Loading...
SR-402-004 PCD:SF:JT:AS:KC:JL:f:\plan\share\council\strpt\00APP070 & 00APP072.doc Council Mtg: October 10, 2000 Santa Monica, California TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: City Staff SUBJECT: Appeals 00-070 and 00-072 of Planning Commission Approval of Conditional Use Permit 99-045 to Allow the Issuance of a Type 48 (On- Sale General Public Premises) Alcohol License for an Existing Legal Non- Conforming Establishment that is Currently Operating as a Nightclub with a Type 42 (On-Sale Beer and Wine Public Premises) Alcohol License Located at 814 Broadway Applicant: Suite Events, LLC, Club Sugar, Appellants: Kelly Olsen (00-070) and Suite Events (00-072), Property Owner: Kayvan Naimi INTRODUCTION This report recommends that the City Council deny the appeals and uphold the Planning Commission’s approval of Conditional Use Permit 99-045 for the issuance of a Type 48 (on-sale general public premises) alcohol license for an existing legal non- conforming nightclub establishment at 814 Broadway. On May 17, 2000, the Planning Commission voted 5-1 to approve the project. The Planning Commission staff reports, Statement of Official Action and minutes are included with this report as Attachments B – E. Two appeals were filed; one on May 18, 2000, by Planning Commissioner Olsen; and, a second on May 31, 2000, by the applicant. The appeal statements are included with this report as Attachment F and G, respectively. BACKGROUND Site Location The subject property is a 7,500 square foot parcel located on the south side of Broadway between Lincoln Boulevard and Lincoln Court. The parcel is developed with 1 one building constructed to the property lines and contains three tenant spaces: the subject nightclub, located nearest the corner of Lincoln Court and Broadway; a vacant tenant space, formerly a restaurant; and, a diner-style restaurant (Swinger’s) fronting on Lincoln Boulevard. Surrounding properties include a fabric store and deli to the south, a grocery store and general retail to the west across Lincoln Boulevard, an automobile dealership across Broadway; and, general retail across the alley to the east. Properties to the north, south and west are similarly zoned C4 (Highway Commercial) and properties to the east are zoned BCD (Broadway Commercial District). Residentially zoned properties (R3 – Medium Density Multiple Family Residential) are located approximately 100 feet from the subject property. Project Description The applicant requests approval to upgrade the existing Type 42 alcohol license to a Type 48 alcohol license, which would permit the sale of liquor, beer and wine for on-site consumption. The existing nightclub is a legal non-conforming use that was established prior to current regulations that require a conditional use permit for nightclubs. The business contains approximately 3,000 square feet of floor area that includes an 1,100 square foot dance floor, 264 square foot bar and a 200 square foot fixed seating area. The remainder of the area is devoted to general circulation, office, support and restrooms. Since the subject establishment existed prior to municipal regulations requiring a conditional use for nightclubs and alcohol outlets, the use is not subject to standard 2 operating conditions that the City typically imposes on similar businesses. The applicant’s request for the alcohol license upgrade, if approved, would enable the City to implement standard conditions of approval and special conditions as necessary to mitigate impacts related to the upgraded alcohol license. If denied, or if the applicant elects not to implement the entitlements of the CUP, the business may continue as a legal non-conforming use, until such time that use is abandoned for more than one year. Further analysis regarding existing hours of operation and issues pertaining to abandoned uses is provided in the Appeal Analysis section of this report. Planning Commission Action On May 17, 2000, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing to consider the applicant’s request for a Type 48 alcohol license. The applicant detailed the nature of the operation and stated the requested alcohol license was intended in part to attract and cater to more mature clientele. In response to the Commission’s questions, the applicant indicated that the club is typically open Wednesday through Sunday until 2:00 a.m. Although generally supportive of most of the staff recommended conditions, the applicant did object to restricting the hours of operation between Sunday and Thursday to midnight, preferring instead, 2:00 a.m. The current hours of operation are 11:00 a.m. to 2:00 a.m. Except for one individual, 10 nearby residents voiced their continued frustration with the owners of the nightclub, related noise impacts generated by the patrons of the establishment and the amplified music. Each resident indicated a need for operational 3 restrictions, but expressed concern that additional entitlements may exacerbate the problems. Neighbors specifically cited issues related to noisy patrons outside the nightclub, including vehicle noise and car alarms; trash in the alley; and, excessively loud music and bass vibration emanating from the nightclub. The applicant refuted these claims maintaining that the club has been responsive to the neighbors and encourages club patrons not to disturb adjacent residents. In approving the application, the Planning Commission incorporated additional conditions to address issues raised by residents and the applicant. The Commission discussed modifying one proposed condition pertaining to security guards and the specific hours they would be required to be present at the club, but this was not included in the final motion. Much of the discussion, however, focused on the hours of operation and whether approving a 7-day a week operation constituted an expansion of a legal non-conforming use. An argument was made that the applicant’s intent to operate the nightclub 7-days a week until 2:00 a.m. represented an expansion to the hours of operation and therefore an expansion of a legal non-conforming use. This argument and the contention that the nightclub use was abandoned for more than