HomeMy WebLinkAbout1704 (2)
.
.
~
RESOLUTION NO, 1704
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
NO. 2004-002 FOR THE SALE OF BEER AND WINE IN AN EXISTING
2,000 SQ,FT. RESTAURANT (D,B.A. CAFE FUSION) WITH 68 SEATS
AND OPERATION HOURS OF 11:00 A.M. TO 11:30 P.M., SUNDAY
THROUGH THURSDAY, AND 11:00 A.M. TO 1:00 A.M., FRIDAY AND
SATURDAY, AT 510 E. LIVE OAK AVENUE.
WHEREAS, on March 8, 2004, a conditional use permit application was filed
by C. C. Chang, agent of Cafe Fusion, for the sale of beer and wine in an existing
2,000 sq.fl Restaurant (d,b.a, Cate Fusion) with 68 seats and operation hours 11:00
a,m. to 11:30 p.m., Sunday through Thursday, and 11:00 a.m. to 1:00 a.m., Friday and
Saturday (Development Services Department Case No. CUP 2004-(02) at property
commonly known as 510 E. Uve Oak Avenue; and
WHEREAS, a publiC hearing was held on April 27, 2004, at which time all
interested persons were given full opportunity to be heard and to present evidence,
NOW THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ARCADIA RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. That the factual data submitted by the Development Services
Department in the attached report is true and correct.
SECTION 2, This Commission finds:
1. That the granting of such Conditional Use Permit will not be detrimental to
the public health or welfare, or injurious to the property or improvements in such zone
or vicinity because the initial study did not disclose any substantial adverse effects to
the area affected by the proposed project.
2. That the use applied for at the location indicated is a proper one for which a
Conditional Use Permit is authorized.
3, That the site for the proposed use is adequate in size and shape to
accommodate said use. All yards, spaces, walls, fences, loading, landscaping and
other features induding the shared par1<ing 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.
SECTION 3. That for the foregoing reasons this commission grants
Conditional Use Permit no, CUP 2004-002 for the sale of beer and wine in an existing
2,000 sq.f1. restaurant (d,b.a, Cafe Fusion) with 68 seats and operation hours of 11 :00
a,m. to 11:30 p.m., Sunday through Thursday, and 11:00 a.m. to 1:00 a.m., Friday and
Saturday at 510 E. Live Oak Avenue, upon the following conditions:
1. The hours of operation shall be limited to 11:00 a.m. to 11:30 p,m" Sunday
through Thursday, and 11:00 a,m, to 1:00 a.m., Friday and Saturday.
2. There shall be no outdoor seating permitted.
3. The sale of beer and wine is incidental to the restaurant use only alJd is not
intended for off-premise consumptiol} or a bar use,
4. The maximum number of seats shall be 68 or the maximum occupancy as
determined by Building Services, whichever is lower.
5. The use approved by CUP 2004-002 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 2004-002,
6. A separate sign design review application shall be submitted for all new
signs on the premises.
7, Any exterior alteration to the building requires the filing and approval of a
design review application.
8, All conditions of approval shall be complied with prior to opening the
restaurant. Noncompliance with the plans, provisions and conditions of approval for
CUP 2004-002 shall be grounds for immediate suspension or revocation of any
approvals, which could result in the closing of the restaurant,
9, Approval of CUP 2004-002 shall not take effect until the property owner(s),
and applicants have executed and filed the Acceptance Form available from the
2
1704
Development Services Department to indicate awareness and acceptance of these
conditions of approval.
10. 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 April 27, 2004, by the following votes:
A YES: Commissioners Hsu, Lucas, Wen, Olson, Baderian
NOES: 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 27'" day of April, 2004, by the
fOllowing votes:
AYES:
NOES:
-
.
none
Commissioners Hsu, Lucas, Wen, Olson, Baderian
,
Secretary, Planning CommISsion
City of Arcadia
APPROVEDAST~FO~M: A
~P./~
Stephen P. Deitsch, City Attorney
Q?b~
Chairman, Planning Commission
City of Arcadia
3
1704
e
-
-
STAFF REPORT
Development Services Department
April 27, 2004
TO: Arcadia City Planning Commission
FROM: Donna L. Butler, Community Development Administrator
By: Thomas P. Li, Assistant Planner
SUBJECT: Conditional Use Permit Application No, CUP 2004-002 for the sale of beer
and wine in an existing 2,000 sq.ft, restaurant (d,b,a. Cafe Fusion), at 510
E. Live Oak Avenue.
SUMMARY
Ms, C, C. Chang submitted this Conditional Use Permit application, as the agent
representing the subject business, for the sale of beer and wine in an existing 2,000
sq,ft. restaurant (d.b.a. Cafe Fusion) at 510 East Live Oak Avenue. The business
provides seating for 68 patrons, and would be open from 11 :00 a.m. to 11 :30 p.m"
Sunday through Wednesday, and 11 :00 a.m. to 1 :00 a.m., Thursday through Saturday.
