5.1 land use and relevant planning - azusa, ca

5.1 Land Use and Relevant Planning

Waste Management Material Recovery Facility

Transfer Station and Household Hazardous Waste Facility Environmental Impact Report

Public Review Draft ● March 2011 5.1-1 Land Use and Relevant Planning

5.1 LAND USE AND RELEVANT PLANNING This section identifies the existing land use conditions, evaluates the project’s consistency with relevant planning policies, and recommends mitigation measures, which would avoid or lessen the significance of potential impacts. This section identifies on-site and surrounding land use conditions and land use policies and regulations, as set forth by the City. Information in this section is based upon the Azusa General Plan (April 2004) and Chapter 88 of the City of Azusa Municipal Code (Azusa Development Code). 5.1.1 EXISTING SETTING

The project site is located in the southern extent of the City, adjacent to the City’s southern boundary with the City of Irwindale. The project site is located in the City’s industrial district (i.e., West End Industrial District), which occupies the western portion of the City and includes industrial, manufacturing, and technological uses. The project site is adjacent to the existing Azusa Land Reclamation landfill. The western portion of the site is generally located to the northeast of the intersection of Irwindale Avenue and Gladstone Street and the eastern portion of the site is located to the northeast of the intersection of Gladstone Street and Vincent Avenue; refer to Exhibit 3-2, Site Vicinity. More specifically, the eastern portion of the project site, which is the location of the proposed HHWF, is generally situated northwest of the Gladstone Street and Mira Loma Drive intersection. The HHWF site currently encompasses a landscaped area, the shared entrance road to the Azusa Land Reclamation landfill and Cemex plant (located to the north), and a southern portion of the Azusa Land Reclamation landfill facilities presently used for truck parking purposes. The western portion of the project site, which is the location of the proposed MRF/TS, is generally situated northeast of the Irwindale Avenue and Gladstone Street intersection. The MRF/TS site was formerly a waste tire reclamation processing facility. This portion of the site is currently occupied by two vacant single-story industrial structures, a concrete paved driveway, a partially paved storage area, a vacant lot, three landfill gas flares, and the southwestern edge of the Azusa Land Reclamation landfill. The project area between the eastern and western portions of the project site involves a linear corridor that generally extends north of and along the Gladstone Street right-of-way. This corridor area is comprised of a vacant lot, dirt road, and the southern edge of the Azusa Land Reclamation landfill. The land uses that surround the project site are exclusively industrial and landfill. More specifically, the surrounding land uses are described, as follows.

• North: The predominant land use located north of the project site is the Azusa Land Reclamation landfill, operated by the Azusa Land Reclamation Company. The landfill is a 283-acre, primarily-unlined, inert waste disposal site located in an empty sand and gravel pit. The landfill accepts non-hazardous inert wastes, both non-friable and friable asbestos,




contaminated soil, and tires. The facility is equipped with leachate and gas collection systems. Azusa Land Reclamation landfill has a maximum permitted throughput of 6,500 tons per day (tpd).1 The Cemex plant is located northeast of the future HHWF site. Cemex is a building materials supplier of cement and concrete products. As previously noted, the entrance road to the Azusa Land Reclamation landfill and Cemex concrete plant forms part of the HHWF site. According to Azusa General Plan Figure CD-4, Land Use Diagram, land uses located north of the project site are designated Industrial and Recreation/Landfill Mixed-Use.

• East: Mira Loma Avenue is located immediately east of the HHWF site and industrial uses

are located in the area beyond the right-of-way. Land uses located east of the project site are designated Recreation/Landfill Mixed-Use; refer to Azusa General Plan Figure CD-4.

• South: Gladstone Street is located immediately south of the project site and industrial uses

are located in the area beyond the right-of-way. Land uses located south of the project site are designated Industrial (refer to Azusa General Plan Figure CD-4) and Industrial/Business Park (refer to City of Irwindale General Plan Exhibit 2-3, Base Land Use Designations).

• West: Irwindale Avenue and industrial uses are located immediately west of the MRF/TS

site. Industrial uses occupy the area beyond the right-of-way. Land uses located west of the project site are designated Industrial; refer to Azusa General Plan Figure CD-4.

5.1.2 REGULATORY SETTING

REGIONAL PLANS AND POLICIES Regional plans/policies created by planning agencies such as the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) and the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), influence land use planning in the City of Azusa. Southern California Association of Governments SCAG is the largest of nearly 700 councils of government in the United States. It functions as the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) for six counties: Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino, Riverside, Ventura, and Imperial. The region encompasses a population exceeding 19 million persons in an area of more than 38,000 square miles. As the designated MPO, the SCAG is mandated by the Federal government to research and draw up plans for transportation, growth management, hazardous waste management, and air quality. Additional mandates exist at the State level.

1 CalRecycle Website, http://www.calrecycle.ca.gov/SWFacilities/Directory/19-AA-0013/Detail/, Accessed

August 16, 2010.




SCAG is responsible for the maintenance of a continuous, comprehensive, and coordinated planning process. SCAG is also responsible for the development of demographic projections, as well as the development of the integrated land use, housing, employment, transportation programs, measures, and strategies for portions of the South Coast Air Quality Management District’s 2007 Air Quality Management Plan for the South Coast Air Basin (2007 AQMP). The Gateway Cities Council of Governments (COG) is one of 13 Subregional Organizations that make up SCAG. The Gateway Cities COG consists of 27 cities, including Azusa, and has a combined population of two million people, who live and work in communities as diverse as their populations. SCAG Regional Comprehensive Plan SCAG’s 2008 Regional Comprehensive Plan: Helping Communities Achieve a Sustainable Future (2008 RCP) addresses regional issues such as housing, traffic/transportation, water, and air quality. The 2008 RCP serves as an advisory document to local agencies in the Southern California region for their information and voluntary use for preparing local plans and handling local issues of regional significance. The 2008 RCP presents a vision of how Southern California can balance resource conservation, economic vitality, and quality of life. The 2008 RCP identifies voluntary best practices to approach growth and infrastructure challenges in an integrated and comprehensive way. It also includes goals and outcomes to measure progress toward a more sustainable region. Regional Transportation Plan (2008 RTP) On May 8, 2008, SCAG adopted its 2008 Regional Transportation Plan: Making the Connection (2008 RTP). The 2008 RTP presents the transportation vision for the SCAG region through the year 2035 and provides a long-term investment framework for addressing the region’s transportation and related challenges. The 2008 RTP focuses on maintaining and improving the transportation system through a balanced approach and considers system preservation, operation, and management, improved coordination between land-use decisions and transportation investments, and strategic expansion of the system to accommodate future growth. Compass Blueprint Growth Visioning Program In 2001, SCAG started a regional visioning process (i.e., Southern California Compass) to develop a strategy for regional growth that would accommodate growth while providing for livability, mobility, prosperity, and sustainability. This process was spearheaded by the Growth Visioning Subcommittee, which consists of civic leaders from throughout the region. The result is a shared “Growth Vision” for Imperial, Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, and Ventura Counties. The Compass Blueprint Growth Vision is a response, supported by a regional consensus, to the land use and transportation challenges facing Southern California now and in the coming years. The Growth Vision is driven by four key principles: mobility- getting where we want to go; livability- creating positive communities; prosperity- long-term health for the region; and sustainability- promoting efficient use of natural resources. To realize these principles on the ground, the Growth Vision encourages:

Creating a shared regional vision is an effective way to begin addressing issues such as congestion and housing availability that may threaten the region’s livability. The Compass Blueprint strategy promotes a stronger




link between region-wide transportation and land use planning and encourages creative, forward-thinking, and sustainable development solutions that fit local needs and support shared regional values. In the short-term, SCAG’s growth visioning process has found common ground in a preferred vision for growth and has incorporated it into immediate housing allocation and transportation planning decisions. In the long-term, the Growth Vision is a framework that will help local jurisdictions address growth management cooperatively and will help coordinate regional land use and transportation planning. The result of this growth visioning effort is SCAG’s Growth Vision Report (GVR).