a year is the basis for one of the appeals. The other appeal, submitted by the applicant, is a request to modify the Planning Commission’s hours of operation to allow the nightclub to remain open until 2:00 a.m. 7- days a week. 4 BASIS FOR APPEALS Appeal 00-070 On May 18, 2000, Commissioner Olsen appealed the Planning Commission’s decision granting the subject nightclub a Type 48 alcohol license, with conditions, including one that restricted the hours of operation to midnight Sunday through Thursday and until 2:00 a.m. on Friday and Saturday. The appellant contends that the granting of the 7-day a week operation represents an intensification of use, based upon the applicant’s testimony that the club is only open 4-5 days during the week. The appellant also contends that the legal non-conforming status of the nightclub was lost since more than a year lapsed between the time that Kingston 12 closed and Club Sugar opened. Appeal 00-072 The applicant filed an appeal of the Planning Commission’s decision in order to have the hours of operation expanded to include a closing time of 2:00 a.m., 7-days a week. The Planning Commission limited the hours of operation to 10:00 a.m. to 2:00 a.m. Friday and Saturday, and 10:00 a.m. to 12:00 midnight Sunday through Thursday. The specific hours are identified in Condition 25 of this report. The applicant contends that the hours imposed by the Planning Commission are unreasonable and, if implemented, would prohibit the continued use of the nightclub. On September 11, 2000, the applicant’s representative submitted a letter that addresses the issues raised by the other appellant and includes signed declarations from the property owner and current nightclub operator regarding the history of the site. The letter is included with this report as Attachment J. 5 APPEAL ANALYSIS Nightclubs are conditionally permitted uses in the C4 zoning district, subject to a CUP. All new alcohol outlets, intensification of existing non-conforming outlets and substantial modifications to existing outlets, similarly require approval of a CUP. Club Sugar is the latest establishment to occupy the subject property and represents a continuation of a use that was established prior to the current, more restrictive regulatory provisions of the Municipal Code. When the nightclub use was first established, the only regulatory requirement in effect was approval of a business license. Since the use is not presently governed by a CUP for either the nightclub or alcohol component, the subject nightclub is a legal non-conforming use. Most legal non-conforming uses are permitted to remain in operation provided the use is not abandoned, ceases operation for a continuous period of one year or more or, is not expanded or intensified. Intensification occurs when there is a change to the mode or character of the establishment including an extension to the hours of operation, substantial remodeling, or a change in the number of seats or service floor area for bars. The benchmark for assessing the issue of intensification is the nature and scope of the operation of the use at the time it became non-conforming. However, as detailed below, establishing this benchmark is not often easy. Pursuant to the Alcohol Outlet Ordinance, the request to upgrade the Type 42 alcohol license to a Type 48 alcohol license requires approval of a CUP. A change to the hours of operation would similarly require a CUP application for the nightclub component. 6 However, as discussed later in this report, the subject application does not include a request to modify the hours of operation and, therefore, the applicant is not required to obtain CUP approval for the nightclub. This is an important distinction because it limits the discussion, decision and conditions to impacts associated with the alcohol component. Impacts associated with the nightclub operation, independent of the alcohol component, may not be considered. Had the nightclub operation been subject to review, the Planning Commission could have imposed more stringent conditions to further alleviate related impacts to the neighborhood. Included with this report is a table that highlights significant events associated with the subject tenant space (Attachment A). According to City records, the use at the site as an alcohol outlet became non-conforming in November 1984, nearly one year before Kingston 12 was permitted to begin operation. In 1988, the City amended the Zoning Ordinance to require a CUP for nightclubs in the C4 district. At that time, Kingston 12 became non-conforming for lack of a CUP for the nightclub component of the establishment. In 1985, when Kingston 12 occupied the site and again in 1998 for Club Sugar, staff evaluated each proposal and determined that neither use represented an expansion or intensification of a legal non-conforming use nor that the subject tenant space had not been abandoned for more than a year. In determining Kingston 12’s hours of operation prior to it’s becoming a non-conforming use, staff research principally focused on City records. A September 29, 1993 City staff report to the Planning Commission identified the hours of operation of Kingston 12, the 7 predecessor to Club Sugar, as 11:00 a.m. to 2:00 a.m. Request for service calls to the Police Department related to Kingston 12 between June 8, 1995, and October 11, 1997, indicate that the majority of the “disturbing the peace calls” related to music, were received on Fridays, Saturdays, Sundays and Mondays up to and beyond 2:00 a.m. Additionally, an L.A. Times newspaper article, dated July 17, 1988, indicated that Kingston 12 was open nightly from 8:00 p.m. to 2:00 a.m., except Mondays when it was closed. Prior to the Planning Commission’s review of a CUP application submitted by the previous tenant, correspondence from the applicant in response to staff questions states that Kingston 12 was open 7-days a week, 9:00 p.m. to 2:00 a.m. (August 8, 1993). A letter received from at least one resident during that public hearing process claims that music could be heard from Kingston 12 until 2:00 a.m. on Thursdays, Fridays, Saturdays and Sundays (August 24, 1993). Both of these letters are part of