No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1528 \ '- RESOLUTION 1528 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. CUP 95-008 FOR A TUTORIAL CENTER AT 524 SOUTH FIRST A VENUE. WHEREAS, on August 21, 1995, a Conditional Use Permit application was filed by Dennis G. Schrader (dba: American Resource Education Center) for a tutorial center in a 5,000 square foot commercial building, Development Services Department Case No. CUP 95-008, at property commonly known as 524 South First Avenue, more particularly described in Exhibit "A". WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on September 26, 1995, 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 1. 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 properly one for which a Conditional Use Permit is authorized. 3. That the site for the proposed use is adequate in size and shape to accommdiiate said use, and all yards, spaces, walls, fences, parking, loading, landscaping and other features required 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 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 adverse effect on wildlife resources. or the habitat upon which the wildlife depends. ~ . . SECTION 3. That for the foregoing reasons this Commission grants a Conditional Use Permit for a tutorial center in a 5,000 square foot commercial building at 524 South First Avenue upon the following conditions: 1. The tutorial center and the site shall be maintained and operated in a manner that is consistent with the proposal dated August 21, 1995 and the Supplementary Information and plans that were submitted with the application for CUP 95-008. This shall include, but not be limited to, preventing the students from disturbing the adjacent residents and businesses, and providing a trash enclosure, wheel stops, a van accessible parking space and bicycle racks to the satisfaction of the Community Development Division. 2. A Modification for 14 substandard parking spaces with no landscaping in lieu of 22 spaces with five percent landscaping is granted for CUP 95-008 3. CUP 95-008 shall be monitored by staff and, if there are problems, referred to the Planning Commission for reevaluation at a public hearing. If the Commission's reevaluation determines that there are detrimental or injurious affects, the Commission may amend the approval and impose additional conditions of approval to mitigate such affects. 4. CUP 95-008 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 awareness and acceptance of the conditions of approval. 5. All local code requirements regarding building occupancy, fire protection and safety features shall be complied with to the satisfaction of Building Services and the Fire Department. 6. All of the conditions of approval shall be complied with prior to .- occupancy of the tutorial center. Noncompliance with the plans, provisions and conditions of CUP 95-008 shall constitute grounds for its immediate suspension or revocation which may result in closure of the tutorial center. SECTION 4. The decision, findings and conditions contained in this Resolution reflect the Commission's action of September 26, 1995 and the following vote: AYES: Commissioners Bell, Huang, Kalem:kiarian, Murphy and Sleeter NOES: Commissioner Daggett ABSENT: Commissioner Kovacic 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. -2- 1528 I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was adopted at a regular . meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 26th day of September, 1995 by the following vote: A YES: Commissioners Bell, Huang, Kalemkiarian, Murphy and Sleeter NOES: Commissioner Daggett ABSENT: Commissioner Kovacic ATTEST: . ~~ Secretary, Planning Commission City of Arcadia APPROVED AS TO FORM: 11iJ~)f Jrl~~ Michael H. Miller, City Attorney . -3- 1528 .. Exhibit "A" Legal Description 524 South First Avenue Lot I and the South 51 feet of Lot 2, Block 63-1/2, Tract 866, in the City of Arcadia, County of Los Angeles, State of California, as per Map recorded in Book 16, Pages 198 and 199 inclusive of Maps, in the office of the County Recorder of said County. . . Exhibit "A" 1528 STAFF REPORT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT September 26, 1995 TO: Chairman and Members of the Arcadia City Planning Commission FROM: Donna Butler, Community Development Administrato~ By: James M.Kasama, Associate Plann~ SUBJECT: Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 95-008 A 5,000 square foot tutorial center at 524 S. First Avenue SUMMARY . Conditional Use Permit application no. CUP 95-008 was submitted by Dennis G. Schrader to operate a 5,000 square foot tutorial center for a maximum of 60 Junior High and High School students at 524 'S. First Avenue. The Development Services Department is recommending approval of this Conditional Use Permit application subject to the conditions in this report. GENERAL INFORMATION APPLICANT: Dennis G. Schrader (dba: American Resource Education Center) LOCATION": 524 S. First Avenue REQUEST: A Conditional Use Permit with parking modifications for an accelerated academic tutorial center that will be limited to a maximum of 60 students in grades 7 through 12 with minimUm 3.0 grade point averages. SITE AREA: 13,635 square feet (0.31 acre) FRONTAGES: 101 feet along S. First Avenue 135 feet along Fano Street . . . . EXISTING LAND USE & ZONING: The site is developed with a vacant 5,000 square foot commercial building, and another 1,900 square foot commercial building that is occupied by a tailor and beauty salon. There are 15 substandard on-site parking spaces. The site is zoned C-2 (General Commercial). GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Commercial SURROUNDING LAND USES & ZONING: North: Insurance offices and a nonconforming residence zoned C-2 South: Florist and nonconforming residences zoned C-2 E a S t: Condominiums zoned R-3 West: Accountant's offices and a beauty salon zoned C-2 PROPOSAL AND ANALYSIS The proposal is to operate a tutorial center in an existing 5,000 square foot commercial building at the northeast corner of First Avenue and Fano Street. The tutorial center will offer accelerated academic programs to Junior High and High School students (grades 7 to 12) with minimum 3.0 grade point averages. There will be four classrooms with approximately 12 students in each classroom, and a computer lab for six students at a time. The maximum number being taught at anyone time will not exceed 60 students. There will be four instructors and one clerical staff person. Classes will be scheduled as follows: Regular Acadernic Sessions: Monday - Friday: Saturday: Monday - Friday: Saturday: 3:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. 10:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. 1:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. .- Summer Sessions: Details of the proposal are outlined in the attached letter and Supplementary Information. Schools are permitted in any zone with an approved Conditional Use Permit (Sec. 9275.1.35.1). The subject building was previously occupied by a retail interior design center. The site is also improved with another 1,900 square foot commercial building that is occupied by a tailor and a beauty salon, as shown on the attached site plan The site needs a trash enclosure which the applicant will provide. The existing parking does not comply with the zoning regulations, and there is no landscaping in the parking CUP 95-008 September 26, 1995 Page 2 . area. Further issues to be addressed are automobile access, parking area improvements, and compatibility with surrounding uses. Automobile Access and Parking Access to the site is from Fano Street. The existing parking layout of the subject site enables through access to the alley. This through access would facilitate the pick-up and drop-off of the students, however, the access to the alley exists only at the convenience of the property owners to the north. The access to the alley is not secured by an easement. Without the through access to the alley, pick-ups and drop- offs would have to take place at curb side, or in the rear parking area which is not large enough to provide a good turnaround area, and the existing driveway is not wide enough to accommodate two-way traffic. There are 15 on-site parking spaces, none of which comply with the City's parking design regulations, and the parking area lacks the required five percent landscaping. There are eight parking spaces in a tandem arrangement directly behind the tailor shop and beauty salon. The applicant has stated that there is an agreement that these eight spaces are exclusively for the use of the tailor and beauty salon, and that he will honor this agreement. It appears that the existing parking situation has served the subject property adequately. . The remaining seven spaces are available for the proposed tutorial center. There are three at the rear entrance to the proposed tutorial center, one parallel to the east wall of the garage, and three parallel to the block wall along the east property line. One of the spaces at the rear entrance will be eliminated to provide a 17 foot wide van accessible parking space. This will result in six substandard on-site spaces being available for the tutorial center. According to the applicant's Supplementary Information, six parking spaces are all that is u,eeded. However, based on a maximum of 60 students, the zoning regulations require twelve spaces (one space for each five classroom seats). The tailor and beauty salon should have ten spaces (one space per 1,000 gross square feet). Therefore, there should be 22 on-site parking spaces. However, if the parking area was redesigned and landscaped to comply with the zoning regulations, staff estimates that only six or seven spaces could be accommodated and the through access would be eliminated. Observations of other tutorial centers support the applicant's statement that on-site parking for the students is not necessary. Almost all of the students are dropped-off and picked-up in carpools or by Arcadia Transit, or use bicycles, or walk. The parents rarely need a parking space to wait for the children. Staff recommends that . CUP 95-008 Septernber26,1995 Page 3 . with the exception of providing a trash enclosure, wheel stops, and a van accessible parking space, the existing parking area improvements be allowed to remain as is. The applicant will install racks in a portion of the existing garage for bicycle parking. The situation should be monitored and if parking or traffic problems arise either on-site or off-site, this application should be reevaluated to determine if conditions of approval can be added to control the situation, or if the intensity of the use should be reduced. Compatibility With Surrounding Uses In this case, the amount of traffic and the number of students will be greater than the traffic generated by the former interior design center. However, the intensity of the activity generated by the proposed tutorial center would not necessarily be greater than that for other uses that could occupy the site without a Conditional Use Permit. Provided that the access and parking situations do not cause problems, and if the students do not disturb the adjacent residences and businesses as stated in the applicant's Supplementary Information, the proposed tutorial center will be compatible with the surrounding uses. . The situation should be monitored and if problems arise, this application should be reevaluated to determine if additional conditions of approval can be added to control the situation, or if the intensity of the use should be reduced. CEOA Pursuant to the provIsIons of the California Environmental Quality Act, the Developlll.ent Services Department has prepared an initial study for the proposed project. Said initial study did not disclose any substantial or potentially 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 adverse effect on wildlife resources or the habitat upon which the wildlife depends. Therefore, a Negative Declaration has been prepared for this project. . CUP 95-008 September 26, 1995 Page 4 . . . RECOMMENDATION The Development Services Department recommends approval of Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 95-008 subject to the following conditions: 1. The tutorial center and the site shall be maintained and operated in a manner that is consistent with the proposal dated August 21, 1995 and the Supplementary Information and plans that were submitted with the application for CUP 95-008. This shall include, but not be limited to, preventing the students from disturbing the adjacent residents and businesses, and providing a trash enclosure, wheel stops, a van accessible parking space and bicycle racks to the satisfaction of the Community Development Division. 