HomeMy WebLinkAbout1555
-
&-
e
RESOLUTION NO. 1555
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO.
CUP 97-011 TO PERMIT A 1,900 SQ. FT. DELICATESSEN WITH INDOOR
AND OUTDOOR SEATING AT 206 S. FIRST AVENUE.
WHEREAS, on September 18, 1997, an application was filed by Daniel Doolittle and
Mary Owen for 1,900 sq. ft. eating establishment with seating for 20 people indoors and 16
people outdoors; Development Services Department Case No. CUP 97-0 II, to be located at 206
S. First Avenue, more particularly described as follows:
The Northerly 25 feet of the Southerly 45 feet of Lot 35 in Block 65 of A Part of
Arcadia Santa Anita Tract in the County of Los Angeles, State of California as
recorded in the Miscellaneous Records Book 15, Pages 89 & 90 in the Office of
the Recorder of Said County.
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on October 28, 1997, 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
carty 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 Commission approves Conditional
Use Permit No. CUP 97-01 I to permit a 1,900 sq. ft. delicatessen with indoor and outdoor
seating at 206 S. First Avenue subject to the following conditions:
I. The delicatessen and the site shall be maintained in a manner that is consistent with
the plans submitted and approved for CUP 97-01 I .
2. The sidewalk and/or outdoor dining shall comply with the City's Sidewalk and/or
Incidental Outdoor Dining Regulations.
3. All local code requirements regarding accessibility, fire protection, occupancy, and
safety shall be complied with to the satisfaction of Building Services and the Fire Department
including the posting of an approved seating plan and maximum occupancy load sign.
4. Water services shall be provided to the satisfaction of the Arcadia Water Division
including any necessary backflow devices, and pressure vacuum breakers.
5. A trash and recyclables enclosure shall be provided at the rear of the property subject
to review and approval by the Community Development Division.
6. An agreement, per Section 9264.3.4 of the CBD zoning regulations and in a form
approved by the City Attorney, shall be executed and recorded by the property owner
establishing the nonexclusive and shared-use status of the parking behind the building.
7. Approval of CUP 97-0II 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.
-2-
1555
-
.,.
.
8. All conditions of approval shall be complied with prior to completion of the tenant
improvements, and operation of the eating establishment. Noncompliance with the plans,
provisions and conditions of CUP 97-011 shall constitute grounds for immediate suspension
and/or revocation of any approvals which could result in cessation of operation.
SECTION 4. The decision, findings, and conditions of approval contained in this
Resolution reflect the Planning Commission's action of October 28, 1997 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Commissioners Bell, Bruckner, Huang, Sleeter and Murphy
None
Commissioner Kalemkiarian
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 foregoing Resolution No. 1555 was adopted at a regular
meeting of the Planning Commission held on November 12,1997 by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioners Bell, Bruckner, Huang, Sleeter and Kalemkiarian
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioner Murphy
Ch' an Planning Commission
City 0 Arcadia
A ITES-'Fl
g~~
'~/A~ ......~ -
Secretary, Planning Commission
City of Arcadia
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
}!J.,1:L.~y~~
City of Arcadia
- 3 -
1555
..
.J. .l.:fi'
~~ ....
... .;
STAFF REPORT
.. , DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
",-
.r._...... .
]. .:. . J......
'OW,
. .~... .
:.~
October 28, 1997
-'''-.',i. .
" .' .
.........
TO:
;- .. _ _ _ '- : '. . ~ .' ,.1--., .;
Chairman and Members of the' Arcadia City'Pbiiinin C<iinmission
'.- .~:';; . . 1:::1.' :\'!~"i \.:=. ':'"':. ." . .' g ~'l.:.:
'," . ...-.., '"f': ..
Donna Butler, Community Deve!OPIIlcilfArlmini..uator ..
By: James M. Ka~.mH. Associate Planner
FROM:
:
SUBJECT: Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 97-011 '.. .....
An eating establishIDent (Mid-City Sandwich Co.) at 206 S. First Avenue
. ' . ',_ .. _. . '.r .
. . _ . . I
":"'4 .
SUMMARY
This "application waS sub6itteii by ..banie~ boo~ttl~ and Mary .<;>Wen for a 1,900 sq. it
delicatessen with indoor and outdoor seating at an existing retail building at 206 S. First
Avenue. the :Development Services DepartIDent'isi-ecoriunending approval sUbject to the
CO~ditiOIlSlisted'in thisreP~f-.1:~- .-' . . "'. .
-.
\ .'
GENERAL INFORMA nON
APPLICANTS: Daniel Doolittle and Mary Owen
LOCATION:
206 S. First Avenue
REQUEST: A Conditional Use Permit for a 1,900 sq. ft. delicatessen with indoor
seating for 20 people at 5 tables, and outdoor seating for 16 people at 4
tables at an existing retail buildiIig. .
