Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1686 . . . RESOLUTION NO. 1686 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION NO. CUP 02-019 TO EXPAND AN EXISTING RESTAURANT (FULL HOUSE RESTAURANT) AT 1220 S. GOLDEN WEST AVENUE. WHEREAS, on October 28, 2002, a conditional use permit application was filed by Full House Restaurant, to expand an existing restaurant. Full House Restaurant, (Development Services Department Case No. C:U.P. 02-019) at property commonly known as 1220 S. Golden West Avenue; and WHEREAS, A public hearing was held on December 10, 2002, at which time all interested persons were given full opportunity to be heard and to present evidence. NOW THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. That the factual data submitted by the Development Services Department in the attached report is true and correct. SECTION 2. This Commission finds: 1. That the granting of such Conditional Use Permit will not be detrimental to the public health or welfare, or injurious to the property or improvements in such zone or vicinity because the initial study did not disclose any substantial adverse effects to the area affected by the proposed project. 2. That the use, applied for at the location indicated is a proper one for which a Conditional Use Permit is authorized. 3. That the site for the proposed use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate said use. All yards, spaces, walls, fences, loading, landscaping and other features including the shared parking with the neighboring business, are adequate to adjust said use with the land and uses in the neighborhood. The proposed project complies with all related zoning requirements as set forth in the Arcadia Municipal Code. 4. That the site abuts streets and highways adequate in width and pavement type to carry the kind of traffic generated by the proposed use. 5. That the granting of such Conditional Use Permit will notadversefy affect the comprehensive General Plan because the land use and current zoning are consistent with the General Plan. . . . 6. That the use applied for will not have a substantial adverse impact on the environment, and that based upon the record as a whole there is no evidence that the proposed project will have any potential for an adverse effect on wildlife resources or the habitat upon which the wildlife depends. SECTION 3. That for the foregoing reasons this Commission grants Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 02-019, to expand the existing Full House Restaurant, upon the following conditions: 1. The restaurant approved by CUP 02.:.019 is limited to the 1,173 square foot food court area that shall be constructed in compliance with the Building and Fire Codes, to the satisfaction of the Building Official, Fire Marshall and Community Development Administrator. The hours of operation on any day shall be between 9:00 a.m. to 12:00 midnight. 2. All onsite signage shall be in compliance with the City's sign ordinance (AMC Sec. 9262.4 to Sec. 9262.4.20). All signage shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Division and appropriate permits shall be obtained from the Building Division. All signage shall be removed unless an SADR approval or Building Permit is on file in the Development Services Department regarding said signage. This includes wall signs, window signs. and temporary banners. 3. Noncompliance with the plans, provisions and conditions of approval for CUP 02-019, shall be grounds for immediate suspension and/or revocation of any approvals, which shall result in closing of the restaurant. 4. Approval of CUP 02-019 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 awareness and acceptance of these conditions of approval. 5. The applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Arcadia and its officers, employees, and agents from and against any claim, action. or proceeding against the City of Arcadia, its officers, employees or agents to attack, set aside, void, or annul any approval or condition of approval of the City of Arcadia conceming this project and/or land use decision, including but not limited to any approval or condition of approval of the City Council, Planning Commission, or City Staff, which action is brought within the time period provided for in Government Code Section 66499.37 or other provision of law 2 . . . applicable to this project or decision. The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim, action, or proceeding concerning the project and/or land use decision and the City shall cooperate fully in the defense of the matter. The City reserves the right, at its own option, to choose its own attorney to represent the City, its officers, employees, and agents in the defense of the matter. SECTION 4. The decision, findings and conditions contained in this Resolution reflect the Commission's action of December 10, 2002, and the following vote: AYES: Baderian, Hsu, Lucas, Wen, Olson NOES: None ABSENT: None SECTION 5. The Secretary shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution and shall cause a copy to be forwarded to the City Council of the City of Arcadia. I HEREBY CERTIFY that the forgoing Resolution was adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 14th day of January.2003, by the following votes: AYES: Baderian, Hsu, Lucas, Wen, Olson NOES: None ABSENT: None 1 fl K- cS;R Chairman, Planning Commission City of Arcadia - ATTEST: /::? Secretary, PlanRl City of Arcadia APPROVED AS TO FORM: ~P.J~ Stephen P. Deitsch, City Attorney 3 " . . . STAFF REPORT Development Services Department December 10, 2002 TO: Arcadia City Planning Commission FROM: Donna L. Butler, Community Development Administrator By: Joseph Lambert, Associate Planner SUBJECT: Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 02-019 to expand an existing restaurant (Full House restaurant) at 1220 S. Golden West Avenue. >'" SUMMARY This Conditional Use Permit application was submitted by Full House restaurant to convert approximately 1,173 square feet of food court area to restaurant space at 1220 S. Golden West Avenue. The Development Services Department is recommending denial of this application, based on the factors listed in this report. GENERAL INFORMATION APPLICANT: Full House restaurant LOCATION: 1220 S. Golden West Avenue (in the President Square shopping center) REQUEST: A Conditional Use Permit to convert approximately 1,173 square feet of food court area to restaurant. Full House restaurant is approximately 3,900 square feet and the applicant is proposing to expand the restaurant an additional 1,173 square feet. The proposed expansion would take floor area away from the adjacent food court area. SITE AREA: 240,930 square feet (5.53 acres) FRONTAGES: Approximately 637 feet on Golden West Avenue Approximately 378 feet on Duarte Road Approximately 378 feet on Naomi Avenue CUP 02-019 December 10, 2002 Page 1 . . . EXISTING LAND USE & ZONING: This site is within the President Square shopping center, which includes the 99 Ranch Market, Full House restaurant, food court, and several retail and office uses. The entire shopping center is zoned C-1 & D SURROUNDING LAND USES & ZONING: North: Multiple-family residential; zoned R-3 South: Multiple-family residential; zoned R-3 East Commercial retail center and a nonconforming apartment building: zoned C-2 West: Multiple-family residential and an automobile service station; zoned R-3 and C-2 respectively. GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Commercial BACKGROUND On April 9, 1991, the Planning Commission granted a Conditional Use Permit (CUP 91-003) to operate a 14,179 square foot food court within an existing 62,099 square foot shopping center (President Square). Another part of CUP 91-003 was