HomeMy WebLinkAbout1573
. .
. RESOLUTION NO. 1573
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CONDmONAL USE PERMIT
NO. CUP 98-014 TO OPERATE A 1,600 SQ. Fr. ICE CREAM PARLOR
WITH SEATING FOR 22 PEOPLE AT 145 E. FOOTHILL BLVD.
.
.
WHEREAS, on June 8, 1998, an application was filed by Bryan Tungseth of Express
Permits on beha1fofBaskin-Robbins to operate a 1,600 sq. ft. ice cream parlor with seating for
22 people within an existing shopping center; Development Services Department Case No.
CUP 98-014, at 145 E. Foothill Blvd., more particularly described as follows:
A portion of Lot 9 of Tract 23972 in the City of Arcadia, County of
Los Angeles, State of California, as per Map recorded in Book 748,
Pages 63,64 & 65 of Maps, in the Office of said County Recorder.
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on July 14, 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 RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. That the t8ctua1 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 the Conditional Use Permit will not be detrimental to the
public health or welfare, nor injurious to the propeIty or improvements in the 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 subject propeIty is designated for commercial use in the General Plan,
that the proposed use is consistent with that designation, and that the granting of the
Conditional Use Permit will not adversely affect the comprehensive general plan.
.
.
.
.
.
6. That the evaluation of the environmental impacts as set forth in the initial study are
appropriate and that the project will have no significant effect upon the environment within the
meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, and, when considering the
project as a whole, there was no evidence before the City that the proposed project would have
any potentially adverse effect on wildlife resources or the habitat upon which wildlife depends,
and therefore, a Negative Declaration should be approved.
SECTION 3. That for the foregoing reasons this Commission approves Conditional
Use Permit No. CUP 98-014 to operate a 1,600 sq. ft. ice cream parlor with seating for
22 people within an existing shopping c:enter at 145 E. Foothill Blvd., subject to
the following conditions:
1. The ice cream parlor and the site shall be operated and maintained in a manner that
is consistent with the proposal and plans submitted and approved for CUP 98-014.
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. Provision of a grease interceptor if ice cream is to be manufactured on-site.
b. Installation ora Knox-box with keys in conformance with UFC Section 902.4.
c. Installation of Quick Response Fire Sprinkler heads.
d. For this occupancy, a separate tire .f1ow switch shall be installed and shall be
connected to the shopping center's Fire Alarm Panel with separate zoning.
3. Water services shall be provided to the satisfaction of the Arcadia Water Division
including the submittal of a Water Meter Clearance Application to ensure adequate water
meter and service size.
4. Approval of CUP 98-014 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.
S. All conditions of approval shall be complied with prior to the installation of seating
at this ice cream parlor. Noncompliance with the plans, provisions and conditions of
CUP 98-014 shall be grounds for immediate suspension or revocation of any approvals, which
could result in removal ofthe seating.
-2-
1573
.
.
6 SECTION 4. The decision, findings, and conditions of approval contained in this
Resolution ceflectthe Planning Commission's action ofJuly 14, 1998, by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioners Bruckner, Huang. Murphy and Kalemkiarian
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioner Sleeter
SECTION S. The Secretary sha1l certifY to the adoption of this Resolution and sha1l
cause a copy to be forwarded to the City Council of the City of Arcadia,
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution No. 1573 was adopted at
a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on July 28, 1998, by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioners Bruckner, Huang, Murphy & Kalemkiarian
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: Commissioner Sleeter
.
C .
City 0
anning Commission
ATIEST:
~~
City of Arcadia
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
!!I:J:Ila~
City of Arcadia
.
-3-
1573
.
.
.
.
STAFF REPORT
DEVELOPMrnNTSERVICESDEPARTMENT
July 14, 1998
TO: Chairman and Members of the Arcadia City Planning Commission
FROM: Donna Butler, Conununity Development Administrator
By: James M. Kasama, Associate Planner
SUBJECT: Conditional Use Pennit No. CUP 98-014
A proposed ice cream parlor at 145 E. Foothill Blvd.
SUMMARY
This Conditional Use Permit application was submitted by-Bryan Tungseth ofE"Press Pennits
on behalf of Baskin-Robbins to operate a 1,600 sq. ft. ice cream parlor with seating for 22
people, within the existing shopping center at 145 E. Foothill Blvd. The Development
Services Department is reconunending approval subject to the conditions listed in this report.
GENERAL INFORMATION
APPLICANT: Bryan Tungseth of Express Permits on behalf of Baskin-Robbins
LOCATION: In the VonslSav-On shopping center at 145 E. Foothill Blvd.
REQUEST: A Conditional Use Permit and a related parking modification to allow
seating for 22 people within a 1,600 sq. ft. ice cream parlor.
