DOCSLIB.ORG

3901 San Fernando Road Los Angeles, California Supplemental Report Link Project Draft EIR

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
3901 San Fernando Road Los Angeles, California Supplemental Report Link Project Draft EIR City of Glendale GLENDALE LINK PROJECT Final Environmental Impact Report Submitted to: City of Glendale 633 East Broadway, Room 103 Glendale, California 91206 Submitted by: IMPACT SCIENCES, INC. 638 East Colorado Boulevard Suite 301 November 2013 Pasadena, CA 91101 (805) 437-1900 GLENDALE LINK PROJECT Final Environmental Impact Report Prepared for: City of Glendale 633 East Broadway, Room 103 Glendale, California 91206 Prepared by: Impact Sciences, Inc. 638 East Colorado Boulevard Suite 301 Pasadena, California 91101 November 2013 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page 1.0 Summary .................................................................................................................................................1.0-1 2.0 Corrections and Additions ....................................................................................................................2.0-1 3.0 Responses to Comments ........................................................................................................................3.0-1 Topical Responses Topical Response 1 .................................................................................................................................3.0-4 Topical Response 2 ............................................................................................................................... 3.0-10 State and Local Agencies Letter No. 1. State of California, Native American Heritage Commission, September 17, 2013 ...................................................................................................................... 3.0-12 Letter No. 2 California Department of Transportation, October 8, 2013 ................................ 3.0-16 Private and Local Organizations Letter No. 3 Glendale Historical Society, October 14, 2013 ...................................................... 3.0-21 Letter No. 4 Los Angeles Conservancy, October 14, 2013 ........................................................ 3.0-58 Letter No. 5 Citizens Advocating Rational Development, October 13, 2013 ......................... 3.0-66 Individuals Letter No. 6 Diane Lewis, October 7, 2013 ................................................................................. 3.0-76 Letter No. 7 Randall Bloomberg, October 7, 2013 ..................................................................... 3.0-78 Letter No. 8 Ely Lester, October 7, 2013 ...................................................................................... 3.0-80 Letter No. 9 Carolyn West, October 7, 2013 ............................................................................... 3.0-82 Letter No. 10 Judy Bruce, October 7, 2013 .................................................................................... 3.0-84 Letter No. 11 Linkchorst, October 7, 2013 .................................................................................... 3.0-86 Letter No. 12 Joemy Wilson, October 8, 2013 ............................................................................... 3.0-88 Letter No. 13 Cathy Green, October 8, 2013 ................................................................................. 3.0-90 Letter No. 14 Sam Manoukian, October 8, 2013 .......................................................................... 3.0-92 Letter No. 15 Alexander Sardarian, October 8, 2013 ................................................................... 3.0-94 Letter No. 16 David Alishan, October 8, 2013 .............................................................................. 3.0-96 Letter No. 17 John Ballon, October 8, 2013 ................................................................................... 3.0-98 Letter No. 18 Matteo Bitetti, October 8, 2013 ............................................................................. 3.0-100 Letter No. 19 Lawerence Cimmarusti, October 9, 2013 ............................................................ 3.0-102 Letter No. 20 Pierre Chraghchian, October 9, 2013 ................................................................... 3.0-104 Letter No. 21 Ara Aroustamian, October 9, 2013 ...................................................................... 3.0-106 Letter No. 22 Ellen Svaco, October 10, 2013 ............................................................................... 