Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-11-29 PC MINS MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ' OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA Council Chambers 6:00 p.m.. 276 Fourth Avenue Wednesday, November 29, 2006 Chula Vista, CA 6:os:5a PM CALL TO ORDER: ROLL CALLJMOTIONS TO EXCUSE: Members Present: Cmrs Felber, Clayton, Vinson, Moctezuma, Bensoussan, Spethman Member(s) Absent: Cmr. Tripp Staff Members Present: Jim Hare, Assistant Planning Director Rick Rosaler, Principal Planner Harold Phelps, Associate Planner Luis Hernandez, Development Planning Manager ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: No public Input. i 1.. PUBLIC HEARING: PCC 06-95; Consideration of a Conditional Use Permit for the sale of alcoholic beverages at "A Taste of Italy Restaurant" located at 1730 East Palomar Street, Suite 1.. Applicant: Steve Abbo„ (Quasi~ludicial) ! i Background: Harold Phelps reported that on November 30, 2004 a public notice was sent to I 51 residential units located in the vicinity of the restaurant regarding the application for a liquor I license,. On December 2004 the liquor license was approved and a zoning affidavit was i erroneously approved, indicating that a CUP was not necessary. With no public comment, the ABC license was issued without conditions on January 27, 2005. The Villagio condominiums opened in 2005; meanwhile the permitting and construction process took place for the restaurant, which opened in April 2006, The Police Department received a complaint for noise disturbances associated with alcohol consumption occurring on the patio,. The complaintwas brought to the attention of the Planning Department, where it was discovered that a CUP application should have been made for the sale of alcohol The owner was notified and subsequently applied for a CUP. The Planning Department sent out notices to residents within 500 ft. of the restaurant for a Zoning Administrator determination and subsequently received letters and petitions from the residents, A ZA hearing was held on October 23, 2006 and since a consensus could not be reached, the Zoning Administrator determined to refer the CUP to the Planning Commission,. The applicant is requesting a continuance to December 13, 2006, The Villagio residents are requesting that a continuance not be granted and that the Planning Minutes of the Planning Commission - 2 - November 29, 2006 Commission move forward with the Public Hearing as scheduled for November 29, 2006 Commission Comments: Upon a brief discussion on the merit of accepting or rejecting the applicant's request to continue the public hearing to December 13, 2006, the following motion was offered. MSC (Bensoussan/Moctezuma) (4-2-1-0) that the Planning Commission open public hearing, take testimony and continue the public hearing to December 13, 2006, Motion failed with Cmrs. Spethman, Felber, Vinson, Clayton voting against the motion.. I Public Hearing Opened: Steve Abbo, restaurant co-owner, 1730 E.. Palomar St.., Ste.1, Chula Vista reiterated that at the time that they went through the entitlement process with the City and obtained their liquor license with the ABC, they were never told that a Conditional Use Permit was required. Mr, Abbo stated that their ABC license was granted based on the hours of operation they ~!I submitted and were approved by the City.. He indicated that their business concept works and i they have been successful because they are able to hold the hours of operation and sale of alcohol that they do. The restaurant is patronized by a client-base that favors late-night fine dining and want to enjoy and accompany their meal with an alcoholic beverage or wine.. Their I restaurant is competing with higher-end restaurants that you would find in the Gaslamp District and Little Italy. Their objective is to enable their clientele base to stay in the area and not have to drive to downtown San Diego to enjoy fine Italian cuisine. Mr, Abbo stated that they have already experienced a reduction in business due to more restaurants opening in eastern Chula Vista; in his opinion, the added restrictions that are being proposed under this CUP would most likely force him out of business.. Cmr.. Spethman asked the applicant to elaborate on who is patronizing his restaurant at such late hours during week days and inquired what is the average time that they stay open during I week-days. ~ Mr'.. Abbo responded that it's not uncommon to get a group of ten professionals or a family group consisting of couples that come in at 11:00 p m,; most like to sit outside in the patio area, During the week-days, staying open til 1:00 would keep their business viable, however, closing I as 12:00 midnight would have a significant