a parking modification to provide 383 parking spaces in lieu of 385. Any significant alteration to the approved use (food court) requires a Conditional Use Permit application. PROPOSAL AND ANALYSIS The applicant is proposing to convert approximately 1,173 square feet of food court area to restaurant. Full House restaurant is approximately 3,900 square feet and the applicant is proposing to expand the restaurant an additional 1,173 square feet. The proposed expansion would take floor area away from the adjacent food court area and Full House restaurant would expand to 5,136 square feet. The original Conditional Use Permit granted permission to operate an approximately 14,179 square foot food court area. Between the original approval date and now, approximately 3,900 square feet of the food court area was devoted to Full House restaurant seating area. Originally, the Full House restaurant seating area was part of the food court seating area and was in compliance with CUP 91-003. The Full House area and the food court were one big seating area. Over time, the Full House restaurant seating area became completely separated by a wall from the food court area and is now a separate restaurant. In staff's opinion, the restaurant use is more intense than a food court use. The proposed expansion of Full, House restaurant would result in approximately 5,136 square feet of restaurant area and 9,500 square feet of food court. The CUP 02-019 December 10, 2002 Page 2 . . . original Conditional Use Permit was intended for the entire 14,179 square foot space to be food court area. Of the 1,173 square feet Full House plans to add, approximately 442 square feet of that will be used for additional restaurant seating area. The remaining 731 square feet will be used as kitchen and restroom areas. Based on occupancy limits set forth in the Uniform Building Code, 442 square feet of additional seating area can accommodate 29 seats. ParkinQ When CUP 91-003 was evaluated, the 14,179 square foot food court area was parked as a restaurant. The required parking for an eating establishment is 10 parking spaces for every 1 ,000 square feet of floor area. At that time, staff determined that 385 parking spaces were required by code. As part of CUP 91-003, the Planning Commission granted a parking modification to provide 383 spaces in lieu of 385 spaces required. The applicant submitted a parking survey of all the parking spaces within the entire shopping center. The survey was conducted from October 14 to October 27, 2002 at one-hour intervals beginning at 11:00 AM and ending at 10:00 PM. The survey indicates that there are usually between 15 and 70 parking spaces available of the 383 spaces surveyed. The busiest time surveyed was Sunday, October 20, at 8:00 PM, which indicated three spaces available for the entire shopping center. According to the parking survey, there were at least 10 times during that week when less than 10 parking spaces were available. In addition, there were several times during the parking survey when less than 20 parking spaces were available. This indicates that parking is an issue at this shopping center and there is not any extra parking available. The Full House restaurant is an intense use and usually operates at capacity during lunch and dinner hours. The existing food court is usually not operating at capacity, and also serves many customers who come in for take-out. In staff's opinion, Full House restaurant probably serves twice as many sit-down customers as the food court. Ed Cline, Traffic Engineer for the City of Arcadia, recommended that a qualified traffic engineer conduct an expanded traffic and parking study to determine if the existing parking lot can accommodate the restaurant expansion. Staff originally told Mr. Cline that the restaurant expansion consisted of a 2,600 square foot conversion of food court to restaurant and his original recommendation was based on those figures. However, at the time this report was written, staff advised Mr. Cline that the restaurant expansion involved approximately 1,100 square feet of floor area, and he still stands by his recommend(,itions listed in his memo dated November 14, 2002. It is staff's opinion that the expansion of Full House restaurant would result in a significant increase of traffic at the shopping center. As demonstrated in the applicant's parking survey, there are very few extra parking spaces under existing CUP 02-019 December 10, 2002 Page 3 . ,conditions, especially during lunch and dinner hours. CUP 91-003 granted approval for an approximate 14,000 square foot food court. Full House restaurant was not originally intended to be a restaurant separate from the food court area. Now, the restaurant area takes up approximately 3,900 square feet of the food court and in staff's opinion, is a much more intense use than the food court. Currently, adjacent to the food court and Full House restaurant, there is an additional sit-down restaurant and a bank. These uses, as well as 99 Ranch Market, are also popular destinations within President Square that share parking in the shopping center. The President Square shopping center was originally designed as a retail shopping center and the parking lot is not designed to accommodate additional intense restaurant uses. 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, flora, fauna, ambient noise and objects of historical or aesthetic significance that could not be made less than. significant with mitigation incorporation. 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 Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared for this project. The mitigation measures are those conditions of approval that address the potential noise, parking, and police service impacts. FINDINGS Section 9275.1.2 of the Arcadia Municipal Code requires that for a Conditional Use Permit to be granted, it must be found that all of the follOWing prerequisite conditions can be satisfied: 1. That the granting of such Conditional Use Permit will not be detrimental to the public health or welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in such zone or vicinity. 2. That the use applied for at the location indicated is properly one for which a Conditional Use Permit is authorized. 3. That the site for the proposed use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate said use, and all yards, spaces, walls, fences, parking, loading, landscaping, and other features required to adjust said use with the land and uses in the neighborhood. . CUP 02-019 December 10, 2002 Page 4 . . . 4. That the sjte abuts streets and highways adequate in width and pavement type to carry the kind of traffic generated by the proposed use. 5. That the granting of such Conditional Use Permit will not adversely affect the comprehensive General Plan. RECOMMENDATION . The Development Services Department recommends denial of Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 02-019 due to the fact that the existing parking lot is not designed to accommodate the additional traffic generated by the restaurant expansion. If the Planning Commission determines that based on the evidence presented this is an appropriate use ,at this site and moves to approye Conditional Use Permit CUP 01-019, staff recommends the following conditions of approval: 1. The restaurant approved by CUP 02-019 is limited to the 1,173 square foot food court area that shall be constructed in compliance with the Building and Fire Codes, to the satisfaction of the Building Official, Fire Marshall and Community Development Administrator. The hours of operation on any day shall be between 9:00 a.m. to 12:00 midnight. 