Loading...
CC - Item 2A - Reduction of Parking Requirements for Fast-Food Restaurants• E M F 5 p ~ 9 Air ORATED t9`'Q 17 ROSEMEAD CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCI FROM: ANDREW C. LAZZARETTO, CITY MANAGER DATE: DECEMBER 19, 2006 SUBJECT: REDUCTION OF MINIMUM ON-SITE PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR FAST-FOOD RESTAURANTS SUMMARY The City's zoning ordinance currently requires that a minimum of one on-site parking stall be provided for every fifty (50) square feet of gross floor area for all fast food business. After analyzing this zoning ordinance, staff believes that the requirement has proven to be excessive. Based on a review and analysis of parking ratio requirements for fast food restaurants in surrounding communities, staff feels that it would be appropriate to change the existing zoning code to require one parking space for each 100 square feet of gross floor area for fast food restaurants. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends that the City Council waive further reading and introduce Ordinance 847, amending section 17.84.070 of the Rosemead Municipal Code relating to parking for fast food restaurant uses. ANALYSIS Over the last ten years, the City of Rosemead Planning Commission has approved parking variances on ten occasions for fast food type operators looking to locate into the City, including Burger King, McDonalds, Carl's Jr., Jack in the Box, Starbucks, Quiznos, Baskin Robbins, Mr. Baguette, Lee's Sandwiches, and the Rosemead Shopping Center across the street from City Hall. The approved parking variances for each of the ten operators was at a rate of around one parking spot for every 100 square feet of gross floor area, and to ensure that the variance has not negatively impacted traffic, staff conducted surveys during peak demand times for these restaurants. It is important to note that staff did not notice any parking problems impacting the streets or neighborhoods surrounding the eateries. communities. In an effort to better gauge industry standards for fast food parking requirements, staff also conducted a survey of seven communities surrounding Rosemead. The following table illustrates the comparative parking ratios required between each of the APPROVED FOR CITY COUNCIL AGENDA: (2 City Council Meeting November 28, 2006 Paqe 2 of 3 CITY FAST FOOD RESTAURANTS Rosemead 1150 s.f. GFA Temple City 1/100 w/o drive-thru 11150 w/drive-thru (both include outside dining and GFA) San Gabriel 11100 s.f. GFA Arcadia 1511,000 w/o drive-thru 10/1,000 w/drive-thru El Monte 1/150 GFA South El Monte 1 /4 fixed seats Alhambra 1/120 s.f. of GFA Monterey Park 5.5/1,000 GFA Interestingly, five of the seven cities surveyed have less stringent fast food parking requirements than staff is recommending for Rosemead. PUBLIC NOTICE PROCESS This item was posted as a public hearing notice at all public posting locations and the Los Angeles County Clerk's office on November 28, 2006. • • City Council Meeting November 28, 2006 Page 3 of 3 Xrad tted by: ohnso n Planning Services Administrator Attachment A: Draft Ordinance No. 847 Attachment B: Initial Study ORDINANCE NO. 847 • AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD, CALIFORNIA AMENDING SECTION 17.84.070 OF THE CITY'S MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR FAST FOOD RESTAURANTS. WHEREAS, the City currently has provisions in its Municipal Code relating to parking requirements for fast food restaurants; and WHEREAS, the City has determined that the parking requirements are unnecessarily stringent; and WHEREAS, the City desires to change the parking requirements and has initiated an ordinance amendment; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Rosemead held a duly noticed hearing on this proposed amendment on December 18, 2006 and recommended that the City Council adopt the amendment; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rosemead held a duly noticed hearing on this proposed amendment on December 19, 2006: NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Section 17.84.070 of the Rosemead Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows: B. Drive-through, Walk-up, Take Out and Other Similar Uses Which Serve Food and Drink to the Public. Not less than teR manes far the first five Not less than one parking space for every one hundred (100) square feet of gross floor area shall be provided. 0 Section 2. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day of .2007. Mayor Attest: Nina Castruita, City Clerk • 0- Initial Study / Negative Declaration OFF-STREET PARKING REQUIREMENTS - FAST FOOD CITYWIDE PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR FAST FOOD RESTAURANTS Citywide - City of Rosemead Rosemead, Los Angeles, California Lead Agency: City of Rosemead 8838 E. Valley Boulevard, Rosemead, CA 91770 626-569-2144 Contact: Brad Johnson, Planning Director Municipal Code Amendment 06-01 Project Proponent City of Rosemead 8838 E. Valley Boulevard Rosemead, California 91770 November 20, 2006 • Otial Study/ Negative Declaration City of Rosemead ^Aunmrpal Code Arnendmen( 06-01 Fast Food On-Site Parking Requirements SECTION 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 PURPOSE Tile City of Rosemead has prepared this Initial Study for the purpose of identifying and evaluating the potential impacts that could occur as a result of a proposed Municipal Code Amendment to decrease the existing, minimum off-street parking requirements for Fast Food Drive-Through, Walk-up, Take Out and other similar uses which serve food and drink to the public. It is the intent of this environmental document to address, to the extent foreseeable, the potential environmental impacts that could be expected to occur with this project. 