HomeMy WebLinkAbout1650
-
RESOLUTION 1650
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, GRANTING CONDmONAL USE
PERMIT NO. CUP 01-020 TO OPERATE ATUTORIAL CENTER,
LOCATED AT 54-70W. LAS TUNAS DRIVE
WHEREAS, on July 16,2001, a Conditional Use Permit application was filed by
Grace Tan to expand and operate an existing tutorial center, Development Services
.
Department Case No. C.U.P. 01-020 at property commonly known As 54-70 W. Las
Tunas Drive, and more particularly described as Lot 69 of the Santa Anita Colony Tract;
and
WHEREAS, A public hearing was held on August 28, 2001, 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:
1. That the granting of such Conditional Use Permit will not be detrimental to
the public health or welfare, or injurious to the property or improvements in such zone or
vicinity.
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 abuts streets and highways adequate in width and pavement type
to carry the kind of traffic generated by the proposed.use.
4. That the granting of such Conditiohal Use Permit will not adversely affect the
comprehensive General Plan.
5. That the use applied for will not have a substantial adverse impact on the
environment, and that based upon the record as a whole there is no evidence that the
proposed project will have any potential for an adverse effect on wildlife resources or the
habitat upon which the wildlife depends.
.
-
I. There shall be no parking or stopping along the driveway aisle for picking-
up/or dropping off of students.
2. The total maximum number of students including existing facility at anyone
time shall not exceed one hundred seventy (170).
3. All City code requirements regarding accessibility, fire protection, occupancy,
and safety shall be complied with to the satisfaction of Building Services and the Fire
Department.
4. Approval of CUP 01-020 shall not take effect until the property owner and
applicant have executed and filed the Acceptance Form available from the Development
Services Department to indicate acceptance of the conditions of approval.
5. All conditions of approval shall be complied with prior to the expansion of the
tutorial center. Noncompliance with the plans, provisions and conditions of CUP 01-020
shall be grounds for immediate suspension or revocation of any approvals for the tutorial
_ center.
SECTION 4. 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 August 28, 2001, by the following vote:
A YES: Commissioner Baderian, Huang, Murphy, Olson, Kalemkiarian
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
/'
V'-
Chairm , Planning Commission
City of Arcadia
.
e
e
.
ecretary, Planning Commission
City of Arcadia
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
~r.~
Stephen p. Deitsch, City Attorney
STAFF REPORT
DEVELOPMENTSER~CESDEPARTMENT
August28,2001
TO: Ancadia City Planning Commission
FROM: Donna Butler, Community Development Administrator
By: Thomas Li, Assistant Planner
SUBJECT: Conditional Use Permit No. 01-020
SUMMARY
This Conditional Use Permit (C.U.P.) application Was submitted by Grace Tan for a
2,200 sq. ft. expansion of a tutorial center at 54-58 W. Las Tunas Drive. The intent of
the tutorial center is to aid young students to become academically successful in
school.
e The Development Services Department is recommending approval of CUP 01-020
and adoption of Resolution No. 1650 that grants such permit subject to the conditions
in this staff report.
GENERAL INFORMATION
APPLICANT: Grace Tan (Little Harvard Academy)
LOCATION: 54-58 W. Las Tunas Drive
REQUEST: A Conditional Use Permit for an expansion of a tutorial center.
SITE AREA: 28,890 sq.ft. (0.66 acres)
FRONTAGES: 342.83 Feet on Las Tunas Avenue
334.69 Feet on Live Oak Avenue
EXISTING LAND USE & ZONING:
The site is developed with a 28,890 sq.ft. commercial center; zoned CoM.
.
e
e
e
SURROUNDING LAND USES & ZONING:
North: Coco's Restaurant; zoned C-2.
South: Superior Concrete; zoned CoM.
East Las Tunas Drive and Live Oak Avenue intersection
West Burger King; zoned CoM.
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION:
The site is designated as Commercial.
PROPOSAL AND ANALYSIS
The applicant is requesting a Conditional Use Permit for a 2,200 sq.ft. expansion at
54-58 W. Las Tunas Drive of an existing 3,386 sq.ft. tutorial center (CUP 97-009) at
62 W. Las Tunas Drive, as shown on the submitted site plan. The center currently is
limited to a maximum of 80 students during any given session under CUP 97-009.
