CC – Item 4E – Staff Report – Consideration of Dues Increase for the San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments wo."' stafa or
_______________T
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR
AND MEMBERS
ROSEMEAD CITY COUNCIL
FROM: FRANK G. TRIPEPI, CITY MANAGER
DATE: MAY 7, 1998
RE: CONSIDERATION OF DUES INCREASE FOR THE SAN GABRIEL
VALLEY COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS
Attached for your consideration is a memorandum regarding a proposed dues increase for the San
Gabriel Valley Council of Governments. The current dues of$ 11,617 include $5,510 in
Proposition A Funds, $ 3,857 in AB 2766 Funds and $2250 in General Funds. The proposed
increase would raise the Proposition A& C and AB 2766 contributions to $6,612 a piece. The
General Fund contribution would remain at $2,250.
RECOMMENDATION
II It is recommended that the City Manager be directed to inform the San Gabriel Council of
Governments of the Council's decision to support or oppose the request.
COUNCIL AGENDA
MAY 121998
ITEMNo. -Lit • cG
061, 4
go MEMORANDUM
OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER
DATE: MAY 5, 1998
TO: SAN GABRIEL VALLEY CITY MANAGERS
FROM: wIsiii W WILLIAM R. KELLY, PRESIDENT - SAN GABRIEL VALLEY CITY
MANAGERS' ASSOCIATION
SUBJECT: DUES FOR THE SAN GABRIEL VALLEY COUNCIL OF
GOVERNMENTS
As was briefly discussed at the last City Manager's luncheon, enclosed is notice of a
proposed dues increase for the San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments ("COG").
The reason for the increase is that the COG cannot continue to operate with its present
revenue. Accordingly, it has been suggested that the dues be increased as outlined
on the attachment a smallnd thatt the
from your money coe from
dyour Proposition A and C and 2766
funds with
The Executive Committee of the COG has determined that they do not want to roll back
work programs because of the lack of revenue. They eel i tiinsraps pre appropriateto
charge
the above referenced funds in order to keep going.
out
$410,000 and will keep the COG in operation for the next fiscal year.
I will need to know if there is any significant opposition so that I can present this at the
next COG meeting
y 21.increase.
Trefore, please get back to me as soon as you can
if your City opposes the dues
I realize this is coming to you late as most of us have already done or are finishing our
budget. Please feel free to call me at (626) 574-5401 if you have any questions. If you
have specific questions about operational issues you may want to call Nick Conway,
COG Executive Director, at (626) 564-9702. Thanks.
Attachment
cc: Nick Conway, Executive Director - COG
San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments
Proposed Dues Increase
1997 Dues Proposition A&C AB 2766 'General Proposed
City Population Employment Received `'$.12JCy$tta* $.177CA' pita" Fund 199299 Dues
395 $ 17,915.00 $ 10,740.00 . $ 10,740.00 $ 2,700.00 $ 24,180.00
Alhambra 90, 6,312.00 6,31200 2,250.00 14,874.00
11,192.00
Arcadia 53,126
9,69050 5,318.00 5,35800 2,700.00 12816.00
Azusa Baldwin
45,097
15,198.00 8,928.00 ' 8,928.00 2,550.00 20,406.00
Bradbury Park T,109 1,716.00
106.00 . 108.00 1$00.00
1,653.00 10,206.00
Bradbury 9094,12g 00 1,950.00
7,798.00 4,128.00
Claremont 34,744 5,57400 2,100.00 __._13,2.8.03
9,996.50 5,574.00 .
Covina 46,915 6,804.00 2,250.00 . 15,858.00
57,267
Diamond11,889.00 6,804.00 Bar 2,658.00 2,65800 1,800.00 7,116.00
5,5653072
Duarte 16,2 13,812.00 3,000.00 30,624.00
20,000.00 13,812.00
l5f2,411 6,228.00 , 14,706.00
El Monte 0.00
11,073.00 6,228.00 25
Glendora 52,419
1,617.30 82.80 82.80 1,500.00 1.665.60
Industry .. 177 139.20 1,500.00 1,778.40
Ir
1,172 1,697.20 139.20
L Puente 4,896.00 4,896.00 2,100.00 11,892.00
9,036.00
La
La Vernernet 41,208 3,948.00 1,950.00 9,846.00
7,543.00 3,948.00
Monrovia 39,799 . 4,728.00 1,950.00 11406.00
39,794 6,648.OD 4,728.00
63,428 12,926.00 7,536.00 7,536.00 2,250.00 17,322.00
Montebello7,75200 2,40000 17,90400
13,38200 7,75200
Monterey Park... 40,289. 3,000.00 36,336.00
20,000.00 16,668.00 16,668.00
140,289 16,968.00 36,936.00.
Pasadena3,000.00
AL
16,968.00
Pomonasem142,814 11,617.00 .. .2,250.00 15,474.00
11,617.00 6,612.00 6,612.00 Rosemead 36,101 1,950.00 10,530.00
36,108 8,02730 4,29000 4,290.00 San Dimas 4,806.00 4,806.00 2,100.00 ' 11,712.00
40,451 8,90850 . 4,902.00
San GabMarinoriel 1,626.00 1,626.00 1,650.00
13,686 . 3,95350 4,362.00
San M 1,356.00 1,356.00 1,650.00
11,413 3,571.00 6,918.00
SierrautMadre2,634.00 2,634.00 1,65000
22,170 5,38150
South ElMonte _,. _ -- 3,018.00 3,01800 1,800.00 7,836.00 '.
25,402 6,075.50 _ _..
Walnut 32,320
3,840.00 3,840.00 1,950.00 9,630.00
7,390.00
West Covina 12 408.00 12 408.00 3 070.00 27 816 00
West
104.434 . 20.000.00 .
