HomeMy WebLinkAbout1647
'",
.
.
.
.
.
RESOLUTION NO. 1647
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OFTHE CITY OF
ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO.
01-016 TO OPERATE A PROPOSED 895 SQ.FT. JUICE BAR AND
RESTAURANT WITH SEATING FOR 25 PATRONS AT 651 W. DUARTE
ROAD
WlliEREAS, on May 29, 2001, a conditional use permit application was filed
by Heng Zhao to operate a proposed 895 sq.ft. juice bar and restaurant with seating for
25 patrons (Development Services Department Case No. C.U.P. 01-016) at 651 W.
Duarte Road, more particularly described as:
The east 75 feet of Lot 40 of Tract 3430, in the City of Arcadia, County of Los
Angeles, State of California, as recorded in Parcel Map Book 42, Page(s) 32, in
the Office of the County Recorder of said County. Except there from the southerly
10 feet measured at right angles to Duarte Rd. 60 feet in width.
WHEREAS, A public hearing was held on July 10, 2001, at which time all
interested persons were given full opportunity to be heard and to present evidence.
NOW THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ARCADIA HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION I. That the factual data submitted by the Development Services
Department in the attached report is. true and correct.
SECTION 2. This Commission finds:
I. 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 becanse the initial study did not disclose any substantial adverse effects to the
area aff~cted 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 not adversely affect the
comprehensive General Plan because the land use and. current zoning are. consistent with
the General Plan,
6. That any new exterior design elements for the subject building will be subject
to Architectural Design Review and in compliance with the design criteria set forth in the
City's Architectural Design Review Regulations.
. 7. 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 a
Conditional Use Permit, to operate a proposed 895 sq.ft. juice bar and restaurant with
seating for 25 patrons at 651 W. Duarte Road subject to the following conditions:
1. That building code compliance and conditions of approval must be met to the
complete satisfaction of the Inspection Services Officer. All ADA requirements shall be
meet for disabled access; parking, restrooms, door hardware, and entrances.
2. All City code requirements regarding accessibility, frre protection, occupancy,
and safety shall be complied with to the satisfaction of Building Services arid the Fire
Department which shall include, but are not limited to the following items:
.
2
1647
.
.
.
a. A Knox-box with keys shall be installed in conformance with Uniform Fire
Code, per UFC 904.
b. An NFP A-72 Fire Alarm System shall be installed in accordance with the
Uniform Building Code and all other applicable provisions of the Arcadia
Municipal Code (3114.1).
c. Provide occupant, load signs at all locations within the occupancy. Provide
seating plan and have in posted in the manager's office for inspection.
d. Exit illumination shall comply with Sec. 1211 UFC.
e. That all exit doors shall be equipped with panic hardware as defined in the
building code. All interior doors shall open in the direction of travel.
3. Seating shall be limited to a maximum of twenty-five (25) people (excluding the
waiting areas).
4. A modification is granted for 214 on-site parking spaces in lieu of 373 spaces
required. This approval shall not constitute an approval for a general reduction in parking
. for the total site. That this parking modification shall only be for the use approved by
CUP 01-016 (a restaurant).
5. The hours of operation of shall be limited to 11 :00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m., Sunday
thru Thursday and II :00 a.m. to II :00 p.m., Friday and Saturday.
6. That CUP 01-016 shall not take effect until the owner and applicant have
executed a form available at the Planning Office indicating awareness and acceptance of
the conditions of approval.
7. All conditions of approval shall be complied with prior to completion of the
tenant improvements, and opening of the learning center and computer arcade.
Noncompliance with the plans, provisions and conditions of CUP 01-016 shall be
grounds for immediate suspension or revocation of any approvals that couId result in the
closing of the computer arcade.
12. Noncompliance with the provisions and conditions of this conditional use
permit shall constitute grounds for its immediate suspension or revocation.
.
3
1647
.
.
.
.
.
SECTION 4. The decision, findings and conditions contained in this Resolution
reflect the Commission's action of July 10, 2001, and the following vote:
AYES: Commissioners, Huang, Murphy, Olson, Kalemkiarian
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 ]4th day of August 200], by the
following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Commissioners, Huang, Murphy, Olson, Kalemkiarian
Chainn , Planning Commission
City of adia
ecretary, Planning
City of Arcadia
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
~r~
Stephen P. Deitsch, City Attorney
4
1647
.
.