SITE AREA: 6,075 sq. ft. (0.14 acre)
FRONTAGE: 45 feet along S. First A venue
EXISTING LAND USE & ZONING:
The site is improved with a 3,650 sq. ft. retail building with 5 parking
spaces behind the building. Tenant improvements are being constrUcted at
the subject address for a take~u1 delicatessen.. The other unit is an office.
The property is zoned CBD - Central Business District.
.
.
.
.
.'
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Mixed Use - CommerciallMultiple Family
SURROUNDING LAND USES & ZONlNG:
North:
South:
East:
West:
, .
. ,
Retail - zoned CBD
Retail and offices :- zoned CBD
Multiple familyiesidential- zoned R-3
Retail - zoned CBD
PROPOSAT, & ANALYSTS
The appliCants are in the process of constructing tenant improvements for a take-out
delicatessen and want to have indoor seating for 20 people and outdoor seating for 16 people.
The operating'hours will be Monday through Saturday 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.ro.
.'
.'
The proposed outdoor seating is partially on the public sidewalk. A Sidewalk Dining Permit
will be necessary for any seating within the public.right-of"way. The outdoor dining that is on
private property is included in this . Conditional Use Permit, aJ}d l!- separate outdoor dining
permit is not necessary. The arrangement of any outdoor Seating; whether on public or private
property, will be in accordance with the City's outdoor dining regulations.
Parking
There are :live (5) existing parking spaces behind the subject building. Staff anticipates that
these will be used by the tenants and employees of the delicatessen and office use, and that the
customers of the delicatessen will either utilize street parl<ing. or will v.'lIlk from their places
of business. The applicants anticipate that the delivery service they intend to provide will
account for a significant amount of their business.
::
In the CBD zone, a change in use or occupancy of an existing building is eligible to utilize the
shared-use parking standar~ In this case, the former tenant was a golf shop. Therefore, the
proposed 1,900 sq. fL delicatessen with indoor Se"",;ng requires :five (5) parking spaces per
1,000 gross sq. fL (3.61 spaces) and the existing 1,750 sq. fL office use requires three (3)
spaces per J,OOO gross sq. fL (3.06 spaces) for a requirement at this property of seven (7)
parking spaces. Parking is not required to be provided for the outdoor dining area
Based on the shared-use parking standards for the CBD zone, there is a two (2) parking space
deficiency for the proposed indoor Sl'",;ng. Staffs opinion is that the parking deficiency is
insignificant, and that the proposed use is the type of pedestrian oriented activity that is being
encouraged in this area A shared-use parking agreement must be signed and recorded by the
property owner.
CUP 97-0])
October 2&, 1997
Page 2
..
. Trash Enclosure
At present, a single trash bin is being Pl'l?vided for this property. It is located in a marked
space immediately adjacent to.the rear of the building. It is J:lot in an enclosure. Staffs
opinion is that a single trash bin'is iruic!equate fl?r a food service business, and that the lack of
an enclosure could ~ult in an unsightly accumulation of trash and recy~lables,
- -
Staff reco=ends that a masonry enclo.Sure with solid metal gates be provided against tIie
rear of the building to the north of the back door. It appears that a six (6) foot by nine (9) foot
enclosure will fit at that location. The enclosure should be large enough to contain the trash
bin and provide space for storing recyclables,
There is no l.andscaping. in the rear p~king. area, nor is there any room for landscaping.
Compliance with the block wall and five (5) foot wide landscape buffer along the adjacent
res~dentially zoned property would result in the loss of a parking space. Staffs opinion is that
the existing situation, with the exception of providing a trash enclosure, is the most effective
. .
use of the rear parking area.
CEQA
. 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,
tIora. 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.
RECOMMENDA nON
The Development Services Department recommends approval of Conditional Use Permit No.
CUP 97-011 subject to the following conditions:
1. The delicatessen lUId the site shall be maintained in a manner that is consistent 'with the
plans submitted and approved for CUP 97-011. and shall include
2. The outdoor and/or sidewalk dining shal1 comply with the City's Sidewalk and/or
Incidental Outdoor Dining Regulations.
.
CUP 97-01 I
October 28. 1997
Page 3
. 3.
.
.
4.
All local code requirements regarding accessibility, fi.re protection, occupancy, and safety
shall be complied with to the satisfaction of Building Services and the Fire Department
including the posting of an approved seating' plan -and maximum occupancy load sign.
- ......
. , . . ' . .
. .
Water services shall be p~vided to the satisfaction of the Arcadia Water Division'
including any necessary backflow devices, and pressure vacuum breakers.
..
.;.
5. A trash and recyc1ables enclosure shall be provided at the rear of the property' subject to-
review and approval by the CommUnity Development Division.
'.
