HomeMy WebLinkAbout0971
.
.
.
,RESOLUTION NO. 971
,
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF ARCADIA DENYING A ZONE VARIANCE
FOR TWO EXISTING SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLINGS ON
AN R-3 LOT AT 121-121\ BONITA STREET.
WHEREAS, on December 13, 1976, Richard Heumann filed an
application for a zone variance seeking Planning Commission approval
for two illegal additions to one of two single-family dwellings
located on an R-3 lot located at 121 and 121\ Bonita Street, more
particularly described as follows:
Lot 6, Block 70, of Arcadia Santa Anita Tract, City of
Arcadia, County of Los Angeles, State of California,
as per map recorded in Book 15, pages 89 and 90, of
M.R., in the office of the County Recorder.
.
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on said matter on
December 28, 1976, at which time all interested persons were given
full opportunity to be heard and to present evidence;
NOIY, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ARCADIA HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. That the factual data submitted by the Planning
Department in the attached staff report is true and correct.
SECTION 2. This Commission finds:
1. That there are no exceptional or extraordinary circum-
stances or conditions applicable to the property involved, or to
the intended use of the property, that do not apply generally to
the property or class of use in the same zone or vicinity.
2. That the granting of such variance could be
. materially detrimental to the public health or welfare or injurious
-1-
971
.
.
. to the property or improvements in such zone or vicinity in which
the property is located.
3. That such variance is not necessary for the preservation
and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant
possessed by other property in the same zone and vicinity.
4. That the granting of such variance will not adversely
affect the comprehensive general plan.
SECTION 3. That for the foregoing reasons, this Commission
denied zone variance V-76-7 for the expansion of a nonconforming use
in an R-3 zone.
SECTION 4. Pursuant to the provisions of the California
Environmental Quality Act and State Guidelines, an initial study has
been prepared for the proposed project. The initial study did not
. disclose any substantial or potentially substantial adverse effect on
the environment. Hence, a Negative Declaration has been approved and
filed.
SECTION 5. The Secretary shall certify to the adoption of
this resolution.
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing resolution was
adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the
City of Arcadia held on the 11th day of January, 1977, by the
following vote:
AYES:
Commissioners Huddy, Kuyper, Clark
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
None
Commissioners
Commissioners
Hegg, perlis
COghL~
/ Cha~
-'22
~~
Secretary
-2-
971
.
.
.
December 28, 1976
TO: PLANNING CO~~ISSION
FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT
SUBJECT: VARIANCE V-76-7
121 AND l21~ BONITA STREET
APPLICATION
This application was filed on December 13, 1976 by Richard
Neumann and proposes to seek Planning Commission approval for
two illegal additions to one of two single-family dwellings
located on an R-3 lot at 121 and 121~ Bonita Street.
4It HISTORY
City records indicate that a building permit was issued for a
single-family dwelling in 1937 and an additional building permit
was issued for a second dwelling and garage in 1953. In
October of 1976, the City Building Division conducted a real
estate inspection and noted several areas which did not meet
Code and two additions to the front house that were constructed
without building permits. The present property owner contends
that both illegal additions were made before he acquired the
property in 1970. For the present owner to obtain building
permits legalizing the aforesaid additions, a variance must be
granted by the City.
Lfu~D USE AND ZONING
The subject property is zoned R-3 and developed with two single-
family dwellings. All adjacent property is zoned R-3 and
developed with a mixture of apartments and single-family
dwellings.
PROPOSAL
.
The applicant is requesting a variance which would allow him,
to legally expand the present nonconforming use by obtaining
building permits for the existing additions (den and service
porch) which were constructed without permits.
.
.
V-76-7
2
.
ANALYSIS
The existing buildings are 23 and 29 years old and could remain
in their present configuration if this application were approved.
The den contains approximately 130 square feet while the service
porch contains 40 square feet. The service porch does not' appear
to be of the same standard of construction as the den or the
other house.