The GVR presents the comprehensive Growth Vision for the six-county SCAG region as well as the achievements of the Compass process. It details the evolution of the draft vision, from the study of emerging growth trends to the effects of different growth patterns on transportation systems, land consumption, and other factors. The GVR concludes with a series of implementation steps – including tools for each guiding principle and overarching implementation strategies – that will guide Southern California toward its envisioned future. South Coast Air Quality Management Plan The SCAQMD is one of 35 air quality management districts that have prepared Air Quality Management Plans to accomplish a five-percent annual reduction in emissions. The 2007 AQMP relies on a multi-level partnership of governmental agencies at the Federal, State, regional, and local level. The 2007 AQMP proposes policies and measures to achieve Federal and State standards for improved air quality in the South Coast Air Basin and those portions of the Salton Sea Air Basin (formerly named the Southeast Desert Air Basin) that are under SCAQMD jurisdiction. The 2007 AQMP also addresses several State and Federal planning requirements and incorporates significant new scientific data, primarily in the form of updated emissions inventories, ambient measurements, new meteorological episodes, and new air quality modeling tools. The 2007 AQMP is consistent with and builds upon the approaches taken in the 2003 Air Quality Management Plan, the 1997 Air Quality Management Plan, and the 1999 Amendments to the Ozone State Implementation Plan for the South Coast Air Basin for the attainment of the Federal ozone air quality standard. Refer to Section 5.4, Air Quality, for an evaluation of the project’s consistency with the 2007 AQMP. LOCAL PLANS AND POLICIES City of Azusa General Plan 2004 The Azusa General Plan may be generally described as the City’s constitution for development. Based on the community’s vision for long-term physical growth and preservation, it informs residents, property owners, and public of the City’s goals, policies, and implementation programs. The substantive function of the document is to provide principles and an overall framework for detailed public and private development decisions. It also establishes requirements for additional planning studies where greater specificity is needed. State law requires that each General Plan specifically address at least seven subjects or elements: land use, circulation, open space, housing, conservation, safety, and noise. The Azusa General Plan groups these state-required elements into three themes: the Built Environment; Economy and Community; and Natural Environment. The Compendium contains studies and plans prepared for and to implement the Azusa General Plan.




The Built Environment focuses on five areas that are or have been constructed by people: City Design (land use and urban form); Mobility; Housing; Historic and Cultural Resources; and Infrastructure. The City Design portion of The Built Environment fulfills the State’s requirement for a land use element. The land use element has the broadest scope of the General Plan elements required by the State. To this end, the City Design portion (or land use element) regulates how land is to be used in the City. As a result, many of the issues and policies contained in all other plan elements are impacted and or impact this element. Azusa General Plan Figure CD-2, Urban Form Diagram, illustrates the location of neighborhoods, districts, and corridors that make up the City’s urban form. According to Figure CD-2, the project site is located in the South Portion of the West End Industrial District. The West End Industrial District is described as follows:

The West End Industrial District is a regionally important source of jobs and wealth. A compatible mix of stores, restaurants, gas stations, offices, warehouses, public storage, and other uses strengthens the District’s vitality...2

Within each of the General Plan elements are “big ideas” intended to bring about significant change for Azusa. The City Design “big idea” for the West End Industrial District is that it “provide industrial, manufacturing, and high-tech opportunities for small, midsize, and large companies.”3 Also, it is the City’s vision to continue to promote its manufacturing (and commercial) West End by supporting the retention and expansion of existing businesses and continuing to attract new firms that supply good jobs. Land use designations and appropriate density standards and development standards are established, in order to ensure a balance of land uses, as defined in Built Environment Element Table CD-2, Land Use Diagram Classification, and illustrated on Built Environment Element Figure CD-3, Regulating Plan, and Built Environment Element Figure CD-4, Land Use Diagram. According to the Regulating Plan, the project site is located in the South Portion of the West End Industrial District. As depicted in the Land Use Diagram, the project site is designated Recreation/Landfill Mixed Use, except for the western corner of the site (i.e., northeast corner of the Irwindale Avenue and Gladstone Street intersection), which is designated Industrial. Pursuant to Built Environment Element Table CD-2, the typical principal-uses (not all inclusive) and maximum allowable intensity for these land use designations are:

Recreation/Landfill Mixed Use Typical Principal-Use: Recreation/Landfill. Maximum Allowable Intensity: Not applicable.

2 City of Azusa, Gateway to the American Dream: Azusa General Plan, April 2004, Page 3-9. 3 City of Azusa, Gateway to the American Dream: Azusa General Plan, April 2004, Page 3-2.




Industrial Typical Principal-Use: Heavy manufacturing; and related uses. Maximum Allowable Intensity: 0.5 to 3.0 floor area ratio (FAR).

The Azusa General Plan Built Environment Element - City Design policies that are relevant to the proposed project are detailed in Table 5.1-1, Azusa General Plan Consistency Analysis, provided later in this section. Pursuant to Implementation Program LU5, Development Agreements, Development Agreements are authorized by State law to enable a city to enter into a binding contract with a developer that assures the city as to the type, character, and quality of development and additional “benefits” that may be contributed. Such an Agreement also assures the developer that the necessary development permits will be issued regardless of regulation changes. The City determines whether it will seek Development Agreements on a project-by-project basis. City of Azusa Development Code In contrast to a General Plan, zoning refers to particular land uses, which are legally permitted or prohibited on any given parcel of land. Zoning is the method the City uses to control land uses in accordance with the City’s General Plan goals and policies. Azusa’s Zoning law is found in Chapter 88 of the City of Azusa Municipal Code (Azusa Development Code). The Azusa Development Code carries out the policies of the Azusa General Plan by regulating development and land uses within the City, consistent with the General Plan. The Azusa Development Code was adopted to protect and promote the public health, safety, comfort, convenience, prosperity, and general welfare of the City’s residents and businesses. The Azusa Development Code’s purposes are, among others, to:

• Provide standards for the continuing orderly growth and development of the City that will assist in enhancing and maintaining distinct community identity, and contribute to the health and well being of residents; and

• Ensure compatibility between different types of development and land uses.

