HomeMy WebLinkAbout1583
.
.
.
RESOLUTION 1583
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO.
98-023 TO OPERATE A TUTORIAL CENTER AT 100 E. LIVE OAK AVE.
WHEREAS, on September 21, 1998, applications were filed by Thomas P.
Clarke Arroyo Pacific Inc. to operate a tutorial center for up to 45 students, Development
Services Department Case No. C.U.P. 98-023, at 100 E. Live Oak Avenue, and more
particularly described as:
Lot 1 & 2 of Tract 13623 in the City of Arcadia, County of Los Angeles, State of
California, as recorded in Parcel Map Book 278, Page 29, in the Office of the
County Recorder of said County
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 I. That the factual data submitted by the Development Services
Department in the attached report is true and correct.
SECTION 2. This Commission finds:
I. That the granting of such Conditional Use Permit will not be detrimental to
the public health or welfare, or injurious to the property or irnprovementsin 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
accommodate said 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 the granting of such Conditional Use Permit will not adversely affect the
comprehensive General Plan because the land use and current zoning are consistent with
the General Plan.
6. That the new exterior design elements for the subject building are in
compliance with the design criteria set forth in the City's Architectural Design Review
Regulations.
7. That the use applied for will not have a substantial adverse impact on the
environment, and that based upon the record as a whole there is no evidence that the
proposed project will have any potential for an adverse effect on wildlife resources or the
habitat upon which the wildlife depends,
SECTION 3. That for the foregoing reasons this Commission grants a
Conditional Use Permit, to operate a tutorial center for up to 45 students upon the
following conditions:
I. That building code compliance and conditions of approval must be met to the
complete satisfaction of the Inspection Services Officer. All ADA requirements shall be
meet for disabled access; parking, restrooms, door hardware, and entrances.
2. All City code requirements regarding accessibility, fire protection, occupancy,
and safely shall be complied with to the satisfaction of Building Services and the Fire
Department which shall include, .but are not limited to the following items:
.
2
1581
.
.
.
a. A Knox-box with keys shall be installed in conformance with Uniform Fire
Code, per UFC 904.
b. An,NFP A-72Fire Alarm System shall be installed in accordance with the
Uniform Building Code and all other applicable provisions of the Arcadia
Municipal Code (3114.1).
c. Provide occupant load signs at all locations within the occupancy. Provide
seating plan and have in posted in thernanager's office for inspection.
d. Exit illumination shall comply with Sec. 1211 UFC.
e. That all exit doors shall be equipped with panic hardware as defined in the
building code. All interior doors shall open in the direction of travel.
3. That a modification be granted for 17 on-site parking spaces in lieu of 27 for the
tutoring center. This parking Modification does not constitute an approval of a general
reduction ofthe parking requirement for the entire site, butrather only for the specific use
approved by this CUP.
4. That CUP 98-023 shall not take affect until the owner and applicant have
executed a form available at the Planning Office indicating awareness and acceptance of
the conditions ofapproval.
5. Noncompliance with the provisions and conditions of this conditional use permit
shall constitute grounds for its immediate suspension or revocation.
SECTION 4. The decision, findings and conditions contained in this Resolution
reflect the Commission's action of November 24, 1998, and the following vote:
A1rES: Commissioner Huang, Murphy, Sleeter, Bruckner
NOES: None
ABSENT: 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.
3
1581
.
'.
.
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the forgoing Resolution was adopted ata regular
meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 24th day of November 1998, by the
following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Commissioners, Huang, Murphy, Sleeter, Bruckner
None
Commissioner Kalemkiarian
/
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
M:!Jt:iZ, c~1!:;
4
15S1
STAFF REPORT
DEVELOPMENTSER~CESDEPARTMENT
November 24, 1998
TO:
Chairman and Members of the Arcadia Planning Commission
FROM:
Donna 1. Butler, Community Development Administrator
By: Candice Burnett, Assistant Planner
SUBJECT:
Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 98-023
A academic learning center at 100 E. Live Oak Avenue
SUMMARY
This Conditional Use Permit application was submitted by Thomas P. Clark, to operate an
academic learning center at ] 00 E: Live Oak Avenue. The Development Services Department
is recommending approval of Conditional Use Permit No, 98-023 subject to the conditions
. that are outlined in this staff report.
GENERAL INFORMATION
APPLICANT: Thomas P. Clark
LOCATION: ]00 E. Live Oak Avenue
REQUEST:
A conditional use permit to operate an academic learning center for up to
45 students with a related parking modification.
LOT AREA:
Approximately ] 6,000 square feet (.3 7 acres)
FRONTAGE:
95 feet along Live Oak.
EXISTING LAND USE & ZONING:
The site is currently developed with a 2,546 sq.ft. office building, and is
zoned C-2.
.