1,464,147 5 291,74450 $ 173,958.00 5 173.95800 $ 62,10000 S 410,016.W
• 1997 Prop.A&C rates:5.10
"1997 AB2766 rates:5.07
....E-M .
-
cm
stat
teport
TO: FRANK G. TRIPEPI, CITY MANAGER
FROM: KEN RUKAVINA, CITY ENGINEER
DATE: MAY 5, 1998
RE: APPROVAL OF PARCEL MAP 24136 - 3450 BARTLETT AVENUE
Attached for consideration and approval of Parcel Map No. 24136 are the following:
1. Copy of Parcel Map No. 24136.
2. Planning Commission's conditions of approval.
Four feet of street dedication will be granted on the map for pedestrian sidewalk purposes.
The City Engineer has determined that all conditions of approval for the map have been
met and the map is ready for Council's approval.
RECOMMENDATION
1. Approve Parcel Map No. 24136.
2. Accept the street dedication.
3. Direct the City Clerk to arrange for the recordation of the map.
Attachment
KJR:kr COUNCIL AGENDA
pm24136
MAY 1 2 1998
ITEM No. e& F
K 2
Staff Report for Planning Commission
Meeting of January 16, 1995
CASE NO. : Tentative Parcel Map 24136
APPLICATION REQUEST: To subdivide an existing lot into three (3)
parcels to facilitate single-family dwelling
development.
LOCATION: 3450 Bartlett Avenue
APPLICANT: Sophia Wong
1388 West Colorado Blvd.
Pasadena , CA 91105
OWNER: Tritech Associates, Inc.
735 W. Emerson Avenue
Monterey Park, CA 91754
PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE: 55 Notices were mailed to property owners
within 300 feet of the subject property on
12-22-94 .
EXHIBITS: Tentative Parcel Map 24136, dated 12-7-94 ,
marked Exhibit B
Site and Floor Plans, marked Exhibit C
Owner' s Application
Negative Declaration
L.A. County Fire Department comments, x
11-14-94
L.A. County Sheriff ' s Department comments, W
10-31-94
Rosemead School District Comments, 11-1-94
L.A. County Sanitation District comments,
Imm
11-8-94
L.A. County Department of Health Services ,..0
comments, 1-4-95
So. California Gas Co. comments, 11-3-94 W
Assessor ' s Map Book 5289 , page 8 , parcel 40
City Engineer' s Report, dated 11-2-94
Zoning Map
GENERAL PLAN: Low Density Residential ,
4.9
ZONING: R-1 Z
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT:
Based on an initial environmental study, the proposed subdivision
qualifies for a Negative Declaration in accordance with CEQA and
local regulations.
SURROUNDING ZONES AND LAND USES:
To the north, south, east, and west are R-1 properties developed
with single-family dwellings.
MUNICIPAL CODE SUBDIVISION REQUIREMENTS: a
1. The proposed division will not be materially detrimental tail
the public welfare nor injurious to the property or S
improvements in the immediate vicinity.
2 . The proposed division will not be contrary to any official N
plan adopted by the City Council of the City of Rosemead; or
to any official policies or standards adopted by the City
Planning Commission or the City Council and on file in thee
office of the City Clerk at or prior to the time of filing
of the application hereunder;
•
.___ STAFF REPORT
Tentative Parcel Map 24136
1-16-95
Page 2 of 2 .
3 . Each proposed parcel conforms in area and dimension to the
provisions of zoning and subdivision requirements of the
City of Rosemead; and
4 . All streets, alleys and driveways proposed to serve the
property have been dedicated or such dedication is not
required for the protection of public safety, health and
welfare and that such streets, alleys and driveways are of
sufficient width, design and construction to preserve the
public safety and to provide adequate access and circulation
for vehicular and pedestrian traffic.
5. All easements and covenants required for the approval of the
tentative map or plot plan have been duly executed and
recorded (RMC Section 9412) .
STATE SUBDIVISION MAP ACT REQUIREMENTS:
A parcel map shall be recuired for those subdivisions on which
the land before division contains less than five acres, each
parcel created by the division abuts upon a maintained public
street or highway and no dedication or improvements are required
by the legislative body (section 66426 a) .
PROPERTY HISTORY AND DESCRIPTION:
The subject property is a rectangular shaped parcel with 21, 579
square feet of land area. The property is currently developed
with one (1) single family dwelling, a duplex, and detached
accessory structures. The property takes access from Bartlett
Avenue which is a local street according to the General Plan.
This area is included within the original incorporated boundaries
of the City.
ADMINISTRATIVE COMMENTS AND ANALYSIS:
The applicant now proposes to subdivide the property into three
(3) parcels in order to provide for one single family dwelling on
each newly created parcel. Lot 1 will measure 6, 000 square feet;
Lot 2 will measure 6, 080 square feet; and Lot 3 will measure
9 , 105 square feet. The applicant plans on demolishing all of the
existing structures on the proposed parcels.
The project has been designed to accommodate on-site drainage by
utilizing a sump pump. A drainage easement on Parcel 2 for the
benefit of Parcel 3 will be necessary, and is included as a
condition of approval .
The proposed dwellings will be two story in height and be
approximately 2 , 430 square feet. Each home has a four (4)
bedroom, two (2) bath floor plan, each with attached accessory
structures (garages) . The proposed homes meet all City zoning,
setback, and floor-area ratio requirements. The rear yard
setback complies with Section 9104 . 5 of the Municipal Code which
requires a rear yard minimum of twenty-five (25) feet or twenty
percent (20%) of the depth of the lot, whichever is less. The
proposed setbacks fall within those guidelines. Staff supports
the proposal because it improves the quality of housing in the
area, and transforms the lot from rental to ownership property.