The Development Services Department is recommending approval of this application,
and adoption of Resolution No. 1704 subject to the conditions in the staff report.
GENERAL INFORMATION
APPLICANT: Ms. C. C, Chang (Agent representing Cafe Fusion)
LOCATION: 510 E. Live Oak Avenue
REQUEST: A Conditional Use Permit to permit the sale of beer and wine in an
existing 2,000 sq,ft, restaurant (d.b,a, Fusion Cafe) with 68 seats, and
business hours of 11 :00 a.m, to 11 :30 p,m., Sunday through
Wednesday, and 11 :00 a,m. to 1 :00 a.m., Thursday through Saturday,
7,497 sq.ft. (0.17 acre)
LOT AREA:
e FRONTAGES: 50 feet along Live Oak Avenue
EXISTING LAND USE & ZONING:
The subject property is improved with a 2,000 sq.ft. restaurant and a
1,000 sq.ft. beauty salon, and is zoned C-2.
SURROUNDING LAND USES & ZONING:
North: Commercial Retail Center and Service Station; zone C-2
South: Single-family dwellings; L.A. County area
East: Beauty Salon; zoned C-2
West: Japanese Restaurant; zoned C-2
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION:
Commercial
BACKGROUND
The subject business has been operating as a restaurant before the City required a
Conditional Use Permit for such use. Therefore, there is no existing CUP for the
restaurant, which is currently known as Cafe Fusion.
. PROPOSAL AND ANALYSIS
The subject business, Cafe Fusion, is a 2,000 sq.ft. restaurant with 68 seats that
opened earlier this month (April 2004). They serve a variety of homestyle Chinese food
with a limited selection of baked goods and drinks. The applicant is proposing to serve
beer and wine in the restaurant, and to have business hours of 11 :00 a.m. to 11 :30
p.m., Sunday through Wednesday, and 11 :00 a".m. to 1 :00 a.m., Thursday through
Saturday. Currently, the restaurant is open from 11 :00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m., seven days
a week.
Restaurants serving beer and wine and businesses which are open to the public
between midnight (12:00 a.m.) and 6:00 a.m. within 150 feet of residentially zoned
property are required to secure an approved Conditional Use Permit from the Planning
Commission.
In staff's opinion, this proposal would not have a negative impact on the neighborhood.
The beer and wine service is restricted to on-site consumption and would be incidental
to the restaurant use. The applicant does not intend to operate this business as a bar
or cocktail lounge, which would require a separate Conditional Use Permit.
Since this use is adjacent to residential zoned properties, business hours on Thursday
shall also be limited to 11 :00 a.m. to 11 :30 p.m. as on Sunday to Wednesday.
It
CUP 2004-002
April 27, 2004
Page 2
e
.
e
The Police Department have reviewed the proposal including a site visit and observed
no issues of public safety.
PARKING
The proposed service of beer and wine and extended hours for the restaurant would
not increase the parking requirements. However, as mentioned, there is no Conditional
Use Permits for the existing restaurant because the use predates the requirement for
such permits. Below is an analysis of the existing parking situation.
By code, a 2,000 sq.ft. restaurant requires a total of twenty (20) on-site parking spaces
(10 spaces per 1,000 sq.ft. of gross floor area). The subject business has shared
parking with the 1,000 sq.tt. beauty salon use in the commercial center, which requires
five (5) additional spaces. Therefore, the total number of parking spaces required is
twenty-five (25), where only sixteen (16) spaces are provided. A parking survey was
not requested as part of this application. However, based on staff's observation, the
parking lot is underutilized.
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.
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.
Fire safety and occupancy limits shall be provided to the satisfaction of the Fire
Marshall, and shall include at a minimum the following:
· Minimum 6-inch high address numbers shall be provided on the front of the building
facing First Avenue.
. Commercial cooking operations shall be protected by a hood-and-duct system.