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION:
. Commercial
SURROUNDING LAND USES & ZONING:
North:
Soulh:
East:
West:
Mixed commercial; zoned C~2 & D
Single Family; within county area.
Mixed commercial and light industrial; zoned CoM and C-2.
Mixed commercial; zoned C-2.
PROPOSAL & ANALYSIS
The applicant is requesting a conditional use permit to operate an academic learning center
for up to 4S slUdents (ages of pre-high school and above). The proposed school would occupy
a vacant 2,546 sq. ft. financial building, as shown on lhe submitted site plan (copy attached).
Business hours would be from 7:30a.m. to 10:00 p.m. Monday through Saturday.
Automobile Parking
.
The applicant has indicated lhat lhe majority of lhe slUdents would be less lhan 18 years old,
and lhat lhey will more lhan likely be dropped off in lhe parking lot by lheir guardians. The
facility has an entrance into lhe building in lhe front and rear.
Access to lhe on-site parking is from Myrtus Avenue by means of two driveways. Such
access would enable lhe on-site pick-up and drop-off of lhe slUdents to be within lhe parking
area to lhe rear of lhe subject building, which should mitigate lhe possibility of congestion on
lhe public right-of-ways. Also, lhere is a drive-thru lane,a1ong lhe site's easterly property
line; lhatmay provide an additional drop-off and pick-up area
Tutoring centers/schools require I parking space for each 35 sq.ft. of gross floor area lhat is
within a non-pennanent seating area Within lhe proposed IUtoring center lhere is
approximately 940 sq.ft. of seating area (classroom space), which amounts to a parking
requirement of 27 on-site spaces for lhe proposed use. The site has a total of 17 on-site
parking spaces. The applicant has submitted a parking summery to indicate lhe maximum
number .of on-site spaces lhat lhey may use, which.is estimated to be no more lhan 15 spaces
(see attached summery),
Slaff's observations of olher IUtoring centers support lhe applicant's parking summery i.e.,
almost all of lheslUdents lhat attend tutoring centers are dropped-off and picked-up by
carpools, private transportation, or walk. In addition, lhe proposed class schedule (copy
attached) shows lhat a maximum of 4S slUdents would be"in attendance wilh"lhe majority of
lhe students below lhe driving age.
.
CUP 98-023
November 24, 1998
Page 2
..
ANAL YSlS
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; it is staff 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 Departmelit 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.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
The Development Services Department recommends approval of Conditional Use Permit No.
98-023. The Planning Commission should file the Negative Declaration and adopt Resolution
1583 approving Conditional Use Permit 98"023 to operate a tutoring center at 100 E. Live
. Oak Drive, subject to the following conditions.of approval:
1. Building code compliance and conditions of approval must be met to the complete
satisfaction of the Inspection Services Officer. All ADA requirements shall be meet for
disabled access; parking, restrooms, door hardware, and entrances.
2. All City code requirements regarding accessibility, fire protection, occupancy, and safety
shall be complied with to the satisfaction of Building Services and the Fire Department
which shall include, but are not limited to the following items:
a A Knox-box with keys shall be installed in conformance with Uniform Fire Code,
per UFC 904.
b. An NFPAc72 Fire Alarm System shall be installed in accordance with the Uniform
Building Code and all other applicable provisions of the Arcadia Municipal Code
(3] ]4.1).
c. Provide occupant load signs at all locations within the occupancy. Provide seating
plan and have in posted in the manager's office for inspection.
d. Exit illumination shall comply with Sec. ]211 UFC.
.
CUP 98-023
November 24, 1998
Page 3
.
.
.
e. The calculated occupant load is over 50, aU exit doors shall be equipped with panic
hardware as defined in the building code. All interior doors shall open in the
direction of travel.
3.
A modification be granted for 17 on-site parking spaces in lieu of 27 required for the
tutoring center. This parking Modification does not constitute an approval of a general
reduction of the parking requirement for the entire site, but rather oniy for the specific
use approved by this CUP.
4.
That CUP 98-023 shall not take affect until the owner and applicant have executed a
form available at the Planning Office indicating awareness and acceptance of the
conditions of approval.
5.
Noncompliance with the provisions and conditions of this conditional use permit 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 decision and specific findings.
Should the Planning Commission have any questions regarding this matter prior to the
scheduled public hearing, please contact John Halminski at your earliest convenience.
Approved By:
~
".' ~
.. I nnaL. But er .
Community Development Administrator
~
Attachments: Land Use and Zoning Map, site plan, floor plan, Negative Declaration,
Environmental documentation, and parking summery
I
r
,
CUP 98-023
November 24, 1998
Page 4
.
.
I'-
AO'
R-2
...
:0
5@~d
I~O . I.L..
