HomeMy WebLinkAbout1732
RESOLUTION NO. 1732
.
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2005-13 FOR A 750
SQ.FT. EATING ESTABLISHMENT WITH 12 SEATS AT
100 E. FOOTHILL BL YD.
WHEREAS, on June 7, 2005, a conditional use permit application was
filed by Andrew Babakhanlou, lessee of the subject property, for a 750 sq.ft.
eating establishment with 12 seats, Development Services Department Case No.
CUP 2005-13, at 100 E. Foothill Blvd.; and
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the Planning Commission on
July 12, 2005, 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 RESOL YES AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1.
That the factual data submitted by the Development
Services Department in the attached report dated July 12, 2005 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
.
I
improvements in such zone or vicinity because the initial study did not disclose
. any substantial adverse effects to the area affected by the proposed project.
2. That the use applied for at the location indicated is a proper one for
which a Conditional Use Permit is authorized.
3. That the site for the proposed use is adequate in size and shape to
accommodate said use. All yards, spaces, walls, fences, loading, landscaping
and other features including the shared parking with the neighboring business,
are adequate to adjust said use with the land and uses in the neighborhood. The
proposed project complies with all related zoning requirements as set forth in
the Arcadia Municipal Code.
4. That the site abuts streets and highways adequate in width and
pavement type to carry the kind of traffic generated by the proposed use.
5. That the granting of such Conditional Use Permit will 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 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.
.
2
SECTION 3.
That for the foregoing reasons this Commission grants
. Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 2005-13, for an eating establishment with 12
seats at 100 E. Foothill Blvd., upon the following conditions:
1. The hours of operation shall be limited to 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.rn.,
seven days a week.
2. The maximum number of seats shall be limited to 12.
3. The use approved by CUP 2005-13 is limited to the eating
establishment. The eating establishment shall be operated and maintained in a
manner that is consistent with the proposal and plans submitted and approved
for CUP 2005-13.
4. A separate sign design review application shall be submitted for all
.
.
new signs on the premises.
5. Any exterior alteration to the building requires the filing and approval
of a design review application.
6. All conditions of approval shall be complied with prior to opening the
eating establishment. Noncompliance with the plans, provisions and conditions
of approval for CUP 2005-13 shall be grounds for immediate suspension or
revocation of any approvals, which could result in the closing of the eating
establishment.
7. Approval of CUP 2005-13 shall not take effect until the property
owner(s), and applicants have executed and filed the Acceptance Form available
3
from the Development Services Department to indicate awareness and
. acceptance of these conditions of approval.
8. 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 this project or decision. The City shall promptly
notify the applicant of any claim, action, or proceeding concerning the project
and/or land use decision and the City shall cooperate fully in the defense of the
.
matter. The City reserves the right, at its own option, to choose its own attorney
to represent the City, its officers, employees, and agents in the defense of the
matter.
SECTION 4. The decision, findings and conditions contained in this
Resolution reflect the Commission's action of July 12,2005, by the following
votes:
AYES:
Commissioners Baderian, Hsu, Lucas, Olson, Wen
.
4
.
.
.
none
NOES:
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 July 12, 2005, by the
following votes:
AYES:
Commissioners Baderian, Hsu, Lucas, Olson, Wen
none
NOES:
-Secretary, Planning Commission
City of Arcadia
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
~P.~
Stephen P. Deitsch, City Attorney
Chairman, PI ing Commission
City of Arcadia
5
"
.
STAFF REPORT
Development Services Department
July 12, 2005
TO:
Arcadia City Planning Commission
FROM:
Donna L. Butler, Community Development Administrator
By: Thomas P. Li, Associate Planner
SUBJECT: Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 2005-13 for a 750 sq.ft. fast
food eating establishment, at 100 E. Foothill Blvd.
SUMMARY
. Andrew BabakhanJou, lessee, submitted this Conditional. Use Permit application for a
fast food eating establishment (d.b.a. Subway) at 100 E. Foothill Blvd. The business
provides 12 seats, and would be open from 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m., seven days a week.
The Development Services Department is recommending approval of this application,
and adoption of Resolution No. 1732 subject to the conditions in the staff report.
GENERAL INFORMATION
APPLICANT: Andrew Babakhanlou (lessee)
LOCATION: 100 E. Foothill Blvd.
REQUEST: A Conditional Use Permit for a 750 sq.ft~ fast food eating
establishment (d.b.a. Subway) with 12 seats, and business hours of
7:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m., seven days a week.
LOT AREA: 16,997 sq.ft. (0.39 acre)
FRONTAGES: 144 feet along Foothill Blvd.
91 feet along First Ave.
.
.
.
.
EXISTING LAND USE & ZONING:
The subject property is improved with a 5,400 sq.ft. commercial retail
center, and is zoned C-2.
SURROUNDING LAND USES & ZONING:
North:
South:
East:
West:
Financial Institution; zone C-2
Multiple-family dwellings; zoned R-2
Santa Anita Wash; unzoned
Auto repair shop; zoned C-2
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION:
Commercial
PROPOSAL AND ANALYSIS
The applicant is proposing to operate a "Subway" eating establishment with 12-15 seats
that would occupy a 750 sq.ft. unit in an existing commercial retail center. Typically,
there will be 3-4 employees serving freshly made sandwiches, salads, and breakfast
items. The proposed business hours are 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m., seven days a week,
In staffs opinion, this small fast food establishment should be limited to a maximum of
twelve (12) seats as shown on the submitted site plan. The plans have been reviewed
and received preliminary approval by Building Services and the Fire Department;
however, increasing the occupancy may change the compliance status.
