HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-27-09
:;"
j
(I)
AGENDA
ARCADIA PLANNING COMMISSION
Tuesday, Janumy 27, 2009, 7:00 P.M.
Arcadia City Council Chambers
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLLCALL
MOTION: To read the Resolution by title only and waive reading the full text of the Resolution.
SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION FROM STAFF REGARDING AGENDA ITEMS
TIME RESERVED FOR mOSE IN mE AUDIENCE WHO WISH TO ADDRESS mE PLANNING COMMISSION
ON NON-PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS - 5 minute time limit per person.
All interested persons are invited to appear at the Public Hearing and to provide evidence or testimony concerning any of the
proposed items set forth below for consideration. You are hereby advised that should you desire to legally challenge any action
taken by the Planning Commission with respect to the proposed item for consideration, you may be limited to raising only those
issues and objections, which you or someone else raises at or prior to the time of the Public Hearing.
PUBLIC HEARING
1. CONDmONAL USE PERMIT NO. CUP 08-15 (Continued from December 9,2008 and January 13,2009)
921 S. Baldwin Avenue, Units G & H (dba Happy Blues Crab)
Terence Kwok: (Architect)
The applicant is requesting a Conditional Use Permit to expand an existing eating establishment into an adjacent unit to
create a 1,971 square foot dine-in restaurant with beer and wine service and seating for 40 patrons.
RECOMMENDATION: Conditional approval
A Resolution reflecting the decision of the Planning Commission will be presentedfor adoption at the next Commission
meeting. There is a five working day appeal period after the adoption of the Resolution.
2. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. CUP 08-19
921 S. Baldwin Avenue, Unit A (dba Dumpling House)
Terence Kwok (Architect)
The applicant is requesting a revision to a previously approved Conditional Use Permit and parking modification
(CUP 94-01/ Resolution No. 1508) for a 1,376 square-foot eating establishment with seating for eight (8) patrons.
The applicant is requesting to increase the number of permitted seats from eight (8) to thirty-seven (37).
RECOMMENDATION: Conditional approval
A Resolution reflecting the decision of the Planning Commission will be presentedfor adoption at the next Commission
meeting. There is afive working day appeal period after the adoption of the Resolution.
3. TEXT AMENDMENT 09-01
Citywide
Text Amendment No. TA 09-01 establishes regulations for wireless communications facilities in the City's Zoning
Ordinance; Article IX, Chapter 2, Part 8 of the Arcadia Municipal Code.
RECOMMENDATION: Approval
Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the Planning Commission members regarding any item on this agenda will be made
available for public inspection in the Planning Services office at City Hall, 240 W. Huntington Dr., Arcadia, CA 91007, (626)574-5423.
PC AGENDA
1-27-09
iI
CONSENT ITEMS
4. RESOLUTION NO. 1788
A Resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Arcadia, California, approving Conditional Use Permit
No. CUP 08-18 to allow teen driver safety classes with a maximum of 18 students in a 493 square-foot conference
room on the second floor of an existing general office use at 420 E. Huntington Drive.
RECOMMENDATION: Adopt
5. MINUTES OF JANUARY 13,2009
RECOMMENDATION: Approve
MATTERS FROM CITY COUNCIL & PLANNING COMMISSION
MODIFICATION COMMITTEE AGENDA
MATTERS FROM STAFF & UPCOMING AGENDA ITEMS
ADJOURNMENT
Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the Planning Commission members regarding any item on this agenda will be made
available for public inspection in the Planning Services office at City Hall, 240 W. Huntington Dr., Arcadia, CA 91007, (626)574-5423.
PC AGENDA
1-27-09
..:0
I
PLANNING COMMISSION
Pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act, persons with a disability who require a disability related modification or
accommodation in order to participate in a meeting, including auxiliary aids or services, may request such modification or
accommodation from the City Clerk at (626) 574-5423. Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to
make reasonable arrangements to assure accessibility to the meeting.
Public Hearin2 Procedure
1. The public hearing is opened by the Chainnan of the Planning Commission.
2. The Planning report is presented by staff.
3. Commissioners' questions relating to the Planning report may be answered at this time.
4. The applicant is afforded the opportunity to address the Commission.
5. Others in favor of the proposal are afforded the opportunity to address the Commission (LIMITED TO 5
MINUTES).
6. Those in opposition to the proposal are afforded the opportunity to address the Commission (LIMTIED TO
5 MINUTES).
7. The applicant may be afforded the opportunity for a brief rebuttal (LlMIlED TO 5 MINUTES).
8. The Commission closes the public hearing.
9. The Commission members may discuss the proposal at this time.
10. The Commission then acts on the proposal and either approves, approves with conditions or modifications,
denies the application, or continues it to a certain date.
11. Following the Commission's action on Conditional Use Permits and Variances, a resolution reflecting the
decision of the Planning Commission is prepared for adoption by the Commission. (There is a five working
day appeal period after the adoption of the resolution).
12. Following the Commission's action on Modifications and Design Reviews, there is a five working day
appeal period.
13. Following the Commission's review of Zone Changes, Text Amendments and General Plan
Amendments, the Commission's comments and recommendations are forwarded to the City Council for the
Council's consideration at a scheduled public hearing.
14. Following the Commission's action on Tentative Tract Maps and Tentative Parcel Maps (subdivisions) there
is a ten calendar day appeal period.
Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the Planning Commission members regarding any item on this agenda will be made
available for public inspection in the Planning Services office at City Hall, 240 W. HlUltington Dr., Arcadia, CA 91007, (626)574-5423.
PC AGENDA
1-27-09
STAFF REPORT
Development Services Department
January 27, 2009
TO: Arcadia Planning Commission
FROM: Jim Kasama, Community Development Administrator
By: Steven Lee, Assistant Planner
SUBJECT: Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 08-15 and a related parking
modification for a 1,971 square-foot restaurant with beer and wine service
and seating for 40 patrons at 921 S. Baldwin Avenue, Units G & H
SUMMARY
Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 08-15 was continued from the December 9,
2008 Planning Commission meeting. CUP 08-15 proposes to expand an existing 1,006
square-foot eating establishment into an adjacent unit to create a 1,971 square-foot
dine-in restaurant with beer and wine service and seating for 40 patrons. The
Development Services Department is recommending approval of Conditional Use
Permit Application No. CUP 08-15, subject to the conditions listed on page 6 of this
report.
GENERAL INFORMATION
APPLICANT: Terence Kwok (Architect)
LOCATION: 921 S. Baldwin Avenue, Units G & H
REQUEST: A Conditional Use Permit and parking modification to allow a 1,971
square-foot restaurant with beer and wine service and seating for 40
patrons at 921 S. Baldwin Avenue, Units G & H
SITE AREA: Approximately 29,710 square feet (0.68 acre)
FRONTAGES: Approximately 182 feet along South Baldwin Avenue and 120 feet
along Fairview Avenue
ZONING & EXISTING LAND USE:
The site is zoned C-2, General Commercial, and is developed with a
one-story 9,976 square-foot commercial strip center containing a mix
of commercial uses. A total of 50 parking spaces are provided in a
surface lot behind the building.
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION:
Commercial
SURROUNDING LAND USES & ZONING:
North: Bank and restaurant, zoned C-2
South: Convenience store, zoned C-2
East: Mixed commercial, zoned C-2
West: Multiple-family residential, zoned R-3
PUBLIC HEARING NOTIFICATION
Public hearing notices of Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 08-15 were mailed on
November 26, 2008 to the property owners, tenants and occupants of those properties
that are within 300 feet of the subject commercial center (see attached radius map).
Because the proposed project is exempt from the requirements of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the public hearing notice was not published in the
Arcadia Weekly newspaper. Additionally, the application was not re-noticed for tonight's
meeting because the public hearing was closed at the December 9, 2008 meeting with
discussion continued to a date certain. Staff did not receive any comments from the
neighboring residents or business owners regarding the proposed restaurant.
BACKGROUND
The subject units are located at the south end of an existing single-story 9,976 square-
foot commercial strip center constructed in 1987. Unit H is currently occupied by the
English House of Fish & Chips, and is operating under Conditional Use Permit No. CUP
87-19 for an eating establishment with seating for 12 patrons. Unit G was previously part
of a martial arts studio (CUP 96-01) but is currently vacant.
A public hearing on this proposal was held by the Planning Commission at its
December 9,2008 meeting. However, because the owner of another restaurant in the
same retail center testified that she had just submitted a Conditional Use Permit
application to increase the number of permitted seats in her restaurant, the
Commission decided to continue discussion of CUP 08-15 to tonight's meeting so that
both CUP applications could be reviewed concurrently.
On December 15, 2008, the owner of the proposed business, Dr. Nan Sook Lee,
submitted a letter explaining that the delay had put her business plans in jeopardy. Dr.
CUP 08-15
921 S. Baldwin Avenue, Units G & H
January 27, 2009 - page 2
Lee requested that the Planning Commission reconsider the continuance and act on
the application as soon as possible. On January 13, 2009, the Planning Commission
reaffirmed the continuance to review the application at tonight's meeting.
PROPOSAL AND ANALYSIS
The applicant is proposing to expand an existing eating establishment into an adjacent
unit to create a 1,971 square-foot dine-in restaurant (dba Happy Blues Crab) with beer
and wine service and seating for 40 patrons. The proposed hours of operation are 11 :00
a.m. to 11 :00 p.m., 7 days a week. According to Arcadia Municipal Code Section
9275.1.53.5, a restaurant is permitted in the C-2 zone with an approved Conditional Use
Permit. The proposed restaurant would be located at the south end of the multi-tenant
commercial strip center on the northwest comer of Baldwin Avenue and Fairview
Avenue. The commercial center currently contains a mix of retail uses, restaurants, and
a dental office. Several Conditional Use Permits and Parking Modifications have been
approved for this center over the last 20 years, resulting in an overall parking deficiency
at the site. The current uses and parking requirements of the center are summarized in
the table below:
Unit #
A
B
C
D
E
F
G*
H*
Totals:
*Subject units
921 S. Baldwin Avenue - Existing Uses and Parking Requirements
Parking
Reauired
13.6
13.9
8.7
7.8
5.4
5.8
4.8
10.06
70
Current Use
Restaurant
Restaurant
Dental office
Fitness gym
Flower shop
Day spa
Vacant (presumed retail)
Eatina establishment
Sa. Fta.
1,358
1,393
1,447
1,563
1,075
1,169
965
1.006
9,976
Notes
CUP 94-01 (max 8 seats)
CUP 89-19 (max 40 seats)
MC 91-08
CUP 87-19 (max 12 seats)
With a parking requirement of 70 spaces and only 50 spaces provided on-site, the
center is currently deficient by 20 parking spaces. Approval of the proposed restaurant
would further increase the deficiency because the proposal involves converting a
general retail space (Unit G) into a restaurant use, and the parking requirement is
greater for restaurants than for retail uses (10 spaces per 1,000 square feet of floor area
for restaurants/eating establishments versus 5 spaces per 1,000 square feet for retail).
Pursuant to the City's parking regulations, a 1,971 square-foot restaurant would require
20 parking spaces, or 5 spaces more than would be required if unit G were to remain
retail and unit H were to remain an eating establishment. As a result, the parking
deficiency at the center would increase from 20 to 25 spaces; 50 spaces in lieu of 75
spaces required overall.
In order to assess the actual parking situation at the site, the Development Services
Department asked the applicant to provide a parking survey tracking the number of
vacant parking stalls at the site at different times of the day. The attached survey was
CUP 08-15
921 S. Baldwin Avenue, Units G & H
January 27,2009 - page 3
conducted between Thursday, September 11, 2008 and Sunday, September 21,2008.
The applicant recorded the number of unoccupied parking spaces at hourly intervals
between 10:00 a.m. and 9:00 p.m. Staff visited the site on multiple occasions and
verified that the survey data is accurate. As expected, parking demand was highest
during the lunch and dinner hours due to the numerous restaurants at the center.
Parking availability ranged from 47 vacant spaces at 10:00 a.m. on a Sunday to only 2
vacant spaces at 7:00 p.m. on a Friday. The parking shortage was particularly severe
during weekend dinner hours when the parking lot was consistently over 90 percent
occupied.
Under the current parking conditions, staff believes the opening of a new 40-seat
restaurant has the potential to create a serious parking shortage at the site. However,
while researching the files for the subject property, staff discovered that the restaurant in
unit A (dba Dumpling House) is only permitted to have seating for 8 patrons in
accordance with Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 94-01, which was originally granted
for a Mexican fast-food restaurant. According to the City's business license records,
there have been at least two other restaurants in the unit prior to Dumpling House, but
staff is unaware of whether or not they were operating in compliance with the seating
condition. Unfortunately, the dumpling restaurant has been operating with 44 seats
since it opened in 2006. As a result, the owner of Dumpling House recently submitted a
Conditional Use Permit application (CUP 08-19) to revise the previously approved CUP
and increase the number of permitted seats from 8 to 37. Both Conditional Use Permit
applications are under consideration at tonight's hearing.
Although the Municipal Code's parking requirement for restaurants and eating
establishments is based on gross floor area and not the number of seats, staff believes
that limiting the number of tables and chairs available for customer use could reduce the
demand for parking. The subject commercial center currently has three restaurants and
eating establishments with a total of 96 seats. Staff finds the two CUP requests to be
acceptable provided that the aggregate number of restaurant seats at the center does
not increase. Eliminating the existing 40-seat Japanese restaurant in unit B from the
equation, there are a total of 56 seats available for Dumpling House and the proposed
Happy Blues Crab restaurant. Staff recommends allocating the 56 seats proportionally
based on each unit's square footage. Unit A (Dumpling House) is 1,358 square feet in
area and Units G & H, when combined, would be 1,971 square feet, or approximately 45
percent larger than unit A. Therefore, unit A should be allocated 23 seats and units G &
H should be allocated 33 seats (approximately 45 percent more). The existing and
proposed seating capacities are summarized in the following table:
Restaurant seating capacities at 921 S. Baldwin Avenue
Current conditions
Unit A (Dumpling House).... ........44 seats
Unit B (Japanese Restaurant).....40 seats
Unit H (Fish & Chips).................12 seats
Total.................................... .96 seats
Prooosed
Unit A (Dumpling House).. ..... .......23 seats
Unit B (Japanese Restaurant)....... 40 seats
Units G & H (Happy Blues Crab)....33 seats
Total...................................... ..96 seats
CUP 08-15
921 S. Baldwin Avenue, Units G & H
January 27, 2009 - page 4
Though approval of this CUP will further increase the parking deficiency at the site by
five (5) parking spaces, staff believes the actual parking situation will not be significantly
affected provided that the restaurants strictly adhere to the approved seating limits. This
will obviously require monitoring by staff. Additionally, it is staff's opinion that allocation
of the seats to each restaurant based on its square footage is equitable to both parties,
and will help ensure that all of the businesses at the center can continue to operate with
adequate parking for their customers and employees.
CODE REQUIREMENTS
All City requirements regarding disabled access and facilities, occupancy limits, building
safety, emergency access, and site design shall be complied with to the satisfaction of
the Building Official, Community Development Administrator, Fire Marshall, City
Engineer, and Public Works Services Director.
CEQA
Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the
Development Services Department has determined that the proposed project is a minor
alteration of an existing facility, and is therefore categorically exempt from CEQA (Class
1, Section 15301). A Preliminary Exemption Assessment is attached.
FINDINGS
Section 9275.1.2 of the Arcadia Municipal Code requires that for a Conditional Use
Permit to be granted, it must be found that all of the following prerequisite conditions can
be satisfied:
1. That the granting of such Conditional Use Permit will not be detrimental to the public
health or welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in such zone or
vicinity.
2. That the use applied for at the location indicated is properly one for which a
Conditional Use Permit is authorized.
3. That the site for the proposed use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate
said use, and all yards, spaces, walls, fences, parking, loading, landscaping, and
other features required to adjust said use with the land and uses in the
neighborhood.
4. That the site abuts streets and highways adequate in width and pavement type to
carry the kind of traffic generated by the proposed use.
5. That the granting of such Conditional Use Permit will not adversely affect the
comprehensive General Plan.
CUP 08-15
921 S. Baldwin Avenue, Units G & H
January 27, 2009 - page 5
RECOMMENDATION
The Development Services Department recommends approval of Conditional Use
Permit Application No. CUP 08-15, subject to the following conditions:
1. The business hours of the restaurant shall not exceed 11 :00 a.m. to 11 :00 p.m., 7
days a week.
2. The restaurant shall be operated and maintained in a manner that is consistent with
the proposal and plans submitted and conditionally approved for CUP 08-15 (a
1,971 square-foot restaurant with beer and wine service and seating for up to 33
patrons), subject to the satisfaction of the Community Development Administrator.
3. The approval of CUP 08-15 includes a parking modification of 50 spaces in lieu of
75 required. This modification is approved only for the specific combination of uses
approved by CUP 08-15, and not for the building and/or site in general.
4. Noncompliance with the plans, provisions and conditions of approval for CUP 08-
15 shall be grounds for immediate suspension or revocation of any approvals,
which could result in the closing of the restaurant.
5. All City requirements regarding disabled access and facilities, occupancy limits,
building safety, emergency access, and site design shall be complied with to the
satisfaction of the Building Official, Community Development Administrator, Fire
Marshall, City Engineer, and Public Works Services Director.
6. Approval of CUP 08-15 shall not take effect until the property owner(s), business
owner(s), and applicant 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 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.
CUP 08-15
921 S. Baldwin Avenue, Units G & H
January 27, 2009 - page 6
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
Approval
If the Planning Commission intends to approve this proposal, the Commission should
move to approve Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 08-15, state the supporting findings,
and direct staff to prepare a resolution incorporating the Commission's decision, specific
determinations and findings, including the CEQA exemption, and the conditions of
approval, for adoption at the next meeting.
Denial
If the Planning Commission intends to deny this proposal, the Commission should move
to deny Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 08-15, state the finding(s) that the
proposal does not satisfy, and direct staff to prepare a resolution incorporating the
Commission's decision and specific findings, for adoption at the next meeting.
If any Planning Commissioner, or other interested party has any questions or comments
regarding this matter prior to the January 27th meeting, please contact Steven Lee,
Assistant Planner, at (626) 574-5444 or via email atslee@cLarcadia.ca.us.
asama, Community Development Administrator
Attachments: Aerial Photo with Zoning Information
Radius Map
Plans
Parking Survey
Photos
Preliminary Exemption Assessment
CUP 08-15
921 S. Baldwin Avenue, Units G & H
January 27, 2009 - page 7
CUP 08-15 - 921 S. Baldwin Ave., Units G & H
CUP 08-19 - 921 S. Baldwin Ave., Unit A
...
......
