No preview available
CC RESOLUTION 3918RESOLUTION NO. 3918 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EL SEGUNDO, • CALIFORNIA, DENYING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 94 -6, TO ALLOW A CAR WASH WITH A MINI -LUBE FACILITY AND ACCESSORY USES, INCLUDING A 24 -HOUR MINI -MART WITH FOOD AND OFF -SITE CONSUMPTION BEER AND WINE SALES, AND REJECTING A PROPOSED MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (EA 359), FOR THE PROJECT LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SEPULVEDA BLVD. AND PALM AVENUE, 639 N. SEPULVEDA BLVD. PETITIONED BY THOMAS G. ENNIS, N/S CORPORATION. WHEREAS, an application has been received from Thomas G. Ennis, N/S Corporation, requesting approval of an Environmental Assessment and Conditional Use Permit to allow the development of a car wash with gasoline sales and a mini -lube facility, and accessory uses, including a 24 -hour mini -mart with food and off -site beer and wine sales ( "Project ") on a currently vacant 0.86 acre lot located at 639 Sepulveda Blvd. in the General Commercial (C -3) Zone; and WHEREAS, an Environmental Assessment (EA -359), including a Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impacts for the new use, has been prepared and circulated to all interested parties, staff, and affected public agencies for review and comment in the time and manner prescribed by law; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the application and supporting evidence with the authority and criteria contained in the California Environmental Quality Act, State CEQA Guidelines and the City of El Segundo Guidelines for the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (Resolution No. 3805); and WHEREAS, a Traffic Impact Study was conducted by Stevens - Garland Associates to evaluate all transportation and circulation impacts associated with the project and submitted with the application; and WHEREAS, an Acoustical Analysis was conducted by Davy & Associates, Inc. to evaluate any potential noise impacts associated with the operation of the facility and submitted with the application; and WHEREAS, a Fiscal Impact Analysis to evaluate the project costs versus project revenues and the project's impact on City services was conducted by the Planning Staff; and • WHEREAS, on March 9, 1995, the Planning Commission did hold, pursuant to law, a duly advertised public hearing on such matter in the Council Chamber of the City Hall, 350 Main Street, and notice of the public hearing was given in the time, form and manner prescribed by law; and WHEREAS, opportunity was given to all persons present to speak for or against the findings of Environmental Assessment EA -359 and Conditional Use Permit 94 -6; and WHEREAS, at the said hearing, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2362, denying EA -359, and CUP 94 -6; and WHEREAS, on March 16, 1995, within the ten day appeal period, an appeal to the City Council of the Planning Commission decision was filed by Mr. Ennis, the applicant; and WHEREAS, the proposed. project was revised to include elimination of the gasoline sales, left -turns onto Palm Avenue, and the westernmost driveway onto Palm Avenue; and WHEREAS, the proposed project was further revised to include a point of sale office with the sales tax revenue generated from $3 million dollars in car wash equipment sales by N/S Corporation, which would require approval by the State of California, Board of Equalization and would be a voluntary situation for the applicant, and to limit the hours of the proposed convenience store to 6 a.m. - 12 midnight; and 1 WHEREAS, on April 18, 1995, the City Council did hold, pursuant to law, a duly advertised public hearing on the appeal, and notice of the public hearing was given in the time, form and manner prescribed by law, and the Council received public testimony related to the conditional • use permit, and continued the hearing to the May 2, 1995 City Council meeting; and WHEREAS, on May 2, 1995, the City Council did hold, pursuant to law, a duly advertised continued public hearing on the appeal, and notice of the public hearing was given in the time, form and manner prescribed by law; and WHEREAS, opportunity was given to all persons to present testimony or documentary evidence for and against proposed Environmental Assessment EA -359 and Conditional Use Permit 94 -6; and WHEREAS, at said hearing the following facts were established: 1. The applicant is proposing to construct a new car wash facility on a currently vacant 0.86 acre lot located at 639 N. Sepulveda Blvd. The project also includes accessory uses of a 2,815 square foot mini -mart retail store with prepared food and off -site consumption beer and wine sales. 