HomeMy WebLinkAbout1673
.
,
.
-
RESOLUTION NO. 1673
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OFTHE CITY OF
ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO.
02-010 TO REOPEN AN AUTOMOBILE SERVICE STATION WITH THREE
SERVICE BAYS AT 900W. DUARTE ROAD.
WHEREAS, on May 22, 2002, a conditional use permit application was filed
by Toheed Asghar to reopen an automobile service station with three service bays
(Development Services Depiu1ment Case No. C.U.P. 02-010) at property commonly
known as 900 W. Duarte Road; and
WHEREAS, A public hearing was held on July 23, 2002, at which time all
interested persons were given full opportunity to be heard and to present evidence.
NOW THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ARCADIA RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION I. That the factual data submitted by the Development Services
Department in the attached report is true and correct.
SECTION 2. This Commission finds:
I. That the granting of such Conditional Use Permit will not be detrimental to
the public health or welfare, or injurious to the property or improvements in such zone or
vicinity because the initial study did not disclose any substantial adverse effects to the
area affected by the proposed project.
2. That the use applied for at the location indicated is a proper one for which a
Conditional Use Permit is authorized.
3. That the site for the proposed use is adequate in size and shape to
accommodate said use. All yards, spaces, walls, fences, loading, landscaping and other
features including the shared parking with the neighboring business, are adequate to
adjust said use with the land and uses in the neighborhood. The proposed project
complies with all related zoning requirements as set forth in the Arcadia Municipal Code.
4. That the site abuts streets and highways adequate in width and pavement type
to carry the kind of traffic generated by the proposed use.
.
.
e
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 02-010, to reopen an automobile service station with three service
bays, upon the following conditions:
J. The use approved by CUP 02-010 is limited to the automobile service station.
The service station shall be operated and maintained in a manner that is consistent with
the proposal and plans submitted and approved for CUP 02-010.
2. That the use of the automobile service station shall be limited to those
activities allowed for such use under Arcadia Municipal Code section 9275.4.7 unless
determined otherwise under CUP 02-010. The allowed activities include dispensing
gasoline, oil, grease, tires. batteries and automobile accessories directly to users of motor
vehicles; tuning motors; wheel and brake adjustment and other minor repairs and
servicing of motor vehicles only to the extent of installation of tires, batteries and
automobile accessories directly to users of motor vehicle.
3. That at a minimum the site shall be landscaped in accordance with the plans
submitted and in addition that a minimum of two (2) 24" box specimen trees shall be
planted on the property, location subject to the review and approval of the Community
Development Administrator.
4. Remove all bollards at the northeast corner of the property where a propane
tank used to be. Any future installation of fuel tanks shall be located away from the
driveways, subject to the approval of the Community Development Administrator.
2
1673
e
,
e
5. Remove the existing pole sign. If the applicant wishes to have a sign at the
street corner, a monument sign may be a viable option to be reviewed under the sign
design review process.
6. That all signs on the premises, including all wall signs, window signs,
monument signs,. and those presented on the proposed elevations, shall be subject to a
'separate fonnal sign design review.
7. That the five (5) parking stalls shall be striped to City Standards.
8. A trash enclosure with decorative block wall screening per the City standards
shall be installed in a location subject to the approval of the Community Development
Administrator.
9. That the asphalt shall be treated with slurry seal to cover all cracks and
damages.
10. That the entrances of the restrooms shall be screened from the view of
adjacent properties or streets rights-of-way by solid decorative screening, subject to
approval by the Community Development Administrator.
II. All conditions of. approval shall be complied with prior to opening of the
automobile service station. Noncompliance with the plans, provisions and conditions of
approval for CUP 02-010 shall be grounds for immediate suspension or revocation of any
approvals, which could result in the closing of the service station.
12. Approval of CUP 02-010 shall not take effect until the property owner(s), and
applicants have executed and filed the Acceptance Fonnavailable from the Development
Services Department to indicate awareness and acceptance of these conditions of
approval.
13, 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
3
1673
e
,
e
brought within the time period provided for in Government Code Section 66499.37 or
other provision of law applicable to this project or decision. The City shall promptly
notify the applicant of any claim, action, or proceeding concerning the project and/or land
use decision and the City shall cooperate fully in the defense of the matter. The City
reserves the right, at its own option, to choose its own attomey to represent the City, its
officers, employees, and agents in the defense of the matter.
SECTION 4. The decision, findings and conditions contained in this Resolution
reflect the Commission's action of July 23,2002, and the following vote:
A YES: Commissioners Baderian, Huang, Murphy,. and Olson.
