HomeMy WebLinkAbout1997-03-17 City Council (17)City of Palo Alto
C ty Manager’s Report
TO:HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL
FROM:CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT: Planning and
Community Environment
AGENDA DATE: MARCH 17, 1997 CMR:169:97
SUBJECT:3897 E! Camino Real: Site and Design Application to demolish an
existing one story gas station building (1,075 square feet) and
construct a new single story, 900-square-foot car wash building, an
1,855-square-foot gas station canopy and related site improvements
and Conditional Use Permit to allow operation of an automotive
service and automotive service station use.
This application is for Site and Design approval to demolish an existing one story gas station
building (1,075 square feet) and construct a new single story, 900-square,foot car wash
building, an 1,855-square-foot gas station canopy and related site improvements, and for a
Conditional Use Permit to allow operation of an automotive service and automotive service
station use at 3897 E1 Camino Real. The application was reviewed by the Planning
Commission on January 8, 1997, and by the Architectural Review Board on February 6,
1997. Both bodies recommended approval of the project.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Staff, the Planning Commission and the Architectural Review Board. recommend that the
City Council:
Approve the attached Mitigated~ Negative Declaration (Attachment 2), finding that the
proposed project will not result in any significant environmental ~impacts, if certain
conditions of approval are imposed;
Approve the Site and Design, as revised, for construction of the gas station and car
wash facility based on theattached findings and conditions; and
CMR: 169:97 Page 1 of 6
Approve the Conditional Use Permit for the operation of an automotive service and
service station use, based on attached findings and conditions.
POLICY IMPLICATIONS
The project must be determined to be consistent with the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan and
Zoning Ordinance. In addition, the E1 Camino Real Design .Guidelines can be used to
evaluate the proposal. The following Comprehensive Plan objectives, policies and programs
apply to this project:
Comprehensive Plan:
Urban Design Element. Objective. page 42: "Promote the orderly and harmonious
development of the city and the attainment of the most desirable land use and
improvements through the review of new development." The site is designated
Service Commercial and the proposed automotive service and service station use is
included in this land use designation of the Comprehensive Plan.
o
°
Urban Desi_ma Element. Ob_iective. p.42: "Promote visual environments which are of
high aesthetic quality and variety and considerate of each other." The proposed car
wash building, gas station canopy and signage create a commercial facade with uxban
scale elements at street level typical of a service station and landscaping at a human
scale that is visually attractive to pedestrians.
Urban Design Element. Proffam 4: "Discourage garish signs through sign regula-
tions, and design standards and encourage signs that blend with the site and area."
The proposed signs consist of the business name in a simple design on the gas station
canopy that are functional and easy to read.
Urban Design Element. Proffam 14: "Encourage the use of street trees and planting
in the space between the street and sidewalk rather than unrelieved concrete paving."
The project proposes the planting of two new Sycamore street trees and on-site
planting in addition to the existing two street trees along the E1 Camino l~ontage.
Urban Desi~ma Element. Text Pa~: "The use of the 1979 El Camino Real design
guidelines will eliminate out of character development as sites are developed or
modified and result in more street trees and other landscaping." The project will
result in a row of Sycamore street trees along E1 Camino Real as well as landscaping
on-site that will create a visually appealing planting strip along the street frontage.
CMR:169:97 Page 2 of 6
El Camino Real Design Guidelines Consistency:
The E1 Camino Real Design Guidelines are considered an incentive and guide for
redevelopment, rather than policy, and provide for continued development of the E1 Camino
Real District. The guidelines for this district which apply to this site include the following:
1. Landscaped Street Theme: One 15 gallon street tree will be required for every 30feet of
frontage on El Camino Real or streets Intersecting El Camino Real.
The project has 135 feet frontage on E1 Camino Real and 115 frontage on Ventura Avenue.
The existing Sycamore and Scarlet Oak-trees are currently located about 55 feet apart on E1
Camino Real and four Liquidambar trees are located along the Ventura Avenue frontage. The
four Liquidambar trees along the Ventura Avenue frontage meet the intent of the Guidelines
and should be preserved in their existing location. (See "Issues" section for an analysis of the
project’s compliance with the E1 Camino Real Guidelines.)
2. Landscaping and Paving: Provide landscaping adjacent to and within parking areas in
order to screen vehicles from view. Trees and shrubs should be grouped together. Sight
distance shouM be preserved. Existing trees shouM be protected. Landscaping shall be
installed in buffers between commercial and residential lots.
The project meets all of these landscaping guidelines, in that adequate perimeter and on-site .
landscaping is provided, parking areas are screened from view, and a sufficient number of
street trees are provided along both street frontages.
3. Signs: The area of signs shouM be one half to two thirds of the maximum allowed and the
height shouM conform to building setbacks. Signs shouM be brief tastefully designed and "
fit into the surrounding environment.
The project meets all these sign guidelines as discussed under Sign Ordinance Compliance
in the "Issues" section.
4. Architecture, Site Plan: Buildings shouM be set back; parking and trash areas shouM be
scr.eened; building elevations shouM have an integrated character; driveways shouM be
minimized; commercial buildings shouM be compatible with their neighbors.
The project meets these architecture and site plan guidelines in that the car Wash building and
related paving are adequately set back; parking and trash areas are screened by a ten-foot-
wide landscaped strip; building elevations demonstrate an integrated, contemporary design;
the driveways are the minimum number and width needed to serve the proposed uses; and
the automotive service use is compatible with adjacent uses on E1 Camino Real, particularly
CMR: 169:97 Page 3 of 6
by providing landscaped, acoustical and driveway buffers between the car wash and the
nearby residential use to the rear of the site. .
.5. Buffers and Parking Lots: A ten-foot-wide landscaped buffer is required; one 15-gallon
tree for every 20feet of common property line is suggested," parked ears should be screened;
landscaping should be dispersed so that paving is shaded.
The project meets these buffer and parking lot guidelines in that a ten-foot-wide landscaped
buffer is provided; ten 15-gallon trees are provided along the rear property line; parked cars
are screened by a landscaped buffer; and the paving area is shaded along the perimeter of the
site.
6. Light: Light poles should be 12 to 20feet high; the light source should not be directly
visible at any point over 6feet outside the boundaries of the lot; overall light intensity shouM
be an average of.25 to .5foot candles; low pressure sodium lights are not preferred; spill
light should not exceed, l foot candles on private property at any point over 6feet outside
the boundaries of the parking lot.
The gas station canopy height has been reduced to meet these guidelines, although average
on-site lighting, while meeting Zoning Ordinance requirements, is somewhat greater than
suggested by these guidelines. Refer to the "Issues" section of the attached Architectural
Review Board staff report for a detailed discussion of lighting..
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The site currently contains a vacant single story gas s~tion building (1,075 square feet)
which was previously occupied by the Co-Op gas station. The existing building is dilapidated
and the existing site is strewn with litter and poses a potential safety hazard. The City has
been receiving complaints about the condition of the property for several years. The City’s
Code Enforcement staff have spent considerable time investigating citizen complaints.
Development of the property with the proposed use would terminate complaints conceming
the dilapidated condition of the building and site.
The Planning Commission and Architectural Review Board both unanimously recommend
approval of the project. Their comments are summarized as follows.
~ Commission Comments
Commissioners were supportive of the service station and ear wash uses at the proposed site
and noted that any impacts on. neighboring properties were mitigated by acoustical
treatments, on-site landscaping and setbacks, and the addition of street trees along El Camino
Real. Commissioners also supported a request by the applicant to shift the driveway toward
the comer by 3 feet and to shift the driveway toward the northern planter strip by 5 feet,
CMR:169:97 Page 4 of 6
resulting in a 28-foot-wide driveway near the comer and a 30-foot driveway near Jack-in-the-
Box. This revision would allow improved access to the site while providing at least 25 feet
between the Sycamore street trees on E1 Camino Real, as called for in the E1 Camino Real
Design Guidelines. The revised plans dated January-21, 1997 reflect these revisions.
Commissioners also supported the addition of the attached four Conditional Use Permit
Conditions (Attachment 6), which regulate the hours of operation of the car wash and
deliveries, adherence to the .City’s Noise Ordinance, and prohibition of engine or body work
on-site. The Commission unanimously recommended approval of the project, as modified,
with the attached conditions. One Commissioner inquired about the lack of trees in the
planter strip on the northern perimeter of the property next to Jack-in-the-Box. Staff
recommends that the conditions be modified to add a row of Arbutus Marina (15 gallon) in
the planter strip along this perimeter lot line.
Architectural Review Board Comments
The Architectural Review Board (ARB) reviewed the project on February 6, 1997. The ARB
members expressed an interest in replacing the dilapidated existing structure with a modem
building. They noted the extensive landscaping and setbacks and the acoustical mitigations,
including the rear wall, to protect neighboring properties. They also appreciated the use of
a monument sign instead of a pole sign for the fuel price sign on E1 Camino Real. The ARB
members requested that staff approve three minor revisions to the project priorto building
permit approval. ~ These include: 1) the use of ceramic tile or concrete masonry to replace the
brick at the base of the building and the base of the monument sign; 2) the addition of vines
to soften the appearance of the rear wall; and 3) the addition of a light pole within the center
planter on E1 Camino Real to balance the lighting along this frontage.
FISCAL IMPACT
There will be no fiscal impact as a result of this project in that the cost of project review is
fully covered by the City’s Cost Recovery Program.
ENVIRONMENTAL ’ASSESSMENT
The project is subject to environmental review under provisions of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). An environmental impact assessment was prepared for
the project and determined that the project would have a less than significant impact on the
environment and that a Mitigated Negative Declaration should be prepared. The Mitigated
Negative Declaration was made available for public review from November 20 through
December 11, 1996 and is attached to this staff report (see Attachment 2).
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment # 1. Planning Commission staff report, January 8, 1997 (w/o attachments)
Attachment #2. Mitigated Negative Declaration (96-EIA-36)
Attachment #3: Conditional Use Permit Findings
CMR: 169:97 Page 5 of 6
Attachment #4: Site and Design Findings
Attachment #5: Site and Design Conditions (Condition # 1) .
Attachment #6: Conditional Use Permit Conditions
Attachment #7: Standard Conditions of Project Approval
Attachment #8: Minutes from Planning Commission meeting of January 8, 1997
Attachment #9: Minutes from Architectural Review Board meeting of February 6, 1997
PREPARED BY: Chandler Lee, Contract Planner
DEPARTMENT HEAD REVIEW:
KENNETH R. SCHREIBER
Director of Planning and
Community Environment
City Manager
CC:Robert H. Lee, Architects, 1137 N. McDowell Boulevard, Petaluma, CA 94954
Tom Leonardini, 255 W. Santa Inez Avenue, Hillsborough, CA 94010
Dan Askari, 1601 S. De Anza Bl~cd. #101, Cupertino, CA 95014
CMR: 169:97 Page 6 of 6
PLANNING COMMISSION
MEMORANDUM
TO:PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM:
AGENDA DATE:
SUBJECT:
Chandler Lee, Contract Planner DEPARTMENT: Planning
January 8, 1997
Site and Design to demolish an existing one story gas station building
(1,075 square feet) and construct a new single story 900 square foot car
wash building, an 1,855 square foot gas station canopy and related site
improvements and Conditional Use Permit to allow operation of an
automotive service and automotive service station use at 3897 El
Camino Real: 96-ARB-174, 96-UP-53, 96-D-8, 96-EIA-36,
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council:
Approve the attached .Mitigated Negative Declaration (Attachment 4), finding that the
proposed project will-not result in any significant environmental impacts, if certain
conditions of approval are imposed; and
m Approve the attached Site and Design and Conditional Use Permit for construction of
the gas station and car wash facility and operation of an. automotive service and
automotive service station use based on the attached findings and conditions.
BACKGROUND/PROJECT INFORMATION
This report addresses a Site and Design and Conditional Use Permit Application to allow
demolition of an existing one story gas station building(1,075 square feet) and construction
of a new single story 900 square foot car wash building, an 1,855 square foot gas station
canopy, project signage and related site improvements as well as operation of an
automotive service and automotive service station use. The property is located in the E1
Camino Real. corridor and is surrounded by retail, service commercia!, restaurant, and
CWL[ P:WCSR\ECR3897.SR Page 1
1-2-97
multiple family residential uses. Details on the project description, as well as information
on ~he subject property are presented below.
Project Description
The project entails the replacement of a vacant, dilapidated gas station building with a new
gas station and car wash facility. The existing building is a plain single story structure built
in 1964 surrounded by a partially paved vacant lot that is overgrown with weeds. The
proposal will improve the existing condition of the site by adding landscaping and an
attractive, modern building design while providing a service (the car wash) that is not
currently available in the vicinity. The proposed project, with conditions, is compatible
with surrounding uses and will be a significant visual improvement over the existing use.
Proposed features include: a single story 900 square foot car wash building, an 1,855
square foot gas station canopy, project signage, perimeter and interior landscaping, a
sound wall facing the adjacent apartment building, and three parking spaces.
The site is a rectangular shaped parcel ofland totaling 15,525 square feet with a 135 foot
width (along E1 Camino Real) and115 feet depth. The existing site slopes about 1% from
south to north and drains into the gutters onthe street. The site is surrounded by retail,
service commercial, restaurant, .and multiple family residential buildings. The site is
bordered by a Jack-in-the-Box drive through restaurant (on E1 Camino to the southeast),
the former La Cumbre (across Ventura to the northwest), an assortment of retail stores
(across E1 Camino to the northeast), and a multiple family apartment building (across the
alley to the southwest).
