The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1596 RESOLUTION 1596 ~ A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. CUP 99-014 TO OPERATE A REMEDIAL TUTORING CENTER FOR STUDENTS IN GRADE SCHOOL THROUGH mGH SCHOOL, LOCATED AT II W. DUARTE ROAD. WHEREAS, on July 20, 1999, a Conditional Use Permit application was filed by Chung-I Wu to operate a remedial tutoring center for students from grade school through high school, Development Services Department Case No. C.U.P. 99-014, at property commonly known as 11 W. Duarte Road, more particularly described in Exhibit "A". WHEREAS, A public hearing was held on August 24, 1999, at which time all interested persons were given full opportunity to be heard,and to present e\idence; NOW THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA HEREBY RESOL YES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. That the factual data submitted by the Development Services Department in the attached report is true and correct. . SECTION 2. This Commission finds: I. That the granting of such Conditional Use Permit will not be detrimental to the public health or welfare, or injurious to the property or improvements in such zone or vicinity . 2. That the use applied for at the location indicated is a proper use for which a Conditional Use Permit is authorized. 3. That the site abuts streets and highways adequate in width and pavement type to carry the kind of traffic generated by the proposed use. 4, That the granting of such Conditional Use Permit will not adversely affect the comprehensive General Plan. 5. That the use applied for will not have a substantial adverse impact on the environment, and that based upon the record as a whole there is no evidence that the proposed project will have any potential for an adverse effect on wildlife f(:sources or the habitat upon which the wildlife depends. tt. . SECTION 3. That for the foregoing reasons this Commission grants a Conditional Use Permit to operate a remedial tutoring center for students in grade school through high school, upon the following conditions: 1. Building Code compliance and conditions of approval must be met to the complete satisfaction of the Building Section. 2. Fire safety shall be provided to the complete satisfaction of the Fire Department. 3. The hours of operation shall be from 3:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. Monday through Friday, and I :00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Saturday, with a maximum of 10 students per session. 4. The parking lot shall be re-paved and appropriately landscaped to the review and approval of the Development Services Department. 5. Parents' picking-up/or dropping students off shall drive into the parking lot and park in designated areas only. There shall be no parking or stopping along the curb or driveway along Duarte Road. 6. The trash enclosure wood door shall be replaced with a metal door to comply . with current requirements. 7. That C.U.P. 99-014 shall not take effect until the property owner and applicant have executed and filed the Acceptance Form that is available from the Development Services Department to indicate awareness and acceptance of the conditions of approval. 8. Noncompliance with the provisions and conditions of this conditional use permit shall constitute grounds for its immediate suspension or revocation. SECTION 4. The Secretary shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution and shall cause a copy to be forwarded to the City Council of the City of Arcadia. I HEREBY CERTIFY that the forgoing Resolution was adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on August 24,1999, by the follo'Ning vote: . . . . AYES: Commissioners Hua~g, Kalernkiarian, Murphy, Sleeter, Bruckner NOES: .None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None ATTEST: ~~~~ ecretary, Planning ommission City of Arcadia APPROVED AS TO FORM: l!L~!1!!3- STAFF REPORT DEVELOPMENTSEIDnCESDEPARTMENT August 24, 1999 TO: Arcadia City Planning Commission FROM: Donna Butler, Community Development Administrator By: Kenneth Phung, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 99-014 to operate a mmedial tutoring center for students in grade school through high school, from 3:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. Monday through Friday, and from 1 :00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Saturday. SUMMARY This Conditional Use Permit application was submitted 'by Chung-I Wu to operate a remedial tutoring center for students in grade school through high school at 11 W. Duarte Road. The site is situated on ,a lot with a single-story commercial office building that is currently vacant. The Development Services Department is . recommending approval of CUP 99-014 subject to the conditions in this staff report. GENERAL INFORMATION APPLICANT: Chung-IWu (property owner) LOCATION: 11 W. Duarte Road REQUEST: A Conditional Use Permit to operate a remedial tutoring center SITE AREA: Approx. 