financial impacts.. Cmr, Spethman clarified that his understanding of the applicant's position is that although their late-night busy days are Thursday thru Saturday, the applicant would like the flexibilityto remain open late Sundaythru Wednesdayforthe occasional Tate nightcrowd, although past experience has been that they closed by 1:00 a.m Cmr. Clayton stated that this is a two-fold matter; first is the restriction on the hours of operation; secondly, of most concern to her is the restriction that alcohol may not be served on the patio after 9:00 p.m. She indicated that over 2/3rds of the restaurant's seating capacity is outside in the patio; this, in her opinion, would have a significant financial impact and the restaurant's viability may potentially be at stake, Minutes of the Planning Commission - 3 - November 29, 2006 Robert Riley, 1250 Santa Cora #736, Chula Vista, CA stated that he is a local resident who enjoys patronizing the restaurant at least twice a week. He noted that the only defect on the project design is the location of the trash receptacle for the restaurant; it doesn't seem appropriate to have the restaurant dispose of their trash in the same area as the residents.. A new location should be considered. Diah Asker', 4001 EI Cajon Blvd.. Ste„ 211, San Diego, CA 92105, restaurant co-owner. Mr. Asker re-stated that theyfulfilled all of the requirements of the entitlement process in good faith; proper noticing to the area residents was conducted and that residents were aware through their HOA CC&R's that the area they were choosing to live in was zoned Mixed-Use Zenia Morlet,1839 Cherbourg Dr.., Chula Vista, CA stated that she patronizes the restaurant on a frequent basis 'The restaurant offers fine dining, is an attractive, clean restaurant, and a tranquil place to enjoy alate-night diner accompanied with a glass of wine.. She has never witness disorderly behavior One of the things she mostly Tikes is being able to walk to the restaurant from her home, and she supports the restaurant maintaining its present hours of operation and hours for sale of alcohol. i Jaime Garibay, 1839 Cherbourg Drive, Chula Vista, CA stated he patronizes many restaurants in Chula Vista and A Taste of Italy is one of his favorites for all of the reasons previously stated by his fiance, Ms Morlet He emphasized that they appreciate a restaurant of this caliber being in the South Bay where you are able to enjoy fine late-night dining. He too supports the restaurant maintaining its present hours of operation, Neset Yalcinkoya, 1760 East Palomar St., #301, Chula Vista, CA stated that inebriated people leave the restaurant screaming, laughing, sometimes fighting, honking horns or peeling tires, He opposes the present hours of operation because of the nuisance late-night noise that is severely impacting the quality of life for his family.. Evelyn Bermick, 1241 Santa Cora Ave.. #134, Chula Vista, CA made some points of clarification that unlike the other restaurants that have been mentioned, i,e Miguel's, ' Alejandro's, and others, this restaurant is located in a Mixed-Use area where both businesses and residents need to peacefully co-exist, which is why it is going through the Conditional Use Permit process now. Ms. Bermick pointed out that over 98% of the signatures on the petition I submitted by the applicant in support of maintaining the status quo are residents that do not live in the area, therefore, are not impacted like the Villagio condominium project. Ms. Bermick and her neighbors have endured disorderly behavior that goes beyond nuisance, from both the patrons and employees of the restaurant., 'The restaurant owners and managers have not been good neighbors and shown total disregard to the neighborhood's complaints. Aja Reed, 1760 E. Palomar Street, #303, Chula Vista, CA stated that she has patronized the restaurant, but right now they are not being good neighbors.. She indicated that when the restaurant closes at midnight, the employees don't leave until 1:00, the kitchen employees don't leave until 3:00 or 4:00 a m. and when those employees are leaving they are slamming car doors, blaring their radios, saying their good-byes yelling back and forth, and talking on cell phones, Minutes of the Planning Commission - 4 - November 29, 2006 John Melvin, 1760 E„ Palomar Street, #114, Chula Vista, CA stated there are serious problems caused by drunkenness and has personally witnessed people urinating on cars, and he has had his windshield smashed He stated that this is his life's investment and these undesirable conditions is causing his property value to go down The applicant's argument that they were never told in the beginning that they would have to applyfor a CUP, although