HomeMy WebLinkAbout12-8-09PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL
MOTION: To read the Resolution by title only and waive reading the full text of the Resolution.
SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION FROM STAFF REGARDING AGENDA ITEMS
TIME RESERVED FOR THOSE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO WISH TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING
COMMISSION ON NON PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS 5 minute time limit per person.
All interested persons are invited to appear at the Public Hearing and to provide evidence or testimony
concerning any of the proposed items set forth below for consideration. You are hereby advised that
should you desire to legally challenge any action taken by the Planning Commission with respect to the
proposed item for consideration, you may be limited to raising only those issues and objections, which
you or someone else raises at or prior to the time of the Public Hearing.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. CUP 09 -14
1313 S. Baldwin Ave.
Paul Supancheck
ARCADIA PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA
Tuesday, December 8, 2009, 7:00 P.M.
Arcadia City Council Chambers
The applicant is requesting a Conditional Use Permit to allow the following changes to the existing
leaming center for children that was approved under Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 04-11 (d.b.a.
Kids Island):
a. Business hours are currently from 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. every day. The applicant is proposing
extending the business hours from 9:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m., every day; and
b. Allow private parties for children (max. 30 people and 3 staff members) during times when
open play and classes are not in session.
RECOMMENDATION: Conditional approval
RESOLUTION NO. 1809
A Resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Arcadia, Califomia, granting Conditional Use
Permit No. CUP 09 -14 to extend the existing business hours and to allow private parties for children
at the existing children leaming center at 1313 S. Baldwin Avenue (d.b.a. Kids Island).
There is a five working day appeal period after the adoption of the Resolution. Appeals are to be filed
by 5 :30 p.m. on Tuesday, December 15, 2009.
Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the Planning Commission members regarding any item on this agenda will be
made available for public inspection in the Planning Services office at City Hall, 240 W. Huntington Dr., Arcadia, CA 91007, (626)
574 -5423.
PC AGENDA
12 -8 -09
2. ZONE VARIANCE NO. ZV 09 -01 AND MODIFICATION NO. MC 09 -36 AND SINGLE FAMILY
ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. SFADR 09 -43
231 W. Wistaria Ave.
J. Don Crenshaw (Architect)
The applicant is requesting approval of the following requests to rebuild an existing 2,523 square -foot,
one -story, single- family residence and add 1,198 square feet for a total living area of 3,721 square
feet:
A. A Zone Variance to allow a three -car garage (24 linear feet of garage opening) to face the street
on a 99.98 -foot wide lot in lieu of the minimum 100 -foot lot width required for a three -car garage to
face the street; and,
B. Modifications to permit the following setback encroachments:
1. A front yard setback of 34' -0" in lieu of 35' -0" required (the average front yard setback of the
two adjacent properties is 31' -8
2. An easterly side yard setback of 7' -0" in lieu of 10' -0" required to allow the addition to align with
the existing house,
3. A westerly side yard setback of 7' -0" in lieu of 10' -0" required to allow the addition to align with
the existing house, and
4. A westerly side yard setback of 8' -0" in lieu of 10` -0" required for two (2) air conditioning units.
C. Single- Family Architectural Design Review
RECOMMENDATION: Conditional approval
A Resolution reflecting the decision of the Planning Commission will be presented for adoption at the
next Commission meeting. There will be a five working day appeal period after the adoption of the
Resolution.
CONSENT ITEMS
3. MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 24, 2009
RECOMMENDATION: Approval
MATTERS FROM CITY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMISSION
MODIFICATION COMMITTEE AGENDA
MATTERS FROM STAFF UPCOMING AGENDA ITEMS
ADJOURNMENT
Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the Planning Commission members regarding any item on this agenda will be
made available for public inspection in the Planning Services office at City Hall, 240 W. Huntington Dr., Arcadia, CA 91007, (626)
574 -5423.
PC AGENDA
12 -8 -09
PLANNING COMMISSION
Pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act, persons with a disability who require a disability related
modification or accommodation in order to participate in a meeting, including auxiliary aids or services,
may request such modification or accommodation from the City Clerk at (626) 574 -5423. Notification 48
hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to assure accessibility to
the meeting.
Public Hearing Procedure
1. The public hearing is opened by the Chairman of the Planning Commission.
2. The Planning staff report is presented by staff.
3. Commissioners' questions relating to the Planning staff report may be asked and answered at this
time.
4. The applicant is afforded the opportunity to address the Commission.
5. Others in favor of the proposal are afforded the opportunity to address the Commission.
(LIMITED TO 5 MINUTES)
6. Those in opposition to the proposal are afforded the opportunity to address the Commission.
(LIMITED TO 5 MINUTES)
7. The applicant may be afforded the opportunity for a brief rebuttal.
(LIMITED TO 5 MINUTES)
8. The Commission closes the public hearing.
9. The Commission members may discuss the proposal at this time.
10. The Commission then makes a motion and acts on the proposal to either approve, approve with
conditions or modifications, deny, or continue it to a specific date.
11. Following the Commission's action on Conditional Use Permits and Variances, a resolution reflecting
the decision of the Planning Commission is prepared for adoption by the Commission. This is usually
presented at the next Planning Commission meeting. There is a five (5) working day appeal period
after the adoption of the resolution.
12. Following the Commission's action on Modifications and Design Reviews, there is a five (5) working
day appeal period.
13. Following the Commission's review of Zone Changes, Text Amendments and General Plan
Amendments, the Commission's comments and recommendations are forwarded to the City Council
for the Council's consideration at a scheduled public hearing.
14. Following the Commission's action on Tentative Tract Maps and Tentative Parcel Maps (subdivisions)
there is a ten (10) calendar day appeal period.
Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the Planning Commission members regarding any item on this agenda will be
made available for public inspection in the Planning Services office at City Hall, 240W. Huntington Dr., Arcadia, CA 91007, (626)
574 -5423.
PC AGENDA
12-8 -09
December 8, 2009
TO: Arcadia Planning Commission
FROM: Jim Kasama, Community Development Administrator
By: Lisa L. Flores, Senior Planner
SUMMARY
GENERAL INFORMATION
APPLICANT: Paul Supancheck (Tenant)
LOCATION: 1313 S. Baldwin Avenue
STAFF REPORT
Development Services Department
SUBJECT: Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 09 -14 to allow private parties for
children and extend the business hours at the existing children
learning center at 1313 S. Baldwin Avenue (d.b.a. Kids Island, Inc.).
The applicant, Mr. Paul Supancheck, is requesting a Conditional Use Permit to
allow private parties for children and to extend the business hours of his existing
children learning center at 1313 S. Baldwin Avenue (d.b.a. Kids Island). The
Development Services Department is recommending approval of Conditional Use
Permit No. CUP 09 -14 and adoption of Resolution No. 1809, subject to the
conditions listed in this report.
REQUEST: A Conditional Use Permit to permit private parties for children
when open play and classes are not in session and to extend the
existing business hours from 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. to 9:00 a.m.
to 9:00 p.m., seven (7) days a week.
SITE AREA: The subject business occupies a 4,800 square foot unit in the
772,134 square foot (17.73 acres) shopping center on the west
side of Baldwin Avenue between Duarte Road and Naomi
Avenue (a.k.a. The Hub).
FRONTAGE: The subject unit has a frontage of 80 feet on the overall 679 foot
shopping center frontage.
EXISTING LAND USE:
The subject unit is located within the Arcadia Hub shopping
center, which includes a 1,151 -space surface parking lot, a
Burlington Coat Factory /Baby Depot, L.A. Fitness health club,
Joann Fabrics, Vons Pavilions supermarket, and three multi
tenant strip commercial buildings. The property is zoned C -2, and
the property located along Baldwin Avenue is zoned C -2 H4 (4-
story height overlay).
ZONING: C -2 General Commercial
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION:
Commercial
SURROUNDING LAND USES ZONING:
North: General Office and Commercial zoned C -2 and C-
2 H4
South: Drug store center zoned C -2 and Multi- Family
Residences zoned R -3
East: Commercial Uses zoned C -2
West: President Square shopping center zoned C -1 D
PUBLIC HEARING NOTIFICATION
Public hearing notices of CUP 09 -14 were mailed on November 13, 2009 to the
property owners, tenants and occupants of those properties that are located within
300 feet of the subject property (see attached radius map). The project is subject
to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), therefore the public hearing notice
was published in the Arcadia Weekly on November 12, 2009, and the Notice of
Intent to Adopt a Negative Declaration was filed with the L.A. County Recorder's
Office on November 18, 2009.
BACKGROUND
The subject unit is located in the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center, near the
southeast corner, adjacent to the new L.A. Fitness health club. The majority of the
buildings that exist on the site were originally constructed in 1957. Although the
shopping center consists of two separate parcels, the center is joined together
through a recorded reciprocal parking and driveway easement, which allows the
adjacent Von's Pavilions shopping area to utilize the parking areas in common.
In 2004, the Planning Commission approved Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 04-
11 to permit a children learning center with a parking modification within the
subject 4,800 square -foot unit. The unit consists of a 2,800 square -foot indoor
CUP 09 -14
1313 S. Baldwin Avenue Kids Island, Inc.
December 8, 2009 Page 2
playground, and 1,500 square feet of classrooms, associated office, entry lobby,
and mechanical spaces. The business has been in operation since 2005 and was
permitted for music, art, an indoor playground, ballet, and tap dancing classes for
children ages 6 months to 6 years old. In 2007, the Applicant took over
management and ownership of the business. At that time, a routine fire inspection
was conducted, which is required when a new business license is filed with the
City, and the Fire Inspector discovered that birthday parties were being held
without the proper permits. On June 12, 2009, the Applicant filed a Conditional
Use Permit to expand the business operation to include private parties for children.
PROPOSAL AND ANALYSIS
The Applicant is proposing to expand the business by including private parties for
children, and extend the business hours from 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. to 9:00 a.m.
to 9:00 p.m., seven (7) days a week to accommodate the late afternoon /evening
parties. In the event of a private party, the entire facility is reserved and the
activity will not exceed a maximum attendance of 33 people, which includes 3 staff
members. Since a "private party" would utilize the entire Kids Island facility, no
open play, classes, or other activities will be permitted during that activity.
Additionally, no food will be allowed to be prepared on the premises. Should food
be requested, the host of the party will be required to supply all the food for their
party. The Applicant has stated that during these challenging economic times,
private parties are critical for the survival of his business since the parties generate
more revenue than the open play time and classes.
Parking
Since the facility is currently not permitted to host private parties for children, staff
requested that an evaluation of the parking demands be conducted to assure that
adequate on -site parking is available. A 2006 parking report that was conducted
for the development of the L.A. Fitness health club, assessed that Kids Island was
operating at maximum usage and concluded that there was a surplus of parking.
The same conclusion was made in the updated parking report that re- evaluated
the current uses to be consistent with the 2006 study. Given that the parking
assessment assumed maximum usage, and the proposed Conditional Use Permit
will not allow for private parties to occur at the same time as open play or classes,
staff does not anticipate a parking problem. Therefore, it is staff's opinion that
approval of the expanded use and extension of the business hours would satisfy
all the prerequisite findings for granting a Conditional Use Permit.