SITE AREA: 5.25 acres
FRONTAGES: 617.67 ft. along Foothill Blvd. and 451.76 ft. along Second Ave.
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Conunercial
EXISTING LAND USE & ZONING:
The site is improved with 66,200 sq. ft. of conunercial space with
327 parking spaces. The property is zoned C-l: Limited Commercial.
SURROUNDING LAND USES & ZONING:
North: Single-family residential- zoned R-I
South: Conunercial- zoned C-2
East: Single-family residential & retail- zoned R-l & C-2, respectively
West: Santa Anita Wash - not zoned
.
.
. BACKGROUND
The subject shopping center was built in the mid-1960s with 290 parking spaces. The
McDonald's Restaurant and Bank of America are on separate parcels, but their parking crosses
over the property lines. The total number of parking spaces currently available for all three
properties is 327 spaces.
PROPOSAL &. ANALYSIS
.
The applicant is proposing to add seating for 22 people to a 1,600 sq. ft. ice cream parlor in
one of the retail shops between the two anchor tenants, as shown on the submitted site plan.
A take-out only ice cream shop would be <Xlnsidered a retail use that would not require a
Conditional Use Pennit, and would be <Xlnsidered in <Xlmpliance with the parking
requirements. However, the addition of seats to any food sales establishment triggers the CUP
requirement, and increases the parking requirement to 20 spaces per 1,000 gross square feet
for such a use. The proposed 5epting results in a requirement of 24 additional parking spaces
for the subject ice cream parlor.
Based on current parking requirements for each of the individual uses in the shopping center,
including this proposal, there should be a total of 434 on-site parking spaces. Therefore, there
is an overall deficiency of 59 spaces. The proposed mix of uses, their current parking
requirements, and the deficiencies are shown in the following table:
ProDosed Mix orUses and Current Parkin!! Reauirements
Approx. Cunent Cunent
Size Parking Parking Parking
~ of Use in sa. It Reouirement Allocated. Deficiencv Notes
Retail Uses 53,200 266 244 22 Legal-nllDCOllforming
Fast Food (KFC &. McD) 4,800 48 48 0 Conforming by CUPs
Bank 6,600 40 27 13 Legal-rl(mconforming
Ice Cream Parlor 1.600 32 8 Z4 CUP 98-014
Totals 66,200 434 327 59
.Based on the use's shan: of the 327 parking spa= currently available (ie., 4.56 spa= per 1,000 sq. It)
.
With the Baskin-Robbins, this shopping center will be fully occupied. A review of the current
parking situation by staff indicates that this proposal will not result in a parking problem.
The applicant <Xlnducted the attached parking counts during the first week: of June. The
highest <Xlunt was 203 occupied parking spaces at 5:00 p.m. on Wednesday, June 3n1, and the
lowest was 108 occupied spaces at 11:00 a.m. on Thursday. The average count was
141 occupied parking spaces. Staff's observations concur with the applicant's survey. Since
.
.
.
this proposal is limited to an ice cream parlor, the addition of seating to this food sales
establishment should not result in a parking problem.
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 any substantial or potentially substantial adverse change in any of the physical
conditions within the area affected by the project including land, air, water, minerals, flora,
fauna, ambient noise and objects of historical or aesthetic significance. 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 98-014 subject to the following conditions:
I. The ice cream parlor and the site shall be operated and maintained in a manner that is
consistent with the proposal and plans submitted and approved for CUP 98-014.
. 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. Provision of a grease interceptor ifice cream is to be manufactured on-site.
b. Installation of a Knox-box with keys in conformance with UFC Section 902.4.
c. Installation of Quick Response Fire Sprinkler heads.
d. For this occupancy, a separate fire flow switch shall be installed and shall be connected
to the shopping center's Fire Alarm Panel with separate zoning.
3. Water services shall be provided to the satisfaction of the Arcadia Water Division
including the submittal of a Water Meter Clearance Application to ensure adequate water
meter and service size.
4. Approval of CUP 98-014 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.
S. All conditions of approval shall be complied with prior to the installation of seating at this
ice cream parlor. Noncompliance with the plans, provisions and conditions of
CUP 98-014 shall be grounds for immediate suspension or revocation of any approvals,
. which could resu1t in removal of the seating.
CUP 98-014
luly 14, 1998
Page 3
.
.
. FINDINGS AND MOTIONS
Aporoval
If the Planning 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 Commi$Sion.
Denial
If the Planning Commission intends to deny this application, the Commission should move for
denial and direct staff to prepare a resolution incorporating the Commission's decision and
supporting findings.
.
