Camarillo City Council
AGENDA REPORT
Date: February 14, 2024
To: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers
From: Greg Ramirez, City Manager
Submitted by: David Sanchez, Community Development Director Subject: Public Hearing to Consider an Appeal of the Planning Commission Decision to Approve CPD-226M(5) and CUP-422 and its Adoption Approving Second Subsequent MND 2023-4 for the Construction of a Costco Wholesale with Off-Sales of Alcoholic Beverages and Free-Standing Fuel Facility, Located South of U.S. 101, North of West Ventura Boulevard, Approximately 980 Feet East of
Springville Drive
BACKGROUND
On December 5, 2023, the Planning Commission adopted Second Subsequent Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) 2023-4 (4-1, Commissioner Limon dissenting), Commercial Planned Development (CPD) 226M(5) and Conditional Use Permit (CUP) 422 (4-1, Commissioner Limon dissenting) for the development of a Costco Wholesale with off- sales of alcoholic beverages and free-standing fuel facility, located south of U.S. 101, north of West Ventura Boulevard, approximately 980 feet east of Springville Drive and west of Home Depot.
In accordance with the Camarillo Municipal Code (CMC) sections 19.26.260 and
19.62.090, the approval by the Planning Commission is final and conclusive on the tenth consecutive calendar day following the date of the Planning Commission’s decision, unless an effective timely and complete appeal is filed. An appeal may be filed by any interested person.
On December 14, 2023, an appeal was filed by Supporters Alliance for Environmental Responsibility (SAFER), represented by the law office of Lozeau Drury LLP. (Attachment 9). On December 15, 2023, a second appeal was filed by Darshann M. Wienick, Esq. on behalf of Ventura County Citizens Against Mega Gas (VCCAMG) (Attachment 10).
The two appeals were filed within the 10-day appeal period following the Planning Commission’s approval of the project. The timely filing of an appeal stays the decisions of the Planning Commission pending the City Council action on the matter. The hearing before the City Council is a de novo hearing where the Council has no obligation to honor
Second Subsequent MND 2023-4, CPD-226M(5) and CUP-422, Costco Wholesale February 14, 2024
1 6
9 9
the prior decision of the Planning Commission and has the authority to make a different decision. The City Council’s decision is final.
APPEAL HEARING PROCEDURES
Below outlines the process for the appeal hearing for due process.
1. City Council will receive staff report.
2. First appellant (SAFER) has 15 minutes to present its reasons for Appeal.
3. Applicant has 15 minutes for a response.
4. First appellant has 5 minutes to rebut.
5. Second Appellant (VCCAMG) has 15 minutes to present its reasons for Appeal.
6. Applicant has 15 minutes for a response.
7. Second Appellant has 5 minutes to rebut.
8. City Council will take public comment.
9. At the conclusion of public comment Councilmembers will have the opportunity to ask questions and request clarification from the parties and to deliberate and render its decision on the appeals.
DISCUSSION
Project Description
CPD-226M(5) was approved by the Planning Commission for the development of 20 acres into a new 163,177-square-foot, one-story Costco Wholesale retail warehouse and free-standing fuel facility with a parking lot consisting of approximately 901 stalls.
The Costco warehouse would include a bakery, pharmacy, optical center, hearing aid center, indoor food court, tire center along with the sales of over 4,000 products. The fuel station is shown at the most northwesterly area of the site to avoid traffic and queuing conflicts with the warehouse and spillover onto the street. The fuel station will provide a fueling capacity for 32 cars at a time with a stacking area to accommodate an additional 42 cars. The pumps will be fully automated and self-service for Costco members only, with an attendant present to direct vehicles and oversee operations.
CUP-422 is requested for the sale of alcoholic beverages under a Type 21 – Off-Sale General Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) license, which authorizes the sale of beer, wine and distilled spirits for consumption off the premises. The floor plan shows liquor sales will utilize 1,980 square feet of interior space and will be located near the back of the warehouse.
The project is consistent with the Camarillo General Plan, Airport North Specific Plan, and zoning for the site, which designate the property for commercial uses. The building is designed in an Early California style of architecture consistent with the Heritage Zone and Airport North Specific Plan guidelines.