11,000 sq.ft. (.25 acres) FRONTAGES: Approximately 81 feet on Duarte Road EXISTING LAND USE & ZONING: The site is zoned C-2, and is currently developed with a vacant single-story commercial office building with 14 parking spaces. . ~ . SURROUNDING LAND USES & ZONING: North: Commercial: zoned C-2 South: Public Library: un-zoned East: Commercial: zoned C-2 West: Commercial and Arcadia High Schoql: zoned C-2 & R_ol GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: The site is designated as Commercial PROPOSAL AND ANALYSIS . The applicant is requesting a Conditional Use Permit to operate an 1,800 sq.ft. remedial tutoring center for students in grade school through high school at 11 W. Duarte Road, as shown on the submitted site plan. The tutoring center will operate with two full time and one part time employees from 3:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. Monday through Friday, and 1:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Saturday with a maximum often (10) students per session. The intent of the tutoring center is to aid young students to become proficient with Mathematics and the English language. Such a center is a permitted use in the C-2 zone with an approved conditional use permit. The site currently provides 14 on-site parking spaces, as shown on the submitted site plan, which does not meet the current parking ratio requirement for schools I.e., one space per 35 sq.ft. of instructional area. Based on this requirement, 35 spaces are required for the proposed tutoring center. Although the proposed use would have an on-site parking deficiency of 21 spaces, staff believes that such a deficiency would be mitigated by the applicant's intent to have a maximum of ten studel~ts per session. Also, the proposed use will be the only tenant within the subject building. It is anticipated that there will be 3 instructional sessions per day. The applicant shall be required to comply with all code requirements as determined necessary by the Building Official, Fire Marshall, Maintenance Service Director and Development Services Director. CEQA Pursuant to the provIsions of the California Environmental Quality Act, the Development Services Department has prepared an initial study for the proposed project. Said initial study did not disclose any substantial or potentially substantial 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. When considering the record as a whole, there is no evidence that the proposed project will have any potential for adverse effect on wildlife resources or the habitat upon which the wildlife depends. Therefore, a Negative Declaration has been prepared for this project. . CUP 99-014 August 24, 1999 Page 2 . . . RECOMMENDATION The Development Services Department recommends approval of Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 99-014 subject to the following conditions: 1. The remedial tutoring center shall be maintain~d and operated in a manner that is consistent with the application and plans submitted and approved for CUP 99- 014. 2. The parking lot shall be re-paved and appropriately landscaped, subject to the review and approval of the Development Services Department. 3. Parents' picking-up/or dropping students off shall drive into the parking lot and park in designlilted areas only. There shall be no parking or stopping along the curb or driveway along Duarte Road. 4. The trash enclosure wood door shall be replaced with a metal door to comply with the current requirements. 5. The maximum number of students per session shall not exceed tEln (10). 6. All City code requirements regarding accessibility, fire protection, occupancy, and safety shall be complied with to the satisfaction of Building Services and the Fire Department. 6. Approval of CUP 99-014 shall not take effect until the propElrty owner and applicant have executed and filed the Acceptance Form available from the Development Services Department to indicate acceptance of the conditions of approval. 