Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC AG PKT 2008-05-12 #V e . . CITY OF SEAL BEACH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPT. INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM AGENDA ITEM "V" REQUEST FOR CONTINUANCE To: Mayor and City Council Attention: David Carmany, City Manager Q.uinn .~~rrow,..Gity Attorney From: Lee Whittenberg, Director of Development Services. Date: May 8, 2008 SUBJECT: Public Hearing De Novo - Conditional Use Permit No. 08-2, 12415 Seal Beach Boulevard (PetS mart) The City has received a request from the appellant, PetSmart, to continue this matter to the next available City Council Meeting. (Letter request attached) The next available City Council Meeting is Tuesday, May 27, 2008. Staff recommends that the City Council open the public hearing and continue to May 27, 2008. No additional mailed notice is necessary if the public hearing is opened and continued to a date certain. * * * * \\SBNAS\Users\LWhittenberg\My Documents\CUP\08-2.Continuance Memo.doc\LWI05-08-08 · pET.MARI 1960 I North 27th Avenue. Phoenix, AZ 85027 · (623) 580-6100 Andrew Whiteaker Zoning Manager Direct Phone: (623) 587-2570 Direct Fax: (623) 580-6137 Internet Address: awhiteaker@ssg.petsmart.com VIA EMAIL AND REGULAR MAIL May 8, 2008 . Mr. Lee Whittenberg Director of Development Services City of Seal Beach City Hall 211 Eighth Street Seal Beach, CA 90740 Re: PetSmares Appeal of Planning Commission Hearing Resolution No. 08-6 Approving Conditional Use Permit 08-2 Dear Mr. Whittenberg: This letter serves as Applicant PetSmart's request that the appeal of the above-referenced Conditional Use Permit currently scheduled on the May 12,2008 City Council's Agenda be continued and placed on the Agenda for the next available City Council meeting. I apologize for any inconvenience. Sincerely, 11.1dU-- - ~w Whiteaker Zoning Manager . cc: Mindy Leigh (via email) . AGENDA REPORT DATE: May 12, 2008 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council THRU: David Carmany, City Manager FROM: Lee Whittenberg, Director of Development Services SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING DE NOVO -- CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 08-2, 12415 SEAL BEACH BOULEVARD (PETSMART) SUMMARY OF REQUEST: After rt9ceiv:i.r:tg al.1 public testimony, the City Counc;:H has the .following ~ptio'1s: . Direct staff to draft a resolution conditionally approving Conditional Use Permit 08-2 with appropriate conditions. or 2) . Direct staff to draft a resolution conditionally approving Conditional Use Permit 08-2 and to either delete Condition 27 or revise Condition 27 with alternative condition language determined appropriate by the City Council. 1) BACKGROUND: On February 20, 2008 the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing and approved the subject request subject to certain terms and conditions. The Commission conditionally approved the CUP on a 4-0-1 vote (Chairperson Deaton was absent). Please refer to Attachment 2 to review Planning Commission Resolution No. 08-6 for the findings and determination of the Planning Com~ission regarding the conditional use permit. Please refer to Attachment 3 to review the Planning Commission Minutes of February 20. 2008 and to Attachment 4 to review the Planning Commission Staff Report of February 20. 2008. . The Applicant timely appealed the Planning Commission's decision because the Applicant does not want an automatic review of the CUP (please refer to Attachment 1), and the matter is now before the City Council for consideration at a de novo public hearing. AGENDA ITEM \/ Z:\My Docum~nts\CUP\08-2 Appeal.CC Staff Report -12415 SBB (PetSmart).DOC\LW\05-05-08 Public Hearing De Novo re: Appeal of Conditions on Conditional Use Permit 08-2 City Council Staff Report May 12, 2008 . FACTS: Cl The Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on February 20, 2008 to consider Conditional Use Permit 08-2. Both written and oral evidence was submitted for the project. At the public hearing the applicant and representatives of PetSmart spoke in favor of the request. At the public hearing 1 person spoke in opposition, indicating that he also represented 2 other persons. After receiving all public testimony the Planning Commission closed the public hearing and after discussion, the Commission approved the requ~sted PetSmart store facility and as a condition of approval for CUP 08-2 imposed a condition requiring a subsequent review of the Conditional Use Permit by the Planning Commission at a public hearing (Condition 27). The Commission adopted Resolution 08-6 imposing the conditions on February 20. 2008. Cl On March 3, 2008 an appeal was filed (See Attachment 1). The matter is now before the City Council for consideration ~t a de novo public hearing. STANDARD OF REVIEW FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT: Conditional Use Permit: . Under Municipal Code Sections 28-2503 and 28-2504, all conditional use permit requests must be evaluated in light of three issues: 1) Is the use conditionally permitted in the zone?; 2) Is the use compatible with the General Plan?; and 3) Is the use compatible with, rather than detrimental to, stlrrounding uses and the community in general? APPELLANTS REASONS AS TO WHY THEY FEEL THE PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION WAS IN ERROR: Please refer to Attachment 1 to review the written "Applicant's Statement to Appeal Application to City Council"". The appellant/applicant is requesting that the City Council delete Condition 27 and substitute the appellant/applicant's proposed condition language. Property is located at.12415 Seal Beach Boulevard. DISCUSSION RELATING TO THE "STANDARDS OF REVIEW" FOR CUP APPROVALS: . 08-2 Appeal.CC Staff Report-12415 see (PetSmart) 2 . Public Hearing De Novo re: Appeal of Conditions on Conditional Use Permit 08-2 City Council Staff Report May 12, 2008 The subject application is a conditionally allowable project, and the Planning Commission was r~quired to make the findings specified in Municipal Code Sections 28-2503 and 28-2504 in order to approve the application. The Planning Commission determined that by imposing conditions set forth in Resolution 08-6, the Commission could make the required findings. Specifically, the Conditi9n 27 language being appealed has become a "Standard condition" language imposed by the Planning Commission on generally all , Conditional Use permits; the varying factor is the determined review period - either 6 or 12 months generally. The specific language of Condition 27 is: "The term of this permit shall be 12 months from the date of the first day of business. At the end of the initial term, the applicant may apply for an indefinite extension of CUP 08-2. The Planning Commission may grant an indefinite extension, provided that all conditions of approval have been met" and no significant police or other problems have occurred. The applicant is hereby advised that a new application and accompanying fee must be submitted to the' Gity'prior to consideration of aR indefin'ite extension." . Please refer to Section 5 of Resolution 08-6 (Attachment 2) to review the findings and determinations of the Planning Commission regarding the determinations relative to the CUP approval. Upon conclusion of the public hearing before the City Council, the Council will also be required to make appropriate findings regarding is compatibility with the General Plan and with the surrounding neighborhood regarding Conditional Use Permit 08-2. Resolution of the appeal issue will depend on the Council's view as to whether the proposed condition language of the appellant/applicant still allows for the project to be consistent with the intent, purpose and vision of the General Plan and the implem~nting zoning ordinance provisions of the City. During Planning Commission discussion, on February 20 the issue of compatibly with provisions of the General Plan was discussed by one person (Refer to Attachment 3). Additionally, it will depend on the City Council's review of the evidence presented during the public hearing regarding impaCts to the surrounding community of the proposed project at the subject property. . Suggested language by PetSmart to replace current Condition 27 language is: "PetSmart will receive written notice of any failure to comply with the conditions in the Conditional Use Permit at least 30 days prior to the revocation or modification of the Conditional Use Permit as provided for in Article 28. Notwithstanding the terms of Article 28 (d), if the use is exercised in the manner required by the terms or conditions of the 08-2 Appeal.CC Staff Report - 12415 SBB (PetSmart) 3 Public Hearing De Novo re: Appeal of Conditions on Conditional Use Permit 08-2 City Council Staff Report . May 12, 2008 approval, the mere existence of such use shall not be deemed to constitute a nuisance. Continued failure to comply shall be referred to the Planning Commission for report and recommendation and to the City Council for public ~earing. At the public hearing, the Applicant may contest such failure and supply evidence as appropriate. Appeals may be made by any person aggrieved including the . Applicant and during the pendency of such appeal, the Conditional Use may continue unabated." The basic issue in this appeal matter is the concern of PetSmart that the review required by Planning Commission Condition 27 may result in the loss of the right to conduct the business after a substantial investment and that the City can accomplish a similar review based on non':'oompliance with the other conditions imposed pursuant to Planning Commission Conditions 19, 20, 24, 25 and 29. Please .refer. to. the referenced..'~Applicant'.s Statement to Appeal Application. to~ City.. : ..... - ..... ,. . . Council," included as part of Attachment 1. This issue is a matter of discretion by the City Council. The Condition 27 language . has become a "standard condition" that is routinely imposed by the Planning Commission. The intent is to allow for the public to be able to respond to a notice of a public hearing after a specified time period to allow for the Commission to receive public input in determining if the conditions imposed for a particular business operation need to be modified after there has been some "real-life" experience with the allowed use. This is the first tome that Staff can recall that the Condition 27 language has been appealed. Staff feels that the Commission wishes for Pet Smart to be successful and a good neighbor and understands somewhat the concern regarding the potential denial of a required following' approval of an indefinite request. In an effort to provide a compromise between the Commission language of Condition 27 and the suggested language of the applicant, Staff and the City Attorney propose the following alternate Condition 27 language for consideration by the City Council: "27. No earlier than 8 months and no later than 1 0 months after the opening of the subject business operation, City staff shall provide a notice to all property owners and occupants within a 300-foot radius of the subject property of a staff review of compliance with conditions of approval for such business operation, requesting comments as to the compatibility of the business operation with neighboring uses or non-compliance with conditions of approval. Upon receipt of any public comments staff shall place a report on the Planning . 08-2 Appeal.CC Staff Report -12415 SBB (PetSmart) 4 . . . Public Hearing De Novo re: Appeal of Conditions on Conditional Use Permit 08-2 City Council Staff Report May 12, 2008 Commission Agenda for review and consideration by the Commission. If the Commission determines that the business operation is not operating in compliance with the conditions of approval, it shall instruct Staff to inform the business operator of sl!ch determination, and indicate that a revocation hearing will be scheduled within 45 days pursuant to Condition 29." CITY COUNCIL OPTIONS re: APPEAL: After receiving all public testimony and considering the decision of the Planning Commission, the City Council has the following options: 1) Direct staff to draft a resolution conditionally approving Conditional Use Permit 08-2 with appropriate conditions, or 2) Direct staff to draft a resolution conditionally approving Conditional Use Permit 08-2 and to either delete Condition 27 or revise Condition 27 with , ,. '. "alternative"condition' language determined appropriate by the City, CounciL..... . ....."... ....... ,.,. FISCAL IMPACT: Possible impacts to city receipt of property tax and sales tax revenues if business operation does not open within the City. NOTED AND APPROVED: ~D David Carmany City Manager Attachments: (5) Attachment 1: Appeal of Pet$mart, received March 3, 2008 Attachment 2: Planning Commission Resolution 08-6, adopted February 20, 2008 Attachment 3: Planning Commission Minutes: February 20, 2008 Attachment 4: Conditional Use Permit 08-2, Planning Commission Staff Report, dated February 20, 2008 Attachment 5: Project Development Plans Os:.2 Appeal.CC Staff Report - 12415 SBB (PetSmart) 5 . Public Hearing De Novo re: Appeal of Conditions on Conditional Use Permit 08-2 City Council Staff Report May 12, 2008 ATTACHMENT 1 APPEAL OF PETSMART, RECEIVED MARCH 3, 2008 . . 08-2 Appeal.CC Staff Report - 12415 SBe (PetSmart) 6 ~pETS..ARI FILE COPl 1960 I North 27th Avenue. Phoenix, AZ 85027 · (623) 580-6100 Lisa Guenther Assistant Zoning Manager Direct Phone: (623) 587-2620 Direct Fax: (623) 580-6137 Internet Address: 19uenther@ssg.petsmart.com VIA EMAIL AND US REGULAR MAIL April 1, 2008 . Lee Whittenberg ,- Director of Development Services City of Seal Beach City Hall 211 Eig~$ S~yet '." Seal Beach, cA 90740 Re: PetSmart's Appeal of Planning Commission Hearing Resolution No. 08-6 Approving Conditional Use Permit 08-2 Dear Mr. Whittenberg: This letter serves as Applicant PetSmart's request,that the appeal of the above-referenced Conditional Use Permit be heard at the City Council's May 12,2008 meeting. Best regards, ~~ Lisa Guenther Assistant Zoning Manager cc: Min~r. L~igh (via email) r-....... -_. . ...... ... . - . ........- ..~-..w-" 1 . ,- 0::;'.1,)\" ::;;~ ::~n \ I \ \ i i , .. -7 2008 . r . r., . . .,. .'" - . ......--... . . . APPEAL APPLICATION TO CITY COUNCIL For Office .use Only Planning. Cpmmission Date.: Planning .ComJ:1:1issioh Action: D~t~ .'Appear Filed:' . Noti.ce Pate: . '. '. Gity. Cou';,cil.ACtiort : Planning Comm. Resolution No.: Approv~1 Denial' Other City Council Date: Re$o!utiorf NO:.: . . 1. Property Address: \ ~y \ s Se~\ ~ ~ac..n ~\ U ~ (~e:\~tr'Q<<:\ '\ Applicant's Name: \'e:.\~~ \ +Nc... Address: \9lc:O~ f\..\. ~~ A-~ ,p~\.')( A-"'2 BC;;;:-C')97 Work Phone: (G>:J~ 'SB7 -dfo~D '. Mobile: ( ) Home Phone: ( ') FAX: ({oQ3) SBb-<a\'37 Property Owner's Name: ~~()1 aryR Shof'~. L.L c... Address: 0\6\\ Wl\~h\~ e,\\J 6 I ~u.\.~ (p4 0 ~n6.0"0n\~, Home Phone: (310) ~ loY - <-1:7 qc, . cf\ qOL/:) ~ 2. 3. 4. The undersigned hereby appeals the following described action of the Seal Beach Planning Commission conceming Public Hearing No. OS-Co ~e\~ 01\ ~~ 'd.~\ WO<B. Attach a statement that explains in detail why the decision of the Planning Commission is being appealed, the specific conditions of approval being appealed, and include your statements indicating where the Planning Commission may be in . e':D ~~~ (Signature of Applicant) (Signature of Owner) L..\SA. ~ t=>~~~ 1 .:DVc... (Print Name) (Print Name) ~-d.9 -08 (Date) (Date) r-r.~'''~ ..of"". ~ r....''! l: ........ J":' ..',,:...r \........J~ ...........-....., .....-- MAR - 3 2008 I -- .....J crrv Or sr: /\; l - ;;-" .r: IJ I -,..__..:....:.-.:.~~ .::'-..::' _\ .:. :~.:.J APPEAL APPLICATION TO CITY COUNCIL For Office Use Only Planning Comm. Resolution No.: Approval Denial Other City Council Date: Planning Commission Date: Planning Commission Action: Date Appeal Filed: Notice Date: City Council Action: Resolution No.: . 1. Property Address: \~4\'S SeD\.' ~eac..'h ~\\)6 (~e:\~\"'0Q<<:\\ 2. Applicanfs Name: "e:\~~, 4=Nc... Address: \ "1cO\ M. d~ A-~. I f~\.')( Pr'::2 ~~')9 / Work Phone: (";)~ "SB7 - dolo ~D . . Mobile: ( ) Home Phone: ( '> FAX: (fcP3) S8b-Co'~ "7 3. Property OWner's Name: ~~rYl a'"1R. &hOfSo I LL c... Address: aBn U:>l~~\-\\~ BllJ61 ~U.l~ (pLIO ~('l'la:llbA., Home Phone: (3C~ aCoL{ - L,{, qc, I vA qOt..b~ 4. The undersigned hereby appeals the following described action of the Seal Beach Planning Commission conceming Public Hearing No. C1f3-(o ne\b ot\ ~~ ';).e>\ J.e)Oca. Attach a statement that exolains in detail why the decision of the Planning Commission is being appealed, the specific conditions of approval being appealed, :~;ude your statements Indicatlng where the Plan~ning ~o;/j;n m;y be in ~~l~ ~ ~- (Signature of Applicant) - (S;g~t~r;~. er) r...~s~~ \~~~ , .DVC-. MtAJ.elv:f' ~'-f.el (Print Name) . (Print Name) ~ -d, <1 - 08 2-/Zf1/'2,.OO'l (Date) (Date) . r------ .."".-.--- I r> i\ Ii ,.......~\ :. .~'J .... . ~, :=[1 I r~"-"'.' .-._...:~' ...-" I. ..........-l I. I MAR - 3 2008 I I L._.__~ t /'""1-, Y 0"'- ......- . L~~~.__ ~,- ::;~.:~.r}.L. f::,:',r;,~...J '__-...-_ 4~' 1 . . . Applicant's Statement to Appeal Application to City Council Applicant: PetSmart, Inc./Property Owner: Rossmoor Shops, LLC Planning Commission Hearing Resolution No. 08-6 Approving Conditional Use Permit 08-2 On February 20,2008, the City of Seal Beach Planning Commission approved Conditional Use Permit 08-2, as passed, approved and adopted under Resolution No. 08-6. Applicant, PetSmart, Inc., ("PetSmart") is appealing the Planning Commission Resolution No. 08-6 to have Condition No. 27 removed from Conditional Use Permit 08-2. Condition No. 27 states that the term of the Conditional Use Permit will be twelve (12) months; however PetSmart was informed that a revised Resolution will be issued by the Planning Commission changing the term to six (6) months. Further, this Condition states that the Planning Commission may grant an indefmite extension, provided that all conditions of approval have been met and no significant police or other problems have occurred and that a new application and accompanying fee must be paid to the City prior to consideration of the indefmite extension. PetSmart understands that the procedure for applying for an indefmite extension will involve a filing fee and new application, as well as public notice to the surrounding property owners, a new staff 'report, a public hearing and a final resolution that may result in modified -and/or additional conditions after PetSmart's considerable investment in the center. PetSmart understands that Condition No. 27 is recommended by the Planning Commission for Conditional Use Permits granted to businesses that have unusual operating hours, sell or serve alcohol, or presumed to be a potential problem to the neighborhood, and is not a standard restriction in the Seal Beach Zoning Code. PetSmart's building and its policies and procedures are designed to mitigate any possible nuisances that may impact the center and surrounding residents. Furthermore, PetSmart is the leading worldwide operator of retail stores specializing in the sale of small pets, pet food, supplies, accessories, veterinary care; pet grooming, training, and boarding services. There are over 1,000 PetSmart stores throughout the United States, with over 100 PetsHotels, and PetSmart has been a positive influence in the neighborhoods and cities in which it conducts its operations including delivering Total Lifetime Care for pets and strengthening the special bond that exists between pets and pet parents, not to mention saving over 3,000,000 homeless pets lives though its PetSmart Charities Program. Although PetSmart is certain it will meet all conditions of approval in Conditional Use Permit 08-2, it cannot make the considerable investment in fixtures, merchandise, and hiring associates from the community for the store at The Shops at Rossmoor with anything less than an indefmite approval of Conditional Use Permit 08-02. . It is PetSmart's understanding, based on Article 25 and Article 28 of the Seal Beach Zoning Code, that failure to comply with any of the conditions in Conditional Use Permit 08-2 (which conditions affect the entire operation of this. PetSmart store) may result in the revocation of said Conditional Use Permit and therefore Condition No. 27 is redundant and PetSmart respectfully requests removal of this condition. . Public Hearing De Novo re: Appeal of Conditions on Conditional Use Permit 08-2 City Council Staff Report May 12, 2008 ATTACHMENT 2 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 08-6, ADOPTED FEBRUARY 20, 2008 . . 