfied prior to final inspection of the project. MP 09 -04, TR 09 -13 SFADR 09 -47 2 W. Pamela Road October 13, 2009 page 6 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION Approval If the Planning Commission intends to approve this project, the Commission should move to approve Modification No. MP 09 -04, Oak Tree Permit No. TR 09 -13, and Single- Family Architectural Design Review No. SFADR 09 -47, subject to the conditions set forth above, or as modified by the Commission, and based on at least one of the following findings: 1. That the Modification will secure an appropriate improvement of a lot; 2. That the Modification will prevent unreasonable hardship; or 3. That the Modification will promote uniformity of development. Denial If the Planning Commission intends to deny this project, the Commission should move to deny Modification Application No. MP 09 -04, Oak Tree Permit Application No. TR 09- 13, and Single Family Architectural Design Review No. SFADR 09 -47, based on the evidence presented and state the reasons why the project does not meet the above findings. If any Planning Commissioner or other interested party has any questions or comments regarding this matter prior to the October 13, 2009 public hearing, please contact Thomas Li, Associate Planner at (626) 574 -5447 or via email at tli @ci.arcadia.ca.us. Approved by: Jimsa a Co munity Development Administrator Attachments: Aerial Photograph and Vicinity Map Site and Neighborhood Photographs Architectural Plans Santa Anita Avenue Setback Measurements Public Hearing Notification Radius Map Preliminary Exemption Assessment MP 09 -04, TR 09 -13 SFADR 09 -47 2 W. Pamela Road October 13, 2009 page 7 PAMELA RD (30) (20) Development Services Department Engineering Division Prepared by: R.S.Gonzalez, October 2009 SANTA ANITA TER (18) (10) (4) (1406) (1412) (1430) (1504) (1512) (1560) R -1 J_ 2 W Pamela Road MP 09 -04, TR 09.13 SFADR 09.47 1 2 W Pamela Rd Arcadia Zone Development Services Department Engineering Division Prepared by: R.S.Gonzalez, October 2009 2 W Pamela Road MP 09 -04, TR 09 -13 SFADR 09-47 (150 PROJECT SITE: 1431 S. SANTA ANITA AVE, ARCADIA, CA 91006 PHOTO 1: NW OF PROJECT SITE. (VIEWING W'LY ON SANTA ANITA AVE). ['Hero sky' OF PROJECT SITE, Y /(Yv /NF IA/Ty acv s74N7 14NI TA ,a v6) 3 pf 3, NE of rRpJ'E c? SITE (V,E VUN4 oN s,'W722 AfETA AVE Mom 4. E aF Pkal1C7 S)TE (YI DA/11 Ely w SANTA AN1TA f(VE). pNoro 5 SE OF PRCITECT SITE (v /Fl4 /AV4 E%( o) s41■/7 A///TA AYE). 1 Z0 0 nit 74: x 8 00C 00 yrn Zi 0IOL ,bL9)��af11+(l )I. a V8 r.:4 Wy •W97 (1tl��Y° A t/S �NI 1YNO OVANVS 0 lYW .f+. swag lM9W/M ob�M 10LS. L S BOUND SANTA ANITA AVE (LNq■ llM.S awonu we r eY NI0 ulix�0a I. oil ox'M J l__�xlu kJDIA "W M1N [fiW 500 125.00 VO `VIaVO21V aVON V'13VIVd 'M Z 3Sf1OH AllINVd MONIS r F r J 0.0k11Vo (939) Y•d• ••09`9•• IWO in 'V'9l1'900H V9 +Y'00i• "W Rum slum 3 333 OuNU p0u•pp3 v3 `YIGV3W Ot/O2I V13INVd 'M Z 1471-,..A., 3SflOH AIIWdd 31ONIS 1 o9orbL91 +•d•9rOrHr(Iz )ni Ys'n'90014C r 0p•41V'0000 10 1: •10.0.7992 0u0u.0 I.Ow0 'ONI 1VNOI1VNM31N1 OVANVS 6100 va `vlavQMV av021 V13WVd 'M Z 3Sf10H A1IWVd 310NIS HOUSE SETBACKS ALONG SANTA ANITA IN ARCADIA ADDRESS STREET NAME SETBACK FROM PRor L 1121 S. SANTA ANITA 46.4 1123 S. SANTA ANITA 49.7 7 W. MAGNA VISTA 49.9' 1127 S. SANTA ANITA 34.9 1135 S. SANTA ANITA 34.9' 1201 S. SANTA ANITA 52.3' 5 W. LA SIERRA 49.0 1219 S. SANTA ANITA 45.9 1223 S. SANTA ANITA 54.5' 1305 S. SANTA ANITA 34.9 Y 1317 S. SANTA ANITA 49.8 1323 S. SANTA ANITA 50.0' 50.1 -r 49.9 i 1331 S. SANTA ANITA S. SANTA ANITA 1401 1411 S. SANTA ANITA 49.8' 1425 S. SANTA ANITA 49.0' 1431 S. SANTA ANITA PROJECT SITE 1501 S. SANTA ANITA 44.9' 1511 S. SANTA ANITA 34.5' 8 W. SANTA ANITA TERRACE 9.9' 1527 S. SANTA ANITA 26.7' 8 W. CAMINO REAL 25.3' 9 W. WINNIE WAY 25.9' 1691 S. SANTA ANITA 50.0' 1703 S. SANTA ANITA 47.4' 47.6' 1705 S. SANTA ANITA 1715 S. SANTA ANITA 49.1' 1727 S. SANTA ANITA 46.5' 1733 S. SANTA ANITA 49.5' 1739 S. SANTA ANITA 45.6' 38.9' 1805 S. SANTA. ANITA 1809 S. SANTA ANITA 49.8' 1829 S. SANTA ANITA 58.7' 1835 S. SANTA ANITA S. SANTA ANITA 55.3' 50.0' 1905 1925 S. SANTA ANITA 49.7' 1933 S. SANTA ANITA 50.0' 2001 S. SANTA ANITA 48.5 2011 S. SANTA ANITA 49.1' 2 W. LAS FLORES 34.8' 2031 S. SANTA ANITA 50.5' 2105/2107 S. SANTA ANITA 60.4' 2115 S. SANTA ANITA 75.1 2121 S. SANTA ANITA 75.1' 2129 S. SANTA ANITA 70.1 3 BISHOP COURT 30.0' 2 BISHOP COURT 30.6 ore SUE MORENO a17 (626) 350 -5944 OWNERSHIP OCCUPANTS UST RADIUS MAPS LAND USE PLANS MUNICIPAL COMPLIANCE CONSULTING 12106 LAMBERT AVE.EL MONTE, CA 91732 FAX(626)350-1532 PROJECT INFORMATION 1431 S. SANTA ANITA AVE. ARCADIA, CA. 09-191 SCALE 1" =100' 76 76.. 7 73 73 4 D 9 7 29 33 8 •v•••• 6 30 34 PAMELA 0 7 75 p5of•' :s 3 4 55 7145 2.50 70.5 I 1 in I 1 0 I Iti 1 1 1 -sn c I 0 5 35 0 2 6 4 36 3 75 60 0 3 37 6'0 60 80 1 /85 `.J 2 /SS r7 I /55 11 /33 R D. r 5 2 /20 YA 1— 1— z f v! /00 co L v 3 of 74%17 8/1i ?a 1 h a29 Ac .k h �1 R 1 to vii SliAlr .sal I /.5Of 0' 455 30 84.43 e sa i;aaos•• o 9.� TERR. 1 t m e£/ 75 ;r' 10 O ,Z I 1 L 62 oi w h hl I1 1 12 '?.-.o 1 42a0,0' 4400/ 1 7,d5Of° b I s7 0 75 75 6 8.2 I 7 5.8 k 70 I I P i os, (1) 7/ I GC 9 I 7a A l 7A 7 `tr... /00 ti h 249.40 21 o.53 rvI 249.40 100.92 ti h 400 L4n 290.92 230 1'30 <8) 589•55'W 1 NB9•If z /60 1. Name or description of project: PRELIMINARY EXEMPTION ASSESSMENT (Certificate of Determination When Attached to Notice of Exemption) Modification Application No. MP 09 -04, Oak Tree Application No. TR 09 -13, and Single Family Architectural Design Review Application No. SFADR 09 -47 for a new two -story, 4,124 square -foot residence. 2. Project Location Identify street address and cross streets or attach a map showing project site (preferably a USGS 15' or 7'/' topographical map identified by quadrangle name): 2 W. Pamela Road on the south west corner of S. Santa Anita Avenue and W. Pamela Road 3. Entity or person undertaking project: A. City of Arcadia B. Other (Private) (1) Name: Robert Tong (2) Address: 255 E. Santa Clara St. #200 Arcadia, CA 91006 4. Staff Determination: (3) Phone: 626 -446 -8048 The City's Staff, having undertaken and completed a preliminary review of this project in accordance with the City's "Local Guidelines for Implementing the Califomia Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)" has concluded that this project does not require further environmental assessment because: a. The proposed action does not constitute a project under CEQA. b. The project is a Ministerial Project. c. The project is an Emergency Project. d. The project constitutes a feasibility or planning study. e. The project is categorically exempt. Applicable Exemption Class: 5 Section No.: 15305 f. The project is statutorily exempt. Applicable Exemption: Section No.: g. The project is otherwise exempt on the following basis: h. The project involves another public agency which constitutes the Lead Agency. Name of Lead Agency: Date: September 21, 2009 Staff: Tom Li, Associate Planner October 13, 2009 TO: Arcadia Planning Commission FROM: Jim Kasama, Community Development Administrator By: Tim Schwehr, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: Modification Application No. MP 09 -05 and Oak Tree Permit Application No. TR 09 -18 for a new 6,719 square -foot residence with a 67' -0" front yard setback in lieu of the 97' -6" average of the two adjacent neighbors required by City code and encroachment upon 15 oak trees. SUMMARY The applicant, Mr. Jack Lynch is requesting a Modification to reduce the required 97' -6" front yard setback to 67' -0" to accommodate the construction of a new 6,719 square foot residence. The new residence would encroach upon the driplines /protected zones of 15 oak trees on or adjacent to the subject property. The architectural plans have been reviewed and approved by the Santa Anita Oaks Homeowners Association's Architectural Review Board. The Development Services Department is recommending approval of MP 09 -05 and TR 09 -18, subject to the conditions listed in this report. GENERAL INFORMATION APPLICANT: LOCATION: REQUESTS: SITE AREA: FRONTAGE: Mr. Jack Lynch 1235 Rodeo Road 120 feet along Rodeo Road STAFF REPORT Development Services Department A Modification to allow a 67' -0" front yard setback in lieu of the 97' -6" average of the two adjacent neighbors required by City code (9251.2.2) and an Oak Tree Permit to encroach upon 15 oak trees. 51,376 square feet (1.18 acres) EXISTING LAND USE ZONING: The site is vacant. A demolition permit for the 2,281 square -foot, one story residence that was built in 1956 was issued on September 30, 2009. The site is zoned R -0- 30,000 Single Family Residential with a minimum lot size of 30,000 square feet. GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Single Family Residential at 0 -2 dwelling units per acre SURROUNDING LAND USES ZONING: The surrounding properties are developed with single family residences that are zoned R -0- 30,000. BACKGROUND On September 24, 2009, the Santa Anita Oaks Homeowners Association's Architectural Review Board approved the architectural design of the proposed new residence. On September 29, 2009, Planning Services approved the removal of a hazardous oak tree that was overhanging the existing driveway (Tree #1 on site plan). This tree is included in the attached arborist's report and amendment. PUBLIC HEARING NOTIFICATION Public hearing notices for MP 09 -05 and TR 09 -18 were mailed on October 2, 2009 to the property owners, tenants and occupants of those properties that are within 100 feet of the subject property (see attached radius map). Because Modification applications are categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as minor alterations in land use limitations under Section 15305 of the CEQA Guidelines, the public hearing notice was not published in the Arcadia Weekly newspaper. PROPOSAL AND ANALYSIS This proposal is before the Planning Commission because Section 9251.2.12 of the Arcadia Municipal Code requires that any side, front or rear yard setback Modification request for a new dwelling and /or rebuild shall be subject to approval by the Planning Commission. And, because the Modification is subject to the Planning Commission's consideration, the attendant Oak Tree Permit Application is also subject to the Commission's review and approval. The applicant is requesting a Modification to allow a 67' -0" front yard setback in lieu of the 97' -6" required by Code. Arcadia Municipal Code 9251.2.2 states that there shall be a front yard setback of not less than 35 -feet or the average of the two adjacent properties, whichever is greater. With adjacent front yard setbacks of 82 feet and 113 MP 09 -05 TR 09 -18 1235 Rodeo Road October 13, 2009 page 2 feet, the required front yard setback for this property is 97' -6 The Santa Anita Oaks Homeowners Association has an additional requirement that no building shall be erected Tess than 65 feet from the front property line, which the proposed residence complies with. The applicant submitted a diagram showing the front yard setbacks of some of the residences on the west -side of this block of Rodeo Road. Staff verified this information and compiled the attached list of front yard setbacks for all of the existing residences on the west -side of this block of Rodeo Road. Five of these properties have front yard setbacks of 65 feet or less, but these properties are located at the north and south ends of this block. The residences located at the middle of the block in the vicinity of the subject property have front yard setbacks in excess of 80 feet. However, the residence that was at the subject property had a front yard setback of only 63 feet. Although the proposed residence does not meet the required 97' -6" front yard setback, it would exceed the front yard setback of the previous residence at this property by 4 feet, and the proposed residence would have roughly the same building footprint as the previous residence. Furthermore, the requested 67' -0" front yard setback helps avoid encroaching upon the numerous mature oak trees in the rear yard. The applicant is also requesting an Oak Tree Permit to allow the new residence to encroach upon the driplines /protected zones of 15 mature oak trees in the front and side yard areas. A Certified Arborist, Mr. Michael Crane, has reviewed the proposal and concludes that with the recommended protective measures outlined in the attached report, the project will not cause any permanent harm to the protected trees. It is staffs opinion that the requested Modification and Oak Tree Permit, if conditionally approved, would secure an appropriate improvement to this property. The new residence has been designed to preserve the maximum number of mature trees, and meets the 65' -0" minimum front yard setback required by the Santa Anita Oaks Homeowners Association. CODE REQUIREMENTS The proposed project is required to comply with all other code requirements and policies as determined to be necessary by the Building Official, Fire Marshal, City Engineer, Development Services Director, and Public Works Services Director, which are to be determined by having fully detailed construction plans submitted for plan check review and approval. CEQA Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the Development Services Department has determined that the proposed project is Categorically Exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section No. 15305 of the CEQA MP 09 -05 TR 09 -18 1235 Rodeo Road October 13, 2009 page 3 Guidelines as a Class 5 Categorical Exemption for Minor Alterations of Land Use Limitations. A Preliminary Exemption Assessment is attached. RECOMMENDATION The Development Services Department recommends approval of Modification Application No. MP 09 -05 and Oak Tree Permit Application No. TR 09 -18, subject to the following conditions: 1. The project shall comply with all of the following tree protection measures to the satisfaction of a certified arborist: A. All root pruning shall be done professionally and supervised by a certified arborist, and decisions regarding the minimum distance from the trunk and the extent/percentage of root removal shall be determined by a certified arborist. B. A protective fence shall be installed around the oak trees and any other trees to be preserved before beginning construction at locations to be determined by a certified arborist and the protective fences shall be maintained through completion of the construction of the new house. C. No staging or storage of equipment or materials shall occur within the driplines /protected zones of the oak trees and any other trees to be preserved. D. The existing driveway shall be used as the haul route or if removed, that area and any other area that needs to be accessed by heavy equipment and /or vehicles or is to be used for storing of such, as well as any construction material shall be protected by a 4 -6 inch layer of chipped bark mulch or similar materials E. Root disruption and soil compaction are to be avoided during construction by employing the following measures: i. Prior to beginning construction, the contractor and a certified arborist shall meet on site to ensure that protective fences have been properly installed and to review the goals for the protection of the oak trees and any other trees to be preserved. ii. All construction and the storing and delivery of construction materials shall be done without moving vehicles or heavy equipment onto the bare soil within the driplines /protected zones of the oak trees and any other trees that are to be preserved. iii. All excavation and /or construction within driplines /protected zones of the oak trees and any other trees to be preserved shall be done by hand and monitored by a certified arborist. MP 09 -05 TR 09 -18 1235 Rodeo Road October 13, 2009 page 4 F. All work shall adhere to the following guidelines to the satisfaction of a certified arborist to avoid and /or minimize impacts to the health and stability of the oak trees and any other trees to be preserved: i. Roots within three times the trunk diameter (dbh) shall not be cut. ii. Roots, when cut, shall not be ripped, split or torn; a clean cut shall be made using a sharp hand tool (saw or pruner) and any wound dressing shall be at the discretion of a certified arborist. iii. All cut and exposed roots shall be covered with moistened burlap, black plastic tarp, etc. or fill soil to avoid desiccation. iv. Supplemental irrigation and /or pest control shall not be applied except at the direction and supervision of a certified arborist. v. Any pruning of oak trees as well as pruning and /or removal of any other trees in the vicinity of an oak tree or any other tree to be preserved shall be done professionally and supervised by a certified arborist. vi. A certified arborist shall be notified of any injury whatsoever to an oak tree and /or any other tree to be preserved and shall be allowed to apply whatever remedial measures are deemed necessary. 2. All City requirements regarding building safety, fire prevention, fire detection, fire suppression, emergency access, parking, water supply and water facilities, sewer facilities, trash reduction and recycling requirements, and National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) measures shall be complied with to the satisfaction of the Building Official, City Engineer, Fire Marshal, Public Works Services Director and Development Services Director. Compliance with these requirements is to be determined by having fully detailed construction plans submitted for plan check review and approval. 3. The applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Arcadia and its officers, employees, and agents from and against any claim, action, or proceeding against the City of Arcadia, its officers, employees or agents to attack, set aside, void, or annul any approval or condition of approval of the City of Arcadia concerning this project and /or land use decision, including but not limited to any approval or condition of approval of the City Council, Planning Commission, or City Staff, which action is brought within the time period provided for in Government Code Section 66499.37 or other provision of law applicable to this project or decision. The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim, action, or proceeding concerning the project and /or land use decision and the City shall cooperate fully in the defense of the matter. The City reserves the right, at its own option, to choose its own attorney to represent the City, its officers, employees, and agents in the defense of the matter. 4. Approval of MP 09 -05 and TR 09 -18 shall not take effect until the applicant and property owner have executed and filed an Acceptance Form available from the MP 09 -05 TR 09 -18 1235 Rodeo Road October 13, 2009 page 5 Development Services Department to indicate awareness and acceptance of the conditions of approval, and that all conditions of approval shall be satisfied prior to final inspection of the project. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION Approval If the Planning Commission intends to approve this project, the Commission should move to approve Modification No. MP 09 -05 and Oak Tree Permit No. TR 09 -18, subject to the conditions set forth above, or as modified by the Commission, and based on at least one of the following findings: 1. That the Modification will secure an appropriate improvement of a lot; 2. That the Modification will prevent unreasonable hardship; or 3. That the Modification will promote uniformity of development. Denial If the Planning Commission intends to deny this project, the Commission should move to deny Modification Application No. MP 09 -05 and Oak Tree Permit Application No. TR 09 -18, based on the evidence presented and state the reasons why the project does not meet the above findings. If any Planning Commissioner or other interested party has any questions or comments regarding this matter prior to the October 13, 2009 public hearing, please contact Assistant Planner, Tim Schwehr at (626) 574 -5422 or by email at tschwehraci.arcadia.ca.us. Approved by: Jim ma Co munity Development Administrator Attachments: Aerial Photograph and Vicinity Map Architectural Plans Site and Neighborhood Photographs Tree Site Plan Public Hearing Notification Radius Map List of front yard setbacks along Rodeo Road Arborist Report Amendment Arborist Report Preliminary Exemption Assessment MP 09 -05 TR 09 -18 1235 Rodeo Road October 13, 2009 page 6 1235 Rodeo Rd Arcadia R -o Zone Development Services Department Engineering Division Prepared by R.S.Gonzalez, October2009 1235 Rodeo Road MP 09 -05 TR 09.18 SYCAMORE AVE Development Services Department Engineering Division Prepared by: R.S.Gonzalez, October 2009 HACIENDA DR 1235 Rodeo Road MP 09.05 TR 09.18 I a O60tsz (IZI) a•IIOI•III (W) 11 va•n eoo�6 vo .m. v o6u as Iwea a oIx 6 ••••a •wwn•a '3N11VNOI1VNN31NI OVAN VS V3 `VIOV321V '021 03402E 9C 3S(lOH AIIIW i 370N1S U cr 0E asaa as a i a S 1 111 Wit MI 7 111 1111 1 11gII 111 h U U e 2v 6 RODEO RD C AD IA WAS 00 z g w 1— w i owrn► uxm ■•a •woesn aro) r1 •VSfl 9WL6 Wi '•WuY'UCi# u gp•N•Y '8 iiZ ••••a iaw•••u '3N1 1YNOLLYNY3INI OVANVS S V3 VIaV321V 'GU 030021 MI. 3SI1oH A1IWVd 319NIS 1 Fr u l 12zslag MLR lama e 1 _J r i immi -penult irgere li li 1 IIIIIIIII s ik; •Ii- 1 c I e IrQo I _kg J 11 III 1 0601•SM (SLS)nd•SIS7."...Z:::-. YS fl YE010 V3 '•IP••' OSU '3 ore Sh7•••Id l•SI•VI••y '3NI 1VN OLLVNt131Ni OVA N Y S vo `VIavoav as o3ao11 SUL 3Sf1OH AIIWVI 310NIS vsn'woacvo'nv�r »w io Y oNi 1vnoun+aaL+i OVA v� viav :av avoa o3aoa ssz4 3Sf1OH AIIWVI 31ONIS f I r xn 'iooii;.a' :ir�++v'ooriK e.n —w nawv m 'ONI IYNOLLYNU31NI OVANVS V3 VICIVOZIV OVOZ! 033011 BSZL 3SIlOH AIIWVA 310NIS SUBJECT PROPERTY ADJACENT PROPERTY TO THE SOUTH (1225 Rodeo Rd) PROPERTY ACROSS THE STREET (1238 Rodeo Rd) PROPERTY TO THE NORTH (1300 Rodeo Rd) 11 ya Ira, Ume'. A I BPIUMPrz II Th 'rte l:Wq AL I$ I_ FrIll 0 OSA L.) r ip 1235 Rodeo Rd. 100 foot radius map FRONT YARD SETBACKS ALONG RODEO ROAD Address on Existing Year Originally Rodeo Road Setback Built 1317 65 feet 1973 1311 64 feet 1937 1305 113 feet 2001 1235 Subject Property 63 feet 1956 demolished 1225 82 feet 1939 1215 85 feet 1937 1205 103 feet 1942 1141 81 feet 1964 1131 85 feet 1937 1121 61 feet 1938 1111 47 feet 1936 1105 55 feet 1954 Average 75.3 feet September 23, 2009 Arbor Care Inc. Arboricultural Consulting Plant Health Care Post Office Box 51122 Pasadena California 91115 Tel/Fax: 626- 737 -4007 TO: City of Arcadia, Planning Department FROM: Michael Crane, Project's Arborist of Record SUBJECT: Amendment to Protected Tree Report: 1235 Rodeo Road, Arcadia. Dated: September 2009. The original tree report stated that one tree, Tree 39, Magnolia grandiflora, would require removal and replacement in order to accomplish the proposed plans. The plans have been adjusted and Tree #39 will not be removed, however; Tree #1, Quercus engelmanii will need to be removed in order to accomplish the proposed design of the new driveway. The Engelmann Oak (Photo 1 on next page) has an awkward lean that extends over the existing driveway.. The clearance height in the center of the driveway is six feet. The location of the new driveway will be in the same place as the existing one so that the driveway apron can be kept in place. A clearance greater than six feet will be necessary to reliably and safely use the new driveway. The driveway will be contoured around the Magnolia tree (Photo 2 on next page) and the tree will be preserved. Protective fencing will be installed after the existing paving stone driveway is removed by hand. Aside from the subject tree that will be removed the report data does not change. Only one protected tree will be removed from the property. The recommended mitigation is still two 24" boxed oak trees to be planted in the back yard area near the west property line. Please accept this letter as an amendment to my original tree report. If there are any questions please call my office and I can discuss this matter further or meet on site. Sincerely, Michael Crane Registered Consulting Arborist #440, American Society of Consultin Board Certified Master Arborist #WE6643B, International Society o Agricultural Pest Control Advisor (PCA) #8269, CA Dept. of Pesticid Photo 1: Tree #1, Quercus Encgelmanii, will require removal and replacement. Photo 2: Tree #39, Magnolia grandiflora will be protected and preserved. Prepared For: Prepared By: Michael Crane Arbor Care, Inc. P.O. Box 51122 Pasadena, CA 91115 Tel: (626) 737 -4007 Fax: (626) 737 -4007 September 2009 Protected Tree Report: Survey, Encroachment, and Protection 1235 Rodeo Road Arcadia, 91006 Mur -Sol Constrution, Inc. 119 East Saint Joseph Street Arcadia, CA 91006 Tel: (626) 447 -0558 Fax: (626) 447 -6923 Table of Contents Summary of Data 1 Background and Purpose of Report 1 Project Location and Description 1 Observations Analysis 2 Protected Tree Evaluation Matrix 3 Discussion 6 Root Pruning 6 Size and Distribution of Tree Roots 7 Findings 8 Additional Recommendations 8 Photos 9 Certification of Performance 13 Topographic Site Plan Pocket at back SUMMARY OF DATA BACKGROUND PURPOSE PROJECT LOCATION DESCRIPTION Protected Tree Survey, E 1 achment and Protection Report 1235 Rodeo Road, Arcadia September, 2009 Total number of live protected trees on property 39 Total number of dead or nearly dead protected trees on site 0 Total number of protected trees to be relocated to on -site locations 0 Total number of live protected trees to be removed 1 Total number of proposed replacement trees (24" boxed) to be