Z
W
W
cr
~
D""~i
"'-,."..
ta.IO---'
<>
,a7 <>
.", O~"'U
: I L r-
. 95.00
EO
'1Ii 6 g IO../,'
;E fi)~ t"' 'l,
95,09
157.71
'" .
'" -
I
...
'; '2
mn " R.-2 '-t.F
...\ l;t'- 'M.D, '-t,.,.
4- 155J. I
.0, :: 'B;7,
t I
80
0) 1 SB.H
I r-
43 '.C-2 & D
f\1~ t' ~ .r }-\ }
..
10 ..
~~
-
r CD 0::: a.>
U";": IQ ~
<(~ c ~ 0
0:: a:i~ -
'!-.., ~
',~ C-O & D ~",.,
(67) 1""" ,- .;::i
:2..'f>
. Live Oak Dr.
i..
(~ ~~~
'm'
- .
~ =:
Cl =
.::: ...
'00_ ~ii
~ \II ~ ~
,.. I) ~
... oJ
.::: """
[-<I
\ c-;..
&0 .-
<>
of ..
(loO
uJ
~
~
,
~
"
I.
;r. "'..,,'"
11 Z2
0 - :::
... ~
'f ,. ...
... ...
... ~.?...:t':
$"
^L I;~ _
<'
~ IU~
,"~ ~~ -~
~ "C- CJ
-." ~ ~
""II! ....
t>~ 0
,
~
~
80 J
CJ
I !::
co ....
'" 0
'"
.... "::l
<" a.>
I<
.-
~
~
.."
:ea
\.:==
- .
C<l
,q; CJ
O~ :a
"C.... a.>
<:..J~ """
lll::a:: t<:;
"CI- -
...'" (lIS)
"'~. I08.!Q
C-2 & D 1"(!Jr.l 80.98 l.
u o~...
(/45)
,DD
100'
-
&0
(/36)
(fSaJ
,
, .
'2",
-
I#.
ii
..
:...
ll'"
i
~~n"'O
{,,g',r
{. rn
... C-2
III 9
.~ -po :i
- Cl ~
~e 9~ 0-
=: :;= f.
~ ~...
'-'I ..",.2'
."..:l" ..,
'=>0 ~:'c;1'l ~O."O ~o."o I
'E :B'Il,. 20;,.
_ ,V;~.~i .
~ 4 , ,.-..0 "'" (t4, E'
~ ~~ '~O (/DA ~ r) ~. "/rO) .=
,,04 - r\ tlII .'. l''OO '
~"'" ~ nt" =",) ... . C
:~. .J~ ~ ~~/&I ~ 5 =
~ l'-.. ell' 4 '-'I
I' I ~~ ~. ~ ~ ~
~~.~~o\'OO -
C-2 ...." '00 \
~~~~~ \~ &<>
":0 /4ilCAOIA''' .~c. .-" 2IMzr.u loc...,
~s.lI. \i5W_C:flt Tif -:1:' '2-7 "ZB ~ U ~
n ~ ~
~ S' ale FamilY Residentia I ~
. In.. \ \ 5'- 1'17.,,(8.'4 "7 ~3;lj
~'I> '\ !J{. s'
c..O Il-r". Gc"
I."
'3.0
tn
~
1-
>=
:E
('D
Land Use and Zoning Map
100 E. Live Oak Drive INORTH
. CUP 98-023 Scale: I inch = 200 feet
.
...,"
/
,
'T---
I _..
--l-.._...
.._~- ,I ,
"
.'
____JoO.. ....
~
I lilJ
-r~--~'r~
'-'-- q..-.-
I
I
[~-_. ....
r::=.:- .
'il.' _n.
1'-;
-
~ a
c
~ 1\',
'=>. 'r-
.J:. ~
-D c
- .:"i>
C ~
c:: r-.
.
MYRTus A VEHUE
. .. " '--..- --.-"h--.---.
-_._'~.==----
(o!;) . /.w
"~-"-"-:'I::)
/-.-f) . .~ ~____
'.. .-..... ~..--
...
'.
.-._.~:....:;,~--
.'
.__.~_..
~- --..--- -_.~-
,lilt'.
L "
I
L...~
," ~:-.
JI~)1
i'B~
\~. .."'" V" .,... )
.,
'--~
,1ft,
weU8 FARGO BANK
t
i~ l(~ l~ :11
e_: r__ ~':r-;~~:)
--I'~~>,
. ,.
, .
... ..
,
~~
.~
I
---""'I~,-
..~.,.
.
f :"~"::::"~':
Rl!.fu,II~ I
~.-..cl'CN'.AU.f.,oeol"~.
.-.......
'" ~NC/l.eVol tMotG .
c ~GII7I'. ".; .-~.....
...----...----.-
R"'"
fi1r"';:~~~...~ ;,;-:,..,..