08-2 Appeal.CC Staff Report - 12415 SBB (PetSmart) 7 . . . RESOLUTION NUMBER 08-6 O~Q ~ A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 08-2 FOR A PET STORE WITH PET BOARDING FACILITIES, VETERINARY ~ERVICES, PET GROOMING, PET TRAINING, AND PET ADOPTION SERVICES AT 12415 SEAL BEACH BOULEVARD, SEAL BEACH (PETSMART). TIIE PLANNING COJv.1MISSION OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH DOES HEREBY FIND AND RESOL VB: .... .... ..... .... ...,Section 1,..... -..On. January.. 16,...2Q08i' Austin .Podrat ..filed .an .application ,for .... "'" .' . Conditional Use Permit 08-2 with the Department of Development Services.- Sectio~ 2. The applicant is requesting approval to permit a pet store with pet boarding facilities, veterinary services, pet grooming, pet training, and pet adoption services at 12415 Seal Beach Boulevard, Seal Beach. Section 3. Pursuant to 14 Calif. Code of Regs. ~ 15301, staffhas determined as follows: The application for Conditional Use Permit 08-2 for the requested land use entitlements at a proposed pet store is categorically exempt from review pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to 14 Calif. Code of Regs. ~ 15305 (Minor Alterations in Land Use Limitations), because the proposal involves a minor alteration in land use limitation and does not involve either a property in excess of 20% slope or a change in land use or density. Section 4. A duly noticed public hearing was held before the Planning Commission on February 20, 2008 to consider the application for Conditional Use Permit No. 08-2. At the public hearing the Planning Commission received written and oral evidence on the proposed proj ect. Section 5. The record of the public hearing of February 20,2008 indicates the following: (a) On January 16, 2008, Austin Podrat filed an application for Conditional Use Permit 08-2 with the Department of Development Services requesting approval to permit a pet store with pet boarding facilities, veterinary services, pet grooming, pet training, and pet adoption services at 12415 Seal Beach Boulevard. 10f6 Planning Commission Resolution No. 08-6 Conditional Use Permit 08-2 12415 Seal Beach Boulevard (petSmart) February 20, 2008 . (b) The subject property is located in the Shops at Rossmoor development, located west of Seal Beach Boulevard, north of St. Cloud Drive, and south of Bradbury Road. (c) The proposed PetSmart store location is approximately 700 feet west of Seal Beach Boulevard and 300 feet north of St. Cloud Drive, and is proposed to be occupy approximately 27,696 square feet of an approximately 48,210 square foot building. (d) Surrounding land u~es and zoning are as follows: NORTH: Commercial uses within the General Commercial (C-2) Zone; residential uses within the Residential High Density (RHD) Zone. SOUTH: Commercial uses within the General Commercial (C-2) Zone; Residential uses within the unincorporated community of Rossmoor. EAST: Commercial uses within the General Commercial (C-2) Zone (Old Ranch .Town'Center).. ... ,..... ............. .... .......... WEST: Residential uses within the Residential High Density (RHD) Zone; Residential uses within the unincorporated community of Ross moor. . (e) The pet store will have approved operating hours of 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday, and 8:00 to 7:00 p.m. on Sunday. Section 6. Based upon the facts contained in the record, including those stated in ~5 of this resolution and pursuant to ~~ 28-1300, 28-2503-2504 of the City's Code. the Planning Commission makes the following findings: (a) Conditional Use Permit No. 08-2 is consistent with the provisions of the Land Use Element of the City's General Plan and the Zoning Code of the City, both of which provides a "General Commercial" designation for the subject property and permits pet store facilities subject to the issuance of a Conditional Use Permit. The use as a pet store with pet boarding facilities, veterinary services, pet groQming, pet training, and pet adoption services is also consistent with the remaining elements of the City's General Plan as the policies of those elements are consistent with, and reflected in, the Land Use Element. Accordingly, the proposed use is consistent with the General Plan. b. The building and property at the Shops at Rossmoor Center are adequate in size, shape, topography and location to meet the needs of the proposed use of the property. Required adherence to appliqable building and fire codes ensures there will be adequate water supply and utilities for the proposed use. c. The pet store, if properly conditioned and enforced, is . compatible with the character of the surrounding area. Adherence to conditions of approval 20f6 . . . Planning Commission Resolution No. 08-6 ConmtionalUsePennu08-2 12415 Seal Beach Boulevard (petSmart) February 20, 2008 placed on the use by the City of Seal Beach would mitigate any negative impacts to neighboring resIdential properties. Section 7. Based upon the foregoing, the Planning Commission hereby approves Conditional Use Permit No. 08-'2, subject to the following conditions: 1. Conditional Use Permit 08-2 is approved for a pet store with pet boarding facilities, veterinary services, pet grooming, pet training, and pet adoption services at 12415 Seal Beach Boulevard. 2. All construction shall be in substantial compliance with the plans dated January 2008, that were submitted as a supplement to the application for Conditional Use Permit 08-2. 3. The permitted hours of operation for the combined operations within the pet store (including retail, grooming, day care, and boarding) shall be from 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday, and from 8:00 a:m; to 7:00 p.m. on Sunday. . . '... '.. . 4::.. " Applicant .shall obtain a City of .seal Beach business. license, I as.well. as..any. applicable. .'. '. State and/or County health permits or operating permits before commencing business. . 5. All applicable State laws requiring that only weaned animals be available for sale or adoption shall be adhered to. 6. All animals for sale or adoption or guests of the day care and/or boarding facilities shall have appropriate food and fresh water available to them, as provided by State law and as appropriate to their needs, unless otherwise directed by a licensed veterinarian or licensed veterinary technician. 7. Food and drink receptacles within all animal cages and boarding facilities shall be constructed and positioned to minimize fecal contamination. 8. All animal cages, holding pens, boarding areas, 'play areas, etc. shall be maintained in a sanitary condition, and as provided by State law. 9. All animals' shall be provided with adequate housing and space, and as provided by State law. 10. All animals offered for sale or adoption shall have current vaccinations and examinations, where applicable, and must be in good health, as far as can be reasonably determined. 11. Any sick or injured animal must receive appropriate care and treatment immediately. 12. No wild or dangerous animals shall be offered for sale or adoption. 30f6 Planning Commission Resolution No. 08-6 Conditional Use Permit 08-2 12415 Seal Beach Boulevard (petSmart) February 20, 2008 . 13. No animal shall be stocked, sold, or offered for adoption unless the staff, or a member of the staff, is familiar with the care and welfare of such animal. 14. No outdoor displays of animals or merchandise are allowed unless a Special Event Permit is obtained from the City of Seal Beach. 15. Adequate ventilation and climate controls shall be provided for all animals at all times. 16. Any windows or doors facing residential areas shall remain closed at all times, except when accessing the building only. 17. No commercial deliveries or trash disposal activities may occur in association with the operation of this business between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. 18. Litter and trash receptacles shall be located at convenient locations inside and outside the establishment. Operators of such establishments shall remove trash and debris on an appropriate basis so as not to cause health problems. There shall be no dumping of trash ""'''' ..... ...... ..... . .....,..{)utside the.-establishment,between.-the.hoursuoflO:,OO'p.m: and 7:00 a,m,.. ~,. ~~."... ".'".. .,'-' .".............. ,...,...... 19. In the event staff determines security problems exist on the site, the Conditions of this permit may be amended, under the procedures of The Code of the City of Seal Beach, to require the provision of additional security measures. . 20. The establishment shall comply with Chapter 7.15, "Noise" of the City of Seal Beach Municipal Code. as the. regulations of that Chapter now exist or may hereafter be amended: Should complaints be received regarding noise generated by the establishment, the Planning Commission reserves the right to schedule this permit for reconsideration and may require the applicant/business operator to mitigate the noise level to comply with the provisions of Chapter 7.15 21. Building permits shall be obtained for all new construction. 22. A lightirig and security plan shall be submitted to the Director of Development Services for approval prior to the issuance of a building permit. Lighting plan shall provide 'cut- off' or similar fixtw:es to ensure that .there is no light encroachment onto adjacent commercial or residential properties, yet provide adequate lighting for security purposes. 23. This CUP shall not become effective for any purpose unless/until a City "Acceptance of Conditions" form. has been signed by the applicant in the presence of the Director of Development Services, or notarized and returned to the Planning Department; and until the ten (10) calendar-day appeal period has elapsed. 24. A modification of this CUP shall be applied for when: a. The establishment proposes to modify any of its current Conditions of Approval. J '.......... . 40f6 . 25. 26. Planning Commission Resolution No. 08-6 Conditional Use Permit 08-2 12415 Seal Beach Boulevard (petSmart) February 20. 2008 b. There is a substantial change m the mode or character of operations of the establishment. The Planning Commission reserves the right to revoke or modify this Conditional Use Permit pursuant to Articles 25 and 28 of The Code of the City of Seal Beach if harm or retail-related problems are demonstrated to occur as a result of criminal or anti-social behavior, including but not limited to the congregation of minors, violence, vandalism, solicitation and/or litter. This Conditional Use Permit shall become null and void unless exercised within one (1) year of the date of final approval, or such extension of time as may be granted by the Planning Commission pursuant to a written request for extension submitted to the Department of Development Services a minimum of ninety (90) days prior to such expiration date. The term of this permit shall be 12 months- from the date of the first day of business. At the end of the initial term, the applicant may apply for an indefinite extension of CUP 08- "..,. " " -.-...: ,... ,'.,- . .'-.' 2.'" T>he..:Pl-an1'.l.:ing.r.Gomm.issien .may...grant 'an- indefinite.. extension, . provided' .that-..-aU.-the ,., .: ,', ,; "0-" ....;:' . conditions of approval have been met and no significant police or other problems have occurred. The applicant is hereby advised that a new application and accompanying fee must be paid to the City prior to consideration of an indefinite extension. 27. . 28. The applicant shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless City, its officers, agents and employees (collectively ''the City" hereinafter) from any and all claims and losses whatsoever occurring or resulting to any and all persons, firms, or corporations furnishing or supplying work, services, materials, or supplies in connection with the performance of the use permitted hereby or the exercise of the rights granted herein, and any and all claims, lawsuits or actions arising from the granting of or the exercise of the rights permitted by this Conditional Use Permit, and from any and all claims and losses occurring or resulting to any person, firm, corporation or property for damage, injury or death arising out of or connected with the performance of the use permitted hereby. Applicant's obligation to indemnify, defend and hold harmless the City as stated herein shall include, but not be limited to, paying all fees and costs incurred by legal counsel of the City's choice in representing the City in connection with any such claims, losses, lawsuits or actions, expert witness fees, 'and any award of damages, judgments, verdicts, court costs or attorneys' fees in any such lawsuit or action. 29. Failure to comply with any of these conditions may result in the revocation of this Conditional Use Permit. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Plarining Commission of the City of Seal Beach at a meeting thereof held on the 20th day of February 2008 by the following vote: . AYES: Commissioners Roberts, Bello, Delay, and Massa-lavitt 50f6 NOES: Commissioners None Planning Commission Resolution No. 08-6 Conditional Use Permit 08-2 12415 Seal Beach Boulevard (PetSmart) Feb~ary 20, 2008 ABSENT: Commissioners Deaton ABSTAlN: Commissioners None Lee 'ttenberg . , . s<;;; .itO'....., 'PI '. e =.....: .. " .. '.".. . .. t:iC"te'""-L:"" 'iI.'tUll!I:g' olliu:usslotr" '.... ". .... ***** Roberts -Chairperson, Planning Commission -." -p.,.... ',.. .,................... "... ",;. ."l, .".... . ....", ,,' ," 6 of6 . -'1"01. ,',r; . . . Public Hearing De Novo re: Appeal of Conditions on Conditional Use Permit 08-2 City Council Staff Report May 12, 2008 ATTACHMENT 3 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES: FEBRUARY 20, 2008 . . 08-2 Appeal.CC Staff Report - 12415 SBB (PetSmart) 8 .. 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 .' 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 Mr. Flower advised that the adoption of Resolution No. 08-3 begins a 10-day calendar 42 appeal period to the City Council. The Commission action tonight is final and the 43 . appeal period begins tomorrow morning. 44 ~ ._ ',. 5. Conditional Use Permit 08-2 12415 Seal Beach Blvd. (PetSmart) City of Seal Beach Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of February 20, 2008 that this would provide flexibility to extend the hours of operation, should the community desire this. Vice-Chairperson Roberts asked if all Sprouts locations sell alcoholic beverages. Mr. Brewer stated that the owners of Sprouts Farmers Market formerly owned Henry's Natural Food Markets. He explained that Sprouts specializes in health foods and organic wines, and most customers who shop in traditional large grocery stores would expect to have all of the same amenities when shopping at Sprouts. Vice- Chairperson Roberts asked if the plans reflect the total number of tables and seats . proposed for the outdoor seating. Mr. Brewer stated that he believes the plans reflect the correct number of seats. Mr. Olivera stated that City Code does limit outdoor seating to 12 seats. Mr. Whittenberg clarified that the current Zoning Code (ZC) does not set a limit; however, the proposed ZC will limit this to 12 seats. He indicated that the condition as proposed approves the project in accordance with the plans submitted, which show three 4-seat tables. Mr. Brewer added that Sprouts has no intention of allowing consumption of alcohol in the outdoor seating area and will post signage prohibiting this. There being no one else wishing to speak, Vice-Chairperson Roberts closed the public hearing. . - Commissioner Comments Vice-Chairperson Roberts polled the Commission regarding Mr. Brewer's request for a change in the hours of operation. Mr. Whittenberg stated that Staff is recommending a one-year review of this CUP. Commissioner Massa-Lavitt stated that she does not believe Sprouts will become any kind of "hangout" and a 7:00 a.m. opening time would be convenient for shoppers wishing to make a purchase before work. Vice-Chairperson Roberts asked if Mel's Diner were open until 11 :00 p.m. Mr. Whittenberg stated that he believes the closing time for Mel's is 1 :00 a.m. and the closing time for the other restaurant uses is 11 :00 p.m. on weekdays and midnight on weekends. Commissioner Massa-Lavitt stated that Sprouts would be a great asset to the City. MOTION by Massa-Lavi~; SECOND by Bello to approve Conditional Use Permit 08-1, subject to conditions, and adopt Resolution 08-3 as amended. MOTION CARRIED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: 4-0-1 Roberts, Bello, Delay, and Massa-lavitt None Deaton 5 of 15 (- " 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 r" ~..,,' 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 ~ C..' City of Seal Beach Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of February 20, 2008 Applicant/Owner: Austin PodratlRossmoor Shops LLC . Request: To establish a pet store with pet boarding facilities and veterinary services. The store will also provide pet grooming, pet training, and pet adoption services. . Recommendation: Approval, subject to conditions, and adoption of Resolution 08-6. Staff Report Mr. Olivera delivered the staff report. (Staff Report is on file for inspection in the Planning Department.) He provided some background information on this item and noted that the proposed pet store will measure approximately 27,696 sq. ft. and will be part of a new structure to be located where the existing Roger Dunn golf shop is and former Contours Express women's gym was located. He stated that the nearest residences are approximately 150 feet to the west of the proposed building, directly behind. He stated that the Shops at Rossmoor management had conducted a community meeting on February 11, 2008, with homeowners associations for the surrounding residential properties to address concerns regarding locating a pet store at the proposed location. Mr. Olivera then noted that he had visited existing PetSmart stores in Signal Hill and Long Beach and found them to be very clean and with no evidence of noise emanating from the pet hotel at the Long Beach store. He said that this new construction is to be built to pet store specifications with noise attenuation and soundproof walls. He indicated that Staff has received no comments in response to the public notices for Conditional Use Permit 08-2 and Staff is recommending approval, subject to conditions. . Mr. Whittenberg noted that Staff has provided a memorandum outlining modifications to the Conditions of Approval. Commissioner Questions Vice-Chairperson Roberts asked what the capacity is for the PetSmart pet hotel in Long Beach. Mr. Olivera stated that when visiting the store he heard no noise at all when he walked into the pet hotel section, but once he walked through the kennels he noted that 75% of them were occupied with well behaved animals. When he inquired about this, the manager explained that pets are screened before they are taken in and aggressive dogs with obedience problems are not allowed. Public Hearino Vice-Chairperson Roberts opened the public hearing. Austin Pod rat of Century National Properties (CNP) and Rossmoor Shops LLC stated that they are in full agreement with all of the conditions of approval and appreciated the help of Staff in preparing the Staff Report. He said that CNP and the Rossmoor Shops . 6 of 15 eL 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 .~.' 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 .