planted on site 2 Total number of protected trees to be impacted by construction within dripline 10 Total number of live protected trees which will not be removed or impacted 28 I was retained by the Project Manager and General Contractor, Mark Travisano, of Mur- Sol Construction, Inc. to be the consulting arborist for the planned redevelopment of the property located at 1235 Rodeo Road, Arcadia. There are dozens of protected trees located on the property. The proposed construction may impact the trees and this report will serve to both notify the City of Arcadia Planning Department of the extent of the potential impacts as well as to inform the builder of the proper protection measures which must be taken in order to preserve the trees. As part of my preparation for this report I made a site visit to the property on September 13, 2009. I met with Mr. Travisano at that time to discuss the proposed construction plans as they relate to the protection of the protected trees. The property is located at 1235 Rodeo Road in the City of Arcadia. Rodeo Road is located within the Santa Anita Oaks Homeowners Association. According to the Resolutions (No. 5290) of the Association protected trees are considered as the following: 5. TREES. No living oak, sycamore, liquidambar, magnolia, or pine tree with a trunk diameter larger than six inches, measured at a point on the tree which is not more than three feet above the grade immediately adjacent to Protected Tree Survey, E ;chment and Protection Report 1235 Rodeo Road, Arcadia September, 2009 said tree, shall be cut down, killed or removed in any manner, without first securing the written permission of the Board. Such permission shall not be granted unless it is shown that the tree is a nuisance, and that there is no practical way of removing the nuisance except by cutting down, killing or removing it. The property encompasses a total area of approximately 51,375 square feet. (See full scale Site Map included in the pocket at the back of this report). The existing home is in disrepair and the property appears to have been vacant for a while. The existing home will be demolished and a new home is planned to be built. The new home's footprint is similar to the footprint of the existing home and pool; therefore, no trees will be removed to accommodate the house or any hardscape feature planned for construction. OBSERVATIONS ANALYSIS Refer to Site Plan located in pocket at back of this report and Photos on pages 9 -12. The property consists of 39 protected trees most of which are in fair to good conditions. Thirty seven of the protected trees are oak species, most of which are in good condition and should contribute a considerable amount of value to the property if they are properly cared for. Two of the protected trees are a Monterey Pine and a Southern Magnolia. The pine is in fair condition and the Magnolia is in poor condition. The Magnolia is the only protected tree that is planned to be removed (Photo 4). It is in poor health and is a good candidate for removal and replacement regardless of the construction plans. It is recommended that this tree should be replaced with two 24" boxed nursery grown Quercus agrifolia, Coast Live Oak trees, which can be planted among the existing oak woodland in the back yard area. The plans have been drawn with respect to the protection and preservation of the protected trees on the property. A majority of the property is naturalized oak woodland (Photo 8). This area has been well preserved over the years to the benefit of the many oak trees and the new construction plans will maintain the existing naturalized environment. The great majority of the new home and other hardscape features will be built within the same footprint of the existing home, pool and hardscape. Details regarding the anticipated excavation as well as pruning of live canopies of the protected trees can be found in the matrix located in the next section of this report. According to the proposed plans all of the excavation and required pruning is tolerable to the protected trees. Trees 13 and #18 will be the most impacted but the required excavation is either in the same footprint as the existing home or well away from the trunk (Photos 5 6). Because of the project's design,protective fencing can easily be installed to section off large areas for tree protection. The existing driveway will be removed and replaced so a temporary haul route shall be made in the front yard area with a bed of chipped bark or similar material. This will help to control unnecessary soil compaction within the driplines of the protected trees in that portion of the property (Photos 1 -3) 2 0 0 s 04 0 04 le y 8 m E fl C Z 4 8 3= v y Q N a.a� G... o 000 ›oo 13 h 0 03 coo .0 a 4 0 c s� o N 0 d 0 g 0) PROTECTED ;no aq o; gm JO yaueaq ;salmi jo Je ;aweia 1MT e/u m e/u penowaa eq o; Adouea OM JO e6e11193i9d 0 0 0 0 1 mning 8 paaanas eq o; ssew ;ooi ;o e6e;uaaJed 0I. 1 0I. 01• 71171 (sayaui) uoi ;eneaxa pajinbaa ;o y ;dea 0 CO 0 0 9 (;aai) Muni; WWI uoi ;eneaxa;sasoIO 8L TZTTI Z. I5T1 Protection Status peAIeseJd pee pale ;oid eq of X Ienowaa Jo; pauueld (uol ;e3o1 Jo seIaads `ez.$) Am Aq pape;oad X X X X az lg (Pea) peaads a6weny OZ of 1 01 1 OE 1 09 1 (lee A) ;gbleH a ;ewixoiddy OZ OV of 1 OZ 1 O V 1 (segoul) H9a Munal co bZ OE j7Z aan ;on. ;s pue y ;ieey jo Bum uoi ;ipuoO I- .sled poop poop I Poop (eweu leoiue;oq) seioeds 1 i f IQuercus enaelmannii I i 1 IQuercus aarifolia ce o 14 a co a a f i I ello0!Joe snoaenoi I Quercus agrifolia JegwnN eau. N co 44- to 0 0 s 04 0 04 le y 8 m E fl C Z 4 8 3= v y Q N a.a� G... o 000 ›oo 13 h 0 03 coo .0 a 4 0 c s� o N 0 d 0 g 0) PROTECTED Required Pruning Excavation) ;no aq o; gwli Jo goueJ ;se6nel ;o ie ;awela e/u e/u 1 e/u e/u e/u 1 e/u 1 e/u c0 e/u e/u CO CO co 1 e/u 1 e/u 1 e/u eN panowal i Jo aBewaaled 00 0 0 0 00 1 96 00 96 91• 91. 0 0 000 pa ssew 100J 10 06EnUO3Jed OZ 01. 0 0 0 9Z 9Z 1 0t7 LO LO OZ 01. 01. 9 LO 0 0 0 aye Aeoxe paqnbai Jo tpdea co co 91. 96 I91.I 1 17Z 17Z 17Z 17 17Z 17Z I 17Z 17 17Z 17Z (pal) 4uru; WWI uoueneoxa ;sesOD 0 8 0Z 017 I 017 017 CD CO 0£ 01. CO 91. 01. 8 017 1 9Z 09 917 99 Protection Status peAJasaad puepa43a ;oadagol XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX lenowall ao; pauueld (uopeaol Jo sapads 'mils) 'GXXXXXXX az!S 1d OE OE OZ OE OE OZ OZ OE 017 09 OZ OZ 017 1 oz 09 09 09 (3' 1 OWWIXOJddly 9Z OZ OZ 017 OE OZ O Z OE 017 09 9Z 91. 017 OZ 017 09 09 96 01. 04 Z 1 01. 1 01. OE _I 17 Z co 81 Z I. 8 ZE 9E 917 817 aan;ol 6u .ned ales P00 1 P0°0 L p 1 p° °Q 1 poo0 poop poop Aej poo0 poo0 food poop Poop P (et sepeds Quercus engelmannii Quercus engelmannii IQuercus engelmannii IQuercus agrifolia 1 1Quercus agrifolia 1Quercus engelmannii IQuercus engelmannii Quercus agrifolia Quercus agrifolia Quercus agrifolia Quercus agrifolia Quercus engelmannii Quercus agrifolia IQuercus engelmannii 1 Quercus agrifolia Quercus agrifolia Quercus agrifolia iegwnN ea.il co ti 0 rn 01 I.1 Z 1. 1 171• El. 81. L6 91. 91. 1 61, 1 ZZ 1.Z OZ 0 U LL 0 Required Pruning Excavation I ;na eq o; quill JO yaueaq ;sa6ael ;o aa;awela e/u 1 1 ex 1 e/u e/u I e/u e/u e/u 1 e/u 1 e/u 1 e/u 1 e/u I e/u I Lei_U I panowaa aq o; Adouea any 10ebe ;uamiad 000000000 0 000000 1 e/u ssei 0 000005 IeN paynbei jo wdea tiZ jZ PZ bZ PZ j7Z PZ 1'Z tiZ t�Z j7Z 4 z bz 0 9 1 'Z 1 eiu (my) Tuna; woa; uol ;eneax0 4seso13 08 OL 1.1 +006 +006 +00 +001. +001. I +006 +001. +001. +001. 1 +006 1 +006 L +006 e/u Protection Status panaaseid puepapa ;oadegol XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX RAMMON ao; pauueld X (uoR XXXXXXX OZIS geoids awany OZ Ob 1 o£ 09 OE OZ OZ OP 09 OZ 09 OP OE 0£ OZ OZ OZ ;y 9Z 0£ Ob 917 0£ OZ 0£ OP 1 O OZ 01 017 1 o£ 9Z 09 OZ 1 of 91. 91. 0£ 1 OE OZ 01. 01. PZ Z£ 31. OE t7Z 1 Z6 1 6 co OE 8 Z6 ainpn.lis pue Limey Jo Bun good Aej I .lied I poop P000 poop poop aled poop poop poop P I I0o0 poop .sled med 1 goo (awe sepeds Quercus agrifolia Quercus agrifolia IQuercus agrifolia Quercus agrifolia Quercus agrifolia Quercus agrifolia Quercus agrifolia Quercus agrifolia Quercus agrifolia 1 Quercus agrifolia Quercus agrifolia Quercus agrifolia Quercus agrifolia Quercus agrifolia Quercus agrifolia Pinus halepensis Magnolia grandifolia aagwnN eau. 1' Z EZ I 1 SZ 1 OE 6Z 8Z LZ 9Z 6E c t�E I EE 1 5£ 8 8E L£ 6E OF ARCADIA FOR THE C TREE EVALUATION MATR DISCUSSION Protected Tree Survey, L achment and Protection Report 1235 Rodeo Road, Arcadia September, 2009 Root Pruning Taken from Root Pruning. Hagen, Bruce W. International Society of Arboriculture Western Arborist V. 33 #2 pp. 18 -22 Decisions regarding the minimum distance from the trunk and the extent of root removal should be based on the potential impacts of both tree health and root stability. Tree roots are concentrated near the soil surface, and even minor digging can cause significant damage to tree root systems unless adequate precautions are taken. Root cutting, depending on severity, can cause dieback or decline by restricting water and nutrient uptake. Loss of roots close to the trunk can also have an immediate destabilizing effect and can ultimately lead to severe root decay. There are no well- defined standards regarding the percentage of root mass that can be cut without appreciably affecting tree health because there are so many variables involved. It's not uncommon, though, for trees to survive after losing more than 50 percent of their root systems. The number, size of roots cut, and distance from the trunk are more important than the percentage of roots cut. The loss of roots on one side of a tree at about five times the trunk diameter is generally considered to be acceptable, depending on tree health, condition and root distribution. Some guidelines for avoiding or minimizing impacts to tree health and stability include: Roots within three times the trunk diameter (dbh) are critical to a tree's stability and should not be cut. Major buttress roots cut within this distance should be considered as providing little or no structural support. When roots must be cut, do so in a manner that prevents ripping, splitting or tearing. Cuts should be made using a sharp hand tool, such as a saw or pruners, to ensure a clean cut. This will encourage callous tissue formation and root regeneration. Wound dressings are generally not recommended. Cover all hand cut, exposed roots with moistened burlap, black plastic tarping, etc. or fill soil to avoid desiccation. 6 Protected Tree Survey, L achment and Protection Report 1235 Rodeo Road, Arcadia September, 2009 Size and Distribution of Tree Roots Taken from Arboriculture. Integrated Management of Landscape Trees Shrubs and Vines. Harris, R.W., Clark, 7.W., Matheny N.P. Prentice Hall 2004. Roots of most plants, including large trees, grow primarily in the top meter (3 ft) of soil (see figure below). Most plants concentrate the majority of their small absorbing roots in the upper 150 mm (6 in.) of soil if the surface is protected by a mulch or forest litter. In the absence of a protective mulch, exposed bare soil can become so hot near the surface that roots do not grow in the upper 200 to 250 mm (8 to 10 in.). Under forest and many landscape situations, however, soil near the surface is most favorable for root growth. In addition, roots tend to grow at about the same soil depth regardless of the slope of the soil surface. Although root growth is greatly influenced by soil conditions, individual roots seem to have an inherent guidance mechanism. Large roots with vigorous tips usually grow horizontally. Similar roots lateral to the large roots grow at many angles to the vertical, and some grow up into the surface soil. However, few roots in a root system actually grow down. Depth In 11. 1 2 3 4 5 FIGURE In mature trees, the taproot is either lost or reduced in size. The vast majority of the root system is composed ofhoi izcin ally criehted lateral roots, 7 Depth In meters 0 0.5 1.0 1.5 FINDINGS Protected Tree Survey, L achment and Protection Report 1235 Rodeo Road, Arcadia September, 2009 As with many construction projects, soil compaction is the most preventable impact that will need to be monitored in order to provide reliable protection and long -term preservation of the trees. Since roots are distributed in the top several inches of soil, it is important to keep in mind that roots require air just as much as they require water and nutrients for proper growth and survival. Compaction of the pore or air space in the soil eliminates the soil's structure and it's conduciveness for root growth. To prevent unnecessary soil compaction protective fences must be installed around the protected trees before any demolition occurs. The goal is to enclose the largest possible amount of space underneath the tree so that the heavy equipment required for demolition can be routed away from root zones. The existing driveway will be removed prior to demolition so that the paving stones can be used for the new driveway. The main haul route shall therefore be in the area of the new driveway. A four to six inch layer of chipped bark mulch or similar material shall be installed in this area designated as the main haul route. The recommended fence placement is drawn in red on the Site Plan of this report. Very little pruning of the live canopies is required to complete the project. The only anticipated pruning will occur on four oak trees #'s 13, 16, 17 18). No more than 15% of the live canopy will be removed on any tree. Foliage provides the energy source for the trees which allows them to build stronger root systems and thrive in their natural environment. FURTHER RECOMViENDATIONS Prior to demolition the contractor and consulting arborist shall meet on site to make sure fences are properly placed and installed and to review the goals for the tree protection plan. The locations of the protective fences are drawn in red on the Site Plan included in this report. A 4 -6 inch layer of chipped bark mulch or similar material shall be installed underneath the designated haul route. All heavy vehicles and equipment shall be required to remain in this area. The mulch layer shall be maintained until the new driveway is built. Maintain the fences throughout the completion of the project. No staging of materials or equipment is to occur within the fenced protected zones. All demolition and excavation within the dripline of the oak shall be done with hand tools and monitored by the consulting arborist. No supplemental irrigation should be required. Any irrigation as well as pest control or fertilizer shall only be applied under the direction of the consulting arborist. If any injury whatsoever should occur to the oak tree or any other preserved tree, call the consulting arborist immediately. Timeliness is critical to being able to provide the best mitigation treatment for injuries. 8 Protected Tree Survey, E._ .,achment and Protection Report 1235 Rodeo Road, Arcadia September, 2009 Photo 1: Street view facing northwest. The driveway on the left will be removed and not replaced. The new driveway will be located at the north side of the front yard. Photo 2: The northern driveway will be moved about ten feet south (orange lines). This is tolerable to all protected trees in the area of the driveway. 9 Protected Tree Survey, E Jachment and Protection Report 1235 Rodeo Road, Arcadia September, 2009 Photo 3: The existing driveway of interlocking pavers will be removed prior to demolition. A 4 -6 inch layer of chipped bark will be installed under the haul route. Photo 4: The Magnolia is the only protected tree that will be removed. The Monterey pine behind it will be preserved. All other protected trees on the property are oaks. 10 Protected Tree Survey, Ens ,hment and Protection Report 1235 Rodeo Road, Arcadia September, 2009 Photo 5: Tree #13. Much of the new home will be built within the footprint of the existing home and pool. Some pruning of the live canopy will be necessary to accommodate the second story. Photo 6: Tree #18. Excavation will come to within 15 feet on the east side of the tree. 11 Protected Tree Survey, EL 4chment and Protection Report 1235 Rodeo Road, Arcadia September, 2009 Photo 7: Trees #14 #15. The pool will be demolished and the new home will not encroach within the driplines. Photo 8: A majority of the property is naturalized oak woodland which will be completely fenced and preserved. The replacement trees can easily be planted here. 12 CERTIFICATION OF PERFORMANCE Protected Tree Survey, E;. I, Michael Crane, certify that: I have personally inspected the tree(s) and the property referred to in this report and have stated my findings accurately. I have no current or prospective interest in the vegetation or the property that is the subject of this report and have no personal interest or bias with respect to the parties involved. The analysis, opinions, and conclusions stated herein are my own and are based on current scientific procedures and facts. My analysis, opinions, and conclusions were developed and this report has been prepared according to commonly accepted arboricultural practices. No one provided significant professional assistance to me, except as indicated within the report. My compensation is not contingent upon the reporting of a predetermined conclusion that favors the cause of the client or any other party not upon the results of the assessment, the attainment of stipulated results, or the occurrence of any subsequent events. I further certify that I am a member in good standing of the American Society of Consulting Arborists and the International Society of Arboriculture. I have been involved in the field of Horticulture in a full -time capacity for a period of more than 15 years. Signed: 7 4 Date: 13 .chment and Protection Report 1235 Rodeo Road, Arcadia September, 2009 Registered Consulting Arborist #440; American Society of Consulting Arborist Board Certified Master Arborist #WE 6643B; International Society of Arboriculture Licensed California Agricultural Pest Control Adviser #AA08269 IL-1 /Os, 1 Name or description of project: 4. Staff Determination: PRELIMINARY EXEMPTION ASSESSMENT (Certificate of Determination When Attached to Notice of Exemption) Modification Application No. MP 09 -05 Oak Tree Permit Application No. THE 09 -18 for a 67' -0" front yard setback in lieu of the 97' -6" average of the two adjacent neighbors required by City code (9251.2.2) and an Oak Tree Permit to encroach upon 15 oak trees, for a new 6,719 square -foot residence. 2. Project Location Identify street address and cross streets or attach a map showing project site (preferably a USGS 15' or 7W topographical map identified by quadrangle name): 1235 Rodeo Road (between Hacienda Drive and West Sycamore Avenue) 3. Entity or person undertaking project: A. City of Arcadia B. Other (Private) (1) Name: Jack Lynch (2) Address: 2390 Bateman Avenue (3) g. The project is otherwise exempt on the following basis: Irwindale, CA 91010 Phone: (626) 353 -9627 The City's Staff, having undertaken and completed a preliminary review of this project in accordance with the City's "Local Guidelines for Implementing the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)" has concluded that this project does not require further environmental assessment because: a. The proposed action does not constitute a project under CEQA. b. The project is a Ministerial Project. c. The project is an Emergency Project. d. The project constitutes a feasibility or planning study. e. The project is categorically exempt. Applicable Exemption Class: 5 Section No.: 15305 f. The project is statutorily exempt. Applicable Exemption: Section No.: h. The project involves another public agency which constitutes the Lead Agency. Name of Lead Agency: Date: September 30, 2009 Staff: Tim Schwehr, Assistant Planner October 13, 2009 TO: Arcadia Planning Commission STAFF REPORT Development Services Department FROM: Jim Kasama, Community Development Administrator By: Thomas Li, Associate Planner SUBJECT: Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 09 -11 and Architectural Design Review No. ADR 09 -09 for a 22,090 square -foot athletics building and a 750 square -foot locker facility addition at an existing youth program facility at 5150 Farna Avenue. SUMMARY Mr. John Martin of the Kare Youth League submitted Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 09 -11 and Architectural Design Review No. ADR 09 -09 to construct a 22,090 square -foot athletics building and a 750 square -foot locker facility addition at an existing youth facility. It is staffs opinion that the proposal is appropriate for the location and will not have adverse impacts upon the neighboring properties. The Development Services Department is recommending approval of CUP 09 -11 and ADR 09 -09, subject to the conditions in this staff report. GENERAL INFORMATION APPLICANT: Mr. John Martin of the Kare Youth League LOCATION: 5150 Farna Avenue REQUEST: A Conditional Use Permit (CUP 09 -11) and Architectural Design Review (ADR 09 -09) to construct a 22,090 square -foot athletics building and a 750 square -foot locker facility addition at an existing youth facility SITE AREA: 5.78 acres (4.7 acres are located in unincorporated County area) FRONTAGE: 60 feet along Farna Avenue EXISTING LAND USE ZONING: The site is developed with the Kare Youth League facilities and Rio Hondo Preparatory School. The buildings on the subject site were constructed in different phases with construction dates ranging from 1953 to 1992. The portion within Arcadia city boundaries is unzoned. The portion in the unincorporated County area is zoned for single family residences. SURROUNDING LAND USES ZONING: The properties to the north, south and west of the subject site are within an unincorporated County area and are developed with single family dwellings. The area is zoned for single family residences. The property to the north of the subject site is located in the City of Arcadia and is developed with the Arcadia Par -3 Golf Course and is unzoned. To the east of the subject property is the Rio Hondo Flood Control Channel. GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Public Facilities and Grounds PUBLIC HEARING NOTIFICATION Public hearing notices of Application Nos. CUP 09 -11 and ADR 09 -09 were mailed on September 23, 2009 to the property owners, tenants and occupants of those properties that are within 1,000 feet of the subject property (see the attached radius map). The 1000 -foot notification was provided at the request of the County. This notice, and the Notice of Intent to adopt a Negative Declaration, were published in the Arcadia Weekly newspaper on September 21, 2009. BACKGROUND Kare Youth League is a youth sports organization for boys and girls from Kindergarten to 12th grade, and has served the San Gabriel Valley since 1931. Rio Hondo Prep is a private school started in 1964 by the Kare Youth League as an educational extension of their programs, with students from 6 through 12 grades. There are three different Kare Youth League facilities in the San Gabriel Valley, and the subject facility has about 500 participants. There are currently 179 students at Rio Hondo Prep, all of whom are also members of the Kare Youth League. The 50 faculty and staff members of Rio Hondo Prep are on duty from 8:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m., and about 52 Kare staff members are on duty from 3:00 p.m. to 6:30 p.m. for the Kare Youth League programs. About 30 of these staff members serve both the School and the Youth League and are on duty during both time periods. The subject Kare Youth League facility has eight (8) existing buildings constructed in different phases from 1953 to 1992. Multiple Conditional Use Permits have been granted (CUP 76 -20, CUP 77 -33, and CUP 86 -4) for the existing uses and buildings. CUP 09 -11 ADR 09 -09 5150 Farna Avenue October 13, 2009 page 2 The most recent approval, CUP 86 -4, included a master plan that outlined a seven -year building schedule for the construction of twelve (12) buildings to the year 1993. These buildings have a total floor area of 55,090 square feet. Of these approved structures, only one building, an 11,850 square -foot classroom and library building known as "Hampton Hall" was constructed after the plan's approval in 1986. The other buildings were constructed before this approval and were never replaced as suggested by the attached Master Plan. The buildings labeled "new" were to be built, and the annotations below each building description indicate its current status. The existing buildings have a total floor area of 31,406 square feet. The existing 8,890 square -foot gymnasium is a temporary structure that was conditionally approved in 1977 under CUP 77 -33. This permit expired in 1980, but was granted subsequent extension approvals to extend the expiration date to December 31, 1985. The Master Plan approved in 1986 under CUP 86 -4 included a remodel of this structure into a permanent structure by 1989. However, the remodeling of this structure never occurred. PROPOSAL AND ANALYSIS The applicant is proposing to remove the existing 8,890 square -foot gymnasium along with 4,200 square -feet of office and classroom structures for the construction of a new, two -story, 22,090 square -foot athletics building. A 750 square -foot locker facility will be added to Hampton Hall, which is north of the gymnasium site. The proposed athletics building includes a 12,319 square -foot sports court/ auditorium that is to be capable of being configured into the following three layouts: A) Competition Court one basketball or volleyball court with