7. All conditions of approval shall be complied with prior to the opening of the remedial tutoring center. Noncompliance with the plans, provisions and conditions of CUP 99-014 shall be grounds for immediate suspension or revocation of any approvals for the remedial tutoring center. FINDINGS AND MOTIONS Approval The Planning Commission should move to approve the Negative Declaration and adopt Resolution No. 1596: A Resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Arcadia, California, granting Conditional Use Permit No. 99-014 to opElrate a remedial Moring center. Denial If the Planning Commission intends to deny this Conditional Use Permit application, the Commission should move for denial and direct staff to prepare a resolution which incorporates the Commission's decision and specific findings. CUP 99-014 August 24, 1999 Page 3 . . . , If any Planning Commissioner, or other interested pa~ has any questions or comments regarding this matter prior to the August 24 public hearing, please contact Assistant Planner, Kenneth Phung at (626) 574-5447. Approved by: ~~ Community Development Administrator Attachments: Land Use and Zoning Map Plans Negative Declaration & Initial Study Resolution 1596 CUP 99-014 August 24, 1999 Page 4 . . . 9 ~ o ARCADIA HIGH SCHOOL CAMPUS DR 110 . I (8) (12) II "~l (/4) I 1<0 I ,.... I at. 'I~ ~ OFFICE I I \ I I I.. ',,"0 .,," . If------- . O:L 110 ...J.~" . ~ - so ---'-"0 I ~ ql ' "I I I I~ \..; ~ I I I . t '(f1) I eI!.9' OUARTE RO IOI.V"%. I I~ I~- '0 u> ep-1 >>. .... ~- '1..1\'1 1"1'r~) .,1.11' lZ,-4-). UNZONED 4 J) on 9 Ci PUBLIC LIBRARY -~&.. ~ 'oil ... Ir"l. ~,. .... II "" .. - 01 ~ .. ",'" ~:: ..... (.p \O\!l!:> .... iol. ..... ~. ~ ~ w > <C <C I- - Z <C <C I- Z <C C/) ~ ~- ..... ... ,= s: ~ I. .,\:1 ~~ ( ..~1' ~ I: LUC ~~ ..J '$4:'~ o r! w ~- ~ o o I 51 '" .. ..- ~ IS GAS STATION 100' ~...." \~ i , .' f:21.,,~ GA, S STlA~ION 110 .. Q~ II II> ... fTDI a I qj I LAND USE AND ZONING MAP 11 W. Duarte Road t NORTH CUP 99-014 Remedial Tutoring Center Scale: 1linch = 100 feet , ; , _:~ " 100' -, . . . I ) Project Information Spotlight Education Center Chung-! Wu and Hui-No C. Wu (626) 236-2880 11 W. Duarte Rd., Arcadia, CA 91007 C-2 Project: Tenant/Owner: Address: Zone: Description: Lot Size: Building: Size: Parking: Educational resource providing remedial and enrichment instruction in mathematics and English to sJ;udents in grade school through high school after school hours. Approx. 11,000 sq. ft. Existing one story type V building Existing 1800 sq. ft. Existing parking lot in the rear and side of 1he building; Tota1l4 parking spaces. SIIe: II Ol/A-RI'E RD l~ ~ ~ I': " ~ ~ ~ .1' ~ ~ - R.o V / CIN I T Y" M A- f.') -- A-I = , , x ~ Q - It) ,\b-l -:-::. . J-.\.b ~ ~ III :... ~ ... .~ ~ , '. . ~,o' 30,0 ' , ,6 . , II Ol/AR.T5 1<f) () . OQ \0 p061 It-l SJ&H ~> 4; Ii 0 .. + N TRASN 7f \ . 80,0" ; V,I:"": I ~, , J4-t>TRJPfB-D PARkJNf SPk.J;;.s 5;?r/57l#t 4SP~J:T 8fYWf 111 y)L./fi RT ~ R OA-Z> ~ - . SIlt; PLA-N ,. A-2 s: :l =- 10-1.. 01' . , . .. II) ... II) , 5ToRA~ , () , .~~ r.:l4e. I tf''':' - -~ ',' I .~ ~ ().. '- ,. c\o.&s ~ Roo"" ~ . ~;) , \ ckss ROOM C:l. U. I '0 .. ~ TC>/l,i.T ," '0 ~c.~'. '" ~ " -,I- .cu- . N~"% . . .~.,.,.f- "{ r~ I. I 'FLooR. PLAN s.; I, ,. I .:::. I 0 - 0" It- ..3 . . . File No: CUP 99-014 CITY OF ARCADIA 240 WEST HUNTINGTON DRIVE ARCADIA, CA 91007 CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT NEGATIVE DECLARATION A. Title and Description of Project: Conditional Use Permit No. 99-014: A Conditional Use Permit to operate a remedial tutoring center for students in grade school through high school, from 3:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. Monday through Friday, and from 1 :00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Saturday. B. Location of Project: 11 W. Duarte Road, City of Arcadia, County of Los Angeles C. Name of Applicant or Sponsor: Applicant: Chung-I Wu 1735 Hillard Dr. San Marino, CA 91108 (626) 286-2880 D. Finding: This project will have no significant effect upon the environment within the meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 for the reasons set forth in the attached Initial Study. E. Mitigation measures, if any, included in the project to avoid potentially significant effects: None Date: July 28, 1999 Date Posted: July 28, 1999 ~-;::? By: <:::~ enneth Phung, Assistant - . . . CITY OF ARCADIA 240 WEST HUNTINGTON DRIVE ARCADIA, CA 91007 CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM: 1. Project Title: Conditional Use Permit No. 99-014 2. Project Address: 11 W. Duarte Road Arcadia, CA 91007 3. Project Sponsor's Name, Address & Telephone Nnmher: Applicant: Chung-I Wu 1735 Hillard Dr. San Marino, CA 91108 (626) 286-2880 Contact: Same 4. Lead Agency Name & Address: City of Arcadia - Development Services Department Community Development Division - Planning Services 240 W. Huntington Drive P.O. Box 60021 Arcadia, CA 91066-6021 5. Contact Person & Telephone Number: Kenneth Phung, Assistant Planner (626) 574-5447 6. General Plan Designation: Commercial 7. Zoning Classification: C-2 General Commercial -1" File No.: CUP 99-014 CEQA Checklist 7/99 File No.: CUP 99-014 . 