CODE REQUIREMENTS
All City requirements regarding building safety, disabled access and facilities,
occupancy limits, fire prevention, detection, suppression, emergency access,
health code compliance, parking and site designs, water supply and water
facilities, sewer facilities, trash reduction and recycling requirements, and National
CUP 09 -14
1313 S. Baldwin Avenue Kids Island, Inc.
December 8, 2009 Page 3
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) measures shall be complied with
to the satisfaction of the Building Official, City Engineer, Community Development
Administrator, Fire Marshal, and Public Works Services Director.
CEQA
Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), 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 that cannot be mitigated to a level that is less than significant 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. Also, the Department of Fish and Game determined that
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. 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 No. CUP 09 -14, subject to the following conditions:
CUP 09 -14
1313 S. Baldwin Avenue Kids Island, Inc.
December 8, 2009 Page 4
1. The business hours shall be limited to 9:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m., seven (7)
days a week.
2. The private parties for children shall be limited to 33 people, which include
3 staff members.
3. The private parties for children shall not occur during the same time as
open play and classes (permitted under Conditional Use Permit No. CUP
04 -11).
4. All City requirements regarding building safety, disabled access and
facilities, occupancy limits, fire prevention, detection, suppression,
emergency access, health code compliance, parking and site designs,
water supply and water facilities, sewer facilities, trash reduction and
recycling requirements, and National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) measures shall be complied with to the satisfaction of the
Building Official, City Engineer, Community Development Administrator,
Fire Marshal, and Public Works Services Director.
5. The applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of
Arcadia and its officers, employees, and agents from and against any claim,
action, or proceeding against the City of Arcadia, its officers, employees or
agents to attack, set aside, void, or annul any approval or condition of
approval of the City of Arcadia concerning this project and /or land use
decision, including but not limited to any approval or condition of approval of
the City Council, Planning Commission, or City Staff, which action is
brought within the time period provided for in Government Code Section
66499.37 or other provision 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.
6. Approval of CUP 09 -14 shall not take effect until the applicant and property
owner have executed and filed an Acceptance Form available from the
Development Services Department to indicate awareness and acceptance
of the conditions of approval, and that all conditions of approval shall be
satisfied prior to implementation of this Conditional Use Permit.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
Approval
If the Planning Commission intends to approve this proposal, the Commission
should move to approve Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 09 -14, state the
CUP 09 -14
1313 S. Baldwin Avenue Kids Island, Inc.
December 8, 2009 Page 5
supporting findings and environmental determination, and adopt Resolution No.
1809 to extend the business hours and permit private parties for children at 1313
S. Baldwin Avenue.
Denial
If the Planning Commission intends to deny this Conditional Use Permit
Application, the Commission should move to deny, state the specific reasons and
findings for denial, and direct staff to prepare the appropriate resolution for
adoption at the Commission's next meeting.
If any Planning Commissioner or other interested party has any questions or
comments regarding this matter prior to the December 8, 2009 public hearing,
please contact Senior Planner, Lisa Flores at (626) 574 -5445 or by email at
Iflores @ci.arcadia.ca.us.
Approved by:
Jim /kasarna, Community Development Administrator
Attachment 1: Resolution No. 1809
Attachment 2: Site and Floor Plans, and Photos of the Facility
Attachment 3: Negative Declaration, Initial Study and No Effect Determination Form
Attachment 4: Review of the Parking Report by the Deputy Director of Development
Services /City Engineer, dated July 15, 2009 and Parking Report, dated
August 19, 2008
Attachment 5: Aerial Photograph and Vicinity Map:
Attachment 6: Public Hearing Notification Radius Map
CUP 09 -14
1313 S. Baldwin Avenue Kids Island, Inc.
December 8, 2009 Page 6
Attachment No. 1
RESOLUTION NO. 1809
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. CUP 09 -14 TO PERMIT
PRIVATE PARTIES FOR CHILDREN AND EXTEND THE
BUSINESS HOURS TO THE EXISTING CHILDREN
LEARNING CENTER AT 1313 S. BALDWIN AVENUE (d.b.a.
Kids Island).
WHEREAS, the City of Arcadia on August 12, 2009, received an a
Conditional Use Permit application to permit private parties for children and
extend the business hours from 9:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m., seven (7) days a
week to the existing children learning center at 1313 S. Baldwin Avenue
(d.b.a. Kids Island); and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental
Quality Act, Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq. "CEQA and
the State's CEQA Guidelines, the City of Arcadia prepared an Initial Study
and determined there is no substantial evidence that the approval of
Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 09 -14 would result in a significant adverse
effect on the environment. Accordingly, a Negative Declaration has been
prepared and notice of that fact was given in the manner required by law;
and,
1
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the Planning Commission on
December 8, 2009, at which time all interested persons were given full
opportunity to be heard and 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 proposed use will be
compatible with the surrounding uses, and it will be an appropriate use for
the subject site, and the proposed project will provide adequate parking for
the new health club and existing restaurant.
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, loading, landscaping, parking,
and other features are adequate to adjust said use with the land and uses
2
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 three streets that are 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 09 -14 to permit private parties for children
and extend the business hours from 9:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m., seven (7) days
a week at the existing children learning center located at 1313 S. Baldwin
Avenue, upon the following conditions:
1. The business hours shall be limited from 9:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m.,
seven (7) days a week.
2. The private parties for children shall be limited to 33 people, which
include 3 staff members.
3
3. The private parties for children shall not occur during the same time
as open play and classes (permitted under Conditional Use Permit No. 04-
11).
4. All City requirements regarding building safety, disabled access and
facilities, occupancy limits, fire prevention, detection, suppression,
emergency access, health code compliance, parking and site designs,
water supply and water facilities, sewer facilities, trash reduction and
recycling requirements, and National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) measures shall be complied with to the satisfaction of the
Building Official, City Engineer, Community Development Administrator,
Fire Marshal, and Public Works Services Director.
5. The applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of
Arcadia and its officers, employees, and agents from and against any
claim, action, or proceeding against the City of Arcadia, its officers,
employees or agents to attack, set aside, void, or annul any approval or
condition of approval of the City of Arcadia concerning this project and /or
and 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,
4
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.
6. Approval of CUP 09 -14 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, and that all conditions of
approval shall be satisfied prior to implementation of this Conditional Use
Permit.
SECTION 4. The Secretary shall certify to the adoption of this
Resolution. Passed, approved and adopted this 8 day of December,
2009.
ATTEST:
Secretary, Planning Commission
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Stephen P. Deitsch, City Attorney
5
Chairman, Planning Commission
Attachment No. 2
41.1061.W.- •Mg 'qjvpossy puv spalltpay
No0158 MN
Avow, co8541efeN1
L
13311 11411111111
pooki eatuoli Ma CCU
00 4
N I
0. 0
0 0 0
o-
111
0
.9VEICE
8011550
0/.05.9N
7.7
11(
I
MM■MMIMINMOMMIN*
h
.0 9e I 3.0/.05.8N
vmSON:3 1:3":1,1sA .11:1-
utrni4 04 av° ”op
3/W i ll:10.1 1.0
tsR,sup
1 1111
11HAI-H-D
0
7-,0
Kaa
NI1J.S., X
IMAGINATION
DRESS UP AREA
z
z
z Q
1f321t! N3HO1D4.._
A`dld
l 1
W
I .0-.5
r
am*
Attachment No. 3
1. Name or description of project: j Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 09 -14 To permit private parties for
children and extend the business hours at the existing children learning
center (d.b.a. Kids Island, Inc).
2. Project Location Identify street
address and cross streets or attach a
map showing project site (preferably
a USGS 15' or 7 1/2' topographical
map identified by quadrangle name):
1 1313 S. Baldwin Avenue located at the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center
j
1
3. Entity or Person undertaking project:
A.
B. Other (Private)
(1) Name. 1 Paul Supancheck
(2) Address: i 1 1313 S. Baldwin Avenue, Arcadia, CA 91006
The City Council/Planning Commission, having reviewed the Initial Study of this proposed project and having reviewed
the written comments received during the comment period and the recommendation of the City's Staff, does hereby find
and declare that the proposed project will not have a significant effect on the environment. A brief statement of the
reasons supporting the findings are as follows:
The City Council/Planning Commission hereby finds that the Negative Declaration reflects its independent judgment. A
copy of the Initial Study may be obtained at:
City of Arcadia
Development Services Department Community Development Division Planning Services
240 West Huntington Drive
Arcadia, CA 91007
Phone No.: (626) 574 -5445
The location and custodian of the documents and any other material which constitute the record of proceedings upon
which the City based its decision to adopt this Negative Declaration are as follows:
Lisa Flores, Senior Planner
City of Arcadia
Development Services Department Community Development Division Planning Services
240 West Huntington Drive
Arcadia, CA 91007
Phone No.:
Date Received
for Filing: 1
Negative Declaration \City\2009
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Staff
FORM "E"
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
1. Project Title: Conditional Use Permit No. 09 -14
2. Lead Agency Name and Address:
City of Arcadia
240 W. Huntington Dr.
Arcadia, CA 91006
3. Contact Person and Phone Number Lisa Flores, Senior Planner (626) 574 -5445
4. Project Location: 1313 S. Baldwin Avenue (d.b.a. Kids Island)
5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address:
Paul Supancheck
1313 S. Baldwin Avenue
Arcadia, CA 91006
6. General Plan Designation: Commercial 7. Zoning: C -2
8. Description of Project: (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to later phases of the
project, and any secondary, support, or off -site features necessary for its implementation. Attach additional
sheet(s) if necessary.)
To allow the following changes to the existing learning center that was approved under Conditional Use Permit
No. 04 -011: 1) Extend the business hours from 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. to 9 a.m. to 9 p.m., everyday; and, 2) Allow
private children birthday parties (max. 30 people and 3 staff members) during times when open play and classes
are not in session.
9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: (Briefly describe the project's surroundings.)
North Commercial; zoned C -2
South Commercial (C -2) and High Density Residential (R -3
East Commercial (C -2) and West Commercial (C -1)
10. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement):
N/A
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that
is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
Aesthetics
Biological Resources
Hazards Hazardous Materials
Mineral Resources
Public Services
O Utilities Service Systems
Agriculture Resources
Cultural Resources
Hydrology Water Quality
Noise
Recreation
0 Mandatory Findings of Significance
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST\LA LARGE NPDES \CITY\2008 Page 1 of 16
0 Air Quality
Geology Soils
0 Land Use Planning
0 Population Housing
x Transportation Traffic
FORM "J"
DETERMINATION (To be completea 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.
El I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a
significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project
proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
El I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT is required.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant" or "potentially significant unless mitigated"
impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant
to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as
described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the
effects that remain to be addressed.
E] I fmd that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially
significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to
applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE
DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing
further is required.
Signature
Lisa Flores
Printed Name
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS:
Date
For
1I
A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the
information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately
supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one
involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone).