the public record and were provided at a time when hours of operation were not being contested. There is no other information available in any of the prior entitlement applications that further clarify the hours of operation for Kingston 12. While it is not possible based on City records to definitively establish Kingston 12's hours of operation at the time it became non-conforming, it would appear that historically Kingston 12 was open until 2:00 a.m. with the possible exception of Mondays. Consequently, allowing Club Sugar to remain open until 2:00 a.m. would not be an intensification of this non-conforming use. Moreover, staff does not believe there 8 is sufficient evidence indicating that Club Sugar intended to abandon or limit its right to be open consistent with the hours of operation of its predecessor. The fact that Club Sugar has not always operated to the full extent that Kingston 12 operated does not establish abandonment. Notwithstanding this conclusion, and as detailed more fully on page 11 of this staff report, staff believes that restricting the hours of operation of Club Sugar is an appropriate condition of approval of the requested alcohol CUP. As discussed, a second issue raised by the appellant pertains to a period of abandonment when Kingston 12 ceased operation and Club Sugar established operation. Based on City records, staff has concluded that Kingston 12 ceased operation at or just before the time the current owner applied for an Alcohol Determination from the City. On November 4, 1997, the current owner submitted an application for an Alcohol Determination to change ownership of the club, transfer the alcohol license and for proposed interior remodeling. Approval was granted on May 13, 1998. The permits necessary for tenant improvements were approved shortly thereafter a business license was issued for the new operation in October 1998, which enabled the nightclub to being operation in December. As an indicator of nightclub activity, Police Department records of calls for service can similarly be used to determine a period of inactivity at an establishment. The last call for service to Kingston 12 occurred on Saturday, October 11, 1997 and resumed Saturday, 9 December 18, 1998; a period of approximately 14 months. These dates provide a general indication of when nightclub activity was suspended, but may not document exact closure or operation dates. It had been the past practice of the City to allow a legal non-conforming use to continue operation if a business license application was approved prior to the one year abandonment of that use. The City’s present practice requires that a non-conforming use be re-established within the prescribed timeframe and that the business be in regular operation, which means open for business to the general public during the use’s customary business hours. Following the practice in place at that time, a new business license was granted one year and one day following the last known request for service at the site. The one year date (October 11, 1998) fell on a Sunday. As typical with other similar deadlines that fall on a weekend, the expiration date was extended to the next business day. However, it is unclear whether or not October 11, 1997, was the last day of operation for Kingston 12, only that it was the last time a request for service was made to the Police Department prior to the opening of Club Sugar. Staff’s review of the project history, prior application entitlements, staff analysis, correspondence and other written material contained in the public record, supports the conclusions rendered in May 1998 that approved the Alcohol Determination for Club Sugar and the business license in October 1998. However, not all of the facts associated with the history of the site, prior Club Sugar, are entirely clear. Nevertheless, both of the approvals appear to be consistent with applicable City policies at that time. 10 Staff also rejects the applicant’s appeal. Staff continues to support the hours of operation imposed by the Planning Commission based upon the conclusions of the noise study that was completed on April 7, 2000, comments received from residents in the area, and City records regarding reported noise violations. Further, restrictions to the hours of operation are necessary to effectively regulate the proposed project and to ensure a compatible relationship between the nightclub and neighboring uses. It is anticipated that the request for an upgraded alcohol license will increase customer patronage to the site and exacerbate problems already perceived by residents in the area. Restrictions to the hours of operation will mitigate the expected impacts as a result of the upgraded license, but will not completely eliminate the continued intrusion of nightclub related activity into the adjacent residential areas. Impacts related to the availability of street parking, noise from club patrons and their vehicles may continue, however, restricted hours of operation will reduce incidents of disturbances. Staff maintains that it is appropriate, given the proximity to adjacent residential uses, the lack of adequate on-site parking and the late night crowds of club patrons, to limit the hours of the nightclub operation to days more customarily associated that type of activity. It is clearly not appropriate to expand the alcohol related component of the subject nightclub, which will attract more customers and subsequently associated impacts, to 7- days a week until 2:00 a.m. in such close proximity to residential units. It is expected that the restricted hours of operation, combined with other conditions that prohibit noise and bass vibrations from being audible beyond site boundaries, required soundproofing measures and general operational restrictions, will minimize potential conflicts between 11 nearby residents and the nightclub. Staff’s analysis, findings and the recommended conditions of approval support the Planning Commission’s imposed hours of operation. Conclusion This application provides an opportunity to promote greater compatibility between the residential and commercial land uses while ensuring that anticipated impacts from an expanded alcohol license are consistent with community goals and objectives. Staff supports the Planning Commission’s determination. Implementation of the Commission’s decision will reduce the disturbances experienced by residents in the area while providing the nightclub owner the opportunity to expand alcohol service. CEQA STATUS The project is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Class 1, Section 15301 of the State Implementation Guidelines in that the request to upgrade the existing alcohol license to allow on-site consumption of liquor represents a minor alteration to the operation of an existing private structure. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION Pursuant to Municipal Code Section 9.04.20.20.080, within 30 days after the subject application was deemed complete, the applicant posted a sign on the property stating the following information: Project case number, brief project description, name and telephone number of applicant, site address, date, time and location of public hearing, 12 and the City Planning Division phone number. It is the applicant's responsibility to update the hearing date if it is changed after posting. In addition, pursuant to Municipal Code Section 9.04.20.22.050 and 9.04.20.24.030, notice of the public hearing was mailed to all owners and residential and commercial tenants of property located within a 500-foot radius of the project at least ten con- secutive calendar days prior to the hearing. Notice was also given to all neighborhood groups, the Chamber of Commerce, individuals who provided written and oral correspondence, and published in the Our Times section of The Los Angeles Times and posted on the Department’s Internet web page. A copy of the notice is included with the staff report (Attachment H). BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACT The recommendation presented in this report does not have any budget or fiscal impact. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Council deny Appeals 00-070 and 00-072 and uphold the Planning Commission’s approval of Conditional Use Permit 99-045, based upon the following findings and subject to the following conditions: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FINDINGS: 1. The proposed use is conditionally permitted within the subject district and complies with all of the applicable provisions of the "City of Santa Monica Comprehensive Land Use and Zoning Ordinance", in that the request to upgrade the existing Type 42 alcohol license to a Type 48 alcohol license for an existing 13 nightclub in the C4 District, which is legally non-conforming for a Conditional Use Permit, is consistent with the Zoning Ordinance regulations governing alcohol outlets, subject to conditions of approval. 2. The proposed use would not impair the integrity and character of the district in which it is to be established or located in that the request to upgrade the existing Type 42 alcohol license to a Type 48 alcohol license for an existing nightclub, as conditioned, will ensure that the impacts typically associated with such projects does not disrupt the character of the district. Specifically, conditions 11-20 require physical noise reduction improvements to the existing structure to mitigate impacts associated with the new alcohol license including increased patronage and the anticipated prolonged continuation of the nightclub use as a result of the expanded alcohol service. 3. The subject parcel is physically suitable for the type of land use being proposed, in that the subject parcel is located in a commercial district, is currently developed and used for commercial purposes and has all necessary public improvements and access to utilities. 4. The proposed use is compatible with any of the land uses presently on the subject parcel if the present land uses are to remain, in that all uses on site are commercial uses and are intended to remain unchanged. Two businesses currently occupy the site, a restaurant and the subject nightclub establishment. A third tenant space, formerly a restaurant is now vacant. 5. The proposed use would be compatible with existing and permissible land uses within the district and the general area in which the proposed use is to be located, in that the subject nightclub, although non-conforming for a Conditional Use Permit, is conditionally permitted within the district it is located and, if appropriately conditioned, compatible with the land uses in the general area. The requested entitlement to allow the sale of general spirits to club patrons would have the potential to render the existing use not compatible with the surrounding area unless conditions are implemented to address impacts typically experienced with similar alcohol-serving establishments. Specifically, approval of the Type 48 alcohol license would have the potential to extend the operation of the existing establishment, generate additional customer patronage and subsequently, increase disturbances to the neighboring properties and land uses from impacts normally associated with alcohol-serving establishments and intoxicated patrons. To minimize such impacts and foster a compatible relationship between the additional alcohol entitlement and surrounding land uses, conditions 11-20 and 22-30 have been added to reduce the anticipated noise-related impacts and provide operational conditions that will ensure that the nightclub use is not disruptive to the neighborhood land uses. 6. There are adequate provisions for water, sanitation, and public utilities and services to ensure that the proposed use would not be detrimental to public 14 health and safety, in that the proposed site is located within an existing urban environment and developed with an existing structure. Currently not available on- site is a recycling and refuse collection area. As the requested entitlement to expand alcohol service will increase the amount of refuse and recyclable material generated by the use, condition 28 has been added requiring an on-site collection area, or alternative refuse collection arrangement subject to the review of city staff. Such a condition will ensure the requested entitlement is not detrimental to the public health and safety. 