Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution No. 5420 0 RESOLUTION NO. 542 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD DIRECTORS OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF AZUSA CERTIFYING THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND CONFIRMING THE CERTIFICATION OF THE ENVIRON- MENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF AZUSA AND DEROSA PROPERTIES THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF AZUSA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The Board of Directors of the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Azusa does hereby find, determine and declare that: A. An Initial Study of Environmental Impact and a Negative Declaration have been prepared for the proposed agreement entitled "Disposition and Development Agreement by and between the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Azusa and DeRosa Properties, a California General Partnership," dated as of February 6, 1989, and said Initial Study and Negative Declaration were prepared in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act, the State CEQA Guidelines, and the City's CEQA procedures. B. On July 5, 1988, the Board of Directors of the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Azusa certified and approved the Environmental Impact Report for the proposed Coastfed Properties (CBD -I) Redevelopment Project adopting Resolution No. 472. This Environmental Impact Report addressed a project consisting of the Coastfed apartment project to the west of San Gabriel Avenue as well as the commercial project north of Foothill Boulevard and between San Gabriel Avenue and Azusa Avenue which is the project approved by the Agreement between the Agency and DeRosa Properties. Additionally, on September 18, 1978, the Board of Directors approved and certified an Environmental Impact Report for the Central Business District Redevelopment Project. Subsequent Environmental Impact Reports were also prepared for amendments to the project area and were certified and approved by the Board on or about July 2, 1979, July 21, 1981, November 28, 1983 and December 17, 1984. These EIR's address issues concerning development in the Central Business District Redevelopment Project Area which includes the proposed DeRosa project. Applicable mitigation measures in said EIR's, and particularly in the EIR approved for the CBD -1 project on July 5, 1988, have been incorporated into this Project. The Project contains no features or impacts which will require important revisions to 0 0 the previously approved EIR's, nor new, significant environmental impacts not previously considered in the EIR's. Substantial changes have not occurred with respect to the project discussed in the EIR of July 5, 1988, or in the environmental factors addressed which will require important revisions in the previous EIR's due to the involvement of new, signifcant environmental impacts not covered in the previous EIR's. No new information of substantial importance has become available on the project, nor on Central Business District Redevelopment Project area so as to require revision of the EIR's. These issues were specifically addressed in the Initial Study of Environmental Impact prepared for the approval of this Disposition and Development Agreement. C. At its meeting of February 6, 1989, the Board of Directors of the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Azusa held a duly -noticed public hearing on the proposed agreement and heard evidence on the proposed agreement and the Negative Declaration. D. Prior to approving the Agreement, the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Azusa considered the proposed Negative Declaration, the Initial Study of Environmental Impact, and the information from the previous EIR's described above, together with any comments received during the public review process. E. On the basis of this review, there is no substantial evidence that the Project as conditioned, will have a significant adverse effect on the environment. SECTION 2. The Board of Directors of the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Azusa hereby certifies and approves the Negative Declaration for the proposed Disposition and Development Agreement between the Agency and DeRosa Properties, a copy of which Negative Declaration is attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and by this reference incorporated herein. The Agency Board of Directors hereby establishes a monitoring procedure to follow through and implement the mitigation measures set forth in the Environmental Impact Report approved on July 5, 1988, which monitoring program shall consist of periodic review by the staff as frequently as necessary and at least once each year, as well as formal review of the mitigation measures prior to approval of a Certificate of Completion. The Agency further determines that the Negative Declaration shall be filed with the County Clerk of the County of Los Angeles in the manner required by law. SECTION 3. The Secretary shall certify the adoption of this Resolution. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 6th day of February , 1989. PJA -2- pmt/RES3353 I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Board of Directors of the Azusa Redevelopment Agency of the City of Azusa, at a regular meeting thereof held on the 6th day of February , 1989. AYES: BOARD MEMBERS: AVILA, STEMRICH, LATTA, MOSES NOES: BOARD MEMBERS: NONE ABSENT: BOARD MEMBERS: NARANJO SECRETARY J -3- ec 41(-�, rC�AZUSA-z LINITIAL STUDY OF CITY Of � C<,.ITY �Ll3j• 0 CITY OF= "° -y ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT +'u C IPAZUS10� rr I.BACKGROUND 1. Name of Proponent/Applicant: City of Azusa Redevelopment Agency 2. Address and phone number of Proponent/Applicant: 213 East Foothill Boulevard Azusa, CA 91702 (818)334-5125 3. Name of Project (if applicable): CBD -1 Site/Centennial Square Site 4. Description of Project and Address: The project is a proposed 52,000 square foot commercial center. A previous EIS/EIR which contemplated 35,000+ square feet of commercial development was certified by the Redevelopment Agency on July 5, 1988. This proposal contemplates approx- imately 17,000 additional square feet of building. The Site is 3.5 acres at the northwest corner of Azusa Avenue and Foothill Boulevard. 