If a Planning Commissioner, or any other interested party has any questions or comments
regarding this matter prior to the July 14th public hearing, please contact Associate Planner,
TIID Ka~~m" at (626) 574-5445.
Appro\'
/'
~LB_
Community Development Administrator
Attachments: Plans
Vicinity MapÈParking Survey
Negative Declaration & Initial Study
.
CUP 98-014
July 14, 1998
Page 4
.
--r=-=---~--
\-."-' .
\
\
\ Ji3>=
I
I
9
t:
I
I
,
~I\
I-~
.-
~~,.". ~- --:
~
ti -
;.:-, (.) u_
I ~
,,,,.
. .
. -. 'l-~~ -== - - - - ~-=-=-~~~ :=;11 I
.--.--. III
VONS lAARKET
...... /" I
'- ,,1
'-.~- /'1'"
... ,..... ~
~ ./ to
..(,jY \').
....... ,./ I
....... ,/ r
'-- '/1
\\\~\\\'C_-3\\\\~\\\ \ \ ~ ~:
~~ W#lmA r
SftOPS
C':t
~
Ot
,
(:)
.....
~
'~OJlm~
~~ ~
I ~
I ::::::
~
,.............
t/
/ / ~ ~
i
8
FOOn/ILL
BOULEVARD
SAil ON DRUG. STORE
.
.J
.
~
/
/.-'
-~
Q~l..
,/
/'
&ANk
.........
-::;::.:
/"r'"'"
/"
'}~Ij' .J
- .'
~
--
l~
"
I ~
I
Ilg
1'1 __
I I _~ ~
V1 I ~
W "
~ I
I
I
"
I
"
lIS
--
.......
SALES
POINT CAKE: DLSR.AY AREA ""
CJ'SAlE
.
.
~
e
I:l
!
I
w
\.2
~
€;I
~
~
w
V1
.
SERVICE
I
---...-------1
I I
I
CAIIt m:P AAfA I
I
I
I
~-
,;
"
,
STORAGE
o
~.,.
..-- ..
,," ",
, ,
, . ,
t WC>>.OI'S ADA \
I """""'" I
: REST'ROOM /
, ,
, -'
.....~--_..
,';
,':
I
<-
.
O.!~~~1~:!!~~!~!F~.
.
s:
8-
.......
g-:- ~
..- ...-
.....
S~
g--
-=- -=-
"
OFFICE
20 APR 98
REFERENCE
6
NORTH
8YCAMORIt
~~.. ~ ~ I .~"
."aM l 0 r'~
II" ili !l:ru~
_" I ..- :'llg:
f 0 ~\~~
~ _~.. ~;lf [.-~~-
o rq ~ 0ta
l-a I---~--
t..,:a\, -
if ";f' I) 9 l<. ~ :
;: ~ ~ ~ ;
: ,t J G ,
#HI """l~ i: f1pI I~o."'"
.
'0,.
..
,.
",.-
.
'IS' Ii-V
3. b --~l
1-____
~. 1
",--,-~
1-----
rI,::
kI~:
~ lIiGj: u
( I!"
I ,,-It:
~ 'j/'
"
.
~ \
;;r
\ \'
..~ \ \\-
.
('U' (l4,A- .1 ..'
.... ......T.t ;0..
- ... .- ('14'
, . , . .
. -r H IlI-\ C T
~ .. _:.
'.. ..~
, .,'
AVE.
(...) ti:"., 01"
.
l N~ OJ ! 5
,." ~~
-.
...
\ ~~
l" '("
~
~ ~
l" 'WI
...
l"
;.
FOOTHILL
~ ~'.I
t! I
~A'w~ .
l!'" :...._~_A\
~_ '''l.~
1 ~
iA~~~I-T p;
..
.. tf. .,
!;e T R AC Tt~::J.,
~; 38964 -
~.... ~n~" ..--.J
= [~~;
;: ~L~' 634QT~1
iii
>
~
}.
--_.:.
f:
--f
.~
,i
!l
~~'" iJ3 ",... ...... tl
\. ~:T~ C;[ ;L-,,~':--~
~ t~~ V---I=~.r ~
..,~ ),... !~=';T--"-~
. \.'1 -""'~ -
.
.
,
..
II
1&Ii l_
A' ~ ~'.
~ji'!-: 1.
=
" 'c "
. ''c. ,
, ... ,
..
..
0
., 0 II Baak
u
. ::II
- ' -- .. ...
BLVD.
, I"" I':' I""" IAl' -..
~ :1 . ~I\F}.r{j ~illLLi , ~
......; ._ I _ 1_'1'"': _ I..
nil" n 10
:i " " .. W .. " ~ ..
~ NO, ~
CI .
!jl_ ':t' ~ 1'1' 1?'11Y ,'!rPIJl"I'.
UIlJREl.
