HomeMy WebLinkAbout1581
.
.
.
RESOLUTION 1581
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO,
98-021 TO OPERATE A 235 SEAT RESTAURANT FACILITY AT 400 E.
HUNTINGTON DRIVE.
WHEREAS, on September 8, 1998, applications were filed by BJ,s Pizza,
Grill and Brewery to operate a 235 seat restaurant facility, to be located in a CPD-I zoned
property that is commonly known as 400 E, Huntington Drive, and more particularly
described as:
Parcel 2. of Parcel Map I 9433 in the City of Arcadia, County of Los Angeles, State
of California, as recorded in Parcel Map Book 209, Pages 1 & 2, in the Office of
the County Recorder of said County
WHEREAS, A public hearing was held on October 13, 1998, at which time all
interested persons were given full opportunity to be heard and to present evidence;
NOW THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ARCADIA HEREBY RESOL YES AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. That the factual data submitted by the Development Services
Department in the attached report is true and correct.
SECTION 2. This Commission finds:
1. That the granting of such Conditional Use Permit will not be detrimental to
the public health or welfare, or injurious to the property or improvements in such zone or
vicinity because the initial study did not disclose any substantial adverse affects to the
area affected by the proposed project.
2. That the use applied for at the location indicated is a proper use 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, parking, loading, landscaping and
other features 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 oftraffkgenemted by the proposed use.
5. That the granting of such Conditional Use Permit will not adversely affect the
comprehensive General Plan because the land use and current zoning are consistent with
the General Plan.
6. That the new exterior design elements for the subject building are in
compliance with the design criteria set forth in the City's Architectural Design Review
Regulations.
7, 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 a
Conditional Use Permit, to operate a 23S-seat restaurant facility upon the following
conditions:
I. That any plumbingbackflow devices existing or to be installed shall be.screened
from public view to the satisfaction of the Community Development Administrator.
2,. All City code requirements regarding accessibility, fire protection, occupancy,
and safety shall be complied with to the satisfaction of Building Services and the Fire
Department which shall include, but are not limited to the following items:
a. Two disabled access toilet rooms (one male, one female) on the ground
floor must be available in conformance with the Uniform Building Code.
b. Two disabled access parking spaces, one of which shall be van accessible,
must be provided, These parking spaces are to be provided in
conformance with the Uniform Building Code.
c. A Knox-box with keys shall be installed in conformance with Uniform
Fire Code, per UFC 904.
2
1581
.
.
.
d. An NFP A-72 Fire Alarm System shall be installed in accordance with the
Uniform Building Code and all other applicable provisions of the Arcadia
Municipal Code (3114.1).
e. An NFP A-13 central-station monitored automatic fire sprinkler system
with quick response sprinkler heads must be installed by aState licensed C-
16 contractor and representative sprinkler heads with identification as to
their locations in the building shall be provided in a spare sprinkler box in
tenant space. A certified copy of the central-station monitoring contract
must be filed with the Fire Department prior to occupancy.
f. Provide a Hood and Duct extinguishing. system for cooking areas with
Class I hood .systems. If there is an existing system a functional test will be
required,
g. Provide occupant Load signs at all locations within the occupancy,
3. The restaurant. shall be checked for the proper Grease Interceptor by the City
Industrial Waste Discharge Engineer.
4. That a landscape and irrigation plan shall be submitted to the Community
Development Division for review and approval, prior to the issuance of a building permit.
5.. Approval of CUP 98-021 shall not take effect until the property owner and
applicant have executed and filed the Acceptance Form available from the Development
Services Department to indicate acceptance of the conditions of approval.
6. Noncompliance with the plans, provisions and conditions of approval for CUP
98-021 shall be grounds for immediate suspension or revocation of any approvals, which
could result in the cessation of classes.
SECTION 4, The decision, findings and conditions contained in this Resolution
reflect the Commission's action of October 13, 1998, and the following vote:
A YES: Commissioners Bruckner, Huang, Murphy, Sleeter, Kalemkiarian
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
3
1581
.
.
.
SECTION 5. The Secretary shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution and
shall cause a copy to be forwarded to the City Council of the City of Arcadia,
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the forgoing Resolution was adopted at a regular
meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 27th day of October 1998, by the
following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
A~:
Commissioners Bruckner, Huang, Murphy, Sleeter, Kalemkiarian
None
None
g Commission
Ch ' P g Commission
City of 'a
4
158]
-),
October 13,1998
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
STAFF REPORT
DEVELOPMENTSER~CESDEPARTMffiNT
Arcadia City PIanning Commission
Donna Butler, Community Development Administrator
By: Candyce Burnett, Assistant Planner
Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 98-021
SUMMARY
This Conditional Use Permit application was submitted by Chicago Pizza and Brewery to
operate a 7,371 sq. ft. restaurant (doing business as BI's Pizza, Grill and Brewery) at 400 E.
