Loading...
CC RESOLUTION 40130 RESOLUTION NO. 4013 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EL SEGUNDO, CALIFORNIA, DENYING, AND UPHOLDING THE PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION DENYING ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT EA -387 AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CUP 96 -3 FOR A 3,050 GROSS SQUARE FOOT CARL'S JR. DRIVE -THRU RESTAURANT AT 639 NORTH SEPULVEDABOULEVARD. PEI I ITONED BYCKERESTAURANTS, INC. WHEREAS, on May 3, 1996 an application was received from CKE Restaurants, Inc., requesting approval of an Environmental Assessment and a Conditional Use Permit to allow the development of a 3,050 gross square foot Carl's Jr. drive -thru restaurant development on a 0.86 acre currently vacant property located at 639 North Sepulveda Boulevard in the General Commercial (C -3) Zone; and, WHEREAS, an Environmental Assessment (EA -387), including a Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impacts for the proposed use, was prepared and circulated to all interested parties, City Staff, and affected public agencies for review and comment in the time and manner prescribed by law; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission 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, on February 27 and March 27,1997, the Planning Commission did hold, pursuant to law, duly advertised public hearings on such matter in the Council Chamber of the City Hall, 350 Main Street, and notice of the public hearings was given in the time, form and manner prescribed by law; and, WHEREAS, opportunity was given to all persons present at such Commission meetings to speak for or against the findings of Environmental Assessment EA -387, and Conditional Use Permit CUP 96 -3; and, WHEREAS, on April 10, 1997, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No.2380, finalizing its findings made on February 27 and March 27, 1997, and denying Environmental Assessment EA -387 and Conditional Use Permit CUP 96 -3; and WHEREAS, on April 3, 1997, within the ten (10) day appeal period after the March 27, 1997 Planning Commission decision, an appeal of the Planning Commission's denial of Environmental Assessment EA -387, Conditional Use Permit CUP 96 -3 was filed by Mr. Lorenzo Reyes, Representative for CKE Restaurants, Inc.; and WHEREAS, on May 6, 1997, the City Council did hold, pursuant to law, a duly advertised public hearing on the appeal, and notice of hearing was given in time, form and manner prescribed by law; and 1 W1 EREAS, at said hearing, opportunity was given to all persons present to present testimony or documentary evidence for or against the findings of Environmental Assessment EA -387 and Conditional Use Permit CUP 96 -3; and , at said hearings the following information was presented: 1. The proposed project is the construction of a new approximately 3,050 gross square foot (2,966 square foot net) 89 seat Carl's Jr. fast -food restaurant with a drive -thru. No outdoor dining or alcohol sales were proposed and the inside sit- down portion of the restaurant would be owned and operated by CKE. Approximately 50% of the business would be generated by the drive -thru. The restaurant was proposed to operate from 7:00 am to 11:00 pm Sunday through Thursday and 7:00 am to 2:00 am on Friday and Saturday. The drive -thru had at the Planning Commission hearings been proposed to operate twenty -four (24) hours a day, seven (7) days a week. Staff had proposed limiting the hours of operation for the drive -thru to 8:00 am to 12:00 midnight on Saturday, 8:00 am to 10:00 pm on Sunday, 7:00 am to 10:00 pm Monday thru Thursday and 7:00 am to 12:00 midnight on Friday. At the City Council meeting the applicant agreed to the hours of operation for the drive -thru, as proposed by Staff. The menu board /speaker box was proposed to be located on the northeast corner of the building with the drive -thru queue on the east side, and pick -up window on the north side. The building would be one story and 25 feet maximum in height. 2. Access to the site was proposed by a new 25 foot wide two -way driveway on Sepulveda Boulevard, on the south end of the site. Three existing curb cuts on Palm Avenue would be removed and a new 30 foot wide curb cut was proposed, approximately 47 feet east of the westerly side property line. The new curb cut was proposed to accommodate a two -way driveway with an accentuated "pork - chop" shaped raised median to accommodate a right -turn only exit off of the property onto Palm Avenue. A 13 foot wide by 50 foot long loading zone was proposed on the west side of the building and 40 total parking spaces were to be provided. A portion of the Hacienda Hotel surface parking lot, which encroaches approximately 13 feet ten inches onto the west side of the property, was proposed to remain. 3. According to the Traffic Impact Study, the project was expected to increase daily traffic volumes along Sepulveda Boulevard by approximately 1,040 trips, or approximately 1.6 percent of the total daily traffic on Sepulveda Boulevard (58,000 trips /day). Existing Palm Avenue traffic, between Sepulveda Boulevard and Washington Street, is approximately 800 trips per day and the project was anticipated to add a maximum of 670 trips (on Saturdays, 650 on weekdays) east of the project driveway on Palm Avenue - an 84% increase. West of the project driveway on Palm Avenue, the project was anticipated to generate a maximum of 230 additional trips on Palm Avenue during Saturdays; 100 additional trips are anticipated weekdays. This would be a 29% increase above the existing Saturday level and a 13% increase above the existing weekday traffic level. 