HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution No. 00-C0260 0
RESOLUTION NO. 00-C26
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AZUSA APPROVING
THE MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR
AZUSA PACIFIC UNIVERSITY/AZUSA SQUARE SPECIFIC PLAN 5
AND RELATED LAND USE APPROVALS
(APN's 8608-030-906 & 907)
WHEREAS, an Initial Study and a Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared
collectively for: (1) General Plan Amendment No. GPA 2000-01; (2) Azusa Pacific
University/Azusa Square Specific Plan 5; (3) Zone Change No. Z-2000-01; and (4) Precise Plan
of Design No. P.2000-22 (collectively "Project Approvals").
WHEREAS, the City prepared the Initial Study and a Mitigated Negative Declaration in
compliance with CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines, Cal. Code of Regs., Title. 14, Section
15000, et seq., and the City of Azusa implementing procedures.
WHEREAS, the City circulated the Initial Study and a Mitigated Negative Declaration
for review by the public and other public agencies in compliance with CEQA, the State CEQA
Guidelines, and the City of Azusa implementing procedures.
WHEREAS, the Applicant sponsored a community meeting on February 8, 2000 to
solicit input regarding the Project Approvals and to disseminate information regarding the same.
WHEREAS, the City published a notice of its intention to adopt the Mitigated Negative
Declaration in compliance with Public Resources Code section 21092 in the San Gabriel Valley
Tribune on February 10, 2000, which notice also included a notice of the public hearing before
the Planning Commission on March 1, 2000.
WHEREAS, the City's notice of its intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration
was filed with and posted by the Los Angeles County Clerk on February 10, 2000 until March 1,
2000.
WHEREAS, the City's notice of its intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration
was posted on February 10, 2000 in the City Clerk's Office, the City Library, the Azusa Police
Department lobby, and the West Wing of City Hall as evidenced in the declaration of posting on
file in this matter.
WHEREAS, the City mailed notice of its intention to adopt the Mitigated Negative
Declaration in compliance with Public Resources Code section 21092 on February 10, 2000, to
the contiguous landowners and to all public entities entitled to notice under CEQA, which notice
also included a notice of the public hearing before the Planning Commission on March 1, 2000.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on March 1,
2000, on the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration and on the Project Approvals,
during which hearing testimony was received from nine residents living near the Project site in
favor of the proposed Project; and written comments and testimony from two resident against the
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration was submitted.
WHEREAS, after receiving the aforementioned testimony and comments, the Planning
Commission closed the public hearing on March 1, 2000 and deliberated regarding the Initial
Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration and the Project Approvals, and duly considered all
information presented to it, the Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend that the
City Council approve the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration, and further
recommended that the City Council approve the Project Approvals.
WHEREAS, the City again published a notice of its intention to adopt the Mitigated
Negative Declaration in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune on February 24, 2000, which notice also
included a notice of the public hearing before the City Council on March 6, 2000.
WHEREAS, the City again mailed a notice of its intention to adopt the Mitigated
Negative Declaration to the contiguous landowners and to all public entities entitled to notice
under CEQA, which notice also included a notice of the public hearing before the City Council
on March 6, 2000.
0 0
RESOLUTION NO.
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
PAGE 2
WHEREAS, the members of the City Council have been provided with copies of the
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration and the comments received, and have fully
reviewed the documents and comments, as well as the other information in the record of
proceedings.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY AZUSA HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1: The City Council finds that the Mitigated Negative Declaration has been
prepared and processed in compliance with CEQA, the State CEQA Guideline, and the City's
CEQA implementation procedures. The City Council has independently reviewed and considered
the information contained in the Mitigated Negative Declaration, and finds that it adequately
describes and addresses the environmental effects of the proposed Project, and that, based upon
the initial study, the comments received thereon, and the entire administrative record for this
Project, that there is no substantial evidence in light of the whole record that there may be
significant adverse environmental effects as a result of the approval of this Project. The
mitigation measures identified in the Mitigated Negative Declaration have been incorporated into
the Project and these measures mitigate any potential significant effect to a point where clearly
no significant environmental effects will occur as a result of the Project.
SECTION 2: The City Council has fully considered the proposed Mitigated Negative
Declaration and the comments received thereon.
SECTION 3: The Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment and
analysis of the City and the individual Council members.