Site Information
Information regarding the applicant, owner, assessor’sparcel number, Comprehensive
Plan designation, .zoning district, .existing land use, and parcel size is shown below in
Table 1.
TABLE 1: PROJECT INFORMATION
Applicant:Robert H. Lee, Architects
1137 N. McDowell Boulevard
Petaluma, CA 94954
Owner:Tom Leonardini
CWLI P:\PCSR\ECR3897.SR Page 2
1-2-97
Assessor’s Parcel Number:
Comprehensive Plan Designation:
Zoning District:
Surrounding Land Use:
Parcel Size:
255 W. Santa Inez Avenue
Hillsborough, CA 94010
132-41-086
Service Commercial
CS (Service Commercial)
Commercial and Residential
15,525 square feet or .36 acres
Project History_
The site currently contains a vacant single story gas station building (I,075 square feet)
which was previously occupied by the Co Opt gas station.
pOLICY IMPLICATIONS
The project must be determined to be consistent with the Palo .Alto Comprehensive Plan
and Zoning Ordinance. In addition, the E1 Camino Real Design Guidelines can be used to
evaluate the proposal. The following Comprehensive Plan objectives, policies and
programs apply to this project:
Comprehensive Plan:
~r.hfllLD_.e,~g~. Element. Objective. page 42: ."Promote the orderly and harmonious
development of the city and the attainment of the most desirable land use and
improvements through the review of new development." The site is designated Service
Commercial and the proposed automotive service and service station use is included
in this land use designation of the Comprehensive Plan.
r an De"e bieetive, o.42: "Promote visual environments which are
of high aesthetic quality and variety and considerate of each other." The proposed
car wash building, gas station canopy and signage create a commercial facade with
urban scale elements at street level typical of a Service station and landscaping.
CWL I P:\PCSR\ECR3897.SR Page 3
.1-2-97
o Urban Design Element. Program 4: "Discourage garish signs through sign
regulations and design standards and encourage signs that blend with the site and
area." The proposed signs consist of the business name in a simple design on the gas
station canopy.
o Urban Design Element. Program 14: "Encourage the use of street trees and planting
in the space between the street and sidewalk rather than unrelieved concrete paving."
The project proposes the planting of two new sycamore street trees and on-site
planting in addition to maintenance of the existing two street trees along the E1
Camino frontage, and four on the Ventura frontage.
o Urban Design Element. Text Page 46: "The use of the 1979 El Camino Real design
guidelines will eliminate out of character development as sites are developed or
modified and result in more street trees and other landscaping." The project will
result in a row of Sycamore street trees along E1 Camino Real as well as landscaping
on-site that will create a visually appealing planting strip, along the street frontage.
El Camino Real De isjgn Guidelines Consistency:
¯The E1 Camino Real Design Guidelines are used to evaluate redevelopment along E1
Camino Real. The guidelines for this district which apply to this site include the
following:
1. Landscaped Street Theme: One 15 gallon street tree will be required for every 30feet
of frontage on El Camino Real or streets Intersecting El Camino Real.
The project has 135 feet frontage on E1 Camino Real and 115 frontage on Ventura Avenue.
The existing Sycamore and Scarlet Oak trees are currently located about 55 feet apart on
E1 Camino Real,and .four Liquid Amber trees are located along the Ventura Avenue
frontage. The four liquid amber trees along the Ventura Avenue frontage meet the intent
of the Guidelines and should be preserved in their existing location. However, a
modification to the project design is required in order to meet the Guidelines for tree
spacing along E1 Camino Real. (See "Issues" section for an analysis of the project’s
compliance with the E1 Camino Real Guidelines.)
2. Landscaping and Paving: Provide landscaping adjacent to and within parking areas in
order to screen vehicles from view. Trees and shrubs should be grouped together. Sight
distance should be preserved. Existing trees should be protected. Landscaping shall be
CWL[ P:\PcsR\ECR3897.SR Page 4
1-2-97
installed in buffers between commercial and residential lots.
The project meets all of these landscaping guidelines in that adequate perimeter and on-site
landscaping is provided, parking areas are screened from view, and a sufficient number
of street trees are provided along both street frontages.
3. Signs: The area of signs should be one half to two thirds of the maximum allowed and
the height should conform to building setbacks. Signs should be brief, tastefully designed
and fit into the surrounding environment.
The project meets all these sign guidelines as discussed under Sign Ordinance Compliance
in the "Issues" section.
4. Architecture, Site Plan: Buildings should be set back; parking and trash areas should
be screened; building elevations should have an integrated character; driveways should be~
minimized; commercial buildings should be compatible with their neighbors.
The project meets these architecture and site plan guidelines in that the car wash building
and related paving is adequately set back; parking and trash areas are screened by a ten
foot wide landscaped strip; building elevations demonstrate an integrated, contemporary
design; the driveways are the minimum number and width needed to serve the proposed
uses; and the automotive service use is compatible with adjacent uses on EICamino Real,
particularly by providing landscaped, acoustical and driveway buffers between the car
wash and the nearby residential use to the rear of the site.
5. Buffers and Parking Lots: A ten foot wide landscaped buffer is required; one 15 gallon
tree for every 20 feet of common property line is suggested; parked cars should be
screened; landscaping should be dispersed so that paving is shaded.
The project meets ~aese buffer and parking lot guidelines in that a ten foot wide landscaped
buffer is provided; ten 15 gallon trees are provided along common property lines; parked
cars are screened by a landscaped buffer; and the paving area is shaded along the perimeter
of the site.
6. Light: Light poles should be 12 to 20feet high; the light source should not be directly
visible at any point over 6 feet outside the boundaries of the lot; overall light intensity
should be an average of .25 to .5 footcandles; low pressure sodium lights are not
preferred; spill light should not exceed .1 footcandles on private property at any point over
CWL I P:\PCSR\ECR3897.SR Page 5
1-2-97
6feet outside the boundaries of the parking lot.
The gas station canopy height has been reduced to meet these guidelines although average
on-site lighting, while meeting Zoning Ordinance requirements, is somewhat greater than
suggested by these guidelines. Refer to the "Issues" section for a detailed discussion of
lighting.
Issues and Analysis
The staff analysis for this project relates to zoning, site and design, E1 Camino Real Design
Guidelines, conditional use permit, and sign ordinance compliance.
Zoning Ordinance Cornpliance
Zone Designation:
Existing:CS
Use Category_:
Service Commercial District
Automotive Service and Automotive Service
station
The proposed project has been reviewed for compliance with the Palo Alto Zoning
Ordinance (Title 18). A comparison of the proposed project to the Service Commercial
(CS) District regulations is provided in Table 2.
CWL I P:\PCSR\ECR3897.SR Page 6
1-2-97
Table 2
Pr~ect Comparison With Ordinance Requirements
Floor Area None900 s.f. carwash
(1,855 s.f.canopy)
.06to 1
16.5 feet
17%
3 spaces
0
10 feet landscaped
FAR .4 to 1
Height 35 feet (1)
Lot Coverage n/a
Parking 3 spaces
Bicycle Parking None
Landscaped Setback 10 feet
(Rear) ¯landscaped (2)
Trash/Recycling Trash - Yes Trash - Yes
Recycling - Yes Recycling - Yes
Loading Area 300 s.f.540 s.f
Employee Showers None None
(1) The site is located within 150 feet of an RM-30 residential area and is subject to a 35
foot height limit. Daylight plane requirements do not apply due to the alley separating the
site from the neai:by apartment building..
(2) The site is located within 150 feet of an RM-30 residential area and is subject to a
minimum 10 foot setback adjacent to the alley at the rear of the property. This 10 foot
setback must be planted and maintained as a.landscaped screen.
The project; as revised per conditions, .meets all development regulations of the CS zoning
district, Off-Street Parking Ordinance, and the landscaping requirements for parking
facilities. An explanation of landscaping, street trees, loading area, recycling facilities, and
CWL I P:\PCSR\ECR3897 .SR Page 7
1-2-97
lighting is asfollows.
Landscaping
There are four existing trees within the site boundaries all of which will be preserved.
Three of the four liquid amber trees are 6 inches in diameter and one is 8 inches - all four
appear to be in good health. No oak trees or heritage trees exist on the property. Six new
trees will be planted along the rear perimeter to screen the project from the apartment
building across the alley. The project also will add two trees to the planter strips along E1
Camino Real to increase the amount of landscaping as recommended by the El Camino
Real Guidelines. The Zoning Ordinance requires that one tree be planted for every 600
square feet of landscaped islands. The project proposes a total of 10 trees for the 1,350
square feet at the rear of the site and, therefore, meets this requirement. A final landscape
plan and irrigation plan are required as a condition of approval.
The applicant has revised the site plan to. increase the amount of landscaping on-site along
the E1 Camino Real frontage. The landscape planter has been increased from 12 feet to 27
.feet along this frontage to provide for a greater provision of trees and plantings in this
corridor as called for in the E1 Camino Real Guidelines.
The site is located within 150 feet. of an RM-30 residential area and is subject to a
minimum 10 foot setback adjacent to the alley in the rear of the property. This 10 foot
setback must be planted and maintained as a landscaped screen. The proposed site plan
includes a 10 foot landscaped setback and a 7 foot existing wall and, therefore, is
consistent with this requirement.
Street Trees
There are currently four liquid amber trees planted in the sidewalk along the Ventura
Avenue frontage and one Sycamore and one Scarlet oak tree along the E1 Camino Real
frontage. The El Camino Real Design Guidelines recommend that street trees be planted
every 25 to 30 feet along E1 Camino Real which would include four or five trees where
there are currently only two. The site plan proposes .the planting of two Sycamore street
trees tO supplement the two existing street trees. The Public Works Operations Division’s
tree specialist is recommending that the Scarlet Oak.be replaced with a Sycamore. The
spacing between the street trees is adequate according to the E1 Camino Real Guidelines
except for the space between the two trees in the center of the E1 Camino .Real frontage.
These two trees are spaced about 17 feet apart instead of the 25 to 30 feet suggested in the
CWLI P:\PCSR\ECR3897.SR Page 8
1-2-97
E1 Camino Real Guidelines. The City’s arborist maintains that the 25 foot Separation is
required in order for the trees to grow in a healthy manner. Therefore, staff recommends
that the plans be revised to provide an additional 8 feet of spacing between these two trees.
This could be accomplished by reducing the 30 foot driveway near the corner to 25 feet
and reducing the proposed 28 foot southern driveway to 25 feet. Both driveways would be
well within the 20 to 33 foot range stipulated in the Zoning Ordinance. The planter strip
on-site should be lengthened accordingly from 27 to 35 feet and planted with an evergreen
tree as recommended by the Planning Arborist witha low canopy to fill in between the
Sycamore street, trees. An evergreen of the same species should be planted in each of the
corner planter strips along E1 Camino Real. The new street tree, on-site trees, and
landscaping should be located so as not to block the sight distance triangle for drivers
exiting the site. The four liquid amber trees along the Ventura Avenue frontage meet the
E1 Camino Real Guidelines and should be preserved in their existing location.
Staff believes that this revision to the site plan would make the project consistent with the
E1 Camino Real Guidelines while providing safe and convenient access to the gas station
and car wash uses.
The project meets all other requirements for landscaping on-site.
Loading
The Off-Street Parking regulations require one off-street loading space consisting of a
rectangular area not less than 12 feet wide by 45 feet long. Although the proposed gas
station and car wash use requires only minimal loading of supplies for convenience goods
and car wash supplies, staff feels that a loading zone should be reserved for delivery trucks
and other supply vehicles. The site plan sets aside a loading zone located over the fuel
tanks and near the gas station office. The proposed loading area is 300 square feet (12 by
25). square feet which is smaller than the loading zone requirement of the Off-Street
Parking Ordinance. The loading zone should be expanded to 540 square feet (12 by 45
feet) to conform with the requirements of the Off-Street Parking Regulations. This
requirement is made as a condition of project approval.
.Recycling
The site plan_ originally provided for a trash enclosure but not a recycling enclosure. City’
recycling staff recommended that the proposed trash container be expanded to include one,
2 cubic yard container for cardboard and two, 64 gallon containers for bottles and cans.
CWL I P:\PCSR\ECR3897.SR Page 9
1-2-97
The trash and recycling enclosure area should be enclosed with a roof. The applicant has
revised the site plan to accommodate the recycling containers within an enclosed trash
enclosure area. This requirement is included as a condition of project approval. The
applicant should work with the City Recycling program staff for assistance.
Lighting
The plans indicate that the major lighting source on site is the gas station canopy. The
lights inside the canopy are 13.5 feet above grade. In addition, there are four perimeter
light fixtures - two along the Jack in The Box frontage and two along the apartment
frontage. The spanners on top of the gas pumps and several of the signs are internally
illuminated. The plans are unclear as to the height of the perimeter lighting fixtures,
although the applicant has indicated that the height is 16.5 feet. Zoning regulations for sites
within 150 feet of a residential area indicate that lighting fixtures should not exceed 15 feet
in height..The canopy meets this requirements and the height of the perimeter lights will
be reduced to 15 feet as a condition of project approval. The photometrics also indicate
illumination at a greater intensity than normally allowed. In general, lighting illumination
is ngt approved for measurements beyond an average of 1.5 footcandles and a range of.5
to 1.5 is optimal. The E1 Camino Real Guidelines stipulate that overall light intensity
should be an average .of .25 to .5 footcandles and spill light should not exceed .1
footcandles on private property at any point over 6 feet outside the boundaries of the
parking lot.
