Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1537 . RESOLUTION 1537 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO, 96-005 TO OPERATE A TUTORING CENTER AT 103 LAS TUNAS DRIVE, WHEREAS, on June 3, 1996, a Conditional Use Permit application was filed by Grace Tan to operate a tutoring center, Development Services Department Case No, C.U,P. 96-005, at property commonly known as 103 Las Tuna Drive, more particularly described as follows: Lot 35, tract 13540, Book 277, Page II and 12 WHEREAS, A public hearing was held on July 9, 1996, 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 improvements in such zone or vicinity. 2, That the use applied for at the location indicated is a proper use for which a Conditional Use.Permit is authorized. 3, That the site 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. 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, . . 6, That the new exterior design elements for the subject building ,are iJ compliance with the design criteria set forth in the City's Architectural Design Revie, Regulations. 7. That the use applied for will not have a substantial adverse impact on th, environment, and that based upon the record as a whole there is no evidence that th, proposed project will have any potential for an adverse effect on wildlife resources or th, habitat upon which the wildlife depends., SECTION 3, That for the foregoing reasons this Commission grants Conditional Use Permit to operate a tutoring center at 103 Las Tunas Drive upon th, following conditions: 1. Building Code compliance and conditions of approval must be met to th, complete satisfaction of the Building Section, 2. Fire safety shall be provided to the complete satisfaction of the Fir, Department. 3. Both gates leading into the rear parking lot shall remain open during norma business hours, 4, That the tutoring center provide a properly licensed driver for transportation t, the site, as stipulated in the proposal, 5. The operator of the center shall provide a bicycle rack at the rear of th, building. 6, A modification be granted for 11 on-site parking spaces in lieu of 23 for th, addition of a tutoring center on the commercial/office development. This parkinl Modification does not constitute an approval of a general reduction of the parkinl requirement for the entire site, butrather only for the specific use approved by this CUP, 7. C.U,P, 96-005 shall not take effect until the property owner and applican have executed and fIled the Acceptance Form that is available from the Developmen Services Department to indicate awareness and acceptance of the conditions of approval. 8. Noncompliance with the provisions and conditions of this conditional us' permit shall constitute grounds for its immediate suspension or revocation. . . 2 1'537 . SECTION 4, The decision, findings and conditions contained in this Resolution reflect the Commission's action of July 9, 1996, and the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Commissioner's Bell, Bruckner, Huang, Murphy, Sleeter, ana Kovacic. None Kalemkiarian SECTION 5, The Secretary shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution and shall cause a copy to be forwarded to the City Council of the City of Arcadia. I HEREBY CERTIFY that the forgoing Resolution was adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 23rd day of July 1996, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Commissioner's Bell, Huang, Murphy, Sleeter, and Kovacic None Bruckner and Kalemkiarian . ABSTAIN: None :i~J6. ~~) C an, Planning Commission City of Arcadia A Secretary, Planning City of Arcadia APPROVED AS TO FORM: ?n~~ f7J1$-- Michael H. Miller, City Attorney . 3 1537 ,,.-. STAFF REPORT DEVELOPMENTSERWCESDEPARTMENT July 9, 1996 TO: Chairman and Members of the Arcadia Planning CommissiQn FROM: Donna L. Butler, Community Development Administrator By: John Halminski, Assistant PllUlqer 91' , Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 96-005 A tutoring center at I OJ LasTunas Drive SUBJECT: SUMMARY This Conditional Use Permit application was. submitted by Grace Tan to operate a: tutoring center at 103 Las Tunas Drive, The Development Services Department is recommending approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 96~005 subject to the conditions that are outlined in this staff report, . GENERAL INFORM A TlON APPLICANT: Grace Tan LOCATION: 103 Las Tunas Drive REQUEST: A conditional use permit to operate a tutorial center for 30 students with a related parking modification, LOT AREA: Approximately 11,750 square feet " FRONTAGE: , .. 