1.2 LOCATION The proposed project area is citywide which includes an irregular shaped municipal boundary area that encompasses the incorporated area lying between the Cities of EI Monte, South El Monte, San Gabriel, Temple City, Monterey Park, Montebello and the unincorporated pockets of Los Angeles County. The new off-street parking requirements proposed would affect any commercial or industrial property that is already developed with fast food restaurant uses as well as any future proposal for fast food restaurant uses. See Figure 1.1 Location Map. 2 Fast Food Parking Requirements • litial Study/ Negative Declaration City of Rosemead Munrcipal Code Amendmenf 06.01 Fast Food On-Site Parking Requirements •e7~'s h'anwlu! Fareu • I'a~adcna • vradia 7FAuniv 41.1 Nil I l ,17 1--, I irl l':~11 ~'i' • Luu t IS.•:1 • \:nrta A lw •Iluuit ou 71:,~~ Brurli 1 Nem purl • ftr~eh Facr/ic Onae Figure 1.1 Location Map 1.3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Municipal Code Amendment 06-01 is a request to reduce the existing off-street parking requirements for Drive-Through, Walk Up, Take Out and Other similar fast food uses involving the seating and serving to the public. 1.3.1 Existing Fast Food Restaurant Parking Requirements RMC 17.84.070 (B): Drive-Through, Walk Up, Take Out and Other similar uses involving the seating and serving to the public. Not less than ten spaces for the first five hundred (500) square feet or less of gross floor area and one such space for every additional fifty (50) square feet of floor area shall be provided. On-site parking for vehicles shale be provided for each employee or contract person on the major shift. 1.3.2 Proposed Fast Food Restaurant Parking Requirements RAIC 17.84.070 (B): Drive-Through, Walk Up, Take Out and Other similar uses involving the seating and serving to the public. Not less than one space for each one-hundred (100) gross square feet of floor area shall be provided. 3 Fast Food Parking Requirements • Oaf Study/ Negative Declaration City of Rosemead &T-c,oar'ode Amendrrrenf 06-01 Fast Food On-Site Parking Requirements 1.4 INTENDED USES OF THIS DOCUMENT This document is intended to be used by the City of Rosemead and all other responsible, trustee or regulatory agencies to evaluate the project's environmental impacts and to develop appropriate mitigation measures to reduce those impacts, if any, to less than a significant level, according to the regulations set forth in the California Environmental Quality Act and Guidelines (Public Resources Code § § 21000 -.21177, and California Code of Regulations § § 1500 - 15387). 1.5 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING The Citv of Rosemead is a suburb within the Greater Los Angeles area located 10 miles east of the City of Los Angeles. It is bounded on the north by the City of Temple City, on the west by the City of San Gabriel and the County of Los Angeles, on the south by the City of Montebello, and the City of El Monte and South El Monte on the east. The City of Rosemead is 5.5 square miles in size with a residential population of approximately 53,505 people. The proposed new parking regulations would apply citywide to all commercial and industrial land use districts which currently allow fast food type of take out restaurant establishments by right in the Commercial and Industrial zones. a Fast Food Parking Requirements • *at Study/ Negative Declaration City of Rosemead Municipal Code Amendmenf 06-01 Fast Food On-Site Parking Requirements SECTION 2 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Environmental Factors That Could Result in a Potentially Significant Impact The environmental factors listed below are not checked because the proposed zoning ordinance amendment would not result in a "potentially significant impact" as indicated by the preceding checklist and supported by substantial evidence provided in this document. ❑ Aesthetics ❑ Agriculture Resources ❑ Air Quality ❑ Biological Resources ❑ Cultural Resources ❑ Geology/Soils ❑ Hazards & Hazardous Materials ❑ Hydrology/Water Quality ❑ Land Use/Planning ❑ Mineral Resources ❑ Noise ❑ Population/Housing.. ❑ Public Services ❑ Recreation ❑ Transportation/Traffic ❑ UtiIities/Services Systems ❑ Mandatory Findings of Significance F Environmental Determination On the basis of this initial evaluation: ® I find that the proposed project could not have a significant effect-on the environment, and a Negative Declaration will be prepared. ❑ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A Mitigated Negative Declaration will be prepared. ❑ I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an Environmental Impact Report is required. ❑ I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or '`potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measure 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. ❑ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or Negative Declaration, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. ' Date Z p D 6 Signed 74 _11 - Fast Food Parking Requirements • litial Study/ Negative Declaration City of Rosemead Municipal Code Amendfnent 06-01 Fast Food On-Site Parking Requirements SECTION 3 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS I ) CEQA requires a brief explanation for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening anal)isis). 