Loading...
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