Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1586 . . . RESOLUTION NO. 1586 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF TIm CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, GRANTING CONDmONAL USE PERMIT NO. CUP 99-002 FOR A SCHOLASTIC ASSESSMENT TEST (SAT) REVIEW AND CONSULTATION SERVICE AT 411 E. HUNTINGTON DRIVE, UNIT NO. 211. WHEREAS, on December 23, 1998, an application was filed by STUDYWORKS Inc., A Maryland Corporation, to operate a Scholastic Assessment Test (SAT) review and consultation service in a 1,258 square foot commercial space (Unit No. 211) Development Services Department Case No. CUP 99-002, at 411 E. Huntington Drive, more particularly described in the attached legal description labeled, Exhibit" A". WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on January 26, 1999, at which time all interested persons were given full opportunity to be heard and to present evidence; NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. That the factual data submitted by the Development Services Department in the attached report dated January 26, 1999 are true and correct. SECTION 2. This Commission finds: I. That the granting of the Conditional Use Permit will not be detrimental to the public health or welfare, nor injurious to the property or improvements in the zone or vicinity. 2. That the use applied for at the location indicated is properly one for which a Conditional Use Permit is authorized. 3. That the site for the proposed use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate said use, and all yards, spaces, walls, fences, parking, loading, landscaping and other features required to adjust said use with the land and uses in the .neighborhood. 4. That the site abuts streets and highways adequate in width and pavement type to carry the kind of traffic generated by the proposed use. 5. That the subject property is designated for commercial use in the General Plan, that the proposed use is consistent with that designation, and that the granting of the Conditional Use Permit will not adversely affect the comprehensive general plan. e . . 6. That the evaluation of the environmental impacts as set forth in the initial study are appropriate and that the project will have no significant effect upon the environment within the meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, and, when considering the project as a whole, there was no evidence before the City that the proposed project would have any potentially adverse effect on wildlife resources or the habitat upon which wildlife depends, and therefore, a Negative Declaration should be approved. SECTION 3. That for the foregoing reasons this Commission approves Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 99-002 to operate a Scholastic Assessment Test (SAT) review and consultation service in a 1,258 square foot commercial space; Development Services Department Case No. CUP 99-002, at 411 E. Huntington Drive, Unit No. 211, subject to the following conditions: 1. The SAT (Scholastic Assessment Test) review and consultation service (tutorial center) shall be operated in a manner that is consistent with the application and plans submitted and approved for CUP 99-002, including thefollowing provisions: a. During the months of September through May, no classes shall be held before 1 :30 p.m. on weekdays. b. The parking structure shall be accessible to all clients, students and instructors. 2. All City code requirements regarding accessibility, construction, fire protection, occupancy, plan checking, safety and utility services shall be complied with to the satisfaction of all City Departments and sha1l include, but are not limited to the following items: a. Submittal of tenant improvement plans to Building Services for plan check and approval, as well as issuance of any necessary permits by the City. b. The subject space sha1l be equipped with Quick Response fire sprinkler heads, and keys shall be provided for the Knox box. 3. Approval of CUP 99-002 shall not take effect until the property owner and applicant have signed and returned the Acceptlince Form available from the Development Services Department to indicate acceptlince of the conditions of approval. 4. All conditions of approval shall be complied with prior to operation of the proposed use at the subject property. Noncompliance with the plans, provisions and -2- 1586 f) . . conditions of CUP 99-002 shall be grounds for immediate suspension or revocation of any approvals which could result in the cessation of operations. SECTION 4. The decision, findings, and conditions of approval contained in this Resolution reflect the Planning Commission's action of January 26, 1999, by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners Huang, Murphy, Sleeter and Kalemkiarian NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Bruckner SECTION S. The Secretary shal1 certity 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 foregoing Resolution No. 1586 was adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on January 26, 1999, by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners Huang, Murphy, Sleeter and Kalemkiarian NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Bruckner Chai City ATTEST: ~Ao~# Secretary, Planning CommissIon City of Arcadia APPROVED AS TO FORM: o. ~ /!fda- Michael . Mil er, City Attorney City of Arcadia -3- 1586 EXIIIBH "A" l[C~L DESCRIPTIOII . BECIIIIIIIIG AT "IIE IIITERSI:CTIOII or TilE CEIITERLIIIE or IIUIITIIIGTOII DRIVE, 100 rHT WIDE, AS SIIOWII Oil HAP or TRACT 110. 