4. No new fences or walls were proposed. The total site landscaping would have been approximately 10,838 square feet in area, covering 29% of the total site. A total of thirty -five (3 S) to forty (40) employees would have occupied the site; with 7 a total of six (6) to eight (8) employees per shift. Currently, the site is relatively level with.very little. vegetation and is completely paved containing no unique geologic features, and is rectangular in shape; 181 feet wide by 206.8 feet in length. 5. The site is zoned C -3 (General Commercial), which permits those uses set forth in the El Segundo Municipal Code, Section No. 20.33.020. Drive -thru Restaurants require approval of a Conditional Use Permit, pursuant to- El Segundo Municipal Code Section No. 20.33.040. 6. The project site is located within the northwest portion of the City of -El Segundo, approximately one mile west of the San Diego (I -405) Freeway and one -half mile south of the Glenn Anderson (1 -105) Freeway and Los Angeles International Airport (LAX). 7. The surrounding area is developed with one and two -story multiple- family residential units (small condominium and apartment complexes, many with underground parking which limits visibility when vehicles exit) to the north and west, a two -story restaurant/bar/billiards parlor across Palm Avenue to the north, an eight -story office building and single story commercial shopping center across Sepulveda Boulevard to the east, and a surface parking lot, for the Hacienda Hotel, immediately to the south and west. The Hacienda Hotel parking lot has a curb cut on Palm Avenue with metal "teeth" in the driveway which only allows vehicles to exit, not enter the lot from Palm Avenue. To the west of the parking lot, approximately 74 feet away from the subject property, is a two -story condominium complex with underground parking. The Hacienda Hotel parking lot is separated from the condominium project to the west by a block retaining wall, a landscape strip, and a property line block wall. The first floor elevation of the condominium complex is approximately ten (10) feet higher than the elevation of the subject property. Further west on Palm Avenue, at Washington Street approximately 340 feet west of the subject site is Washington Street Park; a linear city park with a tot lot, picnic tables, grass areas and par - course located under the Southern California Edison power lines. 8. The properties to the north across Palm Avenue are zoned Commercial General (C- 3) and Multi- Family Residential (R -3), to the south and west is zoned Parking (P), and further west is zoned Multi- Family Residential (R -3), and to the east across Sepulveda Boulevard is zoned Corporate Office (C -O). 9. 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 by Staff which could not be mitigated to an insignificant level, including impacts to: transportation /circulation, hazards, noise, public services, and aesthetics. 3 . 10. At the public hearings, on February 27, March 27 and May 6, 1997, public testimony was presented by, among others, numerous residents who live in the immediate vicinity of the project site, and other evidence was presented that indicated that the project would generate additional vehicular trips which would negatively impact parking, pedestrian and vehicular safety, and traffic flow on the streets in the immediate vicinity of the site, particularly that portion of Palm Avenue near the project site; Palm Avenue is a local street, substandard in width (40 feet right -of -way, with a pavemenf width of only 29' -6 ", compared to the General Plan standard of SO feet) and sloped; on- street parking on Palm Avenue is very limited since it is only allowed on the south side of the street, and prohibited immediately adjacent to the project; the block adjacent to the project site contains multi - family residential units with limited on -site parking; the proposed number of parking spaces will be inadequate to accommodate the parking demands for both customers and employees, particularly since drive -thru customers often park on -site to eat their meals and limited off -site parking would also not accommodate drive -thru customers parking and eating in their ears; the drive -thru operations would serve commuters at the expense of residents of the City and the surrounding neighborhood; the proposed project would result in an increase in noise levels due to the drive -thru facility operations including the honking of car horns, 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 and odors from the drive -thru operations will result in significant air quality impacts to the adjacent residential areas which will be hazardous to the health of the residents; the proposed project will increase crime (above the level of a vacant lot), and decrease property values due to the increase in traffic volumes, noise, trash and crime; the drive -thru operations will generate trash which will be scattered throughout the residential neighborhood and park, and will negatively impact the neighborhood; the proposed drive -thru located near residential neighborhoods does not promote an upscale image of the town, is not consistent with the City's "small town" characteristics and will impact the residential quality of life; the development of the proposed facility in the vicinity of Washington Park, which is a neighborhood park, will be detrimental to the safety of children using the park and organized activities such as Little League and soccer, and will negatively impact activities in the park and residents adjacent to the park; there are many children which live in the area, particularly Palm Avenue (approximately 40 within the block between Washington Avenue and Sepulveda Boulevard), who will be impacted by the additional vehicles; the proposed on -site lighting is at the same level as the bedrooms of the condominiums to the west which will have negative off -site light, glare, and illumination impacts; the "porkchop" median will not stop cars from turning left onto Palm Avenue from the project driveway, adding further traffic impacts; and the additional vehicle trips on Palm Avenue (a 13% to 29% increase) is a significant increase. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that after considering the above facts and study of proposed Environmental Assessment EA -387 and Conditional Use Permit CUP 96 -3, the City Council makes the following findings and in so doing, Denies the proposed project: F_ -I L 0 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 1. The Draft Initial Study was made available to all local and affected agencies and for public review and comment in the time and manner prescribed by law; and, 2. 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 City Council received testimony and evidence at the public hearings which established 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 land use planning, public services, air quality, parking, circulation, traffic, aesthetics, and noise, the City Council rejects the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impacts and finds the Mitigated Negative Declaration to be inadequate. ZONING CODE CONSISTENCY 1. The site is zoned C -3 (General Commercial), which permits those uses set forth in the El Segundo Municipal Code Section No. 20.33.020 at a. FAR of 1.0 or less. The proposed drive -thru restaurant would only be allowed under the existing Zoning designation with approval of a Conditional Use Permit. CONDITIONAL USE PERW 1. The proposed project is not a compatible.use on the particular site in relationship to other existing and potential uses within the general area in which the use is proposed to be located; due to the close proximity of the project to residential and recreational land uses; and, 2. The proposed drive -thru restaurant use is not consistent nor is it compatible with the purpose of the zone in which the site is located because application of the applicable development standards in the zone can not mitigate the negative impacts on the abutting and surrounding land uses that will be created by the project; and, 3. The proposed project does not adequately compensate for potential impacts that will be generated by the proposed use, such as noise, smoke, dust, light, fumes, vibration, odors, traffic, aesthetics, and hazards. Specifically, the development of the project would result in an increase in noise levels, fumes, odors, light, and traffic generated by the drive -thru restaurant. The adjacent residential area is already heavily impacted by traffic, light, and business operations noise from existing adjacent commercial uses and Sepulveda Boulevard. The project lights would impact adjacent residences as the height is the same as their bedroom windows. 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; and, 5 4. The proposed location of the proposed project is not in accord with the objectives of this title, which require a project to serve the public health, safety, and welfare and provide the economic and social advantages resulting from orderly planned use of land resources due to existing infrastructure conditions, the project's location, and traffic impacts, and conflicts with the purposes of the zone in which the site is located; and, 5. The proposed location of the conditional use and the conditions under which it would be operated or maintained will be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare, and be materially injurious to properties and 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 only 29' -6" feet and limited on- street parking only on the south side. 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 proposed project would result in an increase in noise levels due to the facility operations including the honking of car horns, loudspeakers, and car stereos. SECTION 1. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council hereby upholds the Planning Commision's decision, and denies Environmental Assessment EA -387 and Conditional Use Permit CUP 96 -3. SECTION 2. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this resolution; shall cause the same to be entered in the book of original resolutions of said City; and shall make a minute of the passage and adoption thereof in the records if the proceedings of the City Council of said City, in the minutes of meeting which the same is passed and adopted. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 20th day of May 1997. r Ynd y Mor s n, Cit Clerk (SEAL) APPROVED AS TO FORM: • Z, L d Mark D. Hensley, City Attorney 0 Sandra Jacobs, M o.r of the City of E e, undo, California , P.\proJects \ea- 387\ea3874.res CERTIFICATION 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. 4013 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 20th day of MAY, 1997, and the same was so passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Mayor Jacobs, Mayor ProTem Wernick, Councilwoman Friedkin, Councilman Weston, and Councilman Gordon NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTENTION: None NOT PARTICIPATING: None May,1997. WITNESS MY HAND THE OFFICIAL SEAL OF SAID CITY this 21st day of Cin y esVCity Clerk of the City of El Segundo, California (SEAL)