W
McC0RMICK
BARSTOW LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
Christopher S. Hall
(Admitted in California)
[email protected]
FRESNO, CA OFFICE
7647 North Fresno Sfeet
Fresno, California 93720
P.0. Box 28912
Fresno, CA 93729-8912
Tel€phone (559) 433-'1300
Fax (559) 433-2300
othor ottices of
McCoRMICK, BARSToW, SHEPPARD,
WAYTE & CARRUTH LLP
M. mccormickbarstow. com
BAKERSFIELD, CA OFFICE
5060 California Avo., Suite 1090
Bakersfield, California 93309
Telephone (661 ) 616-1594
Fax (661) 616-1595
CINCINNATI, OH OFFICE
Scripps Center, Suite 1050
3'12 Walnut Street
Cincinnati, Ohio 45202
Telephone (51 3) 7 62-7 52O
Fax (5131 762-7521
LAS VEGAS, NV OFFICE
8337 West Sunset Road, Suite 350
Las Vegas, Nevada 891 13
Telephone (702) 949-1 100
Fax (702) 949-1 101
MODESTO, CA OFFICE
1 1 25 I Street, Suite 1
Modesto, California 95354
Telephone (209) 524-1 100
Fax (209) 524-1 1 88
RENO, NV OFFICE
201 W. Liberty Street, Suite 320
Reno, Nevada 89501
Telephone (775) 333-0400
Fax (775) 333-041 2
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA OFFICE
'1041 Mill Street, Suite l05
San Luis Obispo, California 93401
Telophone (805) 541-2800
Fax (805) 541-2802
Re
May 11,2023
Vra, U.S. Mlrr, aNo Er-pcrRoNrc Mrul
Jennifer Clark, Director
Planning & Development
City of Fresno
2600 Fresno Street
Fresno, California 93721
APPEAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
Development Permit Application No. P22-01346
Our File No.: 041235.000000
Dear Ms. Clark:
Pursuant to Fresno Municipal Code section 15-5005(I), Xiamy Ly-Yang on behalf of Rivendell Community, Inc., and Gerry Mirassou as Co-Trustee of the Mirassou Survivor's Trust created April 30, 2005 (Owner of Airport Village) hereby appeal the findings of the Director and Planning Commission that Development Permit Application No. P22-01346 is categorically exempt from CEQA under 14 CCR $ 13332 /Class 32 In-Fill Project. A copy of the Notice of Exemption filed on May 8, 2023 is attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and is incorporated by this reference as though fully set forth herein. The basis of this Appeal is that there is a reasonable probability that the designated activity for the Project will have a significant effect on the environment due to unusual circumstances. (14 CCR $ 15300.2(c).) As detailed in the numerous comment letters presented in opposition to the Project, the Project is located adjacent to an adult daycare facility for autistic individuals. These individuals are particularly susceptible to noise, traffic and parking concerns associated with the Project. (See Letters in Opposition, attached hereto as Exhibit "B", incorporated by references as though fully set forth herein.) Despite the unusual circumstance and reasonable probability of significant environmental effects being brought to the Director and Commission Members' attention, no findings were made regarding the issues in violation of CEQA.
Ms. Ly-Yang and Mr. Mirassou are conculrently petitioning Mayor Dyer and Councilmember Maxwell to appeal the approval of Development Permit Application No. P22-01346. A copy of that Petition will be provided under separate cover. Please include this Appeal and the subsequent Petition in the Record of Proceedings associated with the Project.
W
McCORMICK
BARSTOW LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
Jennifer Clark
May 11,2023
Page2
Please contact the undersigned with any questions, comments or concerns. I have previously requested special notice of any actions taken regarding this Project.
Very truly yours,
Christopher S. Hall
CSH
Enclosures
cc: Mayor Jeny Dyer
Councilmember Tyler Maxwell
Xiamy Ly-Yang
Gerry Mirassou
Jose Valenzuela
Kristi Costa
041235-000000 9108485. I
EXHIBIT (IA''
FROM: Cily of Fresno
Planning and Development Department
2600 Fresno Streel, 3'd Floor
Fresho, Galifornia 937 21 -3604
NOTI M ON
TO: X Fresno County Clerk
2220'Tulare Street
Fresno, California 93721
€za > tj,{}{}$ !3L
ItE
MAY tl8 2023
-Office
of Planning & Research SCH NO.: N/A
P.O. Box 3044, Room 212
Sacra rnento, Galiforn ia 9581 2-30 44
Project Titlez Development Permit Applieation No. P22-01 346 Project Laca:tion; 4941 East McKinley Avenue (APN: 491-291-05) Proiect'Loeatidn -.City: City of Fresno Project Location - Coun$y: County of Fresns Description of Nature, Purpose, and Benefiaiaries of Project: Envir,onmental Assessment No, P22-0i346 was filed by Orlando Ramirez of Rarnirez Planning, lnc-, on behalf of Mohamad Assad, and pertains to t0.69 acres of vacant property. Development Permit Application P22-O1346 requests authorization to construct a t3,500- square-foot autornated carwash building with approximately 16 ysn-i6ls.self-serviee- vacuum stalls. ln addition, the project proposes on and off.site i6provements including but not lirnited to landscaping, a modified drive approach and utilities. The project is located in the lL (Light lndustrial) zone district.
Name of PubliC Agency Approving Project: City of Fresno, Planning and Development Department lVame 6f Petson or Ag€ne Carrlring Out Projecf;Orlando Ramirez of Ramirez Planning, lnc.
Declare.d' Emerge.ncyl -PRCS21
Emergency Project - PRC s
FRE$NO COUNTY CLERK
By . "YVrq*,q,nrvt,.
{} " t} {l DEPUTY
(check if aftached)
agency approving the prpject? [ Yes n No
Exempt Sfafirs,:
Ministerial:
(check,one),
PRC S 21080(b X1)r cEOn
CEQA G ines 1X Categorical Exemptions -
I Statutory Exemption - PRC
Reasons why prqject is exempf; The proposed project is character:ized as in-fill development and ,is- coRsistent with the c6nditions of Sectish 153321Class 32 exemption, as demo-nslrated in the attached Categorical Exemption Deter:mination fot"Development Permit No. P22'01346.