Azusa Development Code Article 2, Urban Standards, provides standards and guidelines for development within the City, and establishes the City’s planning and zoning areas (i.e., Zoning Classification Map). Azusa Development Code Chapter 88.20, Regulating Plan, establishes 17 planning areas within the City, based on the time periods and types of development and land uses that characterize each area. As depicted in Azusa Development Code Chapter 88.20 Figure 1, Diagrammatic Key to Planning Areas, the project site is located in the West End Industrial District planning area. Additionally, the districts shown on the Regulating Plan identify areas occupied primarily by non-residential land uses and activities. As depicted on the Regulating Plan, the project site is located in the south portion of the West End Industrial District. More specifically, as depicted on the City of Azusa Zoning Classification Map, the project site is zoned District West End Light Industrial (DWL), except for the western corner of the site (i.e., northeast corner of the Irwindale Avenue and Gladstone Street intersection), which is zoned District West End Industrial (DW). Azusa Development Code Section 88.24.005 Table 2-2, Allowed Land Uses and Permit




Requirements for Districts, establishes allowable land uses and permit requirements for new land uses and development in the DWL and DW Districts. Any one or more land uses identified by Table 2-2, as being allowable within the DWL or DW Districts, may be established on any parcel within that zoning district, subject to the listed planning permit requirement, and in compliance with all applicable Azusa Development Code requirements. The West End Industrial District’s purpose, desired future/proposed changes (i.e., non-regulatory sections), and site planning/building design (i.e., Azusa Development Code regulations) are summarized as follows, based on Azusa Development Code Section 88.24.040, West End Industrial Districts. Purpose. The West End Industrial District (DW) is applied to areas of the City appropriate for a variety of manufacturing, industrial, and heavy commercial activities. The standards for the DW District are intended to accommodate a full range of light and medium-intensity manufacturing and industrial activities, automotive services, and the existing Azusa Land Reclamation landfill and gravel mining operations. Desired Future and Proposed Changes (South District). The general objective for the DW District is to maintain the character of this district as a light industrial area. The General Recommendations are:

1. Implement streetscape improvements (i.e., install/repair sidewalks and install street lighting,

of a design distinctive and consistent throughout the City); 2. Improve landscaping (i.e., encourage drought tolerant plants, and plant shade trees on

southern and western exposures to reduce cooling loads on buildings); and 3. Buildings should be built facing onto the street creating a public, pedestrian character with

the parking and truck access behind facing the obstructed views and noisy uses. Site Planning and Building Design.

1. Building Placement: Buildings shall be placed within the shaded area as shown in the diagram (refer to Azusa Development Code Section 88.24.040.D.1, Plan Diagram).

• Front Setback: 10.0 feet minimum. • Side Street Setback: 10.0 feet minimum. • Sideyard Setback: 0.0 feet. • Rear Setback: 0.0 feet.

2. Parking Placement: Parking not enclosed by a structure is allowed only in the shaded area as

shown in the diagram (refer to Azusa Development Code Section 88.24.040.D.2, Plan Diagram).

• Front setback: Not required up to 50 percent of frontage. • Side street setback: 10.0 feet minimum. • Side and rear setbacks: Not required.




Parking shall be provided according to Azusa Development Code Chapter 88.36; refer to discussion below.

3. Building Height and Profile:

• Height: Maximum: 55.0 feet. • Encroachments: Gallery/arcades, awnings, balconies, and outdoor dining furniture

may encroach into the setback and public right-of-way.

- Front encroachment: 10.0 feet maximum. - Side Street encroachment: 10.0 feet maximum. - Side encroachment: 10.0 feet maximum. - Maximum encroachment height is two stories or 40.0 feet.

4. Allowable frontage types: Gallery/arcade, shopfront, stoop, and forecourt.

Azusa Development Code Chapter 88.30, Standards For All Development and Land Uses, expands upon the zone standards of Azusa Development Code Article 2 by addressing additional details of site planning, project design, and the operation of land uses, relevant to the following issues (among others): Fences4, Walls, Hedges, and Screening; Hazard Mitigation; Height Limits and Exceptions; Setback Requirements and Exceptions; and Underground Utilities. The intent of these standards is to ensure that proposed development is compatible with existing and future development on neighboring properties, and produces an environment of stable and desirable character, consistent with the General Plan. Each new nonresidential project would be subject to the provisions of this Chapter. Azusa Development Code Chapter 88.31, Operational Standards, provides standards that regulate the following operational aspects of an approved land use: Noise Standards; Outdoor Lighting; and other Performance Standards (i.e., Air Emissions, Combustibles/Explosives, Ground Vibration, Liquid Waste, Odor, Radioactivity, and Electrical Disturbance/Electromagnetic Interference). Each new nonresidential project would be subject to the provisions of this Chapter. Azusa Development Code Chapter 88.34, Landscaping Standards, establishes requirements for landscaping to enhance the appearance of development projects, reduce heat and glare, control soil erosion, conserve water, screen potentially incompatible land uses, preserve the integrity of neighborhoods, improve air quality, and improve pedestrian and vehicular traffic and safety. Each new nonresidential project would be subject to the provisions of this Chapter. Azusa Development Code Chapter 88.36, Parking and Loading, outlines parking requirements in order to ensure that sufficient off-street motor vehicle parking facilities are provided for all uses and structures, and that parking facilities are properly designed, attractive, and located to be unobtrusive, generally to the rear of the site, while meeting the needs of the specific use or structure.

4 For locations within the West End District, the maximum allowable height of fences, walls, and hedges is 8.0 feet outside of required front setback; refer to Azusa Development Code Table 3-1, Maximum Height of Fences, Walls, and Hedges.




Azusa Development Code Chapter 88.42, Standard for Specific Land Uses, provides site planning, development, and/or operating standards for certain land uses and for activities that require special standards to mitigate their potential adverse impacts. Azusa Development Code Section 88.42.170, Recycling Facilities, specifies four categories of recycling facilities: Reverse Vending Machines; Small and Medium Collection Facilities; and Processing Facilities. Based on the criteria outlined in Azusa Development Code Section 88.42.170, the following standards that pertain to a Large Collection Facility and Processing Facility are relevant to the proposed project: Location Requirements. A Processing Facility shall not be located on a parcel that abuts a parcel zoned or occupied for residential use. Limitation on Activities. Allowed activities are limited to baling, briquetting, compacting, crushing, grinding, shredding, and sorting of source-separated recyclable materials and repairing of reusable materials. The facility shall not bale, compact, or shred ferrous metals, other than beverage and food containers. Outbound truck shipments from the site shall not exceed an average of two each day. Maximum Size. The facility shall not exceed 45,000 square feet of floor or ground area. Container Location. Containers provided for "after hours" donation of recyclable materials shall be permanently located at least 500 feet from any property zoned to allow residential use other than live/work, constructed of sturdy, rustproof materials, have sufficient capacity to accommodate materials collected, and be secured from unauthorized entry or removal of the materials. Outdoor Storage or Activities. All materials shall be stored and activities conducted entirely within a building. Operating Standards. Any dust, fumes, odor, smoke, or vibration, produced by the facility above ambient levels, shall not be detectable on adjoining parcels. As specified in Azusa Development Code Section 88.51.032, Design Review, Design Review is intended to ensure that the design of a proposed development and new land uses assists in maintaining and enhancing the City’s appearance. Therefore, the purposes of these procedures are to:

• Recognize the interdependence of land values and aesthetics and encourage the orderly and harmonious appearance of development within the community;

• Ensure that new uses and structures enhance their sites and are compatible with the highest

standards of improvement in the surrounding neighborhoods; • Retain and strengthen the visual quality and attractive character of the community; • Assist project developers in understanding the City’s concerns for the aesthetics of

development; and




• Ensure that development complies with all applicable city standards and guidelines, and does not adversely affect community health, safety, aesthetics, or natural resources.