Second Subsequent MND 2023-4, CPD-226M(5) and CUP-422, Costco Wholesale February 14, 2024
1 6
9 9
The project was reviewed by the Camarillo Airport and determined to be compatible with the airport operations, Airport Compatibility Land Use Plan (ACLUP) and below the maximum building coverage of 50 percent prescribed in the ACLUP. The building heights were determined to be within the allowable height limits under Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR Part 77) and the Avigation Easement held by the County of Ventura.
The project furthers the goals of the Economic Development Strategic Plan to foster growth in the Camarillo economy, as it promotes the objective of encouraging optimal land use patterns to ensure the long-term viability of Camarillo’s commercial and industrial areas. It is anticipated that Costco Wholesale and the fuel facility will employ approximately 225 to 255 full-time employees.
Additional project details are provided in the Planning Commission agenda report, dated December 5, 2023 (Attachment 5).
Environmental Review
In 2007, the City Council adopted MND 2006-17 for the Paseo Camino Real commercial center project (CPD-226) on a 44.84-acre site, which includes the 20-acre Costco project area, and evaluated the development of up to 499,000 square feet of building coverage with an assumed mix of 429,469 square feet of retail space, 29,531 square feet of restaurant space, and 40,000 square feet of office space.
In 2011, the Planning Commission adopted an Addendum to MND 2006-7 for a Major Modification [CPD-226M(1)]. The modification included changes to the site layout but the overall type and amount of development at the site continued to be less than 499,000 square feet of commercial center building space and the site access points remained unchanged.
In 2016, the Planning Commission adopted Subsequent MND 2016-1 for the Amara Shopping Center project [CPD-226M(3)] for changes to the site plan and building elevations. The Subsequent MND evaluated the development of up to 499,000 square feet in order to provide flexibility in the subsequent site plan development for the project.
A Second Subsequent MND 2023-4 was prepared for the proposed Costco Wholesale and fuel station on 20 acres of the 44.84-acre overall site. The analysis of impacts in Second Subsequent MND 2023-4 tiers off of the analysis presented in the adopted Subsequent MND 2016-1. For purposes of analyzing the remaining 24.84 acres under CEQA, the Second Subsequent MND analyzed up to 335,823 square feet of future commercial building area.
Section 15162 of the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (State CEQA Guidelines) addresses the situation of when an MND has previously been adopted for a project and the issue of whether a subsequent environmental document needs to be prepared. A subsequent EIR is required: when substantial changes are being proposed for a project which requires major revisions to the previously adopted MND due to new potentially significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified potentially significant effects; Second Subsequent MND 2023-4, CPD-226M(5) and CUP-422, Costco Wholesale February 14, 2024
1 6
9 9
when substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project will be undertaken which will require major revisions to the previous MND due to new potentially significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified potentially significant effects; or when there is new information of substantial importance not known at the time of the previous MND’s approval. None of these criteria for a subsequent EIR have been met, therefore, a Second Subsequent MND has been prepared.
Second Subsequent MND 2023-4 concludes that the approval and implementation of the proposed project will not change the location, type, or maximum amount of development evaluated in previously Subsequent MND 2016-1. The mitigation measures identified in Second Subsequent MND 2023-4 will reduce potential impacts of the proposed project to less than significant levels. As such, no new significant impacts will occur with the proposed project beyond those that were evaluated in Final MND 2006-17 and Subsequent MND 2016-1.
A Notice of Availability and Intent to Adopt a Second Subsequent MND was combined with the Notice of Public Hearing and mailed to all property owners and residential occupants within a 600-foot radius of the subject site, posted at Camarillo City Hall, on the City’s website, published in the Ventura County Star and posted on-site. The public comment period to provide written comments on the Second Subsequent MND was from November 9, 2023, through November 28, 2023.
A total of 12 comments on the Second Subsequent MND were received during the 20- day public comment period. Although not a requirement under CEQA, responses to comments were prepared (Attachment 11). The comments and responses to comments are included in the Final Second Subsequent MND 2023-4.