Huntington Drive (formerly Bennigan's). The Development Services Department is
recommending approval of this conditional use permit application subject to the conditions that
are outlined in this staff report.
.
GENERAL INFORMATION
APPLICANT:
LOCATION:
REQUEST;
SITE AREA:
FRONTAGES:
Chicago Pizza and Brewery, Inc. (BI's Pizza, Grill and Brewery)
400 E. Huntington Drive
A Conditional Use Permit to operate a 235-seat restaurant facility, within an
existing 7,371 sq. ft. building at the subject location (formerly Bennigan's),
9.11 acres
874.08 feet along Huntington Drive and 426.46 feet along Fifth Avenue,
EXISTING LAND USE & ZONING:
The site (Arcadia Gateway Centre) is developed with the following uses:
. 48,500 sq. ft. two story medical office building
. 67,00 sq. ft. four story office building
. 23,600 sq, ft. three story office building(AAA)
. 26,900 sq. ft, one story multi-tenant retail building
. 7,371 sq. ft. one story restaurant (vacant-formerly Bennigan's)
. 9,200 sq. ft. two story restaurant (Olive Garden)
. 3 level parking structure with 235 spaces & 586 surface parking spaces
The property is zoned CPD-l (Commercial Planned Development) and is
located within the Arcadia Redevelopment Area.
.
.
.
.
,.
SURROUNDING LAND USES & ZONING:
North: Hotels and restaurants - zoned CPO-I
South & West: Railroad right-of-way - unzoned
East: 3-story office building - zoned CPO-I & across Fifth Ave. is a public
storage facility in the City of Monrovia
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: The site is designated as Commercial
BACKGROUND AND PARKING:
In August, 1987, the City Council approved Modification No. M-87-69 for 745 parking spaces
in lieu of 830 required for the Arcadia Gateway Center. The proposal was to be comprised of a
47,300 sq. ft. medical building, 70,200 sq, ft, of business offices, two restaurants totaling
13,000 sq. ft., and 26,900 sq. ft. ofretail shops.
In July, 1988, after the construction of Bennigan's Restaurant, the City Council approved
Modification MM 88-005 for 821 parking spaces in lieu of 908 required for the revised
project. The new project square footage totaled 48,500 sq. ft. for the medical building, two
office buildings totaling 90,600 sq. ft, two restaurants totaling 13,400 sq. ft., and a 26,900 sq,
ft. multi-tenant retail building.
BJ's Pizza, Gril1 and Brewery is proposing to lower the amount of seats in their establishment
from the 260 approved for the former Bennigan's restaurant (CUP No,87-18) to 235. This
should lessen the impact on the parking demand,
PROPOSAL & ANALYSIS:
The applicant is proposing to operate a Grill and Brewery in the existing 7,371 sq, ft. one--story
building at 400 E. Huntington Drive. Hours of operation will be as followed:
Monday through Thursday 11 :00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m.
Friday & Saturday 11 :00 p.m. to 12:00 p.m.
Sunday 1l:00a.m. to 10:00 p.m.
The proposal includes minor improvements to the exterior of the building which will consist of
raising the existing entry mass with brick veneer, providing new signage, and replacing the
existing light fixtures, as shown on the submitted building elevations. Colored renderings will
be provided at the meeting to show the proposed color scheme for the building's exterior.
BJ's Pizza, Gril1 and Brewery is proposing indoor seating for 235 people, this is in lieu of the
260 seats approved for the previous eating establishment (Bennigans).
The applicants are proposing new signs on the north, south, and west walls of the building as
shown on the submitted building elevations, The existing free-standing monument sign that is
adjacent to Huntington Drive, will be changed out with a new 56 sq, ft. sign.
CUP 98-021
October 13, 1998
Page 2
.
.
.
"
An additional free-standing sign, in the shape of a grain silo, is proposed for the north side of
the building. The silo will be approximately 19'-6" in height, matching the existing building
height. A 64 sq. ft, logo sign will be attached to the structure, The silo, as a free-standing sign
strocture requires a modification to allow two free-standing signs i.e., the silo and the site's
monument sign, to be within 200 feet of each other.
ARCffiTECTURAL DESIGN REVIEW:
Concurrent with the consideration of this conditional use permit, the Planning Commission
may approve, conditionaI1y approve of deny the applicant's design concept. In addition, since
this proposal has been forwarded to the Redevelopment Agency for further design review,
since it is within the boundaries of the Arcadia Redevelopment area.
It is staff's opinion that the applicant's proposal complies with the intent of the design criteria
as set forth in the City's Architectura1 Design Review Regulations.
