Loading...
SR-092303-6BPCD:SF:JT:AS:JC:BL:f:\plan\share\council\strpt\03Wmend CUP 435market Council Mtg: September 23, 2003 Santa Monica, California TO: Mayor and Councilmembers FROM: City Staff SUBJECT: Amendment of Condition 1 of Parcel Map 18025 and CUP 435 to Allow the Continued Operation of an Existing Neighborhood Market Located at 2225 Fourth Street. Applicant: Paul Chen / Hacque Helal INTRODUCTION This report recommends that the City Council amend Condition 1 of Parcel Map 18025 and CUP 435 to allow the continued operation of an existing nonconforming neighborhood grocery store located at 2225 Fourth Street in the OP2 District. Currently, this condition requires that the neighborhood market building be demolished and the area converted to a front yard for the existing two-unit condominium building. BACKGROUND In 1929, the parcel on which the neighborhood grocery store is located was zoned "Class B, Income." In 1946, the parcel was rezoned to the R2 District, which did not specify neighborhood grocery stores as a permitted use. Records are not available to determine when the original use was established. However, based on its location, the building design and lack of alterations, it is likely that the building has been occupied by a market since it was constructed in 1928. In 1948, the City adopted an ordinance requiring all commercial uses in residential districts to be removed in 25 years. As a result of this ordinance, successive owner's of the grocery store obtained Conditional Use Permits in 1973, 1979, 1984, and 1985 to allow the grocery store to continue operating until October 23, 2000. 1 On February 2, 1987, Parcel Map 18025 and CUP 435 were approved allowing the rear portion of the property to be developed with two condominiums. Condition 1 of Parcel Map 18025 and CUP 435 was amended on appeal by the City Council on April 28, 1987. Condition 1 c is particularly significant because it requires the market use and building to be removed by October 23, 2000. The property owners acknowledged and agreed to remove the commercial building by October 23, 2000 as documented in the recorded deed restriction, approved condominium CC&R's and accepting the benefits of the City approvals by developing the condominium project pursuant to this agreement. The applicant submitted CUP 00-009 to allow the market to continue. However, the Zoning Ordinance, PM 18025 and CUP 435 require the use to be abated unless the demolition condition is modified to allow the building to remain and a new CUP can be approved. The Planning Commission considered the applicant's request on April 2, 2003 and April 23, 2003. The Planning Commission approved CUP 00-009 subject to the City Council modifying the demolition requirement. ANALYS I S The condition requiring demolition of the commercial building was imposed because the proposed condominium project on the rear of the lot would preclude modifications and improvements that could make the market comply with development standards, or allow other improvements to enhance compatibility with the neighboring residential use. Conversely, the market building on the front of the lot renders the condominium project nonconforming. Without Condition 1, the Planning Commission and City Council would 2 not have been able to make the required findings to approve the condominium project because it would not be consistent with the Zoning Ordinance and General Plan. To modify this condition, the City Council needs to consider and re-adopt all of the findings approving Parcel Map 18025 and CUP 435 in an affirmative manner. Since these conditions were specifically imposed by the City Council, and required that a deed restriction be recorded between the project's owner and the City, the Planning Commission could not modify the condition. A copy of the City Council Staff Report approving the condition, the recorded Deed Restriction and an excerpt from the approved CC&R's are contained in Attachment F. Plannina Commission Action The Planning Commission considered this request on April 2, 2003 and April 23, 2003. Based on overwhelming support from residents, the Planning Commission determined that this neighborhood market provides a valued service to the neighborhood, reduces vehicle trips and contributes to the neighborhood character. By a six to one vote, they approved CUP 00-009 and recommended the City Council amend the demolition condition. Subsequently, on July 22, 2003, the City Council adopted Ordinance 2090 (CCS) to allow the Planning Commission, or City Council on appeal to modify development standards and the operating hours of existing neighborhood markets. Although this market operator wants their hours increased, the issue before the City Council at this time is amending conditions of Parcel Map 18025 and CUP 435. Therefore, any 3 modification of operating hours would need to return to the Planning Commission as a modification to CUP 00-009. Staff recommends the following modification to Condition 1 of PM 18025 and CUP 435: 1. The applicant shall provide within the CC&R's and a separate recorded Deed Restriction provisions which state that: a) The existing neighborhood market is a non-conforming building and use, subject to +;m° ';m;+~ °n~ conditions set forth in Conditional Use Permit ~ 00-009; b) As a non-conforming building and use, the neighborhood market is subject to Santa Monica Municipal Code (SMMC) Sections 9.18 Q~'~~° ~n~ Q~ ~zaR rcnnnnri which establish significant controls and restrictions on non-conforming buildings and uses including the potential for removal of such buildings and uses; and c) The store building shall be removed and the underlying area landscaped or redeveloped in a manner consistent with legal requirements then in effect at such time should the retail store use be discontinued for a continuous period of one year or the Conditional Use Permit e~es be revoked `"~hinho~ior „~~, ,r~ f,r~+ The CC&R's and Deed Restriction shall be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney prior to ;"° °~~r^„°' ^f ° €~a~ap being recorded on the property title. Conclusion This neighborhood grocery store has served the surrounding neighborhood for a long period of time and has significant support from the neighbors as demonstrated by petitions submitted to staff and the number of residents that spoke in favor of the applications at the Planning Commission meeting. The condition requiring demolition of 4 the commercial building was imposed to allow the construction of the condominium project on the rear of the property. A new CUP cannot be approved to allow the market to continue unless the demolition condition is modified. The Planning Commission could not modify the condition because the condition was imposed by the City Council. This neighborhood market provides a valued service to the neighborhood, reduces vehicle trips and contributes to the neighborhood character. Therefore, the use should be continued. CEQA STATUS The project is categorically exempt from the provisions of California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15301, Class 1 of the State Guidelines for Implementing the California Environmental Quality Act in that the project would allow the continued use of a residentially zoned property for a commercial neighborhood grocery store which would involve no expansion of use. RENT CONTROL STATUS The proposal will not affect the owner occupied condominium units and a Commercial Project Exemption is on file. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION Pursuant to Municipal Code Sections 9.04.20.22.050, 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 consecutive calendar days prior to the hearing. A copy of the notice is contained in Attachment A. 5 BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACT The recommendation presented in this report does not have any budget or fiscal impact RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Council amend Condition 1 of Parcel Map 18025 and CUP 435 to allow the continued operation of the existing neighborhood grocery store: CONDITION 1 OF PM 18025 AND CUP 435 1. The applicant shall provide within the CC&R's and a separate recorded Deed Restriction provisions which state that: a) The existing neighborhood market is a non-conforming building, subject to conditions set forth in Conditional Use Permit 00-009; b) As a non-conforming building and use, the neighborhood market is subject to Santa Monica Municipal Code (SMMC) Sections 9.18, which establish significant controls and restrictions on non-conforming buildings and uses including the potential for removal of such buildings and uses; and c) The store building shall be removed and the underlying area landscaped or redeveloped in a manner consistent with legal requirements then in effect at such time should the retail store use be discontinued for a continuous period of one year or the Conditional Use Permit be revoked. The CC&R's and Deed Restriction shall be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney prior to being recorded on the property title. Prepared by: Suzanne Frick, Director Jay M. Trevino, AICP, Planning Manager Amanda Schachter, Principal Planner John Chase, Urban Designer Bruce Leach, Associate Planner City Planning Division Planning and Community Development Department Attachments: A. Notice of Public Hearing B. Radius and Location Map C. CUP 381 & CUP 435 D. CUP 00-009 Planning Commission Staff Report, STOA & Minutes E. Deed Restriction, City Council Staff Report & CC&R Excerpt F. Correspondence/Petitions G. Photographs of Site and Surrounding Properties H. Plot Plan & Floor Plans 6 ATTACHMENT A Notice of Public Hearing NOTICE OF A PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE SANTA MONICA CITY COUNCIL SUBJECT: Amend Parcel Map 18025 and CUP 435 to Allow the Continued Operation of an Existing Neighborhood Market at 2225 Fourth Street LOCATION: 2225 Fourth Street. APPLICANT: Paul Chen / Hacque Helal PROPERTY OWNER: Hacque Helal A public hearing will be held by the City Council to consider the following request: Amend Condition 1 of Parcel Map 18025 and CUP 435 to allow the continued operation of an existing neighborhood grocery market located at 2225 Fourth Street. The existing condition requires the commercial building to be demolished. The condition was adopted to allow the property owner to construct the two-unit condominium project at the rear of the residential zoned property. On April 23, 2003, the Planning Commission approved CUP 00-009 to allow the market to continue operating subject to the City Council amending the demolition condition. DATE/TIME: TUESDAY, September 23, at 6:45 p.m. LOCATION: City Council Chambers, 2nd Floor, Santa Monica City Hall 1685 Main Street, Santa Monica, California HOW TO COMMENT The City of Santa Monica encourages public comment. You may comment at the City Council public hearing, or by writing a letter. Written information will be given to the City Council at the meeting. Address your letters to: City Clerk Re: C U P 435/C U P 00-009 1685 Main Street, Room 102 Santa Monica, CA 90401 MORE INFORMATION If you want more information about this project or wish to review the project file, please contact Associate Planner Bruce Leach at (310) 458-8341, or by e-mail at bruce- leach@santa-monica.org. The Zoning Ordinance is available at the Planning Counter during business hours and on the City's web site at www.santa-monica.orq. 8 The meeting facility is wheelchair accessible. For disability-related accommodations, please contact (310) 458-8341 or (310) 458-8696 TTY at least 72 hours in advance. All written materials are available in alternate format upon request. Santa Monica Big Blue Bus Lines numbered 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 9, and 10 serve City Hall. Pursuant to California Government Code Section 65009(b), if this matter is subsequently challenged in Court, the challenge may be limited to only those issues raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City of Santa Monica at, or prior to, the public hearing. ESPAIVOL Esto es una noticia de una audiencia publica para revisar applicaciones proponiendo desarrollo en Santa Monica. Si deseas mas informacion, favor de Ilamar a Carmen Gutierrez en la Division de Planificacion al numero (310) 458-8341. APPROVED AS TO FORM: JAY M. TREVINO, AICP Planning Manager f:\plan\share\cc\notices\03WmendCU P435market 9 ATTACHMENT B Radius and Location Map Electronic version of attachment is not available for review. Document is available for review at the City Clerk's Office. 10 ~. ~8 ~L ~ 5919. ttl ~i5a IJ 16~- I~~~ I/3~5 59/9 .ET e N ~~,~ce' o.. .-sixrx ' - .a ~ ns~ ~o~ •o~ ~o ~ w o o' ~ .*sav' r xe 40 q ~ ase - I 2 3. 4_ ~ 6. ~. ~. 0 "z ; 41 iufi ~ 116•42 "SIXTH n~ ~ . _~ `A 6~. f I9 ~,.^~~ _ . „ E- r m~ `~ 1 16 BEVERLEY ~ 2T9PCTII 6~ 59q. In ~ m 'rPo1BR6Ft23e . . ; e• eo' ~o 5g ° ao' 17 R W 9 IB ~0' °, 19 g S959' . t ~ e b' ~N 10 <0' a0' S0- 50' So' S5' So H I G 22 23 2d~ 2~ 6~ 5 ~;, „ .° ` e Z- 3~ 4 • 50~ 5 ~ _. 7• ~~ V 6tE ~ ~~ ~N- ,(~ `. 9~ • W•1 • ~ ~ o .o' ~o sas. i so so ~.~ ~sv~ ~ m~ ~o ~o~ .o' ~o .o . so' s 2202 ~ u~~ 4d . - ~ er ~a ~o~ ~o ~o' ~o~ . ~ w .o~ m iac .`45 S ~ - ..§ 9 4 9 . .l 46 ~ I 2 3 4~ 5 - 7 8 - ~t6' n 41 ~ ' . , .• 91' 1~ ~ . urc r ¢ - m m w 48 ' ~I15 -_ ~ ~ ~ , A49 9 6 II 12 I -14 IS 6 17 I 19 20 g ~ 9 3 . 5~ _ 4 ~ '~`--~ v .o~ .o- :o .o~ .o' m .o' ooFiFTH nn~ .__' Zlo,,. tli9 6~ i K ~ ~ p .. 2301j - - . .. <o Q4R1, 2soa aaoe m ~o. eo' ~a' ' , ° s : s Ss - B - ~ : - ,9: - 's ~ N 3; m' < 6 ~ P e ;R ~o ~o .o II 12 13 I4 15 ~ 16. 17 18. 19. 20. ~ ~~m $ a _ ; <a' 9 ~a' m~ _ ~o~ ao .o ~ ~$Z~ vt._., ~ 33(a9: ~ l, - i~16' Ilb ~4' ~0' ~0' IO ~a' , ~0' !0' S3 ~ a 116 5d - a - $ - a ° s + - a - 0 o ~~„ ~~ ~ l 2 3 d 5 7 8 9 10 55 ere. " 69 )69' 169' )[9. lJW 10 0' ~0 __ W' <p' ° N 'c 56 51 SS 59' ~ '+ -~ .. ~ ~ ~ ~ - " - ,~~ _ 12g _ .13 14„ 15 I= Il,; _ IB- 19r 20 , 't 9d 6O J69ti b90 I ~0 10 90 f0 90 9 ~ i0. 00 j] y 1 t y i 1 y J w ~ z w ¢ Il zc~! 2002 -~ ~ ~ ~,1 N U LL U d O. ~ N ~a O : w' ~o a~ a~ .. „ ~o~ M h 19, 3 ~ o ~ ' L . 9 ~ m + L + ~ 2 3 a- 5 G~~ a 8: I~ m __ :o' R ~~ ~ ' T - ~sa> x ^II 12~ 13; 14 IS 16-0 ~ 18~ 19 _ ~~ ~ ~a ~)5 90 ~O^ ~O ~~ ~DA - 0 i0 ~-_-- - _~-'- F- w w ~ ~ o p ~0 -'0 0 b' e0~ 50~ 50 50' _ 3= 4"s - - Y ' B 7 6 5 ~o~ ~o~ ~ .o so~ 5 6 ~8 1 2 ~~~.3 4 _ . yg . 9 a ~o' ~o' -so sa~ so'. . uU`~ SOi: 5~1 i~~.~ l _,.~ y~,~2dDt ' 4'; E302 :240 ~. m~ ~o~ ~ ~. 6 ~ N ~ N ~ ~-~~aa b' ~0' b' ~0' S0' So' S¢ 50~ v a ~ ~ ~~ ~ ° / ~ 8_ 7 .6 5~ ~ ii 10 9 ~ 2 3 4 . i - - g 1 - o sa' ~ W ~ so- ~ so _ ~ F N E. = P ~ 2 ~ 2 -5- 6. lm B' I 2, d„ J J _ m " " - - T = g ~ - ao' ~o' qo' ao so' a• N ~~.ao' . so' eo '1 -1 -y -1 -'-` - J ~'~° s i `1 - .,~~ r an i0-- 50' ~ ~ X i M _._ M C d ' F. R' P _ « . ^ no' ~+ d 3 2 ~ ° ~ c ~ ~ ~~. v , z ~e~ m' so~ iw. Y % ^ in' ^ =5 ~ 6x 7 x B ~ ~,~. ~a~ .e' v~ ~~a, o V A i s t "~' _ ` .- •- _'- _- - _ - . e . a . . g 9 ~ ~ ~I'@' O ~ ~ ~ 9 e 0 ~ ~3 ~ ' ~ 9 = 10 II 12 '= --.~ ,_ ) 2 3 / s o iso ~ ~sti isr { ~ { ~ _ p o 6C ~. . 6f . ,= ~ ~ 60' 40' W~ 60' 60- =Z ~ ~ W F- )if t5' t5' , t5 ~~ . x fa . f~ ~ Q - J 1 5 J -c; i 5 ~ , p ' R ' ~ ~ pB 29 30 31 '_ ° ~ ~ 4~ ' 16- 15 '4_ 13 a = H F I ~ _ _ _ _ rJ N - _ ~ ~o nr ~s a :s' 60' ' 60 60 ~ ~ry .'~'. • 60' 60' ~t' 4' b w' St~ ~j6 zto~ ~2ot ~ $ STREET x , a zio ---- zzoz. ; .. i a ~, a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ , a ao ~ ~ •' • z0 ~~~ ' S Nl ^. Y T ~ ia oC ~i -I _ ""'" 20 I 19 ~ ' 14 ^ is.. ~I ~~ i .,,' ~+ ~r _ -PORTION ?WVI' FOLIR7N ATTACHMENT C CUP 381 & CUP 435 Electronic version of attachment is not available for review. Document is available for review at the City Clerk's Office. 11 ..'. Y ~ ~:' § S'PATEME~,~T pF' OFFICIAL ACTION PR0.7F.C~P NUMBER: C.L.P. 381 LOCATIObI; 2225 4TH Street APPLICAL~?T< Ming-Sin Ru and Tien Hp Chen Ru REQUEBT; To Permit an Existing Neighborhood Market in a Residentiai District to Continue in Operation PLANNING COMMISSION ACTI 5/13/85 Date X Approved based on the ~ollocving £indings and subject to the conditions below Denied Other Findings 1. The proposed use and iocation are in accordance with good zoning practice, in the public interest and necessary that substantial justice be done ir. tha± this market which has been in operation since 1973, provides a neighborhood serv- ing use for the area's residents. 2o The proposed use is compatible with existing and potential uses ~aithin the general area, trafPic or parking congestion wi11 not result, the public health, safety and gen2ral wel~ fare are protected and no narm to adjacent properties tivill result in that the market serves primarily walk-in trade £rom the surrounding residential neighborhood. Conditicns 1. Plans for signage shell be subject to review and approval by the Architectural Re-view Board. The building sha11 be pain- ted ann appropriate landscanina shail be added subject to review an3 approval by the Architectural Revieca Board. 2. Re£use areas, storage areas and mechanica2 eguipment shall be screened in accordance with Sec. 9117J.2-4 (SM~IC}. Re- fuse areas sha11 be of a size adequate to meet on-site need, 3, The operation sha11 at a11 times be conducted in a manner r~ot detrimental to surrounding nroperties or residents by reason of lights, noise, activiti.es, parking or o±her actions. _ ~ _ ~~"s ~ {, :: .~ ~ SY 4, No noise generating compressors or other such equipment shall be placed adjacent to neighboring residential buildings. 5, The Conditional Use Permit to perznit a neighborhood market to be located in an R3 zone shall be ef£ective throguh Oc- tober 23, 2000 to coincide with the Planning horizon of the current Land Use Element. b. Approval of this Conditional Use Permit sha71 not constitute a new alcohol outlet withzn the meaning of Ord. 13i9 and it sha11 therefore be excempt from the requirments of Ord. 1319. Any substantial change in the mode or character oi operation shall require application ~or an aicohol outlet Conditional Use Permit per Ord. 1319. 7. The operation shall not detrimental to reason of lights, actions. 8. No noise generatin~ sha11 be placed buildings, at all times be conducted in a manner surrounciing properties or rasidents by noise, activities, parkzng or other s, compressors or otner such equipment adjacent to neighboring residential 9. Business hours of operation sha11 be iimited to 8:00 a,m, to 7:30 p,me seven days per week, St381 ,~~ `' ~~ ~~~~ ~~ , ;~. -z- _;~ , t~~ l~, ~: STA^1EifENT pF pFFIC~AL ACTION NtiMBERa TPNI 18025, CUP ~35 LOCA?'IO~~; 2225 Fourth Street, R3 Dis~rict ~PPLICANT; i~Sinq°-Sin Ru and Tier.-Ho Ru R=QIIESm, Two-Unit Condominium PL~;NNING COr~IISSION ACTION 2/2; ~7 Date, Approved based on the foll ocving ~-:idi•:~.ys ar.d subject to the conc~itions belour. Denied, Other, H -r_1DrTrGS 1..: The proposed sub~ivision, together with i°.:s p'rovision ior its design and improvements, is consistent with applicable Ge;~era1 and specific plans as adopted by tne Cityo ux" San~a i~ionica based on the analysis and conditions contained in this report and incorporated herein by reference, _. lhe site is physically sui~able £or ~he proposed ty~e ar.d density of development in that the project is an ~.r.-~i~_1 oz" u.rban land adequately served by existing infrastruct~.:re and having no significant physical site cha,ac~eris*_ics precluding the;proposed development, ;. The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements ~aill not cause substantial er.vironm.enta~ damage or sub- stantially and avoidably injure fisn or ~aildlife cr '~hei~ habi~at, 4. The design of the subdivision or the type of impre~remer.t ?vi11 not cause serious publ-c health ~aroblems, 5, T}7e design of the subdivis?on or ,:aill not conflict with easements, a~ ~a~q2, zor access th~ough; or the p-roposed stibdivision, the t_ype of improver~ents acquired ~_y the public ?se o_', r; ope.~~~~, ,.._~`?=-~'. ir; z~ I: i; ~ ~ 6. The design of the subdivision does not preclude ruture passive or nacural heating or cooling opportunities. 7. mhe proposed use and location are in accordance with gcod substantial justice be done and the proposed use is com- patible zaith existing and potential uses within the general area, traffic or parking cor.gestion o~ill not result, the public health, safety and general welfare are protected and no harm to adjacent properties wi11 result based on the analysis and conditions contained in this report and incorporated herein by reference. SPECIAL CONDITIONS ~. The existing retail store building shall be made part of the common area of the subject Parcel Map. The applicant may provide within the CC & R's (and other documents ii appropriate) provisions which tie one residential unit to the existing retail store for purposes of exclusive use, occupancy, responsibility, mair.tenance ard benefic, mr~ CC & R's sha11 state that 1) The existing retail store is a non-conforming building and use, subject to time limits nr,d conditions set farth in Conditional Use Permit 381, 2) As a non-conforming building and use, the retail store i_s subject to Sections 9136A and 9136B (SNID1C) c.~hich establish siqnificant controls and restrictions on non-conformir,g buildings and uses including the potential for remcval cf such buildings and uses, and 3) At such time as th~ stare bu.ilding is removed or destroyed, the store area sha'_1 be ~andscaped and placed under the control of the condomini~m. association as part of the unrestricted comnon area. 2, Plans for final design, landscaping, screening, ard trash enclosures shall be subject to review ar.d approval by ~he ~rchitectural Review Boarda The Board shall careiuliy ~ez~iew ~he project design and reauire modiiicacions _i_g necessary to 2nsur2 a harmonicus relationship c,~i~h the surroLmding neighborhood, sTANDARD CONDITIONS 3. Al1 ofF site improvements required by the City Er.gi~eer shall be installed. Plans and specifications r"or cff site improvements sha11 be prepared by ~ registered civ '_ ~n- gineer and approved by the C~ty Engineer. Before the City Engi;~eer may appro~e the Final map, a sub~ d?vision improvement agreement for all off site im~reve- ments required by the City Engineer shall be pr~pared and a performance bond posted througn ihe C~ty Attorney's oi~ice, 5. ?'he t2ntacive map shall axpir~ 24 months afte~ app=oval, e~,cept as ~rovided in the ~rcvisions of CaliPorr.,~a Govern-- ment Code Sec~ion 66452.6 Gr,d Sections ~~80-Q382 of Lr2 _. ~ ~ 5,: £x i.. ~' .1 U Santa Monica riunicipal Code. zinal map shali be pres2nted for approval. During this time per?od the to the City of Santa PSOn? ca the City of 8anta rionica with one Diza1 Cloth print reproduction and microfilm of each sheet of the final map after recordation. 7, trior to approval of the final map, Condominium Associa- tion B_y-Laws and a Declaration of CC & R's shall be re- ~~iecaed and approved by tha City Attorney. The CC & R's shall contzin a nondiscrimination clause as presented in Section 9392 (SMMC) and contain such provisions as are required by Section 9122E (SMMC). The CC & R's sha11 also incorporate provisions providing for treatment of the ex- isting commerc?al building in a manner consistent with Special Condition 1 above, to the satisfaction or" the Ciry Attorney. .. ~'he deve~ oper sha11 provide ior payr,ient oi a Condo~i~,ium Tax of $1;000 per saleable residential uni't per tne provi- sions o~ Section 6651 et seq. oi the Santa D:onica P~tuniciaal Code. 9. ~i'he zo.rm; contents, accompanying data, and filir.g of the f?na1 parcel map sha11 conform to che prov?sions o~ Sec- ~ions 9350 tnrough 9357 (SP~IC) anc? che Subdivision hlap Act. _^. 7'h~ f-inai map shall be recorded with ti:e Los Angeies Ccun-- ~y Recorde'r prior to issuance of any building permit for a condominium project pursuant ~o Government Code Secticn 66~99.30. __. Conditional Use Permit ^3~ shall be deemed to ;,e oi no iurther zo.rce or effect i~ Tentative I'ract DTap ~~~42 ex- ~ires piior to approval of a Final ~fap for said tract, }?_.. 2-linor amendments to the plans shall be subject to approval ~y che Director of Planning. An increase of more than 10o of the square footage or a significant change in the ap- pro~red concept may be subiect to Planning Commission Re-- view, Constrkcti_on shall be in substantial conformance s~-ith the plans submitted or as modified b_y the Pianning Commission; Architectural Revieca Board or Director of Planning, ~_3. The applicant shall comply ~,ith all legal requi~eme~Ls regarding provisions for the disabled, includii~y ~h~se seL icrth in the Cal==ornia A~mir.is~rative Code, Ti'~'e 2~, Pc.r~ 2 , _-_. Final parking lot layout and spec~ficatzons shall be sub-- ject to che rev_e*,, a_n.d approval of th~ :Park_;_nu and Tra~f~c ~~,~g;~neer. t"± €j !.i ~ 1 1 15, The operation of buildings on the site shall at all times be conducted in a manner not detrimental to surrounding pronerties or residents by reason of lights, noise, ac- tivities, parking or other actions, 1'0, No noise generating compressors or othe~ such equipment shall be placed adjacent to neighboring residential buildings. 17~ Project design shall comply with the building energy reg- ulations set forth in the California Administrative Code, Title 24, Part 2, (Energy Conservation Standards £or New Residential Buildings), such conformance to be verified by the Building and Safety Division prior to issuance of a Building Permit. 18~ Openable windows shall be provided throughout Lhe project, in a manner consis~ent with applicable building code and 9nergy conservation requirements. ls. Natural ligh~ sha21 be provided in at leasf one bathreom in 2ach dwelling unit. 20. Street trees sha11 be maintained, relocated or provided as required in a manner consistent with the City°s Tree Code (Ord. 1242 CCS), per the specifications of the Department of Recreation and Parks and the Department of General Ser- vices. No street tree shall be removed without the ap- proval oi the Department of Recreation and Parks, 27_- Street and/or alley lighting shall be provided cn public rights-oi-way adjacent to the project ii and as r:eeded per the specifications and u~;th the approval of the Department of General Services. 22e The Tentative Map determination shall not become effective zor a period of ten days from the date of determination (twenty days for the Conditional Use Permit determination) or, if appealed, until a final determination is made on the appeal. 23. This project shall not exceed ~o' in height to the highest point, including parapets. ~"OTE Ayes~ Burns, Israel, r.3tzmer, NeJ_son, Per'man, Hecht Nays: Far~var ~bstain: Absent< ° 'T , ~;~ z~ia;~~ tr~ v I h~reby cert~r~ thai this Statemen4 of Official §ction aCCUr3L2?y rafiecta ~he finai ~etermination of the Planning /' . . >/'i-: - I~dLa ~i; e F2~4nh STCUP~35 03/1=/87 _. ~ _. ~:~ ~t {-' `' i J ATTACHMENT D CUP 00-009 Planning Commission Staff Report, STOA & Minutes 12 CP:JT:AS:PF:BL:f:\plan\share\pc\strpt\CUP00-009market Santa Monica, California Planning Commission Mtg: April 23, 2003 TO: The Honorable Planning Commission FROM: Planning Staff SUBJECT: Conditional Use Permit 00-009 Address: 2225 Fourth Street Applicant: Paul Chen Property Owner: Paul and Mary Chen / Hacque Helal INTRODUCTION Action: A continued hearing on an application for a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to allow the continued use of an existing nonconforming neighborhood grocery store in a residential district. The applicant also requests amending restrictions on the store's operating hours pursuant to Condition 9 of CUP 381. The Planning Commission continued final action to the April 23, 2003 meeting so staff could prepare findings to support Planning Commission approval with conditions. Recommendation: Approval with conditions. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The applicant requests continued operation of an existing nonconforming neighborhood grocery store in the OP2 District. The applicant also requests amending restrictions on the store's operating hours pursuant to Condition 9 of CUP 381. The Conditional Use Permit that allowed the nonconforming neighborhood grocery store to operate for a limited term expired on October 23, 2000. In addition, a two-unit condominium was constructed behind the market pursuant to Parcel Map 18025 and CUP 435 prior to the expiration of the market's limited term CUP. Condition 1 of the condominium project requires the market building to be demolished by October 2000 and the area converted to a landscaped front yard for the condominium project. The record indicates that the Planning Commission and City Council would not have approved the condominium project unless the applicant agreed to Condition 1, because the project would not comply with pertinent regulations and the General Plan if the commercial building was retained. Accordingly, the Planning Commission would have to amend Conditions 1 of Parcel Map 18025 and CUP 435 before considering the merits of allowing the market use to continue. If the prior permits are amended, Santa Monica Municipal Code (SMMC) Section 9.04.18.040(h) would allow the Planning Commission to extend or renew the Conditional Use Permit to allow the neighborhood market use to continue even if the prior limited term CUP has expired, but only if all of the findings set forth in SMMC Section 9.04.20.12.040 can be made in an affirmative manner. However, since the market does not conform with building setbacks, off-street parking and off-street loading required in the OP-2 District, the CUP finding regarding compliance with Code 13 requirements cannot be made in an affirmative manner. The CUP could only be approved if Text Amendment (TA) 03-004 is adopted by the City Council and the Planning Commission modifies setbacks, parking, and loading requirements. MUNICIPAL CODE AND GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE Subject to the City adopting proposed Text Amendment 03-004, the Planning Commission approving a modification allowing the existing setbacks, off-street parking and off-street loading to continue and the permit holder correcting violations of conditions, the proposed project is consistent with the Municipal Code as shown in Attachment A. HISTORIC RESOURCES INVENTORY STATUS The existing building on the project site was built in 1929, but is not identified in the City's Historic Resources Inventory. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION Pursuant to Municipal Code Section 9.04.20.20.080, within 15 days after the subject Pursuant to Municipal Code Section 9.04.20.20.080 and in accordance with the posting requirements set forth by the Zoning Administrator, prior to application filing the applicant posted a sign on the property regarding the subject application. At least 8 weeks prior to the public hearing date, the applicant submitted a photograph to verify the site posting and to demonstrate that the sign provides the following information: Project case number, brief project description, name and telephone number of applicant, site address, date, time and location of public hearing, and the City Planning Division phone number. A copy of the site posting photograph is contained in Attachment A. 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, 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 and published in the "California" Section of The Los Anqeles Times at least ten consecutive calendar days prior to the hearing. A copy of the notice is contained in Attachment A. BACKGROUND After considering the application at the April 2, 2003 hearing, the Planning Commission directed staff to prepare the following findings that would support approval with conditions for consideration at this meeting. The Planning Commission indicated that 14 the conditions should be similar to the conditions used for CUP 02-001, including the limitations on alcohol and removal of the exterior window bars. The Planning Commission's action to approve the application should be subject to the City Council amending Condition 1 of Parcel Map 18025 and CUP 435 and the City Council approving TA 03-001. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Planning Commission: 1) Modify building setbacks, off-street parking and off-street loading requirements; 2) Approve CUP 00-009 based on the following findings, conditions; and 3) Specify that the approvals are subject to and are not valid until the City Council amends Condition 1 of Parcel Map 18025 and CUP 435 and adopts an ordinance implementing TA 03-001. MODIFICATION FINDINGS 1. That the use has been in continuous operation since the effective date of the Zoning Ordinance (September 8, 1988), in that the market has been in continues operation since 1948. 2. That the strict application of the provisions of this Chapter would result in practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships inconsistent with the general purpose and intent of this Chapter or that there are exceptional circumstances or conditions applicable to the proposed development that do not apply generally to other developments covered by this Chapter, in that the market building complied with development standards when it was constructed in 1929. In order to comply with current setback requirements, the existing building would need to be 4' from the north side, 10' from the south side property line and 20' from the front property line. This would result in a reduction of 72% in the building's floor area. Reducing the building's floor area, which also reduces the amount of inventory available to customers by 72%, represents an unreasonable hardship. The costs associated with demolishing and constructing a new building would also be substantial. Current regulations require four parking spaces and one off-street loading space. However, there is only sufficient lot area to provide three parking spaces behind the building. While a two-car parking design would also meet loading space requirements, a loading space would be under utilized due to commercial vehicles access limitations, and the additional on-site parking space is more beneficial to neighborhood's limited parking resources. 3. That the granting of a modification would not adversely affect surrounding properties or be detrimental to the district's residential-oriented environment, in that the neighborhood grocery store is a neighborhood serving use, has served the surrounding neighborhood for a long period of time and can be upgraded to improve its appearance to be more compatible with its residential context. 15 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FINDINGS 2. The proposed use is one 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 Zoning Ordinance allows existing neighborhood grocery stores in residential districts with the approval of a Conditional Use Permit. Subject to the Planning Commission modifying side and front yard setbacks, off-street parking and off-street loading requirements pursuant to TA 03-001, the project complies with the special standards for neighborhood grocery stores. 3. 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 neighborhood grocery store has been in operation for over 50 years and serves the surrounding area. Although the market does not currently comply with neighborhood market standards, the project can be upgraded to comply with standards and conditions necessary to insure that the commercial use is compatible with neighboring residential uses and to protect the public health, safety, and general welfare. 4. Subject to the City Council modifying conditions of Parcel Map 18025 and CUP 435, the subject parcel is physically suitable for the type of land use being proposed, in that the subject project can be upgraded to reasonably comply with pertinent standards and conditions necessary to insure that the commercial use is compatible with neighboring residential uses. 5. 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 the neighborhood grocery store is an existing commercial use, which has been located at the site with a second story apartment for more than 50 years. 6. 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 neighborhood grocery store is an existing use which has been located at the site for more than 50 years. Although the market does not currently comply with neighborhood market special standards, the project can be upgraded to comply with standards and conditions necessary to insure that the commercial use is compatible with neighboring residential uses. 7. There are adequate provisions for water, sanitation, and public utilities and services to ensure that the proposed use would not be detrimental to public health and safety, in that the site is located in an urbanized area adequately served by existing infrastructure. 8. Public access to the proposed use will be adequate, in that the site has street frontage on Fourth Street. In addition, the neighborhood market is within walking distance for a large residential population and has adequate on-site parking to accommodate customers. 16 9. Subject to the City Council adopting TA 03-001, the physical location or placement of the use on the site is compatible with and relates harmoniously to the surrounding neighborhood, in that although the market does not currently comply with neighborhood standards, the project can be upgraded to comply with standards and conditions necessary to insure that the commercial use is compatible with the neighborhood. 10. The proposed use is consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the General Plan, in that the proposed use is neighborhood serving while preserving the existing scale and character of the surrounding area. Further, Circulation Objectives and Policies 4.1.2. encourages land use patterns which reduce vehicle miles traveled and the number of vehicle trips. The grocery store is in close proximity to many residential units reduces the number of vehicle trips needed by area residents needing routine grocery items. 11. The proposed use would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or general welfare, in that the project can be upgraded to comply with standards and conditions necessary to insure that the commercial use is compatible with neighboring residential uses and to protect the public health, safety, and general welfare. 12. Subject to the City Council adopting TA 03-001, 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 all special standards for neighborhood markets have been met, with the exception of building setbacks, lot coverage, off-street parking and off-street loading. The Planning Commission has modified these special standards for this neighborhood market since 1) the market has been in continuous operation since the Zoning Ordinance's effective date; 2) the strict application of the provisions of this chapter would result in practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships inconsistent with the general purpose and intent of this chapter in that the market occupies an existing structure where compliance with physical development would require building demolition and markets are currently allowed in the OP2 District subject to a Conditional Use Permit; and 3) the granting of this modification would not adversely affect surrounding properties or be detrimental to the district's residential-oriented environment in that the one-story market building has been located on the site since 1929 without adversely impacting the residential character. 13. The proposed use will not result in an overconcentration of such uses in the immediate vicinity, in that the neighborhood grocery store is 720 feet away from the nearest commercial area. Another neighborhood grocery store is located approximately 480 feet south of the subject grocery store and a mini-mart is located at the corner of Fourth Street and Pico Boulevard. 17 CONDITIONS 1. The approval of CUP 02-001 is contingent on the City Council amending Condition 1 of Parcel Map 18025 and CUP 435 and adopting TA 03-004. Accordingly, CUP 02-001 is not valid unless the City Council amends Condition 1 of Parcel Map 18025 and CUP 435 and the City Council adopts an ordinance that implements TA 03-004. 2. These Conditions replace and supersede the conditions from CUP 381. 3. This approval is for those plans dated July 1, 2000, a copy of which shall be maintained in the files of the City Planning Division. The plans shall be amended to show the removal the exterior security bars. Project development shall be consistent with such plans, except as otherwise specified in these conditions of approval. Improvements to the property shown on the plans and specified in these conditions, including, but not limited to the building farade work shall be completed within 180 days from the effective date of this permit. 4. 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. 5. 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. Operational 6. The operation shall at all times be conducted in a manner not detrimental to surrounding properties or residents by reason of light, noise, activities, parking, or other actions. 7. The use shall continue to be limited to that of a neighborhood food market carrying a full line of grocery items. 8. Only 20% of the shelf area may be stocked with beer and wine and no liquor is permitted. 9. All signs other than the "Fair Market" sign over the entrance of the market shall be removed or painted out, including those in the windows. Only permanent signs that are specifically approved by the ARB may be allowed. Because of the residential context and OP2 District sign limitations, new signs should be limited 18 to the markets name, such as Fair Market, building address and exempt regulatory signs, such as no parking in driveway. 10. The premises shall be maintained in an acceptable state of repair and maintenance, including the adjacent parkways and sidewalks, fencing and trash enclosure. 11. No business license shall be renewed or issued to any owner until the above conditions have been met. 12. That the owner and operators and all their assigns, employees or agents shall obey all laws and ordinances, particularly those relating to the sale of alcoholic beverages and conviction for violation of such laws shall be cause for revocation of this permit and forfeiture of all rights included therein. 13. The neighborhood grocery store shall be operated completely within an enclosed building. The store "unit" may not be used for residential purposes. 14. One (1) on-street passenger loading zone space shall be located adjacent to the entrance to the store on Fourth Street for use by customers who arrive by automobile. The applicant shall reimburse the City for the costs of painting the curb, posting signs and installing a parking meter that may be necessary to designate and enforce the passenger loading zone between 8:00 a.m. and 9:00 p.m. as determined by the City Transportation Management Division. 15. No exterior activities such as trash disposal or other maintenance activity generating noise audible from the exterior of the building shall be conducted between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m., Monday through Friday, and between 10:00 p.m. and 9:00 a.m., Saturday and Sunday. Trash enclosure shall be secured with a lock between 9:00 p.m. and 8:00 a.m. No after hours operation shall be permitted. 16. Lighting shall comply with SMMC Section 9.04.10.02.270, which states that all outdoor lighting associated with commercial uses shall be shielded and directed away from surrounding residential uses. Such lighting shall not exceed .5 footcandles of illumination beyond the property and shall not blink, flash, oscillate or be of unusually high intensity of brightness. 17. The store may be open for business only between 9:30 a.m. and 9:00 p.m. 18. Deliveries shall be permitted only between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. 19. Exterior mechanical equipment shall comply with current City screening and noise regulations SMMC Sections 4.12 and 9.04.10.02.130 - 9.04.10.02.150. 20. The trash enclosure shall be secured with a lock between 9:00 p. m. and 8:00 a. m. 19 21. Within 14 days of the effective date, the applicant shall post a notice at the building entry stating that the site is regulated by a Conditional Use Permit and the Statement of Official Action, which includes the establishment's conditions of approval, is available upon request. This notice shall remain posted at all time the establishment is in operation. 22. The applicant is on notice that signage, exterior modifications, or exterior alterations require prior approval of the Architectural Review Board, see Condition 9. 23. The store operator 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 sales. The program shall require all employees having contact with the public to complete a California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) sponsored alcohol awareness training program within 90 days of the effective date of this approval. All new employees shall attend the alcohol awareness training within 90 days of hiring. In the event the ABC no longer sponsors an alcohol awareness training program, all employees having contact with the public shall complete an alternative program approved by the Director of Planning and Community Development. 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. 24. Any increase or intensification in the mode or character or operation of alcohol sales shall require application for an alcohol outlet Conditional Use Permit. The applicant is on notice that no increase or intensification in the mode or character or operation of nonconforming alcohol uses is permitted as of the date of this permit. 25. Window bars that have been installed on the exterior of the building shall be removed. Electrical conduit, pipes and security bars may be installed inside the building with pertinent permits. Validity of Permits 26. 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. 27. Within ten days of City Planning Division transmittal of the approved Statement of Official Action, project applicant shall sign and return a copy of the Statement of Official Action prepared by the City 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 20 regarding said conditions. The signed Statement shall be returned to the City Planning Division. Failure to comply with this condition may constitute grounds for potential permit revocation. 28. 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. The effective date is also subject to the City Council approving Text Amendment 03-004 and its effective date and the City Council amending Condition 1 of Parcel Map 18025 and Cup 435. Exercise of rights shall mean actual commencement of the use granted by the permit. One six month extension may be permitted if approved by the Director of Planning and Community Development. Applicant is on notice that time extensions may not be granted if development standards relevant to the project have changed since project approval. Prepared by: Bruce Leach, Associate Planner Attachments: A. Notice of Public Hearing B. Plot Plan and Floor Plans JT:bgl f:\plan\share\pc\strpt\00\OOcup09market 21 CP:JT:AS: PF: BL:f:\plan\share\pc\strpt\CUP00-009market2 Planning Commission Mtg: April 2, 2003 TO: The Honorable Planning Commission FROM: Planning Staff SUBJECT: Conditional Use Permit 00-009 Address: 2225 Fourth Street Applicant: Paul Chen Property Owner: Paul and Mary Chen INTRODUCTION Santa Monica, California Action: Application for a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to allow the continued use of an existing nonconforming neighborhood grocery store in a residential district. The applicant also requests amending restrictions on the store's operating hours pursuant to Condition 9 of CUP 381. The conditional use permit that allowed the nonconforming neighborhood grocery store to operate for a limited term has expired. However, Conditions of Parcel Map 18025 and CUP 435, which allowed the construction of a condominium project on the site, requires the market building to be demolished and the area to be converted to a landscaped front yard for the condominium. Accordingly, Condition 1 of the condominium's subdivision map and CUP must be amended to allow the Planning Commission to consider the merits of extending the market's CUP. Even if the condominium condition is amended, the market is inconsistent with Municipal Code requirements for neighborhood markets. The Planning Commission could modify building setback, off- street parking, parking access and off-street loading requirements for the project if Text Amendment 03-004 is adopted by the City Council. Recommendation: Deny CUP 00-009 Permit Streamlininq Expiration Date: December 12, 2000. SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION The subject property is a 5,200 square foot parcel located on the east side of Fourth Street. Surrounding uses consist of: • North, Multi-family units in the OP-2 (Ocean Park Low Multiple Family) District; • South, Multi-family units in the OP-2 (Ocean Park Low Multiple Family) District; 22 • East, Multi-family units in the OP-2 (Ocean Park Low Multiple Family) District; and • West, across 4t" Street, Multi-family units in the OP2 (Ocean Park Low Multiple Family) Districts. Zoning District: OP2/Ocean Park Low Multiple Family District Land Use District: Medium Density Housing Parcel Area: 40' x 130' = 5,200 square feet PROJECT DESCRIPTION The applicant requests continued operation of an existing nonconforming neighborhood grocery store in the OP2 District. The applicant also requests amending restrictions on the store's operating hours pursuant to Condition 9 of CUP 381. The Conditional Use Permit that allowed the nonconforming neighborhood grocery store to operate for a limited term expired on October 23, 2000. In addition, a two-unit condominium was constructed behind the market pursuant to Parcel Map 18025 and CUP 435 prior to the expiration of the market's limited term CUP. Condition 1 of the condominium project requires the market building to be demolished by October 2000 and the area converted to a landscaped front yard for the condominium project. The record indicates that the Planning Commission and City Council would not have approved the condominium project unless the applicant agreed to Condition 1, because the project would not comply with pertinent regulations and the General Plan if the commercial building was retained. Accordingly, the Planning Commission would have to amend Conditions 1 of Parcel Map 18025 and CUP 435 before considering the merits of allowing the market use to continue. If the prior permits are amended, Santa Monica Municipal Code (SMMC) Section 9.04.18.040(h) would allow the Planning Commission to extend or renew the Conditional Use Permit to allow the neighborhood market use to continue even if the prior limited term CUP has expired, but only if all of the findings set forth in SMMC Section 9.04.20.12.040 can be made in an affirmative manner. However, since the market does not conform with building setbacks, off-street parking and off-street loading required in the OP-2 District, the CUP finding regarding compliance with Code requirements cannot be made in an affirmative manner. The CUP could only be approved if Text Amendment (TA) 03-004 is adopted by the City Council and the Planning Commission modifies setbacks, parking, and loading requirements. The Planning Commission also needs to determine if the business is being operated as a grocery market and not a liquor store. The applicant filed the current conditional use permit application to extend this commercial use which is located in a residential district on April 25, 2000. 23 MUNICIPAL CODE AND GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE The proposed project is not consistent with the Municipal Code as shown in Attachment A. CEQA STATUS The project is categorically exempt from the provisions of CEQA pursuant to Section 15301, Class 1 of the State Guidelines for Implementing the California Environmental Quality Act in that the project would allow the continued use of a residentially zoned property for a commercial neighborhood grocery store which would involve no expansion of use. HISTORIC RESOURCES INVENTORY STATUS The existing building on the project site was built in 1929, but is not identified in the City's Historic Resources Inventory. RENT CONTROL STATUS The proposal will not affect the second floor residential unit and a Commercial Project Exemption is on file. FEES The project is not subject to any special City Planning related fees. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION Pursuant to Municipal Code Section 9.04.20.20.080, within 15 days after the subject Pursuant to Municipal Code Section 9.04.20.20.080 and in accordance with the posting requirements set forth by the Zoning Administrator, prior to application filing the applicant posted a sign on the property regarding the subject application. At least 8 weeks prior to the public hearing date, the applicant submitted a photograph to verify the site posting and to demonstrate that the sign provides the following information: Project case number, brief project description, name and telephone number of applicant, site address, date, time and location of public hearing, and the City Planning Division phone number. A copy of the site posting photograph is contained in Attachment B. 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, 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 and published in the "California" Section of 24 The Los Anqeles Times at least ten consecutive calendar days prior to the hearing. A copy of the notice is contained in Attachment C. On February 28, 2003, the applicant was notified by phone and in writing of the subject hearing date. The applicant also solicited support from their customers and has submitted a petition signed by approximately 737 persons which is contained in Attachment F. ANAI Y~I~ Backqround This neighborhood grocery market use has been granted three previous CUPs to allow the use to continue in the residential district: • CUP 192 7/25/1973 to 3/1/1984 • CUP 381 5/13/1985 to 10/23/2000 • CUP 435 2/2/1987 to 10/23/2000 In 1929, the parcel on which the neighborhood grocery store is located was zoned "Class B, Income." In 1946, the parcel was rezoned to R2 District, which did not specify neighborhood grocery stores as a permitted use. Records are not available to determine when the original use was established, however based on its location, the building design and lack of alterations, it is likely that the building has been occupied by a market since the it was constructed in 1928. In 1948, the City adopted an ordinance requiring all commercial uses in residential districts to be removed in 25 years. As a result of this ordinance, in 1973, the owner of the grocery store applied for a Conditional Use Permit, pursuant to SMMC Section 9148, which provided that the Planning Commission may grant a Conditional Use Permit to extend the amount of time non- conforming uses could operate. On July 25, 1973, the Commission approved Conditional Use Permit 192 for an additional three year period. A three year extension to CUP 192 was granted in 1976 and an additional extension was granted in 1979, extending CUP 197 to 1984. On May 13, 1985, the Planning Commission approved another Conditional Use Permit (CUP 381) to allow the grocery store to continue operating until October 23, 2000, with the following conditions: • Plans for signage shall be subject to review and approval by the Architectural Review Board. The building shall be painted and appropriate landscaping shall be added subject to the review and approval of the Architectural Review Board. • Refuse areas, storage areas and mechanical equipment shall be screened in accordance with SMMC Section 9117J.2-4. Refuse area shall be of a size adequate to meet on-site need. • The operation shall at all times be conducted in a manner not detrimental to surrounding properties or residents by reason of light, noise, activities, parking, or other actions. 25 • No noise generating compressors or other such equipment shall be placed adjacent to neighboring residential buildings. • The Conditional Use Permit to permit a neighborhood market to be located in an R3 Zone shall be effective through October 23, 2000 to coincide with the planning horizon of the current Land Use Element. • Approval of this Conditional Use Permit shall not constitute a new alcohol outlet within the meaning of Ordinance 1319 and it shall therefore be exempt from the requirements of Ordinance 1319. Any substantial change in the mode or character or operation shall require application for an alcohol outlet Conditional Use Permit per Ordinance 1319. • Business hours of operation shall be limited to 8:00 a.m. to 7:30 p.m. seven days per week. On February 2, 1987, Parcel Map 18025 and CUP 435 were approved allowing the rear portion of the property to be developed with two condominiums. The conditions of Parcel Map 18025 and CUP 435 were amended on appeal by the City Council on April 28, 1987. Condition 1 c is particularly significant because it requires the market use and building to be removed by October 23, 2000. The property owners acknowledged and agreed to remove the commercial building by October 23, 2000 as documented in the recorded deed restriction, approved condominium CC&R's and accepting the benefits of the City approvals by developing the condominium project pursuant to this agreement. The applicant submitted this application on April 25, 2000. Although the market has been in continuous operation, the Zoning Ordinance, PM 18025 and CUP 435 require the use to be abated unless a new CUP can be approved. Code Enforcement The permit holder has recently violated conditions of their existing CUP. The following violations were filed with the City Code Compliance Division and the applicant was given notice to abate them on February 12, 2001: 1) The permit holder has installed numerous signs without Architectural Review Board (ARB) approval or permits. The signs that were on the building in 1987 have been removed. There are no sign approvals or permits for any of the existing signs; 2) The business operator has placed displays including, but not limited to a Lottery kiosk and telephone booth on the public sidewalk; and 3) The security light on the south side of the building illuminates the adjacent residential buildings. The applicant submitted photographic evidence on February 19, 2003 that, except for three wall signs with the market's name, the violations were abated. 