According to Azusa Development Code Section 88.51.040, Use Permit and Minor Use Permit, the Use Permit and Minor Use Permit provide a process for reviewing proposed uses and activities that may be appropriate in the applicable zoning district, but whose effects on site and surroundings and, therefore, the appropriateness of the use or activity to the site or surroundings cannot be determined before a proposal is submitted for a specific site. As described in Azusa Development Code Section 88.51.050, Variance and Minor Variance, the Variance and Minor Variance provide a process for City consideration of requests to waive or modify certain standards of the Azusa Development Code when, because of special circumstances applicable to the property (i.e., location, shape, size, surroundings, topography, or other physical features), the strict application of the development standards otherwise applicable to the property denies the property owner privileges enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity and in the same zoning district. Pursuant to Azusa Development Code Section 88.51.060, Zoning Amendments, initiation of amendments to the Zoning Map or modification of the Azusa Development Code provisions shall be by action of the City Council/Planning Commission/City staff or by application by one or more property owners of property proposed for rezoning. The Azusa Planning Commission and City Council would be required to make certain findings of fact, before approving a Zone Change or Development Code amendment. Azusa Development Code Chapter 88.53, Development Agreements, establishes procedures and requirements for the review and approval of development agreements, consistent with Government Code Sections 65864, et seq. 5.1.3 IMPACT THRESHOLDS AND SIGNIFICANCE

CRITERIA

Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines contains the Initial Study Environmental Checklist Form, which includes questions relating to land use and relevant planning. The criteria presented in the Initial Study Environmental Checklist have been utilized as thresholds of significance in this section. Accordingly, a project may create a significant environmental impact relative to land use if it would:

• Physically divide an established community (refer to Section 10.0, Effects Found Not To Be

Significant); • Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction

over the project (including, but not limited to, the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect (refer to Impact Statements LAND-1, LAND-2, and LAND-3); and/or




• Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plans (refer to Section 10.0, Effects Found Not To Be Significant).

For the purposes of this impact analysis, a significant impact would occur if implementation of the proposed project would result in inconsistencies or conflicts with the adopted goals and policies of the Azusa General Plan and/or applicable rules and regulations of the Azusa Development Code. Based on these standards, the project’s effects have been categorized as either a “less than significant impact” or a “potentially significant impact.” Mitigation measures are recommended for potentially significant impacts. If a potentially significant impact cannot be reduced to a less than significant level through the application of mitigation, it is categorized as a significant and unavoidable impact. 5.1.4 IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS LAND-1 THE PROPOSED PROJECT COULD CONFLICT WITH SCAG’S

REGIONAL PLANNING EFFORTS. Impact Analysis: SCAG’s Intergovernmental Review (IGR) Section is responsible for performing a consistency review of local plans, projects, and programs with regional plans. There are two sets of minimum criteria for classification of projects as regionally significant: Criteria 1-12 are recommended for use by the CEQA Guidelines, Section 15206; and Criteria 13-22 reflect SCAG’s mandates and regionally significant projects that directly relate to policies and strategies contained in the 2008 RCP. Review of SCAG’s criteria for classification of projects as regionally significant indicates there are two criteria relevant to the proposed project:

• Criteria 6: A proposed industrial, manufacturing, or processing plant, or industrial park planned to house more than 1,000 persons, occupying more than 40 acres of land, or encompassing more than 650,000 square feet of floor area.

• Criteria 20: Proposed solid waste disposal sites in excess of 40 acres or the expansion of

these facilities by 40 acres. The proposed project does not satisfy the minimum requirements, as specified in Criteria 6 and 20. Additionally, the City distributed the NOP of this Draft EIR to responsible and trustee agencies, including SCAG, on August 3, 2010. The City requested the agencies’ views and specific concerns related to the proposed project’s potential environmental effects. SCAG did not respond to the NOP. It is concluded that the proposed project is not regionally significant. Therefore, no further analysis is warranted and a less than significant impact would occur in this regard. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required. Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.




CITY OF AZUSA GENERAL PLAN LAND-2 THE PROPOSED PROJECT COULD CONFLICT WITH THE AZUSA

GENERAL PLAN POLICIES OR REGULATIONS. Impact Analysis: The proposed MRF/TS involves an approximate 125,000-square foot Processing Facility with offices, and the proposed HHWF involves a 5,400 square foot collection facility. The project components and design features are discussed in detail in Section 3.0, Project Characteristics. The Azusa General Plan’s big ideas/visions, designations, standards, and policies as previously presented. The proposed project has been analyzed for consistency with the Azusa General Plan, as follows. Big Ideas. The project site is located in the South Portion of the West End Industrial District (District); refer to Azusa General Plan Figure CD-2, Urban Form Diagram. The project proposes an industrial development (i.e., MRF/TS and HHWF) that involves state-of-the-art recycling facilities. Therefore, project implementation would further the City’s objective to provide industrial high-tech opportunities for companies within the District. The project proposes a MRF/TS and HHWF in the West End Industrial District and would supply jobs to approximately 75 persons (69 jobs for the MRF/TS and 6 jobs for the HHWF). Therefore, project implementation would further the City’s vision for the District to attract new firms that supply jobs. Land Use Designations. The project site is designated Recreation/Landfill Mixed Use, except for the western corner of the site (i.e., northeast corner of the Irwindale Avenue and Gladstone Street intersection), which is designated Industrial; refer to Built Environment Element Figure CD-4, Land Use Diagram. Pursuant to Built Environment Element Table CD-2, Land Use Diagram Classification, the typical principal-uses for the Recreation/Landfill Mixed Use and Industrial designations are recreation/landfill and heavy manufacturing/related uses, respectively. The proposed HHWF development area is designated Recreation/Landfill. Pursuant to Built Environment Element Table CD-2, the proposed HHWF would be consistent with the intended principal uses for the Recreation/Landfill designation. The proposed MRF/TS development area is designated Recreation/Landfill and Industrial. Pursuant to Built Environment Element Table CD-2, the proposed MRF/TS would be consistent with the intended principal uses for the Industrial designation, however, would be inconsistent with the intended principal uses for the Recreation/Landfill Mixed Use designation. In order to ensure consistency with the Azusa General Plan and Azusa Development Code (see discussion below), the project proposes a General Plan Amendment (GPA 2010-01), changing a portion of the site’s land use designation from Recreation/Landfill Mixed Use to Industrial. Approval of a General Plan Amendment by the City would result in the project’s compliance with the intended principal uses for the Industrial designation. Table 5.1-1, Azusa General Plan Consistency Analysis, provides an analysis of the project’s consistency with the Azusa General Plan Built Environment Element - City Design Policies that are relevant to the proposed project. As concluded in Table 5.1-1, the proposed project is considered consistent with the applicable Azusa General Plan Built Environment Element - City Design Policies.




