The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1992-09-08 - AGENDA REPORTS - ZC DENIAL 90 010 PERMIT (2)AGENDA REPORT City Manager Approval Item, o beipre nted PUBLIC HEARING Lynn M. Harris DATE: September 8, 1992 SUBJECT: Appeal of the Planning Commission's denial of Zone Change 90-010, Conditional Use Permit 90-020 and Oak Tree Permit 90-046 to allow for the development of a 30,050 square foot (35' in height) auto service center and full service car wash with 133 parking spaces on 2.6 acres located north of Soledad Canyon Road between Furnivall and Honby Avenues (20529 Soledad Canyon Road). Appellant: Michael Lee Cone (Mike's Tireman). DEPARTMENT: Community Development BACKGROUND The applicant filed the present application on July 6, 1990. The project was deemed incomplete on August 6, 1990 and the applicant was given a list of requirements. On March 31, 1992 the applicant submitted a letter requesting a hearing within 60 days (see attachment). Two days later, a revised site plan was received by the Community Development Department. On June 16, 1992, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution P92-21 denying the above referenced project. The project site has 2.95 acres with two zones: C-3 (Unlimited Commercial) south of the existing alley and A-1-10,000. (Light Agricultural Zone, 10,000 square foot minimum lot size) north of the alley. The applicant is requesting to change the zone to C -3 -DP (Unlimited Commercial, Development Plan Required) for the entire site. _ A conditional use permit is requested to implement the attached development plan. The oak tree permit is required to relocate one existing non-native oak tree. The site currently contains a large auto and truck tire changing facility on Soledad Canyon Road, south of the alley. North of the alley are a garage, a single .family residence, a Quonset but used as a residence and miscellaneous tire and vehicle storage. The site is surrounded by single family residences and commercial/industrial uses. The site is relatively flat and only minor grading is proposed with this development. , The applicant is proposing to construct four commercial buildings totaling 30,050 square feet. South of the alley, the applicant is proposing to construct two single story buildings ("A" and "B") which are 35 feet tall and total 11,960 square feet in floor area. The applicant is proposing 18 parking spaces including two handicapped. North of the alley the applicant is proposing to construct Building "C" which contains' 12,090 square feet of commercial space with employee parking on the roof and a 230 foot long access ramp. Building "D" would be a 6,000 square foot full service car wash. The area north of the alley would contain 115 parking spaces, of which three are handicapped and 47 are compact. All 40 spaces located on the roof of building "C" are compact. � C A eadaltem:-' i 9 o?� The one oak tree onsite is located along the northern property line adjacent to Honby.Avenue. The tree, a Cork Oak, is 25 feet tall and 11 inches in diameter. Vhile the tree is native to the Mediterranean region, it is protected by the City's oak tree preservation ordinance. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION The project was heard by the Commission on June 2, 1991. Though the applicant was advised the submittal was inadequate, the applicant requested that the project be heard by the Planning Commission. During the Planning Commission's public hearing on the project issues were raised regarding compatibility. of the use with nearby residential uses, a possible vacation of the alley, internal circulation, submittal inconsistencies, and an incomplete site plan. Seven area residents spoke in opposition to the project. The concerns of the residents focused on the compatibility of the uses with nearby residential uses, traffic, safety and the existing tire operation_. One resident in the area spoke in favor of the project. Following the public hearing, the Commission found that the project: 1) Failed to meet the minimum submittal requirements 2) No loading zones were provided 3) A lack of buffering from the existing residential units 4) An overage of compact parking spaces on the submitted site plan 5) The design created circulation and noise impacts to existing residences The Planning Commission denied the project without prejudice on a four to one vote. During the Commission's deliberation of the project, the Commission directed staff to review the options associated with a possible vacation or relocation of the alley. A copy of the report from the Traffic Engineer on the vacation . is attached. The report discusses five criteria or reasons we may wish to keep an alley. Since none of the criteria apply in this case, the recommendation is made to vacate this alley. RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council: 1) Deny Zone Change 90-010, Conditional Use Permit 90-020 and Oak Tree Permit 90-046; 2) Direct staff to prepare a resolution of denial for the Council's consideration at the September 22, 1992 meeting; and 3) Direct the 'applicant as to whether the City would consider a re -designed project with a good internal circulation plan and'. vacation of the alley. Resolution P92-21 Planning Commission Staff Report Minutes. June 2, 1992 Commission meeting Negative Declaration Correspondences FLF/467 PUBL:C H?AR:NG PHOCBCU4fi 1. Mayor Opens Hearing a. States Purpose of Hearing 2. City Clerk Reports an Hearing Notice 3. Staff Report (City Manager) or (City Attorney) or (RP Staff) 4. Proponent Argument (30 minutes) 5. Opponent Argument (30 minutes) 6. Five-minute Rebuttal (Proponent) a. Proponent 7. Mayor Closes Public Testimony 8. Discussion by Council 9. Council Decision 10. Mayor Announces Decision CITY OF SANTA CLARITA AN APPEAL OF.THE PLANNING.COMMISSION'S DENIAL OF ZONE CHANGE 90-010, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 90-020, AND OAK TREE PERMIT 90-046 TO ALLOW FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A 2.6 ACRE SITE WITH A 30,050 SQUARE FOOT AUTO SERVICE CENTER AND AUTOMATIC CAR WASH. THE SITE IS PRESENTLY DEVELOPED WITH AN AUTOMOBILE SERVICE AND TIRE FACILITY AND ACCESSORY OUTSIDE STORAGE AREAS. THE LOCATION IS 20529 SOLEDAD CANYON ROAD IN THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA THE APPLICANT IS MICHAEL LEE CONE. PUBLIC NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN: A Public Hearing will be held before the City Council of the City of Santa Clarita to consider an appeal of the Planning Commission's denial of Zone Change: 90-010, Conditional Use Permit 90-020, and Oak Tree Permit 90-046. to allow for