Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 2 - Attachment 5 - Procopio LetterAq Pro PROCOPIO Cop id 525 B Street *Mau Suite 2200 Sari Diego, CA 921.01 T. THEODOREJ. GRISWOLD Partner AUSTIN DELMAR HEIGHTS PHOENIX SAN DIEGO SILICON VALLEY October 4, 2017 VIAARtWIlliQ.MA 1— R&UR& ktEeffIPt k. EQUESTE#�, VIA LN L; GYPILIN661 11GA11I37�CQ(. 0 Caroline Young Associate Planner/Project Manager Development Services Department City of Chula Vista 276 4th Ave. Chula Vista, CA 91.910 Re, Noise Analysis Report - Chula Vista Wash 'N Go Project No. DR15-0037; CUP15-0023; PER15-003 Dear Caroline: As you may be aware, our. office represents a homeowner immediately adjacent to the proposed Wash 'N Go Carwash at 495 Telegraph Canyon Road ("Project"). As we previously outlined In our letter to you dated April 4, 2017 (attached), there were several deficiencies with the draft Noise Analysis that needed to be addressed in order for the final noise analysis to comply with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act. These deficiencies have still not been addressed in the Final Noise Analysis Report, dated August 7, 2037 ("Noise Study"), We understand that the City staff has considered rendering this Noise Study as "complete." It is not. Until such deficiencies (described below and in our April 4th letter) are addressed, the City of Chula Vista cannot make an adequate determination that the Project will not have significant environmental noise impacts, complies with the City Noise Ordinance, nor can it make the required legal findings necessary to approve the condltlonal use permit. The Noise Study, as we previously highlighted, only includes an analysis of the noise caused by the dryers located on the eastern side of the automobile carwash tunnel (see figure 4 of Noise Study). It does not analyze the. noise emanating from other components of the Project, including, the vacuums located outside of the automobile carwash tunnel, intercoms, and customer noise such as car radios and horns. In fact, no noise point sources are Included at any location other than the carwash tunnel. Customer noise is of particular concern, as it is reasonable to anticipate customers, while vacuuming or waiting in the queue of five to ten cars, will have their radios playing loud enough to be heard over the ambient noise (which the Noise Study finds is slgnlficdnt), the vacuums in use, the dryer noise and other operational nolses. These procaploxam DOCS 999992-040101/3076634.2 Attachment 5 gProcopid are customer activities that regularly occur in an automated carwash which are completely ignored by the current study. Given the project's proposal to have minimal personnel on site, these customer -caused noise effects will be virtually unpoliced and predictable. They reed to be included in the Noise Study and structural controls (enclosures) must be in place to minimize the Impact on the community. The Noise Study is inadequate until it is revised to include an analysis of the above noise impacts, In additlon, the Noise Study also does not address the nuisance effects of the aforementioned noises. Due to the high ambient noise level, the Noise Study finds that mitigation measures may be Implemented to reduce the effect of the noise impacts associated with the dryers. However, all of the Intermittent nuisance noise from idling vehicles, the recurring start/stop cycle of the carwash, the noise from the vacuums, music from vehicles waiting in the queue or while customers are vacuum ing their cars and noise from the intercom make the carwash incompatible with the adjacent residential properties. At least one other municipality in San Diego County has denied an automated carwash conditional use permit on the above mentioned ground, finding that, notwithstanding noise impacts being considered less than significant (due to high ambient noise using noise ordinance standards), the nuisance effects from the proposed automated carwash; nearly identical to the above mentioned noises, would not be compatible with the adjacent residential neighborhood and that a Conditional Use Permit should not be Issued. To exacerbate these issues, this is not a case where the residential properties are across the street or otherwise separated from the proposed Project, rather the proposed location of the Project directly borders the residential properties within feet of homes and backyards. In addition, the Noise Study fails to analyze periodic increases in ambient noise levels In the project vicinity as a result of the Project. According to the Noise Study, the ambient noise exceeds the exterior noise levels limits established by municipal code; however, the Noise Study does not address the increases In ambient noise as a result of the Project. Just because a location near residences has become noisy due to expanded traffic