The expansion will accommodate an additional 60 students.
After school programs will be provided during weekdays for children from
Kindergarten to sixth grade. Class hours will be on weekdays from 3pm to 6pm with
no classes on weekends. The administrative office hours will be 9am to 7pm .on
weekdays and 9am to 6pm on Saturday.
The tutorial center currently provides mass transportation from regular schools to the
center and will continue to do so after the expansion. Most students of the center
travel to the site this way.
A tutorial center is a permitted use in the CoM tone with an approved conditional use
permit.
The proposed 2,200 sq. ft. expansion would create a total square footage of 5,586
sq.ft.. A tutorial center requires one space per 35 sq. ft. of instructional area (3,465.4
sq. ft.). Based on this requirement, 100 spaces are required for the tutorial center.
Currently, the site has a parking deficiency of 42 spaces, and with the addition of the
proposed tutorial center the overall parking deficiency would be 82 I.e., 58 on-site
spaces provided in lieu of 140 required by code.
CUP 01-020
August 14, 2001
Page 2
e
Proposed Mix of Uses and Current ParkinQ Requirements
Approx. Current Total
Size Parking Parking Parking
Tvoe of Use in sa. ft. Reouirement Allocated' Deficiencv Notes
1t1 - Florist 506 3 2 1
112 - Donut 506 3 2 1
1t3 - Restaurant (Tasty Grill) 1,682 17 9 8
1t4 - Fantastic Sams 1,682 9 9 0
1t5 - Crossroad Medical 1,235 8 7 1
1t7 - School wI expansion 5,586 100 29 71 CUP 01-020
Totals 11,197 140 58 82 (net parking deficiellCY)
'Based on each use's share of the 58 on-site parking spaces available (i.e., 5.18 spaces per 1,000 sf.)
The proposed expansion of the tutorial center, if approved, would account for 71
spaces (87%) of an overall site deficiency of 82 parking spaces.
ANALYSIS
Staff believes that the applicant's proposal, if approved, would not impact that noted
on-site parking. The parking definitions, in this case, do not reflect parking needs for
e this project since the students are not of a driving age.
Staff has visited the site on several occasions, at times when students are anticipated
to be picked-up or an occasional drop-off, and observed that there are ample on-site
parking spaces available in the vicinity of the proposed tutorial center. Because the
center provides transportation to the site for students, the need for parking for the
loading and unloading of children is minimal. Also, The impact on the public right-of-
ways will be less than significant with site accessibility from both Las Tunas Drive
and Live Oak Avenue.
.
The tutorial center will occupy approximately 50% of the commercial center after the
expansion. With the limited traffic generation, the tutorial center will leave more than
enough parking during peak hours of the other uses in the commercial center.
The applicant shall be required to comply with all code requirements as determined
necessary by the Building Official, Fire Marshall, and Community Development
Administrator. .
CEQA
Pursuant to the prOVIsions of the Califomia Environmental Quality Act, the
Development Services Department has prepared an initial study for the proposed
project. Said initial study did not disclose any substantial or potentially substantial
CUP 01-020
August 14, 2001
Page 3
e
e
.
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 adverse effect on
wildlife resources or the habitat upon which the wildlife depends. Therefore, a
Negative Declaration has been prepared for this project.
RECOMMENDATION
The Development Services Department recommends approval of Conditional Use
Permit No. CUP 01-020 subject to the following conditions:
1. There shall be no parking or stopping along the driveway aisle for picking-up/or
dropping off of students.
2. The total maximum number of students inciuding existing facility at anyone time
shall not exceed one hundred forty (140).
3. All City code requirements regarding accessibility, fire protection, occupancy,
and safety shall be complied with to the satisfaction of Building Services and the
Fire Department.
4. Approval of CUP 01-020 shall not take effect until the property oWner and
applicant have executed and filed the Acceptance Form available from the
Development Services Department to indicate acceptance of the conditions of
approval.
5. All conditions of approval shall be complied with prior to the expansion of the
tutorial center. Noncompliance with the plans, provisions and conditions of CUP
01-020 and CUP 97-009 shall be grounds for immediate suspension or
revocation of any approvals for the tutorial center.
FINDINGS AND MOTIONS
Approval
The Planning Commission should move to approve and file the Negative Declaration
and adopt Resolution No. 1650: A Resolution of the Planning Commission of the City
of Arcadia, California, granting Conditional Use Permit No. 01-020 to operate a
tutorial center.