2. All onsite signage shall be in compliance with the City's sign ordinance (AMC Sec. 9262.4 to Sec. 9262.4.20). All signage shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Division and appropriate permits shall be obtained from the Building Division. All signage shall be removed unless an SADR approval or Building Permit is on file in the Development Services Department regarding said signage. This includes wall signs, window signs, and temporary banners. 3. Noncompliance with the plans, provisions and conditions of approval for CUP 02-019, shall be grounds for immediate suspension and/or revocation of any approvals, which shall result In closing of th~ restaurant. 4. Approval of CUP 02-019 shall not take effect until the property owner and applicant have executed and tiled the Acceptance Form available from the Development Services Department to indicate awareness and acceptance of these conditions of approval. 5. The applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Arcadia and its officers, employees, and agents from and against any claim, action, or proceeding against the City of Arcadia, its officers, employees or agents to attack, set aside, void, or annul any approval or condition of approval of the City of Arcadia concerning this project and/or land use decision, including but not limited to any approval or condition of approval of the City Council, Planning Commission, or City Staff, which action is brought within the time period provided for in Government Code Section 66499.37 or other provision CUP 02-019 December 10, 2002 Page 5 . . . of law applicable to this project or decision. The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim, action, or proceeding concerning the . project and/or land use decision and the City shall cooperate fully in the defense of the matter. The City reserves the right, at its own option, to choose its own attorney to represent the City, its officers, employees, and agents in the defense of the matter. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION Denial The Planning Commission should move to deny this Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 02-019, because the proposal cannot satisfy all of the 'required prerequisite conditions for a Conditional use Permit, and direct staff to prepare a resolution incorporating the Commission's decision and specific findings. Approval If the Planning Commission intends to approve Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 02-019. the Commission should move to adopt the Negative Declaration, state the supported findings, and direct staff to prepare a resolution incorporating the Commission's decision, specific findings, and any conditions of approval. If any Planning Commissioner, or other interested party has any questions or comments regarding this matter prior to the December 10, 2002 public hearing, please contact Joe Lambert at (626) 574-5444. nna L. utler Community Development Administrator Attachments: Aerial Photo & Zoning Map Land Use Map Photographs Memos from other City Departments Parking Survey submitted by applicant Correspondence and plans submitted by applicant Negative Declaration & Initial Study Environmental Information CUP 02-019 December 10, 2002 Page 6 . ," ~ N -.:~~" .:.~ . ~DJ tdl ,~ 100 o 100 200 Feet , ereJ " , -.'~'~.."! I;" '~l~~'." '~'''.''. "(1' ~"'-'~ - , PII' . 1~" ~ ~ ~':,.,' ,'...,.. , I"~ "rJ I ",Ie. \'\ ~~ ...,,'; "19 I' ,--...:-;t ''', >.-,1:. 1!1 " ::"f:';~:: }:i~ '1 ~ D IR-31 Full House Restaurant Arcadia Zone ~ eopment SelVices Deparlment Engineering Division A'opIJBIJ by. R.SGonzallz, -. 2002 11 "'" \ "'" \ P" , ... .... "'" "'. "'" "'" "'" 1ft. .... "'" .... - ... P" ADIA AVE "'" ... .... .... eo N .... ,.,.. l'flll .... 100 Feet ... ......... 0 P"'q r:- p..., t:J "'''' "'''' ~ "'''' "'", ~ M" l}1~ "'.. en '~""j pn) P" o..! r-tJiVlt ... P'" ~ ~i~f;", "'" ... l ~- ~ ~ ~ '" )> .... "'" ... ....::::z- .. ~ .... ~~iJ2M.+- ... ,- \ """- ......DUARTE RI? r; ~-:-(~ ... ,.", -.... .., 'Yj;, ~Zl I r ,~\I-, ..-J \ .... :::: A "T" i~ v .., -\- \1 ~~- 8 f r-- ~~\<#..= g i ~ L- -< t" \ L:r- j ~~~= z. / ~ ~.'-'- ~ --:E, -- ~~L. "7 5 JRP'~ ~. , cP - , < \ m "'"' "".. " iL\~. " -. ;;. r-" ~t7UJ"" , , ' .... """ k..pte CitY , " , - -.-, - \"r;'pie:CiIY ) , \ q --- \ .Q 1acI1-\...' r-- ---- 1 'l~'" \... -' ~ - , - - r-- r- - fl "". - \ ~ ,..-- ---" \ \ """ \ ,...... \ \ -~ - , \ ~\.. ~ n \\ >-- ..-1fl;_ .... it. ~ 1220 S Golden West Ave Full House Restaurant Engineering DMsion ~~ ~ ~. CUP 2002-019 /fepIrodby:R.S-'Deoember. 2002 "o"po~....".' 1111:':~;'I!~ [1~.'~~':~li 1.1~~lj,II" :V".. , ' " . - -- '~- - 0,1 ,!"lIIIL,',' ,"" , ., __'7,;-,"",~ ,-' _,' r I I I~' a" I i.'Jj~'~~; "'" ....,-. - I -- -- , I n.1 ~ lJ .' .. _. ,,';'!- ~!~ .' ~--., It..! I ,~.Ir -;1.1 I I I" Ik _. ~ I -II, ';,,' .~I' ~.Il I .".'~- ""-r"~- r "'rto,Sjc::l' '1 , . I,! ',' -'::, _ _.'~'~ }, '~ ~ ill "a ,', ;c'. ,', f~'" Ill':.., 'c'" .. ,~,.,.J;<!., ,I,. C' · ::.c ~Q,;'~~;;:;;"'-...-' , " ",I,,!;, , I,~' 'I~i~"~' . ,J:."R~'" r ~ i ' ,", , ,I"",,tl ....IlI'II!I~, ,6.!.i...~"lIj(,~~'L,.3~= , o/~J~,"I!M.:~ ....1', I~:; l~flUJ, ~':~' , tl-jl~ '0 "il':i"~ "',:" l~ ~~. ~G/l~-e$~,:~1 ,'" '~:FI:~iiiiUl ),~I -..;\il,; .~-' '.~";ii:"--""' ;;-':f.s;;"" I,: r 11"~::'llil"tii'l '1 :;; "tl ~f:II'1 I, 1;':'::~'~:':'I"II.",,,,,~,".,::tJj:;';~I, " II ~ I T ~II~ I 1- . It 1.. J.. I~ ~ -"'-.crV./ j. \ . ' ; I , !I~III';' 'ii..,.ll;ltl.:p~~, 1 " '-' a~~~~"Al,tt- }.;'~'-'''ly' ~ ',I" ';~!i "lil1l'I~--'\J!,~~,,:'~i,.j, ~1'~~ . '~, _~~!r.W~r l' ~'~~! ';',~r,ell~! 1\.1. 1~111'~""!t[.,'-,""PJ.IItLioj: ",'"1,1 ~"'.. ' ,r; ,; :, "O~~lli: ' ~:; 'ii:'L" I' .t~1f '. '. , ;' ~:\ :{~ ,II~I~~' I I~~ :;":- ~ ,",'e-,' r, ,l"".~. '~"''Ii\'~,- f1'":''''''''' ~; "~\li:l" Ijl~ ' o ;;;tr;11,-::,~i'1"ii ,f. ,,' - " ' ,""oJ '.. 1f;:';'i'I':jL ~l~, ,~", A,*,:. 1"~' "r '4~! ' ".'r '1Ij~i 11 -1"';;'1 __, ,:~~~ilr:-,~ .,...,...~ 1:~11~" ;, "1J~'i I . -l~lt.16 "".. 'I ',1 ~ -. '.'- _ . . I" /.. ... r.' 1- II f1r__ c :t;:, \1',:.11',:, . ""',1;.' <,,;:.;,, , . '~'l'j,III;;coo,M ,{ ;"'" :.111;~1111'1~11 if~I,' . - . I _ ,.i'l~';i~\~':_(~'~\-\',j'tl," '111 li~i, ,I: ~r ;J'i~f1 ~ I I: ,,-.!,' _ ".'1 . .' - : ' " ,\ F:, "'" ~.,.!+ .;: :;,1;::"' .- 1,1 '.~,'~I~~""~1~n. ';"1~" rrl'f". "I'I l ,1" ...:. I',", .".~.I;,. I," , I," ,Iv ,:!;IP,IIi" J'llltl<"';"\";.,,,,,,. 1,"/11"" 'I j . \ \ :"1 -', 7-I~~111.l"~I\~~i_').~"'~'~<fillrl;-tl' . . A partial view of the Food Court . . , . . --. __d _, ,\.' Portion of the Food Court to be converted to Full House Restaurant . ,7" :-,' . .. . Main dining area of Full House Restaurant . Existing Full House Restaurant kitchen area (proposed to be expanded as part of this proiect) MEMORANDUM POLICE DEPARTMENT DATE: November 8, 2002 TO: Joe Lambert, Planning Services FROM: Bob Sanderson, Captain ~ SUBJECT: CUP 02-019,1220 S. Golden West Ave. Back2round The "Full House Restaurant".Jocated at 1220 S. Golden West Ave., has an existing restaurant space of 3,900 square feet and seeks to add an additional 2,600 square feet to their restaurant. The restaurant is located within the food court of the President's Square . shopping center. Discussion . The police department has no objection to an expansion of the restaurant per se, however, it appears from the plans that existing general food court dining area would be used in this expansion. The police department is not aware of the lease and ownership situation within the food court area, but it is our understanding that different restaurants operate in the food court. The expansion of the "Full House Restaurant" would take up some of the general dining area. Would this expansion encroach upon the dining area of other restaurants in the food court? Is there agreement from the other merchants to approve this expansion? Our concern focuses on any potential disagreements or disturbances that may be created by this expansion with other merchants in the food court area. Recommendation Provided that there is agreement from any adjacent merchant potentially impacted by expansion, construction and available dining area usage, the police department has no objection to approval of the CUP for this project. . . . . MEMORANDUM Development Services Department DATE: November 14, 2002 TO: Joe Lambert, Associate Plan'/1 _ .