HomeMy WebLinkAbout1584
.
.
.
.
.
RESOLUTION 1584
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT NO. 98-024 TO OPERATE A TUTORING CENTER AT 806 S.
FIRST AVENUE.
WHEREAS, on October 13, 1998, applications were filed Temple Education
Center Corporation to operate a tutoring center, to be located on a C-2 zoned property
that is commonly known 806 S. First Avenue, and more particularly described as Lot 38
and 39 of Block 62.
WHEREAS, A public hearing was held on November 24, 1998, 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 c1atasubmitted by the Development Services
Department in the attached report is true and correct.
SECTION 2. This Commission finds:
1. 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 because the initial study did not disclose any substantial adverse affects to the
area affected by the proposed project.
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 for the proposed use is adequate in size and shape to
accommoclatesaid use. All yards, spaces, walls, fences, parking, loading, landscaping and
other features,are adequate to adjust said use with the land and uses in the neighborhood.
The proposed project complies with all related zoning requirements as set forth in the
Arcadia Municipal Code.
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 \he granting of such Conditional Use Permit will not adversely affect \he
. comprehensive General Plan because \he land use and current zoning are consistent wi\h
\he General Plan.
6. That the new exterior design elements for \he subject building are in
compliance wi\h \he design criteria set forth in \he City's Architectural Design Review
Regulations.
7. That \he use applied for will not have a substantial adverse impact on \he
environment, and that based upon \he record asa whole \here is no evidence \hat \he
proposed project will have any potential for an adverse effect on wildlife resources or \he
habitat upon which \he wildlife depends.
SECTION]. That for \he foregoing reasons this Commission grants a
Conditional Use Permit, to <!perate a tutoring center upon \he following conditions:
I. Building code compliance and conditions of approval must be met to \he
complete satisfaction of \he Inspection Services Officer.
2. Fire safety shall be provided to \he complete satisfaction of \he Fire Department.
.
3. That \he tutoring center provide transportation to \he site, as stipulated in \he
proposal.
4. That \he parking area be resurfaced and striped in accordance wi\h City
standards.
5. That a trash enclosure be located on-site in accordance wi\h City standards.
6. That a covenant be recorded prior to occupancy which will require \he proposed
tutoring center and church to maintain \he agreement to use \he adjacent parking
for \he duration of \he proposed tutoring center.
7. That CUP 98-024 shall not take affect until \he owner and applicant have
executed a form available at \he Planning Office indicating awareness and
acceptance of \he conditions of approval.
8. Noncompliance wi\h the provisions and conditions of this conditional use
permit shall constitute grounds for its immediate suspension or revocation.
.
2
1584
.
.
.
.
.
SECTION 4. The decision, findings and conditions contained in this Resolution
reflect the Commission's action of November 24,1998, and the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Commissioners Huang, Murphy, Sleeter, Bruckner
None
Commissioner Kalemkiarian
SECTION 5. 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 the 24th day of November 1998, by the
following vote:
AYES: Commissioners Huang, Murphy, Sleeter, Bruckner
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioner Kalemkiarian
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
~it'City~~
3
1584
STAFF REPORT
DEVELOPMENTSER~CESDEPARTMENT
November 24, 1998
TO:
Chainnan and Members of the Arcadia Planning Commission
FROM:
Donna L. Butler, Community DeyelopmentAdministrator
By: John Halminski, Assistant Planner
SUBJECT:
Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 98-024
A tutoring center at 806 S. Firs! Avenue
SUMMARY
.
This Conditional Use Permit application was submitted by Temple Education Center
Corporation to operate a tutoring center at 806 S. First Avenue. The Development Services
Department is recommending approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 98-024 subject to the
conditions that are outlined in this staff report. '
GENERAL INFORMATION
APPLICANT: Temple Education Center Corporation
LOCATION: 806 S. Firs! Avenue
REQUEST: A conditional use permitto operate a tutorial center for up to 90 students.
LOT AREA: Approximately 10,800 square feet (0.247 acres)
FRONTAGE: 80 feet along First Avenue and 135 feet along Alice Street.
EXISTING LAND USE & ZONING:
The site is currently developed with a 6,070 sq. ft. office building, and is
zoned C-2.
.'
.
.
.
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION:
Commercial
SURROUNDING LAND USES & ZONING:
North:
South:
East:
West:
Mixed commercial; zoned C-2.
Mixed commercial and church; zoned C-2.
Mixed residential; zoned PR-3 and R-3.
Mixed commercial; zoned C-2.
PROPOSAL & ANALYSIS
The applicant is requesting a conditional use permit to .operate a tutoring center for up to 90
students (grade kindergarten through 811>) with approximately six staff members. The
proposed school would occupy a vacant 3,662 sq. ft. office building, as shown on the
submitted site plan (copy attached). The remaining 2,408 square foot space will still be
occupied by the current office use. Business hours would be from 8:30 am. to 7:00 p.m.