3.0-108 Letter No. 23 Nancy Bain, October 10, 2013 ............................................................................... 3.0-110 Letter No. 24 Bruce Merritt, October 10, 2013 ............................................................................ 3.0-112 Letter No. 25 Sue Flocco, October 10, 2013 ................................................................................. 3.0-114 Letter No. 26 Tom Jacobsmeyer, October 10, 2013 .................................................................... 3.0-117 Letter No. 27 Alex Avakian, October 10, 2013 ........................................................................... 3.0-119 Letter No. 28 Paul Berolzheimer, October 11, 2013 ................................................................... 3.0-121 Letter No. 29 Albert Babayan, October 11, 2013 ........................................................................ 3.0-123 Letter No. 30 Marty Bracciotti, October 11, 2013 ....................................................................... 3.0-126 Letter No. 31 Kama Hayes, October 11, 2013 ............................................................................. 3.0-128 Letter No. 32 Rima Cameron, October 11, 2013 ......................................................................... 3.0-130 Letter No. 33 Janet Harootun, October 11, 2013 ........................................................................ 3.0-132 Impact Sciences, Inc. i Glendale Link Project Final EIR 1162.001 November 2013 Letter No. 34 Gilda Killeen, October 11, 2013 ............................................................................ 3.0-134 Letter No. 35 Tatiana Eremima, October 11, 2013 ..................................................................... 3.0-136 Letter No. 36 Janine Massoomian, October 11, 2013 ................................................................. 3.0-138 Letter No. 37 Denise Walker, October 11, 2013 ......................................................................... 3.0-140 Letter No. 38 Anita Rinaldi-Harnden, October 11, 2013 .......................................................... 3.0-142 Letter No. 39 Catherine Jurca, October 11, 2013 ........................................................................ 3.0-144 Letter No. 40 Sonia Montejano, October 11, 2013 ...................................................................... 3.0-147 Letter No. 41 Ruth Campbell, October 11, 2013 ........................................................................ 3.0-149 Letter No. 42 Alex Rojas, October 11, 2013 ................................................................................. 3.0-151 Letter No. 43 Marilyn Oliver, October 11, 2013 ......................................................................... 3.0-153 Letter No. 44 Scott Lasken, October 11, 2013 ............................................................................. 3.0-155 Letter No. 45 Ara Mirzayan, October 12, 2013 ........................................................................... 3.0-157 Letter No. 46 Anita Weaver, October 12, 2013 ........................................................................... 3.0-159 Letter No. 47 Viktoryia Shypkova, October 12, 2013 ................................................................ 3.0-161 Letter No. 48 Richard Lee, October 13, 2013 .............................................................................. 3.0-163 Letter No. 49 Don Savarese, October 13, 2013 ........................................................................... 3.0-165 Letter No. 50 Marcia Hanfor, October 13, 2013 ......................................................................... 3.0-167 Letter No. 51 Christina Rizzo, October 13, 2013 ........................................................................ 3.0-169 Letter No. 52 Jeff Sredni, October 13, 2013 ................................................................................. 3.0-171 Letter No. 53 Sean Bersell, October 14, 2013 .............................................................................. 3.0-173 Letter No. 54 Desiree Shier, October 14, 2013 ............................................................................ 3.0-180 Letter No. 55 Scott Fraser, October 14, 2013 ............................................................................... 3.0-182 Letter No. 56 Stephanie Schus, October 14, 2013 ....................................................................... 3.0-184 Letter No. 57 Tony Riccio, October 14, 2013 .............................................................................. 