Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1732 RESOLUTION NO. 1732 . A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2005-13 FOR A 750 SQ.FT. EATING ESTABLISHMENT WITH 12 SEATS AT 100 E. FOOTHILL BL YD. WHEREAS, on June 7, 2005, a conditional use permit application was filed by Andrew Babakhanlou, lessee of the subject property, for a 750 sq.ft. eating establishment with 12 seats, Development Services Department Case No. CUP 2005-13, at 100 E. Foothill Blvd.; and WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the Planning Commission on July 12, 2005, 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 RESOL YES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. That the factual data submitted by the Development Services Department in the attached report dated July 12, 2005 is true and correct. SECTION 2. This Commission finds: I. That the granting of such Conditional Use Permit will not be detrimental to the public health or welfare, or injurious to the property or . I improvements in such zone or vicinity because the initial study did not disclose . any substantial adverse effects to the area affected by the proposed project. 2. That the use applied for at the location indicated is a proper one for which a Conditional Use Permit is authorized. 3. That the site for the proposed use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate said use. All yards, spaces, walls, fences, loading, landscaping and other features including the shared parking with the neighboring business, are adequate to adjust said use with the land and uses in the neighborhood. The proposed project complies with all related zoning requirements as set forth in the Arcadia Municipal Code. 4. That the site abuts streets and highways adequate in width and pavement type to carry the kind of traffic generated by the proposed use. 5. That the granting of such Conditional Use Permit will not adversely affect the comprehensive General Plan because the land use and . current zoning are consistent with the General Plan. 6. That the 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. . 2 SECTION 3. That for the foregoing reasons this Commission grants . Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 2005-13, for an eating establishment with 12 seats at 100 E. Foothill Blvd., upon the following conditions: 1. The hours of operation shall be limited to 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.rn., seven days a week. 2. The maximum number of seats shall be limited to 12. 3. The use approved by CUP 2005-13 is limited to the eating establishment. The eating establishment shall be operated and maintained in a manner that is consistent with the proposal and plans submitted and approved for CUP 2005-13. 4. A separate sign design review application shall be submitted for all . . new signs on the premises. 5. Any exterior alteration to the building requires the filing and approval of a design review application. 6. All conditions of approval shall be complied with prior to opening the eating establishment. Noncompliance with the plans, provisions and conditions of approval for CUP 2005-13 shall be grounds for immediate suspension or revocation of any approvals, which could result in the closing of the eating establishment. 7. Approval of CUP 2005-13 shall not take effect until the property owner(s), and applicants have executed and filed the Acceptance Form available 3 from the Development Services Department to indicate awareness and . acceptance of these conditions of approval. 8. The applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Arcadia and its officers, employees, and agents from and against any claim, action, or proceeding against the City of Arcadia, its officers, employees or agents to attack, set aside, void, or annul any approval or condition of approval of the City of Arcadia concerning this project and/or land use decision, including but not limited to any approval or condition of approval of the City Council, Planning Commission, or City Staff, which action is brought within the time period provided for in Government Code Section 66499.37 or other provision of law applicable to this project or decision. The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim, action, or proceeding concerning the project and/or land use decision and the City shall cooperate fully in the defense of the . matter. The City reserves the right, at its own option, to choose its own attorney to represent the City, its officers, employees, and agents in the defense of the matter. SECTION 4. The decision, findings and conditions contained in this Resolution reflect the Commission's action of July 12,2005, by the following votes: AYES: Commissioners Baderian, Hsu, Lucas, Olson, Wen . 4 . . . none NOES: SECTION 5. The Secretary shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution and shall cause a copy to be forwarded to the City Council of the City of Arcadia. I HEREBY CERTIFY that the forgoing Resolution was adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the July 12, 2005, by the following votes: AYES: Commissioners Baderian, Hsu, Lucas, Olson, Wen none NOES: -Secretary, Planning Commission City of Arcadia APPROVED AS TO FORM: ~P.