Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1710 - . e RESOLUTION NO. 1710 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2004-008 FOR A 1,300 SQ. FT. TEST PREPARATION CENTER FOR UP TO 44 STUDENTS AT 411 E. HUNTINGTON DRIVE, UNIT #309 WHEREAS, on June 1, 2004, a conditional use permit application was filed by Philip Ross, representative of The Princeton Review, for a test preparation center for up to 44 students (Development Services Department Case No. CUP 2004-008) at property commonly known as 411 E. Huntington Drive, Unit #309; and WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on July 13, 2004, 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 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 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. . . e 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. SECTION 3. That for the foregoing reasons this Commission grants Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 2004-008. for a test preparation center with 44 students at 411 E. Huntington Drive, Unit #309, upon the following conditions: 1. The maximum number of students at anyone time shall not exceed forty-four (44). 2. The students shall be of at least high school age (16 years and older). 3. The hours of operation shall be 4:30 p.m. to 10:00 p.m., Monday through Thursday, 4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Fridays, 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Saturdays, and 8:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. on Sundays. Except the time period between June 1st and Labor Day. when the hours on Monday through Thursday shall be 9:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. 4. The employees and students shall park in the gated par1<ing structure. 5. All City code requirements regarding accessibility, fire protection, occupancy; and safety shall be complied with to the satisfaction of Building Services and the Fire Department. 6. Approval of CUP 04-008 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. 7. The applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Arcadia and its officers, employees, and agents from arid against any claim, 2 1710 e . . 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 13, 2004, by the following votes: AYES: NOES: Commissioners Baderian, Hsu. Lucas. Olson, Wen None 3 1710 . 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 27, 2004, by the following votes: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Commissioner Hsu, Olson, Wen, Baderian None /'J A~T/ Commissioner LUcas~c.~.....c..c-;' Chainnan. Planning Commission City of Arcadia Secretary, Plan City of Arcadia APPROVED AS TO FORM: . ~p~ Stephen P. Deitsch, City Attorney . 4 1710 e It . STAFF REPORT Development Services Department July 13, 2004 TO: Arcadia City Planning Commission FROM: Donna L. Butler, Community Development Administrator By: Thomas P. Li. Assistant Planner SUBJECT: Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 04-008 for a test preparation center at 411 E. Huntington Drive, Unit #309. SUMMARY This Conditional Use Permit application was submitted by Philip Ross, representing The Princeton Review. to operate a test preparation center for up to 44 students at 411 E. Huntington Drive. Unit #309. The Development Services Department is recommending approval of this application subject to the conditions in this staff report. GENERAL INFORMATION APPLICANT: Philip Ross (Representative of The Princeton Review) LOCATION: 411 E. Huntington Drive, Unit #309 REQUEST: A Conditional Use Permit with a parking modification to allow a test preparation center for up to 44 students that would occupy a 1 :300 square foot unit within an existing commercial building. SITE AREA: 166.000 sq. ft. (3.8 acres) FRONTAGE: Approximately 550 feet along Huntington Drive EXISTING LAND USE & ZONING: The site is developed with a 3-story, 69,700 sq.ft. commercial office and retail building and two freestanding restaurants totaling 11,600 sq.ft. constructed in 1990. and is zoned CPD-1 & D. Commercial Planned Development with Architectural Design overlay. e It . SURROUNDING LAND USES & ZONING: No rt h: Santa Anita Wash - unzoned South: Commercial Office building - zoned CPD-1 & D East: Santa Anita Wash - unzoned We s t: Hotel and Restaurant - zoned CPD-1 GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Mixed Use - CommerciaVMultiple Family Residential PROPOSAL AND ANALYSIS The proposal is to operate a test preparation center that would occupy a 1,300 square foot unit on the third floor of an existing commercial office and retail building at 411 E. Huntington Drive. The students will be of high school age and will be limited to a maximum of 44 students per session. The proposed class hours are from 4:30 p.m. to 10:00 p.m., Monday through Thursday. 