The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1571 . . . RESOLUTION NO. 1571 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CONDmONAL USE PERMIT NO. CUP 98-012 TO ALLOW AUTOMOTIVE REPAIR BUSINESSES IN ANY AND ALL OF THE STRUCTURES AT 401 N, FIRST AVENUE. WHEREAS, on May 4, 1998, an application was filed by Benny Joseph to allow automotive repair uses in the existing rear four-unit industrial building; Development Services Department Case No. CUP 98-012, at 401 N. F'JrSt Avenue, more particularly described as follows: Lot 1 in the City of Arcadia, County of Los Angeles, State of California as shown on Parcel Map No. 8886 recorded in Parcel Map Book 99, Pages 1 & 2 in the Office of the County Recorder of said County. WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on June 9, 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 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 the Conditional Use Permit will not be detrimental to the public health or welfare, nor injurious to the property 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 property 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 Commi~on approves Conditional Use Permit No, CUP 98-012 to allow automotive repair businesses in any and all of the structures at 401 N. FU'St Avenue subject to the following conditions: 1, The automobile repair businesses and this site shall be operated and maintained in a manner that is consistent with the proposal and plans submitted and approved for CUP 98-012 to the satisfaction of the Development Services Director, This proJ)osal does not include automobile bo4y and paint work. nor does it include en~e rebuilding. 2, All City code requirements and policies regarding accessibility, civil engineering, construction, tire protection, maintenance of public facilities, NPDES, occupancy, plan checking, safety, and utility services shall be complied with to the uti~faction of the various City Departments prior to occupancy. 3. All work and storage, industrial as well as automotive repair shall be inside the buildings. 4 . Vehicles shall not be stored at this site. 5. All businesses shall be in compliance with the County's Industrial Wastewater Discharge requirements, 6. Approval of CUP 98-012 shall not take effect until the property owner and applicant have executed and filed the Acceptance Fonn available from the Development Services Department to indicate acceptance of the conditions of approval. 7. All conditions of approval shall be satisfied prior to any new automotive repair business beginning operation. Noncompliance with the plans, provisions and conditions of CUP 98-012 shall be grounds for immediate suspension or revocation of any approvals, which could result in closure of the noncomplying business. -2- 1571 . SECTION 4. The decision, findings, and conditions of approval contained in this Resolution reflect the Planning Commission's action of June 9, 1998, by the foUowing vote: AYES: Commissioners BeD, Bruckner, Huang. Kalemkiarian, Sleeter, and Murphy NOES: None SECTION 5. The Secretary shaU certify to the adoption of this Resolution and shaU cause a copy to be forwarded to the City Council of the City of Arcadia. I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution No. 1571 was adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on June 23, 1998, by the foUowing vote: AYES: Commissioners Bell, Runag, Kalemkiarian, Sleeter, Murphy NOES: None AUBSElfr: Commissioner Bruckner . ~~ . PI Commission City of Arcadia ATTEST: ~~ l, ecretary, Planning COmnussion City of Arcadia ~ APPROVED AS TO FORM: llV:i~,l~ City of Arcadia . -3- 1571 STAFF REPORT D~PMENTSERVICESDEPARTMENT June 9, 1998 TO: Chainnanand Members of the Arcadia City Planning Commission FROM: Donna Butler, Community Development Administrator By: James M, Kasama, Associate Planner SUBJECT: Application No. CUP 98-012 - A Conditional Use Permit to allow automotive repair in a four-unit industrial building at 401 N. First Avenue, SUMMARY Conditional Use Permit application no, CUP 98-012 was submitted by Benny Joseph to allow automotive repair uses in the existing four-unit industrial building at the rear (westerly portion) of 401 N. First Avenue. The Development Services Department is recommending approval . subject to the conditions listed in this report. GENERAL INFORMATION APPLICANT: Benny Joseph LOCATION: 40LN. First Avenue REQUEST: A Conditional Use Permit to allow automotive repair uses in an existing four- unit industrial building. SITE AREA: 21,851 sq, ft, (0.502 acre) FRONTAGES: Approximately 98 ft. along N, First Ave. and 190 ft, along LaPorte St. GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Industrial ZONING DESIGNATION: M-1 / Planned Industrial District. EXISTING LAND USE &. ZONING: The site is improved with three industrial buildings totaling 8,860 sq, ft, and 27 on-site parking spaces, . . SURROUNDING LAND USES & ZONING: North: Two single family dwe1lings - zoned M-l South: Automotive repair & metal filbrication - zoned M-l East: A single family dwelling & automotive repair - zoned M-l West: Six-unit residential apartment - zoned M-l BACKGROUND . The existing layout of the subject property was approved by CUP 77-8 to allow a radiator shop in an existing 1,230 sq, ft. retail building and in a new 3,578 sq. ft. industrial building, CUP 77-8 also approved a separate 3,872 sq. ft. four-unit