The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1672 (2) . RESOLUTION NO. 1672 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 02-009 TO OPERATE A TEA HOUSE AND CAF~ WITH SEATING FOR 46 PATRONS AT 815 W. NAOMI AVENUE, UNIT G. WHEREAS, on May 22, 2002, a conditional use permit application was filed by Wen-Ling Lee to operate a tea house and cafe with seating for 46 patrons including an outdoor seating area (Development Services Department Case No. C.U.P. 02-009) at property commonly known as 815 W. Naomi Avenue, Unit G; and WHEREAS, A public hearing was held on August 13, 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: e 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 e 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 not adversely affect the comprehensive General Plan because the. land use and current zoning are consistent with the General Plan. 6. That the use applied forwill 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 02-009, to operate a tea house and cafe with seating for 46 patrons including an outdoor seating area, upon the following conditions: 1. The eating establishment approved by CUP 02-009 is limited to the 1,550 square foot commercial space with a maximum capacity of 46 patrons (inside and outside) that shall be in compliance with the Building and Fire Codes, and the City's Regulations for incidental outdoor dining (AMC Sec. 9270) to the satisfaction of the Building Official, Fire Marshall and Community Development Administrator. Compliance may result in less than 46 patrons being able to fit in the 1,550 square foot commercial space and adjacent outdoor seating area. . e 2. The hours of operation on any day shall be between 11.:00 a.m. to 12:00 midnight. 3. This approval of CUP 02-009 includes a parking modification of 8 spaces in lieu of 31 spaces. This Modification does not constitute an approval for a general reduction of the parking requirements for the building or the center, but rather only for the computer game arcade approved by CUP 02-009. 4. 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 e 2 . e e 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. 5. Noncompliance with the plans, provisions and conditions of ~pproval for CUP 02-009, as well as noncompliance with the City's Regulations for incidental outdoor dining (AMC Sec. 927D) shall be grounds for immediate suspension and/or revocation of any approvals, which shall result in closing of the eating establishment. 6. Approval of CUP 02-009 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. 7. 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 of law applicable to t~is project or decision. The City shall promptly notify the a'pplicant 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 ~. The decision, findings and conditions contained in this Resolution reflect the Commission's action of August 13, 2002, and the following vote: 3 e e e 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 13th day of August 2002, by the following votes: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Chairman, Planning Commission City of Arcadia ATTEST: Secretary, Planning Commission City of Arcadia APPROVED AS TO FORM: Stephen P. Deitsch, City Attorney 5 ~ N 100 0 100 200 300 Feet ,----- ~ j . 1lfs Development Sel1lices Department Engineering Division Ptepaed by.' R.SGoI1zsI92, Jum 2002 813W Naomi Avenue Suite G CUP 2002-009 L_ ,\ . '"'" \ "'.. Ii) o (f111;! ttf1~ r- g tf1MJ "1m Z "''" ~ -I .... )10 il\ ... "'" ~l-'- IDD D P'"'lI "'.~ "'!-~ ... ~~ ~ N 100 2DD 300 Scale: 1"=200' \ 4DD Fee \ "''' .L.-- ....- ~ DUAR~D '\ "",-\ - ~4 "1 . "'. :f\\ \ - ~ .---'- - 0". Oml -' "'.. Om) \ ---l-k -L- -- \ ~ .... \ - """Ii) """ 0 -r- C m z '/ e .--r-- r--, ~ S en """ " -I 0"" .--- 1:- rrJSlJ 'L. --~ ..... - '\ '-- NAOIVlIAIlE1iiO....1"'. .... ....\ -,?'"',... \;;;\ ~' , - ~ c---- \t,,,,,, - ,i>l- \_ ~~ \-- ~ "'" \ 'iil ... \ _.~ AV _""\..- \ ~ '.:; q ~, p \ "".,m < ...., ::: (lff't'IG1J I" "'. '-, ,,- ... ... A'It:' 0 - ~ 0 ReAL y.. -1;;;0 "'4\). . CAIVlI~ \ I:=' \ \ I '/ '/ "'" ... = j7P) (7111 (1UJ 17'>"'1 - \ - NA.E!"I~ .- .. ..r -\'. - _r- - i- - - ~ \ \ \\ II' \ -I \ 'I { \ - - \"'" I...."',\~ .'" 17'>.!!!J.."'- eAL AIlE _ CAMINO R .... 'I .... 0.. 171&. : ~S :Alopment Sendces Department I!. Engineering Division 11 ~by:RSGOITl8I8Z.J"""2fXJ2 -.~~ JJ ,~ ~., cO.tPOar'l'JlI~..\: \ 815 W Naomi Ave Suite G CUP 2002-009 - \ \ I C[]:J C():J ~ w (y6 , ~ 24'xno TABLE,W/2 C~AIR5. TOTAL 24 5EAT5 E><TE~IOR. TABlE Wr2 CI-lAIRS. TOTAL 12 5EArS L~E'SOFA. TOTAL b SEATS TA6l~ W/4 CI-IAIR$, TOTAL:.t &EATS irl"..' """-""'" n..... w..' ..... i I ..... AU 79 TEA HOUSE "5 W.,IWMA\'t..1O ARCADII.,CAllOO1 Tt1i (121) lJ74-M&5 -- """"" "~ ..' .- FLOOR PLAN '34 12- ~ ~ ~ /"J>>1f)e a.._ ~ .4 - ~ ~~D ~e, """"""'" _e, - 11'.,' I........ """""'" 1R1 e Q " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " tF=-============== d)::J """"" ~ '=' ' -~ d)::J ~==----====-===== " " " " " " ." " " " " " " " " " " " " " " o --,,-, --". " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " ==~ "" , - e A c AU 79 TEA HOUSE 815 w. NAmll AVE. IG ARCADI4, CA 91007 TEl: (626) 574-7665 e == ~O~ IQJ IQJ SITE PLAN ec4L f(,U".,..q - M ~ f'~/Ne:, S4rz..vey'h II Available parking spaces (out of approximately 140 parking spates around the building. Please . refer to the outlined sketch, - conducted from April 12, 2002. to April 25, 2002 Fri. Sat. Sun. Mon. Tues. Wed. Thurs. , 4/12 4/13 4/14 4/15 4/16 4/17 4/18 11 :30 a.m, 63 57 54 51 62 55 60 2:30 p.m, 54 50 52 . 51 53 60 45 6:00 p.m. 60 65 57 70 78 52 60 9:30 p.m, 71 49 76 69 56 73 72 Fri. Sat. Sun. Mon. Tiles. Wed. Thurs. 4/19 4/20 4/21 4/22 4/23 4/24 4/25 11 :30 a.m. 50 49 59 66 63 57 52 2:30 p.m. 63 56 50 57 59 67 72 e 6:00 p.m. 67 64 62 70 53 80 69 9:30 p.m. 33 49 57 62 75 84 77 e 08/08/01 12,21P P.002 ~~'~N~ ~f!-Vellt." ~ .21"1", >>", ... ----- - .- -----. . . -. e -----...,- u '- . -......, ... I ! l__-.L. I ~ ~ fr1ffiHtOO-~ fULJillLWllJJi1 ~ e w ! ~ . ~ o < o ~ i w = . ." W f- , ( , o . e ! , ~ . ~-~ HHI~ ~ 1'"f./e eJJC-l.A>seP sPAa:5../' ~ -rHe loto -sf'4<es <><AJl-'Ieyeo '$t.f THe M~ ~ . ~. Q . . . R . . w , z w ) ( i o ( z FileNo.: CUP 2002-009 CITY OF ARCADIA 240 W. HUNTINGTON DRIVE ARCADIA, CA 91007 . CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT' NEGATIVE DECLARATION Adopted: Draft A. Title and Description of Project: Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 2002-009: A Conditional Use,Permit to expand the seating capacity of an existing eating establishment to accommodate 46 patrons, located at 815 W. Naoml,Avenue, Suite G, In the City of Arcadia, County of Los Angeles B. Location of Project: 815 W. Naomi Avenue, Suite G. In the City of Arcadia, County of Los Angeles C. Name of Applicant, Sponsor or Person Undertaking Project: Wen-Ling Lee 815W. Naomi Avenue, Suite G Arcadia, CA 91007 (826) 446-0225 e The 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 recommendaiton of the City's staff, does hereby find and declare that the proposed project will not have a slglnlficant effect on the environment. A brief statement of the reasons supporting the City Council's findings are as follows: The Planning Commission, hereby finds that the Negative Declaration refiects Its Independent judgement. A copy of the Initial Study may be obtained at: Community Development Division City of Arcadia 240 W. Huntington Dr. Arcadia, CA 91007 (626) 574-5423 The location and custodian of the documents and any other material which constiture the record of proceedings upon which the City based Its decision to adopt this Negative Declartlon are as follows: Community Development Division City of Arcadia 240 W. Huntington Dr. Arcadia. CA 91007 (626) 574-5423 -L I 4:yAJer;p( ~ e Date: ~. (J ~4Y2._ Date Posted: 1J&7. I?;'. I) y 4/01 . . e ij\ ~ FILE NO.: CUP 2002-009 CITY OF ARCADIA ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM 1. Project Title: 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: Application No. CUP 2002-009 City of Arcadia Development Services Department Community Development Division / Planning Services 240 W. Huntington Drive P.O. Box 60021 Arcadia, CA 91066-6021 3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Joe Lambert (626) 574-5444 4. Project Location: 815 W. Naomi Avenue, Suite G 5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Win-Ling Lee 815 W. Naomi Avenue. SuiteG Arcadia, CA 9,1007 (626) 446-0225 6. General Plan Designation: Commercial 7. Zoning: C-2 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 sheet(s) if necessary.): Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 2002-009: A Conditional Use Permit to expand the seating capacity of an existing eating establishmenllo accommodate 46 patrons located at815 W. Naomi Avenue, Suite G. 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, and the properties to the east and west are C-2 and C-1, respectively, and are developed with commercial land uses. 10. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement): City Engineering Division 1 FILE NO.: CUP 2002-009 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. 0 Aesthetics 0 Agriculture Resources 0 Air Quality 0 Biological Resources 0 Cultural. Resources 0 Geology I Soils 0 Hazards & Hazardous 0 Hydrology 1 Water Quality 0 Land Use 1 Planning Materials 0 Noise 0 Population 1 Housing 0 Mineral Resources 0 Recreation IJ Transportation 1 Traffic 0 Public Services 0 Mandatory Findings of 0 Utilities 1 Service Significance Systems DETERMINATION (To be completed by the Lead Agency): On the basis of this initial evaluation: X I find that,'the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. o I find thafalthough the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. e o I find that the proposed project MAY have a Significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. o I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigl!tion measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL. IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. o I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have peen avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or . ation asur s that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. 