Late comments from Ventura County Air Pollution Control District (VCAPCD), Ventura County Environmental Health Division (VCEHD), and Ventura County Watershed Protection District (VCWPD) were received the day of the Planning Commission meeting on December 5, 2023. The letter from VCAPCD requested additional measures be considered to reduce mobile emissions, such as hiring locally and providing an employee rideshare incentive program. The letter from VCEHD identified permits that would be required for the food court and fuel station. These permits are required under applicable regulations and are not mitigation for potentially significant impacts of the project. The letter from VCWPD confirmed that the project design and the City’s conditions of approval mitigate the direct and indirect project-specific and cumulative impacts to flood control facilities and watercourses.
The comments submitted by the County were responded to verbally during City staff’s presentation to the Planning Commission. Subsequently, following the Planning Commission meeting staff elected to prepare written responses to the County’s comments. A copy of the letters from the County and staff’s responses are provided in the Responses to Late Comments (Attachment 12).
Second Subsequent MND 2023-4, CPD-226M(5) and CUP-422, Costco Wholesale February 14, 2024
1 6
9 9
At the conclusion of the public hearing on December 5, 2023, the Planning Commission approved CPD-226M(5), and CUP-422 with modifications to the conditions of approval to add the recommendations from VCAPCD with the exception of “compressed work schedules” and “reducing number of fuel pumps or staging area capacity”, and the recommendations from VCEHD related to obtaining required permits. These have been added as conditions 210 and 231.
Appeals
An appeal was filed by Darshann M. Wienick, Esq., on behalf of VCCAMG. A letter was submitted detailing the reasons for the appeal, dated December 15, 2023, which has been responded to in the Responses to Late Comments (Attachment 12). The appeal included a copy of the letter submitted during the 20-day public review period on November 28, 2023, which was thoroughly responded to in the Responses to Comments in the Final Second Subsequent MND 2023-4.
A second appeal was filed by Lozeau Drury LLP on behalf of SAFER. The appeal attached the same letter from Lozeau Drury LLP that was submitted on December 30, 2023, after the 20-day public review period. The letter was provided to the Planning Commission prior to the hearing. Staff has provided responses to the comments in the Responses to Late Comments (Attachment 12).
The two separate parties appealing the Planning Commission’s decision to approve the project allege deficiencies in the environmental review of the project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Below is a summary of the issues raised in the appeals and staff’s responses. The appealing party’s name is in parentheses. Full detailed responses are provided in Attachments 11 and 12 and should be referred to for purposes of the Appeals.
•A Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (SEIR) should have been prepared. (VCCAMG and SAFER)
Summary of Response: A comprehensive Second Subsequent MND was prepared to analyze the potential impacts of changes to the approved Amara Shopping Center Project analyzed in the 2007 Final MND and 2016 Final Subsequent MND, specifically the Costco development, as well as changes in the circumstances under which the project will be undertaken. As set forth in the Second Subsequent MND, such changes would not result in any new significant impacts that would require the preparation of a subsequent Environmental Impact Report. Therefore, the Second Subsequent MND is an appropriate document to evaluate the potential environmental impacts of the project. •Second Subsequent MND 2023-4 fails to establish that air quality impacts will be less than significant. (VCCAMG and SAFER)
Summary of Response: The construction-related and operational air quality impacts of the proposed project will be mitigated to less than significant levels through the implementation of mitigation measures AQ-1 through AQ-4. VCAPCD Second Subsequent MND 2023-4, CPD-226M(5) and CUP-422, Costco Wholesale February 14, 2024
1 6
9 9
reviewed the Draft Second Subsequent MND and did not dispute the conclusion that the project will result in a less than significant impact. •Second Subsequent MND 2023-4 fails to establish that the project’s energy impacts will be less than significant. (VCCAMG and SAFER) Summary of Response: Consistent with CEQA and the City of Camarillo CEQA Environmental Guidelines, the Second Subsequent MND assessed whether the project would result in the wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary use of energy and concluded that impacts would be less than significant. Therefore, mitigation measures are not necessary. However, in response to this comment, a Supplemental Energy Analysis was prepared that quantifies the project’s energy use during construction and operation that amplifies, clarifies, and confirms the conclusion of the Second Subsequent MND that the project would not result in wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary use of energy. (Attached to Attachment 12) •The City should require an independent third-party comprehensive study and analysis of transportation impacts. (VCCAMG)
Summary of Response: While the Second Subsequent MND incorporates the information presented in certain technical reports prepared by experts under contract to Costco, the Second Subsequent MND was prepared by Cadence Environmental Consultants under contract to the City of Camarillo. Technical reports were reviewed by Cadence and City staff and subject to revision, which is expressly allowed under CEQA. Traffic impacts are assessed under CEQA based on vehicle miles travelled (VMT), as required under state law. Traffic congestion (as measured by level of service (LOS)) is no longer a CEQA issue and was therefore not addressed in the Second Subsequent MND. No new transportation or traffic impacts from those evaluated in the prior CEQA document for the Amara Shopping Center were identified.
