Resolution 15300A RESCYLINITIOR TERfTTflAA1Tr1U_1_SE_PER[T,
CONFORMING USE OF THE PROPERTY AT 1200 PARK STREET,
ALAMEDA, CALIFORNIA
WHEREAS, the Planning Board, in March 1979, conditionally approved a use
permit for an automobile tire repair services business on the property located at 1200
Park Street, including that the term of the use permit be limited to five years and imposed
conditions requiring all automobiles to be serviced at the site to be confined to the property
itself, that parking of cars on the site be limited, that all work on the cars occur within the
building, and that no cars be parked overnight on the property; and
WHEREAS, in 1982 when a franchisee of Big 0 Tires became the operator of the
business and applied for a use permit to operate at the Park Street location, City staff
determined that the use permit issued in 1979 was still valid; but confirmed to the operator
that the property must be used primarily to sell and install tires, that the use permit for tire
sales/installation would expire in 1984 (but could be renewed), and that parking of
vehicles must be restricted to the site; and
WHEREAS, in 1988, however, another use permit application for this use was
submitted to the City; and.
WHEREAS, residents who lived in the areas near the site objected to the City's
issuing another permit for this site, stating that the operators of the business had not,
and were not, complying with the 1979 conditions of approval, in particular that because
the number of cars to be serviced exceeded the number of cars that could be reasonably
parked on site, the operator was parking cars to be serviced in the adjoining
neighborhood, thereby making it difficult for residents to find on-street parking; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Board conditionally approved a new use permit (Use
Permit 88-36) but to address the neighbors' concerns about the overflow parking
impacting street parking, the Board imposed a condition requiring the operators within 60
days to "find an alternative long term parking site for customer cars, as well as for
employees"; and
WHEREAS, some 18 months later, Planning staff sent a letter to the operator
advising him that the use was not in compliance with the conditions of approval, in
particular the continued parking of cars in the adjoining neighborhood and the failure to
secure an alternative site to park cars to be serviced and to park employees' cars; and
WHEREAS, in January 2013, Planning staff received a letter from an attorney
representing a resident in the area, as well as from other residents, pointing out that the
conditions of approval of the conditional use permit were being violated, including the
business parking cars on City streets for long periods of time, thereby making it difficult
for residents to find on-street parking close to their residences and/or parking cars on
metered City streets, thereby taking up parking spaces intended for shoppers along Park
Street; and
WHERES, in light of these complaints Planning staff notified the operators of the
business that they were not in compliance with the conditions of approval because they
had not found an alternative site on which cars associated with the business could be
parked and, as a corollary, because the business continued to park cars associated with
the business on City streets; and
WHEREAS, as a consequence, the operators submitted an application to amend
the 1988 conditional use permit, including deleting the requirement that the operator find
an alternative site on which to park its customers' vehicles, and allowing minor automobile
repair work to be done outside of the structure; and
WHEREAS, when the Planning Board heard the amendment to the use permit in
July 2015, planning staff opposed eliminating that requirement, noting that the business'
use of public parking spaces was not acceptable and the operator must confine its
operation to its own property because to do otherwise impacts the adjoining neighborhood
and other businesses along Park Street and at the Board's hearing; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Board continued the item in order to give the operator
additional time in which to find an alternative site for the overflow parking and some time
later the operator indicated an alternative site had been found; and
WHEREAS, in recognition that the operator had represented that a different
location had been found on which to move the entire business operation, the Board on
November 9, 2015, amended the conditions of the Use Permit to require the operator to
continue its efforts to secure a long -term parking site for its customers' and employees'
cars; and
WHEREAS, in August 2016, planning staff received a petition from more than 20
residents in the area of the business requesting a public hearing to review the use permit
because of their long- standing position that the property was too small for this type of
business and the overflow parking needs of the business continued to impact the
neighborhood; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Board conducted a public hearing on November 28,
2016, to consider the Planning staff's recommendation that the use permit be terminated
but continued the item so that planning staff could monitor the activities at the business
and note any violations; and
WHEREAS, Planning staff documented instances where the conditions of
approval were not being observed, including employees of the operator parking
customers vehicles on City streets; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Board conducted another public hearing on May 8, 2017,
to consider whether to terminate the use permit or to modify the conditions of approval in
order to allow the use to continue and after receiving testimony from residents who
chronicled the history of the operators not complying with the conditions of approval,
receiving testimony from the property owner and representatives of Big 0 Tires who urged
the Board not to terminate the use permit, and discussing the matter at length, the
Planning Board voted to terminate the use permit by modifying the use permit to include
a condition that the use permit and non-conforming use of the property for auto repair
shall terminate within 60 days of final action by the City; and
WHEREAS, the property owner filed a timely appeal to the Planning Board's
decision; and
WHEREAS, on July 18, 2017, the City Council conducted a public hearing on the
appeal, at which time it considered the July 18, 2017 agenda report and the record
attached therewith, the testimony of the property owners and their representatives and
the testimony from other members of the public; and
WHEREAS, based thereon, the City Council finds and determines that (1) the
property at 1200 Park Street for ' automobile repair is not consistent with the Zoning
Ordinance of the City of Alameda but there are a wide range of uses consistent with the
zoning of the property that is available to the property owners, (2) the use is not proper in
relation to adjacent uses, (3) the use is materially detrimental to the character of the
immediate neighborhood, (4) the conditions of approval that were intended to protect the
best interests of the neighborhood have not been observed in that the property has been
used in repeated and continued violation of the conditions of approval of Use Permit 88-
36, in particular the failure to secure timely, and thereafter to use, an off-site location on
which to park customers' vehicles to be serviced, has resulted in vehicles being parked
on City streets, thereby exacerbating a shortage of street parking spaces and adversely
affecting residents and other businesses near the property, and (5) the property owners
have received adequate and sufficient notice of the violations such that they had ample
time, but failed, to correct the violations or to have found a solution to the underlying
causes of the violations.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF ALAMEDA AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Use Permit 88-36 and the non-conforming use of the property at 1200 Park
Street for automobile repair/service shall terminate within 60 days from the date of this
Resolution.
Section 2. This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption.
I, the undersigned, hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was duly and
regularly adopted and passed by the Council of the City of Alameda in a regular meeting
assembled on the 18th day of July, 2017 by the following vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Ezzy Ashcraft, Matarrese, Vella and Mayor
Spencer — 4.
NOES: Councilmember Oddie —1.
ABSENT: None.
ABSTENTIONS: None.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of
said City this 19th day of July 2017.
L. lti.
Lara Weisiger, Ci Clerk
City of Alameda
Approved as to form:
�. Janet C. Kern, City Attorney
City of Alameda