the development of a 2.6 acre site with a 30,050 square foot auto service center. and automatic car wash. The site is presently developed with an Automobile Service and tire facility and accessory outside storage areas. The location is 20529 Soledad Canyon Road in the City of Santa Clarita. The applicant is Michael Lee Cone. The hearing will be. held by the City Council in the City Hall Council Chambers, 23920 Valencia Blvd., 1st Floor, Santa Clarita, the. 8th -day of September, 1992, at or after 6:30 p.m. Proponents, opponents, and any interested persons may appear and be heard on this matter at that time. Further information may be obtained by contacting the City Clerk's office, Santa Clarita City Hall, 23920 Valencia Blvd., 3rd Floor, Santa Clarita. If you wish to challenge this order in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City Council, at, or prior to the public hearing. Date: August 10, 1992 Donna M. Grindey, CMC City Clerk Publish Date: August 14, 1992 CITY OF SANTA CLARITA INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM DATE: July 24, 1992 TO: Richard Henderson, Principal Planner t FROM: Bahman Janka, City Traffic SUBJECT: Alley Vacations Per your request, we have reviewed the subject of alley vacations and in particular the alley for Mike Cone's Tires Auto Center and offer the following comments. We have recommended vacating the alleywhich subdividesthe proposed Mike's Tires Auto Center. Our goal is to minimize the number of access points to all commercial properties to improve traffic flow operations on the public streets and minimize the potential for accidents. The proposed site will have one driveway access on the east and west side of the property. There is no need for second access to the property via the alley entrances on each side of the property. The internal circulation and parking spaces should be designed in such a way to make the site self-sufficient without the need for the access from the alley. We cannot recommend for or against alley vacations throughout the City. We believe each case should be evaluated separately for Its merits and potential impacts on the public street. In general, some of the reasons we might want to keep an alley are if: • The alley provides access to residential garages • The alley provides access to apartment building driveways • The alley provides access to multiple commercial sites • The alley Is used as a truck loading zone for commercial properties • The alley is continuous across several properties In each of the above cases, the alley might reduce the number of access points on the public right- of-way, could provide a function (like loading zone) which might not be possible or safe to accommodate on-site or on the adjacent public street, or could provide a circulation alternative among several sites. All of the above would benefit the street's traffic operation by minimizing the interruptions, reducing the number of conflict points, and eliminating traffic frictions caused by parked cars/trucks. We believe none of the criteria mentioned above reflects the use of the alley In Mike's Tires Auto Center. Therefore, we reaffirm our previous recommendation for vacating this alley. cc: Anthony Nisich, City Engineer Kevin Michel, Senior Planner BJ:dis:alleyvac.bj r- & ASSOCIATES, Inc. Consufting Engineers CITY OF S4111A OLARITA Jake � 0 ? 179Z "' Donna Grindey, City Clerk City of Santa Clarita 23920 Valencia Blvd. Santa Clarita, Ca 91355 Dear Ms. Grindey; 26017 Huntington cane, Suite B Valencia, California 91355 Telephone: (805) 295-0400 Fax: (805) 295.1602 Zone Chango 90-010 C.U.P. 90-020 ------------ Hale & Associates, Inca is representing Michael L. Cone, who is the owner/applicant for Zone Change 90-010 and Conditional Use Permit 90-020 located at 20529 Soledad.Canyon Road. On behalf of Mr. Cone we hereby appeal the City Planning Commission's denial of this project (Resolution No. P92-21). A check in the amount of $465.00 is enclosed herewith for the appeal fee. The reasons for our appeal are numerous, though the primary issue for this project is the disposition of the 20 foot public alley which extends from Furnival Avenue to Honby Avenue and bisects the project site. Over the past two years the City staff has been unable to reach a definitive recommendation on the disposition of this alley. The staff's position has fluctuated from retention of the right of way, to vacation of the right of way, to widening of the alley and finally to their present non committed position. The frustration caused by the uncertainty of the staff's position led our client to.formally "insist" that the City Planning Commission conduct a public hearing for this project. Predictably, the City staff recommendeddenial of the project and based their recommendation on an inaccurate assessment of the project's status and application materials. The resolution of denial strongly critiques the projects application materials, which fails to acknowledge that the current proposal constitutes a "DESIGN Concept" only. This is stated on the current plans in Bold Print. The City's fluctuating position on the alley right of way has caused the project to be designed and redesigned at least four times. We acknowledge that the current application packet is not up to date, but we must have a definite answer on the alley prior to a complete redesign and submittal. The Planning Commission hearing on June 2, 1992 was dominated by the Staff's negative critique of the site plan and the discussion of the alley right-of-way. The opposition's testimony was directed at the applicant's personal integrity rather than the project's issues. We feel that this was inappropriate. Unfortunately, the Planning Commission could not establish a formal recommendation to the City Council on the disposition of the alley. The Commission has now directed the staff to research the alley issue and report back to them. Based on the City's uncertain position, the applicant has little choice but to appeal to the City Council for a policy decision on the disposition of the alley right of way. We request that the and concentrate disposition of the we can effectively of the City and residents of Santa DEH/lm Enclosure cc: Bob Funk Michael Cone file (2) City Council review the appeal for this project. on adopting an official policy regarding the public alley. Upon the City Council's decision design a project which will enhance that portion provide local services and employment to the Clarita. Sincerely, AE D. E. HALE R. C. E, ti 3 i CITY OF SANTA CLARITA -'� 23920 VALENCIA BLVD.. SUITE 300 • SANTA CLARITA 91355 18051259.2489 - �ODATE: RECEIVED OF: CITY & LP: PHONE NO: ( ) �) .