4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Fridays, 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Saturdays, and 8:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. on Sundays. . The interior of the unit will be divided into four areas. Each area will be designated for instructional purposes. The administrative functions will be performed at a desk on-site and at an off-site office. A test preparation center is a permitted use in the CPD-1 zone with an approved conditional use permit. A tutorial center occupied units #313-314 (approximately 2,600 sq.ft.) within the building from 1991 through 1995. That tutorial center was approved by CUP 91-014 for a maximum enrollment of 60 students and operated from 9:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. Monday through Friday. No problems were associated with this past operation. The Building Code restricts education occupancy to locate above the second floor. However. if the students are of high school age (16 and over), the occupancy changes to 'Type B", where such use may be located on the third floor. Therefore. if approved. this center shall limit the age of the students to sixteen (16) and over. CUP 04-008 July 13, 2004 Page 2 e e . Parkinq There are 428 on-site parking spaces. By Code. a test preparation center is required to provide 1 space per employee plus 1 space for every 3 students. Under this regulation, the proposed 1,300 sq.ft. test preparation center with 44 high school aged students and 4 employees would require nineteen (19) parking spaces. This is in comparison to the six (6) spaces required for the original office use designation of the subject unit (4 spaces per 1,000 sq.ft. of gross floor area). As a result, this use would increase the parking deficiency by 13 spaces. Of the 428 on-site parking spaces, 244 of them are within a gated parking structure that staff has observed as rarely being used. If this application is approved. the students and employees of the proposed use would utilize the parking structure to alleviate any potential parking impacts 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. Any exterior improvements, such as any new signs, sign face changes, and awnings shall be subject to architectural design review and approval by the Community Development Division. 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 that could not be made less than significant with mitigation incorporation. 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. CUP 04-008 July 13, 2004 Page 3 e It I 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. RECOMMENDATION The Development Services Department recommends approval of Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 04-008, subject to the following conditions: 1. The maximum number of students at anyone time shall not exceed forty~four (44). 2. The students shall be of at least high school age (16 years and older). 3. The hours of operation shall be 4:30 p.m. to 10:00 p.m.. Monday through Thursday, 4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Fridays. 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Saturdays, and 8:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. on Sundays. 4. The employees and students shall park in the gated parking structure. 5. All City code requirements regarding accessibility. fire protection. occupancy, and safety shall be complied with to the satisfaction of Building Services and the Fire Department. 6. Approval of CUP 04-008 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. 7. 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 CUP 04-008 July 13. 2004 Page 4 e It . 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. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION Approval The Planning Commission should move to approve Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 2004-008, and direct staff to prepare a resolution to approve CUP 2004-008 for a test preparation center at 411 E. Huntington Drive, Unit #309. 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 13th public hearing, please contact Thomas Li at (626) 574-5447. a L. Butler Community Development Administrator Attachments: Floor and Site plans Vicinity Map & Aerial Photograph with Zoning Information Environmental Documents CUP 04-008 July 13. 2004 Page 5 UNIT 101-A; - 1,301SF -- UNIT 101-B; - 1,19951' UNIT 101-C; - 3,740SF UNIT .101-0; - 9BOSF UNIT J.02 J.,090SF UNIT J.03 993SF UNIT 105 - 993SF UNIT 106 993SF UNIT J.07 - 993SF UNIT lOll 993SF UNIT 110 - 993SF UNIT 111 - 993SF UNIT 112 - 993SF UNIT 113 993SF UNIT 114 993SF UNIT 115 993SF UNIT 116 2,278SF UNIT :l,J.7 J.,858SF UNIT 118 1,121SF ~Q CTt CD ,UNIT 119 - 1,121SF N N ~ ~ UNIT 120 1, 121SF ~ ~ ~ ~ - "*''''' .... q~ . UNIT 121 1,121SF 'UNIT 122 1,685SF N eD - - - . __ j..:o I ,.....,--r .r:'.C....I- ,., . E. HUNTINGTON DRIVE .. J -...- All. INRJAMATIDN OR DESIGN IllllJColllfD H.eREON IS PREl.IlllNAIlY DIlLY. IT IS IUIlJSlT TD MDDlflCATION BT SlIlIYfT RID _ BY 80VElIlIINB AGENCIIIL FIRST FLOOR PL6.N . 411 E. HUNTINGTON DRIVE ARCADIA , . CALIFORNIA BUILDING TOTAL: 62,452 SQ,FT. UNIT 201 890 UNIT 202 890 UNIT 203 890 UNIT 204 890 UNIT 205 890 -e UNIT 206 890 UNIT 207 890. UNIT 208 890. UNIT 209 890, UNIT 210 . - 890: UNIT 211 1,258: UNIT 212 990: UNIT 213 1,121: UNIT 214 1,121: UNIT 215 1,121: UNIT 216 1,121: UNIT 217 1,668: >e,- ~.cr IL'- IIIF'llIlMATlON on DESIGN 1l/0lCAroJ ltEft~OH IS PRELlMIIIARY DIll. Y. IT IS 6UBJECT TO MODIFICATION 8Y SURVEY MIl APl'llOVAL 8Y GOVElII/IHO AGEIICIES. .... . . . Ii ,/ s ----1 '"':".. . 1 -- i\ ~ N E9 .. SECOND FLOOR PU\N . --- Il1 \IlIVIllIATlOK lllI m.IDlllIDICAlBl IIIIIGIIUIIEI:IIJIIWl1'ClIlU'. IT II IIlaillT 111 MGOlfiltATlVIIII1' GIII1YE't MIl 1118/14111' CIIYEIIIIllIGoAaEliClY. . 