Monday through Friday and 9:00 am. to 4:00 p;m. on Saturday.
Automobile Parking .
The applicant has indicated that all the students will be less than 16 years old, and that they
will more than likely be dropped off in the parking lot by their guardians. The facility has an
entrance into the building in the front and rear. Also, the center will be providing
transportation to the site with private vans.
Access to the on-sile parking is from Alice Street by means of a driveway along the site's
northerly property line. Such access would enable the on~site pick-up and drop-off of the
students to be within the parking area to the rear of the subject building, which should
mitigate the possibility of congestion in the public right-of~ways. In addition, the Arcadia
Presbyterian Church, adjacent to the subject site to the south, has agreed to share their
parking lot for additional parking as needed. The additional parking will enable the children
to enter safely into the building from the front entrance along First A venue.
Tutoring centers/schools require I parking space for each 35 sq.ft. of gross floor area that is
within a non-permanent seating area. Within the proposed tuloring center there is
approximately 2,326 sq.ft. of seating area (classroom space), which amounts to a parking
requirement of 67 on-site spaces for the proposed use. The existing on-site parking ratio of
1.8 spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. of gross floor area for the pre-existing building, which is divided
into two spaces, results in a net parking space requirement of 63 spaces for the proposed
tutoring center.
CUP 98-024
November 24, 1998
Page 2
.
.
.
The site has a total of lIon-site parking spaces. The applicant has submitted a letter from
the Arcadia Presbyterian Church indicating that the church will provide the additional
parking required for the proposed tutoring center (i .e., 63 spaces). Off-site parking is
permissible under A.M.C. Section 9269.6, provided it is within 150 feet of the subject site
and that a covenant be recorded which will require such owner or owners to continue 10
maintain such parking spaces for the duration of the proposed tutoring center.
It was noted during a recent site inspection that the site lacks a trash enclosure and the
parking area is in need of resurfacing and striping.
Staff's observations of other tutoring centers support the applicant's explanation i.e., almost
all of the students at their tutoring centers are dropped-off and picked-up by carpools, private
transportation, or walk. Staff believes that with such a limited age group of the students, a
shared parking agreement and a vanpool service the demand for on-site parking will be
reduced. In addition, the proposal will ensure that the parking needs of the site's current
office use will be provided for.
ANALYSIS
Uses such as tutoring centers require conditional use permits, and traffic concerns can be
addressed as part of the consideration of such applications. Generally, staff does not
encourage uses, which are deficient in parking; however, based upon the applicant's proposal
which includes a shared parking agreement; it is staff's opinion that the proposed use would
be appropriate for the site.
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 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 an adverse effect on
wildlife resources. Therefore, a Negative Declaration has been prepared for this project.
RECOMMENDA nONS:
The Development Services Department recommends approval of Conditional Use Permit
No.98-024. The Planning Commission should file the Negative Declaration and adopt
Resolution 1584 approving Conditional Use Permit 98-024 to operate a tutoring center at 806
S. FirS! A venue, subject to the following conditions of approval:
CUP 98-024
November 24, 1998
Page 3
.
.
.
I. Building code compliance and conditions of approval must be met to the complete
satisfaction of the Inspection Services Officer;
2. Fire safety shall be provided to the complete satisfaction of the Fire Department.
3. That the tutoring center provide transportation to the site, as stipulated in the
proposal.
4. That the parking area be resurfaced and striped in accordance with City standards.
5. That a trash enclosure be locatedon-site.in accordance with City standards.
6. That a covenant be recorded prior to occupancy which will require the proposed
tutoring center and church to maintain the agreement to use the adjacent parking for
the duration of the proposed tutoring center.
7. That CUP 98-024 shall not take affect until the owner and applicant have executed a
fonn available at the Planning Office indicating awareness and acceptance of the
conditions of approval.
8. Noncompliance with the provisions and conditions of this conditional use pennit
shall constitute grounds for its immediate suspension or revocation.
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.decisionand specific findings.
Should the Planning Commission have any questions regarding this matter prior to the
scheduled public hearing, please contactJohn Halminski at your earliest convenience.
~~
nna L. Butler
Community Development Administrator
Attachments: Land Use and Zoning Map, site plan, floor plan, business proposal,
environmental infonnation, and Resolution 1584
CUP 98-024
November 24, 1998
Page 4
.
.
.
I '" ~
'.PR-3 ; ~ C-2
. ~@~ .
;.;.. ('S$) ~ ($7.) .
.50.0 ~ , ff2A
'I I .
~:PR-3 ,~R-37
I
CHUR~H/P~RKINGT LOT
13; I 50 I 50 .50 5
~
~ C-2
.