26 Condition 1 of Parcel Map 18025 and CUP 435 The condominium project on the rear of the lot precludes modifications and improvements that could make the market comply with development standards and other improvements that are necessary for it to be compatible with the neighboring residential use and development. Conversely, the market building on the front of the lot renders the condominium project nonconforming. Without Condition 1, the Planning Commission and City Council would not have been able to make the required findings to approve the condominium project because it would not be consistent with the Zoning Ordinance and General Plan. The parcel's narrow width and the condominium project on the rear of the lot precludes modifications and improvements, such as moving the building to comply with setbacks and provide off-street loading, deliveries and parking for the market, or provide proper access to the condominium which is necessary to continue the use. The market building is built at the front and north side yard property lines (no setback). It is only 7'- 11" from the south property line (7'- 6" to the fence). The minimum driveway width to the condominium parking is 10' clear. The narrow south side yard setback creates substandard access to the condominium precluding access to larger passenger vehicles and most delivery and service/maintenance trucks. As a result, commercial delivery vehicles, service or maintenance trucks as well as market employees and customers must park on the street. Parking resources are particularly scarce in this residential neighborhood. In lieu of having 60% to 80% of the front yard landscaped, the market precludes any front yard landscaping. Although the building's appearance was recently improved by being painted and removing signs, the building has no architectural features or character to offset or soften its intrusion into the mid-block pattern of residential development where buildings are setback from the street. Condition 1, the recorded Deed Restriction and the CC&R's clearly require the commercial building to be removed. In agreeing to the Conditions of CUP 435 and executing the deed restriction, the property owner acknowledged that the subject market and building needed to be demolished to allow the City to approve the condominium project on the site. To modify this condition, the Planning Commission would have to consider and re-adopt all of the findings approving Parcel Map 18025 and CUP 435 in an affirmative manner. Moreover, since these conditions were imposed by the City Council, and the Council required the recording of a deed restriction, it is not clear that the Planning Commission would be authorized to change this provision. Having accepted the benefits of Parcel Map 18025 and Cup 435, the applicant cannot be heard to complain about the burden of complying with conditions of these approvals. A copy of the City Council Staff Report approving the following condition, the recorded Deed Restriction and an excerpt from the approved CC&R's are contained in Attachment E. Condition 1 of TPM 18025 and CUP 435: 1. The applicant shall provide within the CC&R's and a separate recorded Deed Restriction provisions which state that: a) The existing retail store is a non- conforming building and use, subject to time limits and conditions set forth in Conditional Use Permit 381; b) As a non-conforming building and use, the retail 27 store is subject to Sections 9136A and 9136B [SMMC] which establish significant controls and restrictions on non-conforming buildings and uses including the potential for removal of such buildings and uses; and c) The store building shall be removed and the underlying area landscaped or redeveloped in a manner consistent with legal requirements then in effect at such time as the retail store use is discontinued for a continuous period of one year or the Conditional Use Permit expires, whichever occurs first. The CC&R's and Deed Restriction shall be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney prior to the approval of a Final Map. Conditional Use Permit If the Planning Commission determines that the condominium restriction should be amended to permit the commercial building to remain, the Commission can consider the merits of approving the continued use of the market and amending its operating hours. The term of the existing CUP cannot be extended because the Zoning Ordinance no longer allows for durational permits. Therefore, a new CUP is required to allow continuation of the neighborhood use. Santa Monica Municipal Code (SMMC) Section 9.04.18.040(h) allows the Planning Commission to approve a new Conditional Use Permit to allow the neighborhood market use to continue even if the prior limited term CUP has expired, but only if all of the findings can be made in an affirmative manner. However, because the project does not conform to building setbacks, parking, or off- street loading required for neighborhood markets the CUP finding regarding compliance with Code requirements cannot be made. Consequently, the applicant must either 1) alter the project to comply with the special standards for neighborhood markets (SMMC Section 9.04.14.080), or 2) the Planning Commission approves a modification to setback, off-street parking. Parking access and off-street loading requirements pursuant to TA 03-004. The existing building would need to be 4' from the north side, 20' from the front and 10' 3" from the south property lines to comply with setback and access requirements. This would result in a reduction of 72% in the building's floor area. It would also require demolition of the building because over 50% of the walls would be removed. The narrow driveway width and condominium project limit the ability to comply with parking and off- street loading requirements. The size and location of the market building also prevents compliance with front yard landscaping requirements. The following special conditions were adopted by the City to mitigate negative impacts typically created when this type of commercial establishment is located in a residential district. Although they were adopted for new projects, existing markets must comply with these standards if they wish to continue beyond the life of their limited term CUP. The following section analyzes how the subject neighborhood grocery store complies, or does not comply with these conditions. Location. No neighborhood grocery store shall be located within three hundred linear feet of an adjacent commercial district in which similar facilities are located. Complies - The existing grocery store is located approximately 760 feet from the 28 nearest commercial district, which is that portion of the CM2 (Main Street Commercial) District located west of the project. Another neighborhood grocery store, the Budget Market, is located approximately 480 feet south of the subject grocery store at 2331 Fourth Street, also located in an OP2 District. A mini-mart is located at the corner of Fourth Street and Pico Boulevard. Structure. A neighborhood grocery store shall be operated completely within an enclosed building. The store shall be located on the ground floor and shall count as a residential unit for the purpose of calculating the unit density permitted on a parcel. The store "unit" may not be used for residential purposes. Complies - The grocery store is currently operating within the building. The grocery store is located on the ground floor (one-story building). Two residential units are located in a three-story building behind the market. Heiqht, Setback and Parcel Coveraqe. A neighborhood grocery store shall comply with the height, setback and parcel coverage requirements for the residential district in which it is located. If the store is contained in a structure that includes other uses, no portion of the remaining portion of the structure in which the store is located shall exceed the height, setback and parcel coverage requirements for the residential district. Non-compliant - The property development standards for the OP2 District and how the project complies are as follows: Property Development Standard Requirement Provided Building Height 23' for flat roof, 30' for pitched roof Aprox. 15'- 2" Flat roof Parcel Coverage 50% 49.8% Front Yard Setback 20' 0' (at pL) Rear Yard Setback 15' 15' Side yard Setback 4' North - 0' (at pL) South - 7'- 11' The grocery store building's side and front setbacks, lot coverage, parking and off-street loading do not comply with OP2 District requirements. Parkinq. A minimum of two off-street parking spaces shall be provided for employees of the store. In addition, if the neighborhood grocery store exceeds six hundred square feet, an additional parking space shall be provided for each additional three hundred square feet or a portion thereof. Non-compliant - The neighborhood grocery store contains 1,117 square feet in floor area and requires 3 parking spaces (2 spaces +(886 s.f. - 600 s.f.) / 300 s.f.). Only one (1) parking space can be provided and that space does not comply with access requirements. Passenqer Loadinq. One on-street passenger loading zone shall be located 29 adjacent to the parcel near the entrance to the store for use by customers who arrive by automobile. Complies - One passenger loading area could be provided on Fourth Street, adjacent to the grocery store entrance. Off-street Loadinq. One off-street loading area may be used for parking by store customers. Loading and unloading for store merchandise shall be permitted only between 8:30 a. m. and 6:00 p. m. Non-compliant - A loading space cannot be provided. Li htin . Lighting shall comply with SMMC Section 9.04.10.02.270, which states that all outdoor lighting associated with commercial uses shall be shielded and directed away from surrounding residential uses. Such lighting shall not exceed .5 footcandles of illumination beyond the property containing the commercial use and shall not blink, flash, oscillate or be of unusually high intensity of brightness. Complies - Security lighting on the south side of the building has been screened to minimize illumination adjacent residential buildings. Hours of Operation. The store shall be open for business only between 8:00 a.m. and 9:00 p. m. Complies - The neighborhood grocery store is currently open from 8:00 a.m. until 7:30 p. m. If a new CU P is approved, the hours are proposed to be 8:00 a. m. to 9:00 p. m. Maximum Size. No neighborhood grocery store shall exceed 3,000 square feet. Complies - At 886 square feet, the existing grocery store complies with this requirement. Alcohol Sales beverages. No neighborhood grocery store shall be permitted to sell alcoholic Legal-nonconforming - The grocery store was operating with a Type-20 (Off-sale Beer and Wine) alcohol license prior to the City requiring conditional use permit and special standards for alcohol outlets. Because this alcohol use has been in continuous operation and no change in mode of operation is occurring, a conditional use permit is not required for alcohol sales and the standard alcohol conditions cannot be applied to this use. While the alcohol license is not a part of the requested approvals, denial of the grocery store CUP would also terminate alcohol sales at this location. Deliveries. Deliveries shall be permitted only between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. Complies 30 Additional Requirements The proposal does not currently provide a trash and recycling enclosure. Although the special CUP conditions prescribed by SMMC Section 9.04.14.080 do not require a trash enclosure, SMMC Section 9.04.18.040(f) provides that the "Planning Commission (or City Council on appeal) may impose such conditions as may be deemed necessary to protect the public health, safety, and general welfare and secure the objectives of the General Plan, including conditions designed to insure compatibility of the existing commercial or industrial use with neighboring residential uses." Given the significant quantity of trash and garbage generated by grocery stores, staff believes that a separate trash/recycling enclosure that conforms to current standards is needed. It could be placed behind the market building and would reduce the private open space for the front condominium. The market building and front condominium are under common ownership. 31 Police Department Comments The Police Department has no law enforcement concerns regarding the continued operation of this neighborhood grocery store. Neiqhborhood Compatibility As previously stated, the neighborhood grocery store has operated at this location for more than 50 years. Community and Cultural Services has no concerns regarding the operation of the grocery store which is near Mary Hotchkiss Park. A petition from patrons of the grocery store has been submitted supporting the continuation of its operation (Attachment F). However as discussed above, the market does not comply with City standards necessary to insure compatibility of the commercial use with neighboring residential uses. The size and location of the market building and condominium project on the rear of the lot precludes modifications that would provide on-site parking or loading. Accordingly commercial delivery vehicles and employees must park on the street. Parking resources are particularly scarce in this neighborhood. Although the building's appearance was recently improved, the building has no architectural features or character to offset or soften its intrusion into the mid-block pattern of residential development where buildings are setback from the street. ALTERNATIVES Other than the recommended action, the Planning Commission may: • Approve CUP 00-009 based on revised findings, conditions and subject to the City Council approving TA 03-001; or ('.nnr.li i¢inn Although the grocery store has been in continuous operation, the Zoning Ordinance and CUP 381 and CUP 435 require the use and building to be abated. The use could be continued if Condition 1 of PM 18025 and CUP 435 is amended and a new CUP can be approved. However, the Planning Commission and City Council would not have approved the condominium project without the property owner agreeing to remove the nonconforming building because the condominium project would not be consistent with the Zoning Ordinance and General Plan. In agreeing to the Conditions of CUP 435 and executing the deed restriction, the applicant acknowledged that the subject market and building needed to be demolished to allow the City to approve the condominium project at the rear of the site. In addition, the neighborhood market does not conform to building setbacks, parking or off-street loading requirements for neighborhood markets in a residential district. The Planning Commission would need to modify building setbacks, off-street parking, 32 parking access and off-street loading requirements pursuant to TA 03-004 if the requested CUP was approved. In order to make the CUP findings that the proposal is consistent with the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance, the Planning Commission must also determine that the primary use of this project is a Neighborhood Market. Although this business does not sell spirits, the high volume of alcohol compared to grocery products is more consistent with liquor stores. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Planning Commission deny CUP 00-009 based on the following findings and approve a 180 day abatement period: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FINDINGS 1. Condition 1 of PM 18025 and CUP 435 requires the store building to be removed and the underlying area landscaped or redeveloped in a manner consistent with legal requirements in effect at such time as Conditional Use Permit (CUP) 381 expires. Since CUP 381 expired on October 23, 2000, Condition 1 of PM 18025 and CUP 435 preclude approval of a new Conditional Use Permit to allow the commercial building or use to continue unless PM 18025 and CUP 435 is amended. However, the Planning Commission and City Council would not have approved the condominium project without the property owner agreeing to remove the nonconforming building because the condominium project would not be consistent with the Zoning Ordinance and General Plan. In agreeing to the Conditions of PM 18025 and CUP 435, executing the deed restriction and developing the property pursuant to such agreement, the property owner acknowledged that the subject market and building had to be demolished to allow the construction of the condominium project. 2. The proposed use is one conditionally permitted within the subject district, but the application does not comply with all of the applicable provisions of the City of Santa Monica Comprehensive Land Use and Zoning Ordinance, in that the subject market is operating pursuant to a limited term Conditional Use Permit (CUP) and Santa Monica Municipal Code (SMMC) Section 9.04.18.040(h) allows the Planning Commission to approve a new CUP to allow the neighborhood market use to continue only if all of the findings set fourth in SMMC Section 9.04.20.12.040 can be made in an affirmative manner. However, the project is inconsistent with SMMC Section 9.04.20.12.040(k) because the project does not conform to building setbacks, parking, parking access, or off-street loading required for neighborhood markets that are specified by SMMC Section 9.04.14.080(d). 3. The proposed use does not conform precisely to the applicable special conditions outlined in Subchapter 9.04.14 of the City of Santa Monica Comprehensive Land Use and Zoning Ordinance, in that the project is inconsistent with SMMC Section 9.04.14.080(d) because the project does not conform to building setbacks, lot coverage, parking or off-street loading required for neighborhood markets located in the OP2 District. 33 4. The subject parcel is not physically suitable for the type of land use being proposed, in that the parcel's narrow width and the condominium project on the rear of the lot precludes modifications and improvements, such as moving the building to comply with setbacks and provide off-street loading, deliveries, parking, landscaping and access to the condominium that is necessary to continue the use. 5. The proposed use is incompatible with any of the land uses presently on the subject parcel if the present land uses are to remain, in that Parcel Map (PM) 18025 and CUP 435 were approved on February 2, 1985 allowing the rear portion of the property to be developed with two condominiums subject to the market use and building being removed by October 23, 2000. In agreeing to this Condition and executing a covenant, the applicant acknowledged that the market was not compatible with the condominium project and the market building needed to be demolished. Without agreement to this condition, the Planning Commission and City Council would not have approved the condominium project. Prepared by: Bruce Leach, Associate Planner Attachments: A. Municipal Code and General Plan Conformance B. Notice of Public Hearing G. Radius and Location Map H. Copy of CUP 381 & CUP 435 I. Deed Restriction, City Council Staff Report & CC&R Excerpt J. Correspondence/Petitions G. Photographs of Site and Surrounding Properties H. Plot Plan, Floor Plans and Elevations JT:bgl f:\plan\share\pc\strpt\00\OOcup09market2 34 ATTACHMENT A MUNICIPAL CODE AND GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE LAND l~~E CATEGQRY ELEMENT MUNICIRAL Ct~DE RR~JECT Permitted Use Medium Neighborhood grocery Allow nonconforming Density store with a CUP & neighborhood grocery Residential Special Conditions. store to continue use in OP2 District. Moratorium Status N/A N/A N/A Dwelling Units 1 DU/2000 s.f. 2 units + Market 5,200/2000 = 2.6 units Height of Building 23' Flat roof Aprox. 15'- 2" Flat roof Number of Stories 2-Stories 1-Story Height of Walls, N/A Minimum 5' high fence 5' wood fence between Fences is required between driveway and parking and residential residential neighbor. neighbors. (CUP Findings) Setbacks Frontyard N/A 20' 0'-0" Sideyard N/A 6'-3" - North North - 0'-0" 10' - South South - 7'- 11" Rear Yard N/A 15' 15'-0" OP Primary Window N/A N/A if windows face Windows face street. street or rear yard. Lot Coverage N/A 50% Maximum 49.8% 2,460/5,874 = 42% Parking Access Alley access Alley access is is required when alley From 4t" Street (no encouraged exists. alley) when alley 25' back-up radius & 15' back-up & 7'6" exists. 10' D/W width D/W width. (SMMC 9.04.10.08.080). Parking Space N/A 2 for employees (600 1 space Number sf) + 1/300 sf 2 employees (600 sf) _ 35 CATEGQRY ~~N~ usE ELEMENT MUNICIRAL Ct~DE RR~JECT 2 286 sf/300 = 0.95 = 1 Total req. 3 Compact Parking N/A 40% of 1=.4 = none 1 Space % 36 Loading Spaces N/A 1 Off-street space Street loading and (may use a parking delivery. space if 10' x 20') (SMMC 9.04.14.080(g)) Trash Area N/A 5'x9' Trash enclosure With residential with minimum 5'- 8' solid walls and gate required. (SMMC 9.04.10.02.151(a)(2)) Mechanical Mechanical equipment Complies Equipment N/A extending more than Screening 12" above roof parapet shall be fully screened from a horizontal plane. (SMMC 9.04.10.02.140) Location of Not permitted on side On roof. Mechanical of building if adjacent Equipment N/A to a residential building on an adjoining lot. (SMMC 4.12 & SMMC 9.04.10.02.180) Parking Area N/A 5' to 8' block wall 5' Wood fence. Screen Frontyard 10% of parking areas None Landscaping N/A (SMMC 9.04.10.04.070) Special Standards for Neighborhood N/A Grocery Stores (b) Location: 300' 370' SMMC9.04.14.080 separation from uses. • Location • Structure (c) Structure: Must Operates within • Height, operate within an building, except Loto setbacks & enclosed building. kiosk, phone, etc. parcel coverage • Parking (d) Height, Does Not comply with • Passenger setbacks & parcel OP2 setbacks (See 37 Loading coverage per OP2 above) • Off-street standards. Loading (e) Parking: • Lighting 2 for emp + 1/300 sf 1 space • Hours of 2 employees (600 sf) _ Operation 2 • Deliveries 286 sf/300 = .95 = 1 Passenger loading Total req. 3 available on 4t" Street. (f) One on-street passenger loading space adj to entrance Non-compliant. (g) One 10' x 20' Off-street loading space Non-compliant (h) Lighting Requesting (i) Hours of 8 a.m. to 9 p.m. Operation 8 a. m. to 9 p. m. Complies (I) Deliveries 8 a. m. to 6 p. m. (SMMC9.04.14.080) Code Violations CUP 381 Conditions: Violation of CUP 322 Conditions 1 Signage shall be Numerous signs have reviewed & approved been installed w/o City by ARB. approval or permits (not permitable). 3 The operation shall An unscreened at all times be security light conducted in a manor illuminates adjacent not detrimental to apartments. surrounding properties or residents by reason Store displays & of lights, noise, phone encroach activities, parking, or sidewalk, impede other actions. pedestrian R/W. Historic Resources N/A Not listed. Inventory 38 PROJECT CASE NUMBER: Conditional Use Permit 00-009 LOCATION: 2225 Fourth Street APPLICANT: Paul Chen PROPERTY OWNER: Paul and Mary Chen / Hacque Helal CASE PLANNER: Bruce Leach, Associate Planner REQUEST: The applicant requests continued operation of an existing nonconforming neighborhood grocery store in the OP2 District. The Conditional Use Permit that allowed the nonconforming neighborhood grocery store to operate for a limited term expired on October 29, 2000. Santa Monica Municipal Code (SMMC) Section 9.04.18.040(h) allows the Planning Commission to approve a Conditional Use Permit to allow the neighborhood market use to continue. However, the market does not conform with building setbacks, lot coverage and off-street parking required in the OP-2 District. Accordingly, one of the CUP findings cannot be made in an affirmative manner and the CUP cannot be approved unless Text Amendment 03-004, which is being considered under a different application, is adopted and the Planning Commission modifies the special conditional use permit standards for this neighborhood market. CEQA STATUS: The project is categorically exempt from the provisions of CEQA pursuant to Section 15301, Class 1 of the State Guidelines for Implementing the California Environmental Quality Act in that the project 39 would allow the continued use of a residentially zoned property for a commercial neighborhood grocery store which would involve no expansion of use. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION ,4r,r~ i~ ~'~, ~nn'~ Date. X Approved Denied. Other. EFFECTIVE DATES OF ACTIONS IF NOT APPEALED: Approval of CUP 00-030 is subject to and is not valid until the City Council amends Condition 1 of Parcel Map 18025 and CUP 435 and ay 8, 2003 Text Amendment 03-001 becoming effective. EXPIRATION DATE OF ANY PERMITS GRANTED: May 8, 2004 LENGTH OF ANY POSSIBLE EXTENSION OF EXPIRATION DATES: Any request for an extension of the expiration date must be received in the City Planning Division prior to expiration of this permit. 6-months Each and all of the findings and determinations are based on the competent and substantial evidence, both oral and written, contained in the entire record relating to the Project. All summaries of information contained herein or in the findings are based on the substantial evidence in the record. The absence of any particular fact from any such summary is not an indication that a particular finding is not based in part on that fact. MODIFICATION FINDINGS 40 4. That the use has been in continuous operation since the effective date of the Zoning Ordinance (September 8, 1988), in that the market has been in continues operation since 1948. 5. That the strict application of the provisions of this Chapter would result in practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships inconsistent with the general purpose and intent of this Chapter or that there are exceptional circumstances or conditions applicable to the proposed development that do not apply generally to other developments covered by this Chapter, in that the market building complied with development standards when it was constructed in 1929. In order to comply with current setback requirements, the existing building would need to be 4' from the north side, 10' from the south side property line and 20' from the front property line. This would result in a reduction of 72% in the building's floor area. Reducing the building's floor area, which also reduces the amount of inventory available to customers by 72%, represents an unreasonable hardship. The costs associated with demolishing and constructing a new building would also be substantial. Current regulations require four parking spaces and one off-street loading space. However, there is only sufficient lot area to provide three parking spaces behind the building. While a two-car parking design would also meet loading space requirements, a loading space would be under utilized due to commercial vehicles access limitations, and the additional on-site parking space is more beneficial to neighborhood's limited parking resources. 6. That the granting of a modification would not adversely affect surrounding properties or be detrimental to the district's residential-oriented environment, in that the neighborhood grocery store is a neighborhood serving use, has served the surrounding neighborhood for a long period of time and can be upgraded to improve its appearance to be more compatible with its residential context. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FINDINGS 14. The proposed use is one 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 Zoning Ordinance allows existing neighborhood grocery stores in residential districts with the approval of a Conditional Use Permit. Subject to the Planning Commission modifying side and front yard setbacks, off-street parking and off-street loading requirements pursuant to TA 03-001, the project complies with the special standards for neighborhood grocery stores. 15. 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 neighborhood grocery store has been in operation for over 50 years and serves the surrounding area. Although the market does not currently comply with neighborhood market standards, the project can be upgraded to comply with standards and conditions necessary to insure that the commercial use is compatible with neighboring residential uses and to protect the public health, safety, and general welfare. 41 16. Subject to the City Council modifying conditions of Parcel Map 18025 and CUP 435, the subject parcel is physically suitable for the type of land use being proposed, in that the subject project can be upgraded to reasonably comply with pertinent standards and conditions necessary to insure that the commercial use is compatible with neighboring residential uses. 17. 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 the neighborhood grocery store is an existing commercial use, which has been located at the site with a second story apartment for more than 50 years. 18. 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 neighborhood grocery store is an existing use which has been located at the site for more than 50 years. Although the market does not currently comply with neighborhood market special standards, the project can be upgraded to comply with standards and conditions necessary to insure that the commercial use is compatible with neighboring residential uses. 19. There are adequate provisions for water, sanitation, and public utilities and services to ensure that the proposed use would not be detrimental to public health and safety, in that the site is located in an urbanized area adequately served by existing infrastructure. 20. Public access to the proposed use will be adequate, in that the site has street frontage on Fourth Street. In addition, the neighborhood market is within walking distance for a large residential population and has adequate on-site parking to accommodate customers. 21. Subject to the City Council adopting TA 03-001, the physical location or placement of the use on the site is compatible with and relates harmoniously to the surrounding neighborhood, in that although the market does not currently comply with neighborhood standards, the project can be upgraded to comply with standards and conditions necessary to insure that the commercial use is compatible with the neighborhood. 22. The proposed use is consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the General Plan, in that the proposed use is neighborhood serving while preserving the existing scale and character of the surrounding area. Further, Circulation Objectives and Policies 4.1.2. encourages land use patterns which reduce vehicle miles traveled and the number of vehicle trips. The grocery store is in close proximity to many residential units reduces the number of vehicle trips needed by area residents needing routine grocery items. 23. The proposed use would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or general welfare, in that the project can be upgraded to comply with standards and conditions necessary to insure that the commercial use is compatible with neighboring residential uses and to protect the public health, safety, and general welfare. 42 24. Subject to the City Council adopting TA 03-001, 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 all special standards for neighborhood markets have been met, with the exception of building setbacks, lot coverage, off-street parking and off-street loading. The Planning Commission has modified these special standards for this neighborhood market since 1) the market has been in continuous operation since the Zoning Ordinance's effective date; 2) the strict application of the provisions of this chapter would result in practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships inconsistent with the general purpose and intent of this chapter in that the market occupies an existing structure where compliance with physical development would require building demolition and markets are currently allowed in the OP2 District subject to a Conditional Use Permit; and 3) the granting of this modification would not adversely affect surrounding properties or be detrimental to the district's residential-oriented environment in that the one-story market building has been located on the site since 1929 without adversely impacting the residential character. 25. The proposed use will not result in an overconcentration of such uses in the immediate vicinity, in that the neighborhood grocery store is 720 feet away from the nearest commercial area. Another neighborhood grocery store is located approximately 480 feet south of the subject grocery store and a mini-mart is located at the corner of Fourth Street and Pico Boulevard. CONDITIONS: 3. The approval of CUP 02-001 is contingent on the City Council amending Condition 1 of Parcel Map 18025 and CUP 435 and adopting TA 03-004. Accordingly, CUP 02-001 is not valid unless the City Council amends Condition 1 of Parcel Map 18025 and CUP 435 and the City Council adopts an ordinance that implements TA 03-004 becomes effective. 4. These Conditions replace and supersede the conditions from CUP 381. 