1)610. AS PER HAP RECORDED III BOOK ~89 PACE 21 or HAps, III TilE ornCE or TilE COUIITY RECORDER or SAID COUIITY wlTtI TilE 1I0RTIIERLY PROLO"CATION or TilE CEIITERI.IIIE or TilE EXISTIIIO IHPRovEHEIITS Oil rOURTII AVEIIUE, AS SAID rOURTII AVEjlUE EXTEIIDS SOUTIIERLY rROII SAID IIUIITIIIGTOII DRIVE, SAID IIITERSEC"rJOII DEIIIC DISTAIIT ALOIIC SAID CErnERLIIIE or IIUIITllIcrOIl DRIVE, 1I0llTII 89'59' 40. WEST 426.51 rE!:T rROII TilE CEf'TEIlLItIE or rl F"T11 AVEIIUE, 60 rEET WIDE. AS SIIOWII Oil SAID ItAP or TRACT 110. 13610; TlIEIICE ALOIIG SAID CEIITEIlLIIIE or IIUIITlIIOTOII DIIIVE, SOUTII 89' 59' 40' E1,ST 0.50 or A rOOT: TIIEIICE 1I0llTII 00' 00' 20. EAST 20D FEET TO TilE TRUE Pol/lT or BEOI11I1 IIIC: TIIEIICE PARALLEL WITII SAID IIUIITIIlOTOII DRIVE, SOUTII 89' 59' 40' EAST 16 2. 50 rEET TO TilE 1I0RTIIEAST COIlIIEIl or TilE LAlID DESCR I BED ItI PARCEL 1 ItI TilE DEED TO WALTER SEAWERT, IlECOROED APRIL 28, 1949 AS ,"STIIUHE/lT "0. 59). IN BOOK 29948 PAGE 118, orrrCIAL RECORDS or SAID COUIITY; TIIEIICE 1I0RTIIlIESTERLY III A DIRECT LIIIE 209.61 rEET HORE 011 LESS TO A PolIlT DISTAIIT 1I0llTII 00' 20' EAST 112.50 rEET rROl1 TilE TRUE POIIIT OF jjEOIIIIII;fO: TIIEIICE SOUTII 00' O~' 20. NEST 1)2.50 rEET TO TilE TIlUE POIIIT OF B EO III/II 110. PAnCEL 4t . TIIOSE PORTIOIIS or LOTS I AIID 4, III BLOCK 84 or TilE SAIITA AIIITA TMCT. AS PER "AP RECORDED IIi BOOK H PAOES II AlID 42 or HISCELLAIIEOUS RECORDS, !II TilE orflCE OF TilE COUIITY RECORDER OF SAID COUIITY, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS, comiEIICIIIG AT TilE ItITERSECTIOII OF TilE CEIIHRLIlIE or IIUIITIIlGTOII DRIVE, 100 rEET WIDE, AS SIIOWII Oil IIAP or TRACT I/O. 116~~, .'.S .PEII ItAP RECORDED III BOOK 189. PAGES 21 /oJID 22 Of' IIAPS, III 'fIIE orrrCE Of' 1.IIE COUIITY IIECORDER I< IT II TilE 1I0RTIIERLY PROLOIIGATIOII Of' TilE CENTERLItfE Of' TItE EXISTIIIG IHPROVEHEIITS Oil FOURTII AVE"UE. AS SAID FOURTII "VEIIUE EXTI:II0S SOUTIIERLY rROH SAID IIUIITIIIQTOII DRIVE. SAID IlITERSECTIOH BEINO DISiAlIT ALOIIG SAID CEIITERLIIIE or IIUIITIIIGTOII DRIVE, 1I0RTII B9' 59' 40. WI:ST 426'.51 FEET FROH TilE CI:IITERLItIE OF fIFTII AI/EllUl:. 60 rEET WIDE, AS SIIOWI/ Oil IlAP OF SAID TRACT 110. 11640: TIIEIICE ALOIIG SAID CEllTERLIIIE OF ItUIITIIIGTOII DRIVE, SOUTII 89' 59' 40. EAST 0.50 or A FOOT: TIIEIICE 1I0RTII DO' 00' 20' EAST 10.00 FEET TO TilE TRUE POIIIT OF BEOIIIIIIIIG III TIlE SOUTlIERLY LIIIE or SAID LOT I: TIIEIICE COIITIIIUIIIO "ORill 00' 00' 20. I:AST 110.00 FEET; TIIEIICE SOUTII 89' 59' 40" EAST 162.50 rEET: TIIEIICE SOUTII 00' 00' 20" WEST 110.00 rEET TO TilE SOUTIIERLY LiliES Of' SAID I.OT (; TIIEIICE II0RTII B9' 59 L 40' WEST "LOIIO TIIS SOUTIIERLY LIIIS OF SAID LOTS 4 AlID l, A DISTAI/CE Of' 162.50 rEET TO TIIS TRUE POUlT Of' BEGJllIIJIIO. PAIlCEL 5: Tlt.'oT PORTlOI; OF LOT 4 III BLOCK B4 OF TilE SAIITAAIIITA TRACT, AS PER IIAP HCORDED III BOOK 14 PAGES 41 1.110 42 or ItlSCELLAIIEOUS RECORDS, III TilE OFFICE OF 't.W: mt.JJU:.! DFI""nanet os .s:.u.o .coUUTV OrlS;C.UD~O ^' FOLLOWS I B~~I/IIIII1G AT .TIIE IIITERSECTIOII OF TilE CElfTERLIIIE OF IIUIITIIIGTOII DRIVE 100 DO I' T WIDE. AS SIIOWII Oil TilE 'L\P OF TRACT 110. 116'0, AS PER IIAP RECORDED ill BOO~ 289. PAGI:S 21 AlID 22 OF 'lAPS, III Till: OFFICI: OF Till: COUIITY RI:CORDI:R OF S~:~ COUNTY. WITII TilE 1I0RTIII:RLY PROI.OIIGATIOII OF TilE CEIITERLIIIE OF TilE E, TIIIO IHPROVEHElfTS 011 nil AVEl/UE liS SAID fTlI A"EIIUE ExnllOS SOUTIIERLY rr.OH SIIID IIUIITJIIGTOII DRIVE, SAID IIITERSECTIOII DEIIIG DISTM'T AtOIlC SIIID Ct:':TtRLItI!: OF IIUUTJUGTOII Dr.IVE, t10RTII B9- 59' 40" weST 426.51 "n:tT rnou TilE: ~EI TEIILIIIE Of' 5TII AVEIIUE, 60 FEET WIDE. AS SIIOIIII Oil TilE "'.~ 0.. Sill!) TRACT ':"; '!!.'O, 111EIICE ALOIle; SAID CEIIlERLllIE or IIUIITIlfCTOII CRIVE. SOU'!'II d9' 59' .0 E.:.T 0..50 Of' A 1'00'1'; TIIEIICE 1I0RTII 0' 00' 20' EAST )0.00 FEET TO A POlIIl 1/' ;IIC SOU1IIERLY LIIIE or LOT) III BLOCK B4 Of' SAID SAIIl'A AIII1'A TRACT' TII~"CE COIITIIIUIIIG. II0RTlI O' 00' 20" EIIST 110.00 I'EET; TIIEIICE SOUllI 89: 59.' 40 EAST 162.50 FEET TO TilE TRUE PO lilT OF BEOIII/IIIIO' TIIEIICE FROIl SAID TRUE POI/IT OF BEOIIIIIIIIO, SOIlTII 0' 00' 20. WEST 170.00 rd:T TO A rOlllT III TilE SOUTIIERLY LIIIE Of' SAID LOT '" TilE liCE ALOIIC TilE SOUlllERLY LIIIE Of' SIIIO LOT " SOUTII 89' 59' 10' EAST TO ITS IIITERSEC"TIOil WITII A STAAIOIIT LIIIE EXTEIIDIIIG SOUTIIEASTERLY rROI. TilE TRUE rOJIIT Of' TillS DESCRIPTlOII AIID WIIICII ST~ICIIT LitlE PASSES TIIRU A POIIIT 1/1 TilE IIORTIIERI.Y LIIIE Of' SAID'IIUIITI/IGTOII DRI E TWIT I.S DISTAIIT EASTERLY IIEIISUREO ALOIIG SAIO 1I0111'IIEIII Y LIIIE III 91 ~~~~,r.~~~v~II~E~g~~:~~CTIOII OF SAID II0RTIIERLY LIIIE WlTlI TlL\'r CERTAW COURSE , AS IL\VIIIO A .BEARltIG or SOUTII 0' 0.0' 20' WEST AI/D A Lel/GTII OF 110,00 F&ET: TIIEIICE 1I0RTIIWESTERLY ALOIIO SAlO' OfMIOIIT LIIIE TO SA! 0 TRUE PO lilT OF BEOIIIII~1I0. ~. .