591, Remodel existing garage into a, Application• •
REOUEST FOR HEARING
FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW
PROPERTY OWNER: LES HROMAS
OWNER'S ADDRESS: 2 S. QUAIL RIDGE ROAD 2.(-(. Lid.
TELEPHONE NO: (310) 3 7 7- 6 5 7 5
PROPERTY'S ADDRESS: 2 S. QUAIL RIDGE ROAD Y1, i_(. f`A ,
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOT NO.
1
ASSESSORS BOOK NO. 7567 PAGE 17 PARCEL 19
AGENT'S NAME:
AGENT'S ADDRESS:
TELEPHONE NO:
FRANK POLITEO
1300 S. BEACON ST. #225 SAN PEDRO, 90731
(310) 831-3035
NATURE OF PROPOSED PROJECT
Describe in detail the nature of the proposed project, including what aspects of the project require
a Site Plan Review:
pd) 7n S en /\in) ( (ew 15 V-.6-a_ A 3 CINK Ct ,Raci Ti.
c ni n5 !U-( 4 c ZA ru U) D iL.c, Am() ( (2
`c-1-1- L 1 M` o f l
Ll(.-(E,4 arsc i4,
• •
SITE PLAN REVIEW CRITERIA
Site plan review criteria upon which the Planning Commission must make an affirmative finding.
Describe in detail the project's conformance with the criteria below:
A. Is the project compatible with the General Plan, the Zoning Ordinance and surrounding uses? Explain how it
compares to the sizes, setbacks and other characteristics of neighboring houses.
¶'4 SA7(`7l 15- Cest-ttvfl 4 /Zak)(7MV(,VYr
(,5AHD 1)/91- s tJoT, Ehi'ccrz0/1.('u ,2 `-r S'ET f76 c-14_
�2s~ (uff/ , Fr) `rs4'E F E STr1i4 42-E.S (06N'Cc
cA, SZ14 7leY t Cef-1pe r.LAI&(GK13011 (jc'�
1-1C L, CIS
B. B. How does the project preserve and integrate into the site design, to the maximum extent feasible, existing natural
topographic features of the lot including surrounding native vegetation, mature trees, drainage courses, and land
forms (such as hillsides and knolls)? Explain how the project preserves and integrates existing natural features.
r e-(1✓ , V E 7-6 7'(0 N t-(9 c t L R:Crvi i 4 S 1 r/ 5.
Dor2ofe ACc `-E' «-1- Ft_c wee 1 ()L) (sal C{' 01d2t; " r
T 4 �. 6 q o 1.z 1 014 t-e: 6 L 7' M e S. j" t_- k( O N 'r'f { L C V Crt,
tilt-.=n I NJ Pry l (.fatly 11' r'GUiC 44zcc. Sr am..
G�l W S a w1 LI d'7c R-'D-g-o ,S T'o f3 Ial b 1"7"c�
JI`r1l3C
C. How does the site development plan follow natural contours of the site to minimize grading? Extensive grading
and recontouring of existing terrain to maximize buildable area shall not be approved. Graded slopes shall be
rounded and contoured so as to blend with existing terrain. Grading shall not modify existing drainage redirect
drainage flow unless into an existing drainage course. Explain the nature and'extent of the impact of grading
and proposed minimization on lots.
TA- l-lf LLSM wf A. .2bDr :1 zi3 05r j.lt9oC7-1.1 ..re *pi7'
A pEaTI b1, TV T(JrG C<Ad26a 6.»oI7iexi
l UI - (-Ye, y-! ro V O S u% 1 t1 ).f p,> t,, i ht c n Ys sif 1 S.Z' I > / ^hjTD o 'e g
D. To what extent does the site development plan preserve surrounding native vegetation and supplement it with
landscpping that is compatible with and enhances the rural character of the community? Landscaping should
provide a buffer and transition zone between private and public areas. Explain how the project preserves native
vegetation, integrates landscaping and creates buffers.