Denial
If the Planning Commission intends to deny this Conditional Use Permit application,
the Commission should state the reasons for denial and direct staff to prepare the
appropriate resolution incorporating the Commission's decision and specific findings.
CUP 01-020
Augl:Jst 14, 2001
Page 4
e
e
.
If any Planning Commissioner, or other interested party has any questions or
comments regarding this matter prior to the August 14, 2001 public hearing, please
contact Assistant Planner, Thomas Li at (626) 574-5447.
APpr);,V'e by: .//
/ ,~--/
~Yf-J:l/'?-?4 "~///fi ~
'onna L. Butler
Community Development Administrator
Attachments: Land Use and Zoning Map
Plans
Negative Declaration & Initial Study
Resolution 1650
CUP 01-020
August 14, 2001
Page 5
e
e
e
"
" .
rrOJ)~
.
",7 \
",..
,
(UI
,.
7
en,
,
I ,
_.:1 ~ f~
R 2 ~"q,
... . - o.~
'~'. "'.~:!"!~'~' "".~,,,,.:~,>..~.:.,..,.~.."-, L..., ,..:...!':iJt ~
-.~~, '~l),W~i'lv~~.}-,"rf;"::'~'\~'~\:~~~'~- ,:\;. '.: :;:-::;,,: <.
..:~, ~
~;~ -
-Id Z
~< <t.
~~~ ~
'~) ~
..' ~~ (J)
~.!k"." ..'
,.~.....'.//21_1""2 <) ~~
--~~~~......Jr'l1 ~ "'C!(~
. ~.",~~,U] (~ ...~3
~I"'''''- .~.~
---.q1'>l$"'~i.w"fD!'
.
('1)
SANDRA AVE .
""
MoU~ "I)
.
.
""
llU.1
...
.
I -
.
I .
'R-1
14 f
__,'to-.-.,~tO..... flitrt..
~~~~ft~
-_.....:.:1;iOiIit
4
..........a'2
~ -10
,5 ~
":O.;r
.tZ.,'.~
3
.
:.
'C-2
11'Gl~
'~~;j
1
I
I
1;l
e
I
I
I
~:"
r1i~,{jt""'1
~~t
,U
.
.
"l..~.\
.
.
0,
.
11o'to:.~
u.l.
.. ~.
i
ct
. :i ~
w
. ~ ~
>:
.
"
"",
"
~
\\'l..1to
"u.,
,.
7
\I
~
)'IP
O ___-----
-----.....
~ ---
J ____---
o -----
u ---- .
~\ -------
--- -----
..-
,.
~
"
..
.
...
,0
Land Use and Zoning Map
54-8 Las Tunas Dr.
CUP 01-020
tNORTH
Scale: 1 inch = 200 feet
ihD \<<~f'~
UJ II."
o
\$".>"1- \'1
--
1<
..
'.ss.....(II
(;.1 . 1'lil
.,.'\0.
'"
.
\'\~
"'a.'iPf/lG1Yl
() ''101\'
1\,'
t,,~1g
. l\.~
1-"
T 3~~3'f~1'''1.,,(,q
f\~ iikJ"'~
~'{," ",
t
'"
..
~
,
/
,
,
e:~ll.~(fJ"1'A "~~.,I}~
,,{..I~
'b
,b
c.lo.SbIO.rn.o. _!il/- Ii
<f \'" ,. 3,
').ib-l.
,
,
"
54 & 58 W. Las Tunas Dr.
Little Harvard Academy
62 W. Las Tunas Dr.
Arcadia, Ca 91007
626-514-2018
.
.
~ f;:lIST'^'f,
D NE-w
~,."
'.~.~
'"
Jfb"
.It
\/
~r-' .
61 & 66 W. Las Tunas Dr.
Lot 69 Santa Anita Colony
Assessor's Dumber 5788-021-016
]<:--10 w. La. Tuna. Dr. ~
..
r
..- . ..~..~'.-: -. :---
'.
.,
.~: F.
e
,
i ._-
J'090:: .
. ,
. .
.. '. .....
....... ...
.... ".
- ., -
'. ,\.-.. <-
. . I '.
\: \ ..
,
. .
~'::
-'"
:t'
-.