----.. . Resa, 1586 88-1880;;'71 411 E, Huntington Dr, .f STAFF REPORT DEVELOPMENTSERWCESDEPARTMENT January 26, 1999 Arcadia City Planning Commission Donna Butler, Community Development Administrator By: James M. Kasama, Associate Planner SUBJECT: Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 99-002 - An SAT review and consultation servica at 411 E. Huntington Drive, Unit #211 TO: FROM: SUMMARY This Conditional Use Permit application was submitted by StudyWorks Corporation to operate an SAT (Scholastic Assessment Test) review and consultation servica in unit #211 of the landmark Center at 411 E. Huntington Drive. The Development Services Department is recommending approval subject to the conditions listed in this report. . GENERAL INFORMATION APPLICANT: StudyWorks Corporation lOCATION: REQUEST: 411 E. Huntington Drive, Unit #211 A Conditional Use Permit and a related parking modification for an SAT review and consultation service for a maximum of 10 students per session. The proposed hours of operation are 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on weekdays and 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. on weekends. EXISTING LAND USE & ZONING: The site is developed with a commercial center consisting of 31,900 sq. ft. of retail space, 37,800 sq. ft. of office space, two freestanding restaurants totaling 11,600 sq. ft., and 428 parking spaces (184 in the open parking lot at ground level, and 244 spaces in a 3-level structure. ) The property is zoned CPD-1: Commercial Planned Development, and is within the Redevelopment Project Area. - GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Mixed Use - CommerciallMultiple Family Residential . .., . . SURROUNDING LAND USES & ZONING: North: Hotel- zoned CPD.1 South: Mixed Commercial- zoned CPD-1 East: Santa Anita Wash - unzoned West: Hotel and restaurant - zoned CPD-1 BACKGROUND This commercial center was originally developed in 1990. It is currently occupied with the following uses: Required Parking Use CUP No. Sa. Ft. Parkina Provided Ground Floor Retail n. a. 24.861 124 124 Thai Restaurant CUP 90-013 993 10 5 Sandwich Shop CUP 90-015 1,090 22 6 Chinese Restaurant CUP 91-012 1,685 17 9 Computer Academy CUP 94-010 3,271 (1,980*) 57 17 . 2nd & 3111 Floor Offices n. a. 37,800 151 151 Tony Roma's Restaurant CUP 89-007 5,000 50 50 Tokvo Wako Restaurant CUP 89-008 6.600 66 66 Totals 81,300 497 428 .' " , "Area used for instructional purposes for adults. Parklng is required at a ratio of one space per 35 sq. ft. of this area. For non-clriving age students, a ratio of one space per 5 seats is used. ? .:' Four of the above uses account for a cumulative parking Modification of 69 spaces, which were granted by the respective CUPs. The number of parking spaces has not been an issue at this center. However, the location of the parking spaces and the on-site circulation pattern are problematic. Of the 428 on-site parking spaces, less than half (184 = 43%) are in the open parking lot at ground level. The other 244 spaces are in a gated parking structure that is accessed by using a security code. Staff's observations reveal that the 90+ spaces on the basement level are very rarely used. I' , l, i I, The on-site traffic is concentrated in the main parking aisle that parallels the front of the building. Most of the traffic occurs at the building's main entrance at the center of the complex, or towards the east end near Kinko's, which is a popular business activity center. Traffic appears to be heaviest in the morning hours and at lunchtime. . CUP 99-002 January 26, 1999 Page 2 . . '-, ..." . ,'" ., '. - . . PROPOSAL & ANALYSIS The applicant is proposing to operate an SAT (Scholastic Assessment Test) review and consultation service (Le., a tutorial center) in 1,258 sq. ft. of office space on the second-floor of the Arcadia Landmark Center. The students will typically be juniors and seniors in high school, and the maximum size of a review session is proposed to be 10 students, but the applicant indicates that most sessions are with 4 to 8 students, and many sessions are one-on-one. The proposed hours for conducting review sessions are 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on weekdays, and 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. on Saturdays and Sundays. . The 1,258 sq. ft. space is divided into three rooms, and 30 people is the maximum occupant load for the proposed space. The change in use of the 1 ,258 sq. ft. space from general office to education-related,. increases the parking requirement by one for this space based on the parking requirement of one space per 5 seats for instructional purposes. This increases the parking deficiency to a total of70 spaces. Staffs experience with tutorial centers is that students are mostly dropped-off and picked-up, rather than driving themselves to their sessions. This correlates with the parking requirement of 6 spaces for 30 students. If the students are dropped-off and picked-up, it is anticipated that this will most likely occur in front of the main entrance to the building at the center of the complex. This is a heavily trafficked area, and such activity could significantly add to the traffic, particularly during weekday momings and lunch times. However, the applicant has indicated that the parking structure will be made accessible to their clients so that the students can use the rear entrance to the building on the upper level of the parking structure. This could divert a significant amount of traffic away from the front of the building. In addition, revising the hours of operation so that the review sessions do not begin before 1 :30 p.m. on weekdays would also reduce the potential for on-site traffic problems. It should be noted that a tutorial center occupied 2,591 sq. ft. on the third floor from 1991 through 1995. That tutorial center was approved by CUP 91-014 for a maximum enrollment of 60 students and operated from 9:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. Monday through Friday. No problems were associated with that operation. CEQA Pursuant to the prOVIsions of the . Califomia 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 . CUP 99-002 January 26, 1999Page 3 ,:.'