314 313 312 311 310 309 ,. ,- .... ,,,.. w,.. """ mJ. I V " I ~e I THIRD FLOOR PLAN e ;>2' 13'-3' 20' , r i I yol I ! ! , ! ~j ,,-~ . I _.__ u -"'" I '. '" ! YOl I l . ,- .. .- Eq Eq J 57' SUITE #309 411 E. Huntington Dr, Arcadia, CA 91106 - "Z.~ 20' , 1 - ~ N o 100 20IJ Feel , ., SANTA CLARA ST II") l' 'I .5 ~ 6' ~ ,0 0 b (U/ ~ .q: (2') ~ II~ lIe ~ it (I~ >- . (If I ~ ... ~I ~ (Ul) HUNTINGTON DR ("') / C"'I ~ c4lDJ .q: C4fA)' ~ /3DOJ it '" ('20) 1ffs Ippment SernC6S Department Engineen'ng Division Frepa.a by:R.S Gon1<JIez. JIiy, 2004 411 E Huntington Drive #309 CUP 04-008 e ~ N o 100 ~ 411 E Huntington Dr o Arcadia I CPb~ Zone 1IIs .,pment Services Dep81fment Engineering Division Propa,.d by: RS GonZBle~ July, 2004 200 Feet , 411 E Huntington Drive #309 . CUP 04-008 e e . File No.: CUP 2004-008 CITY OF ARCADIA 240 W. HUNTINGTON DRIVE ARCADIA, CA 91007 CAliFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAl QUAlITY ACT NEGATIVE DECLARATION (DRAFT) A. Name, if any. and a brief description of the project: Conditional Usa Permit Application No. CUP 2004-008 for a test preparation center with 44 students in an eXisting commercial office and retail buildings with an approximate floor area of 1,300 sq.ff. B. Location of Project: 411 e. Huntington Drive, Unit #309 In the City of Arcadia, County of Los Angeles C. Namfl of Applicant, Sponsor or Person Undertaking Project: A. ..1L B. Other (Private) (1) Name (2) Address Philip Ross - The Princeton Review 1964 Westwood Blvd. #230. Los Anaeles. CA 90025 The Plannin9 Commission D City Council D, having reviewed the Inllial Study of this proposed project and having reviewed the written comments received prior to the pUblic meeting of the Planning CommissionlCity Council, including the recommendaiton of the City's staff, does hereby find and declare that the proposed project will not have e siginlficant effect on the environment. A brief statement of the reasons supporting the Planning Commlssion's/City Council's findings are as follows: The City Council D Planning Commission D, hereby finds that the Negative Declaration reflects its independent judgement. A copy of the Initial Study may be obtained at: Community Development Division City of Arcadia 240 W. Huntington Dr. Arcadia, CA 91007 (626) 574-5423 The location and custodian of the documents and any other material which constiture the reGard of proceedings upon which the City based its decision to adopt this Negative Declartlon are as follows: Date: b ~1?-c?4 Date Received for tiling Community Development Division City of Arcadia 240 W. Huntington Dr. Arcadia, CA 91007 (626) 574-5423 'T~ L-l Staff Form "E" 4/03 -- File No. CUP 04-008 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 2004-008 2. Project Address (Location) 411 E. Huntington Drive, Unit #309 3. Project Sponsor's. Name, Address & Telephone Number: The Princeton Review 1964 Westwood Blvd. #230, Los Angeles, CA 90025 310-473-3423 e 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 Administrator (626) 574-5442 6. General Plan Designation: Mixed Use (CommerciaV Multiple Family) 7. Zoning Classification: CPD-1 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.) . CI:OA Env. Checklist Part 1 -1- 4/03 e e . File No. CUP 04-008 A Conditional Use Permit for a test preparation center with 44 students in an existing commercial office and retail building with an approximate floor area of 1,300 sq. ft. 9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: surroundings.) (Briefly describe the project's North: South: East: West: Santa Anita Wash - unzoned Commercial Office building - zoned CPD-1 & D Santa Anita Wash - unzoned Hotel and Restaurant - zoned CPD-1 10. Other public agencies whose approval is required. (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement): The City Building Services, 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 test preparation center 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. [ ] Air Quality [ ] Cultural Resources . [ ] Hazards & Hazardous Materials [ ] Land Use & Planning [ ] Noise [ ] Public Services [ ] Transportation I Circulation [ ] Aesthetics [ ] Biological Resources [ ] Geology/Soils [ ] HydrologylWater Quality [ ] Mineral Resources [ ] Population & Housing [ ] Recreation [ ] Utilities and Service Systems [ ] Mandatory Findings of Significance DETERMINATION (To be completed by the Lead Agency) On the basis of this initial evaluation: CECA Env. Checklist Part 1 -2- 4103 e e . File No. CUP 04-008 [Xl I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. [l 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. [l I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment. an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. [l J 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. [l 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. z;b- &7 W Signature June 15. 2004 Date Thomas Li Printed Name For EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: 1. A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the 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 CEQA Env. Checklist Part 1 -3- 4/03 e e . File No. CUP 04-008 (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 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 t6 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. CEQA Env. Checklist Part 1 -4- 4/03 File No.: CUP 04-008 - Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than Significant With Significant No Impact Mitigation Impact Impact Incorporation 1. AESTHETICS - Would the project a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? 