~ ,
\
-
c, -
~
'.
.
.j
.-
.
,
...
~-
d_
.
..
g.
0;
~
O.
,
,
!
....
~
-.
v
1~- _...--
- --~...-
..
7'
"
I
\ ;:o~
.~::~:
'!~-
.--..-
..,.
..
6.
!.
\
\
\
\
\
\
!
.>
?;'~:;~7~~f~~%~L~i~f!~~i
. ;-.:' ::~ ;,:::..
""'.;
~ .~:::;,.:'1
. .....::-... -.
"..'. ;'~ '.'
I
I
--:-5
::-
.
~
...
.i.
f
-
-
~
k
.".
;;.
.,
k
-
I
.
.'
g,
c.
I
I
,
/
..
.
;:-
\ ., . , . H
~1.-~~~'~ r ~/
.r,.. ~I\.r. ,...c-" =';...J........
-1t .... -_;;a~~~.-.. "j/.
'Lt! I .~', ,.J.'_'" ~._... "..+A...J..
~,~;':I- ."'-"I.~;:C::-~~- ,..".-
. ffi\~!Iilra~l~
, .(t>-Ar;= I~J }..:..J ,
. ~ . 1.l~J tv' . !
.'T_ ~-" .
. " . ~ -.
.:- ~L .fj)' I
mi~ f.'r/, l ....
~~ ~l: ,. . .
JiI "~,j '--
.. '\ .1 .
I ..w ~ --=:::-=:---. -~'l- - ..~. ...:.-.- --'
/. [ ~;"r :1 ....,
' ; '"
~< --'-";"'--' "':-"'~:-'-"-"
,_ _,.I'" j/o.1Jor f',!t....I~. A,.., -. 0.1<2,.t r~
: '- LtUJ. 14)'<'1 ;; ~ 1: il:
. . I .
r,......: ~...:-. :.:..;.~,~,:"'7"--p.o r.A"~"'i rr.,:J,J, - 71 st..../:..
,,-.......-.- ~~._4.. -: ---r~.~ G
Zone. - eM
"
~
,,'-
I
/
,
,
,
i
,
~
-
o
,
...
.
;
~-_:.
.... .
'. ..:~-
...
+
. .
.
;. .-
~:
..
.~~.
'..""
."
Site Plan
54 &.58 West Las Tunas Dr., Arcadia
Little Harvard Academy
Lot 69 Santa Anita Colony
626-574-2018
e
.
.
FileNo.:
cup 01-020
CITY OF ARCADIA
240 W. HUNTINGTON DRIVE
ARCADIA, CA 91007
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
NEGATIVE DECLARATION'
A. Title and Description of Project:
A Conditional Use Permit (CUP 01-020) for a 2,200 sq.ft. expansion of a tutorial center.
B. Location of Project:
54-S8W. Las Tunas Drive
In the City of Arcadia, County of Los Angeles
C. Name of Applicant, Sponsor or Person Undertaking Project:
Little Harvard Academy
62W. Las Tunas Drive,
Arcadia, CA 91007
(626) 574-2018
The City council 0 Planning Commission 0, having reviewed the Initial Study of this proposed project
and having reviewed the written comments received prior to the public meeting of the City Council,
including the recommendaiton of the City's staff, does hereby find and declare that the proposed project
will not have a siginificant effect on the environment. A brief statement of the reasons supporting the City
Council's findings are as follows:
The City Council 0 Planning Commission 0, hereby finds that the Negative Declaration reflects its
independent judgement. A copy of the Initial Study may be obtained at:
Community Development Division
City of Arcadia
240 W. Huntington Dr.
Arcadia, CA 91007
(626) 574-5423
The location and custodian of the documents and any other material which constiture the record of
proceedings upon which the City based its decision to adopt this Negative Declartion are as follows:
Community Development Division
City of Arcadia
240 W. Huntington Or.
Arcadia, CA 91007
(626) 574-5423
Date:
Date Posted:
Staff
8/01
e
e
.
(j)
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
1. Project Title:
Conditional Use Permit No. 01-020
2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Arcadia
Development Services Department
Community Development Division I Planning Services
240 W. Huntington Drive
P.O. Box 60021
Arcadia, CA 91066-6021
3. Contact Person and Phone Number:
Thomas Li (626) 574-5447
4. Project Location: 54-58 W. Las Tunas Drive
5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Little Harvard Academy
62W. Las Tunas Dr.