2. A Modification for 14 substandard parking spaces with no landscaping in lieu of 22 spaces with five percent landscaping is granted for CUP 95-008. 3. CUP 95-008 shall be monitored by staff and, if there are problems, referred to the Planning Commission for reevaluation at a public hearing. If the Commission's reevaluation determines that there are detrimental or injurious affects, the Commission may amend the approval and impose additional conditions of approval to mitigate such affects. 4. CUP 95-008 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 awareness and acceptance of the conditions of approval. 5. All of the conditions of approval shall be complied with prior to occupancy of the tutorial center. Noncompliance with the plans, provisions and conditions of CUP 95-008 shall constitute grounds for its immediate su~pension or revocation which may result in closure of the tutorial center. - FINDINGS AND MOTIONS Approval If the Planning Commission intends to approve of this Conditional Use Permit application, the Commission should move to approve and file the Negative Declaration and adopt a resolution which incorporates the Commission's decision, specific findings and conditions of approval as set forth in the staff report, or as modified by the Commission. CUP 95-008 September 26,1995 Page 5 . Denial If the Planning Commission intends to deny this Conditional Use Permit application, the Commission should move for denial and adopt a resolution which incorporates the Commission's decision and specific findings. Note: Because there will not be an October 10, 1995 Planning Commission meeting, resolutions of approval and denial have been prepared for adoption so that there will not be an inordinate delay in the processing of this application. If any Planning Commissioner, or other interested party has any questions regarding this matter prior to the September 26th public hearing, please contact Associate Planner, Jim Kasama at (818) 574-5445. Approved by: Q onna L. Butler Community Development Administrator Attachments: Applicant's proposal letter and Supplementary Information Site Plan and Floor Plan Land Use & Zoning Map Negative Declaration & Initial Study .- . CUP 95-008 September 26,1995 Page 6 ( ( AMERICAN RESOURCE EDUCATION CENTER . 141 E. Duane Ro:ul. Sui'e IOJ. Are:ulia. CA 91006 Tel: (R I R) 445-6112 Fax: (RIR) R21-9057 August 21, 1995 Re: Conditional Use Permit American Resource Education Center Dear Sir or Madam: American Resource Education Center will offer accelerated academic programs to Middle School and High School students who qualify with a 3.0 G.P.A. As lhe owner and director of American Resource, I have more than 25 years experience in classroom instruction and curriculum design. Needless to say our educational program at American Resource is far more than a "business"; it is a commitment. Briefly, our curriculum will include the following: I) Honors and Advanced Placement math and science classes: All designed around existing Arcadia High School textbooks and taught exclusively by distinguished Cal- Tech instructors; . 2) English Grammar and Composition; 3) ESL, featuring systematic vocabulary and grammar "groupings": All materials developed "in house" for publication by American Resource; 4) SAT Math and Verbal; SAT-2 Achievement Tests; 5) Rapid Reading: State-of-the"arl technique and equipment to teach efficient eye movement. We will in"lddition build a computer lab with both Intel Pentium-90 and Apple Power Macintosh computers - Internet connected and open free of charge to all of our students. It is our sincere goal to graduate students equipped with real 'Job skills" and logical reasoning ability. In this increasingly complex world, we believe American Resource has a responsibility to do more than raise grades and SAT scores. If! can provide any further information regarding our program at American Resource Education Center, please do not hesitate to contact me at your convenience, We very much appreciate your considering us for the Conditional Use Permit. Sincerely yours, . ~~A~ Dennis G. Schrader { ( AMERICAN RESOURCE EDUCATION CENTER . 141 E. Duarte Road. Suile 103. Arcadia. CA 91006 Tel: (818) 445-6112 Fax: (818) 821-9057 Supplementary lnfonnation a) Schedule: Regular Academic Session (September 10 - June 3): Monday - Friday: 3:00 - 7:00 p.m, Saturday: 10:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. Summer Session (June 19 - August 19): Monday - Friday: 1:00 - 7:00 p,m. Saturday: 10:00 - 6:00 p.m. Note: Our regular academic session is coordinated with Arcadia High School's quarterly system. b) Rooms: 4 classrooms, I computer lab, a student lounge and a parent-teacher conference room. c) Number of employees: 4 instructors and 1 clerical staff . d) Number of students per classroom: 12 maximum per classroom and 6 maximum in computer lab, Length of classes: 1. 5 - 2.0 hrs, e) Parking and Access: .