If only one single-family d~elling existed on the property, the
applicant would be allowed to expand the structure up to 500
additional square feet. Because the property contains two single-
family dwellings, the Arcadia Municipal Code would require the
second single-family dwelling be removed before permits could be
issued for the property. To permit the expansion of a non~
conforming situation could set a precedent in all areas zoned
R-3 in Arcadia and may result in the permanent retention of many
older nonconforming uses in various states of repair.
.
Granting a variance as requested by the applicant would assist
him with his immediate concern over obtaining building permits;
however, in the opinion of staff, the applicant's request does
not meet the established criteria for granting a variance in
that there are no exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or
conditions involved (see application, Page 2, Question "A").
Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental
Quality Act, the Planning Department has prepared an initial
study for the proposed project (Variance V-76-7). Said initial
study did not disclose any substantial or potentially sub-
stantial adverse change in any of the physical conditions
within the area affected by the project including land, air,
water, minerals, flora, fauna, ambient noise, and objects of
historical or aesthetic significance. Therefore, a Negative
Declaration has been prepared and filed for this project.
Before the Planning Commission should act on this project, the
Commission should "move to approve and file the Negative
Declaration and find that the project will not have a significant
effect on the environment."
RECOMMENDATION
.
The Planning Department cannot find sufficient justification
for recommending the granting of this variance. However, should
the Planning Commission be able to establish that granting said
variance is consistent with the prerequisite conditions found
in the Arcadia Municipal Code, staff recommends the following
conditions:
1. That Variance V-76-7 be granted and that the Commission
make the following findings:
'.
.
.
.
.
V-76-7
~
.)
a. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circum-
stances or conditions applicable to the property
involved, or to the intended use of the property,
that do not apply generally to the property or class
of use in the same zone or vicinity.
b. That the granting of such variance will not be
materially detrimental to the public health or wel-
fare or injurious to the property or improvements
in such zone or vicinity in which the property is
located.
c. That such variance is necessary for the preservation
and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the
applicant possessed by other 'property in the same
zone and vicinity.
d. That the granting of such variance will not adversely
affect the comprehensive general plan.
2. That all substandard building conditions be corrected to the
satisfaction of the Superintendent of Building and Safety.
3. That this variance is granted solely to allow for the
legalization of the den and laundry additions and not for
the approval of the nonconforming use of the property.
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
~ad~n"~W~
J~~E';'iJ. WITTE
ASSOCIATE PLANNER
JFW!at
Attachments
I
I.
I
I
I
J
r
j
I
I
j
1
.
.
w
~
.2
G:
I i' UL,J
l!J
I~
c-\ 10 0
PARKI N& , l- i
i I
PH-:3H z
...... 4.
0 0 0 0 0 <.J 0 0
(I'l ~ 0 4.
v >
>-
C!J ( '1.1) (\'~5'> (10'1) (1,-\3) (1'1':5) (\ '5 \) US,) llS7
' ,
A.L 1" A. 5T.
UHo} T'I\'<3) (110) (n.") (101) (I' ~) (n.e) Q1n) (1~4) (ISO) (':;2) (15'<3
C.-I P:b
~ 0 @ 0 0 O. 6) @ @ 6) C
?
...... c( 2
0
0 (l) ~ ~ 0
- :!
v cf.
t!. R-3
PARKING a.
36 ~c
1:
'"
so
I-
z
4:
V
~
(,I'I~)
so
000
000
Q)(ISlv" 0
lI'1S) (151) (155)
-3
000
~s
~~
~E'
vv
...1
.(
a::
n ~
I-
Z.
<{
v
~
( I LlI)
o
~ ~
~O- G) 0 0 0.10
~ (In)
, (,.\\'3) (II"!) (\1.5) (11.~'I!I) (1.1)
..
N
~
o
'"
~
o
13 U
BON \11\ ST.
C-I (1110') (\1.0') (11.'1) (11.10) ( \'10) (loLl) (,I,a) (I'\Y) ( I,a) (150) (I5~) (Ise:
......
