Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000-06-27 - AGENDA REPORTS - SPEEDWAY CARWASH CUP APPEAL (2)AGENDA REPORT City Manager Item to be presented CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: June 27, 2000 Jeff Hogan SUBJECT: AN APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DENIAL ON A SPLIT DECISION FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A FULL SERVICE HAND CAR WASH ON MCBEAN PARKWAY THAT INCLUDES A RETAIL BUILDING AND DETAIL SHOP. THE APPLICANT IS SPEEDWAY CARWASH. DEPARTMENT: Planning and Building Services RECOMMENDED ACTION City Council close the Public Hearing, adopt a resolution adopting the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project and approve Master Case No. 00-108 which consists of Conditional Use Permit No. 00-008 subject to the attached conditions of approval. BACKGROUND An application for a conditional use permit was filed with the Planning and Building Services Department on March 15, 2000 to allow for the development of a full service handcar wash. Staff presented the application and recommended approval to the Planning Commission on May 2, 2000 which resulted in the meeting being continued to May 16, 2000 for more information related to the car wash's valet parking and site plan modifications associated with the stacking areas. At that meeting, the Planning Commission voted 2-2 on the proposal that resulted in a split decision thus a denial of the project since all split decisions are an automatic denial. The split decision was a result of two Commissioners believing the car wash use was an inappropriate land use for that area. However, the two Commissioners that voted yes on the proposal believed the use was consistent with the area taking into account all of the constraints on and surrounding the property. As a result of the denial, the applicant appealed the decision to the City Council. However, because the Planning Commission's vote was split there is no recommendation to the City Council by the Planning Commission. Thus, staff will not change the previous recommended action which is for the City Council to approve the proje'Adopted:��_ DD �-7 un ® I� The proposal was originally set for the June 13, 2000 City Council meeting, but was continued to the June 27, 2000 meeting because the applicant had a family emergency. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The .67 acre project site is located within the Valencia community of the City. The site is currently vacant. There is an earthquake fault zone that runs through a majority of the western portion of the site and a pedestrian bridge on the eastern portion of the site, which prohibits any structures from being built on a majority of the parcel. The car wash facility would be built between the pedestrian bridge and earthquake fault zone and would include a wash tunnel, a 1,161 retail building, and a 500 square foot detail building. The wash tunnel consists of no machines other than wheel tracks to pull the cars through the tunnel and tubes splashing soap on the cars. All cars will be hand washed and dried. The water used for the wash tunnel will be recycled through reclaiming pits. The detail shop will consist of two bays, which will be adjacent to the retail building that will include basic retail products for cars. The applicant will also provide valet service for the Valencia Town Center Mall, Spectrum Club, Hyatt Hotel, and the Greens. The applicant will provide each valet service customer with a claims ticket which will be dropped off at the requested business with the customer's car and keys. 01:4Y.\l►m, Landuse The proposed project site is in the Commercial Town Center zone that permits a variety of uses that include basic retail, restaurant, and office uses. The applicant has received support from the surrounding businesses which include the Greens Restaurant & Putting Green, Hyatt Hotel, and the Valencia Town Center. In addition, the City's Transit Division will be locating a Bus Transfer Station adjacent to the project site. The Transit Division has seen the proposal and have made the standard comments and made the applicant aware that there will be buses driving by the proposed site throughout each day. Because of the constraints, such as the earthquake fault zone and pedestrian bridge, the parcel is severely limited on the allowable areas to build. In addition, the pedestrian bridge gives the site very limited visibility from McBean Parkway. The site is also somewhat of a distance from the Town Center area where most businesses would rather be located where all the restaurants and retail uses are and away from the Bus Transfer Station and Hyatt Parking lot. Because of all these constraints, staff believes it would be relatively difficult for office or retail uses to survive in this area. A full service hand car wash, however, would work well with the constraints and would compliment the immediate businesses, which has been expressed specifically by the Greens Restaurant & Putting Green. Thus, staff believes this use is consistent with the surrounding area. Traffic/ Circulation Staff and the Planning Commission had the applicant revise the site plan numerous times in order to provide the maximum amount of stacking square footage as possible. The entrance of the tunnel has a stacking ability of 10 cars and the drying area has an area of approximately 4,700 square foot for stacking which results in 22 cars. The stacking for the car wash does comply with and exceed the Unified Development Code and has been approved by the Traffic Division. Aesthetics /Landscaping The aesthetics and landscaping was reviewed by the City's Design Consultant. The Design consultant comments included the applicant incorporating stone stacked decorative walls, a landscaped berm and 48 -inch box trees around the tunnel's entrance and exit areas, textured crosswalk paving, additional stone work on the elevations, and include a water fountain within the waiting area. In addition, staff worked with the applicant to ensure architectural consistency with the surrounding buildings which would include a lot of the same features the Greens building has just south of the proposed site. Staff also wanted the applicant to incorporate trees and landscaping along McBean Parkway to screen all of the cars waiting to be washed and dried. Staff believes that the architecture and landscaping being proposed will be consistent with the surrounding area. FISCAL IMPACT The proposal will bring in sales tax revenue for the City. ALTERNATIVE ACTION 1. Deny the conditional use permit. 