~ Stephen P. Deitsch, City Attorney Chairman, PI ing Commission City of Arcadia 5 " . STAFF REPORT Development Services Department July 12, 2005 TO: Arcadia City Planning Commission FROM: Donna L. Butler, Community Development Administrator By: Thomas P. Li, Associate Planner SUBJECT: Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 2005-13 for a 750 sq.ft. fast food eating establishment, at 100 E. Foothill Blvd. SUMMARY . Andrew BabakhanJou, lessee, submitted this Conditional. Use Permit application for a fast food eating establishment (d.b.a. Subway) at 100 E. Foothill Blvd. The business provides 12 seats, and would be open from 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m., seven days a week. The Development Services Department is recommending approval of this application, and adoption of Resolution No. 1732 subject to the conditions in the staff report. GENERAL INFORMATION APPLICANT: Andrew Babakhanlou (lessee) LOCATION: 100 E. Foothill Blvd. REQUEST: A Conditional Use Permit for a 750 sq.ft~ fast food eating establishment (d.b.a. Subway) with 12 seats, and business hours of 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m., seven days a week. LOT AREA: 16,997 sq.ft. (0.39 acre) FRONTAGES: 144 feet along Foothill Blvd. 91 feet along First Ave. . . . . EXISTING LAND USE & ZONING: The subject property is improved with a 5,400 sq.ft. commercial retail center, and is zoned C-2. SURROUNDING LAND USES & ZONING: North: South: East: West: Financial Institution; zone C-2 Multiple-family dwellings; zoned R-2 Santa Anita Wash; unzoned Auto repair shop; zoned C-2 GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Commercial PROPOSAL AND ANALYSIS The applicant is proposing to operate a "Subway" eating establishment with 12-15 seats that would occupy a 750 sq.ft. unit in an existing commercial retail center. Typically, there will be 3-4 employees serving freshly made sandwiches, salads, and breakfast items. The proposed business hours are 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m., seven days a week, In staffs opinion, this small fast food establishment should be limited to a maximum of twelve (12) seats as shown on the submitted site plan. The plans have been reviewed and received preliminary approval by Building Services and the Fire Department; however, increasing the occupancy may change the compliance status. PARKING By code, a 750 sq.ft. fast food eating establishment requires a total of twelve (12) on- site parking spaces (15 spaces per 1,000 sq.ft. of gross floor area). In this case, the subject business has shared parking with the other retail uses that total 4,650 sq.ft. within the site's commercial center, which requires twenty-four (24) additional spaces. Therefore, the total number of on-site parking spaces required is thirty-six (36), where thirty (30) spaces are provided. Although there is a deficiency, based on staffs observation, the parking lot is underutilized and would provide adequate on-site parking if the proposed use is added to the center. CODE REQUIREMENTS All City requirements regarding disabled access and facilities, occupancy limits, building safety, health code compliance, parking and site design shall be complied with to the satisfaction of the Building Official, Community Development Administrator, Fire Marshall, and Public Works Services Director, and are to be determined by submitting fully detailed tenant improvement plans for plan check review and approval. The Los Angeles County Health Department must also approve the tenant improvement plans before building permits will be issued. CUP 2005-13 July 12, 2005 Page 2 . . . Any exterior improvements, such as any new signs, sign face changes, awnings and trash enclosures shall be subject to architectural design review and approval by the Community Development Division. An Industrial Waste Discharge Permit shall be obtained from the Public Works Services Department prior to opening of the restaurant, and the tenant improvements shall include the Best Management Practices (BMPs) of the Minimum Project Requirements for reducing the level of pollutants in storm water runoff. CEQA Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act, the Development Services Department has prepared an Initial Study for the proposed project. Said Initial Study did not disclose any substantial 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. FINDINGS Section 9275.1.2 of the Arcadia Municipal Code requires that for a Conditional Use Permit to be granted, it must be found that all of the following prerequisite conditions can be satisfied: 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 accommodate 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. CUP 2005-13 July 12, 2005 Page 3 . . . RECOMMENDATION The Development Services Department recommends approval of Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 2005-13, subject to the following conditions: 1. The hours of operation shall be limited to 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m., seven days a week. 2. The maximum number of seats shall be limited to 12. 3. The use approved by CUP 2005-13 is limited to the restaurant. The restaurant shall be operated and maintained in a manner that is consistent with the proposal and plans submitted and approved for CUP 2005-13. 4. A separate sign design review application shall be submitted for all new signs on the premises. 5. Any exterior alteration to the building requires the filing and approval of a design review application. 6. All conditions of approval shall be complied with prior to opening the restaurant. Noncompliance with the plans, provisions and conditions of approval for CUP 2005-13 shall be grounds for immediate suspension or revocation of any approvals, which could result in the closing of the restaurant. 7. Approval of CUP 2005-13 shall not take effect until the property owner(s), and. applicants have executed and filed the Acceptance Form available from the Development Services Department to indicate awareness and acceptance of these conditions of approval. 8. A parking modification be granted to permit 30 on-site spaces in lieu of 36 required for the applicant's proposal. 