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