St )12,1?-00 1 01 N r; Ver z i r(t t I Lc iCL P7r Pf2rsSE12.vcv
AND CPIs PEA FtlLc210E i,t31CC- 55V PU Jzt f) Z"eo MfrCu
S`►r Nr; VLC(eroTrt?►:.t
• •
E. How does the site development plan preserve the natural and undeveloped state of the lot by minimizing building
coverage? Lot coverage requirements shall be regarded as maximums and the actual amount of lot coverage
permitted should depend upon the existing buildable area of the lot. Explain how the lot coverage proposed
compares with lot coverage square footage and percentages on neighboring lots.
LD5(7tn(\( t4- LL7 Co\,'iS
p 1,2 p c rz'r ro Nre r -r(9 12
F. Is the site development plan harmonious in scale and mass with the site, the natural terrain and surrounding
residences? Setbacks shall be regarded as minimums and more restrictive setbacks shall be imposed where
necessary to assure proportionality and openness. Explain how the proposed project setbacks compare with the
existing setbacks of neighboring properties.
T ( C pr9 s t`-l) , Dt ' ('7 (f2i-) I S {-(--S t 2 ("`-t ,1 ,FJ 1('7
S �'✓� C, /� 1J .� NS •A- S S 5 (J 1 ZIZ e.)�° i�-� n 1 l�% �� z✓ Lw C . s
f -1 5E7 C (C S /S t2C l` / ft%f-! /4? 're' L 157(i .J �e
p ( Cf.( RE, 2 I C loge (7c4 2 . Z? . s -
G. Is the site development plan sensitive and not detrimental to convenience and safety of circulation for pedestrians
and vehicles? Explain how the number and types of vehicles relate to the driveway location, design, trip data,
landscaping and other on -site parking or storage areas.
14 C 7 17 N l S Nc% Y iv era t X1 ".11r4 c
YOtry-)$3r(4..3c ()d2l UC,tA..:( jZC 14( ft,,1C
f\ii(J .(r1 -tom ,dJppywc' 14 ..7:r9 7 4-F s—rtZFFT- 1f L}Nc ci,(t-;:j�
H. Does the site development plan conform with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act?
Explain how the project impacts the environment, e.g. significant impact, proposed mitigation measures.
s I z (^: o NF0 a. /4 , c Go( 714 -r Co
7 -P J1 D1>f l O) I3 L'EIL) D.s I ,a' 4 A/D ,vOcis 1Y C 7
l M f)/4 CT 'T F 1=/(--' V I rf2D/L (C` ,L T'.
• •
I hereby certify that the statements furnished above, and in attached exhibits, presents the data and
information required for the site plan review criteria evaluation to the best of my ability; and, that
the facts, statements and other information presented are true and correct to the best of my
knowledge and belief.
Date:
I2--221-1'
,J,.A,
ature
For: !., C Cs 1,4--P._. 0 -t 6 C
Applicant
• S
DATE ZONING CASE NO. ADDRESS 2 S. QUAIL RIDGE ROAD
APPLICANT FRANK POL I TEO/ I_F5 H-Hg0,4A.
CALCULATION OF LOT COVERAGE
BUILDING AREAS EXISTING PROPOSED TOTAL
NET LOT AREA 45,430 sq.ft. sq.ft. 45,430 sq.ft.
BUILDING PAD(S) (9I)sq.ft. 903 sq.ft. 27,525 sq.ft.
EXISTING GARAGE
RESIDENCE 3,683 sq.ft. 723 sq.ft. 4,890 sq.ft.4INTO84 S.F.TOTAL ADDED
GARAGE 484 sq.ft. 717 so. 717 sq.ft.
CONVERTED TO RESIDENCE
SWIMMING POOL/SPA 700 sq.ft. 0 sq.ft. - 700 sq.ft.
STABLE iq.ft. 0 sq.ft. 450 q
s .ft.
