Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 1October 25, 2011 Development Services Department TO: Arcadia Planning Commission FROM: Jim Kasama, Community Development Administrator By: Nick Baldwin, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: Healthy Oak Tree Removal Application No. TRH 11 -05 to remove two Coast Live Oak trees that are located on the common rear property line of 130 W. Longden Avenue and 123 W. Birchcroft Street. SUMMARY The subject application was filed by Mrs. Linda Lee, property owner at 130 W. Longden Avenue, to remove two Coast Live Oak trees that are located on the common rear property line shared with 123 W. Birchcroft Street. This application was heard by the Modification Committee on October 11, 2011 and the Committee had concerns that this case could be policy- setting, and referred it to the Planning Commission. The Development Services Department is recommending approval of this application, subject to the conditions listed in this report. GENERAL INFORMATION APPLICANT: Mrs. Linda Lee, Property Owner LOCATION: 130 W. Longden Avenue and 123 Birchcroft Street REQUEST: To remove two healthy Coast Live Oak trees that are located on the common rear property line. SITE AREA: 30,680 square -feet (0.70 acre) FRONTAGE: 100 feet along W. Longden Avenue EXISTING LAND USE & ZONING: The applicant's property at 130 W. Longden Avenue is currently developed with a one -story, 2,913 square -foot single - family residence constructed in 1950. The property is zoned R -1, Single - Family Residential. SURROUNDING LAND USES & ZONING: All of the surrounding properties are improved with single - family residences and are zoned R -1 GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Low Density Residential (4 to 6 du /ac) — This designation is intended to accommodate low density single - family residential neighborhoods PUBLIC HEARING NOTIFICATION Public hearing notices for TRH 11 -05 were mailed on October 14, 2011 to the property owners and tenants of those properties that are located within 100 feet of the subject property — see the attached radius map. Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Section 15304, the public hearing notice was not published in a local newspaper. BACKGROUND INFORMATION The applicant, Mrs. Lee, purchased the subject property in March of this year based largely on the spacious rear yard where her two sons could play. At the time she purchased the property, she was not aware that her sons had any allergies. Soon after moving in, both of her sons exhibited allergic symptoms including respiratory problems and itching. In April 2011, her sons were tested for allergies and it was determined that her sons have severe allergies to Oak trees. The applicant provided a copy of the test results. On a scale of 1 to 6 (1 being absent/undetectable and 6 being very high) both her sons are at level 5 - very allergic to Oak trees. PROPOSAL AND ANALYSIS In concern for the welfare of her children's health, the applicant is requesting to remove two healthy Coast Live Oak trees that are located at the rear property line. The children's pediatrician, Dr. Chava, provided the attached letter stating that allergies to Oak trees can be severe enough to be life- threatening. A certified Arborist inspected the trees and found them to be in fair to good health. He provided details that demonstrated the flaws of the trees such as having been previously topped, having power lines running through the canopies and having unbalanced structures. He recommended trimming one tree and treating the other for borer's beetles. Dr. Chava's opinion is that the trees will continue to sprout and spread leaves, pollens, and allergens to the surrounding area, which create a life- threatening situation for the children. Due to the mediocre health of the Oak trees and concern for the children's welfare, the adjacent property owners, Mr. and Mrs. Jeung, at 123 W. Birchcroft Street have provided written consent to remove the trees. There is an additional Oak in the immediate vicinity of the subject property that is located in the side yard of the adjacent property to the west (see attached