All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off -site as well as on -site, cumulative as well as
project level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts.
Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must
indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant.
"Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is significant. If there are one
or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required.
"Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies when the incorporation of
mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less than Significant Impact." The
lead agency must describe the mitigation measures and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant
level (mitigation measures from Section XVII, "Earlier Analyses," may be cross referenced).
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST \LA LARGE NPDES \CITY\2008
Page 2 of 16 FORM "J"
Earlier analyses may be used when an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration.
Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following:
a) Earlier Analyses Used. Identify and state where they are available for review.
b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope
of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state
whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis.
c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures
Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier
document and the extent to which they address site specific conditions for the project.
Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources supporting the analysis
(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. A source list should be
attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion.
This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies should normally
address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project's environmental effects in whatever format is
selected.
SAMPLE QUESTION
Issues:
I. AESTHETICS. Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on
a scenic vista?
b) Substantially damage scenic
resources, including, but not limited
to, tress, 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?
d) Create a new source of substantial
light or glare which would adversely
affect day or nighttime views in the
area?
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST \LA LARGE NPDES \CITY\2008 Page 3 of 16
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
FORM "J"
Issues:
II. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES. In
determining whether impacts to agricultural
resources are significant environmental
effects, lead agencies may refer to the
California Agricultural Land Evaluation and
Site Assessment Model (1997) 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), as shown on
the maps prepared pursuant to the
Farmland Mapping and Monitoring
Program of the California 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?
III. AIR QUALITY. Where available, the
significance criteria established by the
applicable air quality management or air
pollution control district may be relied upon
to make the following determinations.
Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct
implementation of the applicable air
quality plan?
b) Violate any air quality standard or
contribute substantially to an
existing or projected air quality
violation?
c) Result in a cumulatively
considerable net increase of any
criteria pollutant for which the
project region is nonattainment
under an applicable federal or state
ambient air quality standard
(including releasing emissions
which exceed quantitative
thresholds for ozone precursors)?
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST \LA LARGE NPDES \CITY\2008
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
Page 4 of 16 FORM "J"
Issues:
d) Expose sensitive receptors to
substantial pollutant concentrations?
e) Create objectionable odors affecting
a substantial number of people?
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the
project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect,
either directly or through habitat
modifications, on any species
identified as a candidate, sensitive,
or special status species in local or
regional plans, policies, or
regulations, or by the California
Department of Fish and Game or
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on
any riparian habitat or other
sensitive natural community
identified in local or regional plans,
policies, regulations or by the
California Department of Fish and
Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service?
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on
federally protected wetlands as
defined by Section 404 of the Clean
Water Act (including, but not
limited to, marsh, vernal pool,
coastal, etc.) through direct removal,
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 native resident or
migratory wildlife corridors, or
impede the use of native wildlife
nursery sites?
e) Conflict with any local policies or
ordinances protecting biological
resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance?
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST\LA LARGE NPDES \CITY\2008 Page 5 of 16
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
FORM "J"
Issues:
fl Conflict with the provisions of an
adopted Habitat Conservation Plan,
Natural Community Conservation
Plan, or other approved local,
regional, or state habitat
conservation plan?
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the
project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change
in the significance of a historical
resource as defined in 15064.5?
b) Cause a substantial adverse change
in the significance of an
archaeological resource pursuant to
15064.5?
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a
unique paleontological resource or
site or unique geologic feature?
d) Disturb any human remains,
including those interred outside of
formal cemeteries?
VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the
project:
a) Expose people or structures to
potential substantial adverse effects,
including the risk of loss, injury or
death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake
fault, as delineated on the most
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.
Strong seismic ground shaking?
iii) Seismic- related ground failure,
including liquefaction?
iv) Landslides?
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST\LA LARGE NPDES \CITY\2008 Page 6 of 16
El IEJ
El
FORM "J"
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Issues: Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
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?
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 the public or
the environment?
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST\LA LARGE NPDES \CITY\2008 Page 7 of 16
FORM "J"
Issues:
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
significant risk of loss, injury or
death involving wildland fires,
including where wildlands are
adjacent to urbanized areas or where
residences are intermixed with
wildlands?
VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY.
Would the project:
a) During project construction, will it
create or contribute runoff water that
would violate any water quality
standards or waste discharge
requirements, including the terms of
the City's municipal separate
stormwater sewer system permit?
b) After the project is completed, will
it create or contribute runoff water
that would violate any water quality
standards or waste discharge
requirements, including the terms of
the City's municipal separate
stormwater sewer system permit?
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST \LA LARGE NPDES \CITY\2008
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
EDI
El
El
Page 8 of 16 FORM "J"
Issues:
c) Provide substantial additional
sources of polluted runoff from
delivery areas; loading docks; other
areas where materials are stored,
vehicles or equipment are fueled or
maintained, waste is handled, or
hazardous materials are handled or
delivered; other outdoor work areas;
or other sources?
d) Discharge stormwater so that one or
more beneficial uses of receiving
waters or areas that provide water
quality benefit are impaired?
Beneficial uses include commercial
and sportfishing; shellfish
harvesting; provision of freshwater,
estuarine, wetland, marine, wildlife
or biological habitat; water contact
or non contact recreation; municipal
and domestic supply; agricultural
supply; and groundwater recharge.
e) Discharge stormwater so that
significant harm is caused to the
biological integrity of waterways or
water bodies?
Violate any water quality standards
or waste discharge requirements?
Substantially deplete groundwater
supplies or interfere substantially
with groundwater recharge such that
there would be a net deficit in
aquifer volume or a lowering of the
local groundwater table level (e.g.,
the production rate of pre- existing
nearby wells would drop to a level
which would not support existing
land uses or planned uses for which
permits have been granted)?
h) 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?
i) Significantly increase erosion, either
on or off -site?
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKL!ST\LA LARGE NPDES \CITY\2008
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
Esi
Page 9 of 16 FORM "J"
Issues:
j)
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
flooding on- or off -site?
k) Create or contribute runoff water
which would exceed the capacity of
existing or planned storm water
drainage systems?
1) Significantly alter the flow velocity
or volume of stormwater runoff in a
manner that results in environmental
harm?
m) Otherwise substantially degrade
water quality?
n) Place housing within a 100 -year
flood hazard area as mapped on a
federal Flood Hazard Boundary or
Flood Insurance Rate Map or other
flood hazard delineation map?
o) Place within a 100 -year flood hazard
area structures which would impede
or redirect flood flows?
p)
q)
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?
Expose people or structures to
inundation by seiche, tsunami, or
mudflow?
IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the
project:
a) Physically divide an established
community?
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST \LA LARGE NPDES \CITY\2008
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
CI
Page 10 of 16 FORM "J"
Issues:
b) Conflict with any applicable land
use plan, policy, or regulation of an
agency with jurisdiction over the
project (including, but not limited
to the general plan, specific plan,
local coastal program, or zoning
ordinance) adopted for the purpose
of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect?
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat
conservation plan or natural
community conservation plan?
X. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the
project:
a) Result in the loss of availability of a
known mineral resource that would
be of value to the region and the
residents of the state?
b) Result in the loss of availability of a
locally important mineral resource
recovery site delineated on a local
general plan, specific plan or other
land use plan?
XI. NOISE. Would the project result in:
a) Exposure of persons to or generation
of noise levels in excess of
standards established in the local
general plan or noise ordinance, or
applicable standards of other
agencies?
b) Exposure of persons to or generation
of excessive groundborne vibration
or groundborne 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?
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST\ LA LARGE NPDES \CITY\2008 Page 11 of 16
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
FORM "J"
Issues:
f)
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?
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?
XII. 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
road 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?
XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project:
a) Result in substantial adverse
physical impacts associated with the
provision of new or physically
altered governmental facilities, need
for new or physically altered
governmental facilities, the
construction of which could cause
significant environmental impacts,
in order to maintain acceptable
service ratios, response times or
other performance objectives for
any of the public services:
Fire protection?
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST \LA LARGE NPDES \CITY\2008
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
El
El
Page 12 of 16 FORM "J"
Issues:
Police protection?
Schools?
Parks?
Other public facilities?
XIV. 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?
XV. TRANSPORTATION TRAFFIC. Would
the project:
a) Cause an increase in traffic which is
substantial in relation to the existing
traffic load and capacity of the street
system (i.e., result in a substantial
increase in either the number of
vehicle trips, the volume to capacity
ratio on roads, or congestion at
intersections)?
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
patterns, including either an increase
in traffic levels or a change in
location that results in 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)?
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST \LA LARGE NPDES \CITY\2008
Less Than
Significant.
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
El
El
Page 13 of 16 FORM "J"
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Issues: Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
e) Result in inadequate emergency
access?
f) Result in inadequate parking
capacity?
g) Conflict with adopted policies,
plans, or programs supporting
alternative transportation (e.g., bus
turnouts, bicycle racks)?
XVI. 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. (SB
610), and the requirements of
Government Code Section 664737
(SB 221).
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST\LA LARGE NPDES \CITY\2008
Page 14 of 16 FORM "J"
Issues:
e) Result in a determination by the
wastewater treatment provider
which serves or may serve the
project that it has adequate capacity
to serve the project's projected
demand in addition to the provider's
existing commitments?
g)
Be served by a landfill with
sufficient permitted capacity to
accommodate the project's solid
waste disposal needs?
Comply with federal, state, and local
statutes and regulations related to
solid waste?
XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF
SIGNIFICANCE
a) Does the project have the potential
to degrade the quality of the
environment, substantially reduce
the habitat of a fish or wildlife
species, cause a fish or wildlife
population to drop below self
sustaining levels, threaten to
eliminate a plant or animal
community, substantially 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 the potential
to achieve short-term environmental
goals to the disadvantage of long-
term environmental goals?
c) Does the project have impacts that
are individually limited, but
cumulatively considerable?
"Cumulatively considerable"
means that the incremental effects of
a project are significant when
viewed in connection with the
effects of past projects, the effects of
other current projects, and the
effects of probable future projects.)
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST\LA LARGE NPDES \CITY\2008 Page 15 of 16
FORM "J"
Issues:
Does the project have environmental
effects which will cause substantial
adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST \LA LARGE NPDES \CITY\2008
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
Page 16 of 16 FORM "J"
I CALIFORNIA
oirnamew
fISN &CAME',
California Natural Resources Agency
DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME
Environmental Review and Permitting
1416 Ninth Street, Suite 1260
Sacramento, CA 95814
http://www.dfg.ca.gov
ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, Govemor
CEQA Filing Fee No Effect Determination Form
Applicant Name: Paul Supancheck Date Submitted: November 16, 2009
Applicant Address: 1313 S. Baldwin Avenue
Project Name: Conditional Use Permit No. 09 -14
CEQA Lead Agency: City of Arcadia Development Services Department
CEQA Document Type: (ND, MND, EIR) Negative Declaration
SCH Number and /or local agency ID number: N/A
Project Location: 1313 S. Baldwin Avenue, Arcadia
Brief Project Description: To allow the following changes to the existing learning
center that was approved under Conditional Use Permit No. 04 -11: 1) Extend the
business hours from 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. to 9:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m., everyday; and 2)
Allow private children birthday parties (maximum 30 people and 3 staff members during
times when open play and classes are not in session.