� - ��yS .) DRIVERS LICENSE NO.: N,.fVIW •.1N 4l .54 `ifS Al'S fv !�' ] ( i .0 FQRo,:),� j• ,h,. ITOiAC�AAdOUNF I I . I I ' I I I I I ❑:CASH ` [ CHECK NO:�/_s�.: A7 / . %/S 160 DOLLARS I CENTS CASH RECEIPT N0: 35018 - RECENED BY DEPARTMENT COPY.-.. . City of Santa Clarita Jill Kapc Mayor Jan Heldt Mayor Pro -Tem Carl Boyer Counalmember Jo Anne Darcy Councilmember George Pederson Councilmembar 23920 Valencia Blvd. Suite 300 City of Santa Clarita California 91355 July 7, 1992 Phone (805) 259.2489 Fax (805) 259-8125 Mike's Tireman Inc. 20529 Soledad Cyn. Rd. Santa Clarita, CA 91351 Re: Zone Change 90-010 C.U.P. 90-020 Attn: Michael -Cone Dear Mr. Cone: The City Clerk's office is in receipt of your appeal regarding the Zone Change 90-010, C.U.P. 90-020 located at 20529 Soledad Canyon Road. Your appeal will be heard by the. City Council on Tuesday, September 8, 1992 at 6:30 p.m. at the Council Chambers, 23920 Valencia Boulevard, lst floor. Should you have any information you wish to present to Council, please deliver it to the City Clerk's Office, Suite 301, at least two weeks before the public hearing.. You may obtain further information by contacting the City Clerk's office at 255-4391. Sincerely, Donna M. Grindey, CMC rr City Clerk Enclosure cc: Lynn Harris Fred Follstad DMG/kg/722 RESOLUTION NO. P92-21 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA, DENYING PROPOSED ZONE CHANGE 90-010, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 90-020, AND OAK TREE PERMIT 90-046 TO CONSTRUCT 30,050 SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL SPACE, INCLUDING A FULL SERVICE CAR WASH, ON A 2.95 ACRE PROPERTY LOCATED NORTHERLY OF SOLEDAD CANYON ROAD, BETWEEN HONBY AND FURNIVALL AVENUES IN THE HONBY AREA.` (MASTER CASE NO. 90-147) THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The Planning Commission does hereby make the following findings of fact: a. An application for a zone change (ZC 90-010), conditional .use permit (CUP 90-020) and Environmental Review was filed with the City of Santa Clarita by Michael Lee Cone (the "applicant") on July 6, 1990. The property for which,this application has been filed is•located northerly of Soledad Canyon Road,, between Honby and Furnivall Avenues in the Honby area. (Assessor Parcel Numbers 2805-020-002, 003, 007, 012, 013, 023, 024, 026, 028, and 029, a legal description of 'which is on file in the Department of Community Development.) b. Following review of the initial application, the applicant subsequently filed an application for a oak tree permit (OTP 90-046) on October _2 ,1990. C. ZC .90-010 is a request to change, the zoning on the subject property to C-3(DP) (Unlimited Commercial, Development Plan required). The site presently has' two zoning'..designations- approximately .7 acres are C-3 (Unlimited Commercial) located southerly. of the existing alley, and. 2.3 acres are A-1-10,000' (Light Agricultural Zone, 10,000 square foot minimum lot size). d. CUP 90-020 has. been requested to implement the development plan for the site. e. An OTP 90-046 has been requested to allow the relocation of one oak tree. The oak is not of the heritage. size. An Oak Tree Report dated August 17, 1990 was prepared by McMullen Landscaping to evaluate this proposal. f. The subject parcel is designated as IC .(Industrial Commercial, floor area ratios to 1:1) by the City of Santa Clarita General Plan. The proposed floor area ratio for the project is .23:1. g. The subject site contains a number uses including a large tire repair facility, outdoor storage, two residences, and vacant property. The applicant has proposed only minimal grading due to the site being flat. h. The project site is surrounded by a mobilehome park'to the east, railroad tracks and vacant land to the south, ''existing commercial and industrial uses to the west and single family residential to the north. The General Plan categories for the surrounding uses 'include RM (Residential Moderate) to the east. BP (Business Park) to the south and IC to the west and north including the subject site. The proposal is an infill project. i. Access is proposed to the site from Soledad Canyon Road, Furnivall Avenue, Honby Avenue and an existing alley. J. The project applications were found to be incomplete on August 6; 1990, because a Oak Tree Permit was needed to process this proposal. The City of Santa 'Clarita Development Review Committee (DRC) met on August 23, 1990, to review this project. k. This project was reviewed pursuant to the, provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act .(CEQA). An Initial Study was prepared for this project dated May 12, 1992. Basedupon this Initial Study, staff determined that this project would not have a significant effect on the environment if mitigation measures were implemented, and a MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION was prepared. 1. The applicant submitted a letter, dated March 31, 1992, requesting the project be heard before the Planning Commission within 60 days. M. The applicants agent submitted revised site plans on April 2, 1992 to the Community Development Department. n. A duly noticed public. hearing was held by the Planning Commission on June 2, 1992, at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, 23920 Valencia Boulevard, Santa Clarita. SECTION 2. Based upon the above findings of fact.' oral and written testimony and other evidence received at the public hearing held for the project, and upon studies and investigations made by the Planning Commission and on its behalf, the Planning Commission further finds as follows: a. At the hearing of June 2, 1992, the Planning Commission considered the staff report prepared for this project and received testimony on this proposal. b. The. City's General Plan designation for the project site is Industrial Commercial (IC), which allows for a maximum floor area ratio of 1:1. The project floor area ratio is .23:1 which is below the range,of densities for the IC designation. RESO P92-21 Page 2 C . Based upon a review of the plan submitted on April 2, 1992, the staff report and testimony at the public hearing on June 2, 1992, the subject property is not suitable for the type of development proposed because the project is not consistent with the City's General Plan policies regarding circulation, requiring new development to be compatible with existing residential neighborhoods and preserving oak trees. d. The General Plan's policies calling for new development to be compatible with the surrounding neighborhood include, but are not limited to, Land Use Element policy 6.2 