~ ~J;:;~:-I~ -g;~...',r~
.~ ..,. ... ",..,.
I~"''''n
.=...r:;::t....".v._~
l':.::.!;'::-;-:;-::;..!l....;-:~
L~1~7...~i.1~;:....
~~.-..:lO"~'_lr_"""
'':=(=~~~.;''f;..ri
'~(__'>.1D"'U
''''''l'oftrt__.
"avdtn'""t'-. -..
,,=.;;;o.....,_"'...n~
ou:,~.~=...r.;.:~.:..,,,.
""",."
Q:.I~~<>>."<:O';.l
.....~_t-r-..~.,....'"
l'un.....e:o-:......<I'C"".......
~... 'll,",l
...tC':_t:JCI\:III"Joo:l"t'U~
-
il"l.'..T""""nn.....,..\,
"Qfl....
_m_"'__",
"t~,..;,W'(._tC."." :i)
~w-.;'_w...,'!.~... :..
1t.l~:!I'~VO'>:,:~Go:~.1
g.g,~ 'I_".!;'~~";'~.;:;(' J"
-"'l!"Itt1\JIU_ _
tnl~~_
U,o[. .~_ "ll~ -. 21 ~...
.UTUOIWlt"",o.q,n'NTP-.p
AT1'Of"~~.wr.!IC&
..... - --,
l'in-tt.1a:bLoM;cI'l~~.
..'NiwiP.>nnGCNlDr.o.ll.'~'RI .
.....UIleo.DO.
\:J'I.n.wM..V-V-l!IM Ft.UOll.~IP\IG'''t:'>...J
. 1MlV\Pm!.;ooO"'.llI"~L._._
~~-._-~
w
>
~
'Ii
o
~
.
'o\:i.'iO':"lAl[S
-..:..::.."'''
-_~~?7. ''''''
f,~':.~~;:( .
f, .'.\\
~ I~ "~ c.:~ j',J
,~~~:~}~..I
'-- .--
?..~,'~~~~-:;;<::~~
....--.
"
z
..
III
o
"
a:
..
...
Ul
..J
-'
W.
;:
w
~
.
~
w.
Su
~<
~~
!c
z
:5
"-
w
...
in
j..~~Je,.:;1
'1 ;~~.~.
I _
+=
.\!:i
rI l\1(U t~. I :~'fI~' ( L"i'-
. . Iou ~'V,. U.'Y. A......
At? "l .
(1?cf'tJit;"1) LiEtZ"",
F1 c:::J c:::J ~ CI....Iot:):r!!.....Cj;r;.-.I
~ () C (@
'-'
ME'CH. ""'"'" w.....ru
! (:1.1<>roo....... :;, R/:ON\
'" flEN<)VE: _,ST: w.lL<jcep,,-
,
~
I
I / 7YO~:-!-'. 0) r~ Cl
~_._'i"''--'_C-,'
@
&J-.(1J?
CLI1SSRooM .,p.
4u~ /31<'6 "t.
,
, c $'l)r+.
-J A
, ~:::NGW
-=:: ti:XJsr.
Z.J~b" (5) = S-O"1<6~'"Ir<;'
5'ft: OdOr:-. v../V'~N
..~
C LJl 'U ll.c""l 2- ([) @: J:..o'l'6~''''''/~.
67:0'- ,_,:-~ !:Ie Clod...
==: }r:=::=-~ @ , ,
=.Y--())"lf-o ;~r"
, Jil'.lS"r. WI fI,J(;)Oul ';.;/~ r;,c.
.. @ ':'0 Je'1 ~(j ,o&-L\.I4l.
" 1_/ 1.1
.. -.... 'l/INCol.N 0/,. ,::O'l(,
... ~EH-ooI.e 6"XIsr II I "\ @
I w,......sfDod'-'" I I I ,
~L._I_ C.l
. r"----
... ~ II II 1
II
<- 190 II '/
---.- r...;
,LII;[ {Av. Pit
'..'" . ".:".'"
,/
. ARROYO PACIFIC ACADEMY
.
.
1. LOCATION: 100 E.Live Oak Ave. Arcadia CA91006
2. OWNER: Thomas P. Clarke
Arroyo Pacific Inc.
72 N. Arroyo BI.
Pasadena CA 91105
Tel. 626/795.1602
3. DESCRIPTION: An educational learning center where small classes will
be offered to students at the pre-high school, high school and adult
levels (ESL and computer classes).