NOES:
ABSENT: Commissioner Kalemkiarian
SECTION S. The Secretary shall certify to the adoption of this
Resolution and shall cause a copy to be forwarded to the City Council of the City of
Arcadia.
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the forgoing Resolution was adopted at a regular
meeting of the Planning Commission held on the23rd day of July 2002, by the following
votes:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Commissioners Baderian, Huang, Murphy, and Olson.
Commissioner Kalemkiarian t j 1(. ~
Chairman, Planning Commission
City of Arcadia
Secretary, Planning
City of Arcadia
ommission
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Stephen P. Deitsch, City Attomey
4
1673
.
.
.
STAFF REPORT
Development Services Department
July 9, 2002
TO: Arcadia City Planning Commission
FROM: Donna L. Butler, Community Development Administrator
By: Thomas P. Li, Assistant.Planner
SUBJECT: Conditional Use Permit Application No. CUP 02-010 to reopen an
automobile service station at 900 W. Duarte Road.
SUMMARY
This Conditional Use Permit application was submitted by Mr. Toheed Asghar to reopen
an automobile service station with three service bays at 900 W. Duarte Road. The
Development Services Department is recommending approval of this application,
subject to the conditions listed in this report.
GENERAL INFORMATION
APPLICANT: Toheed Asghar (lessee)
LOCATION: 900 W. Duarte Road
REQUEST: A Conditional Use Permit to reopen an automobile service station with
three service bays. The proposed business hours are 24 hours a day,
7 days a week.
SITE AREA: 14,288 square feet (0.32 acre)
FRONTAGES: 113 feet along Golden West Ave.
125 feet along Duarte Roap
EXISTING LAND USE & ZONING:
The site is located on the southwest comer of Duarte Road and
Golden West Avenue. It is developed with a 1,250 sq.ft. service
station that was constructed in 1964. The property is zoned C-2 -
General Commercial.
.
.
.
SURROUNDING LAND USES & ZONING:
North: Multiple-Family Residential - zoned R-3
South: Multiple-Famiiy Residential - zoned R-3
East: Commercial- zoned C-1
West: Multiple-Family Residential- zoned R-3
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION:
Multiple-Family Residential (24 du/ac max.)
BACKGROUND
The existing station was built in 1964, which was prior to the current code requirement
for a conditional use permit to permit such a use. It has been operating as a legal non-
conforming use until it closed in August of 2001, I.e., a conditional use permit was never
acquired for this operation.
Under the definition of Discontinuance in the Arcadia Municipal Code Section No. 9248,
the cessation from the active participation in a nonconforming use for a period in
excess of ninety (90) days shall conclusively be presumed to constitute the
abandonment of such nonconforming use. Because this use has been discontinued
since August of last year, a conditional use permit is necessary to allow it to reopen as
an automobile service station.
The subject property is located within 150 feet of R-3 zoned properties to the north,
south, and west. .
PROPOSAL AND ANALYSIS
The proposal is to reopen an existing automobile service station with three service
bays. The proposed hours of operation for the sale of gasoline and other motor fuels
are 24 hours a day, seven days a week. The proposed hours of operation for the
servicing of vehicles are Monday through Saturday. 7:00 am to 7:00' pm.
A Conditional Use Permit is required for the following:
1. An automobile service station (AMC Sec~ 9275.1.40).
2. A retail business to be open 24 hours a day that is less than 150 feet from
residentially zoned property (9275.1.53.7).
The applicant intends to retain the eight (8) existing fueling positions and the three
existing service bays, of which two of them are equipped with lifts for minor repairs and
one is intended for smog inspections. The proposed operation will be similar to the
previous service stations that have operated at this location for years.
CUP 02-010
July 9, 2002
Page 2
e
.
.
24-Hour Operation
This proposal includes a request to operate the retail sale of gasoline and other motor
fuels on a 24-hour basis. It is staff's experience that the level of activity at 24-hour
stations is relatively low during off-peak hours, especially when there is no sale of food
or beverages. The Conditional Use Regulations for Drive-in Businesses prohibit
deliveries at locations adjacent to residential zones from 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. It is
anticipated that the proposed hours would not have a detrimental effect on the
residential properties surrounding this site.
However, if problems occur as a result of the automobile service station, the City has
the ability to address nuisance situations by reviewing or revoking a CUP or certain
provisions of a CUP through the public hearing process.
Parkino
By code, an automobile service station shall comply with the parking requirements for
drive-in businesses (20 spaces per 1,000 sq.ft. of gross floor area). Under this
regulation, the proposed service station would require 25 parking spaces.