~ ...J 0 OiG) 0 0
<( 0 0 0 0 0 0 @
.... v
...... ,a: I R
III uJ ~3
0 0
~ :E ?...3 1 ..,
-
-::i' Z ,
N , @ 0 0
". 0 , i
'" u
~ so
~ 0 ~
0 ...J USE
'" <( Lp.,ND
'"
oj ;;
0:: \!) I\ND "ZONING
...... z
:r W -
N ~ :(.
N cl ~
'-' 0 0 @ 8) @
~ ,0 & ,
':T LJ .seA LE 1"...100'
~ (1\3-ns) \n,) ~ 11..1) (,~,) (It~) (i!l))
--.-.
.
/:</ f. /:2/ '/~ BM.-/4. Sf:
Arcadi,a. I GfJ;'r,,; a...
. j---'--f
,
~
......
I
'-.1-'
30-7
~ Re~r tlwsc
,
6'
30'
\. (
I I
\ ,
I r
1 ' I
I I
0--1 I
, ! I
I Gi'Q,n3C'
I ----~
I 0
, ~ 1/-'
,
I I'"~
t I
" !;I
~f.. Of
" "
~ ~I
.
Fe /'lee
- -----.-:-.---
.
.
.
D~ ",'f \ "l. \ -eoN. \1 Po
.
.
.
.
/C'-.
;;
H~5b A.. T:
\2.\ '1'2- eoN.rr~
.
.
6E.:~"VIC:E. 'R)~cH
Pr-r 12\ BONrTA
.
.
RECEIVED
DEe 131976
CITY OF ARCADIA
CITY OF ARCADIA
;.J' ^""~t....r.;; nEPT.
.
APPLICATION FOR ZONE VARIANCE
TO THE CITY PLANNING COMM1SSION:
File No. V-ryb -- -)
1. APPLICANT
NAME Ri"ha,rd, AI/en Neuman.n"
ADDRESS 3(149 Hemps tea,d. Arcadia" Cal ifornia 91006
TELEPHONE NUMBER 446-1858
INTEREST IN PROPERTY OWner
2. PROPERTY OWNER
NAME Richard, Allen Neumann
Q ADDRESS 3049 Hemnstead, Arcadia, Californi.a 91006
TELEPHONE NUMBER 446-1858
.
DATE PROPERTY WAS ACQUIRED
De cembe r 1 970
3. PRCPERTY ADDRESS 121 - 121l Bon ita S tree t, A rcad ia, Califo rn ia 91006
4. LEGAL DESCRIPTION Lot 6; Block. 70 of Arcadia Santa, Anita Tract, as
per m~n recorded in. Book. 15, Paqes 89 and 90 of Miscellaneous
Records.
5. DEED RESTRICTIONS
None
6, REQUEST:
(Use thiS space ~ to state exactly what is intended for the property
which does not conform with zoning regulations.)
The subject nronerty is beinq used and is intented to continue to
he llsed as two senerate sinqle family homes on one lot. Their ha,s
been two ilJeaal additions placed on the front home only. (A den and
service porch built without a permit). Both additions were present
.
on the nropertu when the present owner bouqht it in 1970 with 0.
V.A. Joan.
- 1 -
.
.
.
.
.
7.
(The LAW REQU1RES that the conditions set forth below
be clearly established before a variance ~ be granted.)
PRERGQUIS1TE CONDITIONS:
EXPLAIN lN DETAIL WHEREIN YOUR CASE CONFORMS TO THESE
FOUR CONDITIONS:
A. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable
to the property involved, or to the intended use of the property, that do not apply
generally to the property or class of use in the same zone or vicinity.
NONE.
B. That the granting of such variance will not be materially detrimental to the
public health or welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in such
zone or vicinity.
This property has been in its present state since the owner
took possession in December 1970. The variance will not be
materially detrimental to the public health or welfare or
injurious to the property or improvements in such zone or
vicinity.
- 2 -
/
.
.
.
.
.
c. That such variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substan-
tial property right of the applicant possessed by other property in the same
zone and vicinity.