4. OPERATIONS: Monday to Saturday 7.30am to 1O.00pm
Small class sizes: 10 -15 maximum
5. OCCUPANCY ATAN;( GIVEN TIME PERIOD: 45
5, SCHEDULE OF CLASSES:
8.00AM. 10.00AM 30 - 45 STUDENTS MAXIMUM
10.30AM.12.30PM 30 - 45 STUDENTS MAXIMUM
4.00PM. 6.00PM 30 - 45 STUDENTS MAXIMUM
7.00PM. 9.00PM 30 - 45 STUDENTS MAXIMUM
6. PARKING: 17 Spaces available in designated lot
6 extra spaces available in former drive.thru
Note: Because of the mix of students (pre.high students and lower
high school students who do not drive) it is estimated that no more than 15
spaces will be needed at a given time.
7. ADA/HANDICAP PROVISIONS
1. External: wheelchair ramp from parking lot
Designated handicap parking space in lot
2. Restrooms to ADA code
3. All new walls, doors and windows will conform to fire and
safety codes
8. EVACUATION plan: Wide external doors at each end of building.
Maximum number of occupants: 48
.
.
.
File No.: CUP 98-023
CITY OF ARCADIA
240 WEST HUNTINGTON DRIVE
ARCADIA, CA 91007
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
A. Title and Description of Project:
Application No. Cup 98-023
A Conditional Use Permit to operate an academic learning center.
B. Location of Project:
100 E. Live Oak Ave., Arcadia, County of Los Angeles, California
C. Name of Applicant or Sponsor:
Thomas P. Clarke
72 N. Arroyo Blvd.
Pasadena, CA 91105
(626) 795-1602
D. Finding:
This project will have no significant effect upon the errvironment 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 potentiaUysignificant effects:
None
Date Prepared: October 27, 1998
Date Posted: October29, 1998
c~ f ~/uff
Candyce Be:;nett, Assistant Planner
By:
.
File No.: CUP 98-023
CITY OF ARCADIA
240 WEST HUNTINGTON DRIVE
ARCADIA, CA 9i007
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
1. Project Title:
Application No. CUP 98-023
2. Project Address:
100 E. Live Oak Drive
Arcadia, Ca91 006
3. Project Sponsor's Name, Address & Telephone Number:
Thomasp. Clarke (Arroyo Pacific Academy)
72 N. Arroyo Bvd.
Pasadena, Ca 91105
(626) 294-0661
. 4. Lead Agency Name & Address:
City of Arcadia
Development Services Department
Community Development Division I Planning Services
240 W. Huntington Drive ..
P.O. Box 60021
Arcadia, CA 91066-6021
5. Contact Person & Telephone Number:
Candyc. Burnett, Assistant Planner
(626) 574-5444
6. General Plan Designation: Commercial
7. Zoning Classification: C-2 I General Commercial
.
-1-
CEQA Checklist
7/95
Filc No.: CUP 98-023
.
8. Description of Project:
(Describe the whole action involved. including hut not limited to later pha.liCS of the pmjccl nnd nn)' secondary.
support. or ofT.sitc features necessary for its implementation. Attach additional ShCCLli; if necessar)'.)
A Conditional Use Pennit to operate an academic learning center.
9, Other public agencies whose approval is required:
(e.g., permits. financing. development or participation agreements)
City Engineering Division I City Maintenance Services Department I City Water
Division 1 Los Angeles County Engineer
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 I Circulation [ ] Cultural Resources
[ ] Biological Resources [ ] Resources
[ ] Energy and Mineral Resources [ ] Mandatory Finding of Significance
.
-2-
CEQA Checklist
7/95
.
.
.
DETERMlNA 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 proposed project could have a significant effect on
the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because
the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to
the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
[ ] I find that the proposed projectMA Y have a significant effect on the
environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is
required.
[ ] I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the
environment, but that at least one effecthas 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.
By: Candyce Burnett, Assistant Planner
For: City of Arcadia
Development Services Department
Communjty Development Division / Planning Services
Date: November 24, 1998
-3-
File No.: CUP 98-023
CEQA Checklist
7/95
.
.
.
File No.: CUP 98-023
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 ell.'Plained 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 ona
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 incorporation
of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Si&nmcant Impact" to a
"Less Than SignificantImpact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures,
and briefly explain how they reduce the effect toa 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 15063(c)(3)(D)}. Earlier analyses are
discussed in Section 17 at the end of the checklist.
6. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist, 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
potential impacts involving:
1. LAND USE AND PLANNING
Would the proposal:
a) Conflict with general plan designations or zOning?
(The proposal is consistent with the Commerciai
designation in the General Plan and is a use for
which is authorized by Section 9263.1 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 jurisdictionai 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 academic learning center is
consistent and compatible with the surrounding
land uses.)
d) Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g.,
impacts to soils or farmlands, or impacts from
incompan'ble land uses)?
(There are no agricuituraI resources or operations
in the area;)
e) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an
established community (inciuding a .low-income or
minority community)?
(The proposed academic learning center is
consistent with the surrounding land uses.)