Arcadia, CA 91007
(626) 574-2018
6. General Plan Designation:
Commercial
7. Zoning: C"M
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 additional sheet(s) if necessary.):
A Conditional Use Permit to operate a 2,200 sq.ft. tutorial center expansion at 54-58 W. Las Tunas Drive.
9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: (Briefly describe the project's surroundings.)
North:
South:
East:
West:
Coco's Restaurant; zoned C-2.
Superior Concrete; zoned C-M.
Las Tunas Avenue and Live Oak Avenue intersection
Burger King; zoned C"M.
10. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or
participation agreement):
City Engineering Division I City Maintenance Department I City Water Division I Los Angeles
County Engineer
CEQAFORMS/CHECKLIST
Page 1 of 4
e
.
e
ENVffiONMENTAL 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.
DETERMINATION (To be completed by the Lead Agency):
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a
NEGATNE DECLARATION will be prepared.
- I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will
not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to
by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATNE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
I fmdthat the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant or "potentially significant unless
mitigated" impllCt on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an
earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation
measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
- I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because
all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE
DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant
to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION,.incIuding revisions or mitigation measures that
are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.
Signature
Thomas Li
Printed Name
Date
CITY OF ARCADIA
For
CITY IR VPUB/2000200 1/546265
FORM
UJ"
Page 2 of 4
e
e
e
EVALUATION OF ENVmONMENTAL IMPACTS:
1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are
adequately supported by the,information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following
each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the'feferenced infonnation
sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g. the
project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is
based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g. the project will not expose
sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis).
2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-
site, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as
operational impacts.
3) Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may 'occur, then'the
checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant
with mitigation, or less than significant. "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 EIR is required.
4) "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where
the incorporation 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 XVil, "Earlier Analyses," may be cross-referenced).
5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program ElR, or other CEQA
process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIRor negative declaration. Section
l5063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following:
a) Earlier Analyses Used. Identify and state where they ate available for review.
b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were
within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlierdocumem pursuant to applicable
legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based
on the earlier analysis.
c) Mitigation.Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation
Measures Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined
from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the
project.
6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to infonnation
sources for potential impacts (e.g. general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously
prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a .reference to the page or pages
where the statement is substantiated.
CITYIRVPUB12001l313785 FORM "I"
Page 3 of 4
e
.
.
7) Supporting Information Sources. A source list should be attached, and other sources used or
individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion,
8) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however,
lead agencies should normally address the questions form this checklist that are relevant to a
project's environmental effects. in whatever format is selected.
9) The explanation of each issue should identify:
a) the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used,to evaluate each question; and
b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance.
CITYIRVPUB/2001l313785 FORM "J"
Page 40f 4
e
e
e
Issues:
I. AESTHETICS. Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
b) Substantially damage scenic resources,inc1uding, but
not limited to, tress, rock outcroppings, and historic
buildings' within a state scenic highway?
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or
quality of the site and its surroundings?
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which
would adversely affect day or nighttime viewsin the area?
The proposed tutorial center is surrounded by
commercial and industrial uses. The proposal wID be
required to comply with local architectural standards,
lIIumination limits, and wlIl not effect scenic vista.
II. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES. In determining
whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant
environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the
California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site
Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California
Depe of Conservation as an optional model to use in
assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the
project:
a)Converl Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or
Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown
on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping
and Monitoring Program of the California Resources
Agency, to non-agricultural use? '
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a
Williamson Act contract?
CITY IR VPUB/2000200 1/546265
I
Potentially
Significant
Impact
File No: CUP 01-003
Less Than
SjgIi.ificant
With Less Than
Mitigation Significant No Impact
Incorporated Impact
x
x
x
x
x
x
FORM "J"
e
.
.
Issues:
c) Involve other changes in the existing environment
which, due to their location or nature, could result in
conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use?
The proposal is consistent with the commercial
designation in the General Plan and with the C.M
zoning of the site, and Is required to comply with the
regulations any other jurisdictional agency with
applicable environmental regulations. The proposal is
for a tutorial center use, which is consistent with the
surrounding development.
m. AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significance
criteria established by the applicable air quality
management or air pollution control districI may be relied
upon to make the following determinations. Would the
project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan?
b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute
substantially to an existing or projected,air quality
violation?
c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of
any criteria pollutant for which' the project region is non-
attainment under an applicable federal or state ambientair
quality standard (including releasing emissions which
exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)?