The present owner requested a Real Estate Inspection of the
pronerty in order to sell it. He wishes to conform to all
conditions found and make the necessary corrections needed
to bring this property up to the City of Arcadia requirements.
D. That the granting of such variance will not adversely affect, the comprehensive
general plan.
The owner believes that the qranting of such variance will only
inhance the qeneral plan of the City of Arcadia by bringing the
property up to code, as per the Real Inspection of October 22,
19%.
- 3 -
.
.
8, APPL1CANT'S VER1FICATION
Executed in the City of
A rcar!, in
County of Ln~ Annel es
1 J
day of
.
State of California, this
December
19 76
,
I.HEREBY CERTIFY (or declare) under penalty of perjury that the foregoing
information is true and correct,
TELEPHONE NO. 446-1 B5B
.
TELEPHONE NO.
446-1858
cJW
RECEIPT NUMBER,j)4 ~'1u~'
,
\/~ I~l ('_ /7 C-"
RECEIVED BY
DATE
.
- 4 -
~~4. ~,.
I Signatu e of Appli t
-
ADDRESS: J049 Hempstead, Arcadia
K.Li' 4. g;;J.,
Signature of pro,fert Owner
ADDRESS: '3049 Hemps tead. A read ia
\
-
-........
II.
. "
u
<
L
.
~
x
>-
~
"
~
.
~
~
0
Z
0
0
. (111M tOOA
"
.
.
I
r.O~ITUIU" 'lOt! JllllT I
FILING ADMINISIRATlVE REGULATIO
WITH THE SECR~TARY OF STATE
(Putluonl to Gov,rnment tod. Sullon 11380.1)
74. Appendix I is added to read:
APPENDIX I
ENVIRONt1Etfl'AL CHECKLIST FOHr1
(To be completed by Lead Agency)
I. BACKGROUND
1. Name of
2. Address
~-
Da te of Checklist Submitted 21 D~?b
Agency Requiring Checklis t C~ (;;F l!FCAD/A
Name o~ P~posal, if applicabtt
\/-7tr' (.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
(Explanations 0f all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required
on attached sheets.)
J.
11.
5.
YES MA WE NO
1. Earth. Will the proposal result in:
a. IJns ta hIe earth condi tions or' in
changes in geologic substructures?
-Y
b. Disruptions, displacements, com-
paction or overcovering of the soil?
~
c. Change in topography or ground
surface relief features?
v
d. The destruction, covering or
modification of any unique geologic
or physical features?
v
e. Any increase in wind or water
erosion of soils, either on or off
the sitery
t../"
f. Changes in deposition or erosion
of beach sands, or changes in
siltation, deposition or erosion
which may modify the channel of
a river or stream or the bed of
the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake?
~
-36-
~ OIlM ..00'"
. W
U
<
.
~
~
X
~
~
W
,.
.
~
~
Q
Z
0
C
.
.
.
FOR
tOtHlIlur.lImJ ~.lIl.(r
FILING ADMINISfRATlVE REGULATIONS
WITH THE SECnETARY OF STATE
(Pu,,"nnl In GOY'I'nmf!nl Co.lf! S..tti'HI 10nO.1)
l~' 1-:;-:1'1):;'11'(.' 0[' JlcopIe or' [d'Ofl(;r'L,'/ Lo
~colol~j c l,;}"al'd~; ::,IICll as (.';)1'l.l1qllakcs,
.land::;11dcs, rnucl::;Ude::;, [,round failurc,
or ::;1rnl] aI' l1azard~')
..,
<-.
I\ir,
vJill the propo::;al f'CGult i.n:
a. Substantial ai.r emission~ or
deteriora Lion 0[' ambient ai r' !luaU t.v'!
b. Tile creation of olJ,lectionalJlr.
odor'S?
c. II.!. tel'i1t.lon 0[' a.lr rnovelncnl.,
rnoj::;tllre 01' I.ciI1pC'ral.ul'r., 01' an,\'
Cllilllf,:(' In climal.c, either' .locaJ1.v
or r'Cl'.J onal.l.v ':'
3 . via tee r .