MEMORANDUM
Devdopmmt Senices Department
July 10, 2001
Arcadia City Planning Commission
Donna Butler, Community Development Administrator
By:Candyce Burnett, Assistant Planner
SUBJECT: Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 01-016
TO:
FROM:
SUMMARY
This Conditional Use Permit application was submitted by Heng Zhao to operate a
proposed 895 sq.ft. juice bar and restaurant within an existing commercial shopping
center at 651 W. Duarte Road. The business would be open Sunday thru Thursday,
11 :00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m., and Friday and Saturday, 11 :00 a.m. to 11 :00 p.m. The
Development Services Department is recommending approval of CUP 01-016
subject to the conditions in this staff report.
.
GENERAL INFORMATION
APPLICANT: Heng Zhao (lessee)
LOCATION: 651 W. Duarte Rd.
REQUEST: A Conditional Use Permit to operate a proposed 895 sq.ft. juice bar
and restaurant with seating for 25 patrons, operating from 11 :00
a.m. to 10:00 p.m., Sunday thru Thursday, and 11 :00 a.m. to 11 :00
p.m., Friday and Saturday at 651 W. Duarte Road.
SITE AREA: 110,932 sq.ft. (2.55 acres)
FRONTAGES: . Approximately 389 feet on Duarte Road, and 310 feet on Arcadia
Avenue.
EXISTING LAND USE & ZONING:
The. site is developed with a 48,175,:!:sq.ft. commercial shopping
center with 214 on-site parking spaces. The property is zoned C-2
& H-4 (General Commercial with a Height Overlay for a maximum of
4 stories, not to exceed 45 feet).
.
r
.
.
.
.
.
SURROUNDING LAND USES & ZONING:
North: Multiple family residential, zoned R-3.
South: Offices: zoned C-2 & H-4.
East Offices: zoned CoO
West: Offices: zoned C-2
PROPOSAL
Restaurants are permitted uses in the C-2 zone with an approved cqnditional use
permit.
The applicant is requesting a Conditional Use Permit to operate a proposed 895 sq,ft.
juice bar and restaurant that would occupy a vacant space within the commercial
shopping center at 651 W. Duarte Rd. The business would provide seating for 25
patrons and would be open from 11 :00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m., Sunday thru Thursday
and 11:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m., Friday and Saturday.
PARKING
The subject shopping center was built in 1959, and currently provides 214 on-site
parking spaces (175 parking spaces at the central area of the shopping center and
39 spaces behind the retail buildings on the northerly and easterly portion of the site).
The on-site parking does not comply with the current Code requirements, as
summarized in the following table:
Proposed Mix of Uses and Current Parking Requirements
Approx. Current Total
Size Parking Parking Parking
in SQ. ft. ReQuirement Allocated' Deficiency Notes
14,540 73 62
1,054 11 4
698 7 3
3,406 34 15
2,390 2410
22.500 113 95
2,835 43 12
2,081 59 9
895 9 4
50,399 373 214
Type of Use
#1 - Retail
#2 - Chinese Rest.
#3 - Mexican Rest.
#4 - St. Michel
#5 - Shabu Rest.
#6 - Vacancies
#7 - Tutorial Center
#8- Arcade.
#9 - Proposed Restaurant.
Totals
11
7
4
19
14
18
31
50
5
159
CUP 83-13
legal-nonconf.
CUP 99-010
CUP 00-009
assumed retail
CUP 98..Q02
(/let parking deficiency
CUP 01-016
July 10, 2001
Page 2
I'
'.
.
.
.
.
Based on current parking requirements for the entire shopping center, including the
proposed juice bar and restaurant, there should be 373 on-site parking spaces.
The proposed juice bar and restaurant will occupy a space that was previously a
shoe repair store, which closed in 1989. The required on-site parking for the shoe
repair store was four (4.47) spaces. The proposed juice bar and restaurant requires
9 on-site parking spaces per the current code (Le., 10 space per 1,000 sq.ft. of gross
floor area). If approved, the applicant's proposal would create an overall on-site
parking deficiency of 159 spaces for the site.
ANALYSIS
Based upon the applicant's proposal and background information about the site, it is
staff's opinion '~at the proposed juice bar and restaurant will be an appropriate use
for the commercial center. Staff has visited the site on numerous occasions and has
noted that there is ample on-site parking. Currently, it appears that no more than 50%
ofthespaces within the central parking area are being used during the daily business
hours. Also, staff is not aware of any complaints regarding parking problems on the
site.