which states that the City must "continua to provide for the development of new housing while ensuring that the character, scale, and density of new.. residential development is sensitive, compatible and complementary to existing residential neighborhoods.," The. General Plan also contains numerous policies encouraging preservation of oak trees which include, but are not limited to, Land Use policies 2.2 and 5.6, Housing Element policies 7.2 and 7.5, Community Design Element policy 5.1, and Open Space and Conservation Element policies 1.1 and 3.2. e. The proposal cannot fully meet the required findings for the granting of a conditional use permit as listed in Santa Clarita Municipal Code section 22.56.090, as follows: The requested use at the location will adversely affect the health, peace, comfort or welfare of persons residing or working in the surrounding area; be materially detrimental to the use, enjoyment or valuation of property of other persons located in the vicinity of the site; jeopardize, endanger or otherwise constitute a menace to the public health, safety or general welfare because: The automotive related service uses will affect existing air quality and the peace, comfort and welfare of persons residing in the surrounding area in addition to being materially detrimental to the adjacent residential uses. The project uses will incrementally increase existing noise impacts to the surrounding residential uses. The proposed project's impacts in the areas of circulation, air quality, land use, noise, and public safety substantiate's the above information. The submitted plan fails .to provide an adequate buffering from the existing residential uses. The identified mitigation measures are not satisfactory to properly integrate the project uses with the surrounding residential neighborhood. RESO P92-21 Page 3 f. The proposal cannot fully meet the required findings for the granting of a zone change as listed in Santa Clarita Municipal Code Section 22.16.150, as follows: The placement of the proposed zone at the subject site, in conjunction with the project, will not be in the interest of public health, safety and general welfare, and in conformance with good zoning practice because: The noise impacts associated with project .are not compatible with the adjacent residential uses. Circulation impacts associated with the adjustment of the bike lane will not be in the .interest of public safety. g. The applicants submittal fails to meet the Santa Clarita Municipal Code Section 22.52.1082, 22.52.1084 and 22.52.1060.E. as follows: The submitted site plan depicts 32Z. of the parking spaces as compact which exceeds the maximum allowed by 12Z. The submitted site plan depicts no landscaping within the parking area and no provisions for the required trees. The submitted site plan fails to provide any of the required loading zones. h. The applicants submittal fails to meet the Santa Clarita Municipal Code Section 22.40.050. as follows: The submitted materials failed to provide a detailed plot plan showing the development features including grading, walls, landscaping, height, bulk of the structures, the signs, color and appearance of the buildings and other features that are needed to make the development attractive adequately buffered from existing uses and in keeping with the character of the area. In addition, no progress schedule was provided. i. The applicant's April 2, 1992 submittal failed to meet the criteria set forth in Santa Clarita City Council Resolution 90-118 for materials required. SECTION 3. Based upon the foregoing facts and findings, the Planning Commission hereby determines as follows: a. The design and improvement of the proposed project is not consistent with the City's General Plan because it is not in accordance with circulation, oak preservation and neighborhood compatibility policies. The project is also not consistent with policies requiring submittal requirements, and parking requirements. RESO P92-21 Page 4 b. The requested use may adversely affect the health, peace, comfort or welfare of persons residing in the surrounding area; may be materially detrimental to the use, enjoyment, or, valuation of property of other persons located in the vicinity of the site; and, may jeopardize, endanger or otherwise constitute a menace to the public health, safety or general welfare because of visual impacts to the surrounding community, potential traffic, circulation, and transportation impacts, neighborhood compatibility, and relocation of an oak tree. SECTION 4: The Planning Commission hereby denies Zone Change 90-010, to change the zoning of the site to C-3(DP), denies Conditional' Use Permit 90-020 to allow for implementation of the development plan, and denies Oak Tree Permit 90-046. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 16th day of June 1992. Jerry t. Cherringto , Chairman Planning Commission ATTEST: Lyn" M. Harris Di, Ll of Community Development STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES) as CITY OF SANTA CLARITA) I, Donna M. Grindey, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Santa Clarita at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 16th day of June 1992 by the following vote of the Planning Commission: AYES: ' COMMISSIONERS: Cherrington, Woodrow, Modugno, Brathwaite and Doughman NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None L onna M. Grindey City Clerk FLF:448 RESO P92-21 Page 5 MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF -SANTA CLARITA. Tuesday June 2, 1992 7:00 p.m. ITEM 4: ZONE CHANGE 90-010, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 90-020,. AND OAR'. TREE PERMIT 90-046 - located at 20529 Soledad Canyon Road between Furnivall and Honby Avenues Director Harris introduced Item 4 and Associate Planner Fred Follstad gave the staff report and made a slide presentation. There were questions of staff and discussion among the Commission. At 7:55 p.m., Chairman Cherrington opened the public hearing. Those speaking in favor were: Robert Funk, 27246 Garza Drive, Saugus, representing the applicant, presented a history of the project. -There. was discussion among the Commission. The public hearing was opened at 8:20 p.m. Those speaking in favor of the project were the following: Jason Lombardo, 20541 Soledad Canyon Road, Canyon Country, whose comments included zoning, and surrounding properties. Speaking in opposition were.:`, -. Francis Hamilton, 26950 Furnivall Avenue, Canyon Country, commented on traffic concerns,.and the zoning, Of the'area James.Innes; -.26953 Honby' Avenue, Canyon Country, "-commented on the, existing tire'business