9. The applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Arcadia and its officers, employees, and agents from and against any claim, action, or proceeding against the City of Arcadia, its officers, employees or agents to attack, set aside, void, or annul any approval or condition of approval of the City of Arcadia conceming this project and/or land use decision, including but not limited to any approval or condition of approval of the City Council, Planning Commission, or City Staff, which action is brought within the time period provided for in Government Code Section 66499.37 or other provision of law applicable to this project or decision. The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim, action, or proceeding concerning the project and/or land use decision and the City shall cooperate fully in the defense of the matter. The City reserves the right, at its own option, to choose its own attomey to represent the City, its officers, employees, and agents in the defense of the matter. CUP 2005-13 July 12, 2005 Page 4 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION . ADDroval The Planning Commission should move to approve and file the Negative Declaration and adopt Resolution No. 1732: a Resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Arcadia, California, granting Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 2005-13 for a 750 sq.ft. restaurant (d.b.a. Subway) with 12 seats and operation hours of 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m., seven days a week, at 100 E. Foothill Blvd. Denial If the Planning Commission intends to deny this Conditional Use Permit application, the Commission should state the specific reasons for denial and direct staff to prepare the appropriate resolution incorporating the Commission's decision and specific findings. . If any Planning Commissioner, or other interested party has any questions or comments regarding this matter prior to the July 12th public hearing, please contact Thomas Li at (626) 574-5447. APP~ Donna L. utler Community Development Administrator Attachments: Aerial Photo & Zoning Map Floor and Site plans Environmental Documents Resolution 1732 . CUP 2005-13 July 12, 2005 Page 5 ~ N 100 0 ~ ~ 100 200 Feet , D @i] Zone 1ffs 1@@ IE F~~~hffUU BUvd CUP @5a1J Development Servics$ Depal1mellt Enginflflring Division by: RS.Gonzalez, JINl8, 2005 ~ (1116) N 100 0 100 Feet . . (1112) ~ C) :t (141) (6 71) (T5-17) (101) (12 (131) (49 (55) S7) FOOTHILL BL (54) . (66) ~ (lU) (1 0) ~ c:( (i) I- ~ (1015) CI) 9:: (1012) Si: u: (1011) (1010) (1009) :b ~ (1009) (1006) (1005) (1001) (1000) FLORAL AVE (910) (917) (920) (919) (916) (51) (55) 67 1fs 100 E Foothill Blvd CUP 05-13 DeveloPITIMt SslVioos Department Engineering DMsion P/vim>dby: RSGonuIez. June, 2005 . - . . . " . . 'l'OBACCO CLI&BBllS . CWESI :0011111: SlOP . 'lAD OUT SlOP . UBUDIAlIT 1400 sqft 1000 sqf 750 sq 750 sqft . . . . . ..' . .... . D.' . . . . . '. ., '. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . \ ~ ~6 ~~ 7 8 9 1 11 12 13 14 15 ,fJ . () ~ I 1 2 3 4 . ~ ,., < O' t .~ (V') u:: . . 0'\ '" . co 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 '25 26 27 . '" : ~ .0 E. Foothill Blvd. --- 29' . 15'-5" 13'-2" :@ '-- $ II } ~"X~. CtE~. SPACE REQUIRED @o DIRECT YoIREll @ l I " () 16 TYP. 3'0' X ,... 1/ ....-~*"":) /; \'<--CElUNC rAIl (/ \) (TYPICAL) @ j.. I Co ~ <8" HIGH WAll. . '" u, )( . o ;., ~ / / I I rr . \ ;... \ 7' 16' 7" . '. N I Co .. '" . o i .... - . NOTE: PLEASE BE SURE TO UTIUZE THIS ONEPAGE DRAWING WHEN MEETING WITH LOCAL BUILDING'" HEAlTH INSPECTORS TO VERIFY WHETHER THE PROPOSED PLAN MEETS WITH LOCAL CODES AND ALSO TO VERIFY ALL DIMENSIONS. BEFORE REOUESTING A FULL SET OF PLANS. . GENERAL NOTES: - CEILING HEIGHT IS 10' A.F.F. (MUST BE CONFIRMED) - aECTRICAL OUTLET HEIGHTS MEASURED TO BOTTOM OF BOX. - ONE ELECTRICAL JUNCTION BOX TO BE LOCATED IN CEIUNG ABOVE EACH WlNDOW. - CUNO MODEL SW3-EL-IH WATER FlLlRAnON SYSTEM IS REQUIRED IN ALL NEW STORES Tl'fA T DISPENSE BEVERAGES (IN CANADA THE ECOLAB FRESH HZO REMAINS OPTIONAl). THE RECOMMENDED PLACEMENT fOR INSTAUA TION IS REMOTE MOUNTING ONTO THE BACKROOM BEVERAGE SYRUP RACK OR' MOUNTING ONTO BACKRODM WALL OPTIONAl INSTAlLATION MOUNTING INSIDE THE FRONT BEVERAGE COUNTER lItfERE SPAct LIMITATIONS OCCUR. IN AREAS WHERE CHLORAMlNE IS IN USE BY THE LOCAL MUNIClPAUTY THE CUNO MODEL CFSCRC CANISTER IS REOUIRED TO BE INSTAllED IN ADDITION TO lHE STANDARD SW3-E1.-IH SYSTEM. REOUIRED: I/Z" INCOlllNG WAlER UN!: FEED WITH 1/2" BALL VAlVE SHUTOFF AND 1/2" FPT CONNECTION. MINIMUM 110 VOLT. 20 AMP ELECTRICAl SERVICE TO SUPPORT THE CARBONA TOR AND WATER BOOSTER (MUST BE DEDICA TED CIRCUIT). - PROIAOTlONAl flOOR STAND (MFR. TRANS WORLD) REQUIRED IN CUSTOIolER AREA AT POINT Of ORDER (PREFERRED PLActMENl). '4 1/2" X 10" BASE. 54" OVERAlL HEIGHT. - EXIT UGHTS INSTAllED BY G.C. PER LOCAL CODE. - EMERGENCY UGHTS INSTAlLED BY G.C. PER LOCAL CODE. - EXTINGUISHERS. SMOKE AND FIRE DETECTION SYSTEMS INSTALLED BY G.C. PER LOCAL CODE. - LABOR '" idA TERIAL SUPPLIEO BY C.c. UNLESS OlHERWlSE NOTED. - AlL DIMENSIONS TO BE VERIFlED BY G.C. ON SITE. - DECOR SPEClFlCA TIONS ARE ro BE SUBWA Y"S "TUSCANy"' SCHEIolE. - SEE OWl'lER FOR REFRIGERATOR AND FREEZER HEIGHT OPTION. NOTE: "THESE PLANS ARE FOR REVIEW ONLY AND ARE NOT TO BE CONSTRUED AS FINAL APPROVAL." . l' 29' ~_. NO. ITEM 4A 30" X 30" TABLE 4B 20" X 24" TABLE 6A CHAIR 8 TRASH REctPTACLE 9 SODA MACHINE 10 BEVERAGE DES11NAnON CENTER 11 RED NEON "OPEN" SIGN 13 WALL ART (uPSCAlE) \4 CHIP RACK '6 WAlL PLANT 17 INTERIOR DOOR 19 FRONT COUNTER 21 COOKIE DISPLAY CASE 22 DISPLAY REFRIGERATOR 23 SAfE Z4 SUBSHOP 2000 P.D.S. 25 MICROWAVE 26 HAND SINK 27 BREAD OVEN 28 ENCLOSED BREAD CABINET 29 MENUBOARD 32 BACK COUNTER 33 REFRIGERATED BACK COUNTER 34 RAPID COOK OVEN 36 SINK 37 MOP SINK 3B HOT WATER TANK 39 S.S. WORKTABLE 40 WALL SHELF 41 VEGETABLE SINK 43 CLEANING PRODUCT RACK 4S NEMCO EASY SLICER 46 RETARDER CABINET 47 REFRIGERATOR 48 FREEZER 49 STORAGE UNI TS 50 SOQA STORAGE 51 STEREO SYSTEM PLEASE NOTE: 00 NOT SCALE lHlS FLOOR PLAN. REFER TO tHE WRITTEN DIMENSIONS. PHOTO- CoPYING OR FAXING WlLL OISTORT THIS ORA WING STORE CONCEPT fllAIIGUSIT .BABAKHANLOU / ISSAGOUL YAN STIJR:[ ADDRESS 100 E. FOOTHILL BLVD. ARCADIA, CA 91007 ..... RUTH SENDER SCALE I STORE · 1/4" - 1: 36130 DAn: APRIL 12th, 2005 IJMW BY 0 PENNY NOLEN Al.