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations?
CITY IR VPUB12000200 1/546265
2
Potentially
Significant
Impact
File No: CUP 01-003
Less Than
Significant
With Less Thlln
Mitigation Significanl No lmpact
Incorporated Impact
x
x
x
x
x
FORM "1"
e
.
.
Issues:
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial
number of people?
The proposed tutorial center expansion will not expose
sensitive receptors to pollutants, alter climatic
conditionS, or result in objectionable odors. The
development of the site will be in accordance with local
air quality regulations as administered by the South
Coast Air Quality Management.District. No
objectionable odors have been associated with the
proposed use.
rv. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or
through habitat modifications, on any.species identified as
a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or
regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the
California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service?
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian
habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in
local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the
California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service?
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally
protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean
Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal
pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, fIlling,
hydrological interruption, or other means?
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any
native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or
with established native resident or migratory wildlife
corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery
sites?
CITY IRVPUBI2000200 J 1546265
3
PDlenthilly
Significant
Impact
Pile No: CUP 01-003
Less Than
Significant
With Less Than
Miligntion Significant No ,Impact
Incorporated "Impact
x
x
x
x
x
FORM "J"
'e
e
e
Issues:
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation
policy or ordinance?
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation
Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habiiat
conservation plan?
The proposed tutorial center expansion is .within a
populated area zoned for uses in which similar
projects have been developed. The proposal will not
have any impacts on biological resources. None of the
above circumstances exisL
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Cause.a substantial adverse change in the significance
of a historical resource as defined in ~ 15064.5?
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance
of an archaeological resource pursuant to ~ 15064.5?
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological
resource or site or unique geologic feature?
d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred
oUlsideof formal cemeteries?
The proposed tutorial center expansion is within a
populated area zoned for commercial uses In which
similar projects have been developed. None of the
above resources have been identified.at the subject
area, and none of the impacts have beeu associated
with the proposed use.
VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS - Would the project:
a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial
adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury or death
involving:
CITY IR VPUB12000200 1/546265
4
Potentially
Significant
Impact
-
File No: CUP 01-003
Less Than
Significant
With Less Than
Mitigation SignificMt No Impnct
[ncorporated lmpncL
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
FORM"J"
e
e
e
Issues:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on
the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning
Map issued by tbe State Geologist for the area or based on
other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to
Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42.
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including
liquefaction?
iiii) Landslides?
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or
that would become unstable as a result of the project, and
potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral
spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-
B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating
substantial risks to life or property?
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use
of septic tanks Or alternative waste water disposal systems
where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste
water?
While this entire region is subject to the effects of
seismic activity, the subject location has not been
determined to be especially susceptible to any of the
above geological or soil problems.
YD. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS.
Would the project:
CITY IR VPUB12000200 1/546265
5
J:>olcntially:
Significant
Impact
File No: CUP 01-003
Less Than
Significant
With Less Than
Mitigation Significant No lmpnct
Incorporated Impact
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
FORM "J"
e
.'
.
Issues:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
. environment through the routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials?
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and
accident condilions involving the release of hazardous
materials into the environment? '
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or
acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within
one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?
d) Be located on' a site which is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code section 65962.5 and, as Hesult, would
it create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment?
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or,
where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles
of a public airport or public use airport, would the project
result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in
the project area?
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip,
would the project result in a safety hazard for people
residing or working in the project area?
g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with
an adopted emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan?
CITY IRVPUB12000200 1/546265
6
Potentially
Significant
Impact
File No: CUP 01-003
Less Than
Significant
With Less Than
Mitigation Significant No Impact
Incorporated Impact
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
FORM "J"
e
e
e
Issues:
h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of
loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including
where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where
residences are intermixed with wildlands?
The City Building Services and the City Fire
Department will review the plans for the tutorial
center expansion to prevent any of the above impacts.
No existing sources of potential health hazards have
been identified at the subject property.
VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY.
Would the project:
a) Violate any water qualiiy standards or waste discharge
requirements?
b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere
substantially with groundwater recharge such that there
would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of
the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate
of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which
would not support existing land uses or planned uses for
which permits have been granted)?
