Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution No. 8671RESOLUTION NO. 8671 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AZUSA CERTIFYING THE NEGATIVE DECLARATIONS FOR ZONE CHANGE CASE NO. Z-89-1 AND ZONE CHANGE CASE NO. Z-89-2 AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT GPA -89-1 WHEREAS, Initial Studies of Environmental Impact and Negative Declarations have been prepared for Zone Change Case No. Z-89-1 and Case No. Z-89-2 and General Plan Amendment GPA -89-1 (hereinafter "Projects") in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act and the State CEQA Guidelines; WHEREAS, a duly -noticed public hearing was held by the Planning Commission for the City of Azusa on the 12th and 26th day of April, 1989, and the City Council of the City of Azusa on the 19th day of June, 1989, at which time evidence was heard on the proposed Projects and the Negative Declarations; WHEREAS, prior to approving the Projects the City Council of the City of Azusa considered the Initial Studies of Environmental Impact and the Negative Declarations together with any comments received during the public review process; WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Azusa hereby finds and determines that on the basis of the Initial Studies and any comments received in the public review process, there is no substantial evidence that the Projects will have a significant adverse effect upon the environment. Any potentially significant effects of the Projects will be avoided by implementation of mitigation measures which have been made part of the Projects. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AZUSA that the Negative Declarations for the Projects, attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and Exhibit "B" respectively, and by this reference incorporated herein, are hereby certified and approved and determined that these Negative Declarations shall be filed with the County Clerk of the County of Los Angeles. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution. ADOPTED AND APPROVED this 17thday of July 1 1989. MAYOR 0 0 I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the City of Azusa at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 17th day of July 1989, by the following vote of the Council: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS AVILA, STEMRICH, NARANJO NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS NONE ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS NONE ABSTAIN: COUNCILME ERS L TTA, MOSES -2- FJN/RES4079 0 0 EXHIBIT A r AzuSA^� nCITYOF�� NEGATIVE DECLARATION LAO �lC1TYOF E L!'AZUSA' Date: April. 12, lo59 NOTICE: Pursuant to the provislens Of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA-Public Resources Ccde, Section 21100 et. se the City of Azusa has determined t:^at the referenced herein Ler _. Project reverenced er will not have a significant effect on the environment, PROJECT TITLE: Zone Change Case No. Z-89-1, General Plan Amendment No. BPA -89-1, Variance No. V-89-8 and Precise Plan of Design No. P-89-44 PROJECT LOCATION: 1171 best .Arrow Highway Azusa, Ca. 91702 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Zone change from Ria to C2, general plan amendment from medium density residential to general commercial to construct a medical laboratory building with reduced landscaped setbacks. PROJECT PROPO:IE_IT: A.M.C. Clinical Laboratory, Inc. A copy of the Initial Stu y, dccu-enting reasons to support the findings that said project will not :ave a significant effect and containing any mitigating measures p-cposed to be included in the project to avoid potentially sicni_==-cant effects, is attached hereto for public review. An Environmental Impact Report is not required for this project. APPEAMS. Any person or agency acor-eved by this decision may appeal to the Azusa City Council in ccnol'v with f, -" "e all provisions for ing of such appeals. Any such appeal must be f'1 (30).days after the - - ed within thirty sscarce o- v tnis decision, or it shall be dis- missed by the City Council. DANIEL M. 4rATROUS, SENIOR PLANNER CONTACT PERSON TITLE EXHIBI T A 8) 334-5125 TELEPHONE 262 • e r{ AzusA �� INITIAL STUDY nCI7YOF�� NO �} �Y •---� ii l CITY OFU E J �J V I R© N Mc J '� Y A L AZUSA'�Z I.. BACKGROUND 1. Name of Proponent/Applicant: A.M.C. CLINICAL LABORATORY, INC. 2. Address and phone number of Proponent/?.ppiicant: 1183 West Arrow Highway Azusa, California 91702 (818) 334-2951 OF I M PAC i 3. Name of Project (if applicable): Zone Change No. Z-89-1, General Plan Amendment No. GPA -89-1, Variance No. V-89-8 and Precise Plan of Design No. P-89-44. 4. Description of Project and Address: Zone change from R3a to C2 and general plan amendment from medium density residential to general commercial to construct a medical laboratory building with reduced landscaped setbacks. 1171 West Arrow Highway Azusa, California 91702 5. Identification of Environmental Settinc: Small vacant parcel along a busy mixed use thoroughfare, in an area bordering suburban residential and commercial/industrial areas. Or or EllC01MMUNITY DEVELCPi,1ENT DEPARTrAENT INITIAL STUDY , ASSESSMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS A copy of the initial Study for Cc-rmu pity Covelopmer.t Ceoartcec_ rrojects will be available to tfm p_blic in the Cormunity Devolopr,ent Cepartnent and in the Azusa c.._c -racy. Consents from the o,bllc on t , projects may be made in writing to Che Community Deyelep-e-.t __rector or at the public hearings or. Che project. Project Description: Z-89-1/GPA-89-1/V-89-8/P-89-44, zone change from R3a to C2 and general plan amendment from medium density residential to general commercial to II. ENVIRCNXENTAL IXEACTS construct a medical laboratory building with reduced landscaoc (Explanations o: all "pus" and Era ybe" answers are req�.:i red on a_tae*.ed sheets.) setbacks. 