CEOA
Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act, the Development
Services Department has prepared an initial study for the proposed project. Said initial study
did not disclose certain substantial or potentially substantial adverse changes in physical
conditions within the area affected by the project any ofthejncluding land, air, water, minerals,
flora, fauna, ambient noise and objects of historical or aesthetic significance. When considering
the record as a whole, there is no evidence that the proposed project will have any potential for
adverse effect on wildlife resources or the habitat upon which the wildlife depends. Therefore,
a Negative Declaration has been prepared for this project.
RECOMMENDATION
The Development Services Department recommends approval of Conditional Use Permit
No, CUP 98-021, subject to the following conditions of approval:
1. That any plumbing backflow devices existing or to be instaIIed sha1l be screened from
public view to the Sl/tidilction of the Community Development Administrator.
2. All City code requirements regarding accessibility, fire protection, occupancy, and safety
sha1l be complied with to the satisfaction of Building Services and the Fire Department
which sha1l include, but are not limited to the following items:
a. Two disabled access toilet rooms (one male, one female) on the ground floor must be
available in conformance with the Uniform Building Code.
b. Two disabled access parking spaces, one of which sha11 be van accessible, must be
provided. These parking spaces are to be provided in conformance with the Uniform
Building Code.
CUP 98-021
October 13, 1998
Page 3
,.
.
c. A Knox-box with keys shall be installed in conformance with Uniform Fife Code, per
UFC 904.
d. An NFP A-72 Fife Alarm System sha1l be installed in accordance with the Uniform
Building Code and all other applicable provisions of the Arcadia Municipal Code
(3114.1).
e. An NFP A-13 central-station monitored automatic fire sprinkler system with quick
response sprinkler heads must be installed by a State licensed C-16 contractor and
representative sprinkler heads with identification as to their locations in the building
sha1l be provided in a spare sprinkler box in tenant space. A certified copy of the
central-station monitoring contract must be filed with the Fire Department prior to
occupancy.
f. Provide a Hood and Duct extinguishing system for cooking areas with Class 1 hood
systems. If there is an existing system a functional fest will be required.
g. Provide occupant Load signs at all locations within the occupancy.
3. The restaurant sha1l be checked for the proper Grease Interceptor by the City Industria1
Waste Discharge Engineer.
4. That a landscape and irrigation plan sha1l be submitted to the Community Development
. Division for review and approva1, prior to the issuance of a building permit.
S. Approval of CUP 98-021 sha1l not take effect until the property owner and applicant have
executed and filed the Acceptance Form available from the Development Services
Department to indicate acceptance of the conditions of approval.
6. Noncompliance with the plans, provisions and conditions of approval for CUP 98-021
sha1l be grounds for immediate suspension or revocation of any approvals, which could
result in the cessation of classes.
FINDINGS AND MOTIONS
Approval
If the P1anning Commission intends to approve this application, the Commission should move
to approve and file the Negative Declaration and direct staff to prepare a resolution
incorporating the Commission's decision, supporting findings and conditions of approval as set
forth in the staff report, or as modified by the Commission.
.
CUP 98-021
October 13, 1998
Page 4
.
.
.
,.
~
If the P1anning Commission intends to deny this application, the Commission should move for
denial, state the supporting findings, and direct staff to prepare a resolution incorporating the
Commission's decision and findings,
If a Planning Commissioner, or any other interested party has any questions or comments
regarding this matter prior to the October 131b public hearing. please contact Assistant Planner,
Candyce Burnett at (626) 574-5444.
Approved by:
Attachments: Plans
Land Use and Zoning Map
Negative Declaration & Initial Study
CUP 98-021 October 13, 1998
Page 5
.
.
.
.'
w
~
~
'0' 'e. I"'" ',~. .
Retail and_Resta!lrant~~..,~,>,"\ ~"., I
':~t:';-lu'7,,-;-,,\..-'r"~ " ~.
:1':" I '~,"",,~ ..~:
...l'i I \~. ""I'
~ r, ..' ~l .,,~-=-, . ~
1'1-" I ."..
C:rD-l :.1: HJ I ,JM ".~....~
'''' . .'. .... I :., '''d' 01.,
J"w.IIS
2:741.'
{.~'"
CPD-l&H" ~
IoU: fi.,.,,' '<<'
N 138
(~/911
5
20
.;
~
~<t'
DR
I,"
(U~) ",'"
2:!J i
. "
~
21G.J17.
(-1"J,fl~\
:A
.1
!
R~3
sST
.,..~ ,:1. i
-----------~~ ~
>.
~,..
Jl'
~'l
_'_ _.3h~ ___
~! -~ ~;
.'.f -L _ _'t!. _ _ :
1:::'1
.
~.