· A Knox Box shall be provided for access to any restricted areas.
. Approved lighted exit signs shall be provided above all exits.
. A Class 'K' fire extinguisher shall be provided for the cooking area and a Class
'2A:10BC' fire extinguisher shall be provided at a location to be determined by the
Fire Inspector.
· A floor and seating plan approved by the Building Official and Fire Marshall shall be
posted in a conspicuous location.
CUP 2004-002
April27,2004
Page 3
e
.
e
An Industrial Waste Discharge Permit shall be obtained from the Public Works Services
Department prior to opening of the cafe, 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
haqitat 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.
RECOMMENDATION
The Development Services Department recommends approval of Conditional Use
Permit Application No. CUP 2004-002, subject to the following conditions:
1. The hours of operation shall be limited to 11 :00 a.m. to 11 :30 p.m., Sunday
through Thursday, and 11 :00 a.m. to 1 :00 a.m., Friday and Saturday.
CUP 2004-002
April 27, 2004
Page 4
e
.
e
2. There shall be no outdoor seating permitted.
3. The sale of beer and wine is incidental to the restaurant use only and is not
intended for off-premise consumption or a bar use.
4. The maximum number of seats shall be 68 or the maximum occupancy as
determined by Building Services, whichever is lower.
5. The use approved by CUP 2004-002 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 2004-002.
6. A separate sign design review application shall be submitted for all new signs on
the premises.
7. Any exterior alteration to the building requires the filing and approval of a design
reviewapplication.
8. All conditions of approval shall be complied with prior to opening the restaurant.
Noncompliance with the plans, provisions and conditions of approval for CUP
2004-002 shall be grounds for immediate suspension or revocation of any
approvals, which could result in the closing of the restaurant.
9. Approval of CUP 2004-002 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.
10. 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 Govemment 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.
CUP 2004-002
April 27, 2004
Page 5
e
.
e
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
Approval
The Planning Cornrnlsslon should move to approve and file the Negative
Declaration and adopt Resolution No. 1704: a Resolution of the Planning
Comrnisslon of the City of Arcadia, California, granting Conditional Use Permit
No. . CUP 2004-002 for the sale of beer and wine in an existing 2,000 sq.ft.
restaurant (d.b.a. Fusion Cafe) with 68 seats and operation hours of 11 :00 a.rn. to
11:30 p.m., Sunday through Wednesday, and 11:00 a.m. to 1:00 a.m., Thursday
through Saturday, at 510 E. Live Oak Avenue.
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 April 27th public hearing, please contact Thomas Li at
(626) 574-5447.
f~PP2'roved by:
(' .
.:....-' #~VL
Donna L. Butler
Community Development Administrator
Attachments: Aerial Photo & Zoning Map
Floor and Site plans
Environmental Documents
Resolution 1704
CUP 2004-002
April 27, 2004
Page 6
~
N
o 100
.
~ 510 E Uve Oall Ave
D Arcadia
IEl Zone
1ffs
~OP/llent SeMCB$ Deperlment
., Engineering Division
F1epa/8dby:R,SGanzaIoz. ApriJ21XJ4
510 E Live Oak Avenue
CUP 2004-002
~ (Zl38)
3) (B15) (%4QJ
AV
~ N 18) (t/JDI (SD8) fBl4)
0 100 200 Feel
(2513)
(25Zl) !:Ii!
<o:C
~ (2534)
CI) (83l)
(6Z3) (83l)
,
(&119) 181$) I
f8IJl)
(S29) LIVE OAt< A'IE
1521)
1511) (1130)
~) 1818)
(035) uVE OAt< A'IE (&20)
In ~
f5Il6J
Z
(41B) 0
;a
m
~
.
I . }t~
~ Q!YJ -- L YNROSE ST
z-Jl.County
--
...
In
z
o
;a
m
~
1ffs
Aopment SeTVices Department
., Engineering Division
P/epIrecIby: R.SGonz8lJz, Apt/, 2004
510 E Live Oak Avenue
CUP 2004-002
e
.
e
100'W E. LIvE OAK AVE.
SIDEWALK
.
~
--l
<t
\I)
}-
I-
~
w
III
~) PA~ING LS/j
~ __ __ __ __ __ 1_ _
J ,,(2)' -(2); 1
20'W ALLEY
5CALE, 1'.20'-0' -00-
CAFE FUSION
!:II0 E. LIvE OAK AVE.