-L DlMENSIDNS I4UST BE VERIFIED PRIDR TO REQUESTING A FULLSET OF PLANS. - l City of Arcadia ~ Stormwater Plan Check Correction Sheet ~tact Name: ~ct Title: Company Name: Mailing Address: City, State, Zip: Phone Number: Fax Number: Tracking#: CUP 05-13 Site Name: Subway Site Address: 100 E. Foothill Blvd. Type Of Facility: Restaurant SIC Code: 5B12 Submittal Date: 6/21/2005 Plan Return Date 6/27/2005 Distributed Area: 750 sq.ft Priority Project 0 1 Items Requiring Corrections: . Complete form OC1 and place "Stormwater Construction Notes" on Plans (all projects). . Submit 3 sets of-a Standard Urban Stormwater Mitigation Plan in a report format - include plans. . Guidance booklet enclosed. . Complete form PC or provide a brief description of the proposed use of the site. worm P1 must be completed (front and back) and properly signed on both signature lines. . The SUSMP must contain this EXACT statement signed by the landowner or engineer of record: I certify under penalty of law that this document and all attachments were prepared under my jurisdiction or supervision in accordance with a system designed to assure that qualified personnel properly gather and evaluate the information submitted. Based on my inquiry of the person or persons who manage the system or those persons directly responsible for gathered the information, to the best of my knowledge and belief, the information submitted is true, accurate, and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false information, including the possibility of fine and imprisonment for knowing violations. Include printed name, position/title and date along with signature . Other corrections/clarifications required. 1. Plan review fees to be determined upon resubmlttal of plans. . Sets of plans needed ApplicationlPlan Check fee of 3 $0.00 City of Arcadia Department of Public Works 11800 Goldring Road Arcadia, California 91066- 6021 For Office Use Only Plan Checl<ed By: [John L. Hunter Date: 612712005 I Stormwater Plan review expires 180 days from June 27, 2005 Signature (562) 802-7880 Page 1 ort . . . File No. CUP 05-13 CITY OF ARCADIA 240 WEST HUNTINGTON DRIVE ARCADIA, CA 91007 CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM 1. Project Title: Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 2005-13 2. Project Address (Location) 100 E. Foothill Blvd. 3. Project Sponsor's Name, Address & Telephone Number: Andrew Babakhanlou 100 E. Foothill Blvd., Arcadia, CA 91006 (818) 522-8098 4. Lead Agency Name & Address: City of Arcadia - Development Services Department Community Development Division - Planning Services 240 W. Huntington Drive Post Office Box 60021 Arcadia, CA 91066-6021 5. Lead Agency Contact Person & Telephone Number: Donna Butler, Community Development Administretor (626) 574-5442 6. General Plan Designation: Commercial 7. Zoning Classification: C-2 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 750 sq. ft. 'Subway" eating establishment with 12 seats and operation hours of 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m., seven days a week. CEQA Env. Checklist Part 1 -1- 4103 . . . File No. CUP 05-13 9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: (Briefly describe the project's surroundings.) North: South: East: West: Financial Institution; zone C-2 Multiple-family dwellings; zoned R-2 Santa Anita Wash; unzoned Auto repair shop; zoned C-2 10. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement): The City Building SelVices, Engineering Division, Fire Marshall, Public Works Services, and Water Services will review the construction plans for the tenant improvements for compliance with all applicable construction and safety codes and will oversee construction and installation of any necessary infrastructure or improvements on-site and/or within and along the publiC right-of-way. The tenant improvements for the coffee shOp will also be reviewed by the Los Angeles County Health Department for compliance with local health codes. 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. [ I Aesthetics [ I Biological Resources [ I GeologylSoils [ I Hydrology/Water Quality [ I Mineral Resources [ I Population & Housing [ I Recreation [ I Utilities and Service Systems [ I Mandatory Findings of Significance [ I Air Quality [ I Cultural Resources [ I Hazards & Hazardous Materials [ I Land Use & Planning [ I Noise [ I Public Services [ I Transportation I Circulation DETERMINATiON (To be completed by the Lead Agency) On the basis of this initial evaluation: [XI I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATiVE DECLARATiON will be prepared. [] I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. CEQA Env. Checklist Part 1 -2- 4/03 . . . File No. CUP 05-13 [] I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. [] I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, but that at least one effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards and has been addressed by mitigation measures based on