06/03/2002 Date CITY OF ARCADIA For e 2 e e e FILE NO.: CUP 2002-009 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL 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 Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g. the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g. the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis). 2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as project-jevel, Indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. 3) Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant; less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. "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, anEIR is required. 4) "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section XVII, "Earlier Analyses," may be cross-referenced). 5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief .discussion should identify the following: 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 mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated,' describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project. 6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g. general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. 3 FILENO.: CUP 2002-009 7) Supporting Infonnation Sources. A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be'cited in the discussion. e 8) This is only a suggested fonn, and lead agencies are free to use different fonnats; however, lead agencies should nonnally address the questions fonn this checklist that are relevant to a project's.environmental effects in whateverfonnat is selected. 9) 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 significance. e - 4 e e e File No.: CUP 2002..()09 less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Slgnlllcant MilIgatlon Slgnlllcant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact I. AESTHETICS - Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? [ I [ I [I [Xl b) Substantially damage scenic resources, Including, but not limited 10, trees, rocl< outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? [ I [ I [I [X] c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? [ I [ I [I [XI d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare, which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? [ I [ I [I [XI The proposed project consists of a conditional use permit 10 expand the seating capacity of an existing eating establishment to accommodate a maximum of 46 patrons. 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. As such, the proposal will have no Impacts on aesthetics. II, AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES - (In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agenc;jes may refer to Ihe Callfomla Agricultural Land Evaluation and Sile Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the Califomia Department of Conservation as an optional model to use In assessing impacts on agricuiture and farmland.) Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland) as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monlloring Program of the Califomia Resources Agency, to non- agricullural use? [ I [ I [I [XI b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? [ ] [] [I [XI c) Involve other Changes in the existing environment which, due 10 their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use? [ I [ I [I [Xl The proposal is consistent with the Commercial land use designation of the General Plan and with the zoning of the site, and is required 10 comply with the regulations of any other jurisdictional agency with applicable 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. III. AIR QUALITY - (Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or pollution control di~trict may be relied upon to make the following determinations.) Would the proposal: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of Ihe applicable Air Quality Plan? [ I [] [I [XI b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air qua/ily violation? [ I [ I [J [XI c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net Increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non- attainment under an applicable federal or stale ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions, which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? [ I [ I [I [XI d) Expose sensitive receplors to substantial pollutant concentrations? [ J [ J r I [XI Form -J" -5- CEQA Checlcllst 4199 File No:: CUP2002..Q09 Less Than Significant PotentIally WlIh Less Than Slgnlflcanl MItlgation SIgnIllc3nl No Impact IncorponllIon Impact Impact e) Create objectionable odors affectlng a substantial number of people? [ ) [ ) [) [X] The proposed project consists of a conditional use pennit to expand the seating capecity of an existing eating establishment to accommodate a maximum of 46 patrons. The project site is already developed with a commercial building 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 adverse impacts are anticipated. IV. BIOlOQICAl RESOURCES - Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse impect, either directly or through hebltat modifications, on any species Identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species