~. City of Seal Beach Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of February 20, 2008 look forward to providing the community with a first class pet operation. He indicated that PetSmart has gone to great lengths to completely mitigate any odors or noise and once the residents understood that the pet hotel and the veterinary services would be completely contained within the premises, they had no further concerns regarding this project. Thomas Reilly stated that he lives in the Bridge Creek condominium complex at 12466 Montecito Road, which is immediately adjacent to the parking lot from the existing. Roger Dunn and Contours building. He said he opposes this plan and is also speaking on behalf of Laura Gallo and Carolyn Borg. He stated that Ms. Borg had visited the Long Beach PetSmart to observe the operation, and within one-half hour she observed four dogs defecating outside the premises and there was no cleaning up after them. He then expressed his firm belief that his homeowners association received no notice of a community meeting, and their condos are the ones most immediately affected by this project. He questioned whether the stores mentioned are close to any residential units, and asked what recourse residents would have should they experience problems with noise from this new PetSmart. Mr. Olivera mentioned that the PetSmart stores in Signal Hill and Long Beach are not in close proximitY to any residential areas. He added that with regard to noise,. the project is conditioned that it must .comply with..the City of Seal. . Beach Noise Ordinance, and if. there are any problems this project could be revisited and the CUP could be revoked. Vice-Chairperson Roberts referred to the noise study provided by PetSmart and asked if the measurements cited would meet the standards for the City's noise ordinance. Mr. Olivera stated that they would. Madelyn Jackrel of Century National Properties (CNP) and Rossmoor Shops LLC stated that CNP had provided an invitation to all three of the condo associations, but later found that the management of one of the associations had not distributed the notice. She noted that one resident from Bridge Creek did come and was given a virtual tour that alleviated her concerns. Vice-Chairperson Roberts asked how many residents had attended the meeting. Ms. Jackrel reported that only 3 residents attended. She said that the other associations invited had sent word that they were happy with the center. Vice-Chairperson Roberts asked if the meeting addressed PetSmart only. Ms. Jackrel stated that the discussion included the development of this final portion of the center and PetS mart. Bobby Mansuer, Orange County District M~nager for PetSmart, stated that with regard to animal waste, all of the stores are equipped with an outdoor oops station for disposal of waste and there are 4 of these stations inside each store. He said that all of the walls in the pet hotel are metal studs with insulation, full height ceilings, and dropped ceiling to create noise reduction. He noted that there are no open or outdoor kennels. Vice- Chairperson asked what the capacity of the hotel would be. Mr. Mansuer stated that he does not have an exact number, but noted that the Tustin Marketplace hotel has 100 rooms and the Long Beach hotel has approximately 140 rooms. Vice-Chairperson Roberts stated that the study on noise and odors was quite impressive, particularly the information on the separate ventilation systems for dogs and cats. Mr. Mansuer noted 7 of 15 ~-. ( I::. 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 ..20 21 22 t~ . ~., 25 2 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 4-1:\ l.. " City of Seal Beach Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of February 20, 2008 that PetSmart does have a program that requires the manager to make hourly inspections outside the store for waste that needs to be picked up. . Austin Pod rat emphasized that the operation at this center is first class with three employees specifically dedicated to parking lot areas, to ensure that they are clean, safe, and that landscaping is well maintained. He added that the evening security patrol is also responsible for ensuring that the common areas and parking lots are kept clean. He indicated that this PetSmart hotel will have approximately 148 rooms (58 large rooms, 78 regular size rooms, and 16 suites). There being no one else wishing to speak, Vice-Chairperson Roberts closed the public hearing. Commissioner Comments Commissioner Massa-Lavitt stated that with the sound attenuation built in, one could not possibly hear the dogs barking. She recommended revisiting this project to ensure that there are no issues with noise. Mr. Flower noted that Staff has added a condition that this approval be subject to a 12-month review. Commissioner Bello stated that she was not aware of all of the services offered for pets through PetSmart. She indicated that she had researched the PetSmart Company online and it appears that they do run a good operation. . Commissioner DeLay asked if a 6-month review period would be appropriate. Mr. Whittenberg noted t~at if Conditional Use Permit 08-2 is approved and the City begins to receive complaints related to the operation of this store prior to the end of the review period, the City can bring the application before the PC for violation of their Conditions of Approval. Vice-Chairperson Roberts stated that he is concerned with sanitation, and noted that PetSmart does have the clean-up stations both in the parking lot and inside the store. He asked if there were a condition or procedure that would provide for cleaning of the PetSmart parking lot area. Mr. Whittenberg noted that under the Nationa'l Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) standards imposed on cities by state water quality boards, hosing down of parking lots would not be permitted. He indicated that Staff would have to work with the applicant on this, as they would have to use something with a sand base to it in a confined area with no drainage out of the area. Vice-Chairperson Roberts then noted that, with regard to noise and odors, the reports provided are quite complete and have relieved his concerns that these would be a problem. He agreed that a 6-month review period would be appropriate. He encouraged CNP and Rossmoor Shops to schedule another meeting to provide opport~nity for more residents to attend. . 8 of 15 . I&. 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19. 20 21 22 .-. ... " '-. 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 .~.. City of Seal Beach Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of February 20, 2008 MOTION by Bello; SECOND by DeLay to approve the Conditional Use Permit 08-2, subject to conditions and a 6-month review, and adopt Resolution 08-6 as amended. MOTION CARRIED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: 4-0-1 Roberts, Bello, Delay, and Massa-lavitt None Deaton Mr. Flower advised that the adoption of Resolution No. 08-6 begins a 10-day calendar appeal period to the City Council. The Commission action tonight is final and the appeal period begins tomorrow morning. 6. Variance 08-1 901-1101 Pacific Coast Highway (Seal Beach Center) Applicant/Owner: Paul Sheppard/ Regency Centers Request: To allow less than Code-required parking/shared parking within an existing shopping center. Recommendation: Approval, subject to conditions, and adoption of Resolution 08-5. Staff Report Mr. Olivera delivered the staff report. (Staff Report is on file for inspection in the Planning Department.) He provided sOlT!e background information on this item and noted that the proposed variance would allow the property owner, Regency Centers, to utilize a parking demand analysis to justify a Variance for relief from Code required parking standards. He explained that an original parking demand analysis showed 421 spaces within the center being utilized with 438 spaces available, but when Staff calculated the current individual uses within the center according to their respective parking requirements, the total demand came to approximately 500 spaces. Staff also discovered that the spreadsheet formulas used to calculate required parking totals were not correctly adding the numbers and both Staff and Regency Center had relied on these incorrect totals to determine the amou.nt of available parking within the center. He indicated that once Staff noticed this error, Regency Centers was informed and after consultation with the City Attorney Staff determined that a new Shared Parking Analysis reflecting current and future projected uses within the center would be required, along with an application for a Variance from required code parking standards, as the code does not currently allow that a shared parking analysis be used in-Jieu of code required parking. Mr. Olivera then stated that Staff feels, from a functional standpoint, there should be adequate parking to serve all present uses within the center, but still has reservations regarding the long term functionality of the parking lot, as vacant lease spaces remain 9 of 15 . Public Hearing De Novo re: Appeal of Conditions on Conditional Use Permit 08-2 City Council Staff Report May 12, 2008 ATTACHMENT 4 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 08-2, PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT, DATED FEBRUARY 20, 2008 . . 08-2 Appeal.CC Staff Report - 12415 SBB (PetSmart) 9 . . . February 20, 2008 STAFF REPORT To: From: Honorable Chairperson and Members of the Planning Commission Department of Development Services Subject: Conditional Use Permit 08-2 (petSmart) 12415 Seal Beach Boulevard I GENERAL DESCRIPTION I Applicant: AUSTIN PODRAT Owner: ROSSMOOR SHOPS, LLC Location: 12415 SEAL BEACH BOULEVARD Classification of Property: GENERAL COMMERCIAL (C-2) Request: FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A PET STORE WITH PET BOARDING FACILmES AND VETERINARY SERVICES. THE STORE WILL ALSO PROVIDE PET GROOMING, PET TRAINING, AND PET ADOPTION SERVICES. Environmental Review: THIS PROJECT IS CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM CEQA REVIEW. Code Sections: 28-1300;28-2503;i8-2504 Recommendation: AfPROV AL OF RESOLUTION 08-6, SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL AS RECOMMENDED" BY STAFF, AND AS MAY BE FURTHER REVISED BY THE COMMISSION AFTER CONSIDERATION OF PUBLIC TESTIMONY. Conditional Use Permit 08-2 Planning Commission Staff Report 12415 Seal Beach Boulevard February 20, 2008 . I FACfS I . On January 16, 2008, Austin Podrat (''the applicant") filed an application with the Department of Development Services for Conditional Use Permit 08-2 to establish a pet store with pet boarding facilities, veterinary services, pet grooming, pet training, and pet adoption services. . The subject property is located within the Shops at Rossmoor development, located west of Seal Beach Boulevard and south of Rossmoor Center Drive. . The proposed new structure will be approximately 48,210 square feet in area. . The overall subject property (Shops at Rossmoor) is approximately 1,676,157 square feet (approximately 38.48 acres) in land area and is developed with a large retail shopping center. Tenants on the property include a combination of retail shops, financial institutions, specialty stores, and restaurants. . The nearest residential properties are located to the south, north and west of the property, and include the community of Rossmoor and multi-family residential uses within the City of Seal Beach. . · The surrounding land uses and zoning are as follows: ~ NORTH - Commercial uses within the General Commercial (C-2) zone; Residential uses within the Residential High Density (RHD) zone. ~ EAST - Commercial uses within the General Commercial (C-2) zone (Old Ranch Town Center). ~ SOUTH - Commercial uses within the General Commercial (C-2) zone; Residential uses within the unincorporated community of Rossmoor. ~ WEST - Residential uses within the Residential High Density (RHD) zone; Residential uses within the unincorporated community of Rossmoor. · Sergeant Tim Olsen with the Seal Beach Pol~ce Department has reviewed the application and has no reservations or concerns regarding the subject request. . As of February 14,2008 the Planning Department has received no correspondence, written or otherwise, in response to the hearing notices that were mailed and published for the proposed project CUP 08-2. . Page 2 . . . Conditional Use Permit 08-2 Planning Commission Staff Report 12415 Seal Beach Boulevard February 20, 2008 I DISCUSSION I The applicant's request is to establish a pet store with pet boarding facilities, veterinary services, pet grooming, pet training, and pet adoption services. PetSmart currently operates approximately 1,000 stores in North America, and is the leading worldwide operator of retail stores specializing in the sale of small pets, pet food, supplies, accessories, veterinary care, pet grooming, training, and boarding services. The proposed PetSmart store is approximately 27,696 square feet in area, and is to be comprised of a combination of retail sales, a veterinary facility, a "PetsHotel/Doggie Day Camp" facility for the boarding of pets, pet grooming facility, pet adoption area, and a training area. The remaining store area is for offices and storage. Dog TraininglEducation/Grooming PetSmart is proposing to offer dog training and education for dogs of all ages, puppy through adult. Typical classes would have an average of 5-7 pets and pet owners per class and are conducted within an approximately 366 square-foot classroom within the store. The grooming facility would be operated during regular store hours, with the exception of early drop-offs, and would be located in a 950 square foot area of the store. Pet Adoption In lieu of selling dogs or cats at its stores, unlike most pet shops that offer live animals, each PetSmart location donates a portion of its store to be used by local animal protective agencies and shelters for the adoption of pets as an ongoing effort to end animal' euthanasia.' The applicant is proposing to house up to 10 cats in an approximately 122 square foot adoption facility for adoption to qualified prospective owners. On occasion, a small area of the sales floor will be used to facilitate the adoption of a handful of dogs. Local animal protective agencies and shelters would bring dogs to the store during regular store hours for adoption and those dogs not adopted would be returned to the shelter and would not be kept or boarded at the store. Staff has visited nearby PetSmart locations in the cities of both Long Beach and Signal Hill and found that the permanent cat adoption facilities in both locations were well kept, clean, and free of any excessive pet odors. Staff also had the opportunity to be at the Signal Hill location while a dog adoption was taking place and found that there was a staff member, as well as an additional volunteer, supervising the animals to ensure that they stayed within a confined area and to assist and answer any questions from prospective adoptive owners. Page 3 Conditional Use Permit 08-2 Planning Commission Staff Report 12415 Seal Beach Boulevard February 20. 2008 . Veterinary Facility The proposed veterinary facility would be a full-service veterinary care facility located within an approximately 1,933 square foot area of the store and would be ope;rated by Banfield, a licensed affiliate of PetSmart. Banfield is one of the leading private veterinary practices in the nation and also operates veterinary hospitals in the UK. and Mexico. Veterinary services at this proposed location would be provided by properly licensed professionals and would generally consist of outpatient care, routine examinations and vaccinations, phannacy, dental care, and most surgical procedures. All medical waste generated onsite would be properly contained and handled by experienced, qualified operators in accordance with established policies and local regulations. Boarding or keeping of pets would not typically be offered by Banfield as a separate service, however, an overnight stay may occasionally be offered for the safety and/or well being of a pet. PetsHotel Facility The PetsHotel offers overnight boarding services of cats and dogs, incidental to the retail store operation. The facility is entirely indoor and fully enclosed in an approximately 7,235 square foot area within the PetSmart store. There are no outdoor activities or outdoor pet runs associated with the PetsHotel operation. From the time a pet checks in until it departs, the pet . never leaves the PetsHotel facility. The building design and operations incorporate measures to eliminate any nuisance cause by sound, odor, and/or pet waste. Since this will be new, ground-up construction, PetSmart has the opportunity to incorporate sound attenuation and design features into the building to minimize or eliminate any potential environmental impacts. The PetsHotel is fully air-conditioned and the ventilation system filters the air constantly. Separate ventilation systems will be used in the respective cat and dog areas so that they can't sense each others presence, minimizing additional stress to the animals. Staff was given a tour of the Long Beach PetsHotel facility by Mr. Jerome Garrett, the PetsHotel manager, and found the facility to be extremely clean and well kept, and pet odors were virtually non-existent. All of the resident pets seemed relatively happy, and while there was some detectable animal noise within the lobby area of the PetsHotel, the lobby area is completely enclosed within the store's interior and pet noise was virtually undetectable within the store itself and non-detectable directly outside the store. Mr. Garrett explained to me that aggressive dogs or dogs with behavior/obedience problems are not allowed at the PetsHotel, to help minimize noise within the facility and minimize stress amongst other PetsHotel residents, and all pet guests must show proof of vaccinations before they are accepted into the facility. Special pet themed programming is broadcast into the rooms and suites, there are social hours for the pets, and there is even a "Bone Booth" to allow pet parents to call and speak with their pet. The PetsHotel design incorporates a "Pet Relief" room, i.e., a room with unique floor textures and odors designed to encourage pet waste to occur in this room. Nevertheless, regardless of where pet waste occurs, all pet waste is either flushed or washed directly into the sanitary sewer . Page 4 . . . Conditional Use Permit 08-2 Planning Commission Staff Report 12415 Seal Beach Boulevard February 20, 2008 system. Staff found that even inside the "Pet Relief' room at the Long Beach store, odors were virtually non-existent (A scientific Analysis of Odors at PetSmarts/PetsHotels conducted by Dr. Susan Schiffman of the Duke University Medical Center is provided as an attachment). For the security of the pets, the PetsHotel will be staffed by trained associates twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week. Staff feels that this does not necessarily constitute a "twenty-four hour business", which would require a CUP, but rather, in this case, staff that is on the premises after hours acts more like a security guard would at any other business. The PetsHotel will be open to the public during regular store hours, which would typically be 9:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday, and 10:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. on Sunday. Pet grooming facilities would typically open earlier at 7:00 a.m., Monday through Saturday, and 8:00 a.m. on Sunday to allow pet owners the opportunity to drop pets off for grooming before leaving for work. "Doggie Day Camp" (Daytime Boarding) Doggie Day Camp is an additional service that is being offered by PetSmart as part of the PetsHotel facility. Doggie Day Camp offers daytime play, exercise, and socialization for dogs in one of four climate-controlled playrooms, along with other dogs and PetSmart safety-certified associates. Pet owners would have the option of purchasing full-day or half-day play for their dog. The Doggie Day Camp is an entirely indoor activity. Dogs will occasionally be kenneled in the event a pet needs to take a ''timeout'' or other break from the playrooms. Summary The primary issues of concern with this type of use are generally noise, odors, and incompatibility with adjacent businesses or the neighborhood. Upon visiting PetSmart locations within the City of Long Beach and the City of Signal Hill, Staff found that at both locations, these issues were non-existent. The operation and layout of the PetSmart operations, as well as the building designs, allowed PetS mart to exist hannoniously with adjacent businesses. However, neither the Long Beach or Signal Hill locations are in close proximity to residential areas, while the proposed Seal Beach location is approximately 150 feet from a residential area which is located directly behind the proposed location. In response to concerns from some of the residents within this area, Ms. Madeline Jackrel of Century National Properties conducted a meeting with some of the adjacent condominium homeowners associations on Monday, February 11, 2008 to address questions that Century National Properties had received in response to the proposed PetSmart. In a follow-up conversation with Ms. Jackrel after the meeting, Ms. Jackrel explained to Staff that the residents in attendance at the meeting appeared satisfied their concerns were address and did not believe that the use, if properly conditioned, would create an adverse impact within the neighborhood. In addition, since this location is proposed to be' new Page 5 Conditional Use Permit 08-2 Planning Commission Staff Report 12415 Seal Beach Boulevard February 20, 2008 . construction to meet PetSmart's requirements, PetSmart also has the opportunity to incorporate design features into the building that would further mitigate any potential adverse impacts as a result of the business operation. Based on Staff's fIrst-hand experience with the business operation at two existing PetSmart locations in the area, as well as an examination of the literature provided by the applicant, Staff also feels that, if properly conditioned, this use would not create an adverse impact within the shopping center or the adjacent residential neighborhood, and recommends approval of the proposed project with conditions. I RECOMMENDATION I Section 28-2503 and 28-2504 of the Municipal Code sets forth "fmdings" which the Planning Commission must make affirmative determinations regarding in order for a conditional use permit to be granted. They are: o The proposed use is compatible with surrounding uses, the community in general, and the General Plan. o The proposed use is compatible with surrounding uses and not detrimental to the . neighborhood. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission, after considering all relevant testimony, written and oral, presented during the public hearing, approve Conditional Use Permit 08-2 subject to conditions. Staff's recommendation is based upon the following: . Conditional Use Permit 08-2, as proposed to be conditioned regarding business operations, is consistent with the provisions of the Land Use Element of the City's General Plan, which provides a General Commercial zoning designation for the subject property and permits the proposed use, subject to the issuance of a conditional use permit. The use is also consistent with the remaining elements of the City' s G~neral Plan, as the policies of those elements are consistent with, and reflected in, the Land Use Element. Accordingly, the proposed use is consistent with the General Plan. . The building and property at 12415 Seal Beach Boulevard are adequate in size, shape, topography and location to meet the needs of the proposed use of the property, as proposed to be conditioned. . Required adherence to applicable building and fire codes ensures there will be adequate wa~ supply and utilities for the proposed use. . The proposed pet store, as proposed to be conditioned, is compatible with the character of the surrounding uses and is not anticipated to detrimental to the neighborhood. . Page 6 . . . CondftfunalUsePermft08-2 Planning Commission StcdJ Report 12415 Seal Beach Boulevard February 20, 2008 Approval of Conditional Use Permit 08-2 should be through the adoption of Resolution No. 08- 6, with the following conditions in place: 1. Conditional Use Permit 08-2 is approved for a pet store with pet boarding facilities, veterinary services, pet grooming, pet training, and pet adoption services at 12415 Seal Beach Boulevard. 2. All construction shall be in substantial compliance with the plans dated January 2008, that were submitted as a supplement to the application for Conditional Use Permit 08-2. 3. The permitted hours of operation for the combined operations within the pet store (including retail, grooming, day care, and boarding) shall be from 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday, and 8:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. on Sunday. 4. Applicant shall obtain a City of Seal Beach business license, as well as any applicable State and/or County health permits or operating permits before commencing business. 5. All applicable State laws requiring that only weaned animals be available for sale or adoption shall be adhered to. 6. All animals for sale or adoption or guests of the day care and/or boarding facilities shall have appropriate food and fresh water available to them, as provided by State law and as appropriate to their needs, unless otherwise directed by a licensed veterinarian or licensed veterinary technician. 7. Food and drink receptacles within all animal cages and boarding facilities shall be constructed and positioned to minimize fecal contamination. 8. All animal cages, holding pens, boarding areas, play areas, etc. shall be maintained in a sanitary condition, and as provided by State law. 9. All animals shall be provided with adeqijate housing and space, and as provided by State law. 10. All animals offered for sale or adoption shall have current vaccinations and examinations, where applicable, and must be in good health as far as can be reasonably determined. 11. Any sick or injured animal must receive appropriate care and treatment immediately. 12. No wild or dangerous animals shall be offered for sale or adoption. Page 7 Conditional Use Permit 08-2 Planning Commission Stqff Report 12415 Seal Beach Boulevard February 20, 2008 . 13. No animal shall be stocked, sold, or offered for adoption unless the staff, or a member of the staff, is familiar with the care and welfare of such animal. 14. No outdoor displays of animals or merchandise are allowed unless a Special Event Permit is obtained from the City of Seal Beach. 15. Adequate ventilation and climate controls shall be provided for all animals at all times. 16. Any windows or doors facing residential areas shall remain closed at all times, except when accessing the building only. 17. No commercial deliveries or trash disposal activities may occur in association with the operation of this business between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. 18. Litter and trash receptacles shall be located at convenient locations inside and outside the establishment. Operators of such establishments shall remove trash and debris on an appropriate basis so as not to cause health problems. There shall be no dumping of trash outside the establishment between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. 19. In the event staff determines security problems exist on the site, the Conditions of this permit may be amended, under the procedures of The Code of the City of Seal Beach, to require the provision of additional security measures. . 20. The establishment shall comply with Chapter 7.15, ''Noise'' of the City of Seal Beach Municipal Code, as the regulations of that Chapter now exist or may hereafter be amended. Should complaints be received regarding noise generated by the establishment, the Planning Commission reserves the right to schedule this permit for reconsideration and may require the applicantlbusiness operator to mitigate the noise level to comply with the provisions of Chapter 7.15 21. Building permits shall be obtained for all new construction. 22. A lighting and security plan for the driv~-tbru area shall be submitted to the Director of Development Services for approval prior to the issuance of a building permit for the drlve-thru area. Lighting plan shall provide 'cut-off' or similar fixtures to ensure that there is no light encroachment onto adjacent commercial or residential properties, yet provide adequate lighting for security purposes. 23. This CUP shall not become effective for any purpose unless/until a City "Acceptance of Conditions" form has been signed by the applicant in the presence of the Director of Development Services, or notarized and returned to the Planning Department; and until the ten (10) calendar-day appeal period has elapsed. . Page 8 . . . Conditional Use Permit 08-2 Planning Commission Staff Report 12415 Seal Beach Boulevard February 20, 2008 24. A modification of this CUP shall be applied for when: a. The establishment proposes to modify any of its current Conditions of Approval. b. There is a substantial change in the mode or character of operations of the establishment. 25. The Planning Commission reserves the right to revoke or modify this Conditional Use Permit pursuant to Articles 25 and 28 of The Code of the City of Seal Beach if harm or retail-related problems are demonstrated to occur as a result of criminal or anti-social behavior, including but not limited to the congregation of minors, violence, vandalism, solicitation and/or litter. 26. This Conditional Use Permit shall become null and void unless exercised within one (1) year of the date of final approval, or such extension of time as may be granted by the Planning Commission pursuant to a written request for extension submitted to the Department of Development Services a minimum of ninety (90) days prior to such expiration date. 27. The applicant shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless City, its officers, agents and employees (collectively "the City" hereinafter) from any and all claims and losses whatsoever occurring or resulting to any and all persons, firms, or corporations furnishing or supplying work, services, materials, or supplies in connection with the performance of the use permitted hereby or the exercise of the rights granted herein, and any and all claims, lawsuits or actions arising from the granting of or the exercise of the rights permitted by this Conditional Use Permit, and from any and all claims and losses occurring or resulting to any person, firm, corporation or property for damage, injury or death arising out of or connected with the performance of the use permitted hereby. Applicant's obligation to indemnify, defend and hold harmless the City as stated herein shall include, but not be limited to, paying all fees and costs incurred by legal counsel of the City's choice in representing the City in connection with any such claims, losses, lawsuits or actions, expert witness fees, and any award of damages, judgments, verdicts, court costs or attorneys' fees in any such lawsuit or action. 28. Failure to comply with any of these cQnditions may result in the revocation of this Conditional Use Permit. For: February 20, 2008 o e livera, AICP e or lanner epartment of Development Services Page 9 Conditional Use Permit 08-2 Planning Commission Staff Report 12415 Seal Beach Boulevard February 20. 2008 . Attachments (7): 1. Proposed Resolution 08-6 2. Application 3. Code Sections 4. Analysis of Odors prepared by Dr. Susan Schiffman, Duke University 5. Noise Analysis prepared by Dominion Environmental Consultants 6. Status of On-Site Environmental Issues 7. Plans . . Page 10 . Conditional Use Permit 08-2 Planning Commission Staff Report 12415 Seal Beach Boulevard February 20, 2008 ATTACHMENT 1 . PROPOSED RESOLUTION 08-6, A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 08-2, FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A PET STORE WITH PER BOARDING FACILITffiS, "VETERINARY SERVICES, PET GROOMING, PET TRAINING, AND PET ADOPTION SERVICES AT 12415 SEAL BEACH BOULEVARD (PETSMART) . Page 11 . . . Conditional Use Permit 08-2 Planning Commission Staff Report 12415 Seal Beach Boulevard February 20, 2008 RESOLUTION NUMBER 08-6 A RESOLUTION OF TIlE PLANNING COM::MISSION OF TIlE CI'f.Y OF SEAL BEACH APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 08-2, APPROVING A PET STORE WITH PET BOARDING FACILITIES, VETERINARY SERVICES, PET GROOMING, PET TRAINING, AND PET ADOPTION SERVICES AT 12415 SEAL BEACH BOULEVARD, SEAL BEACH (PETSMART) TIlE PLANNING COl\.1lVlISSION OF TIlE CITY OF SEAL BEACH DOES HEREBY FIND AND RESOL VB: Section 1. On January 16, 2008, Austin Podrat filed an application for Conditional Use Permit 08-2 with the Department of Development Services. Section 2. The applicant is requesting approval to permit a pet store with pet boarding facilities, veterinary services, pet grooming, pet training, and pet adoption services at 12415 Seal Beach Boulevard, Seal Beach. Section 3. Pursuant to 14 Calif. Code of Regs. ~ 15301, staff has determined as follows: The application for Conditional Use Permit 08-2 for the requested land use entitlements at a proposed pet store is categorically exempt from review pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to 14 Calif. Code of Regs. ~ 15305 (Minor Alterations in Land Use Limitations), because the proposal involves a minor alteration in land use limitation and does not involve either a property in excess of 20% slope or a change in land use or density. Section 4. A duly noticed public hearing was held before the Planning Commission on February 20, 2008 to consider the application for Conditional Use Permit No. 08-2. At the public hearing the Planning Commission received written and oral evidence on the proposed project. Section 5. following: The record of the public hearing of February 20, 2008 indicates the Page 12 Conditional Use Permit 08-2 Planning Commission Staff Report 12415 Seal Beach Boulevard February 20, 2008 . a. On January 16, 2008, Austin Podrat filed an application for Conditional Use Permit 08-2 with the Department of Development Services requesting approval to permit a pet store with pet boarding facilities, veterinary services, pet grooming, pet training, and pet adoption services at 12415 Seal Beach Boulevard. b. The subject property is located in the Shops at Rossmoor development, located west of Seal Beach Boulevard, north of St. Cloud Drive, and south of Bradbury Road. c. The proposed PetSmart store location is approximately 700 feet west of Seal Beach Boulevard and 300 feet north of St. Cloud Drive, and is proposed to be occupy approximately 27,696 square feet of an approximately 48,210 square foot building. d. Surrounding land uses and zoning are as follows: NORTH: Commercial uses within the General Commercial (C-2) zone; residential uses within the Residential High Density (RHO) zone. SOUTH: Commercial uses within the General Commercial (C-2) zone; Residential uses within the unincorporated community of Rossmoor. EAST: zone (Old Ranch Town Center). Commercial uses within the General Commercial (C-2) . WEST: Residential uses within the Residential High Density (RHO) zone; Residential uses within the unincorporated community of Ross moor. e. The pet store will have approved operating hours of 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday, and 8:00 to 7:00 p.m. on Sunday. Section 6. Based upon the facts contained in the record, including those stated in ~5 of this resolution and pursuant to ~~ 28-1300, 28-2503-2504 of the City's Code, the Planning Commission makes the following findings: a. Conditional Use Permit No. 08-2 is consistent with the provisions of the Land Use Element of the City's General Plan and the Zoning Code of the City, both of which provides a "General Commercial" designation for the subject property and permits pet store facilities subject to the issuance of a Conditional Use Permit. The use as a pet store with pet boarding facilities, veterinary services, pet grooming, pet training, and pet adoption services is also consistent with the remaining elements of the City's General Plan as the policies of those . elements are consistent with, and reflected in, the Land Use Element. Accordingly, the proposed use is consistent with the General Plan. Page 13 . . . Conditional Use Permit 08-2 Planning Commission Staff Report 12415 Seal Beach Boulevard February 20, 2008 b. The building and property at the Shops at Rossmoor Center are adequate in size, shape, topography and location to meet the needs of the proposed use of the property. Required adherence to applicable building and fire codes ensures there will be adequate water supply and utilities for the proposed use. c. The pet store, if properly conditioned and enforced, is compatible with the character of the surrounding area. Adherence to conditions of approval placed on the use by the City of Seal Beach would mitigate any negative impacts to neighboring residential properties. Section 7. Based upon the foregoing, the Planning Commission hereby approves Conditional Use Permit No. 08-2, subject to the following conditions: 1. Conditional Use Permit 08-2 is approved for a pet store with pet boarding facilities, veterinary services, pet grooming, pet training, and pet adoption services at 12415 Seal Beach Boulevard. 2. All construction shall be in substantial compliance with the plans dated January 2008, that were submitted as a supplement to the application for Conditional Use Permit 08-2. 3. The permitted hours of operation for the combined operations within the pet store (including retail, grooming, day care, and boarding) shall be from 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday, and from 8:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. on Sunday. 4. Applicant shall obtain a City of Seal Beach business license, as well as any applicable State and/or County health permits or operating permits before commencing business. 5. All applicable State laws requiring that only weaned animals be available for sale or adoption shall be adhered to. 6. All animals for sale or adoption or guests of the day care and/or boarding facilities shall have appropriate food and fresh water available to them, as provided by State law and as appropriate to their needs, unless otherwi~e directed by a licensed veterinarian or licensed veterinary technician. 7. Food and drink receptacles within all animal cages and boarding facilities shall be constructed and positioned to minimize fecal contamination. 8. All animal cages, holding pens, boarding areas, play areas, etc. shall be maintained in a sanitary condition, and as provided by State law. 9. All animals shall be provided with adequate housing and space, and as provided by State law. Page 14 Conditional Use Permit 08-2 Planning Commission Staff Report 12415 Seal Beach Boulevard February 20, 2008 . 10. All animals offered for sale or adoption shall have current vaccinations and examinations, where applicable, and must be in good health as far as can be reasonably determined. 11. Any sick or injured animal must receive appropriate care and treatment immediately. 12. No wild or dangerous animals shall be offered for sale or adoption. 13. No animal shall be stocked, sold, or offered for adoption unless the staff, or a member of the staff, is familiar with the care and welfare of such animal. 14. No outdoor displays of animals or merchandise are allowed unless a Special Event Permit is obtained from the City of Seal Beach. 15. Adequate ventilation and climate controls shall be provided for all animals at all times. 16. Any windows or doors facing residential areas shall remain closed at all times, except when accessing the building only. 17. No commercial deliveries or trash disposal activities may occur in association with the operation of this business between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. . 18. Litter and trash receptacles shall be located at convenient locations inside and outside the establishment. Operators of such establishments shall remove trash and debris on an appropriate basis so as not to cause health problems. There shall be no dumping of trash outside the establishment between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. 19. In the event staff determines security problems exist on the site, the Conditions of this permit may be amended, under the procedures of The Code of the City of Seal Beach, to require the provision of additional security measures. 20. The establishment shall comply with Chapter 7.15, "Noise" of the City of Seal Beach Municipal Code, as the regulations of.' that Chapter now exist or may hereafter be amended. Should complaints be received regarding noise generated by the establishment, the Planning Commission reserves the right to schedule this permit for reconsideration and may require the applicant/business operator to mitigate the noise level to comply with the provisions of Chapter 7.15 21. Building permits shall be obtained for all new construction. 22. A lighting and security plan for the drive-thru area shall be submitted to the Director of Development Services for approval prior to the issuance of a building permit for the drive-tbru area. Lighting plan shall provide 'cut-off' or similar fixtures to ensure that . Page 15 . . . Conditional Use Permit 08-2 Planning Commission StajJReport 12415 Seal Beach Boulevard February 20, 2008 there is no light encroachment onto adjacent commercial or residential properties, yet provide adequate lighting for security purposes. 23. This CUP shall not become effective for any purpose unless/until a City "Acceptance of Conditions" form has been signed by the applicant in the presence of the Director of Development Services, or notarized and returned to the Planning Department; and until the ten (10) calendar-day appeal period has elapsed. 24. A modification of this CUP shall be applied for when: c. The establishment proposes to modify any of its current Conditions of Approval. d. There is a substantial change in the mode or character of operations of the establishment. 