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. When considering the record as a whole, there is
no evidence that the proposed project will have any potential for adverse effect on
wildlife resources or the habitat upon which the wildlife depends. Therefore, a
Negative Declaration has been prepared for this project.
RECOMMENDATION
The Development Services Department recommends approval of Conditional Use
Permit No. CUP 01-016 subject to the following conditions of approval:
1. The restaurant shall be maintained and operated in a manner that is
consistent with the application and plans submitted and approved for CUP
01-016.
CUP 01-016
July 10, 2001
Page 3
.
.
.
.
2. Seating shall be limited to a maximum of twenty-five (25) people (excluding
the waiting areas).
3. A modification is granted for 214 on-site parking spaces in lieu of 373
spaces required. This approval shall not constitute an approval for a
general reduction in parking for the total site. That this parking modification
shall only be for the use approved by CUP 01-016 (a restaurant).
4. All City code requirements regarding accessibility, fire protection,
occupancy, and safety shall be complied with to the satisfaction of Building
Services and the Fire Department which shall include, but not limited to the
following items:
5. If only one of the proposed restrooms is to be disabled/handicapped
accessible, then both of the restrooms must be unisex.
6. Installation of a Knox-box with keys in conformance with the Uniform Fire
Code.
7. Installation of an NFPA"72 fire alarm system in conformance with the
Arcadia Municipal Code.
8. Approval of CUP 01-016 shall not take effect until the property owner and
applicant have executed and filed the Acceptance Form available from the
Development Services Department to indicate acceptance of the conditions
of approval.
9.. All conditions of approval shall be complied with prior to completion of the
tenant improvements, and the opening of the restaurant. Noncompliance
with the plans, provisions and conditions of CUP 01-016 shall be grounds
for immediate suspension or revocation of any approvals that could result
in the closing of the restaurant.
FINDINGS AND MOTIONS
Approval
The Planning Commission should move to approve the Negative Declaration
and direct staff to prepare a Resolution of the Planning Commission of the City
of Arcadia, California, granting Conditional Use Permit No. 01-016 to operate a
Juice Bar/restaurant at 651 W. Duarte Road.
Denial
If the Planning Commission intends to deny this Conditional Use Permit application,
the Commission should move for denial and direct staff to prepare a resolution which
incorporates the Commission's decision and specific findings.
CUP 01-016
July 10, 2001
Page 4
.
.
.
.
If any Planning Commissioner, or other interested party has any questions or
comments regarding this matter prior to the July 10th public hearing, please contact
Assistant Planner, Candyce Burnett at (626) 574-5444.
Approved by:
~.
Donna L. Butler
Community Development Administrator
Attachments: Land Use and Zoning Map
Plans
Negative Declaration & Initial Study
.
CUP 01-016
July 10, 2001
Page 5
I _.\..: .\ 0) i \ \
r:"-'~It,;;::>~: rJR,.iHG .!.<i 0 \Q@8
" CQ,oiM. '\ -- ??-J I -' V 1~.>6 ..0
~.2 1....;. ~ ~ - (~ -
..- ";1.. "'f': -~.
".R:.AtL u,e I ___ :-<""
.. -'" ~""'I"
. ,~I~.. IT'
------- t
I
t
I
I
I
I
~t f= In.,':'
r
.
.
.
.
-
<:
a O'W i..{ N GALL E Y
COol c!r: ~..4
ii",] 3
!l'-\. - .
n.il
,o:..l :1
"'RC....DU,
"",/ /~ Ir.JI
... "///~//////////
t/////. ///////////~////
/////////////////////
Go ///1'////,1'//1'/////////
.."!'. / / " ,. / ... / / / / / / I' /./ t' ./ / I' / I' I'.J
l'A iI.'XI NC O'f" / /.// / I' / /// / I' 1';",/,.;, / /./ /, _
-(///////////////////// ~
r://///(////./////_//////~. .
0'//////.'(./////////////// :.(
y'//1/./f///'///////////1 ~
///v//////////////////
~///// //1'// ";'/1'// I' // //
~//////////////////I//~ .