RECOMMENDATION:
Based on the information presented, staff recommends that the
Planning Commission make the required findings set forth above,
and approve Tentative Parcel Map 24136 subject to the conditions
set forth in Exhibit A.
rY:Y
ATTACHMENT A
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 24136
3450 BARTLETT AVENUE
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
JANUARY 16, 1995
1. The property shall be developed in accordance with Tentative
Parcel Map 24136 dated 12-7-94 , marked Exhibit B, site and floor
plans marked Exhibit C, and approved by the Planning Commission
on 1-16-95.
2 . The project shall comply with the conditions as set forth in the
City Engineer' s report dated 11-2-94 , and the Fire Department's
recommendations dated 11-14-94 That all conditions shall be
completed to the City Engineer ' s and Director of Planning' s
satisfaction prior to recordation of the final map.
3 . The interior property line of the newly created lots, and where
designated by the Director of Planning, the perimeter property
line, shall be fenced with a six-foot (6 ' ) high masonry or wooden
fence ending at the rear of the dwelling unit on Lot 1. If a
wooden fence is installed, the fence shall be supported by steel
posts set in concrete. Said fence shall be installed prior to
recordation of the parcel map or at the time of issuance of
building permit be made a matter of condition. All masonry walls
shall have finished surface on both sides.
4 . Each newly created lot shall be provided with a 15-gallon tree
subject to the approval of the Director of Planning.
5 . All utilities shall be underground including appropriate wiring
for Cable Television.
6. The property shall be kept cleared of weeds, debris and abandoned
vehicles, and maintained to the L.A. County Fire and Health codes
until it is developed. All trash shall be contained in dumpsters
and removed on an as-needed basis. No trash shall be visible
from outside the dumpster. Surplus construction materials shall
be stored so as to be screened from view when not actually in
use.
7 . A covenant shall be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney
assuring that the private, common driveway shall be continually
maintained and that any costs associated with such maintenance
shall be equally shared by lots 1 and 2 in accordance with
Section 9104 .21 I, 5 (g) . This covenant shall be recorded prior
to or in conjunction with the final parcel map.
8. A drainage easement shall be recorded on Parcel 2 for the benefit
of Parcel 3 and shall be shown on the final map.
9 . This map shall be finaled and recorded within two (2) years of
tentative approval. Failure to do so may result in the map' s
expiration and the need for another tentative map application.
Any request for extension must be submitted, in writing, together
with ten (10) copies of the map and corresponding plans, to the
Planning Department before the expiration date.
10. The conditions listed on this Exhibit shall be copied directly
onto development plans submitted to the Planning and Building
Departments for review.
11. Construction activities shall be limited to take place between
the hours of 7: 00 a.m. and 8: 00 p.m. Monday through Saturday. No .
construction shall take place on Sundays or on any legal
holidays.
.
W .I
12 . The numbers of the address signs shall be at least 6" tall with a
minimum character width of 1/4" , contrasting in color and easily
visible at driver ' s level from the street. The location, color
and size of such sign shall be subject to the approval of the
Planning Director.
13 . The applicant shall sign an affidavit of agreement, and return it
to the Planning Department within ten (10) days after approval of
this request.
WPM24136
=sc;
�i6't'
CITY OF ROSEMEAD
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
8838 E. VALLEY BOULEVARD
ROSEMEAD, CA 91770
X NEGATIVE DECLARATION
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
1. Entitlement: Parcel Map 24136
2. Applicant: Sophia Wong
3 . Proposal : Subdivide one existing lot into three lots in
order to facilitate the constructin of three single-family
dwellings.
4 . Location & Parcel Number (s) : 5289-8-40
3450 Bartlett Avenue
Rosemead, CA 91770
5. Responsible Agencies: City of Rosemead
II . STATEMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS:
An initial study was conducted by the Planning Department to
evaluate the potential effects of this project upon the
environment. Based upon the findings contained in the
attached initial study, it has been determined that this
project could not have a significant effect upon the
environment. Based upon the initial study evaluation the
project will have a de minimis impact on fish and wildlife
and therefore is exempted from State Fish and Game Code
Section 711 . 4 for payment of $1, 250 filing fee for a ND and
$850 filing fee for an EIR.
III . PUBLIC REVIEW
1 . Public Notice: Publication of a notice in a newspaper
of general circulation in the area.
2 . Document Posting Period. X
3 . Direct mailing to owners of property within 300 feet of
project. X
/ i
3
CITY OF ROSEMEAD
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING
INITIAL STUDY
Entitlement: Parcel Map 24136
Date of Initial Study: December 21, 1994
Name of Applicant: Sophia Wong
Location of Project: 3450 Bartlett Avenue, Rosemead
Assessor' s Parcel No (s) : 5289-8-40
General Plan Land Use
Designation: Low-Density Residential
Proposed General Plan
Land Use Designation: Low-Density Residential
Present Land Use: Single-Family Residential
Existing Zoning: R-1
Proposed Zoning: R-1
Agency staff Contact: City of Rosemead .
8838 E. Valley Boulevard
Rosemead, CA 91770
(818) 288-6671
I . PROJECT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION:
Location: 3450 Bartlett Avenue
Project: Lot subdivision and construction of three new
single-family dwellings.
Site Description: Subject site is a 21, 579 square foot lot which
takes access directly from Bartlett Avenue.