5. AN -MAL LIFE Will Che project resuI- a. Change in the diversity of s^ecies, or nu -hers of any ,ze__es -f animals (b_res, land animals, including reptiles, __s- _.._____sh, benthic o:canism s, insects, o- cicrofauna)? b. RCducCL.n of the number's of any cnigec, rare or ecca 7=_e_ of animals? C- Introcu cticn Of new pecios or an -mals into an arca, or r_-__= _n a barrier to the migrnt_cn or rove ase nt of animals'. d. Deterioration o: exisC ng ._.,o or wildlife hab_tat? 6. NOISE 'dill the project result ir: YES YAY g:: N7 1. EART4 Wi11 the project result in: y` a. Unstable earth cc nd4t4 r.s or in on a noes in COO legie sod`s--_--_,:res? t b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction or overcovering •i one soil? —�-' c. Change Jr. topograp:ry or ground surface relief features? d. The destruction, covering, or modification of any uniq'e ct_agie r b. or physical features? e. Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or ___ h the site? .. Chances in deposition or erosion of beach sands, or c.. des in siltation, deposition or erosion which may modify the cr.=-.rel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, z -_e- or lake? 1 g. Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards see, -as e_rth- quakes, landslides, mudslices, ground failure, or sim -i_=_rds? :r 2. AIR Will the project result in: a. Substantial air emmissions or deterioration of amSiect a_r c_=__tv? b. The creation of objectionable odors? c. Alteration of air moverent, moisture or temperature, __ -_ d-.3-.cP in climate, either locally or regionally? k 3. WATER Will the project result in: a. Changes in currents, or the course of direction of water mo•rements, in either marine o, fresh waters? b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or t.`.e raze --_ amount of surface water runoff? X C. Alterations to the course or flew of flood waters? c. Change in the amount of surface water in any water body? e. discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration of s�f=see 'water earth including but not limited to temperature, disso'_ced cx,.nen or turbidity? I. Alteration of the direction or :ate of flow of ground waters? q. Change in the quality of ground waters, either throcc: c_rec_ _X additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an a =- by cuts or excavations? Y h. Chance in duality of ground water? .� _. Substantial :eduction in the amount of water otherwise a.i e for 'public water supplies? j. Exposure of pecole or too 'perty to water related hazards s__. as —1— fleod4ng or tical waves? +. PLANT LIFE Will the project result in: a. Change in the diversity of species, or number of plants j_nc__..ing trees, shrubs, grass, crops, microflora and aquatic p__nts)? k E. Reduction of uhe numbers of any unique, are or encanoered =__cies or plants? c. Intredection of new species of plants into an area, or to the noreaL replenish.-.ent of existing species? d. Rec1;cticn in aereaao of any aarleultcral crap? 5. AN -MAL LIFE Will Che project resuI- a. Change in the diversity of s^ecies, or nu -hers of any ,ze__es -f animals (b_res, land animals, including reptiles, __s- _.._____sh, benthic o:canism s, insects, o- cicrofauna)? b. RCducCL.n of the number's of any cnigec, rare or ecca 7=_e_ of animals? C- Introcu cticn Of new pecios or an -mals into an arca, or r_-__= _n a barrier to the migrnt_cn or rove ase nt of animals'. d. Deterioration o: exisC ng ._.,o or wildlife hab_tat? 6. NOISE 'dill the project result ir: a. Increase in existing noise icvels? y` b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels? t 7, LIGIiT AND GLARE Will the project produce new liq:-t cr - ar_. X S. I\ND USE Will the project result in: a. Substantial alteration of the present or planned lace use of an arca? r b. Incompatibility with existing zoning, the General =':a^, =ny specific 1 plan, or other applicable land use control? h or 9. NATURAL RESOURCES .4411 the protect result in: a. Increase in the :ate of use cf any natural resources? b. Substantial depletion of any nen-renewable natural resource. 10. R1S8 OF UPSET Does the project involve a risk of an exclusion 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? YES }i\YPE 50 t 11. PCPUL:,TION Will the pro'.ect alter the location, cistri bubon, density or growth rate o` the human populai;cn of an area? 12. HOUSING Will the project affect existing housing or create a demand for additional hearing? 13. TRANSPORTATICN Will the project result in: a. Generation of substantial additional vQhic'A ar movement? ,X b. Effects on existing parking facilities or demand for me.+ parking? C. Substantial impact upon existing transportation systems? d. Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement or people/and or goads? e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? 14. 