8. Description of Project: (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to later phases of the project lind any secondary, support, or off-site features necessary for its implementation. Attach additional sheets ifnecessary.) A Conditional Use Pennit to operate a remedial tutoring center for students in grade school through high school, from 3:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. Monday through Friday, and from 1:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Saturday. 9. Other public agencies whose approval is required: (e.g., pennits, financing, development or participation agreements) The City Building Services, Engineering Division & Fire Prevention Bureau must review and approve the tenant improvement plans for the center, and any other on-site or off-site improvements at the existing shopping center. ENVlRONMENT AL F ACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. [ ] Land Use & Planning [ ] Hazards [ ] Population & Housing [ ] Noise . [ ] Geological Problems [ ] Public Services [ ] Water [ ] Utilities and Service: Systems [ ] Air Quality [ ] Aesthetics [ ] Transportation I Circulation [ ] Cultural Resources [ ] Biological Resources [ ] Resources [ ] Energy and Mineral Resources [ ] Mandatory Finding of Significance . -2- CEQA Checklist 7/99 ~ . . . File No.: CUP 99-014 DETERMINATION (To b. completed by thc Lead Agency) On the basis of this initial evaluation: [X] I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. [ ] I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added 10 the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. [ ] I find that the proposed projectMAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMP ACT REPORT is required. [ ] I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, but that at least one effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards and has been addressed by mitigation measures based on that earlier analysis as described on attached sheets, and if any remaining effect is a "Potentially Significant Impact" or "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated," an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it only needs to analyze the effects that have not yet been addreslled. [ ] I find that although the proposed proj ect could have a significant effect on the environment, there WD...L NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects have been analyzed adequa,ely in an earlier Environmental Impact Report pursuant to applicable standards and have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. Si~~ Kenneth K. Phnng Print Name July 29,1999 Date City of Arcadia For -3- CEQA Chetklist 7/99 File No.: CUP 99-014 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: . I. A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the. parer.theses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact .simply does not apply to projects such as the one involved (e.g., the project is not within a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis). 2. All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including ofl'-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, 'and construction related as well as operational impacts. 3. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is significant. If there are one or more, "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an Environmental Impact Report is required. 4. "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less Than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section 17 "Earlier Analyses" may be cross-referenced). . 5. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program Environmental Impact Report, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyz/:d in an earlier ElR or Negative Declaration {Section l5063(c)(3)(D)}. Earlier analyses are discussed in Section 17 at the end of the checklist. 6. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist, reference:; to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. 7. Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, Elnd other sources, uses or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 8. The analysis of each issue should identifY: a) The significant criteria or threshold used to evaluate each question; and b) The mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significant. . -4- CEQA Checklist 7/99 FileNo.: CUP 99-014 . Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Signifi,:ant DWellS Mitigation Incorporated Would the proposal result in potential impacts involving: 1. LAND USE AND PLANNING - Would the proposal: a) Conflict with general plan designations or zoning? [ ] [ ] b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project? [ ] c) Be compatible with existing land uses in the vicinity? [ ] [ :I d) Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g., impacts to soils or ftu:mlands, or impacts from. incompatible land uses)? [ ] [ :I e) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community (including a low-income or minority community)? [ ] [ J Less Than Significant Impact [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] No Impact [Xl [X] [Xl [X] [Xl . The proposeclremedial tutoring center Is consistent with the. general plan and zoning designations for the area. and will complement surrounding uses. The eonstruction of any tenant improvements, and the operation of the proposed service will be subject.to all other environmental plam or policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over this area. There are no agricultural resources or operations in the vicinity. 2. POPULATION AND HOUSING - Would the proposal: a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections? [ ] [ ] b) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or indirectly (e.g., through projects in an undeveloped area or extension of major infrastructure)? [ ] [ ] c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable housing? [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [Xl [Xl [Xl The proposed service Is consistent with the general plan and zoning designations for the area and will not impact the population or honsing. 3. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS - Would the proposal reslilt in or expose people to potential impacts involving: a) Fault rupture? [ ] [ ] [ ] [Xl b) Seismic ground. shaking? [ ] [ J [ ] [X] . CEQA Checklist 7/99 . . . Would the proposal result in potential impacts involving: Potentially Significant Impact c) Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? [ ] [ ] d) Landslides or mudflows? e) Erosion changes in topography or unstable soil conditiolll; from excavation, grading, or 1il1? [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] I) Subsidence of the land? g) Expansive soils? h) Unique geologic or physical features? File No.: CUP 99-014 Potentially Signifi,:ant Unle", Mitigation IncotpoTated [ ] [ ] [ [ [ '1 [ :I Less Than Significant Impact [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] No Impact [X] [X] [X] [X] [X] [X] While this entire region is subject to the effects of seismie activity, the subject location has not been determined to be especially susceptlble.to any of the above geologic problems. 4. WATER - Would the proposal result in: a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage pattems. or the'rate and amount of surface nmofi? [ ] b) Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding? [ ] c) Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of surface water quality (e.g., temperature, dissolved oxygen, Or turbidity)? [ ] d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any water body? [ ] e) Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements? [ ] I) Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of any aquifer by cuts or excavations or through substantial loss of ground water recharge capability? [ ] g) Altered direction or rate offlow of ground water? [ ] [ ] h) Impacts to gr\lund water quality? [ :I [ :I [ :I [ :I [ I [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] CEQA Checklist 7/99 [X] [X] [X] [X] [X] [X] [X] [X] ~ . . Would the proposal result in potential impacts involving: Potentially Significant Impact i) Substantial reduction in the amount of ground water otherwise available for public water supplies? [ 1 The proposed site alterations would not resulfln any of the above impacts. 