25. The Planning Commission reserves the right to revoke or modify this Conditional Use Permit pursuant to Articles 25 and 28 of The Code of the City of Seal Beach if harm or retail-related problems are demonstrated to occur as a result of criminal or anti-social behavior, including but not limited to the congregation of minors, violence, vandalism, solicitation and/or litter. 26. This Conditional Use Permit shall become null and void unless exercised within one (1) year of the date of final approval, or such extension of time as may be granted by the Planning Commission pursuant to a written request for extension submitted to the Department of Development Services a minimum of ninety (90) days prior to such expiration date. 27. The applicant shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless City, its officers, agents and employees (collectively "the City" hereinafter) from any and all claims and losses whatsoever occurring or resulting to any and all persons, firms, or corporations furnishing or supplying work, services, materials, or supplies in connection with the performance of the use permitted hereby or the exercise of the rights granted herein, and any and all claims, lawsuits or actions arising from the granting of or the exercise of the rights permitted by this Conditional Use Permit, and from any and, all claims and losses occurring or resulting to any person, firm, corporation or property for damage, injury or death arising out of or connected with the performance of the use permitted hereby. Applicant's obligation to indemnify, defend and hold harmless the City as stated herein shall include, but not be limited to, paying all fees and costs incurred by legal counsel of the City's choice in representing the City in connection with any such claims, losses, lawsuits or actions, expert wi1ness fees, and any award of damages, judgments, verdicts, court costs or attorneys' fees in any such lawsuit or action. 28. Failure to comply with any of these conditions may result in the revocation of this Conditional Use Permit. Page 16 Conditional Use Permit 08-2 Planning Commission Staff Report 12415 Seal Beach Boulevard February 20, 2008 . PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Planning Commission of the City of Seal Beach at a meeting thereof held on the day of 2008, by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners NOES: Commissioners ABSTAIN: Commissioners ABSENT: Commissioners Ellery Deaton Chairperson of the Planning Commission . Lee Whittenberg Secretary of the Planning Commission . Page 17 . ATTACHMENT 2 APPLICATION . . Page 18 Conditional Use Permit 08-2 Planning Commission Stqff Report 12415 Seal Beach Boulevard February 20, 2008 ~.. \ . Qty' of SUI Bed -'lr. CltyJ~F~ r - . JAN 16. CITY OF SEAL BEACH ~AR IN : partment of o elopment Services PUBLIC HEARING AP .... I t Se~'..ices Propert!f Address: F.,I,iltl,'I1" AtlJlf!lSs 7*'e.J), ~'foY A&I~s.f :l"7,41~>35 v , seal S',~ County Assessor Parcel No: P{eD~e. '$ee Q.+1-tI~"~J. (4.++4C~,,"C"+ 1.) rrvJ. Applicant Name: AUS-/in ~JYtllf" Address: ~?I/ tA;i/s/',',e fflvd #= 6~O s:'A'~ M~ItU'tll'~)f~O~d7' Phone: Work {3'~ );( I ~... # 7 '19 Home: (J7d ) ;Z S ~ - 4' S ~o FAX: (:J'/~ ) Ii,{~'" 4' '7 9G Mobile: (!' /~) ~ S~.. ~ ~~ t::J E-Mail Address: a. D ~ tt::H // ~d ,. P .~~- . ". Propert!f Owner Name: ffossJl'~" SJ,tlJf'S 1.1. t:. Address~ 2 ?/I {,.u: IslrJl'e ~lvd ;1# d'"~~ SIIIA-liI Mtllt/ol!"4llC \ t:J!I '(J/,'4~ Telephone: (~/tJ ) '2 (' ~- "7 9Y 5. General Plan and Zoning Deslgnatiort: C. - 2.. 6. Present Use of Propert!f: -.f('e+tfi"/ ShdPP""t/1 ~eH"t!l1'" C7 7. Proposed Use of Property: R'e+ti:/ 'S/'4P'p/Y ~,pM-A!-;- Request For: COlld..+llllttt/IJSt!i!- ~'IM;+ -1-0 o/h:,u -.t1~ Q.. p~T- . '/1 ~lu, ,.", + t:J ':./!O ~ ;/;+,., 4, \1 +-,. $e., V ues, r", ~ :+"0" +It<< P*f-seli"U,e f.#IJU .....e,iuJe. pe of """";""'1 +r.:.:;t ..d o.dop+.",,". 9. Describe Proposed Use: p/ellstlt:S"e.e.. a+f4~At9tt1. (Q.++,u.llf~ell-l- ;}) sew".S. . . 1. 2. 3. 4. .f" 1 O. Describe how the proposed improvements are. appropriate for the character of the surrounding neighborhood: T~~ :"t/'I'MNlMtJIic""S CJ.tl I'JI-."lae -I-It~ e.IIIMV..:"''Y /;J.'-I/, :. AI'S'I- ,~S Oe+ sJ,ttP ~ JJer/? 4 ~:,~ \J.,,'e~v t!J1 , , , Se,,,;,es -10 p~-{- C1&tJlte's. Page 7 Rev. I/O, 11. Describe how the approval of this Permit would" be detrimental in any Way to other prop'eJtyrhthevlcihity: THere Wlolf he He JI"d",,:v.e "",p~c"'$. 12. Proof of ownarship Please attach a photocopy of a picture 1.0. and a photocopy of the Grant Deed provided by the applicant. or SIOried .and notarized Property Owner's Affidavit to b,' cQmpleted and attached to the application. 13. Legal D~riptton, (or atta~h description from Titl~ or ,Grant Deed)~ P / e.se see .ttt.++.eAeJ. (a-H"cAltIIe.,,+ 3) By: -4 c:?- , (Signature of Applisant) A", S-I:", p.J,..~ (Pint Name) 1./ 1'1 / ()~ (Date) By: (Signature of Applicant) (Pint Name) (Date) (Print Name). '.' . . (Signature). . . (Print TItl!!V ',' ;< ... :. ~.. (Date)":' . Page 8 Rev. 6106 . . . . . . Environmentall'nformatio'n and Checklist Form Gert~r.al h,fonnation 1. Name and' address of Developer or ProJect'SpotlS,or, N$m$.~,,:" R'o SS;N6t#J' . sJt!J~~. ,,/..'- t;. Addres$ ~~il t.J~/sJi"~' (?l;d. #" 6.-y'" .__ ,_ C1\r." ~I+. H~"."e__ ,Stat~~,'.- &II , " Zip: 9"qc~ Telephone: 3ft,. ~ (' ~ - -~.., ~ ~ 'FAX: '? 1(; __ :l (( +' - ~.7 9. rf" E-mail Address; a. f Q Gltl'c.,I'. eOIM 2. AddressofProjeCtJ~07/-1 :lS:J& Sealll'",elt f?1,J Assessor Parcel Number: PI.eoS'e see a-l--I.t:~e4. (~N.cJ""ellof 1.) 3. Name, address, and dontact information of Project Contact 'Person: Name: ,4,s~;" f?"I"~"'f ., Address.: ';l"'tl/ t.J1'lsl,'r~ fllvd -# 6~O City: $','f'4 H"","&iI State:, (;,4 , . Zip: 9d<Y(J.? Telephone: ":S'1"..~t'f'/Tlt;'l FAX: S/~"':l6~- 1-/79{ E-mail Addresszaa4.t::.N p ~() 1< f? ~IM , 4. List and describe any other related. permits and other public approvals required ~or this- ptbj&'ct, Including thdse required by city~, regronal~ ,state and federal agencies: ,'TJ -e p,.t~~., ~:/I r'('" .'re. deMd/'*rl1dll, tn"tl4'? I be.:/t/;HttI r (;7 rT e1hd S:'f'e. u.vlt:- I"{!!""":+s -1'"..", +"'(2 ~:"y ../J Se./ t?,tkA, ctS'usl1 12' _~,*,.;~/, t!!!ec-l,,-c.1 alii" rlv,.,b;~ fe,,,,,,rs.. Existing zoning: C - ~ Existing General' Plan: ])"$",,'(+ \IX. Propo!Jed use of site: rlulI s,"{.e w,oll e~"'''''iII,on a. ~+S"'t:I'+ ((?/Itllre See a~'h'4A.d deS~";JfI.I,~n) as" '~I// tlf/lS' a A4d-:OIlt.1 "I.lu.e' s u~-r sit, ,.e. (4++~/'1II1ht+ 2) , 5. 6. .' Page 11 Rev. 6108 . Project Description 7. B. 9. 10. 11. 1:2. 13. 14. 15. 16. For residential projects, indicate the: A. Number of units: B. Schedule of Unit sizes: C. Range of sale prices or rents: D. Household size(s) expected: 17. For commercial projects, indicate the:. A. Type of project: Re+Dt;/ B. Whether neighborhood, city or regionally oriented: C :+-)I C. Square footage of sales areas: App t"~)(; IHd 'i-el y S (\ 3" 9 ~ ~Utl'e. .f,,.,. D. Gross bUilding area: -Arf r-x.1M4 "'t'ly 111, :210 <!;fu"."~ lee-f' E. Size of loading facilities: 1/ rr'.x i Mt$'I(~(Y 3, 1.(" SSIltlTe .J (Ie of 18. For industrial projects. indicate the: . Page 12 Rev. 8/08 . A. B. C. Type of project: Estimated employment per shift: Size of loading facilities: 19. For institutional projects, indicate the: A Major function: B. Estimated 'employment per shift: C. Estimated occupancy: D. :Size of loading facilities: E.. Community benefits derived from the project: . .~ 20. If the project Invol.ves a variance, conditional use penn it/unclassified use permit, height variation or zone change application, state this and indicate clearly why the . application is required: Variance: CUP: ./ Height Variation: _ Zone Change: _ Brieflyexplain: The p'cIMseeJ f1,r~M."" w:/( J:,. Q Re~ sIIop L · · ~ ,0 +.t:I'f pl'O,,;de,~ pt!l+ boe.. ".tllI... IIIIa ve+1!!. '6'II4J'Y r~ ~"..~es d!l fNe" as DtIl + "'roo",:'" \ +"ollll.,rJI" Dl#d 4JISO"':'-J11f se~ "6:L..~. . v v (Y , . Are the following iterns applicable to the project or its effects? Discuss below all items checked yes (attach additional sheets as necessary). YES NO / /' / _V. ./ . ./ 21. Change in existing features of any bays, tidelands, beaches, lakes or hills, or substantial alteration of ground contours?' 22. Change in scenic views or vistas from existing residential areas or public lands or roads. 23. Change in pattern, scale or character of general area of project. 24. Significant amounts of solid waste or litter. 25. Change in dust, ash, smoke, fumes or odors in vicinity. 26. Change in ocean, bay, lake, stream or ground water Page 13 Rev. 6108 / ./ ,/ ./ / v . quality or quantity. or alteration of existing drainage patterns. 27. Substantial change in existing noise or vibration levels in the vicinity. 28. Site on filled land or on srope of 10 percent or more. 29. Use or disposar of potentially hazardous materials, such as toxic substances, flammables or explosives. 30. Substantia,!. ch.ang.e In demand for mtmicipal service (!:>olice, fire, water, sewage, etc.). 31. Substantially increase fossil fuel Consumption (electricity. oil, fialura] gas, etc.). 32. Relationship to larger project or series of projects; Environmental Setting 33. On a $eparate page, describe the projeot site as 'it exists before the project, . includ(ng. inf6rm~ort on topography, soil stability, ,plants and' animals, and any cuiturat, hiStorical, or scenic aspects. Describe any .existing structures on the site, and the use of the structures. Attach photographs of the site. (p-l-WcA",e"." Lf) 34. On a ~arate page, .des~nbe the. surrounding properties, including information on ,,'antS an" anImals alid any cultural, histo'ficai or scenIc aspects. Indicate the type of land use (residential; commercial. etc.), intensity of land use (one-family, apartment homes, shops, department stores, etc.), and scale of development (height, frontage., setba'ck, rear yard, etc.). Attach photographs of the vicinity~ (a-l-+6c1t_wr 5) . Page 14 Rev. GlOB . . . Environmental I'm pacts (Please. e~lafn air 'ipQtentially Significant hnpacf', "Le$S Than Significant witfl. MftlSl",tion Incorporated" and "Less Than Significant h",pact" answet'$ on separate'sheets.) I. AESTHETICS - Would the project: ~ a} Have '8 s.\.ib$~hdail advers~ ~ffect, ()n a sCenic '~sta1' b~. SUbStantiany' 'dah:!~ge' seehic resources, includIng. bUf not ni'hited t~, trees.,. roek outcroPpil"!9.,' and' hlstorfc buildings .within a stat$' scenis blgh~Y?' c) S~bsfaritially Qegrade the existing visual characte~ or qualitY of the sitt;t and its'surroundings? d} .,Create a new source of substantial light 'or glare which would 'adversely affect day 'or nighttime views in the area'? 11. AGRtCULTU~ -R.J:SOURCE-S: In determining Whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant envIronmental effects" lead agencies may refer to the ,Californ'ia Agrfcultural Land Ev~luatl()n and Site Assesm$nt Model (1997) 'prepared, by 'the. California Oept. of ,Conservation as an optional model 'to, use in .a~se.ssi~g imp=-cts on agricultu~ '~nd farrn'a.nd. Wot;ll~ th~ pr'ojece' a}. COn'if~tt Prima', Farml~iid" Unique ~arm:land~ 'Of Flrn1LBnd of StateWide' Importance (Farmia.nd}f '8$ .sbown o~ the map, prep~d .pursyant to, th~ 1=arml~nd Mapping and" MOl1itoring ~og'i'aii1 of the Califomia Resources AgenCy; to' non- agriculfurar use? b) Conflict, With existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Ac/t. co~ract? potar:ltlany SIgnificant Impact o ;[:J o LJ .l] D Page 15 Less Than Significant wfth Niftlgatlon Incorporated ,tJ a tJ o o o Less ThIn Significant Impact LI o LI CJ LI o Rev. &10& No Impact ~ ~ rrY' ~ ~ ~ c) Involve otli~t chang.es. In the existing environme.nt whIch, due 'to tbelr IQcaticm at' nature. CdUfd result- rn. 'converSion of FElrml.~nd\ to non-agrioulturallase?A It!. A:U~ QUA.L1T'( - Wh~re $.v.allaple" the. si-g-hifiCEifice. criteria -establj$"~ by "the applil::sble air /:tualfty. rtiatt;;fgement or ait p'QllutiQ~' '~Qntf:Ql. district may' .be' reUel:f upon tq m~ th~ f.oUQwing d~termihatlons.. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct Implementatio'M of the appncable air quality pt$.O'?' b) Violate any air- qOtifity s~ndard or c6ntlibuts 'substannalry ta .an eXisting or proJetfe.d air quafify violafion? C} Result 'In a; clnl1ulativ~IY ~Ds.ld$r-able Ii'et Jncre.$e .of 'any criteria ':poll\lb~nt, for wnith thE! :PrQ}.eCt ~gioit lS. hOlt- attaihment unger an, appJfcable' fe'd~ra.l Qr state a.mbi'~t ,~ir ql.ia1it~ '$tao-d~rd (including teleasing e.misslor:is Which e~ceed -quantitative threshGld$ fot oZbrfe p-recurs"Q~)? d) ,EXpose: sensitive receptors to siJb~tantla)' pollutant consentratians? e) Create objectionable. 'odD'rs, affecting a s.ub$tanlJ.~J .!)Umber of peppt\!7 IV. BTOLOSrCAL ~ES'OURC'ES - Wduld the, projeet a) Hav.e a substantial adver:se, effestj either directly or through tja.bitat modifications, en any species. Identified' as a CiUldidate, sensitive, or -special status species. 'In local or regicmal plahs, policies. bt. re~ulat\bns~ . or bY the California Oep;:trtm-ent of FistHirttl' Gam~ OF U.S. Fish and Wildlife Servit:;e7 PQfentially Sigrlffl)"anf Impact o -Ll t:I tl Ll LI LI Page 15 ~!I! Th.~n 'Slgnlficant With Mlttg~Dri Incorporated Cl [j' Ll d [j C] LI tas Thari Slgniflcan't rmpact CI d tJ LJ LI t:I LI . No '7 r/ ~ ~ . r/ ~ r/ . Rev. 6108 . Potentially Significant Impact . b) Have a subs~ntial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in !ocal or regional plans; paRcies., ~ulations .or by the C.~tlf!)rr:da Departm~'-"t :of :Fish and Game 91"US Fish ,~n.~ Wj.ld~' S~l'Vlc~?' c) f-illiIVe" ~Lipstantr-' ~d:vei's~ '~ff$Qt em federal" Jirotsdted. Wetland. .$' deflr)ed by Section 404. 'of tfie. Clean Water At#, Oneludingj but 1:10t limited to', marsh, vernal pQol, '~~$talt etc.)' through direc.t removaf, tiliihg, ~ydi"otogical interruption; O"r Qtner means? d)' Itlterter.e, sobstar:rtially' with the movement of any matlve resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with ~tab!ll$hed ,native re$.id~ Qr migrptory Wildlife: CC)mdol's, or Impede the Use Of native wildlife nursery sites? e) Cc::mfliet with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological' re,o~rc~s, $yc;h as a tree preservation po!i~ or ordinance? f) 'COnflict. with. the. provisions of an adopted Habitat" Co:nservatlon Plan, Natural eomml.,lrilty Conservation Plan,. or Qth~r a'PproV'~d IQ~I, n,g!()nat; or state habitat' corise-NatiOn' plan? v; CULTURAL RESOURCES - Would the project. a) Cause a substantial 'adverse change in the significance Qf a historical resource as defined In fi. 15064.51 b) CaUse a substantial adverse change in the significance of en archaeological resou~ p~rsuant to fi 1,5064.57' <;) Directly Qr irrditectly destroy a unlq~~ paieonloiogical tesourc;;e ot sIte or unique geologic feature? CI L1 Lf 'LJ (j (j, '(j LJ . Page 17 "I : Less Than Significant with Mitigation InCOi'porated LI d .LI L] [j [] []. []. Less Than Significant Impact LJ .0 [j [] Ll LJ Ll LJ' Rev. s/Os No bn;Y ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ rg/ d) Disturb any human remai'nS', including thQ$~ inter~ outsid~ of funnal. ceii'1~teries? Vl. GEOLOGY AND SOILS - Would th.. project:, a) EXpO'$~ people or structures to p"Qt~~ai St.JQstaritiaJ adverse effects, lncludfng tne risk of loss, injury, of death Inv.oMng: (i) R~Pture 'of a known earthquake fault; as delinea~d on the most ~n.t Alquist- P.riolo' r::arthqu.~ I=~tt Zo.ning M~p is~ued by the State -Geologlst . fot tne area. o.r 'ba$e!i Qr:\ other sub"stantial ttVtdence Qf a ~nown ~l,1]t? .R~fe.r to DMsion '.of Mines and t3eoiogy Sl>eciaf pubfJeatidn 42". (il). S.trong s-elsmle- gra.und shaking? (iin. Seismic-related ground failurei includ!:ng !Iqu.efac;tion? (iv) Landslides? b} Res\ilt in 'Substantial. soil ero'$ion or tile rt)s'~ of'topsoil.? C), B~ l"Ocat~ Qr; . geo.loglc lInlt or .saU that. is unstable, or that would become unstable as. a result of the proJect, and potentially re~.ult in on- or off;.slte landslide, lateral spreadrng~ subsldenc;e, Iiquefactfon or ca.llapse1 d} Be. loc;ated on ~anslve' sPIt;. as d$fined in T~ble. 18-'{-B: of' ~h$: .V,pi-form B\Jifdirig .code. .(1.9.94), treating: sub"stantia[ r:fSJ($. fo. lif~ QI' p'r'opert,y1 . e) Have S'ofis. Incapable Qf a.d'eqtlately suppqrti!'1g the u~e 6f: septi& tiinks ot alt~m$ltive waste water dfspds'al .systems Whei1& sewers ate nO.t available for the d.isposal of waste water? Pofentlally S~9nlfJcant I",pact o CI o C:I' [j tI [j (j 'fj [j Page 18 L,. T"," SIgnificant w!tJ1 MftlgatJon Incotpp.-ated CI tI n n Ll LI Ll LJ r:J, tJ i.ess Than Slgni'ft(:ant Impact d. r:J EJ n. Ll' Cl LJ C] Cl tl. . No- Impact ~ ~ ~ I~ g/ ~ ~ ~ . ~ ~ . Rev.6f06 . . VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS - Would the p~Jec:t: .a}' Create a significant hazard to tn~ publ(a or ~h~- -enVironment thrQ~gh the tQl,Ifln:e. trarispj)rtt u_, 9... dlS,posat. '~f haz.rc;lo~s materialEi? b)' Orgt. .a ~ignlficant hazart!J fa the ptJbll~ l}f . th~ erwironr;n.en( thrpqgh reasortsbly t'dreseea1;ile lIpse.t al')d accid~nt condltions i1'tvoMng the rel~as~ of 'hazardDU~ materials, into me environment? c) Emit hazardous emissiQn$ or handle h~!ilt~Qu. or: a~ly hazard Pus materials,: subStances, or waste' Within one-quarte.r milE! of ,an existing or proposed ~chDot? dl Be lo~ted on a site whlch.is 'Included 011 a list Qf h~~!'dou, ,rrt.terlal~ ~~~S corh~ned putsuant to G'ovemtnerit 't6.de Section 65962.5 and, ia'S. a resultt wduld it, 'create a..significant hazard to' the I'ubliQ or th~ envrt-Qnme,nt? e} Fat.. P.j'tij~ct locatec;f Within ,ar; ailWi't land' 'use plan or.., whete such a plan has not Been adopted, 'within two. rrtiles of a pUblfc .airpor:t Qr publrc :u~ '~irport', WQuld tb~ ptpJ~ct i,'eSioIlt lrt Ii _~ty h~~rd .for pedple residing' Of" WOrking In, tne. pro~ct araa? f) ,For a, projece within the .v.lclnity Qf a priv~te '~i.~trip-, wOl,Jfd the.' pr.~j~ct ~"1,I1l in a ~afety Hazard for' people' residlhg dt working in the. pr.oject 'area? . g)' rmpair' iinp'rem~ntattcn :of or 'physically interfere with 'an adop.t~ emergency' response plan or emergenCy evacuation plan? . Potentially Slgnifl!:ant Impact LI I:l r:J r:J 'LJ. d: LI Page 19 Less Than Significant VIIth Mitigation Incotpdrated o ~L:f r:l r:J ~ l.J d r:J LeSs Than Slgnific8nt Impact .0 t] LI LI CI ,.,.., . LJI LI Rev. 6108 No Impact ~. ~ g' r;/ _/ ~ ~ ~ h) ~bse people or strectures to a sign.ficant risk of logs, injury or de~th inVOlVing wt1d!a.nd fir$sj Including Wtlere WiId1~nds arEI .qjacent to .urbanized area~ er whe-re tesid~iiC~ ~~ intennixed with wildlands? VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY - WOulq ttle proje~ a) Violate any water 4t!allty .standards or Wa$te discharge requirements? 0)' S.ubsta:r1t1aI~y' depJets groundWater supplies or. interfere stJbslantially With g!"Q~tic;l~er ~qt:}~r9~ !Sy~. that there WQU(<f be '~ 'net deflclt 'ii; aqtJ~r volUme or a, loWerIng 'of '~he lo'cal 'groundWaliat' tabie Level (e.g", the. production rate of p're-exi~lng ne~r.by wells' would drQP ~~ ,~, level which would ,/jot support existIng land Uses or pranried lJses for whfch permits have been granted)? c) Substa'nUally !;lIter thf:i eXisting drainage pattern of the site or area, including throUgh 'the alteration of the course of a stream or river. in a manner whIch would result In subst'anlial erosion or sUtation on- or off-site? d) S~.bst~tiany alter the ex.l~ti!'lg dralnag'e pattern of the site or area, lricllidlng through the alteration of the course gf' a $tream or .r;iver, or ~tlPs@.n~!ally irtc~ase. tn~ rate' ot amount of 'surface runoff .in a' manner- which WOUld result In f1oe.ding on... or off-site? e) Create or cQntribut$ runoff wat$r Whicti woufd exceed the capacIty of existing or planned sformwater drainage sY$tems or provide subst~n.~al ~dditlonal sourc~s of polluted runoff? 1) OtherWise SUbstantially destrade water qua'lIty? Potentially Slgnlfi!=ant lmpa~ ,n a C]" Ll CI Ij LI Page 20 less Than Significant with Mitlg.tlori I"corp-orated CI LI CI C] Ll d LJ L~ Than 'Slgnlflcant Impact C] [j C]. LI [j Cl [j . No Impact ~ ~ ~ . rg/ r/ ~ g . Rev.6IOS . . g) PI~ce hou$ing within a 1'Oo-year flood hazard area. as m~pped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood' hazard delineation map? h) Pla~ W11h1n a tOO-year fl'ood hazard are&J. $ln~ptui'.t~$ Which would Impede or redireet'frood' floWs?' i) E~r;ose p'eopJ~ or struc;tures to ~ sl~:ttifl'cant .risk. 