2. POPULATION AND HOUSING
Wouid the proposal:
a) Cumuiatively exceed official regional or local
population projections?
(The proposed academic learning 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
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
File No.: CUP 98-023
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
Less Than
Significant
Impact
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
No
Impact
[X]
[X]
[X]
'.
[X]
[X]
[X]
CEQA Checklist
3/96
.
.
.
Would the proposal result";n
potential impacts involving:
undeveloped area or extension of major
infrastructure)?
(The proposed project is consistent with the zone
designation and general plan.)
c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable
housing?
(The proposed project is consistent with the zone
designation and general plan")
3. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS
Would the proposal resuit in or expose peopie to
potential impacts involving:
a) Fault rupture?
(The site for the proposed use is not within the
vicinity of an identified fault)
b) "Seismic ground shaking?
(The site for the proposed use is not more
susceptible to $eismic ground shaking than any
other site in the area The proposed use will
occupy an existing building that complies with
current seismic $landards")
c) Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction?
(The site for the proposed use is not within the
vicinity of an identified fault or liquefaction zone.)
d) Landslides or mudflows?
(The site for th" proposed use is on flat Illitd, and
not within an'inundation area.)
e) Erosion, chang... in topography or unstable soii
conditions from excavation, grading, or fill?
(The proposed project is consistent with the zone
designation and general plan.)
t) Subsidence of the land?
(The site for the proposed use is not in an area
subject to subsidence.)
Potentially
Significant
Impact
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
File No": CUP 98-023
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ J
[]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
Less Than
Significant
Impact
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
No
Impact
[X]
[X]
[X]
[X]
[X]
[X]
[X]
[X]
CEQA Checklist
3/96
.
.
.
Would the proposal resull in
potential imllacts involving:
g) Expansive soils?
(The site for the proposed use is not in an area
subject to expansion of soils.)
h) Unique geologic or physical features?
(No such features have been identified at the site of
the proposed use.)
4. WATER
Would the proposal result in:
a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or
the rate and amount of surface runoff'?
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis"no
such changes are included in the proposal.)
b) Exposure of people or property to water related
hazards such as flooding?
(The site for the proposed use is not within an
inundation area.)
c) Dis<:harge into surface waters or other alteration of
surface water quality (e.g., temperature, dissolved
oxygen, or turbidity)?
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the
proposal will not affect surface waters.)
d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any
water body?
(Based on 'a project-specific screening analysis, the
proposal will.not affect surface waters.)
e) Changes in currents, or the courSe or direction of
water movements?
(B8$ed 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 loss of ground water
recharge capability?
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the
proposal will not affect ground waters.)
Potentially
Significant
Impact
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
File No.: CUP 98-023
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
[ ]
L]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
Less Than
Significant
Impact
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
No
Impact
[X]
[X]
[X]
[X]
[X]
[X]
[X]
[X]
CEQA Checklist
3/96
FileNo.: CU P 98-023
Potentially
. Significant
Potentially Unless Less Than
Would the proposal result in Significant Mitigation Significant No
potcntial impacts involving: Impact Incorporated Impact Impacl
g) Altered direction or rate of flow of ground water? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
(Based on a project-specific screening anaiysis, the
proposal will not affect ground waters.)
h) Impacts to ground water quality? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
(Based on a project-specific sc.reening anaiysis, the
proposal will not affect ground waters.)
i) Substantial reduction in the amount of ground
water otherwise available for public water
supplies? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the
proposai will not affect ground waters.)
5, AIR QUALITY
Would the proposal:
a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an
existing or projected air quality violation? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
. (The proposed use will be required to comply with
the regulations of the South Coast Air Quality
Manll!lementDistrict:)
b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
(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 climate? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
(Based on a project-specific screening. analysis, the
proposal will not have any such affects.)
d) Create objectionable odors? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the
proposal will not have any such affects.)
6, TRANSPORTATION I CIRCULATION
Would the proposal result in:
a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? [ ] [ ] [X] [ ]
(Based on a project-specific screening- analysis, the
proposal will have minimai increases in trips and
. traffic to the site. Due to the age of the students
and means by which children will be dropped off,
CEQA Checklist
3/96
.
.
.
Would the proposal result in
potential impacts involving:
no such impact will occur. Typically guardians
drop off.the children resulting in the need for.safe
ingress and egress, which is provided.)
b) Hazards to safety from design features (e.g., sharp
curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatibie
uses (e.g., farm 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 guests to serve the proposed use. In
addition, off-site parking is adequate and will not
be impacted.)
e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists?
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis,
there are no existing or potential hazards or
barriers to pedestrians ot 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.a1ternative transportation.)
g) Rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts?
(Based ona project-specific screening analysis, the
proposal will not have any. such .impacts.)