ARCADIA. CA SI006
e
~
~
"
e
1".1'
16'.II!'J'
~
I
~==
I I
I r-------------~
L_________J
KITCl-IEN
II
L.J
~
DINING AREA
cfl:JcrlJcfl:JcrlJ
c]JJ c]JJ c]JJ c]JJ
60'.1<<:1-
CAFE FUSION
51iZ> E. LIVE OAK AVE.
ARCADIA, CA '91iZ>iZ>~
e
PARKING
LOT
;;!
STORAGE
~
1860
~
~
2f!r-6"
SCALE, 1116'=1'-0'
~
e
.
--
File No.: CUP 2004-002
CITY OF ARCADIA
240 W. HUNTINGTON DRIVE
ARCADIA, CA 91007
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
A. Name, if any, and a brief description of the project:
Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 2004-002 for for the sale of beer and wine in an existing
2,000 sq.f1. restaurant (d.b.a. Care Fusion) with 68 seats and operation hours of 11:00 a.m. to 11:30
p.m., Sunday through Wednesday, and 11:00 a.m. to 1:00 a.m., Thursdey through Saturday"
B. Location of Project:
510 E. Live Oak Avenue
In the City of Arcadia, County of Los Angeles
C. Name of Applicant, Sponsor or Person Undertaking Project:
_A.
LB.
Other (Private)
(1) Name
(2) Address
C. C. Chana fReDresentina Care Fusion!
510 E. Live Oak Avenue. Arcadia. CA 91006
The Planning Commission 0 City Council 0, having reviewed the Initial Study of this proposed project
and having reviewed the written comments received prior to the public meeting of the Planning
CommissionlCity Council, including the recommenda~on of the City's staff, 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 Planning Commission'slCity Council's findings are as follows:
The City Council 0 Planning Commission 0, hereby 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
Date: '$-2)_PI/
Date Received for filing
Form "E"
~ t...-I. AsSIS7.d?VT ~WJ#~
Staff
4103
e
File No. CUP 04-002
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 2004-002
2. Project Address (Location)
510 E. Live Oak Avenue
3. Project Sponsor's Narne, Address & Telephone Number:
C. C. Chang
510 E. Live Oak Avenue,
Arcadia, CA 91006
(626) 574-7823
. 4. Lead Agency Narne & Address:
City of Arcadia - Development Services Department
Community Development Division -- Planning Services
240 W. Huntington Drive
Post Office Box 60021
Arcadia, CA 91066-6021
5. Lead Agency Contact Person & Telephone Number:
Donna Butler, Community Development Administrator (626) 574-5442
6. General Plan Designation: Commercial
7. Zoning Classification: C-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.)
The sale of beer and wine in an existing 2,000 sq.ft. restaurant with 68 seats and
operation hours of 11:00 a.m. to 11:30 p.m., Sunday through Wednesday, and
11 :00 a.m. to 1:00 a.m., Thursday through Saturday.
It
CEOA Env. Checklist Part 1
-1-
4103
e
.
e
File No. CUP 04-002
9. Surrounding Land Uses' and Setting: (Briefly describe the project's
surroundings.)
North:
South:
East:
West:
Commerical Retail Center and Service Station; zone C-2
Single-family dwellings; L.A. County area
Beauty Salon; zoned C-2
Japanese Restaurant; zoned C-2
10. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing
approval, or participation agreement):
The City Building Services, 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 necessa'Y 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.
[ ] Aesthetics
[ ] Biological Resources
[ ] Geology/Soils
[ ] Hydrology/Water Quality
[ ] Mineral Resources
[ ] Population & Housing
[ ] Recreation
[ ] Utilities and Service Systems
[ ] Mandatory Findings of Significance
[ ] Air Quality
[ ] Cultural Resources
[ ] Hazards & Hazardous Materials
[ ] Land Use & Planning
[ ] Noise
[ ] Public Services
[ ] Transportation / Circulation
DETERMINATION (To be completed by the Lead Agency)
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
[X] I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the
environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
CECA Env. Checklist Part 1
-2-
4/03
e
.
e
File No. CUP 04-002
[] 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.
[] 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.
~5d-- !:lo"";> r.
C
~?-5 -c>q..
Date
Signature
~AsLI
Printed Name
For
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS:
1. A brief explanation Is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately
supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question.