////////,//////////~// ~
(,;,,;U::I~C; /////~(/////////////.//~ =~
~.>>>> "CT.; It >>>/>>>010-
: .//// 1.\.._.... ///////~'O~
B.ALDWIN PLAZA //~r ~ ., -- '////'//',1"
,,,,. y>>,.~-,"-::;: !t'i-t~./>>>> C
....., <""....... 1~'4~"",////J""'_"'",,,///// 0
'- - ;;.' / " /' ./ ./ /' / / ,/ " / / 1/,' / /' / / ./ / ,. ./ / / ,. / a
' 1///// /// 1 ///////1///./////// ...: U
I /////I//////II/~.,///./~/////.~ ~
///////////////'//////.////// U
I ////////1///1//////////////_
1- 1///////'//////////'''//////////1 c
10 .. -=//////(1/////////'1/..../,..///.-1...
If - t;l...////////..../,/.,////////////.//./( .;:.
~ ;"7/ /./ / / / /' // / /../ / / /... /./ / / / / /,/ / "'. ~
- //////////1/1///1'///////////
- ///////I////~//////I////////
- ///////,/////A,/.I,///////////// '";~:.,
= /////////~////////////////"
,////////////,/~/////// .
//////1//////, "
//////1"
/' .
U"l-' I
~
z
-
::
-
~
<:
:
.
6 A N~
):1\1
~:~
L___..:':.l'--;
CAS
S \ A TtON
t :
, ~
:! =
~I ~
1
1
I
~, . .'"
I
1
'-.1:-:1
.\.JI
\J . r.... -r ~
iJ f'\
-
~~
~
."
-'4
<~
o C
-."
<",
Uu
oiZ
1.:.::':"
:::.9
pl.1-
II
I'~ ;( ;l~
/,;J..~-J; -
J
..
.,
~l
-I
~-4
I
II, .. ~
. ..
Z.~
::
~~
~
5ANK
.~
....
:....
<-
. '4
;,.,-;
- ....
',/,/-;.:..
< -
~
!-....
~-
0-
- -
."
.
,.
,
C-2 ^"
"1'1
I~ r,J:
^ V 'E.,
,.
,
.H."~
.
~
~
.
R-3 1
o
01
:-
z
~~
"'0
. -
.
'"
-
.\. I ~
'-'
",,0.
-
_ :1!.J..o
M EDICAt
OHlCES
C.O '= H.a
Land Use and Zoning Map
651 W. Duarte Rd. tNORTH
CUP 01-016 Scale: 1 inch = 200 feet
.
.
The Premises
.
.
h
UHfT 641
2.835 Sf
SCHOOL
. . UNR' 639
2,094 SF
UNIT G:ilG CYllBOREt
t.~ SF
CHlNESt FOOO
895 s:i.. . UNlT 137
-:.~~~'1'1 2.112 SF
VACAHT ~ER
UNIT 6S1t
942 SF' a~:!t
V/oaXf
BUILDING C ~&7~H
10,122 Sf
Utur G51;{D UNIT .~,
. 2,081
I<NlATt J582 SF' '"
UNIT 651B ~~:H
698 SF
"'O'ICUl FOOD
UNIT ~lA BUILDING A
1,166 sr
0......0 WATtJI 16,346 Sf
UNcf 651 UN", 627
664 SF ~r/L
..- JEWnRY
.. UN'
709 SF
BEOUTY SAlON
UNIT G55 0
'.4&J. SF'
UQUOR STORE
. ~ ii
O~ '" '" ,0)'
O\l~ I\O~ L. .
~[ffi~~[D)~~ ~~~iJ~[ffi
. TOTAl MEA:. 50,468 Sf
PMKING STfoU.S: 215
I,BOO SF
~t
6~9
UNIT .
10.750 g
V/oaXf
,
,
UtlfT &IS
11.250 SF
99c STORE
BUILDING B
22,OOD Sf
UNIT 643
2,J90 Sf
VN;>>fT
,', I
I
,
.1
.
.
JjMI/#t;' AlrE4-;-'
-::~J)i/ol/#G. AI<''''-4.
~16
DOO
I Z"3 4
\
t--
I
i
iliii11
,UQU
$ClWICE'
STAT/Uti
I
1,- 6"
G-d'
~. k'(TCHEH . .
'~
17
g
i NA1K-iN .
I COOU'R :
IZ~IO
I
. "
s. !JI,/- f- 0
...
!
"--i
7 i
f
4:-7~...;...~~___,;___.~_~ .....
'f .'
Z4.-~
.......---..J
.....-1
'.
FLOOR
.PLAN
PROJECT SiTE: 65l w. Duarte Rd.. Unit' F. Arcadia, CA 91007
'I
.