Lead Agency Contact Person: Jose Valenzuela, Supervising Planner Telephone Na.: (559) 621-8070
If filedlsigned by applicant:
Attach certified document of exemption finding
Has a Notice of .Exemption
Signature:
been filed by the p-ublic
Date:
DP No. P22-01346
CEQA Notice of Exemption
May 5, 2923 vs.#2,5t{t{w132
Frinted,Name, and Title: Jose Valenzuela, $uperuising Planner City of Fresno Planning and Development Departr.nent
X signed by Lead Agency n SigneA by applicant
Attachments: Exhibit A - Vicinity Map
,Categorical Exemption Dete rmi nation for P 22-01 346
ExhibitA-VicinityMap 2{LUa
1;4;514
0 0.03 0.06
{)il01 L
1:i lfl zoiag-,. 1 :n7 :zz PM
0 0.0s o"r
Al2ml
O-2 kmm , Subject,FropertY
AtcGlS Wab AppSlild€a
CITY OF FRESNO
CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR 07tz&t0l/,{}ilt32
DEVELOPMENT PERMIT APPLICATION NO. P22.O1346
THE PROJECT.DESCRIBEN HEREII.I IS DETERMINED To BE cATEGoRIcALLY
EXEMPT FROM THE PREPARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTS
ACCORDING TO ARTICLE 19 OF THE STATE CEQA GUIDELINES.
APPLICANT: Orlando Ramirez
Ramirez Development
4233 West Wathen Avenue
Fresno, C493722
PROJECT LOCATION: 4941 East McKinley Avenue, located on the northwest corner of East McKinley and North Fine Avenues in Fresno, California.
APN: 494-291-05 (Councit District 4)
PROJECT DE$CRIPTION: ,Development Permit Application No. P22-01346 was filed'by Orlando Ramirez of Ramir:ez Development and pertains to,a x4,400 square-foot building consisting of a 12O-foot
canruash tunnel and 16 vacuum stalls on a t0.69-acre parcel located at the property noted above. The subject property is located in the lL (Lightt lndustrial) zone district.
This project is exempt under Sections 15332/Class 32 (ln-fill Development Projects)of the California Environmental Quality Act (GEQA) Guidelines as follows:
Section 15332lClass,32 {C-lass 32lln.Fill Development Projeets) of the GEQA Guidelines exempts from the provisions of GEQA, projects characterized as in-fill development, which meet the following conditions:
a) The project is consistent with the applicable general plan designation and all applicable gen policies as well as with applicable zoning designation and regulations.
The proposed project (AutomobileA/ehicle Washing) will meet all the provisio-ns of the Fresno Municipal Code. The project is 'consisfent with 'the Fresno General Plan designatioh, policies, and zoning. The existing'.11, (l-igh't lndustrial) zone district is consistent with the Empioyment-Light lndustrial planned land,use designation approved for this site bylhe Fresno General Plan, McLa'ne Comrnunity Plan, and the Fresno County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. b) The proposed development occurs within city limits on a project site of no more than five acres substantially surrounded by urban uses.
ct (Automobite/Vehicle Washing) is located within the city limits, occurs on a vacant site of :approximately 0,69 acres, which is less than the five-acre maximum, and is surrounded by offices.
c) The project has no value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species.
The site is currently vacant the Fresno Program Environmental lmpact Report (PEIR) did not identify this site as habitat for rare or threatened species. Surrounding developments consists of EA No. P22-01346
December B,2422
€&*zsta{){){}tTL
existing fast-food restaurants,and offices; therefore, it has no value as habitat for endangered, rare, or threatened species.
d) Approval of the project would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality.
The proposed project was routed to the San Joaquin Air Pollution Control Distr:ict, the city of Fresno Public Utilities Department-Water Division, Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District, and no significant effects were identified relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality.
Traffic
Senate Bill (SB) 743, signed in 2013, changes how transportation studies are,conducted in California Environme.ntal Quality Act (CEQA) documents. Vehicle miles traveled (VMT) replaces motorist delay and level of service (LOS) as the metric for impact determination. The Office of Planning and ReSearch provides a TechnicalAdvisory (TA) as a guidance document to establish thresholds for this new VMT'metric. The TA acknowledges that conditions may exist that would presume that a development projecl has a less than significant impact. These may be size, location, proximity to transit, or: trip-making potential. As a result of the final rulemaking surrounding SB 743 and the implementation deadline of July 1, 202.0, the City of Fresno adopted new VMT thresholds and guidefines to address the shift from delay-based LOS CEQA traffic analyses to VMT CEQA traffic analyses on June 25,2O2Aiand became effective on July 1,2A2O.
Based upon the City of Fresnors adopted VMT thresholds and guidelines, screening of projects is perrnitted if a project qualifies as a low,trip generator. (less than 500 daily trips generated). The propgs-ed automated car washing pr:oject consists of approximately 4;400 square feet of building consisting o! a 1l}-foot automated-washing tunnel. Vehicle washing facilities experience the most traffic on Saturdays and peak hours can vary between 10 a.m. to 1 p.m. and 3 p.m. to 5 p.m. Peak hour de.mand rate on. Saturday is gene,rally 2Q% higher. then on weekdays. Based on a peak rate number of '14.2 peak trips per 1,000 sf gross floor area (4,400 sf. building), anticipated peak trlps will not exceed 62 vehicle peak hour demand rate and is anticipated to generally occur between 3:00 and 4:15 p.rn. Trip generation rates for the proposed project was gathered through analysis of the 1l0ih Edition Trlp G'eneration Manual published by the lnstitutb of Transportation Engineers (lTE). Subsequently, the project includes site improvements to the 0.69-acre commercial parcel that upon full buildout; the carwash is anticipated to be used by 300-400 vehicles per day. The total estimated ADT generated by the proposed project is less than the 500 ADT established screening threshold. 6iven the adopted.significance t-hreshotd criteria of the Ciiy of Fresno, staff determined that the proposed project can be screened out from further VMT impact analysis and, therefore, would not result in any significant traffic impacts based upon the City of Fresno's adopted thresholds and guidelines for VMT analyses.