Currently, there is no striped parking on site, however, staff estimates that the site could
accommodate about five parking spaces by the west side of the building if striped to city
standards. Based on this estimate, there would be a parking deficiency of 20 spaces.
Since there will be no retail sales (Le., food and beverages) other than the sale of
gasoline and other motor fuels, it is staff's opinion that five parking spaces will be
sufficientfor the proposed use.
Architectural Desion Review
Since the applicant will not be making any major alterations to the buildings, staff did
not request a formal design review. The applicant proposes to repaint the building to
white with red trims, install new signs (to be reviewed under a separate Sign Design
Review process), and increase the amount of landscaping on site, as indicated on the
plans.
Sions
There is an existing pole sign at this station. The Sign Architectural Design Review
specifies that pole signs are discouraged in the City in favor of monument signs.
Therefore, staff recommends removal of the pole sign. If the applicant wishes to have
a sign at the street comer, a monument sign may be a viable option to be reviewed
under the Sign Design Review process.
Other Code Reouirements
The applicant is required to comply with all development requirements and policies
determined to be necessary by the Building Official, City Engineer, Fire Marshall, Public
CUP 02-010
July 9, 2002
Page 3
,
.
.
Works Services Dir~ctor, Community Development Administrator, and any service
districts and utility providers that will serve the proposed service station.
CEQA
Pursuant to the provisions of the Califomia Environmental Quality Act, the Development
Services Department has prepared an Initial Study for the proposed project. Said Initial
Study did not disclose any substantial or potentially substantial adverse change in any
of the physical conditions within the area affected by the project including land, air,
water, minerals, flora, fauna, ambient noise and objects of historical or aesthetic
significance. When considering the record as a whole, there is no evidence that the
proposed project will have any potential for adverse effect on wildlife resources or the
habitat upon which the wildlife depends. Therefore, a Negative Declaration has been
prepared for this project.
FINDINGS
Section 9275.1.2 of the Arcadia Municipal Code requires that for a Conditional Use
Permit to be granted, it must be found that all of the followirig 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 Lise, and all yards, spaces, walls, fences, parking, loading, landscaping, and
other features required to adjust said use with the land and uses in the
neighborhood.
4. That the site abuts streets and highways adequate in width and pavement type to
carry the kind of traffic generated by the proposed use.
5. That the granting of such Conditional Use Permit will not adversely affect the
comprehensive General Plan.
RECOMMENDATION
The Development Services Department recommends approval of Conditional Use
Permit Application No. CUP 02-010, subject to the following conditions:
1. The use approved by CUP 02~01 0 is limited to the automobile service station.
The service station shall be operated and maintained in a manner that is
consistent with the proposal and plans submitted and approved for CUP 02-010.
2. All regulations on automobile service stations shall be complied with unless
determined otherwise under CUP 02-010.
CUP 02-010
July 9, 2002
Page 4
.
.
.
3. That a minimum of two (2) 24" box specimen trees shall be planted on the
property, location subject to the review and approval of the Community
Development Administrator.
4. Remove all bollards at the northeast comer ofthe property where a propane tank
used to be. Any future installation of fuel tanks shall be located away from the
driveways, subjectto the approval of the Community Development Administrator.
5. Remove the existing pole sign.
6. A separate sign design review application shall be submitted for all new signs on
the premises.
7. That the five (5) parking stalls shall be striped to City Standards.
8. If it is determined to be necessary, on the basis of complaints from surrounding
residents, the Community Development Administrator may require a noticed
public hearing, to be paid for by the owner and/or operator of the automobile
service station, for the consideration of imposing restrictions on the business
hours, and/or to add other site improvements to address the specific complaints.
9. All conditions of approval shall be complied with prior to opening of the
automobile service station. Noncompliance with the plans, provisions and
conditions of approval for CUP 02-010 shall be grounds for immediate
suspension or revocation of any approvals, which could result in the closing of
the service station.
10.Approval of CUP 02-010 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.
11. 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.
CUP 02-010
July 9, 2002
Page 5
e
,
.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
Approval
The Planning Commission should move for approval of the Negative Declaration
and direct staff to prepare a resolution incorporating the Commission's decision
and specific findings, and granting Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 02-010.
Denial
If the Planning Commission intends to deny this Conditional Use Permit application
and/or the Architectural Design Review, the Commission should move for denial and
direct staff to prepare a resolution incorporating the Commission's decision and specific
findings.