\H.l1 Ute pr'o[Jo~;ill l'u:u,lL ill:
a. (;I':1111';l'8 J n CllT'I'ent::, 01' Llrr: (.''''Ir':;C
0" dJI'C'ctlr'lI 01' \J:rV'I' IrJOVl'lIl1:lIL:.:, .i"
elLllcl" rnal'inr' or' ['1'c311 waL<:I'~;"
'" (;ilanr~cG 1n alJr:ol'ption r':,tr..'~"
draill:lf'L' pattCi'~:n, 01' Lilc 1':tLr:
and amount of r:ut'i'ace vlatl'.'r' l'UllO[,J",
c. ^! t(~r'D.tj on~ La the: cou.r':")c or'
fJovI of flood :'.'il \'.',1':: '!
d. Challl:' ,j" 1.1)(' :.lIl1'JlllIL 01' :"Il'I'a"e
wilt,~r in any water' l..od,v'!
c. //1 ~;Ch;lIT:C' jnto ~tH'far.{: :::;11.1.'1'::, 01'
jll ;:111:,' :l.tL(-,'/'al.i.utl of' ~'ur'riLr.C t.,'aLcr'
l\ltL1.:Ji1.:,) Jt\cllldJrw, hilt. IInl ti,nitrrj
to Lr:r'tnr,c'r':.l tlll!I:, dJ:j~~oJ vel! ():~,YI';Ctl 01'
tl.ll'iJlrlJ L.v "
r'. flll.c!';lLj:lr; of' Ull: di.r.r:r;t..L'Jfj nt'
t'ate or ClO\'1 or l.;l'O'ltlU \'1'1 L(,)':,; ':
c;. Cilall!.'e i:, LlII ',iuant.Jt,,' ,1[' ":I'ou'lr1
,late!',';, cJtilc!' LlII'l)lI/;;, dJr'cr'L addlL:ion~
0[' dltlvII'Ll"lo,lc, or' tlll'O\l[:I\ i nLcr'c{',pLlon
oj' an 21JluJ fer b:1 cu tr at' I: :.r:a va L lone.'
- 17,.
YES 1,11\ YBE NO
-k:::'"
~
./'
i/"
~
x
~
L
/
~
/
f'Q,1It.. "00"
. "
u
<
L
.
.
X
>-
~
"
>-
<<
~
>-
a
z
a
"
.
.
.
FOil
COtUnl1JATJOtl SJlUT
FILING ADMItH5rIlATIVE REGULATIONS
Willi THE SECRlTARY Of STATE
(PunUonl to GOY.rnm.nl Cod. s.<rJon 11380.1)
h. Substantial reduction in the
amount of water otherwise available
for public water supplies?
i. Exposure of people or property
to water related hazards such as
flooding or tidal waves?
4. Plant Life. Will the proposal result
in:
a. Change in the diversity of species,
or number of any species of plants
(including trees, shrubs, grass,
crops, microflora and aquatic plants)?
b. "eduction of the numbcrs of any
unique, rare or endangered species
of plants?
c. Introduction of new species of
plants into an orea, or in a barrier
to the normal repleniShment of
existing species?
d. "eduction in acreage of any
agricultural crop?
5. Animal Llfe. Will the proposal
result, in:
a. Change in the diversity of
species, or numbers of any species
of animals (birds, land animals
including reptiles, fish and
shellfish, benthic or~anisms,
insccts or microfauna)?
b. lleducl10n of Lhe numbers or any
uni'1'le, rare or endangered species
of animals?
c. Introduction of new species of
animals into an area, or result in
a barrier to the migration or
movement of animals?
d. De Leriora Lion to exis ting fish
or wildlife habitat?
-311-
YES MA YBE NO
v
v"
./
v
c/
/
/'
~
/
~
or.,.... 406" 0
lOHlIUI'f\1l0U :5ollttl ...
FILING ADMINI:;IRATIVE REGIJL^~S
WITH THE SECllETARY OF STATE
&R
(Purluant to Gavernmlllnt Cod. Secllon 11380,1)
.