3. This approval is for those plans dated July 1, 2000, a copy of which shall be maintained in the files of the City Planning Division. The plans shall be amended to show the removal the exterior security bars. Project development shall be consistent with such plans, except as otherwise specified in these conditions of approval. Improvements to the property shown on the plans and specified in these conditions, including, but not limited to the building farade work shall be completed within 180 days from the effective date of this permit. 4. 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. 43 5. 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. Operational 6. The operation shall at all times be conducted in a manner not detrimental to surrounding properties or residents by reason of light, noise, activities, parking, or other actions. 7. The use shall continue to be limited to that of a neighborhood food market carrying a full line of grocery items. 8. Only 20% of the shelf area may be stocked with beer and wine and no liquor is permitted. 9. All signs other than the "Fair Market" sign over the entrance of the market shall be removed or painted out, including those in the windows. Only permanent signs that are specifically approved by the ARB may be allowed. Because of the residential context and OP2 District sign limitations, new signs should be limited to the markets name, such as Fair Market, building address and exempt regulatory signs, such as no parking in driveway. 10. The premises shall be maintained in an acceptable state of repair and maintenance, including the adjacent parkways and sidewalks, fencing and trash enclosure. 11. No business license shall be renewed or issued to any owner until the above conditions have been met. 12. That the owner and operators and all their assigns, employees or agents shall obey all laws and ordinances, particularly those relating to the sale of alcoholic beverages and conviction for violation of such laws shall be cause for revocation of this permit and forfeiture of all rights included therein. 13. The neighborhood grocery store shall be operated completely within an enclosed building. The store "unit" may not be used for residential purposes. 14. One (1) on-street passenger loading zone space shall be located adjacent to the entrance to the store on Fourth Street for use by customers who arrive by automobile. The applicant shall reimburse the City for the costs of painting the curb, posting signs and installing a parking meter that may be necessary to designate and enforce the passenger loading zone between 8:00 a.m. and 9:00 p.m. as determined by the City Transportation Management Division. 44 15. No exterior activities such as trash disposal or other maintenance activity generating noise audible from the exterior of the building shall be conducted between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m., Monday through Friday, and between 10:00 p.m. and 9:00 a.m., Saturday and Sunday. Trash enclosure shall be secured with a lock between 9:00 p.m. and 8:00 a.m. No after hours operation shall be permitted. 16. Lighting shall comply with SMMC Section 9.04.10.02.270, which states that all outdoor lighting associated with commercial uses shall be shielded and directed away from surrounding residential uses. Such lighting shall not exceed .5 footcandles of illumination beyond the property and shall not blink, flash, oscillate or be of unusually high intensity of brightness. 17. The store may be open for business only between 9:30 a.m. and 9:00 p.m. 18. Deliveries shall be permitted only between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. 19. Exterior mechanical equipment shall comply with current City screening and noise regulations SMMC Sections 4.12 and 9.04.10.02.130 - 9.04.10.02.150. 20. The trash enclosure shall be secured with a lock between 9:00 p. m. and 8:00 a. m. 21. Within 14 days of the effective date, the applicant shall post a notice at the building entry stating that the site is regulated by a Conditional Use Permit and the Statement of Official Action, which includes the establishment's conditions of approval, is available upon request. This notice shall remain posted at all time the establishment is in operation. 29. The applicant is on notice that signage, exterior modifications, or exterior alterations require prior approval of the Architectural Review Board, see Condition 9. 30. The store operator 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 sales. The program shall require all employees having contact with the public to complete a California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) sponsored alcohol awareness training program within 90 days of the effective date of this approval. All new employees shall attend the alcohol awareness training within 90 days of hiring. In the event the ABC no longer sponsors an alcohol awareness training program, all employees having contact with the public shall complete an alternative program approved by the Director of Planning and Community Development. 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. 45 31. Any increase or intensification in the mode or character or operation of alcohol sales shall require application for an alcohol outlet Conditional Use Permit. The applicant is on notice that no increase or intensification in the mode or character or operation of nonconforming alcohol uses is permitted as of the date of this permit. 32. Window bars that have been installed on the exterior of the building shall be removed. Electrical conduit, pipes and security bars may be installed inside the building with pertinent permits. Validity of Permits 33. 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. 34. Within ten days of City Planning Division transmittal of the approved Statement of Official Action, project applicant shall sign and return a copy of the Statement of Official Action prepared by the City 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 City Planning Division. Failure to comply with this condition may constitute grounds for potential permit revocation. 35. 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. The effective date is also subject to the City Council approving Text Amendment 03-004 and its effective date and the City Council amending Condition 1 of Parcel Map 18025 and Cup 435. Exercise of rights shall mean actual commencement of the use granted by the permit. One six month extension may be permitted if approved by the Director of Planning and Community Development. Applicant is on notice that time extensions may not be granted if development standards relevant to the project have changed since project approval. 46 VOTE Ayes: Brown, Clark, Dad, Hopkins, Johnson Nays: Moyle, Olsen Abstain: None Absent: None NOTICE If this is a final decision not subject to further appeal under the City of Santa Monica Comprehensive Land Use and Zoning Ordinance, the time within which judicial review of this decision must be sought is governed by Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.6, which provision has been adopted by the City pursuant to Municipal Code Section 1.16.010. I hereby certify that this Statement of Official Action accurately reflects the final determination of the Planning Commission of the City of Santa Monica. Darrell Clarke, Chairperson Date I hereby agree to the above conditions of approval and acknowledge that failure to comply with such conditions shall constitute grounds for potential revocation of the permit approval. Applicant's Signature Print Name and Title F:\PLAN\SHARE\pc\stfrp\00\OOcu p009market 47 WEDNESDAY, April 2, 2003 CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7:00 P.M. ROOM 213, CITY HALL 1. CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at 7:10 p.m. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Commissioner Olsen led the Pledge of Allegiance. 3. ROLL CALL: Present: Barbara Brown Darrell Clarke, Chairperson Julie Lopez Dad Arlene Hopkins Jay P. Johnson Geraldine Moyle Kelly Olsen Also Present: Kyle Ferstead, Commission Secretary Suzanne Frick, Director of Planning Bruce Leach, Associate Planner Kevin McKeown, City Council Liaison Barry Rosenbaum, Senior Land Use Attorney Amanda Schachter, Principal Planner Jay M. Trevino, AICP, Planning Manager 4. PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPORT: Ms. Frick gave the Director's Report. She reported that the City Council will be hearing the McDonald's appeal on April 8, 2003, and the Enterprise Text Amendments on April 22, 2003. She also reported that the City Council will be reviewing new Code Enforcement fees for proactive enforcement and on bootleg units. The Commission is scheduled to meet on the following dates: April 23, May 7 and May 21, 2003. 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Chair Clarke stated for the record that the minutes scheduled for approval have been continued to April 23, 2003 at the request of one of the Commissioners and staff. 5-A. March 5, 2003 5-B. March 12, 2003 48 6. STATEMENTS OF OFFICIAL ACTION: Consent Calendar Commissioner Johnson made a motion to approve the Statements of Official Action as submitted. Commissioner Dad seconded the motion, which was approved by voice vote. Commissioners Brown and Moyle abstained on item 6-A. Commissioner Johnson abstained on item 6-B. 6-A. Development Review Permit 02-010, 1685 Main Street 6-B. Appeal 02-022 of Variance 01-038, 3107 Santa Monica Boulevard 7. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 7-A. Conditional Use Permit 02-001, Text Amendment 03-004, 2331 Fourth Street. Application for Conditional Use Permit (CUP) 02-001 to allow the continued use of an existinq nonconforminq neiqhborhood qrocery store in a residential district. The conditional use permit that allowed the nonconforminq neiqhborhood qrocery store to operate for a limited term has expired, and a new permit is required. The proposed amendment to the Zoninq Ordinance, Text Amendment (TA) 03-004, would allow the Planninq Commission to modify the special conditional use permit standards for neiqhborhood markets on a case-by- case basis. Approval would require the Planninq Commission to modify special conditional use permit standards for neiqhborhood markets pursuant to TA 03- 004. f Planner; Bruce Leachl APPLICANT: Alice Berkowitz. PROPERTY OWNER: The Estate of Mitilda Filous. The Commission made the following ex parte communication disclosures: Commissioners Brown, Dad, Johnson, Moyle and Olsen, had nothing to disclose; Chair Clarke disclosed that he drove by the site and took photographs at 9:30 a.m. on Wednesday, April 2, 2003; and Commissioner Hopkins stated that Budget Market is her corner market and she is a customer. Associate Planner Bruce Leach gave the staff report. Commissioner Brown asked staff why the application, first submitted in 1998, has taken so long to get to a public hearing. Mr. Leach explained that there were several issues that caused the delay. First, the business was already in operation, therefore the applicant was not actively urging the project forward. Secondly, a Text Amendment was required to move forward because an earlier Text Amendment filed for Smith Pipe did not resolve all the issues affecting neighborhood markets in residential districts. Mr. Leach further stated that the applicant only submitted the required Text Amendment application one month ago. Commissioner Brown asked Mr. Leach about the legislative history mentioned on page six of the staff report. Mr. Leach stated that the legislative history includes the Text Amendment process for Smith Pipe and Supply, which included a list of other businesses, which would be impacted by that Text Amendment. Two of the 49 three neighborhood market were on that list. He clarified that the Smith Pipe Text Amendment made changes to the Zoning Ordinance regarding non-conforming uses (i.e. commercial uses) in residential districts. Senior Land Use Attorney Rosenbaum stated that the Smith Pipe Text Amendment requires findings be made in the affirmative and that special conditions be met. He further stated that the neighborhood markets can not meet the special conditions cited in the Smith Pipe Text Amendment. Commissioner Olsen stated that he does not see a copy of the prior Conditional Use Permit (CUP) in the packet. Mr. Leach stated that the Statement of Official Action is included as Attachment E. Commissioner Olsen asked staff to comment on the issues of compliance and non-compliance, specifically the hours of operation. Mr. Leach stated that the Code in 1982 allowed longer hours than the current code allows. Commissioner Olsen asked staff if the hours of 7:00 a.m. to midnight is a violation of the CUP. Mr. Leach stated that the hours cited violate current code, but not the CUP. Commissioner Olsen asked about requirements for off-street loading for the business. Mr. Leach stated that there were no requirements for off-street loading in 1982 and the current code requirement is a ten-foot by twenty foot loading space. Commissioner Olsen asked staff for confirmation that under the current standards a neighborhood market would not be able to sell alcohol. Mr. Leach answered in the affirmative. Commissioner Olsen asked staff if he is correct that because this is a legal non- conforming use there is no way to condition alcohol sales. Senior Land Use Attorney Rosenbaum stated that there is a provision in State law with regards to if alcohol sales were established prior to local zoning regulations. In such situations, an establishment can continue to operate as long as the type of alcohol license does not change and the mode of operation does not change. Commissioner Olsen stated that he is not inclined to protest the sale of alcohol at this location and he accepts the State's pre-emption in this matter. However, he stated he would argue that if the Text Amendment is not adopted and the use goes away, the alcohol sales could technically continue. Senior Land Use Attorney Rosenbaum stated that if the Text Amendment is not adopted, the entire use must cease despite the provision for a contest via State law and the State Alcohol Beverage Control (ABC). Commissioner Olsen expressed his opinion that there is still a case to be made, in the Text Amendment, to require alcohol sales conditions. Senior Land Use Attorney Rosenbaum stated that the enforcement of conditions of approval can still be addressed. 50 Commissioner Brown asked if SMMC Section 9.04.18.040(h), as amended, does not address Commissioner Olsen's concerns. Senior Land Use Attorney Rosenbaum answered in the negative. Commissioner Brown asked if the cited Section plus the Text Amendment would meet Commissioner Olsen's concern. Senior Land Use Attorney Rosenbaum answered in the affirmative. Commissioner Moyle commented that the prior CUP for the neighborhood market was issued in 1982 and expired in 1997. She asked about a condition relating to the business license (page 4), which indicates no business license is to be issued until all conditions are met. Mr. Leach stated that when a business changes ownership, a new business license is required, otherwise annual renewals are automatic. He stated that this business has been in compliance since the early 1980s according to the file. Commissioner Moyle asked if she understood correctly that business licenses are automatically renewed and do not receive Planning review for compliance. Mr. Leach responded in the affirmative. The applicant's representative, Drew Cicconi, was present to discuss the application. The following members of the public addressed the Commission regarding retaining the neighborhood market: Anita Holcomb, Elan Glasser, and Paul Gascone. Mr. Cicconi spoke in response to the public comment. Commissioner Hopkins asked staff when this project will go to the Architectural Review Board (ARB). Mr. Leach stated that the permit will not be effective until the City Council adopts the Text Amendment, which will take several months. He further stated that plans can be prepared for ARB review, however a public hearing should not be held until after the City Council adoption of the Text Amendment. Commissioner Moyle asked staff about the "limbo" period from the expiration of the CUP in 1997 until now. Specifically if the City generally allows a grace period while arrangements are made to extend a CUP. Mr. Leach indicated that this is not generally the case, however since there were no violations associated with this site, immediate action was not taken by the City. Ms. Frick added that typically when an extension is requested, the CUP is put on hold pending resolution of the extension request. Commissioner Moyle asked for an explanation on the time delay in processing the extension request for this neighborhood market. Mr. Leach stated that there are several reasons for the delay including staff workload, retrieval of files from archives and building the case chronology as well as the need to file a Text Amendment. 51 Commissioner Moyle asked staff if the extensive signage and yard storage was not a"red flag" flag for this property. Mr. Leach acknowledged that signage is a"red flag" as only two are permitted and approved for the building. Commissioner Moyle stated that she is asking these questions to put them on the record and for making a case on item 7-C. Senior Land Use Attorney Rosenbaum stated for the record that the Smith Pipe Text Amendment authorizes approval of extensions of durational CUPs even if they have expired. Commissioner Hopkins asked staff to elaborate on the recommendation for operational hours of 8:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. She stated that this neighborhood market is currently used by neighbors late in the evening and early in the morning. Mr. Leach stated that the hours cited are in the adopted ordinance for neighborhood markets. He stated that the more restrictive hours are because the markets are located in residential areas. Commissioner Brown asked staff why the modifications in the Text Amendment are only for subsections (d), (e) and (g). Mr. Leach explained that those subsections have to do with physical constraints, such as required setbacks and parking requirements. Compliance would be a burden on the applicant. Commissioner Brown asked staff if these would be considered "hardship" issues. Mr. Leach answered in the affirmative. Commissioner Brown asked staff about the subsection on the merchandise on the sidewalk. Mr. Leach stated that this is a standard condition for markets. Commissioner Johnson stated that he is not comfortable with the phrase "the use" in the continuous operation portion of the Text Amendment. Mr. Leach stated that if the non-conforming use is removed, it can not return. Chair Clarke closed the public hearing. Commissioner Olsen made a motion to recommend that the City Council adopt the Text Amendment. Commissioner Johnson seconded the motion. The motion on the recommendation to City Council was approved by the following vote: AYES: Brown, Clarke, Dad, Hopkins, Johnson, Moyle, Olsen. Commissioner Olsen made a motion to approve the Conditional Use Permit. He stated that staff's recommendation is right, the hours of operation are right, and he is not opposed to the sale of alcohol at this location. He asked that the conditions of approval include the standard 52 alcohol sales and employee education conditions as the exterior maintenance/cleaning condition. Commissioner Johnson seconded the motion. Commissioner Dad asked that Condition #2 be amended to 180 days. Commissioner Olsen agreed to the change. Commissioner Dad asked the numbering be corrected on the conditions and noted that there are two Condition #26s. Mr. Leach stated that the maintenance condition is #17. He also amended the wording on Finding #2 as follows: The proposed use does not conform precisely to the applicable special conditions outlined in Subchapter 9.04.14 of the City of Santa Monica Comprehensive Land Use and Zoning Ordinance, in that the project is inconsistent with SMMC Section 9.04.14.080(d) because the project does not conform to building setbacks required for neighborhood markets located in the OP2 District. Commissioners Olsen and Johnson agreed to the change. Commissioner Olsen asked if the conditions of approval include the standard condition that the Conditions of Approval be posted or available at the project address. Mr. Leach replied in the affirmative. The motion on the CUP was approved by the following vote: AYES: Brown, Clarke, Dad, Hopkins, Johnson, Moyle, Olsen. 7-B. Conditional Use Permit 00-030, 672 Marine Street. Application for Conditional Use Permit (CUP) 00-030 to allow the continued use of an existinq nonconformina neiahborhood arocerv store in a residential district. The conditional use permit that allowed the nonconforminq neiqhborhood qrocery store to operate for a limited term has expired, and a new permit is required. Approval would require the Planninq Commission to modify special conditional use permit standards for neiqhborhood markets pursuant to pendinq Text Amendment 03-004. (Planner: Bruce Leach) APPLICANT: Younq Ahn, DBA Minimart. PROF The Commission made the following ex parte communication disclosures: Commissioners Brown, Moyle and Olsen, had nothing to disclose; Commissioner Dad disclosed that she has been in this market. Commissioner Hopkins disclosed that this market is in her neighborhood and she drives by it regularly and has been inside it. Chair Clarke disclosed that he used to live by this market between 1979 - 1985 and that he drove by the site and took photographs at approximately 9:30 a.m. on Wednesday, April 2, 2003. Commissioner Johnson disclosed that he has walked this area and is familiar with the site. Associate Planner Bruce Leach gave the staff report. 53 Commissioner Moyle commented on the window openings, which were sealed as part of an Earthquake retrofit. She stated that while she understands the need for transparent glass in the front of the business, she feels the building is stronger without the glass. Mr. Leach stated that the strength of the structure is probably not dependent on whether or not the windows openings are glass or blocked with concrete and the front wall can be reinforced to be stronger, if necessary. Commissioner Moyle repeated staff's notation that the ABC license requires transparent windows so the interior may be viewed from the street. She asked if the current blocked windows are in violation of the ABC license. Mr. Leach stated that he has spoken to the ABC regarding the alcohol license for this market and there are no current ABC violations. Mr. Leach stated that he visited the site with the City's Vice Unit. Commissioner Moyle commented that on page two of the staff report there is mention of a recent violation of the CUP, which is grounds for a revocation of the permit. She asked how the City would revoke an expired CUP. Mr. Leach stated that the wording in the staff report support's the Commission's past practice that there be no new entitlements if the CUP is not in compliance. He also stated that this applicant applied for a CUP extension prior to its expiration date and the applicant has recently shown good faith. Commissioner Moyle stated that on page four of the staff report a CUP violation is cited with a date of February 12, 2001. She asked about process to abate this violation. Mr. Leach responded that the correct violation date is 2003, not 2001, which was one day prior to the issuance of staff report (March 19, 2003), therefore corrections were not included in the staff report. Commissioner Moyle asked when this application was filed as the expiration date was October 29, 2000. Mr. Leach stated that this application was filed on November 16, 1999. Chair Clarke asked about the signage issue. Mr. Leach explained that there was illegal signage in the windows of the building and that this signage covered between 70% and 80% of the window glass. Chair Clarke asked about the big sign on the east side of the building. Mr. Leach stated that this sign was moved without City permits. The applicant, Mrs. Honga Ahn, was present with an interpreter. The property owner's daughter. Ms. Green, was also present to answer questions from the Commission. Commissioner Olsen expressed concern that the conditions of approval will not be adhered to based on the past non-compliance. Through her interpreter, Mrs. Ahn stated that the signs have been removed and the property owner has promised to bring the parking lot and trash enclosure up to code as well as fixing the front windows. She implored the Commission to believe her. 54 One member of the public, Abby Arnold, submitted a request to speak form and spoke in favor of retaining the neighborhood market and keep the windows as they are. Ms. Arnold's son also addressed the Commission. The applicant waived her time to respond to the public comment. Chair Clarke closed the public hearing. Commissioner Olsen stated that he wants this market to continue serving the neighborhood. He also stated that the problems are addressable and the applicant has expressed willingness to rectify the issues. He asked staff if the applicant can get a building permit without a valid CUP approval. Mr. Leach stated that there would be no impediment in obtaining a building permit for the windows, however he would advise that the applicant wait on redoing the parking lot until the new CUP is approved. Mr. Leach also stated that staff may recommend other conditions of approval and the ARB may suggest painting options. Ms. Frick stated that for the short term, staff would prepare findings and conditions for approval, then wait for the City Council adoption of the Text Amendment. Commissioners Olsen and Dad discussed whether the CUP could be approved or a short continuance would be needed. Chair Clarke suggested that the applicant not be required to make the major expenditures to upgrade the building until after the Text Amendment is approved. He expressed concern regarding the viability of opening up the blocked windows in the masonry building and that such a change could jeopardize the entire building. He also commented that the City is lucky to have this old building considering the current land values in the vicinity. Commissioner Hopkins asked for confirmation as to whether there is a building permit for the infill of the windows. Mr. Leach stated that there is no record of a building permit for this work. Commissioner Hopkins expressed the opinion that a structural engineer should provide proof of the structural integrity of the window infill and building and obtain an opinion on replacing the doors with more glass for visibility. Commissioner Moyle expressed curiosity regarding the building permit history. She recited staff's record on the building as follows: that the property has had the same owner since 1976; that the property owner was issued a CUP in 1985 and was the business operator at that time; and that the current operator has been there since 1996, but is not the building owner. She commented that the current operator inherited the blocked windows, if they were indeed installed following the 1994 earthquake. She expressed concern regarding the building's structural integrity. Commissioner Moyle noted that the property is currently in violation of its CUP and the property owner cannot claim ignorance in this case. She acknowledged that the store operator has been placed in an unfortunate 55 situation. She asked staff who is responsible for CUP compliance. Mr. Leach stated that the ultimate responsibility is with the property owner. Commissioner Moyle asked staff if the property owner has made a commitment to staff to upgrade the building. Mr. Leach stated that he has met with both the property owner and his daughter, as well as their structural engineer, and they have stated that they want to correct the violations. Commissioner Moyle asked staff if this is legally adequate for the record. Senior Land Use Attorney Rosenbaum stated that a condition would be required to perform the necessary work or the CUP would be revoked. Commissioner Olsen commented that he senses the Commission is viewing this from two directions. He stated that no one wants excuses or justifications and the applicant has expressed a willingness to fix the violations. He then made a motion to grant the CUP with the condition that the issues identified by staff be rectified. Commissioner Dad seconded the motion. Commissioner Johnson commented that staff's recommendation was to continue this item and return with findings and the applicant agreed. Ms. Frick stated that the applicant agreed to a continuance so that the violations could be fixed, but staff's recommendation was to return with findings and conditions for approval. Commissioner Hopkins expressed the opinion that this item should be continued for one or two meetings per Commissioner Johnson's comments. She suggested that the staff work with the applicant and property owner as regards the CUP violations; that coordination be done with the ABC regarding the visibility issue; and that the approval be contingent on the City Council's approval of the Text Amendment. Commissioner Johnson seconded Commissioner Hopkins' comments. Chair Clarke asked staff if it would not be better to wait on doing the major work until after the Text Amendment is approved. Mr. Leach replied in the affirmative. Commissioner Olsen asked staff about timing for the continuance. Mr. Leach stated that a staff report could be prepared for the next meeting as the original recommendation had been drafted for approval. Ms. Frick asked the Commission to give staff direction for conditions of approval and findings so that the CUP can return for further review. Commissioner Olsen restated his motion per Ms. Frick's request. Commissioner Dad seconded the revised motion. She stated for the record that only one motion is on the table and that Commissioner Johnson seconded a "laundry list." 56 Chair Clarke asked Commissioner Hopkins if she still wants a structural report on the building. Commissioner Hopkins stated that she wants verification from the ABC regarding the issue of opening up the windows or whether a glass front door would meet their requirements. Mr. Leach stated that the staff report can be amended for the next hearing as well has consulting with a structural engineer and the property owner regarding a cost estimate for opening up the blocked windows. Ms. Frick noted for the record that "costs" are not pertinent as a basis for determining whether to approve the CUP. She restated that the Commission needs