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? c. Schools? d. Parks or other recreational activities? e. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? _. Other governmental services? 15. ENERGY Will the project result in: a. Use of substantial amounts of energy or fuel? 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? b. Communications systems? c. Water? — d. Sewer or septic tanks? e. Storm water drainage? _. Solid waste and disposal? 17. ..UMAN HEALTH Will the project result in: a. Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding mental health)? b. Exposure of people to potential health hazards? 18. .ESTI;E71CS Will the protect result in the obstruction of anv_ scenic vista or view open to the public, or will the p ccsal result in tine creation of an aesthetically offensive site coon to public vie.? 19. P.ECREAT10:1 Will the project result in an impact upon the duality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? 20. ARCHEOLCGiCAL/i{IS7OR1Cf,L Will the prcject result in an alteration of a significant archeological or historical site, structures, object or building? 21. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE 01 k4 X x X X x Y X X a. Dces the project have the potential to decrade the cualiLy of t`.e er.vironm,en L, substantially reduce the 'nabitat c` a f_s- cr wild- life species, cause a fish or wildlife pooulat4cn to prep celoa self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the ranee of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? `( b. Dees the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long -tern, environmental coals? I „ short -tern impact on t:^.e environment is one :ich occurs in a relatively brief dutinitive period of cme while long-term ir_oaets will endure well into the fu Lure.l X c. Does the project have impacts which are individually l4mited but cumulatively considerable? I A prcject 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 0 0 C r AZUSA„ ^CITY OFO V�1 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYS,I11:.� >�CITYCFUG EXPLANATIONS/MITIGATION DISCUSSION AZU.W III. DISCUSSION OF EMIVIRCNM:^NTAL EVALU :TION See attached sheet. IV. MITIGATION MEASURES Describe mitigation measures incl,-ded in the project, if any are needed, to avoid potentially significant effects: None Required. V. DETERMINATION (To be completed by Lead Agency) On the basis of this initial evaluaticn: X I find the proposed project COULD NOT HAVE a significant effect on the environment, and a N�EEGATI E DECARATION has been prepared and is attach' I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the en'J-: ^....ent, there will not be a significant effect in this casebecause the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE WILL EE PREPARED. I find the proposed project ._.Y have a siaai_`icant effect effect on the environment and an ENVIR0M1[-1_NTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. Date: 3/30/89 S' nature• � DANIEL N. ',�ATROUS T_tle: SENIOR PLANNER 0 0 0 ATTACHMENT TO Z-89-1, GPA -89-1, V-89-8 & P-89-44 III. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION l.b. Any grading or compaction of soil will be controlled under an approved grading plan. 2.a. Site will be regularly watered down to minimize fugitive dust during construction. 3.b. Any changes in drainage patterns will be reviewed and controlled under an approved drainage plan. 6.a. Noise during construction will be regulated under the Azusa Noise Ordinance. 8.a. Project involves a zone change from R3a (Multi -family Residential) to C2 (Restricted Commercial), a general plan amendment from medium density residential to general commercial, and a variance from landscaped setback requirements. 13.a.&b. Project will generate a marginal increase in traffic and need for parking. Existing circulation system and provided parking should be adequate to handle the projected increase. Reference is also hereby made to all other Environmental Impact Reports which have been prepared for projects within the City of Azusa for additional information and knowledge of existing and future environmental conditions in the area. 1 0 0 EXHIBIT § C Cd n U SFA CITYO OF NEGATIVE DECLARATION moo„ a�5 > CITYOF Date: 4/1 9/R9 NOTICE: Pursuant to the provisions cf the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA-Public Resources Cede, Section 21100 et, seg.), the City of Azusa has determined that the project referenced hereinafter will not have a significant effect on the environment. PROJECT TITLE: Zone Change No. Z-89-2, General Plan Amendment No. GPA -89-1, Conditional Use Permit No. C-89-6 and Precise Plan of Design No. P-89-49' PROJECT LOCATION: 1901 N. San Gabriel Canyon Road Azusa, California 91702 PROJECT DESCRIPTION:58-unit detached condominium project. PROJECT PROPONENT: D & D Development/Johnny E. Johnson/Speckert Famil 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 anneal must be filed within thirty (30)_days after the issuance of this decision, or it shall be dis- missed by the City Council. DANIEL M. WATROUS, SENIOR PLANNER (818) 334-5125 Ext 262 CONTACT PERSON TITLE TELEPHONE EXHIBIT 9 LN FCAZUSAj�l CITY OF Q O V1 un 0 un< ty CITY OF LPAZUSV-f I.BACRGROUND INITIAL STUDY OF ENVIRONMENTAL 1. Name of Proponent/Applicant: D & D Development Johnny E. Johnson IMPAC Speckert Family Trust 2. Address and phone number of Proponent/Applicant: 711 E. Imperial Highway 919 W. Sierra Madre Ave. 3825 Michillinda D Brea, Califonria 92621 Azusa, Califonria 91702 Pasadena, Ca.91107 .