The key issues on this particular site are the effect of the lighting on the apartment building
across the alley in back of the gas station, compliance with E1 Camino Real Guidelines,
and how distracting it may be for drivers on E1 Camino Real. The 40 foot driveway and
parking area provide a more than adequate buffer between the gas station lighting and the
apartment building. The station lights, are within the 1.5 footcandle value at the perimeter
of.the site and the light intensity diminishes rapidly and reaches values of .1 and .2
footcandles at the edge of the .apartment property. Average light values are within the 1.5
footcandle range required by the Zoning Ordinance but exceed the .25 to .5 range
suggested in the E1 camino Real Guidelines. Average light values on-site exceeding the
recommended range of .5 to 1.5 footcandles may be overly distracting to drivers on E1
Camino Real while values less than this are not recommended for safety reasons for this
type of use. Therefore, staff recommends that the ph0tometrics be revised to meet the .5
to 1.5 footcandle average lighting standards contained in PAMC Section 18.64.030. The
conditions of approval require that all lighting meet these standards and that lighting must
be shielded in a manner to prevent visibility of the light source, eliminate glare and.light
CWLI P:\PCSR\ECR3897.SR Page 10
1-2-97
spillover beyond the perimeter of the development.
Conditional Use Permit
Automobile service stations are a conditional use in the CS zoning district and,. therefore,
can be approved only if the findings established in Section 18.90.060 can be made. Both
findings can be made for the automobile service station and car wash Uses, as shown in
Attachment 1.
Site and Design Findings
Pursuant to PAMC Section 18.45.040, automobile service stations require site and design
review and are required to meet findings established in Section 18.82.060. All four
findings can be made for the automobile service station and car wash uses, as shown in
Attachment 2.
Sign Ordinance Compliance
The proposed signage is compared with the allowed sign measurements of the Sign
Ordinance as shown below.
Wall and Canopy Signs
The proposed wall signs which read, "Car Wash", "Cashier" and "Restrooms", and the
.canopy sign on the gas station canopy which reads "Chevron" comply with the regulations
of the Sign Ordinance. These signs also meet all the requirements of the E1 Camino Real
Design Guidelines for signs which call for signs to be 1/2 to 2/3 of the maximum size
allowed by the sign ordinance..
Freestandin~ Si~.~S.
The freestanding sign is within the sign area allowed by the Sign Ordinance, Section
16.20.150(b)(1). The proposed free standing sign is 41 square feet where the code permits
42 square feet. Although this sign meets the Sign Ordinance requirements it is larger than
the size recommended in the E1 Camino Real Design Guidelines for signs which call for
signs to be 1/~ to 2/3 of the maximum size allowed by. the sign ordinance. Because the
applicant has_agreed to replace the usual pole sign with a more attractive monument sign
and locate the sign within the planter strip near the corner so as not to obstruct the sight
distance triangle for drivers exiting the site, staff recommends that the size of the sign
CWL[ P:\PCSR\ECR3897.SR Page 11
1-2-97
remain as proposed.
Sign Measurements
Wall Sign (Car Wash.} _front of car wash building
Area:
Allowed:40.0 square feet (total)
Proposed:13.5 square feet
Thickness"
Allowed: 10"
Proposed: 9.5"
Clearance:
Allowed:
Proposed:
Minimum 7-feet from grade to bottom of sign.
Maximum 13.2 feet from grade to top of sign.
10.2-feet from grade to bottom of sign.
¯12.2-feet from grade to top of sign.
Wall Sign (Cashier) _front of car wash building
Area:
Allowed:40.0 square feet (total)
Proposed:2.7 square feet
Wall Sign (Car Wash) rear of car wash building
r _r_ca:
Allowed:40.0 square feet (total)
Proposed:13.5 square feet
Wall Sign ¢Restrooms) right side of car wash building
Area:
Allowed:40.0 square feet (total)
Proposed:3.5 square feet
Allowed: 10"
Proposed: 9.5"
Canqoy Sign (Chevron)_front and rear of Gas Pump Canopy
rt~_:
Allowed:20.0 square feet
Proposed:17.1 square feet
Allowed:Minimum 7-feet from grade to bottom of sign.
Maximum 20 feet from grade to top of sign.
CWL { P:\PCSR\ECR3897.SR Page 12
1-2-97
Proposed 13.6-feet from grade to bottom of sign.
16.5-feet from grade to top of sign.
Canqoy Sign (Chevron logo) sides of Gas Pump Canopy and Spanners
Area:
Allowed:20.0 square feet
Proposed (logo):.4.3 square feet
Freestanding Sign (Chevron logo} entry, gas price sign
Area:
Allowed:
Proposed (2 apc panels)
Proposed (I id sign):
42.0 square feet (one sign per fronta:ge)*
8.0 square feet
31.9 square feet
40.9 square feet
Height:
Allowed:
Proposed:
22 feet (Should be designed to ensure sight distance)
8 feet
* Fuel types and prices are exempt from maximum sign area by the Sign Ordinance.
Hazardous Materials: The applicant is currently implementing a Corrective Action Plan
to remediate soil and groundwater pollution on the site, This is required by the Leaking
Underground Storage Tank Oversight Program that is being conducted under the purview
of the Santa Clara Valley Water District (SCVWD). The SCVWD is the lead agency
responsible for administering the cleanup of toxic substances on-site. The SCVWD is
currently satisfied with the results of the remediation system and encourages
redevelopment of properties such as this. The current clean up program entails soil vapor
and groundwater extraction as well as groundwater monitoring. Once the cleanup is
complete, verification monitoring will be required to maintain the integrity of the soil and
groundwater. The clean up and monitoring activities can continue during operation of the
proposed gas station use. The applicant is also requiredto submit a report documenting the
handling, storage, and use of hazardous materials and obtain a Hazardous Materials Permit
as a condition of project approval. Issuance of City and SCVWD permits is contingent
upon the SCVWD verifying that the new use and structure will not interfere with the on-
CWLI P:\PCSR\ECR3897.SR Page 13
1-2-97
going clean up of the site. A letter from the SCVWD to the applicant dated July 3, 1996
indicates the District’s concurrence with the final cleanup actions proposed in the CAP.
The City’s standard conditions of approval will require that the applicant conform to the
provisions of these permits such that the project will have no significant impact on the
handling, use, or storage of hazardous materials.
Noise." Noise generated by the car wash may have an impact on nearby multiple family
residential units. An acoustical study prepared in conjunction with the project identifies
several features of the proposed project that will reduce noise levels to within the range
that is acceptable according to City noise standards. These acoustical features include an
existing seven foot sound wall, an acoustical ribbon curtain at the car wash entrance, and
a 10 foot by 8 foot entrance setback to the car wash. The proposed car wash will be
required to provide these noise reduction features as a condition of project approval and,
therefore, will not have a significant noise impact.
Transportation: The Transportation Division is recommending three revisions to the site
plan: reduce the southern driveway on E1 Camino Real from 41 to 33 feet; reduce the
concrete wall along the Ventura Avenue, E1 Camino Real, and back side perimeter to 3
feet; ensure that all landscaping along the Ventura Avenue, E1 Camino Real, and back side
perimeters is 3 feet or less in height; and ensure that the height of the entry sign at the
corner does not obstruct the sight distance triangle. The first recommendation has been
resolved in the current site plan with the reduction of driveway width to 30 feet. The last
two recommendations are to ensure adequate sight distance. These recommendations are
included as conditions of project approval.
Existing Use Complaints: The existing building is dilapidated and the existing site is strewn
with litter. The City has been receiving complaints about the condition of the property for
several years. The City’s Legal and Code Enforcement staff have spent considerable time
investigating citizen complaints. Development. of the property with the proposed use would
terminate complaints concerning the dilapidated condition of the building and site.
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
Notice of this Planning Commission review was provided by publication of the agenda in
a local newspaper of general circulation. In addition, property owners and utility customers
within 300 feet of the project site were mailed a notice card. A copy of the staff report was
sent to the property owner and applicant
CWL I P:\PCSR\ECR3897.SR Page 14
1-2-97
ALTERNATIVES
1. Recommend modifications to the subject proposal.
2. Recommend denial of the project.
FISCAL IMPACT_
The project will not have a sigrd.’ficant fiscal impact upon the City. This application is
subject to the full cost recovery fee schedule.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
The project is subject to environmental review under provisions of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). An environmental impact assessment was prepared
for the project and determined that the project would have a less than significant impact
on the environment and that a Mitigated Negative Declaration should be prepared. The
Mitigated Negative Declaration was made available for public review from November 20
through December 11, 1996 and is attached to this staff report (see Attachment 3).
The project will proceed according to the following tentative schedule:
Architectural Review Board
City Council
February 6, 1997
March !7, 1997
ATTACHMENTS/EXHIBITS:
Attachment # 1: Conditional Use Permit Findings
Attachment #2: Site and Design Findings
Attachment #3: Standard Conditions of Project Approval
Attachment #4: EIA
Attachment #5: Location Map
Plans [Commission members only]
CWL[ P:\PCSR\ECR3897.SR Page 15
1-2-97
COURTESY COPIES:
Robert H. Lee, Architects, 1137 N. McDowell Boulevard, Petaluma, CA 94954
¯Tom Leonardini, 255 W. Santa Inez Avenue, Hillsborough, CA 94010
Dan Askari, 1601 S. de Anza Blvd. #101, Cupertino, .CA 95014
Prepared by:Chandler Lee, Contract Planner
Project Planner: Chandler Lee, Contract Planner
Division/Department Head Approval: ~.~_---~/~/~/¢’J/~ ~.~//~-----’~,o
Nancy Maddox Lytle, Chief Planning Official
CWLIP:\PCSR\ECR3897.SR Page 16
1-2-97
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
10.
Project Title:3897 El Camino Real
Lead Agency Name and Address:City of Palo Alto - Planning Division
250 Hamilton Avenue -
Palo Alto, CA 94301
Contact Person and Phone Number:Chandler Lee, Contract Planner
415-329-244.1
Project Location:3897 El Camino Real
Palo Alto, CA
Application Number(s):96-ARB-174; 96-EIA-36
Project Sponsor’s Name and Address: Robert H. Lee, Architects
1137 N. McDowell Blvd.
Petaluma, CA 94954
General Plan Designation:Service Commercial
Zoning:CS (Service Commercial)
Description of the Project:
Demolition of an existing one story gas station building (1,075 square feet) and
construction of a new single story 900 square foot car wash building, an 1,855
square foot gas station canopy and related site improvements.
Surrounding Land Uses and Setting:
The site is a rectangular shaped parcel of land totaling 15,525 square feet with a
135 foot width (along El Camino Real) and 115 foot depth. The site is presently
occupied by a vacant, single story gas station building (1,075 square feet) and
P:\EIA\ECR3897.EIA [11/4/96]
11.
related site im~provements. The existing building was built in 1964 and is currently
vacant and dilapidated. The existing site slopes aboutl% from south to north
and drains into the gutters on the street. The site is surrounded by retail, service
¯ commercial, restaurant, and multiple family residential buildings.
Other public agencies whose approval is required. None..
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project,
involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially .Significant Impact" as indicated by the
checklist on the fo.llowing pages.
Land Use and Planning Biological Resources Aesthetics
Population and
Housing
Energy and Mineral
Resources
Cultural Resources
Geological Problems Hazards Recreation
Water X Noise Mandatory Findings of
Significance
Air Quality Public Services
Transportation and
Circulation
Utilities and Service
Systems
P:\EIA\ECR3897.EIA [11/4/96]Page 2
DETERMINATION:
On the basisof 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.
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 effect(s) on the environment, but at
least one effect (1) has been adequately analyzed 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 is required, 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
(1) have been analyzed in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards and (2) have been
avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisionsor mitigation measures
that are imposed upon the p.ropos~d project.
X
roject Planne[
Director of Planning & Community Environment
Date.
Date
P:\EIA\ECR3897.EIA |11/4/96]Page 3
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS:
1)
2)
3)
A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported
by the informatio.n sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact"
answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does
not apply to projects like the one involved (e. g. the project falls outside a fault rupture zonel. A "No
Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general~
standards (e. g. the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific
screening analysis).
All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site,
cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational
impacts.
Potentially Significant Impact’ is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is significant.
If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR
is required.
¯ 4) "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation
measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less than Significant Impac.t."
The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect
to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section 17, "Earlier Analysis," may be cross-
referenced).
5)Earlier analysis may be used where, p~rsuant to the tiering, program EIR, Or other CEQA process, an effect
has been adequately analyzed in an ear.lier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063 (c) (3) (D). Earlier
analyses are discussed in Sectior~ 17 at the end of the checklist.
6)Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for
potential impacts (e.g. general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside
document should, where ’appropriate, include a reference to the. page or pages where the statement is
substantiated. A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should
be cited in the discussion.
7) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free t5 use different ones.
P:\EIA\ECR3897.EIA [11/4/96]Page 4
.1 LAND USE AND PLANNINGI Would the proposal:
a) Conflict with general plan designation or zoning?
b)Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies
adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project?
c) Be incompatible with existing land use in the vicinity?
d)Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g. impact
to soils or farmlands, or impacts from incompatible land
uses)?
e)Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an
established community (including a low-income or
minority community)?
2. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the proposal:
a)Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population
projections?
b)Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or
indirectly (e.g. through projects in an undeveloped area
or major infrastructure?
c)Displace existing housing, especially affordable
housing? ’
1
1
3
3
3
3. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result in or expose people to potential impacts involving:
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
a) Fault rupture?
b) Seismic ground shaking?
c) Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction?
d) Seiche, tsunami, or volcanic hazard~?
e) Landslides or mudflows?
f)Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil
conditions from excavation, grading or fill?
g) Subsidence of the land?
h) Expansive soils?
i) Unique geologic or physical features?
4. 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?
41¸5
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
x
X
X
X
X
X
x
X
x
X
X
P:\EIA\ECR3897.EIA [11/4/96]Page 5
Issues and Supporting I’~formation Sources Sources Potentially
Significant
issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than.
Significant
Impact
3,17 Xc)Discharge into sur, face waters or other alteration of
surface water quality, including but not limited to
temperature, dissolved oxygen, turbidity or other typical
storm water pollutants (e.g. sediment and debris from
construction, hydrocarbons and metals from vehicle
use, nutrients and pesticides from landscape
maintenance?
d)Changes in the amount of surface water in any water
body or wetland?
e)Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water
movements, in marine or freshwater, or wetlands?
f)Change 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 through infiltration of
reclaimed water or storm water runoff that has
contacted pollutants from urban or industrial activities?
Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater
otherwise available for public water supplies?
j) Alteration of wetlands in any way?
3
3,17
3
3
6,17
X
X
X
X
X
X
5. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal:
a)Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an
exiting or projected air quality violation?
b) Expose ser~sitive receptors to pollutants
c)Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or cause
any change in climate?
d) Create objectionable odors?
6,8,9
6,8,9
6,8,9
6,8,9
6. TRANSPORTATIONICIRCULATION. Would the proposal result in:
X
X
x
a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion?
b)Hazards to safety from design features (e.g. sharp
curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses
(e.g. farm equipment))?
10
10
.X
X
P:\EIA\ECR3897.EIA [ 11/4196)Page 6
Issues and Supporting I"~formation Sources Sources Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
c)Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby
uses?
d) Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site?
e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists?
f)Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative
transportation (e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle racks)?
g) Rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts?
10,
11,
12
3,10
10
10
7. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal result in reduction or interference in:
a)Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats
(including but not limited to plants, fish, insects,
animals or birds)?
b) Locally designated species (e.g. heritage trees)?
c)Locally designated natural communities (e.g. oak forest,
coastal habitat, etc.)?
d) Wetland habitat (e.g. marsh, riparian and vernal pool)?
e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors?
8, 16
8
8
8. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal:
a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans?
b)Use non-renewable 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?
8
8
9. 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?
13
1i,
12,
13
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
P:\EIA\ECR3897.EIA [11/4/96]Page 7
Issues and Supporting Information Sources Sources Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
c)The creation of any health hazard or potential health
hazard?
d)Exposure of people to existing sources of potential
health hazards?
e)Increased fire hazard in areas with flammable brush,
grass or trees?
10. NOISE. Would the proposal result in:
a) Increase in existing noise levels?
b) Exposure of people to Severe noise levels?
3, 12,
13
3,12,
13
3,12
14 X
11..PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a needi for new or altered
government services in any of the following areas:
a) Fire protection?8, 12
b| Police protection?8, 11
c) Schools?8
d)Maintenance of public facilities, including roads or 8
storm drain facilities?
e) Other governmental services?8
12.UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. 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?
d) Sewer or septic tanks?
e) Storm water drainage or storm water quality control?
f) Solid waste disposal?
g) Local or regional water supplies?
13. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal:
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
P:\EIA\ECR3897.EIA [11/4/96].Page 8
Issues and Supporting I-~formation Sources Sources Potentially
Significant
issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated ILess Than
Significant
Impact
a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway?
b) Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect?
c) Create light or glare?
3
3
3 X
14. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal:
a) Disturb paleontological resources?
b) Disturb archaeological resources?
c) Affect historicalresources?
d)Have the potential to cause a physical change which
would affect unique ethnic cultural values?
e)Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the
potential impact area?
8
8
8
8
L8
x
X
X
~X
x
X
X
15. RECREATION. Would the proposal:
a)Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks 8 X
or other recreational facilities?
b) Affect existing recreational opportunities?3 X
16. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.
a)X
b)
Does the project have the potential to degrade the
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?
XDoes the project have the potential to achieve short-
term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental
goals?
P:\EIA\ECR3897.EIA [ 11/4/96]Page 9
Issues and Supporting Information Sources Sources Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant "
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
c) Does the project have impacts that are individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively
considerable" means that the incremental effects of a
project are considerable when viewed in connection with
the effects of the past projects, the effects of other
current projects, and the effects of probable future
projects)
d) Does the project have environmental effects which will X
cause substantial adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
17. EARLIER ANALYSES.
Earlier analysis may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects
have beenadequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration. Section 15063 (c).(3) (D). In this case a
discussion, should identify the following items:
a) Earlier analysis used. Identify earlier analyses and state Where they are available for review.
b) Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and
adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects
were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis.
c) Mitigation measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated," describe the
mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined .from the earlier document and the extent to which they
address site-specific conditions of the project.
Authority: Public Resources Code Sections 21083 and 21087.
Reference: .Public Resources Code Sections 21080 (c), 21080.1, 21080.3, 21082.1, 21083, 21083.3, 21093,
321094, 21151; Sundstrom v. CoUnty of Mendocino, 202 Cal. App. 3d 296 (1988); Leonofff v. Monterey Board of
Supervisors, 222 Cal. App. 3d 1337 (1990).
18. SOURCE REFERENCES
1 Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan 1980 - 1995, February 2, 1981 (as amended)
2 City of Palo Alto, Zoning Ordinance, Title 18, Chapter 18.49
3 Planner’s general knowledge of the project and area of proposed development.
4 Palo Alto’ Comprehensive Plan Update: Geology and Seismic Technical Background Report, August 1994
5 FEMA Flood Insurance Rate.Map, Community Panel Number 060348, Map Revised September 6, 1989.
P:\EIA\ECR3897.EIA [1114/96]Page 10
Issues and Supporting I~formation Sources Sources Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than.
Significant
Impact
6 City of Palo Alto Standard Conditions of Approval
7 City of Palo Alto Public Works Engineering Department
8 Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan Update: Existing Setting Memorandum, August 1994
9 Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan Update: Air Quality Technical Background Report, August 1994
10 City of Palo Alto Transportation Division
11 City of Palo Alto Police Department
12 City of Palo Alto Fire Department
13 City of Palo Alto Fire Department, Hazardous Materials Division
14 Palo Alto Comprehensive Plar~ Update: Noise Technical Background Report, August 1994
15 City of Palo Alto Utilities Department
16 Fish & Game Code of California, "Chapter 1.5, Endangered Species", Sections 2050 through 2098
17 Santa clara County Water District, Ordinance 83-2, as amended October 11, 1985
P:\EIA\ECR3897.EIA [11/4/96]Page 11
Issues and Supporting li~formation Sources Sources Potentially
Significant
issues
Significant Significant a
Unless Impact
Mitigadon
Incorporated
19.EXPLANATIONS FOR CHECKLIST RESPONSES
3a,b,
c,f
The entire state of California is in a seismically active area and the site is located in a strong seismic risk
area, subject to very strong .ground shaking in the event of an earthquake. Seismic ground failure,
including liquefaction and subsidence of the land are possible, but not likely at the site. No known faults
cross the project site, therefore fault rupture at the site is very unlikely, but theoretically possible. All new
construction will be subject to the provisions of the most current Uniform Building Code (UBC), portion so
which are directed at minimizing seismic risk and preventing loss of life and property in the event of bn
earthquake.
Construction of the project will increase the amount of landscaping on site and slightly increase the
amount of impervious surface area without significant changes to site topography. Site soil modifications
are not expected to result in significant environmental impacts.
The City’s required standard conditions of approval ensure that potential impacts on erosion and soil will
not be significant. Project conditions of approval will require the applicant to submit a final grading and
drainage plan subject to review by the Department of Public Works prior to issuance of any grading and
building permits.
Mitigation Measures: None reqqired.
P:\EIA\ECR3897.EIA [11/4/96]Page 12
4a,b,h
5a,d
This site is in Flood’Zone X which is not a special flood hazard zone. It is an area of moderate flooding,
outside the 100 year flood zone but within the 500 year flood zone. Sites within this. zone would be
subject to flooding to a depth of less than one foot in the 100 year flood event.
During construction activities, stormwater pollution could result. Runoff from the project site flows to San
Francisco Bay via the local storm drain system. Non point source pollution is a serious problem for wildlife
dependent on waterways and for people who live near polluted streams or baylands. Construction debris is
a source of this pollution.
With the City’s required conditions of approval, the water impacts of the project will not be significant and
by project completion, there will not be significant additional runoff from the site due to the minor increase
in amount of impervious surfaces compared with the existing use. The standard conditions of approval will
require that a drainage plan be submitted which includes drainage patterns on the site and from adjacent
properties. The construction contractor will be required to incorporate best management practices (BMPs}
for stormwater pollution prevention in all construction operatioris, in conformance with the Santa Clara
Valley Nonpoint Source Pollution Control Program, In addition, the applicant must obtain an Industrial
Waste Discharge Permit from the City. With the City’s standard conditions of project approval, conditions
of this Industrial Waste Discharge Permit, the treatment and recycling of carwash water, and inclusion of
BMPs, the project will not result in any significant impacts to storm water runoff or water quality.
The project will require removal and clean up of existing underground gasoline storage tanks. Hazardous
Materials Permits will be required from the City of Palo Alto Fire Department.as well as the Santa Clara
Valley Water District for the installation of underground tanks, an oillwater separator, an underground well,
and a groundwater monitoring well. Issuance of these permits is contingent upon the applicant verifying
that the new use and structure will not interfe~’e with the on-going clean up of the site. The City’s standard
conditions of approval will require that the applicant conform to the. provisions of these permits such that
the project will have no significant impact on groundwater quality.
.Mitigation Measures: NoneS’required.
The project is not expected to result in a significant impact on air quality. The new car wash building will
generate more vehicle trips than the previous gas station building because of the intensification of use,
although this increase is not considered a significant impact because it does not exceed thresholds
established by the.Santa Clara County Congestion Management Agency (CMA), the Bay Area Air Quality
Management District, and the City of Palo Alto.
The standard conditions’ of approval will require that dust control measures will be employed at the site to
reduce dust emissions to acceptable levels during construction.
The State Air Resources Control Board requires gasoline dispensing facilities to be equipped with both
Phase I and Phase II Vapor Recovery Systems to prevent toxic vapors from escaping from the storage
system. The proposed gas station will be required to provide both phases of the Vapor Recovery Systems.
as a condition of project approval and, therefore, will not have a significant effect on air quality odors.
Mitigation Measures: None required.
P:\EIA\ECR3897.EIA [ 11/4/96]Page 13
Issues and Supporting lhformation Sources Sources Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Significant
Impact
6a
7b
9a
The project is not expected to result in a significant impact on traffic congestion. The new car wash
building will generate more vehicle trips than the previous gas station building because of the
intensification of use, although this increase is not considered a significant impact because it does not
exceed thresholds established by the Santa Clara County Congestion Management Agency (CMA) and the
City of Palo Alto,
Demolition and construction activities could disrupt pedestrian and vehicular circulation in the area. With
the City’s required standard conditions of approval, construction impacts should not be significant.
Mitigation Measures: None required.
There are four existing trees on-site all of which will be preserved. Three of the four liquid amber trees are
6 inches in diameter and one is 8 inches - all four appear to be in good health. No oak trees or heritage
trees ere to be removed. A final landscape plan and irrigation plan are required as a condition of approval.
A 2:1 treereplacement ratio is required for removal and/or major damage as a result of accidental damage
to trees during construction.
Mitigation Measures: None required.
The applicant is currently implementing a Corrective Action Plan (CAP) tO remediate soil and groundwater
pollution on the site. This is required by. the Leaking Underground Storage Tank Oversight Program that is
being conducted under the purview of the Santa C{ara Valley Water District (SCVWD). The SCVWD is the
lead agency responsible for administering the cleanup of toxic substances on-site. The SCVWD is currently
satisfied with the results of the remediation system and encourages redevelopment of properties such as
this. The current clean up pr.ogram entails soil vapor and groundwater extraction as well as groundwater
monitoring. Once the cleanup is complete, verification monitoring will be required to maintain the integrity
of the soil and groundwater. The clean up and monitoring activities can continue during operation of the
proposed gas station use. The applicant is also required to submit a report documer~ting the handling,
storage, and use of hazardous materials and obtain a Hazardous Materials Permit as a condition of project
approval. Issuance of City and SCVWD permits is contingent upon the applicant verifying that the new use
and structure will not interfere with the on-going clean up of the site. A letter from the SCVWD to the
applicant dated July 3, 1996 indicates the District,s concurrence with the final cleanup actions proposed
in the CAP. The City’s standard conditions of approval will require that the applicant conform to the
provisions of these permits such that the project will have no significant impact on the handling, use, or
storage of hazardous materials.