2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. 3) Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. 4) "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less Than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section XVII, "Earlier Analyses," may be cross-referenced). 5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following: a) Earlier Analysis 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 Aeasures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project. 6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. 7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 8) This is only a suggested forth, 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. 9) The explanation of each issue should identify: a) the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance. 6 Fast Food Parking Requirements • tial Study/ Negative Declaration City of Rosemead Fast Food On-Site Parking Requirements Municipal Code Amendnrenl 06-01 Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than Significant With Significant No Environmental Issues Impact Mitigation Impact Impact 1. Aesthetics ;Mould the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic 0 El v i sta? b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including; but not limited to, trees, rock El outcroppings, and historic building 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, e i h ti ❑ ❑ m g t which would adversely affect day or n views in the area? 1. AESTHETICS (LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT) a-d) No impact. This code amendment will not result in the construction of any new restaurant projects that would not have been proposed without this amendment. As no construction related impacts are expected, no visual or aesthetic issues arise in this discussion of the review. Any aesthetic related reviews and analysis will occur as individual restaurant related development proposals arise. Each of the proposals will be evaluated and analyzed under the City of Rosemead design review criteria and when applicable, any analysis required pursuant to CEQA. Site planning issues with regards to, vistas scenic areas, lighting sources and other issues will all be analyzed tluough the architectural review committee, planning commission, city council hearings and any other process established for design review analysis. 7 Fast Food Parking Requirements City of Rosemead M,-i-n l Code Amendment 0641 Oiai Study/ Negative Declaration Fast Food On-Site Parking Requirements Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than Significant With Significant No Environmental Issues Impact Mitigation Impact Impact 2. Agricultural 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 Department 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- a,ricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural ❑ use, or a Williamson Act contract? c) Invol,,e other changes in the existing environment, which, due to their location or ❑ nature. could result in conversion of Farmland, use? ❑ ❑ 2. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES (LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT) a-c) No intpact. No parcels located within the incorporated boundaries of the City of Rosemead are identified as a prime, unique, or of statewide or local importance on the California State Important Farmlands Map. This municipal code amendment relating to minimum on-site parking ratios for the City of Rosemead will not increase any opportunities for the removal or degradation of land that could be a valuable agricultural resource. The City of Rosemead is highly urbanized and all properties which are zoned for agricultural uses are not currently utilized for any such purpose other than wholesale plant nurseries, utility company transmission lines, county owned public golf course an elementary school and several other small parcels that are not conducive to agricultural or farniland uses. 8 Fast Food Parking Requirements • City of Rosemead Municipal Code Amendmoaf 06.01 0tiat Studyl Negative Declaration Fast Food On-Site Parking Requirements Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than Significant With Significant No Environmental Issues Impact Mitigation Impact Impact 3. Air Quality Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the ❑ 0 0 applicable air quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute ❑ ❑ substantially to an existing or projected air ❑ quality violation? - c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an li ❑ ❑ ❑ ty applicable federal or state ambient air qua standard (including releasing emissions, which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial El 1:1 El pollutant concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a El 11 0 0 substantial number of people? AIR QUALITY (LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT) a-e) No Impact. The City of Rosemead is within the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB), which is bounded by the San Gabriel, San Bernardino, and San Jacinto Mountains to the north and east, and the Pacific Ocean to the south and west. Air quality in the South Coast Air Basin is managed by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). The South Coast Air Basin has a history of recorded air quality violations and is an area where both state and federal ambient air quality standards are exceeded. Because of the violations of the California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS), the