PARKING
By code, a 750 sq.ft. fast food eating establishment requires a total of twelve (12) on-
site parking spaces (15 spaces per 1,000 sq.ft. of gross floor area). In this case, the
subject business has shared parking with the other retail uses that total 4,650 sq.ft.
within the site's commercial center, which requires twenty-four (24) additional spaces.
Therefore, the total number of on-site parking spaces required is thirty-six (36), where
thirty (30) spaces are provided. Although there is a deficiency, based on staffs
observation, the parking lot is underutilized and would provide adequate on-site parking
if the proposed use is added to the center.
CODE REQUIREMENTS
All City requirements regarding disabled access and facilities, occupancy limits, building
safety, health code compliance, parking and site design shall be complied with to the
satisfaction of the Building Official, Community Development Administrator, Fire
Marshall, and Public Works Services Director, and are to be determined by submitting
fully detailed tenant improvement plans for plan check review and approval. The Los
Angeles County Health Department must also approve the tenant improvement plans
before building permits will be issued.
CUP 2005-13
July 12, 2005
Page 2
.
.
.
Any exterior improvements, such as any new signs, sign face changes, awnings and
trash enclosures shall be subject to architectural design review and approval by the
Community Development Division.
An Industrial Waste Discharge Permit shall be obtained from the Public Works Services
Department prior to opening of the restaurant, and the tenant improvements shall
include the Best Management Practices (BMPs) of the Minimum Project Requirements
for reducing the level of pollutants in storm water runoff.
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.
FINDINGS
Section 9275.1.2 of the Arcadia Municipal Code requires that for a Conditional Use
Permit to be granted, it must be found that all of the following prerequisite conditions
can be satisfied:
1. That the granting of such Conditional Use Permit will not be detrimental to the
public health or welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in such zone
or vicinity.
2. That the use applied for at the location indicated is properly one for which a
Conditional Use Permit is authorized.
3. That the site for the proposed use is adequate in size and shape to
accommodate said use, and all yards, spaces, walls, fences, parking, loading,
landscaping, and other features required to adjust said use with the land and
uses in the neighborhood.
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.
CUP 2005-13
July 12, 2005
Page 3
.
.
.
RECOMMENDATION
The Development Services Department recommends approval of Conditional Use
Permit Application No. CUP 2005-13, subject to the following conditions:
1. The hours of operation shall be limited to 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m., seven days a
week.
2. The maximum number of seats shall be limited to 12.
3. The use approved by CUP 2005-13 is limited to the restaurant. The restaurant
shall be operated and maintained in a manner that is consistent with the
proposal and plans submitted and approved for CUP 2005-13.
4. A separate sign design review application shall be submitted for all new signs on
the premises.
5. Any exterior alteration to the building requires the filing and approval of a design
review application.
6. All conditions of approval shall be complied with prior to opening the restaurant.
Noncompliance with the plans, provisions and conditions of approval for CUP
2005-13 shall be grounds for immediate suspension or revocation of any
approvals, which could result in the closing of the restaurant.
7. Approval of CUP 2005-13 shall not take effect until the property owner(s), and.
applicants have executed and filed the Acceptance Form available from the
Development Services Department to indicate awareness and acceptance of
these conditions of approval.
8. A parking modification be granted to permit 30 on-site spaces in lieu of 36
required for the applicant's proposal.
9. The applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Arcadia and
its officers, employees, and agents from and against any claim, action, or
proceeding against the City of Arcadia, its officers, employees or agents to
attack, set aside, void, or annul any approval or condition of approval of the City
of Arcadia conceming this project and/or land use decision, including but not
limited to any approval or condition of approval of the City Council, Planning
Commission, or City Staff, which action is brought within the time period provided
for in Government Code Section 66499.37 or other provision of law applicable to
this project or decision. The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim,
action, or proceeding concerning the project and/or land use decision and the
City shall cooperate fully in the defense of the matter. The City reserves the
right, at its own option, to choose its own attomey to represent the City, its
officers, employees, and agents in the defense of the matter.
CUP 2005-13
July 12, 2005
Page 4
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
. ADDroval
The Planning Commission should move to approve and file the Negative
Declaration and adopt Resolution No. 1732: a Resolution of the Planning
Commission of the City of Arcadia, California, granting Conditional Use Permit
No. CUP 2005-13 for a 750 sq.ft. restaurant (d.b.a. Subway) with 12 seats and
operation hours of 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m., seven days a week, at 100 E. Foothill
Blvd.
Denial
If the Planning Commission intends to deny this Conditional Use Permit application, the
Commission should state the specific reasons for denial and direct staff to prepare the
appropriate resolution incorporating the Commission's decision and specific findings.
.
If any Planning Commissioner, or other interested party has any questions or comments
regarding this matter prior to the July 12th public hearing, please contact Thomas Li at
(626) 574-5447.
APP~
Donna L. utler
Community Development Administrator
Attachments:
Aerial Photo & Zoning Map
Floor and Site plans
Environmental Documents
Resolution 1732
.