100 feet along Las Tunas, 0, EXISTING LAND USE & ZONING: The site is currently developed with a dental office and vacant office space and is zoned CoO. GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Commercial . I _ SURROUNDING LAND USES & ZONING: . North: Single-family residential; zoned R-I, South: Mixed Commercial and Light Industrial; zoned CoM, East: Mixed commercial and restaurants; zoned C-2, West: Single-family residential; zoned CoO. PROPOSAL & ANALYSIS The applicant is requesting a conditional use permit to operate a tutoring center for 30 students under the ages of 18 which would occupy an office space of approximately 1,032 sqlJill'e feet within an existing commercial building, as shown on the submitted site plan (copy attached), Business hours would be from 9:00 a.m, to 8:00 p.m. Monday through Friday, and 9:00 a,m; to 6:00 p,m, on Saturdays, Automobile Parkini The applicant has indicated that the majority of the students are under 18 years old, and that they will more than likely be dropped off in the parking lot by their guardians, The facility has an entrance into the building in the front and rear, Also, the center will be providing transportation to the site, . Access to the on-site parking is from Las Tunas Drive, The site currently provides for through traffic circulation by the use of two existing driveways, as shown on the submitted site plan, This through access would enable the on-site pick-up and drop-off of the students in a safe fashion, and provides a means for convenient access through the site which mitigates the possibility of congestion on the public right-of-ways. Currently, the dental office occupies 916 sq,ft. with one practicing dentist. The dental office will be continuing their business with no expansion projected, Tutoring centers/schools require 1 parking space for each 35 sq.ft. of gross floor area that is within a non-permanent seating area. Within the proposed tutoring center there is approximately 761 sq,ft, of seating area, which amounts to a parking requirement of 22 on-site spaces for the school. The existing on-site parking ratio of 4 spaces per i ,000 sq.ft. of gross floor area for the office space results in a net parking space requirement of 17 spaces for the proposed tutoring center. In addition, the dental offic'e,requires 6 spaces, which would result in a total of23 required on-~ite spaces, The site has a total of lion-site parking spaces. Staff has made ,random on-site vehicle counts and noted that approximately 75% of the on-site parking is a~ailable during normal business hours, which indicates that the existing parking would be sufficient for the proposed tutoring center, In addition, the applicant has submitted a parking survey which indicates a maximum number of 3 spaces are used at any given time, as indicated on the attached parking survey, The parking survey was conducted during the proposed hours of operation, . CUP 96-005 July 9, 1996 , Page 2 . Sta.ff s observations of other tutoring centers support the applicant's statement that they do not anticipate a parking burden to the site. Almostall of the students are dropped-off and picked-up by carpools, private transportation, or walk. The parents rarely wait in a parking space for the children because the classes are on a strict schedule. A maximum of 30 students will attend classes during any given session, ANALYSIS Uses such as tutoring centers require conditional use permits, and traffic concerns can be addressed as part of the consideration of such applications. Generally, staff does not encourage uses which are deficient in parking; however, based upon the applicant's proposal and the random ,parking counts by staff and the applicant, it is staff opinion that the proposed use would be an appropriate addition to the site, . CEOA . Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act, the Development Services Department has prepared an initial study for the proposed. project. Said initial study did not disclose any substantial adverse change in any of the physical conditions within the area affected by the project including land, air, water, minerals, flora, fauna, ambient noise and objects of historical or aesthetic significance, When considering the record as a whole, there is no evidence that the proposed project will have any potential for an adverse effect on wildlife resources. Therefore, a Negative Declaration has been prepared for this project, RECOMMENDA nONS: The Development Services Department recommends approval of Conditional Use Permit No,96-005, subject to the following conditions of approval: I, Building code compliance and conditions of approval must be met to the complete satisfaction ofthe Inspection Services Officer; 2, Fire safety'shall be provided to the complete satisfaction of the Fire Department. '- 3, Bothgates leading into the rear parking lot shall remain open during normal business hours: . 4, Thatthe tutoring center provide transportation to the site, as stipulated in the proposal. 5. A modification be granted for 11 on-site parking spaces in lie\! of 23 for the addition of a tutoring center on the commercial/office development, This parking Modification does not constitute an approval of a general reduction of the parking requirement for the entire site, but rather only for the specific use approved by this CUP, ' . CUP 96-005 J!lly 9, 1996 Page 3 . . . 6, That CUP 96-005 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. 