"al.I.Ao ',Ao ~1..c.l1 ....
10 B_ H
It 7 7 2 3
"0 ., , " A J '2
1l___!II ... "'Jo .1.;41....-.
VICINITY MAP
145 E. Foothill Blvd.
CUP 98-014
.
'\ &;;; ,;:;.
.
~ ~
__.!2CL.._..
J ~ ,~
I' ''''
f~--
. T. j
. - ~
1
."
,~
)
.v . IA ...
.
.. .i w
I ~~ _ "
I"" .. ..
17 .. 19
~
1=_1"1:
-
.. " II
-.. - ..
0 ..." .. .
:z.
0 IA . ..
U
""
DO 1~JW1 ,,:,,14011
rl.ORAl..1
t NORTH
Scale: 1 inch = 200 feet
.
.
.
Parking Lot Survey For Baskin Robbins
145 E. Foothill Blvd
The parking lot for Parce1#5771-021-029 has a total of '327 parking spaces that
provides parking for 15 retail stores. The following is a survey of occupied parking
spaces at hours of operation on the dates of 06/0 1/98 through 06/05/98.
Monday - At 3:00p.m. there were 152 spaces filled.
At 4:00p.m. there were 186 spaces filled.
Tuesday - At 12:0Op.m. there were 129 spaces filled..
At 1 :OOp.m. there were 110 spaces filled
. Wednesday - At 5:00p.m. there were 203 spaces filled.
At 6:00p.m. there were 155 spaces filled
Thursday - At 10:00am. there were 116 spaces.filled.
At 11:00a.m. there were 108 spaces filled
Friday - At I :OOp.m.. there were 117 spaces filled.
At 2:00p.m. there were 135 spaces filled
Please call if you have any questions or comments
Ary--~ 'l~~
,
-EXPRF.SS PERMITS
('$10) .3Z6 - '300
.
.
.
.
.
.
FileNo.: CUP98~14
CITY OF ARCADIA
240 WEST HUNTINGTON DRIVE
ARCADIA, CA 91007
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
A. Tide and Description of ProJect:
Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 98-014: A Conditional Use Permit and related parking
modification to allow seating for 22 people at a 1,600 sq. ft. ice cream parlor,
B. Location of Project:
145 E. Foothill Blvd. in the.Vons/Sav-Qn Shopping Center
C. Name of Applitant or Sponsor:
Baskin-Robbins
c/o Express Permits
1327 Post Avenue, suite H
Torrance. CA 90501
Contact: Bryan Tungseth - (310) 328-6300
D. Finding:
This project will have no significant effect upon the environment within the meaning of the
California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 for the reasons set forth in the attached Initial
Study.
E. Mitigation measures. if any. included in the project to avoid potentially significant effects:
None
Date Prepared: June 12, 1998
Date Posted: June 18, 1998
ciate Planner
.
.
~
.
.
CITY OF ARCADIA
240 WEST HUNTINGTON DRIVE
ARCADIA, CA 91007
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
1. Project Tide:
Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 98-014
2. Project Address:
145 E. Foothill Blvd.. City of Arcadia, County of Los Angeles
In the Vons/Sav-On shopping center
3. Project Sponsor's Name, Address & Telephone Number:
Baskin-Robbins
do Express Permits
1327 Post Avenue, suite H
Torrance, CA 90501
Contact: Bryan Tungseth - (310) 328-6300
4. Lead Agent)' Name & Address:
City of Arcadia - Development Services Department
Community Development Division - Planning Services
240 W. Huntington Drive
Post Office Box 60021
Arcadia, CA 91066-6021
5. Lead Agent)' Contact Person & Telephone Number:
James M Kasama, Associate Planner - (626) 574-5445
6. General Plan Designation:
Commercial
7. Zoning Classification:
C-1: Limited Commercial
-1-
FileNo.: CUP 98~14
CEQACheddist 7195
I
.
,
.
.
File No.: CUP 9~14
8. Description of Project:
(Describe the whole action involved. including but not limited to later phases of the projeQ and any secondaJy,
support, or off-site features 1'_.')' for its implementation. Atlachadditional sheets ifnec:ess8lY.)
A Conditional Use Permit and related parking modification to allow seating for 22 people
at a 1.600 sq. ft. ice cream parlor.
9. Other public agencies whose approval is required:
(e.g., permits, fin~nclng, cIevelopment or participation agreements)
City Building Services 8r. Fire Prevention Bureau, and the County Health Dept. must
review and approve the plans for the tenant improvements.
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.