RECREATION COURT
( )
SERVICE YARD
OTHER
312
0
177
sq.ft.
sq.ft.
sq.ft.
TOTAL STRUCTURES 5a.8s'6sq.ft.
% STRUCTURAL 12.78 %
COVERAGE
% TOTAL PAD
COVERAGE
DRIVEWAY
PAVED WALKS AND
PATIO AREAS
POOL DECKING
TOTAL FLATWORK
% TOTAL FLATWORK
COVERAGE
0 sq.ft.
0 sq.ft.
0 sq.ft.
1,440 sq.ft.
3.17 To
312
0
177
sq.ft.
sq.ft.
sq.ft.
7,246 sq.ft.
15.95 To
5.23 % 26.32 %
1, 890 sq.ft. 0 sq.ft.
2,354 sq.ft.
987 sq.ft.
5,231 sq.ft.
11.51
TOTAL STRUCTURAL & FLATWORK
COVERAGE 11,037 sq.ft.
% TOTAL COVERAGE 24.29 %
480 sq.ft.
0 sq.ft.
480 sq.ft.
1.05 %
1,890 sq.ft.
2, 834 sq.ft.
987 sq.ft.
5,711 sq.ft.
12.57
1,920 sq.ft. 12057 sq.ft.
4.22 % 28.52 %
• •
DATE ZONING CASE NO. ADDRESS 2 S . QUAIL RIDGE ROAD
• APPLICANT FRANK POL I TEO/ LE5 (u,ti1A5
CALCULATION OF BUILDING PAD COVERAGE
PAD NO. 1
BUILDABLE PAD AREA 27,525 sq.ft.
RESIDENCE 4' 890 sq.ft.
GARAGE 717 sq.ft.
STABLE (BARN) 0 sq.ft.
POOL 700 sq.ft.
RECREATION COURT
( ) 312 sq.ft.
OTHER 177 sq.ft.
TOTAL STRUCTURES ON PAD NO. 1 6,796 sq.ft.
% BUILDING PAD COVERAGE 24.5
PAD NO. 2
BUILDABLE PAD AREA 3,966 sq.ft.
RESIDENCE 0 sq.ft.
GARAGE 0 sq.ft.
STABLE (BARN) 450 sq.ft.
POOL 0 sq.ft.
RECREATION COURT
( )
OTHER
0 sq.ft.
0 sq.ft.
TOTAL STRUCTURES ON PAD NO. 2 450 sq.ft.
% BUILDING PAD COVERAGE 11.30 %
OWNER'S ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Property development in Rolling Hills is governed by ordinances of the CITY OF
ROLLING HILLS ("City") and by private deed restrictions enforced by the ROLLING
HILLS COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION ("RHCA").
The land development permit process of the City and the RHCA are completely
independent and separate. Both must be satisfied and approval given by both the City and
the RHCA to develop property in Rolling Hills. An approval by either the City or the
RHCA does not mean- or imply or ensure approval by the other.
The suggested sequence of property development is to obtain City approvals first.
I, (We), the undersigned, acknowledge that the above statement has been fully read
and its admonition is completely understood.
Executed at L . , California
this 2, 2 .day of D L -
By:
19 g .
By: L (5 S L) c Q, 4 s2i t AS
Z. 5 dlc (-)n( atnrf6-n2U'11r�
Address
{-i<<<.s CA
City
• •
OWNER'S DECLARATION
I (We) declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
Executed at L r -
this 22— day of 0
By: 2; Att
By:
, California,
I_ -Cc/ J E 14- ]folk -CA;
Address W 2 S L Z. (1X; F 6 2 c`.)A-e)
1249 L I h.^c f=i- J C c1 C
NOTE: The Owner's Declaration can only be used if this application is signed in California.
If this application is signed outside of California, the applicant should acknowledge before
a Notary Public of the State where the signature is fixed, or before another officer of that'
State authorized by its laws to take acknowledgements, that he (it) owns the property
described herein, and that the information accompanying this application is true to the best
of his (its) knowledge and belief. Attach appropriate acknowledgment here.