3.0-186 Letter No. 58 Gerri Cragnotti, October 14, 2013 ........................................................................ 3.0-191 Letter No. 59 Judy Cabrera, October 14, 2013 ............................................................................ 3.0-193 Letter No. 60 Ute Baum, October 14, 2013 .................................................................................. 3.0-195 Letter No. 61 Sharon Weisman, October 14, 2013 ..................................................................... 3.0-197 Letter No. 62 Bill Nicoll, October 14, 2013 .................................................................................. 3.0-199 Letter No. 63 Anna Rundle, October 14, 2013 ...........................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Historic-Cultural Monument (HCM) List City Declared Monuments
    Historic-Cultural Monument (HCM) List City Declared Monuments No. Name Address CHC No. CF No. Adopted Community Plan Area CD Notes 1 Leonis Adobe 23537 Calabasas Road 08/06/1962 Canoga Park - Winnetka - 3 Woodland Hills - West Hills 2 Bolton Hall 10116 Commerce Avenue & 7157 08/06/1962 Sunland - Tujunga - Lake View 7 Valmont Street Terrace - Shadow Hills - East La Tuna Canyon 3 Plaza Church 535 North Main Street and 100-110 08/06/1962 Central City 14 La Iglesia de Nuestra Cesar Chavez Avenue Señora la Reina de Los Angeles (The Church of Our Lady the Queen of Angels) 4 Angel's Flight 4th Street & Hill Street 08/06/1962 Central City 14 Dismantled May 1969; Moved to Hill Street between 3rd Street and 4th Street, February 1996 5 The Salt Box 339 South Bunker Hill Avenue (Now 08/06/1962 Central City 14 Moved from 339 Hope Street) South Bunker Hill Avenue (now Hope Street) to Heritage Square; destroyed by fire 1969 6 Bradbury Building 300-310 South Broadway and 216- 09/21/1962 Central City 14 224 West 3rd Street 7 Romulo Pico Adobe (Rancho 10940 North Sepulveda Boulevard 09/21/1962 Mission Hills - Panorama City - 7 Romulo) North Hills 8 Foy House 1335-1341 1/2 Carroll Avenue 09/21/1962 Silver Lake - Echo Park - 1 Elysian Valley 9 Shadow Ranch House 22633 Vanowen Street 11/02/1962 Canoga Park - Winnetka - 12 Woodland Hills - West Hills 10 Eagle Rock Eagle Rock View Drive, North 11/16/1962 Northeast Los Angeles 14 Figueroa (Terminus), 72-77 Patrician Way, and 7650-7694 Scholl Canyon Road 11 The Rochester (West Temple 1012 West Temple Street 01/04/1963 Westlake 1 Demolished February Apartments) 14, 1979 12 Hollyhock House 4800 Hollywood Boulevard 01/04/1963 Hollywood 13 13 Rocha House 2400 Shenandoah Street 01/28/1963 West Adams - Baldwin Hills - 10 Leimert City of Los Angeles May 5, 2021 Page 1 of 60 Department of City Planning No.
    [Show full text]
  • Los Angeles City Planning Department
    Los Angeles Department of City Planning RECOMMENDATION REPORT CULTURAL HERITAGE COMMISSION CASE NO.: CHC-2016-398-HCM ENV-2016-399-CE HEARING DATE: February 18, 2016 Location: 510-514 S. Broadway TIME: 10:00 AM Council District: 14 PLACE: City Hall, Room 1010 Community Plan Area: Central City 200 N. Spring Street Area Planning Commission: Central Los Angeles, CA Neighborhood Council: Downtown Los Angeles 90012 Legal Description: Subdivision of the North Part of Block 13, Ord’s Survey, Lot 3 PROJECT: Historic-Cultural Monument Application for the FORVE-PETTEBONE BUILDING REQUEST: Declare the property a Historic-Cultural Monument OWNER/ Daniel Neman, 5ten Broadway, LLC APPLICANT: 1525 S. Broadway Los Angeles, CA 90015 PREPARER: Suki Gershenhorn, Chattel, Inc. 13417 Ventura Blvd. Sherman Oaks, CA 91423 RECOMMENDATION That the Cultural Heritage Commission: 1. Take the property under consideration as a Historic-Cultural Monument per Los Angeles Administrative Code Chapter 9, Division 22, Article 1, Section 22.171.10 because the application and accompanying photo documentation suggest the submittal warrants further investigation. 2. Adopt the report findings. VINCENT P. BERTONI, AICP Director of PlanningN1907 [SIGNED ORIGINAL IN FILE] [SIGNED ORIGINAL IN FILE] Ken Bernstein, AICP, Manager Lambert M. Giessinger, Preservation Architect Office of Historic Resources Office of Historic Resources [SIGNED ORIGINAL IN FILE] Shannon Ryan, City Planning Associate Office of Historic Resources Attachments: Historic-Cultural Monument Application CHC-2016-398-HCM 510-514 S. Broadway Page 2 of 3 SUMMARY Located on the east side of south Broadway, between Fifth and Sixth Streets, the Forve- Pettebone Building is a five-story, brick commercial vernacular building built in 1905.