62.60 /~2TRN07."!l!f
.~ 6985
, !. Y.'O' !tll'> ... : i 1
II
) @ tfll) i @
l.!~. Ie... Dll.~ ~ ,~
6 5 '&(!9
647 .I~ -
3
) e2.8O b3.15 L@
531
Z' 86 i
~
0 ~
~ Pi
J 9li
(ff1i)
SHEET 2
. 1
-
I
#II""
F"AIRVtEW
us 81)
"'."1
-?f
:Mil
I
."''' .\
.....-1,..,
NO 2731
5220
1 I~
POR @) It? tS
@Vii
"170 11
aL @@:
2 187m _ ..:-l'
-- -1iOR-~- (lJ
~ ::
ZI4.44 . ~
t/J
l-
II.
,.
~
9J
..
a 71
1 II) ~ S
,... l'OII
'lOt' C @ 11
t- ....
W
w
i II)
:E
.-
125 eo 1&
85. !IS.llII
.... "l-
S i ~
t; ~ It>
~
~.:
@ lllO 11$ t:O
~ !i~Z 1 ~ Z
78
...
~ CD
:! 3
2B ,
-----4,,----
r;;.. ~
v::.; .. ~
1351QdF 212.10 ~
01
",
~..,~ AVE..
~ ",'.,'
1711Qgf
~
~~ .
is ...
: ~~ .
<.;.
,,\
L
,
l.
, .
.~.~
. ,
. ",,-:-
.I':~.
".."
,:
'd' ""
--~.~.
,U','
",. I "A
~ .."t.
;i-
""
~. '
h
~~ t
.f;:
., . "f!. Z,
J..
.'; -,.
.. - .....-
......~.
,.
','J
..1
'\'....
f
~
'.....,.=='~ '"'
:I ,
i\:~-- ~,---
r>
l-+-' - r- --
, ,
" '
, ~:.'.~~=:~~
II i
I \----~--
'F4c=~'::<L:-:
i i
I. '
I [~.-
C-'}
.'
._-~~
iB,
--%._~-
l
'::. :'C~.L.
~,-' ,...:._-
f'---f,'::
1""".----~-.
1.
....-_.__.~ .._--~
,
I
-~.....'-_.\
.r -
, . " ~
Tl,-.t-
~:j
i
. i
f!-_ _ -__.:-.
~~:;~~~~;..;:'-
,. ,._____._O__.n-
1--'~.
:~~+__ _L.
c-.--..
r::::~f....-J~~=---..--.
i\ "."--T--'
!i ~\
,i-l':.._L----
~: :. ;~; ~! ~.
"\' . 10' .,
,~~,t- . ~--
I;' ~i
1_..._.--.:..----
.::.-:.:......,:.
~_" (1."'1.1.-
..'
-1--
.,
:; ~._-_.-
I, ~ :
~lQ:.l.-~~~.~-
Ii
\:
.\_: i
'f ; ().--- ~
:r--f---on
11 i .
\~
...----..--:
'::...:::.-:,-4--
',,; 'i
"'~"'tJlJ,
\
'"
:.:0
""'"-...:.;.::,.';;.,,,.::::;.....,,~....-.::-...:;o.;.-.:.:-'t:::-.~-;.,
_J..z_.....__,
'''Y: ----..."
~i
,.._3i....---.
"
..
1l-.:
-~',
~~ ~~
~_. -"':5
:11
.~ c-:-
_ '!:.,;~ .':J._.....n~.
,;
}?;
ri. ~~-,.:;4
;...}.JoZ.:.....
---.---------
-d
I;
-[ ,
~,-; .:..
:~. "':::ST ~'4'C:""'\-
:?S~ ;.f
'),'" ::
.~: CC!:7:;-:-~R.I"I\T
.~7e H'
._;;r:::3
-lZ,i
.\~1ot!ITi.ll
P
I
J
I
\
L---r'
-..."-, r
iJ~ll
<('r'" j""-"
,i.-,.:. '
'-' l
......it
,l.... -..-'-'--'
. "..--- --~ ,;,-- 1 ,t"T ~
i e, win:~~j;l(T~;~~~.:.:R~=:
. .. .~___.. "'I .,,~;F
,,:: ~ \' ' ' - _. - .1 '
.--F~-~ l E ~;",::"",. L'J .;
,-:..-p.__'::"-'; \xt~r
I
:3 I ~-=.:;~G:;:::.-=:----~...
;....$"'_,.__'_,. --"-:>i~';--"~'--"~:,~/,:;r
":l'I~
j
it
~
.!'~... 'c.
:.::: DEII,\-'I!- ,o;Ff:cr:
,"-',5.'
I:' ~""~' ':'.A.-1<'::.
',5e3 :;P
.c~'~;t.:~
'C-;5~.F
:..~;,":'" ?
J:, ~::P:v',::~ (~i"iA\ :.::.l"
'.t=! ~::
~'S t
;
'.-L ::..:::.~,.: ....;....,.~._.
"...._..=-....',,.,.............,...,,...... .....-...>-CL.L-c.,........ .~~~' .'"-,-..
.!:: ,-..:'~';
~:\V\.l,,"
~J..;.,
~';'~IEV\ .A.'lE
_;:._.~-1~_ E~~~At'i :
SC-'\i..:, = i'e '-0' ...-
'-::r:'
:/-.
11)': '
,.)~,...,"
_....."i.
::~..~~...
~~:.(.,w
.~]!;g~".
. l:!
......:!",' .~
A
.._l
'f'
In
<~~:
-;.f~"":::'
,
,
i
--'.. ....'~ -' ....rl.l.~:. ... ,..
E'f -, -~Y14-""
, " '"I I~';ll I !
... :-llJ'. '~./~_.i. ~~.~)
U1',rn /(~:.tJ i__ ,~=-,LL L.
. r-". TT' "F--."::";:-' 'rI~
\: . ...~~.'\..~ r'~::;':;.r.,,;.' .....1.--_11
"r IQj i ~~, \'~: II}" \7" ,. !
::\ ~~~.;'.;' II~; 1-' .).(~t \~~ '~~;,.'l 'I'!
. : 'It :1 'n' II r~.. . ., 1::~ \'r- ~(~y ;,~
!.- .. ..- .,jj I 11''' j fI II .I' '. :; 'lll
~-ljll ,\ l,t-i, ~ '.' ;1 ,,;", -,"~_ --is'; I Iii
ii! / ! ":/11,,:-'1::"1' L':j[,.J ,,:;~~.. L'd~
'I ~ I '.'1 1'';', ~ n'- ""7" - ", -:--:-."--. " ~
I r/", 1 r":- .:... I.., ,I t.::,~,~_
t.,.-" , r.:-"., I ,j ... I (".l,' ..,
I!~ I i1 I L ;-.:rr, J (.~ ./ ". ""\;..~: t'\:
,J ~..; II!?) I-I-I~I'I ~tj)_Ai(; \~, <..,.
I ! ~: I III {~f !~ \ ~ ) . 1"1
. .II- \ ..- "'" - I ,.
II, .:,i!i "1 ' ;<1, i'pi"";I,'~.;'
11 \H! J" . ~ , Ii, { ,,~'.:' ~:,,!...?~. "~!;
I .~ 'J'~l'i:-,~~r!- --(Hil '1!
.1, -~'" ' r..~..~..L ,..
j \'~')i! Qit.f', 'J I'''i'''~'-'' ""'1' i!
!""~:~ . : : ~~;i;~!;[~ i!f>,,:,\:;;\~il~~ :,:,1; :
J'I /@J'I '~., ~'~~1-"
=- =-111 ~lli .1'
'-~T=-=}~~~-- :: C_-r- 1
,~:~~i~~~~::.~i~<Ji! ~rl-! II
i n() (') (~) n Q C) C') (*-', C&' i !---'I I;
!I I '.~~)' '-",~, _. (~-- , .till..'"'' '''(~i-:, III~.;). ,':::;/i(,., '" , " Ii
v\,)_ ~ ~ X.se.C,~/:::..( \, I
I ' 6. '.TI i II~ ,f ',~/ ",~,/ I,
th) t (tj "> :'" ..' ". I I
i I~ PI 111':-J~ :1'1 (>",," > <,>, II
I I 'L] .. 'i:,-' ,I i \ii ~ -' .<. II
i.1 . _~1 'I ~ .. I
I~z:n. i I 0 2~,.,,/<<> I~' , i 'c' ,r ~\v<~ 1,,1
'C I! I [_I ~'" ":! II il I I
\::) ,I 'I 1[', ----- - ! ',',"'" /' ill ~t, ';1, I! 'II' "$i" ! I
" ill" i i 'I iii : I
! ~I --....I'~' l-=::-' Iii '~lr' I! Iii ' .'''' I;
i <.11 'II, I ' i.l' I !~;- ~ ~\~- ;( ',. II
I tlJ, ,\\'-- ',. Irr-::_--~,-{_._._,.JI' :~I~~~\; !!-I
[ \' " II --fj-"rc--,i,! c_. _,~\. ,'-- !I
---~ _--L---'-:E:~~:;;;;:..:.~_._ i If ..' \ lto (I;: ':'_ ~:.;...\ I .1
I --.-----.:~~:~;;.-.~:.;:;.c>.__d f~;' 'E' lit i " ;
I, __.I._".-c.. ,::, "=e'_-.~_I"t 1tL~:::::::~lt- i
A' ^ .<' _.....i':-~"._.. - J . ^
y..., .---,
I
! l' ..
)'. ..._.._-v
i
,
~::4~~:!
e.'~~'
C,'...~'
--1(
I ; '.'j ~ "
-.Y
!
-.r
--n'~;!_ _,
,
i
. ,,-_..."'- ~'J'.'"
i
. It! GOl\C. rw.", I.
!;J
,
.~. ,1.
I i
I':: I ~'~' "~-.l)' :-I~~~
,'" ! '''~il''1
ii, \,
1-- - T ,-':"Y '-:: -- --~ r J~." -~- ,.'
!, /' 11 Jill!'!. ~ L< 1'<,'
I I I "..'1' .1m... '{
8 Il-li~.L~- wi
f~ I \ I " - "'t )"
~ I y'~ Yi:~'
~ . \ I(~l
~ ,:'~'
i I rl" - -i/
!! Ii
j j i ~
I, k
! ! ~ /: iHt:
i :t
[ ;':
i
--J
1-1..;
,
r'
II
.. ~
(i~! ~
""II
,I
i
Ii
l....
I 1
Hj!
:"
,-. .~
~
!
r- .
r :
...:~
i):i,: ~
!-'I~!; !
',.~'.. '_ i): .i;r i.~{:~ l~,.. _:. '~~.
!()If~)I() ..,
',,--, '---/ "'--
'.
".
'.
. - -;EI~;C.,ytJd..J.;
"
~IN6 IS A PROf'ERTY OF. 'FERENC-E KHOK A"C-H/'FEC T.
/11<6 ,S AN lNS'Il<lJHENT OF SfRv'IC-E ""0",1= FO"-
1-1 TNt: SPECIPIC- PRoJEC-T IDENTIFIED, "''lIm<ER
,-IE PROJEc.T IS ~D, N!:ITHER THE t)RAl"IIN6S
:>616N SHAU.: !'f;\ISeD ON. OTHER !'ROJEc.TS OR ON
,'IS TO OR MODlflc.ATIONS OF TlfIS PROJECT I1ITH01JT
;EN c.oHSei;t' OF .TEIlEIiC-E Kl'iOK, ARGt-IITEc. T, I'<HO
! AFPROl"Il.IA'TEl'( C-Oi'lPENsATa> FOR S1.Ic.N ~'SE.
i.rr'r:\?~
Tt=RENGE KriOK,ARGHITEC, T
260 E. 6,ARVEY AVE:.,
MONTEREY PARK, C"A, '1!155
S25-bCJl-2120
.,(
/.
I
i
,
!
.1
Ii
Ii.
I ,.....
I
, I
j'
I!
I
i
I
I
I
!
,
"
"
,I
, '
8
~
'"
~
I
I
~I
~'"
i 1 ~
1 I: <
Ii.' ~
+~-t~" .~.
r--.
0
0
~
en
<(
() CO
- o.
cD 0
~ ~
~
r:: ~
.~ c:n
"0 .e
10 co
en 0
~ 0
N ~
CD ~
~ ~
J2 as
>- E
"0
::s 0
~
CiS Ll-
e>
r::
32
~
co
a.
i;'CO
-g~ r-- ~ GO r-- N ~ ~ It) 0 ('l') CO ~
. N N ('l') N N 'P"
a3'P"
~
>0 CO
l'lIg
"Et:! ~ ~ It) CO <0 ~ It) 10 It) r-- 0 ~
~~ 'P" ..... ..... N N N .....
.
CO
>-g (:)
:2~ ~ It) <0 0 . ~ tS ('l') N CO .0-
N ..... 'P" ..... ('t) 'P" N
u.....
as
>0 CO
lUg
~~ en ~ ..... r-- ,... ~ ..... CO 0 ~ CO It)
('l') N .... N ('l') N N ..... .... N
J5ai .
>0 CO
tug
I~ ~. CO en It) It) ('l') ~ CO r-- <0 r-- ('l')
!~ N .... ..... N ('l') N N
>0 CO
tuO
ll~ ~ ~ CO CO ~ ~ cO r-- .... It) N N
Q)CO N N N N .... .... N
::J....
1-(;5
>0 CO
tug
'2~ .... ~ It) It) It) ~ 0 ~ ~ CO ~ ~
. ('l') N ('I) ('l') ('I)
ia;
CO
>og
~ 10 CO t?J ('l') ~ en ~ It) r-- ~
c~ ~ ('l') N N N .... CO ('I)
::J....
m_
en
>0 CO
tu8
"E~ r-- ~ ~ It) It) ~ r-- ('I) r-- . It) 0
i~ ('I) ..... ..... N N .....
mas
CO
>00
tue ('I) ('l') It) It) It) ~ en N en r--
'ON It) en
'c N ('I) ('I) .... N ('l') N .... .... .....
~....
as
>0 CO
tug
~C! C>> ~ ~ r-- (t) r-- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
::J..... ('I) .... N ('l')
.s::. .....
I-as
E E ~ ~ 1 ~ i ~ i ~ ! E
~ tu
e 0 0 0 8 g 8 8
e ~. 0 ~ 0 0
(:) ..... N .... N it) "'t u; <0 ~ cO 0;
..... .... ....
-
e
It)
I
-
~
i
0)
c
~
tu
0.";
.ill
.Q::J
=I~
iUc
-&.
Ii
Q..!!!
~'i6
~iU
.! .sa
ES
::Jtu
coo
Q)Q)
.s::. .s::.
t-t-
Subject commercial strip center-south side
Subject commercial strip center-north side
Shared parking lot at rear-looking north
Shared parking lot at rear-looking south
Subject units-G & H
PRELIMINARY EXEMPTION ASSESSMENT
(Certificate of Determination When Attached to Notice of Exemption)
1. Name or description of project:
Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 08-15 and the related parking modification for a 1,971 square-foot
restaurant with beer and wine service with meals and seating for 40 patrons at 921 S. Baldwin Avenue, Units G
&H.
2. Project Location _ Identify street address and cross streets or attach a map showing project site (preferably a
USGS 15' or 7W topographical map identified by quadrangle name):
921 S. Baldwin Avenue, Units G & H (at Fairview Avenue)
o A. City of Arcadia
1:8.1 B. Other (Private)
(1) Name: Terence Kwok
(2) Address: 260 E. Garvev Avenue
Monterev Park. CA 91755
(3) Phone: (323) 697-2120
3. Entity or person undertaking project:
4. Staff Determination:
The City's Staff, having undertaken and completed a preliminary review of this project in accordance with the
City's "Local Guidelines for Implementing the Califomia Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)" has concluded that
this project does not require further environmental assessment because:
a. 0
b. 0
c. 0
d. 0
e. 1:8.1
f. 0
g. 0
The proposed action does not constitute a project under CEQA.
The project is a Ministerial Project.
The project is an Emergency Project.
The project constitutes a feasibility or planning study.
The project is categorically exempt. Applicable Exemption Class:
Section No.: 15301
The project is statutorily exempt. Applicable Exemption:
Section No.:
The project is otherwise exempt on the following basis:
h. 0 The project involves another public agency which constitutes the Lead Agency.
Name of Lead Agency:
Date: November 28. 2008
Staff: Steven Lee. Assistant Planner
STAFF REPORT
Developlnent Services Department
January 27,2009
TO: Arcadia Planning Commission
FROM: Jim Kasama, Community Development Administrator
By: Steven Lee, Assistant Planner
SUBJECT: Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 08-19 to revise a previously
approved Conditional Use Permit and parking modification (CUP 94-01 /
Resolution No. 1508) for a 1,376 square-foot eating establishment with
seating for 8 patrons at 921 S. Baldwin Avenue, Unit A
SUMMARY
Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 08-19 proposes to revise a previously
approved Conditional Use Permit (CUP 94-01 / Resolution No. 1508) to increase the
number of permitted seats at an existing 1,376 square-foot restaurant (dba Dumpling
House) from 8 to 37. The Development Services Department is recommending approval
of Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 08-19, subject to the conditions listed on
pages 5 and 6 of this report.
GENERAL INFORMATION
APPLICANT: Terence Kwok (Architect)
LOCATION: 921 S. Baldwin Avenue, Unit A
REQUEST: A revision to a previously approved Conditional Use Permit and
parking modification (CUP 94-01 / Resolution No. 1508) for a 1,376
square-foot eating establishment with seating for 8 patrons. The
applicant is requesting to increase the number of permitted seats to 37.
SITE AREA: Approximately 29,710 square feet (0.68 acre)
FRONTAGES: Approximately 182 feet along South Baldwin Avenue and 120 feet
along Fairview Avenue
ZONING & EXISTING LAND USE:
The site is zoned C-2, General Commercial, and is developed with a
one-story 9,976 square-foot commercial strip center containing a mix
of commercial uses. A total of 50 parking spaces are provided in a
surface lot behind the building.
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION:
Commercial
SURROUNDING LAND USES & ZONING:
North: Bank and restaurant, zoned C-2
South: Convenience store, zoned C-2
East: Mixed commercial, zoned C-2
West: Multiple-family residential, zoned R-3
PUBLIC HEARING NOTIFICATION
Public hearing notices of Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 08-19 were mailed on
January 12, 2009 to the property owners, tenants and occupants of those properties that
are within 300 feet of the subject commercial center (see attached radius map).
Because the proposed project is exempt from the requirements of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the public hearing notice was not published in the
Arcadia Weekly newspaper. Staff did not receive any comments from the neighboring
residents or business owners regarding the proposed revision to the Conditional Use
Permit.
BACKGROUND
The subject unit is located at the north end of an existing 9,976 square-foot single-
story commercial strip center constructed in 1987. The unit is currently occupied by a
dumpling restaurant (dba Dumpling House), and is operating under a Conditional Use
Permit dating back to 1994 (CUP 94-01), which was granted for a Mexican fast-food
restaurant with seating for 8 patrons. According to the City's business license records,
there were at least two other restaurants in the unit prior to Dumpling House, both of
which were subject to the same seating restriction. Staff is not aware of whether or not
the prior restaurants were operating in compliance with the seating condition. This
CUP revision request was submitted after staff discovered-while researching the
property for CUP 08-15 for a new 40-seat restaurant (dba Happy Blues Crab) at the
same retail center-that Dumpling House is only permitted to have seating for 8
patrons in accordance with its CUP. Unfortunately, the dumpling restaurant has been
operating with 44 seats since it opened in 2006. Although the seating limitation was
indicated on the restaurant's business license application, the owner has stated that
he was not aware of the restriction. This application is being reviewed concurrently
with CUP 08-15 at tonight's hearing.