Determination: Based on a review of the Project as proposed, the Department of Fish
and Game has determined that for purposes of the assessment of CEQA filing fees
[F &G Code 711.4(c)] the project has no potential effect on fish, wildlife and habitat and
the project as described does not require payment of a CEQA filing fee. This
determination does not in any way imply that the project is exempt from CEQA and
does not determine the significance of any potential project effects evaluated pursuant
to CEQA.
Please retain this original determination for your records; you are required to file a copy
of this determination with the County Clerk after your project is approved and at the time
of filing of the CEQA lead agency's Notice of Determination (NOD). If you do not file a
copy of this determination with the County Clerk at the time of filing of the NOD, the
appropriate CEQA filing fee will be due and payable.
Without a valid No Effect Determination Form or proof of fee payment, the project will
not be operative, vested, or final and any local permits issued for the project will be
invalid, pursuant to Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(c)(3).
DFG Approval By: 7/1„4 -f'. G� rez. /llto ton .ee,i Date: 2 Z7
Title: Eiivir-Dooltri k( S tvv1
CALIFORNIA DEPT. OF ASH AND GAME
SOUTH COAST REGION
4949 VIEWRIDGE AVENUE Conserving California's Wifffife Since 1870
SAN DIEGO, CA 92123 1662
Attachment No. 4
MEMORANDUM
Development Services Department
DATE: July 15, 2009
TO: Steven Lee, Assistant Planner
FROM: Philip A. Wray, Deputy Director of Development Services /City Engineer
SUBJECT: Parking Demand Evaluation for Existing Kids Island Children
Enrichment Center
I have completed my review of the Parking Demand Evaluation for the Existing Kids
Island Children Enrichment Center in the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center. The study is
based on the 2006 study that was prepared for the conversion of the Ross Dress -for-
Less retail space into the LA Fitness Center and is updated for the current conditions.
At the time of the 2006 study, the Kids Island use was open, in operation, and assumed
to be at its peak usage. The study re- evaluates the current uses for consistency with
the 2006 study. Although the study appears to be a comprehensive comparison of the
two conditions and no significant changes have occurred, no actual parking utilization
survey was conducted recently to compare with the 2006 survey. Based on the
conservative approach of the 2006 study and the center's use consistency since 2006, it
is reasonable to conclude that a surplus of parking still exists during the peak
conditions. I concur with the study.
R I REEN RSCH
Hirsch /Green Transportation Consulting, Inc.
August 19, 2008
Mr. Paul Supancheck
Kid's Island Children Enrichment Center
Arcadia Hub Shopping Center
1313 S. Baldwin Avenue
Arcadia, California 91007
RE: Parking Demand Evaluation for Existing Kid's Island Children Enrichment Center in
the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center in Arcadia, California
Dear Mr. Supancheck,
This letter documents the results of an assessment of several parking issues related to the
ongoing operations of your existing Kid's Island facilities located in the Arcadia Hub Shopping
Center in Arcadia, California. To summarize the issues addressed in this report, your existing
Kid's Island facilities currently occupy a total of approximately 4,814 square feet, including an
approximately 2,700 square foot indoor playground, approximately 1,500 square feet of
"classroom" space, and other associated office, entry lobby, and mechanical spaces. The
facility is located at 1313 South Baldwin Avenue, near the southeast corner of the existing
Arcadia Hub Shopping Center. The location of the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center within the City
of Arcadia is shown in Figure 1, while the location of the Kid's Island facilities near the southeast
corner of the shopping center itself is shown in Figure 2.
Based on our conversations, we understand that the current Kid's Island facility has been in
operation since about January of 2005, but that the previous operator unknowingly did not fully
comply with the City's requirements to obtain use permits for the business. As the operations
and associated parking utilizations for the Kid's Island facilities have existed in their present
form since the facility opened, and there are no changes in facilities or operations that would
affect the amount of parking typically used or required by your operations. However, because
the facility was not, and currently is not, permitted to engage in certain operations, namely
private birthday parties or other such assemblages, in order to obtain the necessary permits to
continue these historical operations, the City of Arcadia Planning Department has requested an
evaluation of the parking demands of your operations to assure that adequate on -site parking is
and will continue to be available at the shopping center. In lieu of such an assessment of the
actual parking demands of the Kid's Island operations, the City has indicated that it will apply its
current "assembly area" parking requirement of one parking space for each 40 square feet of
floor area, or a total parking requirement of approximately 105 spaces for the total 4,200 square
feet of playground and classroom space, assuming the site's office and lobby areas are ancillary
uses and would not require additional parking. These high requirements are not appropriate to
the existing use and operations of the site, as discussed in detail in the following pages.
13333 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 204
Sherman Oaks, California 91423 Phone 818.325.0530 Fax 818.325.0534
IRSCH
REEN
Hirsch /Green Transportation Consulting, Inc
SITE LOCATION AND VICINITY
IRSCH
REEN
0
ra
c
J I IL
Hirsch /Green Transportation Consulting, Inc
time euiwor4
gIew �r
,aeon&
lumen
tAtAl
vow q H
anon kyeeae
euyewgns Aanngns
doai wafl3eN O 1S IttmeN
eralernar woo JapeM
dog$ aKOWS
eJoIS Sad
aaiica s>1'Jn4
.fang Mel
VY
A
0
J111111111 8111111111
-'11111g
(11111I11U11.11(11111t1111111111
re
FIGURE 2
z re
CL
I11IIIii1i0111111111-1
(11111111111111lq
0
EXISTING LOCATION OF KID'S ISLAND
WITHIN ARCADIA HUB SHOPPING CENTER
Letter to Mr. Paul Supancheck
August 19, 2008
Page 4 of 13
Kid's Island Operations and Parking Demands
Our observations of the operations and activities at the site, along with information about the
Kid's Island facilities and philosophy, indicate that this is a rather unique facility, providing a
location for parents to bring their preschool age children to play, socialize, and learn within a
safe, supervised environment; it is not intended, nor does it operate as a day care center to
baby sit children during the day, as most of the parents who utilize the facilities choose to stay
and interact with their and others' children. The focus of the Kid's Island is to provide a creative
play, socialization, and education environment for young children, and as such, the Kid's Island
facility is divided into two major rooms; an approximately 2,700 square foot indoor playground,
and a separate approximately 1,500 square foot area used for classroom(s) or other activities.
A description of the types of programs offered by Kid's Island, along with its hours of operation,
and typical attendance and staffing levels, is provided below.
o Indoor Playground
Kid's Island indoor playground is open to the public for play and social interaction
Monday through Friday from 9:00 AM to 7:00 PM, During typical operations of the
playground, there are approximately seven children, accompanied by a total of one to
three adults, at the facility at one time during open play hours. One staff member is
available to maintain the indoor playground.
o Infant and Toddler Classes
Classes are also held in the classroom during open play hours; see the attached
schedule for class days and times. Classes are generally 45 minutes long, and parents
are typically required to attended with the child and participate in class. Although there
are a number of potential classes offered, actual number and type of classes taught are
based on enrollment; for example, during the current session (July 28 to September 19),
of a total of 10 classes considered, only five were offered due to lack of enrollment in the
other programs. Classes typically have no more than five children accompanied by an
adult, although the current classroom sizes are considerably lower (see the class
schedule contained as an attachment to this document). Each class is taught by one
on -staff instructor, although some also bring in outside teachers or assistants.
o Parent's Night Out Babysttinq
Once each month on a Friday, Kid's Island provides babysitting service for toilet trained
children from 5:00 to 10:00 PM. Children are engaged in arts and craft and games
under the supervision of Kid's Island teachers and staff; typical operations include
approximately 10 children during the program hours, with up to three staff members
supervising the children. Parents are generally permitted at the facility only during the
child drop -off and pick -up activities.
Letter to Mr. Paul Supancheck
August 19, 2008
Page 5 of 13
o Birthday Parties
Private birthday parties are also provided at Kid's Island. During private parties, the
entire facility is reserved generally for children from ages one year to 10 years old,
including both the classroom and indoor playground areas. Birthday parties typically
only on Saturday and Sunday between 9:00 AM and 9:0 PM, generally with three (3)
parties occurring on Saturday, and a single party on Sunday, although birthday parties
can occur infrequently on weekday during open play hours; in these instances, since the
parties reserve the entire Kid's Island facility, there are no "open play classroom, or
other activities permitted to occur during the private birthday party hours. In general,
birthday party scheduling and attendance operate as follows:
Saturday
First Party: 10:00 AM to 12:00 PM This early party is normally small, with only about
five children and a total of 13 adults; parents typically remain at the site for the duration
of the party (note: while some parents do drop -off their children at this and parties held
at other times of the day or on Sunday, it is an infrequent occurrence).
Second Party: 12:30 PM to 2:30 PM More typical of the average birthday party, this
party generally has an average of about 12 children in attendance, with a total of about
16 adults remaining at the site during the activity.
Third Party: 3:00 to 5:00 PM Similar to the "Second Party" activity levels, with a total
of about 12 children and 16 adults in attendance throughout the party.
Sunday
Generally only one birthday party, typically from about 12:00 to 2:00 PM. Similar in
size to the later Saturday activities, with approximately 12 children in attendance, and
a total of about 16 adults remaining at the site during the activity.
In addition to the attendees described above for each of the parties, three Kid's Island
staff members are on hand at all times to run the birthday party activities.
As generally indicated by the operational and attendance /staffing overview of the Kid's Island
facilities, the use does not typically generate either high traffic loads or substantial parking
demands. During a typical weekday, the Kid's Island produces a need for approximately three
to five vehicle parking spaces (assumes one vehicle for each of the average three on -site
parents, plus one playground and one office staff vehicle) for the playground area, and
potentially up to an additional seven vehicles for classroom activities during those periods when
classes are offered (one vehicle per student/parent attendee pair, plus one additional "teacher"
vehicle [not always applicable], plus one Kid's Island staff vehicle. As such, the total typical
Letter to Mr. Paul Supancheck
August 19, 2008
Page 6 of 13
weekday daytime parking demands of the operations are nominal, with 12 or fewer vehicles
parked at the site at any specific time. During the Parents Night Out activities, overall parking
demands are again nominal, with a total of only three staff- related vehicles, although short-term
"drop- off /pick -up" parking activities by parents could increase the total parking demand to
approximately 13 vehicles for brief (less than 15- minute) periods (assuming 10 children
participating, at one child per parent vehicle).
Weekend activities at the Kid's Island are limited to the private parties for birthdays or other
occasions. As described earlier, during parties, no other activities can occur on -site; based on
the typical maximum attendances identified, each of the parties (up to three per day on
Saturdays) could generate a maximum parking demand of up to about 15 vehicles,
conservatively assuming only one child per vehicle and an average parent vehicle occupancy of
1.33 parents per vehicle, plus three staff vehicles; actual vehicle occupancies are generally
much higher, with an average of between about 1.5 to 1.75 parents per vehicle, and many
vehicles typically transport more than one child per vehicle.
