National City planning commission denies Sweetwater Road mixed‑use project after residents cite traffic and safety concerns

The National City Planning Commission voted 4‑2, with one commissioner absent, on Dec. 2 to deny a developer’s proposal for a mixed‑use project at the triangular site on Sweetwater Road at Orange Street that would have included a gasoline service station, six double‑sided fuel pumps, an automated car wash, a 3,329‑square‑foot convenience store with off‑site alcohol sales (ABC type 21), a drive‑through eating place and five residential units above the ground floor.

David Welch, the city planner who led the staff presentation, told commissioners the 0.68‑acre site is eligible for infill treatment under CEQA Class 32 and that staff recommended approval of the discretionary permits with a long list of conditions, including a required noise study for on‑site residences, limits on car‑wash hours and a requirement that the applicant pay for off‑site traffic improvements including a new signal. Welch said the applicant’s transportation analysis estimated the project would generate about 2,743 new daily trips, of which roughly 1,961 would be new to local streets, and that without signalization the Sweetwater/Orange intersection could operate at level‑of‑service E in the evening peak.

But residents, funeral‑home staff and cemetery workers urged commissioners to block the project. Vika Ella Polanco, owner of La Vista Memorial Park, said the cemetery has served the community since 1868 and warned that procession traffic and funeral services would be disrupted: “The road is too narrow and the processions will get jammed right on that corner. It’s a safety issue,” she said. Pablo Bermudez, who works at La Vista, said he has seen funeral processions delayed and worried about families missing burials if the intersection becomes more congested.

Many speakers raised noise and air‑quality fears tied to a 24‑hour car wash and a 24‑hour convenience store with alcohol sales; staff told the commission the National City Police Department’s ABC risk assessment rated the proposal a medium‑risk alcohol outlet, and that the area already has four alcohol licenses, meaning the project would bring the total to five. Several residents pointed to a nearby bar and other off‑sale locations and argued the neighborhood is already overconcentrated.

Tom Morgan, the applicant’s representative, and other project proponents said the design includes mitigation measures, that the developer had worked with city staff and public‑safety departments for months, and that the applicant would contribute about 70 percent of the cost for a new traffic signal. Morgan said the 40‑foot driveway width requested is needed to safely accommodate fuel‑delivery vehicles and that the traffic signal would “solve a lot of those issues.”

Commissioners asked detailed questions about queueing distances for the drive‑through (staff cited 12 vehicles of queuing capacity), car‑wash operations (staff recommended reduced hours and noise‑attenuating speakers), setback and masonry‑wall heights (staff recommended reducing a proposed 7‑foot wall to the 6‑foot maximum allowed), and the difference between ABC license types (staff said Type 20 is beer and wine only; Type 21 allows distilled spirits). Several commissioners also requested additional checks for historic or soil issues after residents raised concerns that the parcel had at‑one‑time supported other uses and that an early‑20th‑century flood might have affected the site.

After public comment closed, the commission debated whether to continue the item to seek redesign or additional studies or to deny the discretionary permits. Commissioner Foreman moved to deny the project, citing public‑safety and air‑quality concerns and the concentration of alcohol outlets; the motion carried 4‑2 with one absence. Commissioners Sanchez and Quinones said they voted against denial because they preferred a continuance to pursue mitigation and design changes.

The staff presentation and the record show the discretionary approvals before the commission included conditional use permits for the service station, the accessory automated car wash, the convenience store with off‑site alcohol and the drive‑through lane; three variances were requested for driveway width, street‑wall coverage and parking‑setback reductions. Staff had recommended conditions of approval that would have required a noise study, hours limits on the car wash, landscaping and a secured storage location for distilled spirits, plus the applicant’s contribution to the traffic signal and replacement of pedestrian/bike improvements displaced by driveway openings.

The denial by the planning commission means the applicant may choose to appeal the decision to the City Council. Commissioners and staff noted the decision does not preclude future proposals, but any revised application would need to address the traffic, noise, safety and alcohol‑concentration concerns that dominated the hearing.

The planning commission adjourned at 9:43 p.m.; the next meeting is tentatively scheduled for Dec. 16, 2024, at 6 p.m.