Noise
Staff reviewed the policies of the Fresno General Plan, Fresno Program Environmental lmpact Report (PEIR), and Municipal code to determine,if the proposed project produces a significant increase in ambient noise levels. The City of Fresno Noise Element of the General Plan establishes a Noise Exposure from Stationary Noise Sources standard of 50 dBA Hourly Equivalent Sound'Level,(Leq) ,and a Maximum Sound Level (Lmax) of 70 dBA during the daytime (7 a.m.-10 p.m.) and 45 dBA and 60 dBA for nighttime (10,p.m,-7 a.m.) respectivelli. The noise exposure standard is applied to the pr:operty line of the receiving land use' EA No. P22-O1346
December 8,2A22
Ezsz%til*$$\3L
Hourly Equivalent Sound is a single-number representation of the fluctuating sound level in decibels over a specifled period of time, in this case one hour. lt is a sound-energy average of the fluctuating level. The Maximum Sound Level is the highest value measured by the sound level meter over a given period of time, based on the time-weighted sound level in dB, using either the fast or slow time constant. A-weighting decibels (dBA) are the measurements from a sound meter which gives more value to where the ear is more sensitive and less value to frequencies that the ear is not as sensitive to. Most modern sound meters automatically convert to A.weighted decibels. ln other words, the A-weighted decibel provides a measurement to how the human ear perceives sound.
Knowledge of the following relationships is helpful in understanding how changes in noise and noise exposur€: dre perceived:
Except under special conditions, a change in sound level of 1 dB cannot be perceived; . A 3 dB change is considered a just-noticeable difference; , . A 5 dB change is required before any noticeable change in community response would be expected. A 5 dB increase is oflen considered a significant impact; and . A 10 dB increase is subjectively heard as an approximate doubling in loudness and almost always causes ah adverse community respon$e.
Outdoor ambient noise levels are perrnitted to be higher for urban areas and commercial sites, and higher still for industrial areas.
Longstanding City policy for stationary sources has been to require enclosure, muffling, and/or greater setbacks so that adjacent propeffies are not exposed to excessive noise levels. Nuisance noise abaternent has been acoomplished through, the Cityls Noise Ordinance. Noise from transportation facilities has been controlled primarity by State and federal standards but also by distancing sensitive uses from these facilities, and by use oJ souhd.pr.oofing construction measures, such as masonry walls and sealed buildings.
According to the projeet.applicantthe proposed carwash would utilize MacNeil RS -301 High Side Washer, MacNeil RS-400 Low Side Washer with MacNeil brush systems. The proposed car wash would also utilize a Motor City Wash Works Air One Dryer system. Noise level measurements were provided at both the entrance and exit sides'of the car wash tunne.l. The dryer (biower) portion,of the operation represents the loudest' equipment, which is located at the-tunhel exit.
Therefore, noise levets,at.the exit side,of the tunnel are louder than those at the entrance side of the tunnel. The measured noise levels provided describe the project-related noise levels at a distance of fifty (50,):feet directly facing:both the tunnel entrance ind the tunn-el ,exit. lrlumbers obtained .from identical facilities in the region provide readings of 71. Leq and 75 Lmax af 50 feet, directly facing the entrance. Readings from 50 feet and directly facing the tunnel exit are 79 Leq and 82, Lmax. The car wash tunnel will be or:iented in an east/west alignment,direction, where the tunnelwalls will prwide varying levels of acoustical shielding to locations to the north and south.
The entrance portion of the carwash tunnet will be approximately 14Q feet when measured at an approximate 45 degree angle, from the nearby Rivendell Adult Day Care Center door and approximately 85 feet from the west ploperty line. Noise levels can be e'xpected to be r:educed to 6-8 dB at 50 f€et away measured al a 45 degree angle from the tunnel entrance and further decibel reduction at a greatei distance. The exit portion of the tunnel will face North Fine Avenue, nebr the East McKinley Avenue and North Fine Avenue corner. Facing the tunnelat 90.degr:ees, noise levels can be expected to be reduced by 10-15 dB below noise levels that were measured directly in line with the tunnel, at the same distance of 50 feet. Further noise reduction would occur with the proposed exit tunnel located approximalely 143 feet away from the adjacent office building and 122 feet from the north property line.
The project would include a vacuum station area with approximately 16 vacuum stalls. The project would utilize Vacutech Model: FT-DD-T33OHP4 (3OHP T3 Turbine Vacuum Producer with Exhaust Silencer) vacuum units at the site. Noise level data provided by the manufacturer indicates that the noise levels associated with the vacuum units would be expected to be approximately 60 dB at a distance of 5 feet from the turbine. The closest p.roposed vacuum unit to the north property line adjacent to exiting office land uses is setback a distance of approxirnately 30 feet. Taking into account the standard rate of attenuation with inereased distance from a point source (.6 dB/doubling of distance), noise levels associated with the vacuum units would not exceed the standards of 50 Leq and 70 Lmax at the shared property lines.
The proposed project will not involve activities which would be anticipated to result in major noise- generating stationary uSes which would impinge on existing noise-sensitive uses within the project area, including but not limited to those daycare and office uses located at a distance of more than 120 feet from the proposed carwash tunnel.
EA No. P22-01346
December 8,2A22
Air Qualitv
The project is conditioned to comply with any
Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District a
regard to air quality during construction and
identified the air district.
Water Quality
*"a79 W{r{t{)\gZ_
applicable regulations and conditions from the San
nd ihe project is subject to review by the agency ih
operation. No significant air quality impacts were
The site has been,reviewed and conditioned by the Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control Distriot, Fresno, Gounty Public l-lealth, and the City of Fresno- Public lJtilities in, regard to water quality, The surounding propefties have been substantially ,developed and therefore ,Utilities and public services infrastructure exists in the area. Therefore, no significant water: quality impacts were identified.
None of the exceptions to Categoricai Exemptions outlined in the CEQA Guidelines, Section 15300.2 apply to the project. Furthermore, the proposed project is not expected to affect the environment significantly. A categorical exemption,,as noted abgve, h3s been prepared for the project, and the aieh is not ehVjronmenfallV sdnsifiVe
Date December 8,2022
la
Supervising Planner
Planning & Development
Department
(559) 621-8070
Submitted by:
EXHIBIT (IB''
m
McCORMlCK
BARSTOW LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
ChrisOpherS.Hall
(AdmiReciin Cajlfomia)
chriseor«[email protected]
FRESNO. CA OFFICE
7S47 North Fresno Sheet
Fresno, Cafifomia93720
P.O. 60x28912
Fresno. CA93729-8912
Telephone{559]433-1300
Fax (559)433-2300
Other offices of
McCORMlCK.BARSTOW,SHB>PARD.