In local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the Callfomla Department of Fish and Game or U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service? [ ) [ I [) [X] b) Have a substantial adverse effect'on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, and regulations, or by the Callfomi,a Department of Fish and Game or U. S. Fish and Wildlife Servlca? [ ) [ ) [) [X) c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands 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 means? [ ) [ ) [) [X] d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native' resident or migratory fish or wildlife species, or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use.of native wildlife nursery sites? [ ) [ ) [) [X] e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation polley or ordinance? [ ) [ ] [] [X] f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation PI,an, Natural Conservation Community Plan, or other approved local, regional or state habitat coll$ervatlon plan? [ ] [ ] [] [X] The proposed project consists of a conditional use permit to expand the seating capacity of an existing eating establishment to accommodate ,a maximum of 46 patrons. 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 constructlon Is proposed at the project site. As such, the proposal will have no impacts on biological resources. V. CULTURAL RESOURCES - Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change In the significance ota historical resource as defined In Section 1.5064.5? [ ] [ ] [] [X] b) Cause a substantial adverse change In the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5? [ ] [ ] [] [X] c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? [ ) [ ] [] [X] d) Disturb any human remains, Including those Interred outside of formal cemeteries? [ ) [ ] [] [X] The propoSed project consists of a conditional use pennitto expand the seating capacity of an exlsling eating establishment to accommodate a maximum of 46 patrons. The project site is alraady'developed FOIm "J" CECA Checkllsl 4199 '-6- e e e e e e File No.: CUP 2002-009 Less Than Slgniflcant PolenlIally WIth Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact with a commercial building and no additional construction is proposed. As such, no adverse impacts on cultural resources are anticipated. VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS - Would ihe project: 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 State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? (Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special PUblication 42). [ I [ I ['I [X) II) Strong seismic ground shaking? [ I [ I [I [X) iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? [ I [ I [I [X) Iv) Landslides [ I [ I [I [X) b) Result In substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? [ I [ I [I [X) c) Be located on a geologic unit or soli 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? [ I [ I [I [X) d) Be located on expansive soli, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1 994) creating substantial risks to life or property? [ I [ I [] [X) e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? [ I ( I (] [X) 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 fiat land, and is not within an area subject to inundation, subsidence, or expansion of soils. The proposed project consists of a conditional use permit to expand the seating capacity of an existing eating establishmenUo accommodate a maximum of 46 patrons. The project site is already developed with a commercial building and no additional construction is proposed. As such, no adverse impacts are anticipated. VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS - Would the project: a) Crea,te a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? [ I [ I [I [X) 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? [ I [ I [I [Xl c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one- quarter mile of an exlsting or proposed school? [ I [ I [ I' [X) d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Governmeni Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would It create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? ( J [ I [I [XI 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 airport, would the project result Fonn"J" .7. CEQA Checklist 4199 File No.: CUP 2002-009 Less Than Significant P0tentla1Iy WIth Lese Then Signlllcenl MiligatIon S1gnlflcent No Impact Incorporation Impect Impact in a safety hazard for people residing or working In the project area? [ I [ ] [I [Xl 1) 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? [ I [ I [I [Xl g) Impair Implementation of, or physically Interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? [ I [I [I [X] h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized .areas or where residences are Inteimlxed with wildlandS? [ I [ I [I [Xl The proposed project consists of a conditional use permit to expand the seating capacity of an existing eating establishment to accommodate a maximum of 46 patrons. The project site is already developed with a commercial building and no eddltional 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. VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUAUTY- Would the project: 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 (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a 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 alteraUon of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-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 runoff In a manner which would result in flooding on or off-site? e) Create or contribute runoff water which wOilld exceed the capaCity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? 