If any Planning Commissioner, or other interested party has any questions or comments
regarding this matter prior to, the July 9th public hearing, please contact Thomas Li at
(626) 574-5447.
onna L. Butler
ommunity Development Administrator
Attachments: Land Use Map
Aerial Photo & Zoning Map
Photos of existing improvements
Plans
Environmental Documents
CUP 02-010
July 9, 2002
page 6
(1117) ~
(1123)
N
100 0 100 FoeI
Scale: 1"=100'
(853)
(901)
DUART
-----
(838-852)
(917)
(925
(935)
(931)
DUARTE R~
(928
(922)
.
Gl
o
r-
C
(1215) m
(1221) Z
(1119) ~m
(1221) (1220)
en
-i
(1223) ~
(1227) ~
(942)
z
Ci of
-- ,..,
-- ....
Q
----,
,
,
,
,
,
,
I
(1240)
(1238)
(1238)
(1234)
(1232)
---
--
1ts
Went Services Department
gineering Division
, by; R, S, GonzsJ&~ Juno 2002
900 W Duarte Rd
CUP 02-010
~
N
100 0
,I./ . ~ ~~e:1"=100'
I c
. .c.')
: FJ~1
i~',
I
I
~ 900 W Duarte Rd
D Arcadia
IR-3 t Zone
I 1ls
(Af'1lent Services Department
~gineering Division
Ptepasdby: RS,_~ June 200~
~@@ W!f)U1JaJrle fRd
CUP ((}2a@1@
e
,
.
I
~
"
'.~~, '- ~~~ ~ n ". . ,,' . ,-.
:~?~:;q]I :~
)~. r '~-~. '..~
~,~ . "~
,,; i. ,.,'1:'!" ,.
,1 f'~ ~
- (" ." 1,:')1 .,
, ," . 1<< . ~
i"'> l;1i. ~W
; ',.-:;: -..~;~ ~ .
't:
.i1
,-
.;',
1
"
,--
-......
- I
, '
--r [t;~~~ ~"~ r:T~_-=_
~" FiJ, ~::~lj: ~,'7 '~_
_ I ""'1 .."".,,' en 'i ~~J,d':U""
- ... -~ .' ~""'~"""
. ~ ~~------'~ '"'--":,.-" .
'j
--...--.
. ~,
, ';
Looking southwest onto subject property
~,
~~,
O~
. .k "::;''1,
-,,,
".
.
-1 .,
'~--'
"
..,.
~
: . , ~";::;;;>':"
,"','
..\ . ~ . e . t ~
~":\"'1.. ~'.', '" ..','
. ., ;).1 :.' "~"'r:. .- '. r' ..
": ..,
'~'", -
Looking west onto subject property
e
,
.'
~",:::-,:-,+:: J. ,. .~ '
~ ~-----:rf\m'~-; ~'1k: ' . .u.~ITill^ _::j~"-~8-'~
" ~~ . ~~l'- ~;." ~l:r '"
Il .' tr. '~ll~,d':~:,:~-:"" <-"._,~.,:~~ ;':-.- j -:.'
..:2:. ~~Q~ "IS \~: " "'"~~ - - ~ '
~-- " ~~'{\' itr: ~'--.. -- - -- ,.: r :::J
: :. J _. -, . ---1
. '~ . - " . . ,
- ,/' - ..--_. I
,. "
. ,
I
I
)
Looking south onto subject property from Duarte Rd.
, '
/:1
----.---..
v
- ........
~J
". ,',- ,'''; ,
. .
. --;;~,:;'--~..:_- -""'~--:';:;'-'~>~-=-",--~-~:-',,:"""'-'
.'
..-=-~_~_'__c...~--~...i. _~'"t.:::_~.~ -~;.....:- :"'-:-~:~__-+." ~
.'
.'
, . ~
..:~ '
..:z-_-~-'-
Looking south onto subject property from Duarte Rd.
. ,
.
tit 1)u~\l..1t
.-.! .~
-
.=--=- - - '-=ml.rVEINA.'j'- - -
- -'~:'
=--"OW1i3A'l'" ~ '=-:'-='~~:1l .- " . _._ ..~ ~ _,
k~ ~~:;-.:. - ...,. ;.'~
,.n_~_J -'1>t'1\1.J.n.AJ: lJUA&. fl.tJWtl~
-r~...z. - W,"'O<-C;;.." g.,. """'" lho.SIt)
I
(
)
c
. ,).~
~
'/
"
~
~
'"
~
~
.t,
t .:XA\..E"~
I o:;.lD rT.
,11<0''''5'''' I. \
:;;;;;: 1'.0"'''' ".~~~"")
1'U\r-)tE\t."t,f'"
Il'irdl;;:;_-.:.;.:;:~1
CASHIER
3 '>&lI.V1<& 6'YS
MEN
IJO"'E>I
STOR..E
I
I.