'of 'loSs; injl.1fY or de~th involving trooding, including' flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? J) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudffow? k) Potentialiy il:T1pa~ stormWater ""noff from constructloli' activities? I) Potentially Impact stonnwater runoff from' post-constnJction actiVities? m) Result in a potential for discharge of stor.mwater pollutants. fi"om areas of material sto,.ge, Vehiqle ar equiPment fuelil!Tg~ vehicre or equipment maintenance. Oncltldlng washing):, Waste handling, hazardQUS matenals handling. or st!Jrag~i deliVery .r.ea~.~ lQ.ding <focJcs' or atlier Qutdool' Wor& 'ar:eas? n) Result 1rt. tn'e potential for dlsct.'Jar.ge of stormwaler ~ affect the beneficial' Uses of receMng ~rs? a) Create; the pot~n~ial' fQr si{:lOjfi~nt charig~ Iii the flOw velocity Dr volume of stormwater runoff to. cause environmental t.larm'1 pJ Cre~t.~ signifiea.nt- lf1crea~es in el"9slon ahtie p~ject ,i~ or surroundfng areas? IX. LAND USE ANn, PLANNING - Would the project: a) Physi.caUy divide an established community? . Potentially Significant Irnpaet C1 [j. tl Ll Ll n Ll a " LI LI Ll Page 21 Less Tban Significant with Mitigation lric;orporated CI tJ LI Ll LI r:J r:J LI Ll d LI L,ssThan Significant Impact LI LI LI LI d LI d LI. LI LI LI Rev. &108 No Impact ~ ~ ~ ~ ufo ~ r/ ~ ~ ~ b) -Confficf .Wifh any appJlcabl~ land use ~tan, policy, or regulation of an ag~ncy ~th .1urisdj~iO'" over the ptqject Ohclufflng, but not Umltec:l to th~ g.eneral plan., specific. I'lan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purp-ose of avoic;iing or mitig'ating an enVitonnient_r effect? 0) 'Conflict with any applicable liabitat con~~rv~tl.an plan or natural 'commurilty conservatioii ptan1 X. MINERAL RESOURCES: -- Wcruld the project!.. . . a.~ Rf:)$~I,t -in, 'th~ IQ$$' qf 'ilvailabOl.ty of a' known mi'ne'f.:al resource that wovld b~ of valu~ to 'the region and thEl' 'residents bf the state? bJ R~sult In the loss of availability pf a loeally-imponcfnf minerai resdUfce recdVery. s,lte delineated on a local gef.'lera'l pl~n, specifIc pian or other land use' plan? XI. NorSE -- Would the 'project resUlt in: a) Expo~ure of persoTl$ to or generation of noise. 'Ie;.fels In excess of standards establfshed in the IQcal general plan or nolS's otd:lrian~i QI' app\jcabl~ standards of other agenci~? b l E~PQsur,e of pl!rsons- te:) or- generation of f:)xc;~,sive gro\'!l.1dbQme vib:r~lJon qr gfoUndbcme'!'i,ofse levels? c) A substantial permanent. Increa'sa In ambient nQI~ l~'lf!tllil In the p.role~ Vlcl'nlty aboVe levers eXisting With'ouUhe project? d) A substantial' temporary ,or perlodid increase In a.mbient noise levels in titre proJect .vicinttt above levels existing: With-ouf the project? F()r purposes, of this analysis-, a! s~bst~ntlal t~mpqrary or periodic IJicrease is -defined as a continuous' nOjse of more than 70 db(A) . Less than Potenfial!y Slgnlficant with Less Than- SiOniflcarit MItigation Significant Mo. Impact Incorporated l~pact Impact CI' 'L] L1' ~ . . C] r/ LJ LI 'L1 if ~. 'C] :0 (j n LI LI' r/ tI LI' [j .1:1. rJ cI CI LI D ~ LI Ll Ll ~ . Page 22 Rev. 6/0B . . for 15 minutes or more or an intermittent noIse of more tMan 75 db(A) for between 5 and 14 mJnut~s re~lting from construction that occUrs petween 7:00 a.m.. and- 8:QO p;m. e) For a prl?Ject, located within an airport land use' plan 'or, where such a plan has nen b~eri- ad9p~e.d, within two miles of a public arrpdrt mr pUblic use airport, would the project expose people residing or workIng In the project area to excessjye noise levels? f)' For a project within the vlcin~ of a private altstrip'. 'WOl!lq th.e pl"Qjec;:t ~9S~ pedple, res,iding ot' WOtkiriQ iii toe :pr.oJ~ct area to excessive noise, levels? XIl. 'POPULATION AND. HOUSING ... WPtJ_Id; :tJ.1e pro~ct: a) fnd,uc,e: sv.bsta~ti~l J?o~lation groWth. in an area, erther' difeetly (for' example., by proposing neW homes aad businesses) Qr indirectly. (for example,. through extens'iCm of"roads 01" other ihfrastructure)~ b) Displace 'sut)slantfal numbers of existing Iiousihg, tn!~es~lt~tJlig the cQt.lstnJctroh ot ret)lacetnent housfng elsewher.e1' c) Displa(:e substantial numbers of peQpl~, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES a) Would the project result In substantial adverse physical impacts asscciated with the provision of new or physically' .lte~ goV'ernmenfaf- facilities, need fOr neW or physically altered :sp,vemmemal facilities. the COr:1struetion of which could cause s:igomcai:lt enViroomel1fal impactS, in" order to maintain acceptable service ratios,' response times 017 other performance objectives for any of the . PQtentj'a1w Slgn~~"t Impact CI I:l tJ IJ: L1 Page 23 Less Than Significant with Mitigation IncorPQ"tecI LI ,1:1 r:I LI LJ Less than Significant Impact (] (] Ll LI (] Rev. 6108 No rmpact ri r/ t/ ~ r/ public services: Fire protection? Police prptecfr'on? SchOols'? Ftarks1 Other publfC facilities? XN. RECREATION a) Wo.ulCl the pr-oJed Increase the. use of ~)Cistitl.9. neiQh.borhood a.nd. regional. parks er' oth'er' recteatldnal faclnties such 1hat substantl'al phys.lcaf deterioration of the facUity wOl;.lld occur or be accelerated? b) Does the. project lnch.ltle recrea~ro"al facilities or require, the GOr1struction 01' e"pansh;m of recreational facmti~s which rtlight have' an adve.rse phySIcal .effect on the environment1- . 'Y0/; TRANSP'ORTATlONlTAAFFIC Would tne prole~ ~) CatJs~ an incteas~ In traffie Whfch is substantial in. :r-el.atio:n tOllhe' existing traffiG IOIilQ .and :capacity of- the street ~ystem (i.e., re'Sult In Q. substantial' increase In eithEilr the numb~ of vehi'cle 1r!ps-{ the volume' to capacity taoo Crt roads." or c.ongestl~n at interse.dicmsf) b) ecce~di' ~Jttl~r indivld~lIy or cuml,.lfatfVely., a level of setvlca stai:tdard established :by the., C'Ounty. col'-ig.~ion man~a~tnEt!1t ~gency for d~signated roads'at' highways? c) 'Resurt In a change, in air traffic patterns. including either an increase In traffic .Ievels or a ctiange in location that rest;flts In substantial safety risks? Pobtntlally Significant Impact LI! CJ: CJ Cl Cl Cl C] r:l n o Page 24 Less Than Significant with Mitlg~t1on lr;cOrP.orated o (] o LI 'LJ [j. LI [:I, d o Less Than Stgnlflcllnt Impact Ll tl LJ O. Ll (j tl LI Ll LJ . No Impact or' uY ....../ rtr. ~ ~ r:/. rsi rI r;/ . ReV. 6106 . d} SubstantiaQy incr'~ase hazards due to. a design. feature (e.g., sharp curve:s ;9r dangerous' intersections) or .Incompatibfe uses. (e,g., farm equipmenij? . e) R~$ult tp ina.deCNat~ emersency. access? - t) Resuft lii ""adequate parking. ~paelty7 . g) Coliflict with adQpted polic:ies, plans; or programs supPQrting a.ltBmat.ive transportation '(e.g.,. bus tlImouts, bicy.cle racks)? XVI. UTilITIES. AND' SERVlCE SYST.EMS - Would the project~ a) Exceed wastewater tre.atment f,t9~l!Iiter:rieiitS 01 th~ appnca~le. Regld.n,1 Water Qualify :Control 'Board? b) Require or result In the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facU'ltleS,. the constnictlQn of Which could caUse significant ~nvfrontnental effects? c) Requite. or result ih the construd.ion' of new st,prm -water d'ra'lna,gEl f~~mtie~ or ~nsiQn of ~~Istllig: faelJltl~$, #l.e construction' of' which could' eause significant. enVlI'CimmenUil effects? d) Have sufficient ~r $uppllEls avaUable to' serve the. ;p'rQj~ct tmm existing ehtitletnents. arid resources, or are new or 'expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a, determination by the wa~water tre,tment pl"QVider. whish serves .or may serve the project that it has adequate capacitY to serve th~ proJ~ct's proJected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? . Potentially Significant Impact Ll .f:] LJ tJ C1 CJ LI. L1 CJ Page 25 Less Than Significant with' Less Than Mitigation Significant lncorporated Impact LI Cl O. LJ: LI. c] r:J: Cl o c,. LJ LI Ll cJ r:J 1:]. r:J [j Itev. BIDS No Impact ~ .~ ~ uY' ~ ri' rgI' ~ f) Be selVed by a landfill with sufficient permitted c~pacity to accommodate the prajecfs solid waste disposal needs? 9) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and ~gu;lations related to solid waste?,' h) "W9.~fd the prole~ (hpl\,ld,~ il n!!w or retr.b~d .stO'm; 'water tl'$a~me", control Best Management practice (BMP), {e.g., water qu~lity treatment 'basin;" constructed: treatment wetl~hds}, the operatlo'n ~f which.' eould result In significant environmental effects (e,g~ lncreased vectors Euid' odors)? XVI.l. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE ~} Does. tt.\e prqject f;tave the potential' to degtade the quality. 01 tOe environment. substantially redoce the habitat of a fish Gr wildlife speci$$. ~us~ a fish or wildlife populatIon to 'drop below self-sustaining levels. threaten to eUminate a plant or anlmal community, reduce the number or ~strtct the range of a rare, or endan~ered plant or ahlmal or eliminate impQ.r:t~nt ~~.mpl~s of the m;:Jjcir per1oc,Js of" California history of prehlsiory? b) Does the: prGject have, Impacts that are tngivl@alJy nfTIit~. bUt cUi'nU:latly.ely oonsfderabre1' C'Cumulatively considerabte" m~ans th$.t the inc.rementa,1 effects of ~ proje~ ~re oonslderable when vieWed in connection With the effects of past prpjects. the effests of other. current proIects, and the effectS of probable flJture proJ~cts)? 0) Does- the pr.oject hav~ environm~ntal effects which will cause subs~nti~1 adverSe effects. "on hUin'an beings, either direCtly or indill!ctly? Potentially Significant Impact LJ tJ ,Cl [j, 'I:] LJ Page 26 Less Than' SIgnificant with MItigation Incorporated CJ CJ CJ La [j LI Less Than SIgnificant Impact LI Ll r-I: l-J LI LJ [::J . No Impact ~ c;( rr/ ~ . ~ ~ . Rev. 6108 . ~91E~, ~~re ~:[~~~e~cy.:cali.~~pt..thi~ :appRC8t!orras .i;bmple~i'~th~ appltCint:mu~ ~~su1t 'ttie,:Dsts p~p~~~ pl:lrsu~n~,~~Sec;ti~n_.~~~.~. ot.~E; :GOV!!!~ni~f1t..C.9~e'.~~d~~~bmlt)I..~ig~~,sta~e,nt indicating whether, the project. and, ar'ly:altei'natlVeS. are located on. S, site whiCh' is Included on. any suctllist, and shall S'p'ecify" any" 115' ( . :. :... ,1' ...~~ .~",:':.. ~'" .~'. '.!. '.':0 ,'.;,;; "!""'.. ': ,',' ~:-. ' :, ,..' - ' . .'.. '.. . ,,:,..\ ' " , &:.4"':rrrl:.lt~'I' .-.1.,' ....~..."1.:)..J:..,2..........'..;-...1 .~..~.)y.~... ".,":" ...J......,l!".... I'.' ~~ ...,.".i. .J...... .............. . "'r" .. .,._____ ':1'+0 ,. I h..... ."... .__"......._.::::!' '''''.--oIl'' 0'-" ......., .1". .,..1 I v.... I.......... n, "1"1.. '1':-' Hazardous Waste and Substances Statement The development project and any alternatives proposed in this application are contained on "the lists complied pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code. ACCQrdingly, the projed applicant Is required to submit a signed statement which contains the following information: : 1. Name of applicant AWS+"M ~J'tI+ Street ~g(/ tJ;/s~"'e 'f?(vJ #' 6~O 2. 3. 4. 5. . 6. 7. B. 9. City: ~A',ta M"",.e4 Zip Code; fO/(Q ~ ., Phone Number:, ,? It) - :? ('1/- 4 "7 y P Address of site (street and zip): ':l"'l./~~tll g'e.eJr glvd S'elt f?'-e"l~1I907~() Local Agency (city/county): Re;"tNI#ll...htel' t<IA"/;""Y CtJ,,'/VQ( r?OtIrJ, Off"? 'DuIffY Assessor's Parcel Number: NtJ _ ((),MtlU!!' ex is,," i H~ fT C7 Specify any list pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code: p.:r N D s 10. Regulatory identification number: Nalle ~"ve" (pletf1se ~ a~JN)(a-+heJ.e"+~ 11. Date of list .. Date: /-/6-08 ~.';~ Signature: Applicant Aus~,," _ ~dv."f * Ple..se see ~"f+De"l!JtI me"'",o ./I., Jl#dt'e ;"'/"V""""ilH. (a-I"4e~"'tMf' 7) . Page 27 Rev. 6108 ( . ( . PROPERTY OWNER'S AFFIDAVIT STATE OF CALIFORNIA } CITY OF 5eAL BeACH } I-OS At.ll:1ELES COUN1Y OF'€>I1ANe31!- } LoS A\I(;ELE.S (1)/0Ne>-Jj(lJ~I'Y1I 1!;,/<rel (Name) . swear that (I am)/{we are) the owner of the property at: 1~CJ7/-/~S15 Se./8e.e/' l?/vd >e41 BetfN.h el( (Street Address) (City) (State) VD7+'d (ZIp) M.Jet (Print Name) 2~1/ W:/S'i'e f.?{Vd #t"lo s;,..."-I1~II..~t1t, lA (Address - Please Print) (City, State & Zip) ~ /'5 't? (Oat . ~o? (ria) ~{JI..'t799 (Telephone) SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME THIS IS- DAY OF .Ta.nua.~ ,tJOOi ~NJ1lD f .~ N ry Public J ... ... ... ... ... Jw,;mi ~ J~; ... J - e Commtsslon:# 1571903 I' Notary Public - California I j LeI Angeles County d _ _ _ ~~:.~~~2~ . Page 31 Rev.6IOS . ATTACHMENT 3 CODE SECTIONS . . Page 19 Conditional Use Permit 08-2 Planning Commission Staff Report 12415 Seal Beach Boulevard February 20, 2008 . CODE SECTIONS Section 28-1300 Permitted Uses. In the C-l Zone, the following uses only are permitted and hereinafter specifically provided and allowed by this article: .. .G. The Following uses subject to the issuance of a Conditional Use Permit: ...7. Pet Shop; Section 28-2503. Conditional Use Permits May Be Granted. The Planning Commission may grant a Conditional Use Permit in the case of an application for a use which is required to be reviewed and conditioned prior ,to .approval so as to insure compatibility with surrounding uses and the community in general and the General Plan. (Ord. No. 948) . Section 28-2504. Purpose of Conditional Use Permit. The purpose of a conditional use permit shall be to insure proposed uses are compatible with surrounding uses and not detrimental to the neighborhood. (Ord. No. 948) . . Conditional Use Permit 08-2 Planning Commission Staff Report 12415 Seal Beach Boulevard February 20,2008 ATTACHMENT 4 ANALYSIS OF ODORS PREPARED BY DR. SUSAN SCHIFFMAN, DUKE UNIVERSITY . . .. Page 20 . Analysis of Odors at PetSmartslPetsHotels February, 2006 Dr. Susan Schiffman, Taste and Smell Laboratory, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC 27710-3259 Summary Odors were evaluated at PetSmartlPetHotels in Cary and Raleigh, North Carolina. The odors were either nonexistent or insignificant, and were far less than those at most other commercial establishments in the same geographical vicinity. Any faint odors that were perceived were rated as pleasant or neutral. Overall, the odors at PetSmartlPetHotels were lower than odors measured at a luggage and gift store, calendar store, leather store, food and cooking supply store, clothing store, department store, chicken sandwich shop, perfume store, doughnut shop, gift card store, food court area in a mall, food and cooking supply store, coffee shop, candle store, gift shop, and photography shop. Thus, most commercial establishments have odors that are greater than those measured at PetSmartlPetHotels. . Study design The objective of this research was to measure the level and character of odors at PetSmartlPetHotels in Cary and Raleigh and to compare these odors with the odors found at nearby businesses. In order to obtain a representative sampling, the ambient air at multiple locations inside and outside the PetSmartlPetHotels was evaluated. These locations included: outside the front door, in tlie center of the store near the checkout counter, in the lobby of the PetHotel, and behind the store at the loading docks. Ratings of odor intensity, nasal irritation, and pleasantness/unpleasantness at these PetSmartlPetHotels were compared with similar ratings from other business establishments in the CarylRaleigh community. Odor assessments were performed by 5 trained odor panelists with extensive experience in evaluating odors from animal facilities using standardized field assessments. The subjects are accustomed to evaluating odors from the full spectrum. of intensity, from near the threshold level (very weak) up to maximal odor intensity. The subjects have evaluated odors at varying degrees of unpleasantness, nasal irritation, and odor character. All ambient air samples were evaluated at a height of approximately five feet (at nose level). Odor panelists wore the HalfFacepiece mask (3M model 6000 series) fitted with the 3M Multi GasNapor Cartridge with PIOO filter before and between odor assessments. This mask prevents exposure to vapors (including odors) as well as dusts, and eliminated olfactory adaptation. . Odor threshold measurements were obtained to determine how many times the odorous source (ifany) needs to be diluted to reach threshold (DIT or dilutions to threshold). In other words, at what dilution level are subjects able to perceive any odor. The higher the DIT value, the more intense is the ambient air being measured. Odor thresholds were obtained with two different in~ents, the Scentometer (Barnebey and Sutcliffe, Columbus, Ohio) and the Nasal Ranger@ . olfactometer CSt Croix Sensory, Stillwater, l\1N). The Scentometer is a hand-held plastic box . with two nasal ports on one end and six inlets for the odorous air (inlet sizes of 1/32" (0.08 cm), 1/16" (0.16 cm), 1/8" (0.32 cm), 3/16" (0.48 cm), 1/4" (0.64 cm), and 1/2" (1.27 cm)) at the other end which are connected to a mixing chamber. These inlets correspond to 350 D/f, 170 D/f, 31 D/f, 15 DIT, 7 DIT, and 2 D/f respectively. DIT values are measured with all but one of the 6 odorous air inlets closed., and the size of the open inlet determines the dilution of the odorous air. For example, if a threshold is found with the 1/16" inlet open, the concentration of the odor was considered to be 170 times above threshold. In addition to the Scentometer, the Nasal Ranger@ olfactometer was used by the odor panel to assess odor thresholds at each location. This olfactometer is a hand-held device which has a <;lial that can be turned to deliver blank air (air that is only drawn through a filter) or to deliver air at the DIT levels of2, 4, 7, 15,30, and 60. The presentation device is the AC'SCENT@ SWIfTTM Nasal Mask. This olfactometer which insures a specific flow rate of 14-18 liters per minute was used in conjunction with the Scentometer for consistency of measurements. After threshold determinations, subjects rated each ambient air sample on 9-point scales for odor intensity, nasal irritation, and pleasantness/unpleasaritness, and provided a description of the odor. The scales used for odor intensity, nasal irritation, and pleasantness are given below: Scale Odor Intensity 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 o Irritation Intensity Maximal Ve Stron Stron Moderatel Stron Moderate Moderatel Weak Weak Ve Weak None at all Pleasantness . Subjects also provided a description of the odor of each ambient air sample. Subjects utilized adjectives based on 146-odor descriptive scales developed by the American Society for Testing an~ Materials (see ASTM, 1984, 1992). If a subject wanted to include in the description of a sample, an odor which is not present among the 146 odor terms, he or she provided other words and/or phrases to describe that odor. Subjects rated at least the odor intensity and nasal irritation based on their first whiff of the sample, and then subsequent whiffs were taken to complete the evaluation of each sample. Results Table 1 gives the mean odor intensity ratings for all locations at PetSmartlPetHotels in Cary and Raleigh along with mean odor intensity ratings from other commercial locations in the Cary/Ra1eigh community. The mean odor intensities, mean irritation intensities, and hedonic ratings' (pleasantness to unpleasantness) for each day of testing at the two sites (for all 5 panelists) are given in Tables 2, 3, and 4. These ratings are represented graphically in Figures 1, . . 2, and 3. Mean values for odor intensity, irritation, and pleasantness for both days combined are given in Table 5; these rating are represented graphically in Figure 4. The detection thresholds (dilutions to threshold are given in Table 6 and Figure 5. Table 1. Comparison of odor intensity ratings from PetSmartlPetHotels in Cary and Ralei h with other commercial locations in the Ca lRalei h communi Location Odor Location intensi Lwrary 1 1 deck 3 1 3 1 3.5 1.3 3.5 1.5 3.5 1.5 3.5 1.5 4 1.5 4 1.7 4 2 4 2 4.5 . 2 4.5 deck 2 4.5 2.5 4.5 2.5 5 2.5 5 Outside Front Door Cashier Area Pets Hotel Lobb Outside Loadin Dock 2 . Outside Front Door Cashier Area Pets Hotel Lobb Outside Loadin Dock 2 . Ca Outside Front Door Cashier Area Pets Hotel Lobb Outside Loadin Dock 8 7 6 ,a. 5 i !4 Is "a o 3 2 1 o Cary . Day 1 Raleigh. Day 1 Cary . Day 2 Location & Day Raleigh - Day 2 Figure 1 2 . Outside Front Door . Cashier Area EI Pets Hotel Lobby .. Outside Loading Dock Scale Odor Intensity 8 Maxlmel 7 Very Strong 8 Strong & Moderately Strong 4 Moderate :I Moderately Weak 2 Weak 1 Very Weak 0 None at all . . . . . 8 7 6 ~ 15 w !i z4 o F= ~ 3 I 2 1 o Cary Day -1 RaleIgh Day - 2 RaleIgh Day - 1 Cary Day - 2 LOCATION Figure 2 . OutsIde Front Door . Cashier Area mJ Pets Hotel Lobby . Outside LoadIng Dock Scale Irrllalon IntlllUllty . Mulmal 7 Very Strong . Strong I Modellllllly Strong 4 Mode,... 