.10 ~"
_II '"
'1" -'
! 0
; r.
-+-
I
\0;
".
0;,
.
"
,
0. lfilVIPI1E/oIT
~te9.'6E
Z '"
:3 RAD WIT _OILIi/?
'Ice ,eoQkM
5' 't.O& 'C'Je
G 1'10 SINK
SJltJ.Y&:.S
N/J f( >48U'
0 PI MSHEJ?
..3 ct.7/1f, . SINK
2 2 V. . RPFRIGERArvR
.3 .gD PREP 5/NK
TEA Df.
15 HAND SINK
16 ~&1/ffHA6P J)IS .
I CAB.WGT
i
I
I
.,
i_...._____
.
.' u_ ..'. ...... ~." . -. .
.
.
.
.
FileNo.:
CUP 01-016
CITY OF ARCADIA
240 W. HUNTINGTON DRIVE
ARCADIA, CA 91007
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
A. Title and Description of Project:
A Conditional Use Permit (CUP 01-016) to operate a proposed 695 sq:ft. Juice Bar/restaurant
with seating for 25 patrons.
B. Location of Project:
651 W. Duarte Rd.
In the City of Arcadia, County of Los Angeles
C. Name of Applicant, Sponsor or Person Undertaking Project:
Heng Zhao (tenant)
2608 W. Grand Ave #C
Alhambra. Ca 91801
(626) 458-8366
The City Council 0 Plqnning Commission ~aVing reviewed the Initial Study of this proposed project
and having reviewed the written comments received prior to the public meeting of the City Council,
including the recommendaiton of the City:sstaff, does hereby find and declare that the proposed project
will not have a siginificant effect on the environment. A brief statement of the reasons supporting the City
Council's findings are as follows:
The City Council 0 Planning Commission ~erebY finds that the Negative Declaration reflects 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 Declartion,are as follows:
Community Development Division
City of Arcadia
240 W. Huntington Dr.
Arcadia, CA 91007
(626) 574-5423
CAnG~AYvuJT
Staff
. Date:
Date Posted:
4/01
.
.
.
File No.: CUP 01-016
CITY OF ARCADIA
240 WEST HUNTINGTON DRIVE
ARCADIA, CA 91007
CALIFORNIA ENVI~ONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
1. Project Title:
Conditional Use Permit; CUP 01-016
2. Lead Agency Name & Address:
City of Arcadia
Development Services Dept./Community Development Div.lPlanning Services
240 W. Huntington Drive
Post Office Box 60021
Arcadia, CA 91066-6021
3. Lead Agency Contact Person & Phone Number:
. Candyce Burnett, Assistant Planner- (626) 574-5444/fax (626) 447-9173
4. Project Location (address):
651 W. Duarte Rd.
In the City of Arcadia, County of Los Angeles
5. Project Sponsor's Name, Address & Phone Number:
Heng Zhao (tenant)
2608 W. Grand Ave #C
Alhambra, Ca 91801
(626) 458-8366
6. General Plan Designation:
The site is designated as Commercial
7. Zoning Classification:
The site is zoned C-2 & H-4, General Commercial with a Height Overlay
.
Form "J"
-1-
CEOA Checklist 4/99
.
.
File No.: CUP 01-016
.
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.)
A Conditional Use Permit (CUP 01-009) to operate a proposed 895 sq.ft. Juice
Bar/restaurant with seating for 25 patrons.
9. Surrounding land uses and setting:
(Briefly describe the project's surroundings.)
North: Multiple family residential: zoned R-3.
South: Offices: zoned C-2 & H-4.
East: Offices: zoned CoO
West: Offices: zoned C-2
10. Other public agencies whose approval is required:
(e.g., permits, flnanclng approval, participation agreement)
The City Building Services, Engineering Division, Fire Marshall, Public Works
Services, and Water Services will review the construction plans for compliance with
all applicable construction codes and will oversee construction and installation of
any necessary infrastructure or improvements within the public right-of-way.
. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENT/ALLY 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:
[ ] Aesthetics
[ ] Agricultural Resources
[ ] Air Quality
[ ] Biological Resources
[ .] Cultural Resources
[ ] Geology /Soils
[ ] Hazards & Hazardous Materials
[ ] Hydrology / Water Quality
[ ] Land Use / Planning
[ ] Mineral Resources
( J Noise
( ] Population / Housing
( J Public Services
( J Recreation
[ J Transportation / Traffic
[ J Utilities / Service Systems
[ ] Mandatory Findings of Significance
.