Surrounding Land Uses:
North: R-1
South: R-1
East: R-1
West: R-1
II. IS THE PROPOSED PROJECT CONSISTENT WITH:
Yes No N/A
Rosemead General Plan X
1
Yes No N/A
Applicable Specific Plan: X
Rosemead Zoning Ordinance X
III .ARE ANY OF THE FOLLOWING STUDIES REQUIRED:
Noise Study
Tree Study
Archaeological Report
Biology Report
Geotechnical Report
Soil Borings & Assessment for Liquefaction Potential
Traffic Study
Others (identify below)
IV. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST AND RESPONSES:
A. Earth
1 . Does the parcel contain slopes of 20% or greater which
will be affected by project construction?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
2 . Is any significant modification of major landforms
proposed?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
3 . Will the project result in disruption, displacements,
compaction, or overcovering of the soil?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
4 . Will the project result in the exposure of people or
property to geologic hazards such as earthquakes,
landslides, mudslides, ground failure, or similar
hazards?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
5. Does the site include any unique geological features or
paleontological resources of significance?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
6. will the project result in a significant increase in
wind or water erosion or siltation either off- or
on-site beyond the construction phase of the project?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
7 . Will the project result in changes in siltation,
2 4
.
_l
deposition, or erosion which may modify the channel of
a river or stream?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
B. Air
1 . Will the project, result in a significant adverse air
quality impact (based on the estimated date of project
completion) , as identified in the Air Quality
Management Air District' s guidelines for the
Preparation of Air Quality Impact Analyses?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
2 . Will the project result in a significant cumulative
adverse air quality impact based on inconsistency with
the South Coast Air Quality Management Plan?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
3 . Will the project result in the creation of
objectionable odors?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
4 . will the project result in the exposure of sensitive
receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
C. water
1. Does the project involve a major natural drainage
course or flood control channel?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
2 . Will the project result in changes in absorption rates,
drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface
runoff?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
3 . Is the project within a 100-year flood hazard area as
identified on the Federal Emergency Management Agency
Flood Insurance Rate Map for the City of Rosemead?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
4 . Will the project result in alterations to the course or
flow of flood waters?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
5. Will the project result in a change in the quantity of
ground waters, either through direct additions or
withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by
cuts or excavations?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
6 . Will the project result in degradation of ground or
surface water quality?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
7 . Will the project change the amount of surface water in
any water body?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
E . Will the project result in substantial reduction in the
amount of water otherwise availabe for public water
supplies?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
D. Plant. Life
1. Will the project result in a substantial change in the
diversity or number of any species of plants (including
trees, shrubs, grass, crops, and aquatic plants) ?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
2 . Are any unique, rare, or endangered species of plants
present on the project site? (See State and Federal
listings and California Native Plant Society, Inventory
of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants. )
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
3 . Will the project result in the introduction of invasive
species of plants into the area?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
4 � ;.
4 . Will the proposal result in the reduction in acreage of
any agricultural crop?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
E. Animal Life
1 . Will the project result in a reduction in the diversity
or numbers of any species of animals (birds, land
animals, including reptiles, fish and shellfish,
benthic organisms, or insects) ?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
2 . Will the project restrict the range of or otherwise
affect any rare or endangered animal species?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
3 . Will the project result in a deterioration of any
significant wildlife habitat?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
4 . Will the project result in a de minimis impact on fish
and wildlife resources?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
F. Noise
1. Will the project result in increases to existing noise
levels?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
2 . Will the project result in the exposure of people to
conditionally acceptable or unacceptable noise levels?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
G. Light and Glare
5
1. Will the project result in new light or glare?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
H. Land Use
1 . Will the proposal result in a substantial alteration of
the present or planned land use of an area?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
2 . Are adjoining or planned land uses incompatible with
the proposed project, so that a substantial or
potentially substantial interface problem would be
created?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
3 . Could the project serve to encourage the development of
presently undeveloped areas or result in increases in
the development intensity of existing developed areas
(examples include the introduction of new or expanded
public utilities, and new industrial , commercial, or
recreational facilities) ?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
1 , Natural Resources
1 . Will the project result in substantial depletion of any
nonrenewable resource?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
2 . Will the project result in the conversion of
agricultural land to nonagricultural use or impairment
of the agricultural productivity of agricultural land?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
6 �//
J. Risk of Upset and Human Health
1. Will the project involve or be subject to a risk of an
explosion or the release of hazardous substances
(including, but not limited to, oil, pesticides,
chemicals or radioactive materials) in the event of an
accident or upset condition?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
2 . areathedsro7ect definedhln byorthe7a Lost to a Angeles County hazard
Is CountyFire
Protection District?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
3 . Will the proposal result in the creation of any health
hazard or potential health hazard and/or the exposure
of people to potential health hazards?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
K. Population
Will 1 density,, e orro project
rowthalter rate ofetheohumannpopulationdistribution,
ofan
area?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
L. Housing
1. Will the proposal require the removal of any housing
unit(s) ?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
2 . Will the proposal reduce currently available low and
very-low income housing through changes in the use or
demolition?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
7
3 . Will the proposal require the displacement of people
from the project site?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
M. Transportation/Circulation
1. Will the proposal result in the generation of
substantial additional vehicular movement? (Identify
extimated a .m. and p.m. peak hour trips and average
daily vehicle trips generated by the project. )
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
2 . Will the proposal result in a substantial impact to the
existing or planned transportation systems?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
3 . Will the proposal result in an increased demand for
off-site parking?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
4 . Will the proposal result in an increase in traffic
hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists, or pedestrians?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
N. Public Services
Will the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a
need for new or altered governmental services such as
police and fire protection, schools, parks or
recreational facilities , or other governmental
services?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
8
,
O. Energy
Will the proposal result in the use of excessive
amounts of fuel or energy?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
P. Utilities
Will the proposal result in a need for new systems, or
substantial alterations to utilities, including power
or natural gas, communications systems, water, sewer,
storm water drainage, solid waste disposal, and street
lighting annexation and/or improvements?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
2. Aesthetics
1 . Will the proposal 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?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
2 . Will the project result in the loss, covering, or
modification of any unique geologic or physical
features such as a natural canyon, rock outcropping,
ridgeline, or hillside with a slope in excess of 25
percent?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
3 . Will the project result in the loss of a distinctive
landmark tree or stand of mature trees?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
9
R. Archaeological/Historical
1 . Is there a potential that the proposal will result in
the alteration or destruction of an archaelogical or
historical site?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
2 . Will the proposal result in adverse physical or
aesthetic effects to an archaeological site or historic
building, structure, or object?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
S. Mandator Findin•s of Si•nificance
I . Does the project have the potential to degrade the
quality of the environment, substantially reduce the
habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or
wildlife population to drop below self staining
llevels, threaten to eliminate a plantor
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?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
2 . Does the project have the potential to achieve
short-term, to the disadvantage m ofpact f ng-term,
environmental goals?
environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief,
definitive period of time while long-term impacts will
endure well into the future. )
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
3 . Does the project have impacts which are individually
may
limited, but cumulatively considerable? (A project
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. The term "cumulatively
considerable" means that the incremental effects of an
individual project are considerable when viewed in
connection with the effects of the past projects, the
effects of other currecnt projects, and the effects of
probable future projects. )
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
10
. i i' •
4 . Does the project have environmental effects which will
cause substantial adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
VI . DETERMINATION
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
X I find the proposcd 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 the
mitigation measures, described in this initial study
could be applied to the project. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION should be prepared.
I find the proposed project MAY have a significant
effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
REPORT is required.
I find the proposed project MAY have a significant
effect on the environment, and an ADDENDUM to an
existing certified ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is
required.
fi\\Prepared by: Concur:
FFsVVV UUU�l eer Lyons
James Plannr;( P
Directtr ofPlanning
Project Planner 11
/ 2.- 27- 51
Date Date
11 /_/,_
03/93
1
CC TY OF LOS ANGELES PIRE DE1 .TRENT
FIRE PRO'1c;CTION REQUIREMENTS -ern
AREAS
DAMAP
Ps W~ /CITY OF ed. c�G Y)
SUBJECT: Pm z v4 3
LOCATION :
FIRE FLOW
[ ] Hydrants and fire flow are adequate to meet current Fire
Department requirements.
-7- j The required fi flow for public fire hydrants at this
location is /2. 0 gallons per minute at 20 psi for a duration
of 2 hours, over and above maximum daily domestic demand.
[ ] The required on-site fire flow for private on-site hydrants is
gallons per minute at 20 psi. Each private on-site
hydrant must be capable of flowing gallons per minute
at 20 psi with any two hydrants flowing simultaneously.
ti",3/41,1 Fire Hydrt requirements as follows:
Install Public Fire Hydrant(s) . Install Private
On-site ire Hydrant(s) . Upgrade Public Fire Hydrant(s) .
.4.1%.1 All hydrants shall measure 6" x 4" x 2-1/2" brass or bronze,
conforming to current AWWA standard C503 or approved equal.
All hydrants shall be installed a minimum of 25' from a
structure or protected by a (2) two hour fire wall.
saITS, Location: As per map comae.i�l]e�w/ith t�S►isss of� iii ee..9 o�I
�[�]" Other location:415 J $ R p ( 1 W pf 7�"G,.
lit..41, All required fire hydrants shall be installed, tested and
accepted prior to construction. Vehicular access must be
provided and maintained serviceable throughout construction.
[ ] Additional on-site hydrants may be required during the building
permit process.
L.%), Upgrade not necessary, if existing hydrant meets fire flow
requirements. r�tst� i�
�� Comments:SVI%IM IT Comp "" ' OATS, a i LA el Be Ivry
Iso IVA3 ()FACE Fort- A neoNIA L tt»141`J
All hydrants shall be installed in conformance with Title 20,
L.A. County Government Code or appropriate city regulations.
This shall include minimum six-inch diameter mains.
Arrangements to meet these requirements must be made with the
water purveyor serving the area.
ZONEMAP
BY qt"...,., DATE NOV 14 1994
FIRE PREVENTION ENGINEERING SECTION - (213) 890-4125
\ . - _
:gy :-.
FORM 266 COUNTY —V LOS ANGELES FIRE DEPARTY 7
01/94 •
CONDITI. .3 OF APPROVAL FOR SDBDIVIS_.JNS
��yy, INCORPORATED� CITIES '�yF�� �T�` I
P1t�R.CCcEL MAP NO. 2T% :JY TENTATIVE MAP DATE $40
CITY F tf$E Me-AD
l 1 This property is Located within the areas described by the Forester and Fire Harden as Fire Zane 4 and future
construction must comply with applicable Code requirements.
"11,90 Provide water mains: fire hydrants, and fire nous as required by Canty forester and Fire Warden for all land
sham on the map to be recorded.
[ 1 The final concept map which has been cEaitted to this Department for review has fulfilled the corditiora of
approval recoeme ded by this Departaent'for access only.
lilta Provide Fire Department and City moved street signs, building address niers prior to occupancy.
Tim Fire Department access shall be extended to within 150 feet distance of any portion of stauctnre to be built.
[ 1 The Canty Forester and Fire Warden is not setting requirements for water mains, fire hydrants and fire flows as
a condition of approval for this division land as presently zoned and submitted.
esermlm Access shall comply with section 10.207 of the Fire code which requires all weather access. All weather access
may require paying.
[ 1 Where driveways extend further than 300 feet and are of single access design, turnarou ds suitable for fire
protection equipment use shell be provided and shown at the final sap. Turnarands shall be designed,
,
constructed and maintained to insure their integrity for Fire Department use. Where topography dictates,
turnarounds shell be provided for driveways which extend over 150 feet.
�my The private driveways shall be indicated on the final map as "FIRE LANE" and shall be maintained in accordance
with the Los Angeles Carty fire Cade.