seating for 429 spectators. B) Practice Courts two basketball courts or three volleyball courts with seating for 136 spectators. C) Auditorium with seating for 780 people with 487 portable chairs on the floor and 293 seats on the bleachers. The athletics building will also include a stage, a multi purpose room, a dance studio, a board room, a crying room, four (4) locker rooms, four (4) coach's offices, and other ancillary uses, such as restrooms, storage spaces, and janitorial facilities. In addition to the new athletics building, a 750 square -foot locker facility addition is also proposed to the basement of the existing 11,850 square -foot "Hampton Hall" building. A sunken deck area will provide access to this new locker facility. A condition of approval of CUP 86 -4 was that the Kare Youth League limit its membership to a maximum of 750 children and that the Rio Hondo Prep School limit its enrollment to a maximum of 250 students. Although the square footage of the athletic CUP 09 -11 ADR 09 -09 5150 Farna Avenue October 13, 2009 page 3 facility is going to increase substantially, the applicant has stated that the Youth League and the School will continue to comply with these limitations. The new athletics building will enable a number of activities that are currently held outdoors, to be held indoors. And, the applicant has stated that there will be no change in the schedule of activities and does not expect a significant increase in attendance. Traffic and Parkinq To address the traffic and parking impacts that this project may generate, the applicant engaged the traffic engineering and transportation planning firm, Kunzman Associates, and submitted the attached focused traffic and parking analyses report. The report analyzed the following roadway segments: Tyler Avenue south of E. Live Oak Avenue Farna Avenue south of E. Live Oak Avenue and south of Freer Street Daines Drive east of Santa Anita Avenue Freer Street east of Santa Anita Avenue The report indicates that these roadway segments currently operate at acceptable levels -of- service (LOS). Although the report shows an increase in the volume to capacity ratios, these roadway segments would remain at acceptable levels -of- service with the proposed athletics building. The report includes a parking survey of the existing on -site parking facilities at 15- minute intervals from 7:30 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Thursday, May 28, 2009. The applicant indicated that this is the busiest day with the combined activities of the Youth League and School. The parking survey shows the number of parked vehicles with a separate count for cars and buses. Of the 156 on -site parking spaces, the survey shows a maximum of 102 parked vehicles on that day, which indicates that at least 54 parking spaces were available at any time of that day. Besides the Prep School and the seasonal Youth League activities, the subject facility is to be used for numerous special events by the School and the Youth League. The largest special events are the High School Graduation with approximately 550 attendees; Santa's Breakfast with 450 attendees; the, "I Kare for Youth Breakfast" with 375 attendees; the Easter Event with 350 participants, and the Annual Family Picnic with 350 attendees. A potential negative impact during these special events is that the attendees might park on the nearby residential streets. The traffic and parking report indicates that the applicant should continue to implement its parking management program, which utilizes traffic directing personnel to guide attendees to specified parking spaces, including the existing sports fields that have been used for parking during the special events. A complaint that has been raised is that in approaching the site, it often appears that the parking is at capacity because the parking area nearest the entrance is already full. CUP 09 -11 ADR 09 -09 5150 Farna Avenue October 13, 2009 page 4 In fact, this area is used by the staff of the Youth League and School because it is the furthest from the facilities that are used by participants and guests. To avoid this confusion, personnel should also be stationed at the entrance to direct inbound drivers into the site and dissuade attendees from parking on the nearby residential streets. The traffic and parking report was reviewed by Mr. William Winter, Assistant Deputy Director of the Traffic and Lighting Division of the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works. Mr. Winter states in the attached letter dated September 16, 2009 that the County agrees with the report's conclusion that the traffic generated by the project will not have a significant impact to the roadways and intersections in the area. Architectural Design Review Concurrent with the Conditional Use Permit, the Planning Commission may approve, conditionally approve, or deny the architectural design of the proposed structure. The applicant describes the architectural style as "Contemporary Institutional." It features smooth plaster finish with light, earth -tone colors. Building elevations are enhanced by visual modulations achieved by building articulations and a deep eave overhang. It is staffs opinion that the proposed structure meets the criteria set forth in the City's Architectural Design Review Guidelines. CODE REQUIREMENTS AD City requirements regarding disabled access and facilities, occupancy limits, building safety, parking, and site design shall be complied with to the satisfaction of the Building Official, City Engineer, Development Services Director, Fire Marshal, Police Chief, and Public Works Services Director. CEQA Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act, the Development Services Department prepared an Initial Study for the proposed project. Said Initial Study did not disclose any substantial or potentially substantial adverse change in any of the physical conditions within the area affected by the project including land, air, water, minerals, flora, fauna, ambient noise and objects of historical or aesthetic significance. Therefore, the attached Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared for this project. FINDINGS Section 9275.1.2 of the Arcadia Municipal Code requires that for a Conditional Use Permit to be granted, it must be found that all of the following prerequisite conditions can be satisfied: CUP 09 -11 ADR 09 -09 5150 Farna Avenue October 13, 2009 page 5 1. That the granting of such Conditional Use Permit will not be detrimental to the public health or welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in such zone or vicinity. 2. That the use applied for at the location indicated is properly one for which a Conditional Use Permit is authorized. 3. That the site for the proposed use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate said use, and all yards, spaces, walls, fences, parking, loading, landscaping, and other features required to adjust said use with the land and uses in the neighborhood. 4. That the site abuts streets and highways adequate in width and pavement type to carry the kind of traffic generated by the proposed use. 5. That the granting of such Conditional Use Permit will not adversely affect the comprehensive General Plan. It is staffs opinion that the proposal satisfies all the prerequisite conditions and criteria for granting a Conditional Use Permit and approval of the Architectural Design Review. RECOMMENDATION The Development Services Department recommends approval of Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 09 -11 and Architectural Design Review No. ADR 09 -09, subject to the following conditions: 1. The use approved by CUP 09 -11 and ADR 09 -09 is limited to the Kare Youth League and Rio Hondo Preparatory School. The subject site shall be operated and maintained in a manner that is consistent with the proposal and plans submitted and approved for CUP 09 -11 and ADR 09 -09. 2. The Kare Youth League shall continue to limit membership to a maximum of 750 children, and the Rio Hondo Preparatory School shall continue to limit enrollment to a maximum of 250 students. 3. There shall be a parking management plan for special events with the following provisions: a. An adequate number of trained traffic directing personnel shall be utilized to guide inbound drivers directly to available parking spaces, and traffic directors shall be positioned near the entrance to the site to direct inbound drivers into the site and dissuade attendees from parking on the nearby residential streets. b. For their safety, traffic directing personnel shall wear brightly colored reflective vests so that they are highly visible, and shall have effective communication devices (i.e., walkie- talkies) to ensure efficient communication. CUP 09 -11 ADR 09 -09 5150 Farna Avenue October 13, 2009 page 6 c. The parking management program is to be regularly monitored and adjusted to maintain its effectiveness. The current pick -up and drop -off procedures are to be maintained and to be regularly monitored and adjusted to maintain effectiveness. 4. All on -site parking stalls shall be striped in accordance with Arcadia Municipal Code Section 9269.8.1. 5. All City requirements regarding accessibility, fire protection, occupancy, and safety shall be complied with to the satisfaction of the Building Official and the Fire Marshal. 6. Approval of CUP 09 -11 and ADR 09 -09 shall not take effect until the property owner(s), and applicant have executed and filed the Acceptance Form available from the Development Services Department to indicate awareness and acceptance of these conditions of approval. 7. All conditions of approval shall be complied with prior to the issuance of a final inspection and /or certificate of occupancy. Noncompliance with the plans, provisions and conditions of approval for CUP 09 -11 and ADR 09 -09 shall be grounds for immediate suspension or revocation of any approvals, which could result in a delay of the certificate of occupancy or the closing of the subject building. 8. The applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Arcadia and its officers, employees, and agents from and against any claim, action, or proceeding against the City of Arcadia, its officers, employees or agents to attack, set aside, void, or annul any approval or condition of approval of the City of Arcadia concerning this project and /or land use decision, including but not limited to any approval or condition of approval of the City Council, Planning Commission, or City Staff, which action is brought within the time period provided for in Government Code Section 66499.37 or other provision of law applicable to this project or decision. The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim, action, or proceeding concerning the project and /or land use decision and the City shall cooperate fully in the defense of the matter. The City reserves the right, at its own option, to choose its own attorney to represent the City, its officers, employees, and agents in the defense of the matter. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION Approval If the Planning Commission intends to approve this proposal, the Commission should move to approve Application Nos. CUP 09 -11 and ADR 09 -09, state the supporting findings, including the acceptance of the Negative Declaration, and adopt Resolution No. 1805, which incorporates the Commission's decision, specific determinations and findings, and the conditions of approval. CUP 09 -11 ADR 09 -09 5150 Farna Avenue October 13, 2009 page 7 Denial If the Planning Commission intends to deny this proposal, the Commission should move to deny Application Nos. CUP 09 -11 and ADR 09 -09; state the finding(s) that the proposal does not satisfy, and direct staff to prepare a resolution incorporating the Commission's decision and specific findings for adoption at the next meeting. If any Planning Commissioner, or other interested party has any questions or comments regarding this matter prior to the October 13 public hearing, please contact Associate Planner, Thomas Li at (626) 574 -5447, or tli @ci.arcadia.ca.us. Approved by: Jim Kas- Com pity Development Administrator Attachments: Aerial Photo Vicinity Map with Zoning Information 1,000 -foot Radius Map Proposed Plans Photos of the Subject Property Traffic and Parking Report Letter from Mr. Winter Environmental Documents Resolution No. 1805 CUP 09 -11 ADR 09 -09 5150 Farna Avenue October 13, 2009 page 8 0`i Lando Channel 5150 Farna Ave Arcadia Li Zone )nservalion Park Development services Department Engineering Division Prepared by R.S.Gonzalez, October 2009 5150 Farna Avenue CUP 09 -11 Development Services Department Engineering Division Prepared by. RS.Gonzalez, October 2009 im 1 TN! ilr 0 I 1 mg x -7 -c toxo.E1 WI ii 11;2583— 62,xT2 il ti ig !I i! r I P "h i l l i i c, 4 e 1 'WO I 0 Int, Int au ip 1 ognsiwk MINECD_IL 1 1_1_1_1 ling NM 11111111111111 IMO 11 W, MINIM vi► 1 1 2 w• 1111:1 j-i-1 "°MINI @tiiii iKIIF:0 iii !_!_!_!_I_!_!_!_ p I_I I I i 11 3 ir gi 3 NO* I °111111 111111: ses ®1 1 1 1 li. 1 1 1 111111 111111- ses srs .f• 1 1 menial /;.f 1.1 1=111111_ 111111:° ®1,, -I 14:; 111111=111111 =F a 1 L: ei f_III1 11- 11111 111. 11111111 ®�r y 11111E ®I 1 1= 111111= 11111' nmi =nnn.- a 111111 =m m 111111 °111 111 11111® 111111 11111 =111111 111111= 1- A111= 111111_111I1E 11111 =RIjl r A r g 1 J l 5r 1 tr r hi WOO'2133NION3 -01d3V HJ MMM 1293 (plL):xV3 £8£8 EL6 (VIZ) 89826 VO '3DNVa0 'oVO' AII1NnO11 NMOJ 1111 :sluaw2as Aennpeoa Sulnnollol ay3 sapnpul ewe Aprils ay3 'gels el3e34 }o Ally 42lnn suolssn3slp o3 3uensand •elpe34 Jo 3IJ ay3 u1 anuany ewe3 4o snulwaal waylnos ay3 le palml sl ails 3aafoad 8ullslxa ail V3ay Aanis •llwaad asn leuo131puo3 ay3 aad saoeds Supped gst sapinoad ueld a3is pasodoid a41 'ueld Supped palle3ap a9l sa3ea3snlil aan813 pue ueld ails pafoad ayl saleilsn!(i Z aanSlj •llwaad asn leuol3lpuo3 8ui3sixa ay3 aad s3uapnls osz 4o wnwlxew e aney of pauowpuoe aq 03 anu13uo3 !um pue pauol3lpuo3 Alluaaan3 osle s1 loops Aaoleaedaad ayl 3iwaad asn leuo13lpuoa Suj3slxaay3 aad wnwlxew Jagwaw OSL a aney of pauolllpuo3 aq 04 anulluoa il!N► pue Alluaun3 sl an2eai y3noA 3HV)( ail 'loops Aaoleaedaad 3uapnls osz e Aq paaeys aq 433 anulluo3 !um pue A13uaaan3 s1 a31s ay3 leyl alou 03 lue3aodwl s! 'pal aienbs 060'22 Sullelol Alllpe4 anSeai 43n0A 321t1)I 40 Sulpllnq alBuls e i31nn pa3eidaJ aq o3 pasodoad aae laaj aienbs 060`£1 Hulle3o3 Alllpe} an2eai ylnoA 3ay)l Jo saanpnals Sullslxa ay3 aaigl 1pafoad sly3 40 3aed e se pue padolanap Alluaaan3 sl a3ls pafoad 8u13slxa ail NOIldlIDS30 •y xlpuaddy ulyllnn papinoad sl swJal 4o AressoiS e 'Suuaaul2ua uollelaodsueal 03 anblun swaal asoy3 yllnn aapeaa ay3 3slsse of •Alaspuo3 -pue Alaeap 3aodaa ail alp/A o3 apew uaaq seq 3ao}}a Aaana'laodaa le3luioal e sl s!ql g2noy31b 'elep Supioddns pue suol lepuawwo3aa' s8ulpu!J'sasAleue'sal8olopoylaw slsAleue Supped pue 311.0 l pasnaoJ ail sluasaad 3aodaa Supped pue 31}04 slyl '(T aanS13 aas) elpe34 4o aq3 ul anuany euae3 �o snucwaal UJGLflnos ail le palml sl ails hafoad Su13slxa ayl •pafoad wnlseuwAD anuany ewe3 OSTS ay3 }a 3uawdolanap ail alenlena o3 s! slsAleue Supped pue 3110e4 pasn3q. paslnaa s143 40 asodind ail J?I \Hilt; .IN1 'l"1J ?X3 JO ::21\'3 O£ 'JN1 `S31VIJOSSV NV1A1ZNllx N011Jf1ao211N1 :uosieD 'mina(' 99016 VD'eipe3JV anuany ewe3 OSTS 3119V31 H1f10A AWN uosaeO pinea all 600Z `TZ lsn8ny Mr. David Carson KARE YOUTH LEAGUE August 18, 2009 Roadway Segments: Tyler Avenue: south of East Live Oak Avenue Farna Avenue: south of East Live Oak Avenue south of Freer Street Dafnes Drive: east of Santa Anita Avenue AREA CONDITIONS Freer Street: east of Santa Anita Avenue 1. Area Roadway System Figure 4 identifies the existing roadway conditions for study area roadways. The number of through lanes for existing roadways are identified. 2. Roadway Segment Analysis Figure 5 depicts the existing average daily traffic volumes. The existing average daily traffic volumes were obtained from traffic counts (see Appendix B) made for Kunzman Associates in April /May 2009. Existing volume to capacity ratios and levels of service have been calculated for the study area roadways and are shown in Table 1. Roadway capacity is generally defined as the number of vehicles that can be reasonably expected to pass over a given section of road in a given time period. Roadway capacities were approved by the City of Arcadia Engineering Staff. For link volume to capacity ratios, the following relationship to Levels of Service have been used: Level of Service A Level of Service B Level of Service C Level of Service D Level of Service E Level of Service F Volume to Capacity Ratio 0.000 to 0.600 Volume to Capacity Ratio 0.601 to 0.700 Volume to Capacity Ratio 0.701 to 0.800 Volume to Capacity Ratio 0.801 to 0.900 Volume to Capacity Ratio 0.901 to 1.000 Volume to Capacity Ratio 1.001 and up W W W.TRAFF IC ENG I NEER.COM Mr. David Carson KARE YOUTH LEAGUE August 18, 2009 PARKING SURVEY For existing traffic conditions, the study area roadway segments currently operate at acceptable Levels of Service (see Table 1). To quantify the existing parking demand for the project site, a parking survey was conducted. The existing parking demand was determined by surveying the existing parking lots at 15- minute intervals from 7:30 AM to 6:00 PM on a Thursday (May 28, 2009). The existing parking survey is shown in Table 2. As indicated in Table 2, the maximum number of occupied parking spaces at the project site is 102 parked vehicles from 5:30 PM to 5:45 PM. PROJECT TRAFFIC 1. Trip Generation The traffic generated by the project is determined by multiplying an appropriate trip generation rate by the quantity of land use. Trip generation rates are predicated on the assumption that energy costs, the availability of roadway capacity, the availability of vehicles to drive, and our life styles remain similar to what we know today. A major change in these variables may affect trip generation rates. To develop a trip generation rate for the project, three 24 hour tube counts at the project access were obtained. Since the project site is shared with an existing school, a percentage of the total count by hour was assumed to represent the project (see Table 3). Trip generation rates were determined for daily traffic for the proposed land use by dividing the maximum number of trips by the existing project land use quantity. By multiplying the calculated traffic generation rate by the proposed land use quantity, the traffic volume is determined. Table 4 exhibits the traffic generation rate for project daily traffic volume. The current development generates a total of approximately 521 daily vehicle trips (see Table 3). The proposed development is projected to generate approximately 879 daily vehicle trips (see Table 4). Trip generation comparison calculations are located in Table 5. The difference in vehicle trips and percent difference in vehicle trips are calculated. The proposed development is projected to generate approximately 358 additional daily vehicle trips. The proposed development is projected to generate approximately 69 percent additional daily vehicle trips. WWW,TR COM 3 Mr. David Carson KARE YOUTH LEAGUE August 18, 2009 2. Trip Distribution Figure 6 contains the proposed project directional distributions. To determine the traffic distributions for the proposed project, peak hour traffic counts of the existing directional distribution of traffic for existing areas in the vicinity of the site, and other additional information on future development and traffic impacts in the area were reviewed. 3. Trip Assignment Based on the identified traffic generation and distributions, project average daily traffic volumes have been calculated and shown on Figure 7. EXISTING PLUS PROJECT ROADWAY SEGMENT ANALYSIS Figure 8 depicts the existing plus project average daily traffic volumes. Existing plus project volume to capacity ratios and levels of service have been calculated for the study area roadway segments and are shown in Table 6. For existing plus project traffic conditions, the study area roadway segments are projected to operate at acceptable Levels of Service. SIGNIFICANT IMPACT THRESHOLD Level of Service C is acceptable if the project does not impact the roadway by four (4) percent or more, Level of Service D is acceptable if the project does not impact the roadway by two (2) percent or more, and Level of Service E/F is acceptable if the project does not impact the roadway by one (1) percent or more. The proposed project is not projected to significantly impact the study are roadways (see Table 7). PARKING ANALYSIS 1. Existing Conditions A total of 156 parking spaces will be provided within the project site. The maximum number of occupied parking spaces at the project site is 102 parked vehicles on Thursday (May 28, 2009) from 5:30 PM to 5:45 PM. 2. Future Conditions A 10 percent buffer is typically desirable to adequately serve patrons to the site. This would allow patrons to easily park rather than drive from aisle to aisle looking for an unoccupied parking space. W W W.TR A FF I C-E NG I NEER.COM 4 Mr. David Carson KARE YOUTH LEAGUE August 18, 2009 Based upon the parking survey with a maximum number of occupied parking spaces of 102, the maximum likely peak parking demand is 112 parked vehicles including a 10 percent buffer (see Table 8). It should be noted that the facility's parking demand will not increase with the expansion. The existing conditional use permit on the project site states that the KARE Youth League may not exceed 750 members and the preparatory school may not exceed 250 students. The parking analysis verifies that existing parking demand with a 10 percent buffer will be accommodated on site. Existing and future event schedules are provided in Appendix C, Exhibits D and E. KARE Youth League events will remain unchanged with the new indoor facility. Existing events that currently take place inside the existing facility will remain and existing events taking place on the blacktop area of the facility will be moved indoors. Sufficient parking will be provided by the project site based upon the parking survey. 