owned by the,applicant;;traffic, and 'safety:. Jerry Cervenka,' 27038 Honby Avenue,. Canyon Country, distributed a letterin opposition to the project, and commented.on his opposition. Ren Perkins, 20543 Soledad Street, Canyon Country, stated his opposition to the project.' Charlotte Diaz, 20551 Soledad Street, Canyon Country, stated her opposition'to the project, citing traffic and safety as concerns. Jerry Hider, 20501 Soledad Canyon Road, Canyon Country, made general comments on the project. Tim Mansfield, 26935 Honby Avenue, Canyon Country, stated concerns regarding traffic and the state of the property. Chairman Cherrington then allowed for rebuttal by Mr. Don Hale, 26017 Huntington Lane, Unit. B, Santa Clarita, engineer for the applicant. Mr. Hale rebutted comments regarding parking, traffic, -speeding on residential streets, the possible .vacation of the .alley by the City. -the conditions of the project, and requested a continuance. There were questions of staff. At 8:53 p.m., the'public hearing was closed. There was discussion among the Commission. Commission Doughman motioned to deny the project with absence of :prejudice, and directed staff to review and report on the options of alley vacation.' Vice -Chairman Woodrow seconded. After some discussion, the motion was approved 4-1 with Commissioner Brathwaite dissenting. CITY OF SANTA CLARITA STAFF REPORT Zone Change 90-010 Conditional Use Permit 90-020 Oak Tree Permit 90-046 MASTER CASE 90-147 DATE: June 2, 1992 TO: Chai man Cher ington and Members of the Planning Commission �A�i 0 FROM: Ly M. Harris, Director Community Development PROJECT PLANNER: Fred Follstad, Associate Planner APPLICANT: Michael Lee Cone LOCATION: 20529 Soledad Canyon Road, between Honby and Furnivall Avenues (Assessor Parcel Numbers 2805-020-002, 003, 007, 012, 013, 022 through 026 and 029). REQUEST: The applicant is requesting', a zone change to C -3 -DP (Unlimited Commercial, Development Plan), a conditional use permit to implement the proposed plan, and an oak tree permit to allow the relocation of one existing Oak tree. 01-VTty; 1,l6 Please refer to the attached chronological list provided to acquaint yourself with the rather complex history of this case. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The project site has 2.95 acres with two zones: C-3 .(Unlimited Commercial) south of the existing alley and A-1-10,000 (Light Agricultural Zone, 10,000 square foot minimum lot size) north of the alley. The applicant is requesting to change the zone to C -3 -DP (Unlimited Commercial, Development Plan Required) for the entire site. A conditional use permit is requested to implement the attached development plan. The oak tree permit is required to relocate one existing non-native oak tree. The site currently contains a large auto and truck tire changing facility on Soledad Canyon Road, south of the alley. North of the alley there are a garage, a single family residence, a Quonset but used as a residence and miscellaneous tire and vehicle storage. The site is surrounded by single family residences and commercial/industrial uses. The site is relatively flat and only minor grading is proposed with this development. The applicant is proposing to construct four commercial buildings totaling 30,050 square feet. South of the alley, the applicant is proposing to construct two single story buildings ("A" and "B") which are 35 feet tall and total 11;960 square feet in floor area. The applicant is proposing 18 parking spaces including two handicapped. North of the alley the applicant is proposing to construct Building "C" which contains '12,090 square feet of commercial space with employee parking on the roof and a 230 foot long access ramp. Building "D" would be a 6,000 square foot full service car wash. The area north of the alley would contain 115 parking spaces, of which three are handicapped and 47 are compact. All 40 spaces located on the roof of building "C" are compact. Agenda Item: 4 The applicant is providing right-of-ways 60 feet from centerline on Soledad and 42 feet from centerline on Honby and Furnivall. In addition, the applicant is would increase the alley width from the existing 20 feet to 30 feet. The one oak tree onsite is located along the northern property line adjacent to Honby Avenue. The tree, a Cork Oak, is 25 feet high and 11 inches in diameter. While the tree is native to the Mediterranean region, it is protected by the City's oak tree preservation ordinance. GENERAL PLAN/LAND USE/ZONING:. Under the City of Santa Clarita's General Plan, the site is designated as Industrial Commercial (floor area ratios to 1.0:1). The applicant is proposing a floor area ratio of .23:1. The proposed project could be found to be consistent with the City's General Plan. The City's General Plan designation, existing zoning, and existing land use of the project site and adjacent properties are as follows: GENERAL PLAN ZONING LAND USE PROJECT SITE IC C-3, A-1-10,000 Existing Tire Store, Proposed C -3 -DP Outdoor Storage and Two Residences SURROUNDING AREA North IC A-1-10,000 Single Family Houses, and Equestrian Uses East RM A-2-1 Parklane Mobile Home Park South BP M-1.5 Railroad Tracks and Vacant West IC M-1.5 Industrial and Commercial Uses ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: State law requires that all "projects" receive an environmental review and determination. An "Initial Study" was prepared for this project which identified possible impacts to the -environment and mitigation measures. After conducting the "Initial Study", staff is recommending that the Planning Commission find that the project would not have a significant effect on the environment, and a draft mitigated negative declaration was prepared for this proposal subject to the conditions of approval and mitigation measures. INTERDEPARTMENT/INTERAGENCY REVIEW: Comments and recommendations were solicited from departments and agencies which would be affected by this project. Comments received were considered by the Community Development Department as part of the project review. A number of issues were raised by various departments which are discussed below. As of the date this staff report was prepared, no inquiries were received from the public. ANALYSIS: Tonight's hearing was scheduled at the request of the applicant per the attached letter dated March 31, 1992. Staff has reviewed the latest site plan the applicant has submitted along with the other entitlements, and the comments are listed below: General Plan Consistency: The project is located in an area of transition where industrial uses are encroaching into rural residential