[ 1 There are no additional fire hydrants or fire flora required for this division of land. Requirements for fire
protection water end access will be determined at the time of building perm
it ami, All required fire hydrants shall be installed, tested and accepted prior to construction. Vehicular access mast
be provided and maintained serviceable throughout construction. -
[ 1 Additional fire protection
systems shall be i
/n
�stilled in lieu of suitable,access and/or
fire protectioniwater.
L� comments: 1 ROJ\OE A 200 1)44 eta ( ( ys th'{
G 1.Eot tZ Tb S tee/ F‘rtE i.A E s evict o
* 2 c 3 . F►RE L 6 SHA (-L
6 ?o s-1 eD
BY: DATE: NOV 14 1994
({0 Mini of tue; Alutclr ; «_,;\
c: dv;:'f �Itrritt.6, Drnartnv'ut tiralquarirra
.Ii an 1,:nnnna Tlrtutlrh arl tl
+Ijnnh•nm .lark. California 0175•1- '2160
- - - - (818) 285-7171
October 31, 1994
James Troyer Associate Planner
City of Rosemead
8838 East Valley Boulevard
Rosemead, California 91770
Dear Mr. Troyer
We are in receipt of Tentative Parcel Subdivision Tract Map Number 24136 concerning the
project in the City of Rosemead
The Sheriffs Department requests that as a condition of approval for this project that the
addresses for the proposed lot be clearly marked at the entrance to the driveway on Bartlett
Avenue to allow for location identification in the event of emergency response to the proposed
residences.
If you have any further questions_ please contact Sergeant Wayne Wallace at (818) 285-7171,
extension 3541
Sincerely,
SHERMAN BLOCK. SHERIFF� nnI
C
Robert Mirabella. Captain
Commander, Temple Station
M 7ra->i17on o/ r)aruce
•
K.a
-- - (818) 443-0173
3640 NORTH RIO HONDO AVE., ROSEMEAD - = CALIFORNIA 91770 _ FAX (818) 443-7470
BOARD OLST_ES
o
ME.ISSA _ Mono
November 1, 1994
Mr. James Troyer
Associate Planner
City of Rosemead
8838 E. Valley Boulevard
P.O. Box 399
Rosemead, CA 91770
Dear James.
This is to inform you that Tentative ParceUSubdivision Tract Map Number 24136 is within
Rosemead School District's jurisdiction and we will provide the appropriate services.
If you have any questions, please call me
Sincerely,
R
Richard Yodites
Business manager
RV cf
k;:
November 8, 1994
File No: 15-00.00-00
Mr. James Troyer
City of Rosemead
8838 E. Valley Boulevard
Rosemead, CA 91770
Dear Mr. Troyer:
Tentative Parcel Map No. 24136
The letter and plans for the subject project, forwarded by your office, were received on
October 27, 1994. The proposed development is located within the jurisdictional boundaries of
District No. 15. We offer the following comments retarding sewerage service:
• The Sanitation Districts arc empowered by the California Health and Safety Code to charge a fee for
the privilege of connecting (directly or indirectly) to the Sanitation Districts' Sewerage System or
increasing the existing strength and/or quantity of wastewater attributable to a particular parcel or
operation already connected. This connection fee is required to construct an incremental expansion
of the Sewerage System to accommodate the proposed project which will mitigate the impact of this
project on the present Sewerage System. Payment of a connection fee will be required before a
permit to connect to the sewer is issued. -
• The design capacity of Districts' wastewater conveyance and treatment facilities are based on
population forecasts adopted in the Southern California Association of Governments' (SCAG) 1994
Regional Comprehensive Plan (RCP). The RCP is in the process of being adopted as part of the
1994 South Coast Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP). The AQMP is jointly prepared by the
South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) and SCAG as a requirement of the
Federal Clean Air Act (CAA). In order to conform with the AQMP, all expansions of Districts'
facilities must be sized and service phased in a manner which will be consistent with the Growth
Management element of the 1994 RCP. The Growth Management element contains a regional growth
forecast for the counties of Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino, Riverside,Ventura, and Imperial
which was prepared by SCAG. Specific policies included in the RCP which deal with the management
of growth will be incorporated into the AQMP strategies to improve air quality in the South Coast
Air Basin. The available capacity of Districts' conveyance and treatment facilities will, therefore,be
limited to levels associated with approved growth identified in the adopted RCP. As such, this letter
does not constitute a guarantee of wastewater service, but is to advise you that the Districts intend
l7
Mr. James Troyer
2 November 8, 1994
to provide this service up to the levels which are legally permitted and to inform you of the currently
existing capacity and any proposed expansion of Districts' facilities.
If you have any questions, please contact the undersigned at (310) 699-7411, extension 2717.
Very truly yours,
Charles W. Carry
Marie L. Pagenkopp
Engineering Technician
Financial Planning &
Property Management Section
MLP:cg
NErvASSEsENV SSZ.TPMFIIRLTR
COUNTY LOS ANGELES • DEPARTMENT OF H _TH SERVICES DNS ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
Mountain & Rural \ Water, Sewerage & Subdivisions Programs
2525 Corporate Place, Suite 150, Monterey Park, CA 91754-7631
(213) 881-4147/4158
January 4, 1995
Bradd Tarr
Assistant Planning Director
City of Rosemead
8838 East Valley Boulevard
P. 0. Box 399
Rosemead, California 91770
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 24136
Dear Sir:
The Los Angeles County Department of Health Services has no objection to the
approval of Tentative Parcel Map No. 24136 provided that sanitary sewers are used
as the method of sewage disposal.
Domestic water will be supplied by Southern California Water Company.
Sincerely,
Norman L. Groom, R.E.H.S.