    [Show full text]
  • “500 Days in Downtown L.A.” Walking Tour
    “500 DAYS IN DOWNTOWN L.A.” WALKING TOUR Selected historic locations from the 2009 Fox Searchlight film “(500) Days of Summer” For much more information about the rich history of this area, including these and other landmarks, take the Los Angeles Conservancy’s walking tour, Downtown Renaissance: Spring & Main. For details, visit laconservancy.org/tours [Suggested route] Start at: SAN FERNANDO BUILDING 400 South Main Street (at Fourth Street) Original Building: John F. Blee, 1907 Addition (top two stories): R. B. Young, 1911 Los Angeles Historic-Cultural Monument #728 Listed in the National Register of Historic Places In the film, Old Bank DVD serves as the video & record store. • Designed in the Renaissance Revival style • Commissioned by James B. Lankershim, one of the largest landholders in California (his father Isaac helped develop the San Fernando Valley for farming) • Originally had a café, billiard room, and Turkish bath in the basement for tenants • Achieved local attention in 1910, when a series of police raids occurred on the sixth floor due to illegal gambling in the rooms • Redeveloped by Gilmore Associates; reopened in 2000 as seventy loft- style apartments—one of the early projects that sparked downtown’s current renaissance Look diagonally across Main Street (northwest corner of Fourth & Main): “500 Days in Downtown L.A.” Walking Tour Page 1 of 6 VAN NUYS HOTEL (Barclay Hotel) 103 West Fourth Street Morgan and Walls, 1896 Los Angeles Historic-Cultural Monument #288 In the film, the Barclay lobby serves as the hangout for
    [Show full text]
  • GC 1323 Historic Sites Surveys Repository
    GC 1323 Historic Sites Surveys Repository: Seaver Center for Western History Research, Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County Span Dates: 1974-1996, bulk 1974-1978 Conditions Governing Use: Permission to publish, quote or reproduce must be secured from the repository and the copyright holder Conditions Governing Access: Research is by appointment only Source: Surveys were compiled by Tom Sitton, former Head of History Department, Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County Background: In 1973, the History Department of the Natural History Museum was selected to conduct surveys of Los Angeles County historic sites as part of a statewide project funded through the National Preservation Act of 1966. Tom Sitton was appointed project facilitator in 1974 and worked with various historical societies to complete survey forms. From 1976 to 1977, the museum project operated through a grant awarded by the state Office of Historic Preservation, which allowed the hiring of three graduate students for the completion of 500 surveys, taking site photographs, as well as to help write eighteen nominations for the National Register of Historic Places (three of which were historic districts). The project concluded in 1978. Preferred Citation: Historic Sites Surveys, Seaver Center for Western History Research, Los Angeles County Museum of Natural History Special Formats: Photographs Scope and Content: The Los Angeles County historic site surveys were conducted from 1974 through 1978. Compilation of data for historic sites continued beyond 1978 until approximately 1996, by way of Sitton's efforts to add application sheets prepared for National Register of Historic Places nominations. These application forms provide a breadth of information to supplement the data found on the original survey forms.
    [Show full text]
  • Spring 2004 ISSN 1521-1576 P RE S ERV at I 0 N©
    Volume 29, No. 1 CALIFORNIA Spring 2004 ISSN 1521-1576 p RE S ERV AT I 0 N© A QUARTERLY PUBLICATIO N OF THE CALIFORNIA PRESERVATION FOUNDATION Register Now for April 28 to May 1 Event at the Presidio of San Francisco This Issue: 2004 California Preservation Conference Information CPF Awarded Multiple California Preservation Conference Heads to the Golden Gate Grants Breathtaking architecture, landscapes, and vistas await delegates to CPF's 29'h Annual California Preservation Conference. The event will be held at the Presidio of San Francisco I Golden Gate National Recreation Area (GGNRA) from Wednesday, April 28 to Saturday, May 1. Register at www.californiapreservation.org. A military post for two centuries under Spain, Mexico, and the United States, the Presidio is a National Historic Landmark District and the centerpiece of the GGNRA, the largest urban national park in the world. The GGNRA in total is home to nine former military sites, as well as Point Reyes and Muir Woods. When the U.S. Army departed a decade ago, an unprecedented and complex effort to revitalize the Presidio's historic buildings, planted forest, and infrastructure for public enjoyment took flight. This "transformation in progress," made possible by an innovative management partnership between the Presidio Trust and the National Park Service, makes the Presidio a fascinating case study for historic preservationists. "Exciting preservation work is taking place at the Presidio/GGNRA, and it's an inspiring place where we can share ideas and practical knowledge from BankofAmerica� � across the state," says CPF ���--re M Executive Director Cindy Heitzman. more conference information next page Bank of America supports California Preservation Foundation's newsletrer production.