CUP 2005-13
July 12, 2005
Page 5
~
N
100 0
~ ~
100
200 Feet
,
D
@i] Zone
1ffs
1@@ IE F~~~hffUU BUvd
CUP @5a1J
Development Servics$ Depal1mellt
Enginflflring Division
by: RS.Gonzalez, JINl8, 2005
~ (1116)
N
100 0 100 Feet
. . (1112)
~
C)
:t (141)
(6 71) (T5-17) (101) (12 (131)
(49 (55) S7)
FOOTHILL BL
(54) . (66) ~ (lU) (1 0) ~
c:( (i)
I- ~
(1015) CI)
9:: (1012) Si:
u:
(1011) (1010) (1009) :b
~
(1009) (1006)
(1005)
(1001) (1000)
FLORAL AVE
(910)
(917)
(920)
(919)
(916)
(51) (55) 67
1fs
100 E Foothill Blvd
CUP 05-13
DeveloPITIMt SslVioos Department
Engineering DMsion
P/vim>dby: RSGonuIez. June, 2005
.
-
. .
. " .
.
'l'OBACCO CLI&BBllS . CWESI :0011111:
SlOP . 'lAD OUT SlOP
.
UBUDIAlIT
1400 sqft 1000 sqf 750 sq 750 sqft
.
. . . . ..' . ....
. D.' . . . . . '. ., '. .. . .
.
.
. . . . . . . . . ,
. \
~ ~6
~~ 7 8 9 1 11 12 13 14 15
,fJ .
() ~ I
1 2 3 4 . ~
,., <
O' t .~
(V') u::
. .
0'\
'"
.
co 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 '25 26 27 .
'"
:
~
.0
E. Foothill Blvd.
---
29'
.
15'-5"
13'-2"
:@
'--
$
II }
~"X~. CtE~.
SPACE REQUIRED
@o
DIRECT
YoIREll
@
l
I
"
() 16 TYP. 3'0' X
,... 1/
....-~*"":)
/; \'<--CElUNC rAIl
(/ \) (TYPICAL)
@
j..
I
Co
~
<8"
HIGH
WAll.
.
'"
u,
)(
.
o
;.,
~
/
/
I
I
rr
. \
;... \
7'
16' 7"
.
'.
N
I
Co
..
'"
.
o
i
....
-
.
NOTE:
PLEASE BE SURE TO UTIUZE THIS ONEPAGE DRAWING
WHEN MEETING WITH LOCAL BUILDING'" HEAlTH INSPECTORS
TO VERIFY WHETHER THE PROPOSED PLAN MEETS WITH
LOCAL CODES AND ALSO TO VERIFY ALL DIMENSIONS.
BEFORE REOUESTING A FULL SET OF PLANS.
.
GENERAL NOTES:
- CEILING HEIGHT IS 10' A.F.F. (MUST BE CONFIRMED)
- aECTRICAL OUTLET HEIGHTS MEASURED TO BOTTOM OF BOX.
- ONE ELECTRICAL JUNCTION BOX TO BE LOCATED IN CEIUNG
ABOVE EACH WlNDOW.
- CUNO MODEL SW3-EL-IH WATER FlLlRAnON SYSTEM IS REQUIRED
IN ALL NEW STORES Tl'fA T DISPENSE BEVERAGES (IN CANADA
THE ECOLAB FRESH HZO REMAINS OPTIONAl). THE RECOMMENDED
PLACEMENT fOR INSTAUA TION IS REMOTE MOUNTING ONTO
THE BACKROOM BEVERAGE SYRUP RACK OR' MOUNTING ONTO
BACKRODM WALL OPTIONAl INSTAlLATION MOUNTING INSIDE
THE FRONT BEVERAGE COUNTER lItfERE SPAct LIMITATIONS
OCCUR. IN AREAS WHERE CHLORAMlNE IS IN USE BY THE LOCAL
MUNIClPAUTY THE CUNO MODEL CFSCRC CANISTER IS REOUIRED
TO BE INSTAllED IN ADDITION TO lHE STANDARD SW3-E1.-IH
SYSTEM. REOUIRED: I/Z" INCOlllNG WAlER UN!: FEED WITH
1/2" BALL VAlVE SHUTOFF AND 1/2" FPT CONNECTION.
MINIMUM 110 VOLT. 20 AMP ELECTRICAl SERVICE TO SUPPORT
THE CARBONA TOR AND WATER BOOSTER (MUST BE DEDICA TED
CIRCUIT).
- PROIAOTlONAl flOOR STAND (MFR. TRANS WORLD) REQUIRED IN
CUSTOIolER AREA AT POINT Of ORDER (PREFERRED PLActMENl).
'4 1/2" X 10" BASE. 54" OVERAlL HEIGHT.
- EXIT UGHTS INSTAllED BY G.C. PER LOCAL CODE.
- EMERGENCY UGHTS INSTAlLED BY G.C. PER LOCAL CODE.
- EXTINGUISHERS. SMOKE AND FIRE DETECTION SYSTEMS
INSTALLED BY G.C. PER LOCAL CODE.
- LABOR '" idA TERIAL SUPPLIEO BY C.c. UNLESS OlHERWlSE NOTED.
- AlL DIMENSIONS TO BE VERIFlED BY G.C. ON SITE.
- DECOR SPEClFlCA TIONS ARE ro BE SUBWA Y"S "TUSCANy"' SCHEIolE.
- SEE OWl'lER FOR REFRIGERATOR AND FREEZER HEIGHT OPTION.
NOTE:
"THESE PLANS ARE FOR REVIEW ONLY
AND ARE NOT TO BE CONSTRUED
AS FINAL APPROVAL."