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 birds)?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
[ 1
[ 1
[ 1
[ 1
[ 1
[ 1
[ 1
File No.: CUP 98-023
Potentially
Significant
Un less
Mitigation
Incorporated
[ 1
[ 1
[ 1
[ 1
[ 1
[ 1
[ 1
Less TImn
Significant
impact
[ 1
[ 1
[X]
[ 1
[ 1
[ 1
[ 1
No
impact
[Xl
[Xl
[ ]
[Xl
[Xl
[Xl
[X]
CEQA Checklist
3/96
FileNo.: CUI' 98-013
Potentially
Significant
. Potentially Unless Less Than
Would the proposal result in Significant Mitigation Significant No
potential Impacts Involving: impact Incorporated Impact IInpact
(Based on a project-specific screening anaiysis, the
proposal will not have any such impacts.)
b) Locally designaled species (e.g., heritage trees)? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the
proposal will not have any such impacts.)
c) Locally designated natural communities (e.g., oak
forest, coastal habitat, etc.)? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the
proposal will not have any such impacts.)
d) Wetland habitat (e.g., marsh, riparian and vernal
pool)? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the
proposal will not have any such impacts.)
e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
(B~ed 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 pians? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
(The proposed project is consistent with the zone
designation and generai plan.)
b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and
inefficient manner? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the
proposal will not bave any sucb impacts.)
c) Resuit in the ioss of availability of a known
mineral resource that would be ,of future value to
the region and the residents of the State? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
(Based on a project-specific screening anaiysis, the
proposal will not have any sucbimpaClS.)
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]
CEQA Checklist
3/96
file No.: CUI' 98-023
Potentially
Significant
. Potentially Unless Less 1113n
Would the proposal resull in Significant Mitigation Significant No
potential impacts invoiving: Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis. the
proposal will not have any such impacts.)
b) Possibie interference with an emergency response
plan or emergency evacuation plan? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
(Based on a project-specific screening anaiysis, the
proposal will nOI have any such impacts.)
c) The creation of any health hazard or potential
health hazard? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
(Based on a project-specific screening anaiysis, the
proposai 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? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
. (Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the
proposal will not bave any such impacts.)
10. NOISE
Would the proposal result in: '.
a) Increases in existing noise levels? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the .'
proposal will not have any sucb impacts.)
"
b) Exposure of peopie to severe noise leveis? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the
proposal will not.have any such impacts:)
11, PUBLIC SERVICES
Would the proposal bavean 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 nOl.have any such impacts.)
b) Police protection? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
.
CEQA Checklist
3/96
FileNo.: CUP 98-023
Potentially
Significant
. Potentially Un less Less Than
Would the proposal result in Significant Mitigation Significant No
potential impacts involving: Impact incorporated Impact Impact
(Based on a project-specific screening. analysis, tile
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 o(public facilities, inciudingroads? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the
proposal will not have any.such impacts.)
e) Other governmental services? [ J [ J [ ] [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) Power Or naturai gas? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the
proposal will not have any sucb impacts.)
b) Communications systems? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
(Based e)D a project-specific screening analysis, the '.~
proposal will not have any such iinpacts.)
c) Locai Or regional water treatment or distribution ..
facilities? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
(Based ()D 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
proposal. will not have any such impacts.)
e) Stann water drainage? [ ] [ ] [ ] [Xl
(Based ona project-specifkscreening analysis, the
proposal will not have any such impacts.)
f) Solid waste disposal? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
(Based on 'a project-specific screening analysis, the
proposal will not have any such impacts.)
g) Local or regional water supplies? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
.
CEQA Checklist
3/96
File No.: CUP 98-023
Potentially
. Significant
Potentially Uniess Less Than
Would the proposal result in Significant Mitigation Significant No
potential impacts involving: Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the
proposal will not have any such impacts.)
]3. AESTHETICS
Would the proposal:
a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the
proposal will not have any such impacts.)
b) Have a demonstrable. negative aesthetics effect? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
(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? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the
proposal will not have any such impacts.)
b) Disturb archaeological resources? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
(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, Ibe
proposal will not have any such impacts.)
d) Have Ibe potential to cause a physical change
which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis, Ibe
proposal will not have any such impacts.)
e) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within;the
potential impact area? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the
proposal will not have any such iJllpacts.)
.
CEQA Checklist
3/96
.
.
.
Would the proposal result in
polenlial impacts Involving:
15. RECREA nON
Would the proposal:
a) increase the demand for neighborhood or regional
parks or other =reational facilities?
(Based on a project-specific screeninganaiysis, 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. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
a) 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
levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal
community, reduce the number or restrict.tbe range
of a rare or endangered plant or animal or
eliminate important exampies 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-term, to the disadvantage of long-term,
environmental goals?
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the
proposal will not baveany such impacts.)
c) Does the project have impacts that are individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable?