that earlier analysis as described on attached sheets, and if any remaining effect is a "Potentially Significant Impact" or "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated," an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it only needs to analyze the effects that have not yet been addressed. [] I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects have been analyzed adequately in an earlier Environmental Impact Report pursuant to applicable standards and have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. Signature Date Printed Name For EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: 1. A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impacr answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects such as the one involved (e.g., the project is not within a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be 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 related as well as operational impacts. 3. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is significant. If there are one or more, "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an Environmental Impact Report is required. 4. "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less CECA Env. Checklist Part 1 -3- 4/03 . . . File No. CUP 05-13 Than Significant Impact: The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section 17 "Earlier Analyses' may be cross-referenced). 5. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program Environmental Impact Report, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration {Section 15063(c)(3)(D)}. Earlier analyses are discussed in Section 17 at the end of the checklist. a) Earlier Analyses Used: Identify and state where they are available for review. b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document 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 that 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 information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. 7. Supporting Information Sources. A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 8. 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 significant. CEOA Env. Checklist Part 1 -4- 4/03 File No.: CUP 04-13 Less Than . Potentially Significant Less Than Significant With Significant No Impact Mitigation Impact Impact InCorporaUon 1. AESTHETICS - Would the project a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? 0 0 0 123 b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited 0 0 0 123 to, trees, 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? o o o 123 d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? o o o 123 The proposed restaurant will be in an existing retail building on a strip commercial street in a fully developed area and will not have any of the above impacts. .. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES - In determining whether impacts to agriculture resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1 997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland) to non-agricultural use? (The Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program in the California Resources Agency to non-agricultural use? o o o 123 b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? o o o 123 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? o o o 123 The proposed restaurant will be in an existing retail building on a strip commeroial street in e fully developed area end will not have any of the above impacts. 3. AIR QUALITY - Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: . CEOA Checklist 5 4.03 . . . 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 ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? e) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? f) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? Polentially Slgnlflcant Impact D D D D D Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporation D D D D D File No.: CUP 04-13 Less Than Significant Impact D D D D D No Impact IZI IZI IZI IZI IZI The proposed restaurant will be in an existing retail building on a strip commercial street in a fuily developed area. Becausa the proposed use is subject to applicable air quality regulations as administered by the South Coast Air Quality Management District, it will not have any ofthe'above impacts. 4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES - Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse impact, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species Identified as a candidate, sensnive, 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 impact on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, and regulations or by the Califomla Department of Fish and Game or US 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 remoilal, 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 resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of wildlife nursery sites? CEQA Checklist 6 D D D D D D D D D D D D IZI IZI IZI IZI 4-03 File No.: CUP 04-13 . Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological 0 0 0 ~ resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation 0 0 0 ~ Plan, Natural Conservation Community Plan, or other approved local, regional or state habitat conservation plan? The proposed restaurant will be in an existing retail building on a strip commercial street in a fully developed area and will not have any of the above impacts. 