WAYTEiCARRimfLiP
www.mccormickbarstow.com
BAKERSFIELD, CA OFFICE
6060 California Ave.. Suite 1090
Bakersfield, California 93309
Telephone (661)516-1594
Fax (661)616-1595
CINCINNATI. OH OFFICE
Scripps Center, Suite 1050
312 Walnut Street
Cincinnati, Ohio 45202
Telephone (513) 762-7520
Fa* (513)762-7621
LAS VEGAS. NV OFFICE
0337 West Sunset Road, Suite 350
Las Vegas, Nevada 89113
Telephone (702) 949-1100
Fax (702) 949-1101
MODESTO, CA OFFICE
1125 I Street, Suite 1
Modesto, Califorrua 95354
Telephone (209) 524-1100
Fa* (209) 524-1188
RENO. NV OFFICE
201 W Liberty Street, Suite 320
Reno, Nevada 89501
Telephone (775) 333-0400
Fax (775) 333-0412
SAN LUIS OBISPO. CA OFFICE
1041 Mill Street, Suite 105
San Luis Obispo, California 93401
Telephorre (805) 541-2800
Fax (805) 541-2802
March 14, 2023
Jose Valenzuela
City of Fresno
Supervising Planner Development Services Division
Via email: Jose.Valenzueiatarresno.'^ov
PubiicConimcntsPlan niwndi]frcsn o. uov
Re: Development Permit Application No. P22-01346
4941 E. McKinleyAve. Project (APN494-291-05)
Dear Mr. Valenzuela and Commission Members:
This letter issubmittedin oppositionto DevelopmentPermit ApplicationNo.
P22-01346, for Property at 4941 East McKinley Avenue (APN 494-291-05) (the "Project"). The undersigned, and the law firm of McCormick Barstow, LLP, has been retained to representXiamy Ly-Yang ("Sammy") and Gerry Mirassou. Sammy is a tenantat the adjacentparcel (4927 East McKinleyAvenue,Fresno,CA93727)and the operator of Rivendell Community Inc., an Adult Development Center. Mr. Mirassou is Co-Trusteeof the MirassouSurvivor's Trust created April 30, 2005, the owner of Airport Village. Please include this correspondencein the Planning Commission's information packet for consideration.
My clients oppose the Project on the grounds that the Project is inconsistent with the uses of the adjacent properties and violates the terms of the Cross Access & Parking Agreement (Exhibit "P" to the Staff Report). They also object to the Applicants improperly attempting to make use of a categorical exemption to avoid examinationof thesignificantenvironmentalimpactsthat will be createdif the Project is approved. My clients ask that the Planning Commission deny the Application in its entirety for the following reasons. Alternatively, the Planning Commission must requirethat the Applicantpreparean EnvironmentalImpactReport ("EIR") to examine the significantenvironmentalimpacts caused by the Project and analyze and adopt feasiblemitigationmeasuresto eliminateor reducethose impacts.
It is ourunderstandingthat there is progress on a planneddevelopment located on 4941 East McKinley Avenue in Fresno. Specifically, we understand that the intendeddevelopmentof thisparcelis anautomatedcarwash,which is ofgreatconcern as set forth herein. There are serious concerns about the detrimentaland damaging impactsof theproposedproject,with respectto boththeexistinguse ofthe neighboring property owned by Gerry Mirassou and the impact of the project upon the current tenants of the neighboring property, who provide tremendous community services to a vulnerable population in Fresno.
1^
IVI c C 0 R IVI1 C K
BARSTOW LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
March 14, 2023
The larger area, commonly known as Airport Village, was planned and developed as an integratedcommercial/officecomplex with shared access and shared parking. (See, Exhibit "P" to the Staff Report.) Generally, the Project involves removingparkingspaces,changingthe locationof thehandicapaccessramp,relocating the entrance driveway, automobile stacking areas immediatelyin front of existing offices tenants, and blocking traffic due to stacking in relocated driveway. What is greatly distressing is that this project will drastically impact the current tenants as well as future prospective tenants on the neighboring property—yet, the neighboring landowner,Mr. Mirassouwasnever consultedaboutthese potentialissuesorpemiitted to engage in dialogue with the developer and/or the City, nor given notice of the proposed Project. Nor was Mr. Mirassou given notice when his property wasrezoned to light industrialas part ofcity-widerezoningeffort. Had notice been provided,Mr.
Mirassouwould have expressedhis concern with the rezoningof his property,given its existing use. Even so, the regulationsgoverning EmploymentDistrictsrequire consideration existing uses so as to provide for the proper location of businesses that may have the potential to generate off-site impacts. (14 CC&R § 15-1301.) The operationof acarwashnext tothe existinguse ofParcel"A" as an adultcare facilityis fundamental inconsistent.
One critical concern is the parking associatedwith the Project. Based upon a reviewof plans andblueprints,it appearsthat SurfThruCar Wash plansto removethe handicap spaces directly in the front and center of the building on Mr. Mirassou's property,and move such spaces to thewesternmostpart of the parking lot. Itfurther appears that the handicap access ramp to the building is also intended to be moved to the westernmost part of the site. Not only will handicap persons have to cross the street to get to the ramp, but it is a significant distance—about 350 feet to get to the easternmost part of the building. In addition to the handicap spaces, it appears that the Project proposes to remove 43 parking spaces from Parcel B, as well as17 spaces from the propertyowned by Mr.Mirassou,leavingonly 38 spacesfor saidproperty.The 38 remaining spaces are less than the required 41 spaces for the property's commercial/officeuse (one spaceper 400 sq.ft.), resultingin Mr. Mirassou's property no longer meeting City of Fresno parking regulations, potentially creating a nonconforming land use.