1) OthelWlse substanUally degrade water quality g) Place housing within a 1 DO-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 structures within a 1 DO-year flood hazard area, 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? Form fAr .a- [ ] [ ] [ I [ I [I [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ I [ I [ I [ I [ I [ I [ I '[ I [ ] [ I [ I [ ] [ I [ I [ I [ I [ I [ I [ I [ I [ I CECA Checklist 4199 [X] [X] [Xl [X] [Xl [Xl [Xl [Xl [X] [Xl e . e . e File No.: CUP 2002-009 LesS Than S1gnlllcant Potentially. WIth Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact The proPOsed project consists of a conditional use permit to expand the seating capacity of an existing eating establishment to accommodate a maximum of 46 patrons. 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. There will be no change to the existing drainage and runoff generated by the project site. As such, no adverse Impacts are anticipated. IX. LAND USE & PLANNING - Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? [ ] [ ] [I [Xl b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of 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? [ I [ ] [I [X) c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? [ I [ I [] [X] The proposal Is consistent with the Commercial land use designation of the General Plan and with the C-2 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 the seating capacity of an existing eating establishment to accommodate a maximum of 46 patrons. 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. As such, no adverse impacts are anticipated. X. MINERAL RESOURCES - Would the project: a) RBliult In the loss of availability ofa 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 minerai 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 sileo As such, no adverse impacts are anticipated. [X] [X] XI. NOISE - Would the project result In: a) Exposure of persons to, or generation of noise levels in excess of standards establisheC! In the local general plan or noiSe ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? [ ] [ ] [ I [X] b) Exposure of persons to, or generation of excessive groundbome vibration or groundbome noise levels? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] c) A substantial permanent Increase In ambient noise levels In the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase In ambient noise levels In the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? [ ] [ I [ I [X] 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 airport, would the project expose people reSiding or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? [ I [ I [ I [X] Fonn"J" .~ CEQA Checldlsl 4199 File No;: CUP 2002-o09 Less Than Slgnlllcant Potentially WIth l.ess Than S1gnlllcanl M1IIgatIon Slgnlflcanl No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact f) For a prOject wlthin the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the projact araa to excessive noise levels? [ I [ I [I [XI The proposed pl'llject consists of a conditional use permit to expand the seating capacity of an existing eating establishment to accommodate a maximum of 46 patrons. 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. Therefore, there will not be any new sources of noise at the project sile. As such, no adverse impacts are anticipated. XII. POPULATION & 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)? [ I [ I [I [XI b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? I I I ] I I [XI c) Displace substantial numbers of people, neceSSitating the construction of replacement housing elSewhere? I I I I I I IX) The proposed project c;onslsts of a conditional use permit to expand the seating capacity of an existing eating establishment to accommodate a maximum of 46 patrons. T~e 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. Therefore, there will not ,be any new construction of residential units. As suCh, no adverse impacts are anticipated. XIII. PUBUC SERVICES - Would the project result In substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered govemmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which would cause significant environmental impacts, In order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance Objectives for any of the public services: a} Fire protedion? I I [ I I I [XI b) Police protection? I I [ I [I [X) c) Schools? [ I [ I I I [X) d} Parks? I J I J I J [X) e) Other public facilities? I I I I I] [XI The proposed project consists of a conditional use permit to expand