- Ed Cline, Traffic Engineer ~ FROM: SUBJECT: CUP 02-019 .1220 SOUTH GOLDEN WEST AVENUE As requested, I have reviewed the plans for the proposed conversion of approximately 2,600 square feet of food court to a quality restaurant in the shopping center located at 1220 South Golden West Avenue. The plans included a parking survey that was conducted over the last two weeks of October 2002. The parking survey found that the existing 381-space parking lot was essentially ,full during several study periods, usually on weekends. According to widely used trip generation data (ITE), a 2,800 square-foot quality restaurant could add 31 additional vehicle trips per hour during the heavier traffic periods on Saturday. The parking study shows that Saturdays and Sundays are the heaviest traffic days of the week. It is unkl10wn how much traffic would be removed from the site due to the conversion of the food court to the quality restaurant. For these reasons, I recommend that a qualified traffic engineer conduct an expanded traffic and parking study. This study should examine the following issues: . How much parking demand would be eliminated by the removal of the food court? . How much traffic generation credit should be applied to the quality restaurant trip generation based on the removal of the food court. . Would any significant traffic related impacts be created at both Golden West Avenue and Naomi Avenue and Golden West Avenue and Duarte Road as the result of additional traffic generated by the quality restaurant? . Would any traffic impacts be created at any of the existing shopping center driveways as the result of the additional traffic generated by the proposed project? EC:pa cc: Philip A. Wray, City Engineer . . . President Square 1220 S. Golden West Arcadia Ca PARKING SPACE ANAL VZE TOTAL PARKING SPACE: 381 Numbers below are shown for vacant spaces only MON TUE WED THRU FRI SAT SUN MON TUE WED THRU FRI SAT SUN 10/14 10/15 10/16 10/17 10/18 10/19 10/20 10/21 10/22 10/23 10/24 10/25 10/26 10/27 11 :OOAM 45 48 39 51 59 45 31 68 62 58 57 43 12 16 12:00PM 30 32 20 15 35 21 18 33 37 31 35 32 .ll ~ - 1 :OOPM 40 33 11 5 16 ..!! 2 46 38 25 15 36 ~ - - - 2:00PM 65 47 52 35 37 ~ r 70 52 46 25 34 1fi - 23 3:00PM 70 81 78 55 38 35 32 79 78 74 67 45 35 20 4:00PM 69 93 97 78 69 68 69 82 74 52 84 87 38 43 5:00PM 77 62 78 63 79 55 52 86 68 65 78 63 58 42 6:00PM 52 59 62 35 45 32 45 67 51 78 43 46 36 24 7:00PM 37 II 22 ..ll 16 21 23 24 24 29 26 49 27 28 8:00PM 32 27 37 13 18 J! .2 43 45 41 18 28 57 42 9:00PM 187 121 164 132 131 83 58 132 182 173 128 86 121 125 1 0:00PM 299 312 338 329 331 308 225 225 332 298 301 276 289 340 e r,~l ITF.mrrnnfXfTrrITfrrr-+; rrFrTl1G~ :~ - :=-t~iC- Iw.u lJJ::l'Jlilll i A =i@;:: -- ~:::'_.-~~ Ii~~~ :~ _~'I_ 'Ill: . ~ t 'w l- V! w 3: :z: w o -' o C) --------e--------- IJUARTE AVENUE -- ---. ~ ,. t I t I , Ot FO<LIro.''i!,. Af1U,;';"424 ~. -. '. ~-,- :.g - ~;t.L ~L ~i1 ~ j'---;:orA) CwqT WA...H~1'3' 'Si I , I t I -~.~ ~ .:!-~ " .-:~--. -'1"'- ... -'- il€DdIJt)fl"ICE AAf~g5CO 5" -r-:-- =If ,_..~= 0:;; " j - ~l' -. $9 P.J\lI;Of WR;<(T Ar..t:.t-ta7.." Sf" ,,~ ~: ;1 1M 31 = ~ T1TDtnTrrrr ~4L~~LU1L~Up<I.1~~~tl~~UlUl1l- NAOMI AVENUE . sm: 0....' LOT aRtA fSll;?....ut-WJ sr 8J.,.ll-~I~ AAE,J., ~~f;2~ ~ FAA:O~iG (l o::lM:N''''.,. "'~1J.&.1S9 SF Ui~\J~~ Mt.k..~ SF. 11$ ~$): A SUlUl!NG OGCUPANC'r' DArk. QFFIC('/RETAlL AI~:A""'6<4:l." Sf' FOOD -CCUFl Mr'..I.....l5131 'if ~~~ NIl..A.-oG8J.O SF 99 IW<<:H ~.ET A,~A-002a1.''' SF PARKING SPACE: .51't.t4YP.O: ~PnCT: H.\.o/1JoCAiC TOf.Al "'),fU!,!/'ffi: 302 SP.ra.5 6'J SPACES HI SP.t;;fS Jat ~ACts PROPERTY OWNER : L1NKWORLD PROPERTIES, LLC ~J" 5 GUL08'J VlESl .YE. ARCAtlJJl,. CA 91007 fULL HOUSE RESTAURANT' 1220 S. C'.(llOEI. W($T AVE ARCAD.... GA 91007 . ----. ~ I -IQ:~!!d- -:~ """'-'[CI~t:''''''I.J( I L~< ~ I 1___ J I L~ ~~~t:F F~W~L'_ J~ ~~ ~ ~ c ~ I! I c I I ;J ~~g ~!!l! ~~ !:~ ,t II , I I II ~ L: 11 uu UO UU o " ElOSIlHO 1IIU/COUNlDl1ll BE REIIlMD -~ EXISTING FOOD COURT AREA ~ .......tEI '1 ~Xl Sfl Nq fr'aO CoURT f /..-06 fZ Pl-AtJ _110 '1~ i I, 4F ~ . . . 12/01/02 Mr. Joe Lambert, Associate Planner Arcadia City Planning Department Arcadia, Ca Dear Mr, Lambert: R.e, Application no. : CUP 2002-019 1220 S. Golden West Ave, Arcadia, Ca 91007 Full House Restaurant After having reviewed Mr. Ed Cline, City TIlIfIic Eilgineer's 11/14/02 memorandum to you, we feel it is absolutely necessmy to clarify the pwpose of our request to add approx. 1,100 s.! to our restaurant: 1. proposed space is approx. 1,100 s.f. , not 2,600 s.f. as mentioned in Mr. Cline's memo. 2. Seating area is approx. 300 s.f" 800 s.f. expanded kitchen. When Full House Restaurant was opened ten years ago, the kitchen was set up to prepare Chinese dishes when ordered. However, due to demand, trend and competition, we have added "dim sum" dishes which preparation demands lI1B"uaIlabor on site. The existing kitchen.is quite impossible to accommodate extra kitchen help ( approx, 6 dim sum che1S). We have requested Landlord to allow us to convert space of Care' Plus to kitchen, however, this will create a veI)' poor floor plan in Food Court. FiIJa) decision of Landlord is to enclose off the north side of Food Court for Full House. The expanded seating area will be approx. 300 s.t: creating 2 tables, 8 chairs. Enclo.sed are drawings: 1. current floor plan of Food Court with BBQ take out counter facing west 2. Landlord's proposed c~ose offnortb side of Food Court 3. reposition BBQ take out counter facing,south, existing bathrooms to be relocated 4. new proposed floor plan - BBQ take out counter turned facing south new bathroom location with new hallway between new seating area . -::. demolish existing bathrooms to kitchen area We sincerely hope this will help the planning department to prepare a correct report to planning commissioners for the 12/10/02 hearing. Please feel free to call my architect, Mr, Fonzy Kao or Landlord's Property Manager, Miss Susana Chan at 626446-1212 if we can be of further assistance to you. Sincerely yours ~ui~~ Owner, Full House Restaurant .. DR.f}WIN4 .:j:f I current. floor plan of Food Court I I I I I , I I I T-~--J L______~____J. ~--------~--------_G------, I I . -. . I \ I I I I I I I I I \ COMMON AREA \ : I 4,298 SF I I I I ~ 1 I. 'r 1 I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I ~-----------~-------------~ t I #l.220-I 3013 Sf' 1I12:2O-A KUO'S 1lAICEllY. loPP. 644 SF 11 12:2().J CAFE PlUS Af'P. 722 SF #t2:2D-H SHAU MAY loP.. 4<2 Sf #l22ll-G CUlUtY lITe . N'P. 485 .SF #122O-B . ---------- ------ FASIlION. O!'llCAL ' - -- APp.l,iio05r.. --- . . . 1I12:20-D tHAMPtON JoPl'. 272 Sf' FlRB Elm' WOMI!N 1I1220-B #1220-1' w.NOAAINE NOODlE ~. 8C2 SF APl'. 500 sF MI!N :fI:1220 AND FOOD COURT Sc:.\LE: o 13 6 10 1S \ , ", N r . , .:It lJ ' ])/lAw IN~ .Iv Landlord's proposed close off north side of Food Coutt " . 90 Sf' : lSt'Sf : 48 Sf I ...____--1 L..___L__.-J ,1:. . 'vENDpR.? ,: ---_/ . ------------------0 -'--___.,' 1 I ' I I 1 I I I I I I 1 COMMON AREA I I 4,298 Sf' I I I : 9 I I 1 I I 1 I I L___________~_____________~ ) I I 11~ SF #122()..A KUO'S IlAKEllY N'f'. ,644 Sf' ' IIl22O-B #1Z20-D CHAMPION 1f!: 272 Sf WOMEN #l22O-B 1I1Z20-F MANDMINE NOOOlf IJ'!. BC2 SF FASHION OJl11CA1. ---~P:l.liooSr;,- -- APP. 500 Sf MEN #1220 AND FOOD COURT SCAI..E: o t J 6 \0 15 . I , r. ", #I220-H SHAU MAY IPP. ~2 Sf STO. ' ~L . DraWing tJ4 Dew proposed floor t,8 N vPit..1" F=P UJ~IZ, PI NlN'&:{ AfZZ"A. ("0 FIAU-- H!lt($6 ~TAv~r PI/Jlfoo!Gq ~eA. ,', ~L.oOR. pL-AN pJU'pt>S6Q o ^'~ "0- , . 