Chief Environmental Health Specialist
Mountain and Rural/Water, Sewage
and Subdivision Programs
NLG:11
''
• The Gas Cow, tly
Technical Services Dupanmenl
November 3, 1994
Mr. James Troyer
Associate Planner
City of Rosemead
8838 E.Valley Boulevard
Rosemead, CA 91770
Southern m
Celiloia
Reference: Parcel Map No. 24136 SGm outhern
Dear Mr. Troyer: v� „ a�,• a
The following is in response to your 10/25/94,letter requesting information relative to an
Environmental Impact Repon on the proposed development of 3 units..
Within the areas of interest and responsibilities of the Southern California Gas Company,we find
the proposed development reasonable and acceptable.
This letter is not to be interpreted as a contractual commitment to serve the subject development,
but only as an information service. Its intent is to notify you that the proposed project can be
served from existing mains in the arca. This can be done without any major impact on overall
system capacity,service to existing customers.or the environment.
Average consumption is estimated at 1095 therms per year per single fa dwelling unit. This
estimate is based on past system averages and does not encompass the possible effect of the State's
new insulating requirements and consumers' loads van'with types of equipment used. The
availability of natural gas service as set forth in this letter is based upon present conditions of gas
supply and regulatory policies. As a public utility, Southern California Gas Company is under the
jurisdiction of the California Public Utilities Commission. We can also be affected by actions of
federal regulatory agencies. Should these agencies take any action that effects gas supply or the
condition under which service is available, gas service will be provided in accordance with the
revised condition.
We have developed several programs which are available. upon request.to provide assistance in
selecting the most effective applications of energy conservation techniques for a particular project.
If you desire further information on any of our energy conservation programs. please call
(213) 881-8208.
Sincerely,
�t f / /
Santo Plescia
Planning Aide
Mountain View Region
CRA:cc
cpr'^4.l3Eea
�G]�Y
A see ssor 's Pup � ! CA
62 89 . 8• ` ..,
3/ lv
SAN BERNARDINO FRWY.•
I M/169/-1
o P 9
• RAMONA BLVD. o
N99°l/'W
5� e l_ EZ 4942 40 18 43
A ao av �i eal I I ��.
40 $. ®o_�"I ° ..I tl O�I4 I I c I "b0 a
CD _ 1 0s9s—L..i,o =Ik I I O I O K
-Xi?/06 12)98
> -51fEG (P II''. I I Cdr
.Z1 m j o ,21 GS ±53.±5- n
1$ '' w I r— i%v5 4. 5.4
m 4 ® ® ole ® � MI
-I 3YSc 21243 -- I
H _ — —_l 4942 60 24I /o06f / r
y tZ7 V °� "u 93.46IsIUG 4B
�.. ..,r,-.A o —.3y. o 15
`` 0 a
tT'a S //6
b X1:`1 ' 209.64 + 4 """
IF) P .`., ,..;....r or"rte w
.3 9 22 us
u7 N'4 l 96./0 //a
a-
s
jr.. /o�7:55 339.9i 4 48
3 r J b a O
Ov" NW oWW /0720
'0— /.06-5,9 0 0
� r 5.3 /0720
u g y u arA; ti a u N Yz9 48
7939 /0720 49
p° .. _
t^ o o
/
3/02
O25
'4 ,4 ; 0 O 3Y2�
� _ OuuO VN /3/02
°
Rio
� ° dB /5
225,07
t.
.s., 3/11) 13f.°� �,
NI'Et
NU sY;1 DUN .® o m _39/ o
N o 9 0
.j I/o 80 N 13/351
N
o_I4> 22157
z/in //i .ii
P9.If 7460 60 .3v/3 m
® 5
2999 __ ___ 9.0
/6°.(fie..flu ` 3407 N 44
3 `j0 ® I 2/0,52 di
TV 0 220.57 /8/39
a
PGo eN
da r
336y
3
36/ o a4eO06 $
WI /00.39 ___
W t .33531119. r4TJ9 5.89°/Yµ: /8139
0 4. - . I, s /o.3<co" 3355 N4o
J Ni ry
33� : % zas„ rzrii�G3 45
®' �s;, o,a 33vq ti .... _ -
33 Sa B 'e'oi w 2120 66__ 40'
e —�� 1
_KBTSL%Of 1ffii — h
�T� v nN,— .33V mom^. 4a
133 Y /res x--10 �,�,JJ—N — 1'4
y I >
---Th,
_ p i — 2NJ 669
40 1 no 9
A.
__
e targe'/fl
TO: PETERS LYONS, PLANNING DIRECTOR
FROM: FRED WICKMAN, DEPUTY CITY ENGINEER
DATE: NOVEMBER 2, 1994
RE: TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 24136
Attached for your consideration is the City Engineer's recommended conditions of approval
for the referenced parcel map.
Attachment
AMF:fw
plan(.con)
City Engineer's Recommended Conditions of Approval for
Tentative Parcel Map No. 24136
GENERAL
1. Details shown on the tentative map are not necessarily approved. Any details which
are inconsistent with requirements of ordinances, general conditions of approval, or
City Engineer's policies must be specifically approved in the final map or
improvement plan approvals.
2. A final parcel map prepared by, or under the direction of a Registered Civil
Engineer authorized to practice land surveying, or a Licensed Land Surveyor, must
be processed through the City Engineer's office prior to being filed with the County
Recorder.
3. A preliminary subdivision guarantee is required showing all fee interest holders and
encumbrances. An updated title report shall be provided before the final parcel map
is released for filing with the County Recorder.
4. Monumentation of parcel map boundaries, street centerline and lot boundaries is
required.