to give staff direction as regards conditions of approval. Commissioner Hopkins stated that she feels there are two options: (1) to reopen the windows and (2) whether the ABC requires this action or not. Ms. Frick stated that she needs four Commissioners to give direction to staff. Commissioner Olsen stated that the ABC issue is not part of his motion and that the windows were present and part of the prior conditions of approval for the neighborhood market. He commented that "safety" is a secondary consideration. Commissioner Brown asked staff to restate the motion. Ms. Frick stated that the motion is approval of the CUP with the conditions that the windows be opened up as per the previous CUP's conditions of approval; that the issues of the trash enclosure and parking be resolved and that the project return to the Commission with findings and conditions. Commissioner Dad stated that the motion is correct except for the window opening issue. Commissioner Brown expressed confusion regarding voting on the motion before findings and conditions are presented. Ms. Frick stated that staff will return with findings and conditions. Commissioner Hopkins commented that 672 Marine is a very old masonry building with many modifications over the years. She expressed concern with making judgments before structural engineering assessments have been made. She asked for two options: (1) the preferred option of opening up the sealed windows; and (2) to move forward in some way if the windows cannot be opened. She also asked that the ABC be consulted regarding the visibility issue and that staff and the property owner return with answers to these issues. Chair Clarke stated that he concurs with Commissioner Hopkins. He expressed the opinion that the proposed physical changes endanger a historic building and the economic viability of the neighborhood market. Commissioner Moyle reminded the Commission that the issues are code violations of the prior CUP. Chair Clarke responded that "earthquakes happen" and the Commission cannot impose onerous conditions. Commissioner Moyle stated that these are not new conditions, but part of the 1985 CUP and structural issues are not part of the Commission's purview or the ABCs. 57 Chair Clarke made a substitute motion that staff report back on the aforementioned issues. Commissioner Hopkins seconded the motion. She stated that these issues need to be resolved in clean, clear way. Commissioner Olsen stated that this hearing is about issuing a CUP, not a Development Review Permit or a building permit. He further stated that the property owner has already retained a structural engineer. Lastly, he stated that the Commission has no legal ability to deal with the issue of costs to the applicant and property owner. There was discussion regarding the two motions on the table. Chair Clarke withdrew his substitute motion. The original motion to approve the CUP and with staff to return with findings and conditions was approved by the following vote: AYES: Brown, Clarke, Dad, Hopkins, Johnson, Moyle, Olsen. [The Commission took a break from 9:57 p.m. to 10;20 p.m.] 7-C. Conditional Use Permit 00-009, 2225 Fourth Street. Application for Conditional Use Permit (CUP) 00-009 to allow the continued use of an existinq nonconforminq neiqhborhood qrocery store in a residential district. The conditional use permit that allowed the nonconforminq neiqhborhood qrocery store to operate for a limited term has expired, and a new permit is required. The applicant also requests amendinq restrictions on the store's operatinq hours pursuant to Condition 9 of CUP 381 and Condition 1 of Parcel Map 18025 and CUP 435 which requires the market buildinq to be removed. Approval would require the Planninq Commission to modify special conditional use permit standards for neiqhborhood markets pursuant to pendinq Text Amendment 03- 004. fPlanner: Bruce Leachl APPLICANT: Paul Chen. PROPERTY OWNER: Paul and Marv Chen. The Commission made the following ex parte communication disclosures: Commissioners Brown, Dad, and Johnson had nothing to disclose. Commissioner Hopkins disclosed that this market is also in her neighborhood and she shops there. Chair Clarke disclosed that he drove by the site and took photographs at approximately 9:30 a.m. on Wednesday, April 2, 2003. Commissioners Olsen and Moyle disclosed that they drove by the market on the way to the meeting, at approximately 6:57 p.m., and Commissioner Olsen disclosed that he went into the market for approximately 20 seconds. Associate Planner Bruce Leach gave the staff report. Commissioner Johnson asked staff about the original Commission approval of this neighborhood market with the adjoining condominium project, and its appeal to City Council. Mr. Leach explained that the land area on the property where the neighborhood market is located is legally part of the open space for the condominium project. The appeal required the neighborhood market buidling to be part of Unit #1 of the two unit condominium project. There was a concern that 58 if the market building was considered open space, then both condominium owners would need to vote and pay to approve the demolition of the market building. Commissioner Johnson asked for confirmation that the property owner was agreeable to the removal of the market. Mr. Leach replied in the affirmative. Commissioner Moyle asked staff about a reference on page nine in the staff report that states the property is under "common ownership," which she takes to mean that the property owner was also the developer of the condominium. Mr. Leach stated that was correct, however the developer/owner is not the current applicant for the neighborhood market CUP. He further stated that the neighborhood market operator purchased Unit #1 (and the market) approximately three weeks ago. Commissioner Moyle commented that the original developer is not a party to this evening's dealing. She noted that the staff report states that the market use must be removed by October 2000 per a deed restriction on the property. Mr. Leach stated that this is correct. Commissioner Moyle asked who is responsible for the expense of demolition of the market. Mr. Leach stated that the responsible party is the owner of Unit #1. Commissioner Moyle commented that this would then be the new owner of the market. Mr. Leach answered in the affirmative. Commissioner Olsen asked if staff has visited the premises recently. Mr. Leach answered in the affirmative. Commissioner Olsen asked about a reference in the staff report which states that "less than 20% of the display area" will be for beer and wine. Mr. Leach stated that this is part of the conditions from the Budget Market CUP. Commissioner Olsen asked if the 20% figure is representative of the other market CUPs. Mr. Leach stated that it was an existing CUP condition. Commissioner Olsen asked if, as a neighborhood market, the shelf space for alcohol increased to 50% would it still be a"neighborhood market." Mr. Leach stated it would likely not be considered a neighborhood market and would also create problems with the Subdivision Map Act and other Planning approvals. Commissioner Olsen asked staff if the other markets fit the "neighborhood market" definition of primary shelf space. Mr. Leach stated that all three markets sell only beer and wine and less than 20% of the other market is beer and wine sales. Commissioner Hopkins stated she was unclear as to the alcohol issue for this market. Mr. Leach stated that this market has a large inventory of beer and wine. 59 The applicant's representative, Drew Cicconi, was present to discuss the application. He indicated that he represented the market operator (Nazmul Haque Helal) who recently purchased the market from the applicant. Commissioner Johnson asked Mr. Cicconi who was the property owner in 1985. Mr. Cicconi stated that his client is the third owner of the market since the condominiums were built. Commissioner Johnson asked Mr. Cicconi about the demolition of the market building. Mr. Cicconi stated that he does not have a clear understanding of the building demolition issue and that he understands CUPs can be extended, therefore there is no expiration of the permit. Commissioner Olsen asked Mr. Cicconi if his contention is that all CUPs have expiration dates, therefore they can all be extended. Mr. Cicconi answered in the affirmative and that the market CUP has been extended three times already. Commissioner Olsen asked Mr. Cicconi where he read that fact. Mr. Cicconi stated that it is in the staff report. Commissioner Olsen stated for the record that in 1987, on appeal to the City Council, this neighborhood market was deemed a non-conforming use and required to be removed when the CUP expired in 2002. Commissioner Dad asked staff for the Statement of Official Action for the prior CUP. Ms. Frick stated that City Council Statements of Official Action were not written in 1987. Commissioner Olsen and Mr. Cicconi discussed whether or not there was a definite date for cessation of the non-conforming neighborhood market use and whether the CUP and use could be extended. Commissioner Johnson expressed dismay and anger over the "victimization" of the current owner of the neighborhood market, specifically that the new owner was apparently not informed by the prior owner that the non-conforming neighborhood market use had an "end date." He suggested several courses of action that the new owner could take against various parties over the omission of information on the property. Commissioner Dad asked Mr. Cicconi when his client purchased the condominium and neighborhood market. Mr. Cicconi stated that his client purchased the condominium three weeks ago as one parcel. Commissioner Dad asked Mr. Cicconi how long his client has been operating the neighborhood market. Mr. Cicconi stated that his client has been operating the neighborhood market for eight years. Commissioner Dad asked Mr. Cicconi if his client was aware of the restrictions on the building when he purchased the parcel. Mr. Cicconi stated that his client 60 was not told of the restrictions and that he was "shocked" when he learned of them. Commissioner Hopkins commented on a reference on page four of the staff report, specifically the three CUP extensions cited. She noted CUP 381 and CUP 435 had the same expiration date. She asked Mr. Cicconi to explain his "serial extension" premise. Mr. Cicconi stated that his understanding is that extensions are permitted by Code. Commissioner Hopkins commented that they may be permitted, but are not necessarily granted. Commissioner Brown asked Mr. Cicconi if his interpretation of the Code is that no CUP would ever expire. Mr. Cicconi answered in the affirmative. Commissioner Dad asked Mr. Cicconi if he believes that the neighborhood market use is permitted with a CUP. Mr. Cicconi answered in the affirmative. Commissioner Dad stated that neighborhood markets are not permitted in the OP-2 District as it is a residential zone, therefore it is a legal non-conforming use. Ms. Frick clarified that it is a current non-conforming use and that to grant a CUP the market must meet certain standards, which this market building cannot meet. Commissioner Olsen stated that the prior applicant's attorney was Shere Baily (spelling?) and it is his understanding that the prior owner sold the condominium and business to Mr. Cicconi's client. He asked when the former owner learned of non-continuing use of the neighborhood market. Mr. Cicconi maintained that his client was not informed of the non-continuing use by the former property owner (the applicant). Ms. Baily stated that her firm was not part of the real estate transaction, however she was aware of the condition but was not privileged to inform the buyer of the City's position. Ms. Baily stated for the record that her involvement in this transaction was on behalf of the seller and the Law Office of Rosario Perry . Commissioner Olsen asked the market operator when he was made aware of the CUP condition to demolish the market. Mr. Helal stated that he was given this information when he was purchasing Unit #1 and the neighborhood market. Mr. Cicconi stated that it is suspicious that the property owner "dumped" the property when staff's recommendation of denial was made known. Commissioner Olsen stated that in a letter from Rosario Perry to the City Attorney's Office, dated May 30, 2000, Mr. Perry's letter stated he had been informed by a planner that this property has a deed restriction and a non- renewable CUP on the neighborhood market, therefore the prior owner was well aware of the requirement to remove the market. Chair Clarke stated that there are over twenty requests to speak and asked if the Commission would entertain a motion to reduce the public speaking time from four minutes per person to two minutes per person. Commissioner Hopkins so moved and Commissioner Moyle seconded the motion. The motion was approved by voice vote. 61 The following members of the public addressed the Commission regarding retaining the neighborhood market:, Jose Sanchez, Linda Banister, Michael Regan, Jeff Jarow, Linda S. York, John Kotch, Mike Stark, Sandy Kotch, Eugene Kallman, Carols Pineiro, Elan Glasser, John Frascati, Paul Gascon, David Cummins, Jeff Williams, Rebecca Anderson, Kathleen Mulcahy, Omyrha Rogers, and Tracey Milan. The following members of the public submitted request to speak forms, but were not present when their names were called: Ann Gustafson, Brandon Fancher, Jay Bazile, Clancy Inislund, and Diana De Villiers. Mr. Cicconi spoke in response to the public comment. Commissioner Johnson asked Mr. Cicconi about the hours of operation, which are required to be 8:00 a.m. to 7:30 p.m. and the public who have said the hours are more on the order of 7:00 a.m. to midnight. Mr. Cicconi stated that the new ordinance requires the hours of operation to be from 8:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. Commissioner Olsen stated that the CUP restricts the hours to 8:00 a.m. to 7:30 p.m. Commissioner Dad asked why the market operator, after eight years, decided to buy the market and condominium. Mr. Helal stated that he used to have a lease for the market, but has been renting it month to month since December 2000. He further stated at the time he learned the condominium and market were for sale and saw an advertisement on the internet, so he got a loan and purchased the condominium and market. He commented that "the market is my life." Commissioner Dad asked if there is an agreement to sell back the property to the former property owner or an option on the property. Mr. Helal answered in the negative. Commissioner Olsen raised the issue of the ratio of alcohol display space. He stated the he personally observed over 60% of the display space was devoted to alcohol products. Mr. Helal stated he would agree to an 80/20 percentage of non- alcoholic to alcohol related display area. Commissioner Olsen asked Mr. Helal if it was true the former property owner never informed him of the conditions of approval for the building regarding hours of operation. Mr. Helal stated that he was never told about the hours of operation by the former market operator and he has worked hard on his market for eight years. Commissioner Moyle asked Mr. Helal if he has been operating on a month to month basis for eight years. Mr. Helal stated that it has only been on a month to month basis since 2001. Commissioner Moyle commented on the lease versus month to month rental of the market, then asked if the lease referenced an end date. Mr. Helal stated that in 1995 the lease he signed was for a period of five years. Commissioner Moyle 62 asked for confirmation that the operator was never told that the market CUP would end. Mr. Helal stated he was not aware of the CUP. Chair Clarke thanked the applicant and his team. Commissioner Olsen asked staff how binding are the CC&Rs for the condominium project and if the Text Amendment eradicates them and the deed restriction. He also asked if the new property owner has any recourse. Senior Land Use Attorney Rosenbaum stated that the deed restriction is clear and envisions that the CUP will expire in October 2000. He further stated that the City Council, on appeal, added the requirement for the deed restriction. He commented that the City Council can revisit this issue and alter the Text Amendment. Commissioner Olsen commented that this neighborhood market is clearly a community benefit. He then noted that the Commission needs to find a way to keep it legally. On the hours of operation, Commissioner Olsen stated that the 1985 CUP sets the hours at 8:00 a.m. to 7:30 p.m., and to change this on a legal non-conforming use would technically intensify the use, which is not permitted. Chair Clarke stated that the hours of operation will be legalized when the CUP is approved. Ms. Frick stated that this market is a legal non-conforming use and building, and it is not physically possible for the building to comply with the neighborhood market standards cited in the proposed Text Amendment, even though the Text Amendment would enable the neighborhood markets to continue with a new CUP. Commissioner Olsen commented on Condition #6, and his opinion that the operation has changed with the increase of shelf space for beer and wine. He again stated that the use benefits the neighborhood and recommended that the original hours of operation be maintained as was done with the prior neighborhood market. Chair Clarke asked staff how this neighborhood market can be approved. Mr. Frick stated that the Commission needs to direct staff to return with conditions of approval and revised findings, effective upon approval of the Text Amendment by the City Council and with a requirement to amend the Deed Restriction. Commissioner Dad commented on the prior neighborhood market sites and that she feels the Commission has been manipulated on this particular market, not by the members of the public who testified, but by the overall history of the project. She noted that the Planning Commission's Statement of Official Action for CUP 435 does not state that the market must go out of operation (Condition #1). Because of that condition, Commissioner Dad stated that she will support the motion for approval of the CUP for the market. Commissioner Olsen asked the applicant who installed the iron grates over the windows. Mr. Helal stated that they were installed prior to his leasing of the market. .6Commissioner Olsen asked if they are important to his business 63 security. Mr. Helal stated that he never looks at the outside of the building and he would agree to remove the iron bars. Commissioner Hopkins asked staff about the hours of operation and what the Code requires. Ms. Frick stated that a new neighborhood market could have hours from 8:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m., but this market has shorter hours due to the prior CUP. Commissioner Hopkins asked if longer hours could be approved for this market. She stated that longer hours improve safety on the street as noted by several members of the public. Senior Land Use Attorney Rosenbaum stated that the new ordinance will set hours of operation for new neighborhood markets, however this neighborhood market is operating under an old CUP and changing the hours would intensify a non-conforming use, which is not permitted by Code. Commissioner Hopkins asked if the hours could only be changed by changing the Code. Senior Land Use Attorney Rosenbaum responded in the affirmative and restated that this cannot be done under the current Code. Commissioner Olsen commented that he appreciates Commissioner Hopkins' enthusiasm, however there are absolutes in the Code and there is no way to change those absolutes legally at this hour. Commissioner Johnson commented that this is "an unbelievably egregious situation" and everyone has "dropped the ball." He also commented that mistakes were made in 1985 and have continued. Chair Clarke discussed that a motion for approval should include the following: that staff be directed to return with findings and conditions of approval; that the conditions should include the percentage of alcohol display space being limited to 20%, unless otherwise cited in the prior CUP; that the window bars be removed; that the approval include the prior CUP conditions, including hours of operation; that employee alcohol training be required using the standard language from other alcohol CUPs; and this all be contingent on approval of the Text Amendment by the City Council. Commissioner Johnson stated he would make the aforementioned motion including all issues cited by Chair Clarke. Commissioner Olsen seconded the motion. Senior Land Use Attorney Rosenbaum stated that there should be a special condition regarding amending the Deed Restriction. Commissioner Hopkins asked about amending the CC&Rs. Ms. Frick stated that there are several steps which the property owner will need to take including changing the Tract Map for the condominium. 64 Commissioner Moyle stated that she cannot support the motion. She stated that clearly this is a wonderful business and owner. She also stated that the market did not enhance the Ocean Park density when the condominiums were approved. She noted that the original property owner owned the parcel, the market and was the developer of the condominium. She also commented that the neighborhood market is a clear benefit to the neighborhood, but approval also rewards the original owner. She stated that her negative vote on this item is a matter of principal because she cannot condone what has been done in the past to this parcel. The motion to return with findings and conditions was approved by the following vote: AYES: Brown, Clarke, Dad, Hopkins, Johnson, Olsen; NOES: Moyle. Commissioner Hopkins thanked the members of public for coming to the hearing and staying though the long hearing. 8. DISCUSSION: Items continued from March 12, 2003 Public Input Permitted Discussion items 8-A through 8-D were continued to April 23, 2003. Item 8-E was heard. 8-A. Discussion and adoption of a policy prohibitinq ex parte meetinqs and other forms of lobbyinq Commissioners by interested parties outside of public view for quasi-iudicial items that appear before the Commission, to establish rules and procedures for the transmittal of written materials and e-mails from interested parties reqardinq quasi-iudicial items and qive direction to staff to prepare lanquaqe to amend the Commission rules to carry out these policies. Requested by Commissioners Johnson and Olsen via e-mail on Auqust 27, 2002. ACTION: Continued to April 23, 2003. 8-B. Discussion on the merits and aracticalitv of initiatina a text amendment to eliminate the siqn code and all rules and requlations related to siqns. Requested by Commissioner Olsen via e-mail on January 28, 2003. ACTION: Continued to April 23, 2003. 8-C. Discussion on developinq quidelines requirinq open courtyards for proiects that are situated on more than one lot in multi-family residential districts. Requested by Commissioner Olsen via e-mail on February 20, 2003. ACTION: Continued to April 23, 2003. 8-D. Discussion on developinq a process reqardinq traffic quidelines/traffic analysis per concerns of neiqhborhood orqanizations. Requested by Commissioner Dad via e-mail on February 26, 2003. 65 ACTION: Continued to April 23, 2003. 8-E. Discussion on the request to direct the Zoninq Administrator to initiate and hold an Administrative Approval revocation hearinq as outlined in Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.04.20.28.040 for the proiect currently under construction at 820 Broadway. Requested by Commissioners Dad and Olsen via e-mail on March 4, 2003, and revised via e-mail March 13, 2003. Commissioners Dad and Olsen introduced this discussion item. They stated that this project is substantially more than what was approved administratively. One member of the public, Chuck Allord, addressed the Commission regarding this discussion item. Commissioner Johnson made a motion to direct the Zoning Administrator hold a revocation hearing on 820 Broadway. Commissioner Hopkins seconded the motion, which was approved by voice vote. Senior Land Use Attorney Rosenbaum stated for the record that the Zoning Administrator, Jay Trevino, was not present for this discussion item. 9. FUTURE COMMISSION AGENDA ITEMS: None. 10. PUBLIC INPUT: None. 11. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 12:43 a.m., Thursday, April 3, 2003. APPROVED: May 21, 2003 66 ATTACHMENT E Deed Restriction, City Council Staff Report & CC&R Excerpt Electronic version of attachment is not available for review. Document is available for review at the City Clerk's Office. 67 ~ Recordinq Requested By: City of Santa Monica 8~-14~9498 When Recorded, Mail to: City of Santa Monica 1685 Main Street Santa Monica, California 90401 Attention: Ci~ Attorney No Recording Fee Required Government Code Section 27383 RECOR DER'SVO FFICEu~US LOS ANGELES COUNTy 3$ MiN. CA`~FORNIq _ PAST. z PM. SEP 9~gg~ AGREEMENT IMPOSING RESTRICTIONS F,R~E Y ON REAL PROPERTY ''~ T~ ~ TIiIS AGREEMENT IMPOSING RESTRICTIONS ON REAL PROPERTY~ entered into this ~ day of ~~, 1987, by and between the CITY OF SANTA MONICA, a municipal corporation (hereinafter "City"), and MING SIN RU AND TIEN-HO CHEN RU (hereinafter "Developer"), is made with reference to the following: R E C I T A L S: A. Developer is the owner of certain real property located at 2225 4th Street in the City of Santa Monica, in the County of Los Angeles, California (hereinafter referred to as the "subject property"). The subject property is more particularly described in Exhibit A which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. B. Developer wishes to construct a three (3) story plus loft, two (2) unit condominium townhouse at the rear of the subject property, which currently contains an existing, one story, non-conforming grocery store - 1 - The grocery store, which ~ ~ : i i ~ ~ has a Conditional Use Permit for a retail use in an R-3 zane district (valid until October 23, 2000), would remain and is proposed for incorporation into the ownership of the front residential unit (to be referred to as Unit one). The City has approved Tentative Tract Map Number 18025 and Conditional Use Permit Number 435 for the proposed development. The City issued this approval subject to canditions which are imposed for the public and surrounding landowners and without which no permit would be issued. NOW, THEREFORE, it is mutually agreed by and between the undersigned parties as follows: 1. DEVELOPER'S CONVENANTS~ CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS. Developer covenants, promises and agrees that: a. The existing retail store building shall be made a part of Unit One. The store building shall be for the exclusive control, benefit and occupancy of the Owners of Unit One, and total responsibility for liability, maintenance, and repair shall be with the Owners of Unit One. b. The existing retail store is a nonconforming building and use, subject to the time limits and.coaditions set forth in Conditional Use permit 381. As a nonconforming building and use, the retail store is subject to Sections 9136A and 9136B of the Santa Monica Municipal Code, which establishes significant controls and restrictions on nonconforming buildinqs and uses including the potential removal of such buildings and uses. - 2 - ~ ~ -144949~ ~ ~ ~, L ~ ~ ~ } _ The store building shall be removed and the underlying area shall be landscaped or redeveloped in a manner consistent with legal requirements then in effect at such time as the retail use is discontinued for a continuous period of one year, the Conditional Use Permit expires (on October 23, 2000), or the Conditional Use Permit is revoked, whichever occurs first. 2. CITY APPROVAL OF DOCUMENTS. The Conditions, Covenants and Restrictions (C,C & R's)for the sub7ect property shall include reference to all applicable obligations and duties of the parties created by this Agreement. The City Attorney of the City of Santa Monica shall approve as to form the C;C, & R's prior to recordation of the final subdivision/parcel map Por the snbject property. 3. ATTORNEY'S FEES AND COSTS. In the event of any controversy, claim or dispute between the parties hereto, arising out of or relating to this Agreement or breach thereof, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover from the losing party reasonable expenses, attorneys' fees and costs. 4. APPOINTMENT OF OTHER AGENCIES. The City may designate, appoint or contract with any other public agency to perform City's obligations under this Agreement. 8'7-1449498 - 3 - ir; ~ i; l. °1~ 3 ,_, 5. SEVERABILITY. In the event any limitation, condition, restriction, covenant or provision contained in this Agreement is to be held invalid, void or unenforceable by any court of competent jurisdiction, the remaining portions of this Agreement shall, nevertheless, be and remain in full force and effect. 6. NOTICES. All notices required under this Agreement shall be sent by certified mail, return receipt requested, to the following addresses: TO THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA TO THE DEVELOPER: City of Santa Monica 1685 Main Street Santa Monica, California 90401 Attention: Director, Community & Economic Development With a copy to: CITY ATTORNEY Ming Sin Ru and Tien-Ho Chen Ru 2225 4th Street Santa Monica, California 90405 Any party may change the address to which notices are to be sent by notifying the other parties of the new address, in the manner set forth above. 7. HOLD HARMLESS. As between the City and the Developer, the Developer is deemed to assume responsibility and liability for, and the Developer shall indemnify and hold harmless the City and its City Council, boards and commissions, officers, agents, servants or employees, from and against any and all loss, damages, charge or 8'~°1449~98 -4- N# ~~ ; ~, "~~, ,-, ~ expense, whether direct or indirect, to which the City or its City Council, boards and commissions, officers, agents, servants or employees may be put or subjected, by reason of any damage, loss or injury of any kind or nature whatever to persons or property caused by or resulting from on in connection with any negligent act or action, or any neglect, omission or failure to act when under a duty to act, on the part of the Developer or any of its officers, agents, servants, employees or subcontractors in his or their performance hereunder. 