~
1~
, I
'~!; :
.. '5J t I
, ~ Ir ~J TA
..r .. C\J , 1M., J4~.I;,-''l:
''-,-It_W_ !=')'"E . 0' I I
~ ~ ~ "~~ t I ~~ : I
'.. "0 ..~~: ,E1 X 571
. "jl, '""~-:;~ 101 I I
~: ~.:~ I ~-i 'P' I
~~2N ~ ~~ 2 I I I I I
G.N ~" ~
l__ '''''~:.~!,Ii It.!'!.'l '~J~ !'P.,Is~(-!t!' ~!~, ~'1
.. V. ~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
!i -JilJ- -,.,. --=--
-., ~~ .... l.n . :Ii.,
"'II }~ '" 2"" .,
!:),- :;> ~.~a ----:
I - ~-'E )0.
I I -a.' ~l; t
1 I tft/el) ~ ~ l:;
I,:!!,... : I~'!l ,~rr.;~ "'~'J ,.._
f,7r-
.~
oi;
"
. ,t',
.----''''---...:
,5
(
R-3
;'"
.' ~:
u... ~-s,,-;-.
II !] :_--;-'
~...:~ ~i ~ ~~;
. ........ - - --
.. ... -:. ; ~
:f,., Mr. ; m" ;<
..- ..
Land Use and Zoning Map
400 E. Huntington Dr. tNORTH
CUP 98-021 Scale: 1 inch = 200 feel
.
.
IU'l,lftDlll~IOOI'~1
f
1
Wt:st Elt:vatlon
.....lUl~_
-
South Elt:vatlon
North Elevation
~
~
::.-.~
East Elt:vatlon
",...
,- -
- .
.'
I
.
400 Itmtlngtcn Drive
^~,C^
.
I'.
_l-.o____
. ----.
... -~.....
---.....--
....
.
If'
;
.'
"'- - J
.1
-
\. ,.
, --._0
- -
0'- '"
'"
<<>-.---.
'"
dD--,.--
!
J,
i
i
!
J,
Floor Plan ~\~
",.. .
......
..../'
....... .
. i~.~::~.
- --
~.-
.~~~-
.,......-.;1..,
~.z-=:.
".'r.";C:.
"
"
Grain 5110 I Slgnage
N.T.5.
.
'f
i-
.-.-
....,.
.-4)
.-
......
,
l
i
i
~
...... .
:CVJJM:-~~
"'"
--- 51, - un 11,,'
~u.-1.l1l.
Site Plan
. ,. .
....-
tUafDlt, (KD'I.J
~jf1'IR.UIi.lPIlII.
:~~=~
It2OWltVRUl. .
,"_.'-
r-
Overall Site Plan
N.T.5.
.IC>'!:O -==_O'OIW.
....::!c.......e.....
r -- 0-.,.......""
ol.-h~NT'INGTOr-t
.
,
90fflC
400 madla. C^
.
I..
-~
--
--.
---
. -=.....--
.. ...-.
~~
.
.
.
"
File No.: CUP 98~21
CITY OF ARCADIA
240 WEST HUNTINGTON DRIVE
ARCADIA, CA 91007
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
A. Tide and Description of Project:
Application No. Cup 98-021
A Conditional use permit to operate a 235 seat restaurantfacility.
B. Location of Project:
400 E. Huntington Dr., Arcadia. County of Los Angeles, California
C. Name of Applicant or Sponsor:
BI's Pizza Grill and BIeWeI)'
26131 Marguerite Parkway, Suite A
Mission Viejo, Ca 92692
(949) 367-8616 X101
D. Finding:
This project will have no significant effect upon the environment within the meaning
of the California Environmental Quality Ad of 1970 for the reasons set forth in the
attached 1nitia/ Study.
E. Mitigation measures, iCany, included in the project to avoid potentially significant effects:
None
Date Prepared: September 21, 1998 By:
Date Posted: September 17, 1998
.
File No.: CUP 98~21
CITY OF ARCADIA
240 WEST HUNTINGTON DRIVE
ARCADIA, CA 91007
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
1. Project Title:
Application No. CUP 98-021
2. Project Address:
400 E. Huntington Dr.
Arcadia, ca 91006
3. Project Sponsor's Name, Address & Telephone Number:
BJ's Pizza Grill and Brewety
26131 Marguerite Parkway, Suite A
Mission Viejo, Ca 92692
(949) 367-8616 X101
. 4. Lead Agency Name & Address:
City of Arcadia
Development Services Department
Conununity DevelopmeDt Division / pl~nni"8 Services
240 W. Huntington Drive
P.O. Box 60021
Arcadia, CA 91066-6021
5. Contact Person & Telephone Number:
Candyce Burnett, Assistant Planner
(626) 574-5444
6. General Plan Designation: Commercial
7. Zoning Classification: CPD-I&D I Conunercial Planned DevelopmeDt
.
-1-
CEQA Checlclist
7/95
'.
File No.: CUP 98~2l
.