Table 5.1-1 Azusa General Plan Consistency Analysis

The Built Environment Element City Design Policies1 Project Consistency Discussion

4.8 Accommodate industrial, manufacturing and supporting commercial use within the West End Industrial District and in accordance with Table CD-2.

Consistent. The project proposes an industrial development (i.e., MRF/TS and HHWF) within the District. Refer also to the Land Use Designations section above.

4.9 Require buildings within the West End Industrial District to be uniquely identifiable, distinguished in their architecture and site planning, and compatible with adjacent uses and districts.

Consistent. Pursuant to Azusa Development Code Section 88.51.032, Design Review, the proposed project would be subject to Design Review, in order to ensure that the proposed uses and structures enhance their sites with the highest standards of improvement and are compatible with the surrounding land uses. Namely, the industrial uses located to the north, east, and west in the City of Azusa, and the industrial uses located to the south in the City of Irwindale. Design Review would also ensure that the proposed development complies with all applicable Azusa Development Code standards and regulations, and Azusa General Plan Policies, and does not adversely affect community health, safety, aesthetics, or natural resources. Additionally, it is noted land use compatibility impacts associated with land development involve quality of life issues, including aesthetics, traffic, and noise, among others. While these may generally be perceived as subjective issues, the significance criteria detailed in each of the respective EIR issues sections provides a basis for assessing land use compatibility impacts. Quality of life issues are analyzed in Section 5.2, Aesthetics/Light and Glare, Section 5.3, Traffic and Circulation, and Section 5.6, Noise. Further, the project would involve Use Permits and Variances, subjecting the proposed development to further discretionary review by the City Staff, Planning Commission, and City Council, which would also minimize land use compatibility issues.

4.10 In the West End Industrial District, establish and require new developments to provide pedestrian and landscape linkages to other areas and businesses within the district and to the Foothill Boulevard corridor, as appropriate.

Consistent. The project proposes to retain the existing sidewalks located along Irwindale Avenue and proposes a curb, gutter, and sidewalk along Gladstone Street, which are considered sufficient linkages with the District’s other businesses, given the industrial nature of the surrounding area. The project also proposes landscaping along Gladstone Street and Irwindale Avenue, as depicted on the Preliminary Landscaping Plan, which is available for review at the City of Azusa Economic & Community Development Department. The project’s landscaping is subject to compliance with the provisions specified in Azusa Development Code Chapter 88.34, Landscaping Standards, which establishes requirements for landscaping, in order to enhance the appearance of development projects.




Table 5.1-1 [continued] Azusa General Plan Consistency Analysis


6.1 Accommodate industrial development in accordance with Table CD-2.

Consistent. Refer to the Land Use Designations section above.

6.2 Require all industrial buildings to be distinctive, constructed of high quality materials, and be of interesting and strong design. All buildings shall be visually attractive from the street, and from adjacent or nearby properties.

Consistent. Refer to Response to Policy 4.9 above and Section 5.2, Aesthetics/Light and Glare.

6.3 Require rooflines and building elevations to be visually attractive from all vantage points.

Consistent. Refer to Response to Policy 4.9 above and Section 5.2, Aesthetics/Light and Glare.

Require site development plans to: • Incorporate physical and visual design elements

that buffer industrial use from any nearby residential neighborhood or use;

Consistent. • The project proposes a decorative perimeter security

wall and landscaping (along Gladstone Street and Irwindale Avenue) that would buffer the proposed development. These would be implemented pursuant to Azusa Development Code Section 88.24.040, West End Industrial Districts, which specifies site planning/building design regulations, Azusa Development Code Chapter 88.30, Standards For All Development and Land Uses, which addresses details of site planning involving fences, walls, hedges, and screening, and Azusa Development Code Chapter 88.34, Landscaping Standards, which establishes requirements for landscaping, in order to enhance the appearance of development projects. The MRF/TS would also involve entirely indoor collection and processing of recyclable materials. The HHWF would collect the waste via an outdoor drop off facility; however, the waste would be sorted and aggregated indoors. There are no residential neighborhoods located nearby. The nearest residential uses are the City’s southeast neighborhoods east of Jackson Avenue.

• Provide elements that link commercial and industrial uses (sidewalks and paths, common architectural design, signage, landscape, etc.); and

• Refer to Response to Policy 4.10 above.

6.4

• Require single level, “at grade” parking facilities to be generously landscaped with shrubs and trees.

• Refer to Response to Policy 4.10 above.

10.1 Require the consideration and mitigation of noise, light, vehicular, and other impacts on residential properties in the design of commercial and industrial development.

Consistent. There are no residential properties located nearby. The nearest residential uses are the City’s southeast neighborhoods located east of Jackson Avenue. As discussed in Sections 5.1 through 5.11 of this EIR, mitigation measures are recommended, in consideration of the project’s environmental impacts. More specifically, refer to Section 5.6, Noise, Section 5.2, Aesthetics/Light and Glare, and Section 5.3, Traffic/Circulation, for discussions regarding the project’s noise, light, and vehicular impacts, respectively.




Table 5.1-1 [continued] Azusa General Plan Consistency Analysis


10.2 Require on-site lighting of institutional, commercial, and industrial uses be constructed or located so that only the intended area is illuminated, off-site glare is minimized, and adequate safety is provided.

Consistent. The project proposes on-site lighting, as depicted on the Conceptual Site Lighting Plan, which is available for review at the City of Azusa Economic and Community Development Department. The project’s lighting is subject to compliance with the provisions specified in Azusa Development Code Section 88.31.030, Outdoor Lighting, which outlines the requirements for outdoor lighting on private property. Also, as concluded in Section 5.2, Aesthetics/Light and Glare, project implementation would result in less than significant impacts involving light and glare.

10.7 Control the development of industrial and other uses that use, store, produce, or transport toxins, generate unacceptable levels of noise, air emissions, or contribute other pollutants requiring adequate mitigation measures confirmed by environmental review and monitoring.

Consistent. Mitigation measures are recommended, in order to mitigate the project’s impacts involving hazardous materials, noise, air quality, and water quality; refer to Section 5.4, Air Quality, Section 5.6, Noise, Section 5.9, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, and Section 5.10, Hydrology and Water Quality, respectively.

11.1 Require all structures to be constructed in accordance with City building and other pertinent codes and regulations, including all new, adaptively re-used, and renovated buildings; allowing appropriate exceptions for historically-significant buildings.

Consistent. The project’s building and engineering plans would be reviewed by the Azusa Building and Safety Section, in order to ensure consistency with Azusa Municipal Code Chapter 14, Buildings and Building Regulations. Chapter 14 includes the Building Codes, Electrical Code, Mechanical Code, and Plumbing Code, among others. Approval of all project plans would be required, prior to issuance of any building, plumbing, electrical, or mechanical permit.

11.3 Require all developments including renovations and adaptive reuse of existing structures (except historically significant buildings) be designed to provide adequate space for access, parking, supporting functions, open space, and other pertinent elements.

Consistent. The project is subject to Development Review, in order to ensure that the proposed development complies with all applicable Azusa Development Code standards and regulations, and Azusa General Plan Policies. Further, the project would involve Use Permits and Variances, subjecting the proposed development to further discretionary review by the City Staff, Planning Commission, and City Council, in order to ensure the adequacy of the various project elements.