Parking Adequacy Analysis Overview /Background
As such, based on this general evaluation of the operations of the Kid's Island facilities, the
maximum parking demands are estimated at 15 or fewer parking spaces at any time during
either the weekday or weekend. These peak parking needs for the Kid's Island operations were
then used to evaluate the ability of the existing Arcadia Hub Shopping Center parking supply to
accommodate these demands. This evaluation was based primarily on a detailed parking
analysis performed by our firm for the recently- approved conversion of the previous Ross Dress
for Less space at the southeast corner of the shopping center to a LA Fitness facility "Parking
Impact Analysis Report for the Proposed LA Fitness Facility in the Existing Arcadia Hub
Shopping Center", Hirsch /Green Transportation Consulting, Inc., July 2006); that document is
incorporated in this assessment in its entirety by reference.
To summarize the results of the LA Fitness parking study, a detailed evaluation, including
empirical parking utilization counts for seven consecutive days, was prepared for both the
existing (year 2006) and forecast "full occupancy" future conditions at the shopping center,
including the planned conversion of the Ross Dress for Less to a LA Fitness facility. That study
focused primarily on the parking utilizations for the "Phase 1" portion of the shopping center,
generally those portions of the shopping center east of the "Phase 2" development (containing
the Pavilions market and shops along the westem edge of the site); the Phase 1 portion of the
center also contains the Kid's Island facilities. The results of the July 2006 parking analyses
indicated that peak parking demand for the Phase 1 portion of the shopping center would occur
on a Saturday evening between approximately 5:00 and 6:00 PM, with a peak forecast parking
utilization (including adjustments to account for "full occupancy" of the shopping center,
Letter to Mr. Paul Supancheck
August 19, 2008
Page 7 of 13
additional adjustments to assure peak "winter holiday shopping season" activity levels, and full
operations of the proposed LA Fitness center facility) of approximately 681 of the 740 total
parking spaces provided (92 percent occupancy), leaving a minimum of approximately 59
spaces unoccupied. These results of the prior analyses are summarized in this document in
Tables 1(a) and 1(b), which are recreations of Tables 10(a) and 10(b) from the July 2006
parking study. As noted in the prior study, parking availability within the shopping center parking
lot times other than the peak demand periods on Saturday, and at all times during other days of
the week, would increase from the minimum values indicated above.
Similarly, an additional evaluation was conducted for the entire Arcadia Hub Shopping Center
(including both the Phase 1 and Phase 2 portions), which indicated that the site in its entirety
would be expected to experience a total forecast peak parking demand of approximately 975 of
the 1,151 spaces provided (85 percent occupancy), again on a Saturday, but occurring
approximately one hour later than the Phase 1 stand -along peak parking demand, from about
6:00 to 7:00 PM, resulting in a minimum availability of approximately 176 parking spaces for the
shopping center as a whole.
Therefore, even under the "worst case" forecast parking conditions analyzed in the July 2006
parking study, more than adequate parking currently exists at the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center
to meet the expected "full occupancy" peak forecast parking demands of the shopping center
(including additional parking demands associated with the now approved LA Fitness facility)
with substantial surplus capacity at all times of the day throughout the week. It is important to
note here that the parking surveys utilized for the July 2006 parking study were conducted
during February of 2006, and as such, intrinsically included the parking demands generated by
the Kid's Island facilities, which had been in operation for about a year, since January of 2005.
As such, the continued operations of the Kid's Island, including the ongoing but currently
unpermitted weekend birthday party operations, would not increase the shopping center's
existing or forecast parking demands as noted in the July 2006 analyses, despite the City's
indication that such activities could be required to provide a total of approximately 105 spaces.
Comparison of Current (2008) And Prior (2006) Conditions
Although as noted above that the July 2006 analyses were used in this assessment of the
potential parking effects of your ongoing Kid's Island operations, a supplemental evaluation of
current conditions at the shopping center was conducted to identify any changes that may have
occurred during the past two years to assure that the conditions identified in that study
continued to be representative of the current occupancies and operations of the Arcadia Hub
Shopping Center. This site survey was conducted on June 12, 2008, and the results indicate
that, while some changes have occurred, in general, the shopping center exhibits the same
tenant mix and overall occupancy levels as described in the July 2006 parking study.
N
y
10 y 0(0(0 000- 0000- 00- 4) 01 0
3 0 c O N N O O C) co co O O M (0 0) (0 M 00
N r e- N N N e- N N N N N N N N e- e-
o aLL
y O
m tt- a g a
N
c C" r C0 O0 CO et 4) 4) O NO)(0(0 00
16 'ya Y r N (0 O CO M O 0- 0 (O 00 (O 0- 74 0 (0 00
4 N N N 0 N N N N N N N r
W a ►o-
N y
04)(0000- 000
C J O NNOO M ODOOM(00)(DMO O
Nr.- NN Nr NNNNNNNNr
LL 0 LL
a3 0.
0
O
1-
at
c
w Y 3
w a 1 0
M 0- 0 4) 0- 0- N a0 O (0 41 (0 O M
N 10(00 0- 0M O) 0000- (00
N r r M M et et 4) 41 et (0 CO (0 (0 et co N
(0 00 N O (0 0 (D M O N M (0 00 0 Imo. et 0
r N et O (D Tr 00 N O OD tt M 0- (0 N 0 M
r e- N N M M N M M N N N r r
C D C D N(0 C00) 00- CO CO 0- M0- MOD 00
0 N r r N M et et et et et 1.0 4) ul st M
K
O e Fil2gJ 0-(0000(0 82 c' SS
N e- e- N et xr m m. Nr OD 1)(n M Me-
C y
y c O NN O 00 M RI RI 10 M 0)
C N N N N N N N N N N N N
C LL
a n.
CO C C (0 CO 00 M N O 10 T T 000- 't (0 NO
73 e-NM0- N et 41 0- OD O M OD 41 4) (0 OD
y Y NNNNNNNMNN e- e-
Wa 1
CO 0 M (0 (0) (0 01 0' et 0- 0 (0 N M 0
.0 N (0 0- O 00 0 M N M 41 0 (O (0 N O
0 N e- r M M et U7 i0 (0 (0 (0 (0 (0 et C' M N
0(0(0000- 0000- 00-41 010
O N N O O M OD O O O M (O CO OD 01 0 0
N r r N N N r N N N N N N N N r r
C C et 00 (0 (0 O N O([') 01 O O et O _O et op
r M et 00- (0 01 N 00 NO
y i 43 r N M M M M M N N N N r
I 1
5
To
0
CO
M
E
d y 04)(0 000- 0 000- 00-4) M0r C
m yy E J ONNOOM m
13 O N r r NNN r NNNNNNNNe r
O O LL
K
(C M '0'5 (0 N0 d' V' 001 (O M O NN
i. T. q. CO 4)e['00- WOM OD 0 et0- cm O0
1 Nrr(7 MetM�� �(0)4)4) 4)�Mr
0)
C C NOON 00- (0004) 4) CO (O N 0 000- 01
e-
-e= .32 e- O0 0. CD OD 0- 0- CO 0 0- CO et 00
y N N N N N N M N N N
w H
00000000000000000
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
6 0- W 0)0.- Nr N M V' (f) (D IN OD 00
(o
0
O
N
z
C
0)
c
7
c
0
0
0
0
CO
n
0)
c
V-
c
a
W
x
e
0
C
Q
G
0)
w
a)
0
v
m
a
m
O
G
m
a
N
co
a
a
co
O
'a+
M
N
To O
06
0)
N
O
a)
0)
m
a o
F a)
c
v c H
N O P O 00 NI 00 r- 004) N0 c h c
a MM M 0 M 00� OO M 4) 4)00
NrrNM4)tf)4) (O CO tD V'MT" 7 N
2 C9
E 4
N N CO M 0D M M (0 Tr (0 N 4 M et O) 0)0D c E QZ
y Y J N N 0 M 0 M M OD OC)N N(O 00 N E m E`
C a:_ M r rr r D D o,
0)
c
'O N
E W
t '6 w O
01 00 d'0OV In N_ M h 00 Ul CD 0D 41 O 0D 0 0) C N
N c. r 0)) mr sf cr cr M f) CO 4 M NOS NN_
0 U
T as C
Y
N 00 M 00 M M N- O N (C) M 'a O) 000 N to
N N 0 01 0 M M O O 47 CO N O) 00 N LL
r r r E
E n c
c 0
r(� O) 4) O) N O h M 04 el r 10 r Tr 0 0 C O
04 C4 01 01 01 01 01 el 04 T
O LL IL
EL 15 CL
CO C'^-' CD 41 M CD O) hOO O) O M 00 O) r- CD 0M
r M 4) 0 O) O) 4) 1� 0 (O (O 0
y Y 1� N M V r (A V' t M N N r
C
W d
0
c c 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
;2 t 5 Q¢QQ¢¢
N 0.c 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
n d 6 f` 000 O r N r N 6i 46, O) I.: OD 6
C C
0) m
c N U
Y
(0 a e
T Q r q
U
O C
m 0.
o
a, a 2
0 O 1p
m
LL. N m
r (0
Letter to Mr. Paul Supancheck
August 19, 2008
Page 10 of 13
The site survey noted that the two suites listed as "vacant" during the 2006 analyses (refer to
Table 1, page 3 of the July 2006 report) are currently occupied, although several of the
previously occupied suites are now vacant. Specifically, the total 14,475 square feet of area
previously identified as vacant is now occupied, including the approximately 10,475 square foot
Suite 1225, which is now occupied by both the "One Stop Dollar Shop" and by "Tuesday
Morning"; these facilities offer wholesale and /or discount prices on a variety of merchandise and
generally exhibit low parking demand activity (on a "per unit area" comparison with higher end
retail or commercial spaces). Additionally, the previously vacant 4,000 square foot Suite 1317 is
now occupied by the "Tomato Bank" facility.
However, a total of approximately 8,927 square feet of floor area previously occupied during the
2006 parking analyses were now vacant, including the 1,550 square foot Suite 733 K/L
proposed for your Subway Restaurant relocation; the 5,857 square foot Suite 1265 previously
occupied by `Blockbuster", and the 1,550 square foot Suite 815 L (in Phase 2 of the center)
previously occupied by "Score" are also currently unoccupied. Further, the Ross Dress for Less
site is currently vacant awaiting its conversion to the approved LA Fitness facility, although this
suite is not considered "vacant" for purposes of this analysis, since the effects of the conversion
from Ross Dress for Less to the LA Fitness are included in the previous July 2006 analyses.
One other change has also occurred to the shopping center since July 2006, Suite 733 E, which
previously housed "Walter Dorn Jewelers" has been converted to the "Ce Fiore" restaurant.