8. Description of Project:
(Describe the whole action involved, incJudina but nollimited to 1ater phases of the project and BlIY seeondaIy,
llIIppOIt, oroff-sitc features....: 'Y for its implementation. Atlachadditional sbeetsifnN 'j.)
A Conditional Use Pennitto operate a.235 seat restaurant facility.
9. Other public agencies whose approval is required:
(e.g., permits, fiDBlIcing, development or participation~)
City Engineering Division / City Maintenance Services Department / City Water
Division / Los Angeles County Engineer
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The environmental factors checked below would be potentia1ly affected by this project,
involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by
the checklist on the following pages.
[ ] Land Use & Planning [ ] Hazards
[ ] Population & Housing [ ] Noise
. [ ] Geological Problems [ ] Public Services
[ ] Water [ ] Utilities and Service Systems
[ ] Air Quality [ ] Aesthetics
[ ] Transportation / Circu1ation [ ] Cu1tural Resources
[ ] Biological Resources [ ] Resources
[ ] Energy and Mineral Resources [ ] Mandatory Finding of Significance
.
-2-
CEQA Chc:clilist
7/95
.
.
.
'.
DElERMINATION
(To be completed by the Lead Agency)
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
[X] I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on
the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
[ ] I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on
the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the
mitigation measures described 00 an attached sheet have been added to the
project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
[ ] I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the
environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL lMPACf REPORT is
required.
[ ] I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the
environment, but that at least one effect has been adequately analyzed in an
earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards and has been
addressed by mitigation measures based 00 that earlier analysis as descnoed
on attached sheets, and if any remaining effect is a "Potentially Significant
Impact" or "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated, .. an
ENVIRONMENTAL.IMPACf REPORT is required, but it only needs to
analyze the effects that have not yet been addressed.
[ ] I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on
the environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case
because all potentially significant effects have been analyzed adequately in an
earlier Environmental Impact Report pursuant to applicable standards and
have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier ElR, including
revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project.
By: Candyce Burnett, Assistant Planner
For: City of Arcadia
Development Services Department
Community Development Division / Planning Services
(!d2 L'btnA77-
Signature
Date: September 21, 1998
-3-
File No.: CUP 98~2l
CEQA Cbecklist
7/95
.
.
.
'.
File No.: CUP 98~2l
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS:
I. A brief explanation is required for all ai1sWers except "No Impact" answers that are
adequately supported by the infonnation sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses
fOllowing each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced
information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects such as the
one involved (e.g., the project is not within a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer
should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general
standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a
project,specific screening analysis).
2. All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as
on-site, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction
related as well as operational impacts.
3. ''Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect
is significant. If there are one or more, "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the
determination.is made, an Environmental Impact Report is required.
4. "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation
of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a
"Less Than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures,
and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation
measures from Section 17 "Earlier Analyses" may be cross-referenced).
5. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program Environmental
Impact Report, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an
earlier EIR or Negative Declaration {Section 15063(c)(3)(D)}. Earlier analyses are
discussed in Section 17 at the end of the checklist.
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.
4-
CEQA Checklist
7/95
'.
FileNo.: CUP98~21
Potcotia1ly
Si!P'ifirJlut
Potcotially UIIIess Less Than
Sisnificant Mitiption Significant No
Impact iDcoIpotated Impact Impact
.
Would the proposal resu1t in potential impacts involving:
1, LAND USE" PLANNING - Would the proposal:
a) Coo1llct with general plan clesignations or zoning? [ J [ J [J [XI
b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies adopted
by agencies with jurisdiction over the project? [ J [ 1 l 1 [XI
c) Be compatible with existing land uses in the viciniJy? [ J [ J [J [XI
d) Alreet agricultnralresources or operations (e.g., impacts to soils
or f'arml~ntls, or impacts from incompatible land uses)? [ J [ J [J !Xl
e)' Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established
community (including a low-income or minority community)? [ J [ J [J [XI
The proposed l'eStaurant is consistent with the general plan and zoning designations for the area, and will
complement the other.u.sea. The establishment will be subject to all other envlro1l1Mntal plans or policies
adopted by the agenctes with jlU'isdictlon OYer this area, and there are no agricultrual reSO/U'CU or operations
In the vicinity.
.
2. POPULA nON" HOUSING - Would the proposal:
a) Cwnu/alively exceed official regional or local popuIatiOD
projections? [ J [ J [ J
b) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or indirectly
(e.g., through projects in an tmdeveloped area or extension of
~or infrastructure)? [ J [ J [ J
c) DispI8ce existing housing, especially a1fordable housing? [ J [ J [ J
The proposed restaurant will be'in an e:dstlng building and will fWt impact the population or housing.
3. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS - Would the proposal resu1t in or expose peopJe to potential impacts
involving:
a) Fault rupture?
b) Seismic ground .h~1ring?
c) Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction?
d)
e)
T ~nrtclid~ or mudfiows?