2. Other action as determined by the Council. ATTACHMENTS Resolution of Project Approval Minutes from the May 2, 2000 and May 16, 2000, Planning Commission Meeting 8 1/2 X 11 Colored Site Plan 8 1/2 X 11 Colored elevations Vicinity Map Appeal letter (reading file) 2 Staff Reports to the Planning Commission (reading file) Initial Study / Negative Declaration (reading file) Cross Section along McBean Parkway (reading file) Letters of Support and Opposition from businesses and citizens (reading file) Petition of interested residents for the car wash (reading file) Full sized colored elevations (reading file) Full sized site plan (reading file) JWH:VPB:JJL pbs\council\arcar ash IIe� j6Ha 4P . "s3s9'g U Z / -�..iZ- w U Z V) U �Q z 0 _o OUQ U w Q W/ U r) Z W ^ J V / � I 1 HACKER, KANOWSKY & BRALY, Attorneys and Corrnselors crl I. rnv A I irniled Liability Par7nenship 24510 Town Center drive / Suite 200 / Valencia, CA 91355 / Pharres. ffiBtJ'Q99=680U p; F,mA601) 259-8830 June 14, 2000 6 la / m MEETING ITEM N0. 1-3 Mayor JoAnne Darcy 0& 23920 West Valencia Blvd., Ste. 300 Santa Clarita, CA 91355 Re: Speedway Carwash cup Agenda Item )2, June 1-3',-2000 City Council Meeting Dear Mayor Darcy: This firm has been retained by Valencia Auto Spa to express our environmental and planning concerns with the proposed location of a hand car wash on a .67 acre parcel adjacent to the Greens Golf Course. LAND USE Everyone seems to agree that the proposed project site is difficult to develop. The Staff Report points out that an earth quake fault zone to the west, and the pedestrian bridge to the east, severely restrict the location and size of any structures on this site. However, although staff concludes that these constraints make it relatively difficult for office or retail. uses to survive in this area, it is important to note that no_ other proposals have been submitted to the City's Planning Department for any review. Section 17.17.040 (c) of the City's Unified Development Code provides for specific development requirements for car washes. Our review of this provision of the UDC indicates that this Project is in violation of two provisions which have not been discussed in the Staff Report. The first is the requirement that there only be one driveway to any one street for a car waste. In this case there are two driveways to the same street. The second Provision is that the enclosed work place shall be constructed so that the entrances, exits and openings don't face any residential. property, or are adequately screened .if they do so. A review of the project site appears that these portions of the project will be visible from some portion of the Woodlands residential development. If that is the case it would violate the UDC. The Staff Report's list of constraints include the fact that the site is not very visible from McBean Parkway. It should be noted that the proposed car wash will be even less visible because of the following proposed conditions of approval: I Page Two Mayor Jo Anne Darcy Speedway Carwash, Agenda Item 13 6/13/00 PR6 The applicant shall provide a minimum of 48 inch box trees along the McBean Parkway frontage. P10 The applicant shall provide a landscaped berm. In addition, Condition P1 states that no signage is approved witty this permit. Understanding the restrictions in the City's sign ordinance, and the berms and trees being required to screen the facility from roadways, it will be difficult for this project to have signage which attracts customers from McBean Parkway. A great deal of discussion at the Planning commission was whether or not this project was compatible for this site. We would submit that just because this is a constrained site is riot sufficient grounds to grant a CUP for a project that does riot fit into the area. Likewise, a concern that the site will remain vacant with weeds should not force the City to approve an incompatible site. The City has resources to ensure vacant land is not allowed to be an eyesore, and it is inconceivable that the landowner would want this site to be unattractive, affecting its adjacent holdings. It is important to note that as recently as May 17, 1999 tine proposed development of Valencia Town Center did not include any structures on the site, rather it is shown as a parking lot on the map prepared by the Valencia Company and enclosed for your review. In addition, this map shows a 7,000 square foot retail building just north of this site across the entrance street from McBean. We believe it is appropriate to ask what has changed in the past year and whether a car wash is compatible with the Planned retail use on the adjacent parcel. In fact, the construction of the 7,000 square foot retail structure may need to have some additional parking, which could be accommodated by the project site, or the two sites could be developed together: - since they have the same owner. Finally, we should discuss the fact that the surrounding businesses support this project. This support appears to be specifically due to the proposed valet service. While this is being highly touted, testimony at the May 16 Planning Commission Hearing by the applicant estimated that 10$ of its customers would use this service. There are also operational problems wl.tlr this service. Valencia Town Center does not have its valet operational during all of its hours and the spectrum does not Presently have a valet service. In addition, the applicant Proposes to have a pickup service that would require its use of golf carts to go to the various locations. There should be some discussion on the traffic .impact and safety of having golf carts cross and use McBean Parkway. ', Page Three Mayor Jo Anne Darcy Speedway Carwash, Agenda Item 13 6/13/00 Whatever the benefit of having a valet service, it is a service which could be provided at any location near Valencia Town Center, and doesn't have to be located on this site. TRAFFIC/CIRCULATION Although the project meets the Unified Development Codes standards for stacking at the entrance and drying areas, we urge the Council not to depend on the site plan which has been provided, but go to the site and visualize the project site. You can imagine how busy and congested that area will be if it washes the 550 cars on Saturday and Sunday the applicant has projected and we believe the stacking ability of only 10 cars in the entrance, and 22 in the exit, will result in an extremely congested site on any busy day. In comparison the Auto Spa has the ability to stack 38 cars in its entrance