photos). Staff asked Mrs. Lee how this tree would be handled considering her children's condition and she said she would work with the neighbor to trim or remove the tree. This Healthy Oak Tree Removal Permit application is unique because the reason for tree removal is not the usual reason offered, which is eliminating overly burdensome obstacles to development. If approved, this would be the first application to remove healthy Oak trees that is granted on the basis of an allergic reaction. As such, the decision made for this case might establish a policy, which is why it is before the Planning Commission. In general, Staff would TRH 11 -05 130 W. Longden Ave., 123 Birchcroft St. Page 2 - October 25, 2011 not consider allergies as an adequate reason for removal of an Oak Tree. However, when the trees are causing life threatening health conditions to residents, which is the case in this circumstance, then perhaps the trees should be removed. Planning Staff received a letter from Mrs. Lee dated October 11, 2011 requesting from the City a release of liability. This letter was submitted to the City Attorney for comment. MODIFICATION COMMITTEE FINDINGS On October 11, 2011, the Modification Committee considered the request at a public hearing. The applicant was not able to attend the meeting. One resident, Mrs. Betsy Caputo of 114 W. Birchcroft Street, addressed the Modification Committee. She stated that she is opposed to the removal because Arcadia has many Oak trees, and cutting only these two trees, is unlikely to resolve the allergy issues of the applicant's children. She believed this could set a bad precedent for Oak tree removal. The Committee discussed the possibility that the removal of the Oak trees may not alleviate the allergy symptoms for the applicant's children considering that there is an Oak tree on the adjacent property to the west and many more Oaks in the neighborhood. The Committee concluded that removal of healthy Oak trees for allergy reasons may be policy- setting, and therefore, the decision should be made by the Planning Commission. CEQA Because only minor alterations of land use are taking place, this project is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15304 of the CEQA Guidelines for the minor alteration in the condition of land use which will not result in land use or density. A Preliminary Exemption Assessment is attached. RECOMMENDATION The Development Services Department recommends that the Planning Commission approve TRH 11 -05 with the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall plant two 24- inch -box trees at locations deemed appropriate by the Community Development Administrator or designee. 2. 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. TRH 11 -05 130 W. Longden Ave., 123 Birchcroft St. Page 3 - October 25, 2011 3. Approval of TRH 11 -05 shall not take effect until the property owner(s) and applicant(s) have executed and filed an Acceptance Form available from the Development Services Department to indicate awareness and acceptance of these conditions of approval. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION Approval If the Planning Commission intends to approve this project, the Commission should move to approve Oak Tree Application TRH 11 -05, subject to the conditions of approval as listed in the staff report, or as modified by the Planning Commission. Denial If the Planning Commission intends to deny this project, the Commission should move to deny Oak Tree Application TRH 11 -05 based on the evidence presented. If any Planning Commissioner, or other interested party has any questions or comments regarding this matter prior to the October 25, 2011 public hearing, please contact Assistant Planner, Nick Baldwin at (626) 574 -5444, or at nbaldwin(cr�ci.arcadia.ca.us. Approved by: Jim Kasama Community Development Administrator Attachments: Aerial Photo and Vicinity Map with Zoning Information 100 -foot Radius Map Letter from Dr. Chava, Pediatrician and Allergy Tests Arborist Report, dated 9/9/11 Photos of Subject Property Site Plan Healthy Oak Tree Removal Permit Application Letter from Mrs. Lee Requesting Release of Liability, dated 10/11/11 