industrial building along the westerly property line, and included a modification for 27 parking spaces.in lieu of the 32 spaces. The following is a description of the improvements and uses: o The 3,578 sq. ft, five-bay industrial building fronting N. First Avenue was built in 1979 (as approved by CUP 77-8) and is occupied by an assembly shop in the northernmost 928 sq. ft, bay and auto repair businesses (radiator, air conditioning and transmission repair) in the other four bays. o The 1,230 sq. ft, industrial building at the southeast comer of the site was built in 1968 and remodeled (as required by CUP 77-8) to match the new building built in 1979. It is occupied by part of the radiator repair business. o The 3,872 sq, ft. four-unit industrial building along the westerly (rear) property line was built in 1979 (as approved by CUP 77-8) and is occupied by a pool cue manufacturer, an automobile detailer, and an automobile window tinting service. The southernmost unit is being used by the applicant for storage, but is available for lease, A smog check only (no repair work) facility is interested in this space, o There are 27 parking spaces and one loading zone provided on-site to serve the industrial buildings described above, as well as the applicant's 6,920 sq, ft. metal fabricating business located across the street at 56 La Porte Street, This was approved by CUP 77-8, PROPOSAL & ANALYSIS Automotive repair businesses are allowed by Section 9275,1.49 in industrial zones with a Conditional Use Permit. Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 77-8 approved automotive repair businesses in the building(s) fronting First Avenue. This CUP application addresses the applicant's desire to have automotive repair businesses in the rear four-unit building, . CUP 98-012 June 9, 1998 Page 2 . . Automotive repair businesses require conditional use pennits, but are considered industrial uses. Automotive repair includes all types of repair and maintenance work such as the types of service performed at gas stations, specialty repair businesses such as muftler, brake and tire shops, smog check stations, and body shops. In this case. however. the applicant has stated that body work is not to be included, Automotive repair does not include automobile detailing, window tinting or stereo and a1arm installation. However, in all cases, industrial as well as automotive repair, all work must be performed indoors. There should not be any equipment stored, cleaned, or operated outdoors, and the parking area is not to be used for overnight vehicle storage. The parking requirement of 2 spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. is applied to both industrial uses and automotive repair uses. The addition of automotive repair uses does not increase the parking requirement. However, the parking spaces may not be used for the storing (overnight) of vehicles that are to be repaired, An additional vehicle storage area should be provided, but there is no area available for such a parking area, However, it should be noted that the hours of operation for industrial uses are not limited, and therefore the parking lot may be used around the clock by the employees. A significant difference between most industrial uses and automotive repair businesses are the Building and Fire Code requirements. There are numerous occupancy designations for specific types of activities. The existing four-unit industrial building complies with the requirements for most basic industrial occupancies, Automotive repair uses, however have many additional requirements depending on the specific type of activities being performed, The following are examples of some types of activities and occupancies: 1. An automotive mechanical repair facility (exchange of parts only) such as at a gas station (requiring no open flame or welding) includes among other things a requirement for the floor area(s) to drain into an approved oil separator to prevent pollutants ftom,entering the sewer and/or storm drain systems, If an open flame torch or welding is involved, then an automatic fire sprinkler system would also be required, 2. The existing building complies with the requirements for uses such as automobile window tinting, stereo and/or alarm installation, and smog check only facilities, except that the smog check use would have additional ventilation requirements, and the floor drain requirement mentioned above would apply if the detailing work includes car washing and/or engine steam cleaning. In addition to the Building and Fire Code requirements there are Industrial Wastewater Discharge requirements that are administered by the County Sanitation District, and National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) requirements that are the City's responsibilities, The NPDES requirements for this proposal are attached. Automotive repair is consistent with the other uses on this site, as well as with the uses in the . area, provided that all Code requirements are complied with. Outdoor work has a significantly CUP 98"()12 June 9, 1998 Page 3 . . . negative aesthetic impact, and therefore it is imperative that all work be pe1formed indoors. The visibility of the repair bays is also undesirable, In this case, the repair bays face into the property, as opposed to facing the street, and the property is screened by trees, a raised planter and wrought