.
l'
29'
~_.
NO. ITEM
4A 30" X 30" TABLE
4B 20" X 24" TABLE
6A CHAIR
8 TRASH REctPTACLE
9 SODA MACHINE
10 BEVERAGE DES11NAnON CENTER
11 RED NEON "OPEN" SIGN
13 WALL ART (uPSCAlE)
\4 CHIP RACK
'6 WAlL PLANT
17 INTERIOR DOOR
19 FRONT COUNTER
21 COOKIE DISPLAY CASE
22 DISPLAY REFRIGERATOR
23 SAfE
Z4 SUBSHOP 2000 P.D.S.
25 MICROWAVE
26 HAND SINK
27 BREAD OVEN
28 ENCLOSED BREAD CABINET
29 MENUBOARD
32 BACK COUNTER
33 REFRIGERATED BACK COUNTER
34 RAPID COOK OVEN
36 SINK
37 MOP SINK
3B HOT WATER TANK
39 S.S. WORKTABLE
40 WALL SHELF
41 VEGETABLE SINK
43 CLEANING PRODUCT RACK
4S NEMCO EASY SLICER
46 RETARDER CABINET
47 REFRIGERATOR
48 FREEZER
49 STORAGE UNI TS
50 SOQA STORAGE
51 STEREO SYSTEM
PLEASE NOTE: 00 NOT SCALE lHlS FLOOR PLAN.
REFER TO tHE WRITTEN DIMENSIONS. PHOTO-
CoPYING OR FAXING WlLL OISTORT THIS ORA WING
STORE CONCEPT
fllAIIGUSIT
.BABAKHANLOU / ISSAGOUL YAN
STIJR:[ ADDRESS
100 E. FOOTHILL BLVD.
ARCADIA, CA 91007
.....
RUTH SENDER
SCALE I STORE ·
1/4" - 1: 36130
DAn:
APRIL 12th, 2005
IJMW BY
0 PENNY NOLEN
Al.-L DlMENSIDNS I4UST BE VERIFIED PRIDR
TO REQUESTING A FULLSET OF PLANS.
-
l
City of Arcadia
~
Stormwater Plan Check Correction Sheet
~tact Name:
~ct Title:
Company Name:
Mailing Address:
City, State, Zip:
Phone Number:
Fax Number:
Tracking#: CUP 05-13
Site Name: Subway
Site Address: 100 E. Foothill Blvd.
Type Of Facility: Restaurant
SIC Code: 5B12
Submittal Date: 6/21/2005
Plan Return Date 6/27/2005
Distributed Area: 750 sq.ft
Priority Project 0
1
Items Requiring Corrections:
. Complete form OC1 and place "Stormwater Construction Notes" on Plans (all projects).
. Submit 3 sets of-a Standard Urban Stormwater Mitigation Plan in a report format - include plans.
. Guidance booklet enclosed.
. Complete form PC or provide a brief description of the proposed use of the site.
worm P1 must be completed (front and back) and properly signed on both signature lines.
. The SUSMP must contain this EXACT statement signed by the landowner or engineer of record:
I certify under penalty of law that this document and all attachments were prepared under my jurisdiction or
supervision in accordance with a system designed to assure that qualified personnel properly gather and evaluate the
information submitted. Based on my inquiry of the person or persons who manage the system or those persons
directly responsible for gathered the information, to the best of my knowledge and belief, the information submitted is
true, accurate, and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false information, including
the possibility of fine and imprisonment for knowing violations.
Include printed name, position/title and date along with signature
. Other corrections/clarifications required.
1. Plan review fees to be determined upon resubmlttal of plans.
. Sets of plans needed
ApplicationlPlan Check fee of
3
$0.00
City of Arcadia
Department of Public Works
11800 Goldring Road
Arcadia, California 91066-
6021
For Office Use Only
Plan Checl<ed By: [John L. Hunter
Date: 612712005
I
Stormwater Plan review expires 180 days from
June 27, 2005
Signature
(562) 802-7880
Page 1 ort
.
.
.
File No. CUP 05-13
CITY OF ARCADIA
240 WEST HUNTINGTON DRIVE
ARCADIA, CA 91007
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
1. Project Title:
Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 2005-13
2. Project Address (Location)
100 E. Foothill Blvd.
3. Project Sponsor's Name, Address & Telephone Number:
Andrew Babakhanlou
100 E. Foothill Blvd.,
Arcadia, CA 91006
(818) 522-8098
4. Lead Agency Name & Address:
City of Arcadia - Development Services Department
Community Development Division - Planning Services
240 W. Huntington Drive
Post Office Box 60021
Arcadia, CA 91066-6021
5. Lead Agency Contact Person & Telephone Number:
Donna Butler, Community Development Administretor (626) 574-5442
6. General Plan Designation: Commercial
7. Zoning Classification: 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 sheets if necessary.)
A 750 sq. ft. 'Subway" eating establishment with 12 seats and operation hours of 7:00
a.m. to 9:00 p.m., seven days a week.
CEQA Env. Checklist Part 1
-1-
4103
.
.
.
File No. CUP 05-13
9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: (Briefly describe the project's surroundings.)