Based on these observations, the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center has experienced a slight
increase in total occupancy levels since 2006; during the original parking demand surveys, a
total of approximately 14,475 square feet (about 4.2 percent) of the center was vacant, while
currently a total of approximately 8,927 square feet (about 2.6 percent) are unoccupied.
However, it is important to note that the "baseline" conditions used in this analysis for evaluating
the potential effects of the proposed Subway Restaurant relocation and expansion are
represented by the forecast future "full occupancy, peak winter shopping" conditions shown in
Tables 1(a) and 1(b). These conditions extrapolated full occupancy of the shopping center
based on the parking demands observed for the existing uses, factoring up the "composite"
parking demands of the various uses to estimate 100 percent occupancy of the site.
This methodology resulted in the forecast full occupancy parking conditions reflecting the mix of
retail, commercial, and restaurant uses in operation during the 2006 parking surveys. However,
a review of the current conditions at the shopping center indicate that, although the total
vacancy rate has decreased slightly from the previously reported conditions, the uses that have
occupied those prior vacancies are similar to, and represent the same relative mix of uses as
the overall Arcadia Hub Shopping Center exhibited during the 2006 surveys. The(efore, the
current mix of uses at the shopping center is consistent with the conditions that were anticipated
to represent the theoretical full occupancy of the site, and as such, the previously identified peak
Letter to Mr. Paul Supancheck
August 19, 2008
Page 11 of 13
parking demands described in detail in the July 2006 parking analyses and summarized earlier
in Tables 1(a) and 1(b), continue to accurately represent the "worst case" parking utilization
estimates for the shopping center (following development of the LA Fitness facility), and are
appropriate for use in this analyses. As such, the peak parking demands forecast in the 2006
study (maximum of 681 occupied spaces for Phase 1, or 975 occupied spaces for the entire
shopping center)) remain valid, and a minimum of approximately 59 spaces in Phase 1 of the
shopping center, or a minimum of 176 spaces throughout the entire site, are available at all
times to meet the potential parking needs of the proposed Subway relocation /expansion project,
which are described in the following section.
Effects of Kid's Island Operations on Site Parking Demand
As described briefly earlier in this document, the existing Kid's Island occupies a total of
approximately 4,814 square feet of floor area, including an approximately 2,700 square foot
indoor playground, approximately 1,500 square feet of "classroom" space, and other associated
office, entry lobby, and mechanical spaces, at 1313 South Baldwin Avenue, near the southeast
corner of the existing Arcadia Hub Shopping Center. According to current Conditional Use
Permit (CUP) records on file with the City, the Kid's Island facility is required to provide a total of
seven (7) parking spaces, although this requirement apparently is based solely on the
operations of the indoor playground and classroom areas, and does not include the
aforementioned "birthday party" operations. However, it must again be emphasized that,
despite these parking requirements, the actual parking demands associated with the current
activities of the Kid's Island facilities, independent of the number of parking spaces technically
required by the City codes, are already included intrinsically in the parking demand surveys of
the "Existing Parking" utilizations, and are therefore also included in the "full occupancy"
forecasts of the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center parking demands shown in Tables 1(a) and 1(b),
and as a result, no additional parking demands are expected to result from the simple
continuation of the Kid's Island's current operations.
Notwithstanding the parking requirements identified in the current CUP, the City of Arcadia
parking code requires general "assembly area" uses to provide parking at one space per 40
square feet of gross floor area (approximately 25.0 spaces /1,000 square feet), and as such, the
existing 4,200 square feet of indoor playground and classroom areas would require a total of
approximately 105 parking spaces; it is assumed that the site office and lobby areas are
ancillary uses for the facility, and would not require additional parking. These potential parking
requirements are considered to be inappropriately high for a small facility such as the kid's
Island, especially given the actual operations and occupancy levels typically associated with the
site, as described earlier. "Assembly area" parking code ratios are generally associated with
such operations as auditoriums or conference facilities that can generate high parking demands
based on temporary seating configurations that utilize nearly the entire floor areas.
Letter to Mr. Paul Supancheck
August 19, 2008
Page 12 of 13
A review of the Kid's Island facilities shows that the 2,700 square foot indoor playground area is
occupied with a variety of fixed play equipment that significantly reduces the actual "assembly
areas Further, due to the types of class activities generally occurring at the site, the
occupancies of the 1,500 square foot classroom area are substantially reduced from the
potential maximum occupancies of typical assembly areas. These factors reduce the actual
parking demands of the subject uses, and as such, the typical parking code ratio of one space
per 40 square feet (25.0 spaces per 1,000 square feet) is exceedingly high. Based on our
observations and a review of the current activity levels at the site, the parking demands of the
existing Kid's Island operations are generally anticipated to be fully addressed by the existing 7
spaces required by the CUP, and no additional parking for the continuation of the current
activities, including weekend birthday parties, is recommended.
However, should the City disagree with this conclusion and require that additional parking
spaces be provided to accommodate the continuation of the birthday party activities, we
recommend that, based on our evaluations, such additional parking be limited to 8 new spaces,
for a total parking requirement for the facility of 15 spaces. This amount of parking (15 spaces)
will be adequate to accommodate the "worst case" transient parking demands associated with
the weekend birthday party 'activities, including parents` and staff vehicles, although it is likely
that many of these spaces would go unutilized during much of the day, since the typical
operations of the Kid's Island facilities generally require fewer than 10 spaces.
It is important to put the above recommendation in perspective, however. As described in detail
in the July 2006 parking analyses, the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center is forecast to provide a
minimum of approximately 59 available parking at all times within the Phase 1 portion of the site
(containing the subject Kid's Island facilities), and a minimum of 176 total spaces available
throughout the entire shopping center site, during the "worst case" peak parking demand
periods (between 5:00 and 7:00 PM on Saturday evenings); available parking spaces at all
other times throughout the week would be considerably higher. As such, even if the City
determines that the continued operation of private birthday or other parties at the Kid's Island
facilities are required to provide an additional eight (8) spaces (or other number identified as
appropriate by the City), the actual parking demands of the shopping center would not increase
from those values identified in Tables 1(a) and 1(b) and described in the July 2006 parking
study, since those analyses include the existing (and therefore, ongoing) parking demands
associated with the Kid's Island operations.
Summary and Conclusions
Based on our evaluation of the operations and parking demands of the Kid's Island facilities,
combined with the detailed study and evaluation of existing and forecast future parking
demands at the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center as a whole as detailed in the July 2006 parking
study referenced in the document, we believe that the current existing parking supply at the
Letter to Mr. Paul Supancheck
August 19, 2008
Page 13 of 13
shopping center provides, and will continue to provide, adequate on -site parking to
accommodate the current and future parking demands of the Kid's Island facilities. As indicated
by the conclusions of the July 2006 parking study, it can reasonably be concluded that even
under the most conservative assumptions identified in that study, no significant parking impacts
from the ongoing operations of the Kid's Island weekend birthday party activities would occur,
since the parking demands for the Kid's Island facilities, including the subject weekend birthday
parties, are already included in the existing and forecast future parking needs estimates in the
July 2006 study, and no additional parking demands associated with Kid's Island are
anticipated. As such, our evaluation of the effects of the Kid's Island operations continues to
support the conclusions of the previous July 2006 study that no parking shortages or "overflow"
parking onto adjacent streets or into the nearby residential areas will occur. Therefore, we
believe that no mitigation measures or parking related conditions of approval are warranted.
Despite this conclusion, the City may determine, in order to bring the current Kid's Island CUP
up to date and include the weekend birthday party activities, that additional parking should be
required for the facility. If that is the City's action, we recommend that the additional parking
requirement be limited to the provision of no more than eight (8) additional (15 total) parking
spaces, based on the observations and analyses contained in this document. However, as
noted earlier, these potential Additional parking requirements will not affect the actual parking
utilizations of the Kid's Island operations or those of the shopping center as a whole. As such,
the current parking supply at the Arcadia Hub Shopping Center is and will continue to be
adequate to meet the demands of the shopping center's tenants, and no additional on -site
parking is necessary as a result of the continued operations of the Kid's Island facilities.
Please feel free to call me if you have any questions or comments.
Sincerely,
Ron Hirsch, P.E.
Principal
Kid's Island Current Class Schedules /Enrollment Summary
Kids Island Arcadia Hub Shoppina Center
Current Class Schedule and Enrollment eve:
(21st Session July 28 to September 19. 20
Current
Class Dav Time Enrollment Comments
mt Ls Crafts I Thursday 10:00 AM 2
(6 months to m montns)
Arts Crafts II Friday 11:00 AM 3
(18 months to 3 years)
Hip -Hop Dance Thursday 6:00 PM 2
(5 years to 7 years)
Almost School Tuesday 4:00 PM 1 Plus 1 additional staff
rnonics ii Program
years ana b years)
Almost School Tuesday 5:00 PM 1 Plus 1 additional staff
Math Program
(3 years and 6 years)
"ther Classes Considered but Not Provided this Session
Class Day Time
Intro to Ballet Wednesday 6:00 PM
(3 years to 5 years)
Almost School Tuesday 3:00 PM
Phonics I Program
2 years and 3 years)
Sing and Dance I Thursday 11:00 AM
(18 months to 3 years) Wednesday 4:00 PM
Sing and Dance II Wednesday 5:00 PM
(4 years to 5 years)
Story Time I Thursday 12:00 PM
(18 months to 3 years)
Attachment No. 5
Development Services Department
Engineering Division
Prepared by: R. S. Gonzalez, December 2009
1313 S Baldwin Avenue
CUP 09 -14
(1201)
(1255)
(1401)
(1404)
(1410)
(1414)
t3 -729)
Development Services Department
Engineering Division
Prepared by: R. S. Gonzalez, December 2009
i
(1322)
(1326)
(1304)
(1310)
(1320)
C -2
(673)
NAOMI AVE
(671)
(670)
(665)
(66(
1313 S Baldwin Avenue
CUP 09.14
Attachment No. 6
56;r2 0S Hine
December 8, 2009
TO: Arcadia Planning Commission
FROM: Jim Kasama, Community Development Administrator
By: Thomas Li, Associate Planner
SUMMARY
GENERAL INFORMATION
APPLICANT: J. Don Crenshaw (Architect)
LOCATION: 231 W. Wistaria Avenue
STAFF REPORT
Development Services Department
SUBJECT: Zone Variance Application No. ZV 09 -01, Modification Application No. MC
09 -36, and Single Family Architectural Design Review Application No.
SFADR 09 -43 to rebuild an existing residence at 231 W. Wistaria Avenue.
The applicant is requesting a Zone Variance, Modifications, and Single Family
Architectural Design Review to rebuild an existing one -story 2,523 square -foot single
family residence with a 1,198 square -foot ground floor addition, for a total living area of
3,721 square feet. It is staff's opinion that the proposal is consistent with the existing
and surrounding development, and if approved, would satisfy the prerequisite conditions
and findings for these applications. Therefore, the Development Services Department
is recommending approval of applications ZV 09 -01, MC 09 -36, and SFADR 09 -43,
subject to the conditions listed in this staff report.
