Planning and Zoning approves preliminary site plan for controversial oil change chain

A chain of 84 quick oil change and car maintenance stores, which is on probation in Southern California in connection with numerous violations of the state’s Automotive Repair Act at 76 of those stores, is wooing Maricopa.

EZ Lube is planning to set up shop in what is now a portion of the Fry’s Marketplace parking lot and is one step closer to doing so.

On Monday, the Maricopa Planning and Zoning Commission heard a request from A & S Engineering of Scottsdale to review the site plan and elevations for the proposed EZ Lube store’s building that would include two oil bays and a car wash within about 2,500 square feet.

Robert Grosse, an EZ Lube representative from Irvine, Calif., said the company routinely opens between 10 and 16 stores per year. Most of them stretch from Bakersfield, Calif., south to San Diego. The company Web site touts its 14-point inspection as being among the best.

“We are less a car maintenance provider and more retail,” Grosse said. “We pride ourselves on running a very clean business.”

If approved, the proposed Maricopa store would be the company’s first in Arizona to include a car wash.

It would provide jobs for two mechanics. They would provide quick oil changes in addition to the traditional filter and fluid checks and replacements. Windshield wipers would also be available for purchase. Most of the additional jobs would be in customer service and store management.

Every oil change customer would get a free car wash, accounting for about 40 runs through the wash and dry tunnel per day, in addition to another 20 estimated customers who would likely come specifically to wash their vehicles.

The city of Phoenix heard an application last month for the proposed Laveen area store on North 55th Avenue at Baseline Road.

Two other EZ Lube stores, both in Avondale, opened within a month of each other in fall 2007 at Central Avenue and Van Buren Street and at Dysart Road and Van Buren Street.

“We are excited to become part of your neighborhood,” Grosse said.

During a question-and-answer period with the applicant, Commissioner Dale Jones said he’d heard something about EZ Lube stores in California being in trouble, possibly closing several stores or going out of business and asked if this was the case.

“EZ Lube is not,” Grosse responded. “A competitor is having some financial trouble, and they are going down.”

When pressed for information regarding the competitor, Grosse said that “Jiffy Lube is closing a lot of stores.”

What he didn’t reveal was that beginning in 2003, news media and government officials in Southern California performed undercover investigations at EZ Lube and Jiffy Lube stores.

As a result, the California Department of Consumer Affairs in late December 2007 disciplined EZ Lube by placing them on probation for five years. In addition, 30 stores were placed on suspension for five days and were required to post a prominent sign showing the dates of the suspension, the reasons for suspension and the limitation on services they were allowed to perform during those days.

“That really hurt their business,” said Russ Heimerich, a spokesman for the California Department of Consumer Affairs.

In addition, the company’s license has been revoked, with a stay allowing them to remain open for operation as long as they do not violate the terms of a settlement between the company and the Office of the District Attorney for Orange County, Calif.

The Office of the D.A. settled for $5 million in connection with 640 alleged violations on 51 undercover vehicles. EZ Lube was also ordered to reimburse the office for legal fees in the amount of $671,900.

The allegations against the California locations included fraud and selling services that were not needed or not performing services for which customers paid.

“They might say you need a $499 radiator flush when you may not,” Heimerich said. “They might say, you need a new gas filter, which you don’t, or say ‘We replaced the gas filter,’ and they didn’t.”

For the duration of the probation period, Heimerich said his office will perform spot checks at various locations to make sure they are not in violation of the settlement.

“What that means is we can at any time go in and if we find nefarious activities we can shut them down,” he said.

No violations have been reported since the stipulation went into effect Dec. 26, 2007.

“As far as we know, they changed their sales practices and are doing training, that sort of thing,” Heimerich said.

Consumers can avoid becoming victims of such fraud by taking a more active role in their car maintenance and practicing due diligence.

“If you look in your owner’s manual, it will tell you exactly the services that are needed at any given mileage,” Heimerich said. “We always recommend checking to see what your manufacturer recommends before going in. If they tell you your manufacturer recommends something and it’s not in there, walk away. That is the best way. Most businesses fear that.”

The California stipulation was not a topic of discussion at the Planning and Zoning meeting, but whether the blowers in the dryer might cause a noise disturbance was.

Joanna Ferguson of North Alma Drive said she lives “right behind where the building is going to go,” about 150 feet from the proposed property line, not counting an additional easement between the two locations.

Ferguson cited concerns ranging from the noise which might keep residents up late or wake them up early to how the new development would affect drainage in the area.

“I don’t want to stop business, because it is good for the city,” Ferguson said. “But we are seeing people leaving the city. I don’t want to see people on my street selling because of this.”

Commission Chair Marquisha Griffin suggested after some discussion amongst those in attendance including city staff that Ferguson provide her contact information to Planning Director Amy Haberbosch to set up a follow-up meeting between her and the Commission and her neighbors regarding noise abatement and related restrictions on hours of operation.

“Part of the problem is we don’t have an ordinance in place, so we can’t stipulate it,” Griffin said.

The Commission did, however, add stipulations requiring the applicant to install a noise reduction package at a cost of about $3,000 to $5,000. It would act something like a muffler on a vehicle’s engine, keeping the outside noise pollution to a minimum, Grosse explained. The Commission also said EZ Lube would need to do an acoustical study before submitting a recommendation to the City Council for approval.

EZ Lube’s site plan already included additional landscaping and a 10-foot wall to minimize its impact on the neighborhood. The plan also included facing the entrance of the car wash away from residents’ homes and placing the dryer within the tunnel instead of at the exit, in another effort to contain the noise.

Griffin invited the commissioners to entertain a motion to approve EZ Lube’s site plan, which Commissioner Keith Loomis did. Commissioner Dale Jones seconded the motion, which subsequently passed.