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the
. ,
site or area, including through the alteration of the course
of a stream or river, in a manner which would result',in
substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site?
d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the
site or area, .including through the alteration of tile course
of a stream or. ri ver, or substantially increase the rate or
amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result
in flooding on- or off-site?
e) Create-or contribute runoff water which would exceed
the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage
systems or provide substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff?
f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality?
CITY IR VPUB/2000200 \1546265
7
Potentially
Significant
Impac,
File" No: CUP 01-003
Less Than
Significant
With Less Than
'Mitigation Significant No Impact
Incorporated Impact
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
FORM"]"
e
e
e
Issues:
g) Place housing within a lOa-year flood hazard area as
mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood
Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation
map?
i) Plrrce within a laO-year flood hazard area structures
which would impede or redirect flood flows?
j) Expose people or structures to a significant risk ofloss,
injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a
result of the failure of a levee or dam?
k) Inundation by seiche, tsunami. or mudflow?
The proposal is for a tutorial center expansion, and
will occupy an existing building. The proposal would
notresult in any of the above impacts.
IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established community?
b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or
regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project
(including, but not limited to the general plan, specific
plan. local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted
for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect?
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan
or natural community conservation plan?
The proposed tutorial center expansion is consistent
with the general plan and zoning designation for the
area. The requested use permit is a permit process to
establish specific conditions for the consideration of
allowing the use within the City of Arcadia. Such a
permit will not affect existing land uses or general plan
designations. The operation of the proposed tutorial
center will be subject to all other environmental plans
or policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over
this area. There are no agricultural resources or
operations in the vicinity.
CITYIRVPUB/2000200 1/546265
8
Potentially
Significant
Impact
File No: CUP 01-003
Less Tban
Significant
With Less Than
Mitigation Significant No Impact
Incorporated Impact
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
FORM"]"
-
e
e
Issues:
X.MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral
resource that would be of value to the region and the
residents of the st1!te?
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important
mineral resource mcovery site delineated on a local
general plan, specific plan or other land use plan?
The proposed tutorial center will be required to
comply with adoHted energy conservation
requirements. None of the above impacts have been
associated with tile proposed type of use. No mineral
resources are knc,wn to exist at the site.
XI. NOISE. Would the project result in:
a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in
excess of standards established in the local general plan or
noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other
agencies?
b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive
groundbome vibration or groundborne noise levels?
c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise
levels in the proje(:t vicinity above levels existing without
the project?
. d) A substantial tmnporary or periodic increase in
ambient noise levds in the project vicinity above levels
existing without t~.e project?
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or,
where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles
of a public airport or public use airport, would the project
expose people residing or working in the project area to
excessive noise le~lels?
CITY IR VPUB/2000200 1/546265
9
Potentially
Significant
Impact
File No: CUP 01-003
Less Than
Significant
With Less Than
Mitigation Significant No lmpncl
Incorporated Impact
x
x
x
x
X
x
x
FORM "J"
e
.
e
Issues:
f) For a project w:ithin the vicinity of a private airstrip,
would the project i~XpOSe people reSiding or working in
the project area to, excessive noise levels?
It is anticipated that the addition ofthe tutorial center
would not generate adverse amount of ambient noise.
Should any problems arise however, compliance with
noise regulations' will prevent any unreasonable noise
levels.
XU. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the
project:
a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either
directly (for exa""ple, by proposing new homes and
businesses) or ind:lrectly (for example, through extension
of road or other infrastructure)?
b) Displace substimtial numbers of existing housing,
necessitating the construction of replacement housing
elsewhere?
c) Displace substlmtial numbers of people, necessitating
the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
The site is presen,tIy improved as a commercial center.
The proposed tulorial center is consistent with the
general plan and zoning designations for the area and
will not impact tile population or housing.
XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project:
a) Result in substllntial adverse physical impacts
associated with th~ provision of new or physically altered
governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered
governmental facilities, the construction of which could
'cause significant finvironmental impacts, in order to
maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other
performance objel:tives for any of the public services:
Fire protection?
Police protection?
CITY IR VPUBI2000"OO 1 1546265
10
Potentially
Significant
Impact
File No: CUP 01.003
Less Than
Significant
Willi Less Than
Mitigation Significant No Impact
Incorporated Impact
x
x
x
x
x
x
FORM "1"
e
e
.