CUP 08-19
921 S. Baldwin Avenue, Unit A
January 27, 2009 - page 2
PROPOSAL AND ANALYSIS
The applicant is proposing a revision to a previously approved Conditional Use Permit
(CUP 94-01 / Resolution No. 1508) for a 1,376 square-foot eating establishment with
seating for up to 8 patrons. The applicant is requesting to increase the allowable number
of seats to 37. According to Arcadia Municipal Code Section 9275.1.53.5, a restaurant is
permitted in the C-2 zone with an approved Conditional Use Permit. The restaurant is
located at the north end of the multi-tenant commercial strip center on the northwest
corner of Baldwin Avenue and Fairview Avenue. The commercial center currently
contains a mix of retail uses, restaurants, and a dental office. Several Conditional Use
Permits and Parking Modifications have been approved for this center over the last 20
years, resulting in an overall parking deficiency at the site. The current uses and parking
requirements of the center are summarized in the table below:
Unit #
A*
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
Totals:
*Subject unit
921 S. Baldwin Avenue - Existing Uses and Parking Requirements
Parking
Reauired
13.6
13.9
8.7
7.8
5.4
5.8
4.8
10.06
70
Current Use
Restaurant
Restaurant
Dental office
Fitness gym
Flower shop
Day spa
Vacant (presumed retail)
Eatina establishment
Sa. Fta.
1,358
1,393
1,447
1,563
1,075
1,169
965
1.006
9,976
Notes
CUP 94-01 (max 8 seats)
CUP 89-19 (max 40 seats)
MC 91-08
CUP 87-19 (max 12 seats)
With a parking requirement of 70 spaces and only 50 spaces provided on-site, the
center is currently deficient by 20 parking spaces. Approval of this CUP revision would
not further increase the deficiency because the parking requirement for restaurants and
eating establishments is based on floor area (10 spaces per 1,000 square feet of gross
floor area) not the number of seats. In reality, however, an increase in the number of
tables and chairs could result in a greater demand for parking because the restaurant
would be able to accommodate more customers at one time. In addition, CUP 08-15,
which is also on tonight's agenda, proposes to enlarge an existing eating establishment
at the same center to create a new 40-seat restaurant.
The attached parking survey was conducted by the applicant of CUP 08-15 between
Thursday, September 11, 2008 and Sunday, September 21, 2008. The applicant
recorded the number of unoccupied parking spaces at hourly intervals between 10:00
a.m. and 9:00 p.m. Staff visited the site on multiple occasions and verified that the
survey data is accurate. As expected, parking demand was highest during the lunch and
dinner hours due to the numerous restaurants at the center. Parking availability ranged
from 47 vacant spaces at 10:00 a.m. on a Sunday to only 2 vacant spaces at 7:00 p.m.
on a Friday. The parking shortage was particularly severe during weekend dinner hours
when the parking lot was consistently over 90 percent occupied. It should be noted that
CUP 08-19
921 S. Baldwin Avenue, Unit A
January 27,2009 - page 3
at the time this parking survey was conducted, Dumpling House was operating with 44
seats.
According to the survey data, it appears the subject center has just enough parking to
meet the current parking demand. With the approval of CUP 08-15 and CUP 08-19,
however, there is a possibility that the parking lot will not be able to accommodate the
expected higher volume of vehicles. Therefore, staff recommends a condition of
approval that would maintain the same aggregate number of restaurant seats at the
retail center. The subject commercial center currently has 3 restaurants and eating
establishments with a total of 96 seats. Subtracting the 40 seats at the existing
Japanese restaurant in unit B from 96, there are a total of 56 seats available for
Dumpling House and the proposed Happy Blues Crab restaurant. Staff suggests
allocating the 56 seats proportionally based on each unit's square footage. Unit A
(Dumpling House) is 1,358 square feet in area and Units G & H, when combined, would
be 1,971 square feet, or approximately 45 percent larger than unit A. Therefore, unit A
should be allocated 23 seats and units G & H should be allocated 33 seats
(approximately 45 percent more). The existing and proposed seating capacities are
summarized in the following table:
Restaurant seating capacities at 921 S. Baldwin Avenue
Current conditions
Unit A (Dumpling House)..... .......44 seats
Unit B (Japanese Restaurant).. ...40 seats
Unit H (Fish & Chips).......... .......12 seats
Total.... ............. ........ ........ ....96 seats
Proposed
Unit A (Dumpling House).. ......... ...23 seats
Unit B (Japanese Restaurant)....... 40 seats
Units G & H (Happy Blues Crab)....33 seats
Total....................................... .96 seats
Assuming each restaurant strictly adheres to its approved seating limit, staff believes the
50 on-site parking spaces will be adequate. This will obviously require monitoring by
staff. Additionally, it is staff's opinion that allocation of the seats to each restaurant
based on its square footage is equitable to both parties, and will help ensure that all of
the businesses at the center can continue to operate with sufficient parking for their
customers and employees.
CODE REQUIREMENTS
All City requirements regarding disabled access and facilities, occupancy limits, building
safety, emergency access, and site design shall be complied with to the satisfaction of
the Building Official, Community Development Administrator, Fire Marshall, City
Engineer, and Public Works Services Director.
CEQA
Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the
Development Services Department has determined that the proposed project is a minor
CUP 08-19
921 S. Baldwin Avenue, Unit A
January 27, 2009 - page 4
r
alteration of an existing facility, and is therefore categorically exempt from CEQA (Class
1, Section 15301). A Preliminary Exemption Assessment is attached.
FINDINGS
Section 9275.1.2 of the Arcadia Municipal Code requires that for a Conditional Use
Permit to be granted, it must be found that all of the following prerequisite conditions can
be satisfied:
1. That the granting of such Conditional Use Permit will not be detrimental to the public
health or welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in such zone or
vicinity.
2. That the use applied for at the location indicated is properly one for which a
Conditional Use Permit is authorized.
3. That the site for the proposed use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate
said use, and all yards, spaces, walls, fences, parking, loading, landscaping, and
other features required to adjust said use with the land and uses in the
neighborhood.
4. That the site abuts streets and highways adequate in width and pavement type to
carry the kind of traffic generated by the proposed use.
5. That the granting of such Conditional Use Permit will not adversely affect the
comprehensive General Plan.
RECOMMENDATION
The Development Services Department recommends approval of Conditional Use
Permit Application No. CUP 08-19, subject to the following conditions:
1. The restaurant's hours of operation shall be limited to 11 :00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.,
Sunday through Thursday, and 11 :00 a.m. to 11 :00 p.m. on Fridays and Saturdays.
2. The restaurant shall be operated and maintained in a manner that is consistent with
the proposal and plans submitted and conditionally approved for CUP 08-19 (a
1,358 square-foot restaurant with seating for up to 23 patrons), subject to the
satisfaction of the Community Development Administrator.
3. The approval of CUP 08-19 includes a parking modification of 50 spaces in lieu of
70 required. This modification is approved only for the specific combination of uses
approved by CUP 08-19, and not for the building and/or site in general.
4. Noncompliance with the plans, provisions and conditions of approval for CUP 08-
19 shall be grounds for immediate suspension or revocation of any approvals,
which could result in the closing of the restaurant.
CUP 08-19
921 S. Baldwin Avenue, Unit A
January 27,2009 - page 5
,
5. All City requirements regarding disabled access and facilities, occupancy limits,
building safety, emergency access, and site design shall be complied with to the
satisfaction of the Building Official, Community Development Administrator, Fire
Marshall, City Engineer, and Public Works Services Director.
6. Approval of CUP 08-19 shall not take effect until the property owner(s), business
owner(s), and applicant 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 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
If the Planning Commission intends to approve this proposal, the Commission should
move to approve Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 08-19, state the supporting findings,
and direct staff to prepare a resolution incorporating the Commission's decision, specific
determinations and findings, including the CEQA exemption, and the conditions of
approval, for adoption at the next meeting.
Denial
If the Planning Commission intends to deny this proposal, the Commission should move
to deny Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 08-19, state the finding(s) that the
proposal does not satisfy, and direct staff to prepare a resolution incorporating the
Commission's decision and specific findings, for adoption at the next meeting.
If any Planning Commissioner, or other interested party has any questions or comments
regarding this matter prior to the January 2ih public hearing, please contact Steven Lee,
Assistant Planner, at (626) 574-5444 or via em ail atslee@cLarcadia.ca.us.
CUP 08-19
921 S. Baldwin Avenue, Unit A
January 27, 2009 - page 6
,
Approved by:
Ji
sarna, Community Development Administrator
Attachments: Aerial Photo with Zoning Information
Radius Map
Plans
Parking Survey
Photos
Preliminary Exemption Assessment
CUP 08-19
921 S. Baldwin Avenue, Unit A
January 27, 2009 - page 7
CUP 08-15 - 921 S. Baldwin Ave., Units G & H
CUP 08-19 - 921 S. Baldwin Ave., Unit A
...
62,50 5:l.76
6ge5 ,
I i @
.' @ (z!) i
} '7llt
6 5
647 ~
3
ez.eo b3.15
t.."_
.. ~'. ~ 531
$
Z 86 M
i
0
~ ~
&
.J, 96 l,;..~. .,,'
F'AlRvtEW
UI 81>>
NO 2731
if't.)
c.....,'t ,
i
'"
II
III
.,.
~
It 71
1 ." ~ i
" l'OIl
.. 0 @
l- ....
W
W
;x: m
'" ~
125 81>> 1&
ll5, J5.0It
9- .....
~ ~ g:
II) It)
('t)
~
@ lllO l8 a t:O
~ ~~z 1 Q)~ Z
78
...
~ m
:E
-
r. I,
, ...
~
," ,
~.~ "
' ,
. .~-;-
Y'~,
",
~ AVE.
,." .,'1
f7aGl1lf
~
l~, '
.s." .
.' =~
~
\!\
".op
".:'
_:.!U,-_
~&I','
'w I "A'
';.'
~. '
b
:~ t
.J "
';"'J! Z,
j:': ...., .
ct... ... _ ....._
....'.-t-.
.,'}
..1
"
qOOlbY? "'iICl'V'?~'7'
'YII '~t\~NIMCI"1'7'9 'S It:b.
3$nql--l.'PNI0.c:;I~nq..
mill.......:.
1...........2. .... ....... \
:o~
Oc:Ic:~Ll>q-Gt:g: ....
SSL.II> ""?'<\~'v'd:^;J~pJ.NOH
"B^'t .l-3AW~,';lOqc:
J.?;;JJ.Ir-l?w'';:lpf,f;ja?N;l~EU,
" "-', .',".'-'" .
",-;
~Q1~;~I'
:)
~1l:,;:::1
(\:<
I ~:t KI~:i,,~~:~t~fL j
~\! :,L~t~'- :~~:.;~_.~~~~' ~
1\ ;'~'r."J~S,P'SI'-71 1\
11\,. .~i , ,r J 11 'I II
i ~'\[CJLl., lJ1 .,~" ,', .t, /d i
! \ C'Ji~{~' LJ II \(~)
I I Ii
N:\ ' 1-\ L---' '._-~ '~...i.L--....~-ll,,\\ r,
,;. \:i'-=~l '1 I
".! jl\ \:JoJ {~l 'L!\ \1
UL' ~il CJ-
:.;) \i~~~~~~j .. lL"lll
~ 1 ; ~~:h : ..-1 \
I II : ~~ ~~ . CJ
I 1\ ""'-'--,1 ,;~ --.------,.
, t,/
t _~___"J
I' i 1
II, \\r _. i.~ ~ \i '
ll'b \ 'II I
r --rb"~:1 \~~f~ -~~~~:t.~il-l'-\'-- t
I I L~1?__.k-.--J IUlII .1
I ~U 't1 "1 :U' h "
i, _ ~;.' '~.' .~ 'II '
\ I\:i~~~, '-:Jdl \
"i \ --~ ~. .<.1 ~;.\
~\ ,i't).~I..~!;t['~~.-1 ~\ .1} ~I.~.I N\,.
I :,.~.I 1~@"iJ
\, .<).,@","i. ,J ~ . , .
1 ::.. I f;;j 'oS) ,~,- tfi9' . I
1 I i 1~:Lj I" t;\'t:\1Z31111 \
,'- i-IT--" ---'-li ~r7"':-1,,,....t---r
: I, ~I h-- \Ii, I ::;-",' ~~ I
1:\ \ ,IL ~ Ill'" \'~~\, tl .rl\ !
\ I, ~ 11 ~" '.'\
1 "\' -- - II \ !\--- '-':i\ ll.. I L~-~I~~'~ \ '
Q \ (~ \ '1 ~..ll 1
r : ~ ~ r / ,':;~j t:r:<~~~:r I
, ,I J I -, ~~(~ iI, f"ll '
" 1 "---- --- 't: -- . , ','!~'l : '---;"
, _.\--- . i,.:--~,..,J',,;Cl;r!t~r t;i;'~1 i. ~~~:{..Jj':':~' \ ~\'
1," ' I {~ t I _,'\A..--L:'. -~, \
, ,-----,.., ------'-"'-----~ --
-~--- - -.--~- ;~ -=\:---------t------"
~J~s:,~~.i~;:~ C:~.,~ - ~.~
~
1:
\<-1
'.1 ,j", ,K
\~ .J \~ {)!.::"l :i
Il~ .!I~I~I\!!.IIIII!
.( 'll IV I.. '_I ~ f; J :i ,1) t IV,' 1-- !~. :t (J Ul 1>: ~J .~
~a~~~~~~~t~1~~;0~~~~1
.~);: ft~R\t1l,P~ !.~rl ..l~,-\l(~~,~v~t~~tfr.~) '.~)~~h}~~)i~)
~ri i
n ~r.
~2 5:!
-(or,
~J ~E t"i
l)l~;
~~ ir'.:c
,_\ H' ~;
~. /. "'l
illFJ~
f\ '" I
i
\
J
~~\
~ ~
~ _I) Ul
:t: ~.~ ~ r~
~fr ~~~~]
z ~ IU I,,)) Il 1~1 \.)
~~d ~ 8~U ul~.
~~~i~it'i~~.~i~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~8f~
\\)1 !~\~ ~ffi ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r! ~ ~? ~ ~ ;;; t') ~ Ds ~~ ~ 1~1 8 ~t
111\ ~ r~ l} t.( t5 ~J t) UJ ili ~ ;( oc ~ l) ~..: .J y ,) ~i ;r\ ~: ~i) 'f
1_-1 'J,_,f)~) ~l '_) u u..... C\.....i,-~I),U.1 In...,. n.-:.,.,,) IJIIU . __,-.-
:)\ :~:li?/~?fi1~~(i'-~~~,{~~X~:i~J~.\!.~{~~(f~,~~'i:~.f)~}~),~~\i~\[l~j
i----.\
;\~)
<(,
[fii;;
\~I'
QI~
\)'0
_.J\")
\1..
..,) \'!
r1 ~
~l I~I
~~
~ ,f'
\. \-;
~ i~!
~ t),
;( 3
~rl \11
~I~ ~f
tl!m.
~c~ ~ ~~l
W. -~ "I
Iii I,;
,:r ~h I~': ~.~ :1
III ~. ~;ri ~ ~~~li
': ,~ ~ ~\ ~ & l~ .n\:\ "1 Jl tll ~j '" ~i ," ;~ ~;
~~. ag~~o: ~~ ~~~~~~R~ri~~~~~~~
(mu~~m~ ~mmmmm~!1
} d'" 1 -D I- . _. Ii' ~ -t.. :!, (I' \) ;( ~ .-. ~ 9 ~ ~} ~ ~ ~~1 g 1Y. c.~ ffi H ~ B ~ ~
t~~ .. tH ~ ", ~ m ~ "t; ~~ V-l ., ..,H; ~..:" -:.~ ....1 ,~'- ~"'~ ,,\!~ ... '''- u.. 0-.
~~.~o,~~~~~~~~~~~~~ D\~~t~h~~)r~~~)F~~
~! 0 ~ '.t fj ~ ~..J. ~ ~ < ~ ~~ b ~ if ~ "! ~ :,. '; ., j:, "\ " ~ ~ t, :.,
,~~
:p:.r
~
";~;~'r
Ii
."
If!"
Yi}j'I\iG17"
. ''''''':>:I,J,
\
- !~C~_r-
i
i
''-;J~
, \ iTr-
!
. ....,,, '0;' 11.
-r:__r--\
i .'
I ,\
\ \ i
, .! 1
IH(~ i
\ ,-, ,-._J f Ii ~
fl--_1I"1 ~r---" ..1'---1- -\ f
,.\ k~>-L I \ \:\' _\ ..._. ."L-.,l 1
\, ,~:~~?~~~V \ ''':~~'; ...1 ~J ~~:J :2 L;lr:J
i: ~.,
i I .\~H
I I I I
l. I I I
I ,l--t- \. ll':~';:f "-'l
\i i '1]1\ 1
~t.~~tJ -' '~,!:l I
,-:t,
:"~'r.
-1'::;...
';\l'!':'
,..
il f. ~~
\:~,:1
'.
~~&~
~~~
'1~~ri
'~ili~
,(
/-----
.;,-,:.,1
i r-',l
-, ;1
;S ::(,0
:ii. (ii'!\:~.
l[ UI-:
\ - llJ
<),\'1'
:[~
. _+It=_L-~,.]'n--l..
I . I ' 'r G i
J '
f\
\'
I
J-,
I '
...-~~~;;~::~I-ti,L
no __"__.___. .'-..~
j
, r
,
,~:.-:: .
1.-----1-
~\
l
,II
h
j'"r'.
1 . ,L, . . \ \ I
,: }i I I. ! ~
I; ~,i: ' I
'1 .---1 - "1 nl~" --.~-""t.."~~.,,..-. ,.
.' . , ~. I?i' .. ~.. .-." ',", I
"': ": 'I'
, j,' " I
. ,~:.'T' 'J..-:~~jl~:=.C); ._L..L
I 4'-" . ,
~. n__ ''''1' "'----t
'-1l""~ or ~:-.......'
.: i
! , I 1
L.~..
I -\---\
j----r':\.
.~..........,..~ .
_.I~"r
i~SJ'
,~_l.., ..,...-
i I
__.,_"'.:,.......,..."i.-_-.=..,
,__...i-.
...L
L
.-......-.:r.~.
~ 1
......
0
0
"""
0)
~ CO
o.
~ 0
~
<( """
c: ~
.i Q)
"C .s
m CO
CI:I 0
""" 0
~ ~
"""
'- """
J2 en
>- E
"C
::J ~
CiS u.