Not only does the proposed Project impede existing property use and compliance, but it also uniquely threatens a group of vulnerable, underprivileged adults. Since 2018, Airport Village has been home to Rivendell Community Inc. ("Rivendell"), an agency serving underprivileged and vulnerable adults with disabilities. Rivendell is owned by Xiamy Ly-Yang. Rivendell offers services five (5) days per week, and its clientele range from severely to mild developmentally disabled adults. Rivendell provides a safe haven to low-income disabled adults who are often socially isolated from the mainstream community due to their disabilities, language barriers, societal and cultural stigmatization, and inadequate services. Rivendell is one of a handful of agencies that serves disabled adults in the Central Valley and has become an integral part of the Fresno community. Many local families, and their m
IVI cCOT^Ml CK
BARSTOW LIP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
March 14, 2023
disabled children, depend on Rivendell to provide assistance and care for these vulnerable adults.
Critically, Rivendell also provides a unique service in on-site job and work training. These jobs at Rivendell are specifically tailored to the needs of the clients.
For example,at Rivendell's bakery kitchen,the adults can work a few hours per day under the proper supervision of Rivendell staff to so that they can develop job skills, job training, and gain further independence.
Sadly, the proposed Project jeopardizes the services that Rivendell will be able to offer the Fresno community, and may jeopardize Rivendell in its entirety. The cumulative impact of the proposed Project on this vulnerable population was not considered in approving a categorical exemption. Nor was the correct baseline establishedto evaluatepotentiallysignificantenvironmentalimpacts. Specifically,the construction of the car wash will result in loud noises from the car washing machines and the large vacuums and the music from the customers' cars. With the vulnerable adult populationjust steps away, these constant,high-volumenoises will cause very likely substantial harm to many of Rivendell's clients who experience sensory integrationchallenges,whichincludevisualand auditorytriggers.TheApplicant's own noise study shows that the Project will generate operational noise levels that exceed 65.
It also shows that levels will reach as high at 60 in certain spots of Rivendell.
Tragically, these sensory integration challenges often present through a physical manifestationof stress and anxiety, such as self-abusive behavior, including clients hitting themselves on the head repeatedly, scratching their own faces, and hitting themselves on the temples. Should the Project be approved, Rivendell's families and clients will likely be unable to continue to participate in the Rivendell program, resulting in this vulnerable group of underprivilegedadults and families lacking necessary support and forcing Rivendell to close its doors and lay off all of its employees.
Additionally,the establislimentof a car wash in this location presents other safety concerns for thisdisadvantagedgroup. As discussed above, Surf Thru Car Wash is proposingto demolishthe existinghandicapparkingstalls right infront of the main entrance to Rivendell. Therefore, Rivendell's clients with wheelchairs and walkers will no longer have direct andunimpededaccess to the main entry door. The distancefrom the existinghandicapparking stalls to the facility'smain door is about 5 feet away, whereasthe new locationof thehandicapstalls under SurfThru Car Wash's proposal places these handicap spaces at hundreds of feet away from the main door. These new handicapparkingstalls would also be locatedon the farwest side of the parkinglot, which, in additionto the physicaldistance,will be challengingfor Rivendell's clients and the public to navigate to the building. The path to Rivendell from across the parking lot has a multitude of support structures that will impede client wheelchairs and walkers along the side of the Rivendell building. The support structures would likely have to be removed and rearranged to allow for a clear path for Rivendell's disabledclientsto accessthe main entrance,whichposesan issuefor Rivendelland the property owner, Mr. Mirassou.
m
IVI c C 0 R IVl 1 C K
BARSTOW LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
March 14, 2023
Along the samelines, the car wash appearsto threatenthe existingbusingand family transportationto and from Rivendell. Many of the adults are brought to the facility by large EOC buses. Given the disabilitiesof Rivendell'sclients, including those clientsin wheelchairs,thesebusesrequirea significantamountof spaceand time to load/unloadtheadults intoand out of thebus. As weunderstand,the existingproject proposes to modify the existing entrance from Fine Avenue for its customers, which would result in Rivendell's buses being unable to use such entrance. This would also precludeRivendellfamiliesand parentsfrom having a safe space to enter the facility and drop off their children.
At its core, the Project proposal as planned, threatens the existenceof Rivendell and drasticallyinterfereswith and obstructsMr. Mirassou'suse of hisown property.
We respectfully urge the City to consider these detrimental impacts of Surf Thru Car Wash and take necessary and appropriate actions to address these such detrimental impactsand toprotectthe vulnerableand underservedadultsin the Fresnocommunity.
I. CEQA
The Application improperly make useof Categorical Exemption Class 32 (In- Fill Development). A Class 32 exemption from the mandates of CEQA is only available if certain criteria is met. On such criteria is that it must be demonstrated that the projectwouldnot resultinany significanteffectsrelatingtotraffic,noise,airquality andwater quality. (14CCR§ 15332(d).)A categoricalexemptionis unavailablewhen there is a reasonableprobabilitythat an activity will have a significanteffect on the environmentdue tounusualcircumstances. (14 CCR §15300.2(c).) An unusual circumstance exists due to the unusual yet vital use made on the adjacent property. As set forth above, Rivendell provides a necessary service to some of theCity's most underservedandsensitiveresidents. These individualsareunusually susceptible to noise and traffic impacts. Adequate disabled parking is crucial to servicing this community. Yet, nowhere in the Environmental Assessment for the proposed Project is this community recognized, much less protected.
A. Noise
The Noise Study prepared by MD Acoustics, LLC establishes that the Project will generate operational noise levels in excess of 65 dB(A). (Exhibit "0" to Staff Report.) Levels within the Airport Village facility, where Rivendell is located, will range between 65 and 45 dB(A). Table 15-2506-B of the Fresno Municipal Code establishes that the maximum allowable dB(A) for schools and office buildings is 45.
It also establishes that the maximum allowed for other noise sensitive uses is to be established by the Review Authority. Despite the study and the limits established by the Fresno Municipal Code, the Environmental Assessment for the Project concludes m
M cCORMlCK
BARSTOW LIP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
March 14, 2023
that the proposedProjectwill not impingeon existing noise-sensitiveuses in the area of the Project.
The proposedProject w/// have a significanteffect on the adjoiningproperty.
The Noise Study conducted for the Project at the request of Fresno County EnvironmentalHealth demonstratesthat the noise generated by the operation of the Projectwill exceedallowablestandardsfor neighboringpropertyownersandusers. No effort in the study was made to evaluate the unusual circumstancecreated by the presence of Rivendell and its sensitive clients. Because it has been demonstrated that the proposedProjectwill have asignificantnoiseimpact,and the reportfailstoevaluate the unusual circumstance of the noise sensitive clients of Rivendell, the Class 32 exemption is unavailable.