(714) 671-1400 (818) 969-1727 (818) 973-7489 3. Name of Project (if applicable): Zone Change No. Z-89-2, General Plan Amendment No. GPA -89-1, Conditional Use Permit No. C-89-6 and Precise Plan of Design No. P-89-49 4. Description of Project and Address: 58 -unit detached condominium project 1900 N. San Gabriel canyon Road Azusa, California 91702 5. Identification of Environmental Settinc: Boundary area between suburban and rural residential areas. nzusn•a COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT >yC`lY Ui°"' INITIAL STUDY NO y VN I + C 11C! C - �nzus,101 II ASSESSMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS A copy of the Initial Study for Community Develcpment Ceparzzect csojects will be available to the lz.rliC in the Community Development Cecartment and in the Azusa Pub L:c L-brary. Comments from the publ'c on the projects may be made in writing to the Cerumunity CocelecmenL __rector or at the public hearings cn the protect. Project Descr'p§ion• Zo❑❑e Chang@ No. Z -g9-2, ng a11 Plan Amendment CPA -89-1, Condition'1 Use Per re 8 trecise Chang?, of Design l-b�-49 for a proposed 58 -unit detached C411d?,q�4BfRNf,uj��rcT3 (Explanations of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required cc attached sheets.) YES MAYBE 1. EARTH Will the project result io: a. Unstable earth conditions or :n charges in ceolcc:c s•ubst ru ct'u res? X b. Disruptions, displacerents, cempacticn or overcevericc c; r: -_e soil? X c. Chance in topography or ground surface re Lef features? X d. The destruction, covering, or modification of any unicne cec'cgic o: physical features? X e. Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the s'_te? X f. Changes in deposition or eros:en o` beach sands, or c-acues 5. in siltation, deposition or eros -en which may modify t^.e c -an -.el of - a river or stream or the bee of the ocean or any bay, '_;ale= or lake? X g. Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards s_ch as earth- X 7. quakes, landslides, mudslides, ground failure, or sinzlar :^__a -ds? X 2. AIR Will the project result in: a. Substantial air e=missions or detericra^_ion of a-:n_ent air c-_it_v? X b. The creation of objectionable odors? X c. Alteration of air movement, moisture or temperat:re, or ani., --a::ge X in climate, either locally or regionally? X 3. WATER Will the project result in: a. Changes in currents, or the course of direction of water mccenen's, in either marine or fresh waters? X b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate _c.. amount of surface water runoff? X c. Alterations to the course or flew of flood waters? d. Change in the amount of surface water in any water b , _X em discharge into surface waters, or in any alteraticn`f=' sur --ca water earth including but not iia.ited to temcerature, c:ssd vec cx%cen c. turbidity? _ X _. ALteraticn of the cirecricn or rate of flow of crea-d waters? .X g. Change in the duality of grcund waters, either tnrc•ugi erect additions or withdrawals, or t.hrojuh lntercentlon or an 3; a=_e- by cuts or excavations? X h. Change in quality of ground water? i. Substantial reduction in the a^.ourt of water otherwise ava=-ac_e for public water supe Lies? X Exposure of pecpLe or procer_y to water related hazards s'.c- as flooding or tical waves? 4. PLANT LIFE Will the project result '_n: a. Change in the diversity of species, or num'oer of plants trees, shrubs, Crass, crops, micrcflora and aquatic plants)? X b. Reduction of the r.0 -hers of any tiniqu e, :are or endangered scec:es or plants? X c. Introduction of new species c`_ plants into an area, or _n _ barrier to the normal replenishment o` existing species? X d. Reduction in acreage of any agricultural cop? 5. ANIMAL LIFE Will the project result in: a. Change in the diversity of spec es, or cumbers of any sx c es Of animals (birds, land ar— mals, incl.dinc reptiles, `:s:- arc =_:-eiah, benthic orcanisms, insects, or nicrcfaana).1 X h. Reduction of Lhe numbers o: any t... qce, rare or endangered species of animals? X C. Introduction of new scecies or nnicals into an area, or rnsc'_t _r. a Carrier to the migra Lcn or movement of an -mals? X d. DeCerioraticn of existing fish or wildli:e habitat? 5. NOSE '4411 the cro4C,-- result in: a. Increase in existnq noise levels? X b. Exposure c`_ people to severe noise levels? X 7. LIGHT AND GLARE Will the project produce new 14_c: -t or - are? X S. ..AND USE Will the project result in: a. Substantial altera— on of the present or planned land '.:se cf an area? X b. Incompatibility with ex1st4ng wing, the General Plan, acv speci_ic plan, or other applicable land use control? X . NATURAL RESOURCES Will the proicct result in: a. Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? b. Substantial depletion of any non-renewable natural resource. RIS{ OF UPSET Does the project involve a risk of an excicsion or the release of hazardous substances (including, but not __-'_ted to oil, pesticides, chemicals or raciation) in the event of _m accident or upset conditions? POPULAT=ON Will the project alter the location, dist:'S'.aicn, density or growth rate of the human population of an area? Will the project affect existing housing or create a for additional housing? . TRAIISPCRTATICN Will the project result in: a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement? b. Effects on existing parking facilities or demand for new c _._ c. Substantial impact open existing transporia_icn systems? d. Alterations to present patterns of circulation or cvement of people/and or goods? e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? _. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? . 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? -_ c. Schools? d. Parks or other recreational activities? e. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? f. Other governmental services? ENERGY Will the project result in: Use of substantial amounts of energy or fuel? Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of energy, require the development of new sources of energy? UTILITIES Will the project result in a need for new sys=ems, substantial alterations to the following utilities? Power or natural gas? Communications systems? Water? Sewer or septic tanks? Storm water drainage? Solid waste and disposal? HUMAN HEALTH Will the project result in: Creation of any health hazard or potentia'_ health. ^___ra mental health)? Exposure of people cc potential health hazards? AESTHETICS Will the project result in the obstruction c- any scenic vista or view open to the public, or will the pr _-_a_ result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? RECREATiCN Will the project :cswir in an impact _ tr._ ___ or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? ARCHEOLOGICAL/HISTORICAL Will the project result in an a_teraticn of a significant archeological or historical site, sur'mct'_res, object or building? Does the project have the potential to degrade the c_ __t_ of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish o- wild - Life species, cause a fish or wildlife population no onto below self-sustainicq levels, threaten to eliminate a pia.._ of animal Community, recuce tie number or restrict the range of a rare on cmdang_ered plant or animal or eliminate important exam=es of _b.e major periods of California :history or prehistory? Does the project have the potential to achieve snort -ter-., to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? ( A siert-term impact on one environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief definitive period of time 'while long-term i-oac_s '.'_'_'_ endure well into the future.) Does the project have impacts which are _nd_vidualiy limited 'nut cumulatively consideracle? ( A project may impact an two or more separate resources where the impact on each resource is relatively small, but where the effect of the total of those :-pacts on the environment is significant.) Goes the project have environmental effects which vil'_ cause substantial adverse effects on human beings directly or indirectly? 0 0 Z ' nC YofUSA� ENVIRONMENTAL ANAL`>(SILnS V1O 'Pe� vy >- C;TYer ¢ EXPLANATIONS/MITIGATION DISCUSSION i,?AZUSAt III. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRON,%='TAL EVALL'ATICl, See Attached Sheet IV. MITIGATION MEASURES Describe mitigation measures included `r, the project, if any are needed, to avoid potentially significant effects: 13. A traffic study shall be conducted to determine if any potential hazards or traffic conflicts will arise as a result of this projec Any traffic control devices or other mitigation measures recommend by this study should be made conditions of approval of this projec DETERMINATION (To be completed by Lead Agency) On the basis of this ini" al eval,:at=cn: I find the proposed project COU=D `70T HAVE a significant effect on the environment, and a :EGATIVE DECARATION has been prepared and is attached. x I find that althcuch the prcoosed project could have a significant effect on the env_rcr.-ent, there will not be a significant effect in this case ..ecause the mitigation measures described on an attac-ed sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECL=�c=___OtI WILL BE PREPARED. I find the proposed project :-'vY have a significant effect effect on the environment and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is recruired. Date: 3/28/89 Signat•_re: NIEL M. IJATROUS Title: SENTOR PLANNER 0 0 III. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION ZONE CHANGE CASE NO. Z-89-2 l.b. Soil on the site will require grading and some compaction. All such activity on the site will be reviewed under an approved grading plan. Soils tests will be conducted to insure stability of any fill material. 2.a. Airborne dust during construction will be minimized by periodic watering of site. 3.b. Any changes in drainage patterns will be reviewed under an approved drainage plan. 4.&5. Existing site contains primarily disturbed earth with minimal native vegetation or wildlife habitate present. 6. Construction noise caused by trucks and equipment will be regulated under the Azusa noise Ordinance (Chapter 8.58 of the Azusa Municipal Code) to prevent noise from disturbing nearby residential areas. 8.a. Site consists of one vacant parcel and a lot developed with a fraternal lodge. A 58 -unit detached condominium project will be constructed on both parcels. 8.b. Project involves a zone change from C3(General Commercial) to R3a(Multi-Family Residential) and a general plan amendment to change land use designation from General Commercial to Medium Density Residential. A conditional use permit is required to exempt this project from a multi -family residential construction moratorium. 