APPLICANT: L,-6S L S 4 Wa, o-i ic)-S
REPRESENTATIVE: r-(LA N 14;
COMPANY NAME: PC - 4 cC p MA k S SD tc.
COMPANY ADDRESS:
1 ?act' (' S d2?� ;; i C 7& rr
r orzo"'
COMPANY PHONE NO. (27 ft1 > (- O's
PROJECT ADDRESS: 2 S Cr L' b t (J (J7
t,c
120LI.y�5c; I4-�.( �
DATE FILED
FEE:
RECEIPT NO:
BY:
ZONING CASE NO:
TENTATIVE HEARING DATE:
• •
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS,
ZONING CASE
CERTIFIED PROPERTY OWNER'S LIST
AFFIDAVIT
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) ss
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS )
I, L E 5 L) C /.a 4.442. 0 1_4.4 S= , declare under penalty
of perjury that the attached list contains the names and addresses of all persons to whom
all property is assessed as they appear on the latest available assessment roll of the County
within the area described and for a distance of one thousand (1,000) feet from the exterior
boundaries of property legally described as:
L.cTIv(
“t sselus ??e-tk= 75-f97 VACtt J a-(=G'`c. jC
Executed at L
- 2"z day of -Cr
Use Permit
Variance
Site Plan Review
Zone Change
, California, this
,19 cCe
SIGNATURE
DATE
ZONING CASE NO. 5./ ADDRESS
APPLICANT
2 S. QUAIL RIDGE ROAD
FRANK POL I TEO/ L S,,5 ►-4:0,'WVT,
CALCULATION OF LOT COVERAGE
BUILDING AREAS EXISTING PROPOSED TOTAL
NET LOT AREA 45,430 sq.ft. sq.ft.
BUILDING PAD(S) 14,110 sq.ft. 1, 60 0 sq.ft.
RESIDENCE 3,683 sq.ft. 723 sq.ft.
GARAGE 4n sq.ft. 717 sq.ft.
CONVER I LU i u RES I DENUL
SWIMMING POOL/SPA 700 ,sq.ft. 0 sq.ft.
STABLE )5(sq.ft. 0 sq.ft.
RECREATION COURT /-
( ) /VW sq.ft. 0 sq.ft.
SERVICE YARD 0 sq.ft. 0 sq.ft.
OTHER 177 sq.ft. 0 sq.ft.
TOTAL STRUCTURES 5,806 sq.ft. 1,440 sq.ft.
% STRUCTURAL 12.78
COVERAGE
45,430 sq.ft.
15,710 sq.ft.
EXISTING GARAGE
4,890 sq.ft.484 S.F. ADDED
INTO TOTAL
717 sq.ft.
700 sq.ft.
sq.ft.
450
312
0
177
sq.ft.
sq.ft.
sq.ft.
7,246 sq.ft.
3.17 % 15.95 %
% TOTAL PAD
COVERAGE. 41.14 % 9.16 % 46.12 %
DRIVEWAY
PAVED WALKS AND
PATIO AREAS
POOL DECKING
TOTAL FLA'TWORK
% TOTAL FLATWORK
COVERAGE
1,890 sq.ft.
2,354 sq.ft.
987 sq.ft.
5,231 sq.ft.
11.51 %
o sq.ft.
480 sq.ft,
0 sq.ft.
480 sq.ft.
1.05 To
1,890 sq.ft.
2,834 sq.ft.
987 sq.ft.
5,711 sq.ft.
12.57
TOTAL STRUCTURAL & FLATWORK
COVERAGE 11, 037 sq.ft. 1,920 sq.ft. 12;957 sq.ft.