YES MAYBE NO
6. Noise. Will the proposal result in:
v
a. Increases in existing noise
levels?
b. Exposure of people to severe
noise levels?
-lL'
7. Light and Glare. Will the proposal
produce new light or glare?
~
8. rand lJ~c. \HIl the rroro::;al r'csul t in
a substantial alteration of the
present or planned land use'of an
area?
--V
9. Natural Resources. Will the
proposal result in: '
a. Increase in the rate of use of
any natural resources?
./
w
. u
<
.
.
.
Z
I-
~
~
I-
~
~
~
0
z
0
0
b. Substantial depletion of any
nonrenewable natural resource?
v
10. I1U;k of Up:;ct. Docs the pt'Opo::(ll
'involve arlsk of an cxploGlon 0"
the t'eJcoce of hazardollc cl~b~;tance:~
(including, but not limited to, oil,
pesticides, chemicals or radiation)
in the event of an accident or
upset conditions?
~
11. PopuJa tion. \>1111 the propOSed alter
the location, dictrlbution, density,
or' grow th rate of the human vopu-
latlon of an area?
~
~
12. JJol.I~,inl~. \'1111 the propo~,al afCrect
cx~L::Urif, 110II:;,jll/~, or' Cl'catC' (l
dcmand Cor additional housing'!
13 .1'ransporta tion/Ci rcu la Lion. \1/111
the proposal result in:
J
a. Gcneration of substantial addI-
tional vehicular movement'!
.
-39-
. Hj' .,. ~, ......
. "0"'" oIO'O^
. COrHlIl':^llOfI IWlll ~
011 PILING ADMHlISTRiUIVE IIIGUL~NS
WITH nil "CnErARY or STAll
(PUNUO"' to Goyern,un' Cod. Sullon 11390.1)
.
YES MA YBE NO
b.' Effects on existing parking
facilities, or demand fo'r new
parking?
.....--
c. Substantial impact upon existing
transportation systems?
~
d. Alterations to present patterns
of circulation or movement of
people and/or goods?
~
e. Alterations to waterborne, rail
or air traffic?
~
f. Increase in traffic hazards to
motor vehicles, bicyclists or
pedes trians?
v
"
u
. <
.
.
'"
,
..
~
"
..
a
l
..
0
Z
0
0
14. Public Services. Will the proposal
have an effect upon, or result in
a need for new or altered govern-
mental services in any of the
following areas:
c. Schools?
/
-.V
V
V
a. Fire protection?
b. Police protection?
d. Parks or other recreational
facilities?
e. l'uintenance of publlc facili-
ties, including roads?
f. Other governmental services?
~
~
15., Energy..:.. Will the proposal re::lUJt in:
a. Usc of substantial amounts of
fuc 1 or ene rgy?
t/
.
b. Substantial increase 1n demand
upon existinr, sources of energy,
or require the development of new
sources of energy?
v
. ,1 ()-
'.
eOR
fiLING A~~I;II~T~~T1VEREGU1.rANS
WITIl TH! SECRETARY Of STI\T~
. ,".... ..~.
(Putluonl to Governme"1 Cod. Seclion.' 1::190.1)
.
YES f'1!l Y DE NO
16. utilitieG. Will the proposal rcsult
in a ticed rOT' nc\'i :-;y[itClnl" 0/'
substantial alterations to the
following utilities:
I
, "
u
. <
~
~
~
x
~
~
"
!: 18.
"
~
~
0
z
0
c
a. Creation of any health hazard or
potential health hazard (excluding
mental health)?
L
V
b. Exposure of people to potentiai
health hazards?
Aesthetics. \vill the proposaJ t'usult
in the obstruction of any scenic
viota or viC\'! open to the p'lhlic, or
will the proposal result in the
creation of an aesthetically
offensive site open to public view?
L
19. Uecreation. Wiil the proposal result
in an impact upon the quaiity or
quantity of existing recreational
opportuni ties"
v
I
I
\
i
,
J
i
,.