    [Show full text]
  • National Register of Historic Places Received JUL I I986
    NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 1024-0018 Exp. 10-31-84 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service For NPS use only National Register of Historic Places received JUL i I986 Inventory—Nomination Form date entered See instructions in How to Complete National Register Forms Type all entries—complete applicable sections____________________________________ 1. Name historic The San Fernando Building and/or common The San Fernando Building 2. Location 400-410 South Main Street street & number N/A not for publication city, town Los Angeles ^vicinity of state California code 04 county Los Angeles code 037 3. Classification Category Ownership Status Present Use district public x occupied agriculture museum X building(s) X private unoccupied X commercial park structure both work in progress educational private residence site Public Acquisition Accessible entertainment religious object in process yes: restricted government scientific being considered X yes: unrestricted industrial transportation X N/A no military other: 4. Owner of Property name Kerrigan Lynch of California, Inc. street & number 400 South Main Street, Suite 100 N/A city, town Los Angeles vicinity of state California, 90013 5. Location of Legal Description courthouse, registry of deeds, etc. Los Angeles County Hall of Records street & number 32° West Temple Street city, town Los Angeles state California 6. Representation in Existing Surveys__________ title LOS Angeles County Museum of Natural History has this property been determined eligible? __ yes -JC-no Survey date July, 1977 federal state county local depository for survey records Los Angeles County Museum of Natural History California city, town Los Angeles state 7. Description Condition Check one Check one excellent deteriorated unaltered original site X good ruins X altered moved Hat* Built 1906-07; 1911 AH.
    [Show full text]
  • Downtown Los Angeles
    use Learning from Los Angeles October 2013 ThePartnership for Building Re About the Partnership NATIONAL TRUST FOR HISTORIC PARTNERSHIP FOR BUILDING REUSE PRESERVATION The National Trust for Historic Preservation The National Trust for Historic Preservation, a and ULI created the Partnership for Build- privately funded nonprofit organization, works ing Reuse in 2012 to enhance opportuni- to save America’s historic places. Launched ties for building reuse in major U.S. cities. by the National Trust in 2009, the Preserva- Recognizing the environmental, economic tion Green Lab strengthens the fabric of com- and community benefits of reusing vacant munities by capitalizing on the inherent value and blighted property, the Partnership for of their irreplaceable built assets to improve Building Reuse brings together community social, environmental and economic perfor- groups, real estate developers, and civic mance. leaders around the common goal of making it easier to reuse and retrofit these valuable URBAN LAND INSTITUTE assets. The Partnership for Building Reuse The Urban Land Institute (ULI) provides launched with a pilot project in Los Angeles leadership in the responsible use of land and in 2012 and is expanding to four additional in creating and sustaining thriving communi- cities in 2013-14. A national convening and ties worldwide. ULI is an independent global publication summarizing the lessons learned nonprofit supported by members represent- through the Partnership for Building Reuse ing the entire spectrum of real estate de- is planned for 2015. velopment and land use disciplines. ULI Los Angeles is a district council of ULI, and car- ries forth the ULI mission as the preeminent regional real estate organization providing inclusive and trusted leadership influencing public policy and practice.