. .'. . . . 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. ~ECOIY.IMENDATI0N The Development Services Department recommends approval of Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 99-002 subject to the following conditions: 1. The SAT (Scholastic Assessment Test) review and consultation service (tutorial center) shall be operated in a manner that is cOnsistent with the application and plans submitted and approved for CUP 99-002, which shall include a revision of the hours so that review sessions are not held before 1 :30 p.m. on weekdays. ., ;'1 2. All City code requirements and policies regarding accessibility, construction, fire protection, occupancy, plan checking, safety and utility services shall be complied with to the satisfaction of all City Departments and shall include, but are not limited to the following items: ,"; .. ;.1 a. Submittal of tenant improvement plans to Building Services for plan check and approval, as well as issuance of any necessary permits by the City. . .'. b. The subject space shall be equipped with Quick Response fire sprinkler heads, and keys shall be provided for the Knox box. ,I '.j :-1 'I ;'.1 ",:j i~ ',! 3. Approval of CUP 99-002 shall not take effect until the property owner and applicant have signed and retumed the Acceptance Form available from the Development Services Department to indicate acceptance of the conditions of approval. 4. All conditions of approval shall be complied with prior to operation of the proposed use at the subject property. Noncompliance with the plans, provisions and conditions of approval for CUP 99-002 shall be grounds for immediate suspension or revocation of any approvals, which could result in the cessation of operations. CUP 99-002 January 26, 1999 Page 4 . PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION The Planning Commission should adopt Resolution No. 1586 approving Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 99-002. 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. Should the Planning Commissioner, or any other interested garty have any questions or comments regarding this matter prior to the January 26 public hearing, please contact Associate Planner, Jim Kasama at (626) 574-5445. Attachments: Plans Land Use and Zoning Map Negative Declaration & Initial Study . Approved by: ~ Donna L. Butler Community Development Administrator . CUP 99-002 January 26,1999 Page 5 :. ,.,.. .... . . . ~Jor/1tJe air cfJ.Il 1.256 ~fT C Ja~ro.'" tlA-Ll-WA-Y e;)cIT 411GA?T HW.lTI1JC{(D,\.! ~11I~ z~ UNIT UNIT UNIT UNIT UNIT UNIT UNIT UNIT UNIT UNIT UNIT UNIT UNIT UNIT UNIT UNIT UNIT UNIT UNIT ,UNIT UNIT UNIT UNIT International, Inc. r: i' C~\.. ~~~~.~..I~ l* \::.!- ~'~ L\ L:. Cio:.-'_ ~ ~ rP~ A-tr ~<(, ~' g .,0 ~Ir"~~ c; ..cf 4" ~ f' RO "'1"['< 'C~~ .y -~ - I'L""> ::..0 y t '-.. , >>M -......... l;: ~ ~,O i<> 0" (j ~., ~<f> 4.~ ~<o ,q ..::. " .:~ 6/ . ./ ~ __..,J. , ~~ . ,."--' . r'j ,--'i. ; . ..~ I .~ n" , , r":~ '. :1 . . i 101-A 101-B 101-C 101-D 102 103 105 106 107 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 1,301SF 1,199SF 3,740SF 980SF 1,090SF 993SF 993SF 993SF 993SF 993SF 993SF 993SF 993SF 993SF 993SF 993SF 2,278SF l,858SF 1,121SF 1,121SF 1,121SF 1,121SF 1,685SF lIII INFORMATION OIl OESIGN 1NOlCATED HEll!'ON IS PRElIMlrlARY ONLY. IT IS . FIRST FLOOR PLAN '" .f'):( ..~\ 411 E. HUNTINGTON DRIVE ARCADIA CALIFORNIA ."!' .. .. ....: ,. .~:--..;>' - "":.f .-.. ~ NORTt- THE INFORMATION CONTAINED HERBN. HAS BEEN OBTAINED FROM SOURCES THAT WE OEEM REUASlE. OR THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY. WE HAVE NO REASoN TO OOUBT ITS ACCURACV, BUT WE 00 NOT GUARANTEE IT. ~-, "on r",>r':R"7rr-:(:-' " ' \" l ",.. I., ...l~ ....,; UNIT 201 UNIT 202 UNIT 203 UNIT 204 UNIT 205 UNIT 206 UNIT 207 UNIT 208 UNIT 209 UNIT 210 ,- UNIT 211 UNIT 212 UNIT 213 UNIT 214 UNIT 215 /. UNIT 216 .~ UNIT 217 :~ . . :<~ .. 890SF 890SF 890SF 890SF 890SF 890SF 890SF 890SF 890SF 890SF 1,258SF 990SF 1,121SF 1,121SF 1,121SF 1,121SF 1,668SF International, Inc. ';, I.~[:,-G~~ ..'. ,,='w.. ,.\...l:;.U\"",' I~Ujj~,P"~ . , . IlllNFllnl.!ATlDN on DES ION INDICATaI l!ER~N IS PREtIMIrIARY DIllY. IT IS BUlIJECT TO MODIFICATION BY SUlMY aJIlI mnovAl. BY GOVERNIIIll AGERCIES. ..~ -' N E9 SECOND FLOOR PLAN /11 ,!~?~ ..;,. -,. ..... 21'. "'. :-:~'.' Ef'~ TNE INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN HAS BEEN OBTAINED FROM SOURCES THAT WE DEEM REUABLE. OR THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY. WE HAVE NO REASON TO DOUBT ITS ACCURACY. BUT WE DO NOT GUARANTEE IT. "!- International, Inc. r - ~. " (' r "',. r -, ,....~ ""t.. ~ ~y ~~ ~,\, L~~'~ '. -" :J[;..~""') 'rr"; ,.... .,"'r-:.: _.~ ~ . . ,'-'~ L l,... -_'~ J 314 313 312 311 309 310 ..,. 