North:
South:
East:
West:
Financial Institution; zone C-2
Multiple-family dwellings; zoned R-2
Santa Anita Wash; unzoned
Auto repair shop; zoned C-2
10. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval,
or participation agreement):
The City Building SelVices, Engineering Division, Fire Marshall, Public Works Services,
and Water Services will review the construction plans for the tenant improvements for
compliance with all applicable construction and safety codes and will oversee
construction and installation of any necessary infrastructure or improvements on-site
and/or within and along the publiC right-of-way. The tenant improvements for the coffee
shOp will also be reviewed by the Los Angeles County Health Department for
compliance with local health codes.
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.
[ I Aesthetics
[ I Biological Resources
[ I GeologylSoils
[ I Hydrology/Water Quality
[ I Mineral Resources
[ I Population & Housing
[ I Recreation
[ I Utilities and Service Systems
[ I Mandatory Findings of Significance
[ I Air Quality
[ I Cultural Resources
[ I Hazards & Hazardous Materials
[ I Land Use & Planning
[ I Noise
[ I Public Services
[ I Transportation I Circulation
DETERMINATiON (To be completed by the Lead Agency)
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
[XI I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the
environment, and a NEGATiVE DECLARATiON will be prepared.
[] I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the
environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation
measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A
NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
CEQA Env. Checklist Part 1
-2-
4/03
.
.
.
File No. CUP 05-13
[] I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
[] I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, but
that at least one effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant
to applicable legal standards and has been addressed by mitigation measures based on
that earlier analysis as described on attached sheets, and if any remaining effect is a
"Potentially Significant Impact" or "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated," an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it only needs to analyze the
effects that have not yet been addressed.
[] I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the
environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially
significant effects have been analyzed adequately in an earlier Environmental Impact
Report pursuant to applicable standards and have been avoided or mitigated pursuant
to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the
proposed project.
Signature
Date
Printed Name
For
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS:
1. A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impacr answers that are
adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses
following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced
information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects such as the one
involved (e.g., the project is not within a 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 related
as well as operational impacts.
3. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect
is significant. If there are one or more, "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the
determination is made, an Environmental Impact Report is required.
4. "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of
mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less
CECA Env. Checklist Part 1
-3-
4/03
.
.
.
File No. CUP 05-13
Than Significant Impact: The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and
briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation
measures from Section 17 "Earlier Analyses' may be cross-referenced).
5.
Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program Environmental
Impact Report, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an
earlier EIR or Negative Declaration {Section 15063(c)(3)(D)}. Earlier analyses are
discussed in Section 17 at the end of the checklist.
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 that 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 used
or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion.
8. The explanation of each issue should identify:
a) The significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and
b) The mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significant.
CEOA Env. Checklist Part 1
-4-
4/03
File No.: CUP 04-13
Less Than
. Potentially Significant Less Than
Significant With Significant No
Impact Mitigation Impact Impact
InCorporaUon
1. AESTHETICS - Would the project
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? 0 0 0 123
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited 0 0 0 123
to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state
scenic highway?
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of
the site and its surroundings?
o
o
o
123
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would
adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
o
o
o
123
The proposed restaurant will be in an existing retail building on a strip commercial street in a fully developed
area and will not have any of the above impacts.
..
AGRICULTURE RESOURCES - In determining whether impacts
to agriculture resources are significant environmental effects, lead
agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation
and Site Assessment Model (1 997) prepared by the California
Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing
impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of
Statewide Importance (Farmland) to non-agricultural use? (The
Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program in the California
Resources Agency to non-agricultural use?
o
o
o
123
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson
Act contract?
o
o
o
123
c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to
their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to
non-agricultural use?
o
o
o
123
The proposed restaurant will be in an existing retail building on a strip commeroial street in e fully developed
area end will not have any of the above impacts.
3.
AIR QUALITY - Where available, the significance criteria
established by the applicable air quality management or air
pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following
determinations. Would the project:
.
CEOA Checklist
5
4.03
.
.
.
a) Conflict with or obstruct Implementation of the. applicable air
quality plan?
b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an
existing or projected air quality violation?
c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria
pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an
applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including
releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for
ozone precursors)?
e) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations?
f) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of
people?
Polentially
Slgnlflcant
Impact
D
D
D
D
D
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporation
D
D
D
D
D
File No.: CUP 04-13
Less Than
Significant
Impact
D
D
D
D
D
No
Impact
IZI
IZI
IZI
IZI
IZI
The proposed restaurant will be in an existing retail building on a strip commercial street in a fuily developed
area. Becausa the proposed use is subject to applicable air quality regulations as administered by the South
Coast Air Quality Management District, it will not have any ofthe'above impacts.
4.
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES - Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse impact, either directly or through
habitat modifications, on any species Identified as a candidate,
sensnive, or special status species in local or regional plans,
policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish
and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
b) Have a substantial adverse impact on any riparian habitat or other
sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans,
policies, and regulations or by the Califomla Department of Fish
and Game or US 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
remoilal, filling, hydrological Interruption or other means?
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or
migratory fish or wildlife species or with established resident or
migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of wildlife nursery
sites?
CEQA Checklist
6
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
IZI
IZI
IZI
IZI
4-03
File No.: CUP 04-13
.
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological 0 0 0 ~
resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation 0 0 0 ~
Plan, Natural Conservation Community Plan, or other approved
local, regional or state habitat conservation plan?
The proposed restaurant will be in an existing retail building on a strip commercial street in a fully developed
area and will not have any of the above impacts.