~
00
...
o
'"
ALICE
ST
, 1IQ,03 r-:.o
I (s.ilI~ (54) .;) ~ 0
) 10\ ....~ r"\ ~ '"
;~ ~~C' \.../ -.;-
:'t ;;.q ~
j ~ '" ~"d'
:::::::::::::13~:::::;:::::: .5.'"
..~........................ r-;;z,
~~:::U:/:n:nH~ z
50
('//4,)
50 5(
.(/22.) (/2'
~<lLjUl~ill1U\~ ~ ~IR"
'" ~ '" PR 3 -3~
t- '- '.
~ ~~ .13, ::; ~~ s~p~CHI."
l1.. ~- - ..::,. VA"" ,. ' PARKING LOT J
'" 0."35 ..
:!l~ '^ So 50 ro
~~ ... . ~I
I : ~
;;
C--2 S~
'i::'...
....J ;:...
- ;::
~-'-
W ,=,"
a:: ~1'
.. 0 '"
W "
X ::."cG
- ....,
~::iE~""
'<l '^
'" ':'1 <>
...:;;
t" ;!
!!:
...
~
I 0.02
P ~ -3 :;
3)
(~J
~~
(~r {.
(.5:5) ~ .
so
()C-2
~
..J~,
~ ...:1
... ...,
C" C"
I
I
. J
(m) I
(125) fa~
5O,Go~
LUCILLE
ST
"'~
.~~
'"
13S'.IS
~
,0 .tf!o.50 1'20
~)"~~g(:S<1)~~ C-2 ~:i:
"'...... OVjtl 70
'i "'t)IR- cr a: I ~o;
.- ... I ~.....
<olE> JIL",'" .'1 70'Q~
~~...:.~- "
.~ ~ 5e.4_1
, - ~ !;; ~ ..MIXED RETAIL3
~ ~ . a:. ., -, 110- ,-0
~~.; ,("I)_~ ;'T"'....
!J'" '($3)..-'
I~ 50.C.'2 50.r:z i,,_
..''''- OU~R"E
\,:>c.-:c;e, ..,"). r;,o'
." \ 50 ... 1
MIXED RETAIL
.. , .
RE.AL~~TATE.;
':t;' OFFICE :::
to- C> :.::
"'..
~'"
(117)
SM'2
(II')
;o.Go'1
.... II' .
. ..'1'" '. ".
eo' _
{-to
(9
>~
11<:5
(lpO)
eg.
50.6'2. 50.6~
5!t~J (!12) (116
I'!'f.B ,3
J:- (1021
'",
o
'"
~ 1::'.,._" ,..~
..
LAND USE AND ZONING MAP
806 S. FIRST AVE t NORTH
CUP 98-024 Scale: 1 inch = 100 feet
.
.'
.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
PROJECT : TENANT IMPROVEMENT
NAME :TEMPLE EDUCA rrON CENTER
ADDRESS : 806 FIRST AVE. ARCADE, CA. 91006
TENANT : MR. LU CHANG TEL: 626-446; 1861
DESCRIPTION: CONVERT EXISTING OFFICE BUILDING TO
EDUCA TlON CENTER USE.
LOT SIZE : 10,800 SF.
ZONING: C:2
BUILDING : EXISTING ONE STORY OFFICE 8UILDING
TYPE: V.NONE
TOTAL BUILDINGHOOR AREA: 6,070 SF.
PROPOSED UNIT FLOOR AREA : 3.662 SF.
HEIGHT :AS EXISTING
HEV A nONS~ AS EXISTING
PARKING :EXISTlNG PARKING LOT
WITH 10 STALLS AND 1 H.C. PARKING SPACE.
ARCAOEPRESBmRJAN CHURCH
AliCE ST.
PROPOSED UNIT-B06 1st. AVE.
ARCADE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH
SlIUTH PARKING LOT 1.120 PARKING SPACE:
;;:
..
;;;
!
DUARTE RD.
~ fVICINlry
t'-1 A. P
t.}
+
_A \; c..~. ___uS!. .__
., ,.,",
v
''\1
I~
.~-
9ru_n:~~:;t?)
uJ \ --, . Lil
~IAMr
LUIING[ .. - . .. ,
~~ I' '___'_' I~' ._ ___ _ t'lll:r-- ='LJ
" . J -nG:[rllmlln~l\Y \,..-. . '~;;I;n:lII>"'-' .. .-. . IJ ,) ~,
".1 il ",~~
'1 .q L.F=-occ'~", Lf---~- " <-I:'~:Y l"l/(0~~
~-
'_4'_" __~--_
-.'
~.
III
:"
'{
onl hl..AVL IrXlsmm 1II11W
>.'
