The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About75B - 1935 E. SEVENTEENTH ST. REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION _ITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: ~ ~ CLERK OF COUNCIL USE ONLY: ~ JUNE 21, 2004 TITLE: PUBLIC HEARING - APPEAL NO. 2004-06 (CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2004-06) TO ALLOW AUTOMOBILE SERVICING IN THE ARTERIAL COMMERCIAL (CS) ZONING DISTRICT Ma CITY MANAGER APPROVED 0 As Recommended 0 As Amended 0 Ordinance on 1s1 Reading 0 Ordinance on 2nd Reading 0 Implementing Resolution 0 Set Public Hearing For CONTINUED TO FILE NUMBER RECOMMENDED ACTION 1. Deny Appeal No. 2004-06. 2 . Adopt a resolution denying Conditional Use Permit No. 2004-06. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION 8:dopted a resolution denying Conditional Use Permit No. May 10, 2004 meeting by a vote of 5:2 (Nalle and Sinclair 2004-06 at its opposed) . DISCUSSION Request of Applicant America's Tire Company is requesting approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 2004-06 to allow an automobile servicing use in the Arterial Commercial (CS) zoning district at 1935 East Seventeenth Street. Property Description The subject property consists of an irregular shaped parcel located on Seventeenth Street, between Old Tustin Avenue and Sherry Lane (Exhibit 1). The property has a General Plan land use designation of General Commercial (GC) and is located within the Arterial Commercial (C5) zoning district. Surrounding land uses include a vacant commercial property and residential uses to the north and west, and commercial uses to the south and east (Exhibit 2). The subject property is part of the 8.92-acre Home Place Shopping Center on the north side of Seventeenth Street. This development, approved in ~997 (EIR No. 96-02, GPA No. 97-01, AA No. 97-01, VA No. 97-07 and CUP ..0.97-10) includes a 53,480 square foot Orchard Supply Hardware (aSH) 758-1 Appeal No. 2004-06 (Conditional Use Permit June 21, 2004 Page 2 No. 2004-06) building, a 3,050 square foot Carl's Jr. restaurant with drive-through window service, and a vacant 8,125 square foot building. Additionally, a parcel map was approved on June 16, 2003 to subdivide the Home Place Shopping Center into five parcels. A total of 558 parking spaces are provided on site. Project Description The project involves the remodeling of an existing 8,125 square foot commercial building into a tire store. The building elevation will remain the same as originally constructed with the exception of additional storefront and window glazing to satisfy the standards for auto servicing uses. Based on the plans submitted, America's Tire Store is in compliance with the design and development standards set forth for auto repair and servicing uses. Operating hours will be from 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Monday through Saturday (Exhibit 3, 4, 5 and 6) . Access to the project will be provided from Seventeenth Street. A of 40 parking spaces are required for the proposed tire store, would be provided on-site and on the adjacent shopping center site. total which Analysis of the Issues The subject property is one of five parcels that function as an integrated commercial development, with reciprocal ingress, egress and parking agreements. Currently, a total of 558 parking spaces are provided for the Home Place Shopping Center. A total of 59 parking spaces were originally allocated to the subject building to accommodate a combination of retail and restaurant uses at this location. With the proposed tire store, the building will require only 40 parking spaces. Since 59 parking spaces were provided for this building, parking is sufficient to accommodate the proposed tire store. On May 10, 2004, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the proposed project. After receiving testimony from the public, the Commission denied the proposed tire store due to potential noise impacts associated with the operation of the tire store and the project's incompatibility with the surrounding residential and professional uses. Additionally, the Planning Commission found that the proposed tire store could adversely affect the present economic stability of properties surrounding the area by providing another automotive service to an area that is already saturated with automotive services. 758-2 ~ppeal No. 2004-06 ~(Conditional Use Permit June 21, 2004 Page 3 No. 2004-06) ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program, Environmental Review No. 2003-232 has been prepared for this project (Exhibit 7). FISCAL IMPACT There is no fiscal impact associated with this action. sd!6i~ Executive Director Planning & Building Agency AN:rb ~\PlanCOmm\CUP04-o6.cc-appeal 8 758-3 ~ Rl :mmm:Ð Rl BEEC J'-''---'-''- -----------~ .~. ~.: .! Rl " R1 " ~ A1 Rl Rl 60.Al-7200 W~ 834.11' ¡"'V9.5-.11H1 p ". j l [ R4FAANZ~AV- m.J ". R4 Al Rl ",I City Rl "3 I' "3 I Rl I ot Rl ~ Tustin Rl R4 --~\-¡ .......--\ì ~I_'..-.-~ -:~_)I_:I___~~'d..-/:-_L.] ~..... ~,J~:j:R4-gRD - ,C:jf ',.~ l"j...{Î -~-¡:::: ::::\i --]: ~I: ~ ~......: ~r R1-PRD C5 U"1' , ,. " R1 ~ R1 e R1-B - ~ ~ j~ "' ~ ~ ~ ,,I .::. q $,!l1 R4 Rl Rl " " ï:iVANC PL. R1 I Al -6 C-SM Cl C1-MD C2 C3 C3-A C4 C5 GENERAL AGRICULTURAL PARKING MOOIFICAT10N COMMERCIAL SOUTH MAIN COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL COMM. COMMERCIAUMUSEUM DISTRICT GENERAL COMMERCIAL CENTRAL BUSINESS CENTRAL BUSINESS-ARTIST VILLAGE PLANNED SHOPPING CENTER ARTERIAL COMMERCIAL PROJECT ::1 / SITE Cl ~ R4 ¡,-'I 1"'-1 . I -_J 'i~'¡:PR9 ~l;:==I\ ~-~ SJ_J R4-PRO ~. ~ z ¡;; " >- ~ ~ CUP 04-6 AMERICA'S TIRE COMPANY 1935 EAST SEVENTEENTH ,. = 1000 FEET p =:;--;:1 r,-J t ~-~ I ~--,..,~ 11 ~I..L ,It.....1 II I ~ I_I I ...!"-' ï ~ i P Cl P >- ; W W cr u. It) It) P A' A2 R3 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL TWO FAMILY RESIDENCE MULTIPLE DENSITY MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENCE SUBURBAN APARTMENTS RESIDENTIAL ESTATE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT SPECIFIC PLAN I CA GC Ml M2 MO 0 P PCO PAD COMMERCIAL RESIDENTIAL GOVERNMENT CENTER LIGHT INDUSTRIAL HEAVY INDUSTRIAL MILITARY OPERATIONS OPEN SPACE PROFESSIONAL PLANNED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVElOPMENT A4 AE SO SP A IN' - - =500 FEET P N G G A c y L A N N A N 0 B U I EXHIBIT 1 758-4 0 L N G E N 8 18 8 CO NO OS ¡..: UI MUL T1 0 FAMILY g RES. ;: :::! ::;; TWENTIETH I I CONDOS: I I ~ " " CI: '" '" '" " " COND,~".''¡ SEVENTEENTH >- ~ ~ 11: <: '" " 5æ >- ~ ~ ~ ;:: '" <: '" <5 æ ., CI: ~ UI ~ :I 3E ¡..: UI ..J 0 UI < II: ~ SIN LE FAM LY ESI ENT AL I COMMER~fAL i)j STREET SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENT/AL ~cl..".!rn:':'=A! N G D . .' , .' I . '!' ~~.'~. . ,"'~ "..' r,:~:w~~i¡~;~~i~:~.,: ~') !!';'~~2:~:J;~ý:;t(:]i = .' ':" HÒMC: 'P"LIt'CE,':' SHOPPING':r '(fEN fE'H, ," ",:. . ~""'/)}:~:'~I;;} :( .".:'~r;"~'. ..::.. S..:: :,,:.,':~{'{;.:.:...:'::' ';j.,:':. . :'/ÎI'/////I//:' ,.}" ,:,,;,101" ';- ,~..¡, :,,,\;~..'.:,.',,.,,~;.~~I-:~' ~:, . :/,/,.::</;/(((--:~~:,;.....:I. ':~>:""';~".~' 'i',",..."",,',. ".::~.\'. '.,;.':~ ,.t::, .:. '¡", ;PRØ'JEC'P ;";:''''9\.' .:".(,:""";:.;: "',..' ,. ':"~("J.:1.{,c';:';: .:,". ~///S.I.+E"// ,,':':~.;';\~~"J.' ".,'::;c.':.':: '. . ',', ~".:,", ~.~: ~',~:.,'.,';.".~,,'I ,,'n..':' 1"/// 'I,'/I","~.."'.,'~ ',.,.';", "",'.. .,...::it\:,., ",'I~"', :'~!~~~~~3~f,~~,¡' :,:<">,;' ,:,~{, ,~~;:" .,:" ~,.: : , ' :';::;:.,~ ",.'..:.( ."", :-:, ": CþMMERCIAL A r 1 E ,: ..,~ ,~ j: . : A : ... ,i. " ;~ ...': ;'".!".'!..I,'(; ~ t\¡ i'M',;"" C 0 M CU P 04-6 AMERICA'S TIRE COMPANY 1935 EAST SEVENTEENTH STREET R r L A eW y p L A N N A N D B u L EXHIBIT 2 758-5 N G G E c A N I' " Iii I 'I ',n ,.~ -,,~ .;,,:.[,., ..,: ". .. . c" ~~I-- ...11 ) ~ -.~'i ';'~:'--íri ~. "".":'=.1'0' io....r t ,I I! II ,L..;--,":III ;Ä,"Þ" ~';-.~'I'~.-.......' ",'.....~-_.~..... .u..'~-~"'::J::....r """"'I~r-:-"'"-~"~".' ~ '.', -,....--.:..: r;i r~ i ~i=:'" ,'s.,' ,.",\ . " ;~:...:. '.":;if -::~~lii¡¡'i--~':':"'-~~"",---_.~="'~:_"",",,,:"::::::::n~_"":"~;:~~.~-' III ~ I .J./' Ilifr'; . < ',---~,~--_.~-_-./f.' <' I ~ . I .¡ "~¡¡~ ~ ! ¡ ~ Ii I ijli~¡ liill! ¡ !¡j'IN; I p!i " ¡r~ Iql~ i ~ lili¡;!n ~IIIIHI!I'I"I'lln!I!!pn ~ i ;II! !Ih ; I , rnU ~ ~p 'I ¡I Iii ~ i' ili I II! ¡II . ~I' ~ In I~I III '! ,¡.II !¡ II!, II; ¡i II II~ 1111. ,i~ !I P I ~qí . ~ I ~ !~i !; I ~ Hi' BB III BK . r ~ I. ;U 0 'I IIII I :lli . '! . II ¡ '! "! . jt ii' it I! " , i': I III ~ . I , . Ii . Ii ¡ i ¡ ili- nnnn III i i ! ¡ I II i c < r ! IT! .~ ¡ ¡ . 'C;¡ = en ::¡ IT! "CI ~ Z SHOPPING CENTER SITE PLAN '- I! -. "I I "I '-I iI,1 I ' ~ . ~ t~ 5 ~ ~I" . . ~ -I II PI rill i;; . I I i;g JI- Z in 'Ht¡ : ~q ~ liL . U I i II. dn" .. ¡n I f HI d !('- ~ ! i ~ I, AMERICA'S TIRE CO. I titll. = II' . ¡¡Uii DP NO. 2003-58 8 ~Qm r-'!IX !iñ~ ~:~ ~r-w ~.. Õ >¡ :J - I WILLIAMS (f> - JtJ m m - 8 ------- " \ '" J + ,z ! S; .. '" ~. ~ , c '" ,::¡ '" ... ,S; z I + 8 , , , , , , , , , , , -:'r 1L \g , , , , , \ , , , , , , , , , , , , ! - ~ , .. i , .. , ¡\; ) - , ~ ", ", , + , , , , , , , , , , , I , - , ~ , ~ : ~ , . , , ¡ ~~ , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ~ 3 ~ ~ ,. ~ - , N , ~ , '" , ~ , . ,.. ,. ~ Ci) ¡¡~nn ~ UillI ~ ~I. 161 0 .~ ~~ ; ;;: ~t ;3 a '" 15 ~IZ . I ~ ¡ h I ~ 1- e:XI6ÞTI~ QFFICE5-2 :5TO~Y 2e't l-lICiI-l TYPE: v CON5T.-FLAT ROOF WILT-UP " . .' r :,". .' I ~~~,~~, '<:~~< <J~'''~:~ . 3,': ~:,"'_,~:ì,i',> ::<:.::~ "11" r., 1',',<,.,'<, ",". . <,'"',"-t'"-,',',~,,þ,, ' ".'.' ""'," 'G"~ "..' .,t, '<--~'-,'"",:\,~ IV"'-': I, .' r.,', '(1c""~ i':~<~~:~ ':>.::.'>t): m:~: ': ¡ ':..::.æ r . ~;~~~12" :..._..::L.'!'-..-'o..::'..':> l.i_'_~'::'~ ",----,~---------------- . , '" / .to:: , '" , ~ I . , E , , , , , . , , , , , , , , , , $ z 1--5ØØ;~,;ø;-W-- - --- ----- ~ '" ~ '" ~ E N - "2!