% TOTAL COVERAGE 24.2.9 % 4,22 % 28. ' %
11460
DATE ZONING CASE NO. ADDRESS 2 S . QUAIL RIDGE ROAD
APPLICANT FRANK POL I TEO/ L.ES H ,tit/'5
_CALCULATION OF BUILDING PAD COVERAGE
PAD NO. I
BUILDABLE PAD AREA 15, 710 sq.ft.
RESIDENCE 4' 890 sq.ft.
GARAGE 717 sq.ft.
STABLE (BARN) 0 sq.ft.
POOL 700 sq.ft.
RECREATION COURT
OTHER
TOTAL STRUCTURES ON PAD NO. 1
% BUILDING PAD COVERAGE
PAD NO. 2
BUILDABLE PAD AREA
RESIDENCE
GARAGE
STABLE (BARN)
POOL
RECREATION COURT
(
OTHER
312
sq.ft.
177 sq.ft.
6,796 sq.ft.
43.26 %
3,966 sq.ft.
0 sq.ft.
0 sq.ft.
450 sq.ft.
0 sq.ft.
sq.ft.
0 sq.ft.
TOTAL STRUCTURES ON PAD NO. 2 450 sq.ft.
% BUILDING PAD COVERAGE 11.30 %
411
Ca opeo eeng
•
ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION FORM.
(To Be Completed By Applicant)
INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274
(310) 377-1521
FAX: (310) 377-7288
1 Email: cityotrh@aol.com
Date Filed
VIY'i 1 g Zoning Case No. c
-m/
GENERAL INFORMATION,
1. Applicant(s) FRANK POLITEO Tel. (310 ) 831-3035
Address 1300 S. BEACON ST. #225 SAN PEDRO. CA q(173T
2. Legal Owner(s) LES HROMAS Tel. ( 310) 377-6575
Address 2 S. QUAIL RIDGE ROAD Z l
3. Project Address 2 S . QUAIL RIDGE ROAD a, 4, ell -
Assessor's Book No. 7 5 6 7 - 17 - 1 q Lot No. 1
4. Other related permits and other public approvals required for this project, including those required
by city, regional, state and federal agencies:
SITE PLAN REVIEW. GRADING PERMIT. BUIL,DTNG PFRMTT
5. Existing zoning district
6. Proposed project/use of site ROOM ADD T T T ON TO S T NC. I F R FS T DFNC F
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
7. Site size
8. Net lot area 4 5 , 4 30 S.F.. "Net Lot Area" means the total area included within the lot
lines of a lot or parcel of property, exclusive of: (a) the entire area within a recorded roadway
easement plus the area within ten (10) feet measured perpendicular to the edge of the roadway
easement; (b) the ten (10) foot perimeter of the lot perpendicular to the property lines; (c) any
private drive or driveway that provides access to any other lot or parcel; and (d) the access strip
portion of a flag lot."
9. Total square footage of structures 7,246 S.F.
10. Number of floors of construction ONE
11. Basement square footage
12. Total cbmbined flatwork and structural lot coverage 2 8 . 5 0
13. Will any exterior walls be removed or relocated? Which walls? NO
14. Will any interior walls be removed or relocated? Which walls? NO
15. Will the entire building structure require a new roof? NO
5-05-98
-1-
Printed on Recycled Pane'
• •
16. Will the existing roof remain intact, with less than 200 square feet added?
17. Grading quantites shall be balanced. Amount cut 100 C.Y.Amount fill 100 C.Y.
(Include any basement cut in grading quantities.)
18. Area of disturbance. 40% maximum; any remedial grading (temporary disturbance), any graded
slopes and building pad areas, and any nongraded area where impervious surfaces will remain or
are proposed to be added. Square feet Percentage of Net Lot Area
19. If residential, include the unit size. Square feet 5 . 6 07 S . F .
20. If commercial, indicate the type of project, whether neighborhood, city or regionally oriented,
square footage of sales area, estimated employment per shift and loading facilities.