5. CULTURAL RESOURCES - Would the project:
a} Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a 0 0 0 ~
historical resource as defined In !l15064.5?
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an 0 0 0 ~
archaeological resource pursuant to !j15064.5?
. c} Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or 0 0 0 ~
site or unique geologic feature?
d} Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of 0 0 0 ~
formal cemeteries?
The proposed restaurant will be in an exisUng retail building on a strip commercial street in a fully developed
area and will not have any of the above impacts.
6. GEOLOGY AND 5011.5 - Would the project:
a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse 0 0 0 ~
effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake faull, as delineated on the 0 0 0 ~
most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Faull 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.
iI} Strong seismic ground shaking? 0 0 0 ~
. ii1) Seismic-related ground failure, Including liquefaction? 0 0 0 ~
CEQA Checklist 7 4-03
.
.
.
v) Landslides?
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would
become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result
in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence,
liquefaction or collapse?
d) Be located on expansive soil as defined in Table 18-1-B of the
Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or
property?
e) Have solis incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic
tanks or altemative waste water disposal systems where sewers
are not available for the disposal of waste water?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
o
o
o
o
o
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporation
o
o
o
o
o
File No.: CUP 04-13
Less Than
Significant
Impact
o
o
o
o
o
No
Impact
[gJ
[gJ
[gJ
[gJ
[gJ
The proposed restaurant will be In an existing retail building on a strip commercial street in a fully developed
area. The subject location has not been determined to be especially susceptible to any of the above gaologlc
problems and is not within a Seismic Hazard Area identified by the Seismic Hazard Mapping Act. The proposal
does not include any excavation, grading or filling. No unique geologic features have been identified at the
site. The project is connected to the local sewer system. The project will not have any of the above impacts.
7.
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?
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?
c) emit hazardous emiSSions or handle hazardous or acutely
hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter
mile of an existing or proposed school?
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
CEOA Checklist
8
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
[gJ
[gJ
[gJ
[gJ
4-03
.
.
.
the public or the environment?
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?
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the
project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in
the project area?
g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted
emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
h) Expose people or structures to a sigificant risk of loss, injury or
death Involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are
adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed
with wildlands?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
D
D
D
D
File No.: CUP 04-13
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporation
D
D
D
D
Less Than
Slgnlflcant
Impact
D
D
D
D
NO
Impact
~.
~
~
~
The proposed restaurant will be in an existing retail building on a. strip commercial street in a fully developed
erea and will not have any of the above impacts.
8.
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY - Would the project:
a) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere
substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be
a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local
groundwater table level (i.e., the production rate of pre-existing
nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support
existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been
granted)?
b) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area.
including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river,
in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation
on- or off-site?
c) 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 fiooding on- or off-site?
d) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity
of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide
CEQA Checklist
9
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
~
~
~
~
4-03
.
.
.
substantial additional sources of polluted runoff?
e) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality
f) Violate any other water quality standards or waste discharge
requirements?
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 within a 1 DO-year floodplain structures which would impede
or redirect flood flows?
i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or
death involving flooding, Including flooding as a result of the
failure of a levee or dam?
j) Expose people or structures to Inundation by seiche, tsunami or
mudflow?
k) During project construction, will it create or contribute runoff water
that would violate any water quality standards or waste dischrage
requirements, including the terms of the City's municipal separate
stromwater sewer system persmit?
I) After the project is completed, will it create or contribute runoff
water that would violate any water quality standards or waste
dischrage requirements, including the terms of the City's
municipal separate stormwater sewer system permit?
m Allow polluted stormwater runoff from delivery areas or ioading
) docks or other areas where materials are stored, vehicles or
equipment are fueled or maintained, waste is handled, or
hazardous materials are handled or delivered, or other outdoor
work areas, to Impair other waters?
n) Potential for discharge of stormwater to cause significant harm on
the biological integrity of the waterways and water bodies
including municipal and comestic supply, water contact or non-
contact recreation and groundwater recharge?
CEOA Checklist
10
Potentially
Significant
Impact
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
File No.: CUP 04-13
Less Than
Significant
WIII1
Mitigation
Incorporation
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
Less Than
Significant
Impact
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
No
Impact
r2'J
r2'J
r2'J
r2'J
r2'J
r2'J
r2'J
r2'J
r2'J
r2'J
4'()3
File No.: CUP 04-13
.
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
0) Dischrage stormwater sothat significant harm is caused to the
biological integrity of waterways or water bodies?
o
o
o
rgJ
p) Ssignlficantly alter the fiow velocity or volume of storm water
runoff that can use environmental harm?
o
o
o
rgJ
q) Significantly increase erosion, either on or off-stle?
o
o
o
rgJ
The proposed restaurant will be in an existing ratail building on a strip commercial street in a fully developed
area. The proposed use will be subject to an Industrial Wastewater Discharge Permit so as not to violate
Regional Water Quality Control Board water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. The proposal
will not alter absorption rates, drainage pattems, surface runoff, surface water conditions, or ground water
condItions. The site is within the Santa Anita Dam Inundation Area, but will not expose people to any additional
or increased hazard levels. The project will not have any of the above impacts.
9. LAND USE AND PLANNING - Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established community? 0 0 0 rgJ
. b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of 0 0 0 rgJ
an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not
limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or
zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or
mitigating an environmental effect?
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural 0 0 0 rgJ
community conservation plan?