- Most of our students walk or bike from Arcadia High School, Dana Middle School and First Avenue Middle School. Any vehicular traffic consists mostly of "pick-ups" and "drop-offs" between classes. In addition, many of our students whose parents are quite busy already have carpooling agreements amongst themselves or use "Dial-a-Ride", It has been my obselVation at past facilities that even when we have the maximum number of students on site, we do not need more than six (6) parking spaces. For those students riding bicycles, we will provide a secured bicycle parking area near the rear access. f) Handicapped facilities will be. provided: including classroom spaces, restrooms and access to computers for homework and independent study. All classrooms and facilities in this complex will be accessible, Corridors are proposed to be 7 feet wide. g) Students will not be permitted to congregate, loiter or create any disturbances in or near any portion of the premises, but most especially in the rear parking area to assure that the adjacent residents will not be disturbed. A sign will be posted at the rear door to inform the students of this restriction, . More than adequate lobby and lounge spaces are proposed to be provided for the students inside the tutoring center should they arrive early for their sessions, or need to wait for Dial-A-Ride or their carpool. . -- .. ( (' ,53.1 MEDICAL OFFICES 1 FAST fOOD ///S".I (//J/ P?.3/ t/J.s.J (/;:,/ 50 50 50 50 50 50 ELDORADO ST. 1'% 141.7 50 SO so so :;;~ MORTUARVO (MS) (/22) t'/?~/ 1'/3a/ "" 0 0 0 0 ~'" 0 OFFICES ~~ ,.., 0 " '-' " 0 CD - g~O z ~ - :< " INS. OFFICE ~~ .: CONFECTIONER 0. NAIL SALON ~ SO C-2~ . _. 135 50 ~ " C-2 R-3 141.7 '--:;" ;> T o ~.o -<:: E4~ VACANT !<j.o ~? INSURANCE 0 NAIL SALON <...:. f-< "'-E. OH1<:E ~ 0 ~ (I) x.. On <.'J ACCT. ~..n () <:> ~ - c::: <S '" OFFICES ~.o ..)< 1i) ..... (5) CD 0) @ i:.t., CD BEAUTY "" V SA LON ~o '\. (lIS) ~'" (/2// (/Z5/ (/23) 14/.7 '- 100.0r;, SO IDP.~ FA NO ST. 50 141.7 135 50 SO Sit 50 SQ'" CSJ.J '" o flORIST 0 02L7.J t'/2 t'/N) 1/3()) 0 BOARD ~ "'~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 -..:: . ,~ OF .!! /25 0 REALTORS :;:~O ~ 0 0 0 ~ , ~ 'C I 0 . ... VACAN'r ~\tl ::.. DENTAL OFFICE ~ t.1) ~~ FARTY RENTALS !6 SO 141.7 ~ ~ 135 - R-3 C-2~ LC-2 SO BEAUTY SALON OFFICES '" '" .n '" LAND USE & ZONING MAP 524 S. First A venue CUP No. 95-008 ... North Tutorial Center Scale: 1" = 100' -- >-1 ~I I ._ "",.1... 11:1' .- " fr. :<. ". ,. _...'.,..,. f'"1") I..., ... ~. r ~ ~ V ... ~ .. ... ~ .. .... ~ ... t! 0 ).. 't ~ .. .. ,. :'; ~ ~ -> H 'Q '- . Ir......'" .l.\.........,. -.-ru','t.T o .61";" rv,~ . !.It....... ~J 'I'"'' H~ ,.,. ~...... .to'lt'r4ll'''''-''''''' r.l ---'-"-.~""'II~ ,.. . . ,-. .:-~~:,... ,..,,.....: ~) .- -~~:,.. ....1..t~'....s.e. :~,."'\.O -......... .'hr--"" . , ~ 1 I'; 11 I . ,. 'T I ._rP'""p~~Et7 r~ve.Gl.l( \ .:-. ~,. ~ " '. . ., ." '.' .' .. ~ w fi ~ '!. JU'(.' ~ v i>~, '" ~.L z~ ~L '" \u + 'l: _ 0(.'" !' " " .' . r.' ';i..n~f ..:!~:,"" ~ -.(f~r, . ~;"';' j"" :~'.:.:;..: : .l~' ~/dt:;.,.. ,..~".::.n~~' .::-: . ,... : >';~","'< ...'....:.'f.~~~.iJ.....~ ."'" ':. h;~::fi!.~.*IJii":"~:ti..'':'': "";:~:il?~"tt I"~ . e~:,!~~1i}ic-I:~Tt'h~I!.:,..1.;.,...:.~....l.~~,~,\..:fiF, "~l""'_'" , . J;:f'.."t.,,~'('~ ..........~,~.- .". ~""""" '.. I'. '~" .. _.. " .. '/tr . I.,. , ' --.1......- .) . ( " ,,"} bl a- rt ,,'1,bl /r -~-~- I t ~ C o,.Jl't,t(;.,.)(!- C.OMI'Vrr/t oJ) (c:.ODM , L-t'\1> ~ F~O~-r :t" ~ , L068Y \3' - ..t , "- s ..r; , ..; ... . . .... 04 C I- A H Il 1:10'-' I.. .." ~ Gl..A ~ Sit OOM ,L , ~ N - 0"' , , t ! I ,,",r~ ,/'1,57, ~ <:> .... , Cl ~ - ... . 0- .r''!'' ~ , '" ~ .... 1= L -" '-1] , OFFr(f=. -4) I "'EAtZ ~ , <;rl/b [~., '" /...o~y ~ 1.(', ' Lof.},J/.r[ . ...!) 3- 1 J.11 II \! . 'I ~ OOOIf: I ,,' (," 1 ,.". ~~ /1''1 " ,yJ''l'' ,y . . . ( File No.: CUP 95-008 CI1Y OF ARCADIA 240 WEST HUNTINGTON DRIVE ARCADIA, CA 91007 CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT NEGATIVE DECLARATION A. Title and Description of Project: Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 95-008 A Conditional Use Permit for an accelerated academic tutorial center for a maximum of 60 students in grades 7 through 12 with minimu 3.0 grade point averages. B. Location of Project: 524 S. First Avenue; Arcadia, California C Name of Applicant or Sponsor: Dennis G. Schrader dba: American Resource Education Center 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 any, included in the project to avoid potentially significant effects: 6a... ~(.J/?Pt.CHhl1ittZY /N~I'fA-7/o4 f7'(0V/Ol"b 6)1 Ar>Pt..ICA1<I-r: &1- t3tJN IS. R17.6-C4IO? . Date: t7....--..I 28/ f~ Date Posted: !tit'.:/- 3 ~ (i'l.5' [2_.~ $--- Sign ure ~~ Title . . . ( ( Pile No. CUP 95-008 CITY OF ARCADIA 240 WEST HUNTINGTON DRIVE ARCADIA, CA 97007 ,(818) 574-5400 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM 1. Project Title: A Conditional Use Permit for American Resources Education Center 2. Project Address: 524 S. First Avenue Arcadia, CA 91006 3. Project Sponsor's Name, Address and Telephone Number: Dennis Schrader American Resources Education Center 141 E. Duarte Road, #103 Arcadia, CA 91006 (818) 445-6112 4. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Arcadia Community Development Division 240 W. Huntington Drive Arcadia, CA 91007 (818) 574-5423 - 5. Contact Person and Phone Number: Jim Kasama, Associate Planner (818) 574-5445 6. General Plan Designation: Commercial 7. Zoning Classification: C-2 / General Commercial CEQA Checklist 7/95 .. . . ( ( 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 sheets if necessary.) A Conditional Use Permit for an accelerated academic tutorial center for a maximum of 60 students in grades 7 through 12 with minimum 3.0 grade point averages. The location of the proposal is within walking distance of the high school from which most of the students will be coming from, and the proposal includes the encouragement of, and facilities for, the use of alternative transportation. 9. Other public agencies whose approval is required. (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement.) Building Services for the issuance of permits for the construction of the tenant improvements (if the Conditional Use Permit is approved). 