REQUEST: The following applications to rebuild an existing 2,523 square -foot,
one -story, single family residence and add 1,198 square feet for a total
living area of 3,721 square feet:
A. A Zone Variance to allow a three -car garage (24 linear feet of
garage opening) to face the street on a 99.98 -foot wide lot in lieu
of the minimum 100 -foot lot width required for a three -car garage
to face the street (Sec. 9251.2.6)
B. A Modification Application to permit the following setback
encroachments:
1. A front yard setback of 34' -0" in lieu of 35' -0" required (the
average front yard setback of the two adjacent properties is
31' -8 (Sec. 9251.2.2)
2. An easterly side yard setback of 7' -0" in lieu of 10' -0" required
to allow additions to align with the existing attached garage
(Sec. 9251.2.3)
3. A westerly side yard setback of 7' -0" in lieu of 10' -0" required
to allow an addition to align with the existing house (Sec.
9251.2.3)
4. A westerly side yard setback of 8' -0" in lieu of 10' -0" required
for two (2) air conditioning units (Secs. 9251.2.1.1 9251.2.3)
C. Single Family Architectural Design Review
SITE AREA: 13,900 square feet (0.32 acre)
FRONTAGE: 99.98 feet along W. Wistaria Avenue
EXISTING LAND USE ZONING:
The subject site is developed with a one -story, 2,523 square -foot
single family residence constructed in 1966. The site is zoned R -0-
15,000 Single Family Residential with a minimum lot size of 15,000
square feet.
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION:
Single Family Residential at 0 -4 dwelling units per acre
SURROUNDING LAND USES ZONING:
The surrounding properties are developed with single family
residences and are zoned R -0- 15,000.
PUBLIC HEARING NOTIFICATION
Public hearing notices for ZV 09 -01, MC 09 -36, and SFADR 09 -43 were mailed on
November 25, 2009 to the property owners, tenants and occupants of those properties
that are within 300 feet of the subject property (see attached radius map). Because
staff determined that the subject applications are categorically exempt from the
requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as minor alterations in
land use limitations under Section 15305 of the CEQA Guidelines, the public hearing
notice was not published in the Arcadia Weekly newspaper.
ZV 09 -01, MC 09 -36, SFADR 09 -43
231 W. Wistaria Avenue
December 8, 2009 page 2
PROPOSAL AND ANALYSIS
The applicant is proposing to rebuild an existing 2,523 square -foot, one -story, single
family residence with a 1,198 square -foot ground floor addition that will result in a total
area of 3,721 square feet. The proposal would add a fifth bedroom (Guest Bedroom) to
the northeasterly portion of the existing four bedroom floor plan; expand a bedroom
(Bedroom #1) the entry, and the dining room; relocate the laundry room; and remodel
the three -car garage.
Zone Variance
Allow a three -car garage (24 linear feet of garage opening) to face the street on a
99.98 -foot wide lot in lieu of the minimum 100 -foot lot width required for a three -car
garage to face the street (Sec. 9251.2.6)
On lots less than 100 feet wide, the Code limits garage openings facing the street to a
maximum of 16 feet, the typical width of a two -car garage opening. A 24 -foot, three -car
garage opening may face the street only if the lot is at least 100 feet wide. The subject
property has a lot width of 99.98 feet, which is 0.02 feet or 1 /4 of an inch less than the
100 -foot requirement. Therefore, the maximum allowable garage opening facing the
street is 16 feet for the subject property.
The applicant is requesting to remodel the existing, legal- nonconforming, three -car
garage and maintain the existing 24 feet of garage opening facing the street. The
remodeled garage would be approximately ten feet closer to the front property line.
Because of the relocation, the legal- nonconforming status is lost, and a zone variance is
required to maintain the 24 feet of garage opening facing the street.
Staff supports the applicant's zone variance request because the proposal is consistent
with the existing building and the surrounding neighborhood. As mentioned above, the
existing residence already has a 24 -foot, three -car garage opening facing the street.
Staff also observed that on this block of West Wistaria Avenue, a majority of the existing
homes have three -car garages facing the street; several of them are shown on the
attached photos, and most of the lots in this block of West Wistaria Avenue have widths
of 99.98 feet.
Modification No. 1
A front yard setback of 34' -0" in lieu of 35' -0" required (Sec. 9251.2.2)
In the R -0 zone, the required front yard setback is 35' -0" or the average of the two
adjacent neighbors, whichever is greater. The applicant is proposing a 34' -0" front yard
setback for the easterly 19' -8" of the three -car garage. The other 11' -0" wide garage
space is setback an additional 2' -6" to provide architectural relief to enhance the
appearance of the garage. Although the proposal does not meet the minimum front
yard setback requirement per Code, the proposed setback exceeds the 31' -8" setback
ZV 09 -01, MC 09 -36, SFADR 09 -43
231 W. Wistaria Avenue
December 8, 2009 page 3
of the two adjacent properties. It is staffs opinion that this request, if approved, would
secure an appropriate improvement.
Modification Nos. 2 and 3
An easterly side yard setback of 7' -0" in lieu of 10' -0" required to allow additions to
align with the existing garage (Sec. 9251.2.3)
A westerly side yard setback of 7' -0" in lieu of 10' -0" required to allow an addition to
align with the existing house (Sec. 9251.2.3)
The Code requires a side yard setback of 10' -0" or 10% of the lot width, whichever is
greater. For the subject property with a lot width of 99.98 feet, the minimum side yard
setback requirement is 10' -0
The existing house has a current setback of 7' -0" for the entire west side of the house.
The existing 7' -0" easterly side yard setback is only along the 22' -8" length of the
garage. The rest of the house is setback 36' -0" from the easterly side property line.
The applicant is proposing to align the additions with the existing 7' -0" side yard
setbacks. The additions encroaching into the easterly side yard setback are a 22' -8"
long portion of a new guest bedroom suite to be added to the rear of the existing
attached garage, and a 10' -0" long front extension of the remodeled garage. In the
westerly side yard area, the portion encroaching is a 10' -0" long extension of an existing
bedroom. Allowing the additions to align with the existing setbacks would result in a
more consistent roofline along the side yard areas. It is staff's opinion that these
requests, if approved, would secure an appropriate improvement of the lot.
Modification No. 4
A westerly side yard setback of 8' -0" in lieu of 10' -0" required for two (2) air
conditioning units (Secs. 9251.2.1.1 9251.2.3)
The side yard setback required for air conditioning units per Code is 10' -0" for the
subject property. The proposed two (2) air conditioning units would have a westerly
side yard setback of 8' -0 as shown on the submitted plans. The 2' -0" encroachment
would allow these units to be away from the proposed bedroom window, while being set
back 1' -0" more than the main dwelling. The issue with air conditioning unit setbacks is
the potential noise impact upon the neighboring properties. In this case, the air
conditioning units will be located behind the main dwelling, and because of the
alignment of the Tots, the units will be at the required rear yard area of the adjacent lot.
This area of the neighboring property is presently improved with a swimming pool.
Therefore, it is staff's opinion that approval of this request would not have an impact
upon the neighboring property, and would secure an appropriate improvement of the lot.
ZV 09 -01, MC 09 -36, SFADR 09 -43
231 W. Wistaria Avenue
December 8, 2009 page 4
Architectural Design Review
Concurrent with the Zone Variance and Modification applications, the Planning
Commission may approve, conditionally approve, or deny the architectural design of this
proposal. The applicant describes the proposed architectural style as "Traditional
Country". It will be finished with "Dusty Gray" wood siding, white trim, and "Eldorado"
stone veneer on the front elevation. The high pitched roof will have Tight concrete tile of
a "Fawn Grey" color. The design also includes dormers, dark blue front door and
shutters, and dual glazed vinyl windows with beveled muntins. In staff's opinion, the
design of the proposed residence is of high aesthetic value and is consistent with the
City's Single Family Residential Design Guidelines.
CODE REQUIREMENTS
The proposed project is required to comply with all other code requirements and policies
as determined to be necessary by the Building Official, Fire Marshal, City Engineer,
Community Development Administrator, and Public Works Services Director, which are
to be determined by having fully detailed construction plans submitted for plan check
review and approval.
CEQA
Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) the
Development Services Department has determined that the proposed project is
categorically exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section No. 15305 of the CEQA
Guidelines as a Class 5 Categorical Exemption for Minor Alterations of Land Use
Limitations. A Preliminary Exemption Assessment is attached.
PREREQUISITE CONDITIONS AND FINDINGS
Section 9291.1.2 of the Arcadia Municipal Code requires that for a variance to be
granted, it shall be shown:
A. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable
to the property involved, or to the intended use of the property, that do not apply
generally to the property or class of use in the same zone or vicinity.
B. That the granting of such variance will not be materially detrimental to the public
health or welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in such zone or
vicinity in which the property is located.
C. That such variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a
substantial property right of the applicant possessed by other property in the same
zone and vicinity.
D. That the granting of such variance will not adversely affect the comprehensive
general plan.
ZV 09 -01, MC 09 -36, SFADR 09 -43
231 W. Wistaria Avenue
December 8, 2009 page 5
Arcadia Municipal Code Section 9292.1.1 states that the purpose of the Modification
procedure is to achieve the following:
1. Secure an appropriate improvement of a lot,
2. Prevent an unreasonable (non- economic) hardship, or
3. Promote uniformity of development.
Staff finds that the proposed project satisfies all of the four prerequisite conditions for a
zone variance, and will secure an appropriate improvement of the subject property.
RECOMMENDATION
The Development Services Department recommends approval of Zone Variance
Application No. ZV 09 -01, Modification Application No. MC 09 -36, and Single Family
Architectural Design Review Application No. SFADR 09 -43, subject to the following
conditions:
1. The project shall comply with all applicable Standard Conditions of Approval.
2. All City requirements regarding building safety, fire prevention, fire detection, fire
suppression, emergency access, parking, water supply and water facilities, sewer
facilities, trash reduction and recycling requirements, and National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) measures shall be complied with to the
satisfaction of the Building Official, City Engineer, Community Development
Administrator, Fire Marshal, and Public Works Services Director. Compliance with
these requirements is to be determined by having fully detailed construction plans
submitted for plan check review and approval.
3. 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.
4. Approval of ZV 09 -01, MC 09 -36, and SFADR 09 -43 shall not take effect until the
applicant, property owner and contractor have executed and filed an Acceptance
Form available from the Development Services Department to indicate awareness
ZV 09 -01, MC 09 -36, SFADR 09 -43
231 W. Wistaria Avenue
December 8, 2009 page 6
and acceptance of the conditions of approval, and that all conditions of approval
shall be satisfied prior to final inspection of the project.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
Approval
If the Planning Commission intends to approve this proposal, the Commission should
move to approve Application Nos. ZV 09 -01, MC 09 -36, and SFADR 09 -43; state the
supporting findings and environmental determination, and direct staff to prepare a
resolution incorporating the Commission's decision, specific determinations and
findings, and the conditions of approval for adoption at the Commission's next meeting.