6. An agreement, per Section 92643.4 of the CBD zoning regulations and in a form
approved by the City Attorney, shall be exec~ and recorded by the PI:operty owner
establishing the nonexclusive and shared-use stafus. of the parking behind the building.
7. Approval of CUP 97-oi 1 shall not takeefrect 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.
8. All conditions of approval shall be complied with prior to completion of the tenant
improvements, and operation of the eating establishment. Noncompliance with the plans,
provisions and conditions of CUP 97-011 shall constitute grounds for immediate
.' suspension and/or revocation of any approvals which could result in cessation of
operation:
FINDINGS AND MOTIONS
.'
Ap.proval
If the Planning Commission intends to approve this application, the Commission should move
to approve and file the Negative Declamtion and direct staff to prepare a resolution which
incorporates the Commission's decision, findings and conditions of approval as set forth in
the staffrepon, or as modified by the Commi~qon.
Denial
If the PIRnninB Commi~~ion intends to deny this application, the Commission should move
for denial and direct staff to prepare a resolution which incorporates the Commission's
decision and supporting findings.
CUP 97-011
October 28, 1997
Page 4
.
"t"""-:.---.-......-
l;'w
l'':
, -.-
~-
=:5
.!
.
::c
::~
=
-;-=-.=-=.="'iL~==:.:r..:...-::--==
g- ..
C=_~--=-._...~~
.c...-~.. ---.-..-
=- "
:=::--.---.-...---.---.-
-=~=-_.--:-":--~-
Cl....,-..!i.-
.
I
!
,.
.
.
I
,.
-"-1\
otRtn.lL MOtU
=-==.:s.::--r;::r:s'.."'='=-
.;:==--...--_.:.
;r:'::\====-":.U':'~~
~-"-"""'.""'"
--------..--
-. -- c::::o:r- ..
-- c::"'_-:1
.. :1r:T:':'"----O:---
.. =-~~_=:r..:=.......~
EB"c:F~-="o;..~=-':!t -
-
.., cO cO
"' <)
01 Q cO
"
~
"CGWAoL." ClNlttQ ~
..
M\I'1,,1at
l
. AC."
~".
.
.g
l
~
r
.
op':::o
"._'~IJ .
. .
----~-------- -~~-------
r----------;';;;;;;;,;;j;T;;.~:;~ -:r==--------j
tWI.,~ =.,~=-~~
-~~~~~
,~ A,:ooI~ "d~ foIcrI'''PM:T="
.
'l
.
=-.-..:.::a+t. l.Ae:..r.
,
/ Ei;l
~ml
-I
"
<
.
~.
: ';;i.o-j'''~1 <<co. ......... Jt,.....,. ~
....-
1:~.J1t~
(~Iu
eq........ .......
-
..........
,--
_'-f:iI'La"n:..
n....:'.~....,.
--..
~;r"""'.==r...7:'-'
.,,~.-
J'UllIIC..,....IC.~
:kw-r__~""""'.
....-:TICICIIIL......_.1..
~~*='AJiINr-.,.,.,
W.........-~.~
~
'.
~~l'C~~tttLOoI,.,~~
. t- "",c.",
~~lIlI'1r~'r:''''''~
~_,_~~,...':t!..-e:
.1'WImZ.'~ .
IU........"..Off lIolrf-u
.i.::,~O.~~~~~~.~~:.ef
i:CO""",~"u~"V4Icfa~C'Ao"
;.~a~';t~~=..-~..
..~~.Z..~~n-~04~
Co U...,...~MI!~~ WI"", r:t::;1..1"LODC-
~~~= 'TC",-,,~~~. ..,-=-
.~~,.:= 11~. 14 tJe crrr_.....~
..~o. .....~D Cloro'IeD _... At ~e
"1'tWt::1i''j..l'AI.J..~e,JoItol,,,.
f.~ I~ eltfLe'T't ,..e t"'lI!on'IotlO 'IW:lI1-1l'1.
...4U. 10o.ll"""":"1 ...... ..11., ......-... ""' l'4."".
"ALL. "'~.c.lIt"""A.loUllllff='C' wn..r."
tlII'fllVO_. ~.,~~~.
'A"00I1..a<t.t.W'ln"lIall~'IoILaf~1.o" .IU._
-...-.r ~
,,""--.a.-__r"IC
_..~"V''''''on ~......
I"aOO-"'O.~ __,...
~~~~...,..~....
-'~1"C" ~ lII'N.C\Ic.IPII"oIeT.~"f:It
\
(
~",,__,,"",,""...U.f~9rt.. 111_
...............................--.
...'-....,~.o..."..........tc-r
r--___._..--....d......~u....
,..._............l-'I:...c---.
C.._...___......_._......
-..-....
_M
~
o
(
~
1'1
I,
. III
.
I I
,
~
.
I I
r
J .
.[
HI ~
,
ifi
r
-,.......,."1
_:,r..t.e.
---
_ -.rl
. .