'"
"l
r==-=-~
COMlWI"EI( ROOM
CI ASS OIlOM
.. ._-\ '
J
CI ASS 111I01.\
ClASS IIlIIIM
CONI'IIENCE
11I111:[
11111111
IU)()M
.
Co!/. I ~ ~l
,
II.C. rAnKING
"
~<:~~~ --:~
~._,.- --_:'- ' ,
~~
2
.
4
STOlt-A( in
ROOM
CI ASS 1I00M
11
;
'II
EXISlltlG rAnKING 101
j-
.
.
---------- -.
.
cnnmnon
[7
''-.J=
?
CLASS nnllM
[j
.,
'0
~
11:1' t-li1"t.Jc:; "H.l.l FI'I~1. '.11.,1 )
L ' _~. -'- --- i'=;='":':;~'~-"~,: _.=._~._~~~:~~,,-,~::::.c;.
.--'It___~l....,...._,__,_,. ....- .1- r-'
.
.
.
"
TECC - Arcadia Branch
141 E, Duarte Rd. #105 Arcadia
Dear Staff of City Planning Department & Councilmen,
Our center is located at 141 E, Duarte Rd. in the city of
Arcadia, We have been in service since 1993 and served the
students from the Arcaida School District. In addition to
Arcadia center, two other locations have been set up in Temple
City and Alhambra to serve the students in those areas.
The majority of our students are of Asian descendant and
range from kindergarten to eighth grade. The center is a well-
planned educational organization which specializes in student's
academic aspects. We have experienced teachers and a
curriculum which guides and helps the students in building a
solid academic foundation.
"
"
'.
During our after school program, students are asked to
complete their school homework first. Then, each class follows
the supplemental program designed to strengthen their
academic skills in various aspects. Classes include reading
comprehension, writing, phonics for lower grades, math,
critical thinking, social studies, and computer science. Chinese
class is also provided in our center. All classes activities
occur inside the classrooms.
,
r
~
t
!
We provide transportations to pick up students from
various schools and some students are sent back home upon
request. Our location on Duarte Rd. is within a walking distance
for Dana Jr. High and First Ave. Jr, High schools' students.
.
.
.
Therefore, it's convenient for many students to attend our
tutoring programs. Some students are drop-off and pick-up by
their parents.
During regular school years our after school classes start
at 3:00 pm. Different class schedules are designed for
different grades. Grade 1 and 2 classes end in 5:30 pm., grade 3
and 4 classes end in 6:00 pm., and grade 5 to 8 classes end in
6:30 pm. Summer school instruction is provided during
students' summer break. There are two sessions of classes:
morning classes are between 8:30 am. to 12:00 pm. and
afternoon classes are between 1 :30 pm. to 5:00 pm.
Our service has been on this location for five years.
Currently we have approximately 90 students and 6 staff
members. All the activities and instruction have been
smoothly operated.
Sincerely yours,
-R6\J 5~' AA.\
Rae Shiau
.
.
.
CITY OF ARCADIA
240 WEST HUNTINGTON DRIVE
ARCADIA, CA 91007
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
A. Title and Description of Project:
CUP 98-024
Consideration of a conditional use permit to operate tutoring center.
B. Location of Project:
806 S. First Avenue
Arcadia, CA 91006
C. Name of Applicant or Sponsor:
TECC Arcadia Branch
D. Finding:
This project will have no significant effect upon the environment within the meaning
of the California Environmental Quality Act of I970 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: October 13, 1998
Date Posted: October 29 1998
BY:~'
J HRlminski, Assistant Planner
.
CITY OF ARCADIA
240 WEST HUNTINGTON DRIVE
ARCADIA, CA 91007
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
ENVffiONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
1. Project Title:
Conditional Use Permit No. 98-024
2. Project Address:
806S. First Avenue
Arcadia, CA 91006
. 3. Project Sponsor's Name, Address & Telephone Number:
TECC
6410 Rosemead Blvd
San Gabriel, CA 91006
(626) 291-2345
4. Lead Agency Name & Address:
City of Arcadia
240 W. Huntington Drive
Arcadia, CA 91007
5. Contact Person & Telephone Number:
John Halminski, Assistant Planner
(626) 574-5447
6. General Plan Designation:
Commercial
.
-1-
File No.: CUP 98-024
CEQA Checklist
7/95
.
.
.
File No.: CUP 98-024
7. Zoning Classification:
C-2 General Commercial
8. Description of Project:
(Describe the whole action invoived, including but not limited to iater phases. of the project and any secondary,
support, or off-site features necessary for its implementation, Attach additionaisheets if necessary.)
A Conditional Use Permit to operate a lUtoring center with related parking modifications.