7. Noncompliance with the provisions and conditions of this conditional' use permit shall constitute grounds for its immediate suspension or revocation, FINDINGS AND MOTIONS Approval If the Planning Commission intends to approve this conditional use permit application, the Commission should move to approve and file the Negative Declaration and direct staff to prepare a resolution which incorporated the Commission's decision, specific findings and conditions of approval as set forth in the staff report, or as modified by the Commission, Denial If the Planning Commission intends to deny this conditional use permit application, the Commission should move for denial and direct staff to prepare a resolution which incorporates the Commission' s decision and specific findings, 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: 6~ Donna L. Butler Community Development Administrator Attachments: Land Use and Zoning Map, site plan, floor plan and parking survey Department memos and conditionsofapprovaifrom Building and Fire CUP 96-005 July 9, 1996 Page 4 r-e g:oo om .0:00 am 1/:00 ",n 11:00 am I :oo pm ]:oo pItI 3Wpm 4:{)I} pm 5:CO pm 6:CO 1'"' 7:00 pm 1:0(/ ",.m. ~3/ ?'- 1d2lL .3 :3 3 a :2. 3 :r .3 .;5 -u rr -6-'- o/~/f" ;2. 1 3 :3 3 :;). ;;:z 3 .;2.. v lr' -- -IIIL - \ - ~~?{, ;;.. .2 3 .< ;Z 2 3 3 3 -r:r -&- "'-- -Yif..IL 5Jt, / ff, 3 3 ~ .3 ;2. 2 3 3 3 ~ c:r- ..-- .lHIL >/11/f& 3 3 .3 .3 .3 .3 ..3 3 3 ~ &- I!r .1..RL . 5// iJ 7(, 3 3 3 ,3 If' y er 6- - ~ <6- -4- -SAL ff -rr- -~ , -- ---- - - t~~~ "." ...". . ~ M' '..S;--.... ~."" ~...,..,.U.~. . Dale: 6/3/96 To: Building. ( ) Econ, De\'.. ~'-! Fire, ( ) Main!.. ( ) Police. ( ) Engine,cring. From: P\;lnning Services. '\CI\'" H ' CUP 96-005 Subject: Applicalion No.: Loe:uion: 103 Las Tunas ..~ .-. ...~ (~:. \'i\" .. !:";i,J ~ r,;...: : 0'; . ~..t:l,:h>. , , MEMORANDUM DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTME1H Waler, ( ) Project Description: Tutorial center for 30 students Please re,'iew the attached proposal and comment on Ihe.following checked ilems and any other item(s) with \\hich vo.ur services may.hare con;ems or'special knowkdgc: . . ( ) Dedications { ) Lcga' deSCription ( ) Tr.tflic circulation ( ) Parkwa~ width(s) ( ) Streel lights I ) Tcnl:lti\'c Parcclrrracl Map contcnts I ) Fitml !.tap contents ( ) SlCccllrecs & plants ( ) 15 thc subjcct addrcss se,,"ed b}' a se\\'er line Utat is tributary to a deficient City trunk line'l ( ) Location and dcsign or dri\'ewil}' and apron ( ) Encroachmenr into a special setback on: ( ) Gr"uing and dmi"age I ) W;lter services ~ Plea~e respond b~': 6/28/96 ( ) I<rig.ilion s"stem ( ) Fireh}'drnnts ( ) Baekflo\\' de\'ices (~ Fire safet)' ( ) Occupancy limits ( ) Public s;tfet}' and securily ( ) Aceesibility ( ) Compliance wilh Building Codes ( ) Sig,ns ( ) Consistency with Rede\'e1opment aIid Re\'ilaliz<Ilion Plans ( ) Other: (>4, Condilions of appro\'al _~ ~EF6R 10 ~CH8) l}-' l\NK 'IOU ~ Re~ron<c' ~f'()O . . By: C-~4AJ-~~r- Date: ~/d5/q(~ Date: June 25, 1996 MEMORANDUM FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU . From: Laura Chafe To: John Halminski Subject Proposed Tutorial Center, 103 Las Tunas 1. Is this building equipped with a fire department Knox Box with keys per U,F,C. 902.4 for each separate tenant space? If not, one will be required. 2, Has this building been vacant? If so, how long, and what was the prior occupancy? 2, Is this building equipped with fire sprinklers? If not, they may need to ,be provided, If so, modification will be r~quired under separate permit. 3, Illuminated exit signs required throughout space, . 4, Fire extinguishers required throughout space. Minimum size is 2A10BC, 5, Is this building equipped with a fire alarm system? If so, modification to it is required under separate permit to accommodate tenant improvements, If not, a fire alarm system is required per AMC 3115,1 and the Uniform Fire Code Section 1007.2.4,1. 6, WI1ere are the exits? 7. What is the construction type? "NOTE: 234 square footroom = 12 students maximum 361 square foot room = 19 students maxumum 100 square foot study area = 5 students maximum 66 square foot study area = 3 students maximum . . Date: 6/3/96 To; ..~ 1- ......... ( ) Fire, (;q Building, ( ) Econ, Dcv.. ( ) Engineering. ( ) Maim.. ( ) Police, From: Planning Sel:viccs, .J ...,\. ':.... r: Subject ApplicalionNo.: CUP 96-005 i\IEl\10RANDUi\1 DEVELOPMENT SER\lCES DEPARTMENT 1 Waler. ( ) Localion: 103 Las Tunas ProjeclDescriplion: Tutorial center for 30 students Pkasc rcvicw lhe auached proposal and COl1ll1lenl on lhe following chccked items and any orller ilemls)wiul which vour services may ha"e concerns or special knowledgc: . . ( ) Dedicalions ( ) Lcg,,' description ( ) Traffic circnlation ( 1 Parkway' widthls) ( ) Strcct lightS ( ) Tenl,llh'e Parcelffract Map conlcnts ( 1 Final Map conlenlS ( ) 51<<x:I trees & plllnts t ) Is the subjecl.address served by a sewer liue thal is lribulary lO " defieicnt Cily lnlllk line? ( ) Localionllnd design of driveway lmdapron ( ) Encro"chmclll inlo II special sctback ou: ( ) Grading alld draitmgc ( ) Waler services ~ ( 1 lrrig"lion sy'sleltl ( ) Firehydrants ( ) B:1Ckflow dedces ( ) Fire safety ( ) Occupancy limits ( ) Public safelY and security I 1 Accesibilily ( ) Compliance wirh Building Codes ( ) Signs ( 1 Consistency' with Rede"elopmenl and Re,'i1alizulion Ph'ns ) Other: (J{ Condilions of appro,'al ( ..{ " ~f ~.. "t +:11 i 1.....~....) , Please respond by: ',6/28/96 /. .~ eI~f/.I~~~~/1f'tnr1/11f~. P.C'~r><'ltl;:C' _.. 1. T'\to (2) disaelGd assat!:: t9ilet f88ft13 retl~iu..d - "ne (1) mr K...uah::t aud aRe (1) for m,,'pc:. C'nmplyirlg u,ith T m" CA~tiaR 2992.1 &Rtf the floQr-tmtt..."nlb fitl;.,h~d per IlBC. ~p~t;ORli g91,l.I "...1 867, l.2 (AM(;: .8130,25), , Occllpancy separation of one-hour construction is required between the E-l '(Educational Occupancy) and the B (Dental Office Occupancy) per UBC 302,4. tr .