1RJ II ~ gm~~ ~ gm ~~~ g;g &m ~~~ fUL,.l..- Holt $~ R~ FULL HOUSE RESTAURANT' ADDiTION AREA o \lIm=--==- fiM~~ . -- FOOD COURT " , , , , , , , . ,. . . , . '. . , , , pRRWJNq .:tf3 ~ .4 eo!J.NTE:P.- Cs(iJ17N~ qo Ifbl'D.fA;? /if B/t1'H.<DOJ'1 t.6<U7/N4 yo ?~I'O.~z,;> o k.tri!/l~J ('tKlJl'INf ~.9.tH1;> - -- ....--..---... EXISnNG FULL HOUSE RESTAURANT " " " " " " " " II PROPOSED FULL-HOUSE II REST. NEW AOOmONAL :' AREA - " , .' " " 'I '. . , , -' '" " ~Jr.Sl.. ~ ... CD DOOR NUMeER .~-."'"' -1", L II .._-i (I c'I'11 I r- 'I · "'_ I r _ tt '" r II " t._ l , ... ...', , " " , '" " q-- JII, I' '.. II 1 -J " " + . , ~- ;'\ f------~... , "-"., ,r.r-:"-::--"'\ of'E' ~, ',','1 " " 'L ~ '~Ir'== SER _- , , " J' ',. ... , " PlUS TEA J~ ------ -----------------~-- . ===::::===::r=R-'::-_ - .- EXISTING WALL/COUNTER TO BE RE~ " " " " ttlL ,- 1'-' " " " " T~ERVICE AREA <A f H'P .- . -4~ t{Et.J 1>6~ CWNlY... _'III ,_:::::::::::::::::::::::-__________..1: .. ~ ..'- - - ...... ,<6 ~ .: J:> " " " """, !h" .A.~I, ~II ~ll "'" ~1I ~" " " 'I " " I -, ~ .I ,. .,>c...' . . . NEGATIVE DECLARATION 1. Name, If any, and a brief description of project: Conditional Use Permit Application No. 2002-019: A Conditional Use Permit to add approximately 1,100 :square feet to an existIng 3,900 square foot restaurant. 2. Location: 12205. Golden West Avenue, City of ArcadIa, County of Los Angelss' 3. Entity or person undertaking project: Full House Resteurant 1220 S. Golden West Avenue Arcadia, CA 91007 (626) 523-3659 ihe Planning Commission, having reviewed the Initial Study of this proposed project and having reviewed the written comments received prior to the public meeting of the Planning Commission. Including the recommendation of the CIty's Staff, does hereby find and declare that the proposed project will not have a significant effect on the environment. A brief statement of the reasons supporting the Planning CommlssionlCity Council's findings are as follows: The proposed use is consistent with .the zoning and General Plan land use designation of the project site and will not have a significant effect upon the environment. 'The Planning Commission hereby finds that the Negative Declaration reflects its independent judgment. A copy of the Initial Study may be obtained at: City of Arcadia Development Services Department Community Development Divi:sion 240 W. HuntIngton Drive . Arcadia, 91007 (626) 574-5423 'The location and custodian of the documents and any other material which constnute the record of proceedings upon which the City based its decision to adopt this Negative Declaration are as follows: City of Arcadia Dev/llopment Services Department Community Development DivIsIon 240 W. Huntington Drive Arcadia, 91007 (626) 574-5423 Joe {hA~ Staff Date Received for Filing Nag Dec ' 7/02 . File No. CUP 2002-019 CITY OF ARCADIA 240 WEST HUNTINGTON DRIVE ARCADIA, CA 91007 CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM 1. Project Title: Application No. CUP 2002-019 2. Project Address (Location) 1220 S. Golden West Avenue 3. Project Sponsor's Name, Address & Telephone Number: Full House Restaurant 1220 S. Golden West Avenue ' . Arcadia, CA 91007 (626) 523-3659 . 4. Lead Agency 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 Agency Contact Person & Telephone Number: Donna Butler, Community Development Administrator (626) 574-5442 6. General Plan Designation: Commercial 7. Zoning Classification: C-1 8. Description of Project: . -1" CEOA Env, Checklist Part 1. 7/02 . . . File No. CUP 2002-019 Conditional Use Permit Application No. 2002-019: A Conditional Use Permit to add approximately 1,100 square feet to an existing 3,900 square foot restaurant. 9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: (Briefly describe the project's surroundings.) The properties to the north and south are zoned R-3, and are developed with multiple-family residential land uses. The properties to the west are zoned R-3 and 0-2, and are developed with multiple-family residential uses and a service station, respectively. The property to the east is zoned 0-2 and is developed with a commercial retail center and a non-conforming apartment building. 10. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or'participation agreement): N/A 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. r ] Aesthetics [ ] Biological Resources r ] Geology/Soils [ ] HydrologylWater Quality [ ] Mineral Resources [ ] Population & Housing r ] Recreation r ] Utilities and Service Systems [ ] Mandatory Findings of Significance [ ] Air Quality r ] Cultural Resources [ ] Hazards & Hazardous Materials [ ] Land Use & Planning r ] Noise [ ] Public Services [ ] Transportation / Circulation DETERMINATION (To be completed by the Lead Agency) On the basis of this initial evaluation: [Xl I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. -2- CEQA Env. Checklist Part 1.7/02 . . . File No. CUP 2002-019 r] 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. r] I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. r] 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 tpat earlier analysis as described on attached 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. r] 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: For: Donna Butler, Community Development Administrator The City of Arcadia - Development Services Department Signature For 11/7/b"L Date ~ '1?u.f"1 ~ - Printed Name EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: 1. A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impacr answers that are adequately supported by the Information sources a lead agency cites In the parentheses follOWing each question. A "No Impacr 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 Impacr 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). -3- CEOA Env. Checklist Part 1, 7/02 . . . \ \ \ File No. CUP 2002-019 2. All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as project,leveJ, indirect as well as direct. and construction related as well as operational impacts. 3. "Potentially Significant Impacr is appropriate If there Is substantial evidence that an effect is significant. If there are one or more, "Potentially Significant Impacr 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 Impacr 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 CECA 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, a) Earlier Analyses Used: Identify and state where they are available for review. b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mjtlgatlon measures based on the earlier analysis. c) . Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures that were Incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project. Lead agencies are encouraged to Incorporate into the checklist, references to Information sources for potential impacts (e.g.. general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. 7. Supporting Information Sources. A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited In the discussion. 8. The explanation of each issue should Identify: a) The significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and b) The mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significant. -4- CEOA Env. Checklist Part 1, 7/02 File No.: CUP 2002-019 . Less Than Poten~ally Significant Less Than Significant With Significant No Impact MltlgaUon ImPact Impact IncorporaUon 1. AESTHETICS - Would the project a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? 0 0 0 181 b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited 0 0 0 181 to. trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? . 