9. Other public agencies whose approval is required:
(e,g., permits, financing, development or participation agreements)
City Building Services 1 City Fire Department/Engineering Department
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
[ ] Population & Housing
[ ] Geological Problems
[ ] Water
[ ] Air Quality
[ ] Transportation I Circulation
[ ] Biological Resources
[ ] Energy and Mineral Resources
[ ] HazardS
[ ] Noise
[ ] Public Services
[ ] Utilities and Service Systems
[ ] Aesthetics
[ ] Cultura1 Resources
[ ] Resources
[ ] Mandatory Finding of Significance
DETERMINATION
(To be completed by the Lead Agency)
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
[Xl I fmd 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 notbe a significant effect in this case because the mitigation
-2-
CEQA Checklist
7/95
.
.
.
File No.: CUP 98-024
measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the pr~ject. A
NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
[ )
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment,
and an ENVIRONMENT AL IMPACT 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 addressed.
[ )
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
potentially 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 revisions or mitigation
measures that are imposed upon the proposed project.
~(~
Si ature
October 13, 1998
Date
John Halminski
Print Name
City of Arcadia
For
.3-
CEQA Checklist
7/95
File No.: CUP 98-024
EV ALUA TION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMP ACTS:
. 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-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 IncoIporated" applies where the incoIporation 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" maybe 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 15063(c)(3)(D)}. Earlier analyses are discussed in Section 17 at
the end of the checklist.
6. Lead agencies are encouraged to incoIporate 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-
CEQA Checklist
7/95
.
.
.
Would the proposal result in
potentiai impacts involving:
1. LAND USE AND PLANNING
Would the proposal:
a) Conflict with general plan designations or zoning?
(The proposal is consistent with the Commercial
designation in the General Pian and is a use for
which is authorized by Section 9265.1 of the
Zoning Ordinance,)
b) Conflict with appliCable environmental plans or
policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over
the project?
(The proposed use will be required to comply with
the regulations of any other jurisdictional agency
with applicable environmental plans. E.g., the
South Coast Air Quality Management District.)
c) Be compatible with existing land uses in the
vicinity?
(The proposed tutoring center is consistent with the
surrounding land uses.)
d) Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g.,
impacts to soils or fanniands, or impacts from
incompatible iand uses)?
(There are no agricultural resources or operations
in the area.)
e) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an
established community (including a low-income or
minority community)?
(The proposed tutoring center is consistent with the
surrounding land uses:)
2, POPULATION AND HOUSING
W()uld the proposal:
a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or locai
population projections?
(The proposed tutoring center is consistent with the
surrounding land uses.)
b) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly
or indirectly (e.g., through projects in an
Potentially
Significant
impact
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
Filc No.: CUP 98-024
Potcntially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
incorporated
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
Less Than
Significant
Impact
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
No
Impact
[X]
[X]
[Xl
[X]
[X]
[X]
CEQA Checklist
3/96
.
.
.
Would the proposal result in
potential impacts involving:
undeveioped area or extension of major
infrastructure)?
(The proposed project is consistent with the zone
designation and general plan.)
c) Dispiace existing housing, especially affordable
housing?
(The proposed project is consistent with the zone
designation and generai plan.)
3. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS
Would the proposal result in or expose people to
potential impacts invoiving:
a) Fault.rupture?
(The site for. the proposed use is not within the
vicinity of an identified faul!:)
b) Seismic ground shaking?
(The site for the proposed use is not more
susceptible to seismic ground shaking than any
other site in the area. The proposed use will
occupy an existing. building that complies with
current seismic standards.)
c) Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction?
(The site for the proposed use is not within the
vicinity of an identified fault or liquefaction zone.)
d) Landslides or mudflows?
(The site for the proposed use is on flat land, and
not within an inundation area.)
e) Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil
conditions from excavation, grading. or fill?
(The proposed project is consistent with the zone
designation and general plan.)
f) Subsidence of the land?
(The site for the proposed use is not in an area
subject to subsidence.)
Potentially
Signilicant
Impact
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
Filc No.: CUP 98-024
Poientially
Significant
Un less
Mitigation
Incorporated
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
Less Than
Significant
Impact
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
No
Impact
[X]
[X]
[X]
[X]
[X]
[X]
[X]
[X]
CEQA Checklist
3/96
.
.
.
Would the propo$al result in
potential impacts involving:
g) Expansive soils?
(TIle site for the proposed use is not in an area
subject to expansion ohoils.)
h) Unique'!!eologic or physicai features?
(No such features have been identified at the site of
the proposed use:)
4. WATER
Would the proposal result in:
a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or
the rate and amount of surface runoff?
(Based On a project-specific screening analysis, no
such changes are included in the proposal.)
b) Exposure of peopie or property to water related
hazards such as flooding?
(The site for the proposed use is not within an
inundation area.)
c) Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of
surface water quality (e.g., temperature, dissolved
oxygen, Or turbidity)?
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the
proposal will not affect surface waters.)
d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any
water body?