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. [ 1 Land Use & Planning [Xl Transportation/Circulation [ 1 Public Services [ 1 Population & Housing [ 1 Biological Resources [ 1 Utilities & Service Systems [ 1 Geological Problems [l Energy & Mineral Resources [ 1 Aesthetics [ 1 Water [ 1 Hazards [ 1 Cultural Resources [ 1 Air Quality [Xl Noise [ 1 Recreation [Xl Mandatdly FincUngs of Signficance CEQA Checklist 7/95 -2- File No. CUP 95-008 . . . ( ( DETERMINATION (To be,complered 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 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 attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared... . . . .. . .. . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . [Xl I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . [ 1 I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) 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, if the effect is a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated." mitigated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . [ 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 all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . [ 1 .- s~~ Da6~ ~~-- 28. /9?s- , Tames M. Kasama Printed Name Community Development Division For CEQA Checklist 7/95 -3. File No. CUP 95-008 ( EV ALUA TION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: e1. . . A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects 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. "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 ElR is required. 4. "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation meas.ures 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, "Ealier Analyses" may be cross-referenced.) 5. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier ErR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). Earlier analyses are discussed in Section 17 at the end of the checklist. 6. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist, references to informatton 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. CEQA Checklist 7/95 -4- File No. CUP 95-008 . . . ( Would the proposal result in potential impacts involving: 1. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal: a) Conflict with general plan designation or zoning? (The proposal is consisteI\t with the commercial designation in the GeI\eral Plan and is a use for which a Conditional Use Permit is authorized by Section 9275.1.35.1 of the Zoning Ordinance.) b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project? (The proposal is not subject to the jurisdiction of any other agencies with applicable environmeI\taJ plans.) c) Be compatible with existing land use in the vicinity? (The proposed use is a commercial operation in a commercially zoned area and will occupy an existing commercial building.) d) Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g. impacts to soils or farmlands, 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 use will occupy an existing commercial building in an existing commercially zoned area.) 2. POPULt\JION AND HOUSING. Would the proposal: a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections? (The proposed use is community based and will serve the existing student population.) b) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or indirectly (e.g. through projects in an undeveloped area or extension of major infrastructure)? (The proposed use will occupy an existing commercial building.) CEQA Checklist 7/95 -5- Potentially Significant Impact ( J ( J ( J [ J ( ] ( ] ( J f r'otentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated ( ] ( ] ( ] [ J ( ] ( ] ( ] Less Than Significant Impact ( ] ( ] [ ] [ J ( ] ( ] [ ] No Impact [XI [XI [XI [XI [XI [Xl [Xl File No. CUP 95-008 . . . ( Would the proposal result in potential impacts involving: c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable housing? (The proposal is for a commercial use in an existing commercial building.) 3. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result in or expose people to potential impacts involving: a) Faultrupture? ('The site for the proposed use is not within the vicinity of an identified fault) b) Seismic ground shaking? (The site for the proposed use is no more susceptible to seismic ground shaking than any other site in the area. The proposed use will occupy an existing building that complies with current seismic standards.) c) Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? (The site of the proposal 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.) e) Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading, or fill? ('The proposal is for the occupancy of an existing commercial building.) f) Subsidence of the land? ('The site of the proposal is not an area subject to subsidence.) .- g) Expansive soils? (The site of the proposal is not an area subject to the expansion of soils.) h) Unique geologic or physical features? (No such features have been identified at the site for the proposed use.) 4. WATER Would the proposalresult 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.) CEQA Checklist 7/95 -6- Potentially Significant Impact [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] ( ,'otentially Significant Unless Mitigation incorporated [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] Less Than Significant Impact [ ] [X] [X] [X] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] No 1m pact [X] [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] [X] [X] [X] [X] [X] File No. CUP 95-008 o . . ( Would the proposal result in potential impacts involving: b) Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding? (The site for the proposed use is within the inundation area of the Santa Anita Dam, however there are no Special Flood Hazard Areas in the City of Arcadia as determined by the Federal Emergency Management Agency.) 