[ ] Land Use 8r. Planning
[ ] Population &. Housing
[ ] Geological Problems
[ ] Water
[ ] Air Quality
[ ] Transportation I Circulation
[ ] Biological Resources
[ ] Energy and Mineral Resources
[ ] Hazards
[ ] Noise
[ ] Public Services
[ ] Utilities and Service Systems
[ ] Aesthetics
[ ] Cultural Resources
[ ] Resources
[ ] Mandatory Finding of Significance
-2-
CEQA Clulcklist 7195
.
.
FileNo.: CUP98~14
.
DETERMINATION
(To be comp1etAld by tbc 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 the mitigation
measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project.
A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
[] lfind that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment,
and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACf 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 dAndards and has been addressed by mitigation
measures based on that earlier analysis as descn"bed 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 EIR, including revisions or mitigation
mea51Jres that are imposed upon the proposed project.
By: James M. Kasama. Associate Planner
For: The City of Arcadia - Development Services Department
~ 7/?~
-
Date: June 12,1998
.
-3-
CEQACbecklisl 7195
.
.
.
.
.
FileNo.: CUP98~14
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS:
I. A brief explanation is required for all answers 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).
S. 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 IS063(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 infonnation
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-
CEQACbecklist 7195
.
.
FileNo.: CUP9~14
.
PoIadialIy
Significant
Polelltially Unless Less Than
S,8";I1....., MitigaliOD Significant No
Impact In.u.l''''.a..I Impacl Impact
Would tbc proposal RSUlt in potenIiaI impacts involoins:
1. LAND USE & PLANNING - Wouhi the proposal:
a) Conflict with general plan designations or ZODing? [ ] [ ) [J [X)
b) Cont1ict with applicable environmeDIal plans or policies adopted
by agem;ies with jurisdiction over the project? [ ] [ ] [] [X)
c:) Be c:ompatible with ...n<ting land uses in the vIc:inlty? [ ] [ ] [] [X)
d) Affect agrIc:ultural n:sources or opemtions (e.g.. i'llpacts to soils
or farmlAnd" or impacts ftom inc:ompatible land uses)? [ ] [ ] [] [X)
e) Disrupt or divide the physic:al arranU"'~nt of an established
community (inc:1uding a low-inc:ome or minority community)? [ ] [ ) [] [X)
The proposed ice cream parlor is coosistent with the general plan and zoning designations for the area, and
will c:omp1ement the 0Iher uses in the shopping center, The est.wlidnn_ will be subject to all 0Iher
envi!Onmp"'A' plans or polic:ies adopted by the llV"ci"$ with jurisdiction over this area, and there are no
agric:ultural n:sources or operations in the vIc:inlty.
2. POPULATION & HOUSING - Would the JUo........:
a) l'lItnUIAtive!y exceed official regional or loc:al population
projec:tions? [ ] [ ] [J [X)
b) Induce subslaDtiaI growth in an mea either cIirectly or indiIectly
(e.g., through projects in an undeveloped mea or extension of
mqjor infmstruc:ture)? [ ) [ ) [J [X)
. c:) Disp1ac:e existing bon,,;ng, ~Ally affordable housing? [ ) [ ) [J [X)
The proposed ice cream parlor will be in an enoting retnil c:omp1ex and will not impact the population or
Itnncing
3. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS - Would the proposal result in or
expose people to potential impac:ts involving:
a) Faultruptun:?
b) !W....i~ ground .bAldng?
c:) Seismic: ground fiillwe, inc:Iuding lilJ'".fl",riOll?
d)
e)
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
I _ddicles or nwdflows'l
[ )
[ )
[ I
[ ]
[ )
[ )
[ )
[ ]
[X)
[X)
[X)
[X)
Erosion. "bAnge< in topography or unstable soil conditions ftom
exc:avation, grading. or fill? [ ) [ ) [J [X)
f) Subsidence of the land? [ ) [ ) [J [X)
g) Expansive soils? [ ) [ ) [J [X)
b) Unique geologic: or pbyslc:al features? [ ] [ ] [J [X)
The subject loc:ation is within the Raymond Hill Earthquake Fault 7mIe and is subject to the provisions of the
Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act. Nevertheless, this entire region is subject to the effects of
seismic: activity. and the subject ]"""t;n'l bas not been determined to be otherwise ~Ally susceptible to any
of the above geologic: problems.
.
4. WATER - Would the proposalresu1t in:
a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns. or the rate and
amount of surllIc:e runoff? [ )
b) Exposure of people or JhO~ty to water re1ated hazards such as
flooding? [ )
-S-
[ )
[ )
[ )
[ ]
[X)
[X)
CEQA CbecIdist 7/95
.
.
FileNo.: CUP9~14
.