YES
N/A
21. If industrial, indicate the type of project, estimated employment per shift, and loading facilities.
N/A
22. If institutional, indicate the major function, estimated employment per shift, estimated occupancy,
loading facilities, and community benefits to be derived from the project.
N/A
23. Attach plans.
24. Proposed scheduling.
25. If the project involves a site plan review, variance, conditional use or rezoning application, state
this and indicate clearly why the application is required.
SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR GRADING PERMIT AND ADDITION
OVER 1.000 S.F.
Are the following items applicable to the project or its effects? Discuss below all items checked yes (attach
additional sheets as necessary).
YES NQ
❑ A 26. Change in existing features of any bays, tidelands, beaches, lakes or hills,or
substantial alteration of ground contours.
❑ 27. Change in scenic views or vistas from existing residential areas or public lands or
roads.
❑ ,t 28. Change in pattern, scale or character of general area of project.
-2-
• •
0
0
0
0
29. Significant amounts of solid waste or litter.
30. Change in dust, ash, smoke, fumes, or odors in vicinity.
31. Change in ocean, bay, lake, stream or ground water quality or quantity, or
alteration of existing draining patterns.
32. Substantial change in existing noise or vibration levels in the vicinity.
33. Site on filled land or on slope of 10 percent or more.
34. Use or disposal of potentially hazardous materials, such as toxic substances,
flammable or explosives.
35. Substantial change in demand for municipal services (police, fire, water, sewage,
etc.).
36. Substantially increased fossil fuel consumption (electricity, oil, natural gas, etc.).
37. Relationship to a larger project or series of projects.
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
38. Describe the project site as it exists before the project, including information on topography, soil
stability, plants and animals, and 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.
714 s) 4-4 4s A- SULLY 1>60 tj2 s f DTP e-1
39. Describe the surrounding properties, including information on plants and animals and any cultural,
historical or scenic aspects. Indicate the type of land use (residential, commercial, etc.), intensity
of land use (one -family, guest house, office use, etc.) and scale of development (height,
frontage, set -back, rear yard, etc.). Attach photographs of the vicinity. Snapshots orpolaroid
photos will be accepted.
T1- V, 5 op-12401,i t tiCt r2o-13's12-Z I C--s y
h t�v 6- L 2a 5 c
-3-
• •
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS:
VI. A brief explanation is required for allanswers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately
supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No
Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply
does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g. the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No
Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project -specific factors as well as general
standards (e.g. the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project -specific
screening analysis).
VII. All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off -site as well as on -site,
cumulative as well as project -level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational
impacts.
VIII. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is
significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made,
an EIR is required.
IX. "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 V, "Earlier Analysis," above may be
cross-referenced).
X. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process,
an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. See Section
15063(c)(3)(D) of the State CEQA Guidelines. Earlier analyses are discussed in Section V, above.
Xl. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources
for potential impacts (e.g. general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside
document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is
substantiated. A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be
cited in the discussion.
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
tg niticant
Potentially Unless Less Than
Signi icant Mitigation Slgn cant No
......:...::::..:..;:. c.::.,:•...:::::..:;..::'::::.:::...:::....:,....>;Impact`° ::; Incorporated lirtp� ...:. Impact
LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal:
a) Conflict with general plan designation or zoning? 0 0 0
b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or 0 0 0 A
polices adopted by agencies with jurisdiction
over the project
c) Be incompatible with existing land use in the 0 0 0 ,(
vicinity?
d) Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g. 0 0 ❑
impacts to soils or farmlands, or impacts from
incompatible land uses)?
e) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an 0 0 0
established community (including a low-income
or minority community)?
II. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the proposal:
a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local 0 0 0
population projections?
-4-
• •
Potentially
Significant
Potentially Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant
Impact Incorporated Impact
b) Induce substantial growth in an area either ❑ ❑ 0
directly or indirectly (e.g. through projects in an
undeveloped area or extension of major
infrastructure)?
No
Impact
c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable 0 0 0
housing?