B. Traffic and Circulation
The proposed Project will also have a significant impact on traffic and circulation. The Site Plan for the proposedProjectshows that it isanticipatedthat the carwash customers will make exclusive use of the entry on Fine Street. This is the same entrance that the buses and vans that transport the clients of Rivendell utilize to enter the premises. Without this access, those buses and vans must make a U-turn on McKinleyatFine to enterthe premisesto the weston McKinley. The analysisoftraffic effects in the EnvironmentalAssessment omit any consideration of the loss of an entranceandthe resultingimpactscreatedby numerousbusesandvans beingforcedto make a U-turn to enter theRivendell premises.
Also, the Site Plan shows that the cars from the carwash will be able to enter the parking lot on Parcel "A" at the "cross-access location". This will create a situation where the disabledclientsof Rivendellare forced to navigatea congestedparkinglot full of carwash customersin a hurry to get back to work. This obviouslycreates a circulation safety issue to this unique community. The Environmental Assessment omits any discussion or analysis of the impacts on circulation created by this situation, instead focusing exclusively on the trips per day generated by the new business.
Becauseof the unusual circumstancesof the Projectlocation,a Class 32exemptionis unavailableandan EIR is requiredto evaluatethepotentiallysignificantenvironmental impacts created by the Project.
C. Parking
The proposed Project will also create significant impacts to existing parking, including disabled parking. Constructionaccording to the Site Plan will cause the loss of sixty (60) parking stalls, including 17 on the property owned by Mr. Mirassou and utilized by the tenants of Airport Village. It includes the loss of crucial disabled spaces and forces peoplein wheelchairsto navigatethe onslaughtof carwashpatronsexisting through Parcel "A". No evaluation of this impact is performed. Nor is it explained how Applicant can cause the loss of parking spaces on property not owned by the m
M c C 0 R M 1 C K
BARSTOW LIP
ATTORNEYS AT l,AW
March 14, 2023
Applicant or force Mr. Mirassou to accept construction on his property to accommodate the Applicant.
If the Applicant believes that the Declaration of Restrictions Regarding Non- Exclusive Common Parkingand Access ("Parking and Access Agreement") authorizes modification of Parcel "A" to accommodate the carwash, the Applicant is mistaken. (Exhibit"P" to StaffReport.) This document,createdat a time that it wasanticipated that Parcel "B" would be put to the same use as Parcel "A", simply allowed for reciprocal parking. It does not give the owner of Parcel "B" the right to make modifications to the existing improvements to Parcel "A" and certainly does not authorize the removal of parking stalls to accommodate a carwash. Simply put, the Applicant cannot build out the Project as reflected on the Site Plan because the Applicant does not own the rights to alter Parcel "A".
In fact, the Parking and Access Agreement mandates that the Project not be approved as designed. Under the Agreement, the tenants of Parcel "A" have a right to ingressand egress for persons and vehiclesthrough Parcel "B", presumablythrough the Fine Street entrance. The design of the proposed Project effectivelyeliminates this recorded right and would be a violation of the restrictions and covenants if built.
II. Conclusion
Sammyand Mr. Mirassourespectfullyrequestthat themembersofthe Planning Commissiondeny the Application to protect the existing tenants of AirportVillage and theirclients. The clientsof Rivendellare vulnerable,unique,and madeof animportant and underserved community. There are plenty of places to build a carwash, but immediatelyadjacentto an AdultCare Facilityfor autisticpeoplesis not one ofthem.
If the members are not willing to deny the Project outright, an Environmental Impact Report is requiredto analyze the significantenvironmentalimpacts cause by the proposed Project and require the adoption of all feasible mitigation measures.
Failureto requirean EIRwill constituteanabuseofdiscretionandrendertheapprovals subject to reversal.
Very truly yours.
Christopher S. Hall
CSH
041235-000000 8905262.1
I\rEI{I}ELLs"1i"" "'-
COMMLINIl'Y II{ITI
,".; .: . ' , '
Fresno City Hall
?600 Fresno Street
Fresno, CA 93721
Date: May 31",2472
RE: APPLICATION NUMBER P22'9t346
My name is Xiamy Ly-Yang and I am the CEO of Rivendell Community, lnc', a non-profil organization that serves adults with disability, since ?OA7. I am writing this letter to you with the intent of convincing Planning and Development departments not to approve the construction of Surf-Thru {carwash} on the corner of Fine and fast McKinley Avenue " I strongly believe that a car wash is not the best fit for our neighborhood and the businesses that are currently operating there, A car wash will bring a lot of noises and ruckus frorrr their large machines and noisy Vacuum to the music from their customer's cars' My agency is located at the corner of Fine and [ast McKinley for the pdst couple of years and my clients have enjoyed the quiet and safe open space of our facility and its surroundings' My clientele ranges from severe to mild developmental disabilities. My autistic clients have a challenging time dealing with loud noises, overstimulation, busy environment and changes' My agency is the only facility in Fresno County that serves South-East Asians disabled clients' Our clients are very often socially isolated from the mainstream community due to language baryiers, societal and cultural stigmatization, lack of knowledge in rescurces and culturally inadequate services. Our clients come from low socio-economic backgrounds' The construction of Sur-Thru car wash will cause loud noises which will trigger my elirnts tc experience an overwhelming amount of stress and anxiety. Additionally, if the car wash we re to be approved, the ongoing traffic brought on by the carwash will pose a dangerous threat lo my clients who go AWOL and often dart out the front door. Legally, I cannot restrain these clients nor lock the front doors to keep them inside the building. These clients will be in dang*r of being harmed and/or ran over by the cars at Surf-Thru car wash' Another very critical threat Surf-Thru car wash will pose to my clients has to do with traffie' My clients are brought into my facility by large EOC buses which nee d a good amount cf space and time to load/unload. Many of my clients are in wheelchairs. I fear that the surf-Thru custcmnrs will not have the patience to wait 5-10 minutes for a bus to load up cllents in wheefchairs and p0ses as a threat to my staff and my clients if they try to :peed around the buses' D]sr
4q27 E. MCKINLEY AVENUT FRE$NO, CATIFORT'IIA 93727
OFFICE: 559.276.177L FAX: 559.276.1181 EMAIL: rivendellfresno@gmail'com D:INI IYEI{DELL
COMMUNI-TY I N{:
AcJutl D*v*i*Pil]fi r,l d)e:llL::
please, consider the safety of my clients and the services I provide for the disabled South €ast Asian community when coming to a decision.