,
i
I
20. ^rcilco~o[\j(:<lJ/'rlGtol'.icaJ. \nll ttlC1
pr'oporiaJ l'C;;u,(t In ,J.n ;,dl:cI'atJon
of a s.ic;nificant ar'cheolor;Jcal 01'
hl"Vlr'J.ca] site, structure, object
or building?
t/
-41~
. ;0"'" "00/.
. (Ol\lIi! J^,IOII )\111" ...
OR fllltlG ADMII,II~TR^T1V! R!G\Jt~NS
WITH nl2 S~CRnARY Of STAll
(PvrIVl'Il'iIIO 00....''''"."1 (GA. s.<ltUl'i 11300.1)
.
w
U
. <
.
.
~
x
"
~
w
"
~
~
"
0
z
&
.
;YES MAYDE NO
21. Mandatory Findinqs of Siqnificance.
(a) Doen the project have the potential
to degrade t11e quality of the environment,
substantially reduce the habitat of a fish
or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife
population to drop below self sustaining
levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or
animal community, reduce the number or
restrict the range of a rare or endangered
plant or animal or eliminate important
examples of the major periods of california
history or prahi.tory?
b. Does the project have the poten-
,tia1 to achieve short-term, to the
disadvantage of long-term, environ-
mental goals? (A shor't- tel'm impact
on the environment is one which
occUr's in a relatively brier,
definitive period of time while
long-term impacts will endure
well into the future.)
c. Does the pr'oject have impacts
which are individually limited,
but cwnulatively considerable?
(A project may impact on two or mOr'e
separate resources where the impact
on each rcsource is relatively
small, but where the effect of the
total of those impacts on the
environment is significant.)
d. [Joco the project havc envll'on-
mental effects which w111 cause
nubotantlnl advcroc effocts on
human bo1tlgD, either directly
or indirectly?
III. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
-42-
~
v
v
/
1.""...,..1.....-.
'Ollllol AOO'"
.
.
.
.OR
COUTIUIJMIOtl 51l1IT .
FlUNG ADMI~IISTR/\T1VE REGUL/\ NS
WITH THE SEl:RET/\RY OF ST/\TE
<1'\11\\10111 to GO....t'ofMIII Co~la S.tliOI\ \\360.\)
IV. DETEHrUNATION
(To be completed by the Lead A~ency)
~
o
z
o
o
On the basis of this initial evaluatIon:
~~d the flrOpoGed project COU/,D NOT have a sl[jrtiflcant
effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION
will be prepared.
,-/
L-
I find that although the pc'opoGed project could I,ave a
si~nificant effect on the envIronment, there will not
be a si~nificant effect in this case because the
miti~ation measures desct'ibed on an attached sheet
have: been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION
WILL BE PREPARED.
I find the proposed project r,1AY have a sic;nificant effect
on the environment, and an ENVlflONMENTAL IMPACT llEPORT
is required.
j
~ LUte tJEC. 211 I~b
.
.
,
~
~
w
~
~
~
L7
~. ~
,i~n~tui'lT
10'0 r' C Jr1f OF-.l1t:=e.AD ( 'A
FLAN,N I Nb c:>ePT
-43-
. '
.
.'
.
.
.
V-76-7
File Reference
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA
A. Descript'iQn of project Variance for t\,;O additions to a single family
dweliing in an R-3 zone. The subject site contains two single
dwellings.
B. Location of project 121-121 1/2 Bonita Street
C.' Name of applicant or sponsor Richard A. Neumann
D. Finding -- It is my opinion'that this'project will have no significant
impact upon the environment within the meaning of the California "
'Environmental Quality Act of 1970.
E. Reasons The Environmental Check List did not reveal any
Rignificant im~act of the environment.
F. An initial study was prepared by Jeff Witte
'Copies may be obtained at the Arcadia Planning Department, 240 West
Huntington Drive.
'Date
Dec. 21,1976
0.4~ vJ~ ~
Slg re .
Date Posted Dec. 22, 1976,
Associate Planner
Title