CC RES 1996-007RESOLUTION NO. 96 -07
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES DENYING CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT NO. 186 FOR THE PROPOSED TACO BELL
FAST FOOD RESTAURANT AT 28798 SOUTH WESTERN
AVENUE
WHEREAS, the applicant, Fancher Development Services, has submitted an
application for Conditional Use Permit No. 186 in association with an application for
Environmental Assessment No. 673, to allow the construction of a new Taco Bell fast food
restaurant at 28798 South Western Avenue; and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act,
Public Resources Code Sections 21000 et. seq. ( "CEQA "), the State CEQA Guidelines,
California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Sections 15000 et. seq., the City's Local CEQA
Guidelines, and Government Code Section 65952.5(e) (Hazardous Waste and Substances
Statement), the City of Rancho Palos Verdes prepared an Initial Study and determined that
there is substantial evidence that the approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 186 would
result in a significant adverse effect on the environment; and,
WHEREAS, after notice issued pursuant to the provisions of the Development Code
and State and local CEQA Guidelines, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on
the project on August 8, September 26, October 10, and October 24, 1995, at which time
all interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard and present evidence; and,
WHEREAS, on October 24, 1995, the Planning Commission adopted P.C.
Resolution Nos. 95 -37 and 95 -38 by a 3 -2 vote, thereby adopting the Mitigated Negative
Declaration that was prepared in conjunction with Environmental Assessment No. 673, and
approving Conditional Use Permit No. 186, thus approving the request to construct a new
Taco Bell fast food restaurant; and,
WHEREAS, on November 6, 1995, within fifteen days of the Planning Commission's
decision, Ms. Vicki Livingston, representing herself and other property owners adjacent to
the subject property, filed a written appeal of the Planning Commission's decision to the
City Council; and,
WHEREAS, after notice issued pursuant to the provisions of the Development Code
and State and local CEQA Guidelines, the City Council held a public hearing on the project
on December 5, 1995, at which time the Council remanded the item to the City's Traffic
Committee to provide a recommendation on the project's traffic- related issues; and,
WHEREAS, on December 13, 1995, the City's Traffic Committee forwarded a
recommendation to the City Council to uphold the Planning Commission's decision, as well
as accepting the Planning Commission's findings relative to the traffic- related issues,
subject to three additional suggestions that would address the project's impacts to traffic;
and,
WHEREAS, after notice issued pursuant to the provisions of the Development Code
and State and local CEQA Guidelines, the City Council held a public hearing on the project
on January 8, 1996, at which time the Council closed the public hearing, voted to uphold
the appeal of the Planning Commission's decision, and directed Staff to prepare the
appropriate Resolution for adoption at the Council's next meeting to deny the proposed
project; and,
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO
PALOS VERDES DOES HEREBY FIND, ORDER, AND RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1: That, in denying the Conditional Use Permit, the City Council finds as
follows:
A. Although the site is located on Western Avenue, which is a highway
designed to carry the type and amount (or volume) of traffic generated by the
proposed use, access to the site will conflict with access to other adjacent
uses and is likely to create unsafe traffic movements (U- turns) at the
intersections of Western Avenue and Caddington Drive and Western
Avenue and Toscanini Drive, that will be hazardous to the public health,
safety, and welfare.
B. The project would exacerbate the existing unsafe traffic movements which
occur by reason of its current design of Western Avenue and its medians by
causing more vehicles to make dangerous and illegal U -turns in order to
access and exit the project site.
C. The project would create conflicting traffic movements resulting from vehicles
exiting (from the subject site) and using the median break leading into the
Palos Verdes Plaza to make a U -turn in the south bound direction while
patrons of the Plaza are attempting either to exit from the shopping center
in either a north or south bound direction.
Resolution No. 96 -07
Page 2 of 5
D. Delivery vehicles servicing the proposed fast food restaurant would
exacerbate the existing conditions which impede traffic flow in the area by
potentially requiring dangerous traffic movements (i.e., U -turns and queuing
beyond the site's driveway) to access and exit the subject site and the
proposed drive - through restaurant.
E. Compounding these traffic issues, is the fact that the subject site is situated
in close proximity to the Christ Lutheran Church /School and Dodson Middle
School. The proposed project would draw additional traffic into an area that
is frequented by school children on a daily basis, thereby creating a potential
safety issue.
F. The proposed mitigation measures (for traffic) including the extension of the
left hand turn pocket along Western Avenue (at Caddington Drive), the
reconfiguration of the median island in front of the subject site, and the
allowance for U -turn movements at the intersection of Western Avenue and
Toscanini Drive, will not reduce the adverse impacts associated with this use
to less than significant levels because the volume of increased traffic that
would be generated by the proposed fast food restaurant could potentially
cause 1) queuing vehicles within the left turn pocket to extent into the
through traffic lane (along Western Avenue); 2) create conflicting traffic
movements into and out of the Palos Verdes Plaza; and, 3) create too many
U -turns at the intersections of Caddington Drive and Western Avenue and
at Toscanini Drive and Western Avenue. These impacts would not conform
with the intent and purposes set forth in the Development Code for the
protection of the public health, safety, and welfare.
G. If this use were approved at this specific location, the proposed project would
result in significant adverse effects relating to noise on the adjacent
residential properties located to the north and east of the project site.
Vehicular noise (including idling engines and stereos) as well as noise from
the speaker for the drive - through window cannot be fully prevented from
emanating (or travelling) to the surrounding residential properties which are
adjacent to the subject property.
H. The proposed fast food restaurant also would result in adverse effects
relating to noise and traffic on the adjacent institutional property (church and
school site) located to the south of the project site. The sources of noise
mentioned above could potentially impact the church's services and the
classrooms used for the school.
Resolution No. 96 -07
Page 3of5
I. The residential properties surrounding the project site would be exposed to
foreseeable graffiti and littering given the restaurant use and expected
patrons of the proposed restaurant.
J. Based on the facts set forth above, the impacts related to traffic and noise
would result in adverse effects on the quality of life for the residents that live
in the immediate area.
K. That the proposed project is contrary to the General Plan since mitigation
measures associated with the fast food restaurant would not ensure a
harmonious correlation with other uses existing in the immediate vicinity of
the project site. Efforts to maintain safe pedestrian and vehicular conditions
should be incorporated into the feasibility of new commercial uses.
Although mitigation measures and conditions of approval were suggested,
the project would still cause significant impacts to traffic and noise which
would have an adverse impact upon the properties and uses located nearby
and upon persons residing in the surrounding area.
Section 2: For the foregoing reasons and based on the information and findings
contained in the Initial Study, Staff Reports, Minutes, and records of the proceedings,
which are all attached hereto by reference, the City Council hereby denies Conditional Use
Permit No. 186 for a Taco Bell fast food restaurant at 28798 South Western Avenue.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 6th day of February 1996.
/Mayor/
ATTEST:
Ci Clerk
State of California )
County of Los Angeles )ss
City of Rancho Palos Verdes )
Resolution No. 96 -07
Page 4 of 5
I, JO PURCELL, City Clerk of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes, hereby certify that
the above Resolution No. 96-07 was duly and regularly passed and adopted by the said
City Council at a regular meeting thereof held on February 6, 1996.
M:\ USERS\ FABIOD \WPWIN60\RESOLUTN \CUP186.NOR
City ClV.:!ancho
City of Palos Verdes
Resolution No. 96 -07
Page 5of5