Form "J"
-2-
CEQA Checklist 4/99
.
.
.
.
.
File No.: CUP 01-016
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.
[] 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 revisions
in the project have been made by or agreed to by the applicant. A MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
,
[] I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the
environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
[] I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" 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 mitigation 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.
[l I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the
environment, but because all potentially significant effects (a) have been
analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant
to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to
that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation
measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is
required.
~~~
Date: June 11, 2001
Candvce Burnett. Assistant Planner
Printed Name & Title
For: City of Arcadia
Form IIJ"
-3-
CEQA Checklist 4/99
.
.
.
.
File No.: CUP 01-016
.
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 responses 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-level, 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, an EIR 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
XVIII, "Earlier Analyses," must 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 DeclaiCltion. 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.
7. Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources, uses or
individuals contacted should be cited in th~ discussion.
8. This is only a suggested form, and lead agendes are free to use different formats; however, lead
agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist. that are relevant to a project's
environmental effects in whatever format is selected..
9. The explanation of each issue should identify:
a) The significant 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.
Form"J"
-4-
CEOA Checklist 4/99
.
.
.
.
I. AeSTHETICS - Weuld the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect en a scenic vista?
b) Substantially damage scenic reseurces, including, but nat
limited to., Jrees, rock eutcroppings, and histeric buildings
within a state scenic highway?
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character ar quality
ef the site and its surreundings?
d) Create a new seurce ef substantial light er glare, which
weuld adversely affect day ar nighttime views in the area?
The prepesal is for a restaurant use and will net have such impacts.
. File No.: CUP 01-016
Le!?s Than
Significant
Potentially W1tl1 less-Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporation Impact Impact
[ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
[ ] [ ] [ ] [Xl
[ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
[ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
II. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES - (In determining whether impacts tciagricultural reseurces are
significant envirenmental effects, lead agencies may refer to. the Califernia Agricultural Land Evaluatien
and Site Assessment Medel (1997) prepared by the Califomia Department af Canservatian as an
eptianal madel to. use in assessing impacts an agriculture and farmland.) Wauld the preject:
a) Cenvert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland. er Farmland af
Statewide Impartance (Farmland) as shewn an the maps
prepared pursuant to. the Farmland Mapping and Menitering
Pragram af the Califernia Resaurces Agency, to. nan-
agricultural use? [ ] [ ] [] [X]
b) Cenflict with existing zaning fer agricultural use, ar a
Williamsen Act centract? [ I [ I [I [XI
c) Invalve ather changes in the existing enviranment which, due
to. their lacatien er nature, ceuld result in cenversien ef
Farmland to. nen-agricultural use? [ ] [ ] [] [X]
The prepesed eating establishment is censistent with the general plan and zaning designatians far the
area. and will cemplement the ather uses in the area.
III, AIR QUALITY - (Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quaiity
management er pellutien centrol district may be relied upan to. make the fellawlng determinatiens.)
Wauld the prepasal:
a) Cenflict with ar ebstruct implementatien ef the applicable Air
Quality Plan? [ ] [ ] [] [X]
b) Vielate any air quality standard er cantribute substantially to.
an existing er prejected air quality vielatien? [ ] [ ] [] [X]
c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase ef any
criteria pellutant fer which the praject regian is nen-
attainment under an applicable federal ar state ambient air
quality standard (Including releClsing emissiens, which
exceed quantitative threshelds far azene precursers)? [ I [ ] [] [X]
d) Expese sensitive receptors to. substantial pellutant
cancentratians? [ I [ ] [] [X]
e) Create ebjectienable edors affecting a substantial number af
peeple? [ ] [ ] [] [X]
The pro.pesed eating establishment will be subject to. lacal air quality regulatjens as administered by the
Ceuth Ceast Air Quality Management District which shauld prevent any impacts relative to. items (b) and
(c) above. There are no. exterier improvement prepased that weuld result in alteratiens to. air mevement,
meisture er temperature, er cause a change in climate.
Form "J"
-5-
CEQA Checklist 4/99
Less Than
Significant
Poten<<ally WIth Less Than
Significant MJ<<gation Significant No
Impact Incorporation Impact Impact
.
.
.