5. Identification of Environmental Setting: The Site consists of a variety of commercial, residential, and industrial land uses. Several vacant lots also exist. The Site is zoned CBD for commercial purposes. •r • pnzusna COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT yalY wo � INITIAL STUDY IAO � V ASSESSMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Gnzusn� A copy of the Initial Study for Community Development Department projects will be available to the public in the Community Development Department and in the Azusa Public Library. Comments from the public on the projects may be made in writing to the Community Development Director or at the public hearings on the project. Project Description: (See #4 of Initial Study of Environmental Impact) II. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS (Explanations of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required an attached sheets.) YES MAYBE I NO 1. EARTH Will the project result in: a. Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic substructures? b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction or overcovering of the soil? X c. Change in topography or ground surface relief features? X d. The destruction, covering, or modification of any unique geologic or physical features? X e. Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site? X f. Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands, or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? X g. Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earth- quakes, landslides, mudslides, ground failure, or similar hazards? X 2. AIR Will the project result in: a. Substantial air emmissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? X b. The creation of objectionable odors? -� c. Alteration of air movement, moisture or temperature, or any change X b. in climate, either locally or regionally? X 3. WATER Will the project result in: X a. Changes in currents, or the course of direction of water movements, in either marine or fresh waters? X b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and 6. NOISE Will the project result in: X a. amount of surface water runoff? X c. Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? X d. Change in the amount of surface water in any water body? X e. discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration of surface water a. earth including but not limited to temperature, dissolved oxygen or _ X b. turbidity? X f. Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground waters? _'_ g. Change in the quality of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquafier by cuts or excavations? X h. Change in quality of ground water? _X_ I. Substantial reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies? X J. Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding or tidal waves? X 4. PLANT LIFE Will the project result in: a. Change in the diversity of species, or number of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, microflora and aquatic plants)? X b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species or plants? c. Introduction of new species of plants into an area, or in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? X d. Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? _X 5. ANIMAL LIFE Will the project result in: a. Change in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of animals (birds, land animals, including reptiles, fish and shellfish, benthic organisms, insects, or nicrofauna)? X b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of animals? X c. Introduction of new species or animals into an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? X d. Deterioration of existing fish or wildlife habitat? 6. NOISE Will the project result in: a. Increase in existing noise levels? X b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels? �- 7. LIGHT AND GLARE Will the project produce new light or glare? X 8. LAND USE Will the project result in: a. Substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? _ X b. Incompatibility with existing zoning, the General Plan, any specific -1 plan, or other applicable land use control? X 0C • YES MAYBE NO 9. NATURAL RESOURCES Will the project result in: a. Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? X b. Substantial depletion of any non-renewable natural resource. X 10. RISK OF UPSET Does the project involve a risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions? _ X 11. POPULATION Will the project alter the location, distribution, 17. HUMAN HEALTH Will the project result in: a. Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding mental health)? X b, Exposure of people to potential health hazards? X 18. AESTHETICS Will the project result in the obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public, or will the proposal result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? X 19. RECREATION Will the project result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? X 20. ARCHEOLOGICAL/HISTORICAL Will the project result in an alteration of a significant archeological or historical site, structures, object or building? X 21. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a. density or growth rate of the human population of an area? }t 12. HOUSING Will the project affect existing housing or create a demand for additional housing? X 13. TRANSPORTATION Will the project result in: a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement? X b. Effects on existing parking facilities or demand for new parking? _X _ c. Substantial impact upon existing transportation systems? _X d. Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people/and or goods? X e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? X f. Increase In traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? - 19. PUBLIC SERVICES Will the project have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered governmental services in any one of the areas: a. Fire protection? b. Police protection? X c. Schools? X d. Parks or other recreational activities? e. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? _X X f. Other governmental services? X 15. ENERGY Will the project result 1n: a. Use of substantial amounts of energy or fuel? X b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of energy, or require the development of new sources of energy? 16. UTILITIES Will the project result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations to the following utilities? a. Power or natural gas? X b. Communications systems? X c. Water? X d. Sewer or septic tanks? X e. Storm water drainage? _X_ f. Solid waste and disposal? _X_ 17. HUMAN HEALTH Will the project result in: a. Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding mental health)? X b, Exposure of people to potential health hazards? X 18. AESTHETICS Will the project result in the obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public, or will the proposal result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? X 19. RECREATION Will the project result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? X 20. ARCHEOLOGICAL/HISTORICAL Will the project result in an alteration of a significant archeological or historical site, structures, object or building? X 21. 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 wild- life 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? X b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? ( A short-term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief definitive period of time while long-term impacts will endure well into the future.) - c. Does the project have impacts which are individually limited but cumulatively considerable? ( A project may impact on two or more separate resources where the impact on each resource is relatively small, but where the effect of the total of those impacts on the environment is significant.) X d. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings directly or indirectly? X E ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS CITY OF OV1 (A O �.�' D CITYC cy EXPLANATIONS/MITIGATION DISCUSSION �OAZUSX, III. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION SEE ATTACHED MITIGATION MEASURES Describe mitigation measures included in the project, if any are needed, to avoid potentially significant effects: SEE ATTACHED DETERMINATION (To be completed by Lead Agency) On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find the proposed project COULD NOT HAVE a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECARATION has been prepared and is attached. X I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED. I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect effect on the environment and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. Date: January 18, 1989 Signature: �t/� Title: Execu ive Director •c • c� III. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION 6.a The proposal will marginally increase traffic to the site. No major changes in the noise environment are expected because of this proposal. 6.b The proposal contemplates an office building near the railroad tracks, a major noise generator. This use is compatible with the expected noise level of 70 db. 8.a. Proposal will involve a minor increase in the size of a proposed commercial center. The environmental impacts of the original center were reviewed under a previously certified EIR/EIS for this project. 13.a, b An increase in generated traffic and demand for parking will occur above levels projected for the original project. Existing circulation systems and provided parking will be adequate to handle the projected increase. IV. MITIGATION MEASURES All mitigation measures previously approved by the Redevelopment Agency Board of Directors on July 5, 1988 by Resolution No. 472 (copy attached) shall be imposed on the revised project with the proposed expansion. •C CITY OF E O t/1 LA +� CITYOF NEGATIVE DECLARATION Date: NOTICE: Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA-Public Resources Code, Section 21100 et. seg.), the City of Azusa has determined that the project referenced hereinafter will not have a significant effect on the environment. CBD -1 Site/Centennial Square Site PROJECT TITLE: North West Corner of Azusa Avenue and Foothill Boulevard PROJECT LOCATION: PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Construction of 17,000+ square feet of additional Commercial space beyond that assessed in CBD -1 Site EIR/EIS dated July 5, 1988. PROJECT PROPONENT: A copy of the Initial Study, documenting reasons to support the findings that said project will not have a significant effect and containing any mitigating measures proposed to be included in the project to avoid potentially significant effects, is attached hereto for public review. An Environmental Impact Report is not required for this project. APPEALS. Any person or agency aggrieved by this decision may appeal to the Azusa City Council in compliance with all provisions for filing of such appeals. Any such appeal must be filed within thirty (30).days after the issuance of this decision, or it shall be dis- missed by the City Council. Robb R. Steel, Redevelopment DirectorE13) 334-5125 Ext. CONTACT PERSON TITLE TELEPHONE M r;�AZiI'A ;CITYOF �`'<: NOTICE OF DETERMINATION �CITYOF LOAZUSA,� TO: COUNTY CLERK FROM: CITY OF AZUSA CORPORATIONS DIVISION -- Room 106 213 E. Foothill $lvd. P.O. Box 151 Azusa, California 917 Los Angeles, Ca, 90053 OFFICE OF PLANNING AND RESEARCH 1400 Tenth Street Sacramento, Ca. 95814 Date: February 6, 1989 CBD -1 Site/Centennial Square Site PROJECT TITLE: PROJECT LOCATION: PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This is to advise that the City of Azusa has approved the above de- scribed project and has made the following determinations regarding same; 1. The project in its approved form 11 will, El will not have significant effect on the environment. 2• ® An Environmental Impact Report was prepared for this pro- ject pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. 3. E A Negative Declaration was prepared for this project pur- suant to the provisions of CEQA. 4. A Statement of Overriding Considerations ❑ was,® was not, adopted for this project. 5. Mitigation measures ® were, ❑ were not, made a condition of approval of the project. CONTACT PERSON (818) 334-5125 Ext. TITLE TELEPHONE NUMBER