areas. The area is shown- on the City's General Plan as Industrial Commercial and the applicant's proposal, including the requested zoning, could be found to be consistent with the general plan if adequate buffering is provided. Staff feels -that special attention should be paid to the existing residents in the area. This could be accomplished through height limits and increased setbacks where the residential property abuts the industrial/commercial uses. Site Plan Review: Staff has reviewed the site plan, which is labeled as conceptual only, and found a number of concerns. The applicant has not submitted any elevations of the buildings, and therefore staff is unable to evaluate the architecture. The site plan does show the rooftop parking access ramp.on- the northern property line adjacent to a single family residence. The submitted site plan does not show any trash enclosures, loading spaces (four required) and there is no landscaping calculation. The applicant shows that there are 32% compact spaces while the parking code only allows for a maximum of 20%. The applicant is showing the setback and monument sign along Furnivall Avenue as being included within the right-of-way. The site plan does not show any drying areas for the car wash, which could present some. circulation concerns. Staff feels that the applicant could revise the site plan to address the Staff's concerns by the relocation of building "CO away from the existing residences, adding a staging area to the car wash and the creation of a landscaped buffer. 3 Circulation: The Traffic Engineering Division has reviewed.the newest site plan along with the ,applicant's traffic study and has made a number of recommendations. The first comment is that the submitted traffic study needs to be, modified to accurately identify the projects in the vicinity. In addition, the Traffic Division is requesting a deacceleration lane along Soledad Canyon Road and that the driveway on Soledad be reduced to 30 feet in width. Lastly, Traffic recommends that the Commission take a look at the possibility of recommending to the City Council that the alley be vacated. Currently, there is no alley to the east and the alley westerly of the site terminates approximately halfway to the next street. The existing alley only provides driveway access to the applicant and the autoparts store to the west: The other two existing buildings, a transmission shop and a multi -tenant structure, backup to the alley with little access. Staff feels that the proposed circulation.onsite would act as an alley. If the alley were .to be vacated the applicant could redesign the project to move buildings "C" and "D" away from the existing. residences and reduce the number of driveways to one on Honby and one on Furnivall. Staff could inquire whether the Council wishes to pursue vacating the alley if the Commission -felt that this action would be appropriate. The City Council would be required to formally vacate the alley. Submittal Inconsistencies: The applicant has added 16,500 square feet of land on Furnivall Avenue which has not been addressed on previous submittals. Staff would recommend that the Commission direct the applicant to update the applications and environmental application to address all the revisions the applicant has made to date. In addition, the applicant's Oak Tree Report states that the oak tree is to be located within a planter area while the newest site plan shows the tree being relocated. Staff would recommend that the Oak Tree Report be updated also. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission: Open the public hearing, receive testimony; AND Deny Zone Change 90-010, CUP 90-020, and OTP 90-046, and direct staff to return with a resolution of denial at the next Planning Commission meeting. FLF:439 0 CHRONOLOGICAL LIST FOR ZONE CHANGE 90-010 On July 6, 1990 the applicant submitted an application for a zone change and conditional use permit. On August 6, 1990 the applicant was advised that an Oak Tree Permit was required. A Development Review Committee reviewed the project and the applicant was advised that a traffic study and additional materials were required on August 23,_1990. The applicant submitted a letter on October 31, 1990 stating that the staff's conditions were excessive and that they would make the project unfeasible. Staff responded to the applicant's letter on November 14, 1990 stating that the requirements were common and that the traffic study was still a requirement. Staff sent a letter to the applicant on February 22, 1991 stating that no activity had. occurred on'the case and that a response was required or the case would be removed from.active case processing. The applicant responded in a letter dated March 6, 1991 that the project was still active. On June 26, 1991 the applicant submitted Plot Plan 91-041 for the expansion of. the existing tire store south of the alley. The applicant's engineer stated that this was the only area that was going to develop at this time and the applicant would continue to process the other entitlements after this plot plan was approved. The applicant was advised of the requirements, and on November 27, 1991, staff transmitted a letter asking for a response or the case would be removed from active processing. Since there was no response, the applicant was advised on January 10, 1992 that the case was withdrawn from active processing. On January 11, 1992 the applicant submitted a letter asking staff to continue processing the original case. The applicant also indicated that a revised site plan would be submitted in the near future. In March of 1992 staff received a traffic study from the applicant along with two copies of a conceptual site plan. On March 31, 1992 staff received a letter asking for a public hearing. On April 2, 1992 staff received the latest revised map which is the subject of this staff report. Within the past week the applicant's agent stated that the main benefit of the hearing will be to allow the applicant to know whether he is proceeding in the right direction. 