0)
c:
:s2
'-
as
a.
~8
'2~ ..... ~ GO ..... ~ ~ 0 It) 0 ~ (0 f:j
~.... "lit ('II ('II ~ ('II ('II ....
CI)~
lV'g
'EN ~ ~ It) 0') (0 ~ It) It) It) ..... 0 ~
.aC5 .... .... .... ('II ('II ('II ....
~~
i;-8 .~ It) <0 0 "lit ~ ~ ~ ~ .....
~~ ('II .... .... .... .... ('\of <0 ('II
u..~
as .
f8 0) ~ .... ..... .... ~ .... 0') 0 "lit Cll) It)
~~ ~ ('II .... ('II ~ ('\of ('II .... .... ('II
i5.as . .
~8
i~ ~. 0') 0) It) It) ~ ~ 0') ..... (0 ..... ~
l~ ('\of .... .... N ~ ('II ('\of
>.0')
lUg
"it:! CO 0 CO CO ~ ~ 0') ..... .... It) ('\of ~
Q)CO CO) ~ ('II ('\of ('II ('II ... ....
~....
t-as
>.CO
eug
-g~ """ ~ It) It) ~ 0 ~ ~ 0 0') 0) ~
"It' ~ ('\of ~ ~ ~ ~
:iai
~8
-g~ ~ ~ 0) ~ f:j 0) ~ It) ..... Cll) C") ~
('II ('II ('\of ('\of ....
~....
Cl)as
>'8
~~ ..... ~ ~ It) It) 0 ..... C") ..... ... It) 0
C") .... .... ('II ('II ('\of ....
lU....
0as
CO
>.g
~~ ~ ~ It) It) It) It) 0 0) ('\of 0) 0) .....
~ .... ('II ~ ~ ('\of .... .... """
u......
as
>.co
~g 0) ..... ..... (01) ..... It) ~ ~ ~ ~
e~ ~ ~
~""" C") ('II ..- ('II ~ ~ ('\of
.s::. ..-
I-as
E E IS i I~ S Ii ~ IS ~ Ij 1&
c!J 8 0 0 0 8 8 g g
0 ~ 0 c::! 0
C .... N .... N M ~ u; to .:..: G:> a;
.... .... """
-
o
It)
~
-
-
II)
8
!
II)
C)
c
~
!..,
.i!~
.Q~
:~
>c
~&.
ii
!~
!~
~eu
.B .sa
ES
::leu
coo
Q)Q)
.s::..s::.
t-t-
Subject commercial strip center-south side
Subject commercial strip center-north side
Shared parking lot at rear-looking north
Shared parking lot at rear-looking south
PRELIMINARY EXEMPTION ASSESSMENT
(Certificate of Determination When Attached to Notice of Exemption)
1. Name or description of project:
Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 08-19 to revise a previously approved Conditional Use Permit and
parking modification (CUP 94-01 I Resolution No. 1508) for a 1,376 square-foot eating establishment with
seating for 8 patrons at 921 S. Baldwin Avenue, Unit A. The applicant is requesting to increase the number of
permitted seats from 8 to 37.
2. Project Location _ Identify street address and cross streets or attach a map showing project site (preferably a
USGS 15' or 7%' topographical map identified by quadrangle name):
921 S. Baldwin Avenue, Unit A (at Fairview Avenue)
3. Entity or person undertaking project: 0 A. City of Arcadia
181 B. Other (Private)
(1 ) Name: Terence Kwok
(2) Address: 260 E. Garvev Avenue
Monterev Park. CA 91755
(3) Phone: (323) 697-2120
4. Staff Determination:
The City's Staff, having undertaken and completed a preliminary review of this project in accordance with the
City's "Local Guidelines for Implementing the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)" has concluded that
this project does not require further environmental assessment because:
a. 0
b. 0
c. 0
d. 0
e. 181
f. 0
g. 0
The proposed action does not constitute a project under CEQA.
The project is a Ministerial Project.
The project is an Emergency Project.
The project constitutes a feasibility or planning study.
The project is categorically exempt. Applicable Exemption Class: 1
Section No.: 15301
The project is statutorily exempt. Applicable Exemption:
Section No.:
The project is otherwise exempt on the following basis:
h. 0 The project involves another public agency which constitutes the Lead Agency.
Name of Lead Agency:
Date: Januarv 22. 2009
Staff: Steven Lee. Assistant Planner
STAFF REPORT
Development Services Department
January 27, 2009
TO: Arcadia Planning Commission
FROM: Jim Kasama, Community Development Administrator
By: Thomas Li, Associate Planner
SUBJECT: Consideration and Recommendation to City Council of Text Amendment
No. TA 09-01 to establish regulations (9288 et. seq.) for wireless
communications facilities and to amend the regulations (9286 et. seq.) for
direct broadcast satellite antennas; Article IX, Chapter 2, Part 8 of the
Arcadia Municipal Code.
SUMMARY
This application was initiated by the Development Services Department to establish
regulations for wireless communications facilities and to amend the regulations for
direct broadcast satellite antennas. As cellular devices and satellite antennas have
become increasingly popular, specific regulations are needed for the placement and
construction of these facilities. The proposed regulations set forth limitations to the
placement, design, and screening criteria of these facilities to protect the public health,
safety, and general welfare of the citizens of Arcadia, and to ensure compliance with
Federal and State legislation; most recently, Senate Bill 1627, which requires
streamlining the approval process for certain co-located wireless communications
facilities. The Development Services Department recommends approval of this text
amendment.
PUBLIC HEARING NOTIFICATION
A public hearing notice of Text Amendment No. TA 09-01 was published in the Arcadia
Weekly on January 5, 2009.
BACKGROUND
With the popularity of cellular devices and their increasing capabilities, the need for
more wireless communications facilities continues to grow. In addition, the City's
satellite dish antenna regulations were initially adopted in 1985, and have not been
updated. The proposed text amendment addresses the locating of wireless
communications facilities on private property and in the public right-of-way, and updates
the satellite dish antenna regulations.
Wireless Communications facilities and large dish antennas that are to be located on
private property are reviewed by the Development Services Department. At a
minimum, an architectural design review is conducted to integrate the facility as much
as possible with the site and structure at which it is to be placed. Many of these types
of installations are limited to rooftop or fac;ade-mounted antennas. But, for standalone
. facilities such as a monopole, a Conditional Use Permit is also required. However,
there are no established standards for the installation of these facilities; development
restrictions are guided by the underlying zone in which the facility is located, and the
circumstances of the site.
For public right-of-way locations, the proposals are reviewed by the Engineering
Division and the Public Works Services Department. And, there are currently no
standards for such installations.
In order to promote wireless development and market competition, Federal and State
laws aim to facilitate the establishment and installation of wireless communication
facilities, and to a certain extent, preempt local regulations. In 2006, California Senate
Bill 1627 was passed to streamline the processing of certain co-location applications.
The legislation requires local governments to administratively approve such
applications, which would be to add antennas or equipment to an existing facility.
Further, the Federal Telecommunications Act preempts local regulations to the extent
that they prohibit or have the effect of prohibiting wireless communications facilities
within the City. The draft ordinance takes this into account and is intended to give the
City clear and objective regulatory standards within the limits of current Federal and
State law.
Last year, the Arcadia City Council and Planning Commission reviewed a series of
alternative proposals for wireless communication facilities at Orange Grove Park. The
initial proposals were for standalone cell towers on the City-owned park and water
facility property. But, when those proposals were not approved, public right-of-way
locations had to be considered. These proposals were all near residential properties,
and faced opposition from the surrounding residents. Because the City does not have
regulations for these facilities, it is impossible for applicants to know what is acceptable.
And, likewise, City staff cannot explain to the public what is specifically allowed or not.
Out of the public hearings for the various Orange Grove Park proposals, it became
clear that regardless of whether, or not a facility was to be approved, both the wireless
industry and the public want regulations to be establishe<;J. Therefore, staff requested
the City Attorney's office to draft a new ordinance setting forth requirements for the
development of wireless communication facilities, and at the same time update the
existing satellite dish antenna regulations.
TA 09-01
January 27, 2009
Page 2 of 4
PROPOSAL AND ANALYSIS
The Development Services Department is proposing a text amendment to establish
regulations (9288 et. seq.) for wireless communications facilities and to amend the
regulations (9286 et. seq.) for direct broadcast satellite antennas; Article IX, Chapter 2,
Part 8 of the Arcadia Municipal Code. The attached draft regulations were prepared by
the City Attorney's office and the Development Services Department and incorporate
current federal and State laws. The draft wireless communication facilities regulations
begin with the following statement of intent and purpose:
9288. INTENT AND PURPOSE. The purpose of these requirements is to
provide placement, design, and screening criteria to regulate the
establishment of wireless communication facilities to protect the public
health, safety, general welfare, and quality of life in the City, while
providing needed flexibility to wireless communication providers.
Additionally, these regulations protect the visual aesthetics of the
community through the promotion of stealthing techniques that
architecturally integrate or camouflage wireless communication facilities
with their surroundings. This Division shall be applied on a competitively
neutral and nondiscriminatory basis to all applicants for wireless
communication facilities.
The draft regulations go on to provide definitions, development standards, design
criteria, and maintenance requirements. These regulations codify the current
application review practices, and provide requirements and processes for installations
within the public rights-of-way. The proposed right-of-way regulations require
compliance with design criteria and height limitations just as is required for proposals
located on private property. Currently, the only requirement for right-of-way locations is
that they obtain an encroachment permit. There is no review for aesthetic
considerations or specific development limitations.
The satellite dish antenna regulations that were adopted in 1985 are proposed to be
updated to clarify the types of antennas that can be regulated by the City. Large direct
broadcast satellite antennas are subject to an architectural design review process;
small direct broadcast satellite antennas that are building-mo~nted and are less than
two feet (2') in diameter are not subject to governmental review or approval.
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) the
Development Services Department completed an Initial Study for the proposed project.
The 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. Staff
has determined that when considering the record as a whole, there is no evidence that
. TA 09-01
January 27, 2009
Page 3 of 4
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.
RECOMMENDATION
The Development Services Department is recommending approval of Text Amendment
No. TA 09-01 and adoption of the Negative Declaration.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
The Planning Commission should direct staff to convey to the City Council the
Commission's recommendations and comments on Text Amendment No. TA 09-01 and
the Negative Declaration.
If any Planning Commissioner, or other interested party has any questions or comments
regarding this matter prior to the January 27th public hearing, please contact Associate
Planner, Thomas Li at (626) 574-5447 or tli~ci.arcadia.ca.us.
Approved by:
Attachments: Draft Text Amendments
Negative Declaration & Initial Study
TA 09-01
January 27, 2009
Page 4 of 4
DIVISION 8.
WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITIES
9288.
INTENT AND PURPOSE.
The purpose of these requirements is to provide placement, design, and screening criteria
to regulate the establishment of wireless communication facilities to protect the public
health, safety, general welfare, and quality of life in the City, while providing needed
flexibility to wireless communication providers. Additionally, these regulations protect
the visual aesthetics of the community through the promotion of stealthing techniques
that architecturally integrate or camouflage wireless communication facilities with their
surroundings. This Division shall be applied on a competitively neutral and
nondiscriminatory basis to all applicants for wireless communication facilities.
9288.1. DEFINITIONS.
"Applicant" means a provider of wireless communication services who applies to the
City to install a wireless communication facility within the City.
"Abandonment" means inoperative or unused for a period of one hundred-eighty (180)
calendar days or more.
"Antenna" means that part of a wireless communication facility designed to transmit or
receive radio frequency or electromagnetic signals, and includes panels, wires, poles,
rods, dishes, or similar devices.
"Cell site" or "site" means a parcel of land or public right-of-way location that contains a
wireless communication facility(ies) including any antenna, support structure, accessory
building, or other components associated with, or ancillary to, the use of the wireless
communication facility.
"Co-location" means the sharing of one site and infrastructure for the purpose of locating
two (2) or more wireless communication facilities.
"Mount" means the structure or surface upon which antennae are mounted.
"Project site" means the site on which an applicant proposes to construct a wireless
communication facility, including any antenna, mount or support structure, accessory
building, or other components associated with, or ancillary to, the use of the wireless
communication facility.
"Roof- or top-mounted" means a wireless communication facility where the antennae are
mounted on the roof or top of a building or structure, other than a standalone facility.
"Side-mounted" means a wireless communication facility where the antennae are
mounted on the side of a building or structure, other than a standalone facility.
1
"Standalone facility" means a wireless communication facility where the antennae are
mounted to a dedicated ground-based structure in order to elevate the antennae to a
useable altitude (ie: monopole, cell tower, etc.)
"Stealthed" means: (1) concealed or otherwise not identifiable as a wireless
communication facility by a casual observer that is located on property other than the
site, and (2) is aesthetically compatible and blends with the site and immediate
surroundings. Stealthing may be achieved by any state-of-the-art means or combination
of means including, but not limited to, the use of camouflage, textures, screening,
painting or architectural integration with the surroundings (e.g., church steeple or bell
tower within a church, unobtrusive penthouse on a roof, false rock, false structure or a
tree amongst other trees.)
"Wireless Communication Facility" or "Facility" means a facility for the provision of
wireless communication services.
9288.2. APPLICABILITY.
(a) Except as set forth below, the procedures and rules set forth in this Division are
applicable to all wireless communication facilities built, installed or modified
within all zones of the City of Arcadia after the date this Division is effective,
including all wireless communication facilities built, installed or modified within
all City public rights-of-way. This Division is also applicable to all lots or
parcels where the construction, installation or modification of wireless
communications facilities is subject to a lease, license or other agreement with the
City.
(b) This Division shall not apply to the following:
(1)
public safety communications facilities owned or operated by the City or
any other public agency.
9288.3.
APPROVAL REQUIREMENTS.
(a) No wireless communication facility shall be built, installed or modified, in the
public right-of-way in any zone, without first applying for and obtaining an
encroachment permit from the Development Services Director. The Development
Services Director shall review all encroachment permit applications in accordance
with Chapter 3 of Article VII (commencing with Section 7300) of this Code.
(b) No roof-mounted, top-mounted or side-mounted wireless communication facility
shall be built, installed or modified, on private property or on public property that
is not in the City's right-of-way 'in any zone, without first applying for and
obtaining administrative architectural design review approval from the
Development Services Director or designee. The Development Services Director
or designee shall administratively review all architectural design review
2
applications in accordance with Division 5, Part 9, Chapter 2 of Article IX
(commencing with Section 9295) of this Code.
(c) Except as set forth in subsection (d) below, no standalone facility shall be built,
installed or modified, on private property or on public property that is not in the
City's right-of-way in any zone, without first applying for and obtaining a
conditional use permit and architectural design review approval from the Planning
Commission. The Planning Commission shall hear all conditional use permit
applications at a public hearing in accordance with Division 5, Part 7, Chapter 2
of Article IX (commencing with Section 9275) of this Code, and shall hear
architectural design review concurrently.
(d) Notwithstanding subsection (c) above, applicants requesting approval for a new
co-location to an existing standalone facility located on private property or on
public property that is not in the City's right-of-way ("base facility") shall only be
required to obtain administrative architectural design review from the
Development Services Director or designee (as set forth in subsection (b) above),
if all of the following apply:
(1) the base facility has already received a conditional use permit;
(2) the base facility has already been reviewed and approved by the City
pursuant to CEQA, resulting in the preparation of a negative declaration,
mitigated negative declaration, or environmental impact report (statutory
and categorical exemptions for the base facility are insufficient);
(3) the new co-location does not require a subsequent or supplemental
environmental impact report due to substantial changes to the base facility,
its site, its circumstances, or new information; and
(4) the new co-location incorporates all mitigation measures that were
required by CEQA for the base facility.
(e) Any decision shall be subject to appeal pursuant to the following provisions of
this Code:
(1)
Decision of the Planning
Commission with respect to a
conditional use permit or
architectural design review
(to the City Council):
Sections 9275.2.9,
9295. 16(B) & 9600
(2) Decision of the Development
Services Director or designee with
respect to architectural design review
3
(to the Planning Commission):
Section 9295.l6(A)
(3)
Decision of the Development
Services Director with respect
to an encroachment permit
(to the City Council):
Section 7300.29
9288.4.
APPLICATION CONTENTS.
Applications for the approval of wireless communication facilities shall include that
information required by this Code for the applicable land use permit (conditional use
permit, architectural design review or encroachment permit), plus the following
information:
(a) Contact Information. The applicant shall submit and maintain current at all times
basic contact information of a form to be supplied by the City. The applicant
shall notify City of any changes to the information submitted within fifteen (15)
days following any such change. This information shall include, but is not limited
to the following:
(1) The identity, including name, address and telephone number of the owner
of the wireless communication facility including official identification
numbers and FCC certifications and, if different from the owner, the
identity of the person or entity responsible for operating the wireless
communication facility;
(2) Name, address and telephone number of a local contact person for
emergencies and type of service provided.
(b) Location and Zoning Information. Location of the project site, including the
address and the names of two nearest cross streets, as well as the present zone
designation of the project site.
(c) Description of the Proposed Project. A description of the proposed wireless
communication facility, including whether the project is a new facility, a co-
located facility, or a modification to an existing facility. If a new facility, the
applicant shall include an explanation of whether the new facility will be designed
to accommodate future co-locations. The applicant shall provide a written
description of the stealthing measures applicant proposes to use to aesthetically
blend the facility to the immediate surroundings. This should include at minimum
a description of proposed stealthing techniques, and the textures and colors to be
used in the stealthing process. The applicant shall also indicate the proposed
height of the facility.
4
(d) Noise. A description of the facilities and/or equipment within the applicant's
project that are expected to induce or generate noise, as well as anticipated noise
levels of said facilities and/or equipment.
(e) Wireless Communication Facility Site Plan. Six (6) copies of a wireless
communication facility site plan, at a scale of 1"=20' or larger and including the
following:
(1) The proposed wireless communication facility;
(2) Location of lot lines, streets (with street names), easements, and all
structures and improvements, including accessory equipment,
underground utilities and support structures, existing and proposed;
(3) Slopes, contours, trees and other pertinent physical features of the site,
existing and proposed;
(4) All exterior lighting on the site, existing and proposed;
(5) Location, use and approximate distance from property lines of the nearest
structures on all properties abutting the site; and
(6) The location of parking for maintenance personnel.
(f) Landscape Plan. Six (6) copies of a landscape plan for the site, at a scale of
1/8"=1' or larger and including the following:
(1) Existing trees with trunk diameter over six inches (6") at four feet (4')
above grade and/or fifteen feet (IS') in overall height within fifty feet
(50') of the proposed wireless communication facility;
(2) Species, diameter and condition of all such trees;
(3) Final disposition of all existing trees; and
(4) Species, location and sizes of trees and other vegetation proposed to be
installed with the wireless communication facility.
(g) Site Photographs. Current color photographs of the site and its surroundings.
