Press Alt + R to read the document text or Alt + P to download or print.
This document contains no pages.
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