SECTION 4: The location of the documents which constitute the record of proceedings
upon which the City Council decision is based is the Azusa City Hall, Department of Community
Development, 213 E. Foothill Blvd., Azusa, California, 91702-1395, and the custodian of those
records is Roy E. Bruckner, Director of Community Development, City of Azusa.
SECTION 5: A mitigation monitoring program, a copy of which is attached hereto as
Exhibit D, is hereby adopted pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 in order to
assure compliance with the mitigation measures during Project implementation.
SECTION 6: Based upon the initial study and the entire record of proceeding, the project
has no potential for adverse effects on wildlife as that term is defined in Fish & Game Code
section 711.2.
SECTION 7: The Mitigated Negative Declaration is hereby approved and adopted as to
Project Approvals, which is defined in the first WHEREAS.
SECTION 8: The City Clerk shall certify to the passage of this resolution and shall cause
the same to be published in compliance with Chapter 88, Article III, Division 13 of the Azusa
Municipal Code.
SECTION 9: The Director of Community Development shall cause to be filed with the
Los Angeles County Clerk a Notice of Determination pursuant to CEQA Guideline 15075(a).
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 6 d4y of March, 2000.
Cristina Cruz -Madrid, MAYOR
0
RESOLUTION N0. 00-C26
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
PAGE
0
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution No.C26 was duly adopted by the City
Council of the City of Azusa at a regular meeting thereof, held on March 6, 2000, by the
following vote of the Council:
AYES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
HARDISON, ROCHA, BEEBE
NOES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
MADRID
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
NONE
ABSTAIN:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
STANFORD
APPROVED AS TO FORM
4z.6. A,, .-- �
City Atmey
0 0
EXHIBIT D
CITY OF AZUSA
MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM
AZUSA PACIFIC UNIVERSITY/AZUSA SQUARE
SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT
APPLICANT: Azusa Pacific University
ADDRESS: 901 E. Alosta Avenue
Azusa, CA 91702-7000
PROJECT LOCATION: 575-647 East Foothill Boulevard, Azusa, CA
PROJECT APPROVAL DATE: March 6, 2000
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: A proposal to change the General Plan land use designation from
CC (Community Commercial) to SP (Specific Plan), to change the zoning designation from C3
(General Commercial) to Specific Plan -5 (SP -5), to adopt a specific plan to allow the phased
development of the Subject Property, and approval of a Precise Plan of Design (P-2000-22) for
the first phase of the project..
MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM: A Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) was
certified for the subject project on March 6, 2000. Certain mitigation measures were required to
reduce impacts to less -than -significant levels. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA) Section 21081.6, this mitigation monitoring program has been prepared to ensure
implementation of those measures.
It may be necessary and appropriate to modify the specifics of the mitigation measures in order
to meet the intent of the City to minimize or eliminate significant environmental effects as
documented in the MND, and the Mitigation Monitoring Program. These changes may be
required because of changes to the proposed project, changes in the environment around the
project, or other changes which make the mitigation measures included in the MND infeasible,
inappropriate to be implemented, or unnecessary to mitigate the significant environmental effects
of the project.
Modifications to the mitigation measures may be made by the Community Development
Department Director subject to one of the following findings, documented by evidence included
in the record. Findings and related documentation supporting the findings involving
modifications to mitigation measures shall be maintained in the project file with the Mitigation
Monitoring Program and made available to the public on request:
1. The mitigation measure included in the MND and the Mitigation Monitoring Program
are no longer required because the significant environmental impact identified in the MND has
been found as a result of changes in the project, changes in conditions of the environment, or
other factors, not to exist, or to occur at a level which makes the impact less than significant.
X2
2. The modifications or substitute mitigation measures to be included in the Mitigation
Mitigation Monitoring Prog* •
Specific Plan 5
Page 2
Monitoring Program provide protection of the environment equal to or greater than that afforded
by the mitigation measure included in the MND and the Mitigation Monitoring Program.
O
The modified or substitute mitigation measures do not have significant adverse effects on the
environment in addition to or greater than those which were considered by the lead agency in its
decisions on the MND, the proposed project and the Statement of Overriding Considerations for
the proposed project.
O
The modified or substitute mitigation measures are feasible, and their implementation can be
assured by the lead agency through measures included in the Mitigation Monitoring Program or
other City procedures.