[ J
[ J
[ J
[ J
[ )
[ J
[ J
[ J
[ J
[ J
[ J
[ )
[XI
[XI
[XI
!Xl
[XI
!Xl
[XI
Erosion. changes in topography or unstable soil conditions. from
excavation, grading. or fill? [ J [ J [J [XI
f) Subsidence of the land? [ J [ J [J !Xl
g) Expansive soils? [ 1 l 1 [J [XI
h) Unique geologic or physical features? [ J [ J [J [XI
While this entire region is subject to the effects of seismic activity, the subject location has not been
delennined to be especially susceptible toony of the above geologic problems.
4. WATER - Would the proposal result in:
a) Changes in absorption 1lItes, drainage patIen1S, or the rate and
amount of surface runofl'/ [ ) [ ) [ J [XI
b) Exposure of people or property to water reIated hazards such as
flooding? [ J [ ) [ ) [XI
. c) Discharge into surfuce waters or other alteration of surface water
quality (e,g., temperature, dissolved oxygen. or tutbidity)? [ ) [ ) [ ) !Xl
d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any water body? [ ) [ ) [ ) [XI
-5- CEQA Cbecldist 7195
File i'{o;: CUP 98~21
e) Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements?
f) Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct
additions or withdrawals, or through interception of any aquifer by
cuts or excavations or through substantial loss of ground water
reclwge capability?
g) Altered direction or rate of now of ground water?
h) Impacts 10 ground.water quality?
I) Substantial reduction in the amount of ground water otherwise
available for public water supplies? [ ] [ ] [ ]
The J11'Oposed resltnlrant wl/l be In an existing building and wl/l not resulfln any o/the above Impo&ts.
POlelltially
SignifiQllll
Polelltially Unless Less Than
Signifu:anl Mitigation SipiliCBllI No
Impact incoIporaIed Impact Impact
[ ] [ ] [] [X]
.
Would the proposal resultm pot...tlal impacts involvin&:
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[X]
[X]
[X]
[X]
.
5. AIR QUALITY - Would the proposal:
a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute 10 an existi1lg or
projected air quality violation? [ ] [ ] [] [X]
b) Expose sensitive receptors 10 pollutants? [ J [ J [] [X]
c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temp. or cause any change in
climate? [ ] [ ] [] [X]
d) CRate objectionable odors? [ J [ ] [] [X]
The proposed ~estQ1ll'ant will be In an existing building and will be nbjecl to locoI air quality regulatlo/lS as
administered by the South Coast Air Quality Management District
6. TRANSPORTATION & CIRCULATION - Would the proposal n:suIt in:
a) Increased vehicle 1rips or traffic congestion? [ ] [ J [J [X)
b) Hazards 10 safety from design features (e.g.. sharp curves or
dangerous inteIsections) or incompab'ble uses (e.g., Wm equipment)? [] [ ] [] [X]
c) Inadequate emergency acCess or access 10 IIe8Iby uses? [ ] [ ] [] [X]
d) Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off.site? [ ] [ ] [] [X)
e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? [ ] ( ] [] [X)
f) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation
(e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle mcIcs)? [ J [ ] [] (X]
g) Rail, watetborne or air traflic impacts? [ ] [ ] [] [X]
The J11'Oposed resJOlU'ant will be In an aIstlng building and will not result In any 0/ the above impacts.
.
7. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES - Would the proposal n:suIt in impacts to:
a) Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats (including
but not limited to plants, .fish. insects, ~nim~l. and birds)? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
b) Loca1Iy designated species (e.g., heritage trees)? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
c) Loca1Iy designated natural communities (e.g., oak forest, coastaI
habitat, etc.)? [ I [ ] [ I [X]
d) Wetland habitat (e.g., marsh, riparian and vemaI pool)? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? [ I [ ] [ I [X]
The proposed restOllrant wll/ be In analstlng building and wll/ not result In any o/the above ImpaclS.
-6-
CEQA Checldisl 7195
.
Would the proposa1n:su1t in potential impacts involving:
FileNo.: CUP98~21
Potentially
Signifieanl
Potentially Unless Less Than
Significant MitigatiOD Significanl No
Impaet 1ncorpomted Impaet Impaet
8, ENERGY & MINERAL RESOURCES - Would the proposal:
a) ConDict with adopted energy conservation plans? ( I ( I (] (X]
b) Use non.renewable resoun:es in a wasteful and lnefIicient
manner? ( ] ( I (I (X]
c) Rl:sult in the loss of availability of a known minernI resource that
would be of future wlue to the region and the residents of the
State? (I (I (I lXJ
The proposed restaurlJ1lJ wiU be in an existing building and will not result In any of the above Impacts.
.