and 32 cars in its drying area and has washed as many as 760 cars on a Saturday or Sunday. CONCLUSION The City Council has total discretion under the City's Unified Development Code to deny this project and should do so. It is a business which can be located anywhere near the mall and still. offer the valet service component. There is no compelling reason to use a town center site for this use. Instead the property owner should be encouraged to be innovative and design a use which is compatible with its planned adjacent 7,000 square foot retail property, along with taking into consideration the potential customer needs of the Transit Center. Although the applicant has submitted some petitions showing support for this project, it was focused on the valet service and not the location. Your decision is not a popularity contest, but. rather a decision for the Council to use its sound judgment. Thank you for the consideration of our views. Sincerely, 4NPTV' BRALY 1 I� cc: Randy Cressall, Valencia AutoPSpa City Council Members Jeff Hogan, Assoc. Planner Center Center ar brive, 11.01 SIDENI IAL 210 D.U. , Ir Valencia Country Club P'.. Mk " """w a...- . 1. W , Cw .5... A .I w . 1�. b7 e^r.r.r.j The Woodlands w vmffll- , Valu IW 1149, "s�dyya CAR WASH . SpeedWay CarWash Holdings, Inc. 10854 Santa Monica, CA 90025 Los Angeles, CA 90025 Ph. (310) 474-6551 Fax (310) 474-3699 May 17, 2000 City of Santa Clarita Director of Planning & Building Services 23920 Valencia Boulevard Santa Clarita, CA 91355-2196 RE: MC 00-108 CUP 00-008 Director of Planning & Building Services We respectfiilly request to appeal to the City Council, the Planning Commission decision regarding a conditional use permit. Sincerely, Atevenhman CITY OF SANTA CLARITA NEGATIVE DECLARATION [X] Proposed [I Final --------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------- MASTER CASE NO: 00-108 PERMIT/PROJECT NAME: Conditional Use Permit No. 00-008 APPLICANTS: Speedy Car Wash LOCATION OF THE PROJECT: The proposed site is situated in the community of Valencia of the City of Santa Clarita. The site is located on the west side of McBean Parkway just north of Valencia Boulevard and "The Greens Restaurant." DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT: The proposed construction and operation of a full service hand car wash which also includes a 1,161 square foot retail building and a 500 square foot car detail building. Based on the information contained in the Initial Study prepared for both projects, and pursuant to the requirements of Section 15070 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City of Santa Clarita [ ] City Council [XI Planning Commission [ ] Director of Planning & Building Services 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 15074 of CEQA. Mitigation measures for this project [ I Are Not Required [X] Are Attached [ ] Are Not Attached JEFF LAMBERT DIRECTOR OF PL I ING AND BUILDING SAFETY Prepared Jeff Hogan, Associate Planner (Signatur) (Name/Title) Approved byU Lisa Hardy, AICP, Associate Planner gna ure) (Name/Title) --------------------------------------------------------------- Public Review Period From Anril 10.2000 To May 2, 2000. Public Notice Given On Anri110, 2000 By: [X] Legal Advertisement [ I Posting of Properties [ I Written Notice ---------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------- CERTIFICATION DATE: current\ndspeedy ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (Initial Study Form B) CITY OF SANTA CLARITA Lead Agency: Contact Person & Phone Number: Master Case or CIP Number: City of Santa Clarita Jeff Hogan, Associate Planner City of Santa Clarita (661)255-4330 Master Case No. 00-108 Entitlement Type(s): Conditional Use Permit 00-008 Project Introduction: This Initial Study is for the proposed construction and operation of a full service car wash which includes a 1,161 square foot retail building and a 500 square foot car detail building. Project Location: The proposed project site is situated in the community of Valencia of the City of Santa Clarita. The site is located on the west side of McBean Parkway just north of Valencia Boulevard and `The Greens" (a putting green and restaurant). General Plan Designation: Commercial Town Center (CTC) Zoning Designation(s): Project Applicant: (Name, Address, Phone) Commercial Town Center (CTC) Speedy Car Wash Steve Fishman 10854 Santa Monica Boulevard Los Angeles, CA 90024 (310)474-6551 Project Description and Setting: The .67 -acre project site is located within the City of Santa Clarita. The site of the proposed project is currently vacant; no structures are located on the site. The project includes the construction of a full service car wash that includes a 1,161 square foot retail building and a 500 square foot car detail building. Site preparation would be minimal as the site is flat and has been previously graded. On-site surface parking is included in the proposed site plan. The car wash requires a total of 5 parking spaces and 13 are being provided. Site improvements would include 8,924 square feet (31%) of landscaping. The applicant will provide a 10 -foot -wide landscaped setback on Tourney Road. There is an earthquake fault running through the western portion of the parcel, however, no structures are being proposed within the fault zone. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: Land uses surrounding the proposed project site include the Hyatt Hotel to the north, the Valencia Town Center Mall to the east, the "Greens" Golf Course to the south, and the Valencia Golf Course to the west. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g. permits, financing approval, or participation agreement):N/A ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED The environmental factors checked below would be affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. [ ] Land Use and Planning [ ] Transportation/ [ ] Public Services Circulation [ ] Population and Housing [ ] Biological Resources [ ] Recreation [X] Geological Problems [X] Noise [ ] Aesthetics [ ] Water [ ] Hazards [ j Cultural Resources [X] Stormwater Management [ ] Energy and Mineral [ ] Utilities and Service & Recycling Resources System [ ] Air Quality [ ] Mandatory Tests of Significance DETERMINATION: On the basis of this initial evaluation: [ ] I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. [X] I 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 the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. [ ] i find that the proposed project MAY have a significant impact