    [Show full text]
  • Crime and Real Estate Development in Downtown Los Angeles [An Experiment in Real Time]
    Columbia Law School Scholarship Archive Faculty Scholarship Faculty Publications 2005 Policing L.A.'s Skid Row: Crime and Real Estate Development in Downtown Los Angeles [an Experiment in Real Time] Bernard E. Harcourt Columbia Law School, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.columbia.edu/faculty_scholarship Part of the Criminal Law Commons, Law and Society Commons, Law Enforcement and Corrections Commons, and the Property Law and Real Estate Commons Recommended Citation Bernard E. Harcourt, Policing L.A.'s Skid Row: Crime and Real Estate Development in Downtown Los Angeles [an Experiment in Real Time], UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO LEGAL FORUM, VOL. 2005, P. 325, 2005; UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO PUBLIC LAW WORKING PAPER NO. 92 (2005). Available at: https://scholarship.law.columbia.edu/faculty_scholarship/1370 This Working Paper is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty Publications at Scholarship Archive. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Scholarship by an authorized administrator of Scholarship Archive. For more information, please contact [email protected]. CHICAGO PUBLIC LAW AND LEGAL THEORY WORKING PAPER NO. 92 POLICING L.A.’S SKID ROW: CRIME AND REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT IN DOWNTOWN LOS ANGELES [AN EXPERIMENT IN REAL TIME] Bernard E. Harcourt THE LAW SCHOOL THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO May 2005 This paper can be downloaded without charge at the Public Law and Legal Theory Working Paper Series: http://www.law.uchicago.edu/academics/publiclaw/index.html and The Social Science Research Network Electronic Paper Collection: http://ssrn.com/abstract_id=739130 Forthcoming in The University of Chicago Legal Forum, Volume 2005 POLICING L.A.’S SKID ROW: CRIME AND REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT IN DOWNTOWN LOS ANGELES [AN EXPERIMENT IN REAL TIME] g1 Bernard E.
    [Show full text]
  • Historicdtla.Pdf
    historic downtown LOS ANGELES design guidelines TABLE OFCONTENTS Design Guidelines Introduction 1 Streetscape Guidelines 143 Introduction 1 Wayfinding Signage 144 Summary of Key Points 7 Lighting 145 Using This Document 13 Paving 146 Study Area Overview 17 Path of Connections 147 Guidelines Overview 23 Interim Solutions 150 Sub-Areas 152 Storefront Guidelines 27 Signage 51 Case Studies 157 Awnings 55 Security Doors 59 Implementation Plan 177 Lighting 63 Entrances 65 Appendices 1. The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards Historic Building Guidelines 71 2. Historical Overview of Study Area Elements 75 3. Street Character Analysis of Study Area Materials 101 4. Glossary Systems 113 5. Bibliography / Further Reading 6. Signage Ordinance Summary Chart New Construction Guidelines 129 7. Existing Historic Preservation Incentives Infill 130 8. Recommended Additional Incentives Additions 136 9. Designation Information july 2002 Design Enhancements 139 10. Related Internet Sites i historic downtown LOS ANGELES design guidelines Existing conditions and guideline example photographs in the Design Guidelines are from the collection of Architectural Resources Group (primary ARG photographers Kellie Phipps, Bridget Maley, Bruce Judd, Cathleen Malmstrom, and Philip Rossetti). The following are exceptions: Amy Anderson Page 48 (top) Bruce Boehner Page 159 National Park Service Page 126 (bottom) Secretary’s Standards IMAGE CREDITS Tom Zimmerman Page 178 University of Southern California Page 100 (Study on LA Murals) Historic photographs in the Design Guidelines are from the collection of the Los Angeles Conservancy with the exception of the following: B’hend and Kaufman Archives Pages 2, 14 (top), 21 (top) and 77 (top) Collection of Tom Owen Pages 17 (top) and 18 Frank Cooper Page 3 Security Pacific National Bank Page 20 (top) Photograph Collection All sketches and collage motifs by Kellie Phipps, Intern Architect, Architectural Resources Group.