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 have any affect upon 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 have any affect upon 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 have any affect on ground or surface waters.) f) Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of any aquifer by cuts or excavations or through substantial loss of ground water recharge capability? (Based on a project- specific screening analysis, the proposal will not have any affect upon ground waters.) g) Altered direction or rate of flow of ground water? (Based'bn a project-specific screening analysis. the proposal will not have any affect upon ground waters.) h) Impacts to ground water quality? (Based on a project-specific screening analysis. the proposal will not have any affect upon 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 have any affect upon groll!'d waters.) CEQA Checklist 7/95 -7- Potentially Significant Impact [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] ( . 1'0tentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] Less Than Significant Impact [Xl [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] No Impact [ ] [Xl [Xl [Xl [Xl [Xl [Xl [Xl File No. CUP 95-008 . . . I Would the proposal result in potential impacts involving: 5. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal: a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation? (Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the proposal will not have any affect upon air quality.) b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? (Based on a project-specific screening' analysis. the proposal will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants.) c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature or cause any change in climate? (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 not have any such affects.) 6. TRANSPORT A TION/CIRCULA TION Would the proposal result in: a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? (The proposed use is within walking distance of the high schooUrom which most of the students will be coming from, and the proposal includes the encouragement of, and facilities for the use of alterniWve transportation.) b) Hazards to safety from design features (e.g. sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g. farm equipment)? (The proposed use will occupy an existing commercial building at a location that has not been identified as hazardous. The proposed use with mitigation of its potential parking demand will be compatible with the surrounding uses.) c) Inadequate emergency access Or access to nearby uses? (The site for the proposed use is readily accessible and will not inhibit access to adjacent or nearby uses.) CEQA Checklist 7/95 -8- Potentially Significant Impact [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] ( l'otenlially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [XI [XI [ ] Less Than Significant Impact [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] No Impact [XI [XI [XI [XI [ ] [ ] [XI File No. CUP 95-008 ( . Would the proposal result in potential impacts involving: d) Insufficient parking capacity on,site or off-site? (Both on-site and off-site parking capacities would be insufficient except that the proposed use is within walking distance of the high school from which most of the students will be coming from, and the proposal includes the encouragement of, and facilities for the use of alternative transportation.) e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? (Based on a project-specific screening analysis, there are no existing or proposed hazards or barriers to pedestrians or bicyclists. The proposal includes a spacious and secured area for bicycle parking.) . f) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation (e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? (The proposed use is within walking distance of the high school from which most of the students will be coming from, and the proposal includes the encouragement of, and facilities for the use of alternative transportation. The proposal includes a spacious and secured area for bicycle parking.) g) Rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts? (Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the proposal will not have any such affects.) 7. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Would the proposal result in impacts to: .- a) Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats (including but not limited to plants, fish, insects, animals and birds)? (Based on a project- specific screening analysis, the proposal will not have any such affects. The proposal is for the occupancy of an existing commercial building in an existing commercially zoned and developed area.) b) Locally designated species (e.g. heritage trees)? (No such species exist at the proposal sita) . c) Locally designated natural communities (e.g. oak forest, coastal habitat, etc.)? (No such communities exist at the proposal site.) CEQA Checklist 7/95 -9- Potentially Significant Impact [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] ( 1'0tentiaIly Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated [X] [ ] [X] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] Less Than Significant Impact [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] No Impact [ ] [X] [ ] [X] [X] [X] [X] File No. CUP 95-008 . . . Would the proposal result in potential impacts involving: d) Wetland habitat (e.g. marsh, riparian and vernal pool)? (There is no wetland habitat in the vicinity of the proposal.) e) Wildlife dispersal or mitigation corridors? (Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the proposal will not have any such affects.) 8. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES Would the proposal: a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? ( The proposal is to occupy an existing commercial building that is not in conflict with any such plans.) b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient manner? (Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the proposal will not have any such affects.) 