3 ModelllllllyWeak 2 Week 1 Very Week o Noned'" 8 . . Outside Front Door . Cashier Area IiJ Pets Hotel Lobby . Outside Loading Dock Scale Pleasantness e Extremely Unpleasant 7 Very Unpleasant 6 Moderalllly Unpleasant 5 SlighOy UnplllBSant 4 Neutral 3 Slightly Pleasant 2 MDdaralBly PlllBSant . Table 5: Mean values for odor intensity, irritation, and pleasantness for both days combined .7 ~ 6 fI) z I!! 5 i!E fI) rfi4 i! Z 3 ~ ~ 2 II. 1 o Cary Day - 1 Raleigh Day - 1 Cary Day - 2 LOCAl1ON Raleigh Day - 2 Figure 3 Odor Intensi 1.266 1.747 Irritation 0.368 0.340 Pleasantness 3.389 3.391 . I.. . 8 7 8 5 ~ l! 4 .s .5 3 2 1 . 0 Intansity Irritation Variables pleasantess Figure 4 . . 350 50 - - - - -,- . Cashier area . Pets Hotel lobby Il!J Loadln dock area 300 250 'a :g 200 1/1 l! ~ .. .g 150 o 100 o . Cary . Day 1 Raleigh. Day 1 Cary . Day 1 LocatlonlDay Raleigh. Day 2 Figure 5 Ca 2 Instrumental measurements could not be obtained with The Jerome Hydrogen Sulfide Analyzer (Arizona Instruments, model 631-X), and the Drager Accuro@ Gas Detection Pump with a Drager Tube (Drager Safety AO & Co. KGaA) specific for ammonia. This is because the levels ofhydrogen sulfide and ammonia at the two PetSmartlPetHotels were so low that they were below the sensitivity of these two devices. . . . . The results of this experiment can be generalized to a range of temperature and humidity conditions. Previous experiments by our laboratory at other animal facilities have found that ambient temperature and humidity are not statistically related to odor levels. Conclusion: The odors were either nonexistent or insignificant, and were far less than those at most other commercial establishments in the same geographical vicinity. Any faint odors perceived were rated as pleasant or neutral. Overall, the odors at PetSmartlPetHotels were lower than odors measured at a luggage and gift store, calendar store, leather store, food and cooking supply store, clothing store, department store, chicken sandwich shop, perfume store, doughnut shop, gift card store, food court area in a mall, food and cooking supply store, coffee shop, candle store, gift shop, and photography shop. Thus, most commercial establishments have odors that are greater than those measured at PetSmartlPetHotels. . Conditional Use Permit 08-2 Planning Commission Staff Report 12415 Seal Beach Boulevard February 20, 2008 ATTACHMENT 5 NOISE ANALYSIS PREPARED BY DOMINION ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS . . Page 21 . . DOMINION September 9, 2006 Ms. Sally Piotrowski Senior Counsel PetSmart Corporation 19601 North 27dt Avenue Phoenix, Arizona 85027 Re: Noise Survey Store #0 1 57, 7290 W. Bell Rd. Store #0131, 10825 Tatum Blvd. Dear Ms. Piotrowski, . . . Pursuant to your request Dominion Environmental Consultants, Inc. performed a noise survey on August 19,2006, at Store # 0157 located at 7290 W. Bell Rd. in Glendale, Arizona and Store #0 131 located at 10825 Tatum Blvd in Paradise VaIley, Arizona. The purpose of the survey was to measure the level of audible noise on the exterior of the building, as a result of barking dogs. The survey was conducted on a typical Saturday during peak occupancy times, at both locations. At the time of the measurements each location had in excess of one hundred and fifty (150) dogs present in the Pets Hotel, and an additional fifteen (15) dogs in the day camp. CONCLUSIONS: Sound levels from the dogs barking at both locations were either not audible OT were below the ambient noise level, in all cases but one which was barely audible. The sound level detected for this one exception was only barely audible by the human ear within one foot (1') of the rear door of Store #0131. However, it was not measurable beyond background. At the fifty foot (50') mark from the rear door the sound was not audible by the human ear and therefore was again not measurable. The fmal conclusion based on the measurements tak~ at these two test sites is that there was no measurable noise exposure of dogs barking to the outdoor enviromnent. In addition, unless a person was standing within one foot (1') oftbe rear door of Store #0131 when all dogs were being intentionally agitated, there was no noise of dogs barking that was audible to the human ear outside either facility. FINDINGS: . The Pet Hotel noise level measurements were obtained during maximum noise conditions at each .location, on August 19, 2006. The measurements were obtained during the morning hours (9:00 AM and 11 :00 AM) and after closing time (10:00 PM - 12:00 PM), at each location. DOMINION ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS. INC. 7330 North 16th Street. Suite B-JOI. Phoenix-Arizona 85020 "leI: (602) 943-0051 Fax: (602) 943-0553 www.dominionenv.net To assess the potential maximum peak noise condition, the dogs were all purposely agitated into a barking frenzy during each sampling episode. This was accomplished by several persons physically running up and down the aisles between. the kennels. Based on the pre-test observations, this level of noise would never be achieved due to the constant care and attention given to the occupants of the hotel by the large staff of PetS mart care givers. However, as a result of the experiment the peak noise level measured at any given moment inside the hotel was: Store # 0157 - 7290 W. Bell Rd. 104.6 dBA Store # 0131 -10825 Tatum Blvd 109.2 dBA In addition to the indoor measurements, exterior measurements were also obtained at the same time. These outdoor measurements provide a comparable measurement between the indoor noise level and therefore the amount of noise level transfer. The outdoor measurements were obtained from within twenty feet (20') feet ofthe front of the building, within I foot of the rear door contiguous to the hotel area, at a distance oftifty feet (50') from the rear of the building, at a distance off1.fty feet (50') from an exterior wall contiguous to the space occupied by the dogs and from the roof above the pets hotel space. The results were as follows: Store #0157 7290 W. Bell Rd. Daytime Nighttime Position Ambient Barking Ambient Barking Front of Building 53 dBA Not Audible 72 dBA2 Not Audible Back of Building Barely Audible (at the rear door) 48 dBA Not measurable 52 dBA3 Not Audible SO' Back of Building 48 dBA Not Audible 48dBA Not Audible West Side of Barely Audible Barely Au.d1"ble Building SO dBA Not measurable 54 dBA Not measurable West Side of Building SO' 50 dBA Not Audible S4 dBA Not Audible - Audible I I Roof 65 dBAI Not Audible 65 dBA1 Not measurable I i I 1 1 t . . Store #0131 10825 N. Tatum Blvd. Daytime Nighttime Position Ambient Barking Ambient Barking Front of Building 55 dBA Not audible 55 dBA Not aumble Back of Building Barely Audible (at I' of rear door) SO dBA Not measurable 50' Back of Building 50 dBA Not Audible Not measurable Roof 67 dBAl Not audible . Footnotes: 1. Roof-top A/C units 2. Cricket noise 3. Buzz from light fixture COMMENTS: 48 dBA Barely Audible Not measurable 48 dBA Not Audible Not measurable 67 dBAl Not audible The back door of Store #0157 is a vestibule double door system. During the daytime measurements, the door to the interior side oftbe vestibule was open. During the nighttime measurements, the interior door was closed. This double door or vestibule configuration was not present at Store #0131. The rear doors at both locations gave access directly into the space occupied by the dogs. APPROACH Multiple measurements were obtained at each site during the sampling episode. The sound measurements were obtained by use of category I - IVIE PC-40 sound level and spectrum analyzer. While the "average dosage" exposure is perhaps the most common method of measure for classifying a time-varying sound level, for a given observation period, this testing episode measured the "peak sound level" at given time. The ""peak level" is the highest level of sound recorded for the multiple readings obtained dming the sampling episode. . . .Since sound levels are expressed in decibels, which are logarithmic, they cannot be averaged arithmetically. Therefore, it is the underlying acoustic pressure squared that is averaged arithmetically, and the results then expressed in decibels. The restriction on averaging pertains only to processing of the fundamental pressure squared variable. Statistical processing of sampled derived measurements, such as an ensemble ofLeq.T values, is not similarly restricted. The formula used for this task was as follows: Leq.T = 10 log [ IT OT 10Lp(t)110 dt] == 10 log [Tl OT [p(t)po]2dt] To further explain the above formula consider the defining function where Lp (t) is sound pressure levels as a function of time, T is the observation or averaging time, pet) is sound pressure as a function of time and po is the reference pressure of twenty (20) micropascals ( Pal. Adoption of the-equivalent sound level terminology was likely motivated to forestall erroneous use of the arithmetic averaging. Nevertheless, the term average sound level is also in wide use md is functionally identical. In an actual circumstance where sound levels could be variable, the equivalent sound level equals a constant sound level that appropriately integrated over the averaging time would result in the same energy as integrating the corresponding variable sound level over the same time. In contrast, for sound levels stated for discrete time increments, the overall equivalent level can be obtained by the following combining relationship. The levels for each discrete time period may be constants or may themselves be equivalent levels. Thus the combined equivalent level is (A-weighted levels used in the following example): N LAeq.T = 10 log [IT ti 10 LAiI10] 1=1 The ultimate result of this type of testing is to obtain sound readings that can be used to establish exposure levels. This exposure level of sound dose can also be stated in joules. Regulatory agencies nonnalize the allowed limit by stating it as percentage dose, where a dose of 100% corresponds to an exposme at the criterion level (Lc) for a duration equal to the criterion time (Tc), which is nonnally specified as eight (8) hours. However~ at stated earlier, in this case the target dose will be the immediate, short term. 100% peak level achieved at any given point during the sampling episode. Therefo~, the noise level results are all stated in decibels. As such a decibel (dB) is a unit for measuring the intensity of sound. The decibel is a dimension less ~tity, based on the logarithm of the ration of two power-like quantities. Considering the human hearing range is theoretically from zero (0) dB (theoretical threshold of audibility) to one hundred and thirty (130) dB, the average pain tlireshold, a comparison can be shown. Sound power (W) of a source is the total acoustic output that it produces in watts (w). For most practical situations the sound power of a source is constant regardless ofits location in different environments. The amplitude of the sound pressure disturbance can be related to the displacement amplitude of the vibrating sound source. Pressure is expressed as force per unit area. The preferred unit of pressure is known as the pascal (pa) or one newton per square meter (N/m2). . . . The reference pressure used in acoustics is twenty (20) micro Pascals dBA - Sound pressure level expressed in decibels, filtered or weighted at the various frequencies is to approximate the response of the human ear. The sound pressure level in decibels is equal to ten (10) times the logarithm (to the base 10) of the ratio between the pressure squared divided by the reference pressure squared. Where L is the level and A an AB are quantities related to power. L= 10 log (A-B ) dB Therefore, any time that the word "level" is referred to in acoustics, decibel notation is implied. The example chart below is using a starting point for the human ear at oem. Sound power level (abbreviated as.PWL and symbolized LW) would be defined as: LWorPWL= 10 Log (W-Wo) db To bring into perspective different dB levels of common sounds, please refer to the chart below. This chart demonstrates several comparison sources of sound that most persons can relate to. They area as follows: SOURCE dB ratin!! 170 Turbojet Engine 160 ISO 140 75 Piece Orchestra 130 120 Large Chipping Hammer Auto on Highway 110 100 90 80 70 Voice, Conversational 60 50 40 30 Voice, Very Soft Whisper 20 10 o The following chart gives an example of the perception .of the human ear to detect change in the dB level: I, . . ........'. .... .....00 ..0. '0 . . '0' ., . CHANGES IN INTENSITY LEVEL (or dB) Changes in Intensity Level, dB Changes in Apparent Noise Level 1 Almost imperceptible 3 Just perceptIble 5 Noticeable to most . . 10 Easily Noticeable to all I hope that this report has provided you with useful information. In the interim, if you should have any questions or would like to discuss the contents of this report please don't hesitate to contact me at any time. Sincerely, . BY~ Vern L. Crow. 1.R. President Dominion Envi . . Conditional Use Permit 08-2 Planning Commission Staff Report 12415 Seal Beach Boulevard February 20. 2008 ATTACHMENT 6 STATUS OF ON-SITE ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES . . Page 22 . . . -- _w Waterstone Environmental, Inc. 2936 E. Coronado St. * Anaheim, CA 92806 714-414-1122 * Fax: 714-414-1166 E:MaR: nberesky@waterslone-env.oom Men10 This 4-page memo and the following 9-page excerpt from a July 2006 Phase I EA are attachments to this permit request. Some CORTESE listings for this property shown in the Phase I EA excerpt are updated by the information in the Dec. 2007 status memo. To: Madelyn Jackrel, Century National Properties From: Nancy Beresky, PG; Prindpal Hydrogeologist Date: December 3, 2007 He: Current Status of Environmental Issues at Rossmoor Center CC: Austin Podrat, CNP o Urgent iii For RevIew 0 Please Comment 0 Please Reply DPlease Recycle The purpose oftbis memo is to provide status on environmental issues within the Rossmoor Center. Specifically, historical and cmrent environmental issues for the Rossmoor Center are associated with the following properties: )- The existing Chevron gasoline station at 12541 Seal Beach Boulevard > The existing Conoc0/76 (former Unocal 76) gasoline station at 12071 Seal Beach Boulevard > Former Goodyear tire and service center at 12239 Seal Beach Boulevard. > Former Goodyear waste dumpster area south of the service center > Former Winston Tire center at 12229 Seal Beach Boulevard > Former Rossmoor dIy cleaners (demolished in 2002, location is on the south central portion of the existing Kohl's deparbnent store with address is 12345 Seal Beach Boulevard) Following is a short S1.JIIlIIla1}'/discussion of each: Chevron -12541 Seal Beach Boulevard Underground storage tanks at this service station leaked and impacted shallow groundwater with gasoline-related compounds in the late 1980's. Chevron has been ac1i.vely monitoring groundwater since the early 1990's. In addition, multiple pilot tests have been performed to identify feasible remediation techniques under the supervision of the Orange Cmmty Health Ms. Madelyn Jackrel Memo Ie: Enviromnen1a1 Issue Update Page 2 of4 WatcrsIm1e Enviromm:ntal,.Jnc. December 3,2007 . Care Agem;y (OCHCA). Century National Properties and Watetstone are in close com11Tlmicati.on with both Chevron and the OCHCA regarding progress. The groundwater plume does not appear to have migrated offsite. The soils in this area. are very impermeable and pilot tests for traditional remediation methods show 1hat a hybrid remediation method will be required to achieve cleanup. Chevron and Waterstone had a meeting in late April 2007 with the OCHCA and subsequently convened a technical meeting to evaluate the geologic challeoges. A new hybrid pIan for remediation has been formulated and has been pilot tested and evaluated. Remediation will be continued when the system is installed (anticipated in the first quarter of2008). The OCHCA is informed that Chevron's lease expires in 201 0 and concurs that remediation should be achieved by 1hat time. Conocon6 -12071 Seal Beach Boulevard Underground storage tanks at this service s1ation leaked and impacted' shallow groundwater with gasoline-related compounds in the late 1980's. Conocofl6 has been actively monitoring groundwater since the early 1990's. In addition, multiple pilot tests have been pedhrmed to identify feasible remediation techniques under the supervision of the OCHCA. Century National Properties and Watel:stu.ae are in close commmrlcation with both Conocofl6 and the OCHCA regarding progress. . The groundwater plmne appears to have migrated offsite into Seal Beach Boulevard. The soils in this area are very impermeable and pilot tests for traditional remediation methods have not yielded the typical successful results. Conoc0f76 installed an ozone injection 1rea1ment system which has been approved by OCHCA and is currently operational. It is ex1Iacting confmninanM and is expected to nm for several years prior to accomplishing cleanup goals. Former Goodyear -12239 Seal Beach Boulevard Seven hoists, a steam cleaning basin, a clarifier, and an underground waste oil storage 1mJk existed at this site. All of these features were removed and any associated impacted soil was also removed. Goodyear's consultant, SECOR, has provided the data for confinnmion soil samples and closure report for the Goodyear service center to the OCHCA as of April 2007 . A "No Further Action" letter was prepared by the OCHCA dated June 15, 20071hat indicates the completion of necessary environmental activities for these features. Former Goodyear WtBte Dumpster Area (behindformer Parasol Restaurant) This is an area where elevated concentrations of gasoline-range hydrocarbons were detected in soil and groundwater. The impacted area for both soil and groundwater measured less than . 100 square feet Soil remediation was peIfoIDled from October 2006 through January 2007 . Ms. Made1yn Jackre1 Memo re: En.viromnental Issue Update Page 3 of4 Watcrstone Enviromnen1a1, Inc. December 3,2007 both by excavation of apploAlmately 80% of the 'hot spot' and dual phase extraction of vapor and groundwater. The OCHCA was con1Rcted in February 2007 to review the data and approve the performance of confirmation borings indicating that soil remediation is complete. OCHCA witnessed the confirmation borings, has reviewed the confirmation boring data, and has verbally approved soil closure. Soil closure was requested of the OCHCA in a report dated July 31, 2007. A soil closure letter fi:om OCHCA is anticipated before year end. Groundwater monitoring is ongoing. It is pOSSlble that some additional groundwater extraction will. be required pending the results of initial monitoring activities. Downgradient wells have been installed to evaluate plume migration. The data indicate the plume is very stable and not migrating. Continued quarterly monitoring is anticipated for at least 2 more quarters. If any elevated groundwater results are detected, additional extraction of groundwater from existing wells may be required. The Regional Water Quality Con1rol Board (RWQCB) is the oversight agency for the groundwater cleanup. The RWQCB has requested a meeting December 4, 2007 with the pOSSlbility of considering closure of groundwater issues. . As a best -case scenario, the site could be closed after 2 more quarm of monitoring. As a worst-case scenario, grmmdwater monitoring for at least one year could be required. Based on monitoring data, if additional water extraction is required, closure of groundwater may take up to 1.5 years from now. Former W"mston Tue Center-12229 Seal Beach Boulevard This site bad 4 pneumatic hoists for car servicing. Hoists were removed in September 2004. Confirmation soil samples were collected at that time under the oveISight of the OCHCA to ensure 1hat no impacted soil remained inside the hoist pits. Environmental Audit performed the hoist removal and prepared the closure report. Closure for this site was issued by OCHCA in 2006. Former Rossmoor Dry Cleaners (currently Kohl's-12345 Seal Beach Blvd) Soil and groundwater were impacted atthis si~ by dry cleaning solvent (perchloroethylene or PCE). Soil and groundwater cleanup occurred in 2002 under the previous consultant, Twining Laboratories. Soil closure was issued for this site by OCHCA. . To address groundwater issues Twining also performed post-remediation groundwater sample collection at the request of the RWQCB. This consisted ofwater sample collection:from hydropunch locations in between existing groundwater monitoring wells. Based on those results, Waterstone requested groundwater closure of the RWQCB in July 2006. The RWQCB requested a small amount of additional extraction. Waterstone has installed the groundwater monitoring well in the approved location and sample collection has occmred. Results indicate a decrease in groundwater concentIations. Based on preHmmmy conversation Ms. Madelyn Jackrel Memo re: EnvirnnmP.n191 Issue Update Page4of4 Waterstone Environmen1al, Jnc. December 3,2007 . with the RWQCB, it was determined that additional ex1raction should be performed. Extraction activities commenced in November 2007. Extraction is anticipated to be performed through year end. The RWQCB has requested an onsite meeting for December 4, 2007 to review this case for near term closure. Closure is anticipated during 1st quarter of 2008. If you have any questions, please ca1Ime at 714-414-1122. (END) . . . . . This 9 page excerr:; 'om Waterstone's \ original Phase I EA lor the Rossmoor Center has been compiled by Nancy Beresky, P.G. Phase I Environmental Assessment Report for the Rossmoor Center Subject Property Located at 12071,12239,12341,12343,12345,12443,12451, 12489, 12491, 12493, 12501, 1253, 12541 and 12515 Seal Beach Boulevard Seal Beach, California 90740 July 17, 2006 Project: 04-273 Prepared for: Century National Properties, Ine. 2811 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 64 Santa Monica, California 90403 Prepared by: ..1 liW Waterstone Environmental, Ine. 2936 East Coronado Street Anaheim, Califomia 92806 (714) 414-1122; Fax (714) 414-1166 Proprietary Notice: The report and its contents are PRIVILEGED.AND CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION. This document should not be duplicated or copied under any circumstances without the express permission of Waters tone Environmental. Inc. The purpose of the report is to allow the client listed above to evaluate the potential environmental liabilities at the Subject Property. Any unazdhorized reuse of Waters tone Environmental Inc. reports or data will be at the unauthorized user's sole risk and liability. r Phase I Environmental Assessment Report for the Rossmoor Center . Subject Property Located at 12071,12239,12341,12343,12345,12443,12451, 12489, 12491, 12493, 12501, 1253, 12541 and 12515 Seal Beach Boulevard Seal Beach, California 90740 July 17, 2006 Project: 04-273 Prepll1'ed by: . ~ fj, 1J:!:.'i' - efJrey v. gdigian, PhD Managing Partner ....1 Waterstone Environmental, Inc. E'iiI 2936 East Coronado Street Anaheim, California 92806 . 