9. HAZARDS - Would the proposal involve:
a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous 6Ubstances
(including, but not limited to: oil, pestic:ides, chemicals or
radiation)? ( I ( I ( I
b) Possible inlerference with an emergency response plan or
emergency evac:uaIion plan? ( ] ( I ( I
c) The creation of any health bazard or,potential health bazard? ( I ( I ( I
d) Exposure of people to eximng soun;es of potential health hazards? (I ( I ( I
e) Increased fire bazard in areas with fl.mm~hle brush, grass or trees? (] ( I ( I
The proposed restaurant will be In an existing building and will not result in any ol/heabuve Impacts.
lXJ
(X]
[XJ
lXJ
[X]
10. NOISE - Would the proposal result in:
a) Increases in exio:ting noise levels? ( I ( I (I [XJ
b) Exposure ofpeople to severe noise levels? ( ] [ I (I [XJ
The proposed restaurant will be in an existing building and wl/l not resullln any of the above Impacts.
11. PUBLIC SERVICES - Would the proposal have an e1fect upon. or result in a need for new or altered
government services in any of the following areas:
a) FirepIOtec:ti.on? [ I ( I (I [X]
b) Police PIOtec:ti.on? [ I ( I [I (X]
c) Schools? [ I [ I (I (X]
d) lvf~;n,p"'nce ofpublic fildJities, including roads? ( I ( I (I IX]
e) Other governm~nt~1 services? ( I ( I [I [X]
The proposed restaurant will be In an existing building and will not result In any of the above Impacts.
.
12. UTILITIES & SERVICE SYSTEMS - Would the proposal result in a need for new systems or supplies,
or substantial a1teratiODS 10 the foUowing utilities:
a) Power or natura1 gas? I I [ I () [X]
b) Communications systems? ( ) ( J () (X]
c) Local or regional water treatment or distribution fildJities? [ ) [ ) () (X]
d) Sewer or septic tanks? ( ) I ) (I [X]
-7-
CEQA Cbecldist 7/95
.
File No.: CUP 98~21
Potentially
SisnifiCBllI
Potential1y Unless Less Than
Would the proposal n:sult in poteDtia1 impacts involving: SignifiCBllt Mitigation SisnifiCBllI No
Impact Jncorporated Impact Impact
e) Storm water drainage? I ) I ) I ) IX)
t) Solid waste disposal? I ) I ) I ) IX)
g) Local or regional water supplies? I ) I ) I ) [X)
The proposed restaurant will be III an exlstlllg bulldillg and wlllllat reSlllt III 011)I afthe above Impacts.
13. AESTHETICS - Would the proposal:
a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? [ ) [ ] [] [X)
b) Have a deD10DSlIllble negative aesthetics effect? [ ] [ ] [] [X)
c) Create light or glare? [ ] [ ] [J [X)
The proposed restaurant will be III an existlllg bulldlllg and wlllllot reSlllt III 011)I of the above Impacts.
.
14. CULTURAL RESOURCES - Would the proposal:
a) Distwb pl11eontological resources? [ ) I ] [] [X)
b) Disturb atChaeological resources? [ ) [ ) [J [X)
c) Affect historical resouro:s? [ ) [ ) [) IX)
d) Have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect
unique etlmic cultuIal values? [ ) [ ) [J [X)
e) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential
impact area? I ) [ ) [J [X)
The proposed restaIIl'tUlt will be III an exist/llg building and will not result In 011)I of the above Im~ts.
15. RECREATION - Would the proposal:
a) Increase the (l""'~nd for neighborltood or regional parks or other
recreations! fucilities? [ ) [ ) [J [X)
b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? [ ) [ ) [J [X)
The proposed restaurant wI/1 be In an existing bulldillg and will not result In any of the above Im~ts.
.
16. 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, c;luse a fish or wildlife population to drop beIowself-
su..oini01g levels, threaten to elimin~tp a plant or animal
commnnity, rednce the number or restrict the I1lIIge of a rare or
endangered plant or animal or pliminAt~ important examples of the
major periods of California history or prehistory? [ ) [ ) [) [X)
b) Does the project have the potential to achieve short-teIm, to the
disadvantage of long-term. environmental goals? [ ) [ ) [J [X)
c) 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 cumnt projects, and the effects ofprobable future project.). I ) [ ) [) [X)
d) Does the project have environmpnt~1 effects which will c;luse
substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or
indirectly? [ ) [ ) [J [X)
The proposed ,estatJl'ant wi/1 be In an existing building and will not result in any of the above Im~ts.
-8-
CEQA CMcklist 7195
.
.
.
Would the proposal result in potential impacts involving:
File No.: CUP 98~21
Potentially
Significant
Potentially Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact 1ncmporatcd Impact Impact
17, EARLIER ANALYSES
No earlier analyses, and no additional documents were referenced pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or
other CEQA processes to analyze the proposal.