Issues:
Schools?
Parks?
Other public facilities?
The proposed USll is consistent with the planned Uses
for the area and will not result in any of.the above
. impacts.
XIV. RECREATION. Would the project:
a) Increase the us,: of existing neighborhood and regional
parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial
physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be
accelerated?
b) Does the proje,:t include recreational facilities or
require the constmction or expansion of recreational
facilities which have an adverse physical effect on the
en vironment?
The proposal is f'lr a tutorial center in a populated
area zoned for commercial type uses in which such
projects bave alrl:ady been developed. The project
will not create any significant impact upon
recreational servi:ces or result in any of the above
impacts.
XV. TRANSPOItTATION / TRAFFIC. Would the
project:
a) Cause an increase in traffic, which is substantial in
relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the
street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either
the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio
on roads, or congestion at intersections)?
b) Exceed. either individually or cumulatively, a leVel of
service standardelltablished by the county congestion
management agen<:y for designated roads or highways?
CITY IRVPUB120002 JO l/546265
II
Potentinlly
Significant
Impact
File No: CUP 01.003
Less Than
Significant
With Less Than
Mitigation SigniticElfll No Impncl
lncorporated 1mp~ct
FORM "J"
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
Issues:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
File No: CUP 01-003
Less Than
Significant
With Less Than
Mitigation Significant No Impact
Incorporated Impact
e
c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including
either an increase in traffic levels or'a change in location
that results in subs':antial safety risks?
x
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature
(e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or
incompatible uses ':e.g., farm equipment)?
x
e) Result in'inadequate emergency access? X
t) Result in inadet;luate parking capaCity? X
g) Conflict with aiiopted poliCies, plans, or programs X
supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts,
bicycle racks)? I
The proposed tutorial center should not substantially
increase the existing traffic load and capacity. The
proposal may be i.ubject to mitigation measures should
e any traffic or parking related impacts arise.
XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would
the project:
a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the X
applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board?
b) Require or result in the construction of new water or X
wastewater treatm~nt facilities or expansion of existing
facilities, the consl:ruction of which could cause
significant enviror.mental effects?
c) Require or result in the construction oCnew storm X
water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities,
the construction of which could cause significant
environmental effllctS?
d) Have sufficient. water supplies available to serve the X
project from existing entitlements and resources, or are
new or expanded l'ntitlements oeeded?
e
CITY IR VPUB12000200 1/546265 FORM "J"
12
e
e
.
Issues:
e) Result in a dete:rmination by the wastewater treatment
provider which sei:ves or may serve the project that it has
adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand
in addition to the provider's existing commitments?
f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted
capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste
disposal needs?
g) Comply with fc:deral, state, and local statutes and
regulations related to solid waste?
It is not anticipated that any of the above utilities or
,
service systems '1'ilI be significantly impacted,
Nevertheless, the proposed improvements will be
reviewed for, and the developer will be required to
provide, if necessary, any new systems or supplies
necessary to miti:gate any such impacts.
XVII, MANDATORY FINDINGS OF
SIGNIFICANCE
a) Does the projei;t have the potential to degrade the
quality of the environment, substantially reduce the
habitat or a fish ot' wildlife species; cause a fish or wildlife
population to drot' below self-sustaining levels, threaten
to eliminate a plar't or animal community, reduce the
number or restrict. the range of a rare or endangered plant
or animal or eliminate important examples of the major
periods of Califomia history or prehistory?
b) Does the proje:t have impacts that are individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively
considerable" me,ms thaI the incremental effects of a
project are consid,:rable when viewed in connection with
the effects of past projects, the effects of other current
project, and the effects of probable future projects.)
c) Does the projec:t have environmental effects which will
cause substantiallLdverse effects on human beings, either
directly or indirectly?
The proposal is f~)r a tutorial center located in area
zoned for such u!:es in which such projects have
already been developed. The project will not have any
of the above mentioned effects or impacts.
CITY IR VPUB12000200 1/546265
13
Potentially
Significant
Impacl
File No: CUP 01-003
Less Than
Significant
With Less Than
Mitigation Significant No Impact
Incorporated Impact
x
x
x
x
x
x
FORM "J"