Should you have further questions, I can be reached at 559-458-1958 and by email at xiamvlv@qmaif ,cqm.
Res submitted,
{
cEo
my Ly-Yang, MSW
4927 E. MCKINLEY AVTNUE FNESNQ. CATIFOI?NIA 93727
oFFtcE: 55g.276,1171 r*l:559.?76.1181 EMAIL: rivendellfresno@gmail',com Esteemed Planning Commissioners:
Airport Village was planned and developed as an integrated commercial/office complex with shared parking, access and egress. Developing this car wash completely negates that premise. Our major concern is how the car wash both immediately and in the long term impacts our building and its tenants Removing parking spaces, changing the location of the handicap access ramp, relocating the entrance driveway closer to the existing building, automobile stacking areas immediately in front of existing offices tenants, blocking through traffic due to stacking in relocated driveway, constructing an S-curb in the main driveway, not being able to actively, or passively, for that matter, be involved in the planning process, by either the City of Fresno or the developer are all major concerns.
What is most disturbing is why the developer is allowed to change, remove and rearrange parking and access to our building in such a manner that it drastically impacts current tenants as well as future prospective tenants. By removing parking spaces to the point that we no longer meet City of Fresno parking standards for our building makes us an illegal, nonconforming land use. Furthermore, DevelopmentofthiscarwashconflictswithSec.15-1301PURPOSE (EmploymentDistricts)ofthe Fresno Municipal Code as follows:
Port B. Provide for the oppropriate locotion of businesses thot may have the potentiol to generote off- site impocts, while providing to ensure compatibility in use and form with existing ond plonned uses.
List of major concerns that follows illustrates the incompatibility of the car wash to our existing commerciaUoffice use :
-Removed 43 spaces from their parcel plus 1-7 from ours leaving only 38 spaces for our building, which is less than the required 41 spaces for our commercial /office use (one space per 400 sq. ft,) -They have not provided any on site parking for employees and/or service vehicles, -They have removed the handicap spaces from directly in the front and center of the building to the Westernmost part of the parking lot, The access ramp to the building is also moved to the westernmost Part of the site, Not only to handicap persons have to cross the street to get to the ramp but it is approximately 350 feet to get to the easternmost part of the building. Furthermore, this directly impacts the existing adult day care center since the handicap spaces and ramp are now directly in front of their entryway.
-lf the stacking area for the car wash is full, cars waiting to use the facility will have to wait in the driveway, thus blocking access to the parking area for our building. Furthermore, if the car wash is very busy, cars could be backed up all the way to Fine thus impeding traffic turning from McKinley on toFine. TheidlingofthecarslOfeetfromthebuildingandtenantswouldbedisruptiveandcreatea noise and air quality problem. Cars entering from the southwest entrance to the property going to the car wash facility would have to turn right into the car wash, and if cars queued up there to get in the car wash both sides of the drive would be blocked totally restricting traffic flow. lt appears that the S curb extends directly into the west-bound traffic lane.
-Neither the City of Fresno nor the developer of the car wash notified us of the proposed car wash. We had absolutely no input into how the car wash layout would affect us. We certainly would have voiced concerns regarding removal of our parking spaces as well as the other concerns indicated above. Plus, by not advising us we had no opportunity to appeal the project. -Giving this project a categorical exemption under CEQA because it is an infill project does not adequately address the negative impacts of the project. A noise study needs to be conducted to determine the impact on the building tenants from L6 vacuum machines, the noise generated by the machinery of the car wash and cars idling in front of the offices. The impact on the relocation of the handicap spaces and ramp needs to be addressed pursuant to ADA requirements as well as its impact on the existing adult day care use. The project may have air quality issues as well with cars idling in front of tenant spaces.
-This project was built in 1981 as an integrated commercial center. The main building of L6,400 sq. ft. and a 6,400 future building site were approved with shared parking and access. This is totally contrary to that proposal. lt not only restricts access but rearranges access and removes parking to the detriment of the main building.
-ln 2015 the property was zoned M-1-P. lt is was rezoned at that time to lL (light industrial) as part of a city-wide rezoning initiative. Under the M-1-P zone a conditional Use Permit would have been required for a car wash and we would have been properly notified of the proposed use and we would have been able to formerly object and make our concerns known in a public forum. We were not notified of that rezoning, and, therefore, did not have a chance to determine how thatzone change would affect us nor publicly object top our parcel being rezoned. Thus, we were not able to voice our opinion on the rezoning. The rezoning to lL creates a situation which limits commercial uses to a maximum 6,000 sq, ft and allows only ancillary office uses. Thus, we are currently a nonconforming use since our building is 16,400 sq. ft, and we have existing office uses that are not ancillary to other uses.
Airport Village was a thriving commercial center in the 1980's and into the l-990's. The tenants back then were directly related to the also thriving office area to the east, Tenants included a business machine concern, office supply, in-line restaurant and offices. As computer age and big box retailers began to take hold and the office area began to decline these uses were no longer viable. Upon their departure, Fresno Airport began to grow and we took on a car rental agency. When the car rental agency found a location closer to the airport, we found that the area began to change and was no longer a viable commercial area. Thus, we began to lease to uses catering to the changing area. Besides office uses we leased to a church and then as the Asian population began to grow we provided space to our major tenant now, the adult day care center. We are adapting our uses to the area as it evolves and we will continue to do so. Approval of the car wash would, without a doubt, severely impair our building now and for the future.
I appreciate the opportunity to comment and voice my concerns regarding the proposed car wash and thank you in advance for your consideration of this matter. I want to reiterate our strong objection to the car wash as it would severely impact our center to the point that it would render it unviable for future uses.