5 CITY OF SANTA CLARITA NEGATIVE DECLARAT ION [X] Proposed [ J Final PERMIT/PROJECT:Zone Change 90-010 Conditional 'Use sPermit '90-020'and OakTree Permit 90-046 APPLICANT: Micheal Cone MASTER CASE N0: 90-147 LOCATION OF THE PROJECT: 20529 Soledad Canyon Road (Assessor Parcel Numbers 2805-020-002, 003, 007, 012, 013, 026, 028, 029). DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT: Zone Change and Conditional Use Permit to allow for 30,050 square feet auto- related'uses with a car wash over.2.6 acres. One hundred thirty-three parking spaces would be provided. In addition the applicant is proposing to relocation one existing non-native Oak tree on site. Based- on itheaainformationa contained in` the Initial 'Study prepared for `this project, and pursuant to the requirements of Section 15065 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City of Santa Clarita [ ] City Council [X] Planning Commission [ ) Director of Community Development finds that the project as proposed or revised will have no significant effect upon the environment, and that a Negative Declaration shall be adopted pursuant to Section 15070 of CEQA. Mitigation measures for this project [ ] are not required. [X] are attached. [ ] are not attached. _Mmm�msas__ae��==aa�aar=a=s=s,�� LYNN M. HARRIS DEPUTY CITY MANAGER/ COMMUNITY DEVE Prepared by: Fred Follstad Associate Planner gnature) (Name/Title) Reviewed by: Approved (Name/Title) Fred Follstad, Associate Planner (Name/Title) ..aa«.............................. Public Review Period From 05/13/92 To 06/02/92 Public Notice Given On 05/13/92 8y: [X] Legal advertisement. [X] Posting of properties. [X] Written notice. CERTIFICATION DATE: '1 1 01• QaY Proximity Map a 4..\ MC 90-147 lD N 7 i w, f� b•4 �- pll 011 1 � R .Y B' 16111 i • \{ t T \gyp \ w:� sx 7 5 ••r,Po<. n eL I{ I \ 111 � � 1 ) 16 Ili � a .. ,lw. as«, 1 _ \OfVO f, ^ 1 Y x wul • 1 1 7 6\ 00 2��1 u i S z c' O Rp I ?. �,•}• may. at �t—�1 r✓po• ,• , - x0 I• r ✓ it \ i . p . f e O» R 4` �� • \ ou .• r» D uPu • I `" ; � Y B X067 i] xe r6.. . �� rvI T• R�5w• _ -• ._ I W• C .' 1 _' 49_t.' »rc< �. r m O�� x .c•¢aV �_. o r T N 01• W ' W Q Q 3OLEDADa ST. >' SUBJECTm ;z _ SP, ITE Um GAN, S. R OpO Off' 0 q W H 3 CITY OF SANTA CLARITA PLANNING DEPARTMENT FRED FOLLSTAD MARCH 31,1992 DEAR MR FOLLSTAD; RECEIVED APR 0 3 19921 €OMyuc"r rl4acop!r6 CIIY, 01! 811NTA CW_iRlj RE; 20529 SOLEDAD CANYON RD. 91-095, 91-041 PER OUR CONVERSATION THIS DATE MY CLIENT, MR MICHAEL LEE CONE IS HEREBY REQUESTING WITHOUT DELAY, A HEARING BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF SANTA CLARITA. THIS PROJECT HAS BEEN UNDERWAY VIA COUNTY AND NOW CITY SINCE 1986. GRANTED THE PLAN HAS BEEN CHANGED AS TO DESIGN, BUT IT CERTAINLY HAS NOT BEEN CHANGED DUE TO LACK OF INTENT TO CONSTRUCT AN AUTO SERVICE CENTER ON HIS LAND. THIS PROJECT HAS INVOLVED EVERY PART-TIME AND FULL TIME PLANNER, TRAFFIC ANALYST AND ANYONE ELSE THAT SEEMS TO BE EMPLOYED BY THE CITY AND ITS RESULTANT BUREAUCRACY. EVERY PERSON THAT IS HIRED BY THE CITY WINDS UP WITH THIS FILE AND IT IS NICE TO KNOW THAT ON THE JOB TRAINING WAS PROVIDED AT MR CONES EXPENSE. THE EXPENSE TO DATE HAS EXCEEDED $30,000 FOR THIS PROJECT ANC STILL THE PROJECT CANNOT BE PRESENTED BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION. IT IS NOT THE JOB OF THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO ALTER PROJECTS TO THEIR SPECIFIC PERSONAL LIKES AND DISLIKES. MR CONE HAS PROVIDED ANYTHING AND EVERYTHING THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT REQUIRED FOR SUBSTANTIVE DATA, IE; TRAFFIC STUDY, PLANS, ELEVATIONS, SURVEYS AS WELL AS ON SITE PERUSAL BY STAFF. A LETTER TO MS LYNN HARRIS LAST YEAR PROVIDED A MEETING IN HER OFFICE IN WHICH TO RECTIFY THIS UNHOLY DELAY AND NONSENSICAL WHIMS OF "STAFF". EVEN THAT TYPE OF AGGRESSIVE PUSHING BY MYSELF ON BEHALF OF MR CONE HAS FALLEN INTO THE CREVICES OF BUREAUCRACY. GRANTED THE CITY AND STAFF HAVE ADOPTED A NO GROWTH ATTITUDE AND A "PERFECT" PROJECT PARAMETER FOR EACH PROJECT BROUGHT BEFORE ITS PURVIEW, THAT STILL DOES NOT ALLOW NOR AUTHORIZE THE "STAFF" TO DENY A TAXPAYER AND EMPLOYER OF PEOPLE THE RIGHT TO A HEARING. HE HAS CONSISTENTLY BEEN TOLD THAT A HEARING CANNOT BE SCHEDULED UNTIL ALL PROVISIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF STAFF HAVE BEEN MET. NOW, YOU HAVE STATED ALL THAT IS NEEDED IS A LETTER DEMANDING SUCH A HEARING. MR CONE, SINCE NOW YOU WILL HAVE TO BE BROUGHT UP TO SPEED ON THIS PROJECT, OWNS 3 PLUS ACRES FOR OVER 20 YEARS, AT 20529 SOLEDAD CANYON ROAD, CANYON COUNTRY. HE HAS SUCCESSFULLY rl PAGE 2 OPERATED A LARGE TIRE SALES AND SERVICE BUSINESS WITH REVENUES IN EXCESS OF 2.5 MILLION DOLLARS ANNUALLY. HE EMPLOYS OVER 10 PEOPLE CONSISTENTLY AND WAS IN BUSINESS LONG BEFORE THE FEW HOUSES AT THE REAR OF ONE OF HIS PARCELS OF LAND WERE EVEN CONSTRUCTED. HE RECENTLY ACQUIRED THE ADJACENT RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY ON FURNIVAL AVE, WHICH WILL ALLOW EVEN MORE LAND USE FOR A PURPOSE THAT PROVIDES TAX DOLLARS TO THE CITY. IT IS INCONCEIVABLE THAT THIS PROJECT SHOULD BE MIRED IN THE MUD OF YOUR OFFICE FOR THIS EXTENDED PERIOD OF TIME. THE COUNTY GOVERNMENT WAS CUMBERSOME, HOWEVER, THIS CITY HAS . WITHIN 3 YEARS GRAVITATED TO THAT LEVEL OF SERVICE WHICH THE PEOPLE OF THIS VALLEY DETESTED. THIS PROJECT, GIVEN THE ECONOMIC CONDITIONS OF THIS AREA AND THE COUNTRY OVERALL, SHOULD BE WELCOMED AS A BOON TO THE LOCAL ECONOMY, NOT MET WITH CONTINUAL HARASSMENT BY STAFF. THIS REVISED PROJECT HAS A COMPLETED TRAFFIC STUDY, IN YOUR HANDS FOR OVER 2 WEEKS AS WELL AS TRAFFIC DEPARTMENT HAVING A COPY FOR AS LONG, MODIFIED THE SITE PLAN TO ENCOMPASS A CAR WASH, PROVIDED A CAPITULATION TO THE CITYS REQUEST FOR LAND FOR RIGHTS OF WAY, PROVIDED MORE THAN ENOUGH PARKING SPACES FOR THE PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS, WILL PLACE THE UTILITIES IN THE ALLEY UNDERGROUND, DEDICATE LAND FOR ROAD WIDENING PER THE NEW GENERAL PLAN REQUIREMENTS, WHICH ALSO CALL FOR THIS LAND TO BE RECLASSIFIED TO COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL, REMOVE HIS EXISTING BUILDINGS ON SOLEDAD CANYON, REMOVE HIS EXISTING SIGNAGE ON SOLEDAD CANYON, PROVIDE FOR A CPD DESIGNATION, PROVIDE FOR A DE -ACCELERATION LANE IN FRONT OF HIS PROPERTY ON SOLEDAD CANYON, REMOVE THE METAL QUONSET HUT, REMOVE THE HOUSE ON FURNIVAL AVE, REMOVE THE GARAGE ON FURNIVAL AVE, AND LANDSCAPE AT LEAST 10 FEET FROM THE PROPERTY LINE OF ADJACENT HOUSE ON HONEY AVE, PROVIDE FOR A 8-10 FOOT WALL TO SEPARATE THE HOUSE ON HONEY AVE FROM THIS PROPERTY, AND OTHERWISE MAKE A NICE PROJECT. THE PROJECT CALLS FOR PARKING ON THE ROOFTOP, HOWEVER THE CARS WILL NOT BE SEEN DUE TO THE HEIGHT OF THE WALL ON TOP WHICH WILL NOT ALLOW THE CARS OF THE EMPLOYEES TO BE SEEN BY ANYONE FROM ANY DIRECTION. SINCE THE HEIGHT REQUIRMENT FOR BUILDINGS IS 3 STORIES THIS WILL BE WELL WITHIN THOSE HEIGHT REQUIREMENTS. HE HAS EVEN ADDRESSED THE LOCATION AND CONSTRUCTION REQUIRED FOR THE DISPOSAL TANKS FOR OIL, BRAKE FLUID AND RADIATOR FLUIDS, WHICH WILL BE BUILT PER FIRE DEPARTMENT REQUIREMENTS. SINCE THE FIRE DEPARTMENT DOES NOT HAVE ANY REQUIREMENTS YET ESTABLISHED, THIS PROJECT WILL BE ANOTHER LEARNING PROCESS FOR THAT