'VI (714) 414-1122; Fax. (714) 414-1166 . . . . Section 4.0 Government Database Review 4.1 Government Databases Searched An investigation of the government environmental databases related to the Subject Property and the nearby area was conducted to identify potential RECs that may be recorded in government database systems or files. Properties that have or may have the potential for existing or future site contamination, enviromnentalliabilities, or the potential for contamination migration to surrounding areas are listed in this report. The information pertaining to the sites on the regulatory databases was obtained from the EDR Radius Map with GeoCheck (See Appendix A) provided by EDR. The databases searched are detailed below. The results of the Subject Property and Surrounding Property listings are summarized in Sections 4.2 and 4.3, respectively. Federal Database Review National Priorities List The NatioDal Priorities List (NPL) is the Environmental Protection Agency's database of uncontrolled or abandoned hazardous waste sites identified for priority remedial actions llllder the Superfund program. A site, to be included on the NPL, must either meet or surpass a predetermined hazard ran ldn.g system score, or be chosen as a state's top-priority site, or meet all three of the following criteria: 1) the US Department of Health and Human Services issues a health advisory recommending that people be removed from the site to avoid exposure; 2) EP A determines that the site represents a significant threat, and 3) EP A determines that the remedial action is more cost-effective than removal action. The ASTM defined search radius for NPL sites is one mile from the Subject Property. . Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation Liability Information System The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Information System (CERCIJS) list includes a list of properties/facilities, which are suspected or confirmed to have adversely impacted the environment. The list is comprehensive in that it includes all properties for which an allegation has been made regarding environmental contamination. The ASTM radius for CERCLIS is one-mile from the Subject Property. Resource Conservation and Recovery Act The EP A's Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) program identifies and tracks hazardous waste from the point of generation to the point of disposal. The RCRA Facilities database is an EP A compilation of reporting facilities that generate, store, transport, treat or dispose ofhazardous waste. However, the listing ofa site as a hazardous waste generator does not necessarily indicate that a hazardous waste release has occurred or that contamination exists at that address. Rossmoor Ccmtm- Phase I BA Seal Beach. CA watr:rstone Enviromne:nIllJ, Inc. Project ~273 8 Section 4.0 Government Database Review . CORRACTS The EP A maintains a database of RCRA facilities, which are undergoing corrective action. A corrective action order is issued pursuant to RCRA Section (h) when there has been a release of hazardous waste or constituents into the environment from a RCRA facility. The ASTM defined radius for CORRACTS is one mile from the Subject Property. RCRlS- Permitted Treatment, Storage. and Disposal (I'SD) RCRA- TSD facilities are those that treat, store, andlor dispose of hazardous waste. The ASTM defined searched radius for this database is one-half mile from the Subject Property. RCRlS- Large and Small Quantity Generators A RCRIS small quantity generator (SQG) site generates at least 100 kilograms per month but less than 1,000 kilograms per month of non-acutely hazardous waste. A RCRIS large quantity generator (LQG) generates at least 1,000 kilograms 'per month of non-acutely hazardous waste or one kilogram per month of acutely hazardous waste. The ASTM defined searched radius for this database is one-quarter mile from the Subject Property. Emergency Response Notification System The Emergency Response Notification System (ERNS) is a national database of information or report releases of oil or hazardous substances. The database contains information from spill reports made to the federal authorities including the u.s. EPA, u.s. Coast Guard, and the u.s. Department of Transportation. . CONSENT Addresses listed in major legal settlements that establish responsibility and standards for cleanup at NPL (superfund) sites are released periodically by United States District Courts after settlement by the parties to the litigation matters. The ASTM defined searched radius for this database is one mile from the Subject Property. RODs Records of Decision (RODs) documents m~ndate a permanent remedy at an NPL (Superfund) site containing technical and health information to aid the cleanup. The ASTM defined searched radius for this database is one mile from the Subject Property. MINES The ~S database is a record of mine locations maintained by the United States Department of Labor, Mine Safety and Health Administration. The ASTM defined searched radius for this . database is one-halfmile from the Subject Property. Rossmoor Ccntl::c Phase I BA Sea1~ CA 9 Watmstone BnviIomncmtaI, Inc. Project: 04-273 Section 4.0 Government Database Review . State Database Review Annual Work-plan (A WP) The Annual Work-plan Database (A WP) includes sites on the state priority list (also referred to as the SPL). The ASTM defined searched radius for this database is one mile from the Subject Property. GAL-Sites (Formerly ASPIS) The Cal-Site database, formerly known as ASPIS, contains both known and potential hazardous substance sites identified by the California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC). The ASTM defined searched radius for this database is one mile from the Subject Property. CHMlRS The California Hazardous Material Incident Report SYstem (CHMIRS) contains informati~ on reported hazardous incident (i.e. accidental releases or spills) provided by the California office of Emergency Services. The ASTM defined searched radius for this database is limited to the Subject Property. . CORTESE The Office of Environmental Protection, Office of Hazardous Materials publishes a listing of confirmed hazardous waste sites based on input from several databases, including: 1) CALSlTES - Department of Toxic Substances Control, Abandoned Sites Program Information Systems, 2) SARA Title ill Section ill Toxic Chemicals Release Inventory, 3) FINDS, 4) HWIS - Department of Department of Toxic Substances Con1rol, Hazardous waste Information System, 5) State Water Resomces Control Board, 6) Integrated Waste Management Control Board, 7) Air Resources Board, 8) RWQCB - Leaking Underground Storage Tanks, 9) RWQCB - Underground Storage Tanks, 10) Update Rule (Chemical Manufacturers), 11) Waste Board, 12) Waste Discharge System, and 13) Department of Toxic Substances Control Docket. The ASTM defined searched radius for this database is one mile :from the Subject Property. Notify 65 Notify 65 records, assembled from the State Water Resources Control Board's Proposition 65 database, contain facility notifications about any release that could impact drinking water and thereby expose the public to potential health risk. The ASTM defined searched radius for this database is one mile from the Subject Property. Toxic Pits . The Toxic Pits Database identifies sites suspected of containing hazardous substances where cleanup has not yet been completed. The ASTM defined searched radius for this database is one Rossmoor Ce.nter Phase I EA Seal Beach, CA 10 WaterstoDc EnviromnlmtlIl, Inc. project: 04-273 Section 4.0 Government Database Review mile from the Subject Property. . State Landfill (SWF/LF) Solid Waste Information System (SWF/LF) records typically contain an inventory of solid waste disposal facilities or landfills that may be active or inactive facilities or open dumps that failed to meet RCRA Section 4004 criteria for solid waste landfills or disposal sites. The ASTM defined searched radius for this database is one-half mile from the Subject Property. WMUDSlSWAT The Waste Management Unit Database System (WMUDS) is used for program tracking and inventory of waste management units and is provided by the State Water Resources Control Board The ASlM defined searched radius for this database is one-half mile from the Subject Property. Bond Erpenditure Plan (BEP) The site-specific Bond Expenditure Plan (BEP) listing was compiled by the Department of Health Services as the basis for an appropriate ofHaza.rd6us Substance Cleanup Bond Act Funds and is not updated. The ASTM defined searched radius for this database is one mile from the Subject Property. . Registered Underground Storage Tanks Underground storage tanks are regulated under Subtitle 1 of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). The risk commonly associated with UST sites is based on a possible release of a hazardous substance/waste from underground storage tanks or containers. The primary concerns related to USTs are the potential migration of cOD'blm;nation impacting the Subject Property soil, groundwater, and/or potable water supply. The ASTM defined searched radius for this database is one-quarter mile from the Subject Property. Leaking Underground Storage Tank Incident Report Leaking underground storage tank records contain an inventory of reported leaking underground storage tank incidents. The ASTM defined searched radius for this database is one-half mile :from the Subject Property. . Voluntary Cleanup Program (YCP) The Voluntary Cleanup Program (VCP) database includes low threat level properties with either confirmed or unconfirmed releases where the project proponents have requested that the DTSC oversee investigation and/or cleanup activities and have agreed to provide coverage for DTSC activi~es. The ASTM defined searched radius for this database is one-half mile from the Subject Property. . Rossmoor Ccnlm' Phase I BA Seal Beacb, CA 11 Watmstone Bnviromm::ntal, Inc.. Project 04-273 . . . Section 4.0 Government Database Review Surrounding Property Unique Local, Supplemental, and/or Proprietary Databases DRYCLEANERS The Drycleaners database contains a listing of dry cleaning related facilities with EP A identification numbers and includes power laundries, garment pressing, dry cleaning plants, upholstery cleaning, and similar service locations. The ASlM defined searched radius for this database is one-quarter mile from the Subject Property. California SUC Database This database is derived from the California Regional Water Quality Control Board's list of spills, leaks, investigations and/or cleanup (SLIC) sites. The ASTM defined searched radius for this database is one-half mile from the Subject Property. HAZNET The HAZNET database lists sites that have generated hazardous was~ manifests received by the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC). The ASTM defined searched radius for this database is limited to the Subject Property. Historical Databases The Historical Gas Station and Dry Cleaners database, compiled by EDR from national collections of business directories, includes, but is not limited to, historical gas stations, filling stations, auto service stations, dry cleaners, and laundry facilities that were available to the EDR researchers. The findings of these databases are provided in the following sections. 4.2 Subject Property Summary The Subject Property addresses1 were listed in the ERNS, UST, HAZNET, LUST, RCRA-SQG, and FINDS databases in the EDR Report. These listings are summarized below: > According to the EDR Report, the Subject Property address, 12239 Seal Beach Boulevard, is listed twice in the ERNS d8.tabase for an ethylene glycol spill to the storm sewer at the former Goodyear Tire business in September 1990. The company manager was reportedly called and warned to stop dumping this material. No further information regarding this incident is provided in the EDR Report. > The former Subject Property tenant, Goodyear M & N Coastline, is listed in the EDR Report's State Underground Storage Tank (UST) database. No further information 1 Due ~ the size of the Subject Property. several surroun.ding properties listed in the EDR Report are or were located within the Subject Property boundaries. These sites are summarized as part of the Subject Property. Rossmoor Centllr Phase I BA Seal Beach, CA 12 Watmstone BnvimmnentaI. Jnc. Project 04-273 Section 4.0 Government Database Review regarding USTs at the Subject Property is provided in the EDR Report. Additional information regarding this Subject Property tenant is discussed in greater detail in Section 5.0 of this report. > The former Subject Property tenant, M & N Coastline Auto and Tire, is listed in the EDR Report's HAZNET database. According to the EDR Report, 2.11 tons of waste oil and mixed oil were removed from the Subject Property for recycling. No further information regarding this listing is provided in the EDR Report. > The former Subject Property tenant, Goodyear, is listed in the EDR Report's FINDS and RCRA-SQG databases. According to the EDR Report, no ReRA violations are reported for the Subject Property. No further information regarding this listing is provided in the EDR Report. > The former Subject Property tenant, Rossmoor Center Animal Clinic Inc., at 12231 Seal Beach Boulevard, is listed in the HAZNET database. According to the EDR Report, 0.140 tons of''meta1 sludge - alkaline solution with metals" was removed from the Subject Property for recycling. Additional information regarding this former Subject Property tenant is discussed in greater detail in: Section 5.0 of this report. > The former Subject Property tenant, Rossmoor Center Animal Clinic Inc., at 12231 Seal Beach Boulevard, is listed in the Cleaners databases. Based on available . information, this listing may reference a dry cleaning business that was formerly located at the Subject Property. Additional information regarding this former Subject Property tenant is discussed in greater detail in Section 5.0 of this report. > The former location of the current Subject Property tenant, Rossmoor Cleaners, at 12441 Seal Beach Boulevard, is listed in the EDR Report's SLIC database. According to the EDR Report, an initial investigation was performed at this site for perchlorethylene (PCE) impact to groundwater. Additional information regarding this former Subject Property tenant is discussed in greater detail in Section 5.0 of this report. > The former location of the current Subject Property tenant, Rossmoor Cleaners, is listed in the EDR Report's RCRA-SQG and FINDS databases. According to the EDR Report, no RCRA violations are reported for this site. > The former location of the current Subject Property tenant, Rossmoor Cleanen, is listed in the EDR Report's HAZNET, Orange Co. Industrial Site, and Cleaners databases. According to the EDR Report, the Cleaners listing was created in Apri11987 and made "inactive" in May 2004. According to the EDR Report's HAZNET listing, 4.0589 tons of "halogenated solvents" and 2,969 tons of "contaminated soil from site cleanups" have been removed from this site. According to the EDR Report's Industrial Site database, a closme certification was issued in August 2002 for a percbloroethylene release. Additional information regarding this former Subject Property tenant is discussed in greater detail in Section 5.0 of this report. > Subject Property tenant, Tosco176 Station #4686, at 12071 Seal Beach Boulevard, is listed in the EDR Report's LUST (twice) and Cortese databases. According to the EDR . . Report, a remediation pIan. is being prepared for reported gasoline impact to groundwater at this site. Additional information regarding this Subject Property tenant is discussed in Rossmoor Centc:r Phase lEA Seal Beach, CA 13 Waterstone Bmironmcntal, Jnc. Project 04-273 . . . . . . Section 4.0 Government Database Review greater detail in Section 5.0 of this report. > The Subject Property address, 12071 Seal Beach Boulevard, is listed once in the County UST database and twice in the Historical (HIST) UST database. According to the IDST UST listing, one (1) 550-gallon waste oil UST, one (1) 9,886-gallon diesel UST, and two (2) 11,763-gallon gasoline USTs were iDstaIled at the Subject Property in 1982. According to the second HIST UST listing, a "waste" tank of unknown size was also installed at the Subject Property. > The former Subject Property tenant, Happy 1 Hr Photo, at 12391 Seal Beach Boulevard, is listed in the EDR Report's RCRA-SQG, FINDS, and Los Angeles Co. HMS databases. According to the EDR Report, no RCRA violations are reported fOr this site. Two (2) open and two (2) closed HMS permits are listed in the EDR Report. No further information regarding this former tenant is provided in the EDR Report. > Subject Property tenant, Chevron #9-5568, at 12541 Seal Beach Boulevard, is listed in the EDR Report's LUST (twice) and Cortese databases. According to the EDR Report, this site received case closure in February 1992 from. the oversight agency for a reported. waste oil leak to soil only. Currently, a remediation pIan. is being prepared for gasoline impact to groundwater at this site. Additional information regarding this Subject Property tenant is discussed in greater detail in Section 5.0 of this report. Additional information regarding the Subject Property and selected nearby properties was requested from local agencies. The results of:file reviews are snmm~:rized in Section 5.2 of this report. Rossmoor Ccm.ter Phase I EA Seal Beach, CA Watmstonll Bnvinmmc:nta1. Inc. Project: 04-273 14 . ATTACHMENT 7 PLANS . . Page 23 Conditional Use Permit 08-2 Planning Commission Staff Report 12415 Seal Beach Boulevard . February 20, 2008 . Public Hearing De Novo re: Appeal of Conditions on Conditional Use Permit 08-2 City Council Staff Report May 12, 2008 ATTACHMENT 5 PROJECT DEVELOPMENT PLANS . . 08-2 Appeal.CC Staff Report - 12415 SBa (PetSmart) 10 . tJ'1t .:~ \ ..\"" \ " ~ \ Il\% .... .......\....\.. \ ~ , 11 .e 1. 1.' \,l '\!l t\\ '\\ -.4 ;!.\ '. ~ \ : l \ i , \ ,\ , ~ " i . ~ , p .~ \ \. \ ~ \~, ~\" _ 'I , 'd. \~' " . \ \ \ ' ',~. t \ l' w ,h' .\ ~ ~\t .1\ ti : ~\ 'Q,' \1' '; "l~\i t in i' j ,... ~ '" ~\ d \\\ h\\\ l \h j\ ~ .... u.. '"3110~$ , $11\"\"3\,\$ \ .\~\\ 8. ' e\ ~ ~ '; \ \...... ':4? 11\' ~N z~ 4. ~~ \ \ ~~ .. ~~ o-~ . I I .. .. '& . ... t. I \ \ \ I I ~.. I .' I . I ~1I" I ,...,..- . \ I ~!\ ' \ --' \ ~. \ . ~ i '6 \ 'e ~. o . -a. g~ %~ it itli , ~~ '\:. ~~ o -.. i 'f~ _ 01n : ~s