/~ .
r_u,..U"RP,b..,/
"Aln""~C:lI'-rl'.r.U.f,
ue
--
....,
\
If~..
--
,.""'"
F.\.Po)J~
.
:L:)DTom"{p~1.- i:.
..sAL-V~^ l.W~JZS
1T1.f~l.
( 'l'Ilb-"';' '.", ;?I )
'R~i- ".>b,EY'ffJJb
r.~'" 5E1>'?~-.nfR."
5C( . 3"HET- ~1.4." .
I ~c:c:rrxtJ ""'XVTft
';.-.
:T~tt.:~
~ .. -' .,. .
--r:rliltl. lJrlJfll
'f..TP:J"~1 _.
~<~~'p
"'
.z;,
E-
~,
7l.K[':1\~u.-s.ACEArfllU-A
"'"
'5t.C;ODE,OOf;>'11(.Ef.,S
. e.'" __ -
'"
I'
I
I
1
I
,
~
~;
~,
;t1
P
,
II
1.
._"~
:;
.
-
-
;.
.5c,....E
I CA, ::. 2..j:EcT
AKC/\llIA
GAS
5r..<J,
bLC<.1<. iJmt"S
,'xZ"ISn"F'!'::-
'//. 'I. ;r, 1-
\
'" ~ <I. v' C;;""'to-<.f" G;""",Ge' C.~'_F
''''=i>. =11; 'D<o~
/
~ "
<
':W;1~~~:}' ".:
~}t:'.~ " ,0
..;::;-;;: ,~:~
,.'~:~::::..
~. ,. ;:~,
.'
'; .l r
,,"
"~~
,. :
....'..
'::.,
,
\
e
.
.
File No;: CUP 02-010
CITY OF ARCADIA
240 W. HUNTINGTON DRIVE
ARCADIA, CA 91007
CAUFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
-draft.
A. Title and Description of Project:
Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 02-010: a Conditional Use Permit to reopen an existing
automobile seNice station with three seniice bays.
B. Location of Project:
900 W. Duarte Road
In the City of Arcadia, County of Los Angeles
C. Name of Applicant, Sponsor or Person Undertaking Project:
Toheed Asghar
8644 Falmouth Ave. #7
Playa Del Rey, CA 90293
(916) 761-7644
The Planning Commission D City Council D. having reviewed the Initial Study ofthis proposed project
and having reviewed the written comments received prior to the public meeting of the Planning
Commission/City Council, including the recommendaiton of the City's staff, does hereby find and declare
that the proposed project will not have a siginificanteffect on the environment. A brief statement of the
reasons supporting the Planning Commlssion's/City Council's findings are as follows:
The City Council D Planning Commission D, hereby finds that the Negative Declaration reflects its
independent judgement. A copy of the Initial Study may be obtained at:
Community Development Division
City of .Arcadia
240W. Huntington Dr.
Arcadia, CA 91007
(626) 574-5423
The location and custodian of the documents and any other material which constiture the record of
proceedings upon which the City based its decision to adopt this Negative Declartion are as follows:
Community Deyelopment Division
City of Arcadia
240 W. Huntington Dr.
Arcadia, CA 91007
(626) 574-5423 _______
lltOMHS L..t ~ <:::
Staff
Date:
Date Posted:
6 ~ '5 ~ tJ.z..
4/01
File No.: CUP 02-010
e
CITY OF ARCADIA
240 WEST HUNTINGTON DRIVE
ARCADIA, CA 91007
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
1. Project Title:
A Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 02-010 to reopen an existing automobile service
station with three service bays.
2. Lead Agency Name & Address:
City of Arcadia
Development Services Dept./Community Development Div./Planning Services
240 W. Huntington Drive
Post Office Box 60021
Arcadia, CA 91066-6021,
3. Lead Agency Contact Person & Phone Number:
, Thomas P. Li, Assistant Planner- (626) 574-5447/fax (626) 447-9173
4. Project Location (address):
900 W. Duarte Road, in the City of Arcadia, County of Los Angeles
5. Project Sponsor's Name, Address & Phone Number:
Toheed Asghar
8644 Falmouth Ave. #7,
Playa Del Rey, CA 90293
(916) 761-7644
6. General Plan Designation:
Multiple Family Residential (24 du/ac max.)
7. Zoning Classification:
C-2 - General Commercial
.
Form"JtI
-1-
CEOA Checklist 4/99
-.
.
e
File No.: CUP 02-010
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 necessaiyfor its implementation.)
A Conditional Use Permit for an automobile service station with 3 service bays. The
proposed business hours are 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.