>'3Ø"- E- ~2~ -- - . - . 5'~ . ~¡¡¡¡r;¡¡r;¡I!!II!I§I!II!II!II!J@J§]IIII!JI!JBI!I§]ŒJ§]E;] EI~ , I j II ~ II ~ " " Ii ~ " " @ " " " @ " " I" :< . I! I! i h I ~ II II 1111; II I!II ~- ~ ~ ç ~ I ç i ç . i i a I ~ - -I ~~ '" inn j n it ~! I ¡ n II~ . tìU 5 I!II ! I- I ~i . - i I I H I I I i ~ 1= ~;U ... C> C> ENLARGED sm: PLAN , fiin, J ¡!.. J~ AMERICA'S TIRE CO. DP NO. 2003.58 I I I I [IJ~@g¡~~~~~EI" œ ! I 1111 ~ ! I I:, I i I ! I I . I II i I Ii! ! .I! Iii II ~ ,¡ I 1- II I Ii i = I¡ I I ¡ I i Ii IIII ¡ i' I ¡I! I i I II lID l1li "" ' , , I I I i ! I I I . I . . I I I ! I i [i@[j]§][f]OOOO@@1§1 I, II ¡ Pili 1¡lili; Ii I I !' ¡il II I ., i ' I II ¡ ~i: I. . I . .... I I i I I .. 'C ! . ! i I I I M ~ I ! . J I I ¡III i ! II j I i I. . ,. I i II I I I III~~ œ r I r I ¡ I I ~ I So I i ï I , I ! , I ~ ",... > ~ I !UliI' III ~ I!IH ~ ." ¡II il! !IIIII ~ nnl ~ ... 11 I ¡ III ¡g ! 8 I . 'lIql ;;1 ell'" ¡-~ IlIli!m ~ !I) &1'11 ~ I hlhn i PI -i nl! '" 'I I !I) ! dil I. I I i 1".11' I ill. I II I . I P Iii! ¡ Ii i I ~ Ii H I -I ~ II i: II : I! I I !I' I 3 C> C> , > 1= ~ ~ a AMERICA'S TIRE co. Iml. N . ... OVERALL FLOOR PLAN DP NO. 2003-58 I - ,.t \. 8 '! f'~~ tr f -~ .:.. -1140: ., -2 i i i " í i ¡ I ----8 - -H------@ " , , - I I I" I ' ' i - j . ' " ' ----~---@ I . -------{§ ., - ¡ -, ~:E , - í ;rn ,-! , - i ¡~ ¡ I, ,- m ¡ I" , , 1 ~ I ' I ---------@ " I . ~ ., I -----@ .. - I !~ i z !! I ---@ -! " '- i~ . ------<:> I . ----~ I ¡'------@ j;~ I -I I 8 04 .~ ì " ----@ ¡----~ i ¡ .1 j . i . ! ~---B . I ì I , I "" - - --€) , ~ Z j~ . 2 , -~ Z I I " OOOO\!1@](3!§l!5l!leJ[!]I!IŒI~SEl:!3 ~ ! I 1 1 1 1 1 ." . . r . . . . . ~ I ,. . ! PIIIIPI! I t: lid CII I .ö n Ž II ¡q! I '. '. ... IIPIIII~I I. I. ,.. ¡ I II::¡- IIHt,!! , i I; ~ I'" IIP!;!I !iilQliiS ' is. I ijliil I Iii 51 I I I , I I I , I . 8 I I . , « I I . I < I ! I I ~ C> C> , ! § AMERICA'S TIRE co. rJi II . ,- ¡ Ihfi 0 DP NO. 2œ3.-SI MAYOR Miguel A. Pulido MAYOR PRO TEM Bren E. Franklin COUNCILMEMBERS Claudia C. Alvarez Lisa Bist Alberta D. Christy Mike Garcia Jose Solorio ~ ~ CITY OF SANTA ANA CITY MANAGER David N. Ream CITY ATTORNEY Joseph W. Fletcher CLERK OF THE COUNCIL Patricia E. Healy PLANNING & BUILDING AGENCY 20 Civic Center Plaza (M-20! P.O. BOX 1988 . Santa Ana. California 92702 www.santa-ana.org NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT A NEGATIVE DECLARATION This is to inform the general public that the City of Santa Ana proposes to adopt a .. Negative Declaration for the following project: Project Title: America's Tire Project Description: The proposed project is a request for a conditional use permit to allow a tire store in the Arterial commercial (C5) zoning district. Project Location: 1935 East Seventeenth Street Project Number: ER 03-232 Public Review Period: 4-8-2-4 to 4-27-2004 Hearing Date: May 10, 2004 Hearing Location: City of Santa Ana Council Chambers 22 Civic Center Plaza Santa Ana, CA 92702 The Negative Declaration and Initial Study as well as all referenced documents will be available for public review at the City of Santa Ana Planning and Building Agency located at 20 Civic Center Plaza, Santa Ana, California. Please submit any comments on the Negative Declaration to the City on or before 4-27-2004. Please direct your comments to: Dan Bott, Environmental Coordinator, City of Santa Ana, P.O. Box 1988, M-20, Santa Ana, CA. 92702. If you have any questions or would like any additional information, please contact Ann Ni at (714) 667-2700. RHCB\lnotice\er EXHIBIT 7 75BJ:fO CS 60'>-2 MAYOR Miguel A. Pulidu MAYOR PRO TEM Brett E. Franklin _OUNClLMEMBERS laudia C. Alvarez Lisa Bist Alberta D. Christy Mike Garcia Jose Solorio ~ ~ CITY OF SANTA ANA CITY MANAGER David N. Ream CITY ATTORN E Y Joseph w. Fletcher CLERK OF THE COUNCIL Patricia E. Healy PLANNING & BUILDING AGENCY 20 Civic Center Plaza (M-20) P.O. BOX 1988 . Santa Ana, California 92702 www.santa-ana.org MlfIGÄfEä:fNEGAfi\ÆŒËÇjIJÆRATfÖ~1 ""~'" ,£.~....._.....:Xõ..Iï&IIIIi_....,ioIIiI... .." ",-,,~~""''',''~''''.ruI.w;::.a.;...~.~,,~_:._:U Pursuant to the Procedures of the City of Santa Ana for implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, the Environmental Evaluator has completed an Initial Study for the project described below: Project Number: DP 03-58, ER 03-232 CUP 04-06 Applicant: America's Tire! Bergman Architecture 8 Project Location I Address: 1935 East Tustin Avenue Project Title I Description: The proposed project is a request for a conditional use permit to allow a tire store in the Arterial Commercial (C5) zoning district. And does hereby 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 of revisions to the project and mitigation measures placed on the project. al1d agreed to by the applicant, reduce each impact to below a level of significance. Signature: l»M~O Environmental Coordinator 4_<;- 2co¿f Date: \ This determination is not final until adopted by the decision-making body or administrative official, and a Notice of Determination is filed. 8 ~~0f38 7::»c-11 -.,.-"",,, Initial Americas Tire Study/Mitigated Negative ER 2003-232 Declaration Proposed Project The proposed project is a request for a conditional use permit to allow a tire store in the Arterial Commercial (C5) zoning district. Setting The project site is an existing 8,125 square foot vacant building located at 1935 East Seventeenth Street. Surrounding land uses include commercial to the north and south, Lathrop Intermediary School to the west and residential uses to the east. The project site has a General Plan designation of General Commercial and a zoning designation of Arterial Commercial. The project site is part of an integrated 8.92-acre development site located on the north side of Seventeenth Street, between old Tustin Avenue and Sherry Lane. The site currently contains a 53,480 square foot Orchard Supply Hardware building, a Carl's Jr. Restaurant with a drive- through window service and a vacant 8,125 square foot vacant building. Proposed Project The proposed project consists of the remodeling of the existing 8,125 square foot building into a tire store. The majority of the construction operations would occur in the interior of the building. Access to the proposed project would be provided from Seventeenth Street. In accordance with the City's parking requirements a total of 49 parking spaces would be provided. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS The following is an environmental analysis on the proposed project based on the City of Santa Ana CEQA Environmental Checklist Form. The analysis incorporates by reference the analysis and findings provided in the City of Santa Ana General Plan Land Use Element EIR. For each environmental 1 7Še~{~ 8 8 8 issue, the analysis identifies the level of impact that is anticipated to occur. Where applicable, mitigation measures have been identified to reduce potentially significant impacts to a level considered less than significant. I. AESTHETICS A. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? B. Damage scenic resources, trees, rock outpourings a State highway? including but not limited to and historic buildings within No Impact According to the City's General Plan Land Use Element EIR, the project site is void of any scenic vistas or scenic resources, Additionally, there are no scenic resources associated with a State Highway within the vicinity of the project site. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not result in adverse impacts to any scenic resource, C. Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and it's surrounding? Less Than Significant Impact According to the City's Urban Design Element, the project site is located within the Cabrillo Park Design District. The Urban Design Element establishes goals and policies to help guide the design of development projects proposed within a Design District. Specifically, land uses proposed within a Design District should exhibit high quality design and should incorporate design elements that are proportional and aesthetically related to the District setting. Through the City's development review process the proposed project has been determined to be consistent with the design and development standards established for auto servicing and auto repair uses, Implementation of the proposed project would not degrade the existing visual character of the project site or the surrounding area. 2 75B~,~f38 D. Create a new source which would adversely the area? of substantial light or glare, affect day or nighttime views in Less Than Significant Impact The project site is currently improved with existing on- street lighting. Implementation of the proposed project would not introduce substantial new sources of light and glare into the project area. A. B. C. II. AGRICULTURE Convert Prime Fa~land, Unique Fa~land or Fa~land of Statewide Importance to non-agriculture use? Conflict with existing zoning for agriculture use or a Williamson Contract? Involve other changes in the existing environment, which, due to their location or nature, could individually or cumulatively result in loss of Fa~land, to non-agriculture use? No Impact According to the California Department of Conservation Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program, the project site does not contain Unique Farmlands, Prime Farmlands or Farmlands of Statewide Importance. Based on the City's General Plan, the project site is not planned for agricultural uses. Additionally, the project site is not included within any existing Williamson Contracts. A site visit conducted by the City's Environmental Coordinator confirmed the project site is currently not in agriculture production. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not result in adverse impacts to any agriculture resources. III. AIR QUALITY A. Less Conflict with or obstruct implementation of Air Quality Attainment plan or congestion Plan? Than Significant Impact applicable Management The project site is located within the South Coast Air Basin and subject to the requirements of the Clear Air Act at both the Federal and State level, as implemented by the 3 75B:.gf438 8 8 8 South Coast Air Quality Management District. The South Coast Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) is the primary planning document to monitor if air quality standards and objectives are being achieved in the South Coast Air Basin. The air quality objectives in the AQMP are based upon population and growth projections provided in regional planning programs and local general plans. A project could be in conflict with the AQMP if it results in population and growth impacts beyond those identified in regional planning programs and/or local general plans. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan. Implementation of the proposed project would not exceed the population and traffic growth proj ections in the General Plan. The proposed project would be considered to be consistent with the regional and local growth projections and would not be in conflict with the air quality objectives established in the South Coast Air Quality Management Plan. B. Violate any stationary source air quality contribute to an existing or proposed air violation? standard or quality Less Than Significant Impact As mentioned previously, the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) regulates air quality in the South Coast Air Basin. The South Coast Air Basin is currently a non-attainment area for carbon monoxide, ozone, particulate matter and nitrogen dioxide. The SCAQMD considers an air quality impact to be significant if it exceeds the thresholds identified below. Table 1 EMISSION THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE Project Pollutant Construction Tons/ Operations Pounds/Day Quarter Pounds/Day Carbon Monoxide 550 24.75 550 Reactive Organic Compounds 75 2.5 55 Nitrogen Oxides 100 2.5 55 Particulate Matter 150 6.75 150 4 75B~,~38 Long-term Operational Air Quality Impacts The primary source of long-term operational emissions associated with the proposed project would be generated by vehicle travel to and from the proj ect site, A relatively minor amount of gaseous emissions would also occur from natural gas and electricity usage. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan. The long-term operational emissions generated by the proposed project are consistent with the air pollutant emissions projected within the General Plan Land Use Element EIR. Implementation of the proposed project would not result in additional air pollutant emissions that would exceed air pollutant emission projections evaluated within the General Plan Land Use Element EIR, Short-term constructed Related Air Quality Impacts Construction operations associated with the proposed project could potentially result in short-term increases in particulate mater, and to a lesser degree increases in carbon monoxide and ozone. Peak day construction emissions for most pollutants arising from construction of the proposed project would occur during the grading and excavation phases. The majority of the construction operations for the proposed project would be interior tenant improvements. A minimal amount of exterior work would occur. Less than significant short-term air quality impacts would be associated with implementation of the proposed project. c. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard? Less Than Significant Impact The proposed project would be consistent with the City's General Plan and the local growth forecasts for the Orange County sub region and regional emissions budget developed by the Southern California Association of Governments for the 1999 Air Quality Management Plan. SCAG has determined that the air pollution impacts of any project that conforms to local growth forecasts would be consistent with this forecast and the regional air quality impacts would be 5 7 5t!e.? f« 8 8 8 adequately mitigated by the Plan to a level considered less than significant. D. Expose Sensitive concentrations? receptors to substantial pollutant Less Than Significant Impact Implementation of the proposed project would not exceed the South Coast Air Quality Management District threshold for potentially significant long-term or short-term air quality impacts. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not expose sensitive receptors to any substantial concentrations of air quality pollutants. E. Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? Less Than Significant Impact The operation of the proposed project would not generate significant objectionable odors to the public. The majority of the construction operations for the project would be interior tenant improvements. Less than significant construction-related odor impacts would occur. IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES 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 and Wildlife Services? B. Have a substantial adverse impact on any riparian habitat or 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? C.Adversely impact federally protected wetlands either individually or in combination with the known or probable impacts of other activities through direct removal, filling hydrological interruption, or other means? 6 7 5aa~~138 D. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as tree preservation policy or ordinance? No Impact The project site is situated within an urban setting. According to the California Department of Fish and Game Natural Diversity Data Base and the City's Updated General Plan Land Use Element EIR, there are no sensitive biological resources located on or within the nearby vicinity of the project site. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not result in any adverse impacts to any onsite sensitive biological resources. v. CULTURAL RESOURCES A. Cause a substantial of a historical 15064.5? adverse change in the significance resource as defined in Section No Impact According to the Santa Ana Local Register of Structures and the Federal Register of Structures, there are no historically significant located on the project site. Historical Historical structures c. Cause a substantial adverse change in the of a unique archaeological resource Section 15064.5? Directly or indirectly disturb or destroy paleontogical resource or site? Disturb any human remains, including those outside of for.mal cemeteries. significance pursuant to B. a unique D. interred No Impact According to the City's General Plan Land Use Element EIR there are no known cultural resources on the project site. Additionally, the project site is currently improved. The probability for the discovery of unknown cultural resources during construction operations would be low. 7 7SS:.'~ 8 8 8 VI. GEOLOGY/SOILS A-l. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? No Impact According to the Seismic Hazard Zone Map, the project site is not located within a current Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone for fault surface rupture hazard. The surface traces of any active or potentially active faults are not known to pass directly through or extend towards the project site, Therefore, the potential for surface rupture due to faulting occurring beneath the site during the design life of the proposed project is considered low. A-2. Strong Seismic Ground shaking? Less Than Significant Impact The project site is situated within a highly active seismic region of southern California. A total of 38 active faults have been identified within an approximate 50-mile radius of the project site. The Newport/rnglewood Fault located approximately 13 miles south from the City of Santa Ana is considered to be one of the most dominant faults in regard to potential seismic shaking impacts. The project site could potentially be subject to a maximum credible horizontal ground acceleration of O. 30g from a magnitude 5.9 earthquake along the Newport/Inglewood fault zone. A seismic event of this scale could potentially result significant damage to the proposed proj ect. However, the seismic risks at the project site would not be considered significantly different from other areas in the southern California region, The proposed project would be subject to the seismic safety standards of the Uniform Building Code. Compliance with the Uniform Building Code would reduce potential seismic hazard impacts to a level considered less than significant. A-3. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? Less Than Significant Impact 8 75 EJ::1°§ 38 Soil liquefaction occurs when loose soil deposits below the water table are subjected to large ground accelerations generated from seismic events, Liquefaction is generally known to occur in saturated cohesionless soils at depths shallower than about 50-feet. According to the City's General Plan Land Use Element EIR, the project site is considered to have very low potential for liquefaction hazard impacts. The proposed project involves the remodeling of an existing building. Implementation of the proposed project would not increase the risk for liquefaction impacts. Additionally, the proposed proj ect would be subj ect to the seismic safety standards of the Uniform Building Code. Compliance with the Uniform Building Code would reduce potential liquefaction hazard impacts to a level considered less than significant. A-4. Landslides No Impact The project area is flat without any topographical relief. According to City's General Plan Land Use Element EIR, there are no landslide planes or slopes on the project site. Therefore, implementation of the project would not result in adverse impacts in regards to landslides. B. Would the project result in substantial soil or the loss of topsoil? erosion No Impact Erosion refers to the removal of soil from exposed bedrock surfaces by water or wind. The effects of erosion are intensified with an increase in slope, the narrowing of runoff channels and by the removal of groundcover, which leaves the soil exposed. Construction operations for the proposed project would not require excavation and grading activities that would uncover soils on the project site. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not result in erosion and sedimentation impacts to onsite and off site drainage facilities. c. Would the project geological feature? result in the loss of a unique 9 75í:r.:~Ó38 8 8 8 No Impact According to the City's General Plan Land Use Element EIR the proposed proj ect does not contain any unique geologic features. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not result in adverse impacts to any unique geologic feature. D. In the project located on strata 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? Less Than Significant Impact According to the City's General Plan Land Use Element EIR the project site consists of Mocho Loam Soils that have low shrink/swell potential, high potential for corrosion of uncoated steel and low potential for corrosion of concrete, Implementation of the proposed project would not require any grading or excavation activities and therefore would not be subject to geotechnical constraints on the project site. E. Where sewers are wastewater is the of septic tanks systems? not available for the disposal of soil capable of supporting the use or alternative wastewater disposal No Impact The project site is located within urban setting where sewer service is available. The proposed project would not require septic tanks or alternative disposal systems. VII. HAZARDS/HAZARDOUS MATERIALS A. Create a significant hazard to environment through the routine disposal of hazardous materials? the public transport, or use the or B. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substance or waste within one- quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? 10 7 5ee..~o138 Less than Significant Impact The operation of the proposed project would not involve the routine transportation, handling or storage of large quantities of hazardous materials or waste or the emission of hazardous emissions. The long-term operation and construction operations associated with the proposed project would involve the handling of incidental amounts of hazardous materials, such as solvents, oils, and paints. The proposed project would be required to comply with local, state and federal requirements regarding the handling and storage of hazardous materials. Compliance with local, state and federal regulations regarding the handling and storage of hazardous materials would reduce potential hazardous material safety impacts to a level that is considered less than significant. c. Be located on a site which is located on a list of hazardous material sites compiles pursuant to Government Code Section 659662.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? No Impact The project site is currently Santa Ana Fire Department the hazardous waste site. improved. According to the project site is not a D, For a project located within an airport land use plan or where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles where a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? No Impact According to the Orange County Airport Environs Land Use Plan, the project site is not located within an accident potential zone, clear zone or FAA Notification Area. Implementation of the proposed project would pose a hazard to people working or residing within the project area. VIII. HYDROLOGY/WATER QUALITY A. Violate Regional Water Quality Control Board water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? 11 75~~~138 8 8 8 I. Resulting an increase receiving waters? in to pollutant discharges J. Result in significant alteration of receiving quality during or following construction. water E. Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? K. Could the proposed project result in increased erosion downstream? N. Tributary to an already impaired water body, as listed on the Clean Water Act Section 303(d) list. If so, can it result in an increase in any pollutant of which the body is already impaired? O. Tributary to other environmentally sensitive areas? If so, can it exacerbate already existing sensitive conditions? P. Have a potentially significant environmental impact or surface water quality to either marine, fresh or wetland waters? R. Cause or contribute to an exceedance of applicable surface or groundwater receiving water quality objectives or degradation of beneficial uses? s. Impact aquatic, wetland or riparian habitat? Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated The project site is located in the San Diego Creek/Newport Bay Watershed. Storm water flows from the project site would be conveyed to a series of underground and open storm drain channels, before ultimately discharging into Reach 1 of San Diego Creek. The Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board has identified San Diego Creek as impaired by nutrients, sediments, metals and pesticides. The primary source of water quality pollutants associated with the operation of the proposed project would be from nuisance flows. Nuisance flows are defined as runoff that occurs during periods that are not usually associated with rainfall, and are most commonly produced from landscaping irrigation, leaking pipes, and water used to wash off 12 75~e~~8 surfaces tributary to the street. Since nuisance flows usually originates in the street, they commonly contain many common pollutants found in streets such as oil/grease, metals and sediment. Because the proposed project involves an auto servicing/auto repair use there is a higher potential for water quality impacts associated with substances such as oil and grease. To minimize the potential for degraded surface water impacts generated from the proposed project, the all entrances of all service bays perimeter of the garage area shall have a raised curb to retain surface water runoff on the project site. Additionally, during construction operations Best Management Practices would be employed to minimize potential construction-related water quality impacts. Mitigation Measure B. Q. . Building plans for the proposed proj ect shall reflect a raised curb around the perimeter of the garage area to retain surface water runoff onsite, . The service area shall be constructed to drain underground clarifier/sump/tank equipped with a off valve that can stop further drainage of water or spilled material into the street and drain system. to an shut- storm storm . Construction plans for the proposed project shall reflect that Best Management Practices would be employed for all exterior construction activities. 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. Have a potentially significant adverse impact on groundwater quality? No Impact Construction operations for the proposed project would not require de-watering activities. The long-term operation of the proposed project would not have any impact on groundwater supplies. Additionally, the proposed project would not interfere with ground water recharge because the 13 75R'2~~8 8 8 8 site is not located in an area that is known to recharge the ground water system. C. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of 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? D. Create or contribute runoff water which, would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stor.m water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted run-off? L. Result in increased impervious surfaces and associated runoff? M. Create a drainage volumes. significant adverse environmental impact to patterns due to changes in runoff flow rates or Less Than Significant Impact The project site is located within an urbanized area with improved drainage facilities. Based on a preliminary analysis of drainage conditions and facilities on the project site and surrounding area, the City's Public Works Department has indicated that it is feasible that existing drainage facilities within the project area would be able to adequately drain the proposed project. F. Place housing within a 100-year floodplain, as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? Place housing within a 100-year floodplain, as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? Place within a 100-year floodplain structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? G. H. No Impac t According to the Flood Rate Insurance Map 0602320029F, the project site is located within Flood Zone X and not subject to 100-year flood risks. Implementation of the proposed project would not increase the risk of flooding. 14 75tr~~ß8 IX. LAND USE/PLANNING A. Physically divide an established community? No Impact The proposed project would not physically divide any established community, in that no existing residential uses are located on the project site. The proposed project would be compatible with other existing land uses in the area. No adverse land use compatibility impacts would be associated with implementation of the proposed project. B. Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? Less Than Significant Impact The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan and conditionally permitted in the City's Zoning Ordinance. Implementation of the proposed project would not be in conflict with any planning programs or policies in the City. C. Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community plan? No Impact According to the City's General Plan Land Use Element EIR, the project site is not included within any habitat conservation plan or any natural community conservation plan. X. MINERAL RESOURCES A. 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? No Impact According to the City's General Plan Land Use Element EIR there are no areas in Santa Ana designated as significant 15 75B'~~g8' 8 8 8 Mineral Aggregate Resource Areas. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not result in the loss of any regionally or locally important mineral resource. XI. NOISE A. Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies. A substantial per.manent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project. c. Less Than Significant Impact According to the City's General Plan Land Use Element EIR, the project site would not be impacted with high levels of noise. The proposed project would not emit noise levels in excess of City standards, nor would employees be subject to excessive noise levels. Implementation of the proposed project would not result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels within the project area vicinity. B. Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? D. A substantial temporary ambient noise levels in levels existing without increase in vicinity above or periodic the project project. Less Than Significant Impact The proposed project would require conventional construction equipment and building practices. No significant ground borne noise impacts or ground borne vibration impacts would be associated with the proposed project. However, construction activities and construction equipment staging operations associated with the proposed project could potentially result in a short-term increase in ambient noise levels. To minimize potential construction-related noise impacts to a level considered less than significant, the project would be required to comply with City's Noise Ordinance. The Noise Ordinance would limit construction activity 7 AM to 8 PM Monday 16 7 S'~~21 through Saturday, and not permitted on Sundays or Federal Holidays. 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? No Impact According to the Orange County Airport Environs Plan, the project site is not located within an is subject to high levels of aircraft noise. Land Use area that XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING A. B. C. Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly or indirectly through extension of roads or other infrastructure. Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? No Impact The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan. Implementation of the proposed project would not induce additional population growth into the area, nor would it displace any existing households or housing. XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES Fire Protection: Less than Significant Impact The Santa Ana Fire Department would provide fire protection and emergency medical services for the proposed project. According to the Santa Ana Fire Department, implementation of the proposed project would not significantly increase the demands for fire protection services over current levels of demand within the project area and that under existing levels of manpower and equipment, they would have the ability to provide adequate fire protection services. Additionally, through the City's development review process, the fire department has reviewed and determined 17 751!~~ä8 8 8 8 that the proposed project would provide adequate fire protection facilities and services. Police Protection: Less Than Significant Impacts The Santa Ana Police Department would provide police protection services for the proposed project. According to the Santa Ana Police Department, implementation of the proposed project would not significantly increase the demand for police protection services over current levels of demand within the project area and that under existing levels of manpower and equipment, they would have the ability to provide adequate police protection services. Schools: Less Than Significant Impact The project site is included within the boundaries of the Tustin Unified School District. The proposed project involves the construction and operation of a tire store. Implementation of the proposed project would not generate project-specific demands for new school facilities. However, the project would be subject to provide school impacts fees to help address cumulative impacts to school services in the School District. Parks, Other Public Facilities: Less Than Significant Impact The proposed project involves the construction and operation of a tire store. Implementation of the proposed project would not significantly increase the demands for additional park facilities or other public facilities. XIV. RECREATION 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, 18 7 5é'~"2°éf38 No Impact The proposed project involves the construction and operation of a tire store. Implementation of the proposed project would not increase the demands for existing recreation facilities or generate the demand for additional recreation facilities. xv. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC A. Cause an increase in traffic, which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system? B. Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? Less Than Significant Impact The proposed project is consistent with the City's General Plan and the traffic projections within the Circulation Element. The Public Works Department has determined that implementation of the proposed project would not result in significant project-related traffic impacts or individually or cumulatively exceed any required level of service established by the City or by the County's Congestion Management Program. C. Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? Less Than Significant Impact The proposed project involves the construction and operation of a single-story tire store. Implementation of the proposed project would not result in any changes to air traffic patterns. The proposed project would not result in any substantial safety risks related to aircraft traffic, D. Substantially increase hazards to a design feature Less Than Significant Impact 19 7 5'B~~Ö 8 8 8 Construction operations associated with the proposed project could result in a short-term increase of construction traffic volumes within the project area. However, the increased level of construction traffic is not expected to significantly increase vehicle or pedestrian hazards within the project area. E. Result in inadequate emergency access Less Than Significant Impact As part of the City's development review process, the Fire Department has reviewed the proposed project for potential impacts in regards to emergency access, The Fire Department has determined that adequate emergency access would be provided, F. Result in inadequate parking capacity Less Than Significant Impact In accordance with the City's proposed project is providing spaces. parking standards, the a total of 49 onsite parking G. Conflict with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation No Impact The proposed project would not be in conflict with any adopted policies regarding alternative modes of transportation. Implementation of the proposed project would not displace existing public transportation facilities. XVI. UTILITIES 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? 20 75ä~§18 E. Result in the 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. Less Than Significant Impact The City of Santa Ana and/or the Orange County Sanitation District would provide wastewater service to the project site. The treatment of wastewater would be provided at Reclamation Plant 1 in the City of Fountain Valley. The proposed project would be required to provide appropriate sewer connection fees with the city of Santa Ana and the Orange County Sanitation District, The proposed project would not significantly increase the demand for additional wastewater facilities. 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 effects. Less Than Significant Impact The project site is located within a currently developed commercial center with improved drainage facilities. Implementation of the proposed project would not significantly increase the amount of surface water runoff generated from the project site. Implementation of the proposed project would not require the construction of new drainage facilities that would impact the environment. D. Are sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources or are new or expanded entitlements needed? Less Than Significant Impact The proposed project would not significantly increase the demand for water service over current levels water demand within the project area. The proposed project is consistent with the City's Urban Water Management Plan. Through the City's development review process, the Public Works Department has indicated that the City would have the ability to provide adequate water service to the project site. No adverse impacts in regards to the provision of 21 7~~~j'2 8 8 8 adequate water service would be associated with the proposed project. F. Is the project served by a landfill with sufficient per.mitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? Comply with federal, state and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? G. Less Than Significant Impact The City of Santa Ana would provide solid waste disposal service for the proposed project. The proposed project would not significantly increase the demand for solid waste disposal over current levels of demand within the project area, Additionally, the City has adopted a Source Reduction and Recycling Element, which establishes programs to reduce the City's overall demand for solid waste disposal. No significant adverse impacts would be associated with providing solid waste disposal service for the proposed project. XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE A. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, 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. No Impact Implementation of the proposed project would not substantially reduce the habitat of fish, wildlife species, or historic structures in that no fish, wildlife populations or historic structures are known to exist on the project site. B. Does the project have impacts that are individually limited but cumulatively considerable? Less Than Significant Impact 22 75B~~! Implementation of the proposed project would not result in significant cumulative impacts. The proj ect' s incremental contribution would not be cumulatively considerable because the proposed project would comply with the applicable requirements of the uniform building code, conditions of approval, mitigation measures and applicable City Ordinances, which provide specific requirements that would avoid any significant cumulative impacts within the project area. C. Does the project have environmental effects, which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings either directly or indirectly? Less Than Significant Impact The proposed project involves the construction of a tire store. The project would not have any direct or indirect adverse impacts on human beings. Mitigation measures have been required for the construction and operation of the proposed project to insure that the project would not have a direct or indirect adverse significant impact to human beings or the environment. XVIII DETERMINATION Based upon the evidence in light of the whole record documented in the above environmental evaluation and cited references, I find that the proposed project could not have a significant effect on the environment and a Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared. XVIV REFERENCES City of Santa Ana General Plan, September 1982 City of Santa Ana General Plan Land Use Element EIR, SC No. 97071058, October 1997, Environmental Impact Report for the General plan Land Use Element, August 1997 City of Santa Ana Zoning Ordinance, December 1998 South Coast Air Quality Management District CEQA Air Quality Handbook, 1993 23 7stf-~1t8 8 8 8 California Environmental Quality Act Statues and Guidelines, 2001 Site Visit by Dan Bott Environmental Coordinator, March 2004 National Register of Historical Resources City of Santa Ana Local List of Historical Resources California Department of Fish and Game Natural Diversity Data Base Orange County Airport Environs Land Use Plan Flood Rate Insurance Map 0602320029F City of Santa Ana Noise Ordinance City of Santa Ana Development Review Committee California Department of Conservation Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program Seismic Hazard Zone Map XX. PRE PARERS Dan Bott, City of Santa Ana Environmental Coordinator 24 is"Ef~~~ ~~fA Environmental Checklist For CEQA Compliance Evaluation of Environmental Impacts: I, A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like thè 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 analysis). II. 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. III, "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. IV. "Potentially Significant Unless 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. Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues & Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact I, Aesthetics - Would the project: A. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? 0 0 0 k B. Damage scenic resources, including but not limited 0 0 0 ~ to, trees, rock outpourings and historic buildings within a state highway? C. Substantially degrade the existing visual character ~ or quality of the site and its surroundings? 0 0 D D. Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views 0 0 A D in the area? dblEnv Form CEOA Chklst Page 1 of 12 ATTACHMENT 8 758:1.86 8 8 8 anf^ Environmental Checklist For CEQA Compliance Issues & Supporting Information Sources Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact 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 prepared by the Califomia Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agricultural farmland. Would the project: III. Air Quality - Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: ( F\ A. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland) to non-agricultural use? (The Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program in the California Resources Agency, Department of Conservation, maintains detailed maps of these and other categories of farmland.) B. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Contract? C. Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could individually or cumulatively result in loss of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? A. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of applicable Air Quality Attainment Plan or Congestion Management Plan? B. Violate any stationary source air quality standard or contribute to an existing or proposed air quality violation? C. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emission which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? D. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? dblEnv Fonn CEQA Chklst ATTACHMENT B 75B~37 D 0 0 0 D 0 0 0 D 0 D 0 D D 0 0 0 ~ ~ J¥ >¥ A 0 0 0 D Page 2 of 12 anf^ Environmental Checklist For CEQA Compliance Issues & Supporting Information Sources E. Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? 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 and Wildlife Services? B. Have a substantial adverse Impact on any riparian habitat or 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? C. Adversely impact federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) either individually or in combination with the known or probable impacts of other activities through direct removal, filling hydrological interruption, or other means? D. Conflict with any local policies protecting biological resources, preservation policy or ordinance? or ordinances such as tree 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? B. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a unique archaeological resource pursuant to define Section 15064.5? C. Directly or indirectly disturb or destroy a unique paleontogical resource or site? dblEnv Form CEQA Chklst ATTACHMENT B 7SB~8 Potentially Significant Impact 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Less Than Significant Impact ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No Impact 0 ~ 9\ Ç( Y\ ~ Å X Page 3 of 12 8 anlA Environmental Checklist For CEQA Compliance Issues & Supporting Information Sources D. Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? VI. Geology and Soils - Would the project: A. Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: 1. Rupture of an known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? 8 2. Strong seismic ground shaking? 3. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? Landslides? 4. B. Would the project result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? c. Would the project result in the loss of a unique geologic feature? D. Is the project located on strata 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? E. Where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater, is the soil capable of supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems? 8 dblEnv Form CEQA Chlds! ATTACHMENT B "'68~9 Potentially Significant Impact D 0 0 D 0 0 D 0 D D Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated D 0 0 0 0 0 D 0 0 D Less Than Significant Impact D D 0 Jg{ ßí D D D ~ D No Impact k D Pr D 0 ß{ )1 A 0 ~ Page 4 of 12 "fA Environmental Checklist For CEQA Compliance Issues & Supporting Information Sources VII. Hazardous and Hazardous Materials - Would the project: A. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials? B. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substance or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? C. Be located on a site which is located on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 659662.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? D. For a project located within an airport land use plan or where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles where 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? VIII. Hydrology and Water Quality - Would the project: A. Violate Regional Water Quality Control Board 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 (i.e., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? dblEnv Form CECA Chklst ATTACHMENT B 15B~ Potentially Significant Impact 0 0 0 0 0 D Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated D 0 0 D ~ 0 Less Than Significant Impact ]x( ?{ D 0 0 D No Impact D 0 Ai ¥ D t Page 5 of 12 8 onf^ Environmental Checklist For CEQA Compliance Issues & Supporting Information Sources C. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result In flooding on- or off- site? D. Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted run-off? E. Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? 8 F. Place housing within a 100-year floodplain, as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? G. Place within a 100-year floodplain structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? H. Place housing within a 100-year floodplain, as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? I. Result in an increase in pollutant discharges to receiving waters? Consider water quality parameters such as temperature, dissolved oxygen, turbidity and other typical storm water pollutants (e.g. heavy metals, pathogens, petroleum derivatives, synthetic organics, sediment, nutrients, oxygen-demanding substances, and trash) J. Result in significant alteration of receiving water quality during or following construction? K. Could the proposed project result in increased erosion downstream? 