7. Public access to the proposed use will be adequate, in that existing streets adequately serve the site. 8. The physical location or placement of the use on the site is compatible with and relates harmoniously to the surrounding neighborhood, in that the subject use is an existing, legal non-conforming nightclub within an existing one-story structure. Other than the construction activity required by the conditions of approval, no other physical development is proposed. 9. The proposed use is consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the General Plan, in that the subject parcel is located in the service and specialty commercial land use designation which is intended to accommodate general commercial and service and specialty commercial uses that serve regional, community and local needs while respecting the adjacent residential neighborhoods (Land Use and Circulation Element of the General Plan: Objective 1.6 and Policy 1.6.5). The existing nightclub provides an opportunity for dancing and live entertainment that serves the regional and local community. Adjacent residential neighborhoods would be buffered from the impacts related to the proposed alcohol entitlement by conditions that require noise-mitigating improvements to the building and operational conditions. 10. The proposed use would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or general welfare, in that the proposed entitlement to modify the existing beer and wine alcohol license to include liquor sales, is a conditionally permitted use in the C4 district and complies with all applicable provisions of the Zoning Ordinance and the General Plan that seek to ensure the compatibility of uses and protect the public interest, health, safety, convenience, and general welfare with regulations that require such uses not be overly concentrated, impact sensitive land uses and generate traffic and circulation problems. 11. The proposed use conforms precisely to the applicable performance standards contained in Subchapter 9.04.12 and special conditions outlined in Subchapter 9.04.14 of the City of Santa Monica Comprehensive Land Use and Zoning Ordinance, in that the proposed project does not contain any of the special features described in the aforementioned Subchapters and, therefore, the Performance Standards and Special Conditions relating to those features do not apply to the proposed project. 15 12. The proposed use will not result in an over concentration of such uses in the immediate vicinity, in that the subject nightclub establishment is the only such use within a minimum of 500 feet from the subject property. ALCOHOL OUTLET FINDINGS 1. The proposed use will not adversely affect the welfare of neighborhood residents in a significant manner in that as conditioned, the request to upgrade the Type 42 alcohol license to a Type 48 alcohol license buffers the neighboring residents from the anticipated impacts generated by the proposed change. Specifically, conditions 11-20 and 22-30 serve to minimize the vehicle and pedestrian intrusions into the residential neighborhoods, require physical sound mitigating improvements of the existing structure to reduce noise and vibration and operational conditions intended to control club patrons. 2. The proposed use will not contribute to an undue concentration of alcohol outlets in the area in that no increase in the number of alcohol licenses within the general vicinity (500 foot radius from the subject property) will occur. However, the license type will change from a Type 42 to a Type 48 alcohol license allowing for liquor, in addition to beer and wine, to be consumed on-site. There are currently four establishments that offer on-site consumption of alcohol, and three that sell alcohol for off-site consumption. Of those seven existing alcohol outlets within 500 feet, only one restaurant has a Type 48 alcohol license, not including the proposed project. 3. The proposed use will not detrimentally affect nearby neighborhoods considering the distance of the alcohol outlet to residential buildings, churches, schools, hospitals, playgrounds, parks, and other existing alcohol outlets in that the request to expand the alcohol outlet entitlement to serve liquor and the impacts generated by the proposed license, have been mitigated with conditions that require physical sound mitigating improvements and operational conditions to ensure that the surrounding sensitive uses are not detrimentally impacted (see conditions 11-20 and 22-30). 4. The proposed use is compatible with existing and potential uses within the general area in that the subject use is an existing, legal non-conforming nightclub within an existing one-story commercial structure located in the C4 (Highway Commercial) zoning district. Surrounding uses include a grocery store, restaurants, general retail and an auto dealership. Residential uses are located in the general area, but will be buffered from the impacts generated by the proposed alcohol license upgrade with conditions that serve to minimize the vehicle and pedestrian intrusions into the residential neighborhoods, require physical sound mitigating improvements to the existing structure and operational conditions intended to control club patrons. 16 5. Traffic and parking congestion will not result from the proposed use in that the existing nightclub, although non-conforming for parking, as a condition of approval, will provide a valet parking service to club patrons during all hours of operation. To mitigate the potential vehicle and pedestrian intrusions into the nearby residential neighborhoods, generated by the expanded alcohol license, and to encourage patron use of the parking service, signs shall be posted alerting patrons to the availability of the service (see condition 24). 