iron fencing along La Porte Street. CEOA Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act, the Development Services Department bas 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, fiuma, 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 bas been prepared for this project. RECOMMENDATION The Development Services Department recommends approval of Conditional Use Permit No, CUP 98-012 to allow automotive repair businesses in any and all of the structures at 401 N. First Avenue subject to the following conditions: 1. The automobile repair businesses and this sitesha1l be operated and maintained in a manner that is consistent with the proposal and plans submitted and approved for CUP 98-012 to the satisfaction of the Development Services Director. This orooosal does not include automobile bodv and oaint work, 2. All City code requirements and policies regarding accessibility, civil engineering, construction, fire protection, maintenance of public facilities, NPDES, occupancy, plan checking, safety, and utility services sha1l be complied with to the S8ti~fAroon of the various City Departments prior to occupancy. 3. All work and storage, industrial as well as automotive repair sha1l be inside the buildings, 4. Vehicles sha1l not be stored at this site. 5. All businesses sha1l be in compliance with the County's Industrial Wastewater Discharge requirements, 6. Approval of CUP 98-012 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, CUP 98-012 June 9, 1998 Page 4 . . . 7. All conditions of approval sha1l be satisfied prior to any new automotive repair business beginning operation, Noncompliance with the plans, provisions and conditions of CUP 98-012 shall be grounds for immediate suspension or revocation of any approva1s, wbich could result in closure of the noncomplying business. FINDINGS AND MOTIONS Approval The Planning Commission should move to approve and file the Negative Declaration and direct staff to prepare a resolution incorporating the Commission's decision, supponing findings and conditions of approval as set forth in the staff report, or as modified by the Commission. Denial The Commission should move for denial and direct staff to prepare a resolution incorporating the Commission's decision and supporting findings. If any Planning Commissioner, or other interested party has any questions or comments regarding this matter prior to the June <J' public hearing. please contact Associate Planner, Tun Kasamaat (626) 574-5445. Approved by: Q~~X3~ Donna L. Butler Community Development Administrator ~ Attachments: Site Plan Land Use and Zoning Map Memorandum regarding NPDES requirements Negative Declaration & Initial Study Letter of support from Carl W. Reinhardt CUP 98-012 June 9, 1998 Page 5 . ~ ~ l! , '~ ~ I~ , , I 1> I .~ I , 1.1 ~ ~ J ~ ! i '~~-of .. ...' ""'" ""~I"'- , ' .. lli . t-.. ~.... ~-" . ,'.. =I r. ;- "",I~ . :'~i~ I' \...P6r='~'1 .W ..." ""'"""Iff!'- 1 - ..- 1=:' . . 'I- ~ 1"./ 1"-.>( 1/' . "'" . .>' ~~~.."..,,___"f"S7l. ....U , ,1,""'1''''''...... . :' " "'- FDU..ur _"... . -'D "It iN ""'i"'iU>eA. '.. ON ~1it;. .,. '.-z:l~ ~. / ^I /' ~~...!) """"'"" ",.". ~.. "'l>f" ""'.... , ~~. I' t ,I i' .."" ~I< 6~ ~- 401 N, fir5+ A'Ie.. . . ~ I j j t. [" - ..... ...:.;~,~~..;,: .:>..... ~ . . . '~ -< '" R-3 IVb~ .-.. - C-M~ 0 0 0 0 0 Uquor Store Parking OFFICES \. COLORADO BLVD. 0 0 CD @) OFFICE ct R-3 CONDOMINIUMS, R-3 @ , 0 CD 0 --.C-2 - AUfOREPAIR . l"'" 0 0 "'''' 0 M f"" AUfOREPAIR , ."" ~ - "" "'" M-l """""""""'" 0 """""""""'" ~ """""""""'" ~"""""""""" C CD 0 ~. CD """""""""'" """""""""'" """""""""'" """""""""'" AUTO REPAIR """""""""'" "~""""""""" LA PORTE ST, AUfO REPAIR .~ AUfOREPAIR INDUSTRIAL INDUSTRIAL < THRlFT BODY SHOP SHOP f-o , M-l- CI:l FURNI11JRE C M-l ~ UPHOLSTERY , j I _l I , I I - - .-.-.. LAND USE & ZONING MAP 401 N. First Avenue t NORTH CUP 98-012 Scale: 1 inch = 100 feet MEMORANDUM DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT Date: Mav 29. 1998 TO: Jim Kasama, Associate Planner FROM: Judy Chu, AssistaDtEngineer SUBJECJ': CUP 98-012 NPDES Requirements for change in uses at 401 N, First Avenue. Conditional Use Permit application no, CUP 98-012 has been reviewed by the City's Stonnwater and Sewer Planning Consultant, John Hunter. Based on a review of the submitted information, the applicant sha1l implement the following Best Management Practices: . a) Stonn drain inlets, catch basins, channels and swales shall be appropriately marked (stencils, signs, etc.) with prohibitive language or graphical icons to discourage illegal dumping. b) Trash container areas shall have drainage diverted around them, and shall be enclosed to prevent unauthorized and unintended off. site transport of trash. The trash containers shall have covers, and the container areas shall have a solid roof where practicable, The accumulation of litter and wastes must be prevented. c) All operations must take place indoors to the maximum extent possible. Outdoor vehicle washing is not pennitted, d) Waste.materials, solvents or other potential pollutants must not be discharged onto pavement. Drip pans and absorbents to catch or pick-uptluids leaking from vehicles must be kept on-site, Outdoor storage of oils, greases or cleaners must be within a containment facility, Parking areas must be swept clean, Washing of the parking area is not pennitted, Outdoor water faucets must be capped, e) All employees must read, understand and implement the Stormwater Best Management Practices for Automotive Maintenance & Car Care described in the pamphlet available from the City's Maintenance Services Department. . " . . . File No.: CUP 98~12 CITY OF ARCADIA 240 WEST HUNTINGTON DRIVB ARCADIA, CA 91007 CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT NEGATIVE DECLARATION A. Title and Description of Project: Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 98"()12: To allow automotive repair activities in an existing multi-tenant industrio/ building. B. Location of Project: 401 N. First Avenue - Northwest corner of First Avenue and La Porte Street C. Name of Applicant or Sponsor: Benny Joseph . 