(h) Proximity Map and Information. For applications for a conditional use permit or
encroachment permit, a map depicting all properties (with street addresses) within
three hundred (300) feet of the project site, a list of the names and addresses of all
current owners of the depicted properties, according to the last equalized
assessor's roll, plus an affidavit indicating that the list of names and addresses
described above is accurate, based upon due and diligent inquiry of the applicant.
5
The proximity map and information set forth above shall not be required for an
application for administrative architectural design review.
(i) Visual Impact Analysis. A visual impact analysis (which shall include
photomontage, photo simulation or similar technique) which demonstrates, from
all four primary directions (north, south, east and west) the potential visual
impacts of the proposed wireless communication facility. Consideration shall be
given to views from public areas as well as from private property. The analysis
shall assess the cumulative impacts of the proposed wireless communication
facility and other existing wireless communication facilities in the area, and shall
identify and include all feasible mitigation measures consistent with the
technological requirements of the proposed wireless communication service. All
costs for the visual analysis, and applicable administrative costs, shall be borne by
the applicant.
(j) Wireless Communication Facility Mount. A description of whether the proposed
facility is a co-located facility, standalone facility, roof/top-mounted, or side-
mounted.
(k) Justification for Location/Co-location. The applicant must provide justification as
to why the applicant chose the location for the proposed wireless communication
facility. Such justification shall include a written assessment of not less than two
(2) alternative locations considered by the applicant and the reasons why said
alternative locations were rejected as candidates. Further, pursuant to Section
9288.6(i), the applicant shall provide written evidence that it has made a good
faith effort to co-locate the proposed facility with an existing facility and indicate
whether co-location is or is not feasible.
(1) FCC/Signal Standards. A report certified by a licensed radio frequency engineer
stating that electromagnetic (EM) emissions from the proposed facility will
neither exceed standards set by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC),
nor interfere with any fire, police or other emergency communications system.
(m) Map of Applicant's Existing Wireless Communication Facilities. A map and
narrative description of all existing wireless communication facility sites used by
the applicant which are located within the City, and any wireless communication
facility sites located outside of the City but which provide coverage within any
part of the City.
(n) Coverage Assessment. A written report setting forth how and why the proposed
wireless communication facility will improve the quality of the applicant's
coverage. The report shall indicate the areas where coverage will be improved,
and shall also include areas where the applicant currently has no coverage, a
significant degradation in coverage or "dead zones". The report shall include a
capacity analysis, a propagation analysis and/or a decibel level report to indicate
6
9288.5.
(a)
(b)
9288.6.
(a)
the quality of service provided by the applicant both at present and after
installation of the proposed wireless communication facility.
(0)
Licenses. Documentation certifying the applicant has obtained all applicable
licenses or other approvals to provide the services proposed in connection with
the application, whether required by the Federal Communications Commission,
California Public Utilities Commission, or any other agency with authority over
the proposed wireless communication facility.
(P)
Application Fee. A fee in the amount established by the current fee schedule
adopted by the City Council.
(q)
Waiver. Any application to develop a wireless communication facility that does
not meet the general requirements and restrictions of this Division shall include a
request for a waiver, as set forth in Section 9288.8 of this Code. A request for
waiver may be submitted at a later time if it is determined that the proposed
facility, as originally submitted, will not meet the requirements and restrictions of
this Division.
(r)
Proprietary or Confidential Information. Any proprietary information or trade
secrets disclosed to the City or the consultant as a part of any application is
hereby deemed not to be a public record pursuant to Government Code Section
6254.7(d), shall remain confidential and shall not be disclosed to any third party
except: (i) with the express consent of the applicant, (ii) pursuant to an order of a
court of competent jurisdiction or (iii) pursuant to an order of regulatory agency
with jurisdiction over the issue.
NOTICE(S) OF HEARING/DETERMINATION.
Whenever this Division requires a public hearing to be held before the Planning
Commission, notice of hearing shall be given as prescribed in Section 9275.2.4 of
this Code.
Whenever this Division requires an administrative decision of the Development
Services Director on an encroachment permit (but not administrative architectural
design review), notice shall be mailed to the owners or authorized agents of real
property within a radius of three hundred (300) feet of the exterior boundaries of
the site. The notice shall be mailed by the applicant, in a format approved by the
City, not later than ten (10) calendar days prior to the date the Development
Services Director renders his or her decision.
LOCATION AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS.
Subject to the restrictions and requirements of this Division, the following
wireless communication facilities may be located in the following zones:
(1) LOCATIONS:
7
(A) Multiple-Family (R-3) zones,
(B) Professional Office (C-O) zones,
(C) Commercial Planned Development (CPD-I) zones,
(D) Architectural Design (D) zones,
(E) Central Business District (CBD) zones, and
(F) Automobile Parking/Multiple-Family (PR-3) zones.
ALLOWED: New roof-mounted, top-mounted and side-mounted facilities;
co-locations to existing roof-mounted, top-mounted and side-mounted
facilities; and co-locations to existing standalone facilities;
PROHIBITED: New standalone facilities.
(2) LOCATIONS:
(A) Residential Mountainous (R-M) zones,
(B) First One-Family (R-O) zones,
(C) Second One-Family (R-l) zones,
(D) Medium Density Multiple Family Residential (R-2) zones, and
(E) Automobile Parking/One-Family and Medium Density Multiple-
Family (PR-O, PR-I and PR-2) zones.
(Except for public rights-of-way and City-owned properties)
ALLOWED: None;
PROHIBITED: All facilities.
(3) LOCATIONS:
(A) All other zones,
(B) Public rights-of-way (any zone),
(C) City-owned properties (any zone).
ALLOWED: All facilities (new or co-located);
PROHIBITED: None.
(b) Setbacks/Lot Coverage/Non-Interference. Except for wireless communication
facilities to be located within public rights-of-way, no facility shall be located
within or extend into the required setbacks established in the applicable zone and
each facility shall also comply with all applicable lot coverage and building
separation standards in the applicable zone.
For facilities proposed to be located within public rights-of-way, no facility shall
unreasonably interfere with usual and customary access or use by pedestrians,
bicycles or vehicles, or negatively impact vehicular parking, circulation, line-of-
sight or safety.
8
(c) Lights, Signals and Signs. Wireless communication facility signals, lights or
signs shall be designed so as to meet but not exceed minimum requirements for
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) or other applicable Federal or State
regulations. Beacon lights shall not be included in the design of a facility unless
required by the FAA. Any required lighting shall be shielded to eliminate, to the
maximum extent possible, impacts on surrounding areas. Any other lighting of
the facility that is not otherwise required is prohibited. No facility or its
supporting equipment shall bear any sign, graphic or advertising device other than
warning/safety signage or those required by this Code or other applicable law.
(d) Dish Antennae. Dish or parabolic antennae serving a wireless communication
facility shall be situated so as to minimize visual impact without compromising
their function. (NOTE: For regulations governing direct broadcast satellite
(DBS) antennas (ie: radio, television, Internet service, etc.), see Division 6
(commencing with Section 9286) of Part 8 of Chapter 2 of Article IX of this
Code.
( e) Equipment Structures. Ground level equipment, buildings, structures, and bases
shall be concealed from public view.
(1) Accessory Equipment. All accessory equipment associated with the
operation of a wireless communication facility shall be located inside an
existing building, a new addition to an existing building or an underground
vault, unless not technically feasible, at which point, accessory equipment
may be located within a separate above-ground enclosure. No separate
above-ground structure may exceed six (6) feet in height measured from
the base of the foundation unless a greater height is necessary to maximize
stealthing/architectural integration. All accessory equipment and
structures, vaults or enclosures containing said equipment shall comply
with the development standards of the zone in which the accessory
equipment is located.
(2) Security. Accessory equipment shall be equipped with tamperproof
cabinets and/or locks to mitigate safety siting issues. All wireless
communication facilities shall be designed so as to be resistant to and
minimize opportunities for unauthorized access, climbing, vandalism,
graffiti and other conditions which would result in hazardous conditions,
visual blight or attractive nuisances. Barbed wire or razor wire fencing is
prohibited.
(f) Building Codes. Wireless communication facilities shall comply with all
applicable building codes.
(g) Height. All wireless communication facilities shall be located at the lowest
possible height that will allow them to operate. Notwithstanding any other height
9
limitations contained in this article, wireless communication facilities may not
exceed the height limitations set forth below:
(1) Roof-mounted facilities (new or co-located) that are placed on an existing
building, or top-mounted facilities (new or co-located) that are placed on
an existing utility pole, water tank, or other similar structure may extend
to, but shall not exceed, a height of ten (10) feet above the roof or top of
the building or structure;
(2) Side-mounted facilities (new or co-located) that are placed on an existing
building, or on an existing utility pole, water tank, or other similar
structure may not extend beyond the height of the existing building or
structure;
(3) Facilities co-located on an existing standalone facility may not extend
beyond the height of the existing standalone facility; and
(4) New standalone facilities may not exceed fifty-five (55) feet in height.
Any applicant that proposes to construct or co-locate a wireless
communication facility that would exceed the applicable height limitations
set forth above must request a waiver, pursuant to Section 9288.8.
(h) Signal/Power Cables. All wireless communication facility cables, wires or similar
electrical transmission devices must be placed underground, be placed within the
existing building or structure or in cableways, and must be properly stealthed to
the maximum extent possible.
(i) Co-Location Requirements:
(1) Co-location. Where feasible, owners or operators shall share sites where
wireless communication facilities are already located, thereby reducing the
number of new facilities.
(2) Good Faith Effort. All applicants shall demonstrate a good-faith effort to
co-locate with existing facilities. The City may deny an approval to an
applicant who has not demonstrated a good-faith effort to co-locate with
an existing facility. Such good-faith effort includes written evidence by
the applicant of:
(A) Contact with all other licensed carriers for facilities operating in
the City within the area of proposed coverage.
(B) Sharing non-proprietary technical information necessary to
determine if co-location is feasible under the design configuration
most accommodating to co-location.
10
In the event the applicant determines that co-location is not feasible, the
applicant shall include with its application a written statement of the
reasons why co-location is not feasible. In the event the applicant
determines that co-location is feasible, the applicant shall include
provisions for co-location of its facility in its application.
(3) Numerical Limits on Co-location. Not greater than three (3) facilities
shall be co-located upon any single site.
(4) All co-located facilities upon a site shall be architecturally coordinated and
stealthed consistently with each other.
(j) Parking. Any wireless communication facility shall not reduce the number of
available parking spaces below the amount required by this Code.
(k) FCC Requirements. All existing and future wireless communication facilities
shall meet all applicable FCC emissions and exposure standards for
electromagnetic (EM) radiation, and all required notices and signs shall be posted
on the site as required by the FCC and PUC.
(1) Noise. All wireless communication facilities must comply with all existing noise
ordinances of the City, but in no case shall any facility generate sound in excess
of: (i) 50 dB CNEL at the property line of the nearest residential use, or (ii) 65 dB
CNEL at the property line of the nearest non-residential use.
9288.7. DESIGN CRITERIA.
(a) Pre-existing Character. Wireless communication facility location and
development shall preserve the pre-existing character of the site as much as
feasible.
(b) Landscaping and Vegetation. Existing landscaping and vegetation, including
trees, foliage and shrubs, whether or not utilized for stealthing, shall be preserved
or improved, and disturbance of the existing topography of the site shall be
minimized, unless removing, altering or disturbing the vegetation would result in
less visual impact of the wireless communication facility on the surrounding area.
Additional landscaping shall be planted where such vegetation is necessary to
provide stealthing or to block the line of sight between a facility and adjacent
residentially-zoned properties. If landscaping is removed to install the facility,
landscaping shall be replaced on the site at a 1.5:1 ratio for the landscaping
removed.
(c) Stealthing. All wireless communication facilities shall be stealthed from view to
the greatest extent feasible, considering technological requirements, by means of
placement, camouflage, color choice, architectural compatibility and other site
11
characteristics. The applicant shall use the smallest and least visible antennae and
supporting equipment possible to accomplish the owner/operator's coverage
objectives.
Blending/Stealthing Methods:
(1) All standalone facilities, plus supporting equipment, shall be composed of
non-reflective materials and painted a color generally matching the
surroundings or background that minimizes their visibility, unless the
FCC, FAA, or other government agency requires a different color. If a
new standalone facility cannot be camouflaged in any other way, it shall
be camouflaged as a tree (ie: monopalm, monopine). Lattice towers,
guyed towers and flag poles shall not be permitted as new standalone
facilities, except by waiver granted pursuant to Section 9288.8 below.
Visible ground level equipment, structures and buildings shall be stealthed
from view by landscape plantings, fencing or other appropriate stealthing
means, and shall be treated with graffiti-resistant paint or coating.
(2) Roof-mounted, top-mounted or side-mounted wireless communication
facilities shall be constructed, painted, finished and fully stealthed to
match the color and texture of the building, structure and/or wall on which
they are mounted. Fayade mounted equipment shall be camouflaged by
incorporating the antenna into the design elements of the building or
structure and they shall be painted and textured to match the existing
structure. If possible, antennae should be located entirely within an
existing or newly created architectural feature so as to be completely
screened from view. In no case shall antennae extend more than twenty-
four (24) inches out from the building face.
Equipment buildings or stealthing enclosures mounted on a roof shall be
architecturally consistent with the building, such as having a finish similar
to the exterior building walls. Equipment for roof-, top- or side-mounted
antennae may also be located within the building on which the antenna is
mounted.
(3)
The City Council may, by resolution, promulgate additional regulations
that further define and clarify the stealthing requirements of this
subsection (c), consistent with the intent and purpose of this Division.
9288.8.
WAIVER REQUEST.
(a) Waiver. A waiver of any of the location, design or other requirements and
restrictions set forth in this Division, may be granted by the Planning Commission
or Development Services Director, whichever is applicable, upon the request of
the applicant, where the applicant demonstrates that such restriction or
requirement either:
12
(1) Prohibits or has the effect of prohibiting the provIsIOn of wireless
communication services pursuant to the United States
Telecommunications Act of 1996 (47 U.S.C. S332(c)(7)(B)(i)(II)); or
(2) Umeasonably discriminates against the applicant when compared to other
providers within the City who are providing functionally equivalent
wireless communication services pursuant to the United States
Telecommunications Act of 1996 (47 U.S.C. S332(c)(7)(B)(i)(I)).
(b) Independent Consultant. Any application for a waiver shall include the
applicant's authorization for the City to retain the services of an independent,
qualified consultant, at the applicant's expense, to evaluate the issues raised by
the waiver request. The application shall include a monetary deposit, as set by
resolution of the City Council, and an agreement by the applicant to reimburse the
City for all reasonable costs associated with the consultation.
9288.9. FINDINGS FOR DENIAL.
Any decision to deny, in whole or in part, a conditional use permit, architectural design
review or encroachment permit to place, construct or modify a wireless communication
facility shall be in writing and supported by substantial evidence contained in the written
record.
(a) A conditional use permit, architectural design review or encroachment permit,
whichever is applicable, shall be approved unless it is determined that:
(1) The applicant has failed to provide any information required in Section
9288.4;
(2) The proposed wireless communication facility fails to comply with the
criteria of Sections 9288.6 and 9288.7;
(3) In the case of a conditional use permit, the Planning Commission cannot
make the findings required by Section 9275.1.2 of this Code, or, in the
case of an encroachment permit, the Development Services Director has
grounds for denial pursuant to Section 7300.4 ofthis Code.
(4) In the case of a new wireless communication facility, co-location at a site
with an existing wireless communication facility is feasible.
(b) Any decision to deny, in whole or in part, a conditional use permit, architectural
design review or encroachment permit to place, construct or modify a wireless
communication facility shall also indicate one of the following:
13
(1)
The applicant did not request a waiver from the requirements of this
Division; or
(2)
The applicant did request a waiver from the requirements of this Division,
but failed to present sufficient evidence that the requirements and
restrictions of this Division either have the effect of prohibiting wireless
communication services or unreasonably discriminate against the
applicant, pursuant to Section 9288.8.
9288.10.
STANDARD CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL.
In addition to conditions of approval which may be imposed in order to ensure
compliance with this Code, the following standard conditions shall be imposed on any
conditional use permit, architectural design review or encroachment permit issued
pursuant to this Division:
(a) The applicant shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City and its officers,
agents and employees form any claim, action or proceeding against the City or its
officers, agents or employees to attack, set aside, void or annul any approval
under this Division. The applicant shall further defend, indemnify and hold
harmless the City, its officers, agents and employees from any damages,
liabilities, claims, suits, or causes of action of any kind or form, whether for
personal injury, death or property damage, arising out of or in connection with the
activities or performance of the applicant, its agents, employees, licensees,
contractors, subcontractors or independent contractors, pursuant to the approval
issued by the City.
(b) For all wireless communication facilities located within the public right-of-way,
the applicant shall remove or relocate, at applicant's expense and without expense
to the City, any or all of its wireless communication facilities, by reason of any
change in grade, alignment or width of any public right-of-way, installation of
services, water pipes, drains, storm drains, lift stations, power or signal lines,
traffic control devices, public right-of-way improvements, or any other
construction, repair or improvement to the public right-of-way.
(c) Where a wireless communication facility site is capable of accommodating a co-
located facility upon the same site, the owner or operator of the existing facility
shall allow another carrier to co-locate its facilities and equipment thereon, upon
reasonable terms and conditions mutually agreeable between the parties.
(d) The City may require the applicant to annually submit a written report prepared
by a qualified engineer, certifying that the facility continues to comply with all
applicable federal, state and local regulations.
14
9288.11.
REVOCATIONS.
(a) At any time, the City may initiate proceedings to revoke an approval issued
pursuant to this Division.
(b) The following shall constitute grounds for revocation for an approval issued
pursuant to this Division:
(1) The owner or operator has abandoned the wireless communication facility;
or,
(2) The wireless communication facility is no longer in compliance with its
respective conditions of approval, with the requirements of this Division,
or with any other applicable law; or
(3) The wireless communication facility is no longer in compliance with
applicable FCC or FAA regulations.
(c) The Planning Commission may revoke a conditional use permit only after holding
a noticed public hearing in accordance with Section 9275.2.15 of this Code.
(d) After a final revocation decision has been rendered, the owner or operator of the
wireless communication facility shall terminate operations and remove the
wireless communication facility from the site in accordance with Section 9288.14.
(e) Any decision of the Planning Commission or Development Services Director to
revoke may be appealed pursuant to Section 9288.3( e) of this Division.
9288.12.
MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS.
All wireless communication facilities shall comply at all times with the following
operation and maintenance standards:
(a) Equipment. All facilities, including antennae, mounts, wires, conduit, lighting,
fences, shields, cabinets, poles and stealthing materials (including artificial
foliage), shall be maintained by the owner or operator in good repair, free from
trash, debris, litter and graffiti and other forms of vandalism, and any damage
from any cause shall be repaired as soon as practicable so as to minimize
occurrences of dangerous conditions or visual blight. All trash, debris, litter and
graffiti shall be removed by the owner/operator within forty-eight (48) hours
following notification from the City.