Letter of Consent from Property Owner at 123 Birchcroft St. Preliminary Exemption Assessment TRH 11 -05 130 W. Longden Ave., 123 Birchcroft St. Page 4 - October 25, 2011 Sreedhar Chava, M.D. 9/09/2011 To City Of Arcadia: Regard: Justin Lee and John Lee Family Medical Clinic Mrs. Linda Lee has come to see me last week with her son John for treatment of a severe asthmatic attack and upper respiratory problem. She requests my recommendation to the situation with the oak trees in her backyard. I have mentioned in my previous letter that Justin and John have severe allergic reactions to oaks which can be life threatening. Accordingly, Mrs. Lee requested Arcadia City permission to remove those trees with much resistant. Arcadia City Council insists Mrs. Lee's Arborist to write a letter of recommendation to remove the oak trees, which have met with much resistance from her arborist on this issue. Mike Parker (Arborist) recommended trimming and treating the insect infested trees to prevent further property damage. However, doing the above measure alone will not prevent the trees from rerouting and spreading leafs, pollens, and allergens to the surrounding home. It is therefore in the best interest of the city and to the health welfare of John and Justin to remove those oak trees permanently. Should there be any questions, please don't hesitate to contact my office. Sincerely, Sreedhar Chava, MD 3580 "A" Santa Anita Ave. El Monte, CA, 91731. PH: (626) 444 -2660 • FX: (626) 448 -1002 Quest i Diagnosti9 QUEST DIAGNOSTICS INCORPORATED COLLECTED: REPORTED: Teat Name 04/20/2011 04/22/2011 09:58 10:02 PATIENT INFORMATION LEE, JUSTIN T DOB: 03/08/2005 GENDER: M ID: 05251966 1 REPORT BTATVS Final ORDERING PHYSICIAN Age: 6 CHAVA, SREEDHAR MD RESPIRATORY ALLERGY PROFILE REGION XIII MITE AND MOLD GROUPING Allergen kU /L Class DERMATOPHAGOIDES PTERONYSSINUS (D1) IGE <0.35 0 DERMATOPHAGOIDES FARINAE (D2) IGE <0.35 0 PENICILLIUM NOTATUM (M1) IGE <0.35 0 CLADOSPORIUM HERBARUM (M2) IGE <0.35 0 ASPERGILLUS FUMIGATUS (M3) IGE <0.35 0 ALTERNARIA ALTERNATA (M6) IGE <0.35 0 DANDER GROUPING CAT DANDER (E1) IGE <0.35 0 DOG DANDER (E5) IGE <0.35 0 COCKROACH (I6) IGE <0.35 0 TREE GROUPING ALDER (T2) IGE <0.35 0 MOUNTAIN CEDAR (T6) IGE <0.35 0 OLIVE TREE (T9) IGE <0.35 0 WALNUT TREE (T10) IGE <0.35 0 COTTONWOOD (T14) IGE <0.35 0 TREE GROUPING OAK (T7) IGE 53.65 H 5 ELM (T8) IGE <0.35 0 WHITE MULBERRY (T70) IGE <0.35 0 L E'. E E. E: E'. E: Page 1 - Continued on Page 2 Quest, Quest Diagnostics, the associated logo and all associated Quest Diagnostics marks are the trademarks 01 Quest Diagnostics. 0 Quest Diagnostics Incorporated. All rights reserved. QD20300.NTL Revised 5/08. SC21( - 115570. Quest i Diagnosti9 QUEST DIAGNOSTICS INCORPORATED COLLECTED: 04/20/2011 09:58 REPORTED: 04/22/2011 10:02 PATIENT INFORMATION LEE, JUSTIN T DOB: 03/08/2005 GENDER: M ID: 05251966 Age: 6 1 REPORT STATUS Final ORDERING PHYSICIAN CHAVA, SREEDHAR MD Test Name RESPIRATORY ALLERGY PROFILE REGION XIII (continued) GRASS GROUPING Allergen BERMUDA GRASS (G2) IGE TIMOTHY GRASS (G6) IGE JOHNSON GRASS (G10) IGE WEED GROUPING COMMON RAGWEED (SHORT) (W1) IGE MUGWORT (W6) IGE RUSSIAN THISTLE (W11) IGE ROUGH PIGWEED (W14) IGE In Range IMMUNOGLOBULIN E 431 H L kU /L Class <0.35 0 <0.35 0 <0.35 0 E: <0.35 <0.35 <0.35 <0.35 Out of Range 0 0 0 0 Reference Range <OR =114 kU /L E: FOOD ALLERGY PROFILE Allergen kU /L Class EGG WHITE (F1) IGE <0.35 0 E: PEANUT (F13) IGE <0.35 0 E: WHEAT (F4) IGE <0.35 0 E: WALNUT (F256) IGE <0.35 0 E CODFISH (F3) IGE <0.35 0 E: MILK (F2) IGE <0.35 0 E SOYBEAN (F14) IGE <0.35 0 MAIZE /CORN (F8) IGE <0.35 0 SHRIMP (F24) IGE <0.35 0 E. SCALLOP (F338) IGE <0.35 0 E: CLAM (F207) IGE <0.35 0 E: SESAME SEED (F10) IGE <0.35 0 E: Page 2 - Continued on Page 3 Quest, Quest Diagnostics, the associated logo and all associated Quest Diagnostics marks ere the trademarks of Quest Diagnostics. © Quest Diagnostics Incorporated. All rights reserved. IID20300•NTL Revised 5 /08. SC2K - 115570. Quest e Diagnostics QUEST DIAGNOSTICS INCORPORATED COLLECTED: 04/20/2011 09:58 REPORTED: 04/22/2011 10 :02 PATIENT INFORMATION LEE, JUSTIN T DOB: 03/08/2005 GENDER: M ID: 05251966 