on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. [ ] I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been mitigated adequately in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets, if the effect is a "potentially significant impact' or "potentially significant unless mitigated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. [ ] I 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 all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. Prepared By: Si ature) Approved by* _ (Signature) 3 Jeff Hogan 3/21/00 Associate Planner (Name[Titie) (Date) Lisa Hardy, AICP 3/21/00 Associate Planner (Name/Title) (Date) ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: S Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Unless Less than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact I. LAND USE AND PLANNING. would the proposal: a) Conflict with general plan designation or zoning? [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project? c) Be incompatible with existing land use In the city? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] d) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] established community (including a low-income or minority community)? e) Affect a Significant Ecological Area (SEA)? [ ] [ ] [ ] [XI f) Other [] [] I LXI II. POPULATION AND HOUSING. would the proposal: a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local [ ] [ ] [ I [X] population projections? b) Create a net loss of jobs? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable [ ] [ ] [ ] IX] housing? d) Other [] [] LI LXI III. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. will the proposal result In: a) Unstable earth conditions or in changes In [ ] [ ] [ ] [XI geologic substructures? b) Disruptions, displacements, compaction or [ ] [X ] [ ] [ ] overcovering of the soil? c) Change in topography or ground surface relief [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] features? d) The destruction, covering or modification of any [ I [ ] [ ] [XI unique geologic or physical features? e) Any Increase in wind or water erosion of soils, [ ] [ ] [ I [X1 either on or off the site? f) Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards [ j [X1 [ I [ I such as earthquakes, landslides, mudslides; ground failure, or similar hazards? g) Changes in deposition, erosion or siltation? L ] [ ] [ ] [X] h) Other modification of a wash, channel, creek, or L ] [ I [ ] [X1 river? i) Earth movement (cut and/or fill) of 10,000 cubic [ ] [ I [ 1 [X] yards or more? S J) Development and/or grading on a slope greater than 25% natural grade? k) Development within the Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone? 1) Other IV. WATER. Would the proposal result in: a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff? b) Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding? c) Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of surface water quality (e.g. temperature, dissolved oxygen, or turbidity) d) Changes In the amount of surface water in any water body? e) Changes in currents, or the course of direction of water movements? f) Changes in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations or through substantial loss of groundwater recharge capability? g) Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater? h) Impacts to groundwater quality? I) Substantial reduction In the amount of groundwater otherwise available for public water supplies? j) Other V. STORMWATER MANAGEMENT AND RECYCLING. Would the proposal result in: a) Would the proposed project result In storm water system discharges from areas for materials stor- age, vehicle or equipment fueling, vehicle orequip- ment maintenance (including washing), waste handling, hazardous materials handling or storage, delivery areas or loading docks, or other outdoor work areas? b) Would the proposed project result in a significant environmentally harmful increase in the flow rate or volume of the project site or surrounding areas? c) Would the proposed project result in storm water discharges that would significantly Impair the beneficial uses of receiving waters or areas that provide water quality benefits (e.g., riparian 5 Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Unless Less than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 11 11 11 [XI [l [] 11 [XI [l [l [] [XI [] [] 11 [Xl [] [1 11 [XI 11 [] 11 [XI [] [l [l [XI [I [] I VI 11 [1 11 [Xl [] [] I [XI [] [] 11 [X] [I [1 11 [Xl 11 11 11 [XI [] [XI 11 11 11 11 11 [Xl 11 [I 11 [XI 11 Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Unless Lessthan Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact corridors, wetlands, etc.)? d) Would the proposed project cause harm to the [] [X] [] [] biological integrity of drainage systems and water bodies? e) Does the proposed project include provisions for [] [] [] [X] the separation and reuse of materials? VI. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal: a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] existing or projected air quality violation? b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] c) Create objectionable odors? [ ] [ ] [X ] [ ] d) Other [ ] [ ] [ ] [x] Al. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the proposal result in: a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? [ ] [ ] [X ] [ ] b) Hazards to safety from design features (e.g. sharp [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] curves or dangerous intersections) or Incompatible uses? c) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] uses? d) Insufficient parking capacity onsite or offsite? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] f) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] alternative transportation (e.g. bus stops, bicycle racks)? g) Disjointed pattern of roadway improvements [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] h) Other I I I [x] VIII. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal result in Impacts to: a) Endangered, threatened or rare species or their [] [] I [X] habitats (including but not limited to plants, fish, insects, animals, and birds)? b) Oak trees? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] c) Wetland habitat or blueline stream? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] d) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] e) Other I I I [x] IX. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal: a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] 11 b) Use nonrenewable resources in a wasteful and Inefficient manner? c) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of future value to the region and the residents of the State? d) Other X. HAZARDS. would the proposal involve: a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous substances (including but not limited to oil, pesticides, chemicals, or radiation)? b) Possible interference with an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? c) The creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard? d) Exposure of people to existing sources of potential health hazards (e.g. electrical transmission lines, gas tines, oil pipelines)? e) Increased fire hazard in areas with flammable brush, grass, or trees? f) Other XI. NOISE. would the proposal result In: a) Increases in existing noise levels? b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels or vibration? Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Unless Lessthan Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact [1 [1 [1 [ 1 [X] [] (] c) Other [] [] Al. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an effect on, or result in a need for new or altered government services in any of the following areas: a) Fire protection? [ ] [ ] b) Police protection? [ ] [ ] c) Schools? [ ] [ ] d) Maintenance of pubic facilities, Including roads? [ ] [ ] e) Other government services? [ ] [ ] XIII. UTILITIES. Would the proposal result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a) Power or natural gas? b) Communications systems? [ ] [ ] c) Local or regional water treatment or distribution [ ] [ ] facilities? 7 No Impact [X] [X] [X1 [X] [X] [X1 [X] [X1 [XI [1 [X] [X] W Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Unless Less than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact d) Sewer or septic tanks? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] e) Storm water drainage? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] f) Solid waste disposal? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] g) Local or regional water supplies? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] h) Other [] [] [] [X] XIV. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal: a) Affect a scenic vista open to public view? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] b) Have a negative aesthetic effect? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] c) Create.light or glare? [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] d) Other I I I [X] XV. CULTURAL RESOURCES. would the proposal: a) Disturb paleontological or archaeological [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] resources? b) Have the potential to cause a physical change [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? c) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the [] [] [] [X] potential impact area? d) Affect a recognized historical site? [] [] [] [X] e) Other [] [] [] [X] XVI. RECREATION a) Will the proposal result in an impact upon the [] [] [] [X] quality or quantity of existing recreation opportunities? XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the [ ] [] [] [X] 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 the potential to achieve [ ] [ ] [] [X] short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? (A short-term impact on the environment is one which occurs In a relatively brief, definitive period of time while long-term impacts will endure well into the future.) c) Does the project have impacts which are [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] Individually limited but cumulatively considerable? W a) Will the project have an adverse effect either [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] individually or cumulatively, on fish and wildlife resources? Wildlife shall be defined for the purpose of this question as "alf wild animals, birds, plants, fish, amphibians, and related ecological communities, Including the habitat upon which the wildlife depends for its continued viability." IXX. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND/OR EARLIER ANALYSES: Section and Subsections Evaluation of Impact Potentially The General Plan designates the project site as Commercial Town Center PLANNING (CTC). The zoning of the project site (Commercial Town Center) is consistent Significant with the General Plan. The Commercial Town Center zone permits "a wide range of retail, service, and related activities which are of a community and Impact regional nature and are located in and around a large regional shopping center." Potentially Unless Less than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact (A project may impact on two or more separate project development, the applicant will be required to meet the appropriate codes regarding building and safety standards, on-site parking, and floor area resources where the impact on each resource is ratio. Land uses surrounding the proposed project site include: a restaurant and relatively small, but where the effect of the total of putting greens (golf course) to the south, the Hyatt Hotel and parking lot to the north, open space/golf course to the west, and the Valencia Town Center Mall those impacts on the environment is significant.) to the east. The proposed project, the construction and operation of a full service car wash would be compatible with existing land uses in the area and d) Does the project have environmental effects which [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] will cause substantial adverse effects on human and is within the scope of development anticipated for this area. The proposed project would not disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established beings, either directly or indirectly? community, including any low-income or minority community, as the project is XVIII. DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME'DE MINUMUS' FINDING a) Will the project have an adverse effect either [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] individually or cumulatively, on fish and wildlife resources? Wildlife shall be defined for the purpose of this question as "alf wild animals, birds, plants, fish, amphibians, and related ecological communities, Including the habitat upon which the wildlife depends for its continued viability." IXX. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND/OR EARLIER ANALYSES: Section and Subsections Evaluation of Impact I. LAND USE AND The General Plan designates the project site as Commercial Town Center PLANNING (CTC). The zoning of the project site (Commercial Town Center) is consistent with the General Plan. The Commercial Town Center zone permits "a wide range of retail, service, and related activities which are of a community and regional nature and are located in and around a large regional shopping center." (UDC 17.11.020.1). The development of this site for a full service car wash is permitted in the CTC zone with an approved conditional use permit. Therefore, with the provision of an approved conditional use permit, this project presents no conflict with the General Plan and or Zoning Ordinance. The proposed car wash would occupy a site that is currently vacant. As part of project development, the applicant will be required to meet the appropriate codes regarding building and safety standards, on-site parking, and floor area ratio. Land uses surrounding the proposed project site include: a restaurant and putting greens (golf course) to the south, the Hyatt Hotel and parking lot to the north, open space/golf course to the west, and the Valencia Town Center Mall to the east. The proposed project, the construction and operation of a full service car wash would be compatible with existing land uses in the area and would not restrict or affect adjacent land uses. The proposal does not conflict with any redevelopment plans or project areas and is within the scope of development anticipated for this area. The proposed project would not disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community, including any low-income or minority community, as the project is 0 Section and Evaluation of Impact Subsections Located within an existing Commercial Town Center zone. No significant adverse impact to land use due to the proposed project site is anticipated. II. POPULATION AND The proposed project will have no cumulative impacts on official regional or HOUSING local population projections. Operation of the proposed project will add jobs to the City of Santa Clarita, having a positive effect on the City's jobs-to-housing balance. However, the proposed project will not induce substantial population growth either directly or indirectly. In addition, the proposed project would not affect existing housing, affordable or otherwise, as it is located within the Commercial Town Center zone. No significant impact to population is anticipated. III.GEOLOGIC Southern California has numerous active and potentially active faults which PROBLEMS could affect the project site. The risk to residences and businesses in Santa Clarita due to earthquakes is considered significant and is unavoidable as earthquakes are an unavoidable natural phenomena. As stated in the City's General Plan, this area is susceptible to geologic hazards in the event of a major earthquake (magnitude 8.3) along the San Andreas Fault. This could result in ground failure and liquefaction. The project site is not within an Alquist- Priolo Special Study zone, however, Allan Seward, who is a local geologist in the Santa Clarita Valley has identified the Que Fault zone which runs through more than half of the project site. No structures are proposed within this fault area as mitigation. MITIGATION MEASURE: The applicant shall not construct any structures within the identified fault zone and comply with all Building and Safety and Engineering requirements of the City of Santa Clarita. With the incorporation of the mitigation measure, no significant impact related to geological problems is anticipated. Development of the site to include the car wash, retail building and detail bays would require minimal land alterations consisting of fine grading. Therefore, site preparation is not anticipated to result in a substantial change in topography or ground surface relief features. In addition, the project site is flat and would not be subject to threats of landslides or mudflows. Development would not occur on a slope greater than 25 percent of the natural grade. The site is not located adjacent to a river, channel, or creek. For this reason, development on the site is not anticipated to affect river stabilization or result in erosive effects. Thirty-one percent of the project site will include landscaping, twelve percent of the project site will include the building pad and car wash tunnel, and the remaining portion of the site will include asphalt and concrete in order to provide parking lots and driveway access throughout the site. However, such surface modification is not anticipated to cause any significant adverse impact to the project site or adjacent properties with the addition of the following mitigation measure. MITIGATION MEASURE: The applicant shall minimize grading and drainage impacts from site development through compliance with the City's graqlMj 10 Section and Evaluation of Impact Subsections ordinance and drainage requirements. With the incorporation of the mitigation measure, no significant impact to geological problems is anticipated. IV. WATER Topographic alterations to the proposed site would be minor and, therefore, the direction of groundwater would remain constant. The proposed project would not affect any local aquifer, as the drainage of surface waters from the new facility would be controlled by building regulations and accommodated by the City's existing flood control channels, storm drains and catch basins. The proposed project would not have a direct discharge to local aquifers and, as a result, would not alter. groundwater quality. In addition, project implementation would not create a demand for, groundwater resources and, therefore, would not deplete existing groundwater resources. The project site is located within the C flood zone, which is defined by FEMA as an area with minimal flooding. No mitigation related to floodproofing is required for new construction within the C zone. Currently, there are no impermeable surfaces on the project site. Following development of the site, approximately 71 percent of the site would be covered with impermeable surfaces. Although this represents a significant change, the drainage of surface water from the project would be controlled by building regulations and directed toward the City's existing flood control channels and storm drains which are intended to accommodate runoff from this area. In addition, the amount of runoff would be insignificant compared to cumulative runoff in the region. No impacts related to drainage to either project site are anticipated. In addition, the proposed project would not result in changes in currents or the course of direction of water movements in either marine or fresh waters because water on the project site does not directly drain