Mitigation Measures: None required.
P:\EIA\ECR3897.EIA [ 11/4/96]Page 14
Issues and Supporting IPiformation Sources Sources Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Significant act
Impact
10a
12a,e
13c
Noise generated by the car wash may have an impact on nearby multiple family residential units. An
acoustical study prepared in conjunction withr the project identifies several features of the proposed project
that will reduce noise levels to within the range that is acceptable according to City noise standards. These
acoustical features include an existing seven foot sound wall, an acoustical ribbon curtain at the car wash
entrance, and a 10 foot by 8 foot entrance setback to the car wash. The proposed car wash will be
required to provide these noise reduction features as a condition of project approval and, therefore, will not
have a significant noise impact.
Demolition and construction activities will result in temporary increases in local ambient noise levels. With
the City’s required standard conditions of approval, noise impacts during construction should not be
significant. The standard conditions of approval will require the applicant to comply with the requirements
of the Palo Alto Noise Ordinance, Chapter 9.0 of the Pato Alto Municipal Code.
Mitigation Measures: Inclusion of mitigations as described on page 3 of the attached Noise Analysis
prepared by Charles M. Salter and dated October 3, 1996.
A padmount transformer is required on-site for this project; The proposed padmount transformer location is
at the rear Of the site. As a .standard condition of approval, a utilities easement will be required for
ins.tailing the transformer at this location, installing the existing primary stub conduit, and extending the
primary conduit to the new transformer location. Future access to the transformer for maintenance may
become a problem should any Portion of the property that is now used for parking be developed. Should
this occur, the owner of the proposed project would be required to relocate the transformer when needed.
As a condition of project approval, the property owner will be required to address the situation in writing.
Mitigation Measures: None required.
Development of the site may result in a negligible increase in light and glare generated from lighting of the
site and glazing on the building, but will not have an adverse impact on surrounding uses. With the
project’s conditions of approval, the li~lht and glare impacts of the project will not be significant. A detailed
lighting plan which is sensitive to existing uses will be required as a condition of approval. The condition of
approval will require the= shielding of lighting such that the light does not extent beyond the site, the
lighting will be directional, and that the source of light is not directly visible
Mitigation Measures: None required.
(p:\eia\ECR3897.eia)
P:\EIA\ECR3897.EIA [ 11/4/96]Page 15
3 October 1996
M Salter Associates | n c
RECEIVED
Consultants
in Acoustics
& Audio/Visua!
S?stern Design
130 Sutter Street
San Francisco
California 94104
Tel: 4t5 397 0442
Fax: 415 397 0454
Dan Askari
Referral Realty
1601 S. De Anza Blvd. #101
Cupertino, CA 95014
Fax: (408) 253-0983
DEPARI"~L--’.~rr O.=. FLANNING
AND COM~iONITY D=’-VELOPMENT
Subject:(~ar Wash Project, Palo Alto m Acoustical Consulting
CSA Project No: 96-283
Dear Mr. Askari:
This letter presents the results of our car wash feasibility study. The car wash is
c,o,,es M Sa,te,. ~E located at 3897 El Camino Real. As part of our study we consulted the Palo Alto
.~,~,hon~sh.~ Noise Ordinance (the Ordinance), conducted.measurements to determine the
o~.,,0 R-~:~,~n~. ~Es extstmg ambient sound level at the proposed site, calculated the future noise level
r-.~a Duesler from the proposed car wash at the adjacent apartments, quantified the noise impact
~o~oc~r,,~o.~on these apartments, and..identified effective sound mitigation measures necessary
Alan T Rosen to meet the Ordinance. It is our finding that for the equipmen.t we recommend,
"specifically a Ryko Voyager style vehicle wash with Ryko Mini-Tunne! drying fansThomas A Schindle¢, PE.~n a short tunnel, with the sound mitigation we recommend below, the City’s Noise,~ol~Go,~oro. ~ Ordinance will be met at the nearby apartments.
’Rachel V blurray. PE " ’
K--=nneth W Graven, PE Criteria
T~mothy M Der
T~m~co,~e.The Ordinance, inthe section concerning residential property noise limits, states:
C~audia Kmehe
Enc L Broadhurst, PE
Mtchael O Toy, PE
Karen E Decker, PE
Philip N Sanders
{~,larion G Miles.
Suzanne Cowden
Alison M D~ Jung
Crislina L Khyar
i’i,ko Wanner
"No person shall produce, suffer or allow to beproduced by any
machine, animal .or device, or any combination of same, on
residential property, a noise level more than 6 dB~ above the
local ambient at any point outside of the property plane.
This means that any noise produced by the proposed car wash must be consistently
less than 6 dB above the measured local ambient noise level. The Ordinance
further describes the "local ambient":
G~fia Coker
Marva D NooKIzee
Juhe A Malork
" ’Local Ambient’ is the lowest sound level repeating itself during
a six,minute period as measured with a precision sound level
meter, using slow response and ’A’ weighting.’’z
"dB" is an abbreviation for decibel, a scientific scale for measuring the loudness of sound.
"A-weighting" is an alteration to the standard decibel scale that takes into account the human ear’s
The measurements conducted for this assessment are in compliance with this
standard. The measurements themselves and the data gathering techniques are
outlined below°
Measurements
Noise measurements were made to assess the existing noise environment with
respect to the Noise Ordinance criteria. Noise level measurements were
conducted at the nearest potentially impacted residential property line over a 24-
hour period using a Larson Davis model 700 precision sound level meter. The data
is included at the end of this report. The meter was located near the adjacent one-
story apartments, which would have a line of-sight to the opening of the carwash
entrance. The meter was located 12 feet above ground, 30 feet from the property
line adjacent tlle Jack in the Box restaurant, 80 feet away from the proposed
location of the car wash equipment.
We measured the L90, for the Ordinance ambient noise. The Lg~ is the level
exceeded ninety percent of the time, all but.six minutes hourly (i.e., 54 minutes).
The L90 varied between 49 dB and 53 dB for the proposed hours of operation of the
car wash between 7 a.m. and 9 p.m. This yields a target number of 55 dB as the Palo
Alto Ordinance criterion, or 6 dB above the ambient noise as determined in the
Ordinance.
Future
The future data used to predict the noise of the car wash was taken from a recent
study in Charles M. Salter Associates acoustical library,3 and from acoustical
information supplied by the manufacturers.’~, The equipment used in the study was
a Voyager style Ryko vehicle wash, with Ryko Mini-Tunnel Drying Fans in a short
tunnel. The bay was approximately 36 feet in length and 16 feet in width The door
openings were approximately 10 feet wide by 10 feet high.
Analysis
The unmitigated noise levels were calculated during the dry cycle of the car wash
as the dryer fans are the loudest factor in a car wash. The dry cycle is an option;
without the optional dry cycle, noise levels are reduced significantly. The
unmitigated noise levels were calculated at.a distance of 90 feet, the set back of the
apartment buildings fromthe entrance of the proposed car wash. We calculated 68
dB at the one story apartments, that have a direct line-of-sight to the car wash
entrance, and 65 dB at the two story apartments, which are at an angle from the
entrance of the proposed car wash. See table 1.
Thesite has an existing seven foot cinderblock wall which will provide
approximately 6 dB of additional acoustical shielding to the one-story apartments,
but no attenuation to the two-story apartments..This will bring the sound level at
the apartment buildings to 62 dB for the one-story apartment building and 65 dB
for the two-story apartment building. These unmitigated noise levels exceed the
55 dB criterion for the project as defined in the Ordinance, by 7 to 10 dB.
uneven response to an even loudness of different frequencies. This allows scientific measurements
to reflect what the ear actually hears. Often combined with dB, as "dBA".
Prepared in 1991 by Steve Pettyjohn of the Acoustics and Vibration Group, Sacramento, CA.¯Clear Fold Door Inc., Bedford Heights, Ohio; Ryko Manufacturing Co., Sacramento, Co.
Mitigation
To provide the..-additional noise attenuation necessary to meet the Ordinance, we
recommend thd use of a ribbon curtain device at the entrance of the car wash,
which faces the adjacent apartment buildings. Several manufacturers’ products
may meet the noise reduction requirements. The use of a curtain to cover the
openings of a car wash is common in the colder regions of the U.S., such as the
East Coast, to provide heat insulation in addition to providing an effective noise
barrier.
The curtain consists of hanging plastic sheets which part to allow vehicles to enter
the car wash. The curtain must hang from the top of the entrance opening,
completely covering the outer edges, and all the way to the ground at the opening ¯
of the entrance to the car wash. After a vehicle has passed through the entrance to
the car wash, the curtain must completely seal off the opening behind the vehicle.
With the curtain in place, the minimum noise attenuation attained will be - 13 riB.
This brings the maximum mitigated sound level at the apartment buildings to
approximately 49 dB for the one-story apartments and 52 dB for the two-story
apartments.
In addition, we recommend that the entrance to the car wash have the dimensions:
10 feet wide by 8 feet tall. This will provide an additional 1 dB noise attenuation at
the facade of the adjacent apartments. This brings the mitigated sound level at the
apartment buildings to approximately 48 dB for the one-story apartments and 51
dB for the two-story apartments. This is 7 dB and 4 dB respectively, below the
target of 55 dB ambient noise level for this location.
Table 1: Car Wash Noise Attenuation, 3897 E! Camino Real, Palo Alto
Sight line, at 90 feet;
Voyager style Ryko
Existing 7 foot barrier
attenuation
Sound level at apartments
Minimum curtain
attenuation
Minimum 10"x 8’ entrance
attenuation
Maximum mitigated sound
level at Apartments
Palo Alto Criteria (6 dB
above ambient)
¯ . 1 Story Apartment 2 Story Apartment
68 dB 65 dB ¯
62 dB 65 dB
- 13 dB - 13 dB
48 dB 51 dB
55 dB 55 dB
Ch:arles M Salter Associates
If you have any questions or require clarification please do not hesitate to call.
Sincerely, "
CHARLES M. SALTER ASSOCIATES
Niko Wenner
Consultant
NW/nw
t
July 3, 1996
Page
SantoClara Valley Water District
5750 ALMADEN EXPRESSWAY
SAN JOSE,CA 95118~686
TELEPHONE (408) 265-2600
FACSIMILE (408) 266-0271
AN AFFIRMATIV~ ACTION £MPL~Y~R
Mr. Thoma~ Leonardird
255 West Santa I~z Avenue
Hillshorough, CA 94302
Mr. Leonardh~i:
Subject:Corrective Action Plan for Site No. 12-032, CoOpt Service Station, 3897 El Camino Real,
Pale Alto, CA
Santa Clara Valley Water District (Distric0 staff has reviewed the ,April 22, t996, Corrective Action Plan
(CAP) and Remedial Investigation Report, proposing final soil and groundwater remediation at the subject,
site, prepared by BACE Environmental (Consultan0. On.May 16, 1996, the District sent out a request
to neighboring property owners for public comment on theCAP to be provided to the District by ~Iune
17, 1996. In respo~e to arequest from an adjacent prope.r~j owner, the District extended the public
cpmment period to Jr.ely 1, t996. To date, the attached June 26, 1.t,96, correspondence from Mr. Adam
. Cintz was received. Comments ~regarding this correspondence are listed below, In accordance with
California Water Code of Regulations, Title 23, Division 3, Chapter 16, Article l 1, the District concurs
with the final cleanup actions aM goals proposed in the CAP and re:luests that you addr=s the comments
below when implementing the CAP at this site.
COMMENTS
Upon shutdown of the treatment system, approximately eight quarters of verification groundwat~.r
monitoring are scheduled, followed by. a risk assessment. If groundwater contamination
concentrations drop significantly’before 2 years of monit~.ring are complete, #ease consider
appropriate action at that time.
Soil and grab groundwater res ~l’ts’ for :sampl¢s collected from soil borings P-I and P-2 in the El
Camino Rent near the intersection with Venmra Avenue indicated up to 1,100 parts per million
(ppm) Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons as gasoline (TPHG) at, d up to 3.5 ppm Benzene in soles and
up to 170,000 parts per billion (ppb) TFHO and up to 23,000 ppb Benzene in groundwater. Please
include plans for verification borings and grab groundwater :;amp!ca from the El Camino near the
intersection with Ventura Avenue (near soil borings P-! and P-2) during the verification monitoring
phase.
In Tabld 2 of the CAP, the analytical results for Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene, Xylenes (BTEX)
corresponding to samples collected April 1992 axe labelled units of milligrams per kilogram
(mg/Kg or ppm). However, the data are from laboratory re~lorts labelled in units of micrograms
per kilogram ugfKg or ppb). Please adjust your data tables accordingly.
PLANNING; Page 3
Mr. T~omas Leonardini 2 ~/uly 3, 1996
Atthch,d is correspondence from Mr. Adam Cint’z, owner of property at 3885 El Camino Real,
adjacent to the subject site. Please address applicable concerns expressed regarding the subject site
while implementing the CAP.