0 0 0 fZI b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limned 0 0 0 fZI to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? e . c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? o o o fZI o o o fZI The proposed test preparation center will be in an existing office and retail building in a fully developad 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 (1997) 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? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? 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 fZI o o o fZI o o o fZI The proposed test preperation center will be in an existing office and retail building in a fully developed area and will not have any of the above impacts. <, .'. 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 e e . d) 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? Potentially Significant Impact o o o o o File No.: CUP 04-008 Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporation o o o o o Less Than Significant Impact o o o o o No Impact ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? The proposed test preparation center will be in an existing office and retail building in a fully developed area. Because 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 of the above impacts. f) 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, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans. policies, or regulations, or by the Callfomia 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 Califomia 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 removal, filling, hydrological interruption or other means? 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? CEOA Checklist 6 o o o o o o o o o o o o ~ ~ ~ ~ 4-03 File No.: CUP 04-008 e 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 [81 resources, such as a tree preservation polley or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation 0 0 0 [81 Plan, Natural Conservation Community Plan, or other approved local, regional or state habitat conservation plan? The proposed test preparation center will be in an existing office and retail building 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 [81 historical resource as defined in ~ 15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in .the signlflcance of an 0 0 0 [81 It archaeological resource pursuant to ~ 15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or 0 0 0 [81 site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of 0 0 0 [81 formal cemeteries? The proposed test preparation center wI/I be In an existing office and retail building in a fu/ly developed area and will not have any of the above impacts. 6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS - Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse 0 0 0 [81 effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the 0 0 0 [81 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 Geoiogy Special Publication 42. Ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? 0 0 0 [81 . Iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? 0 0 0 [81 CEQA Checklist 7 4-03 e e . v) Landslides? b) Result In substantial soli 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, iateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? . Potentially Significant Impact o o o o o File No.: CUP 04-008 Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporation o o o o o Less Than Significant Impact o o o o o No Impact fZI fZI fZI fZI fZI The proposed test preparation center will be in en existing office and retail bUilding in a fully developed area. The subject location has not been determined to be especially susceptible to any of the above geologic problems and is not within a Seismic Hazard Area identified by the Seismic Hazard Mapping Act. The proposal d08S not include any excavation, gredlng 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 CEQA Checklist 8 o o o o o o o o o o o o fZI fZI fZI fZI 4-03 e e . 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 orworking 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 physicaliy 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 o o o o File No.: CUP 04-008 Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incmporation o o o o Less Than Significant Impact o o o o No Impact 19J ~ 19J 19J The proposed test preparation center will be in an existing office and retail building in a fully developed araa and will not have any of tha above impacts. 8. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY - Would the project: a) Substantlaliy deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantialiy 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 permils have been granted)? b) Substantialiy 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) Substantialiy alter the existing drainage pattern 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 flooding 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 o o o o o o o o o o o o 19J 19J ~ 19J 4-03 e e . 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 w~hln 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 100.