into marine or fresh waters. There is no potential to expose persons or property to water -related hazards. All water that is used for washing cars will drain into a reclaiming pit and be recycled. Fresh water is pumped into the wash tunnel and is recycled through four reclaiming pits or four clarifying stages and as new water is needed it is pumped into the system. All water used for the facility never runs off the site. Therefore, there would be no water -related impacts associated with the proposed project. V. STORMWATER Compliance with National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) MANAGEMENT & requirements to reduce pollutants in construction runoff and protect stormwater RECYCLING runoff quality from pollutants that may be generated by operation of the project site. Specifically, compliance with applicable Stormwater Best Management Practices (BMPs) included in "Blue Print for a Clean Ocean" is required as part of the City's conditions of approval for the construction and operation of the project site. The project site is a development planning priority project under the City's NPDES Municipal Stormwater Permit as a car wash. An Urban Stormwater Mitigation Plan and Site Specific Urban Stormwater Mitigation Plan must be 11 Section and Evaluation of Impact Subsections prepared prior to the issuance of grading or building permits to minimize potential stormwater runoff impacts, and to make an effort to maintain flow volume and velocity into receiving water bodies at pre -development levels. Appropriate best management practices (BMPs) must be incorporated into the design of the project. MITIGATION MEASURE. 1. Sediments from areas disturbed by construction shall be retained on site, using structural drainage controls to the maximum extent practicable, and stockpiles of soil shall be properly contained to minimize sediment transport from the site to streets, drainage facilities or adjacent properties via runoff, vehicle tracking, or wind. 2. Construction -related materials, wastes, spills or residues shall be retained on site to minimize transport from the site to streets, drainage facilities or adjoining properties by wind or runoff. 3. Runoff from equipment and vehicle washing shall be contained at the construction site unless treated to remove sediments and pollutants. With the incorporation of the mitigation measures, no significant impact to stormwater is anticipated. In general, however, the construction and operation of the project site would not significantly alter existing stormwater drainage patterns, volume, or quality. All water used for washing the cars will be recycled through four stages and four different reclaiming pits. In addition, the development is not anticipated to result in a significant environmentally harmful increase in the flow rate or volume of stormwater on the project site or surrounding areas. Stormwater discharges from the site are not anticipated to impair the beneficial uses of receiving waters or areas that provide water quality benefits, or cause harm to the biological integrity of drainage systems and water bodies. The applicant will be required to include on-site provisions for the separation and reuse of materials for the proposed project. No significant impact to stormwater is anticipated for the project. VI. AIR QUALITY Construction activities associated with the proposed site would result in short- term air quality impacts. The use of machinery for grading and construction would create a minor amount of dust, emissions and objectionable odors which will be reduced through standard Building and Safety and Engineering requirements resulting in less than a significant impact. The proposed car wash use will not create any significant amount of operation —related emissions. The car wash is hand washed and hand dried. The only machinery in the car wash tunnel is the tracks to pull the cars through the tunnel. Therefore, the project is not anticipated to result in any long-term air quality impacts. VII Parking TRANSPORTATION/ On-site surface parking is included in the proposed site plan. Parking will CIRCULATION include a total of 13 spaces. The Citys Unified Development Code requires a total of 5 parking spaces. The number of parking spaces shown on the site plan exceeds the City's requirements. Therefore, the project will create no adverse impacts related to on- or off-site parking. 12 Section and Evaluation of Impact Subsections The project site also complies with the stacking (which include the washing and drying) requirements of the Unified Development Code. Trio Generation According to the ITE Trip Generation Manual (1997), the proposed car wash would generate approximately 900 total trips (including customers and employees) per day. The applicant's initial study is estimating a total amount of trips per day at 300. The proposed car wash use is to be located in an area which has already been improved with respect to circulation and therefore can accommodate the proposed use. The site is located off Valencia Boulevard and McBean Parkway — Major Highways. The project will be required to pay the appropriate Bridge and Thoroughfare fees as a result of the minor increase in traffic. As a result, there will be no safety hazards from design features, insufficient parking capacity, inadequate emergency access, hazards for pedestrians or bicyclist, conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation, or disjointed patterns of roadway improvements; thus having less than a significant impact on transportation. VIII. BIOLOGICAL The project site is located in an urban setting. No rare or endangered species RESOURCES of animals inhabit the site. The proposal will have no potential to affect -locally - designated species or locally -designated communities of plant or animal. In addition, the project site will have no rare or endangered species of plants or wetland habitat. The project site does not currently produce any agricultural crop. Consequently, the project site will have no significant impact on wildlife dispersal or migration corridors. The project site is vacant. There are no oak trees on the site. No significant impact to biological resources is anticipated. IX. ENERGY AND The proposed project, the development of a full service car wash, would not MINERAL conflict with adopted energy conservation plans. The proposed project is not RESOURCES anticipated to require development of new sources of energy. The utility infrastructure serving the surrounding area is expected to sufficiently accommodate the proposed development. The project would not contribute to a significant increase in energy usage or result in a substantial increase in the use of natural or mineral resources. No adverse impacts are anticipated. X. HAZARDS There are no known hazardous materials or hazardous wastes on the project site. The project would not introduce hazardous material or explosives that would increase risks to the surrounding area. In addition, operation of the car wash would not introduce any odor or dust that could pose a potential health hazard. Construction activities for the project site may result in limited, short-term exposure to various hazardous and toxic materials. Such impacts are anticipated to be of a limited nature and occurrence and would cease after the construction phase. Compliance with applicable laws and guidelines, including existing Building and Safety Department and Los Angeles County Fire Department codes, will result in no significant risk to human health. 