~ Dale:-fJT9 '0 Iq~f.p ,?,:./~,~~J~~~~. . By: 04 04 04- l:l,O~ T~ T5 1'" . SANDRA 'f::.AVE ~ 8'1 0'2 8'2 8'2 TO 10 .0 QloU' ., (/22.1 "'/4:'/ (/14.1 (/"'Z/I~ (98) (94.) (90) (8(,) ( <0 "l <0 ~ (" (" (" ;: 3 1 I .. Z 1'-' r-' 1'-' R-1 ~ '" \1 'Ie. \5 = M,8.11\-S1458 :2 15 0 /t 0'2 en 0'2 10,04 'TO Gi'l,'ll> Gol.U . 90 90 90 1.10 ,., ..33 .34 p^U Q~ lOT 2 0 r" C-o /1= 0 -r' 72V ",,/9.1 (///.J 10.0, ('/0/,) 90 90 90 1.-34,4.4 <". LAS TUNAS DR 147,52 ~ (/.1I?.J ;J C 12.-:.1 . \'\ I~ I I (/29) I 14" S "" 1. - &1 \'\ ,( ~s 100 CO I (//4:1 I (HJd.I I (/02) I~ ~: : ~~- ~r- -t ~. .. \ ... C-M I~ ~I~ I ~t I I I 14~,80 6,01 (0"'9 (8.e) .l/: I I I _ FFBr: r ~I - ~ L. S. \ C. '- -~ 3.,., C,~'6'$ ,<t) Par,.~::" 33.4. (//.9) IOL24 ,.. p-. \J E. '- ?I)' ... U\lE. 6p-.~ ~FlCAOlli CITY ""lIpL.E '10 ;,6." (801..'1 /I." ~ o SCALE:1 "=1 00' 'I~~t.~~.'!f:~;;:;i,~~it[~!~.;~ ".~.J..::;.,'CE}\'"1', 'il"'''''' ~{r"":' I~~~1~~i: """'~'@'~':JI:m.,:.!fi> .~~~;'~~t~i~;~~~~.:{j~~i:.~ LAND USE AND ZONING CUP 96-005 103 LAS TUNAS OR . . . . ~ t ~L"rt '., .........O)~/.. 1"'U"UfD.w AAM" .. .. - I " < . , 3 ~ ., ~ I .~ ~_~""'t"t-,~ 6U1t'e. I,' ~ "-.).n..~~_ 0"- [~~: w I.AS TU<JA> U~~:~gi~l~' lOT. NO ~S 1 ~ 13S1? .~;.~. "I.. - ..--- -.'. .'-., " ..... . . - ~,\ .. ,10,"'" ':?'.~ ':l~<:"'~~' :~~~~~j't~!;;:', '~"I':~.I~'r:'~'~"~~:;::,~~~<,::,~" : ~7i:~-': ';; , : .:.~ ~/;'" . p' .....' 1 "'S,.J . ..... -... .'.i,~~ ,"~'" . _ . ....,' ".':,,,, ,I . ..: . ", . . \t . ~r\' IJty oj; .// . :j: j ". ~! Ii <Ill ~; 3 '", . , . I I / / N,.,'.. I I ,. 1,./ -LH- J .' I ., 19"6 '.,: ;/i( '"," I~ i I I I ; , . . '~' - --> 'T.: .,' . ". "or' ~, ': t~..'. ~.,.-;\ . 7' _.:..'. ~ t "'::1 " 11 ~ Q) , . '.--If I, I , , i I , I '--, ~ i , U .... ~' I' '\ ~.~ \ /\ PLAHT,,,,c; i 'j (9 NC Sf OEW~~~; - ,~ : '.' .~ ... , -:!: "'~:I..I"'" U-.. " 7/ '/1 // 0 ~ .... I / / '.j) /1->--..// , I . <~/ ..~/ -:- c...: '" ., '" I'PC ,JJ~ 1.11_ ~I 'i ~~p, I- I' '--I I /1 I I~ ~ " , "''-A~TIt.lb- '.J 'l'~'" -; . I GRAS.5 ~ GRA"',,, . ~ I < ' . ,- I''l' I. I ~ II II Ir-./J ,-l'! .. - --.- "r~"~--/ .r:,....". "'~I , " ..j - --:~",:".-:,; 'I' 1 ~ "- i I ,.' '" r PLOT " P'-4N " II> N Go... -.'>_~ rill,.. .. -'. ~ 'J : ~~ :.;:0", I \ - , / . - ,~i '~"... ,>'...." '... , 1\ r~ AilSA \ ..., \ \ \ :1 - - \ ! c.~~. \/ "tlw'( 103 w. -L A.s. 1_UN,A,S OR "1 / ' /! , I . .. " ;'T ; ~"..- f ; . , . " '=-.1 . ~ 7 ;l," '^ ~ 'I I / File No.: CUP 96.Q05 . CITY OF ARCADIA 240 WEST HUNTINGTON DRIVE ARCADIA, CA 91001 CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT NEGATIVE DECLARATION A. Title and Description of Project: Conditional Use Permit CUP 96-005 A Conditional Use Permit to operate a tutoring center for 30 students, B, Location of Project: 103 W,.Las Tunas Drive Arcadia, CA 91007 . C, Name of Applicant or Sponsor: Grace Tan D. Finding: This project will have no significant effect upon the environment within the meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 for the reasons set forth in the attached Initial Study. E, Mitigation measures, if ~y, included in the ,project to avoid potentially significant effects: " None Date: June 6, 1996 Date Posted: June 6, 1996 By 1.1 4~' !ssistant larmer . . CITY OF ARCADIA 240 WEST HUNTINGTON DRIVE ARCADIA, CA 91001 CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM 1. Project Title: CUP 96-005 2. Project Address: 103 Las Tunas Drive Arcadia, CA 91007 3, Project Sponsor's Name, Address & Telephone Number: Grace Tan 120 Fisk Ave San Gabriel, CA (818) 573-2668 . 4, Lead Agency Name & Address: City of Arcadia 240 W, Huntington Drive Arcadia, CA 91007 5, Contact Person & Telephone Number: John Halminski, Assistant Planner (818) 574-5447 .... 6. General Plan Designation: Commercial 7. Zoning Classification: CoO Commercial Office . -1- File No,: CUP 96-005 CEQA Checklist 7195 . . . File No,; CUP 96-005 8. Description of Project: (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to later phases of the project and any secondary. support, or off-site features necessary for its implementation, Attach addiiional'sheets if necessary,) Conditional use permit to operate a tutoring center. 9, Other public agencies whose approval is'required: (e,g., pennits, financing, development or participation agreements) City Building Services I City Fire Department ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. [ ] Land Use & Planning [ ] Population & Housing [ ] Geological Problems [ ] Water [ ] AirQuality [ ] Transportation I Circulation [ ] Biological Resources [ ] Energy and Mineral Resources [ ] Hazards [ ] Noise [ 1 Public Services [ ] Utilities and Service Systems [ ] Aesthetics [ ] Cultural Resources [ ] Resources [ ] Mandatory Finding of Significance ... -2. CEQA Checklist 7195 . . . File No,: CUP 96-005 DETERMINA nON (To b. completed by the Lead Agency) On the basis of this initial evaluation: [Xl I fmd that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. [ 1 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 attacl;1ed sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. [ 1 I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. [ J I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, but that at least one effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards and has been addressed by mitigation measures based on that earlier analysis as described on attached sheels, 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. [ J I fmd 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 propose4 project. " ~ 4d.