-9-
CEQA ChecklisI 7/95
.
"
"1
~
\
File No. (!UO
,
9& - 0.2-1
CITY OF ARCADIA
240 WEST HUNTINGTON DRIVE
ARCADIA, CA 91007
ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION FORM
Date. Filed:
General Information
.
1.
Applicant's Name:
Chica~o Pizza & Brewery. Inc.
. Address: 26131 MarRUerite Parkway, Suite A Mission Viejo, CA 92692
2.
Property Address (Location):
400 Huntington Drive
Assessor's Number:
~773-CJI,- 050
3. Name, address and telephone number of person to be contacted concerning this project:
Alain Bally Associates 4510 E. Pacific Coast Hwy., Suite 100 Long Beach 90804
(562) 597-5737 fax (562) 498-1169 Alain Bally or Margaret Taylor
4.
List and describe any other related permits and other public approvals required for this
project, including those required by city, regional, state and federal agencies:
State Alcoholic Beverage Control Board
5.
Zone Classification:
CPD-l
6. General Plan Designation: Planned Development - 1
Proiect Description
10.
ell.
12.
13.
7.
Proposed use of site (project description): Restaurant at an existing site.
Services
will include the sale for on-site consumption of a full line of alcoholic beverages,
as well as an on-site microbrew~ry. Hours: 11a~-11pm M-TH, Ilam-12a~ F,Sat, l1a~-
10p~ Sun. 230 patrons
8.
No change (conunercial center)
Site size:
9.
Square footage per building:
7371 square feet
Number of floors of construction:
one (tenant improvement onlv)
Amount of off-street parking provided:
735 spaces in center, code required available
Proposed scheduling of project:
one phase
Anticipated incremental development:
nonp
14.
.
-")
"'
If residential, include the number of units, schedule of unit sizes, range of sale prices or
rents, and type of household sizes expected:
N/A
15. If commercial, indicate the type, i.e. neighborhood, city or regionally oriented, square
footage of sales area, and ioading facilities, hours of operation:
7371 floor area, loading does ..not apply, hours stated on project description.
city-oriented. as with any restaurant existing in ..the area.
16. If industrial, indicate type, estimated employment per shift, and loading facilities:
N/A
17. If institutional, indicate the major function, estimated employment per shift, estimated
occupancy, loading facilities, and community benefits to be derived from the project
N/A
18.
.
If the project involves a variance, conditional use permit or zoning application, state this
and indicate clearly why the application is required:
Conditional tlse Permit lor alcohol sa~es.
Are the following items applicable to the project or its effects? Discuss below all items checked yes
(attach additional sheets as necessary).
19.
20.
21.
11.
23.
.
YES NO
Change in existing features of any hills, or substantial alteratin of ground
contours.
o
1231
Change in scenic views or vistas from existing residential areas or public
lands or roads.
o
l8J
Change in pattern, scale or character of general area of project.
o
o
~
Significant amounts of solid waste or litter.
181
~
Change in dust, ash, smoke, fumes or odorsin vicinity.
o
E.I.R.
3/95
-:-2-
.24.
'1
-...
YES NO
Change in ground water quality or quantity, or alteration of existing
drainage patterns.
o
~
25.
Substantial change in existing noise or vibration levels in the vicinity.
o
o
~
26.
Is site on filled land or on any slopes of 10 percent or more.
~
27.
Use or disposal of potentially hazardous materials, such as toxic substances,
flammable or explosives.
o
lEI
28.
Substantial change in demand for municipal services (police, fire,water,
sewage, etc.).
o
~
29.
Substantial increase in fossil fuel consumption (electricity, oil, natural gas,
etc.).
o
~
30.
Relationship toa larger project or series of projects.
o
~
Environmental SettinJ?;
,AS1. Describe (on a separate sheet) the project site as it exists before the project, including
. information on topography, soil stability, plants and animals, any cultural, historical or
scenic aspects, any existing structures on the site, and the use of the structures. Attach
photographs of the site. Snapshots or Polaroid photos will be accepted. pli OTO~ S NC.(... oSE.."\) ,
No CHIIN(,E /)THe~ ITf5lYf.
32. Describe (on a separate sheet) the surrounding properties, including information on plants,
animals, any cultural, historical or scenic aspects. Indicate the type of land uses (residential,
commercial, etc.), intensity of land use (one-family, apartment houses, shops, department
stores, etc.), and scale of development (height, frontage, set-backs, rear yards, etc.). Attach
photographs of the vicinity. Snapshots or Polaroid photos will be accepted.
SIiI5 IJrnlc.H6'D rINbINc.S Alii))
Certification l' ;I OT 0.1' .
I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the data
and information required for this initial evaluation to the best of my ability, and that the facts,
statements, and information presented are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.
~/~qJ ~} C
Date atu
.
E.l.R.
3/95
-3-