(b) Landscaping. Each facility which contains trees, foliage or other landscaping
elements, whether or not used as stealthing, shall be maintained in good condition
at all times, and the owner or operator of the facility shall be responsible for
15
replacing any damaged, dead or decayed landscaping as soon as practicable, and
in accordance with the approved landscape plan.
(c) Inspections. Each owner or operator of a facility shall routinely and regularly
inspect each site to ensure compliance with the standards set forth in this
Division. Further, the Development Services Director, or designee, may, upon
providing reasonable advance notice to the owner or operator, conduct an
inspection of a facility to verify compliance with the provisions of this Division.
(d) To ensure compliance with this Division, the owner or operator of a facility shall
affix a label or marker to the facility in a prominent location that identifies the
facility and provides a telephone number that may be called to report any damage,
destruction, graffiti or vandalism to the facility.
(e) Backup Generators. Backup generators shall only be operated during periods of
power outages, and shall not be tested on weekends or holidays, or between the
hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m.
9288.13. "CELLS
DEPLOYMENT.
ON
WHEELS"
PROHIBITED/EMERGENCY
"Cells on wheels" or other mobile wireless communication facilities are prohibited in all
zones, except for the duration of a telecommunications emergency declared by the City.
9288.14.
ABANDONMENT AND REMOVAL.
(a) Notice of Abandonment. Where an owner or operator intends to abandon a
wireless communication facility or portion thereof, the owner or operator shall
notify the City by certified U.S. mail of the proposed date of abandonment or
discontinuation of operations and the date the facility shall be removed. The
notice shall be given not less than sixty (60) days prior to abandonment. Failure
to give notice shall not affect the owner's or operator's obligation to remove an
abandoned facility.
(b) Removal Due to Utility Undergrounding. All facilities located on a utility pole or
structure shall be promptly removed at the owner's or operator's expense at the
time a utility is scheduled to be undergrounded.
(c) Removal. Upon abandonment, revocation, or other lawful order of any federal,
state or local agency to terminate facility operations, the owner or operator shall
physically remove the facility or terminated/abandoned elements within thirty
(30) days following the date of abandonment or termination of use. "Physically
remove" shall include, but not be limited to:
(1) Removal of antennae, mounts, equipment cabinets and security barriers
from the subject site;
16
(2) Transportation of the antennae, mounts, equipment cabinets and security
barriers to an appropriate repository;
(3) Restoring the site to its natural condition except for retaIling the
landscaping improvements and any other improvements at the discretion
of the Development Services Director.
(d) Stay. The Development Services Director may stay the requirement to remove an
abandoned/terminated wireless communication facility upon written request and
evidence submitted by the owner or operator that another wireless provider is in
reasonable negotiations to acquire and use the wireless communication facility.
( e) If an owner or operator of an abandoned wireless communication facility fails to
physically remove the facility and all related equipment within the time frames set
forth herein, the City may do so at the owner/operators expense.
9288.15.
VIOLATION/PENAL TY.
(a) Any owner or operator of a wireless communication facility that violates the
terms of this Division shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, punishable in accordance
with Section 1200 of this Code.
(b) Civil Action/Nuisance Abatement. In addition to the above, if an owner or
operator of a wireless communication facility violates the terms of this Division,
the City may pursue any and all civil remedies available at law or equity,
including but not limited to injunctive relief or initiation of a nuisance abatement
action pursuant to this Code.
(c) Costs of Action. All costs of taking action to enforce the terms of this Division
shall be the responsibility of the owner or operator of the wireless communication
facility. "
SECTION 2. Section 9275.1.11 of Division 5, Part 7, Chapter 2 of Article IX of
this Code is hereby amended to read as follows:
(NOTE: additions are highlighted in bold italics and deletions are highlighted III
strikeout)
"9275.1.11. SAME.
Comnumioations Equipment Buildings. Wireless Communication Facilities, as
setfortlt in Sections 9288 et sell."
17
SECTION 3. Division 6 (Commencing with Section 9286) of Part 8 of Chapter
2 of Article IX of the Arcadia Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows:
(NOTE: additions are highlighted in bold italics and deletions are highlighted In
strikeout)
"DIVISION 6.
DISH DIRECT BROADCAST SATELLITE ANTENNAS
9286. PURPOSE.
The purpose of this division is to establish construction and maintenance
standards and regulations for dish direct broadcast satellite (DBS) antennas installed in
any zone which are accessory to the primary use of the subject lets sites. Such standards
and regulations shall be such as to reasonably restrict and minimize any detrimental
effects of the location and design of such dish DBS antennas on the occupants of
adjoining properties and the neighborhood, and community consistent with the following
findings:
1. There has been an increasing number of dish DBS antennas erected within
the City; this form of antenna has increased in popularity, particularly in the areas of the
City not served by cable television. It is anticipated that this will continue in view of
current communications technology. Numerous concerns have been expressed through
the community with regard to such dish DBS antennas.
2. The City of Arcadia is primarily a residential community with a high level
of property maintenance and concern for the appearance of the community.
3. The City has undertaken numerous actions which include regulations on
signage, requirements concerning landscaping, screening of structures and architectural
treatments as well as regulation of visual clutter, in order to preserve to the maximum
extent possible the natural and man-made scenic beauty of the City.
4. The nature of the community, its goals and objectives have afl entailed a
significant private and public expense to produce a community consistent with the
objectives of the City's General Plan and maintain safety in all areas ofthe City.
5. The installation of dish DBS antennas, and accessory equipment, can
create visual blight to those who reside, work and travel in the City and can endanger the
life, safety and welfare of persons and property through the hazard of collapse and create
adverse economic, aesthetic and safety impacts inconsistent with the health, safety and
general welfare ofthe community.
9286.1
DEFINITIONS.
18
For the purpose of this Division, the following terms shall have the following
meanings:
(a) "EHsft Direct broadcast satellite (DBS) antenna" means any equipment
providing services such as radio, television and high-speed Internet to residential and
business customers by means of a dish, parabolic or other antenna designed for
receiving satellite transmission and which is specifically located on the site that directly
receives such service, ha'liRg a diameter greater than two (2) feet, and ,<,:moh system is
external to or attaohed to the exterior of any building.
(b) "Small DBS antenna" means any DBS antenna that is (i) fIXed (non-
telescoping), (ii) mounted to the roof, top or side of an existing building or structure,
and (iii) not greater than two feet (2') in diameter.
9286.2 DISH
REQUIREMENTS.
f....~TENN,\
PERl\UT
REQUIREDAPPROVAL
Iffl;h DBS antennas; shall be subject to the following approvals: shall require a
building permit and be permitted oRly ':men in oonformity with the de'/elopment
standards of this Di'lision.
(a) Small DBS antennas which are otherwise in compliance with this
Division are a permitted use and no architectural design review shall be required.
(b) All other DBS antennas shall be subject to architectural design review
by the Development Services Director in accordance with Sections 9295 et seq. of this
Code.
(c) Every EHsft DBS antenna, whether temporary or permanent, shall be
subject to the review and approval of the Building Official where required by the
Building Code.
9286.3
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS.
Every EHsft DBS antenna shall be located, designed, constructed, treated and
maintained in accordance with the standards set forth in this Division. Iffl;h DBS antenna
systems may be installed, erected and maintained within all land use zones of the city, but
only in accordance with the provisions oftms Division.
9286.3.1
INSTALLATION AND SAFETY REQUIREMENTS.
(a) Every EHsft DBS antenna shall be installed and maintained in compliance
with the applicable requirements of the Building Code.
(b) Whenever it is necessary to install a EHsft DBS antenna near power lines,
or where damage would be caused by its falling, a separate safety wire must be attached
19
to the antenna mast or tower, and secured in a direction away from the hazard. 9ish DBS
antenna transmission lines must be kept at least twenty-four (24) inches clear of utility
lines.
(c) Every ffisfl DBS antenna shall be adequately grounded for protection
against a direct strike of lightning, with an adequate ground wire of the type approved by
the latest edition of the Electrical Code.
(d) The maximum diameter of any DBS antenna shall be sixfeet (6') unless
the Development Services Director determines that a larger diameter is required for the
proper functioning and purpose of the DBS antenna.
9286.3.2
LOCATION.
(a) No portion of any ffisfl DBS antenna affa;' shall extend beyond the any lot
property lines of the subject site.
(b) No portion of any DBS anteltna (including mounting equipment and
guy wires) shall be located ef inte any front yard of any lot or in any side yard on the
street side of a corner lot, except for small DBS antennas. Guy wires shaH not be
anchored 'NitfltFl any front yard or any lot or '.vithiFl B:fl)' side yard on the street side of a
comer lot. No groUfld mounted dish antellflas shall be located in the area between the
building and the front property line or between the EH::lilding and the side property line on
the street side of a comer lot.
(c) All ground-mounted ffisfl DBS antennas shall be considered to be
accessory buildings and shall conform to the setback requirement for such buildings for
the respective zone in which said ffisfl DBS antenna is located.
(d) Roo/-, top- or side-mounted DBS antennas may not be located in any
residential zone. Any roo/-, top- or side-mounted ffisfl DBS antenna with bases of
attachment on a building located in a commercial, industrial or special zone shall be
located within the middle one-third ('i3) of the roof of said building upon which it is
mounted, unless said ffisfl DBS antenna is otherwise completely screened from view
from grade from the adjoining properties and adjoining public rights-of-way. The
restrictions of this subsection (d) shall not apply to small DBS antennas, which may be
mounted at any locatio/~ on a building in any zone.
9286.3.3
HEIGHT.
ill residential zones, dish anteooas '.vith a diameter greater than two (2) feet shall
not be attached to the roof or wall of any building.
20
(a) In residential all zones, DBS antennas with bases of attaehment on
mounted to the ground or on accessory structures, shall not exceed sixteen (16) feet in
height above the grade.
(b) In commercial, industrial and special zones, roof- or top-mounted dish
DBS antennas with bases of attachment OB a building shall not extend higher than exceed
the height allowed for mechanical equipment on said building. Side-mounted DBS
antennas shall not exceed the height of the building to which they are mounted.
In commercial, industrial and Sfleeial zones, dish antennas with bases of
attachment on the ground shall not eJcoeed sixteen (16) feet in height above the grade.
9286.3.4
SCREENING.
(a) The materials l:lsed in constructing dish DBS antennas shall not be
composed of materials that are excessively bright, shiny, garish or reflective.
(b) I)i.sh DBS antennas should shall be screened to the maximum extent
practicable through the addition of architectural features and/or landscaping that
harmonize with the elements and characteristics of the property site upon which they are
located. All ground-mounted ffi.sh DBS antennas within residential zoned property shall
be screened by walls, fences or landscaping at least five (5) feet in height obscuring
visibility of the ffi.sh DBS antenna from grade from the adjoining property and from
adjoining public rights-of-way. Notwithstanding the above, the requirements of this
subsection (b) shall not apply to small DBS antennas.
9286.3.5
MAINTENANCE.
(a) Every ffi.sh DBS antenna shall be maintained in good condition and in
accordance with all requirements of this Section.
(b) The ffisft DBS antenna shall meet all manufacturer's specifications, and
shall be of noncombustible and corrosive-resistant material. The miscellaneous
hardware, such as brackets, turnbuckles, clips or similar type equipment subject to rust or
corrosion shall be protected with a zinc or cadmi1:lill suitable coating by either
gahanizing or sherardizing process after forming to guard against rust and corrosion-aHEl
to protect the elements against electrolytic action due to the use of adjoining dissimilar
metals.
(c) Every ffisft DBS antenna shall be subject to periodic reinspection. No
additions, changes or modifications shall be made to a ffisft DBS antenna, unless the
addition, change or modification is in conformity with the Building Code and this }J1:iole
Division.
21
9286.4
NONCONFORMING USE OF DISH DBS ANTENNAS.
(a) Bish DBS antennas constructed prior to February 22, 1985
, when revised regulations regarding ffish DBS antennas under
Ordinance +8% Number became effective, and which do not conform to
all of the requirements thereof, as set forth il'l Seetiol'l 9286.1 through 9286.3.5, of this
Division shall constitute a nonconforming use.
(b) No person shall maimam any dish antenna in violation of this flro'lisions
referred to in Subseetiol'l (a) of this Seotiol'l after the e*fliration ef one hundred and eighty
(180) days of the Plaflfting Department giving notiee to the property owner or person in
possession by mailing a notiee to the property owner's address as shovlll on the latest
eql:lalized assessment rell that said dish antenna shall be made oonforming '.vith
rect1:lfrements ofSeotion 9286.1 through 9286.3.5. The notioe pursuant to this Subsection
may be givoo at any time after the effeetiye date of this Seetion.
(eb) \Vhether notiee is gi','oo purSUaRt to Sl:lbsection (8) of this Section or not,
PINo person shall maintain or operate any ffish DBS antenna not fully in conformity with
the provisions of Ordinance +8% Number as referred to aboye after two (2)
years from t~e~ff~~!~Y~ .~.~!~.?f~2rd~1l:~c~ Nu",.~er....c .....~?~.~~.~~.~~t~~ S.~~!ioIl'"
. tll.l'~S>~>><<.):RJ)I!NI.N(J1E2.. '!NO.TOI~'!I"~'llll!J11WI:IIN
22
CITY OF ARCADIA
240 W. HUNTINGTON DRIVE
ARCADIA, CA 91007
File No.: TA 09-01
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
1. Name or description of project:
Text Amendment application no. TA 09-01
2. Project Location: - Identify street address and cross streets or attach a map showing project site (preferably a USGS 15' or 7W topographical
map Identified by quadrangle name)
Citywide
3. Entity or Person undertaking project:
A. City of Arcadia - Development Services Department
240 W Huntington Dr., Arcadia, CA 91007
B. Other (Private)
(1) Name:
(2) Address:
The City Council, having reviewed the Initial Study of this proposed project and having reviewed the
written comments received prior to the public hearing of the Planning Commission, including the
recommendaiton of the City's staff, does hereby find and declare that the proposed project will not have a
siginificant effect on the environment. A brief statement of the reasons supporting the City Council's
findings are as follows:
The City Council hereby finds that the Negative Declaration reflects its independent judgement. A copy of
the Initial Study may be obtained at:
City of Arcadia
Development Services Department
Community Development Division / Planning Services
240 West Huntington Drive
Arcadia, CA 91007
(626) 574-5423
The location and custodian of the documents and any other material which constitute the record of
proceedings upon which the City based its decision to adopt this Negative Declaration are as follows:
Jason Kruckebert, Development Services Director
City of Arcadia
Development Services Department
Community Development Division / Planning Services
240 West Huntington Drive
Arcadia, CA 91007
(626) 574-5414
Date Received
for Filing:
~OH L I
Staff
CEQA Negative Declaration (Form "E")
6/06
File No. TA 09-01
CITY OF ARCADIA
240 WEST HUNTINGTON DRIVE
ARCADIA, CA 91007
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
1. Project Title:
Text Amendment No. TA 09-01
2. Lead Agency Name and Address:
City of Arcadia
Development Services Department
Community Development Division / Planning Services
240 West Huntington Drive - Post Office Box 60021
Arcadia, CA 91066-6021
3. Contact Person and Phone Number:
Mr. Jim Kasama, Community Development Administrator
Phone (626) 574-5442
Fax (626) 447-3309
4. Project Location:
Citywide
5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address:
City of Arcadia
Development Services Department
Community Development Division / Planning Services
240 West Huntington Drive - Post Office Box 60021
Arcadia, CA 91066-6021
6. General Plan Designation:
N/A. Various.
7. Zoning Classification:
N/A. Various.
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 sheet(s) if necessary.)
Text Amendment No. TA 09-01 for the following changes to Chapter 2 of Article IX
(Zoning Regulations) of the Arcadia Municipal Code:
CEQA Env. Checklist (Form "J") Part 1
-1-
6/06
File No. TA 09-01
1. Add "Division 8 - Wireless Communication Facilities" (Section 9288) under the
general provision section of the Zoning Regulations to establish standards for
wireless communication facilities.
2. Amend "Division 6 - Dish Antennas" (Section 9286) under the general provision
section of the Zoning Regulation to revise the definition and approval requirements
for dish antennas.
9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting:
(Briefly describe the project's surroundings.)
The project is to establish regulations for wireless communications facilities and is
applicable to the entire City. Land use in and adjacent to the City include single- and
multiple-family residential, commercial, recreation, racetrack, industrial, institutional, and
open space. Nearby jurisdictions include Monrovia, Temple City, Pasadena,
unincorporated Los Angeles County, EI Monte, Sierra Madre, and Irwin dale.
10. Other public agencies whose approval is required:
(e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement)
None.
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.
[ ] Aesthetics
[ ] Biological Resources
[ ] Hazards & Hazardous Materials
[ ] Mineral Resources
[ ] Public Services
[ ] Utilities / Service Systems
] Agriculture Resources
] Cultural Resources
] Hydrology / Water Quality
] Noise
] Recreation
] Mandatory Findings of Significance
] Air Quality
] Geology / Soils
] Land Use / Planning
] Population / Housing
] Transportation / Traffic
DETERMINATION (To be completed by the Lead Agency)
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
[Xl I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the
environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
[] I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the
environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the
project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
[] I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and
an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
CEQA Env. Checklist (Form "J") Part 1
-2-
6/06
File No. TA 09-01
[] I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant" or "potentially
significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has
been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal
standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier
analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is
required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
[] I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the
environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed
adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable
standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or
NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are
imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.
Is! 7 (JIll, ,!,t
1)~ If, 200f
Signature
Date
Tom Li. Associate Planner
Printed Name
For: City of Arcadia
Jason Kruckeberg
Development Services Director
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 like the one involved (e.g. the project falls outside a fault
rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific
factors as well as general standards (e.g. the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants,
based on a project-specific screening analysis).
2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site,
cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational
impacts.
3) Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist
answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with
mitigation, or less than significant. "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.
4) "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With 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
XVII, "Earlier Analyses," may be cross-referenced).
5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process,
an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section
15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following:
CEQA Env. Checklist (Form "J") Part 1
-3-
6/06
File No. TA 09-01
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 M~asures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures
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.
6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for
potential impacts (e.g. general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or
outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the
statement is substantiated.
7) Supporting Information Sources. A source list should be attached, and other sources used or
individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion.
8) The explanation of each issue should identify:
a) the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and
b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance.