. If any Planning Conunissioner, or other interested party has any questions or comments
regarding this matter prior to the October 28th public hearing, please contact Associate
Planner, Jim Kasama at (626) 574-5445.
.
.
Approved by:
~-
Donna L. Butler ---.::.
Community Development Ailm;n;!:trator
Attachments: Plans
Land Use and Zoning Map
Negative Declaration & Initial Study
CUP 97-01 I
October 28, 1997
Page 5
.
.
.
Baak I
rainlStorr: Parkla, Lo,
-~ ~ ~ t")
-~. , l:l:l l:l:l , ~
U D,.pcl'7 Shop Tu Coasubanl U
Paw.... Shop
lmpol1tr'.omcc . ....caat CD
r::l
> &e.Uf1 Salon
Balal)' Salou -< PbolO:nlph)' Studio CD 0 -~
.......,. Supplies - Ph)'lital1"ba.pisI
...
0 Busloas Carpet Shop 0 0 0 0 C
Off.... Tanain: Shop
BONITA ST.
-
:J~ Frame Shop FJorW 0 0 'CD 0 C
0 &dyc.u. _
lattrioT Desip. Shop
SoJoo J..-d.,. Shop "if:.~:~~~~1J:.:~~~~~~::~~~!.:::~X:~:hZ
0
~"Ift. Aotlqa.s GoIrSbop 0lIia
Skin Care. Salem
IWJ SalaD ROllin: Coama:or
Water FDcer SlOn! _om.. ~ t")
-fI'l Cl c:l ~
I ~ ~ "
...~ U ,
U .."""
- F.... 1ft. Carpet Shop
.."""
Sportio: Goods 3
Two StDt)' -
E-c DinnDaUlr c
-om..B14 'f
17) .
..""', ...
0 Q:::; G
0 t t ...... ~ 0) G) 0
c . r-. GoUStoft.
__E
,5=> Floris!
.. . . . . ,
CALIFORNIA ST.
C-2 0 0 0 0) G
R-3 Middle School Arcadia House
LAND USE & ZONING MAP
206 S. First Avenue t NORTH
em 97-01] Scale: 1 inch"" 1 00 feet
,.
'0.'
...:.:'
.
FileNo.: CUP 97-011
CITY OF ARCADIA
240 WEST HUNTINGTON DRIVE
ARCADIA, CA 91007
CALIFORNIA ENvIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
NEGATIYE DECLARATION
A. Title and Description of Project:
Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 97-011: A Conditional Use Permit for an eating
establishment (Mid-City Sandwich Co. - currently approved as a'take-out delicatessen)
with 20 indoor seats at 5 tables. and 16 outdoor seats at 4 tables at an existing retail
building. .
B. Location of Project:
206 S. First Avenue in the City of Arcadia. Los Angeles County
. C. Name of Applicant or Sponsor:
Daniel Doolittle Mary Owen
913 Royal Oaks Drive 152 N. Alta Vista Avenue
Monr(11/ia, CA 91016 MonrOVia, CA 91016
(626) 860-0082 (626) 359-0879
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: September 18. 1997
Date Posted: October!, 1997
.
FileNo.
(:ar ci7- (:II
CIIY OF ARCADIA
240 WEST HUNTINCTON DRIVE
ARCADIA, CA 91007
ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMA nON FORM
Date Filed: ;
9/;8/77
I ,
. .
General Information
1. Applicant'sNarn. e: J)A~,t:"l....__Doo\....l""T\L..E. //17rl~Y Ovv't;-eJ-_
/
Address: ~ 15Z /V. 4t..,-.4 V67A /l1~,rJ~IJV/A , 9/{)/ ~
2. Property Address (Location): fOb 6. F7e?T Ave- AI'4"IP/A , 9';()~6
/
Assessor's Number:
3.
arne, ad~ess and telephone number of person to be contacted concerning project:
I AN l)bP,-\"'"T\'LE: ClI )CO'<'Al. OA'C:..S . e.-
yY)CNeOv I~ ! C"A . t\)OHo tc"z.~) -gbt:.-OOcZ-
4.
.
List and. describe any o~e.r related penni.ts and other public approvals required for this
project, iIi.cluding'those requiIed by city, regional, state and federal agencies:
:>.
Zone Oassification:
(~rJ
(i J
I . ,
7rl4l"Vo/'J,
6.
General Plan Designation:
Project Description
7. Proposed use of site (project description): iI1 \ \) -c \...'" oANOv:.. \c. \--I. CO.
\...~\\...L ~'-i2-~i5 ~A1\,)O~'c..\:-I,;;~.,> , 5A~~D'S . ~o"\) P
, I
)) e::5S-C---.2:T. -kr'-' \) A L-? [I r...:.A' e-e.. 1 ,.! b.
8. Site size:
\q, Y 6'1.' 'FT'
9. Square footage per building:
10. Number of floors of construction:
.0
12
\
,
1.-'\ 0 C e.