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? (Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the proposal will not have any such affects.) 9. HAZARDS Would the proposal involve: a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazarc;Wus substances (including, but not limited to: oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation)? (Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the proposal will not have any such affects.) b) Possible interference with an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? (Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the proposal will not have any such affects.) c) The creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard? (Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the proposal will not have any such affects.) CEQA Checklist 7/95 -10- Potentially Significant Impact [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] ( ,'otentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] I ] [ ] [ ] Less Than Significant Impact [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] No Impact [Xl [Xl [Xl [Xl [Xl [Xl [Xl [Xl File No. CUP 95-008 . . . ( Would the proposal result in potential impacts involving: d) Exposure of people to existing sources of potential health hazards? (Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the proposal will not have any such affects.) e) Increased fire hazard in areas with flammable brush, grass, or trees? (The site for the proposal is an existing commercial building in an existing commercially zoned and developed area in an urban setting.) 10. NOISE Would the proposal result in: a) Increases in existing noise levels? (The proposal is for a tutorial center with interior facilities for the students. The rear parking area is adjacent to a residential development, however, students will not be allowed to congregate, loiter or recreate in that rear parking area.) b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? (Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the proposal will not have any such affects.) 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? (Based on a project-specific screeniRg analysis, the proposal will not have any such affects.) b) Police protection? (Based on a project.specific screening analysis, the proposal will not have any such affects.) c) Schools? analysis, affects.) (Based on a project-specific screening the proposal will not have any such d) MaintenaIlce of public facilities, including roads? (Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the proposal will not have any such affects.) CEQA Checklist 7/95 -11- Potentially Significant Impact [ 1 [ ] [ 1 [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] ( <,otentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated [ ] [ ] [XI [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] Less Than Significant Impact [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] No Impact [XI [XI [ ] [XI [XI [XI [XI [XI File No. CUP 95-008 . . . ( Would the proposal result in potential impacts involving: e) Other governmental services? (Based on a project- specific screening analysis, the proposal will not have any such affectsc) 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? (Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the proposal will not have any such affects.) b) Communications systems? (Based on a project- specific screening analysis, the proposal will not have any such affects.) c) Local or regional water treatment or distribution facilities? (Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the proposal will not have any such affects.) d) Sewer or septic tanks? (Based on a project-speCific screening analysis, the proposal will not have any such affects.) e) Storm water drainage? (Based on a project- specific screening analysis, the proposal will not have any such affects.) f) Solid waste disposal? ('Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the proposal will not have any such affects.) g) Local or regional water supplies? (Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the proposal will not have any such affects.) 13. AESTHETICS Would the proposal: a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? (The proposal is to occupy an existing commercial building. No exterior alterations to the building are induded in the proposal.) CEQA Checklist 7/95 -12- Potentially Significant Impact [ I [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] ( .-otentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated [ I [ ] [ ] [ ] [ I [ ] [ I [ I [ ] Less Than Significant Impact [ I [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] . [ ] [ I [ ] [ I No Impact [X] [X] [X] [X] [X] [X] [X] [X] [X] File No. CUP 95-008 ( ( "otentially 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? (Based on a project-spe'cific screening analysis, the proposal will not have any such affects.) [ J [ ] [ ] [X] c) Create light or glare? (No new or additional exterior lighting is included in the proposal.) [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] 14. CULTURAL RESOURCES Would the proposal: a) Disturb paleontological resources? (Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the proposal will not have any such affects.) [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] b) Disturb archaeological resources? (Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the proposal will not have any such affects.) [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] c) Affect historical resources? (Based on a project-. specific screening analysis, the proposal will not have any such affects.) [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] . d) Have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? (Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the proposal will not have any such affects.) [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] e) Restrict existing. religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? (Based on a project- specific screening analysis, the proposal will not have any such affects.) [ ] [ ] [ ] . [X] 15. RECREA'TION Would the proposal: a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities? (Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the proposal [X] will not have any such affects.) [ ] [ ] [ ] b) Affect existing recrea tional opportunities? (Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the proposal will not have any such affects.) [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] . CEQA Checklist 7195 -13- File No. CUP 95-008 . 