9. Surrounding land uses and setting:
(Briefly describe the p'roject's surroundings,)
The subject property is built as a gas station with 3 service bays and 8 gas pumps.
To the north, south, and west are multiple-family units, zoned R-3. A commercial
strip center is to the east with a supermarket.
10. Other public agencies whose approval is required:
(e.g.. permits. financing approval. participation agreement)
The City Building Services, Engineering Division, Fire Marshall, Public Works
Services, and Water Services will review the construction plans for the tenant
improvements for compliance with all applicable construction and safety codes and
will oversee construction and installation of any necessary infrastructure or
improvements on-site and/or within and along the public 'right-of-way. The tenant
improvements for the coffee shop will also be reviewed by the Lo.s Angeles County
Health Department for compliance with local health codes.
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this
project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as
indicated by the checklist on the following pages:
[] Aesthetics
[ ] Agricultural 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
[ ] Utilities / Service Systems
[ ] Mandatory Findings of Significance
Form I!JU
-2-
CEQA Checklist 4/99
,
.
.
File No,: CUP 02-010
DETERMINATION:
(To be completed by the Lead Agency)
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
[X] I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the
environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
[] 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 applicant. 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 "potentiaily significant impact" or
"potentially significant unless mitigated impact" on the environment, but at least
one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an eariier 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.
[] I find that although the proposed project COULD have a significant effeci on
the environment, but because all potentially significant effects (a) have been
analyzed adequately in an EARLIER ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT or
NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, anq .(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.
~~'
Sigtlature
?- 3-0'-.
Date:
Thomas P. Li, Assistant Planner
(Printed Name & Title)
For: City of Arcadia
Form "J"
-3-
CEQA Checklist 4/99
e
.
.
File No.: CUP 02-010
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS:
1. A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately
supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the responses following each question. A
"No Impact" answer is adequately supported IT 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 Impacf' answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well
as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a
project-specific screening analysis).
2. All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site,
cumulative as well as project'level, indirect'as well as direct, and construction 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 is significant. If there are one or more, "Potentially Significant Impacf' 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 effectfrom "Potentially SignITicant Impact" to a
"Less Than Significantlmpact." 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
XVIII, "Earlier Analyses," must be cross-referenced).
5. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEOA 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 Analyses Used. Identny 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
cj Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less Than Significant With Mitigation Measures
Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures that were incorporated or refined from the earlier
document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project.
6. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist, references to ,information sources for
potential impactS (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or
outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the
statement is substantiated.
7. Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources. uses or
individuals contacted should beded in the discussion. '
8. 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.
9. The explanation of each issue should identify:
a) The significant criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and
b) The mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significant.
Form "J"
-4-
CEOA Checklist 4/99
.
.
,e
File No,: CUP 2002-010
Less Than
Significant
Potentially w"lth La.. Than
Significant Mitigation Sig~lflcant No
Impact Incorporation Impact Impact
I. AESTHETICS - Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? [ I [ ] I ] [XI
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, Including, but not
limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings
within a state scenic highway? [ I [ I [I [Xl
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality
of the site and its surroundings? [ I [ I [] [Xl
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare, which would
adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? [ I [ I [I [X]
The proposed automobile service station will be occupying an existing building in a fully developed area
and will not have any of the above impacts.
II. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES - (In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are
significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the Califomia 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-
agricultural use? [ I [ I [I [XI
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a
Williamson Act contract? [ I [ I [I [XI
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? [ I [ I [I [XI
The proposed automobile service station will be occupying an existing building in a fully developed area
and will not have any,of the above impacts.
III. AIR QUALITY - (Where available, the signijicance criteria established by the applicable air quality
management or pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations,)
Would the proposal:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable Air
Quality Plan? [ I [I [XJ
b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to
an existing or projected air quality violation? [ I [ I [I [X]
c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any
criteria pollutant for which ihe project region is ron-
attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air
quality standard (including releasing emissions, which
exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? [ I [ I [I [XI
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations? [ I [ I [I [X]
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of
people? [ I [ I [] [XI
The proposed automobile service station will be occupying an existing building in a fully developed area
and will not have any of the above Impacts.
.Form .J-
-5.
CEOA Chackllst 4199
.
.
.
