Email  Print

Body shop draws flak

A proposed auto body repair shop drew fire from nearby residents Thursday when plans were presented for the first time before the Sonoma Planning Commission.

Complaining about fumes, dust, noise and traffic, a parade of neighbors aired their concerns during the public comment section of the study session. Shawn Crozat, the applicant, assured them his business is highly regulated and the old days of pounding dents in fenders and spraying paint in the open are gone.

“We’re dealing with perceptions,” he said, directing his comments to both commissioners and neighbors. “Most people think auto body shops are wrecking yards. I invite you to visit any of my G&C locations in the county unannounced. You’ll find them to be insulated, quiet and clean.”

Crozak hopes to purchase Cavanagh’s, a shop that fixes car and truck engines, not their bodies. It is located at 801 W. Napa St., between the Sonoma Valley Regional Library and an office building to the south. The business has been there for 16 years.

Crozak’s plans include razing the entire site, constructing a new office building with Napa Street frontage and new work bays along the edge of the long, narrow lot. All parking requirements will be met on site, all setbacks and height regulations have been met, and the new construction will be subject to the Green Building Code. The site is zoned commercial and the use is permitted as a conditional use with approval from the Planning Commission.

Michael Cavanagh, owner of the property, said Crozak’s business would be an improvement. “My buildings are over 50 years old. They have no insulation. My business is noisy. Auto body is quieter than auto repair. These guys will be upgrading the property.”

While main access will be from a driveway on Napa, there would be limited vehicular access through a gate onto Studley Street. Residents were opposed to this, fearing additional traffic on their street would create an unsafe environment.

While the Planning Commission had concerns, most agreed that the new buildings would be an improvement, but more landscaping should be included, along with a higher degree of “green” amenities. They also asked that a thorough analysis be done regarding noise and other concerns.

Commissioner Michael George said he was not well-informed about this type of business and would definitely take the applicant up on his invitation and drop into one of his seven facilities to see how they are operated. Most of the commissioners agreed, and encouraged the neighbors to do the same. The issue will not come before the commission again until a formal application is filed.

In other business, the commission rewound the discussion about regulations for existing and new music venues. With little discussion and no audience participation, the commission agreed to add two new “findings” to a list that would allow an existing business with a music component to continue to have it at the time it is sold. Emphasizing language that said approval could not be “unreasonably” withheld, they added the following:

• The proposed new licensee possesses the resources, background, and qualifications to comply with the previously-approved management plan (as may be amended by the Commission)

• There is no evidence that the proposed new licensee has violated the material terms and conditions of any permit, license or entitlement relevant to the operation of a music venue and previously granted to the proposed new licensee by any public agency.

Previously approved conditions included: there was “no pattern of significant complaints or violations associated with the music venue as operated by the predecessor business;” and, “no substantial changes were proposed by the new owner with respect to the nature, scale and operating characteristics of the venue, and the previously approved management plan.”

This ordinance language now goes back to the City Council.