5. CULTURAL RESOURCES - Would the project: a} Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a 0 0 0 ~ historical resource as defined In !l15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an 0 0 0 ~ archaeological resource pursuant to !j15064.5? . c} Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or 0 0 0 ~ site or unique geologic feature? d} Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of 0 0 0 ~ formal cemeteries? The proposed restaurant will be in an exisUng retail building on a strip commercial street in a fully developed area and will not have any of the above impacts. 6. GEOLOGY AND 5011.5 - Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse 0 0 0 ~ effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake faull, as delineated on the 0 0 0 ~ most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Faull Zoning Map issued by the 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? 0 0 0 ~ . ii1) Seismic-related ground failure, Including liquefaction? 0 0 0 ~ CEQA Checklist 7 4-03 . . . v) 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 solis incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or altemative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? Potentially Significant Impact o o o o o Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporation o o o o o File No.: CUP 04-13 Less Than Significant Impact o o o o o No Impact [gJ [gJ [gJ [gJ [gJ The proposed restaurant will be In an existing retail building on a strip commercial street in a fully developed area. The subject location has not been determined to be especially susceptible to any of the above gaologlc problems and is not within a Seismic Hazard Area identified by the Seismic Hazard Mapping Act. The proposal does not include any excavation, grading or filling. No unique geologic features have been identified at the site. The project is connected to the local sewer system. The project will not have any of the above impacts. 7. VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS - Would the project: 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 conditions 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 a result, would It create a significant hazard to CEOA Checklist 8 o o o o o o o o o o o o [gJ [gJ [gJ [gJ 4-03 . . . 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? h) Expose people or structures to a sigificant risk of loss, injury or death Involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? Potentially Significant Impact D D D D File No.: CUP 04-13 Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporation D D D D Less Than Slgnlflcant Impact D D D D NO Impact ~. ~ ~ ~ The proposed restaurant will be in an existing retail building on a. strip commercial street in a fully developed erea and will not have any of the above impacts. 8. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY - Would the project: a) 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 (i.e., 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)? b) 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? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattem of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a. stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in fiooding on- or off-site? d) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide CEQA Checklist 9 D D D D D D D D D D D D ~ ~ ~ ~ 4-03 . . . substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? e) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality f) Violate any other water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? g) Place housing within a 1 DO-year flood hazard area, as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a 1 DO-year floodplain structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, Including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j) Expose people or structures to Inundation by seiche, tsunami or mudflow? k) During project construction, will it create or contribute runoff water that would violate any water quality standards or waste dischrage requirements, including the terms of the City's municipal separate stromwater sewer system persmit? I) After the project is completed, will it create or contribute runoff water that would violate any water quality standards or waste dischrage requirements, including the terms of the City's municipal separate stormwater sewer system permit? m Allow polluted stormwater runoff from delivery areas or ioading ) docks or other areas where materials are stored, vehicles or equipment are fueled or maintained, waste is handled, or hazardous materials are handled or delivered, or other outdoor work areas, to Impair other waters? n) Potential for discharge of stormwater to cause significant harm on the biological integrity of the waterways and water bodies including municipal and comestic supply, water contact or non- contact recreation and groundwater recharge? CEOA Checklist 10 Potentially Significant Impact o o o o o o o o o o File No.: CUP 04-13 Less Than Significant WIII1 Mitigation Incorporation o o o o o o o o o o Less Than Significant Impact o o o o o o o o o o No Impact r2'J r2'J r2'J r2'J r2'J r2'J r2'J r2'J r2'J r2'J 4'()3 File No.: CUP 04-13 . Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact 0) Dischrage stormwater sothat significant harm is caused to the biological integrity of waterways or water bodies? o o o rgJ p) Ssignlficantly alter the fiow velocity or volume of storm water runoff that can use environmental harm? o o o rgJ q) Significantly increase erosion, either on or off-stle? o o o rgJ The proposed restaurant will be in an existing ratail building on a strip commercial street in a fully developed area. The proposed use will be subject to an Industrial Wastewater Discharge Permit so as not to violate Regional Water Quality Control Board water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. The proposal will not alter absorption rates, drainage pattems, surface runoff, surface water conditions, or ground water condItions. The site is within the Santa Anita Dam Inundation Area, but will not expose people to any additional or increased hazard levels. The project will not have any of the above impacts. 