6. The public health, safety, and general welfare are protected in that the project is consistent with the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance and the Land Use Element of the General Plan, which is intended to accommodate general commercial and service and specialty commercial uses that serve regional, community and local needs while respecting the adjacent residential neighborhoods (Land Use and Circulation Element of the General Plan: Objective 1.6 and Policy 1.6.5). Further, the proposed entitlement to modify the existing beer and wine alcohol license to include liquor sales, is a conditionally permitted use in the C4 district and complies with all applicable provisions of the Zoning Ordinance and the General Plan that seek to ensure the compatibility of uses and protect the public interest, health, safety, convenience, and general welfare with regulations that require such uses not be overly concentrated, impact sensitive land uses and generate traffic and circulation problems. 7. No harm to adjacent properties will result in that the project, except for the conditions of approval, will not result in any new physical development of the site, nor intensify the legal, non-conforming nightclub use at the site. Impacts related to the Type 48 alcohol license have been addressed and conditioned to minimize noise-related and operational disturbances associated with the project (see conditions 11-20 and 22-30). 8. The proposed use is consistent with the objectives of the General Plan in that the subject parcel is located in the service and specialty commercial land use designation which is intended to accommodate general commercial and service and specialty commercial uses that serve regional, community and local needs while respecting the adjacent residential neighborhoods (Land Use and Circulation Element of the General Plan: Objective 1.6 and Policy 1.6.5). The existing nightclub provides an opportunity for dancing and live entertainment that serves the regional and local community. Adjacent residential neighborhoods would be buffered from the impacts related to the proposed alcohol entitlement by conditions that require noise-mitigating improvements to the building and operational conditions. 17 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CONDITIONS Plans 1. This approval is for those plans dated June 18, 1998, a copy of which shall be maintained in the files of the City Planning Division. Project development shall be consistent with such plans, except as otherwise specified in these conditions of approval. 2. The Plans shall comply with all other provisions of Chapter 1, Article IX of the Municipal Code, (Zoning Ordinance) and all other pertinent ordinances and General Plan policies of the City of Santa Monica. 3. Minor amendments to the plans shall be subject to approval by the Director of Planning. A significant change in the approved concept shall be subject to Planning Commission Review. Construction shall be in conformance with the plans submitted or as modified by the Planning Commission, Architectural Review Board or Director of Planning and Community Development. Architectural Review Board 4. Refuse areas, storage areas and mechanical equipment shall be screened in accordance with SMMC Section 9.04.10.02.130-90.04.10.02.150. Refuse areas shall be of a size adequate to meet on-site need, including recycling. The Architectural Review Board in its review shall pay particular attention to the screening of such areas and equipment. Any rooftop mechanical equipment shall be minimized in height and area, and shall be located in such a way as to minimize noise and visual impacts to surrounding properties. Unless otherwise approved by the Architectural Review Board, rooftop mechanical equipment shall be located at least five feet from the edge of the roof. Miscellaneous CUP Conditions 5. The building address shall be painted on the roof of the building and shall measure four feet by eight feet (32 square feet). 6. Applicant is on notice that all temporary and permanent signage is subject to the restrictions of the City’s Sign Ordinance. Validity of Permits 7. In the event permittee violates or fails to comply with any conditions of approval of this permit, no further permits, licenses, approvals or certificates of occupancy shall be issued until such violation has been fully remedied. 18 8. Within ten days of City Planning Division transmittal of the Statement of Official Action, project applicant shall sign and return a copy of the Statement of Official Action prepared by the Planning Division, agreeing to the Conditions of approval and acknowledging that failure to comply with such conditions shall constitute grounds for potential revocation of the permit approval. By signing same, applicant shall not thereby waive any legal rights applicant may possess regarding said conditions. The signed Statement shall be returned to the Planning Division. Failure to comply with this condition shall constitute grounds for potential permit revocation. 9. This determination shall not become effective for a period of fourteen days from the date of determination or, if appealed, until a final determination is made on the appeal. Any appeal must be made in the form required by the Zoning Administrator. The approval of this permit shall expire if the rights granted are not exercised within one year from the permit’s effective date. Exercise of rights shall mean actual commencement of the use granted by the permit. Such rights may not be exercised until all physical sound mitigating measures have been completed and received final inspection pursuant to Condition 10. One six month extension may be permitted if approved by the Director of Planning. Applicant is on notice that time extensions may not be granted if development standards relevant to the project have changed since project approval. 10. Within thirty (30) days after final approval of the project, a sign shall be posted on site stating the date and nature of the approval. The sign shall be posted in accordance with the Zoning Administrator guidelines and shall remain in place until a building permit is issued for the project. The sign shall be removed promptly when a building permit is issued for the project or upon expiration of the Conditional Use Permit. ALCOHOL CONDITIONS 11. All of the following physical sound mitigating improvements shall be completed and have received final inspection approval, subject to the review and approval of the Director of Planning and Community Development, prior to implementation of the Type 48 alcohol license. 