File No.: CUP 2002-010
Less Then
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Slgnlllcanl Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporation Impact Impact
IV.BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES - Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse Impact, 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 andWildlife Service? [ I [ I [I [XI
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on a,ny riparian habitat or
other sensitive' natural community identified in local or regional
plans, policies, and regulations, or by the California Department
of Fish and Game or U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service? [ ] [ ] [] [X]
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federaliy 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? [ I [ ] [I [Xl
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 nurselY sites? [ I [ ] [I [X]
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting
biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or
ordinance? [ ] [ I [] [Xl
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation
Plan, Natural Conservation Community Plan, or other approved
local, regional or state habitat conservation plan? . [ ] [ ] [] [X]
The proposed automobile service station will be occupying an existing building in a fully developed area
and will not have any of the above impacts.
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES - Would the project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance ,of a
historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5? [ ] [ ] [] [X]
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an
archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5? [ ] [ ] [J [X]
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological
resource or site or unique geologic feature? [ ] [ ] [] [X]
d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside
offormal cemeteries? [ ] [ ] [] [X]
The proposed automobile service station will be occupying an existing building in a fUlly developed area
and will not have any of the above impacts.
VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS - Would the project:
a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse
effects, in<::ludingthe risk of Joss. injury, or death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on
the most receni Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning
Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based
on other substantial evidence of a known fault? (Refer to
Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42).
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
Iii) Seismic-related ground failure, inclUding liquefaction?
iv) Landslides
[ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
[ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
[ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
[ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
CEOA Ctiecklisl 4/99
Form. J"
-e-
.
.
.
/
Fila No,; CUP 2002-010
Lass Than
Significant
Potantially With Lass Than
Significant Mitigation Significant
Impact Incorporation Impact
['][ ] [ ]
No
Imp8:~t
[X]
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 altemative wastewater disposal systems
where sewers are not available for the disposal of
wastewater? [ ] [ ] [] [X]
The proposed automobile service station will be occupying an existing building in a fully developed area.
The subject location has not been determined to be especially susceptible to any of the above geologic
problems and is not within a Seismic Hazard Area identified by the Seismic Hazard Mapping Act. The
proposal does not include any excavation, grading or filling. No unique geologic features have been
identified at the site. The projectis connected to the local sewer system, The project will not have any of
the above impacts.
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[X]
[ 1
[ ]
[ ]
[X]
VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS, - Would the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the'el)vironment
through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous
materials? [ ] [ ] [l [X]
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? [ ] [ ] [,] [X]
c) Emit hazardous e.missions or handle hazardous or acutely
hazardous materials, substances, or waste w~hin one-
quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? [ ] [ ] ,[] [X]
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 resuit, would it create a significant
hazard to the pUblic or the environment? [ ] [ ] [] [Xl
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? [ ] [ ] [] [X]
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the
project result in a safety hazard for people' residing or
woriting in the project area? [ ] [ ] [] [Xl
g) Impair implementation of, or physically interfere with an
adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation
plan? [ ] [ ] [] [X]
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 w~h wildlands? [ ] [ ] [] [X]
The proposed automobile service station will be occupying an existing building in a fully developed area
and will not have any of the above impacts.
Form-"J-
-7~
ceOA Checklist 4/99
.
,
.
File No.: CUP 2002.010
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitlgeticn Significant No.
Impact Incorporation Impact Impact
VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY - Would 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 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)?
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattem of the site or
area, including through the alteration of the course of a
stream or river, in a manner that 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 ofa
stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount
of surface runoff in a manner that 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
g) Place housing within. a 100,year flood hazard area as
mapped on a federal Flood H~zard Boundary. or Flood
Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map?
h) Place structures within a , OO-year flood hazard area, wbich
would impede or redirect flood flows?
i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injUry
or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of
the failure of a levee or dam? [ ] [ ] [] [X]
j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? [ ] [ ] [] [X]
The proposed automobile service station will be occupying an existing building In a fully developed area.
The proposed use will be subject to an Industrial Wastewater Discharge Permit so as not to violate
Regional Water Quality Control Board water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. The
proposal will not alter absorption rates, drainage patterns, surface runoff, surface water conditions, or
ground water conditions. The site is within the Santa Anita Dam Inundation Area, but will not expose
, people to any additional or Increased hazard levels. The project will not have any of the above Impacts,
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[X]
[ 1
[ ]
[ ]
[Xl
[ ]
[ ] ,
[ ]
[X]
[ ]
[ ]
[Xl
[ ]
[ J
[ ]
[ 1
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[Xl
[Xl
[ ]
[ ]
[X]
[ ]
[ 1
[ ]
[ ]
[X]
IX. LAND USE & PLANNING - Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established community? [ 1 [ 1 [] [Xl
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? [ ] [ ] [] [X]
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or
natural community conservation plan? [ ] [ ] [l [X]
The proposed automobile service station will be occupying an existing building in a fully developed area
and will not have any of the above.ln'lpacts.