11. This project will change property from its planned use as a commercial site to a medium density residential area. 12. Project would involve the construction of 58 detached condominium units. 13. Additional traffic and demand for parking will be generated by this project. On-site parking provided by the project, in garages and guest parking spaces, should be adequate to meet the anticipated needs. The ingress to and egress from the site would be from two points on State Highway 39. Due to the high traffic levels on this road, particularly on weekends, there may be conflicts with traffic generated by this project. Safety of vehicles and pedestrians at these intersections should be studied carefully. 0 0 DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION - Z-89-2 1901 NORTH SAN GABRIEL CANYON ROAD PAGE 2 OF 2 14. Most public services are adequate to serve the proposed project. Nearby schools are operating at or near capacity and the school district will need to allocate some of its developer fee revenues to provide space for students living in this project. The shortage of recreational open space in the vicinity of this site is offset by common open space provided for the project and the proximity of the property to the amenities of the Angeles National Forest. 16. Most utility systems necessary to serve the site are in place and will not require substantial additions or alterations. The project will need to provide connection to proposed storm drain improvements nearby. 21.c. The approval of this project could encourage other similar residential activity in the area. In general, impacts caused by such medium density residential construction are less than those which would be caused by ultimate development of the area under its existing commercial zoning. Reference is also hereby made to all other Environmental Impact Reports which have been prepared for projects within the City of Azusa for additional information and knowledge of existing and future environmental conditions in the area. 2 S -N U six Ct�.CF_ Otn I VL/I0 � - NOTICE OF DETERMINAT10 �N] +� 1O „{. N ICITYQF C �5AZuSA'3 TO: COUNTY CLERK FROM.: CITY OF AZUSA C0R203=.T_IONS DIVISIO`I -- Rcc:a 1066 213 E. Foothill Blvd. P.O. Box 151 Azusa, California 91-70 Los Angeles, Ca. 90053 OFFICE OF PLANNING AND RES-_.;RCH 1400 Tenth Street Sacramento, Ca. 953-14 "at"P : 4/12/89 PRI -j_= _ —LE: Zone Change Case No. Z-89-2, General Plan Amendment No. GPA -89-1, Conditional Use Permit No. C-89-6 and Precise Plan of: Design No. P-89-49. ?30j CT LOC=._10`:: 1901 N. San Gabriel Canvon Road Azusa, California 91702 DESC?.1?_I0N: 58 -unit detached condominium project This is to advise that the City of .i.z_sa has acproved the above de -project and has ...made t:: ^.e __..._ _ dezerminations regar,._::c same: 1. The=roject in its approved f.,_... ❑ will, © will not have sica_ficant effect on the =eat. 2. ❑ An Environ -.ental Impact Yepert was prepared for this prc- jecz pursuant to z -e provis_cas of CEQ:-1. 3. ❑ A Negative Declaration ..as =_ pared for this project pur- suant to the crovisicns of 4. A Statement of Ove_-r'_d'_..^.g Ccnsio__..zions ❑ was,0 was not, adcnzed for . is __eject. _ cation measures ❑ were, were not, made a condition of ap_ _. va1 of _ne _ rojecz. DANIEL `I. 1::1TROUS, SLV'IOR PI__,VNER (919) 334-5125 Ext. 262 TELE?HONE t7U:-'?E3 r�ACITZUOFA Y OFA15 E LAO n ICITYOFV E IPAZUW PROJECT TITLE• C. C NOTICE OF INTENT TO ISSUE NEGATIVE DECLARATION Zone Change Case No. Z-89-2, General Plan Amendment No. GPA -89-1, Conditional Use Permit No. C-89-6 and Precise Plan of Design Case No. P-89-46. PROJECT LOCATION -Specific: 1901 North San Gabriel Canyon Road PROJECT LOCATION - City Azusa PROJECT LOCATION - County Los Angeles DESCRIPTION OF NATURE, PURPOSE AND BENEFICIARIES OF PROJECT: Construction of a 58 -unit detached condominium project, with zone change from C3 (General Commercial) to R3a (Multi -Family Residential) and a general plan amendment to change land use designation from General Commercial to Medium Density Residential LEAD AGENCY City of Azusa DIVISION Planning Division ADDRESS WHERE COPY OF INITIAL STUDY IS AVAILABLE 213 East Foothill Boulevard Azusa, California 91702 REVIEW PERIOD Until April 12, 1989 CONTACT PERSON AREA CODE PHONE EXTENSION Daniel M. Watrous, Senior Planner (818) 334-5125, Ext. 262 ! 10 .NOa FL'YYLY tCHR ASSOCIATES TRANSPORTATION /ENVIRONMENTAL/ URBAN SYSTEMS PLANNING 6 ENGINEERINO March 24, 1989 Ms. Julie M. Singletary D & D Development Company, Inc. 711 East Imperial Highway Suite 200 Brea, California 92621 SUBJECT: TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS OF PROPOSED AZUSA VISTA RESI- DENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IN THE CITY OF AZUSA, CALIFORNIA Dear Ms. Singletary: Transmitted herein are the results of the traffic impact analysis requested by D & D Development Company. PROJECT BACKGROUND The Azusa Vista residential development by D & D Development Company, Inc., Brea, California, is a proposed 58 -lot single-family residential tract. The development site is located on San Gabriel Canyon Road (SR 39), approximately one-fourth mile north of Sierra Madre Avenue, in the City of Azusa, California. During the preliminary planning stages, D & D Development