1 Source: City of Azusa, City of Azusa General Plan Built Environment Element – City Design, April 2004. Development Agreement. The City has entered into a Development Agreement with the project Applicant, as one of various implementation programs intended to ensure that the project design features described in Section 3.0, Project Characteristics, the mitigation measures specified throughout this EIR, and additional improvements that may be contributed by the project Applicant are implemented. Execution of the Development Agreement enters the Applicant into a binding contract with the City that assures the City as to the type, character, and quality of development and additional “benefits.” Such an Agreement would be consistent with Land Use Implementation Program LU 5, which specifies the City utilizes these agreements, as needed.




Overall, approval of a General Plan Amendment (GPA 2010-01) to change the General Plan designation of a portion of the site from Recreation/Landfill Mixed Use to Industrial would be required, in order to be consistent with the Azusa General Plan and Azusa Development Code. As concluded in the above discussions, the proposed project would not conflict with the Azusa General Plan policies or regulations. A less than significant impact would occur in this regard. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required. Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact. CITY OF AZUSA DEVELOPMENT CODE LAND-3 THE PROPOSED PROJECT COULD CONFLICT WITH THE AZUSA

DEVELOPMENT CODE STANDARDS OR REGULATIONS. Impact Analysis: The proposed MRF/TS involves an approximate 125,000 square foot Processing Facility and the proposed HHWF involves a 5,400 square foot Collection Facility. The project components and design features are discussed in detail in Section 3.0, Project Characteristics. The Azusa Development Code carries out the policies of the Azusa General Plan by regulating development and land uses within the City, consistent with the General Plan. The Azusa Development Code is intended to provide standards for the continuing the City’s orderly growth and development, and ensure compatibility between different types of development and land uses. The proposed project has been analyzed for consistency with the Azusa Development Code, as follows. Azusa Development Code Section 88.24.005, Allowable Uses in Districts. The project site is zoned DWL, except for the western corner of the site (i.e., northeast corner of the Irwindale Avenue and Gladstone Street intersection), which is zoned DW; refer to the City of Azusa Zoning Classification Map. The project proposes two land uses (i.e., MRF/TS and HHWF), which would involve the collection, sorting, and processing of recyclable materials. These proposed uses are considered Recycling Facilities, pursuant to Azusa Development Code Section 88.70.020, Definitions of Specialized Terms and Phrases. Azusa Development Code Section 88.70.020 further defines a Large Collection Facility and a Processing Facility, as follows:

Large Collection Facility. [A center where the public may donate, redeem, or sell recyclable materials..] Large collection facilities occupy an area of more than 400 square feet and/or include permanent structures. Processing Facility. An entirely indoor facility for the collection and processing of recyclable materials for shipment, or to an end-user's specifications, by such means as baling, briquetting, cleaning, compacting, crushing, flattening, grinding, mechanical sorting, re-manufacturing and shredding. Also includes the disassembling, breaking up, sorting, and the temporary storage and distribution of recyclable or reusable waste materials, other than motor vehicles and/or motor vehicle parts.

Pursuant to Azusa Development Code Section 88.70.020, the proposed HHWF is considered a “Large Collection Facility” and the proposed MRF/TS is considered a “Processing Facility.”




Azusa Development Code Section 88.24.005 Table 2-2, Allowed Land Uses and Permit Requirements for Districts, establishes allowable land uses and permit requirements for new land uses and development in the DW and DWL zoning districts. The proposed HHWF (i.e., Large Collection Facility) development area is zoned DWL. Pursuant to Table 2-2, a Large Collection Facility is an allowed land use in the DWL district with approval of a Minor Use Permit (MUP), pursuant to Azusa Development Code Section 88.51.040, Use Permit and Minor Use Permit. Accordingly, the proposed HHWF would require an MUP (MUP 2010-13), in order to comply with Azusa Development Code Section 88.24.005. The specific use regulations for a Large Collection Facility are specified in Azusa Development Code Section 88.42.170, Recycling Facilities; refer to discussion below. The proposed MRF/TS (ie., Processing Facility) development area is zoned DWL and DW. Pursuant to Table 2-2, a Processing Facility is an allowed land use in the DW district with approval of a Use Permit (UP), pursuant to Azusa Development Code Section 88.51.040, Use Permit and Minor Use Permit. However, a Processing Facility is not an allowed land use in the DWL district. The project proposes a Zone Change (Z 2009-01), changing a portion of the site’s zoning (on-site areas proposing the MRF/TS, including the scale facility, that are located in the DWL district) from DWL to DW. The proposed MRF/TS would require a UP (UP 2009-01), in order to comply with Azusa Development Code Section 88.24.005. The specific use regulations for a Processing Facility are specified in Azusa Development Code Section 88.42.170, Recycling Facilities; refer to discussion below. The proposed MRF/TS would be a 24-hour operation, which is not allowed in the DW District. A Zoning Code Amendment (ZCA), allowing 24-hour operations in the DW District with a Use Permit, would be required. More specifically, the Applicant proposes a ZCA (ZCA 230) to Azusa Development Code Section 88.24.005, Allowable Uses in Districts, Table 2-2, to allow operating between 9:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. with a Use Permit in the DW zone. Approval of a Minor Use Permit, Use Permits, Zone Change, and Zoning Code Amendment by the City would result in the project’s compliance with the allowed uses for the DW and DWL Districts. Pursuant to Azusa Development Code Section 88.51.060, Zoning Amendments, the Planning Commission and City Council would be required to make the following findings of fact, before approving a Zoning Amendment (i.e., Zone Change) or Zoning Code Amendment:

1. That the proposed amendment is consistent with the goals, policies, and objectives of the General Plan, any applicable specific plan, development agreement, owner participation agreement or disposition and development agreement; and

2. That a proposed Zone Change would not adversely affect surrounding properties.

Azusa Development Code Section 88.24.040, West End Industrial Districts. Azusa Development Code Section 88.24.040 specifies the City’s desired future (i.e., non-regulatory sections) and site planning/ building design regulations for the DW District. The proposed project has been analyzed for consistency with these Azusa Development Code provisions, as follows:




Desired Future and Proposed Changes (South District) The City’s desired improvements for the DW District are: implement streetscape improvements; improve landscaping; and orient buildings toward the street with parking behind. The project proposes to retain the existing sidewalks and to provide landscaping and onsite lighting; refer to Table 5.1-1, Azusa General Plan Consistency Analysis, Responses to Policies 4.10 and 10.2, respectively. Additionally, the proposed parking areas would be buffered by a decorative perimeter security wall and/or landscaping; refer to Table 5.1-1 Response to Policy 6.4. Site Planning and Building Design

1. Building Placement: The proposed buildings are placed consistent with the minimum front, side street, sideyard, and rear setback requirements.