III. GEOLOGICAL PROBLEMS. Would the proposal
result in or expose people to potential impacts
involving:
a) Fault rupture? ❑ 0 0 `
b) Seismic ground shaking? 0 0 0
c) Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? 0 0 0
d) Seiche, tsunami, or volcanic hazard? 0 0 0
e) Landslides or mudflows? ❑ 0 0
f) Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil 0 0 0
conditions from excavation, grading, or fill?
g) Subsidence of the land? 0 0 0
h) Expansive soils? 0 0 0
>:rvir...
i) Unique geologic or physical features? 0 0 0
IV. WATER. Would the proposal result in:
a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, 0 0 X
or the rate and amount of surface runoff?
b) Exposure of people or property to water related ❑ 0 ❑ ill
hazards such as flooding?
c) Discharge into surface water or other alteration 0 0 0
of surface water quality (e.g. temperature,
dissolved oxygen or turbidity)?
d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any ❑ 0 0
water body?
e) Changes in currents, or the course or direction of 0 0 0 ?:f
water movements?
f) Change in the quantity of ground waters, either 0 0 0
through direct additions or withdrawals, or
through interception of an aquifer by cuts or
excavations or through substantial loss of
groundwater recharge capability?
g) Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater? 0 0 0
h) Impacts to groundwater quality? 0 0 0 X
i) Substantial reduction in the amount of 0 0 0
lc
groundwater otherwise available for public water
supplies?
V. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal:
a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to 0 0 ❑
an existing or projected air quality violation?
-5-
•
b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants?
c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or
cause any change in climate?
d) Create any objectionable odors?
VI. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the
proposal result in:
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
f)
g)
Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion?
Hazards to safety from design features (e.g.,
sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or
incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
Inadequate emergency access or access to
nearby uses?
Insufficient parking capacity on -site or off -site?
Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists?
Conflicts with adopted policies supporting
alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts,
bicycle racks)?
Rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts?
VII. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal
result in impacts to:
a) Endangered, threatened or rare species or their
habitats (including but not limited to plants, fish,
insects, animals, and birds)?
b) Locally designated species (e.g., heritage
trees)?
c) Locally designated natural communities (e.g.,
oak forest, coastal habitat, etc.)?
d) Wetland habitat (e.g., marsh, riparian and vernal
pool)?
e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors?
VI II. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the
proposal:
a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation
plans?
b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and
inefficient manner?
c) Rvsult in the loss of availability of a known
mineral resource that would be of future value to
the region and the residents of the State?
IX. HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve:
a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of
hazardous substances (including, but not limited
to: oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation)?
b) Possible interference with an emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
0
Potentially
Significant
Unless Less Than
Mitigation Significant No
Incorporated Impact Impact
❑ ❑
❑ 0 -
❑ ❑ ❑
❑ ❑ ❑
❑ ❑ ❑
❑ 0 0
❑ ❑ 0 /\
❑ 0 0 t
❑ 0 0
❑ ❑ ❑
❑ 0 0
❑ ❑ ❑i
❑ 0 0
❑ 0 0 i(
❑ 0 0 Ni
❑ 0 0 /
❑ 0 0
O 0 0
❑ 0 0
O 0 0
-6-
• •
Potentially
Significant
Potentially Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
c) The creation of any health hazard or potential 0 0 0
health hazard?
d) Exposure of people to existing sources of 0 0 0 K
potential health -hazards?
e) Increased fire hazard in areas with flammable 0 0 0
7
brush, grass, or trees?