CEQA Env. Checklist (Form" J") Part 1
-4-
6/06
1. AESTHETICS - Would the project:
a)
Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
o
Less Than
Significant With
Mitigation
Incorporation
o
File Nos.: TA 09-01
Less Than
Significant No
Impact Impact
~
o
The project is to establish regulations for wireless communications facilities and to revise the direct broadcast satellite
antennas regulations. These regulations include provisions to address aesthetic values of such facilities and ensure that
they would not have an adverse effect on a scenic vista.
b)
Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited
to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state
scenic highway?
o
o
o
~
There are no designated scenic highways within the City of Arcadia. The nearest designated state scenic highway is the
Angeles Crest Highway approximately 15 miles away. Therefore, there will be no impacts to state scenic highways or
scenic roadway corridors.
c)
Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of
the site and its surroundings?
o
o
o
~
The project is to establish regulations for wireless communications facilities and to revise the direct broadcast satellite
antennas regulations. These regulations include provisions to address aesthetic values of such facilities and ensure that
the changes complement the visual character and 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
~
The Arcadia Municipal Code has a provision to prohibit glare upon any neighboring properties; any future changes in the
lighting arrangements must comply with this provision. Therefore, the project would not create a new source of substantial
light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area.
2. 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?
o
o
o
~
There is no farmland in the City of Arcadia. Therefore, the project would not convert farmland to non-agricultural use.
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson
Act contract?
o
o
o
~
There is no agricultural use zoning or a Williamson Act contract in the City of Arcadia. Therefore, the proposed project
would not have the above impacts.
c)
Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to
CEQA Checklist
-5-
o
D.
o
~
4-03
File Nos.: TA 09-01
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant With
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant No
Impact Impact
their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to
non-agricultural use?
There is no farmland in the City of Arcadia, and the project will not convert farmland to non-agricultural use.
3. AIR QUALITY - Where available, the significance criteria
established by the applicable air quality management or air
pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following
determinations. Would the project:
a)
Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air
quality plan?
o
o
o
~
The City of Arcadia is located within the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB), which includes Los Angeles and Orange Counties,
and portions of Riverside and San Bernardino Counties. The air quality in the SCAB is managed by the South Coast Air
Quality Management District (SCAQMD), which funded the development of the West San Gabriel Valley Air Quality Plan.
In 1993, the City of Arcadia adopted Resolution 5725, accepting the principles of the plan and agreeing to use the plan in
the development of a local air quality program. Such a program is promoted through different approaches as outlined in the
City's General Plan under Public Information and Community Involvement, Regional Coordination, Transportation
Improvements and Systems Management, Transportation Demand Management, Land Use, Particulate Emissions
Reduction, Energy Conservation, and Waste Recycling. The project is to establish regulations for wireless communications
facilities and to revise the direct broadcast satellite antennas regulations. These facilities would not conflict with or obstruct
implementation of the air quality plan.
b)
Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an
existing or projected air quality violation?
o
o
o
~
The South Coast Air Basin (SCAB) continued the trend of long-term improvement in air quality; however, air quality
measurements within this region exceed both the State and Federal air quality standards on a regular basis. In Arcadia,
local air quality problems are largely the result of pollutants upwind of the city. The project is to establish regulations for
wireless communications facilities and to revise direct broadcast satellite antennas regulations, and would not violate any
air quality standard or contribute 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)?
o
o
o
~
The South Coast Air Basin (SCAB) is a non-attainment area for Ozone (03), Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5), Respirable
Particulate Matter (PM1o), and Carbon Monoxide (CO), and is in a maintenance area for Nitrogen Dioxide (N02J. The
project will not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant as the project will not increase the
intensity of the existing uses. Any new facility would be subject to review for potential pollutants.
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant 0 0 0 ~
concentrations?
The project will not result in a significant net increase in density from existing developments and uses. Furthermore, the
uses on the subject properties are not listed as uses that emit odors and dust under the SCAQMD Air Quality Guidance
Document. The allowable uses on subject site will remain consistent with the growth expectations for the region, and will
not have an impact that conflicts with or obstructs implementation of the applicable air quality plan.
e)
Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of
o
o
o
rgJ
CEQA Checklist
-6-
4-03
people?
File Nos.: TA 09-01
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant With
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant No
Impact Impact
The project is to establish regulations for wireless communications facilities and to revise direct broadcast satellite antennas
regulations, and would not create objectionable odors.
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 California Department of Fish
and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
o
o
o
rgj
In Arcadia, biological sensitive areas occur along existing creeks, upper watershed areas, existing flood control and
infiltration facilities, and in natural hillside areas within the northerly portion of the city. These areas have generally been
preserved as open space for public safety purposes or as wildlife habitat areas. The project is to establish regulations for
wireless communications facilities and to revise direct broadcast satellite antennas regulations, and any new construction
would be reviewed for its impact on biological resources.
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 California Department of Fish
and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service?
o
o
o
rgj
There are no designated riparian habitats or other sensitive natural communities within the City of Arcadia.
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?
o
o
o
rgj
There are no federally protected wetlands within the City of Arcadia. The subject properties are located within a fully-
developed area that is not close proximity to sensitive biological resources. Therefore, the project will not have the above
impacts.
d)
Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or
migratory fish or wildlife species or with established resident or
migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of wildlife nursery
sites?
o
o
o
rgj
There are no known native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species within the City of Arcadia. Therefore, the project will
not have the above impacts.
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological 0 0 0 rgj
resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?
The City of Arcadia has an ordinance to protect oak trees within the city. The project will not conflict with that ordinance as
it does not interfere with the enforcement of the ordinance. Therefore, the project will not have the above impacts.
CEQA Checklist
f)
Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation
Plan, Natural Conservation Community Plan, or other approved
local, regional or state habitat conservation plan?
-7-
o
o
o
rgj
4-03
File Nos.: TA 09-01
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant With
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant No
Impact Impact
There are no adopted Habitat Conservation Plans, Natural Conservation Community Plans, or other approved habitat
conservation plan within the City of Arcadia. Therefore, the project will not have the above impacts.
5. CULTURAL RESOURCES - Would the project:
a)
Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a
historical resource as defined in ~ 15064.5?
o
o
o
~
If previously unknown cultural resources are discovered during construction on the subject property, all work in the area
would cease, and a qualified historian, archaeologist or paleontologist shall be retained by the development sponsor to
assess the significance of the find, make recommendations, and prepare appropriate field documentation.
b)
Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an
archaeological resource pursuant to ~ 15064.5?
o
o
o
~
The City is not known to contain any archaeological resources. Should any construction activity encounter any unrecorded
archaeological resources, all work in the area would cease and a qualified archaeologist shall be retained by the
development sponsor to assess the significance of the find, make recommendations, and prepare appropriate field
documentation.
c)
Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or
site or unique geologic feature?
o
o
o
~
The City is not known to contain any paleontological or unique geological resources. Should any construction activity
encounter any such unrecorded paleontological resources, all work in the area would cease and a qualified paleontologist
or geologist shall be retained by the development sponsor to assess the significance of the find, make recommendations,
and prepare appropriate field documentation.
d)
Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of
formal cemeteries?
o
o
o
~
There are no known sites containing human remains in the City outside of formal cemeteries. State Health and Safety
Code Section 7050.5 requires that development be halt. Should any remain be encountered, the County Coroner shall be
contacted and has made the necessary findings as to the origin and disposition of the remains pursuant to Public
Resources Code Section 5097.98. Compliance with these regulations would ensure the project would not result in impacts
in disturbing human remains.
6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS - Would the project:
a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse 0 0 0 ~
effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the 0 0 0 ~
most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map
issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other
substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of
Mines and Geology Special Publication 42.
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? 0 0 0 ~
CEQA Checklist -8- 4-03
File Nos.: TA 09-01
Less Than
Potentially Significant With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporation Impact Impact
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? 0 0 0 [gI
iv) Landslides? 0 0 0 [gI
The City of Arcadia contains two local fault zones: the Raymond Hill Fault and the Sierra Madre Fault. The extremely thick
alluvial deposits which underlie the seismic study area are subject to differential settlement during any intense shaking
associated with seismic events. This type of seismic hazard results in damage to property when an area settles to different
degrees over a relatively short distance, and almost all properties in this region are subject to this hazard, but building
design standards do significantly reduce the potential for harm.
The project is to establish regulations for wireless communications facilities and to revise direct broadcast satellite antennas
regulations, and any new construction located within an Alquist Priolo Study Zone area, or any other earthquake hazard
zone would be subject to construction standards for those areas.
b)
Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?
o
o
o
[gI
The project will not involve any activity to create unstable earth conditions. Prior to any construction, soil studies are
required to evaluate the potential impacts of the construction upon the soil.
c)
Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would
become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result
in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence,
liquefaction or collapse?
o
o
o
[gI
The City of Arcadia is located on an alluvial plain that is relatively flat and expected to be stable. The project will not result
in on- or off-site landslide as it does not include any excavation, grading or filling.
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?
o
o
o
[gI
The subject site consists of alluvial soil that is in the low to moderate range for expansion potential as defined in Table 18-1-
B of the Uniform Building Code. The project will not have the above impact.
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?
o
o
o
[gI
The subject properties are in a fully-developed area that utilizes the local sewer system. Soil suitability for septic tanks or
alternative waste water disposal systems is not applicable to this project.
7. 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?
o
o
o
[gI
The project does not include the routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials, and will not have the above
impact.
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment
through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions
CEQA Checklist
-9-
o
o
o
[gI
4-03
involving the release of hazardous materials into the
environment?
File Nos.: TA 09-01
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant With
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant No
Impact Impact
The project does not involve hazardous materials and will not create a significant hazard to the public or release 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?
o
o
o
IZI
The project does not involve hazardous materials and would not emit hazardous materials, substances, or waste.
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
the public or the environment?
o
o
o
IZI
The subject properties are not included on a list of hazardous material sites and will not create a significant hazard to the
public or the environment.
e)
For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where
such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public
airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety
hazard for people residing or working in the project area?
o
o
o
IZI
The subject properties are not located within an airport land use plan or within two miles of a public airport or public use
airport. Therefore, there would not be any airport related safety hazards for people residing or working at the subject
properties.
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?
o
o
o
IZI
There is an existing helipad at the Methodist hospital. However, the project will not have any impact on the helipad since
the installation of antennas requires design review approval to ensure compliance with all air traffic safety measures.
Therefore, the project will not result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area.
g)
Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted
emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
o
o
o
IZI
The project is to establish regulations for wireless communications facilities and to revise direct broadcast satellite antennas
regulations, and any new construction would be reviewed for its impact on any adopted emergency response plan or
evacuation plan.
h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or
death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are
adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed
with wildlands?
o
o
o
IZI
The project is to establish regulations for wireless communications facilities and to revise direct broadcast satellite antennas
regulations, and would not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires.
CEQA Checklist
-10-
4-03
8. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY - Would the project:
a) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere
substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be
a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local
groundwater table level (Le., the production rate of pre-existing
nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support
existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been
granted)?
File Nos.: TA 09-01
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant With
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant No
Impact Impact
o
o
o
t8J
The project is to establish regulations for wireless communications facilities and to revise direct broadcast satellite antennas
regulations. It will not deplete groundwater supplies or interfere with groundwater recharge as there will be no substantial
increase in the intensity of the uses on the subject properties as a result of the project.
b) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area,
including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river,
in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation
on- or off-site?
o
o
o
t8J
The project is to establish regulations for wireless communications facilities and to revise direct broadcast satellite antennas
regulations. The project does not involve alteration of existing drainage patterns and will not result in substantial erosion or
siltation on- or off-site.
c)
Substantially 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?
o
o
o
t8J
The project is to establish regulations for wireless communications facilities and to revise direct broadcast satellite antennas
regulations. The project does not involve alteration of existing drainage patterns and will not 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
substantial additional sources of polluted runoff?
o
o
o
t8J
The project is to establish regulations for wireless communications facilities and to revise direct broadcast satellite antennas
regulations. The project will not create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned
storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff.
e)
Otherwise substantially degrade water quality?
o
o
o
~
Runoff from streets, parking areas, and other developed lands often carries various levels of water pollutants. However,
The project is to establish regulations for wireless communications facilities and to revise direct broadcast satellite antennas
regulations, and will not significantly intensify the use of the subject properties. Any future development proposals will be
subject to aff NPDES requirements to ensure protection of groundwater quality.
f)
Violate any other water quality standards or waste discharge
requirements?
CEQA Checklist
-11-
o
o
o
t8J
4-03
File Nos.: TA 09-01
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant With
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant No
Impact Impact
The project is to establish regulations for wireless communications facilities and to revise direct broadcast satellite antennas
regulations, and would not have the above impacts.
g)
Place housing within a 1 OO-year flood hazard area, as mapped on
a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or
other flood hazard delineation map?
o
o
o
~
A series of flood control channels within the city convey storm water to regional facilities to the south. Due to this system,
there are currently no areas within the City that are within a 100-year floodplain. The City of Arcadia was located within
flood Zone D as identified by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) map Community Number 065014.
Under this zone, no floodplain management regulations have been required. A small portion of the City is within the Santa
Anita Dam Inundation Area. Dam failure may be caused by a seismic event or an unprecedented intense storm that lasts
over an extended period of time. Such an event could lead to the inundation of that portion of the City but is highly unlikely
to occur. The project does not involve the placement of housing units and therefore will not have the above impact.
h)
Place within a 1 DO-year floodplain structures which would impede
or redirect flood flows?
o
o
o
~
As discussed above, there are currently no areas within the City that are within a 100-year floodplain. Therefore, the
project will not have the above impact.
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?
o
o
o
~
As mentioned, a small portion of the City is within the Santa Anita Dam Inundation Area. Dam failure could be caused by a
seismic event or intense storm that lasts over an extended periOd of time. Such an event could lead to the inundation of
that portion of the City, but is highly unlikely to occur. Therefore, the proposal will not expose people to a significant risk of
loss, injury or death involving flooding.
j)
Expose people or structures to Inundation by seiche, tsunami or
mudflow?
o
o
o
~
The City of Arcadia is not located within close proximity to any large inland bodies of water or the Pacific Ocean to be
inundated by a seiche or tsunami. The project is to establish regulations for wireless communications facilities and to
revise direct broadcast satellite antennas regulations, and would not have the above impacts.
k)
During project construction, will it create or contribute runoff water
that would violate any water quality standards or waste discharge
requirements, including the terms of the City's municipal separate
stormwater sewer system permit?
o
o
o
~
Any future development proposals would be subject to NPDES requirements to ensure compliance with the water quality
standards and waste discharge requirements.
I)
After the project is completed, will it create or contribute runoff
water that would violate any water quality standards or waste
discharge requirements, including the terms of the City's
municipal separate stormwater sewer system permit?
o
o
o
~
Any future development proposals would be subject to NPDES requirements to ensure compliance with the water quality
standards or waste discharge requirements.
CEQA Checklist
-12-
4-03
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?
File Nos.: TA 09-01
Less Than
Potentially Significant With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporation Impact Impact
D D D I2J
Any future development proposals would be subject to NPDES requirements to ensure compliance with the water quality
standards and waste discharge requirements.
n) Potential for discharge of stormwater to cause significant harm on
the biological integrity of the waterways and water bodies
including municipal and domestic supply, water contact or non-
contact recreation and groundwater recharge?
D
D
D
I2J
Any future development proposals would be subject to NPDES requirements to ensure compliance with the water quality
standards and waste discharge requirements.
0)
Discharge stormwater so that significant harm is caused to the
biological integrity of waterways or water bodies?
D
D
D
I2J
Any future development proposals would be subject to NPDES requirements to ensure that stormwater discharge causes
no significant harm to the biological integrity of waterways or water bodies.
p) Significantly alter the flow velocity or volume of storm water runoff
that can cause environmental harm?
D
D
D
I2J
Any future development proposals would be subject to NPDES requirements so as not to cause significant alteration of the
flow velocity or volume of storm water runoff that can cause environmental harm.
q)
Significantly increase erosion, either on or off-site?
The subject properties are located in a fully-developed area; the project will not increase erosion.
9. LAND USE AND PLANNING - Would the project:
a)
Physically divide an established community?
, D
D
D
I2J
D
D
D
~
The project is to establish regulations for wireless communications facilities and to revise direct broadcast satellite
antennas regulations, and any potential future development would be reviewed to not 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?
D
D
D
12I
The project is to establish regulations for wireless communications facilities and to revise direct broadcast satellite
antennas regulations, and any new construction would be reviewed for conflicts with any applicable land use plan, policy,
or regulations.
c)
Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural
CEQA Checklist
-13-
D
D
D
I2J
4-03
community conservation plan?
File Nos.: TA 09-01
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant With
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant No
Impact Impact
There is no habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan in the City. Therefore, the project could not
conflict with such plans.
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
[gI
b)
There are no known mineral resources in the City that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state.
Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral
resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific
plan or other land use plan?
o
o
o
[gI
There is no designation in the General Plan for a mineral resource recovery site. Therefore, the proposal would not have
the above impact.
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?
o
o
o
[gI
The project is to establish regulations for wireless communications facilities and to revise direct broadcast satellite antennas
regulations, and any future development will be subject to the City's noise regulations.
b)
Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne
vibration or groundborne noise levels?
o
o
o
[gI
The project is to establish regulations for wireless communications facilities and to revise direct broadcast satellite antennas
regulations, and any future development affected by this project will be limited to wireless communications facilities, and do
not include uses that would generate excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels.
c)
A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the
project vicinity above levels existing without the project?
o
o
o
[gI
The project is to establish regulations for wireless communications facilities and to revise direct broadcast satellite antennas
regulations, and any future development affected by this project will be subject to the City's noise regulations. Therefore,
there is no 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?
o
o
o
[gI
The project is to establish regulations for wireless communications facilities and to revise direct broadcast satellite antennas
regulations, and any future development affected by this project will be subject to the City's noise regulations. Therefore,
there is no substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the
project.
CEQA Checklist
-14-
4-03
e)
For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where
such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public
airport or public use airport, would the project expose people
residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
File Nos.: TA 09-01
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant With
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant No
Impact Impact
o
o
o
[gI
The subject site is not located within an airport land use plan or within two miles of a public airport or public use airport.
f)
For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the
project expose people residing or working in the project area to
excessive noise levels?
The subject site is not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip.
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)?
o
o
o
[gI
o
o
o
[gI
The project is to establish regulations for wireless communications facilities and to revise direct broadcast satellite antennas
regulations, which do not induce substantial population growth.
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating
the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
o
o
o
[gI
The project is to establish regulations for wireless communications facilities and to revise direct broadcast satellite antennas
regulations, and would not displace any existing housing.
c)
Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the
construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
o
o
o
[gI
The project is to establish regulations for wireless communications facilities and to revise direct broadcast satellite antennas
regulations, and would not displace any existing housing.
13.
PUBLIC SERVICES - Would the project:
a)
Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the
provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need
for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant environmental
impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response
times or other performance objectives for any of the public
services:
Fire protection? 0 0 0 ~
Police protection? 0 0 0 [gI
Schools? 0 0 0 ~
CEQA Checklist -15- 4-03
File Nos.: TA 09-01
Less Than
Potentially Significant With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporation Impact Impact
Parks? 0 0 0 [gj
Other public facilities? 0 0 0 [gj
The project is to establish regulations for wireless communications facilities and to revise direct broadcast satellite antennas
regulations, and would not displace any existing housing, and will not affect the above public services.