Would tbc proposal RSUlt in poteotial impal:ts involoins:
Potentially
Significant
PoIadialIy Unless Less Thmt
Si8";r;""nt MitigatiOD Significant No
Impact Inl:orporatecI Impact Impoct
c) Discharge inIo surface waters or other alteration of surface waler
quality (e.g., temperature, dissolved oxygen, or twbidity)? [ ) [ ] [] [X)
cI) f'hA"ll"" In the amount of surface waler In any waler body? [ ] [ ] [] [X)
e) Changes In currents, or the course or dim:tion of waler movements? [] [ ] [] [X)
f) Change In the quantity of ground waters, either through direct
additions or withdrawals, or through interception of any aquifer by
cuts or exl:lMItions or through snMt9nt;91 loss of ground waler
recharge capability? [ ) [ ] [] [X)
g) Altered dim:tion or rate of now of ground water? [ ] [ ] [] [X)
h) Impacts 10 ground waler quality? [ ] [ ] [] [X)
i) SI.'VnntiAI recluction In the amount of ground water otherwise
available for public waler supplies? [ ] [ ] [] [X)
The proposed ice cream parlor will be In an eYiotlng retail complex and is within the Santa Anita Dam
Inundation Area, but will not result In an increased potential for any of the above impacts.
.
S. AIR QUALITY - Would the proposal:
a) Violate any air quality standard or c:onlribute 10 an eYiotlng or
projected air quality violation? [ ] [ ] [] [X)
b) Expose sensitive receptors 10 pollulan1s? [ ] [ ] [] [X)
c) Alter air movement, IDllistwe, or temp. or cause any change In
climate? [ ] [ I [] [X)
d) CRate objecrionnble odors? [ ] [ ] [] [X)
The proposed ice cream parlor will be In an existing retail complex and will be subject 10 local air quality
regulations as administered by the South Coast Air Quality Management District.
6. TRANSPORTATION & CIRCULATION - Would the proposal result In:
a) Increased vehicle hips or 1ralIic congestion? [ ] [ ] [] [X)
b) Hazards 10 safety from design features (e.g., sharp cwves or
dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? [] [ ] [] [X)
c) Inadequate emergency access or access 10 nemby uses? [ ] [ ] [] [X)
d) Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site? [ ] [ ] [] [X)
e) HazardsorbarriersforpedestriansorbicycUsts? [ ] [ ] [] [X)
f) C41'mc:ts with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation
(e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? [ ] [ ] [] [X)
g) Rail, wateIbome or air traffic irnpnNs? [ ] [ ] [] [X)
The proposed ice cream parlor will be In an el<istiltg retail complex. The inclusion of on-site seating will not
result In increased vehicle hips or 1ralIic congestion, and will not result In any of the above impacts.
.
7. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES - Would the proposal result In impacts 10:
a) Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats (including
but not limited 10 plan1s, fish, insects, Ani""". and birds)? [ ]
b) Loc:alIy (IecigJ"ntPll species (e.g., heritage trees)? [ ]
c) Loc:alIy designated natural comm.mlt;ies (e.g., oak forest, coastal
habilal. etc.)? [ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ 1
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[X)
[X)
[X)
-6-
CEQA Cbecldist 7195
.
.
.
.
.
FileNo.: CUP 98~14
Poteolially
Significant
Polenlially Unless Less Than
Would the proposal result in potential impacts invol.ms: Si8"ifiCRJ1t MitigaliOD Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
d) Wetland habitat (e.g., matSb, riparian and vemaJ pool)? [ ] [ ) [) [X)
e) Wildlife dispersal or migration IXII1idim? [ ] [ ) [] [X)
The proposed ice cream parlor will be in an existing retail complex and will not result in any of the above
impacts.
8. ENERGY & MINERAL RESOURCES - Would the proposal:
a) Conflict with adopted energy CODSerVBtion plans? [ ] [ ] [] [X)
b) Use IIllII-reoewable resources in a wasteful and j""fficl....t
IIIBIlIIe/"1 [] [] [] [X)
c) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that
would be of tiJtun: valoe to Ihe region and Ihe resicleots of the
State? [] [) [] [X)
The proposed ic:e cream parlor will be in an existing retail complex and will not result in any of the above
imp"cls.