The proposed restaurant will be in an existing retail building on a strip commercial street in a fully developed
area and will not have any of the above impacts.
10. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that 0 0 0 rgJ
would be of value to the region and the residents of the state?
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral 0 0 0 rgJ
resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific
plan or other land use plan?
The proposed restaurant will be in an existing retail building on a strip commercial street in e fully developed
area and will not have any of the above impacts.
.
CEOA Checklist
11
4-03
.
.
.3.
11. NOISE - Would the project result in:
a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels!n excess of
standards established in the local general plan or noise
ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?
b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundbome
vibration or groundbome noise levels?
c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the
project vicinity above levels existing without the project?
d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise
levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the
project?
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where
such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public
airport or public use airport, would the project expose people
residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the
project expose people residing or working in the project area to
excessive noise levels?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
o
o
o
o
o
o
File No.: CUP 04-13
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporation
o
o
o
o
o
o
Less Than
Significant No
Impact Impact
o
o
o
o
o
o
I8J
I8J
I8J
I8J
I8J
I8J
The proposed restaurant will be in an existing retail building on a strip commercial street in a fully developed
area and will not have any of the above impacts.
12. POPULATION AND HOUSING - Would the project:
a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for
example, by proposing new homes. and businesses) or indirectly
(for example, through extension of roads or other Infrastructure)?
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?
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
I8J
I8J
I8J
The proposed restaurant will be In an existing retail building on a strip commercial street In a fully developed
area and will not have any of the above impacts.
PUBLIC SERVICES - Would the project:
CEOA Checklist
12
4-03
.
14.
.
.
a) Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the
provision of new or physically altered govemmental facilities, need
for new or physically altered govemmental facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant environmental
impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response
times or other performance objectives for any of the public
services:
Fire protection?
Police protection?
Schools?
Parks?
Other pOblic facilities?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
o
o
o
o
o
Less Than
Significant
With
MltigaUon
Incorporation
o
o
o
o
o
File No.: CUP 04-13
Less Than
Significant
Impact
o
o
o
o
o
No
Impact
r8l
181
r8l
r8l
r8l
The proposed restaurant will be in an existing retail building on a strip commercial street in a fully developed
area and will not have any of the above impacts.
RECREATION - Would the project:
a)
Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or
other recreational facilities such that substantial physical
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 have an
adverse physical effect on the environment?
o
o
o
o
o
o
r8l
r8l
The proposed restaurant will be in an existing retail building on a strip commercial street in a fully developed
area and will not have any of the ebove impacts.
15. TRANSPORTATIONfTRAFFIC - 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)?
b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service
standard established by the county congestion management
agency for designated roads or highways?
c) Result in a change in air traffic pattems, including either an
increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in
CEOA Checklist
13
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
r8l
r8l
r8l
4-03
.
.
.
substantial safety risks?
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g.,
sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses
(e.g., farm equipment)?
e) Result in inadequate emergency access?
f) Result in inadequate parking capacity?
g) Conflict with aetopted policies, plans or programs supporting
altemative transportation (e.g., bus tumouts, bicycle racks)?
PolenUally
Significant
Impact
D
D
D
D
Less Than
Significant
With
MiUgaUon
Incorporation
D
D
D
D
File No.: CUP 04-13
Less Than
Signlflcant
Impact
D
D
D
D
No
Impact
IZl
IZl
IZl
IZl
The proposed restaurant will be in an existing retail building on a strip commercial straet in a fully developed
area and will not have any of the above impacts. Although there is a slight parkil)g deficiency according to code
requirements, the parking area is underutilized since the other uses in the center are not intense.
16. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project:
a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable
Regional Water Quality Control Board?
b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater
treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the
construction of Which could cause significant environmental
effects?
c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage
facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of
which could caUlie significant environmental effects?
d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from
existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded
entitlements needed? In making this etetermination, the City shall
consider whether the project is SUbject to the water supply
assessment reqUirements of Water Coete Section 10910, et seq.
(SB 610), and the requirements of Government Code Section
664737 (SB221).
e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider
which serves or may serve the project determined that it has
adequate capaCity to serve the project's projected demand in
addition to the provider's existing commitments?
CEOA Checklist
14
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
IZl
IZl
IZl
IZl
IZl
4-03
File No.: CUP 04-13
.
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to 0 0 0 [81
accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs?
g) Comply with federal, state and local statues and regulations 0 0 0 [81
related to solid waste?
The proposed restaurant will be in an existing retail building on a strip commercial street in a fully developed
area and wiff not have any of the above impacts.
17. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the 0 0 0 [81
environment, substantially 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?
. b Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but 0 0 0 [81
cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means
that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when
viewed In connection with the effects of past projects, the effects
of other current projects, and the effects of probable future
projects)?
c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause 0 0 0 [81
substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directiy or
Indirectly?
The proposed restaurant will be in an existing retail building on a strip commercial street In a fully developed
aree and wiff not have any of the above impacts.
.
CEQA Checklist
15
4-03
.
.
.
File No. 05- \'3
CITY OF ARCADIA
240 WEST HUNTINGTON DRIVE
ARCADIA. CA 91007
ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION FORM
Date Filed:
~O5"'
General Infonnation
1. Applicant's Name; ANDREW BABAKHANLOU & VALENTINE ISSAGOULYAN
Ad~: 922 N. ISABEL ST GLENDALE CA, 91207
2. Property Address (Location); 100 E. FOOTHILL BLVD, ARCADIA CA, 91006
Assessor's Number:
3.