~
Amount of off-street parking provided: ::;. j/Aex...i 1'\J b "D ?E:.'T "'>
Proposed scheduling of project / D / - s / 9 7
..
13. Anticipated incremental development /? ..7.
. .
14.
If residential, include the number of units, schedule of unit sizes, range of sale prices or
rents, and type of household sizes expected:
.
NI~
15. If commercial, indicate the type. i.e. neighborhood, city or regionally oriented, square
footage of sales' area, and loading faciliti~ hours of operation: .'
ve: f)..% \....D~ ,~ ..r~-s~ 71::>OD ~C>'-"'>~""n::>~:-")
p.IjZ{.P.f) I po.. ), \ q 74 .:,~ _ M. \-\r.~Q.~ D'1" ~'7'\,.,:) --g ",,~~-b ~./1'l.
16. If industrial, indicate type, estimated employment per shift, and loading facilities:
~Ip.
.
17. If institutional, indicate the major function, estimated employment p~r shift, estimated
occupancy, loading facilities, and community benefits to be derived fr~m the project:
~)A
.
18. If the project involves a variance, conditional use perinit or zoning application, state this
and indicate clearly why the application is required: -A:, J,'
. A (!.., u. P /5' aetS.e56<=;.r7' ... allva..:>" ~e /^1
1f'L /).c. S~.J v.> i c.-L 5/-.0' .
,
Are the following items applicable to the project or its effects? Discuss below all items -checked yes
(attach additional sheets as necessary).
YES NO
19. Change in existing features of any hills, or substantial alteratin of ground
contours.
o ;i
20. Change in scenic views or vistas from existing residential areas or public
lands or roads.
o ~
21. Change in pattern, scale or character of general area of project.
o l;i9
o ~
o ~
22. Significant amounts of solid waste or litter,
23. Change in dust, ash, smoke, fumes or odors in vicinity.
.
E.1.R.
3/95
-2-
24.
.
'YES NO
Change in ground water quality or quantity, or alteration of existing
drainage patterns.
o
JB
25. Substantial change in existing noise or vibration levels in the vicinity.
o g.
o l2!i
"O--~
. .
26. Is site on filled land or on imy slopes of 10 percent or more.
27. Use or disposal of potentially hazardous materials, such as toxic substances,
flammable or explosives.
28. Substantial change in demand for municipal services (police, fire, water,
sewage, etc.).
o lB
29. Substantial increase in fossil fuel consumption (electriCity, oil, natural gas,
etc.).
o ~
30. Relationship to a larger project or series of projects.
o '9'J
Environmental Settin!!:
_1.
32.
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.
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
.
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 knO~elief.
"7/'7,/77 . G ~-4. n ./ ~
Date Signature
.
E.I.R.
3/95
-3-
.
.
.
.........
File No.: CUP 97-011
CITY OF ARCADIA
240 WEST HUNTINGTON DRIVE
ARCADIA, CA 91007
CALIFORNIA EN:VIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
1. Project Title:
Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 97-011
2. Project Address: ".,
206 S. First Avenue, City of Arcadia, County of Los Angeles
3. Project Sponsor's Name, Address & Telephone Number:
Daniel Doolittle Mary Owen
913 Royal Oaks Drive 152 N. Alta VzstaAvenue
.M011TOvia, CA 91016 Monrovia, CA 91016
(626; 860-0082 . (626) 359-0879
4. Lead Agency Name & Address:
City of Arcadia - Development Services Department
Community Developme!l1 Division - Planning Services
240 W. Huntington Drive
Arcadia, CA 91007
5. Lead Agency Contact Person & Telephone Number:
JamesM Kasama, Associate Planner - (626) 574-5445
6. General Plan Designation:
Commercial
7. Zoning Classification:
CBD: CenJral Business Disrricl
-1-
CEQA Checl:liSl 7/95
.
.
File No.: CUP 97-0 II
.
8. Description of Project:
(Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to later phases of the project and any secondary.
support, or off-site features necessary for its implementation. Attach additional sheets ifnecessary.):
A Condmonal Use Permit for .Qn eating establishment (Mid-City Sandwich Co. --
currently approved as a take-out delicatessen) wit~ 20 indoorsears at 5 tables, and 16
outdoor seats at 4 tables at an existing retail building.
9. Other public agencies whose approval is required:
(e.g., pennits, financing, development or participation agreements)
The City Building Services, City Fire Prevention Bureau, and the. County Health
Department must review and approv.e the plans for the tenant's improvements and
operation. .
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The environmental ~tors 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
[ ] 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
[ ) CulturalResources
[ ] Resources
[ ] Mandatory Finding of Significance
..2.
CEQA Chc<:kJist 7195
.
.
.
".