California Clean Air Act requires triennial preparation of an Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) to achieve the standards. The South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) prepares the basin's air quality management plans with technical and policy inputs from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the California Air Resource Board (CARB), and the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), updating the plans every three years. The most recently adopted plan is the 2003 AQMP, adopted on August 1, 2003, available at http://www.agmd.gov/agmp/AQMD03AQMP.litm. This plan is the South Coast Air Basin's portion of the State Implementation Plan (SIP). The SIP outlines steps required to achieve the standards while allowing for growth projected by the Southern California Fast Food Parking Requirements City of Rosemead Municipal Code Amendment 06-01 • Otial Study/ Negative Declaration Fast Food On-Site Parking Requirements Association of Governments. This plan is designed to achieve the percent annual reduction goal of the California Clean Air Act. The AQMP accommodates growth based on SCAG's predictions. Future regional levels of vehicular air pollution identified in the AQMP are based on SCAG's growth forecasts in the Regional Comprehensive Plan (RCP) coupled with the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). Thus, projects that are consistent with employment and population forecasts are consistent with the AQMP. These forecasts are predicted using local land use plans, particularly zoning and general plan land use designations. The South Coast Air Basin exceeds federal standards for ozone and particulate matter. As this code amendment will not generate additional construction or vehicle trips, This code amendment would not have a significant effect on the environment. Standard conditions of approval that meet with the SCAQMD best management practices and recommendations in the CEQA air quality handbook will be adopted on a project by project basis, if warranted. Issues related to odor and other air quality impacts will be analyzed as restaurant development proposals are submitted to the City in the future. Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than Significant With Significant No Environmental Issues Impact' Mitigation Impact Impact 4. Biological Resources „ l Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or throe-11 habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special ❑ ❑ status species in local or regional plans, policies, El Z 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, 11 and regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited El 11 D to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? 10 Fast Food Parking Requirements City of Rosemead • eal Study/ Negative Declaration Municipal Code Amendment 06-01 Fast Food On-Site Parking Requirements d) Interfere substantially with the movement of anv native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or ❑ ❑ ❑ migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances ❑ ❑ ❑ protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community ❑ ❑ ❑ Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? 4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES (NO IMPACT) a-t) No inipacf. Since the majority of the City is urbanized, there is no existing habitat or wetland with endangered and rare species nor is there any significant vegetation in the commercial districts of the City that may be affected. The commercial and industrial land use districts existing in the City where restaurant uses are permitted, biological resources have already been highly impacted by urban development. The natural communities that existed in these areas prior to the existing development were destroyed many years ago. Therefore, the implementation of Municipal Code Amendment 06-01 will not create adverse impacts to the biological resources because such resources do not exist at any potential restaurant sites. The Code amendment does not generate specific development on its own. Less Than Potentially Significant Significant With Environmental Issues Impact Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact 5. Cultural Resources Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the ❑ significance of a historical resource as defined V ❑ ❑ § 15064.5? in b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the ❑ significance of an archaeological resource ❑ ❑ pursuant to § 15064.51 c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique ue i i ❑ ❑ te or un q paleontological resource or s geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those ❑ ❑ ❑ interred outside of formal cemeteries? Fast Food Parking Requirements City of Rosemead Municipal Code Amendment 06-01 0 Initial Study/ Negative Declaration Fast Food On-Site Parking Requirements 5. CULTURAL RESOURCES (NO IMPACT) a-d) No Impact. Based on a staff review of the proposed code amendment, it is determined that there is no recorded archaeological or historic resources existing that may be affected by the implementation of this proposed project. The City of Rosemead is a highly urbanized city with few properties in the city with significant historical and archaeological resources. Measures in Section 15064.5 of the CEQA guidelines will be included in the proposed project to provide for satisfactory mitigation of any archaeological impact that may result. No specific development projects are part of this analysis as each of the future restaurant uses will be analyzed on their site specific conditions and constraints. Any impacts to cultural resources at the time of development proposals will be reviewed on a project by project basis. Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than Significant With Significant No Environmental Issues Impact Mitigation Impact Impact 16. 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 h ❑ ❑ ❑ e area issued by the State Geologist for t or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geolo-.y Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including ❑ ❑ ❑ liquefaction? - ❑ iv) Landslides? b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of ❑ topsoil? c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a ❑ result of the project and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? _ - ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ 12 Fast Food Parking Requirements City of Rosemead Municipal Code Amendment 06-01 • 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 ow Study/ Negative Declaration Fast Food on-Site Parking Requirements e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater ❑ disposal systems where sewers are not available f- trip rricnncal of wastewater? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ 6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS (NO IMPACT) a-e) No Impact. The entire City of Rosemead lies in a seismically active region. Though there is one section located in the southern portion of the City that is situated in the Alquist- Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone, this proposed code amendment does not analyze specific parcels. The development of specific parcels with restaurant uses will be done as development proposals are submitted to the City for review. Active surface faults within future restaurant development areas will be reviewed in accordance with the Aliquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone Act. Furthermore, the proposed code amendment does not include the construction of new structures. Appropriate erosion control measures will be identified and implemented during the preparation of final grading plans of future projects. Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than Significant With Significant No Environmental Issues * Impact' Mitigation Impact Impact 7. Hazards and Hazardous Materials Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the envu*onment 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 likely 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 within one-quarter mile of a facility that mioltt reasonably be anticipated to emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances or waste? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ 13 Fast Food Parking Requirements • City of Rosemead Municipal Code Amendment 06-01 e) Be located on a site of a current or former hazardous waste disposal site or solid waste disposal site unless wastes have been removed from the former disposal site; or 2) that could release a hazardous substance as identified by the Statc Department of Health Services in a current list adopted pursuant to Section 25356 for removal or remedial action pursuant to Chapter 6.8 of Division 20 of the Health and Safety Code? f) Be located on land that is, or can be made, sufficiently free of hazardous materials so as to be suitable for development and use as a school? g) 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? h) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? i) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? j) 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? k) Be located within 1500 feet of: (i) an above- ground water or fuel storage tank, or (ii) an easement of an above around or underground ❑ pipeline that can pose a safety hazard to the nnncPri crhnnI ) El Z El M 7. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS (NO IMPACT) a-k) No impact. No specific project site is under consideration. No new development is proposed with this code amendment. Each restaurant development in the future will be analyzed for environmental impacts and CEQA considerations on a project by project basis. 14 Fast Food Parking Requirements Otial Study/ Negative Declaration Fast Food On-Site Parking Requirements ❑ o Z ❑ o Z • City of Rosemead Municipal Code Amendment 0&01 • Initial Study/ Negative Declaration Fast Food On-Site Parking Requirements Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than - Significant With Significant No Environmental Issues Impact Mitigation Impact Impact 8. Hydrology and Water Quality H'o uld the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste ❑ ❑ discharge requirements? b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local i ❑ ❑ ❑ on groundwater table level (e.g., the product rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of 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? d) 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? e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned ❑ ❑ stormwater drainage systems or provide ❑ substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? ❑ ❑ 2) V . Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard ❑ ❑ ❑ Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area di ❑ ❑ ❑ rect structures, which would impede or re flood flows? i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, inJiury or death involving flooding, ❑ ❑ ❑ including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? _ j) Inundation by seiche. tsunami, or mudflow? ❑ ❑ El 15 Fast Food Parking Requirements i • City of Rosemead Initial Study/ Negative Declaration Fast Food On-Site Parking Requirements fA .rnrcipal Code A rrrendmen( 06.09 8. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY (NO IMPACT) a-j) No Impact. The implementation of Municipal Code Amendment 06-01 will not create significant impacts to the hydrology and water quality of the area. No specific sites are in question that would result in changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, and the rate and amount of surface runoff. Drainage studies will be prepared, along with the appropriate final grading plans as part of future development proposals. No new construction is proposed with this amendment, therefore no analysis of hydrology or water quality is necessary. Any requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Eliminations System (NPDES) will be followed on a project by project basis. If applicable, adequate drainage facilities will be installed. Surface runoff will be discharged. The proposed code amendment will not create potential impacts to the volume, drainage pattern, rate of flow and overall quality of any body of water. The quality of storiliwater runoff is regulated under the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES). The NPDES stormwater permits provide a mechanism for monitoring the discharge of pollutants and for establishing appropriate controls to minimize the entrance of such pollutants into storm water runoff. As co-permitee (NPDES No. CAS614001), the County requires all development projects in its jurisdiction to comply with the NPDES requirements for construction and operations as appropriate. The proposed project will not deplete ground water supplies, as the project itself only involves the development of a surface parking lot. Water-quality impacts depend on the conditions of the community where a project will be located and what it will involve. Since the City of Rosemead has been declared by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to be in Zone "C", flood insurance is not mandatory and there is no community panel flood map for the city,. 16 Fast Food Parking Requirements • City of Rosemead Municipal Code Amendtoenf 06.01 • Initial Study/ Negative Declaration Fast Food On-Site Parking Requirements nvironmental issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact 9. Land Use and Planning ld the project: H 'ou divide an established community? Physically a ❑ ❑ ❑ . - _ b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or~reoulation 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 miti-gatinV-, an environmental effect? _ c) Conflict with any applicable habitat ❑ ❑ conservation plan or natural communities ❑ conservation plan? 9. LAND USE AND PLANNING (NO IMPACT) a) No inipact. The proposed code amendment will not divide an established community. Examples of "dividing a community" include new roads, rail lines, transmission corridors, or a major development project encompassing numerous city blocks that creates a physical barrier between established neighborhoods or business districts. The proposed code amendment will lessen the minimum number of on-site required parking spaces for fast food restaurants, but it will not divide the community by creating a physical or visual barrier, and existing public rights-of-way will remain unimpeded by the amendment. Consequently, no impact is anticipated. b) No inipact. The proposed code amendment will change the existing parking requirements section of the City's zoning ordinance to lower the ratio of on-site parking stalls required on fast food restaurant land uses that may be developed in the future. The City's current requirement of ten spaces for the first 500 hundred square feet of floor area plus one space per fifty square feet of gross floor area was put in place approximately twenty years at-o.. Parking studies completed over the last seven years have indicated that the Current ratio of one to fifty is excessive and not appropriate to the City of Rosemead or surrounding connmunities. This fact is further proved through the granting of ten variances over the last ten years by the Rosemead Planning Commission, without which no "fast food" or "to go" food and drink restaurants would have developed; as there have not been any negative impacts from the granting of these variances, it shows that the current parking standards are excessive. 17 Fast Food Parking Requirements Initial Study/ Negative Declaration city of Rosemead Fast Food On-Site Parking Requirements Municipal code Amendment 06-01 c) ,1'o ifttpuct. No specific project site is proposed for development, therefore there is no conflict with any habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan. Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than Significant With Significant No Environmental Issues Impact Mitigation Impact Impa 10. Mineral Resources Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known h ❑ ❑ ❑ e mineral resource that would be of value to t 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? 10. MINERAL RESOURCES (NO IMPACT) a-b) No Impact. The City of Rosemead General Plan does not identify any known mineral resource sites within the City; and, there is no specific project site. therefore, the proposed project will not impact locally important mineral resources as identified in local plans. Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than Significant With Significant No Environmental Issues Imp act Mitigation Impact. Impact 11. Noise H'ould 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 o ❑ ❑ ❑ excessive ~aroundborne 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? 1s Fast Food Parking Requirements • City of Rosemead Municipal Code Amendment 06.01 • Initial Studyl Negative Declaration Fast Food On-Site Parking Requirements e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public ❑ ❑ use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? El El 11. NOISE (NO IMPACT) a-f) No Impact. The City of Rosemead has established noise/land use compatibility guidelines consistent with Sate of California criteria. According to Chapter 5.36 of the Rosemead Municipal Code, the Allowable Exterior Noise level for a residential land use is 60 dBA (decibels) between 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. and 45 dBA between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. However, there is no new construction proposed as part of this code amendment. No increase in noise levels will result from the changing of parking ratios for fast food restaurant land uses. Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than Significant With Significant No Environmental Issues Impact Mitigation Impact Impact 12. Population and, Housing Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (e.g., by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (e.g., through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of ❑ ❑ El z replacement housing elsewhere? c Dis place substantial numbers of people ❑ necessitating the construction of replacement ❑ ❑ housing elsewhere? 12. POPULATION AND HOUSING (NO IMPACT) a-c) No Impact. The proposed code amendment will not induce substantial new population growth nor displace existing housing units or people. The project only modifies an existing, requirement for a minimum number of on-site parking stalls to be developed by 19 Fast Food Parking Requirements 0 9 City of Rosemead Initial Study/ Negative Declaration Municipal Code Amendment 06.01 Fast Food On-Site Parking Requirements any person(s) constructing a new fast food restaurant land use or expanding an existing fast food restaurant. Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than Significant With Significant No Environmental Issues Impact Mitigation Impact Impact 13. Public Services lFould the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated ivith 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: a) Fire Protection? ❑ ❑ El E b) Police Protection? ❑ ❑ _ C) Schools d) Parks? ❑ e) Other public facilities? ❑ ❑ [I z 13. PUBLIC SERVICES (NO IMPACT) a-e) No Impact: The proposed code amendment does not have any site specific impacts and any future development of fast food land uses will be analyzed through the CEQA process and include site specific traffic and parking studies to determine public services impacts on the environment. nvironmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less Than Significant No Impact Impact ~'Tl` 1 , f l1. n ti R 4 o ecrea . 1 a) Would the project 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 might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? 20 Fast Food Parking Requirements • City of Rosemead Municipal Code Amendment 06-01 14. RECREATION (NO IMPACT) • Initial Study/ Negative Declaration Fast Food On-Site Parking Requirements a)-b) No Impact: The proposed code amendment to reduce parking required for "fast food" and "to go" food and drink establishments will not increase the need for recreational facilities. Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than Significant With Significant No Environmental Issues Impact Mitigation Impact Impact 15. Transportation/Traffic lfould 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) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or rtation ns t i l ❑ ❑ ❑ po ve ra ternat programs supporting a (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous ❑ ❑ intersections) or incompatible uses farm . e) Result in inadequate emergency access? ❑ ❑ „ _ f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? ❑ ❑ 15. TRANS PORTATIONITRAFFIC (NO IMPACT) a-e) No Impact. This proposed code amendment is not part of a development proposal and therefore there is no analysis available of traffic generation rates, levels of service or design features related to traffic patterns, transportation programs or emergency access. f) No Impact: The proposed code amendment will not produce developments in the future that result in inadequate parking capacity. The City has required all fast food related developments over the last ten years to provide parking studies that illustrate the market demand in their operating outlets in southern California and the San Gabriel Valley. City staff has also conducted studies of adjacent communities surrounding Rosemead and site 21 Fast Food Parking Requirements City of Rosemead Municipal Code Amendment 06.01 • Initial Study/ Negative Declaration Fast Food On-Site Parking Requirements specific studies of existing fast food operators that have built new stores in the last eight years. The results of these studies indicate that the proposed new ratio for "food and drink to go" establishments at a ratio of 1:100 is adequate. Staff performed site specific parking counts during lunch hours for each of the Rosemead locations listed in the study. The results of the study indicate that negative parking issues were not observed. Future projects that incorporate "fast food"' or "to go food and drink" will be required to provide parking and traffic reports and final project plans are subject to review and approval by the City's Traffic Engineer And the City's Fire Marshall to ensure that the site's access complies with all emergency access standards. With the required compliance with all City's Traffic Engineer and Fire Marshall's standards, future development projects that include fast food and food and drink to go will not cause significant impacts due to inadequate parking capacity. 