Sincerely,
Gerry Mirassou
Co-Owner Airport Village
D]NT I\IENf}ELL
rt4:
COMM{.]NI'I'Y IN{I
Dear'l'yler Maxw$ll and l;'resno City Planning
Ccmmission: Novenrber 17.2022
'lhis is a letttlr of opposition to the proposed Surl"l'hrLr Clar Wash in the parking leit of 4t)27 t:ttst McKinley Avenue. 'l'his is the addrcss ol'the Rivenclell Community Center. contracted with Central Valley Regional Centcr. CVRC is a non-profrt corporation uncler State of Califomia ttl , provide services to persorls with devcloprnental disabilitics. 'l'hese are the clients at Rivendell. i
,We are requesting a denial fbr the Surf"I'hru car rvash at this location lor the ftrllowing reasoris:
, L Clients at llivendell and surrounding businesses utilize the parking lot fbr their 'custoln{3rslclients, At Rivendell, t}re parking lot is useel fbr outdoor activities including exercisc and walking.
2. 'l'he noise liom the car r.vashing nrachines and vacuutlls $rs intrusive a$ nlanY clients expcrience sensory integratian challenges which inclucle visunl and ar"rdittlry triggers. Ofien. ccnsumcrs at ear washss ;rlay loucl, vibrating ntusic"
3. "l'ypically car washes bring more traldc ancl congcstii:n. I'hc llivcntlcll Ccnter uses tlre parking ft:t on weekencls in hosting ccrrrmunity activities. Ollen, the parking lot is l'ull on thesc occastolls.
4. lixpress Lube ancl Car Wash is locatecl at 4853 East McKinley. approximately one-quarler of a mile lrom Rivendell. Most people wruld quesliein lhe need lirr iinother car wash.
5. 'Ihe establishment of a serr wash in this loeation lvould be detrimental to the wcll-bcing ol'all peopie in this location/ complcx. As this disadvantaged group presently participates in outdoor activities, incluiling walks in the neighborhood. socialization. and independent living skills. we musl advacale tor them, as they are unable to d* it lbr thernsclves' ln ccnsideration of the above rcasons. wc ask ilrat vou. as our rcprcscntatives in govemment. deny this rcquested plan ft:r a Surf 'fhru an this prr:pcr1y.
All the Families and clients elf ltivendell Community, lnc' )'incerels
4927 E. MCKINLIY AVf t{uE FRESNO, CALlfOflNlA 93727
OFFICE: 559.276.1177 FAX: 559.?76.1181 EMAIL: [email protected] DIINT I\rENDELL
{.'}Ti)
COMMTJI{IT'Y TN{-:
I>,'..'hru , LLe-
fbe r,pan*.
YUIuL€.€
BtrU1nrry ta Lh \A^{-
YlntLpP
EY\ i or9
lrt"l
I
* t 1r1{} isr__ Cr--\{z
,t
I
L
G
€
h
L
4927 E. MCKINLFY AVTNUE FRF$NO. CALIFONNIA 93727
OFFICE: 559.276.1t77 FAX: 559.276.1181 EMAIL: rivendellfresno@outlook'com D-TNI IYEh[I}ELL
{:O M M{-i i{ I "1"Y l I'.IC
;..i1:iiti :,:.j.t-r:,j.::f:,i , 1 i,r:'rll :
r Signrtures of clients and F$milics opposing the construction of SurfThru. ,
It
F.rg- !*ng*
Cl)
Ln iun,e,-o
8e" O le
f\\ !-
TPf YW
0iLLYtYxLLE++
W*
Lsd-
*,x** /.,tu
t
Y
L<3-*j&
CersLCV\
9e (
?
I
4927 E. MCKINLEY AVENUS FRESNO, CAt-t FOt?N W q37 27
OFFICE: 559.276.1171 FAX: 559.276.1181 EMAI L: rivende llf [email protected] To: Jose Valenzuela
From: Gerry Mirassou
On Wednesday April 12th, myself, my attorney, Christopher Hall and my real estate broker, Zack Kaufman met with the developers of the proposed car wash, Mohammad Assad, his father, his consultant, Orlando Ramirez and his realestate broker at the office of Christopher Hall. We reiterated our concerns regarding the impact of the project on Airport Village, i.e., using our parcel to accommodate their use and the impacts the car wash would have on our existing and future use of the property. We also questioned them on why we were not notified during the planning stages of the project so as to avoid the present conflicts between the two sides. After approximately an hour and a half of discussion we concluded the meeting with no progress toward a resolution of our differences.
Although they offered to remove two of the vacuum stalls along the driveway and convert them to handicap parking spaces to mitigate their use of our property we were resolute in our insistence that they cannot use our site at all to develop their car wash. They cannot remove parking spaces, change the driveway location or relocate the handicap parking spaces, We also stated that the car wash would disturb existing tenants of our building due to noise from the car wash machinery, radios, and constant automobile traffic and stacking' We emphasized that the car wash is not compatible with our current uses or other potential uses allowed in Airport Village and that their proposal to remove spaces from our site would severely limit future uses since we would not be able to meet parking requirements. Furthermore, we emphasized that approval of the car wash conflicts with SEC,15- 1301 PURPOSE (Employment Districts) of the Fresno M unicipal Code which states that uses is these zones "provide for the oppropriote location of businesses thot may have the potentiol to generote offsite impocts, while providing to ensure compotfbitity in use and form with existing and plonned uses." We strongly asserted thatthe proposed carwash is not compatible to our use and should be a reason for denial. They stated that the car wash would help us because it would bring in more traffic.
The developers asked us that since we were opposed to the car wash, what other uses might we agree to' We mentioned that a sandwich shop, coffee shop or retail business would be compatible uses as that was what the original site development plan for the parcels envisioned, During our discussion of potential uses, if not a car wash, we discussed that us buying their parcel was a possibility; however, the price they mentioned was too far out of line for our consideration. We were somewhat surprised that they offered to sell the property since they stated that they had a solid deal with the Surf Thru company. lt makes us wonder if they really do have a deal with Surf Thru or if they are just using this proposal as a pretext to leverage a sale to us.
Asfaraslrecall,thesewerethesalientpointsofourmeetingwiththedevelopersoftheproposedcarwash. We steadfastly oppose its approval and considerate its negative impacts to our property very significant and contrary to Sec.15-1301 pURPOSE(EmploymentDistricts). Approvalofthiscarwashprojectwould,ineffect,severelylimittheuse of our property now and in the future.
Thank you for your consideration of this matter and we are available to answer further question or provide further information.
Sincerely,
Gerry Mirassou. Co-owner of Airport Village