12. An interior drop ceiling shall be installed underneath the existing roof consisting of two (2) layers of gypsum board mounted with resilient clips. Insulation with a minimum R-9 rating shall be installed between the gypsum boards and the roof. 13. Ductwork associated with all mechanical equipment shall be installed underneath the roof within the interior of the building. Ducting may penetrate the roof only underneath the associated mechanical unit. Ductwork shall be installed with a minimum of one (1) inch thick insulation. 19 14. All unused ducting and mechanical equipment shall be removed from the roof to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning and Community Development. 15. All vestibules shall be constructed with floor to ceiling wall structures and solid core designed doors with properly functioning automatic door closures. The Director of Planning and Community Development may approve alternatives to the vestibule configuration provided such alternatives comply with the City’s Noise Ordinance and applicable building code requirements. 16. As an alternative to Conditions 12-15, the applicant may present an alternative sound mitigation plan that provides equal or greater noise reduction, subject to the review of the City’s noise consultant and review and approval of the Director of Planning and Community Development. 17. No noise shall be audible and bass vibrations detectable beyond the site boundaries when the establishment’s doors are closed. 18. The exiting door adjacent to the alley shall be re-installed such that the automatic door closer operates properly ensuring a tight seal between the door and door jam, subject to compliance with Building Division code requirements and approval by the Director of Planning and Community Development. 19. Sound absorbing blankets shall be installed over each skylight and shall have an STC rating of 25 or greater. The blankets shall be maintained in good condition and attached to prevent being removed by wind or other environmental elements. 20. Doors to the establishment and vestibule doors shall remain closed at all times except to allow patron entry. Signs shall be conspicuously posted at each vestibule door alerting patrons and staff not to prop door open. 21. The exterior fire doors adjacent to Lincoln Court shall only be used in case of emergency or for commercial loading activity. Use of the doors for commercial loading is prohibited between 6:00 p.m. and 8:00 a.m. 22. Two uniformed security guards shall be present between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 2:00 a.m. Friday and Saturday; and 8:00 p.m. to midnight Sunday through Thursday. 23. No outside promoter shall be permitted to rent or lease the premises. No event held at the establishment shall be advertised under another name. 20 24. The applicant shall make available a valet parking service to all customers, during all hours of operation. The applicant shall encourage patrons to use the valet service and discourage patrons from parking on Lincoln Court or in adjacent residential neighborhoods. The valet parking plan shall provide pick up and drop off service from Broadway and shall discourage the use of the alley, subject to the review and approval by the Transportation Management and Planning Divisions. A clearly legible and appropriately sized sign shall be posted on the wall inside vestibule 1 near the cashier’s window informing patrons of the valet parking service. 25. The permitted hours shall be 10:00 a.m. to 2:00 a.m. on Friday and Saturday with complete closure by 2:30 a.m.; and 10:00 a.m. to Midnight on Sunday through Thursday with complete closure by 12:30 a.m.. No alcohol shall be served after 1:30 a.m. and entrance to the nightclub by patrons shall be closed at 1:00 a.m. on Friday and Saturday. No after hours operations shall be permitted. 26. The applicant shall implement a written policy that requires club management to verbally remind club patrons to exit the club quietly, courteously and to be respectful to the nearby residential uses. Signs shall similarly be posted at an appropriate location within the building and of appropriate size, subject to the approval of the Director of Planning and Community Development. 27. The applicant shall provide and maintain a dedicated phone line that enables direct communication with the on-site manager who shall respond immediately to complaints regarding the nightclub operation. The applicant shall provide written notice to all residential tenants and residential property owners within 500 feet regarding how to access the dedicated phone line. 28. The applicant shall submit a refuse and recycling program that provides regular service for refuse collection on the following day after the nightclub is in operation. The collection plan shall be subject to the review and approval of the Solid Waste Management Division and shall require pick up between 8:30 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. Refuse and recycling material shall only be transferred from the nightclub to the collection area between 9:00 a.m. and 9:00 p.m. 29. The owner shall ensure that club patrons disperse quietly from the club and shall not permit club patrons to congregate outside of the club or in the surrounding vicinity. The property and surrounding area shall be maintained free and clear of litter. 30. The operation shall at all times be conducted in a manner not detrimental to surrounding properties or residents by reason of lights, noise, activities, parking or other actions. 21 31. No expansion in the number of seats fixed seats or change to the existing operation shall occur without prior approval from the City of Santa Monica and State Alcoholic Beverage Control. 32. Dancing and live entertainment shall be permitted during hours of operation only. 33. No person under 21 years of age shall be allowed in the establishment and signs shall be posted to this effect. 34. The owner shall provide for designated types of beverage dispensers that will clearly distinguish alcoholic beverages from non-alcoholic beverages. 35. Signs shall be posted in conspicuous locations advising patrons that alcoholic beverages shall not be sold unless proper identification is displayed. 