8. BURDEN TO RUN WITFI PROPERTY. The covenants and conditions herein contained shall apply to and bind the heirs, successors and assigns of all the parties hereto and shall run with and burden the subject property until terminated in accordance with the provisions hereof. Developer shall expressly make the conditions and covenants contained in this Agreement a part of any deed or other instrument conveying any interest in the subject property. 9. SALE QR CONVERS20N OF PROPERTY. In the event of sale or conversion of the subject property, the Conditions, Covenants and Restrictions (CC & R's) for the subject property, if required, shall incorporate by reference a11 obligations and duties of £he parties created by this Agreement. 10. PROHIBITION AGAINST DISCRIMINATION. Developer agrees not to discriminate against any actual or potential occupant of the subject property on the basis of sex, Si-1~49498 - 5 - ~~ "~~3 race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, se~ai orientation, age, pregnancy, marital status, handicap, family composition, or the potential or actual occupancy of minor children. Developer further agrees to take affirmative action to ensure that no such person is discriminated against for any of the aforementioned reasons. 11. STP,NDING TO ENFORCE AGREEMENT. Violation of this Agreement may be enjoined, abated or remedied by appropriate leqal proceedings by the parties hereto, or their respective successors, heirs, and assigns. The general public shall be deemed a third party beneficiary of this Agreement having standinq to enforce the terms of this Agreement in a court of competent jurisdiction. 12. INTEGRATED AGREEMENT. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the parties and no modification hereof shall be binding unless reduced to writing and signed by the parties hereto. 13. APPLICABLE LAW. All questions pertaining to the validity and interpretation of this Agreement shall be determined in accordance with the laws of California applicable to contracts made to and to be performed within the State. 8~-1~~9Y98 - 6 - ;~§ ~3 `l i 1. 'd~ d; 14. RECORDING OF AGREEMENT. The parties hereto shall cause this Agreement to be recorded in the Official Records of the County of Los Angeles. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed as of the day and year first above written. CITY OF SANTA MONICA, a municipal corporation _~ j . / ~ By ~ -~ ,u ~sLi~ :,_ ~' ~-_ JOHN~~4ALZLI ` City Manager APPROVED AS TO FORM: 11-,r(;-,~.i"~' '-'^- ' l~~C"_~----~ ROBERT M. MYERS City Attorney moxa49/hpw ~'7-1~49~98 -~- ~~ 1jL~J EXHIBZT A [Legal Description of Subject Property] Lots 1 through 2 of Parcel Map 18025 in the City of Santa Monica, County of Los Angeles, California. ~~°~449~98 - 8 - ~~ ~~~~~ ~ - STATE OF CALIFORNIA j ) ss. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) ON J~ p2 , 1987, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared Ming Sin Ru and Tien-HO Chen Ru known to me to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged that he executed the same. WITNESS my hand and official seal. ~- _ _~.~ , OFFICIAL SEAL r`~ -~~~ ~~ JUDIT ZADOR ///~~~~~~" " ' . ,~~ m NOTARY PUBUC - CALIFORNIA ~ ~' " LOS AC~ELES ~OJ.`wTY '~,~~.• MY comm. er.„urN lUN :5, 1988 No Public in and for said State ~"` ~~-1~~9~9~ - 9 - i~. „ ~< ~3 { ~ U `~ ~ STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ss: COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) ON ~~-k ~ Z, 1987, be£ore me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared JOHN JALILI, known to me to be the CITY MANAGER of the CITY OF SANTA MONICA, a Municipal Corporation, that executed the within instrument on behalf of the CITY OF SANTA MONICA, and acknowledged to me that the CITY OF SANTA MONICA executed the same. WITNESS my hand and official seal ~;cJ~- ~' - `~a-c~~-- iNotary Public in and for said State i~ ~ OFFICIAL SEAL ~~ JAC]C D GA;RDNEit ~m pp7q(typUBt,1C'CALIFORNIA lDE AlfBt1FS COl1NTY -t~r wm~a a~ics IIOY 4 1989 8'7-1~d9398 - io - ~„~ ~1t,7~ ~~J~ C/ED:RAS:RM:nh Council Mtg: April 28, 1987 Santa Monica, California To: Mayor and City Council FROM: City Staff SUBJECT: Appeal of Planning Commission Condition of Approval of Tentative Parcel Map 18025 and Conditional Use Permit 435, 2225 Fourth Street, Two-Unit Condominium. Applicants/Appellarits: Ming-Sin Ru and Tien-Ho Ru. INTRODUCTION This report recommends that the City Council uphold the appeal and amend the conditions of approval of Tentative Parcel Map 18025 and Conditional Use Permit 435 for a two-unit condominium approved by the Planning Commission on February 2, 1987 (See Statement of Official Action, Attachment A). BACKGROUND The applicant wishes to construct a three-story plus loft, two-unit condominium townhouse at the rear of a property which currently contains an existing, one-story, non-conforming grocery store. The grocery store, which has a CUP for a retail use in an R-3 Zone District (valid until October 23, 2000), would remain and is prop,osed for incorporation into the ownership o£ the £ront residential unit. On February 2, 1987, after a public hearing, the Planning Commission approved this two-unit condominium project subject to the findings and conditions in Attachment A, including staff's recommendation at that time that the store building be made part _ 1 _ i~9 ~ {~ i. ~ ~ i s of the common area of the Parcel Map, with the option that, for the life of the store building, the applicant may tie the store to one residential unit for purposes of exclusive use, maintenance and benefit. The proposed new residential building was found to meet Municipal Code and General Plan standards. Neither staff nor the Planning Commission had any concern with the construction of the two-unit condominium, which is consistent with the Municipal Code and the General Plan. However, because the grocery store is a non-conforming use and must be removed at the time the existing CUP expires, a mechanism was needed to ensure that the subdivision would not, in and of itself, grant additional entitlements to the store. Staff felt that leaving the store as part of the common area would resolve this issue, and the Planning Commission included that condition on the basis of the staff recommendation. On March 5, 1987, the condition requiring the store to be in the project's common area (Special Condition 1 of the Planning Commission determination) was appealed by the applicants. The applicants contend that the store building will be more difficult to insure if it is part of the common area rather than part of the front condominium unit. ANALYSI3 Following the Planning Commission hearing, the Planning Division and the City Attorney's Office reviewed the pertinent issue and determined an alternative means to accomplish both the applicants - 2 - e~5~ it~ ~ ~ l desire to include the retail store as part of the front condominium unit and the City's aim to not have the subdivision grant additional entitlements to the non-conforming store building. Staff recommends that the project's Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions along with a separate Deed Restriction incorporate a requirement that the store building he removed and the underlying area landscaped or redeveloped to a permitted use at such time as the retail use is abandoned or the Conditional Use Permit expires, whichever occurs first. Accordingly, Special Condition 1 has been revised and is presented below in the staff recommendation. COUNCIL CONSIDERATION In acting on this item, the City Council may uphold the appeal by appropriately modifying Special Condition l to alloor the front unit to incorporate the existing store building; may deny the appeal and approve the Tentative Parcel Map and Conditional Use Permit with the same (or modified) findings and conditions contained in the February 2, 1987, Planning Commission Statement of Official Action; or may reverse the approval of the Planning Commission and deny the Tentative Parcel Map and Conditional Use Permit. Denial of the project would require adoption of specific findings supporting such a determination. BUDGET/FISCAL IMPACT The recommendations presented in this report do not have a budget/fiscal impact. - 3 - ~~ ~I!u~ ~ ~ RECOMMENDATION Staff respectfully recommends that the City Council uphold the appeal and approve Tentative Parcel Map 18025 and Conditional Use Permit 435 with the findings and conditions contained in the February 2, 1987, Planning Commission Statement of O£ficial Action, amended to delete Special Condition 1 as approved by the Planning Commission and to replace it with a new Special Condition 1 to read as follows: 1. The applicant shall provide within the CC&R's and a separate recorded Deed Restriction provisions which state that: a) The existing retail store is a non-conforming building and use, subject to time limits and conditions set forth in Conditional Use Permit 381; b) As a non-conforming building and use, the retail store is subject to Section 9136A and 9136B (SMMC) which establish significant controls and restrictions on non-conforming buildings and uses including the potential for removal of such buildings and uses; and c) The store building shall be removed and the underlying area landscaped or redeveloped in a manner consistent with legal requirements then in effect at such time as the retail use is discontinued for a continuous period of one year or the Conditional Use Permit expires, whichever occurs first. The CC&R's and Deed Restriction shall be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney prior to approval of a Final Map. - 4 - ~~ '(;U~~ Prepared by: R. Ann Siracusa, Director of Planning Richard Mills, Associate Planner City Planning Division Community and Economic Development Department Attachments: A. February 2, 1987, Planning Commission Statement of OfficiaL Action. B. February 2, 1987, Planning Commission Staff Report. C. Letter of Appeal by Applicant dated February, 11~ 1987. D. Letter from Applicant dated March 5, 1987. E. Letter from State Farm Insurance dated February 28, 1987. F. Public Notice for April 7, 1987, hearing. G. Project Plans. RAS:RM:nh PC/RUApp 03/31/87 - 5 - _~ + ~~°~; APPROVAL AS TO FORM OF CC&RS DATE July 28, 1987 PROPERTY ADDRESS: 222~ 4th Street The City Attorney has above-referenced property. maintained in the permanent and a copy forwarded to the APPROVED AS TO FORM: approved as to form the CC&Rs for the A copy of this memorandum should be records of the Planning Department owner. ' ~/iJ'~-~" Lv-- ~ ~--~----~.s ROBERT M. MYERS City Attorney 1lccrsap/hpc , ~~ j%~~~ Section 9. Notices. Any notice permitted or required to be delivered as provided herein shall be in writxng and may be served either personally or by mail. If any notice is served by mail, each such notice shall be sent, postage nrgnai~ tQ tha ?~~racc roflon~oa ~n `h~ ru~ G~~ - - .... .. .. ._., vi ~.i~c Association, and shall be deemed given if~notlactually receiued earlier, at 5:00 o'clock p.m. on the second day after it is deposited in a regular depository of the United States mail as provided herein. The address given by any Person to the Association for the purpose of service of notices may be changed from -:.ime to time by notice in writing to the Association. Section 10. No Rep~esentation or Warranties. No repr~~~~^tations or Marranties of any kind, express or implied, have I>een given or made by Declarant or its agents or employees in car;nection with the Project or any portion of the Project, or any I.nprovement thereon, its physical condition, zoning, compl:ance with applicable laws, fitness for intended use, or in conne~tion with the subdivision, sale operation, maintenance, cost of maintenance, taxes or regu3ation thereof as a condominium project, except as specifically and expressly se~ forth in this Declaration an~~ except as may be filed by Declarant from time to time ~~ith the Department or with any other governmental authority. ARTICLE XIV Special Condi~ons and Restrictio~s Pu~suant t~t}~ Recommendations of the Plannin~_Division of the City of Santa Monica. ~~ction l: The existing retail store buil.ding shall be made a pai:'.: of unit one. The Store building shall be for the exclu,~:`tve control, benefit, and occupancy of the Owners of ~r~it one, ::.;id total responsiblity for liability, maintenance, and repai~ shall be with the Owners of unit one. Section 2: The existing retail store is a nonconforminq building and use, subject to the time limits and conditions set forth in conditional use permit 381. As a nonconforming buila:>^.g ar.d use~ the re~ai3 sto:° is scbj~ct tc Sectior.s 973EP. and 9136B SMMC, which established significant controls and restrictions on nonconforming buildings ang uses including tt3e potential of removal of such buildings and uses. Sectiori 3: The store building shall be removed and the underlying area shall be landscaped or redeveloped in a manner consistent with legal requirements ttien in effect at such time as the retail use is discontinued for a continuous period of one yeac or the Conditional Use Permit expires, whichever occurs first. Section 4: In the event of destruction or abolishment of the p=:oject, reconstruction shall be in accordance with the Code:,,~:~f the City of Santa Monica at the time of such cecon;>i:ruction. The association shall have the power, in the name ~.L all the owners as their attorney in fact (or in the name of ti:~r association as to any property to which the association hold;, title~, to dedicate all or any part of the common area, or to establish easements over the common area for street widen5ng or other purposes to any public agency, entity , autho:ity, or utility. ,: -14- s~fs !J V ~ ~ ATTACHMENT F Correspondence/Petitions Electronic version of attachment is not available for review. Document is available for review at the City Clerk's Office. 68 - - Round #2 ~ Q Snde the Fair Allarket! Dear Friends. Thanks to you and your hundreds (yes!) of phone calls, letters, emails; and participation at the City Planning meeting April 2"a the decision was made to keep the Fair Market open. Now City planners will meet again to deterrriine the markeYs hours and operating conditions. Among other things, they are proposing making the store close at 7 or 8 p.m. Please SPEAK OUT once again to maintain the extended evening hours that we are all accustomed to and which are a great convenience to us, the customers. Community support was decisive in Round #1, where we convinced City planners not to close the Fair Market. Please contact them by letter, email or phone: Bruce Leach ~~~~/ ~,J~~ City Planning Division ~1- CX~~dj~!.~~~~ `.~~"~z ~' 1685 Main St. Santa Monica, 90401 bruce-leachna santa-monica orq 310-458-8341 Please attend the City Planning meeting: "` Wednesday; April 23, at 7:00 p.m, ~ City Council Chambers, Second Floor, Santa Monica City Hall 1685 Main Street, Santa Monica, California r"~` __.~-~--'' ) ~ Signed, ~ ~ Y n l4K-c,v- . ~: c~..-r~r~`..,;~."'>.'^_'' A fellow customer ~~rr ,~~~~~~3° `~r~!~ ~--.~ -,R--.-.. ._ .., . _ . ~#B~tU ~~ t~' i ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~,~~~ ,~~ ~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~~ ''\~\}~ i, P\` ~ \ ~ '\~ • ~ ~ , ~ ~ ~ t\ V W /~ ` t .~'~ ~~' .~' ~~~ ,~~' °~:~~ ~~~'r ~ ~u~~ ~. ~ ~~ 7~~J, ~,• ~i~ oJ ~ ~- ~~ ~ ~ ~~~2`' ~~~'°~ ~~-~ , ~ ~' ~~ Q~ ~ , u ~' ~~ ~l ~~ ~ G~ ~t~' \~~~ix i S i~~ ~~ \~ / C~~ ~ r~a~j ~~I~ ~,16 ~ ~i~ ~~~,~~ ~~,~~I,\~ ~ r,l (~~~,~- ~'S ~J i~ ~. ~ ~ J` ~~-~` ~ ~ ~ ~i ~~~ a i'~~ -~~~ ~p~c~ l ~ ~ ~ ~ a.c~~~~ J~ ~~ ~~~`~~ ~ ~~ ~P"5,~~` . ~S ~b~~~ ~~~ ~, ~L~ ~ G ~ ~C~j~ l ~ ~ ~ `~ ~ t~.~,i' ~ b 'i~ ~~~ ~ r ~" S <~, i ~' ~ ~ ~ ~.. a~ ~ ~~ ~v ~ ~~ ~~ ~,~, `~ y~ ~ t1"'!~'~'~~~is-`~ ! ~ , ~.,,,\,~~ ~ -~e;~ ~' fi ~ ~ ~, ~ ,/° ~ -~~" 1 i~. L~r~ ~ j ~~ ~ ~ d~~ ~ t h _~ ~,, ~ ~ ~~5,~ ~" ~ -~` .S i5 ~~`~ ~,;y c~ ~''~ `~ t~: ~5 "'' ~ / J ~~rrir`~7 t Ci-~'S} ~~t2! ~~ ) ~?~-~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~Le i''X )SS+/.'e ._ ~~ J CyGY~ N. ~.. . ~ ~ : o~~ . +~~. ~ i,.~ CZ Yv'~. ~ ~~ ~ v /~ Y r~l ~ t ~ e' t,~ cess ~~~ ~ ~ S -~ tm~ Lr~~ ~ t ~i~8~ ~a ~ 7e~a~ t~~ ~ce, ~can you i~rra~ine the ,•'nrrerrse z~ ln~crf Lr~a f f f.e i~ all the Fr~ir l~f~r%et arat~ ather local .sto~ Q ~:r~¢v~ners ~re f;~er~ t~ I~RII~ t~sroaar~h the streets of Santr~ ~Ionlta for a hecad: cl~e remedy, en~Qr~ency <i¢~~-ltt~-er, o~- cr-ecazn ~'o~= rraar~in~'ea f~e~ ~hy ex~scerbnte an already cto~ed s~ eet system by ~c?t~~~ ~ut ~~~xistenre ~ v~~b~e, n~uch-ar~o~ ed ~nd CONI~P~IEIv'7"stvrel? ~erisusty, zn thz~ d~y and a~e, c~ lacal ~- ~ el~abie can~l ivalk~n~ dzsta.nce' st~re ~ fs nvt ~nly ~nvenient, In~t ii aarr.lerst~res c~~rmzunity b~ndin~, kee~s -~ f:~e nzi~hbor~ao~d ali~e ~r~d ~/ital, ari~ supports ~~a~alua6le hzys~one in the.~m~rzcan econr~;rry.• the smalZ . ~ns~iness owner. As I unc~erstc~n~~i~, th~ prn~lenz l~es i,n a zonin~ tecluairul?t~, let`s n~t surtunib fn ran :rYar~abin sitr~atton v~her¢ ~~oc~d thin~ is vote~ ouY or '~ e~-tca~aed' ozet af ixist~rue. Dr~n't~~ve S~nta r~lonirq a~icrd nam~ fiy inelur~irz~ it in the rostnr c~ f tamrreunftiz~ that turn th~ir I~aeks ~.n ~o~d, Jaonest ;~nd solfd ~rusir.esses beca~se ofz~nin~ laws that r~~ one ~an relrrte t~ berause th~y r~an't €rr~act on the_ rjr.xndane, reat, rr~n~ e: e rnd ~er~tinent issues t~iat tl~e citi?ens of td:e cornmunity faa~ ~n a c~aety fsnsi4. Zaning or ~'enances c~re. a~ter all, su~erim~vsed laws to str•en~tlaen the in~ast~'uctur'e oj cz renrrrrunity - the intent sur-ely is n~t to weaken the nef~'nbo~-ho~r1 fi~ona the Jnside aut. tl.fiake S~ntc~ M~nrc~r ~rouc~ ar~d ;~~ark thr ou~:h thzs in such a wray trecat su~ports youa~ Zur~l business ~ers~n, th~t res~ects t~e iina~~ c f ;~~is city as a pedestric~n cammunity, and whase c~overn~nent n~~z~s m-e for the F~~~~1 ~ ru>t,for t~~ ~t~-ictarr~s nf irrrrziu~r~b[e i'ed tup~. Ther-e are also nur;3erons rustamers-of Fair tl~l~r'~~t ~s~ha depgna on f~ ~u~ to tdaeir ~3s~tc~1 ~'l~Qbzlltizs, ~r are an a~e where c~rivin~ is no I~n~er~ ~rz optian (t,~anh vor~, and fcr ~eop~ liize ~e;y~el~ 3,n: ~z r n~iterl b~rcl~oet tjiat ,~irrzply have to use ca snra~ler ~ t~re ~~~°gusr i c~rn't stszizr~ to ga t~ cr Su~~e~- ~~/larket ~nd c~ctr~cally see c~ll the pr-adr~c°ts 1 zar-~'t caf~c~~~d ~ c?rz a pers~nal nUte, thr v~vrae~• ~f the st~re is one ~Jf1he ;r~~=t ~'evvt~d busine>s v~~~ratcrs I hsr~e ~ve~~ 7r`1{'~ "H~ r'~fLFS ikir3PC~~S ~3$lf" ~"~'is': £#StC/1FdEf ~~ ~~"~ ~?Ct$ ~'f%Yd~ t,~`tfi ~~" i2f5 `ve'G`~ ~i"~ ~}"fly-ilt~~ £7 ~ ~'t?~ SC~~t'ic~iol3 CFi . 7-~'~?St~71.~'eh~.P ~'.1Y1CC'~, u'F1G' :5 tOf"~1'i ~5 Lb'J;"'ri1~~=~ ffi f,7;~7`6b'7;r~ Z"h£' S2"G°~"~` fFYld ti4 ii?if3~TP ;~P :$iC 32C?,~~f?FJt13'hDOd1. , .`:?~~,Je y~u bren tc~ ~ai~• Murket' 1~ is nor ~r ch~esy, ru~z~o~~z, Iftt~r~staesvn, hr~n~~ut~i- ~fe~~~z~ae~ts an~ = lei~r-ei-s. Ir z~ a~ e~t estn~ilishanent ~rn~ it ~~~u,d be u hza~e b~~~ t~ t7~ts ~c~rt of to~~~rz i f it as~~ e t~ ~e r~c,°z-o~rf n~ Irt~6zness. ~2 ~_1l usve zt ~nr~ ~~°~r~t it ~o .~ i f$1?,d ~ i~lnncy l~ifilhvflr~r~c$ ~:f ~ Ci " i ll D•,=ar Brua', c~~;r yc,9u in;a~inc the ?nc,~ease in Ir~cal n"ea ffic i~ nll the Fair Al(nt~l;et und vther lacr,l stvrr c~~stnrrters are fvrced to 1~~11/E tlzrou~h t~~ie strcets ofSantn N!orzica f~r a headnche remecly~ enmr~ency hitty-litter, vr~ creanx f~~ rrrorn;n~'co~e~~ Why e,Ya~e~"bate arz ~~l~~endy cla~ed street system fry~otEin~ .~ c?ut ot existence a i~~~ble, r~zuclr-aclored arzd CONVENIfNT stor e?? Serivusl~, in this day and a~e, a Ic~cal reliable and 'waliun~a, distancr' stnre is not only c~na~enient, fiut it zer.derscores con;munity bondino hee~s the_nel~hbnrhovd alive arad vit~l, and suppnrts a valuable heystone in the Anrericnn econorny.• the snaall business vri~ze~: ~s /~nrderstar~~ it, tiie problenz lizs in a zoninr~ technieali,'y, l~t s not suetzrmb to an ~~v~idable situatz~n ~vhere a~oad tlzing is voted out ~r 're~~ taped' out oj cxz_ terie. C~n't~ive Santn Morrica a bad narr.e by intludin`s it in th~ raster af <n;nmuni~ies that turn their bczrks on `ood, harrest and_solid Znasinessns berause otzant'n~l~ws that no one cr~n reG~te tu becatrse t{tey dvn't ijrz~att on the m~rndaree, re~~l, canc~~ete an~f p~~~tinent issues thnt the citizens a f the comnurnity fnce ~n a claily basis. Zonin$ ordinances car~e, after all, superimposed lax=s tv sn~en~ther the infi~c~sbzrcture v f a cnnzmtenity - the intent stn~ely is nnt to weaJ~.en the nei~hbor~hoa~ f om the inside out: ~lcrl~,e Santa Monica p~ oud and Ys~orf. Phroz~qh this in suc{i n x~ny that suppvrts your lncnl business Z~er-svn, that resprtts the irnage ~f this city as a pedesfi~ian cor,zniunity, and whDSe~overnment of~ieinlc ctr-e fvr the PEOPL€ nDt fm~ th:~ ~~trrctrn~c~s of irrzmutnble ~'ed tu~e. There are .7lso ncmrn~~oirs casto~riers a f Fair Mc~r~h:t x~ha de~le,nd c~n it c~trP to their j~{rysicci! drsaGilities, vr- are art age wi~e~ e clrivin~ is no lcpngrr mc opCion (t~~e7nk God), artd for ~reop(e lihe nrysel,F on n limited bud~et that siin~ly have io trse a snz~ller stvre beteruse i ems't stearad to ~~a to a Suf~er Ma~-Jzet Gnd actually see all the ~roducts 1 ec~n't af ford ~~n n persatt~rl not~e~, Che ownnt~ ~f tdre store i5 ane ~~ the mnct devated birsiness op~~r-atnrs l.haie e~~~ ire:t 'I-fe hc~s alt~lays p~ri th~ eustnisrer first, f~as k~vne nz:1 af his wvy t~ ~~, ovide n~F eut sclettla~ n, t ;~ asarab~e rn ices, ~,~d is e.l~s~uys tbsr l;in~ ~t hr,~~rvti~rr~~= t~~e-stere ancl its imca~e in the re~~hi~~~~hc~o~. H~ane ynu ~~~en tv fcrzr Murket? tt is n~C a chersy, run-cl~Hm, Iztter-.~~ti~e~tnt, l~.zrt~c'uttor dead~ec~ts and la;terer_4. It is a~Qreat estafilishrner~t~ and it vaoiald be a h~~~~° "vlo~v tc this v~rt o f town ?f zt were t~ he r-u~rvut of busir:ess. bb'e call love i: ~nd ~wczrrt it to S~AI'11?l l~Janry Milholland ~~ ''` ~:~ d~c-s~ Z~~~ - ~`'~ia~-//~ 3J, ~~ `~~ ~~~- L~c~-(, ~Lr~.~ 3~ ~oc `~/~-- 1~-~-~~ F~t~ N~1~+-t~-t-t~P j''J/1~Q K~ ~ ft ~AJ ~' Ll~~ t#~~l pr.~ T~ ~~~~ ~ -rZA4 ~~12._ ('O~`(~W~S ~vo<..~ ~~'~'~~ 1 GAN -~-- ov ~~ ~'t~~i N~ (~Yi N~XT pc~K 15 (~ C~~`~i ~-~l ~'~~ ~ 1'~a ~Ns~ P'tY ~~ ~~025 . ~~ P't~ N Y ~,,+I~'t s ~-r r 5~ .5zx-r ~a~- N~R~s ~ us/ Ar~ ~~o~ ~v~c 7-~ 7v 5~Y '' I~-~~-o ",~N ~> ~~~c-+ ~~ i i t+ N~G ~~.3 w~rt o~Q,.-t~ (~ a~t~t~ N~~~'~- S~ h5 ~~ c~w~~ ,~~~ ~a ~,wt ~~~- fira~Ts . l ~ eS l~ M~~'/ W~Ys ,~ u~Gtt~~N ~ ~/ G ~~~ ~v v s,~r.c, Ar~ l~'?r'~z~((~~ S~s~ Da=- G~~~ c~Nlr~urYC i', ~f- Grvl~ ~ ~~G~- //~ ~ S~1t~1~ NC/G<rr~c,t/zszar> /Qr!'~ r~' ~~''~,4~-71rr~ QS N~~GtIJ v.es 1`>~~/~ A~ ~~~- ~~c~aL /'l!~/Li~~ f~'~%'~"//~ -- ~ ~.Gd~/ Qr~i> ~'ar'~v~3~ ~r~.~ f-~25o,^'~-j %r~S AN~ Sftni~ (~TS ~j/~p Ga~v'GC~ZNj l'~j f GDl~l~3 (.JH~ („~z~LD a~L/ISl3 SrI'~Pc~Y ~~ ~9~'~~i~~ v~ ~ T ,u~,,~~~s ,~N~ 57~"~~ ~ii~R'z~ssa5. (~ ~,~6i~ 7y~v7Z1- ~S ~T L!//..~6 /r/ ~ Ca!/~P~ S~f sXs f'Il~ ~v ~ 2~~`7 S~5 ~N~S //t~G 1f~'~~ . ~T /S ..d~ ~ Z~t._ ~~ ~~/'`'Ov/G/~Clirr~ST.~-Cv~ AS U~ 6a ~~~3z~tZ,`7 t~v~'" P~-!G(,/'~ St~RGS zZ? b~y2 ~Dc~t~.e j,dr~,~ b~.C- ,~6,Q1~ vl% f7 GI ! - 5~l /~2(!/~ /l/ }3~~~~~. / ~.~. /~G ~vrc. L~ i7z-c~' /'~N~f,G~.! ~~ i~~9u ~c~z~3 Gf1r~'G~ 3 ~1L~ ~~- 7>, . .~ ~~ Ia~~ f~"~ I /5 (,~t(ih'J~ (.~JE ~~ eo /~c~T o,/~ r~n~"r~7sY< Ftniv G-~ %~/~d~./ i~ts ~'c-~~~ r,.~~j ~i /f 6i/ ar/`e gLOG/C~ ~46~~ /~J7~°71J> vr 0% S/M~°L-Y ~~/n~C~ 1~ sr~~ o~ c~J~ r3~~ t.-~~,/~s ~~ ~3~i~N~~ Nv,~6~s r i is /~. Nr! X b~ f~P~t3 ' oz~7> >qr~~ Yvvj,i~ ~ G f"ft LD~-~' ~^'~ /~06 s~ r•l^~v SiJG~-f - c-~Hc~ y~J /''~AY o~~Y /,~~T ~r ~vW~ t'~/~~/~~~QnT~ G~-f~~i J~s i~ ~ d`'~~i~~T~s w/~ $~T c,~t~ .~~~ <,~~~ `~o/,Z N~CGI/.~v.i~s'~ ,Q~/D ~c~/o~,r~./G '~3~. i /~,~iZ~ Wt~~ `~c t/ G l ~ .~-~~~ L . lN~-~'/1~ M/~N~'' a~Zr~2. /'~>L- B~'ti~lS /s~~ ,e~~~~S~c,i~ ~~.s~~s ~ 2~2 C~~~/6 v~ ,~c~ ~~- a wN G i ~7Z--~ L c7c~e c- s"~ll~ G,~E-~"~ ~ /S ~',~ ,~~ ! ? rs . ~.~'sT ai ~~.c. ~ ~is r/ ~~ I!~ ~i ~/1~~6 ~"t`j~(~'~~Y~ /~(Q~J~ ~ ~CCL~ ~ lS ~t/ D ~~ ~'/L~~~ JQ.~/`~ ~/o ~~L jyLA ~ ~-'P=s G rK5 1-~ ~~Sr/[~j y~rr~v ~A l .~S ,~i t~GU~.. ~/5 /f ls ~Q1~ c/~~ ~c.c_ l.~~-~~ 7z~~ s~ /~ ;~ ~~~1 k/'/- < f-hA~r~G ~( f~~ 3~~-a 1 S ~-r~ Z~'~i~rri~^&~z f3~~~~ wc3 ~v J1~~ 1b G~ /~ a%~'L c~a.~ G~e_r/~ ~YG! ~~ 5c~'"'g ~i~`~ Pt~r~ G/~rsr/~/~_ ~~ /" ~ ~~S 61~Z- ~G(~/G l~(i/~~YlGI`f ~fV l~~Tl 1~ ~~ GCtD~ a°6/L (~At/ ~ S~/O~'~Ric4-~ S/~'j Y~l~'N 7~, a~ Tlfi~ r~g3-/s ~!~ f~ ~Tc~"" ~ T 7a~" G~/-~ ,~7M~j ~- z~t~~ S~~ r~ an~ cA ~~S ,~~ 7 fn~ ~ c~~g~ ~ o~ 7t'ti~ 1 ~R5! /'o~,,~v 2~ ~~/G/~i~~ Y~,i „/b~,~ fr~rc_ ~~-t~~a-r ~/~i~~~. `lor~°!L~ 6~'~/C!~/(,/ ~'o7TLtv D/ ~//~t~ ~Oi{ CU/~1°/t-.il Cc~~/11N~ 0/tsYCJ b!~ Sov~la C~c~r7 ~vD~cir~l~ ~e~I~~~3 7"ou ~/~ S~or~c~L~ Ce>M~ /~/r/ (,al ~ ~ ~'L.~ _ ~~'~ s~DlN7- /S ~ ~TS ~ U1e Nc~ ~C-~ rfi3 ~1"l~t~ /Y~l~~ ~~ o~~" s C~ R t, Y~1,-ir~ 5~ YS c-~yq~/ C~ ZT~ %'~ ~ c~~1'~/~3 S~~ i~ u c~ ;4c ~ ~ a~ 3 ~ sCA~l.~ / TS s!'~i°'~~rN G 2~ ~C/~l~ fQ r~7~T~J~ LrJ ~r ~ r,•~l4'~' ~vSS/~z~, /~4K~ /% ~/~r P,.~~ Y~~u ~n~ f~~~-Ti.~~ o~y~ c,.~.~c~iAr~ ec~o~M~Nl ~~ ~-~.~~~ /-t~RTi~ G ~S ./~w~~ 7~~%i i~-- vs ~ c~/ ,3c~~~s ~o `7~ ~~ s7~'r~ q,- c~ca~ ~~C~ ox- 7lr ~ y~P°lf ~ MA~ac~ ~i rrr ~o Ij~~~°~-s ~ ~ga i S ,il~T ,~l,v ~a~s~~~ ~r $~jl /T-S ~ ~ovf..~vY ,P~t~r~c-I2.~ jox> F~K ~~c-ac~/~zo sorr~C ~"~'~7~~ ~e~A'%ti(- 7c~r< d~, zorJr~~ rsS~~ ~'~ f'~7~-~'c~r~~ av~a2 ~ ~~t' T~-~T Y~~ `-~~v~ ~~.et~~6 ~~- /`~~16lfe~e/fcz~0 ~`~~ ~ ~XVSG U1= ~~ G/~t.L, ~T Gc3-,~s % yc~v~r~ py/LY f~"~ jc~ ~2//e~ ~~ ~, l~ ~~sTi°r~~~ l~~' ~~ yo~ ~/~ 7~ i3r~ Sa~ NY~%'LK~~ ' /~ ~~"i~ 1~ s/1nvZI~ ~z.~ ~nMv~ I~~ 77~ l~tt~z- fS f~ ~ r~~ b~/~ ,vG~vr(r3c~e~ , (~7,~~5 r./'~fr~%f r r~9o.~-f~i~~ ("I'tr~~~ "i~ ~.G~a~~ l~ ~( R~~L~-7 /~~35n%r ,/!~R ll~Z l~-L~ I'au~- t~'T~U~ Lv~l`- 1 ~~«~~,r~i~0 ~2R~~~~i t6Qs ~N /r~c~ ~~ 7~°f~a~e ~r o2 ~ s~v 7L/c~'( ~( Yr.~/Ls ,KG a.~a+~ c~Nl~s l~c~~a- ~/~.i ~j ~~ f-`~'-~ M~~ ~~ ~i,,,~ aT1~t, ~ 7~~ i ~~~,.~~/r~,,~~ ~ r./ r~ ~i/~r'y~ i ~i2 S~r~~' 6r~jj o~- Sz~c~'116///~~ So Sas~~' !~~ l73 Ua ~/z,~ ~~ Pi°r~i : ~°tA~ $i ~r~l~[~ 7K~ isS~~ ru~w ~~+~~ ~i `~~~-tc.L `' Yo~~~ '~`i-c~ Flv~~~ vs ~~ N~/~ftB~1' ~,•~.~ ~tr~' ~c~~c~ <N'~ lr~MC~~t~"t~_._ /~,~~~ wm~ ~~s %~~ odas f~~Lr~-~ 3~ ~is .~~l~-~i ~/~'~s Lm cP ~ a~/~ F~ ~"~ %/~~' Y"c~ /~C 2~ f~iri5'l-!/.f~ ~~'D° P/~~`9 z~~~ ~~ o~ r?,-~c % S~x~~a~ ~is f(RS f3~~ ,~r~ iss~~ ~~~1`< !,v ! qf36 5eF-~~ . Z° _`%~ 2S A G v~ ~~lys No i~s~/ ,~ s~rG~ , ~ zx~~i ~r`e / /-~ ~i- o v"l ~l AV( r/6 O/~ /''l~~t~ /`~~~ ~D~~ ((/ TAGi l r!/r/J~C~ 5 O F US ~~u ~ N~~tv~aParU~o ~fi~~~ S~~'~ ~~u~/s ~~GrN~ ~~~ ~'~ ~`-~ ~ r! ~ s , S~ ~ ~r~~ j~~~~~ 7~ ~-~ e~,Q v~~P~~ ~~~ ~~$ wn ~ ,,~~J ~G~,.~ ~ i~ u g 4 _ G~. i ii _.-.q..i. .a/ /r//C~JJA2<.L . ~. j-VL-rii . GL/N~ ~~~RPR 02 2003 1:23PM NETWORK STRFFING SERVICES 310-278-8039 B~ ~ 17dYPICL 1JI731SiCi11 °~ 325 Bay 5t, No. 110 g~ ~ $anta Monica, Ca 90405 ~ 310- 399-3175 harrietorinstein (a~hotmail.cam Apri12, 2003 VIA FACSIMILE Mr. Bruce Leach Associate Planner City Planning Di~~sion Rm. #212 Santa Monica City Hall 1675 Main Street Santa Monica, CA 90401 Re: CUP 00-009 Dear Mr, Leach: Wfh respect to the Appiication of Fair Market of 2225 Fourth Street in the Ocean Park neighborhood for a variance enabling Fair Market fo it continue operation as a gourmet speciaity store and wine shop, I submit these comments strongly in favor of qrentinq anv variance necessarv to keep this vital, community store open. The events of Monday, March 10, 2003 iilustrates the importance of this particular store to my household and community in general. I work in a hi-rise building in Century City, and at about 10 a.m, that day a huge black plume of smoke and fire filled the sky in the area near my home. As my partner and our neighbors work during the day, the staff at Fair Market were my local phone contact as i hastily created a phone tree in the event the fire invoived our residence. The day clerk at Fair Market, Baboo, picked up the phone and simply walked outside as the SM Fire Department sped by. "i see the smoke", Baboo told me that day, "iPs south of Ocean Park (Blvd.)". The birds-eye view provided by Baboo saved myself and everyone in my phone tree a fot of stress that day. The building involved by the fire was 875 Ocean Front Walk, Venice. With respect to the uniqueness of Fair MarkeYs products and services ( say this: Fair Market specializes in selling California wines, and has better selection, guality and price than Trader Joes, a huge chain which is known for its wine values. -ts beer selection is awesome. My partner also says the fiot coffee at Fair Ma~ket is better than at the Arco at Pico & Fourth Street, and their bagels are brought in daily from Santa Monica 8agei Factory, which sell out every moming. 1 have been in the sfore when mofhers bring their children in the store, catch up on local events, all of which gives Fair Market the feeling of a family meeting place, where peopte in the cort7munify can interact, face-to-face. The small markets aiong Main Street may also provide simifar products, but parking is always difficuit on Main Street, and with the big developments going in on Main a~ong Bay, Buckneli and Pacific, the parking situation is only going to get worse. Ex¢ept for the alcohol-free Santa Monica Farms on Main 5treet, the other markets are primarily liquor stores, and because of that, they cannot senre the communiiy function that Fair Market pertorms: p.l In c(osing, I encourage you to take all steps within the scope of your authority to ~~ ~ I1 i; g~ KE~P FAiR MARKET OPEN. Hale, Carolyn S (Sue), RTSLS From: Hale, Carolyn S(Sue), RTSLS Sen4: Tuesday, April 01, 2003 9:54 AM To: 'bruce-leach@santa-monica.org' Subject: Fair Market - 4th St., Santa Monica, Ca 90405 Mr. Leach, My family and I own and live at 2229 4th Street....next door to Fair Market and we request that the Planning Commission approve the Conditional Use Permit. Fair Market is a great convince to my 82 year old mother and my disabled brother. We have lived here about 13 years and we visit the market 3 or 4 times a day. We value the service provided to 4he neighborhood by Fair Market...so please approve the Conditional Use Permit. Thank You! ~ ~.'i ?