File #: 2015-2259   
Type: Regular Agenda Item
Body: Planning Board
On agenda: 11/9/2015
Title: PLN14-0134 - 1200 Park Street - Applicant: Gary Voss for Big O Tires. The applicant requests an amendment to an existing Use Permit (UP88-36) for 1200 Park Street. This project is determined to be Categorically Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines Section 15301, Existing Facilities. (Continued from July 13, 2015 meeting)
Attachments: 1. Exhibit 1 - Resolution Amending Use Permit 88-36., 2. Exhibit 2 - July 13, 2015 Planning Board Staff Report, without attachments

Title

 

PLN14-0134 - 1200 Park Street - Applicant:  Gary Voss for Big O Tires. The applicant requests an amendment to an existing Use Permit (UP88-36) for 1200 Park Street.  This project is determined to be Categorically Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines Section 15301, Existing Facilities.  (Continued from July 13, 2015 meeting)

 

 

Body

 

BACKGROUND

 

On July 13, 2015, the Planning Board held a public hearing on Big O’s request to amend an existing Use Permit. There were 22 speakers on the item.  Following the public testimony, the Planning Board continued the item and requested that the applicant and staff continue to consider alternative solutions to the proposed use permit amendments.

 

Since the hearing, Big O has continued to examine means to minimize impacts on the neighborhood parking supply.  As a result of these efforts, the owners have identified a potential off-site location to park cars at 1835 Oak Street in the M-2 General Industry Zoning District.  The site provides a large off-street parking area and a large building that may ultimately serve as a replacement location for the entire operation.  If Big O is successful in acquiring the site, it would immediately begin using the site for overflow parking, and within two years, would relocate all operations to the new location. 

 

Although Big O has not completed its efforts to acquire an additional site, staff is recommending that the Planning Board complete its review of the use permit which began on July 13, 2015.  

 

ANALYSIS

 

As discussed in the July 13, 2015 staff report, a neighboring business owner, Art Thoms and his lawyer, Michael Notaro, submitted complaints about Big O violating several of the 1988 Use Permit conditions. The 1988 Use Permit contains eight conditions.  There are three conditions that are in dispute.  The three conditions relate to: work being performed on cars in the Big O parking lot (condition #1), Big O’s lack of success in securing an off-site parking lot (condition #2), and the lack of a required sign prohibiting left turns from the Big O site onto San Jose (condition #5).

 

Condition #1:  All work to be conducted within enclosed structures. 

 

Big O notes that there are some customers that merely require a quick repair or a discrete task such as a flat tire change or repaired tire installation.  These tasks typically take approximately 10-20 minutes.  Therefore, Big O has requested that this condition be modified to allow for minor repair outside the structure provided that all safety precautions are taken and that the work is done in an expeditious manner.     

 

Staff believes that the minor repairs conducted by Big O on its own property do not represent a significant impact to the public health, safety or welfare. 

 

The Planning Board identified a safety issue regarding cars placed on stationary or stabilizer jacks over night or over the weekend.  Staff is recommending that Condition #1 be modified as follows:  

 

Condition #1: All work to be conducted within enclosed structures. All outdoor parking areas shall be cleared of all cars on stationary or stabilizer jacks during evening hours and weekend hours when the business is closed.

 

Condition #2:  Within 60 days of the date of approval of this Use Permit, applicant shall find an alternative long-term parking site for customer cars, as well as for employees.  Leasing arrangements made by the applicant shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Director. 

 

Since the July public hearing, Big O has been pursuing a new location for its operations and/or for parking.   At this time, staff is recommending that the condition be maintained with some slight modifications.  The revised condition would remain in effect as long as Big O maintains operations at 1200 Park Street.  If at such future time, Big O vacates 1200 Park Street, then the use permit would become null and void.

 

Condition #2.  Within 60 days of the date of approval of this Use Permit,   The applicant shall continue to work to locate and secure a shall find an alternative long-term parking site for customer cars, as well as for employees.  Once a site is secured, the applicant shall notify the Community Development Department that this condition has been fulfilled. Leasing arrangements made by the applicant shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Director.

 

Condition #5.  Applicant shall install a sign directing customers to turn right toward Park Street from the San Jose Avenue exit to alleviate traffic impacts on surrounding residential areas. 

 

Staff verified that the “No Left Turn” sign was reinstalled on the driveway exiting onto San Jose Avenue.  At a recent interdepartmental meeting, Public Works traffic engineering staff stated there was no public safety requirement for this condition, but that it was probably imposed in 1988, as a courtesy to the adjacent residential neighborhood to the southeast. 

 

Neither the City nor Big O can effectively require that customers obey the sign.  The Planning Board may retain the condition, provided it is understood that providing the sign is deemed compliance, and that the condition does not mean, or imply, that the City will be monitoring Big O customers and employees to ensure that they are obeying the sign.  

 

PUBLIC NOTICE and Comments

 

Property owners and residents within 300 feet of the project’s boundaries were notified of the public hearing and given the opportunity to review and comment on the proposal.  As of the writing of this report, staff has received several calls but no written correspondence.

 

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

 

This project is determined to be Categorically Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines Section 15301, Existing Facilities.

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

Approve a Resolution Amending Use Permit 88-36. 

 

Respectfully Submitted,

 

 

Andrew Thomas

Assistant Community Development Director

 

Exhibits:

1.                     Resolution Amending Use Permit 88-36.

2.                     July 13, 2015 Planning Board Staff Report, without attachments