5. AIR QUALITY - Would the proposal: a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation? [ 1 [ 1 b) Expose.sensitive receptors to pollutantS? c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature or cause any change in climate? [ 1 [ 1 d) Create objectionable odors? File No.: CUP 99-014 Potentially Signifkant Unle,;s Mitigation Incorporated [ J [ ] [ 1 [ 1 Less Than Significant Impact [ 1 [ 1 [ ] [ 1 [ 1 No Impact [X] [X] [Xl [X] [X] The proposed remedial tutoring center and its operation will be subject to local air quality regulations as administered by the South Coast Air Quality Management District which sho~ld prevent any impacts relative to items (a) and/or (b) above. There are no exterior improvements proposed that would result in alterations to air movement, moisture or temperature, or cause a ehange In climate. No objectionable odors have heen associated with the proposed use. 6. TRANSPORTATION I CIRCULATION- Would the proposal result in: a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? [ 1 b) Hazards to safety from design features (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., faun equipment)? [ 1 c) Inadequate emergency accesses or access to .nearby uses? [ 1 d) Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site? [ 1 e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? [ ] f) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation (e.g~ bus turnouts, bicycle tacks)? [ ] [ 1 g) Rail, waterbome or air traffic impacts? [ 1 [ ] [ J [ 1 [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] [Xl [ 1 [ ] [X] I 1 [ ] CEQA Checklist 7/99 [ ] [ 1 [X] [X] [ 1 [X] [X] File No.: CUP 99-0]4 - Would the proposal result in potential impacts involving: Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Sigmfioant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact The proposed remedial center is situated on a lot with its use as the only busin~ss. Tbe site has ample parking available for the proposed use and no significant Impacts bave been identified. Tbe proposed project may be subject to mitigation measures shonld any tramc or parking. related impacts arise. 7. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES - Wonld the proposal result in impacts to: a) Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats (including but not limited to plants, fish, insects, animals and birds)? [ ] [ ] [ ] [Xl b) Locally designated species (e.g., heritage trees)? [ ] [ ] [ ] [Xl c) Locally designated natural communities (e.g., oak forest, coastal habitat, etc.)? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] d) Wetland habitat (e.g., marsh, riparian and vernal pool)? [ ] [ ] [ ] [Xl e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? [ ] [ ] [ ] [Xl The proposed service will be in a single story commercial building in a commercial area. None of tbe above circumstances exist. . 8. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES - Wouldtbe proposal: a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? [ ] [ ] [ ] [Xl b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient manner? [ ] [ ] [ ] [Xl c) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of future value to the region and the residents of the State? [ ] [ ] [ ] [Xl Tbe proposed project will be required to comply with adopted energy conservation requirements. None of the above impacts bave been associated witb the proposed type of use. 9. HAZARDS - Would the proposal involve: a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of bazardous substances (including, but not limited to: oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation)? [ ] [ ] [ ] [Xl . b) Possible interference with an emergency .response plan or em"'llency evacuation plan? [ ] [ ] [ ] [Xl CEQA Checklist 7/99 File No.: CUP 99-014 . Would the proposal result in potential impacts involving: Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Signifi,=t Unless Mitigation IncoIporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact c) The cteation of any health hazard or potential health hazard? [ ] [ :I [ ] [Xl d) Exposllre of people to existing sources of potential health hazards? [ ] I [ ] [X] e) Increased fire hazard in areas with flammable brush, grass or trees? [ ] [ I [ ] [Xl The City Building Services and the City Fire Department will reyiew the plans for Iremedial tutoring center to prevent any of the above. impacts. No existing sources of potential health hazards have been identified at the subject property. 10. NOISE - Would the proposal result in: a) Increases in existing noise levels? [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [Xl [ ] [ 1 [Xl b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? . The site of the proposed use is in an existing commercial bnilding in a commercia I area and neither of the above impacts is associated with this location or the proposed use. Should any J~roblems arise however, compliance with noise regulations will prevent any unreasonable noise levels. 