1 REPORT 8TATUs Final ORDERING PHYSICIAN Age: 6 CHAVA, SREEDHAR MD Teat Name INTERPRETATION Specific Level of Allergen IGE Class kU /L Specific IGE Antibody 0 <0.35 Absent /Undetectable 1 0.35 -0.70 Low Level 2 0.71 -3.50 Moderate Level 3 3.51 -17.5 High Level 4 17.6 -50 Very High Level , 5 51 -100 Very High Level 6 >100 Very High Level Allergens denoted with a "w *" include results using one or more analyte specific reagents_ In those cases, the test was developed and its performance characteristics determined by Quest Diagnostics_ It has not been cleared or approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration- The FDA has determined that such clearance is not necessary. Performance characteristics refer to the analytical performance of the test_ Performing Laboratory Information: EN Quest Diagnostics -west Hi118 8401 Fa11brook Ave east H1118 CA 91304 Laboratory Director: Loa H HSlborno M.D. Page 3 - End of Report Quest, Quest Diagnostics, the associated logo and all associated Quest Diagnostics marks are the trademarks of Quest Diagnostics. © Quest Diagnostics Incorporated. All rights reserved. 0020300-NIL Revised 5/05. SC2K - 115570. L E: Sep 09 11 11:50a Cel California Arbor Care Linda Lee 130 West Longden Ave Arcadia, CA 102 p.1 ST. LIC #763339 I performed a tree evaluation /identification at the above address on July 27, 2011. The following is a summary of my observations, with recommendations. If you have any questions or request additional information please give me a call. OBSERVATIONa AND RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Two maturc Oak Trees (Quercus agrifolia) growing in the back yard. Both trees are growing under the power lines and have been previously topped. Both trees appear to be in fair to good health although canopies arc unbalance due to power lines growing thru and above them, Tree number 1 has a DBH (Diameter at Breast Height) of 30 -34" and has recently had a large limb break or cut off (see photo's) leaving an improper cut and should be re cut properly. Tree 1 has termite activity in some parts of the tree. Tree 2 has signs of borers. 2, I recommend trimming (reducing) the canopy of tree number 1 to help avoid any future major limb breakage and making a proper cut on the broken limb. Also treat tree number 2 for borer's (trunk injection. Revised 9/8/2011 Mike Parker Certified Arhorist WE 3414 A 79111 Grp. -.:. £•.• nr.• ills. MIN A IE, 011118A00 ^Jfiiii•ii.: Subject Property and surrounding trees Subject Property Tree 1 .] Tree1&2 to be remove crossed property line i— PROPERTY LINE Treel Tree2 Quercus agrifolia Quercus agrifolia 30 "DBH 20 "DBH 25 Canopy 20' Canopy PROPERTY LINE 205' • • - • • 12' 15'— 16' HOUSE 60' PROPERTY LINE PARKWAY AREA 6' N— CURB LINE 10' g 11 130 W LONGDEN AVE, ARCADIA 91007 PROPERTY LINE iV OAK TREE PERMIT FOR REMOVAL OF HEALTHY TREES l PLEASE COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION: PROJECT ADDRESS 13Q Mesl- APPLICANT t n d o L 1el. ADDRESS 30 Vi(,St \.._()11 rl CA i&. , Prc d0 C qi CITY / Ca i C4 STATE e4" ZIP fl *, , l rod re gia97. TELEPHONE No E -MAIL ADDRESS 620 03-7641- N/a PROPERTY OWNER'S NAME l-injo hL PROPERTY OWNER'S MAILING ADDRESS CITY P .5100-7- Scln�e as alo ✓e, STATE N) P- ZIP N-R PLEASE ANSWER TILE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS: NOTE: Sec. 9704.b.1 of the Arcadia Municipal Code requires that all of the following questions be answered in detail to explain why the oak tree(s) should be removed. (Please attach a separate sheet if necessary.) 1. Why is it necessary to remove the tree(s)? 460 < ti Planning S €I,,icez City of Arcacii Date (71 t Receipt No. )63262. Amount$ By By 3/09 2. Why is removal of the tree(s) more desirable than an alternative project design? c J� V9.f, R C� 3. What mitigation measures are included in the project to compensate for the loss of the oak tree(s)? The applicant and property owner hereby declare under penalty of perjury that all the information submitted for this application is trup'and correct. A' p7Tcant's S)gnature Date Pr rty Owner's Signature Date 8 // /air F//.7-jaa 3/09 1. Why is it necessary to remove the tree(s)? 