-\
FileNo.: CUP 97-01 I
DETERMINATION
(To be completed by the Lead Acency)
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
mmgation measures described 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 attached sheets, and if any
rem"ining 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 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
measures that are imposed upon the proposed project.
By: James M. Kasama, Associate Planner
For: The City of Arcadia- Development Services Department
9- 7?7 '1~
Date: September 1 g, 1997
.3..
CEOA Checklist 7/95
File No.: CUP 97-0 II
. EVALUATION OF ENVlRONMENTAL IMPACTS:
1. A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers 'that are
adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses
following each question. A."No ~mpact" answer is l!-dequately supported if the referenced
information sources show that'the'unpact simply does 'not apply to projects such as the one
involved (e.g., the project is not within a faultrupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should
be explained where it is based on proj~t-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g.,
the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specifit:
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. "Poten1ially Significant Unless Mitigation Incoxporated" applies where the incoxporation 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 tiermg,programEnvironmental Impact
Report, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or
Negative Dec1aration {Section 15063(c)(3)(D)}. Earlier analyses are discussed in Section
17 at the end of the checklist
'.
6. Lead agencies are encouraged to incoxporate 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 7195
File No.: CUP 97-011
. Would the proposal result in potential impacts involving:
Potentially
Significant
Potentially Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorponlled Impact Impa.,
1. LAND USE & PLANNING - Would the proposal:
a) Conflict with general plan desigDatio~ or zoning?' . . . r ] I ] [] [~1
b) Conflict with applicable enViioomen~ plans or policies adopted.
by agencies with jwisdiction over the project? [ ] [ ] [] 1~1
c) Be compatible with existing land uses in the vicinity? [ ] [ 1 [] [~1
d) Affect agrlcultul'lll resourees or operationS (e.g., impacts to soils or
fannlands, or impacts from incompatible land uses)? . [ ] [ ] I] 1~1
e) Disrupt or divide the pbysical arTangement of an established
community (mcluding a low-income or minority community)? [ ] [ ] [] [X]
The proposed eating establishmeirJ (delicatessen) is consistent with the generaf'plan and zoning designations
for the area. and will compl';"ent the other uses in the area; The establishment will be subject to all other
em>ironmental plans or policies adopted by the agencies with jurisdiction l7Ver this area, and there are no
agricultur~ resOll1"Ces or operations in the vicinity.
.
2. POPULATIO~ & HOUSING - Would the proposal:
a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population
projections? [ J [ J [J [X]
b) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or indirectly
(e.g., lhrough projects in an undeveloped area or extension of
major infrastructuIe)?' [ ] [ J [] [X]
c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable housing? I ] [ ] [] [X]
The proposed eating establishment (delicatessen) wiD be in an eristing reJail building and will not impact the
population or housing.:' .
3. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS - Would the proposal result in or exPOse people to potential impacts involving:
a) Fault rupture? I ] [ ] I] [~1
b) Seismic ground shaking? [ ] [ ] [J [X]
c) Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? [ ] [ ] [] [X]
d) Landslides or mudflows? I I [ ] [] ~1
e) Erosion, changes in topography or UIlSlllble soil conditions from
excavation, gnding, or fill? [ ] [ ] I] [X]
f) Subsidence of the land? [ ] [ ] [J [X]
g) Expansive soils? [ ] [ ] [] [X]
h) Unique geologic orpbysical feawres? [ ) [ ) I) IX]
While this entire region is subjeclto the effects of seismic activity, the subjecllOClZlion has not been deJennined
to be especially susceptible to D1!Y o/the above geologic problems.
4. WATER - Would the proposal resuh in:
a) Changes in ab$mption mes, drainage patte:ms, or the rate and
amount of surface nmoff? [ J I ) [ ) [>'1
b) Exposure of people or property to wa= re\alcd hazards such as
flooding? I ) [ J I] [X]
. c) Discharge into surface Wll\CtS or other alteration of surface water
quali!)' (e.g., temperature, dissolved (l),ygen, or mrbidity)? [ ] [ I I ] [~1
d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any v.-ater body? I ) [ ) [ ] 1>'1
-5- CEQA Ch:ckliSl 7.'95
File No.: CUP 97-011
. Would the proposall'CSlllt in potential impactS involving:
e) Changes in =ts, or the course or direction of water lIIovements?
t) Change in the quantity of ground waters, either thro.ugh direct
additions or withdrawals, or through inter.cePtion of any aqu!fer by
OllIS or excavations or tbrougli substantial loss of ground water
recharge capability?
g) Altered direction or mte of flow of ground ~~er?
h} Impacts to ground water quality? .
i) Substantial reduction in the amount of ground water otherwise
available for public water supplies?' , I ] [ ]
The propased eating establishment (delicatessen) will be in an existing retail building. There l;'Te no exterior
alterations to ths building or site thDt would result in 1219' of die above i,;,poel.r. '
POlentiall)'
Significant
Potentially Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorpomtcd Impact Impael
[, 1 [ 1 [] [..\1
[ ]
[ ]
,I ]
[ 1
[ ]
[ ]
','
[ ] 1..\1
[ ] . [X] _
[ ] [X] -
..