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the
proposai will not affect surface waters.)
e) Changes in currents, or the course or direction of
water movements?
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the
proposal will not affect any currents or water
movements.)
f) 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 substantiai ioss of ground water
recharge capability?
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the
proposal will not affect ground waters.)
Potentially
Significant
Impact
[ I
[ I
[ I
, [ I
[ I
[ I
[ I
[ ]
File No.: CUP 98-024
Potcntially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
[ I
[ I
[ I
[ I
[ I
[ I
[ I
[ I
Less Than
Significant
Impact
[ I
[ I
[ I
[ I
[ I
[ I
[ I
[ I
No
Impact
[Xl
[Xl
[Xl
[Xl
[Xl
[Xl
[Xl
[X]
CEQA Checklist
3/96
.
.
.
Would the proposal result in
potential impacts involving:
g) Aitered direction onate of flow of ground water?
(Based on,a project-specific screening analysis, the
proposal will not affect ground waters.)
h) Impacts to ground water quality?
(Based on.a project-specific screening analysis, the
proposal will not affect ground waters.)
i) Substantial reduction in the amount of ground
water otherwise available for public water
supplies?
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the
proposal will not affect ground waters.)
5. AIRQUALITY
Would the proposal:
a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an
existing or projected air quality violation?
(The proposed use will be required to complywlth
the regulations of the South Coast Air Quality
Management District.)
b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants?
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis the
proposal will not expose sensitive receptors to
pollutants:)
c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature or
cause any change in c:limate?
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the
proposal will not have any such affects.)
d) Create objectionable odors?
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the
proposal will not have any such affecis.)
6. TRANSPORTATION I CIRCULATION
Wouid the proposal result in:
a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion?
(Based on a project-specific screening anaiysis, the
proposal will have minimal increases in trips and
traffic to the site. Due to the age of the students
and transportation provided by the tutoring center,
Potentially
Significant
Impact
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
File No.: CUP 98'024
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
Less Than
Significant
Impact
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[X]
No
Impact
[X]
[X]
[X]
[Xl
[X]
'.
.'.
"
[X]
[X]
[ ]
CEQA Checklist
3/96
.
.
.
Would the proposal result in
potential impacts involving:
no such impact will occur. In addition, the
proposed tutoring center has made arrangements to
share parking with the adjacent church facility.)
b) Hazards to safety from design features (e.g., sharp
curves or, dangerous intersections) or incompatible
uses (e.g., fann equipment)?
(The proposed project is consistent with the zone
designation and general pian. The location has not
been identified as hazardous.)
c) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby
uses?
(The site of the proposed use is readily accessible
and the proposed use will not inhibit access to
adjacent or nearby uses.)
d) Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site?
(There is adequate on-site parking for both the
tenants and gnests to serve the proposed use. In
addition, the proposed tutoring center has made
l\rrangements to share parking with the adjacent
church facility. Also, off-site parking is adequate
and will notbe impacted.)
e) Hazards or baniers for pedestrians or bicyclists?
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis,
there are no existing or potential hazards or
baniersto pedestrians or bicyclists.)
f) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting
alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts,
bicycle racks)?
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis,
there are no existing or potential conflicts with
policies supporting alternative transportation.)
g) Rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts?
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the
proposal will not have any such impacts.)
7. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
. Would the proposal result in impacts to:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
File No.: CUP 98-024
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
[ J
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
Less Than
Significant
Impact
[ ]
[ ]
[X]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
No
Impact
[X]
[X]
[ ]
[X]
[X]
[X]
CEQA Checklist
3/96
FileNo.: CUP 98-024
Potentially
Significant
. Potentially Unless Less Than
Would the proposal result in Significant Mitigation Significant No
potential impacts involving: Impact Incorporated Impact impact
a) Endangered, threatened or rare species or their
habitats (including but not limited to plants, fish,
insects, animals and birds)? [ 1 [ 1 [ 1 [Xl
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the
proposal wiltnot have any such impacts.)
b) Locally designated species (e.g., heritage trees)? [ 1 [ 1 [ 1 [Xl
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the
proposai will not have any such impacts.)
c) Locally designated natural communities (e.g., oak
forest, coastal habitat, etc.)? [ 1 [ 1 [ 1 [X]
(Based on a project-specific screening anaiysis,the
proposal will not have any such impacts,)
d) Wetiand habitat (e.g., marsh, riparian and vernal
pool)? [ 1 [ 1 [ 1 [Xl
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the
proposal will oot.have any such impacts.)
e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? [ 1 [ 1 [ 1 [Xl
. (Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the
proposal will not have any such impacts.)
8. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES
Would the proposal:
a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? [ 1 [ 1 [ 1 [Xl
(The proposed project is consistent with the zone
designation and general plan,)
b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and
inefficient manner? [ 1 [ 1 [ 1 [Xl
(Based on a project-specific screening anaiysis, the
proposal will not have any such impacts.)