1. These oak trees are diseased with termites and borers. They will break 2. These oak trees have unbalance canopies with potential for more breakage onto adjacent homes and power lines. 3. These trees cause more health hazard for my two little boys with oak allergy. 4. Last month the oak tree branch broke and bended down to the back yard and very dangerous for my kids to be near at any time. 2. Why is removal of the tree(s) more desirable than an alternative project design? There is no project design. The purpose I bought this property with big lot is all because of my two little boys. I wanted them to be comfortable playing around the house and front/back yards. The land has now become a dangerous place with those two diseased oak trees. Because of these oaks being protected by the city and gave my two little boys restrictions of freedom by living at their own home knowing that these oaks will cause more health problems and danger to them. Alternatively, I will send all my children medical bills to the city to take care if these oaks remain and continuously harmful to my sons health. If my boys die for this reason, there is nothing else in this world that can replace their lives even money. Except those who protecting and prevent the removal of such hazardous trees will pay back the loss of my little kids with their dead bodies if come to this end. 3. What mitigation measures are included in the project to compensate for the loss of the oak tree(s)? 1. The loss of the little children innocent lives is more important than the loss of the oak trees. 2. To save the human lives is extremely important rather than to save an obj ect. 3. There will be healthier kids without sicken by the poisonous oaks. 4. Decrease risk of insect infestation to neighborhood trees. 5. Decrease potential for personal injuries and property damages. 6. Arcadia city will have less potential law suit by residence. October 11, 2001 Arcadia City Hall 240 West Huntington Dr Arcadia, CA 91066 (626)574 -5400 OCI 19 70'1 Planning Se ;vices City of p cadi!.,.. Attention: Planning Department (Jim Kasama -Head Management) I am Linda Lee, owner at 130 West Longden Ave, Arcadia, CA 91007. I have requested the city of Arcadia for the removal permit of the two oak trees since August 2011. I've learned from Nick that my case hearing was deferred on the committee meeting (10/11/11) because I was not present at the meeting. Previously, I was told by Nick that my present at the meeting was not mandatory, but it now seems my application was delayed for this reason. On September 2011 Lisa Flores and Nick Baldwin have asked for all the evidence to support my application for the removal of the oaks in my backyard. Thus far, I have provided all the require documents per Lisa and Nick request and was told by Lisa & Nick as completed on 9/21/2011. It has become appearance that the City Planning Department is intentionally delaying my application for one excuse after another. First, Nick asking me to get a recommendation from the Arborist to recommend for the removal of the trees even when Nick is aware that the Arborist had refused to do so because the Arborist (Mike) think that the tree should be trim and treated. Secondly, I told Nick that my sons have severe allergic issues with the oak and yet he still insist that I must get a letter of recommendation from the Arborist in order for him to process my application. I was disappointed by Nick's request because my sons are sick with severe asthma and he ignored my concern but instead kept on insisting for my Arborist's recommendation. Thirdly, I received a phone called from Nick at 6:00 pm on 10/11/2011 and was told that my application was deferred and further delayed because I was not present at the meeting, even when I was told by Nick that it is not mandatory. So, why now my case is dragging until the next meeting on 10/25/11? Again, of all the excuses from Nick and Lisa I am extremely upset and tire of the way the city is handling this case. Therefore, I am sending a letter of release from liability to the city's attention. I had initially presented this letter to Lisa and Nick on 9/9/11, but they both refused to accept. They