1509f'F 108JSF 108JSF 108JSF 10RJSF 122JSFJ . 13- 11 ~. . IU 11RlW1.110N 011 \lBIOI lllOICA1111 1IlRl000IS ,11EU1J11IAR'f ClU. IT 1. IUIlST to MMlIFICATI1lH IV WRVE1 MIl IlPAfNIJ. BY COVEIDIIIIG'M9o'CIY. r:: /)'(1 .;'..~ . . >.' " 'i'. ~. ,~- ' -: . .-' . .".. ~ THIRD FLOOR PLAN THE INFORMATION CONTAINEO HEREIN HAS BEEN OBTAINED FROM SOURCES THAT WE'OEEM REUABLE. OR THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY. WE HAVE NO REASON TO DOUBT ITS ACCURACV. BUT WE DO NOT GUARANTEE IT. ..... . .-, WIU:t Tanb "', .- SANTA CLARA ST. Hotel = I- ... - ... .- ,.j :- -< Apuunenu Hold . CPD-l ~ IOl . >- < ~ ~EJ EJ - - HUNTINGTON PR. Rcslaur1nI _ . 3,Ilory Office BI4 CPD-l I LAND USE & ZONING MAP Hotel Rest. :,:1 .., " ~ ., " ;' . . . ---, File No.: CUP 99-002 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. CUP 99-002: A Conditional Use Permit and related parking modification for a SAT test review and consultation service for a maximum of 10 clients at a time in an 1,100 sq. ft., second-floor commercial space. The hours of operation will not exceed 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., 7-days a week. B. Location of Project: 411 E. Huntington Drive, Unit #2 I 1, City of Arcadia, County of Los Angeles C. Name of Applicant or Sponsor: StudyWorks Corp., A Maryland Corporation 4405 EW Highway, Suite S04 Bethesda, MD 20814 Contact: Mr. Rob Hinchliffe - (770) 522-9646 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 ! ; ': f " i f Date Prepared: December 28, 1998 Date Posted: December 31, 1998 Br~~ ames M. a, Associate Planner . . . .--- , CITY OF ARCADIA 240 WEST HUNTINGTON DRIVE ARCADIA, CA 91007 CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM 1. Project Title: Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 99-002 File No.: CUP 99-002 2. Project Address: 411.E. Huntington Drive, Unit #211, City of Arcadia, County of Los Angeles 3. Project Sponsor's Name, Address & Telephone Number: StudyWorks Corp., A Maryland Corporation 4405 EW Highway, Suite 504 Bethesda, MD 20814 Contact: Mr. Rob Hinchliffe - (770) 522-9646 4. Lead Agency Name & Address: City of Artadia - Development Services Department Community Development Division - Planning Services 240 W. Huntington Drive Arcadia, CA 91007 5. Lead Agency Contact Person & Telephone Number: James M I<asama, Associate Planner - (626) 574-5445 6. General Plan Designation: Mixed Use - CommerciaI/Multiple Family Residential 7. Zoning Classification: CPD-l: Commercial Planned Development -1- . ...... . CEQA Checklist 7195 'I File No.: CUP 99.002 . 8. Description of Project: (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to.later phases of the project and any secondary, support, or off-site features necessary for its implementation. Attach additionalsheets if necessary.) A Conditional Use Permit and related parking modification for a SAT test review and consultation service for a maximum oflO clients at a time in an 1,100 sq. ft., second-floor commercial space; The hours of operation will not exceed 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., 7-days a week. 9. Otber public agencies wbose approval is required: (e.g.. pennits, financing, development or participation agreements) Building Services & Fire Prevention Bureau must review and approve the plans for occupancy, and any tenant improvements. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS 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 / Circulation [ ] Cultural Resources [ ] Biological Resources [ ] Resources [ ] Energy and Mineral Resources [ ] Mandatory Finding of Significance . -2- CEQA Checklist 7195 -..0" . . . . ) ~ File No.: CUP 99-002 DETERMINA nON (To be completed by the 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 pcoposed 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 to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. [] I find that the proposed project MAYhave a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. .. [] Ifind 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 addressed. '. 1:. . i. [] 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 all potentiaUy significant effects have been analyzed adequately in an earlier Environmental Impact Report pursuant to applicable standards and have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR. including cevisions oc mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. .' :; By: James M. Kasama, Associate Planner For: The City of Arcadia - Development Services Department .. I ~ t ~ .~1~ D''',_28,1998 -3- CEQA Checldist 7/95 . . . File No.: CUP 99-002 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 parentheses 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 off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as project-Ieve~ 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 Urness 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 analyzed in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration {Section l50631O(3)(D)l. Earlier analyses are discussed in Section 17 at the end of the checklist. 6. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist, references 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. -4- CEQACheeklisI 7/95 . . '... ~ ..' --------- --, FileNo.: CUP 99-002 . Would the proposal result in potential impacts involving: Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No hnpact Incorporated hnpact hnpact 1. LAND USE & PLANNING - Would the proposal: a) Conflict with general plan designations or zoning? [ ] [ I [] iXI b) Conflict with applicable environmenl.li1 plans or policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project? [ ] [ ] [] iXI c) Be compatible with existing land uses in the vicinity? [ ] [ ] [] iXI d) Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g., impactS to soils or farmlands, or impactS from incompatible land uses)? [ ] [ ] [] iXI e) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community (including a low-income or minority community)? [ ] [ ] [] iXI The proposed SAT test review service is consistent with the general plan and zoning designations for the area, and will complement surrounding uses. The construction of any tenant improvements, and the operation of the proposed service will be subject to all other environmentaI plans or policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over this area. There are no agricultural resources or operations in the vicinity. . 2. POPULATION & HOUSING - Would the proposal: a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections? [ ] [ ] [I iXI b) Induce substantial growth in an area either direct1y or 41direct1y (e.g" through projects in an undeveloped area or extension of major infrastructure)? [ ] [ ] (] iXI c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable housing? ( I ( ] (] iXI The proposed service is consistent with the general plan and zoning designations for the area and will not impact the population or housing. 3. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS - Would the proposal.result in or expose people to potential impacts involving: a) Fault rupture? ( ] ( ] ( ] iXI b) Seismic ground shaking? ( ] ( ] ( ] iXI c) Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? ( ] [ ] ( ] iXI d) Landslides or mudflows? ( ] ( ] [ ] iXI e) Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading, or fil11 ( I ( ] [ ] iXI f) Subsidence of the land? ( ] ( ] ( ] iXI g) Expansive soils? ( ] ( I ( ] iXI h) Unique geologic or physical features? [ I [ ] ( ] iXI While this entire region is subject to the effects of seismic activity, the subject location has not been determined to be especially susceptible to any of the above geologic problems. 4. WATER - Would the proposal result in: a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface nmofl'l ( ] ( ] ( ] iXI . b) Exposure of people or property to water related hazards S\JCh as flooding? ( ] ( ] ( I iXI -5- CEQA Checldist 7/95 '" ". File No.: CUP 99"()()2 . Would the proposal result in potential impacts involving: Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impoct Impact c) Discharge into sudace waters or other alteration of sudace water quality (e.g., temperature, dissolved oxygen, or twbidity)? [ ] [ ] [I [XJ d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any water body? [ ] [ ] [J [XJ e) Changes in cunents, or the course or direction of water movements? [J [ I [J [XJ f) Change in the quantity of groWld waters, either through direct additions or withdmwals, or through interception of any aquifer by cuts or excavations or through substantial loss of ground water recharge capability? [ ] [ ] [J [XJ g) Altered direction or rate of flow of ground water? [ ] [ ] [J [XJ h) Impacts to ground water quality? [ I [ I [J [XJ i) Substantial reduction in the amount of ground water otherwise available for public water supplies? [ ] [ ] [J [XJ The proposed seIVice will be in an 1,100 sq. ft., second.f1oor space of a thn:e-stoty commercial building. The site is within the Santa Anita Dam InWldation Area, but there are no proposed site alterations that would result in an increased potential for any of the above impacts. . 5. AIR QUALITY - Would the: proposal: a) Violate any air quality standard or contn'bute to an existing or projected ~ quality violation? [ ] [ ] [J [XJ b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? [ ] [ ] [J [XJ c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temp. or cause any ehange in climate? [ ] [ ] [I [XJ d) Create objectionable odors? [ ] [ ] [I [XJ The proposed service and its operation will be subject to local air quality regulations as administered by the South Coast Air Quality Management District which should 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 change in climate. No objectionable odom have been associated with the proposed center. 6. TRANSPORT AnON & C1RCULA nON - Would the proposal result in: a) Increased vehicle trips or traflic congestion? [ ] [ ] [XJ [J b) Hazards to safety fiom design features (e.g., s1uup curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., fiInn equipmeDt)? [J [ ] [J [XJ c) Inadequate emergency access or access to DeaIby uses? [ ] [ I [J [XJ d) Insufficient parking capacity on.site or off-site? [ ] [ I [XJ I ] e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? I ] [ I [I [XJ f) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative transponation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? [ ] [ I [J [XJ g) Rail, watetbome or air traflic impacts? [ ] [ I [J [XJ The proposed service will be on the second.f1oor, which is directly accesst'ble fiom the rear parking deck. This eJirnin.t"" the need to rely on the groWld level parking area in front of the building for parking as well as drop-offs and pick.ups. . I -6- CEQA Checklist 7/95 . . . -, File No.: CUP 99'()()2 PolentiaJly Significant POlentially Unless Less Than Would the proposaJ result in polentia1 impacts involving: Significant Mitigation Significant No ImpacI Incorporated ImpacI Impact 7. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES - Would 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 bitds)? I ] I I I I [X] b) Locally designated species (e,g., heritage trees)? I ] I I I] [X] c) Locally designated natural communities (e.g.. oak forest, coastal habitat, etc.)? I I I I I I [X] d) Wetland habitat (e.g" marsh, riparian and vema1 pool)? I I I I I I [X] e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? I I I I I] [X] The proposed service will be in a three-stOIY commercia1 building in a commercial 8Rl8. None of the above circumstances exist. 8. ENERGY & MINERAL RESOURCES - Would the proposal: a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? I I I I I I [X] b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient manner? I I I ] I I [X] c) Resu1t 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? I] II II [X] The proposed project is required to comply with adopted energy conservation requirements. None of the above impacts have been associated with the proposed type of use. 9. HAZARDS - Would the proposal involve: a) A risk of lKlCidental explosion or release of hazardous substances (including, but not 1imited to: oil, pesticides, chemicals or mdiation)? I I I I I] [X] b) Possible interference with an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? I I I I I] [X] c) The creation of any health ha7Md or potential health ha7Md? I I I I I] [X] d) Exposure of people to existing sources of potential health hazards? I) I I I I [X] e) Increased fue hazard in areas with flammable brush, grass or trees? I I I I I I [X] The plans for the proposed use have been reviewed by the City Building Services, and the City Fire Department and no potential for any of the above impacts has been idCntified. No existing sources of potential health hazards have been identified at the subject property. The plans for any tenant improvements will be subject to review by the City Building Services and City Fire Department and any potential for any of the above impacts will be mitigated. :: '. 10. NOISE - Would the proposal result in: a) Increases in existing noise levels? I I I I I I [X] b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? I I I ] I I [X] The site of the proposed use is in an existing commercial building in a commercial area and neither of the above impacts is associated with this location or the proposed use. -7. CEQA Cheeklist 7/9S '. . Would lb. proposaJ result in potential impacts involving: 11. PUBLIC SERVICES - Would the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered governmenl services in any of the following areas: a) Fire protection? [ ] [ I [J [XI b) Police protection? [ ] [ ] [J [XI c) Schools? [ ] [ ] I ] [XI d) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? [ ] [ ] [J [XI e) Other governmental services? [ ] [ ] [J [XI The proposed use is consistent with the planned uses for the area and will nol impact any of the above services. File No.: CUP 99.(J()2 Potentially Significanl Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 12. UTILITIES & SERVICE SYSTEMS - Would the proposal result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial a1lerations to the following utilities: a) Power or natural gas? [ ] [ ] [J [XI b) Communications systems? [ ] [ ] [J [XI c) Local or regional water treatment or distn'bution facilities? [ ] [ ] [J [XI d) Sewer or septic tanks? [ ] [ ] [I [XI e) Slormwater drninage? [ ] [ ] [I [XI f) Solid waste disposal? [ ] [ ] [I [XI . g) Local or regional water supplies? [ I [ ] [I [XI Improvements to provide any of the above services will be incorporated in this project if o~.~'Y. It is 001 anticipated thai any of the above utilities or service systemS will be significantly impacted. Nevertheless, the proposed improvements will be reviewed for, and the proponent will be reqnired 10 provide, if nea:ssmy, any new systemS or supplies necessmy to mitigate any such impacts. 13. AESTHETICS - Would the proposal: a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? [ ] [ I [J [XI b) Have 8 demonstrable negative aesthetics effect? [ ] [ ] [J [XI c) Create light or glare? [ ] [ ] [J [XI The proposed use will be in an existing commercial building, and any exterior improvements will be required to comply with local architectural standards and illumination limits 10 prevent any of the above impacts. 14. CULTURAL RESOURCES - Would the proposal: a) DisIwb paleontological resources? [ ] [ ] [J [XI b) DisIwb archaeological resources? [ ] [ I [J [XI c) Affect historical resources? [ ] [ ] [J [XI d) Have the poleotiallo cause 8 physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? [ ] [ ] [J [XI e) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? [ ] [ I [J [XI The proposed use will be in an existing commercial building. None of the above resources have been identified 81the subject area, and none of the above impacts have been.associated with the proposed use. . -8. CEQA Checklist 7195 .', . ..