Azusa Pacific University/Azusa Square Specific Plan Project
Mitigation Monitoring Checklist
Issue
Environments Impact
Mitigation Measure
Monitor/Reporter
Timing/Frequency
Transportation
The proposed project is not
1. Intersection No. 3: Cerritos Ave and
Cotmnunity
Prior to Final
/Circulation
expected to create a
Foothill Blvd.
Development
Occupancy for
significant impact at any of
Provide right -turn -only lanes, in addition to the two
Department
Phase III
the six intersections studied.
through lanes, for the eastbound and westbound
However, in anticipated that
Foothill Blvd. Approaches. This measure can be
regional impacts will occur
accommodated within the existing roadway width.
with completion and
Adjust the traffic control system (i.e. signal heads,
occupancy of the project and
mast arms, loop detectors, signal timing) to reflect
related projects at three of the
changes in the lane configuration.
six intersections.
2. Intersection No.5: Citrus Avenue and
Foothill Blvd.
Restripe eastbound Foothill Blvd approach to
provide one left -tum -only lane, one through lane,
and one right -tum -only lane (i.e., convert the
existing optional through/right-tum lane to right -
turn -only lane). This measure can be accomplished
within the existing roadway width. If necessary,
adjust the traffic control system to effect changes in
the lane configuration.
3. Intersection No. 6: Citrus Avenue and
Alosta Avenue
Provide and additional left -tum -only lane (i.e,,
dual left -turns) on the westbound Alosta Avenue
approach. Modify/remove existing raised median
as required. Adjust the traffic control system to
reflect changes in the lane configuration.
0
Issue
Environments Impact
Mitigation Measure
Monitor/Reporter
Timing/Frequency
Parking
At build -out (Phase III),
4. The applicant shall not schedule major
Community
Prior to final
capacity
approximately 322 parking
events at the Events Center and the
Development
occupancy for Phase I,
spaces will be available for
Baseball/Softball fields at the same time. An
Department
and every year
the proposed student housing,
annual calendar of events for both sites shall
thereafter.
and University related
be submitted annually to the City.
commercial/office/classroom
facilities. Parking for the
athletic fields will be
provided at the West
Campus.
Noise
Vehicular Noise
5. The amplified public address system
Community
Prior to final
The would not be a
proposed for the baseball field shall be
Development
occupancy for Phase I
discernable increase in
operated at a volume level no higher than that
Department
ambient noise levels (increase
necessary to be audible above the background
of 3 decibels or more)
noise level.
attributed to project trip
generation at any of the three
6. Azusa Pacific University shall post
sensitive receptor locations.
No significant impacts are
signage, highly visible to adjacent residences,
anticipated.
which includes a telephone number to call to
voice any complaints or concerns regarding
Crowd Noise
noise from the project site.
Noise attributed to baseball
and softball games could
significantly raise the ambient
noise level. However, since
crowd noise would be
temporary and intermittent
and would cease at 10:00
p.m. at the latest, such noise
is not considered to be
significant. No significant
impacts are anticipated.
APU/Azusa Square Specific Plan Page 2 Mitigation Monitoring Checklist
•
•
Issue
Environments Impact
Mitigation Measure
Monitor/Reporter
TiminglFrequency
Light and
Due to the proximity of
7. All high-intensity light standards
Community
Prior to final
Glare
the proposed softball field
associated with the ball fields shall be fitted
Development
occupancy for Phase I
lighting standards to a
with visor and glare control devices such that
Department
residential complex at 601
all light is focused on the fields and glare and
E. 8" Street, some
light spillover onto adjacent properties is
spillover impacts are
minimized to the greatest extent feasible.
expected, although it is
Spillover and glare shall be routinely
unlikely that such spillover
monitored by Azusa Pacific University and
would extend to the units
any necessary adjustment and/or repairs shall
themselves. However,
be made to ensure that spillover and glare are
mitigation measures are
maintained at levels specified in the project
recommended to ensure
lighting plan (to be submitted by the
that the potential for such
manufacturer prior to project approval).
lighting impacts are
reduced to the maximum
8. Azusa Pacific University shall post
extent feasible
signage, highly visible to adjacent residences,
which includes a telephone number to call to
voice any complaints or concerns regarding
light and glare from the proposed project.
APU/Azusa Square Specific Plan Page 3 Mitigation Monitoring Checklist
•
•