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