3. Special Events During special events the site will continue to use the existing sports fields as overflow parking. As shown in Appendix C Exhibit A, the largest five special events are "High School Graduation" at 550 patrons, "Santa's Breakfast" at 450 patrons, "I Kare For Youth Breakfast" at 375 patrons, "Easter Event" at 350 patrons, and "Annual Family Picnic" at 350 patrons. All other events are projected to be 300 patrons or less. During these special events it is important for the site to continue to use traffic directing personnel. It is recommended that the parking management plan include the following features: a. Traffic directing personnel should be used to direct inbound drivers to empty parking lots, empty parking segments within a lot, and then to empty parking stalls. A traffic director should be positioned at the entrance driveway. Another traffic director should be located in the lot to direct drivers to empty parking segments. b. Traffic directing personnel should have brightly colored vests so that they are highly visible for the attendees and for their safety. They should have walky-talkies to ensure efficient communication. They should be trained for maximum efficiency and safety. c. When drivers leave the facility, there is no need for traffic directing personnel to assist. The driver simply unparks their vehicle and leaves via the exit. d. KARE Youth League staff should be encouraged to park on -site at the parking segment furthest from the entrance driveway. W W W:TRAFF I C-ENG I NEER.COM Mr. David Carson KARE YOUTH LEAGUE August 18, 2009 4. Staff Parking UPPER RIO HONDO TRAIL CONSTRUCTION. TRAFFIC e. The project site should contain preferential parking spaces for the handicapped. Each specially designated area should be clearly painted and signed. Signs should be posted to clearly direct the appropriate attendees to the designated handicapped parking spaces. f. A follow -up monitoring program should be used to determine the effectiveness of the parking management plan. Peak periods should be monitored in order to make changes to the parking management program to improve operating conditions, if necessary. Current Pick -up and Drop -off procedures should continue, be monitored, and discussed at weekly staff meetings. g. The City Traffic Engineer should periodically visit the site once the project is constructed and in full operation to verify that the traffic operations are satisfactory. Staff should park in the southern parking lot but not in the northern parking lot located at the entrance of the KARE Youth League facility because patrons attending games located at one of the northern fields will tend to see that this lot is occupied and park on the residential streets before driving into the site and parking in the rear. Continue to clearly post signs stating that additional parking is located at the rear of the site. The Upper Rio Hondo Trail is adjacent the southeast project boundary. Direct access between the trail and the KARE Youth League facility is feasible but not desirable. Providing an open connection between the facility and the trail would allow students /patrons to easily leave the facility and allow potential unauthorized persons to enter the school /KARE Youth League facility. Residents with property sharing the facility boundary have stated that they are concerned with the security after hours at the facility if a direct connection is created. The trail connection has no effect on the traffic calculations. Construction traffic has been calculated by the architect to be between 90 and 95 truck trips. The construction process is projected to be about one year. During this one year period it is projected that 90 to 95 additional trucks will travel over the study area roadways. Calculations are based on a maximum likely projected truck trip count of 95. Truck traffic is the only type of traffic that damages. roadways. It should be noted that this number of truck trips is no greater than if single family homes were constructed on the site. Therefore, these trips have already been accounted for in the original traffic index calculations. W WW.TRAFF IC- ENCINEER.COM 6 Mr. David Carson KARE YOUTH LEAGUE August 18, 2009 To calculate the potential effects to the study area roadway network from the projected construction traffic, a traffic index calculation has been completed for each roadway (see Appendix D). The traffic index analysis has been conducted using a twenty year roadway useful life. Recommended construction traffic distributions are provided in Appendix D Exhibits A and B. Construction truck traffic should make right turns whenever possible. Limit left turns to reduce potential vehicle conflicts at unsignaiized intersections. Existing traffic indexes for each study area roadway were unable to be obtained. Calculations are based on multiple traffic indexes for each roadway. Typically roadways like Santa Anita Avenue and East Live Oak Avenue would have a traffic index of 12.0 and Tyler Avenue, Farna Avenue, Daines Drive, and Freer street would have a traffic index of 6.0. A minimum of five percent of the construction traffic distribution has been assumed on all roadways. The maximum likely construction traffic trip distribution has been assumed on all roadways. The potential construction traffic impact on Santa Anita Avenue is projected to be insignificant. No noticeable degradation in the roadways useful life of pavement is projected. The potential construction traffic impact on Tyler Avenue is projected to be insignificant. No noticeable degradation in the roadways useful life of pavement is projected. The potential construction traffic impact on Farna Avenue is projected to be insignificant. No noticeable degradation in the roadways useful life of pavement is projected. The potential construction traffic impact on East Live Oak is projected to be insignificant. No noticeable degradation in the roadways useful life of pavement is projected. The potential construction traffic impact on Daines Drive is projected to be insignificant. No noticeable degradation in the roadways useful life of pavement is projected. The potential construction traffic impact on Freer Street is projected to be insignificant. No noticeable degradation in the roadways useful life of pavement is projected. CONCLUSION For existing traffic conditions, the study area roadway segments currently operate at acceptable Levels of Service (see Table 1). For existing plus project traffic conditions, the study area roadway segments are projected to operate at acceptable Levels of Service (see Table 6). The proposed project is not projected to significantly impact the study area roadways (see Table 7). A total of 156 parking spaces will be provided within the project site. W W W.TRAFF IC-ENGINEER.COM Mr. David Carson KARE YOUTH LEAGUE August 18, 2009 The maximum number of occupied parking spaces at the project site is 102 parked vehicles on Thursday (May 28, 2009) from 5:30 PM to 5:45 PM. Based upon the parking survey with a maximum number of occupied parking spaces of 102, the maximum likely peak parking demand is 112 parked vehicles including a 10 percent buffer {see Table 8). KARE Youth League events will remain unchanged with the new indoor facility. Staff should park in the southern parking lot to minimize patron parking on the local streets. Direct access between the Upper Rio Hondo Trail and the KARE Youth League facility is feasible but not desirable. Current Pick -up and Drop -off procedures should continue, be monitored, and discussed at weekly staff meetings. The City Traffic Engineer should periodically visit the site once the project is constructed and in full operation to verify that the traffic operations are satisfactory. Construction traffic impacts on the study area roadways is projected to be insignificant. It has been a pleasure to service your needs on this project. Should you have any questions or if we can be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to call at (714) 973 -8383. Sincerely, KUNZMAN ASSOCIATES, INC. "(IA Carl Ballard Principal Associate #4413a W WW.TRAFF1C- ENG1NEER.00M 8 KUNZMAN ASSOCIATES, INC. William Kunzman, P.E. Principal Professional Registration Expiration Date 3 -31 -2010 Roadway Segment Number of Lanes Maximum Capacity (LOS E) ADT V /CI we Thursday Tyler Avenue south of East Live Oak Avenue 2D 18,000 10,492 0.58 A Farna Avenue south of East Live Oak Avenue 2U 12,000 1,402 0.12 A south of Freer Street 2U 3,000 1,016 0.34 A Daines Drive east of Santa Anita Avenue 2U 3,000 1,973 0.66 B Freer Street east of Santa Anita Avenue 2U 3,000 1,976 0.66 B Friday Tyler Avenue south of East Live Oak Avenue 2D 18,000 11,822 0.66 B Farna Avenue south of East Live Oak Avenue 2U 12,000 1,448 0.12 A south of Freer Street 2U 3,000 775 0.26 A Daines Drive east of Santa Anita Avenue 2U 3,000 2,140 0.71 C Freer Street east of Santa Anita Avenue 2U 3,000 2,124 0.71 C Saturday Tyler Avenue south of East Live Oak Avenue 2D 18,000 11,043 0.61 B Farna Avenue south of East Live Oak Avenue 2U 12,000 1,405 0.12 A south of Freer Street 2U 3,000 293 0.10 A Daines Drive east of Santa Anita Avenue 2U 3,000 1,805 0.60 A Freer Street east of Santa Anita Avenue 2U 3,000 2,050 0.68 B ADT Average Daily Traffic. V/C Volume to Capacity Ratio. 3 LOS Level of Service, which is based on maximum capacity (LOS El. Level of Service A Volume to Capacity Ratio of 0.000 0.600 Level of Service 8 Volume to Capacity Ratio of 0.600 0.700 Level of Service C Volume to Capacity Ratio of 0.701- 0.800 Level of Service D Volume to Capacity Ratio of 0.801- 0.900 Level of Service E Volume to Capacity Rado of 0.901 -1.000 Level of Service F Volume to Capacity Ratio of 1.00 and up Table 1 Existing Roadway Operations 9 Time Number of Parked Vehicles Perios Car Bus Total 7:30 AM 5 11 16 7:45 AM 21 11 32 8:00 AM 27 10 37 8:15 AM 28 12 40 8:30 AM 31 12 43 8:45 AM 32 12 44 9:00 AM 34 12 46 9:15 AM 37 12 49 9:30 AM 38 12 50 9:45 AM 37 12 49 10:00 AM 40 12 52 10:15 AM 38 12 50 10:30 AM 37 12 49 10:45 AM 37 12 49 11:00 AM 33 11 44 11:15 AM 33 9 42 11:30 AM 31 9 40 11:45 AM 28 9 37 12:00 PM 29 9 38 12:15 PM 25 9 34 12:30 PM 28 9 37 12:45 PM 22 9 31 1:00 PM 26 9 35 1:15 PM 26 9 35 1:30 PM 27 9 36 1:45 PM 30 10 40 2:00 PM 29 10 39 2:15 PM 31 12 43 2:30 PM 31 12 43 2:45 PM 35 12 47 3:00 PM 41 7 48 3:15 PM 36 7 43 3:30 PM 36 7 43 3:45 PM 32 7 39 4:00 PM 45 7 52 4:15 PM 60 10 70 4:30 PM 70 11 81 4:45 PM 77 11 88 5:00 PM 90 11 101 5:15 PM 87 11 98 5:30 PM 91 11 102 5:45 PM 89 11 100 6:00 PM 85 11 96 Table 2 Parking Count 'Count conducted on Thursday 5/28/2009 10 Hour Total Coun t KARE Youth League Percent of Trips Trips Thursday Friday Saturday Thursday Friday Saturday Thursday Friday Saturday 0 0 0 0 100% 90% 95% 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 90% 90% 95% 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 90% 90% 95% 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 90% 90% 95% 0 0 0 4 1 0 0 90% 90% 95% 1 0 0 5 4 0 0 90% 90% 95% 4 0 0 6 5 7 2 90% 90% 95% 5 6 2 7 175 172 14 10% 10% 95% 18 17 13 8 20 30 32 10% 10% 95% 2 3 30 9 24 35 17 10% 10% 95% 2 4 16 10 14 36 14 10% 10% 95% 1 4 13 11 24 37 13 10% 10% 95% 2 4 12 12 46 64 25 10% 10% 95% 5 6 24 13 40 43 31 10% 10% 95% 4 4 29 14 41 51 12 10% 10% 95% 4 5 11 15 111 83 66 10% 10% 95% 11 8 63 16 157 36 38 90% 90% 95% 141 32 36 17 173 50 15 90% 90% 95% 156 45 14 18 85 57 1 90% 90% 95% 77 51 1 19 51 56 3 90% 90% 95% 46 50 3 20 24 10 3 90% 90% 95% 22 9 3 21 13 3 5 90% 90% 95% 12 3 5 22 3 2 2 90% 90% 95% 3 2 2 23 3 3 0 90% 90% 95% 3 3 0 Total 1016 775 293 521 256 277 1 Project access counts. KARE Youth League trips. Table 3 KARE Youth League 24 Hour Driveway Count 2 Estimated percentage of the access count that represents the KARE Youth League facility. 11 Land Use Quantity Units Daily Trips From Count (Existingl 13.090 TSF 521 KARE Youth League Trio Generation Rate Calculation 13.090 TSF 39.8 KARE Youth League Trip Generation Rates (Existing) 22.090 TSF 39.8 KARE Youth League Trios Generated (Pr000sedl 22.090 TSF 879 KARE Youth League 2 TSF Thousand Square Feet Table 4 KARE Youth League Trip Generation Rates Trip Generation'' I Based on the maximum observed 24 hour tube count (see Table 2). 3 Based on the maximum observed daily trips divided by the existing KARE Youth League facility square footage. 4 Based on the existing trip generation rate (trips/square footage). 5 Based on the proposed square footage multiplied by the existing trip generation rate. 12 Description Daily Existing' 521 Proposed 879 Increase 358 Percent Increase 69% Trip Generation Comparison 1 See Table 3. 2 See Table 4. Table 5 13 Roadway Segment Number of Lanes Maximum Capacity (LOS E) ADT V /C LOS Thursday Tyler Avenue south of East Live Oak Avenue 2D 18,000 10,582 0.59 A Farna Avenue south of East Live Oak Avenue 2U 12,000 1,492 0.12 A south of Freer Street 2U 3,000 1,374 0.46 A Daines Drive east of Santa Anita Avenue 2U 3,000 2,063 0.69 B Freer Street east of Santa Anita Avenue 2U 3,000 2,066 0.69 B Friday Tyler Avenue south of East Live Oak Avenue 2D 18,000 11,912 0.66 B Farna Avenue south of East Live Oak Avenue 2U 12,000 1,538 0.13 A south of Freer Street 2U 3,000 1,133 0.38 A Daines Drive east of Santa Anita Avenue 2U 3,000 2,230 0.74 C Freer Street east of Santa Anita Avenue 2U 3,000 2,214 0.74 C Saturday Tyler Avenue south of East Live Oak Avenue 2D 18,000 11,133 0.62 B Farna Avenue south of East Live Oak Avenue 2U 12,000 1,495 0.12 A south of Freer Street 2U 3,000 651 0.22 A Daines Drive east of Santa Anita Avenue 2U 3,000 1,895 0.63 B Freer Street east of Santa Anita Avenue 2U 3,000 2,140 0.71 C 2 ADT Average Daily Traffic. 2 WC 'Los Volume to Capacity Ratio. Level of Service, which is based on maximum capacity (LOS E). Level of Service A Volume to Capacity Ratio of 0.000 0.600 Level of Service 8 Volume to Capacity Ratio of 0.600 0.700 Level of Service C Volume to Capacity Ratio of 0.701- 0.800 Level of Service D Volume to Capacity Ratio of 0.801- 0.900 Level of Service E Volume to Capacity Ratio of 0.901 -1.000 Level of Service F Volume to Capacity Ratio of 1.00 and up Table 6 Existing Pius Project Roadway Operations 14 Roadway Segment Existing Existing Plus Project V/C Percent Increase S(gnificant Impact V/C 1 LOS V/C LOS Thursday Tyler Avenue south of East Live Oak Avenue 0.58 A 0.59 A 1.00% No Farna Avenue south of East Live Oak Avenue 0.12 A 0.12 A 0.00% No south of Freer Street 0.34 A 0.46 A 12.00% No Daines Drive east of Santa Anita Avenue 0.66 B 0.69 B 3.00% No Freer Street east of Santa Anita Avenue 0.66 B 0.69 B 3.00% No Friday Tyler Avenue south of East Live Oak Avenue 0.66 B 0.66 B 0.00% No Farna Avenue south of East Live Oak Avenue 0.12 A 0.13 A 1.00% No south of Freer Street 0.26 A 0.38 A 12.00% No Daines Drive east of Santa Anita Avenue 0.71 C 0.74 C 3.00% No Freer Street east of Santa Anita Avenue 0.71 C 0.74 C 3.00% No Saturday Tyler Avenue south of East Live Oak Avenue 0.61 B 0.62 B 1.00% No Farna Avenue south of East Live Oak Avenue 0.12 A 0.12 A 0.00% No south of Freer Street 0.10 A 0.22 A 12.00% No Daines Drive east of Santa Anita Avenue 0.60 A 0.63 B 3.00% No Freer Street east of Santa Anita Avenue 0.68 B 0.71 C 3.00% No Table 7 Existing Plus Project Roadway Operations See Table 1. 7 See Table 5. I Significant Impact Threshold: Level of Service C is acceptable If the project does not Impact the roadway by four (4) percent or more Level of Service D is acceptable If the project does not impact the roadway by two (2) percent or more, and Level of Service E/F Is acceptable If the project does not impact the roadway by one (1) percent or more. 15 Description Parked Vehicles Existing Peak Parking Demand 102 Future Peak Parking Demand 102 10% Overage Factor 10 Maximum Likely Peak Parking Demand 112 Provided Parking Spaces 156 Maximum Likely Peak Parking Demand l Obtained from parking count. Table 8 2 The existing and future conditional use permit on the project site states that the KARE Youth League may not exceed 750 members. The parking demand should remain the same. 16 KUNZMAN ASSOCIATES, INC. Figure 1 Project Location Map Da mes Drive East UVe Oak Avenue Site ,-'1 s a 4413a/1 OVER 30 YEARS OF EXCELLENT SERVICE 17 KLINZMAN ASSOCIATES, INC. Figure 2 Site Plan OVER 30 YEARS OF EXCELLENT SERVICE 18 Figure 3 Parking Plan (156 Parking Spaces Provided) KUNZMAN ASSOCIATES, INC. 4413a/3 OVER 30 YEARS OF EXCELLENT SERVICE 19 KUNZMAN ASSOCIATES, INC. Figure 4 Existing Through Travel Lanes Legend 2 Through Travel Lanes D Divided U Undivided 4413a/4 OVER 30 YEARS OF EXCELLENT SERVICE 20 KUNZMAN ASSOCIATES, 1NC. Figure 5 Existing Average Daily Traffic Volumes 1.976/2.124/2.050 4. 1.016/0.775/0.293 Site v. i Legend 1.016/0.775/0.293 Vehicles Per Day (1,000's) Thursday /Friday /Saturday 4413a/5 OVER 30 YEARS OF EXCELLENT SERVICE 21 5% KUNZMAN ASSOCIATES, INC. Figure 6 Project Traffic Distribution 5% Legend 10 Percent To /From Project 4413a/6 OVER 30 YEARS OF EXCELLENT SERVICE 22 Figure 7 Project Average Daily Traffic Volumes KUNZMAN ASSOCIATES, INC. Site s Legend 0.358 Vehicles Per Day (1,000's) 4413a/7 OVER 30 YEARS OF EXCELLENT SERVICE 23 Figure 8 Existing Plus Project Average Daily Traffic Volumes 2.063/2.230/1.895 Q 2.066/2.214/2.140 KUNZMAN ASSOCIATES, INC. Da i n es Drive Ea st Live Freer SO ak Avenue 10.582/11.912/11.133 w 1.492/1.538/1.495 1.374/1.133/0.651 Site i Legend 1.374/1.133/0.651 Vehicles Per Day (1,000`s) Thursday /Friday /Saturday 4413a/8 OVER 30 YEARS OF EXCELLENT SERVICE 24 Appendices Appendix A Glossary of Transportation Terms Appendix B Traffic Count Worksheets Appendix C Facility Operations Information Appendix D Traffic Index Calculations APPENDIX A Glossary of Transportation Terms COMMON ABBREVIATIONS AC: Acres ADT: Average Daily Traffic Caltrans: California Department of Transportation DU: Dwelling Unit ICU: Intersection Capacity Utilization LOS: Level of Service TSF: Thousand Square Feet V /C: Volume /Capacity VMT: Vehicle Miles Traveled TERMS GLOSSARY OF TRANSPORTATION TERMS AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: The total volume during a year divided by the number of days in a year. Usually only weekdays are included. BANDWIDTH: The number of seconds of green time available for through traffic in a signal progression. BOTTLENECK: A constriction along a travelway that limits the amount of traffic that can proceed downstream from its location. CAPACITY: The maximum number of vehicles that can be reasonably expected to pass over a given section of a lane or a roadway in a given time period. CHANNEUZATION: The separation or regulation of conflicting traffic movements into definite paths of travel by the use of pavement markings, raised islands, or other suitable means to facilitate the safe and orderly movements of both vehicles and pedestrians. CLEARANCE INTERVAL: Nearly same as yellow time. If there is an all red interval after the end of a yellow, then that is also added into the clearance interval. CORDON: An imaginary line around an area across which vehicles, persons, or other items are counted (in and out). CYCLE LENGTH: The time period in seconds required for one complete signal cycle. CUL DE SAC STREET: A local street open at one end only, and with special provisions for turning around. DAILY CAPACITY: The daily volume of traffic that will result in a volume during the peak hour equal to the capacity of the roadway. DELAY: The time consumed while traffic is impeded in its movement by some element over which it has no control, usually expressed in seconds per vehicle. DEMAND RESPONSIVE SIGNAL: Same as traffic- actuated signal. DENSITY: The number of vehicles occupying in a unit length of the through traffic lanes of a roadway at any given instant. Usually expressed in vehicles per mile. DETECTOR: A device that responds to a physical stimulus and transmits a resulting impulse to the signal controller. DESIGN SPEED: A speed selected for purposes of design. Features of a highway, such as curvature, superelevation, and sight distance (upon which the safe operation of vehicles is dependent) are correlated to design speed. DIRECTIONAL SPLIT: The percent of traffic in the peak direction at any point in time. DIVERSION: The rerouting of peak hour traffic to avoid congestion. FORCED FLOW: Opposite of free flow. FREE FLOW: Volumes are well below capacity. Vehicles can maneuver freely and travel is unimpeded by other traffic. GAP: Time or distance between successive vehicles in a traffic stream, rear bumper to front bumper. HEADWAY: Time or distance spacing between successive vehicles in a traffic stream, front bumper to front bumper. INTERCONNECTED SIGNAL SYSTEM: A number of intersections that are connected to achieve signal progression. LEVEL OF SERVICE: A qualitative measure of a number of factors, which include speed and travel time, traffic interruptions, freedom to maneuver, safety, driving comfort and convenience, and operating costs. LOOP DETECTOR: A vehicle detector consisting of a loop of wire embedded in the roadway, energized by alternating current and producing an output circuit closure when passed over by a vehicle. MINIMUM ACCEPTABLE GAP: Smallest time headway between successive vehicles in a traffic stream into which another vehicle is willing and able to cross or merge. MULTI MODAL: More than one mode; such as automobile, bus transit, rail rapid transit, and bicycle transportation modes. OFFSET: The time interval in seconds between the beginning of green at one intersection and the beginning of green at an adjacent intersection. PLATOON: A closely grouped component of traffic that is composed of several vehicles moving, or standing ready to move, with clear spaces ahead and behind. ORIGIN DESTINATION SURVEY: A survey to determine the point of origin and the point of destination for a given vehicle trip. PASSENGER CAR EQUIVALENTS: One car is one Passenger Car Equivalent. A truck is equal to 2 or 3 Passenger Car Equivalents in that a truck requires longer to start, goes slower, and accelerates slower. Loaded trucks have a higher Passenger Car Equivalent than empty trucks. PEAK HOUR: The 60 consecutive minutes with the highest number of vehicles. PRETIMED SIGNAL: A type of traffic signal that directs traffic to stop and go on a predetermined time schedule without regard to traffic conditions. Also, fixed time signal. PROGRESSION: A term used to describe the progressive movement of traffic through several signalized intersections. SCREEN UNE: An imaginary line or physical feature across which all trips are counted, normally to verify the validity of mathematical traffic models. SIGNAL CYCLE: The time period in seconds required for one complete sequence of signal indications. SIGNAL PHASE: The part of the signal cycle allocated to one or more traffic movements. STARTING DELAY: The delay experienced in initiating the movement of queued traffic from a stop to an average running speed through a signalized intersection. TRAFFIC ACTUATED SIGNAL: A type of traffic signal that directs traffic to stop and go in accordance with the demands of traffic, as registered by the actuation of detectors. TRIP: The movement of a person or vehicle from one location (origin) to another (destination). For example, from home to store to home is two trips, not one. TRIP END: One end of a trip at either the origin or destination; i.e. each trip has two trip -ends. A trip -end occurs when a person, object, or message is transferred to or from a vehicle. TRIP GENERATION RATE: The quality of trips produced and /or attracted by a specific land use stated in terms of units such as per dwelling, per acre, and per 1,000 square feet of floor space. TRUCK: A vehicle having dual tires on one or more axles, or having more than two axles. UNBALANCED FLOW: Heavier traffic flow in one direction than the other. On a daily basis, most facilities have balanced flow. During the peak hours, flow is seldom balanced in an urban area. VEHICLE MILES OF TRAVEL: A measure of the amount of usage of a section of highway, obtained by multiplying the average daily traffic by length of facility in miles. APPENDIX B Traffic Count Worksheets 00:00 6 3 00:15 4 2 00:30 7 4 00:45 0 17 2 01:00 1 3 01:15 2 0 01:30 4 2 01:45 4 11 5 11 Total Vol. 1758 1180 2938 P 170 0 0.903 Prepared by NDS /ATD 12:00 112 51 12:15 106 67 12:30 104 55 28 12:45 102 424 79 252 13:00 119 64 13:15 104 53 13:30 99 63 NB Daily Totals SB EB WB Volumes for: Thursday, April 30, 2009 City: Arcadia Location: Tyler St NJo Lynrose St Project. 09 -5155 -001 6,384 4,108 0 0 60 96 53 51 45 47 41 38 27 34 170 27 140 27 28 24 21 26 15 27 104 17 81 16 14 17 13 9 6 15 57 5 38 4626 2928 Total 10,492 676 662 10 21 13:45 98 420 62 242 02:00 2 2 14:00 100 59 02:15 0 3 14:15 97 64 02:30 4 0 14:30 140 75 02:45 2 8 3 8 16 14:45 112 449 69 267 716 03:00 4 0 15:00 120 69 03:15 2 0 15:15 118 90 03:30 1 0 15:30 120 87 03:45 9 16 1 1 17 15:45 136 494 85 331 825 04:00 1 2 16:00 108 91 04:15 6 0 16:15 144 97 04:30 4 1 16:30 158 97 04:45 10 21 4 7 28 16:45 167 577 82 367 944 05:00 10 8 17:00 165 88 05:15 9 11 17:15 168 100 05:30 17 10 17:30 130 93 05:45 23 59 16 45 104 17:45 186 649 99 380 1029 06:00 23 21 18:00 140 95 06:15 29 15 18:15 135 90 06:30 40 18 18:30 141 85 06:45 52 144 39 93 237 18:45 119 535 78 348 883 07:00 54 37 19:00 144 92 07:15 63 41 19:15 115 73 07:30 97 54 19:30 96 47 07:45 101 315 62 194 509 19:45 87 442 56 268 710 08:00 70 71 20:00 102 58 08:15 79 55 20:15 59 08:30 68 43 20:30 08:45 78 295 63 232 527 20:45 09:00 65 47 21:00 09:15 67 45 21:15 09:30 53 31 21:30 09:45 63 248 45 168 416 21:45 10:00 65 43 22:00 10:15 84 45 22:15 10:30 84 56 22:30 10:45 79 312 48 192 504 22 :45 11:00 70 54 23 :00 11:15 74 39 23:15 11:30 80 58 23:30 11:45 88 312 68 219 531 23:45 48 305 43 214 519 310 185 95 7554 Total 0.903 Volumes for: Friday, May 08, 2009 City: Arcadia Location: Tyler St N/o Lynrose St Project: 09- 5155 -001 AM Period NB SB 00:00 9 2 00:15 12 8 00:30 9 7 00:45 4 34 2 19 01:00 7 2 01:15 7 5 01:30 3 3 01:45 4 21 4 14 02:00 7 2 02:15 3 1 02:30 3 1 02:45 6 19 3 7 03:00 2 0 03:15 2 2 03:30 6 0 03:45 9 19 1 3 04:00 4 1 04:15 7 1 04:30 6 2 04:45 7 24 4 8 05:00 10 6 05:15 15 11 05:30 22 13 05:45 30 77 17 47 06:00 35 16 06:15 43 17 06:30 47 35 06:45 79 204 29 97 07:00 92 41 07:15 119 39 07:30 127 65 07:45 126 464 71 216 08:00 118 65 08:15 94 48 08:30 98 59 08:45 110 420 43 215 09:00 74 52 09:15 78 48 09:30 83 48 09:45 88 323 64 212 10:00 69 53 10:15 82 50 10:30 85 41 10:45 95 331 46 190 11:00 88 58 11:15 85 50 11:30 124 58 11:45 113 410 63 229 Total Vol. 2346 1257 EB �l6 Prepared by NDS /ATD 12:00 136 66 12:15 124 53 12:30 96 53 53 12:45 133 489 56 228 13:00 83 66 13:15 138 68 13:30 125 69 35 13:45 92 438 59 262 14:00 132 61 14:15 107 56 14:30 130 66 26 14:45 124 493 65 248 741 15:00 146 102 15:15 130 91 15:30 123 60 22 15:45 142 541 79 332 873 16:00 132 98 16:15 151 71 16:30 153 68 32 16:45 132 568 74 311 879 17:00 196 89 17:15 189 91 17:30 189 99 124 17:45 146 720 102 381 1101 18:00 128 89 18:15 178 91 18:30 133 73 301 18:45 158 597 67 320 917 19:00 116 82 19:15 106 90 19:30 123 57 680 19:45 102 447 75 304 751 20:00 103 56 20:15 85 61 20:30 62 27 635 20:45 60 310 45 189 499 21:00 75 43 21:15 72 46 21:30 72 36 535 21:45 59 278 56 181 22:00 52 36 22:15 60 35 22:30 57 29 521 22:45 69 238 30 130 23:00 29 23 23:15 38 21 23:30 25 25 639 23:45 35 127 18 87 3603 5246 2973 8219 PM Period NB Daily Totals NB SB EB WB 7,592 4,230 0 0 SB EB WB Total 11,822 717 700 459 368 214 Total Prepared by NDS /ATD Volumes for: Saturday, May 09, 2009 City: Arcadia Location: Tyler St N/o Lynrose St Project 09 -5i -001 AM Period NB SB 00:00 13 9 00:15 17 12 00:30 13 7 00:45 7 50 10 38 01:00 7 3 01:15 5 9 01:30 1 8 01:45 6 19 12 32 02:00 7 8 02:15 6 4 02:30 7 1 02:45 8 28 1 14 03:00 5 4 03:15 2 0 03:30 2 2 03:45 6 15 0 6 04:00 10 0 04:15 3 0 04:30 8 2 04:45 10 31 0 2 05:00 0 3 05:15 6 3 05:30 21 5 05:45 16 43 3 14 06:00 14 6 06:15 22 11 06:30 36 23 06:45 36 108 14 54 07:00 48 14 07:15 51 30 07:30 68 27 07 :45 85 252 36 107 08:00 75 47 08:15 80 49 08:30 112 50 08:45 89 356 38 184 09:00 99 62 09:15 121 46 09:30 100 67 09:45 124 444 66 241 10:00 90 68 10:15 136 76 10:30 160 66 10:45 125 511 62 272 11:00 104 47 11:15 109 72 11:30 144 85 11:45 153 510 72 276 Total Vol. 2367 1240 WB NB 12:00 109 12:15 127 12:30 133 88 12:45 111 13:00 103 61 13:15 126 71 13:30 138 64 51 13:45 125 492 64 260 14:00 117 73 14:15 121 54 14:30 119 63 22:00 33 25 22:15 67 32 22:30 50 29 783 22:45 39 189 20 106 23:00 34 26 23:15 27 17 23 :30 27 19 786 23:45 21 109 17 79 3607 4680 2756 PM Period 15:00 113 69 15:15 132 62 15:30 97 70 N B Daily Totals SB EB WB 7,047 3,996 0 0 SB 85 101 77 480 59 322 EB WB Tota 1 11,043 802 752 42 14:45 122 479 61 251 730 21 15:45 94 436 53 254 690 16:00 120 58 16:15 121 79 16:30 115 65 33 16:45 148 504 82 284 788 17:00 126 74 17:15 123 60 17:30 139 73 57 17:45 119 507 64 271 778 18:00 108 62 18:15 112 63 18:30 104 73 162 18:45 83 407 65 263 670 19:00 113 72 19:15 106 65 19:30 115 65 359 19:45 81 415 56 258 673 20:00 84 41 20:15 103 47 20:30 97 57 540 20:45 98 382 46 191 573 21:00 