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? [ 1 [ 1 [ 1 [Xl
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the
proposal will not have any such impacts.)
.
CEQA Checklist
3/96
FileNo.: CUP 98-024
Potentially
Significant
. Potentially Unless Less Than
Would lhe proposal resull in Significant Mitigation Significant No
potential impacts involving: Impact Incorporated Impact impact
9. HAZARDS
Would the proposal involve:
a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of
hazardous substances (including, but not limited to:
oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation)? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
(Based on a.project-specific screening analysis, the
proposal will not have any such impacts.)
b) Possible interference with an emergency response
plan or emergency evacuation plan? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the
proposal will not have any such impacts.)
c) The creation of any health hazard or potential
health hazard? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
(Based on a project-specific screening anaiysis, the
proposal will not have any such impacts.)
d) Exposure of people to existing sources of potential
. health hazards? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the
proposal will not have any such impacts,)
e) Increased fire hazard in areas with flammable
brush, grass or trees? [ ] [ ] [ ] [Xl
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the
proposal will oot have any sucb impacts.)
10. NOISE
Would the proposal result in:
a) Increases in existing noise levels? [ ] [ ] [ ] [Xl
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the
proposal will not bave any sucb impacts.)
b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? [ ] [ ] [ J [X]
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the
proposal will not have any such impacts.)
.
CEQA Checklist
3/96
File No.: CUP 98-024
Potentially
Significant
Potentially Unless Less Than
. Would the proposal result.in Significant Mitigation Significant No
potentiai impacts involving: Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
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? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the
proposal will not have any such impacts.)
b) Police protection? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the
proposal will not have any such.impacts.)
c) Schools? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the
proposal will not have any such impacts.)
d) Maintenance of public facilities; including roads? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the
proposal will not have any such impacts.)
. e) Other governmental services? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the
proposal will not have any such 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) Powerornanrralgas? [ ] [ ] [ ] [XJ
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the
proposai will not have any such impacts.)
b) Communications systems? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the
proposal will not have any such impacts.)
c) Local or regional water treatment or distribution
facilities? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the
proposal will not have any such impacts,)
d) Sewer or septic tanks? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the
. proposai will not have any such impacts.)
CEQA Checklist
3/96
FileNo.: CUP 98-024
Potentially
Significant
. Potentially Unless Less Than
Would the proposal result.in Significant Mitigation Significant No
potential impacts involving: Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
e) Storm water drainage? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the
proposai will not have any such impacts;)
f) Solid waste disposal? [ ] [ ] [ 1 [X]
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the
proposal will not have any such impacts.)
g) Local or regional water supplies? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
(Based on' a project-specific screening analysis, the
proposai will not have any such impacts.)
13. AESTHETICS
Would the. proposal:
a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? [ 1 [ ] [ ] [X]
(Based on a project-specific screening.analysis, the
proposal wlllnot have any such impacts.)
. b) Have a demonstrable negative aesthetics' effect? [ ] [ ] [ ] [Xl
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the
proposal will not have any such impacts.) .
c) Create light or glare? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the
proposal will not have any such impacts.)
14. CULTURAL RESOURCES
Would the proposal:
a) Disturb paleontological resources? [ ] [ ] [ ] [Xl
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the
proposal will not have any such impacts.)
b) Disturb archaeological resources? [ ] [ ] [ ] [Xl
(Based on a project,specific screening analysis, the
proposal will not have any such impacts.)
c) Affect historical resources? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the
proposal will not have any such impacts.)
d) have the potential to cause a physical change
.. which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
CEQA Checklist
3/96
.
.
.
Would the proposai result in
potentiai impacts Involving:
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the
proposal will not have any such impacts.)
e) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the
potential impact area?
(Based on a project-specific screening anaiysis, the
proposal will not have any such impacts.)
15. RECREATION
Would the proposai:
a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional
parks or other recreational facilities?
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the
proposal will not have any such impacts.)
b) Affect existing recreational opportunities?
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the
proposal will not have any such impacts.)
16. MANDA TORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
aJ Does the project have the potential to degrade the
quality of the environment, substantially reduce the
habitat ora ,fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or
wildlife population to drop below self,sustaining
leveis, 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 prehistory?
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the
proposal will not have any such impacts.)
b) Does the project have the potential to achieve
short-tenn, to the disadvantage of iong-tenn,
environmental goals?
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the
proposal will not have any such impacts.)
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
when viewed in connection with the effects of past
Potentially
Significant
Impact
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
File No.: CUP 98-024
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
incorporated
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
Less Than
Significant
Impact
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
No
Impact
[X]
[X]
[X]
.,
.'
,
[X]
[X]
CEQA Checklist
3/96
.