A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the
impact simply does not apply to projects 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 ectlon 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. "
CEQA Env. .CheckJist Part 1
-3-
4/03
e
.
e
File No. CUP 04-002
3. .Potentlally Significant Impacr is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is
significant. If there are one or more, .Potentially Significant Impacr entries when the determination is
made, an Environmental Impact Report Is required.
4. .Potentially Signifjcant Unless Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation
measures has reduced an effect from .Potentially Significant impacf' to a "Less Than Significant
Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they
reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section 17 "Earlier
Analyses" may be cross-referenced).
5. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program Environmental Impact Report,
or other 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 sJte.,specific conditions for the project.
6, Lead agencies ate encouraged to incorporate into the checklist, references to Information sources
for potential Impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference toa 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.
CECA Env. Checklist Part 1
-4-
4/03
File No.: CUP 04-002
e Less Than
Potentially Slgnlftcant Less Than
Significant With Significant No
Impact Mitigation Impact Impact
IncotpOl'ation
1. AESTHETICS - Would the project
a) Have a ,substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? 0 0 0 181
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, Including, but not limited 0 0 0 181
to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state
scenic highway?
-
3.
e
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of
the site and Its surroundings?
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would
adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
o
o
o
181
o
o
181
o
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.
a)
AGRICULTURE RESOURCES - In determining whether impacts
to agriculture resources are significant environmental effects, lead
agencies may refer to the Callfomla Agricultural Land Evaluation
and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the Callfomia
Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use In assessing
impacts on agricultura and farmland. Would the project:
Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of
Statewide Importance (Farmland) to non-agricultural use? (The
Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program in the Callfomla
Resources Agency to non-agricultural use?
b)
Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson
Act contract?
c)
Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to
their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to
non-agricultural use?
o
o
o
181
o
o
o
181
o
o
o
181
The proposed restaurant will be in an existing ratail building on a strip commercial street in a fully developed
area and will not have any of the above impacts.
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:
CEQA Checklist
5
4-03
e
-
e
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?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
o
o
o
o
o
File No.: CUP 04-002
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporation
o
o
o
o
o
Less Than
Significant
Impact
o
o
o
o
o
No
Impact
181
181
181
181
181
The proposed restaurant will be in an existing retail building on a strip commercial street in a fully developed
area. Because 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 of the above impacts.
4.
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES - Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse impact, either directly or through
habitat modifications, on any sp~cies identified as a candidate,
sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans,
policies, or regulations, or by the Califomia 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 California 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
removal, 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
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
f8I
f8I
f8I
f8I
4-03
File No.: CUP 04-002
e
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
MlUgation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological 0 0 0 [81
resources, such as a tree preservation polley or ordinance?
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation 0 0 0 [81
Plan, Natural Conservation Community Plan, or other approved
local, regional or state habitat conservation plan?
The proposed restaurant "will ba in an existing retail building on a strip cornmercialstreatin a fully developed
area end 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 [81
historical resource as defined in !l15064.5?
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the Significance of an 0 0 0 181
. archaeological resource pursuant to !l15064.5?
c) Directly or Indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or 0 0 0 181
site or unique geOlogic feature?
d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of 0 0 0 181
fonnal cemeteries?
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 oftha abova impacts.
6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS - Would the project:
a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse 0 0 0 [81
effects, including the risk of loss, Injury; or death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the 0 0 0 [81
most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map
issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other
substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of
Mines and Geology Special Publication 42.
II) Strong seismic ground shaking? 0 0 0 181
e iii) Seismic-related ground failure, Including liquefaction? 0 0 0 [81
CEQA Checklist 7 4-03
e
-
It d)
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 soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic
tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers
are not available for the disposal of waste water?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
o
o
o
o
o
File No.: CUP 04-002
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporation
o
o
o
o
o
Less Than
Slgnlflcant
Impact
o
o
o
o
o
No
Impact
~
~
~
~
~
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 geologic
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/he 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?
Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous
materials sites complied pursuant to Government Code Section
65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to
CEQA Checklist
8
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
~
~
~
~
4-03
e
.
e d)
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 rlsk of loss, injury or
death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are
adjacent to urbanized areas or where resldencas are intermixed
with wildlands?
PotenUally
Significant
Impact
o
o
o
o
File No.: CUP 04-002
Less Than
Significant
Witll
MiUgaUon
IncorporaUon
o
o
o
o
Less Than
Significant No
Impact Impact
o
o
o
o
[81
[81
[81
[81
The proposed restaurant WI71 be In an existIng retalr buildIng on a strip commercial street in a fully developed
area and will not have any of/he 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 lowerlng 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 pattem of the site or area,
including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river,
in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation
on- or off.site?
c)
Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern 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?
Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity
of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide
CEQA Checklist
9
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
[81
[81
[81
[81
4-03
e
.
en)
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 OO-year flood hazard area, asmapped on
a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or
other flood hazard delineation map?
h) Place within a tOO-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 separatestormwater sewer system permit?
m
)
Allow polluted stormwater runoff from delivery areas or loading
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?
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?
CECA Checklist
10
Potentielly
Significant
Impact
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
File No.: CUP 04-002
Less Than
Slgnlflcant
With
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
IZI
IZI
IZI
IZI
IZI
IZI
IZI
IZI
IZI
IZI
4-03
File No.: CUP 04..Q02
-
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mltigetion
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
0) Dlschrage stormwater sothat significant harm is caused to the D D D IZI
biological integrity of waterways or water bodies?
p) Ssignificantly alter the flow velocity or volume of storm water D D D IZI
runoff that can use environmental harm?
q) Significantly increase erosion. etther on or off-stie? D D D IZI
The proposed restaurant will be in an existing rI1tail building on a strip commercial strl1et In a fully developed
area. The proposed use will be subject to an Industrial Wastewater Discharge Permit so es not to violate
Regional Water Quality Control Board water quality standards or waste discharge rI1quirl1ments. 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 hava any of the above impacts.
9. LAND USE AND PLANNING - Would the project:
e a) Physically divide an established community? D D D IZI
b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of D D D IZI
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 D D D IZI
community conservation plan?
The proposed restaurl1nt will be in an existing rI1tall building on a strip commercial street in a fully developed
erea 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 D D D IZI
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 D D D IZI
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 straet In a fully developed
e area and will not have any of the above impacts.
CEOA Checklist
11
4-03
e
e)
.
e
11. NOISE - Would the project result in:
a)
Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of
standards established in the local general plan or noise
ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?
b)
Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive 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?
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 04-002
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporation
o
o
o
o
o
o
Less Than
Significant
Impact
o
o
o
o
o
o
No
Impact
!81
!81
!81
!81
!81
!81
The proposed restaurant will be in an axisting retail building on a strip commercial street in a fUlly developad
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
!81
!81
!81
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.
13. PUBLIC SERVICES - Would the project:
CECA Checklist
12
4-03
e
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 servica ratios, response
times or other performance objectives for any of the public
services:
Fire protection?
Police protection?
Schools?
Parks?
Other public facilities?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
o
o
o
o
o
File No.: CUP 04-002
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporation
o
o
o
o
o
less Than
Significant
Impact
o
o
o
o
o
No
Impact
f81
f81
f81
f81
181
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 facilltywould occur or be accelerated?
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the
construction or expansion of recraational facilities which have an
adverse physical effect on the environment?
o
o
o
o
o
o
181
181
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.
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., resultin
a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the
volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at Intersections)1
b)
Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service
standard established by the county congestion management
agency for designated roads or highways?
e 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
181
f81
181
4-03
e
-.
e)
e
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 adopted policies, plans or programs supporting
altemative transportation (e.g., bus tumouts, bicycle racks)?
PotenUally
Signlllcant
Impact
o
o
o
o
File No.: CUP 04-002
Less Than
Significant
With
MltigaUon
IncorporaUon
o
o
o
o
Le.. Than
Significant
Impact
o
o
o
o
No
Impact
1:&1
1:&1
1:&1
1:&1
The proposed resfaurant will ba in an existing retail building on a strip commarcial street in a fully devaloped
araa and will not have any of the above impacts. Although there is a slight parking deficiency according to code
requirements, the parking area is underutilized sinca the other uses in the center ara not intense.
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 cause significant environmental effects?
d)
Have sufficient water'supplies available to serve the project from
existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded
entitlements needed? In making this determination, the City shall
consider whether the project is subject to the water supply
assessment requirements of Water Code Section 10910, et seq.
(58 610), and the requirements of Govemment Code Section
664737 (SB221).
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
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
1:&1
1:&1
1:&1
1:&1
1:&1
4-03
File No.: CUP 04-002
e
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
WIIh
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to 0 0 0 ~
accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs?
g) Comply with federal, state and local statues and regulations 0 0 0 ~
related to solid waste?
The proposed resteurant 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.
17. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the 0 0 0 ~
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?
e
b Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but 0 0 0 ~
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 ~
substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or
Indirectly?
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.
e
CEQA Checklist
15
4-03
-
.
e
RESOLUTION NO. 1704
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
NO. 2004-002 FOR THE SALE OF BEER AND WINE IN AN EXISTING
2,000 SQ.FT. RESTAURANT (D.B.A. CAF~ FUSION) WITH 68 SEATS
AND OPERATION HOURS OF 11:00 A.M. TO 11:30 P.M., SUNDAY
THROUGH WEDNESDAY, AND 11:00 A.M. TO 1:00 A.M., THURSDAY
THROUGH SATURDAY, AT 510 E. LIVE OAK AVENUE.
WHEREAS, on March 8, 2004, a conditionallise permit application was filed
by C. C. Chang, agent of Caft! Fusion, for the sale of beer and wine in an existing 2,000
sq.ft. Restaurant (d.b.a. Caft! Fusion) with 68 seats and operation hours 11 :00 a.m. to
11:30 p.m., Sunday through Wednesday, and 11:00 a.m. to 1:00 a.m., Thursday
through Saturday (Development Services Department Case No. CUP 2004-002) at
property commonly known as 510 E. Live Oak Avenue; and
WHEREAS, a pUblic hearing was held on April 27, 2004, at which time all
interested persons were given full opportunity to be heard and to present evidence.
NOW THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ARCADIA RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. That the factual data submitted by the Development Services
Department in the attached report is true and correct.
SECTION 2. This Commission finds:
1. That the granting of such Conditional Use Permit will not be detrimental to
the public health or welfare, or injurious to the property or improvements In such zone or
vicinity because the initial study did not disclose any substantial adverse effects to the
area affected by the proposed project.
2. That the use applied for at the location indicated is a proper one for which a
Conditional Use Permit is authorized.
3. That the site. for the proposed use is adequate In size and shape to
accommodate said use. All yards, spaces, walls, fences, loading. landscaping and other
features Including the shared parking with the neighboring business, are adequate to
adjust said use with the land and uses in the neighborhood. The proposed project
complies with all related zoning requirements as set forth in the Arcadia Municipal Code.
4. That the site abuts streets and highways adequate in width and pavement
type to carry the kind of traffic generated by the proposed use.
e
e
e
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.
SECTION 3. That for the foregoing reasons this commission grants
Conditional Use Permit no. CUP 2004-002 for the sale of beer and wine in an existing
2,000 sq.ft. restaurant (d.b.a. Cafe Fusion) with 68 seats and operation hours of 11 :00
a.m. to 11 :30 p.m., Sunday through Wednesday, and 11 :00 a.m. to 1 :00 a.m., Thursday
through Saturday at 510 E. Live Oak Avenue, upon the following conditions:
1. The hours of operation shall be limited to 11 :00 a.m. to 11 :30 p.m., Sunday
through Thursday, and 11 :00 a.m. to 1 :00 a.m., Friday and Saturday.
2. There shall be no outdoor seating permitted.
3. The sale of beer and wine is incidental to the restaurant use only and is not
intended for off-premise consumption or a bar use.
4. The maximum number of seats shall be 68 or the maximum occupancy as
determined by Building Services, whichever Is lower.
5. The use approved by CUP 2004-002 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 2004-002.
6. A separate sign design review application shall be submitted for all new signs
on the premises.
7. Any exterior alteration to the building requires the filing and approval of a
design review application.
8. All conditions of approval shall be complied with prior to opening the
restaurant. Noncompliance with the plans, provisions and conditions of approval for
CUP 2004-002 shall be grounds for immediate suspension or revocation of any
approvals, which could result in the closing of the restaurant.
9. Approval of CUP 2004-002 shall not take effect until the property owner(s),
and applicants have executed and flied the Acceptance Form available from the
Development Services Department to indicate awareness and acceptance of these
conditions of approval.
2
1704
e
.
e
10. 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 Govemment 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 conceming
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 April 27, 2004, by the following vote:
AYES:
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 ofthe City of Arcadia.
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the forgoing Resolution was adopted at a regular
meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 27th day of April, 2004, by the following
votes:
AYES:
NOES:
Chairman, Planning Commission
City of Arcadia
ATTEST:
Secretary, Planning Commission
City of Arcadia
3RO~1D AS JP F R~
~i~ I~ I.
Stephen P. Deitsch, City Alfomey
3
1704