5. Comply with all requirements of the Subdivision Map Act.
6_ Approval for filing of this land division is contingent upon approval of plans and
specifications mentioned below. If the public improvements are not installed prior
to the filing of this division, the developer must submit an Undertaking Agreement
and a Faithful Performance and Labor and Materials Bond in the amount estimated
by the City Engineer guaranteeing the installation of the improvements.
ck
/or
7. The City
approved byserves the right to imose any new- plan City Council subsequentt to tentative approval eof this dpermit fees
map.
DRAINAGE AND GRADING
8. Prior to the recordation of the final map, grading and drainage plans must be
approved to provide for contributory drainage from adjoining properties as approved
by the City Engineer, including dedication of the necessary easements.
9. A grading and drainage plan must provide for each lot having an independent
drainage system to the public street, to a public drainage facility, or by means of an
approved drainage easement.
10. Historical or existing storm water flow from adjacent lots must be received and
lJtj a/
directed by gravity to the street, a public drainage facility, or an approved drainage
easement.
11. Developer shall prepare a covenant, subject to City Engineer's approval for a
drainage easement across Parcel 3 benefitting Parcel 2.
12. Developer shall prepare a covenant, subject to City Engineer's approval, to allow
cross lot drainage.
ROAD
13. Developer shall prepare a covenant, subject to City Engineer's approval, for ingress
and egress, utility and drainage easement, and fire lane.
14. New drive approaches shall be constructed at least 3' from any above-ground
obstructions in the public right-of-way to the top of "x" or the obstruction shall be
relocated.
15. Drive approaches shall be at least 10' wide.
16. Existing drive approaches on Bartlett Avenue shall he closed with full curb, gutter
and sidewalk.
17. Developer shall grant a 4' wide road deed dedication along the property frontage.
SEWER
lg Approval of this land division is contingent upon providing separate house sewer
laterals to serve each lot of the land division.
19. The developer shall consult the City Engineer to determine the sewer location and
design requirements.
20. Easements may be required and shall be subject to review by the City Engineer to
determine the final locations and requirements.
UTILITIES
21. Power, telephone and cable television service shall be underground.
21 Any utilities that are in conflict with the development shall be relocated at the
developer's expense.
•
t �x3 W
WATER
23. All lots shall be served by adequately sized water system facilities which shall include
fire hydrants of the size, type and location as determined by the Fire Chief.
24. The water mains shall be of sufficient size to accommodate the total domestic and
fire flow required for the land division. Domestic flows required are to be
determined by the City Engineer. Fire flows required are to be determined by the
Fire Chief.
25. Plans and specifications for the water system facilities shall be submitted for approval
to the water company serving this land division. The subdivider shall submit an
agreement and other evidence, satisfactory to the City Engineer, indicating that the
subdivider has entered into a contract with the servicing water purveyor guaranteeing
payment and installation of the water improvements.
26. Prior to the filing of the final map, there shall also be filed with the City Engineer,
a statement from the water purveyor indicating subdivider compliance with the Fire
Chiefs fire flow requirements.
-.A .J • I I
at
PN 1.1
co
corzi
SAN BERNRARDINO F htlY. w C R I
F.M 1/69/-2
RAMONA o BLVD.
" 1189"11'W
.$ 80 `." I°y4'
10* V � 1! kI .,� 14941 140 138 143 I\\
I m •
DN i`32 t, 46 � '
A.
1.]
�C I' o0 1 r>.
_Lk asset p9
> j L/CO 0—aver/az 21.96 - ,, 1 ® I ® I ®
;3 ��' " I mar
1 3 '5 ' v w ( I ... K 48 LS��
r w® I o ,- 10244 "
1 3756 I ® I H ;_I� ® 5% 3444
H __ — _nz43 I
A !8128 49.621 QO Ise jr fOc`6s_' m
n Iy`"., 93.48 /46 , 41
✓ se. e� o°oON o o -.37,1,36-6 0 45
UP 1 V`Y ' 20961 e, o--..•m
144
3 5''4 226.8'0 — �at'� 436 e
00
® Ic�2° 7 W ‘GQ
A
3/ Yk ZXa l ' 994/0 iib a as
50
79.39 /0..c0
3 >3e m q O 3 7 / 4 ae
Ov NW N W
�'W e /07z0 C
3 vii gJr.23 ew.
/an,
LI' a 4 'na p N q ® N5135149 t, 48
_ .93r
o Zb f 7913! 40720 49
427548
® u\a° Y2 0 437oz
132
'4.
3 ' n n Of.oz � 11111
Jm 28301 a 2f/48 - /5
3r/2 m' /� N
131.95y
bt U m u e® N p .may/9 o S9
o 3 4 c 21431 e0 M_. /31495 b 1
` 1647 7460 \ 60 .397
2/682 6-4/z.:
- ® m `a /5 m® y e , 4L
m /3
N W
E99> 4 e
11)
i i w)rny.11a.ff .
>Z0.f1 ,?907 n 44
C o 3 yo2 i" I O f
1/6 82
CD s o 886307 /8/.39
rn o F ti o 3370 ® SIS ® 3367 40
' /9891//6 —I 4/596//E /8/39
-1 O sLd P ' �. r 171.39
-
- - _ -1 m3369 ' I
O 1$ m 336/ 44 .
MW1 /71.39
CO 3358 zz„17x"2- `� el:NS.G9`/l/✓ Bf-39
-4 /0,3444' 3355 a °'
014
33.5‘ " .."."'"ono-k. ej. 96..as d4
®;` g
V oO
4 � A a 33Yq 45
33 5D .,E,8J 8'47 V 220.66 .0 4o' ' -_
la
41-71 ?L9-x"'10 I G ^ z- 33'/ 'to°p.o. 44
33179 OI Vo ,0• M FD
S -70117-11 t 0 ,6.®-r' 220.69 m
[n �3Iv2 ,� „$ li7 • o ®
iv 40
40 Ins ...CI
I .33✓' v
e 7487166'/0'6 s �
Y /6i)