Company and the City of Azusa identified the need to address potential traffic impacts, particularly on San Gabriel Canyon Road, a State-controlled and maintained highway. In response, this traffic impact analysis was commissioned by D & D Development Company, and undertaken by KHR Associates, Irvine, California. PROJECT SITE The development site is approximately 8.96 acres in size, and situated along San Gabriel Canyon Road, directly across from the Lewis Homes development. Regional access to the site is provided via the Foothill (1-210) Freeway, the San Gabriel River (I-605) Freeway, San Gabriel Avenue, Azusa Avenue, and Foothill Boulevard. Locally sig- nificant streets include Azusa & San Gabriel Road, and Sierra Madre Avenue. Two private streets into the Lewis homes development, Crystal Canyon Drive and Daybreak Drive, access onto San Gabriel Canyon Road and are in close proximity to the develop- ment site. EXISTING CONDITIONS San Gabriel Canyon Road is a State designated route (i.e, Route 39), and as such, access and traffic operations are controlled by the Department of Transportation (i.e., Caltrans). ;' T "'J,F 20_9 AVINF, CnL 19 ! P71t IJ ,II 7bT 1 11 I.' 10 1 Ms. Julie Singletary March 24, 1989 Page Two San Gabriel Canyon Road north of Sierra Madre Avenue is presently delineated with one through travel lane in each direction in addition to a painted median. - The "1987 Traffic Volumes on California State Highways" publication by Caltrans docu- ments that the average daily traffic (ADT) volume on San Gabriel Canyon Road south of Sierra Madre Avenue was 3,700 vehicles per day. Peak hour and peak month ADTvolumes were 1,300 vehicles per hour and 3,950 vehicles per day, respectively. On San Gabriel Canyon Road north of Sierra Madre Avenue, the volumes are slightly higher. The 1987 ADT volume was 4,600 vehicles per day, while the peak hour and peak month ADT volumes were 1,300 vehicles per hour and 4,900 vehicles per day, respectively. TRIP GENERATION The trip generation component of the travel demand forecasting procedure attempts to quantify the trip making propensities of a given land use or development tvpe. In simplified analyses, trips (or more appropriately, trip ends) generated by a given land use or develop- ment type are often estimated by applying empirically pre -determined trip generation rates. Trip generation rates may be found in a various authoritative documents including the Institute of Transportation Engineers' (ITE) 'Trip Generation," 4th Edition. These standard rates are often adjusted to reflect local conditions. Applicable trip generation rates for residential development are expressed in trip ends per dwelling unit, and typically include average weekday and A.M. and P.M. peak hour rates, which correspond with A.M. and P.M. peak hours of commuter traffic. Based on ITE Rates for single family detached housing the total number of weekday trip ends projected to be generated by the subject project is 584. On a weekday during the A.M. and P.M. peak hours, the numbers of trip ends projected to be generated by the project are 44 and 58, respectively. The total ADT volume on San Gabriel Canyon Road is estimated to increase from 4,600 to 5,184 vehicles per day as a result of the subject project. CAPACITY/LEVELS OF SERVICE The capacity of a roadway segment or intersection is the maximum rate of vehicular traffic flow under prevailing traffic, design, and operational conditions. Factors affecting capacity include traffic controls, lane widths, grades, the amount of truck and bus traffic, the availability of on -street parking, parking turnover, and turn movements. Capacity is most commonly defined for hourly periods of time, and most analyses rely on 15 -minute count increments to establish capacity. However, for generalized planning purposes, it is useful to define capacity as the maximum volume of traffic that a roadway may be expected to carry throughout the day, under the least desirable conditions (e.g., with heavy congestion during the A.M. and P.M. peak hours). Ms. Julie Singletary March 24, 1989 Page Three As a two lane undivided roadway, the present capacity of San Gabriel Canyon Road is estimated to be 15,000 vehicles per day. By comparison, a four -lane divided roadway would have a capacity of 36,000 vehicles per day. The level of service (LOS) of a roadway segment or intersection is a qualitatively defined measure of prevailing traffic, design, and operational conditions. The LOS, denoted alphabetically from "A" to "F," best to worst, is a summary evaluation of the degree of congestion, roadway design constraints, delay, accident potential, and driver discomfort experienced during a given period of time - typically during the peak hour or on a daily basis. While LOS A is the most desirable operational state for a roadway segment or intersection, LOS C is considered a benchmark for planning purposes. In heavily urbanized areas, LOS D is an accepted, though undesirable, condition for peak hours of vehicular travel - particularly on freeways. The LOS may be quantitatively calculated by a number of methods which generally compare traffic volumes with the physical and operational capacity of a roadway section or intersection to carry the traffic demands placed upon it. For roadway segments, the volume -to -capacity (V/C) ratio is indicative of