[ ] [X]
.
5. AIR QUALITY - Would the proposal:
a) Violale any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or
projected air quality violation? [ ] [ ] [] [X]
b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollUllmts? [ ] [ ] , I, ] [X]
c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temp. or cause anycbange in climalC? f] [ ] [] IX]
d) Create objectionable odors? [ ] [ ] [] IX]
The propased eating establishment (delit:atessen) will be in an e:cisting retail building and will be'subject to
local air ljUQlity regulations as administered by the South Coast Air Quality Management District which should
prevent "'9' impael.r relative to items (a) and/or (b) above. Tfu:re are no e:cterior improvements proposed thDt
would result in aherations to air movement, moisture or temperature, or cause a change in climate. The
proposed use is Q delit:atessen. No objectionable odors have been associated with similar esrablishmell1S. .
:;
6. TRANSPORTATION & ClRCULATION - Would the propoSaln:suh in:
a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? [ J I ] [] [X]
b) Hazards to safety from design feamres (e.g~ shllIp curves or
dangerous intersections) or incompanble uses (e.g., filIm equipment)? [] [ 1. [] [X]
c) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses? I ] [ .J [] [X]
d) lnsufficienl parking capacity on-site or off-site? [ ] [ ] [] IX]
e) Hazards or barriers ror pedCSlrians or bicyclists? { ] ( ] [] [X]
t) ConfliClS with adopted policies supporting altema1ive uanspQttBtion
(e.g., bus llIrDOUts, bicycle racks)? [ ] [ ] I], [X]
g) Rail, wmcrblllDe or air traffic impaClS? [ ] [ ) [) [X]
The proposed eating establishment (deliC01essen) will be along an e:cis1ing commercial strip, and recently
recorrfigured public throughway whit:h has been designed to avoid "'9' of the above impactS. Furthermore.
said subject 10000ion has been =ined by the City's Traff<<: Engineer with regard to the proposed
establishment and it has been delermined thDt there should not be "'9' pedestrian or vehicular related impacts.
.
7_ BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES - Would the proposaJ TCSUIt in impaas to:
a) Endangered, threaumed or rare species or their habitats (including
but nOllimited to plants, fish, insects, animals and birds)? I ]
b) Locally designated species (e.g., heritage =)? I ]
c) Locally designated namral communities (e.g., oak forest. coast.a1
habitat, C1e.)? ( )
[ ]
I )
[ ]
I )
[..\1
[X]
{ ]
{ ]
[A1
-6-
CEQA Chccl:liSl 7195
.
.
.
File No.: CUP 97-011
Potentially
Significant
Potentially Unless Less Than
Would the proposal result in potential impacls involving: Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
d) Wetland habitat (e.g., mm. riparian and vernal pool)? [ ] [ ] [] [~1
e) Wildlife dispersal Dr migration corrido!5? . I ] [ ] [] [~1
The proposed eating establishment'(dBIicOtessen} will be in an existing retail building. None of the above
circumstances e:rist.
8. ENERGY & MINERAL RESOURCES - )Vould the proposal:
a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? [ ] [, ] [] [A1
b) Use non-renewable resources in a WllStefuland inefficient manner? [] [ ] [J [X]
c) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that
.' woul~beoffiimrevaJuetotheregion~dtheresidentsoftheStlIte? I] [ ] I ] IX]
The proposed eoJi"g. establishment (dfdicatessen) will be in an existing retail building. The tenant
improvements will be required to comply .with adopted energy conservation requirements. The proposed use is
a delicD1essen. None Of the irb";" impacts hirve been associated withmch establishments.
9. HAZARDS - Would the proposal involve:
a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous substances
(including, bnt not limited to: oil, pesticides. chemicals or
radiation)? [ ] [ ] [] [X]
b) Possible inleIferc:nce with an emergency response plan or
emergeDCY evacuatioo plan? [ ] [ ] [] [X]
c) The creanoo of any tiea!tb hazald or potential health hazard? [ I [ ] [] [X]
d) Exposure of people to existing sources ofpotential health hazards? [] [ ] [] [X]
e) Increased fire hazard in areas with f1.mmRh!e brush, grass or trees? [] [ ] [] [X]
The proposed eDting establishment (delicatessen) will be in an e:xisting.rtpail building which has been designed
wilh consideration already given to the above items (b) and (e). The proposed ten/m/ improvements will be
reviewed by the City Building Services, the City Fire Deponmen1. and the County Health Department /0
prevent the above items (a), (c) and (d). .