Reportedly. there may be plans for development of the ~it,. We do not object with site
development prior to completion of your cleanup activities, However, if development is propose~l
to commence prior to completion of cleanup, please report these intentions to the District.
The District concurs with the Consultant’s recommendation to evaluate treatment system effectiveness
after 6 months of operation. We will receive recommendations based on this review. In the meantime,
we will continue to receive quarterly groundwater monitoring reports.
Pleas, implem,nt the CAP according to the schedule outlined in Plate 13.
If you have any questions, please call me at the District’s Camden Office, (408) 927-0710,
extension :2639.
Sincerely,
Adele R. Shepherd
Water Quality Specialist
Leaking Underground Storage Ta~ Oversight Program
Attachm¢nt
cc (w/att):Mr. Adam Cintz
c/o Mr. Simon Cintz
P.O. Box 1216
Pale Alto, CA .94302
Mr. Joel Bruxvoort
BACE Environmental
¯ 1,735 East Bayshore Road, Suite
Redwood City, CA 94603
~OleOt. 5597 El Camino ~eal
.pp,~.~o. ~o ~o,,~ ~+.~+.~ ~u,~i.~
wash builaing, an 1.~55 s~uar8 foo£ gas
~ O~phic Attachment Date: November 27, 1996 I Scale: 1 inch = ~0 FT
North
(~~ ~ )File#: 96-D-8; 96-UP-53; 96-ARB2174
ATTACHMENT #3
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FINDINGS
3897 EL CAMINO REAL
(96-UP-53)
1) The proposed use, at the proposed location, will not be detrimental to property or
improvements in the vicinity, and will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, general
welfare, or convenience in that sufficient landscaping and landscaped setbacks are provided
around the perimeter of the site to screen the use from neighboring properties, lighting is
sufficiently shielded to reduce lighting impacts on neighboring properties to acceptable
levels, gasoline dispensing facilities will be equipped with both Phase I and Phase II Vapor
Recovery Systems to prevent toxic vapors from escaping from the storage system, all four
existing trees will be preserved, a Corrective Action Plan to remediate soil and groundwater
pollution is currently being implemented on the site and will not be affected by the proposed
gas station use, and the proposed project will incorporated sufficient noise mitigations to
reduce noise levels to within the range that is acceptable according to City noise standards.
These acoustical features include an existing seven foot sound wall, an acoustical ribbon
curtain at the car wash entrance, and a 10 foot by 8 foot entrance setback to the car wash. The
proposed gas station and car wash will be required to include all these provisions as a
condition of project approval and, therefore, will not be detrimental to the public health,
safety, general welfare, or convenience.
2) The proposed use will be located and conducted in a manner in accord with the Palo Alto
Comprehensive Plan and purposes of the zoning district in that the automobile service station
and car wash uses are consistent with Comprehensive Plan policies (Urban Design Element
Objectives on p.42 which provides for orderly development and high aesthetic quality and
Program 4 which discourages garish signs) and meet the development regulations of the
zoning ordinance with respect to floor area ratio, height, lot coverage, parking, landscaping,
setbacks and other requirements.
pAarb\ecr3897.arb Page 1
ATTACHMENT #4 "
SITE AND DESIGN FINDINGS
3897 EL CAMINO REAL
(96-D-8).
1) The construction and operation of the use in a manner thatwill be orderly, harmonious,
and compatible with existing and potential uses of adjoining or nearby sites will be ensured
by the fact that sufficient landscaping and landscaped setbacks are provided around the
perimeter of the site to screen the use from neighboring properties, lighting is sufficiently
shielded to reduce lighting impacts on neighboring properties to acceptable levels, gasoline
dispensing facilities will be equipped with both Phase I and Phase II Vapor Recovery
Systems to prevent toxic vapors from escaping from the storage system, all four existing
trees will be preserved, a Corrective Action Plan to remediate soil and groundwater pollution
is currently being implemented on the site and will not be affected by the proposed gas
station use, and the proposed project will incorporated sufficient noise mitigations to reduce
noise levels to within the range that is acceptable according to City noise standards.
2) The desirability of investment, or the conduct of business, research, or educational
activities, or other authorized occupations, in the same or adjacent areas will be ensured by
the improvements to the site that will add value to the location and replace the existing,
dilapidated building. Also, all off-site impacts on surrounding businesses will be reduced to
acceptable levels through standard conditions of approval and special noise mitigations.
3) Sound principles of environmental design and ecological balance will be ensured by the
conformance of the project with the development standards 0fthe CS zoning district with
respect to floor area,, height, lot coverage, parking, landscaping, setbacks and other
environmental design requirements; the project will reduce the use of water by
implementation of a car wash water recycling system and will prevent toxic vapors from
escaping from the gasoline storage system with the installation of both Phase I and Phase II
Vapor Recovery Systems.
4) The use will be in accord with the policies of the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan in that
the automobile service station and ear wash uses are consistent with Comprehensive Plan
policies (Urban Design Element Objectives on p.42 which provide for orderly development
and high aesthetic quality and Program 4 which discourages garish signs).
p:~xb\ecr3897.arb Page 1
ATTACHMENT #5
SITE AND DESIGN CONDITIONS
3897 EL CAMINO REAL
(96-D-8)
1. The revised site plan shall include the acoustical mitigation measures cited on page 3 of
the Noise Analysis by Charles Salter dated October 3, 1996. These acoustical features shall
include an existing seven foot sound wall, an acoustical ribbon curtain at the car wash
entrance, and a 10 foot by 8 foot entrance setback to the car wash. The freestanding sign
should be a monument sign and be located within the planter strip near the comer. The
landscaping and freestanding sign shall be designed and located so as not to obstruct the sight
distance triangle for drivers exiting the site. The four perimeter light standards shall be
reduced in height to 15 feet. The existing Scarlet oak tree in the sidewalk on El Camino Real
shall be replaced with a Sycamore tree and two new Sycamores planted in the sidewalk for
a total of four Sycamore street trees. The existing 30 foot driveway near the corner shall be
reduced to 28 feet and shifted three feet to the south and the proposed 28 foot ~northem
driveway shall be shifted 5 feet to the north to provide for a 25 foot spacing between street
trees. The planter strip along the El Camino Real frontage shall be lengthened from 27 to 35
feet and planted with an evergreen tree with a low canopy (Arbutus Marina) to fill in between
the Sycamore street trees. An evergreen of the same species should be planted in each of the
comer planter strips along E1 Camino Real. The new street trees, on-site trees, and on-site
. landscaping should be located so as not to block the sight distance triangle for drivers exiting
the site. The loading zone should be expanded to 540 square feet (12 by 45 feet) to conform
with the requirements of the Off-Street Parking Regulations. The planter strip on the northern
perimeter of the property next to Jack-in-the-Box shall be supplemented with a row of
Arbutus Marina (15 gallon) along this perimeter.
p:\arb\ecr3897.arb Page 1
ATTACHMENT #6
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CONDITIONS
3897 EL CAMINO REAL
1)
(96-UP-53)
The proposed service station use may operate 24 hours per day, seven days a week.
The car wash hours of operation shall be limited as follows:
2)
3)
4)
7:00 AM to 9:00 PM Monday through Friday
9:00 AM to 9:00 PM Saturday
9:00 AM to 9:00 PM Sunday.
All on-site activities shall be subject to the requirements of the City’s Noise
Ordinance, Chapter 9.10 PAMC.
All on-site deliveries, including the delivery of gasoline, shall be limited to the
following hours:
7:00 AM to 9:00 PM Monday through Friday
9:00 AM to 9:00 PM Saturday
9:00 AM to 9:00 PM Sunday.
No engine or body work shall be performed on-site at any time.
p:\arb\ecr3897.arb Page 1
ATTACHMENT #7
STANDARD CONDITIONS OF PROJECT APPROVAL
3897 EL CAMINO REAL
(96-ARB-174, 96-UP-53, 96-D-8, 96-EIA-36)
Prior to Issuance of Demolition Permit
Planning/Zoning
A fmal site plan shall be prepared and approved by the Planning Division which reflects
any modifications by the Planning Commission, ARB, and City Council. The revised
site plan shall include the acoustical mitigation measures cited on page 3 of the Noise
Analysis by Charles Salter dated October 3, 1996. These acoustical features shall include
an existing seven foot sound wall, an acoustical ribbon curtain at the car wash entrance,
and a 10 foot by 8 foot entrance setback to the car wash. The freestanding sign should
be a monument sign and be located within the .planter strip near the comer. The
landscaping and freestanding sign shall be designed and located so as not to obstruct the
sight distance triangle for drivers exiting the site. The four perimeter light standards shall
be reduced in height to 15 feet. The existing Scarlet oak tree in the sidewalk on E1
Camino Real shall be replaced with a Sycamore tree and two new Sycamores planted
in the sidewalk for a total of four Sycamore street trees. The existing 30 foot driveway
near the comer shall be reduced to 28 feet and shifted three feet to the south and the
proposed 28 foot northern driveway shall be shifted 5 feet to the north to provide for a
25 foot spacing between street trees. The planter strip along the E1 Camino Real frontage
shall be lengthened from 27 to 35 feet and planted with an evergreen tree with a low "
canopy (Arbutus Marina) to fill in between the Sycamore. street trees. An evergreen of
the same species should be planted in each of the comer planter strips along E1 Camino
Real. The new street trees, on-site trees, and on-site landscaping should be located so
as not to block the sight distance triangle for drivers exiting the site. The loading zone
should be expanded to 540 square feet (12 by45 feet) to conform with the requirements
of the Off-Street Parking Regulations~ The planter strip on the northern perimeter of the
property next to Jack-in-the-Box shall be supplemented with a row of Arbutus Marina
(15 gallon) along this perimeter.
Public Works Engineering.
2. The plan has been reviewed for compliance with applicable codes but the design remains
¯ the responsibility of the architect/engineer who prepared it. Any changes to these plans,
pAarb\ecr3897.arb P~ge 1
other than those provided herein, must be reviewed by the Public Works Engineering
Division.
Utilities Electric
The Permittee shall be responsible for identification and location of all utilities, both
public and private, within the work area. Prior to any excavation work at the site, the
Permittee shall contact Underground Service Alert @ (800) 642-2444, at least 48 hours
prior to beginning work.
Public Works Operations
All existing street trees to be retained, as shown on the final landscape plan, shall be
protected during construction. The existing Scarlet Oak tree in the sidewalk on E1
Camino Real shall be replaced with a Sycamore tree. The following tree protection
measures shall be approved by the City Arboris( and included in construction/
demolition contracts and be implemented during demolition and construction activities
unless otherwise approved. The following tree protection measures shall apply: PAMC
Sec. 8-04-070. Any modifications to these requirements must be approved, in writing,
by the City Arborist. ~-
All trees to be preserved shall be protected with six-foot-high chain link fences.
Fences are to be mounted on two-inch diameter galvanized iron posts, driven into
the ground to a depth of at least 2-feet at no more than 10-foot spacing. The fences
shall enclose the entire area under the dripline of the trees. The fences shall be
erected before construction begins and remain in place until final inspection of the
building permit, except for work specifically required in the approved plans to be
done under the trees to be protected. (See Public Works Department’s standard
specification detail #505).
No storage of material, topsoil, vehicles or equipment shall be permitted within the
tree enclosure area. ~
c. The ground around the tree canopy area shall not be altered.
d.Trees to be retained shall be irrigated, aerated and maintained as necessary to ensure
survival.
The tree protection measures shall be approved by the City Arborist. and Planning
Division and included in construction/demolition contracts and be implemented
during demolition and construction activities unless otherwise approved.
p:\arb\eer3897.arb page 2
A certified arborist shall beretained by the applicant to prepare and~submit tree
protection plans. The plans shall identify the trees to be protected and include measures
for their protection during construction. The certified arborist shall inspect the tree
protection measures and shall certify that the PAMC Sec. 8-04-015 have been installed
prior to demolition, grading, or building permit issuance.
The applicant shall submit a request to disconnect all utility services and/or meters
including a signed affidavit of vacancy. The form is available at the Building
Department. Utilities will be disconnected or removed within 10 working days after
receipt of request. The demolition permit will be issued after all utility services and/or
meters have been disconnected and removed.
Prior to Submittal of a Building Permit
Utilities Electric
This project requires a padmount transformer. The locationofthe padmount transformer
shall be shown on the site plan and approved by the Utilities Department and the
Architectural Review Board.
Three phase electric service is not readily available to the site. The applicant is
responsible for all expenses .to extend three phase service to the site. The Utility will
compute an economic justification based on estimated load consumption and re-imburse
applicant for part of the off-site costs.
9. The applicant shall provide space for an above ground load break cabinet on-site.
Fire Department
10.
11.
Since the car wash requires more than 1,000 gpd of water, fire sprinklers will be required
per PAMC, Section 15.04.170 (dd). The canopy does not require sprinklers.
The applicant shall submit final plans for review and approval by the Fire Department.
Plans and permits are required for the nnderground fire service line and automatic
sprinkler system installation. If the sprinkler system serves 100 sprinklers or more, it
shall be supervised for water flow and value tamper by an approved central station. The
underground fuel storage tanks require a separate plan review by the Fire Department
prior to installation.
pAarb\ecr3897.arb Page 3
Planning/Zoning
12.The approved building materials and color scheme shall be shown on building permit
drawings for all buildings, patios, fences, utilitarian enclosures and other landscape
features.
