My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Packet 3.10.25
Clerk
>
Agenda Packets / Staff Reports
>
Planning Commission (2002-Present)
>
2025
>
Packet 3.10.25
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/2/2025 9:31:55 AM
Creation date
9/2/2025 9:29:46 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
146
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
CUP No. 2025-03 and Variance No. 2025-01 – McFadden and Fairview Development (2745 <br />W. McFadden Avenue and 1001 S. Fairview Street) <br />March 10, 2025 <br />Page 7 <br />4 <br />8 <br />3 <br />7 <br />Pursuant to Section 41-199.4(a), land uses requiring a permit from a regional, state, or <br />federal permit to handle, store, emit or discharge regulated compounds, materials, <br />chemicals, or substances, within 1,000 linear feet of a public park, school (K-12) as defined <br />by Section 11362.768 of the Health and Safety Code, or property used or zoned for <br />residential purposes, are subject to approval of a CUP. <br />In June 2023, the Planning Commission denied CUP No. 2021-41 requesting approval for <br />a service station for the property located at 2230 N. Tustin Avenue. The Commission <br />determined that, among other reasons, the project did not address key topics, including toxic <br />or noxious fumes; hazardous discharges; electromagnetic disturbances; radiation; smoke; <br />odors; dust or waste; undue noise/vibration; and other objectionable features that can be <br />deemed to be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare, or that can be <br />damaging to the physical environment, neighborhood or community. <br />In order to address the key topics that concerned the Planning Commission in 2023, staff <br />ensured this project prepared the necessary environmental technical studies to ensure the <br />proposed project would not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare, or <br />that can be damaging to the physical environment, neighborhood or community. In staff’s <br />determination, the applicant’s request for a CUP for a noxious use will not pose a significant <br />environmental risk to any surrounding sensitive land uses. As part of the project’s analyses, <br />the City hired a consultant from the City’s approved consultant list to prepared technical <br />studies that evaluated the key topics aforementioned. The evaluation included short-term <br />construction impacts, as well as site operations after the construction is completed. <br />Table 3 – Technical Studies and Findings <br />Potential Impacts Exceeding Regional and State ThresholdsTechnical Study Prepared <br />During Construction After Project Completion <br />Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas <br />(GHG) Emissions Assessment None None <br />Health Risk Assessment (HRA)None None <br />Noise and Vibration Impact <br />Assessment None None <br />Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions Assessment <br />The Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions Assessment, including a Health <br />Risk Assessment (HRA) (Exhibit 8) was prepared to illustrate any potential environmental <br />concerns. The Air Quality and GHG Assessment used regional (South Coast Air Quality <br />Management District) and State (CEQA and California Ambient Air Quality Standards) <br />regulations and thresholds of significance when determining whether the new construction <br />and long-term effects would negatively impact the neighboring community. The analysis and <br />assessment conducted illustrate that the proposed project does not exceed any regional <br />thresholds in producing construction relation emissions nor will it emit pollutants during <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.