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 loading ) 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 comestlc supply, water contact or non. contact recreation and groundwater recharge? CEQA Checklist to Potentially Significant Impact o o o o o o o o o o File No.: CUP 04.008 Less Than Significant With 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 18I 18I 18I [gJ 18I [gJ 18I 18I [gJ 18I 4.03 e 0) Dischrage stormwater sothat significant harm is caused to the biological integrity of waterways or water bodies? p) SsignificanUy alter the flow velocity or volume of storm water runoff that can use environmental harm? q) Significantly increase erosion, either on or off.stie? Potenllally Significant Impact o o o File No.: CUP 04.008 Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporation o o o Less Than Significant Impact o o o No Impact [gJ [gJ [gJ The proposed test preparation center will be in an existing office and retail building 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 requiremerlts. The proposal will not alter ebsorption rates, drainage pattems, surface runoff, surface water conditions, or ground water conditions. The site ;s within the Santa Anita Dam Inundation Area, but will not expose people to any additional or increased hazardlavels. The project will not have any of the above impacts. 9. LAND USE AND PLANNING - Would the project: e a) Physically divide an established community? b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural commun~y conservation plan? o o o o o o o o o [gJ 18I 18I The proposed test preparation center will be in an existing office and retail building in a fully developed aree 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 would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? o o o o o o [gJ [gJ b) Result in the Joss of availabllily of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? The proposed test preparation center will be in an eXisting offica and retail building in a fully developed area and will not have any of the above impacts. ' . CEQA Checklist 11 4-03 e e) e . 11. NOISE - Would,the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or ground borne 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? For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, w~in 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 vicin~ 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 04-008 Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporation o o o o o o Less Than Significant Impact o o o o o o No Impact 18I [gJ IZI [gJ 18I 18I The proposed test preparation center will be in an existing office and retail building 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 18I [gJ 18I The proposed test preparation center will be in an existing office and retail building in a fully developed area and will not have any of the above impacts. 13. PUBLIC SERVICES - Would the project: CEQA Checklist 12 4-03 e a) Result In substantial adverse physical Impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered govemmental facil~ies, 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 public facilities? Potentially Significant Impact o o o o o File No.: CUP 04-008 Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporallon o o o o o Less Than Significant Impact o o o o o No Impact ~ ~ [gJ [gJ ~ The proposed test preparation center will be in an existing office-and retail building in a fully developed area and will not have any of the above impacts. e 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? o o o o o o [8J [gJ 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? The proposed test preparation center will be in an existing office and retail building in a fully developed area and will not have any of the above 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) Resuit in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase In traffic levels or a change In location that results In CEQA Checklist 13 o o o o o o o o o ~ [gJ ~ 4-03 - sUbstantial safety risks? d) Substantiaily 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? t) Result in Inadequate parking capacity? Potentially Significant Impact o o o o File No.: CUP 04.008 Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporation o o o o Less Than Significant Impact o o o o No Impad [gJ [gJ [gJ 18I g) Conflict w~h adopted policies, plans or programs supporting altemative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? The proposed test preparation center will be in an existing office and retail building in a fully developed area end will not have eny of the above impacts. Although there is a parking deficiency according to code requirements, the parking area will remain underutilized because the proposed use is not intense. e 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 cause 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 determination, the C~ shall consider whether the project is subject to the water supply 8$sessment requirements of Water Code 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 add~lon to the provider's existing commitments? CEOA Checklist 14 o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o [gJ [gJ [gJ [gJ [gJ 4-03 File No.: CUP 04-008 ~ 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 18I accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state and local statues and regulations 0 0 0 [gJ related to solid waste? The proposed test preparation center will be in en existing office and retail building in a fully developed area and will not have any of the above impacts. 17. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a) Does the project have th!'l potential to degrade the quality of the 0 0 0 18I 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 e the major periods of Califomia history or prehistory? b Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but 0 0 0 [gJ 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 [gJ substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? The proposed test preparation center will be in an existing office and retail building in a fully developed area and will not have any of the above impacts. . CEQA Checklist 15 4.03 FileNo. CITY OF ARCADIA 240 WEST HUNTINGTON DRIVE ARCADIA, CA 91007 (626) 574-5400 ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION FORM Date Filed: 1ftr General Information 1. Name and address of developer or project sponsor: THe PRIMc.p-r;,tI P.EVtE~ 19"'1 wt'fJrwtJt!/J:) AL v/).#~?;O . / L()5 IJ.NGEL{?S I CA 1~~t; , 2. Address of project (Location): . -t/:;. 0/11 G.I{(JNTIII/(j70tV 1)1< . 3CJ9/ A~Ii/)IJ:}1 CA 91f06 _. Name, address and telephone number of person to be contacted concerning this project: PHILiP I!. Ross cjG 771&" fJRI/'ICert't! I<W/EW !q~'f ~rJV(J(J() aU/I),/ #:2.~o /.-CJ6 i1/V&FL~S,' CIJ Q(JrJ;25;. .:]10 - '173 - 3 '1:2- 3 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: C()NOITlON/tl- U~F PEAi'7J.'T'" CITY or- /1I1CAD/A 5. Zoning: 6. General Plan Designation: Proiect Description 7. Proposed use of site (project description): - (6/11. . e Site Size: I.. ~ f9 Sq. Ft. I 9. Square footage per building: . Acre(s) 10. Number of floors of construction: 3 - SfJf'lCE 1$ ON 3AfJ Ft-tJV/J 11. Amount of off-street parking provided: .900 .f- 6fJrr~~ 12. Proposed scheduling of project: JJ Uf1I!J/cC; ~ fA(JL 1- c.t:?)-q-1'E$/;- 13. Associated projects: 14. Anticipated incremental development: ,. 15. If residential, include the number of units, schedule of unit sizes, range of sale prices or rents, and type of household sizes expected: 16. If commercial, indicate the type, Le. neighborhood, city or regionally oriented, square footage of sales area, and loading facilities, hours of operation: 17. If industrial, indicate type. estimated employment per shift, and loading facilities: 1 a. If institutional, indicate the major function, estimated employment per shift, estimated occupancy, loading facilitie~ and community ben~fits to be derived from the project: Ti1T PA",PAP,IrT!(JA/. ~ M If TE'fc.JIGI'6/-5IY/Pl~ I~ - 'Tr? 5TvOt:fV1>. , ..", . 19. . , I3v,IN'ES4 1M l:.'- =s ae tJ7)fMIt-tV - 'tf.1~t9 C~45'Gtf. '(;.IWJ ~qit:L (If}/JM:TI.NlJfi/!t; If the project involves a variance, co~ditional use permit or zoni g application. staia' fhis'-"" . and indicate clearly why the application is required: LufJ I? /;f(lIljff!() Rec"U~E U,E /4 ~ FdA !!(Jfx:.;y7t?#jL fJt/~I5~ . -2- 4/01 Envlronlnfofonn tlo. Are the following items applicable to the project or its effects? Discuss below all items checked yes (attach additional sheets as necessary). YES NO D ~ 21. D [i2I' 22. D 9' 23. D !i3 24. D ~ 25. D ui 26. D uz( 27. D f2( 28. ~ ~ 29. . , D IiZf 30. 0 g 31. Del 32. D ~ 33. Change in existing features of any hills, or substantial alteration of ground contours. Change in scenic views or vistas from existing residential areas or public lands 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 patterns. Substantial change in existing noise or vibration levels in the vicinity. Is site on filled land or on any slopes of 10 perCent or more? Use or disposal of potentially hazardous materials, such as toxic substances, flammable or explosives Substantial change in demand for municipal services (police, fire, water, sewage, etc.) Substantial increase in fossil fuel consumption (electricity, oil, natural gas, etc.) Relationship to a larger project or series of projects Has a prior environmental impact report been prepared for a program, plan, policy or ordinance consistent with this project? D ~ 34. If you answered YES to question no. 33, may this project cause significant effects on the environment that were not examined in the prior EIR? Environmental Settina 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. Describe any existing structures on the site, and the use of the structures. Attach photographs of the site. (Snapshots or Polaroid photos will be accepted.) 35. . EnvlronlnfoForm -3- 4/01 e. Describe (on a separate sheet) the surrounding properties, including information on plants, animals, any cultural, historical or scenic aspects. Indicate the type of land uses (residential, commercial, etc.), intensity of land use (one-family, apartment houses, shops, department stores, etc.), and scale of development (height, frontage, set-backs, rear yards, etc.). Attach photographs of the vicinity. Snapshots or Polaroid photos will be accepted. 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. Date 6/I/OJf , ~. ?J1k. ignature For TilE Pf1,jpt:-/;,7/h' 11 E74 EltJ e - EnvironlnfoForm -4- 4/01