9. HAZARDS - Would the proposal involve:
a) A risk of accihntal explosion or release of bazaIdous S/.Mtan"""
(including. but not limited to: oil. posticitleol. ,,"""'i~l. or
radiation)? [ ] [ ] [] [X)
b) Possible iDll:Jfereoce with an emergew;y n:spoose plan or
emergew;y evawation plan? [ ] [ ] [] [X)
c) The creation of any health hazard or poteDtial bealth hazard? [ ] [ ] [] [X)
d) Exposure of people 10 existing soun:es of potential health ba7ards? [] [ ] [] [X)
c) Iocreased fire hazard in areas with f1ammah1e brush, grass or trees? [] [ ] [] [X)
The proposed ice cream parlor will be in an existing retail complex and will DOl result in any of the above
i"'Pl'l'\9
10. NOISE - Would the proposal result in:
a) Ioa'eases in existing noise levels? [ ) [ ) [] [X)
b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? [ ] [ ) [) [X)
The proposed ice cream parlor will be in an existing retail complex and will DOl result in any of the above
impacts
11. PUBUC SERVICES - Would the proposal bave an eft'ect upon. or result in a need for new or altered
govemmeotservices in any of the following areas:
a) Fire protectioo? [ ] [ I [) [X)
b) Police protection? [ ] [ ) [] [Xl
c) Schools? [ ] [ ) [] [X)
d) Maint...."""" ofpubJic facilities, indntl;ng roads? [ ] [ ) [] [X)
e) Other govemmental services? [ ] [ ] [] [X)
The proposed ice cream parlor will be in an existing retail complex and will not result in any of the above
impacts.
-7-
CEQAChecklist 7195
~
.
.
.
.
File No.: CUP ~14
Would the proposal RSUlt in potential impacts involoins:
Potentially
SigJIifil"Ant
Potentially Unless Less Than
Significant MitigaliOD S;8"ifi.....' No
Impact lDcorporatfd Impact Impact
11. UTILITIES & SERVICE SYSTEMS - Would the proposa1
result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substaDtial alteraliODS
to the followiDg utilities:
a) Power or natural gas? [ ] [ ] [] [X]
b) CommunicatiODS systems? [ ) [ ] [] [X]
c) Local or regional water trP.Atm""\ or distribution facilities? [ ] [ ] [] [X]
d) Sewer or septic tanks? [ ] [ ] [] [X]
e) Storm water drainage? [ ) [ ) [] [X]
f) Solid waste d;o;pn<Al? [ ] [ ] [] [X]
g) Local or regional water supplies? [ ) [ ] [] [X]
The proposed ice cream parlor will be in an existing retail complex and will not. result in any of the above
impads.
13. AESTHETICS - Would the proposa1:
a) Affect a scenic visla or scenic highway? [ J [ ) [) [X]
b) Have a demoDSlrllble negative P~hetiCli effect? [ J [ ] [J [X]
c) Create 1igbI or glare? [ J [ ) [) [X]
The proposed ice cream parlor will be in an existing retail COII1plex and will not result in any of the above
impads.
14. CULTURAL RESOURCES - Would the proposal:
a) Disbub paleontological resoun:es'7 [ ) [ ) [) [X]
b) Disbub ardIaeological resoun:es? [ J [ ) [) [X]
c) Affect bislOrica1 resoun:es'7 [ ] [ ] [] [X]
d) Have the potential to cause a physical cbange which would affect
unique ethnic cultural values? [ ] [ ] [] [X]
e) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential
Impact area? [ J [ J [J [X]
The proposed lee cream parlor will be in an Mri.,;ng retail complex and will. DOl result in any of the above
impacts
15. RECREATION - Would the proposal:
a) lncrease the demand for neigbborhoocI or regional paIks or other
recreational facilities? [ J [ J [] [X]
b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? [ J [J . [J [X]
The proposed iQ: cream parlor will be in an e><i.,;ng retail complex and will DOl result in any of the above
l"'P"cts
16. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
a) Does the project bave the pcltl'nt;JlI to degrade the quality of the
enviroJlJllCllt, lllJP:tAnti.lly reduce the habilat of a fish or wildlife
species. cause a fish or wildlife popu1aIion to drop below self.
sucm;n;ng 1eveIs, threaten to eHm;note a plant or animal
community, reduce the number or restrict the mnge of a IlIIll or
-8-
CEQACbeckIist 7195
. . File No.: CUP ~14
PoteoIia11y
Significant
. PoteoIia11y Unless Less Than
Would theproposalRSUlt in p"'''''I;al impacts involoins: S;8"ifi,,,p' MitigaliOD Significant No
Impact Inoorporated Impact Impact
","IAIIgl"'Cd plant or animal or elimino", important examples of the
lIIllior periods of California history or prehislory? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
b) Does the project bave the potential 10 achieve short-term, 10 the
disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? [ I [ ] [ ] [X]
c) Does the project bave i"lpll<;f1l that are individually limited, but
cumnlatively O()t1<iderable? ("Cumulatively amsiderable" means
that the incremental effects of a project are consiclemble when
viewed in connection with the effects of past projects. the effects of
other cunent projects, and the effects ofprobable future project.) [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
d) Does the project bave environmental effects which will cause
substantial adverse effects on buman beings, either direct1y or
indirectly'1 [ ] [ ] [ I [XJ
The proposed ice cream parlor will be in an exicti'lg retail complex and will not n:suIt in any of the above
impacts.