8 L. Result in increased impervious associated increased runoff? surfaces and db\Env Form CEOA Chklst ATTACHMENT B 75S~íJ~ Potentially Significant Impact 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 D 0 D Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated D D ~ D D 0 t( M ~ 0 Less Than Significant Impact x ~ D D 0 D D 0 D ~ No Impact D D D D D D D D D D Page 6 of 12 onf^ Environmental Checklist . For CEQA Compliance M. Create a significant adverse environmental impact to drainage patterns due to changes in runoff flow rates or volumes? N. Tributary to an already impaired water body, as listed on the Clean Water Act Section 303(d) list: If so. can it result in an increase in any pollutant of which the water body is already impaired? o. Tributary to other environmentally sensitive areas? If so, can it exacerbate already existing sensitive conditions? P. Have a potentially significant environmental impact on surface water quality to either marine, fresh, or wetland waters? a. Have a potentially significant adverse impact on groundwater quality? R. Cause or contribute to an exceedance of applicable surface or groundwater receiving water quality objectives or degradation of beneficial uses? S. Impact aquatic. wetland. or riparian habitat? IX. Land Use and Planning- Would the project: A. Physically divide an established community? 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? B. C. Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? X. Mineral Resources - Would the project: A. Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan? Issues & Supporting Information Sources db\Env Form CECA Chklst ATTACHMENT B 75B1J42 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Potentially Significant Impact 0 fti 9\ ~ 0 ~ )( 0 0 0 0 Potentially Significant Unless ~ D 0 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 Less Than Significant Impact 0 0 0 0 P( 0 0 j¿( 0 A ~ No Impact Page 7 of 12 8 8 8 ~fA Environmental Checklist For CEQA Compliance XIII. Public Services A. 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 could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service rations, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public service: Fire protection? Police protection? Schools? Parks? Other public facilities? XIV. Recreation 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? }N. Transportation I Traffic A. Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (Le. result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ration on roads, or congestion at intersections?) Issues & Supporting Information Sources dblEnv Form CEQA Chklst ATTACHMENT B 155'l43 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Potentially Sig nificant Impact Mitigation Incorporated 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Potentially Significant Unless j( 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 )( Less Than Significant Impact 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ ß{ 0 No Impact Page 9 of 12 anf^ Environmental Checklist For CEQA Compliance XI. Noise - Would the project result in: A. Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? B. Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundbome 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 project? 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? XII. Population and Housing - Would the project: A. Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and business) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? B. Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c. Displace substantial numbers necessitating the construction of housing elsewhere? of people, replacement Issues & Supporting Information Sources dblEnv Fe"." CEOA Chklst ATTACHMENT B 1'5B'~44 D D D 0 0 D D 0 Potentially Significant Impact' Mitigation Incorporated D D D D D D D D Potentially Significant Unless ~ A ß( )( Ä 0 0 0 Less Than Significant Impact 0 0 0 0 0 ß( ~ jg( No Impact Page 6 of 12 8 onf^ Environmental Checklist For CEQA Compliance B. Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? C. Result in a change In air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? D. Substantially increase hazards to a design feature (e.g. sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g. farm equipment)? E. Result in inadequate emergency access? F. Result in inadequate parking capacity? Conflict with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation (e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? G. 8 XVI, Utilities and Service Systems 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. Are sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources or are new or expanded entitlements needed? E. Result in the determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? 8 Issues & Supporting Information Sources dblEnv Fonn CEOA Chklst ATTACHMENT B 1'58245 D D D D D D D D D D D Potentially Significant Impact Mitigation Incorporated D D D D D D D D D D D Potentially Significant Unless A ~ A þ( ~ $( ~ A j( ~ Less Than Significant Impact 0 D D D D D D D D D D No Impact Page 10 of 12 ~fA Environmental Checklist For CEQA Compliance F. Is the project served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's sold waste disposal needs? G. Comply with federal, state and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? XVII. Mandatory Findings of Significance A. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, 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, effects of other current projects and the effects of probable future projects). c. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? dblEnv Form CEOA Chklsl ATTACHMENT B 75So.4e Mitigation Incorporated 0 ~ þ( 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 D 0 K 0 0 0 x 0 0 Page 11 of12 8 8 8 MITIGATION MEASURE Building plans for the proposed project shall reflect a raised curb around the perimeter of the garage area to retain surface water runoff onsite. The service shall constructed drain to underground clarifier/sump/tank equipped with a shut-off valve that can stop further drainage of storm water or spilled material into the street and storm drain system. area be to an Construction plans for the proposed project shall reflect that Best Management Practices would be employed for all exterior construction activities. AMERICA'S TIRE ER 03-232 TIMMING Prior to Building Permits Prior to Building Permits Prior to Building Permits and during construction þJA380f38 7~D-47 RESPONSIBLE AGENCY Building/Planning Building/Planning Public Works . Building/Planning VERIFICATION KO - 06/08/04 RESOLUTION NO. 2004-17 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA DENYING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2004-06 SEEKING TO ALLOW AN AUTOMOBILE SERVICE USE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1935 EAST SEVENTEENTH STREET BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The Planning Commission of the City of Santa Ana hereby finds, determines and declares as follows: A. Conditional Use Permit No. 2004-06 came before the Planning Commission of the City of Santa Ana for a duly noticed public hearing on May 10, 2004. The applicant, America's Tire Company, is requesting approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 2004-06 to allow an automobile servicing use in the Arterial Commercial (C5) zoning district at 1935 East Seventeenth Street. Santa Ana Municipal Code Section 41-424.5 (f) of the Santa Ana Municipal Code (SAMC) allows automobile servicing subject to the issuance of a conditional use permit of the Santa Ana Municipal Code (SAMC). Santa Ana Municipal Code Section 41-638 authorizes the Planning Commission to grant a conditional use permit upon making certain findings. The Planning Commission determines that the findings necessary to grant a conditional use permit have not been established: 1. Will the proposed use provide a service or facility, which will contribute to the general well being of the neighborhood or the community? The proposed tire store will not contribute to the general well being of the neighborhood and the community because it is providing another automotive service to an area that is already saturated with tire stores (6 tire stores within one mile of this location and 17 tire stores within two miles). Additionally, because of the noise impacts associated with the operation of the tire store, the proposed use is not compatible with the existing surrounding residential and professional offices. B. C. D. 758-48 Resolution No. 2004-17 Page 1 of 4 8 8 8 2. Will the proposed use under the circumstances of the particular case be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity? The noise impacts associated with the proposed tire store will adversely affect the health, safety and general welfare of the surrounding businesses and residents. Will the proposed use adversely affect the present economic stability or future economic development of properties surrounding the area? The proposed tire store will adversely affect the present economic stability of properties surrounding the area by providing another automotive service to an area that is already saturated with tire stores (6 tire stores within one mile of this location and 17 tire stores within two miles). Additionally, the tire store is not a compatible use with the existing surrounding land uses that are residential and professional offices; as