77 53 21:15 77 67 21 :30 66 47 685 21:45 60 280 50 217 497 295 188 7436 Total Volumes for: Thursday, April 30, 2009 City: Arcadia Location: Tarns Ave N/o Lynrose St Project: 09- 5155 -002 AM Period NB SB 00:00 1 0 00:15 1 0 00:30 0 1 00:45 0 2 1 2 01:00 0 0 01:15 0 0 01:30 0 0 01:45 0 2 2 02:00 0 0 02:15 1 0 02:30 0 2 02:45 0 1 1 3 03:00 0 0 03:15 0 1 03:30 1 1 03:45 0 1 1 3 04:00 1 1 04:15 0 1 04:30 3 0 04:45 1 5 0 2 05:00 1 0 05:15 0 2 05:30 0 1 05:45 2 3 2 5 06:00 3 5 06:15 4 2 06:30 3 5 06:45 6 16 10 22 07:00 5 12 07:15 9 25 07:30 12 42 07:45 15 41 31 110 08:00 15 24 08:15 9 9 08:30 5 8 08:45 4 33 10 51 09:00 8 8 09:15 5 16 09:30 1 9 09:45 4 18 11 44 10:00 9 9 10:15 5 5 10:30 2 4 10:45 4 20 8 26 11:00 5 8 11:15 5 10 11:30 9 4 11:45 5 24 10 32 Total Vol. 164 302 EB WB Prepared by NDS/ATD PM Period 12:00 12:15 12:30 4 12:45 13:00 13:15 13:30 2 13:45 14:00 14:15 14:30 4 14:45 15:00 15:15 15:30 4 15:45 16:00 16:15 16:30 7 16:45 17:00 17:15 17:30 8 17:45 18:00 18:15 18:30 38 18:45 19:00 19:15 19:30 151 19:45 20:00 20:15 20:30 84 20:45 21:00 21:15 21:30 62 21:45 22:00 22:15 22:30 46 22:45 23:00 23:15 23:30 56 23:45 NB 7 12 6 3 6 6 9 2 Daily Totals NB SB EB WB 518 884 0 0 14 6 10 28 13 43 8 16 13 23 17 54 7 10 7 7 8 13 10 32 22 52 84 16 15 9 13 18 15 10 53 17 60 113 16 32 14 27 9 15 8 47 30 104 151 12 30 30 25 17 23 21 80 17 95 175 8 10 21 16 10 10 8 47 16 52 99 4 7 5 10 1 5 4 14 10 32 46 2 9 2 12 3 8 2 9 5 34 43 3 7 4 4 2 10 2 11 6 27 38 2 5 0 3 1 4 0 3 2 14 2 6 2 4 1 3 2 7 2 15 Total 1,402 71 77 17 22 466 354 582 936 NB SB Daily Totals 518 884 Total o. 00:00 0 2 00:15 1 2 00:30 1 1 00:45 1 3 2 7 01:00 0 1 01:15 1 2 01:30 0 0 01:45 0 1 1 4 07:00 8 13 07:15 8 29 07:30 30 53 07:45 21 67 32 127 08:00 12 26 08:15 5 18 08:30 5 13 08:45 6 28 7 64 09:00 7 12 09:15 6 10 09:30 5 10 09:45 4 22 7 39 10:00 7 9 10:15 7 14 10:30 4 5 10:45 2 20 9 37 11:00 6 10 11:15 12 4 11:30 5 12 11:45 7 30 12 38 Total Vol. 197 341 Prepared by NDSJATD Volumes for: Friday, May 08, 2009 Location: Farns Ave N/o Lynrose St City: Arcadia Project: 09- 5155 -002 12:00 12:15 12:30 10 12:45 13:00 13:15 13:30 5 13:45 02:00 0 1 14:00 02:15 0 0 14:15 02:30 0 0 14:30 02:45 0 2 3 3 14:45 03:00 0 0 15:00 03:15 1 0 15:15 03:30 0 1 15:30 03:45 1 2 0 1 3 15:45 04:00 0 0 16:00 04:15 0 0 16:15 04:30 1 0 16:30 04:45 3 4 0 4 16:45 05:00 3 0 17:00 05:15 0 2 17:15 05:30 3 1 17:30 05:45 2 8 2 5 13 17:45 7 13 6 2 4 7 4 5 2 4 11 13 19 10 17 9 9 16 12 11 12 7 7 11 22:00 6 8 22:15 3 5 22:30 1 6 57 22:45 3 13 4 23 23:00 2 5 23:15 0 3 23:30 2 68 23:45 2 6 6 16 NB Daily Totals SB EB WB 544 904 0 0 2 Total 1,448 u :du i 1 m 18 14 12 28 11 55 4 13 10 20 12 39 14 11 12 30 28 65 95 15 11 10 55 12 48 103 12 18 22 48 17 69 117 11 16 19 37 10 56 93 83 59 06:00 2 1 18:00 8 7 06:15 1 5 18:15 7 9 06:30 3 0 18:30 9 15 06:45 6 12 10 16 28 18:45 9 33 14 45 78 19:00 4 12 19:15 5 10 19:30 9 16 194 19:45 10 28 17 55 83 20:00 8 25 20:15 3 7 20:30 3 7 92 20:45 7 21 10 49 70 21:00 13 15 21:15 8 6 21:30 2 11 61 21:45 5 28 11 43 71 36 22 538 347 563 910 Total Volumes for: Saturday, May 09, 2009 City: Arcadia Location: Farns Ave N/o Lynrose St Project 09- 5155 -002 SB 4 00:15 2 2 00:30 3 2 00:45 1 7 2 10 01:00 2 1 01:15 0 2 01:30 0 1 01:45 0 2 2 6 AM Period NB 00:00 1 WB 0 1,405 x. 02:00 0 0 14:00 12 18 02:15 0 1 14:15 8 19 02:30 0 0 14:30 5 17 02:45 0 0 1 1 14:45 10 35 6 60 95 03:00 0 0 15:00 3 19 03:15 1 1 15:15 8 17 03:30 0 1 15:30 9 22 03:45 1 2 1 3 5 15:45 6 26 21 79 105 04:00 0 0 16:00 7 15 04:15 0 1 16:15 15 15 04:30 0 0 16:30 21 6 04:45 0 0 1 1 16:45 6 49 13 49 98 05:00 1 1 17:00 5 13 05:15 0 1 17:15 12 15 05:30 0 1 17:30 30 11 05:45 0 1 0 3 4 17:45 24 71 10 49 120 06:00 0 0 18:00 10 11 06:15 2 1 18:15 1 12 06:30 1 3 18:30 2 11 06 :45 2 5 10 14 19 18:45 1 14 10 44 58 07:00 3 3 19:00 5 07:15 5 4 19:15 7 07:30 7 9 19:30 5 07:45 7 22 4 20 42 19:45 5 22 08:00 8 14 20:00 3 08:15 8 13 20:15 4 08 :30 10 22 20:30 4 08:45 7 33 24 73 106 20:45 5 16 09:00 8 22 09:15 8 10 09:30 9 8 09:45 7 32 14 54 10:00 6 16 10:15 10 19 10:30 28 10 10:45 20 64 26 71 11:00 16 11 11:15 6 11 11:30 4 8 11:45 16 42 15 45 Total Vol. 210 301 511 3 548 EB WB Prepared by NDS /ATD PM Period NB SB EB WB 12:00 17 20 12 :15 8 17 12:30 8 9 17 12:45 6 39 13 59 13:00 13 11 13:15 13 12 13:30 13 15 8 13:45 8 47 24 62 21:00 2 21:15 4 21:30 3 21:45 3 12 22:00 2 22:15 1 22:30 2 135 22:45 1 6 23:00 2 23:15 0 23:30 87 23:45 Daily Totals NB SB EB WB 556 849 0 0 Total 1,405 98 109 10 8 10 13 41 63 11 9 5 6 31 47 11 8 11 3 33 4 5 4 8 21 9 4 4 9 3 20 45 27 29 894 Total AM Period NB 00:00 0 00:15 0 00:30 0 00 :45 0 01:00 0 01:15 1 01:30 0 01:45 0 1 02:00 0 02:15 0 02 :30 0 02:45 0 03:00 0 03:15 0 03:30 0 03:45 0 11:00 2 11:15 3 11:30 5 11:45 6 16 Total Vol. 127 SB 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 3 2 8 142 EB WB Prepared by NDS /ATD Volumes for: Thursday, May 14, 2009 City: Arcadia Location: Farna Ave S/o Miloann St Project: 09- 5155 -003 PM Period 12:00 12:15 12:30 12:45 5 10 13:00 13:15 13:30 2 13:45 14:00 14:15 14:30 14:45 9 15:00 18 15:15 18 15:30 15 15:45 8 04:00 0 0 16:00 25 04:15 0 0 16:15 28 04:30 0 0 16:30 8 04:45 0 1 1 1 16:45 9 SB 0 12 23:00 0 1 23:15 0 0 23:30 2 0 24 23:45 0 2 0 1 NB Daily Totals SB EB WB 520 496 0 0 EB WB Total 1,016 5 5 3 23 6 23 5 5 1 3 2 10 6 14 8 26 0 6 3 3 5 5 17 10 24 41 9 17 8 59 18 52 111 33 29 8 70 17 87 157 46 40 05:00 0 0 17:00 10 21 05:15 0 0 17 :15 46 19 05:30 1 1 17:30 30 16 05:45 1 2 1 2 4 17:45 19 105 12 68 173 06:00 0 1 18:00 15 15 06:15 1 1 18:15 13 8 06:30 0 0 18:30 13 10 06:45 0 1 2 4 5 18:45 3 44 8 41 85 07:00 4 1 19:00 12 10 07:15 9 16 19:15 2 3 07:30 50 54 19:30 1 4 07:45 19 82 22 93 175 19:45 10 25 9 26 51 08:00 2 2 20:00 4 2 08:15 2 6 20:15 1 2 08:30 1 4 20:30 8 0 08 :45 2 7 1 13 20 20:45 6 19 1 5 24 09:00 2 2 21:00 3 1 09:15 0 4 21:15 2 0 09:30 3 3 21:30 1 0 09:45 6 11 4 13 24 21:45 6 12 0 1 1.3 10:00 3 2 22:00 1 0 10:15 2 2 22:15 1 0 10:30 0 2 22:30 0 0 10:45 2 7 1 7 14 22:45 1 3 0 3 3 269 393 354 747 Total Prepared by NDS /ATD Volumes for: Friday, May 22, 2009 City: Arcadia Location: Farna Ave S/o Miloann St Project. 09- 5155 -003 SB 00:00 0 0 00:15 0 0 00:30 0 0 00:45 0 0 01:00 0 0 01:15 0 0 01:30 0 0 01:45 0 0 02:00 0 0 02:15 0 0 02:30 0 0 02:45 0 0 03:00 0 0 03:15 0 0 03:30 0 0 03:45 0 0 04 :00 0 0 04:15 0 0 04:30 0 0 04:45 0 0 05:00 0 0 05:15 0 0 05:30 0 0 05:45 0 0 06:00 1 1 06:15 0 1 06:30 1 1 06:45 1 3 1 4 07:00 2 4 07:15 9 12 07:30 39 55 07:45 22 72 29 100 08 :00 5 5 08:15 2 7 08:30 1 1 08:45 5 13 4 17 09 :00 6 4 09:15 2 3 09:30 3 8 09:45 4 15 5 20 10:00 1 1 10:15 6 5 10:30 9 5 10:45 2 18 7 18 11:00 6 2 11:15 7 4 11:30 3 2 11:45 9 25 4 12 AM Period NB EB WB 21:00 0 0 21:15 1 1 21:30 1 0 35 21:45 0 2 0 1 22:00 0 0 22:15 1 0 22:30 0 1 36 22:45 0 1 0 1 23:00 0 0 23:15 0 0 23:30 0 0 37 23:45 3 3 0 Daily Totals NB SB EB WB 389 386 0 0 Total 775 PM Period NB SB EB WB 12:00 6 6 12:15 8 15 12:30 4 3 12:45 11 29 11 35 13:00 2 3 13:15 8 4 13:30 6 7 13:45 3 19 10 24 14:00 3 3 14:15 6 3 14:30 2 6 14:45 15 26 13 25 51 15:00 16 12 15:15 14 5 15:30 11 7 15:45 7 48 11 35 83 16:00 4 3 16:15 6 4 16:30 8 6 16:45 3 21 2 15 36 17:00 4 2 17:15 6 3 17:30 6 8 17:45 3 19 18 31 50 18:00 4 17 18:15 20 3 18:30 3 2 7 18:45 3 30 5 27 57 19:00 6 8 19:15 27 2 19:30 3 2 172 19:45 2 38 6 18 56 20:00 2 0 20:15 3 1 20:30 1 1 30 20:45 1 7 1 3 10 64 43 3 2 3 Total Vol. 146 171 317 243 215 458 Total Prepared by NDS/ATD Volumes for: Saturday, May 23, 2009 City: Arcadia Location: Farna Ave S/o Miloann St Project 09- 5155 -003 AM Period MB SB 00:00 0 0 00:15 0 0 00:30 0 0 00:45 0 0 01:00 0 0 01:15 0 0 01:30 0 0 01:45 0 0 02:00 0 0 02:15 0 0 02:30 0 0 02:45 0 0 03:00 0 0 03:15 0 0 03:30 0 0 03:45 0 0 04:00 0 0 04:15 0 0 04:30 0 0 04:45 0 0 05:00 0 0 05:15 0 0 05:30 0 0 05:45 0 0 06:00 0 0 06:15 1 1 06:30 0 0 06:45 0 1 0 1 07:00 1 3 07:15 1 2 07:30 1 0 07:45 0 3 6 11 08:00 2 11 08:15 1 4 08 :30 1 2 08:45 3 7 8 25 09:00 1 4 09:15 3 4 09:30 0 2 09:45 2 6 1 11 10:00 0 1 10:15 5 5 10:30 1 1 10:45 1 7 0 7 11:00 2 2 11:15 2 0 11:30 2 0 11:45 3 9 2 4 EB WB oasis PM Period NB 12:00 7 12:15 3 12:30 1 12:45 5 13:00 4 13:15 4 13:30 4 13:45 4 Total Vol. 33 59 92 117 Daily Totals NB SB EB WB 150 143 0 0 SB 2 2 4 16 1 9 6 2 4 16 3 15 EB Total 293 25 31 14:00 4 2 14:15 1 0 14:30 1 3 14:45 1 7 0 5 12 15:00 1 1 15:15 4 3 15:30 15 13 15:45 14 34 15 32 66 16:00 14 9 16:15 6 2 16:30 3 0 16:45 2 25 2 13 38 17:00 3 0 17:15 3 2 17:30 2 1 17:45 3 11 1 4 15 18:00 0 0 18:15 0 0 18:30 0 0 2 18:45 0 1 1 1 19:00 1 0 19:15 1 1 19:30 0 0 14 19:45 0 2 0 1 3 20:00 0 0 20:15 1 0 20:30 1 0 32 20:45 0 2 1 1 3 21:00 1 2 21:15 1 1 21:30 0 0 17 21:45 0 2 0 3 22:00 1 0 22:15 1 0 22:30 0 0 14 22:45 0 2 0 23:00 0 0 23:15 0 0 23:30 0 0 13 23:45 0 0 5 2 201 Total 293 AM Period NB 00:00 00:15 00:30 00:45 01:00 01:15 01:30 01:45 02:00 02:15 02:30 02:45 03:00 03:15 03:30 03:45 04:00 04:15 04:30 04:45 05:00 05:15 05:30 05 :45 06:00 06:15 06:30 06:45 07:00 07:15 07:30 07:45 08:00 08:15 08:30 08:45 09:00 09:15 09:30 09:45 10:00 10:15 10:30 10:45 11:00 11:15 11:30 11:45 Total Vol. SB EB WB 2 0 2 0 2 1 1 7 0 1 3 1 0 0 0 0 1 4 0 1 1 3 0 0 1 0 0 2 0 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 4 0 1 0 1 3 0 1 1 3 3 7 3 4 0 5 1 5 1 5 12 26 0 13 4 13 2 19 8 14 12 57 4 23 12 31 20 30 29 65 30 114 11 22 13 21 11 15 10 45 23 81 12 14 9 8 9 11 10 40 14 47 7 17 12 13 11 9 10 40 11 50 8 8 7 14 11 9 9 35 9 40 264 427 691 Prepared by NDS /ATD Volumes for: Thursday, April 30, 2009 City: Arcadia Location: Daines Dr E/o Santa Anita Ave Project: 09 -5155 -004 PM Period NB 12:00 12:15 12:30 8 12:45 13:00 13:15 13:30 5 13:45 14:00 14:15 14:30 5 14:45 15:00 15:15 15:30 4 15:45 16:00 16:15 16:30 10 16:45 17:00 17:15 17:30 31 17:45 18:00 18:15 18:30 71 18:45 19:00 19:15 19:30 179 19:45 20:00 20:15 20:30 126 20:45 21:00 21:15 21:30 87 21:45 22:00 22:15 22:30 90 22:45 23:00 23:15 23:30 75 23:45 07:18 185 0484 NB Daily Totals SB EB WB 0 0 1,050 923 SB 786 496 Tota 1,973 WB 8 11 11 49 9 39 88 7 9 12 50 13 41 91 13 13 12 81 22 60 141 12 20 13 80 21 66 146 13 11 13 89 11 48 137 12 20 15 112 14 61 173 11 24 13 111 15 63 174 10 12 8 72 8 38 110 8 9 13 59 7 37 96 3 6 4 41 7 20 61 7 4 6 26 2 19 45 2 0 2 16 0 4 20 1282 Total NB SB EB WB 0 0 1,050 923 65 00/0 Volumes for: Friday, May 08, 2009 City: Arcadia Location: Dames Dr E/o Santa Anita Ave Project 09- 5155 -004 AM Period NB SB EB WB PM Period 00:00 5 0 12:00 00:15 3 2 12:15 00:30 2 0 12:30 00 :45 3 13 0 2 15 12:45 01:00 2 1 13:00 01 :15 1 0 13:15 01:30 1 1 13:30 01:45 2 6 1 3 9 13:45 02:00 0 0 14:00 02:15 3 0 14:15 02:30 0 0 14:30 02:45 2 5 1 1 6 14:45 03:00 0 0 15:00 03:15 0 1 15:15 03:30 1 1 15:30 03:45 2 3 0 2 5 15:45 04:00 0 2 16:00 04:15 2 2 16:15 04 :30 1 0 16:30 04:45 1 4 1 5 9 16:45 05:00 0 5 17:00 05:15 I 6 17:15 05:30 0 6 17:30 05:45 1 2 10 27 29 17:45 06:00 0 9 18:00 06:15 5 10 18:15 06:30 4 17 18:30 06:45 10 19 15 51 70 18:45 07:00 10 21 19:00 07 :15 13 24 19:15 07:30 24 33 19:30 07:45 22 69 32 110 179 19:45 08:00 18 28 20:00 08:15 7 23 20:15 08:30 12 19 20:30 08:45 8 45 14 84 129 20:45 09:00 8 16 21:00 09:15 4 18 21:15 09:30 17 12 21:30 09:45 7 36 13 59 95 21:45 10:00 8 18 22 00 10:15 8 11 22:15 10:30 9 7 22:30 10:45 7 32 10 46 78 22:45 11:00 8 10 23:00 11:15 10 13 23:15 11:30 12 10 23 :30 11:45 8 38 10 43 81 23:45 Total Vol. 272 433 705 Prepared by NDS /ATD N8 NB Daily Totals SB EB WB 0 0 1,162 978 SB EB 15 14 9 16 16 15 8 13 13 17 61 16 45 106 14 21 29 10 11 18 29 83 24 73 156 27 17 17 10 19 13 30 93 7 47 140 23 17 31 9 31 13 21 106 10 49 155 22 14 32 13 28 14 42 124 23 64 188 24 18 29 17 31 13 19 103 14 62 165 24 21 17 12 13 6 15 69 13 52 121 9 13 19 8 11 7 14 53 9 37 90 12 10 26 10 19 12 15 72 9 41 113 12 2 7 4 16 5 4 39 4 15 54 13 1 6 3 7 1 7 33 2 7 40 WB 14 19 7 54 13 53 107 8 Total 2,140 Total 2,140 AM Period NB SB EB WB 00:00 4 4 00 :15 7 2 00:30 9 1 00:45 3 23 1 8 31 01:00 0 1 01:15 4 2 01:30 1 2 01:45 5 10 1 6 16 02:00 1 0 02:15 4 3 02:30 0 1 02:45 1 6 1 5 11 03:00 2 0 03:15 1 1 03:30 3 2 03:45 2 8 0 3 11 04:00 0 1 04:15 3 2 04:30 0 3 04:45 1 4 2 8 12 05:00 0 3 05:15 0 2 05:30 1 5 05:45 0 1 1 11 12 06 :00 0 2 06:15 0 8 06:30 1 3 06:45 5 6 2 15 21 07:00 2 4 07:15 4 12 07:30 3 8 07:45 4 13 8 32 45 08:00 10 13 08:15 9 18 08 :30 13 12 08:45 12 44 19 62 106 09 :00 14 16 09:15 9 11 09 :30 15 19 09:45 12 50 21 67 10:00 15 25 10:15 16 17 10:30 18 16 10:45 16 65 20 78 11:00 15 12 11:15 22 21 11:30 17 23 11:45 15 69 17 73 Total Vol. 299 368 667 Prepared by NDS /ATD Volumes for: Saturday, May 09, 2009 City: Arcadia Location: Dames Dr E/o Santa Anita Ave Project 09- 5155 -004 PM Period SB EB WB 12:00 25 13 12:15 14 14 12:30 17 12 12:45 13 69 19 58 127 13:00 20 12 13:15 15 11 13:30 14 20 13:45 8 57 12 55 112 14:00 16 16 14:15 12 13 14:30 19 14 14:45 14 61 14 57 118 15:00 17 10 15:15 14 9 15:30 12 12 15:45 18 61 8 39 100 16:00 11 18 16:15 18 11 16:30 14 20 16:45 13 56 15 64 120 17:00 10 12 17:15 12 19 17:30 18 14 17:45 9 49 12 57 106 18:00 16 10 18:15 13 18 18:30 16 16 18:45 25 70 9 53 123 19:00 10 8 19:15 7 13 19:30 11 9 19:45 7 35 12 42 77 20:00 20:15 20:30 20:45 21:00 21:15 21:30 117 21:45 22:00 22:15 22:30 143 22:45 23:00 23:15 23:30 142 23:45 Daily Totals NB SB EB_____ WB 0 0 914 891 10 6 10 6 15 6 13 48 8 26 74 9 5 11 10 14 9 8 42 5 29 71 7 1 12 10 9 8 11 39 8 27 66 10 6 9 3 5 3 4 28 4 16 44 615 523 1138 Total Volumes for: Thursday, April 30, 2009 City: Arcadia Location: Freer St E/o Santa Anita Ave Project 09- 5155 -005 Daily Totals NB SB EB WB 0 0 1,035 941 00:00 2 2 12:00 00:15 3 1 12:15 00 :30 2 1 12:30 00:45 1 8 0 4 12 12:45 01:00 0 0 13:00 01:15 3 0 13:15 01:30 1 1 13:30 01:45 1 5 1 2 7 13:45 02:00 2 3 14:00 02:15 0 1 14:15 02:30 0 0 14:30 02:45 1 3 1 5 8 14:45 03:00 0 0 15:00 03:15 1 0 15:15 03:30 0 0 15:30 03:45 0 1 0 1 15:45 04:00 3 1 16:00 04:15 1 2 16:15 04:30 1 0 16:30 04 :45 0 5 2 5 10 16:45 05:00 3 3 17:00 05:15 0 4 17:15 05:30 1 1 17:30 05:45 1 5 4 1I 17 17:45 06:00 1 6 18:00 06:15 1 11 18:15 06:30 1 11 18:30 06:45 5 8 10 38 46 18:45 07:00 7 14 19:00 07:15 9 22 19:15 07:30 27 45 19:30 07:45 19 62 50 131 193 19:45 08:00 12 20 20:00 08:15 14 15 20:15 08:30 10 12 20:30 08:45 6 42 15 62 104 20:45 09:00 12 16 21 :00 09:15 9 11 21:15 09:30 8 12 21:30 09:45 9 38 13 52 90 21:45 10:00 10 14 22 :00 10:15 13 11 22:15 10:30 5 10 22:30 10:45 4 32 12 47 79 22:45 11:00 8 8 23:00 11:15 12 5 23:15 11:30 9 13 23:30 11:45 8 37 9 35 72 23:45 Total Vol. 246 393 639 Prepared by NDS /ATD 789 548 Total 1,976 13 10 7 3 7 10 10 19 20 22 8 10 14 19 31 73 21 72 145 31 22 16 14 19 13 23 89 17 66 155 26 11 31 11 32 14 28 117 16 52 169 35 20 28 18 38 17 34 135 19 74 209 30 19 30 16 18 19 18 96 15 69 165 25 17 30 17 16 9 15 86 9 52 138 14 7 10 7 9 9 4 37 9 32 69 3 9 16 7 13 8 9 41 4 28 69 8 7 9 6 7 3 2 26 2 18 44 1 3 2 3 5 1 2 10 0 7 17 12 6 10 33 5 33 66 11 10 10 46 14 45 91 1337 Daily Totals Total sa 17 ;00 209 950-n, 00:00 00:15 00:30 00:45 01:00 01:15 01:30 01:45 02:00 02:15 02:30 02:45 Prepared by NDS!ATD Volumes for: Friday, May 08, 2009 City: Arcadia Location: Freer St E/o Santa Anita Ave Project 09 -5155 -005 2 5 12:00 2 1 12:15 2 1 12:30 4 10 0 7 17 12:45 1 0 13:00 4 0 13:15 0 0 13:30 0 5 0 5 13:45 1 1 14:00 1 0 14:15 1 2 14:30 0 3 0 3 6 14:45 03:00 0 1 15:00 03:15 0 0 15:15 03:30 1 0 15:30 03:45 1 2 0 1 3 15:45 04:00 1 0 16:00 04:15 2 1 16:15 04 :30 1 0 16:30 04:45 2 6 2 3 9 16:45 05:00 0 4 17:00 05:15 1 1 17:15 05:30 2 3 17:30 05:45 2 5 4 12 17 17:45 06:00 0 7 18:00 06:15 1 10 18:15 06:30 2 6 18:30 06 :45 3 6 8 31 37 18:45 07:00 5 16 19:00 07:15 7 27 19:15 07:30 17 38 19:30 07:45 28 57 45 126 183 19:45 08 :00 18 29 20:00 08:15 17 16 20:15 08 30 17 16 20:30 08:45 10 62 9 70 132 20:45 09:00 10 13 21:00 09:15 8 15 21:15 09:30 6 6 21:30 09 45 11 35 10 44 79 21:45 10:00 10 6 22:00 10:15 8 12 22:15 10:30 8 15 22:30 10:45 8 34 12 45 79 22:45 11:00 12 5 23:00 11:15 19 10 23:15 11:30 15 14 23:30 11:45 6 52 11 40 92 23:45 Daily Totals SB EB WB Total 2,124 tl: V I 1 12 7 18 13 7 11 11 48 10 41 89 21 12 20 17 13 14 17 71 9 52 123 20 14 20 13 25 23 26 91 24 74 165 26 26 21 16 13 5 22 82 11 58 140 25 14 24 16 23 10 24 96 14 54 150 34 20 37 13 32 19 30 133 26 78 211 32 22 39 17 24 15 28 123 18 72 195 20 15 22 15 17 13 15 74 13 56 130 14 10 3 13 8 8 7 32 9 40 72 19 7 15 11 12 8 16 62 14 40 102 8 6 6 4 8 2 11 33 7 19 52 3 10 3 7 6 6 1 13 0 23 36 Volumes for: Saturday, May 09, 2009 City: Arcadia Location: Freer St E/o Santa Anita Ave Project 09 -5155 -005 u 'r i.•.• r u I'' 00:00 00:15 00:30 00:45 01:00 01:15 01:30 01:45 02:00 02:15 02:30 02:45 03:00 Total Vol. 5 2 4 4 2 5 3 14 2 2 1 3 4 0 0 3 8 0 2 6 1 0 2 1 0 5 0 2 2 342 319 661 Prepared by NDSIATD 12:00 12:15 12:30 13 27 12:45 13:00 13:15 13:30 5 13 13:45 14:00 14:15 14:30 7 12 14:45 15:00 15:15 15:30 4 10 15:45 03:15 0 0 03:30 1 1 03:45 3 6 1 04:00 1 0 16:00 04:15 0 0 16:15 04:30 1 0 16:30 04:45 0 2 3 3 5 16:45 05:00 0 0 17:00 05:15 2 0 17:15 05:30 4 2 17:30 05:45 0 6 2 4 10 17:45 06:00 1 2 18:00 06:15 2 3 18:15 06:30 4 7 18:30 06:45 1 8 4 16 24 18:45 07:00 5 5 19:00 07:15 9 9 19:15 07:30 1 13 19:30 07:45 11 26 13 40 66 19:45 08:00 10 12 20:00 08:15 12 12 20:15 08:30 12 6 20:30 08:45 15 49 4 34 83 20:45 09 :00 15 11 21:00 09:15 15 9 21:15 09:30 13 16 21:30 09:45 16 59 21 57 116 21:45 10:00 20 21 22:00 10:15 14 6 22:15 10:30 14 22 22:30 10:45 30 78 15 64 142 22:45 11 :00 18 17 23:00 11:15 21 15 23:15 11:30 21 12 23:30 11:45 21 81 28 72 153 23:45 NB Daily Totals 58 EB WB 0 0 1,141 909 Total 2,050 15 17 24 16 25 15 18 32 25 21 19 29 16 14 17 16 17 12 17 67 13 55 122 31 16 19 14 24 10 28 102 12 52 154 26 14 21 18 22 19 19 88 13 64 152 17 14 17 12 17 12 15 66 16 54 120 13 7 19 8 13 18 16 61 13 46 107 11 11 17 19 19 10 17 64 6 46 110 11 13 7 7 13 11 6 37 5 36 73 11 1 2 4 8 8 9 30 7 20 50 8 10 8 5 7 10 5 28 3 28 56 9 17 11 72 18 55 127 12 21 19 90 16 68 158 24 11 11 94 20 66 160 799 590 1389 Total APPENDIX C Facility Operations Information Date Event Attendance 08/03/09 Track Meet Week Basketball Shoot and Rope Climb (Mon. Thurs.) 50 11/10/09 Staff Appreciation Luncheon 250 12/07/09 Coaches Basketball Clinic 100 12/12/09 Santa's Breakfast 450 12/13/09 Staff Christmas Party 125 12/16/09 J.V. Girls vs Faculty (Basketball) 200 12/24/09 Christmas Eve Staff Gathering 180 01/11/10 Pac 5 Awards 150 01/17/10 Karena Awards 175 02/12/10 J.V. Boys vs Faculty Game 150 02/19/10 Varsity Girls vs Faculty Game 200 03/05/10 Varsity Boys vs Faculty Game 250 03/22 /09 Kare March Madness Open Tournament 100 03/27/09 I Kare For Youth Breakfast 375 03/31/10 Open House 300 04/04/10 Easter Event 350 04/09/10 C Division Awards 250 04/16/10 B Division Awards 200 04/23/10 A Division Awards 200 05/01/09 AA Division Awards 200 05/14/09 AAA Division Awards 200 05/15/10 Annual Family Picnic 350 06/06/10 Baccalaureate 250 06/17/10 Middle School Graduation 300 06/18/10 High School Graduation 550 HARE YOUTH LEAGUE SPECIAL EVENTS EXHIBIT "A" Covina take home and Kare pick up Dept Retum 3:30 4:20 1Dept 3:30 'Return 4:20 Dept Retum 3:30 4:20 'Dept 3:30 Retum 4:20 'Dept 3:30 Retum 4:20 East take home 'Dept 3:15 'Dept Retutn 7:50 'Dept 3:15 'Dept Return 8:35 Dept 3:15 'Dept 3:15 3:15 and Kare pick up 4:10 Retum 4:20 Rem 4:20 'Return 4:20 Rem 4:20 'Dept Retum 4:20 'Morning pick up Retum !Return 7:50 'Dept Retutn 7:50 Reum 4:20 I 'Dept Return 8:35 Dept 7:50 Reum 7: 0 Re Re 7:50 'North nd Kare pick up Retum 4:20 Reum 4:20 I Dept Re um 4:20 'Return 4:20 'Dept Reum 4:20 'West and Kare pick up 'Rs um 4:10 [Dept 4:10 Retum 4:10 Retum 4:10 Retum 4:10 KARE YOITPH LEAGUE BUS RUNS RUN MON TUE WED THR FRI Note: Buses leave and retum for other scheduled activities and games as required EXHIBIT "B" PERIOD TIME 1 7:55 2 8:55 Snack 9:45 3 10:05 MS period 4 10:50 HS period 4 11:00 MS period 5 11:35 HS lunch 11:50 MS lunch 12:15 HS period 6 12:25 MS period 7 12:50 HS period 7 1:00 MS period 8 1:25 HS period 8 1:40 MS PE 2:10 HS PE 2:15 WEEKDAY CHIME SCHEDULE Note: Chime times vary slightly on Wednesday EXHIBIT "C" Friday 7:30 -12:00 RHP H.S. Girls Vollyball Practice 40 RHP H.S. Girls Vollyball Practice 12:00 -4:00 RHP J.H. Girls Vollyball Practice 40 RHP J.H. Girls Vollyball Practice 4:00 -6:00 RHP H.S. Girls Vollyball Practice 40 RHP H.S. Girls Vollyball Practice 6:00 -10:00 Open Gym* 25 Open Gym* Wednesday 7:30 -12:00 RHP H.S. Girls Vollyball Practice 40 RHP H.S. Girls Vollyball Practice 12:00 -4:00 RHP J.H. Girls Vollyball Practice 40 RHP J.H. Girls Vollyball Practice 4:00 -6:00 RHP H.S. Girls Vollyball Practice 40 RHP H.S. Girls Vollyball Practice 6:00 -10:00 Open Gym* 25 Open Gym* Saturday 7:30 -10:00 RHP H.S. Girls Individual Vollyball Prac 20 RHP H.S. Girls Individual Vollyball Prac 10:00 -6:00 Open Gym* 25 Open Gym* 6:00 -10:00 Open Gym* or Special Events 100 Open Gym* or Special Events Sunday 7:30 -11:00 Social Time 250 Social Time 11:00 -8:00 'Open G or Social Time 30 Open Gym or Social Time KARE YOUTH LEAGUE TYPICAL SUMMER SCHEDULE EXHIBIT "D" Note: We do not believe the new gym will change our schedule or add any new teams. We will have two cross courts that will allow two concurrent practices or games, but when this occurs it will just be moving a team that was on an outside court into the gym. IDay/Time !Existing Gym IAtten. INew Gym Monday 7:30 -12:00 12:00 -4:00 4:00 -6:00 6:00 -10:00 RHP H.S. Girls Vollyball Practice RHP J.H. Girls Vollyball Practice RHP H.S. Girls Vollyball Practice Open Gym* 40 40 40 25 RHP H.S. Girls Vollyball Practice RHP J.H. Girls Vollyball Practice RHP H.S. Girls Vollyball Practice Open Gym* Tuesday 7:30 -12:00 12:00 -4:00 4:00 -6:00 6:00 -10:00 RHP H.S. Girls Vollyball Practice RHP J.H. Girls Vollyball Practice RHP H.S. Girls Vollyball Practice Open Gym* 40 40 40 25 RHP H.S. Girls Vollyball Practice 'RHP J.H. Girls Vollyball Practice RHP H.S. Girls Vollyball Practice Open Gym* Thursday 7:30 -12:00 12:00 -4:00 4:00 -6:00 6:00 -10:00 RHP H.S. Girls Vollyball Practice RHP J.H. Girls Vollyball Practice RHP H.S. Girls Vollyball Practice Open Gym* 40 40 40 25 RHP H.S. Girls Vollyball Practice RHP J.H. Girls Vollyball Practice RHP H.S. Girls Vollyball Practice Open Gym Open Gym is time for members to come and practice or play choose up games Social Time is open for Kare teams or groups to have meals or meetings Monday 7:30 -2:00 RHP School Classes 30 RHP School Classes 2:00 -4:00 RHP Volleyball /Basketball Practice 40 RHP Volleyball /Basketball Practice 4:00 -6:00 Kare Volleyball /Basketball Pracitice 40 Kare Volleyball /Basketball Pracitice 6:00 -9:00 Open Gym* 25 Open Gym* Tuesday 7:30 -2 :00 RHP School Classes 30 RHP School Classes 2:00 -4:00 RHP Volleyball/Basketball Practice 40 RHP Volleyball/Basketball Practice 4:00 -6:00 Kare Volleyball /Basketball Pracitice 40 Kare Volleyball /Basketball Pracitice 6:00 -9:00 RHP Volleyball /Baskeball Games 200 RHP VolleyballBaskeball Games Thursday 7:30 -2:00 RHP School Classes 30 RHP School Classes 2:00 -4:00 RHP Volleyball /Basketball Practice 40 RHP Volleyball/Basketball Practice Kare Volleyball /Basketball Pracitice 4:00 -6:00 Kare Volleyball /Basketball Pracitice 40 6:00 -9:00 RHP Volleyball/Baskeball Games 200 RHP Volleyball /Baskeball Games Wednesday 7:30 -2:00 RHP School Classes 30 RHP School Classes 2:00 -4:00 RHP Volleyball/Basketball Practice 40 RHP Volleyball /Basketball Practice 4 :00 -6:00 Kare Volleyball /Basketball Pracitice 40 Kare Volleyball /Basketball Pracitice 6:00 -9:00 RHP Volleyball /Baskeball Games 200 RHP VolleyballBaskeball Games Friday 7:30 -2:00 RHP School Classes 30 RHP School Classes 2:00 -4:00 RHP Volleyball /Basketball Practice 40 RHP Volleyball/Basketball Practice Kare Volleyball /Basketball Pracitice 4:00 -6:00 Kare Volleyball /Basketball Pracitice 40 6:00 -9:00 RHP VolleyballBaskeball Games 300 RHP Volleyball /Baskeball Games Saturday 7:30 -2:00 Kare Volleyball /Basketball Games 100 Kare Volleyball /Basketball Games 6:00 -10:00 Kare or RHP Volleyball /Basketball Games or Special Events 300 Kare or RHP Volleyball/Basketball Games or Special Events Sunday 7:30 -11:00 Social Time 1350 Social Time** 11:00 -8:00 Open Gym or Social Time 120 Open Gym or Social Time HARE YOUTH LEAGUE TYPICAL SCHOOL YEAR SCHEDULE EXHIBIT "E" Note: We do not believe the new gym will change our schedule or add any new teams. We will have two cross courts that will allow two concurrent practices or games, but when this occurs it will just be moving a team that was on an outside court into the gym. IDay/Time 'Existing Gym 'Atten. 