    [Show full text]
  • Packet Before the Meeting
    CITY OF SAN FERNANDO COUNCIL CHAMBERS PLANNING AND PRESERVATION COMMISSION AGENDA Special Meeting March 14, 2012 1. CALL TO ORDER 7:00 P.M. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. ROLL CALL Chairperson Julie Cuellar, Vice-chair Mario Rodriguez, Commissioners, Alvin F. Durham and Jose Ruelas 4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA March 14, 2012 5. PUBLIC STATEMENTS There will be a three (3) minute limitation per each member of the audience who wishes to make comments in order to provide a full opportunity to every person who wishes to address the Commission on community planning matters not pertaining to items on this agenda. 6. CONSENT CALENDAR Items on the consent calendar are considered routine and may be acted on by a single motion to adopt the staff recommendation or report. If the Commission wishes to discuss any item, it should first be removed from the consent calendar. • Planning and Preservation Commission minutes of the March 6, 2012 meeting 7. CONTINUED BUSINESS A: Subject: General Plan Amendment 2012-01, Zone Change 2012-01, Lot Line Adjustment 2012-01, Site Plan Review 2012-01, Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Location: 1501, 1529, and 1601 First Street and 112, 116, and 124 Harding Avenue, San Fernando, CA 91340 Applicant: Aszkenazy Development, Inc., 601 S. Brand Blvd., 3rd Floor, San Fernando, CA 91340 Proposal: The proposed development consists of two neighboring affordable housing projects (the “Project”) consisting of a total of 113 dwelling units. The proposed Project would require a general plan map amendment and zone change to convert industrially zoned property along Harding Avenue to high density residentially zoned property.
    [Show full text]
  • Historic Resource Assessment
    HISTORIC RESOURCE ASSESSMENT 400 S Alameda Street Los Angeles, CA 90012 Prepared for: Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP 333 S Hope Street, 43rd Floor Los Angeles, CA 90071 Prepared by: Chattel, Inc. | Historic Preservation Consultants 13417 Ventura Blvd Sherman Oaks, CA 91423 December 23, 2016 THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Introduction and Executive Summary .................................................................. 1 II Methodology and Evaluation .................................................................................. 3 III. Qualifications ......................................................................................................... 4 IV. Regulatory Setting ................................................................................................. 5 National Register of Historic Places .......................................................................... 5 California Register of Historical Resources ............................................................... 6 California Environmental Quality Act ........................................................................ 7 City of Los Angeles .................................................................................................. 8 V. Historic Contexts .................................................................................................... 9 Industrial District ........................................................................................................ 9 Manufacturing for the Masses
    [Show full text]
  • ¨§¦5 ¨§¦10 ¨§¦8 ¨§¦80 ¨§¦15 ¨§¦40
    FEDERAL HISTORIC TAX CREDIT PROJECTS California A total of 218 Federal Historic Tax Credit projects (certified by the National Park Service) and $637,566,228 in Federal Historic Tax Credits between fiscal year 2001 through 2020, leveraged an estimated $3,666,005,811 in total development. Data source: National Park Service, 2020 McCloud Arcata Eureka4 Ferndale Redding Chico4 Gridley Live Oak¦¨§80 Woodland St. Helena 2 Sacramento 8 Calistoga 6 Winters 3 Petaluma Napa Walnut Grove 3Vallejo Sausalito20 5 Stockton 12Oakland 33 Oakdale San Francisco Hayward Modesto Palo Alto 3 2 San Jose Merced Capitola San Juan Bautista Fresno ¦¨§5 2 San Luis ¦¨§15 Obispo ¦¨§40 Glendale Pasadena Hollywood 2 Claremont Beverly Hills 48 2 0 40 80 160 Whittier Inglewood 3 Miles R 10 Long Beach Santa 215 ¦¨§ Ana ¦¨§ Federal Historic Tax Credit Projects 1 6 - 10 24 8 2 - 5 11 and over ¦¨§ San Diego Provided by the National Trust for Historic Preservation and the Historic Tax Credit Coalition For more information, contact Shaw Sprague, NTHP Vice President for Government Relations | (202) 588-6339 | [email protected] or Patrick Robertson, HTCC Executive Director | (202) 302-2957 | [email protected] California Historic Tax Credit Projects, FY 2001-2020 Project Name Address City Year Qualified Project Use Expenditures John G. Chapman House 974 10th Street Arcata 2020 $900,000 Housing (Chapman House) Motor Boat Building 30-38 Beach Road Belvedere 2005 $850,000 Housing Wallis Annenberg Center 470 North Canon Drive Beverly Hills 2014 $34,832,104 Other For The Performing Arts Francis Home 1403 Myrtle Street Calistoga 2018 $3,000,000 Multi-Use CDW Historic Lawn Way 115-117 Lawn Way Capitola 2010 $233,232 Housing Beach House No project Name 529 Normal Avenue Chico 2012 $298,543 Housing No project Name 429 W.
    [Show full text]