X. NOISE. Would the proposal result in:
a) Increases in existing noise levels? 0 0 0
b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? 0 0 0
XI. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an
effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered
government services in any of the following areas:
a) Fire protection? 0 0 0
b) Police protection? 0 0 0 J
c) Schools? 0 0 0 P
d) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? 0 0 0
----ES_z
e) Other governmental services? 0 0 0
XI I. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the
proposal result in a need for new systems or supplies,
or substantial alterations to the following utilities:
a) Power or natural gas? 0 0 0 !;<
b) Communications systems? 0 0 0
c) Local or regional water treatment or distribution ❑ 0 0
facilities?
d) Sewer or septic tanks? 0 0 0 •i
e) Storm water drainage? 0 0 0
f) Solid waste disposal? ❑ 0 0
g) Local or regional water supplies? ❑ 0 0
XI II. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal:
a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? 0 0 0
b) Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect? 0 0 0
c) Create light or glare? 0 0 0
XIV. CULTURAL RESOURCES: Would the proposal:
a) Disturb paleontological resources? 0 0 0 ��
b) Disturb archaeological resources? 0 0 0
,
c) Affect historical resources? 0 0 0
d) Have the potential to cause a physical change 0 0 0 /
which would affect unique ethnic cultural values?
e) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within 0 0 0 X
the potential impact area?
-7-
• •
Potentially
Significant
Potentially Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
XV. RECREATION. Would the proposal:
a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or El 0 0)3(
regional parks or other recreations facilities?
b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? 0 0 0
XVI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade 0 0 0Icj
the quality of the 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 example of the
major period of California history or prehistory?
b) Does the project have the potential to achieve 0 ❑, 0
short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term,
environmental goals?
c) Does the project have impacts that are 0 0 0
individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable"
means that the incremental effects of a project
are considerable when viewed in connection with
the effects of past projects, the effects of other
current projects and the effects of probable
future projects.)
d) Does the project have environmental effects 0 0 0
which will cause substantial adverse effects on
human beings, either directly or indirectly?
XVII. EARLIER ANALYSES.
Earlier Analyses may be used where, pursuant to the
tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or
more effects have been adequately analyzed in an
earlier EIR or negative declaration. See Section
15063(c)(3)(D) of the State CEQA Guidelines. In this
case a discussion should identify the following on
attached sheets.
a) Earlier analyses used. Identify earlier analyses ❑ 0 0
and state where they are available for review.
b) Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which 0 0 0
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 0 0
than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated,"
describe the mitigation measures which were
incorporated or refined from the earlier document
and the extent to which they address site -
specific conditions for the project.
-8-
• •
NOTE: Before the Lead Agency can accept this application as complete, the applicant must consult the
lists prepared pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code and submit a signed statement
indicating whether the project and any alternatives are located on a site which is included on any such list,
and shall specify any list.
HAZARDOUS WASTE AND SUBSTANCES STATEMENT
The development project and any alternatives proposed in this application are contained on the lists
compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code. Accordingly, the project applicant is
required to submit a signed statement which contains the following information:
1. Name of applicant:
2. Address:
LES HROMAS
2 S. QUAIL RIDGE ROAD jzc), (>f,j C(c,)274
ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274
3. Phone Number: (310) 377-6575
4. Address of Site (street name and number if available, and ZIP code):
2 S. QUAIL RIDGE ROAD j2,
ROLLING -HILLS CA 90274
5. Local Agency (city/county):
ROLLING, HILLS, LOS ANGELES COUNTY
6. Assessor's book, page, and parcel number: 7 5 6 7 -17 -19
7. Specify any list pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code: STATE OF CALIFORNIA
HAZARDOUS WASTE AND SUBSTANCES SITES LIST (available at City Hall).
8. Regulatory identification number:
9. Date of List: JULY 1992
Date
For
Applicant
LES HROMAS
-9-
• •
NOTE: In the event that the project site and any alternatives are not listed on any list compiled pursuant to
Section 65962.5 of the Government Code, then the applicant must certify that fact as provided below.
I have consulted the lists compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code and hereby
certify that the development project and any alternatives proposed in this application are not contained on
these lists.
Date
1 ZL 9' '
For
Signature
LES HROMAS
Applicant
A-19-�, c = i-
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
For
Signature
LES HROMAS
Applicant
.4
forms\environm. 1998app
- 10 -