Form .J-
,8'
CEOA Checklist 4/99
.
,
.
File No,; CUP 2002-010
Less Than
Significant
P9tentlally With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporation Impact Impact
X. MINERAL RESOURCES - Would the project:
a) Result in the loss of availability ofa known mineral resource that
would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? [l [ 1 [l [Xl
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral
resource recovery slle delineated on a local general plan, specllic
plan or other land use plan? [ 1 [ 1 [l [Xl
The proposed automot;>i1e service station will be occupying an existing building in a fully developed area
and will not have any of the above impacts.
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 generai plan or noise
ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? [ 1 [ I [l [Xl
b) Exposure of persons to. or generation of excessive groundborne
vibration or ground borne noise levels? [ 1 [ ] [l [XI
c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the
project vicinity above levels existing without the project? [ 1 [ ] [l [X]
d) A substantial temporary. or periodic increase in ambient noise
levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the
project? [ 1 [ 1 [l [Xl
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? [] [ 1 [l [X]
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the
project expose people residing or woriting in the project area to
excessive noise levels? [ 1 [ 1 [] [X]
The proposed automobile service station will be occupying an existing building in a fully developed area
and wiil not have any of the above impacts. .
XII. POPULATION & HOUSING - Would the project:
a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly
(for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or
indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other
infrastructure)? [ 1 [ 1 [l [X]
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessllating
the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? [ 1 [ 1 [l [Xl
c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the
construction of replacement housing elsewhere? [ 1 [ 1 [l [Xl
The proposed automobile service station will be occupying an existing building in a fully developed area
and wiil not have any of the above impacts.
XIII.
PUBLIC SERVICES - Would the project 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 would 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? [ 1 [ ] [l [Xl
b) Police protection? [ 1 [ J [l [Xl
c) Schools? [ 1 [ 1 [J [Xl
Form.J"
-9-
CEOA Checklist 4/99
.
.
.
File No.: CUP 2002-010
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Slgnlflcant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporation Impact Impact
d) Parks? [ ] [ ] [] [X]
e) qther public facilities? [ ] [ ] [] [X]
The proposed automobile service station will be occupying an existing building in a fully developed area
and will not have any of the above impacts.
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? [ ] [ ] [] [X]
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? [ ] [ ] [] [X]
The proposed automobile service station will be occupying an existing building in a fully developed area
and will not have any of the above impacts.
XV. TRANSPORTATION I TRAFFIC - Would the projEll;t:
a) Cause an increase in traffic that 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)? [ ] [ ] [] [X]
b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service
standard established by the county congestion management
agency for designated rOads or highways? [ ] [ I [] [X]
c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an
increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in
subslantialsafety risks? [ ] [ ] [] [X]
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g.,
sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible
uses (e.g., farm equipment)? [ ] [ I [] [X]
e) Result in inadequate emergency access? [ ] [ I [] [X]
f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? [ ] [ I [X] [ ]
g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans. or programs supporting
alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? [ ] [ I [] [X]
The proposed automobile service station will be occupying an existing building in a fully developed area
and will not have any of the above impacts,
XVI.
UTILITIES & 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?
[ ]
[X]
[ ]
[ ]
[ J
IX]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[X]
[ ]
[ J
[ ]
IX]
[ ]
[ ]
Form. J"
-10-
CEOA Checklist 4/99
.
.
.
File No.: CUP 2002-010
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporation Impact Impact
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 providers existing commitments? [ 1 [ 1 [] [Xl
f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to
accommodate the projecfs solid waste disposal needs? [ ] [ ] [J [Xl
g) Comply with federal, state and local statutes and regulations
related to solid 'waste? [ ] [ ] [] [X]
The proposed a\ltomobHe service station will be occ,!pying an existing building in a fully developed area
and will not have any of the above impacts.
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 wildlHe population to drop below self-
sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal
community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or
endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of
the major periods of California history or prehistory? [ ] [ 1 [l [Xl
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but
cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means
that the incrementa:! effects of a project are considerable when
viewed in conneGlion with the effects of past projects, the effects
of other current projects, and the effects of probable future
projects.) [ ] [ ] [ X 1 []
c) Does the project have environmental effects, which will cause
substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or
indirectly? [ 1 [ 1 [] [Xl
The proposed automobile service station will ,be occupying an existing building in a fully developed area
and will not have any of the above impacts.
XVIII. EARLIER ANALYSES
No earlier analyses, and no additional documents were referenced pursuant to the tiering, program EiR. or
other CECA processes to analyze the project.
Form ioJR
-,,-
CECA .Checklist 4/99