13.Final landscape and irrigation plans encompassing on- and off-site plan table areas out
to the curb must be submitted to and approved by the Utility Marketing Services
Division. A Landscape Water Use statement, water use calculations and a statement of
design intent shall be submitted for each project. These plans should be prepared by a
licensed landscape architect and qualified irrigation consultant. Landscape and irrigation
plans shall include:
a.All existing trees identified both to be retained and removed including private and
public street trees.
b. Complete plant list indicating tree and plant species, quantity, size, and locations.
Irrigation schedule and plan. Spray nozzles are to be chosen carefully to minimize
overspray in the irregular planter beds. A separate, irrigation only, water meter is
to be installed.
14.
d. Fence locations.
Lighting plan with photometric data. The existing lighting plan shall be revised to
reduce the height of the perimeter light standards from 16.5 feet to 15 feet and to
meet the .5 to 1.5 footcandle average lighting standards contained in PANIC Section
18.64.030. All lighting must be shielded in a manner to prevent visibility of the light
source, eliminate glare and light spillover beyond the perimeter of the development.
The lighting plan, photometrics and specification sheets shall be revised to meet
these guidelines and shall be submitted to Planning Division staff for review and
.approval.
Trees to be retained shall be irrigated, aerated and maintained as necessary to ensure
survival.
The project shall include an enclosed trash and recycling area which complies with the
design guidelines adopted by the ARB and approved by the City Council pursuant to
Section 16.48.070 (PAMC). The f’mal site plan shall include an enclosed trash and
recycling area with a roof. The enclosed trash and recycling area should include a two
cubic yard container for cardboard and two 64 gallon containers for bottles and cans.
p:~arb\ecr3897.arb Page 4
The trash/recycling facilities shall be approved by the City of Palo Alto Recycling
Division prior to issuance of a building permit.
Public Works Engineering
15.The applicant shall submit a final grading and drainage plan to Public Works
Engineering, including drainage patterns on site and from adjacent properties. The plan
shall demonstrate that pre-existing drainage pattems to and from adjacent properties are
not altered.
16’.The site shall be fine graded, to provide a minimum 2% slope away from the building
perimeter and adjacent property lines. In no case shall the final grading increase the
sheet flow onto adjacent properties.
17.The proposed development will result in a change in the impervious area of the property.
The applicant shall provide calculations showing the adjusted impervious area with the
building permit application. A storm drainage fee.adjustment will take place in the
month following the final approval of the construction by the Building Inspection
Division.
18.Permittee must obtain a grading permit from the City of Palo Alto Building Inspection
Division if excavation exceeds.100 cubic yards or deeper than 3 feet.
19.The applicant shall obtain an encroachment permit from Caltrans if any lane closures are
needed on E1 Camino Real in performance of this work.
20.A construction logistics plan shall be provided, addressing at minimum parking, truck
routes and staging, materials storage, and the provision of pedestrian and vehicular
traffic adjacent to the construction site. All truck routes shall conform with the City of
Palo Alto’s Trucks and Truck Route Ordinance, Chapter 10.48, and the attached route
map which outlines truck routes"available throughout the City of Palo Alto.
Transportation
21.Signage and landscaping shall meet the sight distance requirements ofPAMC 18.83.080,
applicable to project frontages where driveways are present, and in parking lots.
Landscaping shall be specifically identified in the landscape plan as meeting these height
requirements. Specifically, the project should reduce the concrete wall along the Ventura
Avenue, E1 Camino Real, and back side perimeter to 3 feet, ensure that all landscaping
along the Ventura Avenue, El Camino Real, and back side perimeters is 3 feet or less,
and ensure that the height of the entry sign at the corner does not.impede the sight
distance triangle.
pAarb\ecr3897.arb Page 5
Utilities Electric
22.All utility meters, lines, transformers, backfiow preventers, and any other required
utilities, shall be shown on the landscape and irrigation plans and shall show that no
conflict will occur between the utilities and landscape materials and shall be screened
in a manner which respects the building design and setback requirements.
Utilities/Water-Gas-Wastewater
23.The applicant shall submit a completed WATER-GAS-WASTEWATER SERVICE
CONNECTION APPLICATION - LOAD SHEET for City of Palo Alto Utilities. The
applicant must provid~ all the information requested for utility service demands (water
in G.P.M., gas in B.T.U.P.H., and sewer in G.P.D.).
24.The applicant shall submit improvement plans for utility construction. The plans must
show the size and location of all underground utilities within the development and the
public right of way including meters, backflow preventers, fire service requirements,
sewer cleanouts, and any other required utilities.
25.The applicant must show on the site plan the existence of any water well, or auxiliary
water supply.
26.The applicant shall be responsible for installing and upgrading the existing water and
sewer mains and/or services as necessary to.handle anticipated peak loads, This
responsibility includes the design and all the cost associated with the construction for the
installation/upgrade of the water and sewer mains and/or services.
Prior to Issuance of a Buildin~ Permit
Planning/Zoning
27.Color chips to match the colors specified inthe approved ARB drawings shall be
attached to the cover sheet of the building permit drawing set by the applicant.
Public Works Engineering
28. The applicant shall obtain a Permit for Construction in a Public Street from Public
Works Engineering for construction proposed in the City right-of-way.
pAarb\eer3897.arb Page 6
Public Works Water Quality Control
29.If industrial process water is to be discharged to the sanitary sewer, a waste minimization
study shall be completed prior to construction to ensure that the industrial processes have
employed all appropriate waste minimization techniques. An application for an
Industrial Waste Discharge Permit (for the car wash water and any other wastes other .
than sanitary or storm) shall be filed before (or with) the Building Permit application.
No floor drains shall be allowed in bays unless permitted.
30.The applicant shall install a recycling system and treatment system for car wash water
and treatment system for car wash water and any other discharge wastes other than
sanitary and storm. The applicant must operate the facility in compliance with the City’s
¯ Sewer Use Ordinance, Section 16.09.
Utilities/Water-Gas-Wastewater
31.The applicant’s engineer shall submit flow calculations which show that the off-site and-
on-site water and sanitary sewer mains will provide the domestic water, fire flows, and
wastewater capacity needed to service the development and adjacent properties during
anticipated peak load. Field testing may be required to determine current flows and
water pressures on existing main. Calculations must be stamped by a registered civil
engineer.
32.A separate water meter shall be installed to irrigate the approved landscape plan. This
meter shall be designated as an irrigation account and no other water service will be
billed on the account.
33.An approved Reduce Pressure Principal Assembly (Backflow Preventor Device) shall
be installed for all existing and new water connections from Palo Alto Utilities to
comply with requirements of California Administrative Code, Title 17, Sections 7583
through 7605 inclusive. The Reduce Pressure Principle Assembly shall be installed on
the owner’s property and directly behind the water meter. Inspection by the Utilities
Cross Connection Inspector is required for the supply pipe between the meter and the
assembly.
34.An approved Check Valve shall be installed for the existing or new water connections
for the fire system to comply with requirements.of California Administrative Code, Title
17, Sections 7583 through 7605 inclusive. The Double Check Detector Check Valve
shall be installed on the owner’s property adjacent to the property line. Inspection by the
Utilities Cross Connection Inspector is required for the supply pipe between the city
connection and the assembly.
pAarb\ecr3897.arb Page 7
During Construction
Building Inspection
35.To reduce dust levels, it shall be required that exposed earth surfaces be watered as
necessary. Spillage resulting from hauling operations along or across any public or
private property shall be removed immediately and paid for by the contractor. Dust
nuisances originating from the contractor’s operations, either inside or outside of the
right-of-way shall be controlled at the contractor’s expense.
Fire Hazardous Materials
.36.All gasoline dispensing facilities shall be equipped with both Phase I and Phase II Vapor
Recovery Systems to prevent toxic vapors from escaping from the storage system per
State law.
Utilities Electric
37.All new underground electric services shall be inspected and approved by both the
Building Inspection Division and the Electrical Underground Inspector before
energizing.
38.All new underground service conduits and substructures shall be inspected before
backfilling.
39.Contractors and developers shall obtain a street opening permit from the Department of
Public Works before digging in the street fight-of-way.
Police
40.All non-residential construction activities shall be subject to the requirements of the
City’s Noise Ordinance, Chapter 9.10 PAMC, which requires, among other things, that
a sign be posted and that construction times be limited as follows:
8:00 AM to 8:00 PM Monday thru Friday
9:00 AM to 8:00 PM Saturday
10:00 AM to 6:00 PM Sunday.
Public Works Engineering
41.The contractor must contact the CPA Public Works Inspector at (415) 496-6929 prior
to any work performed in the public right-of-way.
pAarb\ecr3897.arb Page 8
42.
43.
44.
45.
No storage of construction materials is permitted in the street or on the sidewalk without
prior approval of Public Works Engineering.
The developer shall require its contractor to incorporate best management practices
(BMP’s) for stormwater pollution prevention in all construction operations, in
conformance with the Santa Clara Valley Nonpoint Source Pollution Control Program.
The Inspection Services Division shall monitor BMP’s with respect to the developer’s
construction activities on private property; and the Public Works Department shall
monitor BMP’s with respect to the developer’s construction activities on public property.
It is unlawful to discharge any construction debris (soil, asphalt, sawcut slurry, paint,
chemicals, etc.) or other waste materials into gutters or storm drains. The applicant also
will be required to paint a "No Dumping/Flows into the Bay" logo near all drainage
inlets.
All construction within the City right-of-way, easements or other property under City
jurisdiction shall conform to Standard Specifications of the Public Works and Utility
Departments.
The applicant shall be required to replace a 50 foot section of sidewalk and driveway
approach on the Ventura Avenue frontage. ¯
Utilities/Water-Gas-Wastewater
46.The applicant shall pay the connection fees associated for the installation of the new
water service/s to be installed by the City of Palo Alto Utilities
Prior to Finalization
Planning/Zoning
47.The landscape architect shall certify in writing and submit to Planning Division, and call
for inspection, that the landscaping has been installed in accordance with all aspects of
the approved landscape plans, that the irrigation has been installed and that irrigation has
been tested for timing and function, and all plants including street trees are healthy.
Public Works Engineering
48.All sidewalks bordering the project shall be repaired and/or removed and replaced in
compliance with Public Works approved standards.
49.The Public Works Inspector shall sign offthe building permit prior to the finalization
of this permit. All off-site improvements shall be finished prior to this sign-off.
p:\arb\ecr3897.arb ’Page 9
After Construction
Utilities/Water-Gas-Wastewater
50.The customer shall give the City written notice of any material changes in size,
character, or extent of the equipment or operations for which the City is supplying utility
servicebefore making any such change.
p:\arb\ecr3897.arb.Page 10
ATTACHMENT 8
The Planning Commission met in a regular meeting on Wednesday, January 8, 1997 at 7:00 p.m.
in the Council Chambers with Chairperson Cassel presiding.
Present:Commissioners Beecham, Byrd, Cassel, Eakins, Ojakian, Schink and Schmidt
Absent:None
June Fleming, City Manager
Ariel Calonne, City Attorney ..
Sue Case, Senior Assistant City Attorney
Debra Cauble, Senior Assistant City Attorney
Emily Harrison, Deputy City Manager ’
Chandler Lee, Contract Planner
Nancy Lytle, Chief Planning Official
Kenneth R. Sehreiber, Director of Planning and Community Environment
ORAL COMM-UNICA~ONS
" _Chail:g~LC.g~: The first item on our agenda is Oral Communications. At this time, any
member of the public may speak¯to any item that is not on the agenda. Is there anyone who
wishes to speak this evening? Seeing none, we will move on to the next agenda item.
A: [ PCMINS4 [ PCO 108.drf Page 2
1-08-97
Item 2 3897 EL CAMINO REAL: Site and design and conditional use permit
application to demolish an existing one-story gas station building
(1,075 square feet) and construct a new single-story 900-square-foot car wash
building, an 1,855-square-foot gas station canopy, and related site
improvements. Environmental Assessment: A mitigated negative declaration
has been prepare.& File Nos. 96-ARB-174, 96-UP-53, 96-D-8, 96-EIA-36.
Chairperson Cassel: The reason that this item is before us is because we do site and design
review for all gas stations in town. Nancy, would you like to introduce the staff?.
Ms. Lytle: Yes, I would. First, we have Chandler Lee, the contract planner who handled this
site and design and use permit application. You have the conditional use permit because of
the streamlining provision in the code which allows us to take zoning administrator approvals
and process them concurrently with approvals that are going forward to commission and
council. Also I would mention that there are some use permit conditions at your places that
Chandler Lee will be describing. They are an addendum this evening, a recommended
addition to the approval.
Chandler Lee: As you mentioned, this is a review of a site and design and a conditional use
permit approval for a gas station and car wash on E1 Camino Real. It is a pretty
straightforward project and is described in the staff report. One of the two major issues is the
acoustical mitigations which are attached as conditions of approval.with respect to the
multiple-family residential use behind the car wash, also the addition of two sycamore street
trees along the El. Camino frontage, providing for 25-foot spacing and the creation of a row
of sycamore street trees on E1 Camino Real, as provided for by the El Camino Real design
guidelines. In addition to those conditions in the staff report, staff has come up with four
additional conditions which are before you relating to hours of operation for the car wash,
which staff believes should be restricted in deference to the residential use nearby. Also,
compliance with the city’s noise ordinance, which is a standard condition of approval,
restriction of all on-site deliveries also in deference to the residential use nearby, and the
prohibition of any engine or body work on automobiles at that location. With the. addition of
these four conditions before you and the standard conditions of approval in the staff report,
staff is recommending approval of the project.