IV. 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
Selvice? [ ] [ J
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any rip;;irian habitat or
other sensitive natural commiJnity identified in local or'
regional plans, policies, and regulations, or by the California
Department of Fish and Game or U. S. Fish and Wildlife
Service? [ ] [ ]
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, vernal pool, coastal,
etc.) through direct removal, fiiling, hydrological interruption,
or other means? [ ] [ I
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? [ ] [ ]
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting
biological resources. suet'! as a tree preservation policy or
ordinance? [ ] [ ]
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural Conservation Community Plan,
or other approved local, regional or state habitat
conservation plan? [ ] [ ]
The proposed eating establishment will not have any impacts on biological resources.
.
V, CULTURAL RESOURCES - Would the project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a
historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5? [ ] [ ]
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an
archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5? [ ] [ ]
c) Directly or Indirectly destroy a unique paleontological
resource or site or unique geologic feature? [ ] [ ]
d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside
of formal cemeteries? [ J [ I
The proposed eating establishment will not have any impacts on cultural resources.
.
VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS - Would the 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 racent 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 Mlnes.and Geology Special Publication 42).
iI) Strong seismic ground shaking?
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
Form"J"
-6-
Fila No.: CUP 01-016
[ ]
[ ]
[ I
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ I
[ ]
[ ]
CEQA Checklist 4/99
[XI
[X]
[X]
[X]
[X]
[X]
[X]
[XI
[X]
[XI
[X]
[Xl
.
.
.
.
File No.: CUP 01-016
.
Less Than
Significant
Potentielly With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporation Impact Impact
[ ] ! ] [] [X]
[ ] [ ] [] [X]
[ ] [ ] [] [X]
Iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction?
Iv) 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?
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? [ ] [ ] [J [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.
[ ]
[X]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[X]
[ ]
[ ]
VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS - Would the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the pUblic or the environment
through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous
materials? [ ] [ ] !] IX]
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment
through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident
conditions involving the release of hazardous matenals into
the environment? [ ] [ ] [J [X]
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely
hazardous materials. substances, or waste within one-
quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? [ ] [ ] [] [X]
d) Be located on a.site which is included on a list of hazardous
materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code
Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant
hazard to the public or the environment? [ ] [ ] [] [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 result
in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the
project area? [ ] [ ] (J (X]
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? [ ] [ ] [] [X]
g) Impair implementation of, or physically interfere with an
adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation
plan? [ ] [ ] [] [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 intermixed with wildlands? ( ] [ ] [] [X]
The proposed eating establishment will in an existing shopping center and has been designed with
consideration already given to the above items. Any proposed tenant improvements will be reviewed by the
City Building Services, the City Fire Department, and the County Health Department.
Form"J"
-7-
CEQA Checklist 4/99
.
.
File No.: CUP 01-016
less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporation Impect Impact
VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY - Would the project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge
requirements?
b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere
substantially with groundwl!ter 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 alterthe 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 siitation 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 would exceed the
capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems
or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff?
f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality
g) Place housing within a 100-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 100-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? [ ] [ I
The proposed eating establishment will be in an existing commercial center. There are
alterations to the building or site that would result in any of the above impacts.
IX. LAND USE & PLANNING - Would the project
a) Physically divide an established community?
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?
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or
natural community conservation plan? [ ] [ ] [] (X]
The proposed eating establishment is consistent with the general plan and zoning designations for the
area, and will complement the other uses in the area. The establishment will be subject to all other
environmental plans or policies adopted by the agencies with jurisdiction over this area, and there are no
agricultural resources or operations in the vicinity.
.
[ ]
[ ]
[ I
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ I
.
[ ]
[ I
[ ]
[ 1
[ ]
[ ]
[ I
[ ]
[ ]
[ I
[ ]
[ ]
.
Form "J"
..a-
CEOA Checklist 4/99
[ ]
[X]
t ]
[X]
[ ]
[XI
[ ]
[X]
[ ]
[ ]
[X]
[X]
[ I
[X]
[ ]
[X]
[] [X]
[] [Xl
nO exterior
[ ]
[X]
[ ]
[Xl
.
.
. XIII.
.
.
File No.: CUP 01-016
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporation Impact Impact
X. MINERAL RESOURCES - Would the project
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? [ ] [ ] [] [X]
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? [ ] [ ] [] [X]
The proposed eating establishment will be in an existing commercial center. Any tenant improvements will
be required to comply with adopted energy conservation requirements. None of the above impacts have
been associated with such establishments.