16. Utilities and Service Systems 11'ould 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 ti n ❑ ❑ ❑ o expansion of existing facilities, the construc 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? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider, which serves or may serve to serve it ❑ ❑ ❑ y the project that it has adequate capac the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted lid ' ❑ ❑ ❑ s so capacity to accommodate the project waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes ❑ ❑ ❑ and regulations related to solid waste? 22 Fast Food Parking Requirements City of Rosemead initial Study/ Negative Declaration Fast Food on-Site Parking Requirements MunidpafCode Amendment 06-07 16. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS (NO IMPACT) a-g) No Inipact. The implementation of the proposed code amendment would not affect any Utility Service Systems related to wastewater, storm water, water supplies or landfills and solid waste. There will be no new construction as a result of this code amendment other than expected developments proposed and outlined in the City's existing general plan and zoniniz ordinance. nvironmental Issues Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than Significant With Significant No Impact Mitigation Impact Impact 17. Mandatory Findings of Significance a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the enviromnent, 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 El ❑ plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? - b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects) - - - c) Does the project have environmental effects; ff D ❑ ects on which will cause substantial adverse e h„man beings. either directly or indirectly? 17. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE (NO IMPACT) a) No Inipact: As discussed in Section 4 of this document, the proposed code amendment would not have substantial impacts to special status species, stream habitat, and wildlife dispersal and migration. Furthermore, the proposed code amendment would not affect the local, re=ional, or national populations or ranges of any plant or animal species and would not threaten any plant communities. Similarly, as discussed in Section 5 of this document, the proposed code amendment would not have substantial impacts to historical, zs Fast Food Parking Requirements 0 0 City of Rosemead Initial Study/ Negative Declaration Fast Food On-Site Parking Requirements Municipal Code Amendment 06.01 archaeological, or paleontological resources, and thus, would not eliminate any umponanL examples of California history or prehistory. Therefore, the proposed municipal code amendment does not have a Mandatory Finding of Significance due to impacts to biological or cultural resources. b) No Impact: The proposed code amendment would not cause substantial impacts that are cumulatively considerable. The proposed code amendment does not have the potential to contribute~to cumulative air quality, hydrology, water quality, noise and public services impacts. Therefore, the proposed project does not have a Mandatory Finding of Significance due to cumulative impacts. C) No Intpuct: The proposed code amendment does not include any new construction of buildings and would not expose persons to any negative environmental impacts as stated in the foregoing sections of this study. Therefore, the project would not create environmental effects that would cause substantial adverse effects on human beings either directly or indirectly. 24 Fast Food Parking Requirements • • Initial Study/ Negative Declaration Fast Food On-Site Parking Requirements City u.,....-o of f Rosemead oeAmendment 06-01 SECTION 4 REFERENCES i. City of Rosemead General Plan, November 24, 1987 ii. City of Rosemead Municipal Code Iii. City of Rosemead Building Department Records iv. CEQA Air Quality Handbook, prepared by South Coast Air Quality Management District V. Department of Finance - E-5, Cite / County Population and Housing Estimates, 2005 vi. Surrounding Communities Fast Food Restaurant Parking Study - prepared by City of Rosemead, November 2006 25 Fast Food Parking Requirements 0 0 RESOLUTION NO. 06-45 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL AMEND SECTION 17.84.070 OF THE ROSEMEAD MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO PARKING FOR FAST FOOD RESTAURANTS. WHEREAS, the City currently has provisions in its Municipal Code relating to parking requirements for fast food restaurants; and WHEREAS, the City has determined that the parking requirements are unnecessarily stringent; and WHEREAS, the City desires to change the parking requirements and has initiated an ordinance amendment; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Rosemead held a duly noticed hearing on this proposed amendment on December 18, 2006; NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The Planning Commission of the City of Rosemead does hereby recommend that the City Council adopt the Ordinance attached hereto as Exhibit A. Section 2. This Resolution shall take effect immediately.