-, File No.: CUP 99-002 Potentially significant Polentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact . Would the proposa1 result in polential impacts involving: . . 15. .RECREA TION - Would the proposal: 8) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities? [ I [ ] [I [XJ b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? [ 1 [ 1 (l [XJ The proposed use will be in an existing commercial building, and the proposed project will not result in any of the above impacts. 16. MANDA TORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE 8) Does" the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self. sustaining 1eve1s, threaten to eliminate 8 plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the I8Dge of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? [ ] b) Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? [ ] c) Does the project have impactS that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considetable" means that the incremental effects of 8 project are considerable when 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 Pl'Oject have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirect1y? [ ] [ ] [ ] [XJ [ 1 [ I [XJ [ 1 [ 1 [XJ [ ] [ ] [XJ The proposed use will be in an existing commercial building in a commercial area and will not result in any of the above impacts. The proposed use is similar to other uses that have been approved and operated at this location, and which have subsequently ceased and/or moved elsewhere. The previOIlS similar uses did not cause any of the impacts listed in this Initial Study. 17. EARLIER ANALYSES No earlier anaIy$C5, and no additional documents were referenced pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA pro<:esses to analyze the proposal. 18. MITIGATION MEASURES None -9. CEQA Checldist 7195 " " ..., FileNo. '~'C(jP 99-tJ{)2.- CITY OF ARCADIA 240 WEST HUNTINGTON DRIVE ARCADIA, CA 91007 ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION FORM Date Filed: ..6J~ 9rr o/M;hf? General Information 1. Applicant's Name: <11IP'(W'n~..j:::( C~f'. , A tvtAF.'(l.A-N b vli~OfA11t1N Address: -A:...4ot F3'W .j-\l~ . ~iAl-W,j;;:b4- t3e11/'t~DA. /"to zof3llf I , 2. Property Address (Location): _t81 ~. l-WINn tJ611l N P!l-IV l? ,,jF-2 U Assessor's Number: 3. Name, address and telephone number of person to be contacted concerning this project: .Hit. ~OI"f\fIB l.-A'M .. 1../-/1 [;.. l-tUf.fT7NG1ON O/!1H3., #-.sog; ,M2CMJIl't , C/t q fI5(Ff . .. r1~ ') #6-.)PI B~ 4. List and describe any other related permits and other public approvals required fbr this project, including those required by city, regional, state and federal agencies: . ecJ.fDl\r OIJM... l.lhf; PE:tI"o/(T 5. Zone Oassification: vf'I?'\ 6. General Plan Designation: 17~W ~,^,Bl"T Proiect Description 7. Proposed use of site (project description): \lS' kl" ~ ~e 8. Site size: { J.1't M~ 9. Square footage per building: 6;). I 4-0 ~ tP. Fr. 10. Number of floors of construction: ~ .. Amount of off-street parking provided: 12. Proposed scheduling of project: J,4-tJU~'( 01/ I t/tifq 13. Anticipated incremental development: N.A. '" .. ,. . "'"'\ If residential, include the number of units, schedule of unit sizes, range of sale prices or rents, and type of household sizes expected: ---1JllT Af'PLlI!.A-€~ . 14. 15. If commercial, indicate the type, i.e. neighborhood, city or regionally oriented, square footage of sales area, and loading facilities, hours of operation: fJf.:I ((1J 8m: I~ J UtrtoJ./IrL , 16. If industrial, indicate type, estimated employment per shift, and loading facilities: 17. 18. . (JQf A-efU~l..e If institutional, indicate the major function, estimated employment per shift, eStimated occupancy, loading facilities, and community benefits to be derived from the project: N.I.I- If the project involves a variance, conditional use permit or zoning application, state this and indicate clearly why the application is required: C.Il.P. Pan IfbUCll-iUJNNL ur"l:<7 Are the following items applicable to the project or its effects? Discuss below all items checked yes (attach additional sheets as necessary). 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. . YES NO Change in existing features of any hills, or substantial alteratin of ground contours. D Change in scenic views or vistas from existing residential areas or public lands or roads. D I . Change in pattern, scale or character of general area of project D D D Significant amounts of solid waste or litter. Change in dust, ash, smoke, fumes or odors in vicinity. -2- M u1 ~ ~ PI E.I.R. 3/95 .4. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. ) '-, YES NO Change in ground water quality or quantity, or alteration of existing drainage patterns. D jgf 25. Substantial change in existing noise or vibration levels in the vicinity. D ~ D ~ D~ 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. Substantial change in demand for municipal services (police; fire, water, sewage, etc.). D J2i Substantial increase in fossil fuel consumption (electricity, oil, natural gas, etc.). D Ia" Relationship to a larger project or series of projects. D ~ Environmental Settine e. 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 information 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 my ability, and that the facts, statements, an information presented are true and co to my kno dge and belief. Date . E.LR. 3/95 -3- . ......, .....