told me that my provided evidence was sufficient for the committee and that I should not submit the "Release from Liability" letter. However, my sons are in danger with their medical problem and I cannot wait for further delays Again, if my case doe not conclude by the next meeting (10/25/2011), I will pursue legal action against the city for negligent to respond to a very serious medical problem of my sons. September 09, 2011 Arcadia City Hall 240 Huntington Dr. Arcadia CA 91006 (626) 574 5400 To: City of Arcadia Attn: Planning Department Regard: Letter of Release from Liability I Linda Lee owner of property at 130 West Longden Ave, CA 91007, writing this letter to inform the city of Arcadia that I have asked for the permission for the removal of the oak trees in my backyard due to my sons medical conditions and also due to the potential property damages /personal injuries on mine and my neighbors' homes. My neighbor and I strongly agreed and request for the removal of the two oak trees as soon as possible. If the City of Arcadia keeps insisting not to allow the removal of the trees, then the city is legally and financially liable on any damages and injuries to anyone, including my sons' medical bills relating to the illness cause from those trees. According to the rules and regulations of City of Arcadia, I am released from any legal or financial liability, damages, or lawsuit upon me, friends, relatives, and neighbors cause by the two oak trees in my backyard. In addition, City of Arcadia Planners Lisa L. Flores (Senior Planner) and Nick Baldwin (Assistant Planner) requested a written recommendation from my Arborist (Mike Parker) to recommend for the removal of the oaks in order for the city to make a decision. However, Mike Parker refused to make this statement. City of Arcadia is aware that Mike Parker is an Arborist and not a medical doctor to make a recommendation to remove the trees base on medical issues. Mike Parker told me that he is an Arborist only, and therefore he could not authorize or recommend any thing that relate to medical matters. He told me to ask my doctor or sons Pediatrician on his recommendation, relating to all medical issues. Therefore, the final decision and consequences rest totally upon the decision of City of Arcadia. Sign: Linda Lee Date: Sign: Date: City of Arcadia or Representative (Your signature is acknowledgement of receiving this Release Letter from the applicant) Arcadia City Hall 240 Huntington Dr. Arcadia Ca 91006 (626) 574 -5400 To Whom It May Concern: Re: Consent Letter We are Bob and Karen Jeung, the owner of property at 123 W Birchcroft Street, Arcadia, CA 91007. We consent and agreed with Mrs. Linda Lee on the removal of two oak trees in her backyard crossing over the property line. There is potential for personal injuries and property damages between both of our properties side. Thank you. Husband Signature: 0,1-14-d-- Date: 7--6—// L►�_ Wife Signature: ra ∎ Date: ,�P-- 6 Ad&htdiui) : atA¢e b6. tt;Vj. ea ap_ez with -a& na.aovaQ.A -thkro t)tu14, tOe ¢vte 11t,e2a -mac, ‘64um1 aocaA-- tkat ry4At 12 e-t- )46012.) !zLni-evaL tAIL 041)vv Vv62-4, aAL cPca .6611 LpinC&.tial2 d2 harr4tva..e 6Lt.)-6 2!Tiee,L) CITY OF ARCADIA 240 W. HUNTINGTON DRIVE ARCADIA, CA 91007 PRELIMINARY EXEMPTION ASSESSMENT (Certificate of Determination When Attached to Notice of Exemption) Date: 10 -20 -11 Preliminary Exemption Assessment\2011 Staff: FORM "A" 1. Name or description of project: TRH 11 -05 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): 130 W. Longden Avenue. 3. Entity or person undertaking project: A. B. Other (Private) (1) Name Linda Lee (2) Address 130 W. Longden Avenue, Arcadia, CA 91007 4. Staff Determination: The Lead Agency's Staff, having undertaken and completed a preliminary review of this project in accordance with the Lead Agency'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. The project is categorically exempt. e. 1.1 Applicable Exemption Class: 04 -Minor Alterations to Land f. ❑ The project is statutorily exempt. Applicable Exemption: 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: 10 -20 -11 Preliminary Exemption Assessment\2011 Staff: FORM "A"