2. . The proposed project consists of a conditional use permit to expand an existing restaurant use within an existing commercial building. The project site is alraady developed with commercial buildings and no additional construction ;s proposed. The project site is surrounded by similar commercial uses and is part of a larger shopping center. As such, no adverse impact is anticipated. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES - In determining whether impacts to agriculture resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Depl. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project: Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland. or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland) to non-agricultural use? (The Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program In the California Resources Agency to non-agricultural use? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and Its surroundlngs~ d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? a) b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use? o o o 181 o o o 181 o o o 181 o o 181 o o o 181 o CEOA Checklist 5 7/02 . File No.: CUP 2002-019 Potentially Significant Impact lass Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact The proposal Is (:onsistent with the Commercial/and use designation of the General Plan and with the zoning of the site, and is required to comply with the regulations of any other jurisdictional agency with appliceble environmental regulations. The project site is surrounded by similar uses and no additional commercial construction is proposed at the project site. As such, the proposal will have no impacts on agricultural resources. 3. AIR QUALITY - Where available. the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? . c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net Increase of any criteria pollutant for which the proj ect region Is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? e) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? f) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? o o o o o o o o o o o IZI o IZI o IZI o IZI o IZI The proposed project consists of a conditional use permit to expand an existing restaurant use within an existing commercial building. The project site is already developed with commercial buildings and no additional construction is proposed. The continued use of the site will be in accordanCe with local air quality regulations as administered by the South Coast Air Quality Management District. As such, no edverse impacts are anticipated. 4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES - Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse impact, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate. sensitive, or special status species In local or regional plans, policies, or regulations. or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? . b) Have a substantial adverse Impact on any riparian habitat or other o o o o o 181 o 181 CEQA Checklist 6 7i02 File No,: CUP 2002-019 . less Than Potentially Significant Less Than Significant With Significant No Impact Mlijgatlon Impact Impect IncorporaUon sensitive natural community identified In local or regional plans, policies, and regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protectedwellands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including but not limited to , marsh, vemal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological Interruption or other meal)s? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any na~ve resident or 0 0 0 1:81 migratory fish or wildlife species or with established resident or migratory wildlife corridors. or impede the use of wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological 0 0 0 1:81 resources, such as a tree preservation polley or ordinance? . f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation 0 0 0 181 Plan, Natural Conservation Community Plan, or other approved local, regional or state habitat conservation plan? The proposed project consists of a conditional use permit to expand an existing restaurant usa within an existing commarcial building. The project site is already developed with commercial buildings and no additional construction is proposed. As such, the proposal will have no impacts on biological rasources. 5. CULTURAL RESOURCES - Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a 0 0 0 181 historical resource as defined in !j15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an 0 0 0 181 archaeological resource pursuant to !j15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unlql,le paleontological resource or . 0 0 0 IZI site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of 0 0 0 IZI formal cemeteries? The project site is already developed with a commercial building and no additional construction is proposed. . As S1!ch, no adverse impacts on cultural ri1sources are anticipated. GEOLOGY AND SOILS - Would the project: CEOA Checklist 7 7/02 . a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects. including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: I) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the St~te Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. II) Strong seismic ground shaking? iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? v) Landslides? . b) Result In substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? . c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that Is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil as defined In Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? File No.: CUP 2002-O19 Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact 181 IZI IZI IZI IZI IZI IZI IZI IZI e) Have salls Incapable of adequately supportIng the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? While this entire region Is subject to the effects of seismic activity, the subject location has not been determined to be especially susceptible to any of the above geological or soil problems. The site is essentially flat land, and is not within an area subject to inundation, subsidance, or expansion of soils. The proposed project consists of a conditional use permit to expand an existing restaurant use within an existing commercial building. The project- site is already developed with commercial buiidings and no additional construction is proposed. As such. no adverse impacts are anticipated. 7. VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS - Would the project o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o CEOA Checklist 8 7/02 . . a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? File No.: CUP 2002-019 Potentially Significant Impact o o o o o o o o Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporation o o o o o o o o Less Than Slgnlflcanl No Impact Impact o 12I b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions Involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? o t2J c) emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? o t2J d) , . Be located ona site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Govemment Code Section 65962,5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? o t2J e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public eirport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip. would the project result In a safety hazard for people residing or working In the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a sigificant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are Intermixed with wildlands? o t2J o t2J o t2J o t2J The project site is already developed with a commercial building and no additional construction is proposed. The project site is surrounded by similar uses and no additional commercial construction is proposed at the project site. The proposed project does not involve hazardous substances, nor will It create. or expose people to health hazards. The proposal will be in compliance with emergency access and fire safety regulations. As such. no adverse impacts are anticipated. . HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY - Would the project: CEOA Checklist 9 7/02 . . a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (I.e., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop toa level which would not support eXisting land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattem of the site or area, inclUding through the alteration of the course of a stream or river. in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation 01'1- or (iff-site? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage. pattem of the site or area, inclUding through the alteration of the course of a stream or river. or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoffin a manner which would result in flooding 01'1- or off-site? e) Create or contribute runoff water which would B)(ceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) OtherWise substantially degrade water quality g) Place housing within a 1 OO-year flood hazard area, as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a 100-year floodplain structures which would Impede or redirect flood,flows? I) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? . j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami or mudflow? File No.: CUP 2002-019 Potentially Significant Impact o o o o o o o o o D. Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporation o o o o o o o o o o Less Than SignIRcant Impact o o o o o o o o o o No Impact 181 181 181 181 181 181 181 181 181 181 CEQA Checklist 10 7/02 File No.: CUP 2002-019 . Po19ntially Slgnlflcant Impact Less Than Slgnlflcant With Mitigation Incorporation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact k) Potential impact of project construction on storm water runoff? 0 0 0 ~ I) Potential Impact of project post-construction activity on storm 0 0 0 ~ water runoff? m Potential for discharge Qf storm water from areas from material 0 0 0 rzI storage. vehicle or equipment maintenance (including washing). waste handling, hazardous materials handling or storage, delivery areas or roading docks, or other outdoor work areas? n) Potential for discharge of storm water to cause significant harm 0 0 0 rzI on the biological integrity of the waterways and water bodies? , '- 0) Potential for discharge of storm- water to Impair the beneficial 0 0 0 181 . uses of the receiving waters or areas that prOVide water quality benefit? p) Potential for significant changes in the flow velocity or volume of 0 0 0 rzI storm water runoff that can use environmental harm? q) Potential for Significant increases in erosion of the project site or 0 0 0 rzI surrounding areas? The projecf site is already developed with a commercial building and no additional construction is proposed. The project site is surrounded by similar uses and no additional commercial construction is proposed et the project site. There will be no change to the existIng drainage and runoff generated by the project site. As such. no adverse Impacts ere anticipated. 9. LAND USE AND PLANNING - Would the project: a) PhYSically divide an established community? 0 0 0 rzI b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of 0 0 0 rzI an agency with jurisdiction over the project (Including. but not limited to the general plan, specific plan. local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? . c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural 0 0 0 ~ CECA Checklist 11 7/02 . . . File No.: CUP 2002-019 Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With M1l1getion Incorporation Less Than Significant Impacl No Impact community conservation plan? The proposal is consistent with the Commercial land use designation of the General Plan and with the C-1 zone. .and is required to comply with the regulations of any other jurisdictional agency with applicable environmental regulations. The proposed project consists of a conditional use permit to expand an existing restaurant use within an existing commercial building. The project site is already developed with commercial buildings and no additional construction is proposed. As such, no adverse impacts are anticipated. a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? b) Result In the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, . specific plan or other land use plan? No minerai resources are known to exist at the site. As such, no adverse impacts are anticipated. 10. MINERAL RESOURCES - Would the project: 11. NOISE - Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundbome noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase In ambient noise levels In the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use air:port, would the project expose people residing or working in the proJect area to excessive noise levels? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working In the project area to excessive noise levels? o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ IZI IZI IZI CEQA Checklist 12 7/02 . .. . File No.: CUP 2002-019 Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant WIIh Mitigation Incorporation No Impact Less Than Significant Impact The project I>lte il> I>urrounded by I>imilar UI1eI> and no additional commercial conl>truction il> propol>ed at the project I>lte. Therefore, there will not be any new I>ourcel> of noil>e at the project I>lte. AI> I>uch. no adverse impacts are anticipated. 12. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth In an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or Indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? o IZI o o b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? o o o IZI c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? o IZI o o . .., The project I>lte is I>urrounded by similar usel> and no additional commercial conl>tructlon il> proposed at the project site. Also, there will not be any naw construction of rel>ldentlal units. As such, no adverse Impacts ere anticipated. PUBLIC SERVICES - Would the project: a) Result In substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities. the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, In order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection? 0 0 0 IZI Police protection? 0 0 0 IZI Schools? 0 0 0 IZI Parks? 0 0 0 IZI Other public facilities? 0 0 0 IZI The project I>ite Is already developed with a commercial building and no addftlonal construction Is proposed. The project site is surrounded by similar uses and no additional commercial construction is proposed at the project site. Therefore, no impacts to public services are anticipated. 14. RECREATION - Would the project: a) Increase the use.of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical o IZI o o CEOA Checklist 13 7/02 FileNo.: CUP 2002-019 . Less Than Potentlany Significant Less Than Signlflcant With Significant No Impact Mitlgation Impact Impact Incorporatlon deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the D D D t8I construction or expansion of recreational facilities which have an adverse physical effect on the environment? The proposed project consists of a conditional use permit to expand an existing restaurant use within an existing commarcial building. The project sita is already developed with commercial buildings and no additional construction is proposed. As such, the project will not create a significant impact,upon recreational services. 