45 E La Porte Street Arcadia, CA 91006 (626) 447-8187 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 anached 1nitial Study; E. Mitigation measures, if any, included in the project to avoid potentially significant etTects: Compliance with Building, Environmental and Fire Codes will be required Date Prepared: May 12, 1998 Date Posted: May 14, 1998 "'fJ ~ -- J. es M Associate Planner . . . CITY OF ARCADIA 240 WEST HUNTINGTON DRIVE ARCADIA, CA 91007 . CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM 1. Project Title: Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 98-011 2. Project Address: 401 N. First Avenue. City of Arcodia, County of Los Angeles 3. Project Sponsor's Name, Address It Telephone Number: Benny Joseph 45 E. La Porte Street (616) 447-8187 . 4. Lead Agency Name It Address: City of Arcadia - Development Se1'llices Department Community Development Division - Planning Se1'llices 140 W. Huntington Drive Post Office Box 60011 Arcodia, CA 91066-6011 S. Lead Agency Contact Person & Telephone Number: James M. Kosama. Associate Planner - (616) 574-5445 6. General Plan Designation: Industrial 7. Zoning Classification: M-l: Planned Industrial District . .1. File No.: CUP 98-012 CEQA Cbecklist 7195 . . . . . FileNo.: CUP 98"()12 8. Description of Project: (Describe the whole lIl:tion involved, including but DOt limited to laIer phases of the projed.andllDJ sealJ1da~T support, or oft'-sife featnres nec:essaJY for its implementation. Atlach additional sheets if~<''Y.) A Conditional Use Permit to allow automotive repair activities in an existing multi- tenant industrial building. 9. Other public agencies whose approval is required: (e,g., pennilS, filUlociog. development or participation agreements) City Building Services & Fire Prevention Bureau, City Engineering Division, City Maintenance Services Dept. and City Water Division must review and approve the plans for any tenant improvements that may be necessary to comply with various Building, Environmental and Fire Codes The project is also subject to the regulations of the South Ccxist Air Quality Management District, and the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System requirements. , ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The environmental tactors 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 & Planning [ ] Hazards [ ] Popu1ation & Housing [ ] Noise [ ] Geological Problems [ ] Public Services [ ] Water [ ] Utilities and Service Systems [ ] Air Quality [ ] Aesthetics [ ] Transportation / Circu1ation [ ] Cu1turaI Resources [ ] Biological Resources I ] Resources [ ] Energy and Mineral Resources [ ] Mandatory Finding of Significance -2- CEQA Cheeklist 7195 . . FileNo.: CUP98~12 . DETERMINA nON (To be completed by the Lead AseDcY) On the basis of this initial evaluation: [ ] I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared, [Xl 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 descnDed on 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 IMPACT 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 on that earlier analysis- as' described- on "tlm..-bc:d sheets; and if any remaining effect is a "Potentially Significant Impact" or "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated," an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but . it only needs to analyze the effects that have not yet been addressed, [ ] I find that although die proposed project coufQ liave a signiJicant etrect on the environment, there WILL NOT be a lligJ1ificant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects have been analyzed adequately in an earlier Environmental Impact Report pursuant to applicable standards and have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. By: James M. Kasama, Associate Planner For: The City of Arcadia - Development Services Department F 711 j~- Date: May 12,1998 . -3- CEQACbecldist 7195 . . . . . File No,: CUP 98-012 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: I, A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects such as the one involved (e.g., the project is not within a filult rupture zone), A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general- 1I1:lwdwdli (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 Cbec:Idist 719S . . Would the JlIIlPOSII! resu1t in poteotial impacts inwlving: 1. LAND USE & PLANNING - Would the pI.....,..d: a) Conf1ict with general plan designations or ZllIliDg? b) Conflict with applicable environmenta1 plans or policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project? c) Be llOlIlpatjble with ~""qg land uses in the vicinity? d) Affect agricultuIal resources or opemtions (e.g.. impacts