~~-~v AT&T Business Solutions Manager halecs@ems.att.com 310-396-1935 Office 760-875-7968 Fax 310-291-4321 Cell ~ ~ ; ~ ~ ~ ~ ~-T~~ , t_~~~,~ ~ ~~1 f ! «<t~fic~/twv~r;.iqservices.aitcon~ibackbone»>/AT&T Backbone Map r<hitq jiiqr~e~vvicek.hqtmo.ip.att.neti»>/ AT&T IP Network Pertormance Site €fF ~ t i 'v ~ J ~I~2~~o3 ~~ Rebecca Anderson 2311 4`~ St. #304 Santa Monica CA 90405 Dear City Council Members, As a resident of the Ocean Park area of Santa Monica, the Fair Mazket has provided friendly neighborhood service to myself and many others. I rented a property at 2035 4th SY. for four yeus 2nd ~~hen I recently purchased a condo at 2311 4th St. ±wo years agq the Fair Market was part of the reason I wanted to stay in the area. The Fair Market provides friendly service and carries high quality products. On countiess occasions I have walked over to pick up last minute items that I need for dinner. I go to the market daily for coffee and when I have guests for dinner their wine selection is second to none. The entire staf'f is knowledgeable and a pleasure to deal with. They are always wiiling to go the e~tra mile and make special orders upon request. They cater to those who cannot drive by being so close by and making deliveries when needed. They know their customers on a first name basis which adds to the customer service that cannot be found at a larger grocery store. This day in age, the seroice provided by the people at the Fair Market is not easily found. The market makes this neighborhood a more close knit community. In addition to the service, the Fair Market provides a safety net for me as a single woman when I walk my dog in the evening and night. It is a comfort to know that they are there and that they know who I am. Not having the Fair Market open late at night would 6e a great loss to the community. Overall, the Fair Market is part of our neighborhood. Please do all that you can to heip the city understand how important the market is to all of us and what a great loss it would be if the city closed them down. By cutting down on traffic, providing high quality service and products and keeping the neighborhood a community, the Fair Market is a huge asset to the area. Thank you very much for your time and your efforts. Sin rely~.-~ ~ ,~-_---,~-" R becca Anderson 2311 4th St. #304 Santa Monica CA 90405 310-450-0750 ~"! ?~'-e ~.'' tr L~ ~ -~~~-E~ ~ Dear Mr. Leach, I am writing to implore you NOT to force Fair Matket out o£ our neighboihood. I've been living next CIOOT to this mazket for moie~than 20 years and it~is a huge cenvenience - not only fos me bu*_ fo= hundreds of people in the suriounding area. The store is almost constantly busy. I, like many of my neighbors, am in the store at least once a day and sometimes, twice and three times. if it weren't there, that would mean I'd have to get into my car and drive at least a mile if.not more to'find what I need. Plot oniy is- this~a waste of energy resoumes, it's also a hardship because I iive on a busy-strezt (4th Stieet)~and it often takes me 5 r.tinutes c: more to get ongoing tia££ic to stop long enough to let me out. Many people who frequent the store are elderly and/or don't nave a car. They walk £rom their homes, sometimes from several blocks away because it is one of the few in the aiea that has basic staples. But Convenience is oniy a small part of why we don't want to lose Fai~ Market. COMM[;NITY is an even greater reason. Zn this age of isolation and depersonalization, the people who work at Fair Market provide an even greater service. Th2y are always frizndly and nice. Hawk, Babu and Ray are not only our neigbhors, but have become friends to many of us ir, the neignborhood. They go out of theii wap to be helpful. For example, if I foiget to go to the bank, they'll cash a cneck. I£ Z ~have iriends coming from out of town but I can't be home when they arrive, I leave my xeys for them to oick up at Fair Market. Zf I am. out running and don't have cash on me, I can take an item and come back iatei to pav. They'11 make.sure to give the mailman my lette=s when I can't find a mailbox. A few times, I've inadvertently locked my gate when I didn't have my keys and one of them has hopped tne fence to help me get in. Theie have been incidents~on the street with rowdy people and the guys from the store have come out to check and make sure we're alright. I'm a single woman living alone and I know that I could ca11 ~hem any time if I needed help. I feel safei because of their oresznce. And, they ask about me if they haven't seen me, just as they ask about other neighbozs~, especialiy the seniors - just to check and make sure we're ok. i know they o_cen give credit to regular customers who are a few dollars short until payday. If there's something you'd like to have and they don't stock it, they'll order it £or yon or even start ~ carrying it. If someone is sick or disabled, they'll help them with home delivery. And above all, tha~ store is the centez o£ information exchange, conversation and good cheer among neighbo=s. There is almost always a dog or two tied up outside waiting for someone in the store, neighbors coming in and out, salutations. In short: ~ LIFE and ~ Connection which is what gives Santa Monica it's wonderful character and makes it a great place to live. Fair Market provides a lot more to a iot of oeople than just convenience. It's true that if Fair Market closed, we coulC £ind another place te =hop, even i£ it took more e£fort. But the neighboihood would be a sadder place. What we'd lose is the trust, ~~ il~~~j Peter Pane 2407 4th St #2 __ ---- __ Santa Monica, CA 90405 (310) 452-8704 -_ _-- _-- _ __ ~~l_ ~~- - - - -- - __ - -- - - / ~Ll~ - ~ `1/r- L.l U~` Oll2~ r~ °z` ~fG~~'t° 2~1_L.[(2~-~~ -_ _ - a~ Y ~: - -- - .. e - -- y ---- m ~,~-7" 7~t~ D~~ !/J_ & _ _ _ -- _ ~~.~.. _- -- ~- ~~~ ~~a- - r,_ __ ~t - - - '~ -G -~-c - -_ -- Page 1 of 1 Bruce Leach -Fair Market From: Paul Kristan To: <bruce-leach@santa-monica.org> Date: 04/02/2003 3:20 PM Subject: Fair Market Dear Bruce, In a world rife with war and intercultural misunderstanding, and in a city with the onus of a car culture long ago forced down its' unsuspecting throat, Fair Market stands as a humble island of hope: a small business where people meet people. A small business to which one can walk and actually interact with members off his own community. What a concept! The City of Santa Monica, however well-intended, would be doing a grave disservice to not only a very decent man and business owner, but to the many residents of Ocean Park who have access to to an efficient and friendly store and who take a great deal of everyday human comfort patronizing this testament to the American Dream. Fair Market stands as proof that there is hope. There is hope that a humble mah can come to a free country, set roots and nurture a business that serves his community in a joyful, unassuming, and most vital way. There is hope that in our hectic, overly modernized urban lives, we can actually walk in and shop, rekindling the vanishing tradition of human connection and reminding ourselves just how lucky we are to be alive. Please! Let our good and valued neighbor stay! Thank you for your time. Sincerely, Paul Kristan =z bt i, f` 1~~=~ file://C:\Documents%20and%20Settings\Bruce_L\Local%20Settings\Temp\GW}000O1.HT 04/02/2003 Page 1 of 1 Bruce Leach - 2331 Fourth Street endorsement From: "k" <ktouzin@earthlink.net> To: <bruce-leach@santa-monica.org> Date: 04/02/2003 7:02 PM Subject: 2331 Fourth Street endorsement CC: "K" <ktouzin@earthlink.net> Honorable members of the Santa Monica City Counsel I fully endorse and hope that the shop at 2331 Fourth street continues to operate. This store has one of the safest operating. It maintains the lowest levels of noise even during times when the store has numerous customers. This store even has a parking lot that keeps the two streets that form the corner it sits on. The staff is genuinely warm and friendly and this completes the scenario for the perfect neighborhood corner store. They should be granted the ability to operate for the next 15 years. Thank you for your time and consideration Professionally yours, Keith Touzin, CSVE, MCSE, EMT-1 Chief Radio Officer, City of Santa Monica Disaster Communications Service LA County Disaster Communications Service. Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http; www~rsoft.com). Version: 6.0.463 /Virus Database: 262 -Release Date: 3/17/03 ~~~ ' iG2 file://C:\Documents%20and%20Settings\Bruce_L\Local%20Settings\Temp\GW } 000O1:H... 04/03/2003 4/1 /03 Called @ 1:15 pm. Would like a return call today please. Marilyn Tuberman, age 85 Resident of 4th St: ------__ --- Phone:310-399-5841 > Re: Fair Market Ms. Tuberman is learning-impaired ('retarded' in her own words) and has speech difficulties as well as walking difficulties. She is opposed to closing the Fair Market and bringing in more condominiums and people into her neighborhood. She states that the owners/operators of the Market are very kind and helpful to her and often deliver her groceries/supplies because of her walking problems. She states that this is a valuable service to her and she would be bereft if it were to cease. The store is of great value to her and she would like her point of view on this subject noted. - Valarie Vogel Page 1 of 1 Bruce Leach - 4th St Markets From: <BILKO2000@aol.com> To: <bruce-leach@santa-monica.org> Date: 04/17/2003 10:39 AM Subject: 4th St Markets Asa 7 year resident of 4th Street I'm writing to express my support for the markets in their effort to maintain extended operating hours. As the recent planning commission hearing demonstrated, there is huge neighborhood support for these businesses. One of the main reasons why my neighbors and I value them so much is when we run short of something (toilet paper, milk, bananas, etc.) at 10:30pm we don't have to get in the car and drive all the way to Albertson's to satify our needs. I understand that the commission is considering limiting the market's operating hours by imposing an 8:OOpm closing time. Most days I'm not even home by 8:OOpm. Let's face it, lifestyles have changed since these codes were originally conceived -people are working longer hours and commuting further to and from work. After fighting traffic on the 405 every night I don't even want to get near my car once I'm home for the evening. I don't think anyone in the neighborhood has a problem with these markets staying open till midnight. In fact, it's precisely between the hours of 8:OOpm and midnight that these markets provide their greatest convenience to the neighborhood. I urge the commission to weigh this perspective when considering whether or not to allow these markets to continue operating in the manner we have grown accustomed to over the years. Phil Silver 2311 4th St. #207 Santa Monica 310/450-7154 (j1~4 file://C:\Documents%20and%20Settinos\Bruce L\Local%20Settings\Temp\GW;000OLH... 04/17/2003 Page 1 of 1 Bruce Leach -About the advatages of the Fair Market on fourth street in Santa Monica From: "Roeland Nuyts" <roeland.nuyts@verizon.net> To: <bruce-leach@santa-monica.org> Date: 04/16/2003 8:04 AM Subject: About the advatages of the Fair Market on fourth street in Santa Monica Dear Mr. Bruce Leach, I am writing you because I would like to ask you to keep the "fair market" on fourth street in our neighborhood open. I believe it is important to keep the market open for the following reasons: it makes our neighborhood more attractive, as a matter of fact, having the fair market close door was one of the most compelling reasons why I choose to live on fourth street in Santa Monica it provides a social function (meeting people, chat with the owners etc.) it is on walking distance which limits use of car and I don't need to worry about parking, like I would with Vons or Albertsons, both on Lincoln Blvd. I hope my email helps in convincing you to do everything in your power to help keep the fair market open! Thank you in advance for your help. Cordially, Roeland Nuyts, Ph.D. 2211 4th street, Apt# 207 Santa Monica, CA90405 +1-310-664 8798 (home) +1-323-702 1612 (cell) 5 ~ i, l i,i file://C:Documents%20and%20SettinQS~Bruce L\Local%20Settin,~s\Temp\GW}00002.H... 04/16/2003 Frank_Gruber Planning_Commission and_Corner_Grocery_Stores ~t~ 1_~c~G~;:?:~t CO/U/,1l1S ' ~' ~'~ ~~ _ .. 4 ~~. About. Frank Gruber Market Value Page 1 of 4 Send email to: FrankGruber@surtsantamonica.com "About six and a half years ago I entered this quiet and beautiful neighborhood, and operated this market in the past and I would like to operate it in the future. " -- Translation of the remarks of Hong J. Ahn, proprietor of the Mini-Mart at Seventh and Marine, at the Planning Commission meeting, April 2, 2003 By Frank Gruber It's always puzzled me how people who live in neighborhoods without corner stores typically panic at the idea of having them, while people who live in neighborhoods with comer stores panic at the idea of losing them. There is no good or bad here, no moral issue -- it's just that people like what they are used to. Since my high school years I've lived in neighborhoods with comer stores. I won't pretend to be objective. It's hard forme to imagine living somewhere where I can't walk a block or two to buy a gallon of milk or a six-pack of beer. When we have friends over for dinner, it's great to give the kids some money and send them out to buy ice cream. I recognize the attraction single-use zoning has for people. People have an instinct for order, even if in real-life they rather enjoy chaos. This is not a progressive vs. conservative, or old fashioned vs. avant-garde issue. Modernists whose politics were radical liked the order of separating functions, as do traditionalists whose architecture is conservative. Even people who live in and apparently enjoy neighborhoods made of diverse forms and functions can react negatively to the idea of more "disorder." For instance, neighbors who live on Second Street in Ocean Park, who acknowledge that they enjoy their proximity to the relative chaos of Main Street, insisted that Abby Sher, when she developed Edgemar, build a big wall to separate them from the development. `z+~` f!~Cl~ ci httn://www.surfsantamonica.com/ssm site/the lookoutrcolamns/FrankGmber/4-2003/04 1 ~ 04/15/2003 Frank Gruber Planning_Commission_and_Corner Grocery_Stores Page 2 of 4 What this separated them from was the charming "piazzetta" that Frank Gehry designed in the middle of the development. That sweet spot could have been part of their neighborhood, but now they have to walk around the block if they want to get a coffee from Peet's or an ice cream from Ben & Jerry's. What's the use of that? They still complain about noise in the parking lot. When I moved to Beverley Avenue three years ago the market at Fourth and Hollister became "my store." It's been in operation since 1925. That's fortunate, as it could not have been built even a few years later. In 1948 the City, following the trend to single-use zoning, decreed that stores in residential zones would have to close in 25 years. Fortunately by 1973, when the 25 years were up, something in the mindset had changed, and the City allowed markets to continue operation if they obtained conditional use permits. My store, along with two others in Ocean Park, the "Mini-Mart" at Seventh and Marine, and the "Fair Market" on Fourth near Pacific, now need to have their conditional use permits renewed, and for that purpose all three markets were the subject of the Apri12 Planning Commission meeting. It was interesting. The Planning Commission heard from about 20 neighbors, all of whom were in favor of allowing the markets to continue operation, without regard to zoning law limitations on store hours and the sale of alcohol. The neighbors were eloquent, speaking not only about the convenience the markets provided, but also the social benefits of having a place to bump into neighbors or to leave your keys for out-of--town guests to pick up. The commissioners received a real lesson about how zoning rules enacted purportedly for the benefit of neighbors may in fact not benefit them at all. Planning-staff wants to help the markets survive, and to this end proposed, among other things, amending the zoning law to give the Planning Commission and ultimately City Council more flexibility in adjusting impracticable zoning requirements. Planning commissioners initially had a hard time grasping the concept that sometimes actions taken and standards adopted in the past need to be revisited (as if that ever stopped them from voting down a development that was consistent with existing development standards), but ultimately came around and blessed the markets and sent them to City Council for further proceedings. City Council, however, should take a deeper look at one issue -- hours of operation. Currently, by ordinance, neighborhood stores cannot open before eight a.m. or operate after nine p.m., and the Fair Market on Fourth Street is required by its permit to close at 7:30. http://www.surfsantamonica.com/ssm site/the lookout/columns/FrankGn~her/4-?nn;/n4 na/t S/inn. Frank_Gruber Planning_Commission_and_Corner Grocery_Stores Page 3 of 4 Currently, at both mazkets on Fourth Street, the operators either ignore these restrictions or don't know they exist, and they open at seven and stay open until midnight. And it's a good thing. One of the reasons to have a local store is so that you can run out in the morning to buy milk or eggs for breakfast without starting up the car. And being open late at night, the stores also provide security for neighbors out for a walk. According to staff, there have been no complaints relating to the hours of operation of the three stores. Hopefully Ciry Council will direct staff to initiate a process for another zoning amendment that would legitimize longer hours. There are technical problems with this, because the stores are classified as "legal, nonconforming" uses that cannot be "intensified," but City Council should look into amending the underlying zoning, which is already special to Ocean Park. ~ ~ This issue of later hours, which several of the neighbors mentioned, struck a chord with Planning Commissioner Arlene Hopkins, who at one point asked staff the reasonable question whether there was any legal process available to fix the problem. While usually commissioners treat each other with exaggerated courtliness, the same tone people use when talking to known psychotics, and allow each other to wander off in whatever tangents they want to go, something snapped in Commissioner Kelly Olsen. He came down on Hopkins like a ton of glass block, accusing her, among other things, of not knowing the zoning code and wasting everyone's time by "thinking out loud." This outburst came right after Olsen had ruminated for quite some time in a reverie of his own on an irrelevant "angels on the head of a pin" type issue regarding what theoretical change in the Fair Market's operation might be sufficient to trigger the need for a special permit for selling alcohol. I'm not sure it was thinking, but it was out loud. After the meeting, Hopkins confronted Olsen on the dais. Reliable sources report that they went at it, nose to nose, in the presence of other commissioners and staff, for more than five minutes, Hopkins letting Olsen know that she didn't appreciate being lectured at. Apprently Olsen forgot that the tone the commissioners use on staff, or applicants and their representatives, or members of the public they disagree with, is not appropriate to use on other commissioners. ~~ ~ { 1 ( n httn'//www_surfsantamnnica cnm/sam cite/the lnnknnt/rnhimnc/Frank(:rnhPr/d_~(1(1~/nd (ld/1 5/x(1(12 Frank Gruber Planning_Commission_and_Corner_Grocery_Stores Page 4 of 4 The views expressed in this column are those of Frank Gruber and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of The Lookout. ,• Copyright ©1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003 surfsantamonica.com. ~toorcour All Rights Reserved. "~ etiwa ~c~ 1~1~~3 Pa e1; f Bruce Leach - Re. Fwd' Meeting with C Ciccone Esq _ _ ~_ 9 From: Barry Rosenbaum To: Bruce Leach Date: 1 /6/03 11:10AM Subject: Re: Fwd: Meeting with Drew Ciccone, Esq. Thanks for the remainder. Do we need to meet a few minutes in advance to have a mind meld? »> Bruce Leach 01/06!03 10:38AM »> Just a reminder that we have a meeting to discuss a potential text amendment regarding CUP's for the markets in the OP District tomorrow at 2:30 p.m. in the Small Conference room. ,, { Dear Mr. Leach, I am writing to implore you NOT to. force Fair Market out of our neighborhood. I've been living next door to this market for more than . 20 years and it is a huge corver,i ence - not only for me but fcr hundreds of people in the surrounding area. The store is almost constantly busy. I, like many of my neighbors, am in the store at least once a day and sometimes, twice and three times. If it weren't there, that would mean I'd have to get into my car and drive at least a mile ii rot more to find what I need. Not only is this a waste of energy resources, it's also a hardship because Z live or. a busy street !4th Street) and it often takes me 5 minutes or more to get ongoing traffic to stop long enough to let me out. Many people who frequent the store are elderly and/or don't have a car. They walk from their homes, sometimes from several blocks away because it is one of the few in the area that has basic staples. But Convenience is only a small part of why we don't want to lose Fair Market. COMMUNITY is an even greater reason. In this age of isolation and depersonalization, the people who work at Fair Market providean' even greater service. They are always friendly and ri ce. Hawk, Babu and Ray are not only our neigbho rs, but have become friends to many of us in the neighborhood. They go out of their way to be helpful. For example, if I forget to go to the bark, they'll cash a check. If I have friends coming from out of town. but I can't be home when they arrive, I leave my keys for them 'to pick up at Fair Market. If I am out running and don't have cash or. me, I can take an item and come back later to pay. They'll make sureto give the mailman my letters when I can't find a mailbox. A few times, I've inadvertently locked my gate when I didn't have my keys and one of them has hopped the fence to help me get in. There have been incidents on *_he sheet with rowdy people and the guys from the store have come out to check and make sure we're alright. I'm a single woman living alone and I know that I could call them any time if I needed help. I feel. safer because of their presence. ?,nd, they ask about me if they haven't seen me, just as they ask about other neighbors, especially the seniors -- just to check and make sure we're ok. I know they often give credit to regular customers who are a few dollars short until payday. If there's something you'd like to have and they don't stock it, they'll order i*_ for you or even start carrying it. If someone is sick or disabled, they'll help them with home delivery. And above all, that store is the center of information exchange, conversation and good cheer among neighbors. There is almost always a dog or twc tied up outside waiting for someone in the store, neighbcrs coming in and out, salutations. In short: LIFE and Connection which is what gives Santa Monica it's wonderful character and makes it a great place to live. Fair Market provides a lot more to a lot of people than just convenience. It's true that if Fair Market closed, we could find another place to shop,. even if it took more effort. But the neighborhood would be a sadder place. What we'd lose is the trust, ,tact: Veff 32~ Bav Street_ \o. I10 Santa \Ioniea, California 90405 (310) 399-3175 mutzl i e~a aol.com April 2, 2003 ~ L~ FACSI~[ILL y~Ir. Bntce Leach associate Planner City Ptauning Division, Room 212 Santa .Monica City Hull 16'} Blain Sh~cct Santa\Ion[ca, Califontia90401 Rc: C'tIP DO-009 Dear Mr. Leach: R"ith respect to the Application oFFair Market of 2225 Fourth Street in the Ocean Park neighborhood for a rariance enabling Fair 1!-Iarket to it continue operation as a gourmet specialh store and wine shop, I submit these cornrnents strongly in favor of granting any variance necessary to keep this vital, oomrnunity store open. The events of!y4onday. March 10, 2003 ilhtstt ales the importance of this particular store to m}' household and community in gencntl. I work in a hi-rise building in Century City, and at about 10 am. that day a huge black plume oFsnu>ke and fire Fllad the sky in the area near my home. As mV partner and our neighbors work during the day.. the stafTat Fair Market ttzre ut} local phone contact as I hastily created a phone tree in the watt the fire imalved our residence. The da~° clerk at Fair Market, Baboo, picked up the phone xnd simply v~alkcd outside as the Ski Fire Department sped by. "I see the smoke", Baboo told me that day, "it's south of Ocean Park (Blvd.)". The birds-eve view provided by Baboo saved myself and everyone in my phone tree a lot of stress that day. The building involved by the fire was 875 Ocean Fronl yl'alk, Venice. ~~'ith respect to the uniqueness of Fair Market's products and services I sa}' this: Fair Market specializes in selling California twines, and has better selection, quality and price than Trader Joes, a huge chain which is known for its twine values. Its bca selection is awesome. t~iy partner also says the hot coffee at Fair Market is Netter than ai the .-1rc-o at Pico & Fourth Street and their' bagels are hrou~ht in dailVFrom Santa Monica Ragel Faetort,-which sell out every morning. I have been in the store when mothers bring their children in the storz. catch up on local events, all of\shich gives Fair ly~4arket the feeling of a Tamil} meeting place, w+-here people in the community can intecac[. face-to-face. The small markets aloug I4Iain Street may also provide similar products, but parking is ahways difficult on Dlain Street, and with the big developments going in on Nlain along Bay; Bucknell and Paoifiq the parking situation is onh going ut get worse. Except for the alcohol-free Santa A4onioa F'atms on Main Street_ the other markets are primarill liquor stores, and hecause of that, the}' cannot sen•e the community function that Fair Market perfotnts. In closing. I env-ourage you to take all sups within the scope of your authority to kEEP FAIR NL~RkFT OPF,ti. vpnt t, awo Sincerel}; ' is f i, _, Jack Neff +~ ~~1~~ Fair Market Page 1 of 1 Bruce Leach -Fair Market From: "Marlowe, Brandon" <MARLOWEB@Mattel.com> To: "'bruce-leach@santa-monica.org"' <bruce-leach@santa-monica.org> Date: 04/02/2003 9:12 AM Subject: Fair Market Good Morning Mr. Leach - I read a notice today at the Fair Market on Fourth Street which indicated that its survival is in question due to zoning. Is this correct? If so, I am writing in support of maintaining the Fair Market. The Fair Market is an example of community in Santa Monica that must be preserved. I urge you to consider that this is an opportunity to do the right thing. These opportunities are the greatest thing that happens to us - a chance to exert our influence and use our better judgement toward a better city -one that is consistent with our goal of promoting community while resisting the forces of gentrification and blind development. Almost daily I enjoy patronizing Fair Market and engaging in talk with-the owners and customers. The difference between that and the sterility of AM/PM is too depressing to think about. I would. hate to think a developer is somehow behind this. Thanks for your time and consideration. Brandon Marlowe 420 Pico Bouelvard # 305 Santa Monica ~~"" I ji3 Page 1 of 1 Bruce Leach - re hearing on the Fair Market, 4th Street in Ocean Park . ~ ~ - From: Daphne Dennis <ddennis@weho.org> To: "'brute-leach@santa-monica.org"' <brute-leach@santa-monica.org> Date: 04/02/2003 9:44 AM Subject: re hearing on the Fair Market, 4th Street in Ocean Park Mr. Leach--I am unable to attend the hearing tonight about the Fair Market in the 2200 block of 4th Street in Ocean Park, but I wanted to express my hope that it will continue in its location as an important neighborhood service. My family and I live around the corner on 6th Street and use the market several times per week. I'm not writing to urge the continued operation because it's convenient for me to stop in while walking the dog to grab milk or a banana. I'm writing because the Fair Market's extension of credit to many neighbors on fixed incomes is a crucial service which should be considered in the process of review of its approval to operate. I'm the Social Services Manager for the City of West Hollywood, so I see first-hand the difficulty people on fixed incomes are having with making ends meet. When it's the end of the month and the benefit check has not arrived, folks have the opportunity to secure a few essentials at the Market to tide them over. It's the kind of neighborhood gesture that no Vons or Albertson's would ever make. It's an wonderful addition to our neighborhood to have a "corner store"--the people. who work there are friendly, reliable, and look out for their neighbors. I urge the approval to continue operation. Thank you--Daphne Dennis 2240 6th Street Santa Monica 90405 323 848 6478 (work) 310 396 5047 (home) ,,~ (;1~4 Page 1 of 1 Bruce Leach -Fair Market From: "Jeremy Edney" <jjedney@hotmail.com> To: <bruce-leach@santa-monica.org> Date: 04/02/2003 10:07 AM Subject: Fair Market Dear Mr. Leach, I have been part of the Santa ihonica community for nearly 3 years, residing at 4th St. and Bay. St. Yesterday evening I went to the Fair Market to buy milk and was flabergasted to discover, due to zoning issues, that the Fair Market is scheduled to be closed; a strange feeling washed over me at the thought. It was a mixture of anger, sadness and frustration. The Fair Market has been part of our community for a long period of time and I cannot imagine the neighbourhood without it. Certainly other stores may carry the same items, in some cases they are even cheaper, but a discussion of products and prices belies the true nature of the Fair Market: in the time I have been living here the employees of the Market have become good friends and the store has become a staple in my daily routine. When I drive by I wave at the employees and I am always met with a warm, friendly smile. I am writing to ask that you do not take this away from the community - it is an elemental part of our fabric. Thank you kindly, Jeremy Edney 2015 4th St. Apt. 6 Santa Monica, CA 90405 310.314.8284 Protect your PC -get McAfee.com VirusScan Online http:J[clinic.mcafee.comJclinic(ibuy(campaign.asp?cid 3963. Page 1 of 1 Bruce Leach -Fair Market From: <NancyMilholland@aol.com> To: <bruce-leach@santa-monica.org> Date: 04/01/2003 11:40 PM Subject: Fair Market Dear Bruce, can you imagine the increase in local traffic if all the Fair Market and other local store customers are forced to DRIVE through the streets of Santa Monica for a headache remedy; emergency kitty-litter, or cream for morning coffee? Why exacerbate an already clogged street system by zoning out of existence a viable, much-adored and CONVENIENT store!? Seriously, in this day and age, a local reliable and 'walking distance' store is not only convenient, but it underscores community bonding, keeps the neighborhood alive and vital, and supports a valuable keystone in the American economy: the small business owner. As I understand it, the problem lies in a zoning technicality, let's not succumb to an avoidable situation where a good thing is voted out or'red-taped' out of existence. Don't give Santa Monica a bad name by including it in the roster of communities that turn their backs on good, honest and solid businesses because of zoning laws that no one can relate to because they don't impact on the mundane, real, concrete and pertinent issues that the citizens of the community face on a daily basis. Zoning ordinances are, after all, superimposed laws to strengthen the infrastructure of a community -the intent surely is not to weaken the neighborhood from the inside out. Make Santa Monica proud and work through this in such a way that supports your local business person, that respects the image of this city as a pedestrian community, and whose government officials are for the PEOPLE not far the strictures of immutable red tape. There are also numerous customers of Fair Market who depend on it due to their physical disabilities, or are an age where driving is no longer an option (thank God), and for people like myself on a limited budget that simply have to use a smaller store because I can't stand to go to a Super Market and actually see all the products I can't afford. On a personal note, the owner of the store is one of the most devoted business operators I have ever met. He has always put the customer first, has gone out of his way to provide a great selection at reasonable prices, and is always working at improving the store and its image in the neighborhood. Have you been to Fair Market? It is not a cheesy, run-down, litter-strewn, hangout for deadbeats and loiterers. It is a great establishment and it would be a huge blow to this part of town if it were to be run-out of business. We all love it and want it to STAY!!!! Nancy Milholland ~~~ s.11 ~ Kathy Beres 2221 4th St. #A Santa Monica, CA 90405 310-581-7997 Bruce Leach City Planning Division 1685 Main St. Santa Monica, CA 90401 Re: The Fair Market Dear Bruce, I am writing to express my support for keeping the Fair Market open and operating under its current management. Obviously, the market is a convenience to the neighborhood. From bagels and coffee to laundry detergent and fine wine, the tiny market carries most of what I need so that I rarely have to shop elsewhere. Just as important, the market represents a gathering place where neighbors can say hello and get to know each other. This contributes greatly to the sense of community that makes our neighborhood so friendly_and pleasant. Moreover, I feel safer knowing that the operators of the Fair Market act as the eyes and ears of our neighborhood. They run a tidy and orderly business with zero tolerance for any patron who would cause a disturbance. Given that my cottage is directly adjacent to the market, I am particularly sensitive to any noise and traffic that could be generated by the market, and I've never had cause to complain. The Fair Market is a tremendous asset to our neighborhood, and the operators are our friends. It would be a great loss to our community and to myself personally if we lost our Fair Market. I hope you'll do what you can to keep it in business. Sincerely, Kathy Beres ~s ~ ~ I 1 "1 Page 1 of 1 Bruce Leach - FAYR MARKET ;;;.