2. Parking Placement: The proposed parking areas are placed consistent with the minimum

front, side street, sideyard, and rear setback requirements. 3. Building Height and Profile: The proposed MRF/TS would involve a tiered structure,

ranging in height from approximately 30 to 57 feet, and the proposed HHWF would involve a maximum building height of 26 feet. The proposed MRF/TS building would exceed the 55-foot height limit requiring a Variance (V 2010-03), pursuant to Azusa Development Code Section 88.51.050, Variance and Minor Variance. Approval of a Variance by the City would result in the project’s compliance with the building height limit established for the DW District. The proposed building encroachments would not exceed the maximum front, side street, and side yard encroachment limits. Additionally, although the front elevations of the proposed buildings would not be consistent with the allowable frontage types (i.e., gallery/arcade, shop front, stoop, and forecourt), the building frontages would be buffered by a decorative perimeter security wall and/or landscaping.

Azusa Development Code Chapter 88.30, Standards For All Development and Land Uses. Azusa Development Code Chapter 88.30 addresses additional details of site planning, project design, and the operation of land uses. The proposed project would be consistent with the standards established in Azusa Development Code Chapter 88.30, except with respect to the proposed wall height pursuant to Azusa Development Code Section 88.30.020, Fences, Walls, Hedges, and Screening. More specifically, the maximum allowable height of fences, walls, and hedges for locations within the DW District is 42 inches inside of required front setback; refer to Azusa Development Code Table 3-1, Maximum Height of Fences, Walls, and Hedges. The project proposes a 6.0-foot decorative perimeter security wall along Gladstone Street and Irwindale Avenue. The proposed wall would exceed the 42-inch height limit requiring a Variance (V 2010-02), pursuant to Azusa Development Code Section 88.51.050, Variance and Minor Variance. Approval of a Variance by the City would result in the project’s compliance with the wall height limit established for the DW District.




Azusa Development Code Chapter 88.31, Operational Standards. Azusa Development Code Chapter 88.31 provides standards that regulate the operational aspects of an approved land use, for the protection of public health, safety, and welfare. The proposed project has been analyzed for consistency with the operational standards, as follows:

• Noise Standards; refer to Section 5.6, Noise; • Outdoor Lighting; refer to Section 5.2, Aesthetics/Light and Glare; and • Performance Standards:

- Air Emissions and Odor; refer to Section 5.4, Air Quality. - Combustibles/Explosives, Radioactivity, and Electrical Disturbance/

Electromagnetic Interference; refer to Section 5.9, Hazards and Hazardous Materials; - Ground Vibration; refer to Section 5.6, Noise; and - Liquid Waste: Section 5.9, Hazards and Hazardous Materials.

Azusa Development Code Chapter 88.34, Landscaping Standards. Azusa Development Code Chapter 88.34 establishes requirements for landscaping; refer to Response to Policy 4.10 in Table 5.1-1. Azusa Development Code Chapter 88.36, Parking and Loading. Azusa Development Code Chapter 88.36 outlines parking requirements in order to ensure that sufficient off-street motor vehicle parking facilities are provided for all uses and structures, and that parking facilities are properly designed. The total number of parking spaces required for the proposed MRF/TS/HHWF is 269 spaces, based on the following:

• One (1) parking space per each 500 square feet of manufacturing area: 119,306 square feet

MRF/TS or 236 spaces; and • One (1) parking space per each 250 square feet of office area: 6,711 square feet proposed

office or 27 spaces.

• One (1) parking space per each 1000 square feet of storage warehouse area: 5400 square feet proposed HHWF storage or 6 spaces.

The MRF/TS/HHWF proposes a total of 87 parking spaces, or 182 parking spaces short of the required parking. However, as the project proposes a MRF/TS/HHW facility, the typical parking requirements have been determined to be excessive based on the number of anticipated visitors, number of employees, and employee shifts; refer to Table 5.1-2, Proposed Parking. The MRF/TS would require a Use Permit (UP 2010-04), pursuant to Azusa Development Code Section 88.51.040, Use Permit and Minor Use Permit, to allow a reduction in the required parking for the project. Approval of a Use Permit by the City would result in the project’s compliance with the Azusa Development Code’s parking requirements. It should be noted that implementation of Mitigation Measure TRA-2 would require the removal of approximately 18 on-street public parking spaces along the western portion of Vincent Avenue, to the south of Gladstone Street. However, the industrial uses along Vincent Avenue have adequate parking spaces within each respective lot for those uses. No public uses are located within this area. Thus, the loss of 18 on-street public parking spaces are not anticipated to result in significant parking impacts along Vincent Avenue.




Table 5.1-2 Proposed Parking

Persons Parking Required

Employees 72 Visitors 81

Tour Groups/Meetings 201

Total Parking Needed (from 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.) Total Parking Needed (from 5:00 p.m. to 5:30 p.m.)

712 753

Total Parking Proposed 87 Total Parking Required 269

Notes: 1. These parking spaces would be counted in the total employee spaces, as only one shift (37

employees plus the six HHWF employees on the weekend) would occur during business hours (8:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.).

2. The total parking needed during business hours (8:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.) was calculated as follows: 43 employees (37 MRF/TS daytime shift plus 6 HHWF employees) plus 8 visitors plus 20 spaces for tour groups/meetings.

3. The total parking needed from 5:00 p.m. to 5:30 p.m. would include all employees during shift change (assuming that the second shift would be arriving as the first shift is leaving). Note that the calculations do not take into account biking to work and/or carpooling.

The total number of parking spaces required for the proposed HHWF is determined by the review of the proposed use through a Minor Use Permit. The HHWF proposes a total of six (6) parking spaces, which the City has determined is adequate for the proposed use. Azusa Development Code Section 88.42.170, Recycling Facilities. Azusa Development Code Section 88.42.170.C, Processing Facilities, provides site planning, development, and/or operating standards for a Large Collection Facility (i.e., HHWF) and Processing Facility (i.e., MRF/TS). The proposed project has been analyzed for consistency with these Azusa Development Code provisions, as follows:

Location Requirements A Processing Facility and Large Collection Facility are not allowed on a parcel that abuts a parcel zoned or occupied for residential use. There are no parcels zoned or occupied for residential use abutting the project site. The proposed facilities satisfy this location requirement. Limitation on Activities The proposed project would involve activities consistent with those allowed (i.e., baling, briquetting, compacting, crushing, grinding, shredding, and sorting of source-separated recyclable materials and repairing of reusable materials). The project’s outbound truck shipments are an estimated 193 trucks per day.5 The MRF/TS’s daily shipments would exceed the maximum allowed per day (i.e., average of two per day) requiring a Variance (V 2010-04),

5 KOA Corporation, Traffic Impact Study for Azusa Material Recovery Facility and Transfer Station Table 3 - Trip

Generation Tonnage and Daily Trip Estimate, December 9, 2010.




pursuant to Azusa Development Code Section 88.51.050, Variance and Minor Variance. Approval of a Variance by the City would result in the project’s compliance with the outbound truck shipments limit for Processing Facilities. Maximum Size The proposed MRF/TS involves an approximate 125,000 square foot Processing Facility and the proposed HHWF involves a 5,400-square foot Collection Facility. The MRF/TS’s floor area would exceed the maximum allowed (i.e., 45,000 square feet) requiring a Variance (V 2010-04), pursuant to Azusa Development Code Section 88.51.050, Variance and Minor Variance. Approval of a Variance by the City would result in the project’s compliance with the size limit for a Processing Facility. Container Location After hours containers are not allowed 500 feet from any property zoned to allow residential use. There are no properties zoned to allow residential use within 500 feet of the project site and the project would not involve the use of after hour containers. Outdoor Storage or Activities All materials are required to be stored and activities conducted entirely within a building. The MRF/TS would involve entirely indoor collection and processing of recyclable materials. However, occasional outdoor storage of baled material may occur. Therefore a Variance (V 2010-04) would be required. The HHWF would collect the waste via an outdoor drop off facility; however, the waste would be sorted and aggregated indoors. Operating Standards Project-related dust, fumes, odor, smoke, or vibration on adjoining parcels is prohibited. The analysis has concluded project implementation would result in less than significant operational impacts, with mitigation incorporated, as follows:

• Dust, odor, and smoke; refer to Section 5.4, Air Quality; • Fumes; refer to Section 5.9, Hazards and Hazardous Materials; and • Vibration; refer to Section 5.6, Noise.