Name, address and telephone number of person to be contacted concerning this project: '\
-Nf.b'v' (6A({f -t O/!firv d,'OA ~';)~~ L e. C In- (; (..-11"11 (io,.~
~ ~ I D) '17 g 'ftlJ '
4.
List and describe any other related permits and other public approvals required for this project, including those
required by city, regional, state and federal agencies:
(u lJ'I-f.;CI. e.L V V' lJ(rM./r
. . ~ - I
5.
c-z
6. General Plan Designation:
Zone Classification;
Proleel DescriDtion
7.
Proposed use of site (project description): 5 V b "Vll..1
~p(fat/r"-n 1-
8.
54-0()Sr '-s
,
-f1, e f yo Ie,. -f 'I
I I
9.
Site size: . 750 sf
Square footage per building:
Number of floors of construction: ol1e {InDy.
Amount of off-street parking provided: '30 Oa r ~ ,'11-1
, v
Proposed scheduling of project: J; /vi i J 14, T f' 11 G If:, 6/05
10.
II.
12,
13,
Anticipated incremental development:
14,
If residential, include the number of units, schedule of unit sizes, range of sale prices or rents, and type of
household sizes expected:
15,
If commercial, indicate the type, i.e. neighborhood, city or regionally oriented, square footage of sales area,
and loading facilities, hours of-operation:
.
19.
. 20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
.
S",bW<l- !<ru,kvrdt1 t (7)() <;1 ooi"j
t\\.vnlL 7~f(')11'W1_.#/<;D 7()>:fi~s~k"fl/Q.L cuea.
'0 ; ~ tda >
ilA"-() S DJ; t l!5 l't.e!J.
16. .I f industrial, indicate type, estimated employment per shift, and loading facilities:
NO IT!; RESTlWR-'\JIT WITH e eliftElleyees.
17. .If institutional, indicate the major function, estimated employment per shift, estimated occupancy, loading
facilities, and community benefits to be derived from the project:
18. If the project involves a variance, conditional use pennit or zoning application, state this and indicate clearly
why the application is required:
WE NEED TO CET CONDITIONAL UGlJ PERMIT 30 Tlli'I.T A 3UBHiiY
RESTAURANT CAN BE STABLISHED .ALSO ~~ NEED THIS PERMIT SO WE
Cl'N.OPERA'rE OUR RESTAURANT. WITH ARCADIA CITY CODRS. . .
Are the followmg Items apphciible to the project or Its effects'l'TIlscussoeTow al1ltems checlceoyes (attach additIonal
sheets as necessary).
Change in existing featUres of any hills, or substantial a1teratin of ground contours.
YES NO
!J 1]1
!J [iJ
!J iii
[J ~
[J ~
[J ~
[J W
[J ~
[J ~
YES NO
[J ~
E.I.R
01/14/04
Page 2
Change in scenic views or vistas from existing residential areas or publiclands or roads
Change in pattern, scale or character of general area of project
Significant amounts of solid waste or litter.
Change in dust, ash, smoke, fumes or odors in vicinity.
Change in ground water quality or quantity, or alteration of existing drainage pattersn.
Substantial change in existing noise or vibration levels in the vicinity.
is site on filledland or on any slopes of 10 percent or more.
Use or disposal of'potentiallyhazardous materials, such as toxic substances, flammable
or explosives.
28. Substantial change in demand for municipal services (police, fire, water, sewage, etc.)
.
.
.
29.
Substantial increase in fossil fuel consumption (electricity, oil, natural gas, etc.
o
o
o
30.
Relationship to a larger project or series of projects.
31.
Stonn water system discharges from areas for materials storage, vehicle or equipment
fueling, vehicle or equipment maintenance (including washing), waste handling, hazardous
materials handling or storage delivery or loading docks, or other outdoor work areas?
32.
A significantly environmentally hannful increase in the flow rate or volume of stonn water
o
ronoft'l
33.
A significantly environmentally hannful increase in erosion of the project site or surrounding
areas?
o
34.
Stonn water discharges that would significantly impair the beneficial uses of receiving waters
or areas that provide water qw,)itybenefits (e.g. riparian corridors, wetlands, etc.)?
o
35.
Hann to the biological integrity of drainage systems and water bodies?
o
Environmental Settinl!
36.
Describe (on a separate sheet) the project site as it exists before the project, including infonnation on
topography, soil stability, plants and animals, any cultural, bistorical or scenic aspects, any existing slnlctures
on the site, and the use of the stnIctUres. Attach photographs of the site. Snapshots or Polaroid photos will be
accepted.
Q!I
l(J
U3
U3
ua
~
~
37. Describe (on a separate sheet) the surrounding properties, including information on plants, animals, any
cultural, historical or scenic aspects. Indicate the type of land uses (residential, commercial, etc.), intensity of
land use (one- family, apartment houses, shops, department stores, etc.), and scale of development (beight,
frontage, set-backs, rear yards, etc.). Attach photographs of the vicinity. Snapshots or Polaroid photos will be
accepted.
Certification
J hereby certilY that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the data and infonnation
required for this initial evaluation to the best of my ability, and that the facts, statements, and infonnation presented are
true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.
fJt!o7(C>
Date
/h)ro, ~- p1~
Signature .)
E.LR.
01/14/04
Page 3