to soils or 1ilrmIands, or ''''lJlle's from incompatible land uses)? e) Disrupt or divide the physil:al ap'lI~ of an estab1isbed IlOIIIJl1U1lily (including a low-income or minority IlOmmnnity)? . FileNo,: CUP9~12 Potentially Sijprlficant Potentially Unless Less Than Sil!l'ifiCAft' Mitiption Significant No Impact Inoorporaltd Impact Impact [ ) [ ] [ ) [XI [ ) [ ) [ ) [XI [ ) [ ] [ ) [XI [ ) [ ] [ ) [XI [ ) [ ] [ ) [XI The JH'OPOSDI Is to aJ10w automotive repair uses at QIt exlsJing industrial complex in a ftlly developed sublD'bQlt envil'Oll1lfent. The p1'Oposed uses are consJsJent with the ge""mJ plQlt and will be required to comply with all applicoble envil"onmental plans. policies and regulations. The subject p1'Operty is across the street from other automobile repair businesses. There are no l1&'icultural reSOtln:es 01' operoJions in the vicinity Q1td the existing Industrial complex does not di81Vpl 01' divide the physical D/'I'a1/gementofthe comm1illity, . 2. POPULATION & HOUSING - Would the proposal: a) Cumulatively exa=I official regional or loc:aI population projections? b) IDduc:e p._nri..1 growth in an area either directly or indirec:tIy (e,g.. thmugh projects in an lIIIdeveloped area or el'tenoinn of llll\ior infrastruc:ture)? c) Displal:e ~""ng l1<lndn& "'V"'..11y aftlmIable housing? [ ) [ ) [ ) [XI [ ) [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [XI [XI The p1'OposaIls far indJIsJrlal uses ot QIt eJdsJing indllslrtal complex and will not impact the populotion 01' housing, 3. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS - Would the proposal result in or expose people to p"""'.;,,1 i"'lJllc:ts involving: a) Fault rupture? [ ] [ ) [ ) [XI b) !lP.llllllic ground .....lcing? [ ] [ ] [ ) [XI c) Seismic ground flIilun:, jnchuling \iqud'adion? [ ] [ ) [ ) [XI d) T ...ndoH""" or mudflows? [ ] [ ] [ ] [XI e) Erosion, l!h"n8l'" in topography or unstable son l101Iditions from excavation, grading. or fill? [ ] [ ] [ ) [XI f) Subsidence of the land? [ ] [ ] [ ) [XI g) Expansive soils? [ ) [ ] [ ) [XI h) Unique geologic or physic:al Ceatuml? [ ) [ ] [ ) [XI . While this entire region Is subject to the effecta of seismic activity. the subject location has not been detennined to be especially susceptible to any of the above geologic p1'Oblems. -,- CEQA Cbec1dist 7f9S . . File No.: CUP 98~ 12 PoteoIia1Jy Signifiam1 . PolentialIy Unless Less Than Would the propoaaI result in potential impacts involving: Signifiam1 Mitiplion Significant No Impai:t In=ponllA:d Impai:t Impai:t 4. WATER - Would the proposal result in: a) Cbanges In absorption rates, drainage pattems, or the rate and amount of surIiK:e runoft"I [ ] [ ] [ ] [Xl b) Exposun: of people or property 10 water related bazan:Is such as flooding? [ ] [ ] [ ] [Xl 1:) Disc:barge into swfac:e waws or other a1teratIon of surIiK:e water quality (e.g., temperature, dissolvlld oxygen, or tUJbidity)? [ ] [ ] [ ] [Xl d) OUlItgeo in the amount of surIiK:e water In any water body? [ ] [ ] [ ] [Xl e) CMngl!!l in c:urrents, or the c:ourse or dinx:lioD of water movements? [ ] [ ] [ ] [Xl t) Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through dim:t odditi(lns or withdrawals, or through inteIa:ption of any aquifer by c:u1S or exl:lIVBlions or through suMlantiat loss of ground water rec:harge c:apability? [ ] [ ] [ ] [Xl g) Altered dinlc:tion or rate of flow of ground water'1 [ ] [ ] [ ] [Xl h) I",P""'" 10 grouod water quality? [ ] [ ] [ ] [Xl i) S.._ntial reduction in the amount of ground water otherwise available for public: water supplies? [ ] [ ] [ ] [Xl . Th8 proposalla lor an existing Indfl.Jtrlal complex In a fidlyodeve/oped suJnuoban envlronmenl and wlllllDt result In any olthe above Impacts. 5. AIR QUALITY - Would the proposal: a) Violale any air quality SllIDdard or llOIltribute to an existing or projec:ted air quality violation? [ ] [ ] [ ] [Xl b) Expose sensitive n:ceptors 10 pollutanla? [ ] [ ] [ ] [Xl c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or cause any change in climate? [ ] [ ] [ ] [Xl d) Create objedin"""leoclOIs? [ ] [ ] [ ] [Xl The proposal will be subJecl to IOCQ/ air flIUIll/y regulations as administered by the SmIth Coast AI, Quality Mt1n41leTMnJ DIstrict. and will not conJrlbule toward any olthe above Impacts. 6. TRANSPORTATION & CIRCULATION - Would the proposal result in: a) IntIeased vehicle trips or traffic: coogestioD? [ ] [ ] [Xl [ ] b) Hazards to safety fiom desigD features (e;g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g" farm equi~)? [ ] [ ] [ ] [Xl 1:) Inadequate emergeoc:y aa:ess or aa:ess to IIC8Iby uses? [ ] [ ] [ ] [Xl . d) Insufficient paricillg capacity on-site or oft'-site? [ ] [ ] [Xl [ ] e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicycIisls? [ ] [ ] [ ] [Xl -6- CEQA Cbecldisl 7195 . . . Would the proposal result in polentia1 impacts involvins: File No,: CUP 98'{)12 PotenIially SISDificant PotenIially Unless Less Than Sill"Hicant Mitigation Sigoificont No Impact In<:orporated Impact Impact f) Conf1icls with adopted po1icies supporting ailerllaliw traDSpOrtation (e,g., bus tumoutB, bicycle raW)? [ ) g) Rail, WlIleIbome or air traffic i"'P""'s? [ I [ ) [ ) [ I [ I [Xl [Xl The addition of Qll/omotlve repai1' uses to the existing Industrial compIer could result In additional vehicle trips to the site, bill will not'result In unacceptable levels of congestion. There are no