Chairperson Casse!: Are there any questions of staff?.
Cogamissioner B.v...rd: What automotive service does not include engine work.’?
~: The automotive service allowed within the district is only for the dispensing of
gasoline, as I understand it.
~: I believe also that the specific design that is before you is not designed with
service bays and things that mitigate the noise impacts of hydraulic equipment and other
A: [ PCMINS4 [ PC0108.drf Page 37
1-08-97
equipment used for engine repair. So given the design of the structure and the proximity of
the residential use, I think that is the basis for the staff condition in this particular instance.
The reality is that without the structure being designed for it, it probably would not occur, but
this is a kind of caution in ease somebody decides to repair engines on the side next to the
pumps.
Comrlais~i0ner Eakins: What is happening across Ventura at the old La Cumbre site? Does
anyone know what is going in there?
~: Yes, we had a retail video use that was in process. I am not sure of the status on
that application.
Chainaerson Cassel: If there are no further questions, I will open the publi~ hearing and we
will hear from the applicant.
Dan Askari. 1252 Ridgeline Court. San Jose: I will be very bde£ I would like to take just a
couple of minutes of your time to go over the project with you. As you already know, the
property has been vacant for the past six or seven years. If you pass by the property, you
have seen the weeds all over the property. The building is in really bad shape with broken
doors and windows. It is an eyesore. For the past few years, there have been a lot of
complaints from the neighbors about the condition of the property. I have been to the
property numerous times, and find that there are some people who do not have any place to
stay at night that are practically living there. They drink and create all kinds of
inconveniences. So there have been a lot of complaints about this from the.neighbors. What
I am proposing tonight is to have a gas station and ear wash. It is a really unique design
which you do not see in the City of Palo Alto. I think it will be a great asset.
I am proposing extensive landscaping which also will be a great asset, enhancing the
appearance of El Camino Real by 500%. We will be working with Chevron Oil Company, a
really well known company. We will be presenting their product, so we are working with a
major oil company. I have been working very closely with your staffover the past few
months, and we have come a long way and have met all of the requirements. I would like to
thank staff for their.hard work and their support of the project.
I would also like to add that I have read the staff report, and we will be happy to comply with
all of the conditions of approval in the report. There is one minor modification that I would
like to bring up and get your thoughts about it. Ultimately, it will accomplish exactly what
the staff is recommending, but it would be in a different way~ and I think you will have great
benefit as regards traffic flow on the site. I would like get your support on it, if at all
possiblel (He shows a slide.) One of the conditions of approval is to maximize the space that
we have between the twotrees on E1 Camino Real. What i have done is to just move the
driveway two feet this way, pushing this driveway farther back five feet. In that way, we can
get the 25-foot requirement that staff is requesting. At the same time, we will get easier
A:IPCMINS41PC0108.drf Page 38
1-08-97
exiting for the cars. It will give better visibility for cars exiting. This is exactly what staff
was looking for in having the 25-foot spacing between the two trees. Other than that, we
meet all staff conditions. Gas stations are becoming an extinct species. They are
disappearing altogether, and wehave come a long way. What we are proposing tonight will
be an asset to the neighborhood and make a big difference with the landscaping. Everything
will be livelier in this location. Thank you.
Chairperson Cassel: I have before me four conditions that were handed to us this evening. I
wanted to ask if you concur with them.
Mr. Askari: Yes I do. I have no problem with them.
Chairperson Cassel: Are there questions of the applicant.
Commissioner Qiakian:~ I have one quick one offthe last comment that you made. In a few.
words, why are gas stations becoming an extinct species?
Mr. Askari: I really do not know why. It is very costly to build one, but I do not have an
answer for that.
i er ’t: Staff is adding a condition toenlarge the loading zone. Is that
merely a matter of making it a larger striped area, or will you have to relocate?
~: Unfortunately, I do not have my architect with me, as he has the flu.. But when I
talked to him on the phone, he said. he has read the report and will comply with that. It is
really no problem, either enlarging it or designating a larger area. We will comply with that.
~2ommissioner Schink: Will restrooms be maintained for public use?
Sure.
~: He is proposing a slight variation in moving two feet. Does that cause
you any problem? It looks to me like it would be easier getting out his way.
rJ~Ldd~: I would agree with that. You could alter the end landscape strips by a matter of a
couple of feet, and you would gain a wider driveway. That would certainly be better,
operationally, for the gas station. You could maintain the 25-foot spacing between the
sycamore trees on El Carnino Real¯
~: However, the wider concrete pavement for the driveways would reduce the soil
volume for the sycamores, so they would never get as large as they would have with a little
additional soil volume. If you have any questions about that, our planning arborist is in the
A:I PCMINS41 PC0108.drf Page 39
1-08-97
audience tonight. He has reviewed the plans and has recommended against that revision for
that reason.
Chairperson Cassel: I do not understand why would sliding this slightly different make a
difference in these current trees?
~: The trees along El Camino are to be replaced with sycamores, and those that are
there now should remain. The sycamore tree, as I understand it, needs a certain dimension of
soil volume in order to reach a height that you would want to see along that street. One of
the things that is competing here for the space, in addition to the convenience of the motorists
getting out of these driveways, is the health of the trees on El Camino. We..have had
difficulty getting those trees to do well, frankly, so we are balancing those objectives in the
design of landscaping along the public frontage.
Chairperson Ca~sel: Can we hear from the arbodst?
would like to introduce Steve Doctor, the new planning arbodst.
~: For theexisting trees, we would have to be careful in widening the driveway in
order not to encroach on the root system, so we would have to ensure that the fight protection
is there. You would probably have to have an arborist there while the curb is being cut and
moved. There are proper ways to pnme the roots and fertilize the trees to minimize that
impact.
The young trees that are put in will pretty much be able to adapt to whatever areas that will
be there. The important thing about the 25 feet will come into play much more down the
road when the branches get wider so that they do not come together and start to die back in
the middle. The 25-foot rule is a good, sound rule for long-term branching, plus it is
important to maintain the consistency all the way up and down E1 Carnino Real. The most
important thing is that the two middle trees have that 25-foot spread. That is very critical.
The tree specifically on the right can handle whatever root pruning might be necessary. It is
already used to high compaction now, so I don’t think we will be adding much more
compaction by moving the curb in a little bit.
Chairperson Cassel: I am a little confused. I thought the proposal was to put the 25 feet at
the center and to make a slight angle of the two on the outside, correct? (Yes). Are you
saying that is okay?
~: Yes, that is okay. It is for the middle two that we did not have the 25 feet
originally. We were able to get the 25 feet in the middle by widening the outside. That is
what was altered.
~: So what he is proposing is what you agree with. (Yes)
A:I PCMINS41 PC0108.drf.Page 40
1-08-97
Commissioner Sehmidt: On Page 11, there is a reference to the free-standing sign. It says
that because the applicant has agreed to replace the pole sign with a more attractive
monument sign, the size. of the sign can remain as proposed. Then in the conditions on Page
20, Standard Conditions of Project Approval, it says, "The freestanding sign exceeds the
maximum allowable area and must be redesigned to meet the requirements of the sign
ordinance." Is that inconsistent with --
~: You are correct. That one sentence in the condition should be stricken.
~: Seeing no other speakers, I will return this item to the Planning
Commission for deliberations.
Commissioner Sehink: I am delighted to see gas stations returning to Palo Alto. I want to
relate that many years ago, when I was on the Architectural Review Board, we used to review
a lot of gas stations and modifications. We really took it upon ourselves to beat up pretty
hard on gas stations, and the gas station owners would say to us, we earmot afford to do all of
these things. We brushed it aside as being the usual excuse that we hear. Suddenly, they
disappeared, so maybe there was some troth in it. I, for one, learned a lesson, and I will not
try to pile on a lot of conditions here. I know you guys are a rather fragile operation at this
point, and we appreciate seeing you come hack into town. So I would extend my weleome
and look forward to your opening..-
" t: I would move the staffreeommendation with the
additional four conditions that we were given tonight, and with the deletion of the sentence
on lines 7-9 of the condition we just discussed on Page 20 regarding the free-standing sign,
also the adjustments across the driveway as proposed this evening.
~: By Commissioner Ojakian.
¯ i " : I agree with Jon. I am happy to see a gas station back in Palo Alto.
The staff report comments on that,too..We have lost many, many gas stations in recent
years, and we do not need many, manyback, but we do need one or two back. I am sure
everyone agrees that this will be a much better use of the site than what is now there. That
has been a poor looking coruer for a long time, and this will be a vast improvement.
o_C__o_mmi,s~’oner Oiakian: I agree with what Kathy has said, and would just add that iris also
nice that we do not see any neighbors here opposing this partieul~ project, so I am assuming
they are in favor of it. I like the location for the gas station, as it is not quite centralized, but
is in an area where different parts of the city can access it. Not only is thelot not too
attractive, but this will add to the South ElCamino area, which is where some of.us have
been.hoping for some development to start happening. So for me, it is a hooray that it is all
happening.
A:I PCMINS41 PC0108.drf Page 41
1-08-97
~0mmissioner Eakins: I wanted to ask about the wastewater from the car wash. I looked
through the report, and I did not fred it. Is it all recycled?
Yes, that is a requirement in the conditions.
Commissioner Eakins: Relating to screening the apartments, I notice that the trees at the
Jack-in-the-Box drive-up lane are almost nonexistent. I want to take this opportunity to
complain that those trees need to be either replanted or revived. They are not doing their
share for screening the apartment building. That is not on your application, but it was
¯ obvious to me today.
MOTION PASSES: Chainperson Cassel: Is there any further discussion on this motion? All
those in favor of the motion to recommend to the City Council the approval of attached
mitigated negative declaration, finding that the proposed project will not result in any
significantenvironmental impacts if certain conditions of approval are imposed; approve the
attached site and design and conditional use permit application for construction of a tas
station and ear wash facility and operation of an automotive service and automotive service
station use based on the attached findings and conditions, minus Lines 7-9 on Page 20 related
to the free standing sign, and including the addition of four conditions given to us this
evening Concerning time and other issuesrelated to that, and the adjustment in the driveway
lines as proposed this evening, please say aye. All opposed? That passes unanimously on a
vote of 7-0.
~: This indicates that it goes to the City Council on March 17th. And it needs to
go to the ARB before going to the City Council.
~:~ Congratulations and good luck with this project.
A: [ PCMINS4 [ PC0108.drf Page 42
1-08-97
rch.ilectural
I ev ew
City of Palo Alto
MINUTES
ATTACHMENT 9
Thursday, February 6, 1997
8:00 AM,
CouncilConference Room
250 Hamilton Avenue
Palo Alto, California
At ROLL CALL
Board Members Present:Frank Alfonso
Jim McFall
Bob Peterson
Cheryl Piha
David Ross -
Board Members Absent: None
Staff Members Present:Joe Colonna
Lisa Grote
Chandler Lee (forItem II.2)
Lorraine Weiss
Phillip Woods
B.L~¯None
Ce
Item 11.3 has been continued to the 2/20 ARB meetingl
Item II.5 has been continued to the 2/20 ARB meeting.
APPROVALS: The Architectural Review Board (ARB) decision on the design of the
project is a reeomrnendation to the Director of Planning and Community Environment
(the Director), who makes the final decision. Unless otherwise stated by the ARB or
the Director, project approvals generally incorporate Project Review Committee
B:ARB:MIN0206.drf.Page 1
35.The Public Works Inspector shall sign off the building permit prior to the
finalization of this permit. All off-site improvements shall be finished prior to
this sign-off.
Dan Askari
96-ARB-174; 96-UP-53
96-D-8; 96-EIA-36
¯ Review of a site and design application to demolish an existing one story gas station
building (1,075 square feet) and construct a new single story 900 square-foot car wash
building, an 1,855-square-foot gas station canopy and related site improvements and
Conditional Use Permit to allow operation of an automotive service and automotive
service station use. ,
PROJECT REPRESENTATIVES: Dan Askari, project applicant, presented the proposal.
PUBLIC TESTIMONY: Bob Moss, 4010 Orme, Barron Park Association,
commented that the neighborhood is pleased to see a ear wash and gas station
along El Camino Real, though the Board has not yet voted on this particular
project. Color and materials needed to be dearly identified, lighting at the rear
needs to be toned down, to protect the neighbors, and the monument sign should
be made smaller. He also indicated that the hours of operation needed to be
established for this service station and .compatible with the adjacent residential
neighborhood.
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD ACTION: Approved (5-0-0-0) with conditions
including the following:
Color and materials palette and identification of where the colors and
materials will be placed. ’
Additional landscape/vine on masonry fence at rear of parcel.
Brick material’ for base and monument sign should be changed to another
material which is more in character with the building and is durable and
shall be reviewed bystaff for approval.,
Scale down the sizeof the monument sign.
The canopy shall be white with blue letters.
CONDITIONS
B:ARB:MIN0206.drf Page