14. 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
[gj
The project will not increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities. The project
is to establish regulations for wireless communications facilities and to revise direct broadcast satellite antennas
regulations, and would not displace any existing housing. and will not adversely impact recreational facilities.
b)
Does the project include recreational facilities or require the
construction or expansion of recreational facilities which have an
adverse physical effect on the environment?
o
o
o
[gj
The project is to establish regulations for wireless communications facilities and to revise direct broadcast satellite antennas
regulations, and will not require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities.
15. TRANSPORTATIONITRAFFIC - 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 (Le., result in
a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the
volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)?
o
o
o
[gj
Arcadia's roadway network is nearly built out, consisting of the Foothill Freeway (/-210), regional arlerial roadways,
collectors and local streets. The subject properlies are bordered by a Modified One-Way Primary Arlerial with 3 lanes in
each direction. Based on the Highway Capacity Manual, the capacity of a given street and the amount of traffic each street
actually carries is expressed in terms of levels of service (LOS), ranging from level A (Free Flowing) to F ("Jammed". The
project will not change the density of the existing uses, and will not cause an increase in traffic in relation to the existing
load and capacity of the street system.
b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service 0 0 0 [gj
standard established by the county congestion management
agency for designated roads or highways?
The Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transporlation Authority (MTA) adopted their most recent Congestion Management
Program (CMP) in 2004. For the purposes of the CMP, a significant impact occurs when the proposed project increases
traffic demand on a CMP facility by 2% of capacity (VlC ~ 0.02), causing LOS F (VlC > 1.00). If the facility is already at
LOS F, a significant impact occurs when the proposed project increases traffic demand on a CMP facility by 2% of capacity
(VlC ~ 0.02). The lead agency may apply more stringent criteria if desired. The project will not change the density of the
existing uses, and would not the above impact.
c)
Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an
increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in
substantial safety risks?
o
o
o
[gj
CEQA Checklist
-16-
4-03
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant With
Mitigation
Incorporation
File Nos.: TA 09-01
Less Than
Significant No
Impact Impact
The project is to establish regulations for wireless communications facilities and to revise direct broadcast satellite antennas
regulations, and will not change the density of the existing uses, and will not cause an increase in air traffic.
d)
Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g.,
sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses
(e.g., farm equipment)?
o
o
o
~
The project is to establish regulations for wireless communications facilities and to revise direct broadcast satellite antennas
regulations. The project does not change the density of the existing uses and does not include new design features or
incompatible uses.
e)
Result in inadequate emergency access?
o
o
o
~
The project is to establish regulations for wireless communications facilities and to revise direct broadcast satellite antennas
regulations, and any future development would be subject to review to not obstruct or reduce access to emergency
services.
f)
Result in inadequate parking capacity?
o
o
o
~
The project is to establish regulations for wireless communications facilities and to revise direct broadcast satellite antennas
regulations. The project would not have an effect on parking demand.
g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans or programs supporting
alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)?
o
o
o
~
The project is to establish regulations for wireless communications facilities and to revise direct broadcast satellite antennas
regulations, and would not displace any existing housing. The project does not change the density of the existing uses and
will not conflict with alternative transporlation opporlunities.
16. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS - Would the project:
a)
Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable
Regional Water Quality Control Board?
o
o
o
~
The California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Los Angeles Region, is the local board with jurisdiction over Arcadia.
This board has established the Basin Plan which (i) designates beneficial uses for surface and ground waters, (N) sets
narrative and numerical objectives that must be attained or maintained to protect the designated beneficial uses and
conform to the state's antidegradation policy, and (Hi) describes implementation programs to protect all waters in the region.
The project is to establish regulations for wireless communications facilities and to revise direct broadcast satellite antennas
regulations. The project will not change the density of the uses and will not exceed the wastewater treatment requirements.
Any future development is also subject to the requirements as set forlh in the Basin Plan.
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?
o
o
o
~
The project is to establish regulations for wireless communications facilities and to revise direct broadcast satellite antennas
regulations. The project will not change the density of the uses and will not result in the need for new water or wastewater
treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities.
c)
Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage
CEQA Checklist
-17-
o
D.
o
~
4-03
File Nos.: TA 09-01
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant With
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant No
Impact Impact
facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of
which could cause significant environmental effects?
Local Stormwater management facilities, such as the storm drains within the area roadways, are the City's responsibility,
while regional facilities are the responsibility of the Los Angeles Department of Public Works (DPW). The City municipal
storm drain facilities will be maintained and improved in conformance with the City of Arcadia Drainage System Technical
Memorandum.
The project is to establish regulations for wireless communications facilities and to revise direct broadcast satellite antennas
regulations. The project will not change the density of the uses and will not result in the need for new storm water drainage
facilities or expansion of existing facilities.
d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from 0 0 0 f2:I
existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded
entitlements needed? In making this determination, the City shall
consider whether the project is subject to the water supply
assessment requirements of Water Code Section 10910, et seq.
(58 610), and the requirements of Government Code Section
664737 (58221).
For the purposes of compliance with Senate Bill 610 and Senate Bill 221, the subject proposal does not qualify as a
"project': A "project" means any of the following:
1) A proposed residential development of more than 500 dwelling units.
2) A proposed shopping center or business establishment employing more than 1,000 persons or having more than
500,000 square feet of floor space.
3) A proposed commercial office building employing more than 1,000 persons or having more than 250,000 square
feet of floor space.
4) A proposed hotel or motel, or both, having more than 500 rooms.
5) A proposed industrial, manufacturing, or processing plant, or industrial park planned to house more than 1,000
persons, occupying more than 40 acres of land, or having more than 650,000 square feet of floor area.
6) A mixed-use project that includes one or more of the projects specified in this subdivision.
7) A project that would demand an amount of water equivalent to, or greater than, the amount of water required by a
500 dwelling unit project.
If a public water system has fewer than 5,000 service connections, then "project" means any proposed residential,
business, commercial, hotel or motel, or industrial development that would account for an increase of 10 percent or more in
the number of the public water systems existing service connections, or a mixed-use project that would demand an amount
of water equivalent to, or greater than, the amount of water required by residential development that would represent an
increase of 10 percent or more in the number of the public water system's existing service connections. The project is to
establish regulations for wireless communications facilities and to revise direct broadcast satellite antennas regulations and
will not conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation.
e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider
which serves or may serve the project determined that it has
adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in
addition to the provider's existing commitments?
o
o
o
f2:I
The project is to establish regulations for wireless communications facilities and to revise direct broadcast satellite antennas
regulations. The project will not change the density of the uses and will not increase the wastewater treatment demand.
Any future development shall also be subject to the requirements as set forth in the Basin Plan.
CEQA Checklist
-18-
4-03
f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to
accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs?
File Nos.: TA 09-01
Less Than
Potentially Significant With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporation Impact Impact
D D D ~
The project is to establish regulations for wireless communications facilities and to revise direct broadcast satellite antennas
regulations. The project will not change the density of the uses and will not increase the need for landfill capacity.
g)
Comply with federal, state and local statues and regulations
related to solid waste?
D
D
D
~
The project is to establish regulations for wireless communications facilities and to revise direct broadcast satellite antennas
regulations. The project will not change the density of the uses and will not violate any federal, state or local statues and
regulations relating to solid waste. Any future development shall also be subject to the requirements as set forth in the
Basin Plan.
17. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade 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 examples of
the major periods of California history or prehistory?
D
D
D
~
The project is to establish regulations for wireless communications facilities and to revise direct broadcast satellite antennas
regulations, and any future development will be reviewed to ensure that it does not have the potential to degrade the quality
of the environment. It will not reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species since it is located in a fully-developed area.
b)
Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but
cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means
that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when
viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects
of other current projects, and the effects of probable future
projects )?
D
D
D
~
The project is to establish regulations for wireless communications facilities and to revise direct broadcast satellite antennas
regulations, and will not have negative impacts on the environment; neither individually limited, nor cumulatively
considerable since it is located in a fully-developed area.
c)
Does the project have environmental effects which will cause
substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or
indirectly?
D
D
D
~
The project is to establish regulations for wireless communications facilities and to revise direct broadcast satellite antennas
regulations, any future development will be reviewed for any potential environmental effects that will cause substantial
adverse effects on human beings. No physical changes are proposed by the project.
- - --- ---- - -------- - ----
CEQA Checklist
-19-
4-03
,
."
RESOLUTION NO. 1788
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. CUP 08-18 TO ALLOW
TEEN DRIVER SAFETY CLASSES WITH A MAXIMUM
OF 18 STUDENTS IN A 493 SQUARE-FOOT
CONFERENCE ROOM ON THE SECOND FLOOR OF AN
EXISTING GENERAL OFFICE USE AT 420 E.
HUNTINGTON DRIVE
WHEREAS, on November 10, 2008, a conditional use permit
application was filed by George Tamayo of the Automobile Club of
Southern California to allow teen driver safety classes in a 493 square-foot
conference room on the second floor of an existing general office use,
Development Services Department Case No. CUP 08-18, at property
commonly known as 420 E. Huntington Drive; and
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the Planning Commission
on January 13, 2009, 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 staff report dated January 13, 2009 is true and
correct.
f.
...
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 proj ect is exempt from
the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act per Section
No. 15322, for educational or training programs involving no physical
changes.
2. That the use applied for at the location indicated is a proper one
for which a Conditional Use Permit is authorized.
3. That the site for the proposed use is adequate in size and shape to
accommodate said use. All yards, spaces, walls, fences, loading,
landscaping and other features including the shared parking with the
neighboring business, are adequate to adjust said use with the land and uses
in the neighborhood. The proposed project complies with all related zoning
requirements as set forth in the Arcadia Municipal Code.
4. That the site abuts streets and highways adequate in width and
pavement type to carry the kind of traffic generated by the proposed use.
5. That the granting of such Conditional Use Permit will not
adversely affect the comprehensive General Plan because the land use and
current zoning are consistent with the General Plan.
2
1788
:'
.
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 08-18 allow teen driver safety
classes with a maximum of 18 students in a 493 square-foot conference
room on the second floor of an existing general office at 420 E. Huntington
Drive, subject to the following conditions:
1. There shall not be more than eighteen (18) students in class at any
one time for the teen driver safety classes.
2. The class hours shall be limited to 6:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m.,
Monday through Thursday.
3. The use approved by CUP 08-18 is limited to the proposed teen
driver safety program. The facility shall be operated and maintained in a
manner that is consistent with the proposal and plans submitted and
approved for CUP 08-18.
4. Noncompliance with the plans, prOVISIOns and conditions of
approval for CUP 08-18 shall be grounds for immediate suspension or
3
1788
'"
revocation of any approvals, which could result in the suspension of the
teen driver safety classes.
5. Approval of CUP 08-18 shall not take effect until the property
owner(s), and applicant have executed and filed the Acceptance Form
available from the Development Services Department to indicate awareness
and acceptance of these conditions of approval.
6. The applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City
of Arcadia' and its officers, employees, and agents from and against any
claim, action, or proceeding against the City of Arcadia, its officers,
employees or agents to attack, set aside, void, or annul any approval or
condition of approval of the City of Arcadia concerning this project and/or
land use decision, including but not limited to any approval or condition of
approval of the City Council, Planning Commission, or City Staff, which
action is brought within the time period provided for in Government Code
Section 66499.37 or other provision of law applicable to this project or
decision. The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim, action,
or proceeding concerning the project and/or land use decision and the City
shall cooperate fully in the defense of the matter. The City reserves the
right, at its own option, to choose its own attorney to represent the City, its
officers, employees, and agents in the defense of the matter.
4
1788
AI'
,
SECTION 4. The Secretary shall certify to the adoption of this
Resolution.
Passed, approved and adopted this 27th day of January, 2009.
Chairman, Planning Commission
ATTEST:
Secretary, Planning Commission
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
,
~~. 0.~
Stephen P. Deitsch, City Attorney
5
1788
..
MINUTES
ARCADIA PLANNING COMMISSION
Tuesday, January 13, 2009, 7:00 P.M.
Arcadia City Council Chambers
The Planning Commission of the City of Arcadia met in regular session on Tuesday, January 13,
2009 at 7:00 p.m., in the Council Chambers of the City of Arcadia, at 240 W. Huntington Drive,
with Chairman Pro Tern Parrille presiding.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL:
PRESENT:
ABSENT:
Commissioners Baderian, Baerg, Hsu and Parrille
Commissioner Beranek
OTHERS AlTENDING
Community Development Administrator Jim Kasama
Associate Planner Tom Li
Assistant Planner Steven Lee
Senior Administrative Assistant Billie Tone
MOTION:
It was moved by Commissioner Baderian, seconded by Commissioner Hsu, to excuse
Chairman Beranek from the meeting. The motion passed by voice vote with none
dissenting.
MOTION:
It was moved by Commissioner Hsu, seconded by Commissioner Baderian, to read the
Resolutions by title only and waive reading the full text of the Resolutions. The motion
passed by voice vote with none dissenting.
SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION FROM STAFF REGARDING AGENDA ITEMS
None
TIME RESERVED FOR THOSE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO WISH TO ADDRESS THE
PLANNING COMMISSION ON NON-PUBLIC HEARING MATTERS - Five-minute time
limit per person
None
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. CUP 08-18
420 E. Huntington Drive
George Tamayo (Representative of property owner, Automobile Club of South em California)
+
The applicant is requesting a Conditional Use Permit to allow driver safety classes with a maximum
of 18 students in the conference room of an existing general office use (dba Automobile Club of
Southern California).
Associate Planner Thomas Li presented the staff report.
Mr. George Tamaya, Product Administration for Driver Services, Auto Club of Southern
California, said his organization wanted to extend to the city the advantages of a good quality
teen driving school with classes twice weekly on Monday and Wednesday or Tuesday and
Thursday. Mr. Tamaya explained that since none of the students drive, there would be no
impact on parking. There would be only one instructor and a class would be scheduled every
two months. Mr. Tamaya noted that the Auto Club is currently successsfully operating these
classes in 18 California cities.
The public hearing was opened.
Chairman Pro Tern ParriUe asked if anyone else would like to speak in favor of the project.
There were none.
Chairman Pro Tern Parrille asked if anyone would like to speak in opposition to the project.
There were none.
MOTION:
It was moved by Commissioner Baderian, seconded by Commissioner Hsu, to close the public
hearing.
Without objection the public hearing was closed.
MOTION:
It was moved by Commissioner Baderian, seconded by Commissioner Hsu, to approve
Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 08-18 subject to the conditions of approval in the staff
report
ROLL CALL:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Commissioners Baderian, Baerg, Hsu and Parrille
None
Chairman Beranek
PC MINUTES
1-13..09
Page 2
...
DISCUSSION ITEM
2. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. CUP 08-15
921 S. Baldwin Avenue, Units G& H
Terence Kwok (Architect)
The applicant is requesting a Conditional Use Permit and parking modification to expand an
existing eating establishment into an adjacent unit for a combined floor area of 1,971 square
feet with seating for 40 patrons. This item was originally reviewed by the Commission at the
December 9, 2008 meeting. At that time a decision was made to continue the item to the
January 27 meeting. The applicant is now requesting a review of this item at this meeting.
Assistant Planner Steven Lee presented the staff report.
Mr. Paul Salvaterra spoke on behalf of his wife who is planning to open a Cajun restaurant at
the site. He asked the Commissioners if they had received a letter that he had sent asking
them to expedite the decision on his wife's application and the Commissioners assured Mr.
Salvaterra that they had.
Mr. Salva terra explained that Unit G has been vacant for a long time and the landlord is
anxious to get a tenant with a functional business in the unit as soon as possible.
Commissioner Baderian expressed appreciation to Mr. Salvaterra for his letter but noted that
the item was originally continued to the January 27 meeting so that it could be reviewed
along with another application on the same site. Commissioner Baderian said that since there
was no indication that the situation had changed, he still felt that the item should be
continued to the January 27 meeting.
MOTION:
It was moved by Commissioner Baderian, seconded by Commissioner Hsu, to reaffirm the
continuance of Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 08-15 to January 27,2009.
ROLL CALL:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Commissioners Baderian, Baerg, Hsu and Panille
None
Chairman Beranek
CONSENT ITEMS
3. RESOLUTION NO.. 1786
A Resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Arcadia, California, approving
Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 08-16 and Architectural Design Review No. ADR 08-25 for
PC MINUTES
1-13"()9
Page 3
,.
an existing restaurant (The Patio Mediterranean Cuisine) to add a patio cover to an existing
deck, and to expand the live entertainment, including music and dancing, to the second floor
at 21 E. Huntington Drive.
4. RESOLUTION NO. 1787
A Resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Arcadia, California, granting
Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 08-17 to amend Condition No. 3A regarding a parking
restriction of a previously approved Conditional Use Permit (CUP 03-06/Resolution No.
1694) for a 3,300 square-foot restaurant with beer and wine service and a dining capacity of
60 people at 1038-1088 South Baldwin Avenue.
5. MINUTES OF DECEMBER 9, 2008
MOTION:
It was moved by Commissioner Baderian, seconded by Commissioner Hsu, to adopt
Resolutions 1786 and 1787 and to approve the minutes as presented.
Without objection Resolutions 1786 and 1787 were adopted and the minutes were approved
by voice vote as presented.
MATTERS FROM CITY COUNCIL AND PLANNING COMMISSION
Councilman Kovacic expressed his appreciation for the Commissioners' Dinner last
week at the Community Center and thanked the Planning Commissioners for their
service to the city. He said that the City Council honored the Rose Court, especially
Queen Courtney Lee and Princess Lauren Valenzuela, both of Arcadia, at the last
Council meeting. In addition, the City Council discussed a possible change from a
five-day to a one-day system for residential waste hauling which would reduce the
number of truck trips required. Councilman Kovacic also said that Hal Libby, a long
time resident of Arcadia who, along with his wife Carol, had been actively involved
in many local organizations passed away over the weekend and that there is a service
scheduled for January 24 at 2:00 p.m. at the Libby home.
MODIFICATION COMMITTEE MEETING ACTIONS
Commissioner Parrille said that there was no Modification Committee meeting today.
FURTHER MATTERS FROM STAFF
Mr. Kasama said that a draft Text Amendment on wireless facilities will be ready for
the Commission's review at the January 27 meeting. He also said that there will be
an item on the upcoming February 10 agenda regarding the project on Canyon Road
that was recently approved and he reminded the Commissioners of the joint meeting
PC MINUTES
1-13-09
Page 4
...
on February 24 with the City Council on the status of the General Plan project. Mr.
Kasama told the Commissioners that the Conditional Use Permit application for the
tea house and yogurt shop that was denied at the last meeting has been appealed to
the City Council.
7 :20 p.rn.
ADJOURNED
Chairman Pro Tern, Planning
Commission
ATTEST:
Secretary, Planning Commission
PC MINUfES
1-13-09
Page S