DEPARTMENT AS WELL, INSOFAR AS CONSTRUCTION OF THAT I PAGE 3 TYPE OF IMPROVEMENT HAS NOT BEEN GIVEN ANY PARAMETERS BY THE DEPARTMENT OTHER THAN CEMENT VAULT WITH A REMOVABLE TANK INSIDE, LOCATION FROM STRUCTURE ETC. ONCE AGAIN, MR CONE IS WELL AWARE OF A NEGATIVE RESPONSE FROM STAFF AND DENIAL OF THE PROJECT, HOWEVER, GIVEN THE FACT THAT THERE DOES NOT SEEM TO BE ANY OTHER WAY TO GET THIS PROJECT BEFORE THE COMMISSION, HE HAS CHOSEN TO PROCEED WITH THIS REQUEST FOR A HEARING WITHIN 60 DAYS OF MARCH 31, 1992. IT DOES NOT APPEAR THAT STAFF WILL RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THIS PROJECT NO MATTER WHAT IS PRESENTED, BUT STAFF IS PAID BY THE CITY WHICH DERIVES ITS INCOME FROM PROJECTS SUCH AS THIS IN ADDITION TO OTHER TAXES AND REVENUES, AND IT IS EVIDENT THAT IF BUSINESS CONTINUES TO LOCATE OUT OF THIS CITY DUE TO ITS NO GROWTH ATTITUDE, STAFF REALLY WON'T HAVE TO WORRY MUCH ABOUT WHAT KIND OF PROJECTS ARE PRESENTED, AS THERE WILL NOT BE ANY SUBMITTED. IT IS REQUESTED YOU RESPOND TO THIS LETTER WITHIN 5 DAYS, JUST SO WE ALL REALIZE THIS PROJECT IS NOT GOING TO BE DISCARDED OR SH"VED BY STAFF. SINC ROB L FUN4K AGEN FOR MR MICHAEL LEE CONE APPROVED; MICHAEL LEE CONE CC. LYNN HARRIS, GEORGE CARVELLO, MAYOR JILL KLAJAC, CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS, ATTORNEY DAN HON, ATTORNEY GEORGE TURNER 0 June 1, 1992 City of Santa Clarita Planning Commission Dear Commission Members: I am providing the following information with the hope that it will give the commission some insight into the "ludicrous" proposal submitted by Michael L. Cone for the development of an Automotive Service Center and Automatic Car Wash. I personally toured the immediate industrial area (including the streets of Fumival, Ruether, Oak, and Soledad Cyn. Rd.) to End the number of "automotive" related businesses already in operation in our area. I was even more shocked at the proposal by Mr. Cone when I discovered the large number and diversity of automotive services available within a such a small area. Also note that these services are within "pushing of a broken car distance" from our entire neighborhood. These automotive service businesses are listed by street and address: Exclusively British - [Rolls Royce, Jaguar, BMW, VW, Mercedes] 26845 Oak Ave. - Unit #7 ' American Kustom Cycle - Parts & Service 26845 Oak Ave. - Unit #8 CCE - California Custom Engines [Engine Rebuilding] 26846 Oak Ave. - Unit "L" California Collectibles - Chrysler Product Restoration 26846 Oak Ave. - Unit "M" AV Brake Supply- Wholesale 26818 Oak Ave. - Unit "E" Hess Engineering 26740 Oak Ave. - Unit "C" Maranatha Automotive Service 26770 Oak Ave. Arn ecke's Automotive Machine 26740 Oak Ave. - Unit "J" Page 1 r Bohan's Automotive - Tune Up - Brakes - Front End - Air Conditioning Foreign - Domestic + Smog Check 26741 Oak Ave. Antoine's Automotive - Specializing in Toyota -Nissan -Honda -BMW Air Conditioning - Tune Up - Brakes 26723 Oak Ave. Premier Auto Body & Frame - Collision Repairs 26725 Oak Ave. Bowden Custom Cylinder Heads Cylinder Heads and Intake Manifolds 26724 Oak Ave. - Unit "K" Honda Outpost Honda Car Parts & Service 26724 Oak Ave. - Unit "C" SCV Auto Specialists Foreign - Domestic Auto Care 26921 Ruether Ave. S&D Specialty -Custom Automatic Transmissions 26724 Oak Ave. - Unit "J" Canyon Auto Electric and Carburetors 26724 Oak Ave. - Unit "B" Bill's Body & Paint 26867 Ruether Ave. Wolfs Towing & Auto Repair+ Smog Check 26855 Ruether Ave. Canyon Auto Care Main Shop - 20709 Soledad Cyn. Rd. Addt'l Shop - 26821 Ruether Ave. SC Auto Air Russell Dunn Automotive 26821 Ruether Ave. - Unit "M" 26821 Ruether Ave. - Unit "E" Jiffy Lube 26709 Soledad Cyn. Rd. (same corner as Canyon Auto Care) Import Auto Care - Mercedes, BMW, Audi, Porsche, VW, Volvo, Saab, Peugot, Nissan, Toyota, Honda, Dolorean Japanese & European 20723 Soledad Cyn. Rd. Page 2 Apollo Tire Co. - Shocks - Tires - Brakes - Alignment 20733 Soledad Cyn, Rd. Canyon Muffler 20741 Soledad Cyn. Rd. Lingrosso Foreign Auto Supply 20749 Soledad Cyn. Rd. Jerry's Transmission 20501 Soledad Cyn. Rd. Lil John Auto Parts 20541 Soledad Cyn. Rd. Mike's Tire Man 20529 Soledad Cyn. Rd. Car Wash Express - Self Serve/Drive Thru 20621 Soledad Cyn. Rd. Note: All automotive services on Soledad Cyn. Rd. are located within 3 blocks (between Oak Ave. and Honby Ave.) Apollo European Auto Parts & Salvage (auto dismantlers) 27134 Furnival Ave. Acrylic Customs - Automotive. Body & Paint 20665 Santa Clara Rd. CJ Truck & Trailer Parts 20811 Santa Clara Rd. If these 34 automotive businesses are not adequate enough for the average person in the American Beauty Soledad Tract - Honby Area... There are: Trak Auto Parts & Supplies (near Newberrys Dept. Store); and Kragen Auto Parts (near Builder's Emporium) both located within 2 miles east on Soledad Cyn. Rd. Another 1 mile and there is a Chiefs Auto Parts on Sierra Hwy. at Soledad Cyn. Rd. If you go south on Sierra Hwy. approximately 1 mile from the intersection of Soledad Cyn. Rd., there is a complete Auto Service Complex (I assume similar to the one Mr. Cone wishes to build). If the car wash that is presently located only 1 block west of Mike's Tire isn't adequate to handle our needs, there is the Water Wheel Car Wash at Soledad Cyn. Rd. and Sierra Hwy. (approx. 3 mi. away) and the Union Station Car Wash at Soledad Cyn. Rd. and Bouquet Cyn. Page 3 I think the point I am trying to make is that the greater Santa Clarita Valley (including our small neighborhood, with its very own 34 automotive service and parts facilities) has been amply "saturated" with Automotive Service and Car Wash establishments. To add still another Automotive Center to our small (and seemingly non - residentially growing area) would be a slap in the face to the integrity of the Planning Staff, the Planning Commission and the fine tuning of the General Plan ...not to mention the fine residents of this neighborhood! If the Planning Commission and its supporting Staff would like to do something positive for our neighborhood, it would be to add a nice park for our families. We are located too far from North Oaks park, which is already over -used. There is no other park within a reasonable distance from three large residential areas, American Beauty Soledad Tract; Park Lane Mobile Estates Mobile Home Park; and the.Rainbow Glen Tract. But, please, don't allow one of the last of the remaining horse property areas to be swallowed up by still another Automotive Center. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Jerry J. Cervenka Jr. Chairperson Committee for the Honby Area Preservation and Survival Page 4