XI. 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? [ ] [ ] [X] []
b) Exposure of persons to. or generation of excessive
groundbome vibration or ground borne noise levels? [ ] [ ] [X] []
c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in
the project vicinity above levels-existing without the project? [ ] [ ] [X] [1
d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient
noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing
without the project? [ ] [ ] [Xl []
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 [ ] [] [X]
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? [ ] [ ] [] [Xl
The proposed eating establishment will be in an existing commercial center and none of the above
impacts have been associated with this location or the establishment.
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)? [ ]
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing.
necessitating the construction of replacement housing
elsewhere? [ ]
c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the
construction of replacement housing elsewhere? [ ]
The proposed eating establishment will not impact the population or housing.
[ ]
[X]
[ ]
[ ]
[X]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[X]
PUBLIC SERVICES - Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated
with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically
altered govemmental facilities, the construction of which would cause significant environmental
Form" J"
.9-
CEQA Checklist 4/99
.
.
. XVI.
.
.
File No.; CUP 01-016
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mlllgation Significant No
Impact Incorporation Impact Impact
response times or other performance
Impacts, II) order to maintain acceptable service ratios,
objectives for any of the public services:
a) Fire protection? [ ] [ ] [J [X]
b) Police protection? [ ] [ ] [] [X]
c) Schools? [ ] [ ] [] [X]
d) Parks? [ ] [ ] [] [X]
e) Other public facilities? [ ] [ ] [] [X]
The proposed eating establishment will be in an existing commercial center. The use is consistent with
the planned uses for the subject area and will therefore not result in any of the above impacts.
XIV. RECREATION - Would the project:
a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks
or other recreational facilities such that substantial physicai
deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? [ ]
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the
construction or expansion of recreational facilities which
might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? [ ]
The proposed eating establishment will not result in any of the above impacts.
[ ]
[X]
[ ]
[ ]
[X]
[ I
XV. TRANSPORTATION 1 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)? [ ] [ ] [] [XI
b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service
standard established by the county congestion management
agency for designated roads or highways? [ ] [ I [] [X]
c) Result in a change In air traffic pattems, including either an
increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in
substantial safety risks? [ ] [ ] [] [X]
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g.,
sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible
uses (e.g., farm equipment)? [ ] [ ] [] [X]
e) Result in inadequate emergency access? [ ] [ I [I [X]
1) Result in inadequate parking capacity? [ ] [ ] [] [X]
g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting
alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts. bicycle racks)? [ ] [ I [] [X]
The proposed eating establishment will be along an existing commercial strip, and recently reconfigured
public throughway which has been designed to avoid any of the above impacts. Furthermore. said subject
location has been examined by the City's Traffic Engineer with regard to the proposed establishment and it
has been determined that there should not have any pedestrian or vehicular related impacts.
UTILITIES & SERVICE SYSTEMS - Would the project:
a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable
Regional Water Quality Control Board?
[ ]
[ ]
[X]
[ ]
Form "J"
-10-
CEQA Checklist 4/99
.
.
.
.
.
File No.: CUP 01-016
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporation Impact Impact
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? [ I [ 1 [] [Xl
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? [ 1 [ ] [] [X]
d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project
from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or
expanded entitlements needed? [ ] [ ] [l [Xl
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? [ l [ 1 [I [X]
f) Be served by a landfili with sufficient permitted capacity to
accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? [ ] [ 1 [] [X]
g) Comply with federal, state and local statutes and regulations
related to solid waste? [ ] [ ] [] [XI
The proposed eating establishment will be in an existing commercial center. It is not anticipated that any of
the above utilities or service systems will be significantly impacted.
XVII. MANDA TORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of
the environment, substantialiy reduce the habitat of a fish or
wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop
below 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 California history or
prehistory? . [ I [ ] [l [X]
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited,
but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerabie"
means that the incremental effects of a projElCt 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.) [ ] [ ] [] [X]
c) Does the project have environmental effects. which will
cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either
directly or indirectly? [ 1 [ ] [] [Xl
The proposed eating establishment will be in an existlng commercial cenier and will not result in any of the
above impacts.
XVIII. EARLIER ANALYSES
No earlier analyses, and no additional documents were referenced pursuant to the tiering. program EIR, or
other CEOA processes to analyze the project.
Form "J"
CECA Checklist 4/99
-11-