.
.
Would the proposal result in
potcntial impacts involving:
projects, the effects of other current projects, and
the effects of probable future project.)
(Based on a project-specific screeningcanalysis, the
proposal will not have any such impacts.)
d) Does the project have environmental effects which
will cause substantiai adverse effeClson human
beings, either directly or indirectly?
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the
proposal will not have any such impacts:)
17. EARLIER ANALYSES
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.
Potentially
Significant
Impact
[ ]
[ ]
File No.: CUP 98-024
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
[ ]
[ ]
Lcss Than
Significant
Impact
[ ]
[ ]
No
Impact
[X]
[X]
.-
CEQA Checklist
3/96
FileNo. (LlP 9 E' - Cb2. 4
CITY OF ARCADIA
240 WEST HUNTINGTON DRIVE
ARCADIA, CA 91007
ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION FORM
Date Filed:
General Information
1.
Applicant's Name: 1<A1 Sh,'o.lA - TF.-c(... AvLo.~(,l Ryo:~4
Address: blJ../1l ~l2i!trIe.J fl/\/l. 5a.n ~btLJ \ {JL!fl 17t
Property Address (Location): go~ . . I~e... Ay~k.) U}-9 I 00 b
Assessor's Number: ~1 '7 q - I b -? 0
2.
3.
Name, address and telephone number of personto be contacted concerning this project:
. b4lo I !j)/ .1
\<ae sh;'AlA. ~.40l11~~ 1 SAn ~1ib:aeJ ,(),.1117r, leA:/.,>I,-~I~q.t
4. List and describe any other related permits and other public approvals required for this
project, including those required by city; regional, state and federal agencies:
. ~c'ne
Proiect Description
I.
7. Proposed use of site (project description): J{olli'd'" o.J1'OI ~..ol + Iftfoy,'rI ~-1o y
jl~a shl,-itltc; \^'~" r\~pd---'AlJlh'ehal t:l{{""S-to.l'll,,P 011\ ~()~.e 1^10yl
~i{\, ,.J~ ).., f{o/,''J€. <uPfl/Il\I'.J-~ ,,1..u..,A7oYl ~Vl \)lly,'elA4 su~.
8. Site size: _\"O.'ir1V Ie.. ~
9. Square footage per building: '3 b h)' s f
10. Number of floors of construction: I
~.
~.
13.
5. Zone Oassification: G.- ).
6. General Plan Designation:
( P\1\1M.l.r\..( ~ I
Amount of off-street parking provided:
Proposed scheduling of project: ,~O t'1
Anticipated incremental development:
)q-t1
N'Q'f'.e.
14. If residential, include the number of units, schedule of unit sizes, range of sale prices or
rents,. and type of household sizes expected:
. ~ Ye?~LlN\"h\o..l
..J5. If commercial, indicate the type, i.e. neighborhood, city or regionally oriented, square
footage 0 sales area, and loading facilities, hours of 0 eration:
.. '" \
. u C \ 11 ~'
16.
.Ii "_1...' I
N,,' \n~
17. If institutional, indicate the major function, estimated employment per shift, estimated
occupancy, loading facilities, and community benefits to be derived from the project:
1'iJ ~ n !;ti.1J 1'01'1<\ I
18. If the project involves a variance, conditiona1 use permit or zoning application, state this
and indicate clearly why the appli ati~n is require : A
PI \ U ~ \ ~r
· M{'-~ ..~l,~"JA"'j-d",..+.-", .f.i (\""1... "w"J,
Are the following items applicable to the projector 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.
[J rsi
"
:'
20. Change in scenic views or vistas from existing residential areas or public
lands or roads.
[J ~
"
i'
i'
22. Significant amounts of solid waste or litter.
[J c1
[J csV
[J ~
(
21. Change in pattern, scale or character of general area of project.
23. Change in dust, ash, smoke, fumes or odors in vicinity.
.
E.I.R.
3/95
.'
-2-
24. Change in ground Water quality or quantity, or alteration of existing
. drainage patterns.
25. Substantial change in existing noise or vibration levels in the vicinity.
26. Is site on filled land or on any slopes of 10 percent or more.
27. Use or disposal of potentially hazardous materials, such as toxic substances,
flammable or explosives.
28. Substantial change in demand for municipal services (police, fire, water,
sewage, etc.).
29. Substantial increase in fossil fuel consumption (electricity, oil, natural gas,
etc.).
30. Relationship to a larger project or series of projects.
Environmental Settine
YES NO
D ri
D c{
D [3'
D ~
D ~
D ef
D ~
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 s.tructures. 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.
.1.
32.
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 ability, and that the facts,
statements, and information presented are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.
_1-" , Ii r ~ sLJo.u
Date . Signature
.
-3-
E.I.R.
3/95