36. No alcoholic beverage shall be sold for consumption beyond the premises. 37. Alcohol shall not be served in any disposable container such as disposable plastic or paper cups. 38. The applicant shall submit a security plan to the Planning Division and the Chief of Police for review and approval. The plan shall address both physical and operational security issues. 39. The applicant shall submit a plan for approval by the Director of Planning and Community Development regarding employee alcohol awareness training programs and policies. The plan shall outline a mandatory alcohol awareness training program for all employees having contact with the public and shall state management's policies addressing alcohol consumption and inebriation. The operator shall provide the City with an annual report regarding compliance with this condition. This project shall be subject to any future citywide alcohol awareness training program condition affecting similar establishments. 40. The applicant shall also submit a plan describing the establishment's designated driver program, which shall be offered by the operator to the establishment's patrons. The plan shall specify how the operator will inform patrons of the program, such as offering on the menu a free non-alcoholic drink for every party of two or more ordering alcoholic beverages. 41. The project shall at all times comply with all noise conditions of approval in addition to provisions of the Noise Ordinance (SMMC Chapter 4.12). 42. Within thirty (30) days from date of the approval of the Statement of Official Action, the applicant shall provide a copy of the approved Statement of Official Action for this project to the local office of the State Alcoholic Beverage Control department. 22 Prepared by: Suzanne Frick, Director Jay Trevino, AICP, Planning Manager Amanda Schachter, Principal Planner Kimberly Christensen, AICP, Senior Planner Jonathan Lait, AICP, Associate Planner Planning and Community Development Attachments: A. Chronology of Events for 814 Broadway B. Planning Commission staff report, dated May 17, 2000 C. Planning Commission supplemental staff report, dated May 17, 2000 D. Planning Commission Statement of Official Action, dated May 17, 2000 E. Planning Commission Minutes, dated May 17, 2000 F. Appeal Statement from Commissioner Olsen (00-070) G. Appeal Statement from Suite Events, LLC (00-072) H. Notice of Public Hearing I. Correspondence received at or subsequent to the Planning Commission meeting J. Applicant’s Response to Issues Raised by Appellant K. Photographs Site L. Existing Floor Plans, Photographs and Articles, provided by Applicant 23 ATTACHMENT A Timeline of Past Events for 814 Broadway 1924 Original building permit issued for the existing structure. 1960 Zoning Ordinances identify restaurants and bars as permitted uses (Ord. 491 CCS). 1964-1975 Bar established, Type 40 (beer only) alcohol license issued by the Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) and subsequently transferred 5 times. 1975 - 1985 Type 42 (beer and wine, no minors) alcohol license issued by the ABC and transferred 4 times before being surrendered on July 18, 1985. City records indicate incorporation of dancing and entertainment- related activity occurring at the site. November 13, 1984 CUP required for new alcohol outlets. Existing alcohol outlets are not required to obtain a CUP if the same type retail liquor license is retained, or if the licensed premises are operated continuously without substantial change in mode or character of operation. A substantial change in mode or character includes a 10% increase in floor area; a 25% increase in shelf area; and a 25% increase in seating area. (Ord. 1319 CCS). November 14, 1984 The subject establishment becomes a non-conforming use for lack of a CUP for the alcohol outlet. August 12, 1985 Application for an Alcohol Exemption filed with the Planning Division (Kingston 12). August 29, 1985 Alcohol Exemption mistakenly approved for a Type 41 alcohol license (Kingston 12). The application was approved based upon information submitted by the applicant, which contained incorrect information about a restaurant component and the previous alcohol license. Although incidental food appears to have been available up until this time, the tenant space now occupied by Club Sugar never contained a kitchen and therefore, would not be considered a restaurant. Further, a Type 41 alcohol license has never been issued by the ABC for the subject tenant space.. October 11, 1985 New Type 42 alcohol license issued by the ABC to the proprietor of Kingston 12. September 1988 Zoning Ordinance amended establishing nightclubs as a conditionally permitted use and adds one- year abandonment language to non-conforming use section of the Code. September 1988 The subject establishment becomes a non-conforming use for lack of a CUP for the nightclub. November 12, 1992 CUP (99CUP049) application submitted by the proprietor of Kingston 12 to expand existing club to include a restaurant component and requesting a Type 47 alcohol license. September 29, 1993 CUP (99CUP049) application denied by Planning Commission. October 11, 1993 Proprietor of Kingston 12 appeals Planning Commission decision (93AP-010). January 11, 1994 City Council denies applicant’s appeal upholding the Planning Commission determination. October 11, 1997 Last call for service to the Police Department pertaining to disturbances at Kingston 12. November 4, 1997 Alcohol Determination (97AD-024) application filed. November 15, 1997 City Code Enforcement Officers learn that Kingston 12 ceased operation May 13, 1998 Alcohol Determination approved to allowed transfer of the Type 42 alcohol license and continued operation of the nightclub. May – December 1998 Various permits approved for electrical, plumbing, interior remodel and exterior modifications. October 12, 1998 Business license application approved for Club Sugar pursuant to 97AD-024. Establishment permitted to continue operation as a legal non-conforming nightclub that has not been abandoned for more than one year. December 1998 Club Sugar begins operation.