Planning Commission continues hearing on proposed Insurance Auto Auction at Pyrite Road amid Superfund and safety concerns

The Jurupa Valley Planning Commission continued a public hearing to Wednesday, Aug. 27, on a proposal to change the zoning and legalize an Insurance Auto Auction (IAA) storage and online-auction operation at 3500 Pyrite Road.

The continuation comes after staff recommended the commission recommend denial to the City Council, citing conflicts with the city's development standards, pending fire-safety concerns, incomplete CEQA environmental review and the site's location within the Stringfellow Superfund/reclamation overlay.

Principal planner Rob Gonzalez told commissioners the site comprises about 60 acres and that the applicant's plan describes outdoor storage with a stated capacity of 8,500 vehicles. Gonzalez said the property's current zoning (rural residential and limited R2 areas) does not permit salvage-yard and auction uses and that the project does not meet MM (medium manufacturing) zone standards for screening, landscaping and utility undergrounding. He also noted outstanding fire-department comments and incomplete environmental studies needed for a CEQA initial study.

Director Joe Perez told the commission the vehicle storage use has operated without the proper city entitlements since about February 2009. Perez said the city has allowed the applicant to pursue entitlements in good faith but warned that, "if there were, for whatever reason, to be any continuance on this item, then it's the staff's intention to move forward with ensuring that the operation cease immediately" using available code-enforcement tools.

Applicant representative Mike Ricupero said the facility has operated prior to city incorporation and urged the commission to allow more time to coordinate a broader environmental study for the whole North Pyrite area, saying property owners and regulators including the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) and U.S. EPA have been engaged. Ricupero described attempts to submit technical studies over several years and asked the commission for a chance to work with the city and other landowners to fund the environmental work the city council requested. "Let us work with the city to fund the environmental studies that the city council demanded," Ricupero told the commission.

Commissioners and staff repeatedly raised emergency-access and fire-suppression concerns. Multiple commissioners observed Pyrite Street is the only practical route in and out of the site and noted few, if any, fire hydrants or other nearby hydrant infrastructure. Commissioner questions also pressed the applicant on where vehicle fluids are removed and whether onsite operations remove hazardous fluids prior to storage; Ricupero said that policy is to remove fluids and that he would confirm operational details.

Several public commenters urged caution or a later date to ensure more commissioners and the property owner could attend. Resident George Ruiz said the site is "a really sensitive area" and urged more information and owner participation before a final decision.

After deliberation the commission reopened the public hearing and voted to continue the item to the Aug. 27 planning commission meeting. The vote was recorded as 3 in favor, none opposed, with two commissioners absent. Planning staff said they would refrain from immediate code-enforcement action while the commission pursues the short continuance and while staff and the applicant pursue the prospect of owner participation in funding a broader environmental study.

Why it matters: The property sits inside the Stringfellow reclamation / Superfund overlay and is near ongoing remediation infrastructure maintained by DTSC and the U.S. EPA. Commissioners noted potential impacts to habitat, the difficulty of safely siting occupied buildings near active remediation infrastructure (vents, monitoring wells and pipelines) and unresolved fire-safety and road-access issues. Staff concluded several required findings for approval could not be met with the current submittal.

What happens next: The item returns to the Planning Commission on Aug. 27. The commission asked the applicant to appear with a property-owner representative and with a status update on whether landowners are willing to participate in funding the environmental review the city council has asked staff to evaluate. Staff advised that even if conceptual plans are provided, the city still requires environmental analysis and compliance before staff could recommend approval of a zone change or conditional use permit.