- . ignalOre . John Halminski Print Name /t. - June 6. 1996 Date city of Arcadia For -3- CEQA Checklist 7/95 File No,:' CUP 96-005 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 i~ adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects such as the one involved (e.g" the project is not within a fault rupture zone), A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis), 2. All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as "Yell as direct, and construction related as well as operational impacts, 3, "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is significant. If there are one or more, "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an Environmental Impact Report is required. . 4. "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated" applies where theincorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less Than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section 17 "Earlier Analyses" may be cross-referenced), 5, Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program Environmental Impact Report, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration {Section I 5063(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 staiement is substantiated, . -4- cliQA Checklist 1/95 . . . 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 Commercial designation in the General Plan and is a use for which is authorized by Section 9261.1 of the Zoning Ordinance,) b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project? (The proposed use will be required to comply with the regulations of any other jurisdictional agency with applicable environmental plans. E,g" the South Coast Air Quality Management District,) c) Be compatible with existing land uses in the vicinity? (The proposed school is consistant with the surrounding land uses,) d) Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g" impacts to soils or fannlands, or impacts from incompatible land uses)? (There are no agricultural resources or operations in the area.) e) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community (inclUding a low-income or minority community)? (The proposed school is consislant with the surrounding land uses,) .... 2. POPULATION AND HOUSING . Would the proposal: a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections? (The proposed school is consistant 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 [ I [ I [ I [ I [ I [ I File No,: CUP96.005 Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated [ I [ I [ I [ I [ I [ I Less Than Significant Impact [ I [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ I No Impact [XI [Xl [XI [XI [XI [Xl CEQA Checklist 3/96 . . . Would the proposal result in pOlential impacts involving: undeveloped area or extension of major infrastructure)? (The proposed project is consislant with the zone designation and general plan,) c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable housing? (The proposed project is consistant with the zone designation and general plan,) 3. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS Would the proposal result in or expose people to potential impacts involving: a) Fault rupture? (The site for the proposed use is not within the vic;nity ofan identified fault) b) Seismic ground,shaking? (The site for the proposed use is not more susceptible to seismic ground shaking than any other site in the area. The proposed use will occupy an exisling building that complies with current seismic standards,) 'c) Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? (The site for the proposed use is not within the vicinity of an identified fault or liquefaction zone,) d) Landslides or mudflows? (The site for the proposed use is on flat land,. and not within an inundation area,) .... e) Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from excavation. grading, or fill? (The proposeCl project is consislant with the zone designation and general plan.) f) Subsidence of the 11UId? (The site for the proposed use is not in an area subject 10 subsidence,) Potentially Significant Impact [ I [ I [ I [ I [ I [ I [ I [ I File No.: CUP 96-005 Potentially S ignificanl Unless Mitigation Incorporated [ I [ I [ I [ I [ I [ I [ I [ I Less Than Significant Impact [ I [ I [ ] [ I [ I [ ] [ ] [ I No Impact [X] [X] [XI [X] [X] [X] [X] [X] CEQA Checklist 31')6 . . . Would the proposal result in potential impacts involving: g) Expansive soils? (The site for the proposed use is not in an aiea 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) Discharge into surface'waters or other alteration of surface water quality (e,g., temperature; dissolved oxygen, or turbidity)? (Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the proposal will not affect surface waters,) d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any water body? (Based on a project.specific screening analysis, the proposal will not affect surface waters.) 