hazardous design features 01' Incompatible uses. Emergency access to the subject site and SII17'Oundlng sites Is adequoJe, Dn- site and off-8ite parking would be Impacted by the proposed uses, The existing on-8ite parking Is fidly utilized by the existing uses, but this proposal, if approved, would only result In the new uses replocing the eristlng uses. The parking requirenumts f01' both proposed and exlsJlng uses are the same, and provided all the uses oJ this campier as well as the SII17'OlUfding uses operate In occordance with the parking regulations there would not be a parking problem. There Is no space to add on-site parking, The off-s/te porking, i,e" cwbside porallel parking, Is also filly rdlli:zed by the subject properly and a4Jocent uses. There is no space fo1' additional off-8ite parking. There ore no on-site hazards 01' bturlel'S fo1' pedestrians 01' bicycles, and the proposal will not conflict with adopted policies suppo1'tlng altemotlve transportation, n01' will it Impact 1'Ilil, waterborne 01' air traffic. 7. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES - Would tile proposal result in im~ to: . a) Rn"""i"n:d. tib~ or IlIIll species or their babllals (includiJIs but not limited to plants, fish, insecls, animAl. and binls)? [ I [ ) [ ] [Xl b) Locally ......Va.M species (e,s" heritage trees)? [ ) ( ) ( I [Xl c:) Loc:aI1y d"';Va'M DIllWal communities (e.g., oak forest. COIlSIaI babilal, etc,)? [ ) [ I ( I [Xl d) WelIaDdbabitat (e,g., marsh, riparian and vema! pool)? [ ) [ I I ] [Xl e) WiId1ife dispersal or migration c:orridoJS? I ] I ] I ] [Xl The proposal Is fo1' an existing industrial campIez In a filly ~/oped subrnban environment. None of the above reSOJll'Ces have been Identified at, 01' In the prorimity of the subject site. 8. ENERGY & MINERAL RESOURCES - Would the proposal: a) CnnfHct with adopted energy c:onservaIion plans? [ ) [ ) [ ) [Xl b) Use DOn-reuewable n:soun:es in a waste1bI and ;,""Ji~..... IIIllIUIIlr? I ] I ] I I [Xl c:) Result in the loss of availabillty of a known miDeral fIlSOUI'C:e that would be of future value to the Rgion and the ,...;denhl of tile State? I ] I ] [ ] [Xl . The proposallsfor an existing IndustriDI campier In a filly developed subll1'ban environment. The proposed uses will be required to comply with current energy conservation plans. No energy 01' mineral resotlJ'Ces have been Identified oJ the subject sile, -7- CEQA Cbecklist 7195 . . . . Would the propooaJ ICSUIt in poll:otial impacts involving: . FileNo,; CUP 98~12 Potentially Signi1kant Potentially Unless Less Than SigJ1ifiC8llt Mitigation SigDifican1 No Impact Jnoorporated Impact Impact 9. HAZARDS - Would the proposal involve: 8) A risk of ""';_1 explosion or Rlease of bazardous ..,hot."""" (including, but not limited to: oil, pellti<:i"~. "Mlni.,.l. or radiation)? [ ] b) Pll55ible iutiafe....w;e with an enu:rgency RSpOII5e plan or enu:rgency ew<:"9rinn plan? [ ] c) The creation of any health hazard or pnt""ti.1 health hazard? [ ] d) Exposure ofpeople to e>rlsring sources ofpnt""ti.1 bealth hazards? [] e) 1Dcreascd fin: hazard in areas with f1.mltlllh)" brush. grass or trees? [] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [XI [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [XI [XI [XI [XI The J1f'Op0s8d uses wlll.be required to comply with all building, fire and hazmodottsmalerlal regulations. and all South Coast A/J' Qruzllty Managemenl District regulations, which will limit the potential for any of the alxwe Impacts to the levels required bylaw. 10. NOISE - Would the )lJoposal result in: 8) Increases in exicti"8 noise levels? b) Expr-." ofpeople to severe noise levels? [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [XI [XI The J1f'Oposalls for an erJstIng IndtlstrIaI complex In a filly developed stlbruban environment, The J1f'Op0s8d tlSeS are consistent with the existing uses oJ the site. All activities oJ the site are lNbject to crurent noise limitations, 11. PUBLIC SERVICES - Would the proposal have an efI'ect upon, or result in 8 need for DeW or altered government services in any of the following areas: 8) Fin: proteCtiolI? b) Polic:e protection? c) Schools? d) 1.f.lnt"".""" ofpublic facilities, including roads? e) Other governmeutal services? [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [XI [XI [XI [XI [XI The proposal Is for an erJstIng IndustJ'/aI complex In a filly developed stlblU'ban environment. The prop0s8d _s will not restllt In any new or alJe10ed needs from the above govel'7lJnent services. 12. UTILITIES & SERVICE SYSTEMS - Would the proposal result in 8 need for new systems or supplies, or snhd.nti.1 alterations to the fol1owing utilities: 8) Power or natural WJS? b) O>mlD1.nic:ll(jons systems? c) Local or regional water trwootment or disIributioD IiIcilities? -8- [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] CEQA Checldist 7195 [XI [XI [XI . . FileNo,; CUP~12 d) Sewer or septic: tanks? e) Storm waler drainage? I) Solid WlISIe di'lp"C"l? g) Local or regional waler supplies? Potentia11y Signific:anl Potentia11y Unless Less Than signific:anl Mitiption Si!P'mr"''' No lmpaI:t Incorporated Impact Impact I] I] II [X) I] I] I] [X) I] II I] [X) I I I I I I [X) . Would the proposal result in pnt...ti.! impacls invOlving; The fJI'OPOSO/ Is for on existing Industrial complex In a jillly developed sublll'bon environment, The propo8Ol wi// not result In any new or altered needs.from the above utility service systems, 13. AESTHETICS - Would the lollUposa!: a) Affect a-mc vista or -mcbigbway? b) Have a dr.mnn<h'&ble negative oe<'~ effect? c) Cmue ligbt or glare? I I I ] I I I ] I ] I I I I I I I ] [X) [X) [X) The proposal Is for on nIsIIng Industrial complez In a jillly developed sublll'bon environment, No new construction is proposed, nor Is ony lighting proposed to be added . 