("Cumulatively considerable" means that ille
incremental effects of a 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)
(Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the
proposal will not have any such impacts,)
d) Does the project have environmental effects which
will cause substantial adverse effects on human
beings, either directly or indirectly?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
File No.: CUP 98-023
POlentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
Less 111an
Significant
Impact
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
No
Impact
[X]
[X]
[X]
[X]
[X]
[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.)
17. EARLIER ANALYSES
No additional documents were referenced pursuant to
the tiering, program EJR, or other CEQA processes to
analyze any noted effect(s) resulting from the proposal.
Potentially
Significant
Impact
File No.: CUP 98-023
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
.
:
CEQA Checklist
3/96
FileNo. (;t/to 98 - OJ. '3
CITY OF ARCADIA
240 WEST HUNTINGTON DRIVE
ARCADIA, CA 91007
7/ ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION FORM
Sef'r.Lfl. jq9g
/ '
Date Filed:
General Information
.
1.
Applicant's Name: -rH 0 11ft S ? C,L A R. /1' t
Address: 72 N ARR..V'10 B1... 'PAS t:1PEN 1>, CA 'J; IDS'
Property Address (Location): 100 E. LH'/: OAK All,". ftR.CAi:)~A C97/M6
Assessor's Number: ..I... :2.. -rR. 13 b 2. "3 / V IT C. S -r AD J 0 III N""
I
2.
3.
Name, address and telephone number of person to be contacted concerning this project:
-rH 0 n Pr 5? C.LAR. v. ( .
,2...- N, PH'--f{u'10 m _ f~AD[rvA CA qJJ{jj
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:
1SwJf'/flj ..lI(~.lljC - C-r1 ~ Art e.ItOJA
5. Zone Oassmcation:
c 1.. ~ \,1 PI R
{\I J {\
I .,
eo.... '/
6. General Plan Designation:
Proiect Description
8.
9.
10.
e'
12.
13.
7. Proposed use of site (project description):
Ac~~e..'V"\:c:. )eQfu/,rv/- tEf'J-rUt
Af'J () nor" I"i iJ ,I'J'l 7d ( O.{.P Ie fJ
4 O-ft;titZ...c'll"'l j
}f,o{)u S:<if1.
. I
Square footage per building: .2 I ~ 1; b s, f t
J
,,-, A/".-
t..IIV'-
,
Site size:
Number of floors of construction:
Amount of off-street parking provided:
Proposed scheduling of project:
~ J1 ( ('),1.\5
Oc loGc'<<. IN'''~(ft1&YZ
NurJt
S" ,'" old d('J;e -~f..< )
)77;
Anticipated incremental development:
14. If residential, include the number of units, schedule of unit sizes, range of sale prices or
rents, and type of household sizes expected:
. vJlr+
15, If commercial, indicate the type, i.e. neighborhood, city or regionally oriented, square
footage of sales area, and loading facilities, hours of operation:
rJ /~
16. If industrial, indicate type, estimated employment per shift, and loading facilities:
N}::t
17. If institutional, indicate the major function, estimated employment per shift, estimated
occupancy, loading facilities, and community benefits to be derived from the project:
G.l..J:KS,'Z ~1lM Ll"~N,1Ii l.-- .. ~ -rf'PrC'I1l'P..J f'ffl SHIFT
SttA(J{,.J1J
E'D~lt.l? 1Jo~ ItL .5t-<< t?c.tT!
18. If the project involves a variance, conditional use permit or zoning application, state this
and indicate clearly why the application is required:
.
CUP cteq Ll ~n.e.J
sd... IN) tjft DIA..f ~<'sj
Are the following items applicable to the project or its effects? Discuss below all items checked yes
(attach additional sheets as necessary).
YES NO
19.
Change in existing features of any hills, or substantial alteratin of ground
contours.
o
20,
01ange in scenic views or vistas from existing residential areas or public
lands or roads.
o
21.
Change in pattern, scale or character of general area of project.
o
o
o
22.
Significant amounts of solid waste or litter.
23.
Change in dust, ash, smoke, fumes or odors in vicinity.
.
-2-
[3"
[3"
~
ci
~
E.!.R.
3/95
.4.
30.
YES NO
Change in ground water quality or quantity, or alteration of existing
drainage patterns.
25.
o
o
o
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.).
o
29.
Substantial increase in fossil fuel consumption (electricity, oil, natural gas,
etcJ
o
Relationship to a larger project or series of projects.
o
Environmental Setting
..
32
o
~
c1
ct
[3"
ci
~
~
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 of my ability, and that the facts,
statements, and information presented are true and correct to the best of my ~7rledge and belief.
1 //2-J qr --;tC"WiF..o P UN/;/1.t
Date I , Signature
.
-3-
E.I.R.
3/95