10. NOISE - Would the proposal result in:
a) Increases in existing noise levels? I ] [], [] [X]
b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? [ ] [ ] [] IX]
The proposed eDting establishment (deliciziessen) will be in an existing retail building and neither of the above
imp/JC1S have been associated with this location or the proposed establishment.
11. PUBIJC SERVICES - Would the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered
govemment services in any of the following areas:
a) Fire pro1eCli0ll? I ] [ ] I] [~1
b) Police pro1eClion? [ ] I ] [] [X]
c) Schools? [ ] [ ] I] [~1
d) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? I ] [ ] [] [X]
e) Other governmental services? I ] I ] [] IX]
The proposed eDling establishment (deliClllessen) will be in an existing retail building. Both the use and
existing building are consistent with the planned uses for the subject (gea and will/herefore not result in al!l' of
the above impacts.
-7-
CEQA Checklist 7/95
.
.
.
File No.: CUP 97-0 II
Potentlall)'
Si&nificant
Potentially Unless Less Than
Would the proposal result in potential impacts involving: Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact IncolJlorated Impact Impact
12. UI1LlTIES & SERVICE SYSTEMS - Would the proposal resUlt in a need for new systems or supplies,
or substantial a1ten1lions to the following utilities:
.,
a) Power or natural gas? [ ) [ ) [ .J " 1.\1
b) Communications systems? I ] [ ) [] 1.\1
c) Local or regional water treatment or distribution facilities? [ J [ ) [J [.\1
d) Sewer or septic tanks? [ .] [ ] . [] lx]-
e) Storm wale!" dnlinage? I ] [ ] [J [X]
f) Solid waste disposal? [ ] [ ] . [J [.\1
g) Local or regional water supplies? . [ ] [ ] I] [X]
The proposed eating establishment (delicatessen) will be' in an existing N!tai/ building. /t is not anticipated that
any of the aboye utilities or serVice sYStems will be significantly u;.pacted. NlM!11heless, the proposed ienant
. imprCNeme1lts wiD be revieWed for, and the tenant wiD be required to provide, if necessary, any new systems or
supplies necessary to mitigate any such impacts.
....
;',
13. AESTHETICS - Would the proposal:
a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? [ ] [ ] [] [X]
b) Have a demonstrable negative aesthetics effect? [ ] [ J [J [.\1
c) Create light.or glare? [ ] [ ) I] [X]
The proposed eating establishment (delicatessen) wiD be in an existing reJail building and any exterior
improvements will be requited to comply with local architectural standards and illumination limits and will not
result in any of the above impQJ;1s.
14. CULTURAL RESOURCES - Would the proposal:
a) Disturb paleontological resources? [ ) I ) I ) [X]
b) Distulb archaeological resources? [ ] [ ] [] [Xl
c) Affecthistorical resources? I ] [ ] I) [X]
d) Have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect
unique ethnic cultural values? I ] I ) I) [X]
e) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential
impact area? I ] I ] [J [X]
The proposed eating establishment (delicatessen) will be in an existing rerail building. None of the above
resources have been identified at the subj~ area. and none of the above impoctr have been associated with the
proposed use.
..
:.:..
..;
15. RECREATION - Would the proposal:
a) lncrease the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other
recreational facilities? I ] I ] [] [.\1
b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? [ ] I ) [J IX]
The proposed eating establishment (delicatessen) will be in an e::cisting rell1i1 building and wi/I not resuh in any
of the above impDClS. .
-s-
CEQA Chccl:list 7/95
'.
File No.: CUP 97-011
. Woqld the proposal result in potential impacts involving:
16. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
a) Does the project have the potenlial to degrade the quality of the
environment, subslantially teduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife
species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-
sustaining levels, tbIeaten to eliminate a plant or animal
community, reduce the number or restrict the nmge of a rare or
endangered plant or animal or eliminate iriiportant examples of the
major periods of California history or prehistory? [ ] [ ] [] [~1
b) Does the project have the potential to achieve shDrt-term, to the
disadvan1age of long-term, environmental goals? [ ] [ ] [] [X]
c) Does the project have impacts that are individually \imited, but
cumulatively considemble? ("CumnJatively considembJew means
that the incremental effects cif a project are considerable when
viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of
other current projects, and the effects of probable future project) [ ] [ ] [] [X]
d) Does the project bave environmental effects which will cause
substanlial advClSe effects on human beings. either directly or
indirectly? [ ] I ] I] [X]
The proposed eming establishment (tJp./jCQIp-<<en) will be in an existing relDil building and will not result in 1VlJ'
of the above impac/s.
Potentially
Significant
Potentially Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
ImpllCl Incorpol'8led ImpllCl Impact
.
17. EARLIERANALYSES
No earlier analyses. and no additional documents were referenced pursuant to the tiering, program EIR. or
other CEQA processes to anal)r..e the proposal.
.
-9-
CEQA CheckliSl 7.'95