14. CULTURAL RESOURCES - Would the proposal: a) Disbub paleontological resources? I ] I I I ] [X) b) DisIwb an:baeological resources? I ] I ] I I [X) c) Aft'ec:t historic:al resources? I ] I I I I [X) d) Have the potential to cause a physical change wbich would affect unique etImic cultural values? I I I I I I [X) e) Reslrict existing religious or sacred uses within the P"'",ntiAl impact area? I I I I I ] [X) The proposal Is for on existing Industrial comp/n In a jiI//y developed suburban environment. None of the aboIIe resources, ethnk culluml values, or religlOllS uses have been Identified ai, or In the proximity of the subject site, 15. RECREATION - Would the proposal; a) Increase the demAnd for neigbborbood or regiooal parl<s or other rec:realiooal facilities? b) Aft'ec:t existing recreatiooal opportuDilies? I I I I I ] I I I I I I [X) [X) . The proposal Is for on existing Industrial camp/eJcln a jiI//y developed suburban environment, None of the aboIIe facilities or opportunities have been ldentijled as being Impacted by the proposaL -9- CEQA Cbec:klist 7195 . . . Would the proposa1 n:su1t in p"'....tiol impads involving: FileNo,: CUP 98-012 Potentially Significant Pok:nlially Unless Less Than SilP'ifil'.tU't Mitigation SigJ'lifil'.Jmt No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 16. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a) Does the project have the p"'....tiJll 10 degrade the quality of the envirollDlCllt, suhdantially n:dIIl:e the habilal of a fish or wildlife &pedes, cause a fish or wildlife popu1aIion 10 drop below self. sustainillg levels, tIuea1en 10 eliminate a plant or animal community, n:dIIl:e the number or restric:l the range of a I'lIJll or endangered plant or animal or eliminate imponant examples of the lIIlIior periods of California histoJy or pIdJisIoIy? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] The project Is aI an uistlng Industrial compler In a fully developed sublD'ban Q1'eD. TIu1 pro~d uses w//1 be required to comply wllh all cummt environnumtal regulations. The project will not re8Mlt in any of the above Impacts. b) Does the'project have the poteDtiaIlO achieve short-term, 10 the disadvantage oflong-term, environmetilaI goals? [ J [ ] [ ] [X] The proposal is for an uistlng Industrial complex In a fully developed 8Mburban environment, Any new facilities required for any pro~d or future uses will be required to be consistent with cu""nt environmental regulations. . c) Does the project have impacts that are lndividually limiltld, but CUlllll1atively coDSiderablc? ("C'umnlatively troMitl"'1lblc" means that the iDcremenlaI effects of a project are con.iderab1e when viewed In connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other cuneut projects, and the effects of pro\Iab1e future project) [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] TIu1 project may Impact the parldng sltvation. TIu1 project Is aI.an uistlng Industrial compler In afully developed 8MblD'ban environment, and with the exception of possible Impacts on parldng, the changes In the specific types of Industrial activity; will noI resulJ In any cumulatively considerable Impacts. d) Does the project have environmetilaI effects which will cause Sl.hdantial adverse effects on human being&, either diIectIy or indirectly? [ ] [ ] [J [X] The proposal Is for an existing Industrial compler In a fully developed 8Mburban environment, TIu1 project w/11 not hQlle any environmental effects thai w//1 CIlJISe direct or Indirect substantial adverse effects on human beings. . 17. EARLIER ANALYSES The 8Mbject industrial compler was consJructed pursuanJ to a Condlllonal Use Permit (CUP 77-8) approved in 1977 for which a Negative Declaration was prepared and approved TIu1 Initial Study for that Negative Declaration answered, "Maybe" with supplemental responses to the following potential impacts: Noise - Will the proposal result In Increases in uistlng noise levels? - TIu1 existing 822 sq, jt, radiator shop will be replaced with a 2,600 sq, jt. radialor shop, This new facility althmlgh larger and able to tltXOI7IIIIOdaI more cars could possibly CQJISe an Increase In the noise. However, all worlc Is pro~d to be dane Inside a building which should mlllgale any significant noise problems. .lo- CEQA Checklist 7195 . . . . . Would tbc proposal RSUlt in P"'..,t;At impacts involoins: FileNo.: CUP98~12 PoIadialIy SlJP1if'ir.ATlt PoIadialIy Unless Less Than 8;gI'i1i.....t MitigaliOD Significant No Impact lnaNporaled Impact Impact TransporlaJionIClrcvlatlon - Will the proposal result In generation of substontlal additional vehlculor movement? - The constnIctlon of on Industrial complex will create ond generate fIIDI'e traffic. However, traffic generated _Id not be more Ihon that created by most M-I development. TronsporlationlCll'Clllatlon - Will the proposal result In effects on erJstIng parking facilities. or demand for new parking? - The development of thlll