13 Section and Evaluation of Impact Subsections XI. NOISE Construction -Related Noise There will be a short-term increase in noise levels during general site preparation and construction of the project site. Neighboring uses include a golf course, putting green, restaurant, Valencia Town Center Mali, and the Hyatt Hotel. To minimize potential noise -related impacts during the construction period, mitigation measures will be included,as part of the City s conditions of approval. These include the following: MITIGATION MEASURES FOR SHORT-TERM NOISE IMPACTS: 1. The project shall comply with all applicable City of Santa Clarita noise regulations. 2. Construction hours will be limited to the hours of 7..00 a.m. to 7.:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, and between 8:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on Saturdays, unless traffic volumes or public safety issues warrant otherwise (as determined by City, County or State officials). No construction on Sundays or legally proclaimed holidays will occur. 3. Where noise impacts from construction activities prove to unduly interfere with operations of businesses, the applicant will erect temporary noise barriers where they do not restrict access to businesses and where they do not affect visibility of businesses. Although construction activities will increase the ambient noise levels in the short-term, the above mitigation measures will reduce impacts to a less -than - significant level. Therefore, noise levels are not anticipated to adversely affect the neighboring facilities. Operations -Related Noise The proposed use is expected to minimally increase existing noise levels and will be well below the allowable noise levels for the area as the only machinery involved with the car wash is the silenced blowers, vacuums and tracks that pull the car through the tunnel. All cars will be hand washed and dried. Operation of the car wash use is anticipated to create a less than significant noise impact. XIF. PUBLIC The development of project site would create no additional demand for public SERVICES services including fire, police, schools, public facilities and maintenance or other governmental services. Fire and police protection services are more than adequate to meet the needs of the project and the surrounding area. The project site will be required to pay the appropriate school and fire fees to cover any direct or indirect service increase. No significant impact to public services is anticipated XIII. UTILITIES The development of the proposed car wash would create no additional demand for utilities. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations to the following utilities: power and natural gas; communications systems; local and regional water treatment and distribution facilities; sanitary sewer; storm water drainage; solid waste disposal; and local and regional water supplies. No significant impact to utilities is anticipated. 14 Section and Evaluation of Impact Subsections XIV. AESTHETICS There are no scenic vistas in the vicinity of the project site. However, there are new residential homes being built approximately 1000 to 1500 feet away that have very limited view of the mall area and proposed car wash use., The architecture of the car wash will be similar to the existing buildings within the Valencia Town Center Mall resulting in the car wash facility not affecting any views from the residential area. The structure on the project site will comply with zoning and building requirements and be architecturally compatible with surrounding buildings. In addition, as part of the City s conditions of approval, all roof equipment, backflow devices, utilities and trash receptacles shall be adequately screened from view. The building structure itself will be predominantly screened from McBean Parkway because of the pedestrian bridge and slope on the eastern portion of the site. As a result, the project site would not be aesthetically offensive to the public with the following mitigation measures. MITIGATION MEASURES: 1. The placement, type and intensity of lighting shall be reviewed by the City's Development Review Committee. 2. All parking lot lighting shall be directed downward and boxed. 3. No signage is to be reviewed or approved at this time. The applicant shall obtain Planning Division approval for any signage proposed for the project prior to its placement on the buildings/property. 4. All roof equipment shall be screened from public view. 5. The applicant shall provide a landscaped berm along McBean Parkway for screening. 6. Appropriate landscaping shall be placed to help screen the facility. 7. The architecture of the building shall be similar to the "Greens" building. With the incorporation of the mitigation measures, no significant impact is anticipated. XV. CULTURAL No historic or prehistoric artifacts or sites have been previously recorded on or RESOURCES adjacent to the project site. The project site is not listed on the National Register of Historic Places. There are no structures, artifacts or building on either site of prehistoric, historic, religious, sacred, ethnic or cultural significance. No significant impact to cultural resources are anticipated. XVI. RECREATION Construction and operation of proposed car wash would not result in a demand increase for recreational facilities. Therefore, there would be no an adverse impact on the City's parks and recreational facilities. s:\pbs\current\isspeedy 15 O N m coCox z y r O z Ga CIO to z a a e 1 M � IIS f4J'. _ I u O N m coCox z y r O z Ga CIO to z a a