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 fL_h or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal commUtlity, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory,? (Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the proposal will not have any such affects.) b) Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? (Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the proposal will further neither short-term, nor long-term environmental goals.) . 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 projects) (Based on a project-specific screening analysis, the proposal will not have any such affects. No other uses with similar potential impacts exist at the site, or in the vicinity of the proposa1.) d) Does \!;Le 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 not have any such affects with the exception of the mitigated parking demand. Should the parking demand be inadequately mitigated, there could be ad verse effects to nearby businesses and residential uses,) 17. EARLIER ANALYSES: . No additional documents were referenced pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA processes, that have adequately analyzed an effect resulting from the proposal. CEQA Checklist 7/95 -14- Potentially Significant Impact [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] eotentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] Less Than Significant Impact [ ] [J [X] [ ] No Impact , [X] [X] [ ] [ ] File No. CUP 95-008 . . .11. File Ni Cup %-O()fj ( CITY OF ARCADIA 240 WEST HUNTINGTON DRIVE ARCADIA, CA 9IO07 ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION FORM ~ \21 \ 1~ Date Filed: General Information 1. Applicant's Name: \J <E:. ,'\ ",',,, (.; . Address: If fY\J?J", C c... '" R co: s. 0 '^' c:.. '" 52.'t~' :. c: Property Address (Location): T,' t: _-) <;:: c.. ~ r~ ~-t..r )L/ I E. j) ""eM' \- "- i< A -#- I 03 o .II- . .}Ikc",t, " .) w, !UC4"'1 tIJ!f, 2. Assessor's Number: 3. Name, address and telephone number of person to be contacted concerning this project: D -'< \(\ ",',); c: ';. r ^'"' r 0.. J.. wJ" IiiJ E. h 'AoJ t e.. R J. tl...li0 1\ ( r c, ~ " r_ (' j(J., c:; I \) <J h ( ~ \ ~) '7 Lf')~- b 1/ 2 ) ) 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: NJA- I 4. 5. 6. Zone Classification: C - '2 General Plan Designation: (' ;::') "'" {'r-, .(> r ~",\i - Project Description 9. 10. 7. Proposed use of site (project description): .sJ ~ " CO M ') " 1,,0 C n 8. Site size: Square footage per building: t '::l Number of floors of construction: {, \;:) u \" 'Q " Amount of off-street parking proVided(~ '\ "'--......... 1\ + "<{: (Wil/ /~ 15r"r~ 10 I"t"OVI"J.e " yaw P&c-~9,?;J,/~ ~ei) . 14. . 15. , V(}r ~S-cx:>e:J 12. ( ( Proposed scheduling of project: () C. ( '--~ (}.. '^ (~ ~ ;) ^ ~ f ) c:.k-~ 0:1 0--1. -\- "'''''''- " ~ (' r:> V "-1"1<0 Anticipated incremental development: rJ J PI. . '13. If residential, include the number of units, schedule of unit sizes, range of sale prices or rents, and rpe of household sizes expected: GJ A I If commercial, indicate the type, i.e. neighborhood, city or regionally oriented, square footage of sales area, and loading facilities, hours of operation: /VEl 1.."-1~(sot: j,ftrp,o 16. If industrial, 'ndicate type, estimated employment per shift, and loading facilities: ) 17. If institutional, indicate the major function, estimated employment per shift, estimated occupancy, loading facilities, and community benefits to be derived from the project: <:,€-~ r.~ "-~<..~ \' s;.\()\-f"(,,"\{c~~~"\ ;)r""<v*"';)~" . \ 18. If the project involves a variance, conditional use permit or zoning application, state this and indicate clearly why the application is required: C \A ,rg -, .- 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. . YES ~ c/ rf Change in existing features of any hills, or substantial alteratin of ground contours. o Change in scenic views or vistas from existing residential areas or public lands or roads. o Change in pattern, scale or character of general area of project. o E.I.R. 3/95. -2. ( CUI" 95- Cl:1el ( ( YES NO . 22. Significant amounts of solid waste or litter. 0 ~ 0 23. Change in dust, ash, smoke, fumes or odors in vicinity. ~ 24. Change in ground water quality or quantity, or alteration of existing 0 drainage patterns. ~ 25. Substantial change in existing noise or vibration levels in the vicinity. 0 26. Is site on filled land or on any slopes of 10 percent or more. 0 ~ 27. Use or disposal of potentially hazardous materials, such as toxic substances, 0 flammable or explosives. CZ(. 28. Substantial change in demand for municipal services (police, fire, water, 0 sewage, etc.). cf' 29. Substantial increase in fossil fuel consumption (electricity, oil, natural gas, 0 etc.). ~ 30. Relationship to a larger project or series of projects. 0 . Environmental Setting 31. 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 (reside~tial, commercial, etc.), intensity of land use (one-family, apartment houses, shops, department stores, etc.), and scale of development (height, frontage, set-backs, rear yards, etc.). Attach photographs of the vicinity. Snapshots or Polaroid photos will be accepted. Certification I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the data and information required for this initial evaluation to the best of my ability, and that the facts, statements, and information presented are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. X--) '2-\ \ CJ~ Date b.s Signature ~~ . E.I.R. 3/95 -3-