the seating capacity of an existing eating establishment,to accommodate II maximum of 46 patrons., The project site is already developed with a commercial building and no additional construction is proposed. The project site Is slirrounded by similar uses and no additional commercial construction is proposed at the project site. Therefore, no impacts to public services are anticipated. XIV. RECREATION - Would the project: a) Increase the use of l!xisting neighbOrhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioretion of the facility would occur or be accelerated? [ I [ I I I [X) b) Does the project include recreallonal facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreatlonai facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? [ I [ I [I [XI The proposed project consists of a conditional use permit to expand the seating capacity of an existing eating establishment to accommodate'a maximum of 46 patrons. The project site is already developed Form -.r CEQA ChecklIst 4'99 -Il). . e e . e e Ale No.: CUP 2002-009 Less Than Significant PalenIIaIIy Wllh Less Than Significant Mitigation Slgnlflcanl No Impact IncorporslIon Impact Impact 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. As such, the project will not create a significant impact upon recreational servicas. xv. TRANSPORTATtON' TRAFFIC - Would the project: a) Cause an Increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the 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)? [ ] [ ]' [] [X) b) Excaed, eilher Individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? [ ] [ ] [] [Xl c) Result In a change in air traffic patterns, including either an Increase in traffic levels or a change In location that results in substantial safety risks? [ ] I ] [] [X) d) Substantially Increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous Intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? [ ] [ I [J [X] e) Result In inadequate emergency access? [ ] [ ] [] [X] f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? [ I [ ] [X) [] g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting altemative transportation (e.g., bus tumouts, bicycle racks)? [] [ ] [I [X] The proposed project consists of a conditional use permit to expand the sealing capacity of an existing eating establishment to accommodate a maXimum of 46 patrons. The project site is already developed with a commercial building and no additional construct/on is proposed. The project site is surrounded by similar uses and no addilional commercial construction is proposed at the project site. As part of the application, the applicant has submitted a parking survey stating that there Is adequate onsite parking to accommodate the proposed use. Part of the conditional use peimlt 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 iess than significant. XVI. UTILITIES & SERVICE SYSTEMS - Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? [ I [ ] [I [X] 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? [ ] [ ] [] [X] c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? [ ] [ ] [] [XJ d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? [ I [ ] [] [XJ e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capaCity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the providers existing commitments? [ ] [ ] [] [XJ f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? [ ] [ ] [] [X) Form "J" -11- CECA Checklist 4199 File No.: CUP 2002-009 Less Than Slgnlllcant Potentially WIth Less Than S1gntllCant Mitigation Slgnillcant No Impact '1I'lCOIpCMlltIOn ImPact Impact 'g) Comply with federal, state and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? I J r J [J [Xl The proPOsed project consists of a conditional use permit to expand the seating capacity of an existing eating establishment to accommodate a maximum of 46 patrons. 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. As such, no adverse impacts are anticipated. XVII. 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 self-sustaining leveis, 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 Callfomia history or prehistory? r J r J [J [Xl b) Ooes the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively conslderallle" 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.) [ J [ J [1 [Xl c) Does the project have environmental effects, which WIll cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either Cllrectly or Indirectly? [ I r J [J [Xl The proposed project consists of, a conditional use permit to expand the seating capacity of an existing eating establishment to accommodate a maximum of 46 patrons. The project site Is already developed with a commercial building and no additional constructionis..proposed. The project site is surrounded by similar uses and no additional commercial construction is proposed at the project site. 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 anticipated. XVIII. EARUER ANALYSES No earlier analyses, and no additional, documents were referenced pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA processes to analyze the project. ------ Fonn -J- CEOA Checklist 4199 -12- .i - e