volumes, does not mean that adding to that noise is not an impact. To take such a position would logically lead to the effective eviction of homeowners as they struggle to deal with compounding municipal approvals. The above deficiencies, and those outlined in our letter dated April 4th, result 1n a Noise Study that is inadequate to determine the potential environmental impacts of the Project. The proposed mitigation measures fail forthese same reasons, as IIke the impact analysis, theyfail to address the other noise point sources that will occur from the project. On behalf our client, we respectfully request that the Noise Study is revised to address the foregoing and circulated to the pubiic. Should you have any questions or wish to cilscuss please feel free to contact me, Best regards, Theodore J. Griswold Partner, of Procopio, Cory, Hargreaves & Savitch I.LP TJG/pat Enclosure; Letter dated April 4, 2017 2 proccpIO.c0m DOCS 999992.000101/3076834.2 gProcopid PROCPI C5treet 52 6 i�wwwN Suite 2200 San Diego, CA 92102 T. J USTIN E K. N IELSEN AUSTIN DEL MAR HEIGHTS PHOENIX SAN DIEGO SILICON VALLEY April 4, 2017 VIA > MAEL (dY011NG@CH,ULAVlSTACA.Q ft Caroline Young Associate Planner/Project Manager Development Services Department City of Chula Vista 276 Fourth Avenue San Diego, CA 91910 Re: Wash `N Go Carwash - 495 Telegraph Canyon Road Project No. DR 15-0037, CUP 15-0023, & PER 16-0003 Dear Caroline; As you know, we represent neighbors who_ reside near the proposed Wash `N Go Carwash at 495 Telegraph Canyon Road. These neighbors are particularly concerned about the noise impacts associated with the proposed carwash adjacent to a single-family residential neighborhood. We have reviewed the City's Issues Report dated March 17, 2017 and the applicant's draft Noise Analysis dated August 11, 2016 and have significant concerns.. The draft Noise Analysis is inadequate and must be revised in order to comply with the requirements of California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"). In addition to correcting the deficiencies in the Noise Analysis as outlined in the City's Issues Report, we believe the Noise Analysis should, at -a minimum, include the following: Revise the use description consistent with the Chula Vista Municipal Code ("CVMC" ). An "auto spa" is not a recognized use in the CVMC; • Include an analysis of corn piiance with the use regulations applicable to automobile car wash facilities including but not limited to mitigation measures that include soundproofing the facility so that noise emanating therefrom, Including noise from operations as well as customer noise, is no more audible than ambient noise levels; ! Include an analysis of compliance with the City's Noise Significance Thresholds; procoplo.com DOCS 999992-0001.01/2874442.1 OProcopiu MORM14 • Include an analysis of increases in amblent noise levels In the project vicinity; and Include an analysis of periodic increases in noise levels attributed to car alarms, dryers, vacuums and the use car stereos by customers while vacuuming a waiting for car wash entry. Until the draft Noise Analysis is revised to include the foregoing information, the City cannot determine whether significant environmental noise impacts will result from the property and therefore, cannot make a determination as to what type of environmental document must be prepared for the project and which mitigation measures should be incorporated into the project, Additionally, approval of the conditional use permit requires that the decision maker make specific legal findings including the following: That the proposed use at the particular location Is necessary or desirable to provide a service or facility which will contribute to the general well-being of the neighborhood or the community; • That such use will not, under the circumstances of the particular case, be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of persons residing or working In the vicinity, or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity; • That the proposed use will comply with the regulations and conditions specified in this title for such use; • That the granting of this conditional use will not adversely affect the General Plan of the City or the adopted pian of any governmental agency. There is insufficient analysis contained in the draft Noise Analysis to provide enough information to determine whether the proposed car wash use could meet the foregoing findings, particularly as It relates to whether the use is necessary or desirable, or detrimental to the health and general welfare of neighbors, or whether it complies with the City's use and noise regulations. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions or wish to discuss. Very truly yours, -( Justine K. Nielsen cc: Steve Powers 2 procopionlin DOCS 999992.000101/2874442.1