Denial
If the Planning Commission intends to deny this proposal, the Commission should move
to deny Application Nos. ZV 09 -01, MC 09 -36, and SFADR 09 -43; state the finding(s)
that the proposal does not satisfy with reasons based on the record, and direct staff to
prepare a resolution incorporating the Commission's decision and specific findings for
adoption at the next Commission meeting.
If any Planning Commissioner or other interested party has any questions or comments
regarding this matter prior to the December 8, 2009 public hearing, please contact
Thomas Li, Associate Planner at (626) 574 -5447 or via email at tli @ci.arcadia.ca.us.
Approved by:
Jim -sama
mmunity Development Administrator
Attachments: Aerial Photograph and Vicinity Map
Architectural Plans
Site and Neighborhood Photographs
Public Hearing Notification Radius Map
Preliminary Exemption Assessment
ZV 09 -01, MC 09 -36, SFADR 09 -43
231 W. Wistaria Avenue
December 8, 2009 page 7
231 W Wistaria Ave
Arcadia
Zone
Development Services Department
Engineering Division
Prepared by: R.S.Gonzalez, December 2009
231 W Wistaria Avenue
ZV 09.01, MC 09.36
SFADR 09.43
2)
(246)
(240)
(230)
(220)
(210)
(202)
R -0
j% 245)
(205)
(239)
225)
(215)
100
0
100 Feet
(231)
(225)
(215)
LEMON AVE
WISTARIA AVE
(201) J
W
!u
52)
(246)
(230)
(239)
(255)
(245)
(231)
(220)
(225)
(210)
(202)
0
W
Development Services Department
Engineering Division
Prepared by: R.S Gonzalez, December 2009
231 W Wistaria Avenue
ZV 09-01, MC 09 -36
SFADR 09.43
2_10:1 '.2.5.,.!■?..i5oje,dai:3!..1611,EL
0E01 SOC9Z9nel
EEL9 E 9E9 Od 369100
t
Paliti"V-A4V4S149 tioo 'h
L0016 vI/u/1311g0 tIPE
tlitisItti *Lik I ft
U05111101111:1210 Apolow
I L0016 E1 t1Puollf
vIsmslAk "h1. I EZ
lapouzauw aopppE AmIS I
Ca/
ELM
CV-rfF.5t/
(a)
1TR
0.E6
`011:1-4.4( 0
Lt.
-3
flelD
a
0E0I-S0£ 9Z9 x
EEL9 58 E 90 ?I.I
91016 0 on
misosI LEI.,
GG 9nI0
aoa aay- maist1aa3 Nod .r
L0016 e!w `glp9o.I
'ow `eugzs!M'M IEZ
vosugof 11v019 Apo!9W
L0016 g!tuoJllvD 'MEW
'any eptns!M 'M I EZ
japomag2g uo!3!ppe tiois I
a
N
1
1
OW sac 9Z9 xi
EEL9 9Z9
9I0I6 a!^2:=6911." QaoTeu¢ayi
X9109'
1a4qo y- Megsaaa3 and 1E
L0016 B1u Vow
.any'Er1Easib •M I£Z
uosago f uuaio ApoplAr
1
L0016 Emzo3TIED'Eipeozy
•aAVEUEzs!M'M 1EZ
ppomal guoptppE'iols 1
1 0
91016 -9 0 69 Q60'IEa" 061
0£OI 969.
£EL9 58£ 66910 V
1041140- 1V i3 No j it Eill
8
w
0
L0016 elulo;lp3o 'ecpealy
.any `e1lels1P6 IEZ
uosuyof ApolaNI
1
L0016 e WJ!1e3 'elpeaIy
Ay JB1S! P6 IEZ
Iapowalag voyippe AI I
1
0£01 9Z9 x.c1 9101 .1A0.1110
98E 99 Ta 66910 9
moo N I
me4stivo
L0016 E1 t1lYeo.ry
t!'$!R1 'PA 1EZ
11091010f UU019 7s Aporaw
L0016 glum,EIED tcpeo.ry
aAV "91.M1SIA‘ 1 Ez
ppm:taws uomppe Sans
!II''1111111111':
SEM
MEM
EKE
O
O
D)
0
c
c
a)
U
(o
(o
I
a)
Q
(o
(o
O)
M
N
cn
(o
a)
a)
O
L
O
0
0)
c
c
a)
U
(o
"O
ca
I
ai
272 260 252 246 240
230 220 210 202
3 00' M s Me
PRELIMINARY EXEMPTION ASSESSMENT
(Certificate of Determination When Attached to Notice of Exemption)
1 Name or description of project:
Zone Variance Application No. ZV 09 -01, Modification Application No. MC 09 -36, and Single Family
Architectural Design Review Application No. SFADR 09 -43 to rebuild an existing residence.
2. Project Location Identify street address and cross streets or attach a map showing project site (preferably a
USGS 15' or 7W topographical map identified by quadrangle name):
231 W. Wistaria Avenue
3. Entity or person undertaking project: A. City of Arcadia
B. Other (Private)
(1) Name: J. Don Crenshaw
(2) Address: 137 Mauna Loa
Monrovia, CA 91016
(3) Phone: 626- 358 -6733
4. Staff Determination:
The City's Staff, having undertaken and completed a preliminary review of this project in accordance with the
City's "Local Guidelines for Implementing the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)" has concluded that
this project does not require further environmental assessment because:
a. The proposed action does not constitute a project under CEQA.
b. The project is a Ministerial Project.
c. The project is an Emergency Project.
d. The project constitutes a feasibility or planning study.
e. The project is categorically exempt. Applicable Exemption Class: 5
Section No.: 15305
f. The project is statutorily exempt. Applicable Exemption:
Section No.:
g. The project is otherwise exempt on the following basis:
h. The project involves another public agency which constitutes the Lead Agency.
Name of Lead Agency:
Date: November 25, 2009 Staff: Tom Li, Associate Planner
The Planning Commission of the City of Arcadia met in regular session on Tuesday, November
24, 2009 at 7:00 p.m., in the Council Chambers of the City of Arcadia, at 240 W. Huntington
Drive with Chairman Parrille presiding.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL:
PRESENT: Commissioners Baderian, Baerg, Beranek, Hsu, and Parrille
ABSENT: None
MOTION:
It was moved by Commissioner Hsu and seconded by Commissioner Beranek to read the
Resolution by title only and waive reading the full body of the Resolution. Without objection
the motion was approved.
OTHERS ATTENDING
None
MINUTES
ARCADIA PLANNING COMMISSION
Tuesday, November 24, 2009, 7:00 P.M.
Arcadia City Council Chambers
City Attomey, Steve Deitsch
Development Services Director, Jason Kruckeberg
Community Development Administrator, Jim Kasama
Senior Administrative Assistant, Billie Tone
SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION FROM STAFF REGARDING AGENDA ITEMS
TIME RESERVED FOR THOSE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO WISH TO ADDRESS THE
PLANNING COMMISSION ON NON PUBLIC HEARING MATTERS Five minute time limit
per person
None
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. TEXT AMENDMENT NO. TA 09-04
Citywide
Consideration of Text Amendment No. TA 09 -04 for a proposed ordinance to amend Article
IX (Division and Use of Land) of the Arcadia Municipal Code to address assembly uses,
schools, tutoring centers and the requirements for Conditional Use Permits for such uses
and to add a provision for reasonable accommodations of issues related to the federal
Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000.
Community Development Administrator, Jim Kasama, presented the staff report.
Mr. Deitsch explained that the impetus for this Text Amendment is a Federal statue called
Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000 (RLUIPA) which requires that
cities avoid imposing undue burdens on the exercise of religion. Mr. Deitsch further noted
that the city already has land use ordinances that limit placement of new religious
institutions to residential and commercial office zones only and which also require a
Conditional Use Permit. Since the city is already well developed, it is questionable how
easy it would be for a religious institution to find a new location within the city. In addition,
the current zoning scheme allows other uses typical of assembly in areas where religious
uses are not permitted, thus raising the question of equal protection. The proposed Text
Amendment will amend the code to address these issues.
Chairman Perri Ile asked about the reference in Section 9214 to religious exercise of a
"person" as opposed to a church or organization.
Mr. Deitsch said that there is no significant difference in meaning between these terms.
Commissioner Baderian asked if the regulations in the Text Amendment would supersede
existing regulations in regard to eminent domain.
MOTION:
ROLL CALL:
CONSENT ITEMS
2. RESOLUTION 1801
Mr. Deitsch explained that the ordinance before the Commission today is related to land use
only and does not directly relate to eminent domain.
AYES: Commissioners Baderian, Baerg, Beranek, Hsu, and Perri Ile
NOES: None
Commissioner Baderian asked if the Text Amendment was initiated in response to the letter
of September 4, 2009. Mr. Kasama explained that a church was searching,for,a location in
the City and the letter that Commissioner Baderian referred to pointed out discrepancies in
regulations related to assembly uses. Consequently, this Text Amendment was developed
to resolve these issues. Mr. Kasama also explained that this Text Amendment is consistent
with the regular updating of Zoning Regulations.
Commissioner Hsu asked if the proposed regulations are in line with the spirit of the General
Plan Update or if there will be a conflict. Mr. Kasama explained that these regulations are
consistent with the General Plan Update.
It was moved by Commissioner Baderian, seconded by Commissioner Hsu to recommend
approval of Text Amendment No. TA 09 -04 to the City Council.
A Resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Arcadia, Califomia, granting
Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 09 -09 for a 960 square -foot expansion to an existing 2,040
square -foot restaurant located at 510 -512 E. Live Oak Avenue, and approval for this
restaurant to utilize off -site parking at 610 -618 E. Live Oak Avenue in lieu of the required on-
site parking for this expansion.
PC MINUTES
11 -2409
Page 2
MOTION:
It was moved by Commissioner Hsu, seconded by Commissioner Baderian to adopt
Resolution No. 1801.
Commissioner Baderian thanked staff for their efforts in resolving this complex issue.
ROLL CALL:
AYES: Commissioners Baderian, Baerg, Beranek, Hsu, and Parrille
NOES: None
3. MINUTES OF OCTOBER 27, 2009
MOTION:
It was moved by Commissioner Beranek, seconded by Commissioner Baderian to approve
the minutes of October 27, 2009 as presented. Without objection the motion was
approved.
MATTERS FROM CITY COUNCIL AND PLANNING COMMISSION
Chairman Parrille asked staff to take a look at a banner at a business in the shopping
center where the West Arcadia Post Office is located. He said the banner is entirely in
Chinese and covers an old sign and he asked if the banner met code requirements.
MODIFICATION COMMITTEE MEETING ACTIONS
Commissioner Parrille said that there was no Modification Committee meeting today.
MATTERS FROM STAFF
Mr. Kasama said the agenda for the December 8 Planning Commission meeting will
include review of a Conditional Use Permit for Kid's Island which is located next to LA
Fitness on Baldwin Avenue.
ADJOURNED 7:20 p.m.
ATTEST:
Secretary, Planning Commission
Chairman, Planning Commission
PC MINUTES
11 -24-09
Page 3