unfortunate, is not valid,. The code requires it and it is up to the City to conditionally approve or disprove the CUP. Viktor Zagorol, 1760 E.. Palomar St.., #105, Chula Vista, CA restated the same disturbances others have already talked about, regarding the employees leaving at 3:00 or 4:00 a.m. He stated he is disheartened that he and his family cannot enjoy an uninterrupted peaceful, silent night, where they can sleep with their windows open., He urged the commission to impose restrictions on hours of operation. Mayra Pizarro, 1760 E. Palomar, #305, Chula Vista, CA stated that she has experience inappropriate comments and hackling from drunk patrons when she is returning home after being out for the evening. Ms, Pizarro stated that often times she would rather take the longer route walking to her home in order to avoid this situation, Justin Liptord, 1760 E. Palomar, Chula Vista, CA stated he too lives in the Villagio's and concurs with all of the comments the residents have raised, however, as a Social Services employee his perspective is advocating on behalf of the population he serves, which are adolescents., His concern is with the hours and sale of alcohol and the behavior associated with its abuse. It is a public safety issue and should be taken seriously.. Public Hearing Closed.. Cmr. Vinson stated he encourages a compromise by both parties. After hearing the public testimony, it is clear that one of the major problems is a lack of employee management and supervision on the part of the restaurant owners Making agood-faith effort to being a better neighbor would go a long way. Cmc Vinson stated: • He supports Condition of Approval III A. restricting the hours of operation from 11:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. Sunday through Thursday, and 11: a.m to 12:00 midnight, Friday and Saturday. • Recommends eliminating Condition of Approval III, B regarding the sale of alcohol ending at 9:00 p.m.. Sunday thru Thursday, and 10:00 p.m. Friday and Saturday because it is a bit restrictive and could potentially cause a significant financial impact. Cmr. Clayton stated she concurs with Cmr Vinson's comments and further recommended that prior to the Commission taking final action on the CUP that a caveat be added encouraging the applicant to better supervise his employees in being good neighbors and also recommended imposing asix-month trial period in which at the end of the test period the applicant and area residents could re-address the Commission to discuss whether they followed through and took the necessary steps to mitigate or eliminate the problems. Minutes of the Planning Commission - 5 - November 29, 2006 Cmr. Felber stated that in his opinion the hours of operation are not the problem. The restaurant owners are the one who know what works for them and if it's profitable for them to remain open late when no one is coming into the restaurant. He further stated that most, if not all, of the complaints can be eliminated with a strong effort and commitment on the part of the owners and managers to require that all of their employees undergo "sensitivity training" with clearly laid out rules and procedures on how to close down the restaurant, clean-up, dispose of trash, and how to properly address and handle any complaint that is received either by phone or in person.. Every complaint should be taken seriously and directed to the owners to be properly addressed. Signs should be posted and clearly visible explaining the restaurant's i complaint protocol. The employees need to have a clear understanding thatthe operation of the restaurant is only permitted through a Conditional Use Permit, that can be revoked at any time that it is determined that they are not in compliance; its theirjobs and livelihood that is at stake, Cmr'.. Bensoussan concurred with comments previously offered by fellow commissioners to eliminate condition III B. and retain IIh A. She reiterated that good neighbor policies and ; training is the way to go and stated there are many creative ways that the restaurant can engage their patrons and employees to work together in being better neighbors, i.e. posting signs on the parking lot to remind them, j Cmr'.. Moctezuma stated she too concurs with the previous commission comments and favors a six-month trial period, Cmr.. Spethman also echoed the previous comments on the sensitivity training.. He commended the owner and made recognition on the restaurant being ahigh-end, aesthetically appealing restaurant, however, they are dealing with disorderly conduct that doesn't normally occur with this type of establishment, but rather, with much less desirable ones. He further recommended that perhaps the owners should seriously consider hiring a