LOS. Based on the existing AD'I'volume and street capacity of San Gabriel Canyon Road the V/C ratio is calculated to be 0.306, which corresponds to a LOS "A." Based on the projected addition of 584 vehicle trip ends per day on San Gabriel Canyon Road, the projected V/C ratio is calculated to be 0.346, which still corresponds to a LOS .A LEFT -TURN DEMAND ANALYSIS The concept of a functional hierarchy of circulation suggests that deceleration lanes (e.g., left turn pockets) should be provided at all transition areas (e.g., intersections). Whenever possible, sufficient left -turn storage should be provided to meet peak left -turn demand. It is recommended that the design have at least a 95% probability of storing all left -turning vehicles during the peak hour. The required storage for any selected probability of storing all vehicles can be determined using the queuing analysis. Various tables and charts, such as the nomographs found in the ITE publication,'Transportation & Land Development' have been developed for estimat- ing left -turn storage requirements. The procedures outlined are applicable to the analysis of expected turn -bay requirements based on estimated future traffic conditions. For analysis purposes, a directional assignment of trip ends was made. Since the project includes two street access points onto San Gabriel Canyon Road, the development site was split into two sections - the first, south of lot 48, and the remaining section, north of lot 4S, as depicted in the Schematic Site Plan. South of lot 48, during the A.M. peak hour, a total of 19 trip ends are projected to he generated. Five of these trip ends enter the development site, while 14 exit. During the Ms. Julie Singletary March 24, 1989 Page Four P.M. peak hour, 25 trip ends are projected to be generated. Sixteen of These trip ends enter, while 9 exit. North of lot 48, during the A.M. peak hour, a total -of 25 trip ends are projected to be generated. Seven of these trip ends enter the development site, while 18 exit. During the P.M. peak hour, 33 trip ends are projected to be generated. Twenty-one of these trip ends enter, while 12 exit. Assuming a random distribution of arriving left turning vehicles, the street generating the highest number of left turns during the peak hour (i.e., 21) will experience a maximum queue of four vehicles 95% of the time. Therefore, a left -turn pocket length of 100 feet, plus a 90 -foot reverse curve taper, should be more than adequate to meet projected demand. It should be noted that, since traffic on San Gabriel Canyon Road is very light, but on a high speeds nature, some impedance to through traffic will result from vehicles decelerating into left -turn pockets. It should also be noted that, if the median area of San Gabriel Canyon Road is delineated with a two-way left turn lane, the effective length of the storage/deceleration area for left turning vehicles will be significantly greater. As an additional note, existing streets along the east side of San Gabriel Canyon Road (i.e.. Crystal Canyon Drive, Daybreak Drive, and Azusa & San Gabriel Canyon Road), while not aligned with the proposed streets into the project, are separated by at least 300 feet. STOPPING SIGIIT DISTANCES Afield review of the development site indicated that adequate stopping sight distances are available on San Gabriel Canyon Road for both northbound and southbound directions of travel. Immediately adjacent to the south portion of the development site, San Gabriel Carryon Road is on a north -south orientation and is aligned fairly straight. Northerly, from about the mid -point of the development site, the roadway transitions easterly along a sweeping horizontal curve with a 20 foot lateral clearance from the east curbface. The radius of the centerline of is approximately 1,000 feet. This radius corresponds to a design speed of approximately 55 miles per hour. The speed limit is posted at 45 miles per hour. Per the Caltrans "Highway Design Manual," the safe stopping sight distance for a roadway with a design speed of 55 miles per hour, on an 1,000 foot radius horizontal curve with a 20 foot lateral clearance, is approximately 400 feet. Since the Schematic Site Plan indicates that the northerly street into the project is on the outside of the horizontal curve, more than adequate stopping sight distances are provided. CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the above analysis, the following conclusions are reached: 1) the subject project should have no significant traffic impact on existing roadway or intersection capacities or levels of service; Ms. Julie Singletary March 24, 1989 Page Five 2) at both street entrances into the project, adequate safe stopping sight distance is provided on San Gabriel Canyon Road in both approach directions; 3) when San Gabriel Canyon Road is widened to accommodate the subject project, left turn pockets should be delineated on San Gabriel Canyon Road at both street entrances into the project; and 4) left turn pockets should be 100 foot in length, with an additional 90 -foot reverse curve taper. IN CLOSING I hope that the information provided in this report will be useful to you in the development of your project. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely yours, KHR ASSOCIATES Jam s H. Kawamura, P.E. President R.C.E. #3060 R.T.E. #1110 JHK:mm