17. EARLIER ANALYSES
No earlier analyses, and no additional d","nmenls were referenced pursuant 10 the tiering, progJlllll EIR. or
other CEQA processes to analyze the proposal.
.
.
-9-
CEQA Cheddist 7/95
.
FileNO,~,P ~<f-{)\4
CITY OF ARCADIA
240 WEST HUNTINGTON DRIVE
ARCADIA, CA in007
ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION FORM
Date Filed:
,--'8'-- C}Q
General Information
1. Applicant's Name:--..fJ->a~~ I',^- flololo, "'- So % ~.,. PUw\.,' +.-...
Address: L3'Z.? Pt>':>-r Au<.. ~ J,I ~~ C A C}OSZ>I
2, Property Address (Location): I"''' E. h:JrJt',^'"
Assessor's Number: 577 , ~c>'2-1 - 0'2-<1
.
3. Name, address and telephone number of person to be contacted concerning this project:
1b"1CAC.A- - I ~ ~~1-k ('3,0) 3Z~..(~VJ) ,
I ~ 'Z. 7 Po~-r- 4vt::.. '1!rlY- /I - 7ON"~J' J c.A <7a SV I
4.
List and describe any other related permits and other public approvals required for this
project, inc1udin those required by city, regional, state and feral agencies:
~t . ~ Iw .
5. Zone Classification: c.. - 2-
6. General Plan Designation: Go",^~ ow-c...tc-(
Project'Description
7. Proposed use. of site (project description): :LeG ~ ~l '!;.1'l:SIrC. ""...tL.....
Op~:o.... l-lcuv-s ~~ J I*"-- top-.
10.
ell.
12,
13.
8.
Site size:
/ A' I'
I4C/ -C> X
u'- ~IJ
9. Square footage per building:
IS~~
Number of floors of construction:
CMe.
Proposed scheduling of project:
':212. 7
te I "3c / CJ "ir
;&/,f
.
Amount of off-street parking provided:
Anticipated incremental development:
.
.
14. If residential, include the number of units, schedule of unit sizes, range of sale prices or
rents, and type of household sizes expected:
.
15.
16.
17.
18.
.
Ifcommercial, indicate the type, i.e. neighborhood, city or regionally oriented, square
footage of sales area, and loading facilities, hours of operation:
_~ C..-co-. V"t:Au,;l ..,+~ l.->,'ti.... O~tM. ~ ~...... tl ~ - lOp.... .
~11
~tw-c. ~,'Ll be.. \~ccl 1"'-0... rc\t...., ~ /.vI''H-.. '3t2. "'0..-1&.,'"",; ~"o,
L <7 .,1.,-......., ~( \i +r~ o-e.. IDc.c.dted ,'....... '\-l-c.. ~ o~ $L..<.. .;m,.v-c.,
If industrial, indicate type, estimated employment per shift, and loading facilities:
If institutional, indicate the major function, estimated employment per shift, estimated
occupancy, loading facilities, and community benefits to be derived from the project:
If the project involves a variance, conditional use permit or zoning application, state this
1IJ1.d indicate clearly why the application is required:
Vro..ja:t- rea,u.,~ -CDI",.c:lii-I~~ u~ /)e.r~.'r ~ 'tt-.4. z.z. o.oId.'M;,!!!<i
..,a.::k c.-> ~ o.r.:... l>t'l:lU , l:( ''''I'
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.
22.
23.
.
YES NO
Change in existing features of any hills, or substantial alteratin of ground
contours.
o ~
Change in scenic views or vistas from existing residential areas or public
lands or roads.
"'.
DA1
Change in pattern, scale or character of general area of project.
o ~
o )Xj
o 11'
Significant amounts of solid waste or litter.
Change in dust, ash, smoke, fumes or odors in vicinity.
E.I.R.
3/95
-2-
..
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
.
.
YES NO
o ~
o ~
o ~
o ]Q
o }gJ
o ~
o JEI
Environmental Settin2
.. 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.
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.
Certification
Change.in ground water quality or quantity, or alteration of existing
drainage patterns.
Substantial change in existing noise or vibration levels in the vicinity.
Is site on filled land or on any slopes of 10 percent or more.
Use or disposal of potentially hazardous materials, such as toxic substances,
flammable or explosives.
Substantial change in demand for municipal services (police, fire, water,
sewage, etc.).
Substantial increase in fossil fuel consumption (electricity, oil, natural gas,
etc.).
Relationship to a larger project or series of projects.
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.
6/Z."ir/ '18'" ~ % ,~
Date Signa e
.
-3-
E.I.K
3/95