15. TRANSPORTATJONITRAFFIC. Would the project: a) Cause an Increase In traffic which Is substentlalln relation to the D D D t8I existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (I.e" result In a substantial increase In either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at Intersections)? , , b} Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service D D D f8I . standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c) Result In a change In air traffic patterns, including either an D D D t8I increase !n traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., D D D t8I sharp curves or dangerous Intersections) or Incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Result In Inadequate emergency access? D D D t8I f} Result in inadequate parking capacity? D D t8I D g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans or programs supporting D D D t8I altemative transportation (e.g" bus tumouts, bicycle racks)? The proposed project consists of a conditional use permit to expand an existing restaurent use within an existing commercial building. The project site is alreedy developed with commercial buildings and no additional construction is proposed. Part of the conditional use permit process will include an analysis of the parking situation and a determination by staff on the adequacy of parking. As such, the impacts if any, are less than . significant. CEOA Checklist 14 7i02 ~ . ~ 16. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities. the construcilon of which could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? In making this determination, the City shall consider whether the project is subject to the water supply assessment requirements of Water Code Section 10910, et seq. (SB 610), and the requirements of Government Code Section 664737 (SB221). e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project determined that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state and local statues and regulations related to solid waste? File No.: CUP 2002-019 Potentially Significant Impact D D D . '" D D D D Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporation D D D D D D D Less Then Slgnlncant No Impact Impact D D D D D D D ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ The project site is already developed with a commercial building and no additional construction is proposed. The project site is surrounded by similar uses and no additional commercial construction is proposed at the proiect site. As such, no adverse impacts are anticipated. 17. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment. substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species. cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below D D D ~ CEQA Checklist 15 7/02 . . . self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community. reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate Important examples of the major periods of Califomia history or prehistory? b Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? c) Does the project have environmental effects whlc~ will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirecUy? File No.: CUP 2002-019 Potentially Significant Impact o o Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporation o o Less Than Significant Impact o o No Impact [gJ [gJ The proposed project consisfs of a conditional use permit to expand an existing restaurant usa within an existing commercial building. The project site is already developed with commercial buildings and no additional construction is proposed. The conditional use permit shall not result in cumulative impacts to the surrounding. neighborhood or limit the future development of the neighborhood. As such, no adverse impacts are anticipafed. CEQA Checklist 16 7/02 FileNo. ~02.-o('1 CITY OF ARCADIA 240 WEST HUNTINGTON DRIVE ARCADIA, CA 91007 (626) 514-5400 ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION FORM Date Filed: 1C>- 14 - o~ General Information . 1. Name and address of developer or project sponsor: _r-VL-L. 1-l~t)SE. I2B,-AUe.Mrr l~o s. erl>L-Det-l ,,.Joe.... A-uE:. ARGI\PIA. CA cl\oolb 2. Address of project (Location): i2-'2.0 'S. E{OL.DEN Wj;ST AVi:'. Af<CADfA. CA ~l <<=:>06 .. Name, address and telephone number of person to be contacted concerning this project: _FoNZ-\ !ClIO 3-IOfIMAAvl=-, WI>>,c......V1IJA-. ~A C\11~O ( b;2--b ~ l?2-0 - ?61iq . 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: P.,UIWIN&, ~LUTRtCAI.- f>LVHI<:l,IN6- peRMIT. 5., Zoning: C - I 11 .D 6. General Plan Designation: Proiect Descriotion 7. Proposed use of site (project description): .F6-S,..AVR,AIJT . AT:>t>ITION . Site Size: 71800 Sq. Ft./ Acre(s) .. 9. Square footage per building: 10. Number of floors of construction: f'l.-ooR ONLT, 11. Amount of off-street parking provided: rJlA 12. Proposed scheduling of project: c:OMr\..e....n~ pPO)C::CT ON'\ME; sNDot=- '(E:AR. z.oo'2. 13. Associated projects: N/A . . 14. Anticipated incremental development: . N/A 15. If residential, include the number of units, schedule of unit sizes, range of sale prices or rents, and type of household sizes expected: N/A 16. If commercial, indicate the type, i.e. neighborhood, city or regionally orientfild, square footage of sales area, and loading facilities, hours of operation: Nel6"~eaR~oop Dp.leAireJ> RpS.TA"'~AIo.l", I-o/Wwi!'t ffl!:>t-I BA'KUf ResrA<iRMJ1. ,,",0 \.oAOlllltli "Del<, ToTA-I_ "rf2.EA sf. e 1-(0000RS f'f;R. )),I,'r'. ~ ~ &p.<<Afid'J'\ 17. lfindustrial, indicate type, estimated employment per shift, and loading facilities: '?~.......t K . N fA 18. If institutional, indicate. the major function, estimated employment per shift, estimated occupancy, loading facilities, and community benefits to be derived from the project: N/A . 19. If the project involves a variance, conditional use permit or zoning application, state this and indicate clearly why the application is required: EnviranlnfoFonn -2- 4101 .20. Are the following items applicable to the project or its effects? Discuss below all items checked yes (attach additional sheets as necessary). YES NO o \81 21. Change in existing features of any hills, or substantial alteration of ground contours. o ~ 22. Change in scenic views or vistas from existing residential areas or public lands or roads. o Ia o 181 o ~ o ~ o 181 o ~ .0 QSI D~ D ~ 23.' Change in pattern, scale or character of general area of project. 24.' Significant amounts of solid waste or litter. 25. Change in dust, ash, smoke, fumes or odors in vicinity. 26. Change in ground water quality or quantity, or alteration of existing drainage patterns. 27. Substantial change in existing n()ise or vibration levels in the vicinity. 28. Is site on filled land or on any slopes of 10 percent or more? 29. Use or disposal of potentially hazardous materials, such as toxic substances, flammable or explosives 30. Substantial change in demand for municipal services (police, fire, water, sewage, etc.) 31. Substantial increase in fossil ~uel consumption (electricity, oil, natural gas. etc.) o !XI 32. o m. 33. Relationship to a larger project or series of projects. Has a prior environmental impact report been prepared for a program, plan, policy or ordinance consistent with this project? o a 34. If you answered YES to question no. 33, may this project cause significant effects on the environment that were not examined in the prior EIR? Environmental SettinD 35. 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. Describe any.existing structures on the site, and the use of the structures. Attach photographs of the site. (Snapshots or Polaroid photos will be accepted.) . EnvlronlnfoFonn -3- 4101 .6. 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 knowledge and belief. Date I Ci - c; - &1.- ~~2- (Signature) . For . . EnvlronlnfoFonn -4- 4/01