security guard or bouncer to address any disorderly behavior that occurs in the restaurant and surrounding area and parking lot Cmr Spethman stated he concurs with eliminating I I L B and would offer a motion for discussion with a recommendation to amend condition IILA to extend the hours of sale of alcohol to 12:00 midnight during Sunday through Thursday, and 1:00 a,m on Friday and Saturday Cmr.. Vinson indicated that the hours stated in IILA are in line with other restaurants Cmr, Vinson further stated that he would be inclined to consider extending the hours as proposed by Cmr., Spethman, however, he would favor holding off on it until after the six-month trial period.. Cmr. Moctezuma stated that, in her opinion, a restaurant's success, among other things, is based on its clientele's knowledge and coming to rely on certain hours of operation, therefore, she is concerned with flip-flopping back and forth with changing hours of operation Cmr.. Bensoussan stated that she favors Cmr Spethman's recommendation to amend ~ Condition III. A. upfront now, granting the applicant the opportunity to operate under those conditions during the six-month trial period., At the end of the six month period when this matter comes before the Planning Commission again to evaluate their compliance with the issues of concern and their employee sensitivity training, at that time, if they still have not improved their relationship with their neighbors, stricter restrictions could be imposed at that time or the CUP denied Minutes of the Planning Commission - 6 - November 29, 2006 MSC (Vinson/Clayton) (6-0-1-0) that the Planning Commission approve Resolution PCC 06-95 with the following changes to the resolution: • That Condition IILB, be stricken in its entirety • That Condition IIL.A.. be amended to read "The hours of operation for the restaurant, ; including the sales, service and consumption of alcoholic beverages shall be permitted between the hours of 11:00 a.m.. to 12:00 midnight Sunday through Thursday, and 11:00 a..m.. to 1:00 a. m. Friday and Saturday."; and ~ • That this Conditional Use Permit shall be subject to review six months after the date \ of approval at a noticed public hearing conducted by the Planning Commission.. At 1 the review hearing, Conditions of Approval maybe revised or modified, or additional conditions may be added. Motion carried.. ~t 2., PUBLIC HEARING: PCS 06-12; Consideration of a Tentative Subdivision Map to II convert an existing 12-unit apartment complex to 12 condominium units for individual ownership at 582 Arizona Street. Applicant: Floit Homes. (4uas;-Judicial) I~ Background: Luis Hernandez reported that on October 25, 2006 the Planning Commission heard and subsequently continued this item so that the applicant could have additional time to address the parking and open space issues raised at the hearing, Staff reviewed the original site plan, which was approved with approximately 6,580 sf of open II space by the DRC in 1989.. Minor modifications were approved during the building permit j review process resulting in a reduction of open space from 6,580 to approximately 5,910 sf (projects requires 5,760 sf) Staff is of the opinion that the open space is in substantial ~ compliance with the applicable property development standards, therefore, the two existing guest parking spaces may remain and no conversion to open space is required. Staff Recommendation: That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution PCS 06-12 recommending that the City Council approve Tentative Map PCS 06-12 based on the findings and subject to conditions listed in the draft City Council Resolution, MSC (FelberNinson) {5-0-1-1) thatthe Planning Commission adopt Resolution PCS 06- 12 recommending that the City Council approve Tentative Map PCS 06-12 based on the findings and subject to conditions listed in the draft City Council Resolution. Motion carried with Cmr. Spethman abstaining. Minutes of the Planning Commission - 7 - November 29, 2006 3.. PUBLIC HEARING: PCC 05-44; Consideration of a Conditional Use Permit for a hand carwash facility and expansion of an existing mini-mart at a service station located within the Terra Nova Plaza Shopping Center at 350 East H Street.. Applicant: Lorna Ratonel/Carmalor, Inc.. (Quasi-Judicial) Background: Luis Hernandez reported that the applicant is requesting a continuance to the next available Planning Commission meeting, therefore, staff recommends that public hearing be opened and continued to December 13, 2006, MSC (Felber/Clayton) (6-0-1-0) that public hearing be opened and continued to December 13, 2006.. Motion carried. ADJOURNMENT: To a regular meeting on December 13, 2006,. Submitted by Tana Secretary to the Pla ing Commission I