2. The building is two stories, 29 feet maximum in height. The first floor of the building is occupied by the mini -mart, food preparation and sales area, restrooms, equipment rooms and corridor. Employee areas are on the second floor. The building floor area is 7,381 • square feet, plus the 2,498 square foot wash tunnel, for a total building area of 9,879 square feet. 3. The proposed project would have three queuing lanes, with a 20 car capacity, leading cars to the vacuuming area, a one -lane wash tunnel, and a final customer pick -up area, with an 8 car capacity. A 15 foot wide gated emergency escape lane, on the south side of the wash tunnel, is also provided. 4. The site is rectangular in shape and 181 feet wide by 206.61 feet in length and zoned General Commercial (C -3). The car wash and lube facility are defined as a service station which is not a permitted use in the Zoning Code and requires approval of a Conditional Use Permit. Accessory uses must be approved as a part of the Conditional Use Permit process. The purpose of General Commercial (C -3) Zone, pursuant to Section 20.33.010 is to provide for the development of commercial establishments which serve a broad cross - section of the City and surrounding area. Regulations are designated to promote and control their growth in a favorable environment to all abutting and surrounding land uses. 5. The surrounding area is developed with one- and two -story multiple - family residential units and a two -story restaurant/bar/billiards parlor across Palm Avenue approximately • 40 feet to the north, a multi -story office building and single story commercial shopping center across Sepulveda Blvd. to the east, and a surface parking lot immediately to the south and west. To the west of the parking lot, approximately seventy three (73) feet away from the car wash site, is a multi - family residential area which has a grade level approximately eight (8) to ten (10) feet higher than the car wash site. Beyond these residential units is a neighborhood park. There is an existing 2 foot high retaining wall on the west side of the property with an existing 6 foot chain link fence on top which separates the surface parking lot from the proposed car wash site. The surrounding properties to the north are zoned General Commercial (C -3) and Multi- Family Residential (R -3), the south and west sides are zoned Parking (P), and to the east are Corporate Office (CO) and General Commercial (C -3) Zones. 6. The proposed project is subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). In accordance with State guidelines and local requirements, a Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared and circulated for interdepartmental and affected agency review. No significant adverse impacts were identified which could not be mitigated to an insignificant level, including impacts to traffic /circulation, noise, air quality and public services. 7. The Fiscal Impact Analysis, utilizing the City's Fiscal Impact Model, indicates that the • project without gasoline sales, will generate a fiscal surplus for the City of $13,100 during its first five years of operation, after consideration of City service costs. 2 8. At the public hearing, public testimony was presented that indicated that the project would generate additional vehicular trips which would impact parking, pedestrian and vehicular safety, and traffic flow on the streets in the immediate vicinity of the site, • particularly Palm Avenue and Sepulveda Boulevard; Palm Avenue is a local street, substandard in width (40 feet compared to the General Plan standard of 50 feet) and sloped; on- street parking on Palm Avenue is very limited since it is only allowed on the south side of the street, the block contains multi - family residential units with limited on- site parking, and the patrons of the adjacent billiards parlor and bar on the north side of Palm Avenue at Sepulveda Boulevard often use Palm Avenue as overflow parking; vehicular visibility on Palm Avenue is limited since several new condominium projects have underground parking which limits visibility as cars exit the parking areas; the proposed on -site parking will not be adequate to meet the demands since the outdoor employees are not likely to carpool or use public transit; the loading space is located within the customer pick -up area which limits the space for vehicles to park so they will overflow into other areas and impact on -site parking and circulation; there is inadequate stacking space on -site for vehicles waiting to be washed during the peak hours; traffic will increase on Sepulveda and slow down the flow since vehicles travelling southbound on Sepulveda Boulevard turning westbound onto Palm Avenue have to slow down substantially to make the narrow, tight turn and the on- street parking on Sepulveda just north of Palm Avenue limits corner visibility; the proposed number and size of the parking spaces will be inadequate to accommodate the demand of the facility, particularly the employee parking demands; the proposed project would result in an increase in noise levels due to the facility operations including the honking of car horns, outdoor bells and loudspeakers and car stereos, and • the sound will travel upwards since the condominiums to the west are at a higher elevation; the increase in vehicle fumes result in significant air quality impacts to the adjacent residential areas which will be hazardous to the health of the residents; the development of the proposed facility in the vicinity of Washington Park will be detrimental to the safety of children using the park and will impact activities in the park; and there are many children which live in the area, particularly Palm Avenue, who will be impacted by the additional vehicles. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that after considering the above facts and study of proposed Environmental Assessment EA -359 and Conditional Use Permit 94 -6, the City Council makes the following findings: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 1. In reviewing the project the City Council considered the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration along with testimony and evidence received at the public hearings, during the public review process. The Planning Commission and City Council received testimony and evidence at the public hearings which established a fair argument that significant environmental impacts may occur which cannot be mitigated to a level of insignificance. • Based on the testimony and evidence related to negative impacts on parking, circulation, traffic and noise, the City Council rejects the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impacts and finds the Mitigated Negative Declaration to be inadequate. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 1. That the proposed location of the project and the conditions under which it would be operated or maintained will be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare, and materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; since the proposed project will generate additional vehicular trips and parking demand, particularly during the weekdays' afternoon peak hours and during the Saturday afternoon peak hours of 1 -2 p.m. This will impact vehicular and pedestrian safety and parking on the streets in the immediate vicinity of the site, particularly Palm Avenue, which is a local residential street with a sloping substandard pavement width of 30 feet and limited on- street parking only on the south side. The employee parking is inadequate to meet the demands. The increase in traffic volumes and vehicle fumes will have an impact to the residential areas to the west and north of the proposed project. The traffic study does not consider the proximity of the proposed project to the existing neighborhood park. The development of the project would result in an increase in noise levels generated by the car wash operation, the vacuums, and lube facility and after hours maintenance, particularly since the orientation of the wash tunnel will funnel noise towards the residents to the west. The adjacent residential area is already heavily impacted by traffic and business operations noise from existing adjacent commercial uses and Sepulveda Blvd. The development of the proposed facility in the vicinity of the existing park will also be detrimental to the safety of children using the park and will negatively impact activities in the park. 3 SECTION 1. NOW, TE REFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council hereby denies the appeal of the Planning Commission decision, thereby denying Environmental Assessment EA -359 and Conditional Use Permit 94 -6; and SECTION 2. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Resolution; shall enter the same in the book of original resolutions of said City; and shall make a minute of the passage and adoption thereof in the records of the proceedings of the City Council of said City, in the minutes of the meeting which the same is passed and adopted. ATTESTED: dy Morte fe 'ty Clerk (SEAL) APPROVED AS TO FOR&L• Le and G Dolley -j City Attorney 9 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 16th day of May . 1995. .© Carl Jaco on, Mayor City of El Segundo, California EA359.rs7 9 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ] COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ] SS CITY OF EL SEGUNDO ] I, Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk of the City of El Segundo, California, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the whole number of members of the City Council of the said City is five; that the foregoing resolution, being RESOLUTION NO. 3918 was duly passed and adopted by the said City Council, approved and signed by the Mayor or said City, and attested by the City Clerk of said City, all at a regular meeting of the said Council held on the 16th day of May 1995, and the same was so passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: • NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTION: NOT PARTICIPATING: 0 0 Mayor ProTem Weston, Councilman Robbins, and Councilwoman Friedkin. Mayor Jacobson and Councilman Switz None None None WITNESS MY HAND THE OFFICIAL SEAL OF SAID CITY this 18th day of May, 1995. J�NDY RTESEN City Clerk of the City of El Segundo, California (SEAL)