'e) Changes in currents. or the course or direction of "- water movements? (Based on a,project-specific screening'analysis, the proposal will not affect any currents or water movements,) . t) Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of any aquifer by cuts or excavations or through substantial loss of ground water recharge capability? (Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the proposal will not affect ground waters,) Potentially Significant Impact [ I [ I [ J [ I [ I [ I [ I [ I File No,: CUP 96-005 Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated [ ] [ I [ I [ I [ I [ I [ I [ I Less Than Significant Impact [ I [ I [ J [ ] [ ] [ I [ ] [ I No Impact [XI [XI [XI [XI [XI [XI [XI [XI CEQA Checklist 3/96 . . . Would the proposal result in potential impacts involving: g} Altered direction or rate of flow of ground water? (Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the proposal will not,affect ground waters,) h} Impacts to ground water quality? (Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the proposal will not affect ground waters,) i} Substantial. reduction in the amount of ground water otherwise available for public water supplies? (Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the proposal will not affect ground waters,) 5. AIR QUALITY Would the proposal: a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation? (The proposed use will be required to comply with the regulations of the South Coast Air Quality Management District.) b} Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? (Based on a projecl-specific screening analysis the proposal will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants,) c} Alter air movement, moisture, or temperalUre or cause any change in climate? (Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the proposal will not have any such affects,) '- d) Create objectionable odors? (Based on. a project-specific screening analysis, the proposal will ~ot have any such affects,) 6. TRANSPORTATION I CIRCULATION Would the proposal result in: a} Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? (The proposed project is consistant with the zone designation and general plan,) Potentially Significant Impact [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] File No.: CUP 96-005 Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] Less Than Significant Impact [ ] [ ] [ ] [ '] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] No Impact [X] [X] [X] [X] [X] [X] [X] [X] CEQA Checklisi 3/96 .- FileNo,: CUP 96-005 Potentially . Significant Potentially Unless Less than Would the proposal result in Significant Mitigation Significant No potential impacts involving: Impact Incorporated Impact Impact b) Hazards to safety from design features (e,g" sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e;g" fann equipment)? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] (TIle proposed project is consistant with the zone designation and general plan. The location that has not been identified as hazardous,) c) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] (The site of the proposed use is readily accessible and the propos~d use will not inhibit access to adjacent or nearby uses,) d) Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off'site? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] (There is adequate on-site parking for both the tenants and guests to serve the proposed use,) e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] (Based on a project:specific screening analysis, there are no existing or potential hazards or . barriers to pedestrians or bicyclists.) l) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation (e,g" bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] (Based on a project-specific screening analysis, there are n() existing or potential conflicts with policies supporting alternative transportation,) g) Rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] (Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the proposal will not have any such impacts,) 7. BIOLOGICAL RESOU,RCES Would the proposal result in impacts to: \ , 0) Endangered. threatened or rare species or their habitats (including but not limited to plants, fish, insects, animals and birds)? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] (Based on a project.specific screening analysis. the proposal will not have any such impacts,) b) Locally designated species (e,g" heritage trees)? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] (Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the . proposal will not have any such impacts,) C:EQA Checklist 3/96 File No.: .CUP 96-005 Potentially Significant . Potentially Unless Less Than Would the proposal result in Significant Mitigation Significant No potential impacts involving: Impact Incorporated Impact Impact c) Locally designated natural communities (e.g" oak forest, coastal habitat, etc,)? [ ] [ ] [ I [XI (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)? [ ] [ ] [ I [Xl (Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the proposal will not have any such impacts,) e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? [ ] [ J [ ] [X] (Based on a project-specific screening analysis. the proposal will not have any such impacts;) 8. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES Would the proposal: a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? [ ] [ ] [ 1 [X] (The proposed project is consistant with the zone . designation and general plan.) b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and ineflicientmanner'? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] (Based on a project-specific screening analysis. the proposal will not have any such .impacts,) c) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of future value to the region and the residents of the State? [ ] [ 1 [ ] [X] (Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the proposal will,nol have any such impacts,) 9. HAZARDS , Would the proposal involve: '. a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to: oil, pesticides, chemicals Or radiation)? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] (Based on.a project-specific screening analysis, the proposal will not have any such 'impacts.) b) Possible interference with an emergency response plan or emergency'evacuation plan? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] . (Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the proposal will not have any such impacts.) CEQA Checklist 3/96 File No,:; CUP 96-005 Potentially Significant . Potentially Unless Less Than Would the proposal result in Significant Mitigation Significant No potential impacts involving: Impact Incorporated Impact Impact c) The creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard? [ ] [ ] [ '] [X] (Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the proposal will not have any such impacts,) d) Exposure of people to existing sources of potential health hazards? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] (Based on a project-specific. screening analysis, the proposal will not have any such,impacts,) e) Increased fire hazard in areas with flammable brush. grass or trees? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] (Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the proposal will not have 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 such impacts,) b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? [ ] [ ] [ ,] [X] (Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the proposal will not have any such impacts,) 11. PUBLIC SERVICES Would the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered government services in any of the following areas: , a) Fire protection? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] (Based on aproject-specific,screening analysis, the proposal wilfnot have any such impacts,) b) Police protection? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] (Based on a project,specific screening .analysis. the proposal will not have any such impacts,) c) Schools? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] (Based on a project'specific screening analysis, the proposal will not have any such impacts.) . d) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] CEQA Checklist 3/96 File No.: CUP 96-005 Potentially Significant . Potentially . Unless Less Than Would the proposal result in Significant Mitigation Signifi~ant No potential impacts involving: Impact Incorporated Impact Impact (Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the proposal will not have any such impacts,) e) Other governmental services? [ ) [ ) [ ) [X] (Based on a project-specific screening analysis. the proposal will not have any such impacts,) 12. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Would the proposal result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a) Power or natural gas? [ 1 [ 1 [ ) [X] (Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the proposal will not have any such impacts.) b) Communications systems? [ ] [ ) [ ] [X) (Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the proposal will not have any such impacts,) . c) Local or regional water treatment or distribution facilities? [ 1 [ 1 [ ] [X] (Based ona project-specific screening analysis, the proposal will not have any stich impacts,) d) Sewer or septic tanks? [ ) [ 1 [ ) [Xl (Based on,a project-specific screening analysis, the proposal will not have any.such impacts.) e) Stonn water drainage? [ 1 [ 1 [ ] [X] (Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the proposal will not have any such impacts,) t) Solid waste disposal? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] (Based on a project-specif~c screening analysis, the proposal,will not have any such impacts.) g) Local or region.al water supplies? [ ] [ 1 [ 1 [X) (Based,on a project-specific screening analysis; the proposal will not have any such impacts.) 13. 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,) CEQA Checklist 3196 File No.: CUP 96-005 Potentially . Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Would the proposal result in Significant Mitigation Significant No potential impacts involving: Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 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, the proposal will not have any such impacts.) d) have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] (Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the proposal will not have any such impacts,) e) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] (Based on a'project-specific screening analysis, the proposal will not have any. such impacts,) 15. RECREATIQN Would the proposal: a) Increase the demand. for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] (Based on a,project-specificscreening analysis, the proposal will not have any such impacts,) b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] . (Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the proposal will not have any suchimpaclS,) CEQA Checklist 3/96 . . J . Would the proposal result in potential impacts involving: 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 the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate imponant examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? (Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the proposal will not have any such impacts.) b) Does the project have the potential to achieve shon-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? (Based on a project-specific screening-analysis, the proposal will not have any such impacts,) c) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past 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? (Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the proposal will 1'ot have any such impacts,) , 17. EARLIER ANALYSES No additional documents were referenced pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA processes to analyze any noted etTect(s) resulting from the proposal. Potentially Significant Impact [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] File No,: CUP 96-005 Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] Less Than Significant Impact [ ] [ 1 [ 1 [ ] No Impact [X] [X] [Xl [Xl CEQA Checklist 3/96 . FileNo, e ___M\, \:i~ ~ c;(: s. CIIY OF ARCADIA 240 WESTHUNTINGTON DRIVE ARCADIA, CA 91007 ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION FORM Date Filed: General Information . 1, Applicant's Name: Grace Tan Address: 120 Fisk Ave., San Gabriel, CA 91776 2, Property Address (Location): 103 Las Tunas Dr." Suite B, Arcadia, Cj\ 91007-8513 Assessor's Number: Lot 1';. Tract 13540. Book 277. Paee 11 & 12. '. 3, Name, address and telephone number of person to be contacted concerning this project: Lee Ann Tokita, 1822 Longhill Dr., Monterey Park, CA 91754 ' 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: A conditional use permit and n business license for a tutorial center. 5. Zone Classification: CO. 7200- Private Schools. 6, General Plan Designation: Connnercial Office .Proiect Description 7, Proposed use of site (pr9ject description): Tutorial center for 30 students. 8. 9. 10, . 11, l2. 13, Operatin~ ,hours are 9:00a.m. to 8:00p.m. Mondav throueh Fridav. and 9:00a.m. ., to 6:00p.m.'on Saturdays, Site size: 1032 square feet of connnercial office space. Square footage per building: 1948 square feet of building. Number of floors of construction: one Amount of off-street parking provided: 11 parking spaces. Proposed scheduling of project: July 1996 Anticipated incremental development: nOM 1.1" . 15. 16, 17, 18, . If residential, includ" .he number of units, schedule of ,-.,It sizes, range of sale prices or rents, and type of household sizes expected: Ifcommercial, indicate the type, Le. neighborhood, city or regionally oriented. square footage of sales area, and loading facilities, hours of operation: This site has l032SF of sales area. and is in a neiRhbothood type of commercial district. Hours of operation will be 9:00a.m. to 8:00p.m. Monday through Friday, and 9:00a.m. to 6:00p.m. on Saturdays. If industrial, indicate type, estimated employment per shift, and loading facilities: If institutional, indicate the major function, estimated employment per shift, estimated occupancy, loading facilities, and community benefits to be derived from the project: If the project involves a variance, conditional use permit or zoning application, state this and indicate clearly why the application is required: City of Arcadia requires a conditional use permit for all school type of facilities. Are the following items applicable to the project or its effects? Discuss below all items checked yes (attach additional sheets as necessary). 19, 20. 21, 22. 23. . YES NO Change in existing features of any hills. or substantial alteratin of ground contours, o rEl Change in scenic views Or vistas from existing residential areas.or public lands or roads. o rEl Change in pattern, scale or character of general area of project. o o [J Significant amounts of solid waste or litter. ~ [) Change in dust, ash, smoke, fumes or odors in vicinity, o E.I.R, 3/95 -2- - 24. ,- -:>, 26, 27, YES NO Change in ground water quality or quantity, or alteration of existing drainage patterns, o Substantial change in existing noise or vibration levels in the vicinity, o o o Is site on filled land or on any slopes of 10 percent or more, Use or disposal of potentially hazardous materials,such as toxic substances, flammable or explosives, 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, etc.), o 30, Relationship to a larger project or series of projects, o fiI (i) fiI [!J I]J !]I UI EnvironmentalSetting There are no impact on item number 31 & 32. See photo attached. 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. 32, 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, 31. . 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 th~_ bes~ f y knOW[Ve and belief. May 29, 1996 ,I : (,,'.l - -"-, ~ ," Dale Signature . -3- E.I:R. 3/95