•The Second Subsequent MND did not analyze the potential fugitive dust impacts associated with the excavation for underground storage tanks. (VCCAMG) Summary of Response: The Second Subsequent MND fully evaluated the potential environmental impacts of project construction, including grading and excavation associated with the 32-fueling position fuel facility. Mitigation measure AQ-1 in the Second Subsequent MND requires the project developer to implement fugitive dust control measures in accordance with VCAPCD recommendations and include in construction contracts the control measures required and recommended by the VCAPCD at the time of development. The project is also subject to VCAPCD regulations, including compliance with VCAPCD Rule 55 for Fugitive Dust.
Staff continues to affirm that the project has been properly evaluated in compliance with CEQA and the City of Camarillo CEQA Environmental Guidelines and that the Second Subsequent MND is the appropriate CEQA document, as no new significant impacts have been identified that would require the preparation of a Subsequent Environmental Impact Report. The appeals do not change these conclusions.
Second Subsequent MND 2023-4, CPD-226M(5) and CUP-422, Costco Wholesale February 14, 2024
1 6
9 9
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no budget impact as a result of this action.
CEQA DETERMINATIONS
No new significant impacts will occur with the proposed project beyond those that were evaluated in Final MND 2006-17 and Subsequent MND 2016-1 and Second Subsequent MND 2023-4 has been prepared for the project, which identifies mitigation measures that will reduce potential impacts of the proposed project to less than significant levels.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council conduct the appeal hearing to consider both Appellant’s appeals of the Planning Commission’s approvals and evaluate all testimony provided and take one of the following actions:
1. Adopt Resolutions denying the appeal as follows:
a. Adopt a resolution denying the appeal and upholding the Planning Commission’s adoption approving Second Subsequent MND 2023-4 and b. Adopt a resolution denying the appeal and upholding the Planning Commission’s approval of CPD-226M(5) and CUP-422, subject to the recommended conditions of approval.
2. Direct Staff to return with a resolution of project denial (upholding the appeal) with findings indicated by the City Council.
3. Request additional information from staff.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Resolution for Second Subsequent MND 2023-4
2. Resolution for CPD-226M(5) and CUP-422
3. Public Hearing Notice
4. Location Map
5. December 5, 2023 Planning Commission Agenda Report
6. December 5, 2023 Planning Commission Minutes
7. PC Resolution 2023-28
8. PC Resolution 2023-29
9. Appeal filed by Supporters Alliance for Environmental Responsibility (SAFER), represented by the law office of Lozeau Drury LLP.
10.Appeal filed by Darshann M. Wienick, Esq. on behalf of Ventura County Citizens Against Mega Gas (VCCAMG)
11.Responses to Comments
12.Responses to Late Comments
Second Subsequent MND 2023-4, CPD-226M(5) and CUP-422, Costco Wholesale February 14, 2024
1 6
9 9
REFERENCE MATERIALS – AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW AT CITY HALL AND ON CITY WEBSITE AT www.cityofcamarillo.org/pendingprojects
1. Final Second Subsequent MND 2023-4