9. LAND USE AND PLANNING - Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? 0 0 0 rgJ . b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of 0 0 0 rgJ 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 0 0 0 rgJ community conservation plan? The proposed restaurant will be in an existing retail building on a strip commercial street in a fully developed area and will not have any of the above impacts. 10. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that 0 0 0 rgJ would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral 0 0 0 rgJ resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? The proposed restaurant will be in an existing retail building on a strip commercial street in e fully developed area and will not have any of the above impacts. . CEOA Checklist 11 4-03 . . .3. 11. NOISE - Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels!n 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 groundbome noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the 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 levels? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? Potentially Significant Impact o o o o o o File No.: CUP 04-13 Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporation o o o o o o Less Than Significant No Impact Impact o o o o o o I8J I8J I8J I8J I8J I8J The proposed restaurant will be in an existing retail building on a strip commercial street in a fully developed area and will not have any of the above impacts. 12. POPULATION AND HOUSING - Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes. and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other Infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? o o o o o o o o o I8J I8J I8J The proposed restaurant will be In an existing retail building on a strip commercial street In a fully developed area and will not have any of the above impacts. PUBLIC SERVICES - Would the project: CEOA Checklist 12 4-03 . 14. . . a) Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered govemmental facilities, need for new or physically altered govemmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection? Police protection? Schools? Parks? Other pOblic facilities? Potentially Significant Impact o o o o o Less Than Significant With MltigaUon Incorporation o o o o o File No.: CUP 04-13 Less Than Significant Impact o o o o o No Impact r8l 181 r8l r8l r8l The proposed restaurant will be in an existing retail building on a strip commercial street in a fully developed area and will not have any of the above impacts. RECREATION - Would the project: a) Increase the use 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 project Include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which have an adverse physical effect on the environment? o o o o o o r8l r8l The proposed restaurant will be in an existing retail building on a strip commercial street in a fully developed area and will not have any of the ebove impacts. 15. TRANSPORTATIONfTRAFFIC - 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 standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c) Result in a change in air traffic pattems, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in CEOA Checklist 13 o o o o o o o o o r8l r8l r8l 4-03 . . . substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? g) Conflict with aetopted policies, plans or programs supporting altemative transportation (e.g., bus tumouts, bicycle racks)? PolenUally Significant Impact D D D D Less Than Significant With MiUgaUon Incorporation D D D D File No.: CUP 04-13 Less Than Signlflcant Impact D D D D No Impact IZl IZl IZl IZl The proposed restaurant will be in an existing retail building on a strip commercial straet in a fully developed area and will not have any of the above impacts. Although there is a slight parkil)g deficiency according to code requirements, the parking area is underutilized since the other uses in the center are not intense. 16. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of Which could cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could caUlie significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? In making this etetermination, the City shall consider whether the project is SUbject to the water supply assessment reqUirements of Water Coete Section 10910, et seq. (SB 610), and the requirements of Government Code Section 664737 (SB221). e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project determined that it has adequate capaCity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? CEOA Checklist 14 D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D IZl IZl IZl IZl IZl 4-03 File No.: CUP 04-13 . Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to 0 0 0 [81 accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state and local statues and regulations 0 0 0 [81 related to solid waste? The proposed restaurant will be in an existing retail building on a strip commercial street in a fully developed area and wiff not have any of the above impacts. 17. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the 0 0 0 [81 environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? . b Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but 0 0 0 [81 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)? c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause 0 0 0 [81 substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directiy or Indirectly? The proposed restaurant will be in an existing retail building on a strip commercial street In a fully developed aree and wiff not have any of the above impacts. . CEQA Checklist 15 4-03 . . . File No. 05- \'3 CITY OF ARCADIA 240 WEST HUNTINGTON DRIVE ARCADIA. CA 91007 ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION FORM Date Filed: ~O5"' General Infonnation 1. Applicant's Name; ANDREW BABAKHANLOU & VALENTINE ISSAGOULYAN Ad~: 922 N. ISABEL ST GLENDALE CA, 91207 2. Property Address (Location); 100 E. FOOTHILL BLVD, ARCADIA CA, 91006 Assessor's Number: 3. Name, address and telephone number of person to be contacted concerning this project: '\ -Nf.b'v' (6A({f -t O/!firv d,'OA ~';)~~ L e. C In- (; (..-11"11 (io,.~ ~ ~ I D) '17 g 'ftlJ ' 4. List and describe any other related permits and other public approvals required for this project, including those required by city, regional, state and federal agencies: (u lJ'I-f.;CI. e.L V V' lJ(rM./r . . ~ - I 5. c-z 6. General Plan Designation: Zone Classification; Proleel DescriDtion 7. Proposed use of site (project description): 5 V b "Vll..1 ~p(fat/r"-n 1- 8. 54-0()Sr '-s , -f1, e f yo Ie,. -f 'I I I 9. Site size: . 750 sf Square footage per building: Number of floors of construction: ol1e {InDy. Amount of off-street parking provided: '30 Oa r ~ ,'11-1 , v Proposed scheduling of project: J; /vi i J 14, T f' 11 G If:, 6/05 10. II. 12, 13, Anticipated incremental development: 14, If residential, include the number of units, schedule of unit sizes, range of sale prices or rents, and type of household sizes expected: 15, If commercial, indicate the type, i.e. neighborhood, city or regionally oriented, square footage of sales area, and loading facilities, hours of-operation: . 19. . 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. . S",bW<l- !<ru,kvrdt1 t (7)() <;1 ooi"j t\\.vnlL 7~f(')11'W1_.#/<;D 7()>:fi~s~k"fl/Q.L cuea. '0 ; ~ tda > ilA"-() S DJ; t l!5 l't.e!J. 16. .I f industrial, indicate type, estimated employment per shift, and loading facilities: NO IT!; RESTlWR-'\JIT WITH e eliftElleyees. 17. .If institutional, indicate the major function, estimated employment per shift, estimated occupancy, loading facilities, and community benefits to be derived from the project: 18. If the project involves a variance, conditional use pennit or zoning application, state this and indicate clearly why the application is required: WE NEED TO CET CONDITIONAL UGlJ PERMIT 30 Tlli'I.T A 3UBHiiY RESTAURANT CAN BE STABLISHED .ALSO ~~ NEED THIS PERMIT SO WE Cl'N.OPERA'rE OUR RESTAURANT. WITH ARCADIA CITY CODRS. . . Are the followmg Items apphciible to the project or Its effects'l'TIlscussoeTow al1ltems checlceoyes (attach additIonal sheets as necessary). Change in existing featUres of any hills, or substantial a1teratin of ground contours. YES NO !J 1]1 !J [iJ !J iii [J ~ [J ~ [J ~ [J W [J ~ [J ~ YES NO [J ~ E.I.R 01/14/04 Page 2 Change in scenic views or vistas from existing residential areas or publiclands or roads Change in pattern, scale or character of general area of project Significant amounts of solid waste or litter. Change in dust, ash, smoke, fumes or odors in vicinity. Change in ground water quality or quantity, or alteration of existing drainage pattersn. Substantial change in existing noise or vibration levels in the vicinity. is site on filledland or on any slopes of 10 percent or more. Use or disposal of'potentiallyhazardous materials, such as toxic substances, flammable or explosives. 28. Substantial change in demand for municipal services (police, fire, water, sewage, etc.) . . . 29. Substantial increase in fossil fuel consumption (electricity, oil, natural gas, etc. o o o 30. Relationship to a larger project or series of projects. 31. Stonn water system discharges from areas for materials storage, vehicle or equipment fueling, vehicle or equipment maintenance (including washing), waste handling, hazardous materials handling or storage delivery or loading docks, or other outdoor work areas? 32. A significantly environmentally hannful increase in the flow rate or volume of stonn water o ronoft'l 33. A significantly environmentally hannful increase in erosion of the project site or surrounding areas? o 34. Stonn water discharges that would significantly impair the beneficial uses of receiving waters or areas that provide water qw,)itybenefits (e.g. riparian corridors, wetlands, etc.)? o 35. Hann to the biological integrity of drainage systems and water bodies? o Environmental Settinl! 36. Describe (on a separate sheet) the project site as it exists before the project, including infonnation on topography, soil stability, plants and animals, any cultural, bistorical or scenic aspects, any existing slnlctures on the site, and the use of the stnIctUres. Attach photographs of the site. Snapshots or Polaroid photos will be accepted. Q!I l(J U3 U3 ua ~ ~ 37. Describe (on a separate sheet) the surrounding properties, including information on plants, animals, any cultural, historical or scenic aspects. Indicate the type of land uses (residential, commercial, etc.), intensity of land use (one- family, apartment houses, shops, department stores, etc.), and scale of development (beight, frontage, set-backs, rear yards, etc.). Attach photographs of the vicinity. Snapshots or Polaroid photos will be accepted. Certification J hereby certilY that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the data and infonnation required for this initial evaluation to the best of my ability, and that the facts, statements, and infonnation presented are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. fJt!o7(C> Date /h)ro, ~- p1~ Signature .) E.LR. 01/14/04 Page 3