Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBackground ReportBACKGROUND REPORT The need for comprehensive Design Guidelines and Best Management Practices became evident at the time that Caliber Collision relocated from their National City Blvd. location to their current locale at 940 Haffley Avenue. At that time and due to no formal design guidelines, the Environmental Health Coalition (EHC) provided input and conditions for Caliber's Conditional Use Permit. These stopgap conditions, although effective, were not all inclusive and needed to be bolstered and/or updated commensurate with recent environmental regulation changes. In order to look for more permanent and comprehensive requirements and standards for auto body shops, staff applied for and received a grant from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to fund research into standards used elsewhere in the country. The EPA produced a comprehensive document that outlined design guidelines and best management practices for auto body shops. Staff edited the document for content and prepared code changes/additions that are part of the pending Land Use Update. It is the intent of the auto body design guidelines to act in a similar manner to the City's architectural Design Guidelines. Given that body shops generally require a CUP to operate, new facilities will be seen and approved by the Planning Commission and City Council. In this regard, staff requested that the Planning Commission review and comment on the attached guidelines and BMPs. The Commission recommendation is thereby transmitted to the City Council for your review and approval. The auto body design guidelines are intended to apply to new construction of auto body shops but would not necessarily exclude their application to the reuse of an existing building. The best management practices (BMPs) contained in the document are intended to apply to both new facilities and those involving reuse of an existing building. Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on May 2, 2011. Commissioners asked questions about newer less polluting paint products, existing illegal facilities in the Westside area, and applicability of the guidelines. There was also the question of whether any industry representatives could review the guidelines. Although the Commission voted to approve the CUP based on required findings, staff contacted a representative from Greenwald's Auto Body for. Their comments were received via an e-mail, a copy of which has been attached to this report. Comments were related to the following items: Design Guidelines: #8 — Parking: The guidelines encourage parking for both customers and employees. Greenwald's suggested that requiring employee parking was onerous due land costs. Response: guidelines are specifically should statements and are generally advisory in nature. The pertinent Code section in the Land Use Code provides the shall statements, or specific requirements. In this case, the (new) Code requires one space per 500 square feet of gross floor area and does not discriminate between customers and employees. #10 — Building Access: The guidelines require that employees utilize rear entrances and exits. Greenwald's suggested that having staff utilize front entrances and exits reduces the potential for theft and/or misunderstandings. Response: Again, this is a should statement and would not necessarily work for every business model. There is no specific requirement in the pertinent Code section that requires separate ingress/egress. #12 — Fencing: The guidelines require that all equipment and vehicle storage areas be screened. Greenwald's takes issue with this requirement due to the fact that screening can impede the ability to detect property and/or vehicle theft in progress after hours. Response: City codes have historically required screening of industrial and storage uses due to the typically undesirable nature of said uses. Both the old and new Land Use Code requires such screening. Best Management Practices: #13 — Inventory Control Practices: This section used the term "waste" interchangeably with excess materials in reference to recycling. Greenwald's correctly points out that recycling of waste (as in hazardous) materials is not permitted by the State and requires special handling. The intent of the section was to encourage a system for excess (over -stocked) material to be used, possibly by another facility, rather than disposed of as waste. The section (last bullet point) has been edited for clarification.