To summarize, in order to allow the proposed development to occur on the project site consistent with the Azusa Development Code, the following permits/approvals would be required:

• Approval of a Minor Use Permit (MUP 2010-13), allowing the HHWF (i.e., a Large

Collection Facility) in the DWL district, in order to comply with Azusa Development Code Section 88.24.005, Allowable Uses in Districts.




• Approval of a Zone Change (Z 2009-01), changing a portion of the site’s zoning from DWL to DW, in order to comply with Azusa Development Code Section 88.24.005, Allowable Uses in Districts.

• Approval of a Zoning Code Amendment (ZCA 230), allowing 24-hour operations in the

DW District with a Use Permit, in order to comply with Azusa Development Code Section 88.24.005, Allowable Uses in Districts.

• Approval of the following Use Permits:

- Approval of a Use Permit (UP 2009-01), allowing the MRF/TS (i.e., a Processing Facility) in the DW District, in order to comply with Azusa Development Code Section 88.24.005, Allowable Uses in Districts.

- Approval of a Use Permit (UP 2010-05), allowing the MRF/TS (i.e., a Processing

Facility) to operate 24 hours per day in the DW District, in order to comply with Azusa Development Code Section 88.24.005, Allowable Uses in Districts.

- Approval of a Use Permit (UP 2010-04), allowing the MRF/TS parking to be fewer

than required, in order to comply with Azusa Development Code Chapter 88.36, Parking and Loading.

• Approval of the following Variances:

- Approval of a Variance (V 2010-03), allowing the MRF/TS building to exceed the

55-foot height limit for the DW District, in order to comply with Azusa Development Code Section 88.24.040, West End Industrial Districts.

- Approval of a Variance (V 2010-02), allowing the decorative perimeter security wall

along Gladstone Street and Irwindale Avenue to exceed the 42-inch front setback height limit for the DW District, in order to comply with Azusa Development Code Section 88.24.040, West End Industrial Districts.

- Approval of a Variance (V 2010-04) to the Azusa Development Code Section

88.42.170.C Processing Facilities Standards to:

1. Allow the MRF/TS outbound truck shipments to exceed the maximum allowed per day (average two per day);

2. Allow the MRF/TS building to exceed the maximum allowed floor area (45,000 s.f.); and

3. Allow outdoor storage and activities.

• Approval of a Design Review (DR2009-01), allowing the construction of the proposed MRF/TS and HHWF.




As is evidenced by the discussions provided above, the proposed project would be consistent with the Azusa Development Code’s plans and regulations, with approval of the aforementioned permits/approvals. Compliance with the Azusa Development Code’s standards would ensure an orderly and compatible development. By regulating development and land uses, the Azusa Development Code would carryout the policies of the Azusa General Plan, consistent with the General Plan. Project implementation would result in a less than significant impact in this regard. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required. Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact. 5.1.5 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS

THE PROPOSED PROJECT, COMBINED WITH OTHER RELATED CUMULATIVE PROJECTS, COULD CONFLICT WITH APPLICABLE LAND USE PLANS, POLICIES, OR REGULATIONS.

Threshold: Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy or regulation of an agency with

jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to, the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect.

Impact Analysis: Southern California Association of Governments As outlined in Table 4-1, Cumulative Projects List, and illustrated on Exhibit 4-1, Cumulative Project Locations, the related projects and other possible development would occur in the cities of Azusa, Glendora, Covina, Duarte, and Irwindale. Based on the projects identified in Table 4-1, cumulative development would result in new residential, non-residential, institutional, and recreational uses, as follows:

• Approximately 2,354 single-family dwelling units; • Approximately 1,091 multi-family dwelling units; • Approximately 3.6 million square feet of non-residential (i.e., commercial, retail, office); • Approximately 345 hotel rooms; • Educational facilities: approximately 420 grades K-12 students and approximately 3,424

college level students; and • Recreational uses: a 5.5-acre park and 0.5 acres of community facilities.

SCAG’s IGR Section is responsible for performing a consistency review of local plans, projects, and programs with regional plans. Regionally significant projects are reviewed for consistency with the 2008 RCP and the 2008 RTP. The criteria for projects of regional significance are outlined in the CEQA Guidelines, Sections 15125 and 15206, and projects that directly relate to the policies and strategies contained in the 2008 RCP and the 2008 RTP.




Each cumulative project would be evaluated on a project-by-project basis, in order to determine its regional significance, if any. Following the determination of regional significance, project documentation is reviewed and an assessment is made on whether the project is consistent with or supportive of a specific Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide (RCPG) and/or 2008 RTP policy. As all development would be subject to the SCAG IGR Section review, and would be required to comply with the relevant policies and strategies, cumulative impacts with respect to regional plans would be less than significant. General Plan and Zoning Code Consistency As discussed above, cumulative development would result in new residential, non-residential, institutional, and recreational uses. Development of the project site as proposed would not result in any cumulative land use impacts as other projects are implemented within the City of Azusa, as well as the cities of Glendora, Covina, Duarte, and Irwindale. Projects would be evaluated on a project-by-project basis. Each proposed project would undergo a similar plan review process as the proposed project, in order to determine potential land use planning policy and regulation conflicts. Each cumulative project would be analyzed independent of other projects, within the context of their respective land use and regulatory setting. As part of the review process, each project would be required to demonstrate compliance with the provisions of the applicable land use designation(s) and zoning district(s). It is assumed that cumulative development would progress in accordance with the General Plan and Zoning/Development Code of the respective jurisdictions. Each project would be analyzed in order to ensure that the goals, objectives, and policies of the Azusa General Plan, and regulations and guidelines of the Azusa Development Code are consistently upheld. Analysis has concluded that impacts are less than significant and no mitigation is required. Level of Significance Before Mitigation:

Overall Cumulative Impact - Less Than Significant Impact. Project Cumulative Contribution - Less Than Significant Impact.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required. Level of Significance After Mitigation:

Overall Cumulative Impact - Less Than Significant Impact. Project Cumulative Contribution - Less Than Significant Impact.




5.1.6 SIGNIFICANT UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS

The proposed project would be in compliance with the Azusa General Plan and Azusa Development Code. Project implementation would result in less than significant land use and planning impacts.




This page intentionally left blank.

5.1 land use and relevant planning - azusa, ca

Documents