11. PUBLIC SERVICES - Would the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered government services in any of the following areas: a) Fire protection? [ 1 [ ] [ 1 [Xl b) Police protection? [ ] [ ] [ ] [Xl c) Schools? [ ] [ ] [ ] [Xl d) Mainltnance of public facilities, including roads? [ ] [ ] [ ] [Xl e) Other governmental services? [ ] [ ] [ 1 [Xl The proposed use is consistent with the planned nses for the area and will not rllSult in any of the above impacts. 12. UTILITIES. AND SERVICE SYSTEMS - Would the proposal result in a need for new systems or supplies, Or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a) Power or natural gas? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] b) COmmunications systems? [ 1 [ ] [ 1 [X] c) Local or regional water treatment or . distribution facilities? [ ] [ 1 [ 1 [Xl CEQA Checklist 7/99 File No.: CUP 99-014 Potentially Significant Potentially Unler.s Less Than . Would the proposal result in Significant Mitigation Significant No potential impacts involving: Impact IncorpOlated Impact Impact d) Sewer or septic tanks? [ 1 [ 1 [ 1 [Xl e) Storm water drainage? [ 1 [ 1 [ 1 [Xl t) Solid waste disposal? [ 1 [ 1 [ 1 [Xl g) Local or regional water supplies? [ 1 [ 1 [ l [Xl Its is not anticipated that any of the above utilities or service systems will be significantly impacted. Nevertheless, the proposed improvements will be reviewed for, and the developer will be required to provide, if necessary, any new systems or suppUes necessary to mitigate any such im;pacts. 13. AESTHETICS - Wonld the proposal: a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? [ 1 [ 1 [ 1 [Xl b) Have a demonstrable negative aesthetics effect? [ 1 [ 1 [ 1 [Xl c) Create light or glare? [ 1 [ 1 [ 1 [Xl . The proposed use will be in an existing commercial building, and any e:derlor Improvements will be required to comply with local architectural standards and illumination limits and will not result in any of the above Impacts. 14. CULTURAL RESOURCES - Would the proposal: a) Disturb paleontological resources? [ 1 [ 1 [ 1 [Xl b) Disturb archaeological resources? [ 1 [ 1 [ 1 [Xl c) Affect historical resources? [ 1 [ 1 [ 1 [Xl d) Have the potential to cause a physical change, which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? [ 1 [ 1 [ 1 [Xl e) Resmct existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? [ 1 [ 1 [ 1 [Xl The proposed use will be In an existing commercial building. None of the above resources bave been identified at the subject area, and none of the impaets have been associated with the proposed use. 15. RECREATION - Would theprllposal: a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities? [ 1 [ 1 [ 1 [Xl . GEQA Checklist 7/99 . . . Would the proposal result in potential impact; involving: Potentially Significant Impact b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? [ 1 File No.: CUP 99-014 Potentially Signific.ant Vnle,,,, Mitigation IncotpOll!ted [ 1 Less Than Significant Impact [ 1 No Impact [Xl The proposed use will be in an existing commercial building, and tbe proposed projl:ct will not result In any of the above impacts. 16. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substentiallyreduce the babitatof a.ftsh or wildlife species, cause a ftsh or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce.tbe number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant Or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? [ 1 b) Does the project bave the potential to achieve short-tenn, to the disadvantage of long-tenn, environmental goals? [ ] c) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable wben viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future project.) [ ] d) Does the project bave environmental effects, which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? [ ] [ I [ J [ 1 [ ] [ 1 [ ] [ 1 [ ] [Xl [Xl [Xl [Xl The proposed use will be in an existing commercial building, and the proposed project will not result in any of the above impacts. 17. EARLIERANALYSES No additional documents were referenced pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA processes to analyze any noted effect(s) resulting from the proposal. CEQA Checklist 7/99 ....... .. FileNo. Cl~~ ~OI~ CflY OF ARCADIA 240 WEST HUNTINGTON DRIVE ARCADIA, CA 91007 ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION FORM Date Filed: 7/~/~ General Information . 