complex will eliminate on erIst1ng parking 101. Proposed parkingfor thefacillty Is 10 over the requlrementfor the campier. bllt Is 5 less Ihon requlredfor both lots on the north ond SOllth side of La Porte Street. This poIISIble Impact WQS mitlgaled by modiflcaJions to the parking design regulations. Except for the above referenced Negative DecllJl'aJionllnltlal Study ond the City's General Pion. no other O1Ia1ysiS. Dr' other documents were referencedpursuonl 10 the tiering. prognzm EIR. or other CEQA processes to onalyze this project .11. CEQA Cbecldisl 7195 . FileNo. .CelP 98 -Oil CITY OF ARCADIA 240 WEST HUNTINGTON DRIVE ARCADIA, CA 91007 ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION FORM Date Filed: ~1'1/ff; General Information 1. Applicant's Name: Ben/If k'f'J, Address: 'IS E, La Pork $I; 2. Property Address (Location): tto/ N, Arr.4- Ave. Assessor's Number: '5773 - 2 - 35" 3. Name, address and tele hone number of pers~n to be contacted concerning this project: h e i. 'f'S' e. h1 RJrk 7/-. - (6?h) 'f1(7-&187 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: . IY~ ~K/lcr~ I A,-(, lJeP'l. , 5. 6. General Plan Designation: 11-/ Mol- Zone Classification: Proiect Description 7. Proposed use of site (project description): Au-r()ff()"nVE.. aEPkm CjUl1W 8. Site size: 24 A51,r;z! x a 5."0 ~ 9. Square footage per building: 10. Number of floors of construction: OIlt'o .11. 12 Amount of off-street parking provided: 28 "7.poc~ Proposed scheduling of project: 1HifW"H,-re- 13. Anticipated incremental development: /'1.4 . . If residential, include the number of units, schedule of unit sizes, range of sale prices or rents, and type of household sizes expected: NA- 14. . If commercial, indicate the type, i.e. neighborhood, city or regionally oriented, square footage of sales area, and loading facilities, hours of operation: Nit 15. 16. If industrial, indicate type, estimated employment per shift, and loading facilities: AtroRl1Wi. RV'.I-':U~ If institutional, indicate the major function, estimated employment per shift, estimated occupancy, loading facilities, and community benefits to be derived from the project: NIJ. 17. If the project involves a variance, conditional use permit or zoning application, state this and indicate clearly why the application is required: CUP 18. . Are the following items applicable to the project or its effects? Discuss below all items checked yes (attach additional sheets as necessary). YES NO 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ E.1.R. 3/95 19. Change in existing features of any hills, or substantial alteratin of ground contours. 20. Change in scenic views or vistas from existing residential areas or public lands or roads. 21. Change in pattern, scale or character of general area of project. 22. Significant amounts ofsolid waste or litter. 23. Change in dust, ash, smoke, fumes or odors in vicinity. . -2- , . . . YES NO ~ o Change in ground water quality or quantity, or alteration of existing drainage patterns. .4, ~ ~ w o o o Substantial change in existing noise or vibration levels in the vicinity. 25. Is site on filled land or on any slopes of 10 percent or more. 26. Use or disposal of potentially hazardous materials, such as toxic substances, flammable or explosives. 27. ~ o Substantial change in demand for municipal services (police, fire, water, sewage, etc.). 28. ~ o Substantial increase in fossil fuel consumption,(electricity, oil, natural gas, etc.). 29. ~ o Relationship to a larger project or series of projects. 30. Environmental Settinl!: Describe (eft a 8l!l"ilfate ~heet) 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. No c},a~ e. Describe{en a Bep=al:t:: "ileel}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. 1nda i>-l-rl a I ~-SE',=> .1. 32. Certification I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the data and information required for this initial evaluation to the best of my ability, and that the facts, statements, and information presented are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. 5/~1t ~~7 (l~ Date 1 Signature / . E.I.R. 3/95 -3- . . . ,-, ;l>~';"", ."..... ",~ ~. ~~~, ._;~: May 24, 1998 Carl W. Reinhardt Property Management P.O. Box 823 Merlin, Oregon 97532 541-479-6416 FAX 541-476-3959 MAY 2 B 1998 James M. Kasama Associate Planner Development Services Dept. Arcadia City Hall ' 240 West Huntington Drive P.O, Box 60021 Arcadia, California 91066.6021 Dear Mr, Kasama: My purpose In writing you is to give you my favorable opinion with reference to the Benny Joseph matter before the City of Arcadia Planning Department Tuesday, June 9. 1998. I have known Benny Joseph for over 40 years and have known him as an astute businessman who has, in my opinion, done a good job for the City of Arcadia In every sense of the word, One only has to look at his accomplishments with reference to his real estate holdings; they are all well done. It is true that I don't know what the negative declaration could be. Others in this similar business are within a 300 foot radius of the comer of La Porte Street and First Avenue. All of these businesses are offering gainful employment, being prosperous for themesleves and most of all they are an asset to the City of Arcadia. Your careful consideration of this matter, will be appreciated by all concerned, Sincerely, ./7 - du.t t'b.~~~ Carl W. Reinhardt cc Benny Joseph CWRml