| Synopsis: |
Mr. Khosroabadi received site review approval for a new
car was building behind the existing Mobil service station at 2371 Ashland
Street on July 10, 2003. He then submitted building plans for construction
of the new car wash facility. The new facility is a 940 sq. ft. pre-fabricated
automated car wash structure. The total building permit fee was calculated
as $7,226.22. This is broken down as follows:
Building Permit Fee: $1,202.58
State Surcharge: $ 58.70
Development Fees: $1,732.50 (Community Development and Engineering Fees based
upon a percentage of the valuation)
Systems Development Charges: $4,232.44 (water, sewer, and transportation)
TOTAL $7,226.22
Mr. Khosroabadi has questioned the assigned valuation of the structure, claiming
that the value of the pre-fab car wash is $42,000 rather than the $105,000
calculated by the Building Department. The Building Department value is based
upon the value of the exterior structure as reported by the applicant's
contractor ($42,000) and the value of the permanently installed equipment
inside the structure, as reported by the manufacturer ($63,000). The total
value for building permit purposes is the $105,000 used by the Building
Department.
Water and Sewer Systems Development Charges are also questioned by Mr.
Khosroabadi. The water and sewer calculations are based upon the car wash
having an equivalent impact of 10 fixture units. While the car wash is listed
as "water recycling car wash," discussion with the equipment provider indicates
that water use is approximately 11-14 gallons per cycle. Slow days would
have approximately 60 cycles, while busy days would have 200 cycles. We believe
that the 10 fixture unit calculation is a fair representation of the water
usage. By comparison, a residential bath tub is the equivalent of four fixture
units.
Transportation System Development Charges are also challenged by Mr. Khosroabadi.
He has stated that the repair bays of the existing station will be closed,
and that there should be a credit for these areas. However, in the site review
approval by the Planning Commission, the applicant stated that one of the
bays would be converted to storage for the car wash while the other would
be converted to retail space for the service station. We essentially considered
this an equivalent use of the bay space and did not credit any transportation
SDC's, nor charge additional for the retail space.
The actual transportation SDC was based upon a recognition that many of the
trips to the car wash would be linked with trips already generated by the
service station, and also trips linked with other shopping trips to this
area of Ashland. Therefore the total Transportation SDC was $1,644.14. By
comparison, a single family residence - generating approximately 10 trips/day
- has a fee of $2,043.70.
Mr. Khosroabadi has also raised concern regarding the requirement for a fire
protection sprinkler system within the car wash building. While there is
no set requirement for a fire sprinkler system in the car wash, there is
a set code requirement for the allowable distance between the car wash facility
and the closest fire hydrant. That distance is established by the building
code as follows: "When any portion of the building to be protected is in
excess of 150 feet from a water supply on a public street, there shall be
provided on-site fire hydrants and mains capable of supplying the fire flow
as required by Appendix III-A of the Uniform Fire Code." The distance requirement
in the code is based on the required hose deployment & staffing necessary
to deliver the fire flow required by the size of building involved. We have
three standard hose deployments, (1) engine lays 5" hose from hydrant to
fire and deploys 1 3/4" pre-connected hose lines to combat the fire, (2)
engine stops at fire and lays hose from the fire to the hydrant, and (3)
an engine lays hose from the hydrant to the fire and a second engine arrives
at the hydrant and pumps water to the engine that laid the hose to the fire.
The decision as to which deployment to utilize is based on the distance to
and location of the fire hydrant with reference to the fire, the amount of
water required and the flow available from the fire hydrant.
While it may be thought that there should be no fire risk associated with
a car wash, it must be remembered that there is substantial electrical equipment
located as part of the car wash, and when not in operation, there may be
short or similar event that could result in a structure fire. Further, there
is always a potential for a fire associated with a vehicle in the car wash,
perhaps caused by a fuel leak and an electrical spark.
Beginning with the pre-app submitted in March, 2003, and at the Site Review
approval in July, 2003 and again with the submittal of the building permit,
the applicant has been made aware that he would either have to install an
additional fire hydrant to meet the fire department requirements, or install
a fire sprinkler system. This is a standard building code requirement based
on objective standards and cannot be waived based on the use of the structure.
Finally, Mr. Khosroabadi has stated that he did additional site work, including
undergrounding utilities, that should be considered as an offset to his building
permit costs. Those efforts, including the undergrounding of the electric
and phone service to the site, are not linked to the building permit, and
credit cannot be given as part of the building permit for that work. |