1. Applicant's Name: ChtAV\'d-1 Wu... tl.114 Hu1- AJo C. lAllA.. Address: 113~ H ~ II ~o.. yet Dr: j S ClI'\- lvfo.Y/Klfj Ct4 91 ({) t! Property Address (Location): (r w. VUc:\ r-te. K'J., A-rc.o.oi~o... CA <1/007 . Assessor's Number: ..577tf- If/.. -( 7 Mt.::;j ~77t'-l(/--I3" 2. 3. N~e, address and telephone number of person to be contacted conc'~rning this proiect: ChlAl1'(-I WLL. /73,) H;II,'o.r.:4 })r:".. 5aJ1 Har,~,. CA 9//{}!' b;)"b - J.-S-6-~cfO 4. Ust and describe. any other related permits and other public approvals required for this p~;~cluding those required by city, regional, state and federal agencies: _ 5. 6. Zone Classification: ~C- 2 Y y) c. -2..- General Plan Designation: Go WlI'>I-l? 1't..-t'Q.1 Proiect Description 7. Proposed use of site (project description): E-zttACA t,'o 1'\ '^ I Y"e.sou VU:.2.-p ).ov, 'd I';".d ~~ I i"nstYLlJr6->'\~ il1.. H&l-VJ,ftGS ~ '"Gt13I,,<:h/ 1:; sfwb....n i'V1 7-~ Sc.luJoi Hn~~ . ~td.- ~c.~o{ ~~ ~c.~ol luuYS ~ sf,uk.l'~ o.l':{~ J1ofP€4 .iff by po.rettts. 8. Site size: (Looo s'{;. fT. 9. Square footage per building:. LJ"D 0 s f. f+' 10. Number of floors of construction: I . 11. Amount of off-street parking provided: Ilf- 12. Proposed scheduling of project: IJO'NL. 13. Anticipated incremental development: AJOYVL 14. U residential, include the number of units, schedule of unit sizes, range of sale prices or rents, and type of household sizes expected: . Nor t>..prl~c.lAlJe... . 15. If commercial, indicate the type, i.e. neighborhood, city or regionally oriented, square footage of sales area, and loading facilities, hours of operation: Mf!A~;t.borlwoJ. ov/eMh-rl " /U) v~:fZ>.-;( Sales J JUJ loru/.(>'J rCt'(;hRs/ opero..t,l ~ -3;00 fm '1:;; d";oo pwv 16. If industrial, indicate' type, estimated employment per shift, and loading facilities: ~t tIf_inlAJ.{e... 17. If institutional, indicate the major function, estimated employment per shift, estimated occupancy, loading facilities, and community benefits to be derived from the project: 11-&t-~pl; ~- 18. If the project involves a variance, conditional use permit or zoning application, state this and indicate clrarly why the application is required: . CondA-hoMl us.e. perndT ~s r.e..rJ/"u by r-A..a.. c.-.',?-. Are the following items applicable to the project or its effects? Discuss below all items checked yes (attach additional sheets as necessary). YES NO 19. Change in existing features of any hills, or substantial alteratin of ground contours. o Jii 20. Change in scenic views or vistas from existing residential areas or public lands or roads. o ~ 23. . Changein dust, ash, smoke, fumes or odors in viciriity. o JXi o ~ o ~ 21. Change in pattern, scale or character of general area of project. 22. Significant amounts ofsolid waste or litter. El.R. 3/95 -2- , . tj. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. YES NO Change in ground water quality or quantity, or alteration of existing drainage patterns. . o ~ Substantial change in existing noise or vibration levels in the vicinity. o ~ o )&l o ~ Is site on filled land or on any slopes of 10 percent or more. Use or disposal of potentially hazardous materials, such as toxic substances, flammable or explosives. Substan.tial change in demand for municipal services (police, fire, water, sewage, etc.). o ~ Substantial increase in fossil fuel consumption (electricity, oil, natural gas, etc.). o ~ Relationship to a larger project or series of projects. o ~ Environmental Setting .1. 32. Describe (on a separate sheet) the project site as it exists before the project, including information on topography, soil stability, plants and animals, any cultural, historical or scenic aspects, any existing structures on the site, and the use of the structures. Attach photographs of the site. Snapshots or Polaroid photos will be accepted. Describe (on a separate sheet) the surrounding properties, including jnformation on plants, animals, any cultural, historical or scenic aspects. Indicate the type of land uses (residential, commercial, etc.), intensity of land use (one-family, apartment houses, shops, department stores, etc.), and scale of development (height, frontage, set-backs, rear yards, etc.). Attach photographs of the vicinity. Snapshots or Polaroid photos will be accepted. Certification I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the data and information required for this initial evaluation to the best of my abil'ity, and that the facts, statements, and information presented are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. 7/11!q1 . ~--~_;7'~/ Date Signature /' . E.LR. 3/95 -3-