such the future stability of these uses is at risk. Moreover, this retail center and surrounding centers are upscale retail facilities; as such the introduction of a tire store would adversely affect the future economic development of this center and surrounding centers. Will the proposed use comply with the regulations and conditions specified in Chapter 41 for such use. The proposed use will not comply with section 41-1, subdivisions (a) and (f), because (a) the proposed project is not the most appropriate use for the site, in that the site is a high-end, integrated development site formerly occupied with a retail computer store and the site could fail to grow or develop to its maximum potential if a tire store is permitted, and (b) this fact, and the others specified in this resolution if this use were approved, would fail to promote the general welfare of the people of Santa Ana. Will the proposed use adversely affect the General Plan or any specific plan of the City? Because of the large number of tire stores within a one and two mile radius of this location, approval of this conditional use permit would be contrary to the following goals of the Land Use Element of the General Plan: Goal 1 ("Promote a balance of land uses to address basic community needs"), Goal 2 ("Promote land uses which enhance the City's economic and fiscal viability"), Goal 4 ("Protect and enhance development sites and districts which are unique community assets that enhance the quality of life"). Because of its 3. 4. 5. 758-49 Resolution No. 2004-17 Page 2 of 4 adjacency to a residential neighborhood both north and east, approval of the conditional use permit for a use with the noise impacts testified to at the public hearing would be contrary to Goal 3 ("Preserve and improve the character and integrity of existing neighborhoods"). In accordance with the Califomia Environmental Quality Act, this is not a project; no environmental documentation is necessary for this project. Section 2. The Planning Commission of the City of Santa Ana after conducting the public hearing, hereby denies Conditional Use Permit No. 2004-06. This decision is based upon the evidence submitted at the abovesaid hearing, which includes but not is not limited to: the Request for Planning Commission Action dated May 10, 2004 and exhibits attached thereto; and the public testimony written and oral, all of which are incorporated herein by this reference E. ADOPTED this 10th day of May, 2004 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: Commissioners: Cribb, De La Torre, Leo, Lutz, Mondo (5) Nalle, Sinclair (2) None (0) None (0) Commissioners: Commissioners: Commissioners: Glenn Mondo Chairperson APPROVED AS TO FORM: Joseph W. Fletcher, City Attorney By: Kylee O. Otto Deputy City Attomey 7S8-S0 Resolution No. 2004-17 Page 3 of 4 8 8 8 CERTIFICATE OF ATTESTATION AND ORIGINALITY I, MARTHA RAMIREZ, Clerk of the Planning Commission, do hereby attest to and certify the attached Resolution No. 2004-17 to be the original resolution adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Santa Ana on May 10, 2004. Date: Clerk of the Planning Commission City of Santa Ana 758-51 Resolution No. 2004-17 Page 4 of 4 KO - 06/14/04 RESOLUTION NO. 2004-044 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA DENYING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2004-06 SEEKING TO ALLOW AN AUTOMOBILE SERVICE USE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1935 EAST SEVENTEENTH STREET (APPEAL NO. 2004-06) BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The City Council of the City of Santa Ana hereby finds, determines and declares as follows: A. B. The applicant, America's Tire Company, is requesting approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 2004-06 to allow an automobile servicing use in the Arterial Commercial (C5) zoning district at 1935 East Seventeenth Street. Conditional Use Permit No. 2004-06 came before the Planning Commission of the City of Santa Ana for a duly noticed public hearing on May 10, 2004. The Planning Commission, by a vote of 5:2 (Nalle and Sinclair opposed) voted to deny Conditional Use Permit No. 2004-06. On, June 21, 2004 the City Council of the City of Santa Ana held a duly noticed public hearing on Conditional Use Permit No. 2004-06 (Appeal No. 2004-06). Santa Ana Municipal Code Section 41-424.5 (f) of the Santa Ana Municipal Code (SAMC) allows automobile servicing subject to the issuance of a conditional use permit of the Santa Ana Municipal Code (SAMC). Santa Ana Municipal Code Section 41-638 authorizes the City Council to grant a conditional use permit upon making certain findings. The City Council determines that the findings necessary to grant a conditional use permit have not been established: 1. Will the proposed use provide a service or facility, which will contribute to the general well being of the neighborhood or the community? The proposed tire store will not contribute to the general well being of the neighborhood and the community because it is providing another automotive service to an area that is already saturated with tire stores (6 tire stores within one mile of this location and 17 tire stores within two miles). Additionally, because of the noise impacts associated with the operation of the tire store, the proposed use is not C. D. E. 758-52 Resolution No. 2004-xx D,......... -t .....ç. A 8 8 8 2. compatible with the existing surrounding residential and professional offices. Will the proposed use under the circumstances of the particular case be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity? The noise impacts associated with the proposed tire store will adversely affect the health, safety and general welfare of the surrounding businesses and residents. Will the proposed use adversely affect the present economic stability or future economic development of properties surrounding the area? The proposed tire store will adversely affect the present economic stability of properties surrounding the area by providing another automotive service to an area that is already saturated with tire stores (6 tire stores within one mile of this location and 17 tire stores within two miles). Additionally, the tire store is not a compatible use with the existing surrounding land uses that are residential and professional offices; as such the future stability of these uses is at risk. Moreover, this retail center and surrounding centers are upscale retail facilities; as such the introduction of a tire store would adversely affect the future economic development of this center and surrounding centers. Will the proposed use comply with the regulations and conditions specified in Chapter 41 for such use. The proposed use will not comply with section 41-1, subdivisions (a) and (f), because (a) the proposed project is not the most appropriate use for the site, in that the site is a high-end, integrated development site formerly occupied with a retail computer store and the site could fail to grow or develop to its maximum potential if a tire store is permitted, and (b) this fact, and the others specified in this resolution if this use were approved, would fail to promote the general welfare of the people of Santa Ana. Will the proposed use adversely affect the General Plan or any specific plan of the City? Because of the large number of tire stores within a one and two mile radius of this location, approval of this conditional use permit would be contrary to the following goals of the Land Use Element of the General Plan: Goal 1 ("Promote a balance of land uses to address basic community needs"), Goal 2 ("Promote land uses which enhance the City's economic and fiscal viability"), Goal 4 ("Protect and enhance 3. 4. 5. 758-53 Resolution No. 20Q4-xx D__- .., ...~ A development sites and districts which are unique community assets that enhance the quality of life"). Because of its adjacency to a residential neighborhood both north and east, approval of the conditional use permit for a use with the noise impacts testified to at the public hearing would be contrary to Goal 3 ("Preserve and improve the character and integrity of existing neighborhoods"). In accordance with the Califomia Environmental Quality Act, this is not a project; no environmental documentation is necessary for this project. Section 2. The City Council of the City of Santa Ana after conducting the public hearing herby denies Conditional Use Permit No. 2004-06 and Appeal No. 2004- 06. This decision is based upon the evidence submitted at the abovesaid hearing, which includes but not is not limited to: the Request for Council Action dated June 21, 2004 and exhibits attached thereto; and the public testimony written and oral, all of which are incorporated herein by this reference. Section 3. This decision rendered by the City Council of the City of Santa Ana is final and is subject to judicial review pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure section 1094.6. The Clerk of the Council shall give direct notice to the applicant of the Council's decision and these findings. F. ADOPTED this day of ,2004 Miguel A. Pulido Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: Joseph W. Fletcher, City Attorney By: Kylee O. Otto Deputy City Attorney 758-54 Resolution No. 2004-xx D....,..... "')....Ç- It 8 AYES: Councilmembers NOES: Council members ABSTAIN: Councilmembers NOT PRESENT: Council members CERTIFICATE OF ATTESTATION AND ORIGINALITY I, PATRICIA E. HEALY, Clerk of the Council, do hereby attest to and certify the attached Resolution No. 2004-044 to be the original resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Santa Ana on Date: 8 8 Clerk of the Council City of Santa Ana 758-55 Resolution No. 2004-xx c........,., A ....ç. A 758-56