'New Gym Open Gym is time for members to come and practice or play choose up games Social Time is open for Kare teams or groups to have meals or meetings APPENDIX D Traffic Index Calculations Equivalent Single Axle Loads Traffic Index Equivalent Single Axle Loads Traffic Index 4,710 6,600,000 5.0 11.5 10,900 9,490,000 5.5 12.0 23,500 13,500,000 6.0 12.5 47,300 18,900,000 6.5 13.0 89,800 26,100,000 7.0 13.5 164,000 35,600,000 7.5 14.0 28,800 48,100,000 8.0 14.5 487,000 64,300,000 8.5 15.0 798,000 84,700,000 9.0 15.5 1,270,000 112,000,000 9.5 16.0 1,980,000 144,000,000 10.0 16.5 3,020,000 186,000,000 10.5 17.0 4,500,000 238,000,000 11.0 17.5 6,600,000 303,000,000 Conversion of Equivalent Single Axle Loads (ESAL) to Traffic Index (TI) 1 Data from Table 603.4A of the California Department of Transportation, Hiahwav Design Manual, September 1, 2006. Note: This table represents the range of Equivalent Single Axle Loads that can be accommodated by a specific Traffic Index. Vehicle Type Constants 10 Year 20 Year 30 Years 40 Years 2 axle trucks 690 1,380 2,070 2,760 3 axle trucks 1,840 3,680 5,520 7,360 4 axle trucks 2,940 5,880 8,820 11,760 5 axle trucks or more 6,890 13,780 20,670 27,560 Equivalent Single Axle Loads (ESAL) Constants 'Data from Table 603.3A of the California Department of Transportation, Highway Design Manual, September 1, 2006. Note: This table represents the number of Equivalent Single Axle Loads generated by various types of trucks assuming that they drive over a specific point every day. Vehicle Type Equivalent Single Axle Load 20 Year Constants Expanded Average Daily Trucks Total 20 Year Equivalent Single Axle Loads Total 1 Year Equivalent Single Axle Loads 2 axle trucks 1,380 0.0651 90 4 3 axle trucks 3,680 0.0651 240 12 4 axle trucks 5,880 0.0651 383 19 5 axle trucks or more 13,780 0.0651 897 45 Total 0.2604 1,609 80 Additional Equivalent Single Axle Loads (ESAL) Generated by Construction Traffic Note: Projected total construction truck traffic is 95 trucks during the entire project. The projected 95 trucks have been evenly dNided over the four truck vehicle types. The total Equivalent Single Axle Loads is 80 for all 95 trucks assuming an even distribution of 2 axle through 5 axle or more. Santa Anita Avenue Traffic Index m) 103 11.0 11.5 12.0 12.5 13.0 13.5 Equivalent 51* Axle Load(ESAL)Re Minimum 3,020,000 4,500,000 6,600,000 9,490,000 13,500,000 18,90%000 26,100,000 Maximum (Average 4,500,000 3,760,000 5,500,000 9,4 13,500,000 18,900,000 26,100,000 35,600,000 5,000,000 8,045,000 11,495300 16,200,000 22,500,000 30,850,000 Added Construction Truck Equlwlent Single Axle Load (ESAL) 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 Percent Degradation Caused by Construction Traffic 0.001% 0.001% 0.000% 0.000% 0.000% 0.000% 0.000% Projected Useful Life Without Construction 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 With Construction 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 Tyler Avenue Traffic index CIO 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0 6.5 7.0 Equivalent Single Axle Load(ESAL)Range um Average Minim 646 1,850 4,710 10,900 23,500 47,900 89,800 Maximum 1,850 4,710 10,900 23,500 47,300 89,800 164,000 1,248 3,280 7,805 17,200 35,400 68,550 126,900 Added Construction Truck Equivalent SI* Axle Losd (ESAL) 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 Percent Degradation Caused by Construction Traffic 0.321% 0.122% 0.051% 0.023% 0.011% 0.006% 0.003% Projected Useful Ufe Without Construction 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 With Construction 1.9.94 19.98 19.99 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 Fame Avenue Impact on Useful Uh of Pimentos* by Project Construction Traffic by Nwdamy Traffic Iralere Traffic index In 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0 6.5 7.0 Equivalent Single Axle Load (ESAL) Range um Averap Minim 646 1,850 4,710 10,900 23,500 47,300 89,800 Maximum 1,850 4,710 10,900 23,500 47,300 89,800 164,000 1,248 3,280 7,805 17,200, 35,400 68,550 126,900 Added Construction Truck Equivalent Si ne s Axle Load (ESAL) 80 80 BO 80 80 BO 80 Percent Degradation Caused by Construction Traffic 6.41096 2.439% 1.025% 0.46596 0.226% 0.117% 0.063% Projected Useful Live Without Construction 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 With Construction 18.72 19.51 19.80 19.91 19.95 19.98 19.99 East Lin Oak Avenue Traffic Index m) 10.5 11.0 11.5 12.0 12.5 13.0 13.5 Equivalent Single Axle Load (ESAL) Range Minimum 3,020,000 4,500,000 6,600,000 9,490,000 13,500,000 18,900,000 26,100,000 Maxknum 4,500,000 5,500,000 9,490,000 13,500,000 `18,900,000 26,100,000 35,600,000 Avenge 3,760,000 5,000,000 8,045,000 11,495,000 16,200,000 22,500,000 50,850,000 Added Construction Truck Equivalent Single Ada Lad (ESAL) 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 Percent Degradation Caused by Construction Traffic 0.001% 0.001% 0.000% 0.000% 0.000% 0.000% 0.000% Projected UsefulUfo Without Construction 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 With Construction 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20,00 20.00 Dames Drive Traffic Index rut 4.0 4.S 5.0 5.s 6.0 63 7.0 Equivalent Single Axle Load (ESAL) Rarje Minimum 646 1,850 4,710 10,900 23,500 47,300 89,800 Maximum 1,850 4,710 10,900 23,500 47,300 89,800 164,000 Avenge 1,248 3,280 7,805 17,200 35,400 68550 126,900 Added Construction Truck Equivalent 54* Axle Load (8541.) 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 Percent Degradation Caused by Construction Traffic 3.205% 1.220% 0512% 0.233% 0.115% 0.058% 0.032% Protected Useful Lile Without Construction 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 2030 20.00 20.00 With Construction 19.36 19.76 19.90 19.95 19.98 19.99 19.99 Freer Street Traffic Index rn) 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0 7.0 Equhralent Single Axle Wad (ESAL) Range Minimum 646 1,850 4,710 10,900 23,500 47,300 89,800 Maximum 4,710 10,900 23,500 47,300 89,800 164,000 Average 1,248 3,280 7,805 17,200 35,400 68,550 126,900 Added Construction Truck Equivalent Single Axle Load (ESAL) 4 4 4 4 4 4 Percent Degradation Caused by Construction Traffic 0921% 0.122% 0.051% 0.023% 0.011% 0.006% 0.003% Protected Useful Ute Without Construction 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 With C.orsttucdon 19.94 19.98 19.99 2030 20.00 20.00 20.00 'limed eneakuNW ipiaeNnt Single Axle Lad admissions =wain ea csnVUebnbYtY trip and a rnpdmwn M five want Ins been AarWnd end resdasp. Exhibit A Construction Traffic Outbound Traffic Distribution KUNZMAN ASSOCIATES, INC. Legend 10% Percent From Project 4413/a OVER 30 YEARS OF EXCELLENT SERVICE Exhibit B Construction Traffic Inbound Traffic Distribution KUNZMAN ASSOCIATES, INC. Legend 10% Percent To Protect 4413/b OVER 30 YEARS OF EXCELLENT SERVICE GAIL FARBER, Director September 16, 2009 Dear Mr. Kasama: COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS "To Enrich Lives Through Effective and Caring Service" 900 SOUTH FREMONT AVENUE ALHAMBRA, CALIFORNIA 91803 -1331 Telephone: (626) 458 -5100 http://dpw.lacounty.gov Mr. Jim Kasama, Community Development Administrator Development Services Department P.O. Box 60021 Arcadia, CA 91066 -6021 KARE YOUTH LEAGUE GYMNASIUM REVISED TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS (AUGUST 21, 2009) CITY OF ARCADIA RECEIVED SEP 2 1 1009 PLANNING SERVICES ADDRESS ALL CORRESPONDENCE TO: P.O. BOX 1460 ALHAMBRA, CALIFORNIA 91802 -1460 IN REPLY PLEASE ,t REFER TO FILE: T-4 As requested, we have reviewed the Revised Traffic Impact Analysis (RTIA) for the Kare Youth League's (KYL) proposed replacement of an athletic building for its campus located at 5150 Farna Avenue. The KYL campus, which shares the site space with the Rio Hondo Prep School (RHPS), is located in both the unincorporated County of Los Angeles area and the City of Arcadia. We generally agree with the RTIA that the traffic generated by the project alone will not have a significant impact to County and County /City roadways and intersections in the area. We have also confirmed that the RTIA has sufficiently addressed our comments included in our letter dated July 28, 2009, (copy enclosed). No further information related to the review of RTIA will be required. If an interest in County practices regarding neighborhood traffic management is expressed during the public review, please refer to information on our website at http://dpw.lacounty.gov/traffic. Mr. Jim Kasama September 16, 2009 Page 2 If you have any questions regarding the traffic analysis, please contact Mr. Isaac Wong of our Traffic Studies Section at (626) 300 -4796. Very truly yours, GAIL FARBER Director of Public Works WILLIAM J. WINTER Assistant Deputy Director Traffic and Lighting Division IW:cn P:\tlpub \WPFILES \FILES \STU \Isaac\EIR \EIR090098 Kare Youth League Gymnasium RTIA.doc Enc. cc: City of Arcadia (Philip Wray) 1, Name or description of project: Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 09 -11 and Architectural Design Review No. ADR 09 -09 for a 22,090 square -foot athletics gymnasium building and a below -grade 750 square foot locker facility addition at an existing youth program facility. 2. Project Location Identify street address and cross streets or attach a map showing project site (preferably a USGS 15' or 7 1/2' topographical map identified by quadrangle name): 5150 Farna Avenue 3. Entity or Person undertaking project: A. B. Other (Private) (1) Name: Kare Youth League (2) Address: 5150 Farna Avenue, Arcadia, CA 91006 The City Council /Planning Commission, having reviewed the Initial Study of this proposed project and having reviewed the written comments received during the comment period and the recommendation of the City's Staff, does hereby find and declare that the proposed project will not have a significant effect on the environment if mitigation measures are imposed. A brief statement of the reasons supporting the findings are as follows: The City Council /Planning Commission hereby finds that the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects its independent judgment. A copy of the Initial Study may be obtained at: City of Arcadia Development Services Department Community Development Division Planning Services 240 West Huntington Drive Arcadia, CA 91007 (626) 574 -5423 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 Mitigated Negative Declaration are as follows: Jim Kasama, Community Development Administrator City of Arcadia Development Services Department Community Development Division Planning Services 240 West Huntington Drive Arcadia, CA 91007 (626) 574 -5423 Date Received M for Filing: Staff Negative Declaration \City\2009 CITY OF ARCADIA 240 W. HUNTINGTON DRIVE ARCADIA, CA 91007 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION File No.: CUP 09 -11 ADR 09 -09 FORM "E" CITY OF ARCADIA 240 WEST HUNTINGTON DRIVE ARCADIA, CA 91007 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM File Nos.: CUP 09-11 ADR 09 -09 1. Project Title: Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 09 11 and Architectural Design Review No. ADR 09 09 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Arcadia Development Services Department 240 West Huntington Drive Post Office Box 60021 Arcadia, CA 91066 -6021 3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Name: Thomas Li, Associate Planner Phone: (626) 574 -5447 Fax (626) 447 -9173 Email: tli @ci. arcadia. ca. us 4. Project Location: 5150 Farna Avenue 5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Kare Youth League 5150 Farna Avenue Arcadia, CA 91006 6. General Plan Designation: Public Facilities and Grounds 7. Zoning Classification: Unzoned 8. Description of Project: (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to later phases of the project, and any secondary, support, or off -site features necessary for its implementation. Attach additional sheet(s) if necessary.) A 22,090 square -foot athletics gymnasium building and a below -grade 750 square -foot locker facility addition at an existing youth program facility. CEQA Checklist -1- 4 -03 9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: (Briefly describe the project's surroundings.) The properties to the north, south and west of the subject site are within an unincorporated County area and are developed with single- family dwellings. The area is zoned for single family residences. The property to the north of the subject site is located in the City of Arcadia and is developed with the Arcadia Par -3 Golf Course and is unzoned. To the east of the subject property is the Rio Hondo Flood Control Channel. 10. Other public agencies whose approval is required: (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement) None ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. Aesthetics Agriculture Resources Air Quality Biological Resources Cultural Resources Geology Soils Hazards Hazardous Materials Hydrology Water Quality Land Use Planning Mineral Resources Noise Population Housing Public Services Recreation Transportation Traffic Utilities Service Systems Mandatory Findings of Significance DETERMINATION (To be completed by the Lead Agency) On the basis of this initial evaluation: [X] I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable CEQA Checklist File Nos.: CUP 09-11 ADR 09 -09 I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. -2- 4 -03 Signature CEQA Checklist 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. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: 9- z-©7 Date Thomas Li, Associate Planner For: Jim Kasama File Nos.: CUP 09 -11 ADR 09 -09 Printed Name Title Community Development Administrator 1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g. the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project specific factors as well as general standards (e.g. the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project specific screening analysis). 2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off -site as well as on -site, cumulative as well as project level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. 3) Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. 4) "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a Tess than significant level (mitigation measures from Section XVII, "Earlier Analyses," may be cross referenced). 5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following: a) Earlier Analyses Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site specific conditions for the project. 6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g. general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. 7) Supporting Information Sources. A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. -3- 4 -03 File Nos.: CUP 09-11 ADR 09-09 8) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project's environmental effects in whatever format is selected. 9) The explanation of each issue should identify: a) the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significant. CEQA Checklist -4- 4 -03 1. AESTHETICS Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? 2. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES In determining whether impacts to agriculture resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland) to non agricultural use? (The Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program in the California Resources Agency to non agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? File Nos.: CUP 09 -11 ADR 09 -09 Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact The subject site is bordered by a golf course to the northeast, the Rio Hondo Channel and Peck Road Water and Conservation Park to the east and south, and single- family residential dwellings to the west and north. There are no adjacent properties where a potential scenic vista would be obstructed. Furthermore, the project will be replacing an existing gymnasium and will be consistent with the existing developments. Therefore, there will be no impacts to any scenic vistas. b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? There are no designated scenic highways within the City of Arcadia. The nearest designated state scenic highway is the Angeles Crest Highway approximately 15 miles away. Therefore, there will be no impacts to state scenic highways or scenic roadway corridors. The project is to construct a gymnasium on the subject site, replacing the existing gymnasium, locker and office facilities. The proposed gymnasium building would be subject to the City's Architectural Design Review procedure to assure that the changes complement the visual character and quality of the site and its surroundings. d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would El adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? The subject athletics building replacing the existing gymnasium will be surrounded by existing structures on the property. It is further buffered from residential properties by the existing large sports fields with existing pole lighting on the subject site. Therefore, the project would not create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area. There is no farmland in the City of Arcadia. Therefore, the project would not convert farmland to non agricultural use. CEQA Checklist -5- 4 -03 3. AIR QUALITY Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? CEQA Checklist File Nos.: CUP 09 -11 ADR 09 -09 Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact There is no agricultural use zoning or a Williamson Act contract in the City of Arcadia. Therefore, the proposed project would not have the above impacts. c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non agricultural use? There is no farmland in the City of Arcadia, and the project will not convert farmland to non agricultural use. a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air El quality plan? The City of Arcadia is located within the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB), which includes Los Angeles and Orange Counties, and portions of Riverside and San Bernardino Counties. The air quality in the SCAB is managed by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), which funded the development of the West San Gabriel Valley Air Quality Plan. In 1993, the City of Arcadia adopted Resolution 5725, accepting the principles of the plan and agreeing to use the plan in the development of a local air quality program. Such a program is promoted through different approaches as outlined in the City's General Plan under Public Information and Community Involvement, Regional Coordination, Transportation Improvements and Systems Management, Transportation Demand Management, Land Use, Particulate Emissions Reduction, Energy Conservation, and Waste Recyc ling. El The South Coast Air Basin (SCAB) continued the trend of long -term improvement in air quality; however, air quality measurements within this region exceed both the State and Federal air quality standards on a regular basis. In Arcadia, local air quality problems are largely the result of pollutants upwind of the city. The project will accommodate a proposed gymnasium building on the subject site, replacing the existing gymnasium, locker and office facilities, and would not violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation. El The South Coast Air Basin (SCAB) is a non attainment area for Ozone (0 Fine Particulate Matter (PM Respirable Particulate Matter (PM and Carbon Monoxide (CO), and is in a maintenance area for Nitrogen Dioxide (NO The project will not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant as the project will not increase the intensity of the existing and approved uses. d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? the project will not result in a significant net increase in density from existing and approved developments and uses. Furthermore, the uses on the subject properties are not listed as uses that emit odors and dust under the SCAQMD Air Quality Guidance Document. The allowable uses on subject site will remain consistent with the growth expectations for the region, and will not have an impact that conflicts with or obstructs implementation of the applicable air quality plan. -6- 4 -03 e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? 4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse impact, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse impact on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, and regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? File Nos.: CUP 09 -11 ADR 09 -09 Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact El The subject properties do not contain uses that are listed as uses that emit odor and dust under the SCAQMD Air Quality Guidance Document. Therefore, the project will not create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people. lSJ In Arcadia, biological sensitive areas occur along existing creeks, upper watershed areas, existing flood control and infiltration facilities, and in natural hillside areas within the northerly portion of the city. These areas have generally been preserved as open space for public safety purposes or as wildlife habitat areas. The subject properties are located within a fully developed area that is not within close proximity to these biological resources, and is known to not contain any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species. Furthermore, the project is entirely within an already developed school and athletics facility. Therefore, the project will not have the above impacts. El There are no designated riparian habitats or other sensitive natural communities within the City of Arcadia. The subject properties are located within a fully developed area that is not close proximity to sensitive biological resources. Therefore, the project will not have the above impacts. c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption or other means? There are no federally protected wetlands within the City of Arcadia. The subject properties are located within a fully developed area that is not close proximity to sensitive biological resources. Therefore, the project will not have the above impacts. d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of wildlife nursery sites? El El There are no known native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species within the City of Arcadia. The project will accommodate a proposed gymnasium building on the subject site, replacing the existing gymnasium, locker and office facilities at a fully- developed site. Therefore, the project will not have the above impacts. e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? El CEQA Checklist -7- 4 -03 d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? 6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: CEQA Checklist File Nos.: CUP 09 -11 ADR 09-09 Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact The City of Arcadia has an ordinance to protect oak trees within the city. The project will not conflict with that ordinance as it does not interfere with the enforcement of the ordinance. Therefore, the project will not have the above impacts. f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation El Plan, Natural Conservation Community Plan, or other approved local, regional or state habitat conservation plan? There are no adopted Habitat Conservation Plans, Natural Conservation Community Plans, or other approved habitat conservation plan within the City of Arcadia. Therefore, the project will not have the above impacts. 5. CULTURAL RESOURCES Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in 15064.5? There are no known historical resources on or adjacent to the site. If previously unknown cultural resources are discovered during construction on the subject property, all work in the area would cease, and a qualified historian, archaeologist or paleontologist shall be retained by the development sponsor to assess the significance of the find, make recommendations, and prepare appropriate field documentation. b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to 15064.5? The subject properties are within a fully- developed area and are not known to contain any archaeological resources. Should any construction activity encounter any unrecorded archaeological resources, all work in the area would cease and a qualified archaeologist shall be retained by the development sponsor to assess the significance of the find, make recommendations, and prepare appropriate field documentation. c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? The subject properties are within a fully- developed area and are not known to contain any paleontological or unique geological resources. Should any construction activity encounter any such unrecorded paleontological resources, all work in the area would cease and a qualified paleontologist or geologist shall be retained by the development sponsor to assess the significance of the find, make recommendations, and prepare appropriate field documentation. There are no known human remains on the subject property. State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 requires that development be halted should any remain be encountered; the County Coroner shall be contacted whose responsibility is to make the necessary findings as to the origin and disposition of the remains pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. Compliance with these regulations would ensure that the project would not result in unacceptable impacts to human remains. El -8- 4 -03 i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist- Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off -site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? File Nos.: CUP 09 -11 ADR 09 -09 Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? El iii) Seismic related ground failure, including liquefaction? Ei iv) Landslides? El The City of Arcadia contains two local fault zones: the Raymond Hill Fault and the Sierra Madre Fault. The extremely thick alluvial deposits which underlie the seismic study area are subject to differential settlement during any intense shaking associated with seismic events. This type of seismic hazard results in damage to property when an area settles to different degrees over a relatively short distance, and almost all properties in this region are subject to this hazard, but building design standards do significantly reduce the potential for harm. The subject properties are not located within an Alquist Priolo Study Zone area, or any other earthquake hazard zone. Nor are they located on a hillside where landslides may occur. Since the subject properties are located in a fully developed area, the project will not have a significant impact or expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects involving fault rupture, strong seismic ground shaking, ground failure, and landslides. IZI The project will not involve any activity to create unstable earth conditions. Prior to any construction, soil studies are required to evaluate the potential impacts of the construction upon the soil. El The City of Arcadia is located on an alluvial plain that is relatively flat and expected to be stable. The proposed structures will be constructed on a pad where there are existing structures. Furthermore, these structures will be built to current building and safety standards. d) Be located on expansive soil as defined in Table 18 -1 -B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? The subject site consists of alluvial soil that is in the low to moderate range for expansion potential as defined in Table 18 -1- B of the Uniform Building Code. The project will not have the above impact. e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? The subject properties are in a fully developed area that utilizes the local sewer system. Soil suitability for septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems is not applicable to this project. 7. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Would the project: CEQA Checklist -9- 4 -03 File Nos.: CUP 09 -11 ADR 09 -09 Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment El through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? The project does not include the routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials, and will not have the above impact. b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? The project does not involve hazardous materials and will not create a significant hazard to the public or release hazardous materials into the environment. c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? The project does not involve hazardous materials and would not emit hazardous materials, substances, or waste. The subject properties are not included on a list of hazardous material sites and will not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment. e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? The subject site is within two miles of the El Monte Airport. However, the proposed structures are within an existing school and athletics facility, and will replace existing buildings. The proposal would not contribute to any airport related safety hazards for people residing or working at the subject properties. f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? 9) CEQA Checklist El There are no known private airstrips in the area. Since the uses on the subject properties will not be changed, the project will not result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area. El The project is to accommodate a replacement gymnasium building on the subject site. The proposed plans are subject to review by the emergency response units, and will not interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or evacuation plan. -10- 4 -03 h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of Toss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? File Nos.: CUP 09 -11 ADR 09 -09 Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact El The subject properties are not located near wildlands where there is a high fire hazard and will not have the above impact. 8. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY Would the project: a) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (i.e., the production rate of pre- existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? The project is to accommodate a proposed gymnasium building on the subject site, replacing the existing gymnasium, locker and office facilities. Although it has a greater capacity, the footprint of structures will not be substantially increased. It will not deplete groundwater supplies or interfere with groundwater recharge as there will be no substantial increase in the intensity of the uses on the subject properties as a result of the project. b) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off -site? The project is to accommodate a proposed gymnasium building on the subject site, replacing the existing gymnasium, locker and office facilities. The project does not involve alteration of existing drainage patterns and will not result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off -site. c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? The project is to accommodate a proposed gymnasium building on the subject site, replacing the existing gymnasium, locker and office facilities. The project does not involve alteration of existing drainage patterns and will not result in flooding on- or off -site. d) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? The project is to accommodate a proposed gymnasium building on the subject site, replacing the existing gymnasium, locker and office facilities. The project will not intensify the use of the subject properties and will not create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff. e) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? El CEQA Checklist -11- 4 -03 File Nos.: CUP 09 -11 ADR 09 -09 Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact Runoff from streets, parking areas, and other developed lands often carry various levels of water pollutants. However, the project is to accommodate a proposed gymnasium building on the subject site, replacing the existing gymnasium, locker and office facilities and will not substantially intensify the use of the subject properties as there is no proposed increase in the membership of the youth program or the number of students at the school. Any future development proposals for the subject properties will be subject to all NPDES requirements to ensure protection of groundwater quality. f) Violate any other water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? The project does not involve any increase in the intensity of uses on the subject properties and will not have the above impact. g) Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area, as mapped on El a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? A series of flood control channels within the city convey storm water to regional facilities to the south. Due to this system, there are currently no areas within the City that are within a 100 -year floodplain. The City of Arcadia was located within flood Zone D as identified by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) map Community Number 065014. Under this zone, no floodplain management regulations have been required. The project will not allow housing on the subject properties and therefore will not have the above impact. h) Place within a 100 -year floodplain structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? As discussed above, there are currently no areas within the City that are within a 100 -year floodplain. Therefore, the project will not have the above impact. 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 a levee or dam? As mentioned, a small portion at the northeast portion of the subject properties is within the Santa Anita Dam Inundation Area. Dam failure could be caused by a seismic event or intense storm that lasts over an extended period of time. Such an event could lead to the inundation of that portion of the subject properties, but is highly unlikely to occur. Therefore, the proposal will not expose people to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding. El El El j) Expose people or structures to Inundation by seiche, tsunami or mudflow? The City of Arcadia is not located within close proximity to any large inland bodies of water or the Pacific Ocean to be inundated by a seiche or tsunami. The subject properties are on a relatively flat alluvial plain that is highly porous and is unlikely to generate mudflow. k) During project construction, will it create or contribute runoff water that would violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements, including the terms of the City's municipal separate stormwater sewer system permit? The proposed gymnasium development would be subject to NPDES requirements to ensure compliance with the water quality standards and waste discharge requirements. CEQA Checklist -12- 4 -03 I) After the project is completed, will it create or contribute runoff water that would violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements, including the terms of the City's municipal separate stormwater sewer system permit? The proposed gymnasium development would be subject to NPDES requirements to ensure compliance quality standards or waste discharge requirements. m) Allow polluted stormwater runoff from delivery areas or loading docks or other areas where materials are stored, vehicles or equipment are fueled or maintained, waste is handled, or hazardous materials are handled or delivered, or other outdoor work areas, to impair other waters? q) Significantly increase erosion, either on or off -site? CEQA Checklist 9. LAND USE AND PLANNING Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? Potentially Significant Impact The subject properties are located in a fully- developed area; the project will not increase erosion. File Nos.: CUP 09 -11 ADR 09 -09 Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporation The proposed gymnasium development would be subject to the review and approval by the City Engineer so as not to cause significant alteration of the flow velocity or volume of storm water runoff that can cause environmental harm. Less Than Significant No Impact Impact with the water The proposed gymnasium development would be subject to NPDES requirements to ensure compliance with the water quality standards and waste discharge requirements. n) Potential for discharge of stormwater to cause significant harm on the biological integrity of the waterways and water bodies including municipal and domestic supply, water contact or non contact recreation and groundwater recharge? The proposed gymnasium development would be subject to NPDES requirements to ensure compliance with the water quality standards and waste discharge requirements. o) Discharge stormwater so that significant harm is caused to the biological integrity of waterways or water bodies? The proposed gymnasium development would be subject to NPDES requirements to ensure that stormwater discharge causes no significant harm to the biological integrity of waterways or water bodies. p) Significantly alter the flow velocity or volume of storm water runoff that can cause environmental harm? El The subject site is bordered by a golf course to the northeast, the Rio Hondo Channel and Peck Road Water and Conservation Park to the east and south, and single- family residential dwellings to the west and north. The proposed gymnasium development would not physically divide an established community. b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or -13- 4 -03 The project is consistent with the existing development on the subject property and will not conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulations. c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? There is no habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan on the subject properties. Therefore, the project could not conflict with such plans. 10. MINERAL RESOURCES Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that El would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? There are no known mineral resources on the subject properties that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state. b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? The subject properties are not designated in the General Plan as a mineral resource recovery site. Therefore, the proposal would not have the above impact. 11. NOISE Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? The project is to accommodate a proposed gymnasium building on the subject site, replacing the existing gymnasium, locker and office facilities and will not increase noise levels as the uses are to remain the same. The development of the site could create short term noise impacts resulting from construction. Construction hours are limited to the hours between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday. b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? The project is to accommodate the a proposed gymnasium building on the subject site, replacing the existing gymnasium, locker and office facilities and will not increase noise levels as the uses and activities are to remain the same as indicated by the submitted schedule, and do not include uses that would generate excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels. There may be a temporary increase in groundborne vibration or goundborne noise levels during the construction phase of the project. However, the construction will be monitored to comply with noise and time limitations. The current limitation on construction hours is from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday. No construction shall take place on Sunday. c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? CEQA Checklist zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? File Nos.: CUP 09 -11 ADR 09-09 Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact -14- 4 -03 b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? CEQA Checklist File Nos.: CUP 09 -11 ADR 09 -09 II Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact The project is to accommodate a proposed gymnasium building on the subject site, replacing the existing gymnasium, locker and office facilities and will not increase noise levels as the uses are to remain the same. Therefore, there is no substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project. d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? The project is to accommodate a proposed gymnasium building on the subject site, replacing the existing gymnasium, locker and office facilities and will not increase noise levels as the uses are to remain the same. Therefore, there is no substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project. There may be a temporary increase in groundborne vibration or goundborne noise levels during the construction phase of the project. However, the construction will be monitored to comply with noise and time limitations. The current limitation on construction hours is from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday. No construction shall take place on Sunday. e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where El such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? The project is located within two miles of the El Monte Airport. The proposed gymnasium building replaces the existing gymnasium, locker and office facilities on the subject site, which is an existing youth athletics organization and school. Therefore, the proposal would not have the above impact. f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? El There are no known private airstrips in the vicinity of the project. Therefore, there will not be any impact on the noise levels for people residing or working in the project area. 12. POPULATION AND HOUSING Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? The project is to accommodate a proposed gymnasium building on the subject site, replacing the existing gymnasium, locker and office facilities, which will not induce substantial population growth. El El There is no permanent or temporary housing on the subject properties. c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? There are no residents on the subject properties. -15- 4 -03 13. PUBLIC SERVICES Would the project: a) Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: 14. RECREATION Would the project: a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? 15. TRANSPORTATIONfTRAFFIC Would the project: a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? CEQA Checklist File Nos.: CUP 09-11 ADR 09 -09 Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact Fire protection? IZI Police protection? Schools? Parks? Other public facilities? IZI The project is to accommodate a proposed gymnasium building on the subject site, replacing the existing gymnasium, locker and office facilities, and will not affect the above public services. IZI The project is a gymnasium facilitating recreational activities and will not increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities. The proposed gymnasium will not adversely impact recreational facilities. b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which have an adverse physical effect on the environment? The project is to accommodate a proposed gymnasium building on the subject site, replacing the existing gymnasium, locker and office facilities. El -16- 4 -03 c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a. change in location that results in substantial safety risks? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? CEQA Checklist File Nos.: CUP 09 -11 ADR 09 -09 Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact Arcadia's roadway network is nearly built out, consisting of the Foothill Freeway (1 -210), regional arterial roadways, collectors and local streets. The subject properties are bordered by a Modified One -Way Primary Arterial with 3 lanes in each direction. Based on the Highway Capacity Manual, the capacity of a given street and the amount of traffic each street actually carries is expressed in terms of levels of service (LOS), ranging from level A (Free Flowing) to F "Jammed A Traffic Impact Analysis Report was prepared for the project. This report indicates that the levels of service of the surrounding streets will remain at an acceptable level after the completion of the project. El b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? The Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) adopted their most recent Congestion Management Program (CMP) in 2004. For the purposes of the CMP, a significant impact occurs when the proposed project increases traffic demand on a CMP facility by 2% of capacity (V /C z 0.02), causing LOS F (V /C 1.00). If the facility is already at LOS F, a significant impact occurs when the proposed project increases traffic demand on a CMP facility by 2% of capacity (V /C z 0.02). The lead agency may apply more stringent criteria if desired. A Traffic impact Analysis Report was prepared for the project. This report indicates that the levels of service of the surrounding streets will remain at an acceptable level after the completion of the project. El The project is to accommodate a proposed gymnasium building on the subject site, replacing the existing gymnasium, locker and office facilities. The project does not change any air traffic patterns or result in substantial safety risks. d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? The project is to accommodate a proposed gymnasium building on the subject site, replacing the existing gymnasium, locker and office facilities. The project does not significantly change the density of the uses and does not include new design features or incompatible uses. IZ The project is to accommodate a proposed gymnasium building on the subject site, replacing the existing gymnasium, locker and office facilities. The Fire Department has reviewed the plans and found that this project will not obstruct or reduce access to emergency services. The project is to accommodate a proposed gymnasium building on the subject site, replacing the existing gymnasium, locker and office facilities. The project does not significantly change the density of the uses, and there is more than adequate parking capacity. A parking survey completed as part of the Traffic Impact Analysis shows surplus parking for the subject site. For the occasional special event such as graduation day, there is a condition for the school and /or organization to utilize the open sports fields to accommodate overflow parking. g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans or programs supporting El alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? -17- 4 03 The project is to accommodate a proposed gymnasium building on the subject site, replacing the existing gymnasium, locker and office facilities. The project does not significantly change the density of the uses and will not conflict with alternative transportation opportunities. File Nos.: CUP 09 -11 ADR 09 -09 16. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? The California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Los Angeles Region, is the local board with jurisdiction over Arcadia. This board has established the Basin Plan which (i) designates beneficial uses for surface and ground waters, (ii) sets narrative and numerical objectives that must be attained or maintained to protect the designated beneficial uses and conform to the state's antidegradation policy, and (iii) describes implementation programs to protect all waters in the region. The project is to accommodate a proposed gymnasium building on the subject site, replacing the existing gymnasium, locker and office facilities. The project will not change the density of the uses and will not exceed the wastewater treatment requirements. Any future development is also subject to the requirements as set forth in the Basin Plan. b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact The project is to accommodate a proposed gymnasium building on the subject site, replacing the existing gymnasium, locker and office facilities. The project will not significantly change the density of the uses as there is no proposed increase in the membership of the youth program or the number of students at the school. and will not result in the need for new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities. c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? Local Stormwater management facilities, such as the storm drains within the area roadways, are the City's responsibility, while regional facilities are the responsibility of the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works (DPW). The City municipal storm drain facilities will be maintained and improved in conformance with the City of Arcadia Drainage System Technical Memorandum. The project is to accommodate a proposed gymnasium building on the subject site, replacing the existing gymnasium, locker and office facilities. The project will not change the density of the uses and will not result in the need for new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities. d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? In making this determination, the City shall consider whether the project is subject to the water supply assessment requirements of Water Code Section 10910, et seq. (SB 610), and the requirements of Government Code Section 664737 (SB221). CEQA Checklist -18- 4 -03 e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project determined that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? CEQA Checklist File Nos.: CUP 09-11 ADR 09 -09 Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact For the purposes of compliance with Senate Bill 610 and Senate Bill 221, the subject proposal does not qualify as a "project" A `project" means any of the following: 1) A proposed residential development of more than 500 dwelling units. 2) A proposed shopping center or business establishment employing more than 1,000 persons or having more than 500,000 square feet of floor space. 3) A proposed commercial office building employing more than 1,000 persons or having more than 250,000 square feet of floor space. 4) A proposed hotel or motel, or both, having more than 500 rooms. 5) A proposed industrial, manufacturing, or processing plant, or industrial park planned to house more than 1,000 persons, occupying more than 40 acres of land, or having more than 650,000 square feet of floor area. 6) A mixed -use project that includes one or more of the projects specified in this subdivision. 7) A project that would demand an amount of water equivalent to, or greater than, the amount of water required by a 500 dwelling unit project. If a public water system has fewer than 5,000 service connections, then "project" means any proposed residential, business, commercial, hotel or motel, or industrial development that would account for an increase of 10 percent or more in the number of the public water system's existing service connections, or a mixed -use project that would demand an amount of water equivalent to, or greater than, the amount of water required by residential development that would represent an increase of 10 percent or more in the number of the public water system's existing service connections. The project is consistent with the existing development on the subject properties, and will not conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation. The project is to accommodate a proposed gymnasium building on the subject site, replacing the existing gymnasium, locker and office facilities. The project will not change the density of the uses as there is no proposed increase in the membership of the youth program or the number of students at the school, and the submitted schedule is consistent with the existing gymnasium. It will not increase the wastewater treatment demand. Any future development shall also be subject to the requirements as set forth in the Basin Plan. f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to El accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? The project is to accommodate a proposed gymnasium building on the subject site, replacing the existing gymnasium, locker and office facilities. The project will not change the density of the uses as there is no proposed increase in the membership of the youth program or the number of students at the school, and the submitted schedule is consistent with the existing gymnasium. It will not increase the need for landfill capacity. g) Comply with federal, state and local statues and regulations related to solid waste? The project is to accommodate a proposed gymnasium building on the subject site, replacing the existing gymnasium, locker and office facilities. The project will not change the density of the usesas there is no proposed increase in the membership of the youth program or the number of students at the school, and the submitted schedule is consistent with the existing gymnasium. It will not violate any federal, state or local statues and regulations relating to solid waste. Any future development shall also be subject to the requirements as set forth in the Basin Plan. -19- 4 -03 17. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE b) Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term environmental goals to the disadvantage of Tong -term environmental goals? c) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? "Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? d) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? CEQA Checklist File Nos.: CUP 09 -11 ADR 09 -09 Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the NI environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? The project is consistent with the existing use of the subject properties, and does not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment. It will not reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species since it is located in a fully- developed area. The project is consistent with the existing use of the subject properties, and would not achieve short -term environmental goals to the disadvantage of long -term environmental goals. The project is consistent with the existing use of the subject properties, and will not have negative impacts on the environment; neither individually limited, nor cumulatively considerable since it is located in a fully- developed area. The project is consistent with the existing use of the subject properties. The project is to accommodate the existing and approved uses on the properties and will not have environmental effects that will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings. It is located in a fully developed area and no physical changes are proposed by the project. -20- 4 -03 RESOLUTION NO. 1805 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION NO. CUP 09 -11 AND ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION NO. ADR 09 -09 FOR A NEW 22,090 SQUARE -FOOT ATHLETICS BUILDING AND A 750 SQUARE -FOOT LOCKER FACILITY ADDITION AT AN EXISTING YOUTH FACILITY LOCATED AT 5150 FARNA AVENUE. WHEREAS, on June 4, 2009 the Development Services Department received Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 09 -11 and Architectural Design Review Application No. ADR 09 -09, submitted by Kare Youth League for a 22,090 square -foot athletics building and a 750 square -foot locker facility addition at property commonly known as 5150 Farna Avenue; and WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the Planning Commission on October 13, 2009, at which time all interested persons were given full opportunity to be heard and to present evidence. NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. That the factual data provided by the Development Services Department in the staff report dated October 13, 2009 are true and correct. SECTION 2. This Commission finds: 1. That the granting of Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 09 -11 will not be detrimental to the public health or welfare, or injurious to the property or improvements in such zone or vicinity. 2. That the use applied for at the location indicated is a proper one for which a Conditional Use Permit is authorized. 3. That the site for the proposed use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate said use. All yards, spaces, walls, fences, loading, landscaping, parking, and other features are adequate to adjust said use with the land and uses in the neighborhood. The proposed project complies with all related zoning requirements as set forth in the Arcadia Municipal Code. 4. That the site abuts streets and highways adequate in width and pavement type to carry the kind of traffic generated by the proposed use. 5. That the granting of Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 09 -11 will not adversely affect the comprehensive General Plan because the land use and current zoning are consistent with the General Plan. 6. That the use applied for will not have a substantial adverse impact on the environment, and that based upon the record as a whole there is no evidence that the proposed project will have any potential for an adverse effect on wildlife resources or the habitat upon which the wildlife depends, and that the evaluation of the environmental impacts as set forth in the initial study are appropriate within the meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, and therefore, a Negative Declaration was approved. SECTION 3. That for the foregoing reasons this Commission grants Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 09 -11 and Architectural Design Review No. ADR 09 -09 for a 22,090 square -foot athletics building and a 750 square -foot locker facility addition at 5150 Farna Avenue, subject to the following conditions: 1. The use approved by CUP 09 -11 and ADR 09 -09 is limited to the Kare Youth League and Rio Hondo Preparatory School. The subject site shall be 2 Resolution No. 1805 operated and maintained in a manner that is consistent with the proposal and plans submitted and approved for CUP 09 -11 and ADR 09 -09. 2. The Kare Youth League shall continue to limit membership to a maximum of 750 children, and the Rio Hondo Preparatory School shall continue to limit enrollment to a maximum of 250 students. 3. There shall be a parking management plan for special events with the following provisions: a. An adequate number of trained traffic directing personnel shall be utilized to guide inbound drivers directly to available parking spaces, and traffic directors shall be positioned near the entrance to the site to direct inbound drivers into the site and dissuade attendees from parking on the nearby residential streets. b. For their safety, traffic directing personnel shall wear brightly colored reflective vests so that they are highly visible, and shall have effective communication devices (i.e., walkie- talkies) to ensure efficient communication. c. The parking management program is to be regularly monitored and adjusted to maintain its effectiveness. The current pick -up and drop -off procedures are to be maintained and to be regularly monitored and adjusted to maintain effectiveness. 4. All on -site parking stalls shall be striped in accordance with Arcadia Municipal Code Section 9269.8.1. 3 Resolution No. 1805 5. All City requirements regarding accessibility, fire protection, occupancy, and safety shall be complied with to the satisfaction of the Building Official and the Fire Marshal. 6. Approval of CUP 09 -11 and ADR 09 -09 shall not take effect until the property owner(s), and applicant have executed and filed the Acceptance Form available from the Development Services Department to indicate awareness and acceptance of these conditions of approval. 7. All conditions of approval shall be complied with prior to the issuance of a final inspection and /or certificate of occupancy. Noncompliance with the plans, provisions and conditions of approval for CUP 09 -11 and ADR 09 -09 shall be grounds for immediate suspension or revocation of any approvals, which could result in a delay of the certificate of occupancy or the closing of the subject building. 8. The applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Arcadia and its officers, employees, and agents from and against any claim, action, or proceeding against the City of Arcadia, its officers, employees or agents to attack, set aside, void, or annul any approval or condition of approval of the City of Arcadia concerning this project and /or land use decision, including but not limited to any approval or condition of approval of the City Council, Planning Commission, or City Staff, which action is brought within the time period provided for in Government Code Section 66499.37 or other provision of law applicable to this project or decision. The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim, action, or proceeding concerning the project and /or land use decision and the City shall cooperate fully in the defense of the matter. The City reserves the right, at its 4 Resolution No. 1805 own option, to choose its own attorney to represent the City, its officers, employees, and agents in the defense of the matter. SECTION 4. The Secretary shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. Passed, approved and adopted this 13 day of October, 2009. ATTEST: Secretary, Planning Commission APPROVED AS TO FORM: Stephen P. Deitsch, City Attorney Chairman, Planning Commission 5 Resolution No. 1805 MINUTES ARCADIA PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, September 22, 2009, 7:00 P.M. Arcadia City Council Chambers The Planning Commission of the City of Arcadia met in regular session on Tuesday, September 22, 2009 at 7:00 p.m., in the Council Chambers of the City of Arcadia, at 240 W. Huntington Drive with Chairman Parrille presiding. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL: PRESENT: Commissioners Baderian, Baerg, Beranek, Hsu, and Parrille ABSENT: None MOTION: It was moved by Commissioner Hsu and Seconded by Commissioner Baderian to read the Resolutions by title only and waive reading the full body of the Resolutions. Without objection the motion was approved. OTHERS ATTENDING Deputy Development Services Director /City Engineer, Phil Wray Community Development Administrator, Jim Kasama Senior Planner, Lisa Flores Associate Planner, Tom Li Assistant Planner, Tim Schwehr Senior Administrative Assistant, Billie Tone SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION FROM STAFF REGARDING AGENDA ITEMS Resolution No. 1802 was approved without changes by the City Attomey and a revised version of Resolution No. 1804, including rewording on the Conditions of Approval, was distributed to each Commissioner. TIME RESERVED FOR THOSE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO WISH TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON NON PUBLIC HEARING MATTERS Five minute time limit per person None PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. HOMEOWNERS' ASSOCIATION NO. HOA 09 -01 531 North Monte Vista Road Mr. Mrs. Roger Sonnenberg The applicant is appealing the Rancho Santa Anita (Lower Rancho) Homeowners Association Architectural Design Review Board decision to deny their application for a Metro Shake II, stone coated steel roof at the subject residence. Senior Planner, Lisa Flores, presented the staff report. Commissioner Beranek said that the HOA denial cited the Fire Department contention that a metal roof would impede emergency services yet the Staff Report stated that the Fire Department had no objection to a metal roof. He asked for clarification. Ms. Flores said that she contacted the Fire Department and was informed that they had no objection to metal roofs. Commissioner Hsu asked if the homes with metal roofs that were used as samples in the Staff Report had been approved by the same Homeowner's Association. Ms. Flores said that they had. The public hearing was opened. Chairman Parrille asked if anyone wanted to speak in favor of the project. Mr. Roger Sonnenberg, the homeowner, said that he felt his wood shake roof needed to be replaced for fire safety reasons and that he had three options for roofing material; wood, tile or steel. He explained that he considered tile but found that it breaks when walked on and wood is a fire hazard. Mrs. Sonnenberg did some research and they decided that steel was the best roofing material both for durability and appearance. He further noted that he needs to begin the roofing project before the start of the rainy season. Mr. Warren Cross, general and roofing contractor, said that he has been in the roofing business for thirty years and offered to answer any questions the Commissioners might have. Mr. Cross pointed out that in the photos of homes with steel roofs within a few blocks of the project site, it is difficult to see any difference between steel and wood roofs. Further, he said that wood and concrete tiles are subject to deterioration and steel is not. Mr. Cross noted that he has installed steel roofs in the Rancho Santa Anita Residents Homeowner's Association area in the past and was able to work with the HOA to overcome any objections and make the requested adjustments to the roof. Chairman Panille asked if anyone wanted to speak in opposition to the project. Mr. Lou Pappas, a member of the Architectural Review Board said that the Board members take their job very seriously and that it is very rare to have one of their decisions appealed. He said there are a lot of issues regarding roofing materials and that the Board has conditionally approved many types of roofing materials demonstrating their flexibility. In fact, he said, the Board has approved several metal roofs over the last ten years. There are approximately 1000 houses in their area and 15 to 20 have metal roofs but the Board continues to find design and installation flaws in these roofs. He said there are problems with ridges, a variation in width and general appearance. He reminded the Commissioners that the Board members spend many hours scrutinizing plans to make sure they adhere to the high standards of the area and that they have been mandated by the HOA to maintain these standards. Mr. Pappas said that the question is what criteria must be met to overtum the good faith denial of the Board. He said that if the Commissioners overturn the decision of the Board, Mr. Cross will flood the area with marketing of metal roofs. Commissioner Baerg asked what process the Board used for conditional approval of a metal roof. Mr. Pappas said that the applicant is invited to attend a Board meeting and present his plans. Usually, the Board will explain the problems they have had with other metal roofs PC MINUTES 9 -22-09 Page 2 and, typically, will grant approval despite objections. Mr. Pappas said thus far, the Board has not found a metal roof that is acceptable for their neighborhood. Commissioner Hsu said that Mr. Pappas stated there were problems with roof edges and he asked for clarification. Mr. Pappas said the metal roofs are made to look like a wood roof but the finished edges cannot be disguised. Commissioner Hsu asked at what distance this flaw is noticeable and Mr. Pappas said it is visible at a distance of 15 to 30 feet. Mr. Steve Mathison, ARB Chairman, said that Mr. Pappas covered most of the topics of concern to the Board, however, he wanted to add that the finish of the metal roof is stone coat yet it looks like an asphalt roof; it doesn't have the look of natural wood. He also stressed the artificial appearance in edge details. Mr. Richard Fricke, ARB member, restated the fact that the Board spends a lot of time reviewing plans to maintain the high standards of the neighborhood and that most residents are pleased with their efforts. He expressed surprise that a homeowner would not want to comply with these standards. Chairman Parrille asked if the applicant wanted to speak in rebuttal. Mr. Sonnenberg noted that some of the concrete roofs that have been approved are already missing tiles and therefore he feels compelled to challenge the Board's standards. Mr. Cross said that the coating on the steel roofing is shiny at first but dulls with time. He added that trim tiles are not allowed so the steel is folded over as is done with a wood roof, no raw metal is exposed. This is a manufactured product, not real wood, but so is concrete roofing. Mr. Cross said that he has never encountered opposition from any Fire Department or Homeowner's Association before. MOTION: It was moved by Commissioner Baderian, seconded by Commissioner Hsu to close the public hearing. Without objection the motion was approved. Commissioner Baderian said that he understands the Board's desire to maintain their standards, however, in the past, they have conditionally approved this type of roof. Therefore, he is inclined to approve the applicant's appeal. MOTION: It was moved by Commissioner Baderian, seconded by Commissioner Hsu to approve appeal No. HOA 09 -01. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Baderian, Baerg, Beranek, Hsu, and Parrille NOES: None 2. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. CUP 09 -09 Continued from August 11, 2009 510 -512 East Live Oak Avenue Michael Hsiao PC MINUTES 9-22 -09 Page 3 The applicant is requesting a Conditional Use Permit for a 960 square -foot expansion to an existing 2,040 square -foot restaurant located at 510 -512 East Live Oak Avenue. Assistant Planner, Tim Schwehr presented the staff report. Commissioner Baderian noted that if the lease for additional parking is terminated the applicant will be an additional five spaces short of requirements. Commissioner Hsu asked why the entertainment equipment is still at the site and Mr. Schwehr explained the applicant was told to remove it but, as yet, had not complied. The public hearing was opened. Chairman PerriIle asked if anyone wanted to speak in support of the project. Mr. Arthur Chen, Manager of Cafe Fusion, said they have not removed the entertainment equipment but it is not in use either. Mr. Chen said that his customers are only interested in staying late on Friday and Saturday nights so he tried to lease parking space to accommodate the customers and avoid any inconvenience for the neighbors. Commissioner Hsu asked Mr. Chen if he will comply with code by removing the entertainment equipment and Mr. Chen said that he will. Chairman Perri Ile asked if anyone wanted to speak in opposition to the project. There were none. MOTION: It was moved by Commissioner Hsu, seconded by Commissioner Baderian to close the public hearing. Without objection the motion was approved. Commissioner Hsu said that it appears the applicant is trying to comply with the parking requirements and is willing to cut hours but that a traffic and parking study should be done. He said that it is wise to continue the item to a future meeting. Commissioner Baerg noted that the lease agreement for the restaurant is not concurrent with the lease of the restaurant and that a requirement for an active lease should be included in the conditions. Chairman Perri Ile agreed and said that there could be a problem with sufficient parking in the future. Commissioner Baderian also agreed and said that if the Commission continues the item, the applicant should consider other altematives besides a month -to -month lease. MOTION: It was moved by Commissioner Baderian, seconded by Commissioner Hsu to continue Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 09 -09 to October 27, 2009 and require submission of a full parking study along with any other pertinent information. PC MINUTES 9 -22-09 Page 4 ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Baderian, Baerg, Beranek, Hsu, and Parrille NOES: None 3. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. CUP 09 -15 210 North First Avenue Laura Powell and Brandon Kwae (Lessee) The applicant is requesting a Conditional Use Permit for a dance studio with up to 40 students in an existing 3,200 square -foot industrial space. Associate Planner Tom Li presented the staff report. Chairman Parrille asked if Mr. Li had received any objections to the project from the fitness club across the street. Mr. Li said he had not. Mr. Li said the lot to the north of the site is vacant and the office building across the street has a large parking lot. Commissioner Baderian pointed out that if the owner should find tenants for his vacant space, it could mean a marked increase in parking needs. He asked Mr. Li how the parking situation would be affected if the warehouse was utilized. Mr. Li said it would be about the same because only four students would be allowed before 7:00 p.m.. Commissioner Hsu asked if the students are adults and what type of dance lessons will be offered. Mr. Li said that the students will only be adults and ballroom dance lessons will be offered. The public hearing was opened. Chairman Parrille asked if anyone wanted to speak in favor of the project. Ms. Laura Powell and Mr. Brandon Quay, the applicants, explained that most of their business would be conducted in the evening when most other businesses in the area are closed except for the fitness center. They noted that there are 28 spaces on St. Joseph Street which is very convenient for their customers. They also explained to the Commissioners that many of their customers will arrive together, reducing the number of cars and parking spaces used. Chairman Parrille asked if they are willing to comply with staffs recommendations and Ms. Powell said they are. Mr. Mark Rodighiero, an Arcadia resident, said that he is one of the students of the applicants and has taken a number of private lessons during the daytime. He explained that the daytime classes are very small and the evening classes are normally limited to about 20 people. Chairman Parrille asked if anyone wanted to speak in opposition to the project. There were none. PC MINUTES 9-22 -09 Page 5 MOTION: MOTION: It was moved by Commissioner Baderian, seconded by Commissioner Hsu to close the public hearing. Without objection the motion was approved. It was moved by Commissioner Hsu, seconded by Commissioner Baderian to approve Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 09 -15 subject to the conditions in the staff report and to adopt Resolution No. 1802. A Resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Arcadia, California, approving Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 09 -15 to operate a dance studio with a maximum of forty (40) students in a 3,200 square -foot industrial unit at 210 N. First Avenue. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Baderian, Baerg, Beranek, Hsu, and Parrille NOES: None 4. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. CUP 09 -16 21 W. Duarte Road, #A Xiao Ming Chen Yang Chen The applicant is requesting a Conditional Use Permit for a 2,090 square -foot art gallery and fine arts tutoring center with up to 12 students. Assistant Planner Tim Schwehr presented the staff report. Commissioner Baderian asked if the applicant was planning to hold art exhibits at the site. The applicants explained that only their students' work would be displayed. Commissioner Baderian asked if there was an overlap in the hours of operation with the other tutoring center. Mr. Chen said that they staggered their hours so that there would be no overlap in drop -off and pick -up times. The public hearing was opened. Chairman Parrille asked if anyone wanted to speak in favor of the project. Mr. Chen explained that the center would offer private tutoring in art for 4 to 14 year old students. The space would be used only for tutoring and display of students' work. Commissioner Baderian said that he wanted to make it very clear that they do not intend to hold art exhibits. Mr. Chen replied that no public art exhibits would be held. Chairman Parrille asked if anyone wanted to speak in opposition to the project. There were none. PC MINUTES 9 -22 -09 Page 6 MOTION: MOTION: It was moved by Commissioner Hsu, seconded by Commissioner Hsu to close the public hearing. Without objection the motion was approved. It was moved by Commissioner Beranek, seconded by Commissioner Hsu to approve Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 09 -16 subject to the conditions in the staff report and to adopt Resolution No. 1804. A Resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Arcadia, Califomia, approving Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 09 -16 for a 2,090 square -foot art gallery and fine arts tutoring center with up to 12 students at any one time at 21 W. Duarte, Unit A. The age range of the students is limited to 4 14 years of age (non- driving age) and the hours of operation will be 4:00 P.M. to 7:00 P.M. on weekdays, and 9:00 A.M. to 5:30 P.M. on weekends. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Baderian, Baerg, Beranek, Hsu, and Parrille NOES: None CONSENT ITEMS 5. MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 8, 2009 MOTION: It was moved by Commissioner Hsu, seconded by Commissioner Beranek to approve the minutes of September 8, 2009 as presented. Without objection the motion was approved. MATTERS FROM CITY COUNCIL AND PLANNING COMMISSION Commissioner Beranek pointed out that there seem to be a lot of tutoring operations opening in the city and he asked if they are replacing revenue generating retail. Mr. Kasama acknowledged that his observation is correct. MODIFICATION COMMITTEE MEETING ACTIONS Commissioner Parrille summarized the actions taken by the Modification Committee and he noted that MC 09 -32, a proposed medical office building on Santa Clara Street, was approved but might be appealed to the Commission. MATTERS FROM STAFF Mr. Kasama discussed upcoming agenda items and reminded the Commissioners that if they have a concern about a Modification Committee decision they can appeal the decision at the Planning Commission meeting and there is no fee. PC MINUTES 9 -22 -09 Page 7 ADJOURNED 8:30 p.m. ATTEST: Secretary, Planning Commission Chairman, Planning Commission PC MINUTES 9-22 -09 Page 8