~.: From: <blbrown@earthlink.net> To: <bruce-leach@santa-monica.org> Date: 04/01/2003 7:37 PM Subject: FAIR MARKET Mr. Bruce Leach, I was truly upset when I was told that the Fair Market might be closed due to an ordinance technicality. As a resident of Santa Monica for many years, I have been a loyal customer of the Fair Market. Although I do not currently live as close to the market, I find myself often bypassing Albertsons on Lincoln to support the neighborhood market. I lived on Ashland & 4th for many years & now live on Euclid & Ocean Park. I love that we still have available a market in the area where the owners are friendly & will go out of their way to help! Please DO NOT close the Fair Market. It would be like losing an old friend! Thank you for your time. Beth Brown 310.450-4089 ~~ s 11~ _,_,. ._,__.. ,.~ ~~_ ~~..... r. ..~ ~m___~~~~n nnnnn rr nninni~nno Page 1 of 1 Bruce Leach -Fair Market ~~~: • _M From: croscroggie <scroggie.scroggie@verizon.net> To: <bruce-leach@santa-monica.org> Date: 04/01/2003 10:31 PM Subject: Fair Market CC: Harrison RichardsWise <art.dog@verizon.net> Dear Bruce, You people need to stop ruining the city of Santa Monica. We live on 4th street and are very loyal customers of Fair Market. We frequent Fair Market daily, be it for anything from early morning coffee, formula or baby medicine late at night, to nice interaction locally with fellow members of our neighborhood. We had no say or vote in your proposed city ordinance or zoning. With all the changes the city keeps making, the small beach town atmosphere has vanished. Fair Market is an answer to fighting through the intersection at Ocean Park & Lincoln or the twenty minute drive to Vons on Lincoln and Broadway, from 4th and Pico, due to all the traffic congestion. Please stop over-planning Santa Monica. Please leave our neighbor market in our neighborhood. Support the survival of Fair Market at tonight's (04/02/03) town meeting Sincerely, )ohn, Carlin and Pete Glorieux. FW: Fair Market - 4th St., Santa Monica, Ca 90405 Page 1 of 1 Bruce Leach - FW: Fair Market - 4th St., Santa Monica, Ca 90405 ,~ ~--~:; From: "Hale, Carolyn S (Sue), RTSLS" <halecs@att.com> To• <bruce-leach@santa-monica.org> Date: 04/01/2003 L27 PM Subject: FW: Fair Market - 4th St., Santa Monica, Ca 90405 -----0riginal Message-- Prom: Hale, Carolyn 5 (Sue), RTSLS Sent: Tuesday, April Ol, 2003 9:54 AM To.: brute-leach@santa-monica.org Subject: Fair Market - 4th St., Santa Monica, Ca 90405 Mr. Leach, My family and I own and live at 2229 4th Street....next door to Fair Market and we request that the Planning Commission approve the Conditional Use Permit. Fair Market is a great convince to my 82 year old mother and my disabled brother. We have lived here about 13 years and we visit the market 3 or 4 times a day. We value the service provided to the neighborhood by Fair Market...so please approve the Conditional Use Permit. Thank You! AT&T Business Solutions Manager halecs@ems.att.com 310-396-1935 Office 760-875-7968 Fax 310-291-4321 Cell ;~~~ I ~!~ J ole0.bmp i ~ _~ «<http;!(www Ipservlces att.comlbackbpne»>/ AT&T Backbone Map «<httpa/ipnetwork.bgtmo ip.att net/»>/ AT&T IP Network Performance Site _. „`. .._ ,,,_ .. ... ... .. .. .. ,.. .,r .,,,..nn _...__ ~T____, ~~ra nnnni n nniniinnn~ Page 1 of 1 Bruce Leach -Fair Market ~~,:_._ From: <Walkpix@aol.com> To: <bruce-leach@santa- Date: 04/01/2003 9:23 AM Subject: Fair Market Dear Bruce I just heard that the Fair Market might be closed because of some zoning issuee, and I'm writing to let you know how upsetting this would be. I have lived in Ocean Park for over 20 years. I started going to the Fair Market because it has the best price on milk in Santa Monica. But it is truly a neighborhood market, a local institution that improves the quality of life in the neighborhood. The owenrs are genuinely friendly and personable and I would truly misss the market if it were to close. Best regards, Gary Walkow ~» ui t 1 ~ ~ __ ..~._ ..,_,. .,.,_,... .. ..-. r~. ,.,......, ,. ~.,. ~l...n nnnnn rrm nnrni innn~ Page 1 of 1 Bruce Leach -Fair Market ~~ ~. From: "Paul & Anita Murphy" <murphtone@earthlink.net> To: <bruce-leach@santa-monica.org> Date: 04/01/2003 8:31 AM Subject: Fair Market This is an email in support of Fair Market on 4th Street. I've been a customer there for the last twelve years since I became a Santa Monica resident. Not only do I consider the workers at Fair Market friends, I feel they are a very important part of the Ocean Park Community. Closing Fair Market would not only be a detriment to the community, but it would demonstrate bad judgement on the part of the City Planning Division. I'd be happy to talk with you if you'd like to contact me. Dr. Paul R. Murphy _. ..~,_ .., _,. ..., _,. ,-. ._. .,. .......... .. .... .l...ii nnnn, r. nnrni r~nn~ Page 1 of 1 Sruce Leach -CUP 00-003 2225 Fourth Street ~~ From: scix@adelphia.net To: <bruce-leach@santa-monica.org> Date: 04/01/2003 9:02 AM Subject: CUP 00-009 2225 Fourth Street Mr Leach, I'm writing this e-mail in support of continued operation of the market at 2225 Fourth Street. I live just around the corner from this market, and have lived within walking distance for about 30 years. I've shopped there all that time. The market: 1. Is convenient -Saves car trips, reduces polution, etc. 2. Is a godsend when I'm sick. I live alone, and it's great to be able to get food without an auto trip. 3. Gives our neighborhood a little sense of community -this is one of the few places I meet my neighbors. 4: Represents no nuisance This market is as much a part of our neighborhood as anything else. It would be a great shame if it couldn't continue. We preserve our architectural landmarks. This is a social landmark we should preserve. Steve Iglehart 405 Strand Street (310) 399 8511 sci@ieee.org ~~ (a 12 ~. ,,..,., ,,,..,. ,~..,,.~_..~.---`^--~-- ,~r-__mina,.»:_~a-r~....,..~~zznnnnni a n~inii~nnZ Message Page 1 of 1 Sruce Leach -The Fair Market , _ From: "Marcy Sneep" <marcy@sizeappeal.com> To: <bruce-leach@ci.santa-monica.ca.us> Date: 04/01/2003 9:07 AM Subject: The Fair Market I was very surprised by decision of the city to close the Fair Market on 4m Street. One of the reasons why I chose the apartment where I live today was because of the convenience of having a market in walking distance from my home. For what seems like forever, the Fair Market has served me and the residents of this neighborhood providing a great place to pick up milk, eggs or the daily paper. Almost all of the customers arrive on foot, including me! They are people who live in the neighborhood and parking should not be an issue. Please let me know if there is a petition circulating. I am sure that everyone in my complex will be happy to sign it! Thank you, Marcy Sneep Director, Operations SizeAppeal, Inc. T: 310.396.3693 F: 310.396.3074 marcy@sizeappeal.com p;~ ~~24 _. ,,...~ ,, ,,.,. ,,,, .,..,,-..~.-- `T'---- r~r _,...ioi~no,.««:_~.a T,......~C\x7l nnnM a M/M /7M; 3211 Fourth St. Santa Monica, CR 90405 March 30, 2003 Bruce Leach, Rssociate Planner Re: CUP 00-009 - City Planning Division 1685 Main Street, Room 212 ~` Santa Monica, CR 90401 - Re: 2225 Fourth St., Fair Market "' Dear Mr. Leach: 1 urge you to please approve the Conditional Use Permit for our neighborhood market here at 2225 Fourth Street. 1 lice one block away from Fair Market and walk there almost every day to purchase things I need. The availability of this market makes it possible for people in this neighborhood to avoid driving to the market. This convenience is one of the reasons 1 purchased my home in this neighborhood.. It is an important community resource and a meeting place for so many of my neighbors. Please help us to preserve this important service that we aBl value. Thank you for your consideration. Yours truly, Sheila Calpin ~; ~: C=12 5 Page i of 1 Bruce Leach -Fair Market from: Bill Beazley To: <bruce-leach@santa-monica.org> Date: 03/31/2003 1:15 PM Subject: Fair Market March 30, 2003 Dear Bruce, Thank you for the opportunity to speak with you last week regarding the zoning questions facing the Fair Market on 4th Street in Santa Monica. You were very generous with your time and took care to give me a full picture of the situation, and I appreciate that. I am writing to reiterate to the Planning Council my distress upon learning that the Fair Market is slated to be closed. As you know, the market is a great convenience to people like myself, disabled and elderly citizens, who are unable to drive and rely on its easy and nearby street access. In addition, the store is impeccably clean and the operators are extremely helpful and friendly. They even make special orders and do door to door deliveries to customers who require it. I feel it would be a great injustice to punish the store operators and the community, which as you said has expressed a lot of support for the continued operation of this store, simply because the owner of the building has not complied with his promises regarding zoning ordinances. Since I can see no concrete harm that the store or violation of said ordinances is causing and, to the contrary, a very tangible benefit that we all receive from the presence of this store, I implore the Planning Council to find a way to resolve this matter so that the Fair Market may remain in our community. Sincerely, Betsy Beazley ~~ x;126 rr_.n~_rr~____.___._ni~n__~ninnc+_..t___m_____ rrr___ininnn _...___~~r_____~~rni nnnnn rrm n~nir~nno Page I of 1 Bruce Leach -Fair Market .~ From: <Meemer221@aol.com> To: <bruce-leach@santa-monica.org> Date: 03/31/2003 7:30 PM Subject: Fair Market Dear Mr. Leach: We understand that the City of Santa Monica intends to close Fair Market located on 4th Street. As long time residents of Ocear~ Park and patrons of this shop we are deeply concerned about this. We find this store to not only be convenient, but one of the most pleasant and clean local establishments in the area. This is due to it's pride of ownership and it's friendly and helpful staff. Not only do they provide the usual quick-stop sundries, they gladly cater to special requests, not to mention they stock one of the finest collection of wines, at the most reasonable prices. In our opinion this is the type of small locally owned business that makes Santa Monica as a city stand out. Please don't close this shop! Sincerely, Michele & Michael Stark 2441 3rd Street, #5 Santa Monica, CA 90405 zr,=, ~.s i 1 `~ 4;1P~//("~\71n~~~,.~P+~t~o/~lla,~A~/~(1CPttinac\Rrn~a T\T nrala/~nRattinac\Tamn\C:WlOOn(11 H (14/O1/2On~ Page 1 of 1 Bruce Leach -Please don't close the Fair Market From: "Tom Ito" <itot@uci.edu> To: <bruce-leach@santa-monica.org> Date: 03/31/2003 3:18 PM Subject: Please don't close the Fair Market Dear Mr. Leach, I just learned that the city is pushing to close the Fair Market on 4th st. The Fair Market is one of the primary reasons why I moved into my apartment at 2211 4th st. This small market located in a residential area gave the area a small town feel. I think that it's a great idea to have small markets catering to local residents. l~ s also incredibly convenient to be able to walk to the market to get groceries at any time. Thier customer service is impeccable, and I feel like I've made friends with the merchants. This really makes me feel like I'm apart of the community of Santa Monica. Please reconsider the possible closing of this wonderful little market. The zoning/parking issues should be a minor issue, especially since most of their cutomers are within walking distance to the market. I don't believe that the market increases the local traffic or puts a strain on the parking situation in the area. Please let me know if I can personally do anything to keep this market open. thank you, Tom Ito 2211 4th st. #206 Santa Monica, CA 90405 ri,..iin.~r.,.,........~_...oi ~n..,~.,toi ~nca..:..,.,.\>?.,,,.0 7\7v.~.,to/~nCorr;,,rt~\Tcm..\r\EIlMM1 A M!21/~M~ 2311 4t~ Street ~~' Santa Monica, CA 90405 = -- Mr. Bruce Leach City Planning Division 1685 Main Street Santa Monica, CA 90401 ~: Ccnuit:onal i;se Pz;m:Y CC-CC9 26 March 2003 Dear City Planners, As a resident of Fourth Street, I would like to voice concerns about the continued use of the grocery store at 2225 Fourth Street. Although it is convenient indeed to have such an establishment nearby, the fact that liquor is sold in the market is a big problem. On a daily basis we witness transients in the park across the street openly drinking alcoholic beverages purchased at the markets (there are actually two within a block and a half of each other). It has become commonplace to see drunks sleeping soundly on the benches in the park at all hours of the day. On several occasions I have seen transients enter the market, buy alcohol, and then hand over the purchased items to youngsters in exchange for money. Please consider the quality of life of the tax-paying residents of the nearby market and the effect that the sale of alcoholic beverages has on the neighborhood. Thank you for your attention. Sincerely, Peter Sierra ~~ 0129 Bruce Leach, Associate Planner City Planning Div., 1685 Main St., rm.212 Santa Monica, CA 90401 March 24, 2003 RE: CUP 00-009 for 2225 FOURTH STREET Dear Sir, Please don't take away our neighborhood convenience store. I am just one of many seniors who frequent the Fair Market at 2225 4th. Street, in the Ocean Park area of Santa Monica. One of the attractions which led to the purchase of my condo five years ago, in this particular neighborhood, was the fact that there was a little supermarket close by. There are many other people I'm sure, like myself, who have no car to get to other, larger stores in the vicinity. To be able to walk just a short block away and 5nd a clean, neatly- kept store with a variety of food, drink, and kitchen necessities to chose from is a blessing. The owner and his small staff are honest and well-mannered and an integral part of our little community. I would also like the Commision to note that the outside of the store is kept as clean and tidy as any of the residential buildings on the block and is by no means an eyesore for the neighbors. The store hours do not effect me, personally, but the fact that this is a "convenience" store implies it should conveniently be allowed to open eazlier and close later than the regulation hours of other stores. Thank you for your kind consideration to this matter. eB ~~/° Beryl Hart La Padura 2025 Fourth St., 108A Santa Monica, CA 90405 ;,~''~' C. ~' ~ March 26, 2003 Bruce Leach: Associate Planner ,; +: City Planning Division 1685 Main Street, #212 Santa Monica, CA 90401 RE: CUP 00-009 Dear Mr. Leach: The neighborhood store on 4`" Street is my neighbor, and has been for ten years. During this time, I have seen no disadvantage to its presence, only convenience and friendliness. Haqua and his employees have always been friendly: they know all of us in the area, and inevitably stock the one indispensable item I have forgotten or used up. Any alternative to Albertsons is welcome! Over the years, we have discussed neighborhood, local and global politics, and most recently (this is the truth!) a famous Indian poet, Rabindranath Tagore. I raced home to research him on the Internet, and had another cultural window fly open. When my nineteen-year old daughter was much younger, I felt safe sending her on errands to the store, and I can remember only one occasion on which there was a drunk ahead of me in line. To my knowledge, there are no loiterers as there are outside the supermarket, and even on Main Street at Surf Liquor. It would be a shame to lose this asset! Sincerely yours, ~~~ Susan Cope 2312 6a' Street dt2 Santa Monica, CA 90405 ~: ~ r 13 221 6 FOURTH STREET HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION 221 6 FOURTH STREET SANTA MONICA, CA 90405 c ~~ March 26, 2003 -- Bruce Leach, Associate Planner , _, Re: CUP 00-009 Gity Planning Division 1685 Main Street, Room 212 Santa Monica, CA 90401 ~" 12e: 2225 Fourth Street, "Fair Market" We strongly urge the Planning Commission to approve the Conditional Use Permit for the neighborhood market at 2225 Fourth Street. Our building is located directly across the street from this market and, as residents, we value the service provided to the neighborhood. It is an important community resource to have such markets within walking distance. They add to the pedestrian-friendly nature of the Ocean Park neighborhood. The Fair Market has been the central hub of our community for generafions. It's the place where our neighbors meet, and it's the place our elderly can walk to. We need this store to continue. We also support the approval of permit{s} for the market at 2331 4th Street. We further urge the Planning Commissioners to find ways in which the existing neighborhood markets in Ocean Park can be permanently grand-fathered, so that they are no longer considered 'non-conforming' causing unnecessary continuing review of their status. Yours truly, '` ~~ ~ ,~ ' z~ 2216 Fourth Street Homeowners Association Brett Briggs, President ,~ ~ (;13 2 Page 1 of 1 Bruce Leach -Fair Market At 2225 4th. Street From: Clancy John Imislund <clancy1066@yahoo.com> To: <Bruce-Leach@santa-monica.org> Date: 03/27/2003 9:05 AM Subject: Fair Market At 2225 4th. Street Hello Bruce, On my little trip this morning to the "Fair Market", a place I and many others visit everyday for coffee, water, or otherwise convenient supply or snack, I was disturbed to read something concerning a "hearing" that is occur April 2nd, 2003. The subject, the closure of the store. That was very unsettling forme and many members of this Santa Monica community. That market is a special place forme and many others; Not to mention that we are very close to the entirety of the store's active roster. It is ideally located and it is a main hub for many of our everyday needs. The fact that it everi exists where it does is a major reason myself and many others have chosen to live in this area. Whether or not there is some zoning law that maybe in question, consider the value of the store's services to our community. We would greatly appreciate your support. If something could be done to preserve this legitimate business and preserve it's convenience for us, I think people would remember your name should it ever come up in a situation where you might need their assistance. We are proliferating the message of the store's potential closing to others in this area. Also, a few of us will be attending the hearing and speaking on behalf of the market and its proprieters should that be required. Thank you for your time, Clancy John Imislund Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo!_Platinum -Watch CBS' NCAA March Madness, live onyout~r desktop! Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Platinum -Watch CBS' NCAA March Madness, li~e,on you_r_ deslcton! '~; t?133 filP•//C~\T)ncnmPntc~/7(lanA%~n.CethinaeARmce T\Tnral~/~(1SettinacATam,~A(1U71(1l1(llll AT !12/7'7/7(1(12 Page 1 of 1 Bruce Leach -Fair Market From: <JoDresner@aol.com> To: <Bruce Leach@santa monica.org>, <Bruce-Leach@Santa-monica.org> Date: 03/27/2003 12:13 PM Subject: Fair Market Dear Mr. Bruce Leach, It has recently come to my attention that the Fair Market in Santa Monica is in danger of being shut down. I am writing tc ycu with the hopes of making the City aware ofjust how important this market and it s employees are to our neighborhood. They are a part of a community and offer a valuable service. I have been a resident of Santa Monica for the past four years and readily call it home. There is such a great sense of pride and comfort to our community and I would hate for that to be altered. I am also a real estate agent and have worked in this area for the past five years and do believe that this Market only adds value to the area and it's residents. Please take this into consideration and I thank you in advance for your assistance. It is greatly appreciated. Joann Dresner Re/Max Beach Cities Cell: (310) 713-8982 -. - ... 1 ~ ,'~ .~ " 1 $ file://C.\Documents%20and%20Settines\Bruce L\Local%20Settin~s\Temp\GW}000O1.H... 03/27/2003 ' ~ C>~-h.. ~;~ ~ ~ ~I G`L n C~ L ..~ ~-j ~G-"v./bZ'V~/~-~~'"m--.,~ J~U/~'~~'~ i ~, ~ M ~ 1 ~\ ~~ Pl.Zin Nt/"vi ~~ j ~iti""\ i~v"C~vt''i~^ /, / -t..._. ~•-=^tC L.Q.. /~~ ~-'lQ.. , v v - v ~ / Ohl ~/////~ /// II /~ I/ /"/(~, (.~ (/~ ~ p _ / : ~f% tel. 'Y'...~~~ V~ 1 \' /~l/l.. L^ l 1 ' - % ~ ` ~~-LLT C'+- J ~ !/ !? // /J ~~~~ r% ~~ ~ ~ ~~ s.. ~ it v. ~~ ~~ ,,vi'?' `LI Irk1 .~ ~~ ~' " ~~~ ~ /~ ~ ~;;-t C, l%l v ~- , /-~ ~~`l~~ ~~s-s~ ~ J~ -~ ~ - a -~ i~ ~._ ~-~~ ~ZtS ~ ~~ -, ~'T ~'~35 ;:. T __, _ Bruce Leach - Re. Notice of Public Heann~ re Fair Market Page 1 From: Bruce Leach To: JeffLWms@aol.com Subject: Re: Notice of Public Hearing re Fair Market Thank you for your comments on this application. Your letter will be given to the Planning Commission for their consideration. The Staff Report contains background and detailed analysis of regarding this market and the nearby Best Market. Both Staff Reports are available under the Planning Commission Agenda menu (4/2/03) on the City's web site, W W W.santa-monica.org. »> <JeffLWms@aol.com> 03/26/03 09:20PM »> Dear Bruce, I am writing regarding a Notice of Public Hearing I received regarding the convenience market located at 2225 4th Street in Santa Monica, known as the Fair Market. I live across the street from the Fair Market at 2120 4th Street. I work from home and I go to that market at least twice a day. Many of my neighbors frequent the Fair Market on a very regular basis also. In addition to the inconvenience that would result if the Fair Market were put out of business, it would be very unfair and a disservice to our community. The Fair Market is owned by a gentleman I know as "Hawk". He has two employees, Baboo and Ray. All three men are three of the kindest, most helpful, positive people I know. They are an asset to our community and they enhance the quality of life we enjoy here. I would be very disappointed and upset if any steps were taken to put the Fair Market out of business. Thank you for taking the time to read this e-mail and for your consideration of my opinion. Please feel free to contact me if you would like any more information or would like to discuss this matter further. Sincerely, Jeff L Williams, Esq. ATTORNEY AT LAW 2120 4th Street, Suite 18 Santa Monica, CA 90405 Telephone: (310) 452-2190 Facsimile: (310) 452-6134 ~~ ~~~~ March 25, 2003 Bruce Leach, Associate Planner e ~_~ Re: CUP 00-009 ~~~ City Planning Division 1685 Main Street, Room 212 Santa Monica, CA 90401 _ _ Dear Mr. Leach I wish to say that I hope the City of Santa Monica will grant a continuation of the conditional use permit for the grocery store located at 2225 4a` Street, Santa Monica. This store has been in operation at this location for at least 50 years and is a very valuable resource for the immediate community, I which I am a resident. I use this store, on average, twice a week and often more frequently. The loss of this facility would pose a real hardship on the neighborhood residents who use this business on a daily basis. No longer being able to walk to get one's groceries and having to drive instead to the nearest supermarket would be extremely unfortunate and would degrade the quality of life in this section of Santa Monica. Thank you for your attention and consideration. Sincerely, David A. McKellar March 26, 2003 L> ;~.. Bruce Leach: Associate Planner City Planning Division = 1685 Main Street, #212 :,; Santa Monica, CA 90401 RE: CUP 00-009 Dear Mr. Leach: The neighborhood store on 4`h Street is my neighbor, and has been for ten years. During this time, I have seen no disadvantage to its presence, only convenience and friendliness. Haqua and his employees have always been friendly: they know all of us in the area, and inevitably stock the one indispensable item I have forgotten or used up. Any alternative to Albertsons is welcome! Over the years, we have discussed neighborhood, local and global politics, and most recently (this is the truth!) a famous Indian poet, Rabindranath Tagore. I raced home to research him on the Internet, and had another cultural window fly open. When my nineteen-year old daughter was much younger, I felt safe sending her on errands to the store, and I can remember only one occasion on which there was a drunk ahead of mein line. To my knowledge, there are no loiterers as there are outside the supermarket, and even on Main Street at Surf Liquor. It would be a shame to lase this asset! Sincerely yours, Susan Cope 2312 6`" Street #2 Santa Monica, CA 90405 s<s; (i 1 S March 31, 2003 Santa Monica City Council _ EJ 1685 Main Street - - Santa Monica, CA 90401 Reference: 2225 Fourth Street Conditional Use Permit 00-009 Members: I write to request the approval of the CUP 00-009, to allow the continued use of an existing non-conforming neighborhood grocery store in a residential district. This store provides a huge convenience to all local residents, does not disturb the neighborhood, and Pm sure provides the city with additional revenue. Please do not take this convenience away from the citizens of Santa Monica. It would be a great disservice by the council members. Best regards, .%.;, Marcus J. Miceli 2035 4a' Street Santa Monica, CA 90405 310-314-0665 r ~ ~ ~ 4 2 J y~_y. G T ~ L T~s ~ ~ ~.. ~ zm Y 'u ~ rv2 4 . roe 'a . 5 w''I : b.« . ~i v, ce ~. 2Q c~, .,, ~~a ~~~~ ~ ~° 0~ ~o s~~~ I `the ` ~~-~ ~~e ~e~~w~gQ o~ rt e ~~~~ ~o(t ~e ~-C ~ZZ5 ~~~c~`~ ~~~~ \ ~ ~J~ 41Qv~~s v~ g ~~ ~ ~O~e- ~Y~~e ~ S ~-~-~e W ~ I ~ ~ ~ . 2 W~ Y~Q v~ ~Ck~t o~~ ~. ~~~ ~~ ~~u -fi~~ ~ ~~~~ ~~~ ~~. ~i~ ~e ~~~ ~~ ~- ~~~^~-mss ~~~- ~' ~ ~~~~ ~~G~ ~5~ CM~~~ 521 Strand St. Santa Monica CA 90405 Page 1 of 1 Bruce Leach -Fair Market From: Paul Kristan To: <bruce-leach@santa-monica.org> Date: 04/02/Z003 3:20 PM Subject: Fair Market Dear Bruce, in a world rife with war and intercultural misunderstanding, and in a city with the onus of a car culture long ago forced down its' unsuspecting throat, Fair Market stands as a humble island of hope: a small business where people meet people. A small business to which one can walk and actually interact with members off his own community. What a concept! The City of Santa Monica, however well-intended, would be doing a grave disservice to not only a very decent man and business owner, but to the many residents of Ocean Park who have access to to an efficient and friendly store and who take a great deal of everyday human comfort patronizing this testament to the American Dream. Fair Market stands as proof that there is hope. There is hope that a humble man can come to a free country, set roots and nurture a business that serves his community in a joyful, unassuming, and most vital way. There is hope that in our hectic, overly modernized urban lives, we can actually walk in and shop, rekindling the vanishing tradition of human connection and reminding ourselves just how lucky we are to be alive. Please! Let our good and valued neighbor stay! Thank you for your time. Sincerely, Paul Kristan + r;. t ~~ file://C:\Documents%20and%20Settings\Bruce L\Local%20Settings\Temp\G~V}OOOOI.HT 04/02;2003 LRId OP~~~~' P'. PERR'f r, PHONE; 310 394 9831 April 20~ 2000 Tom! :310-~`J4-4?5?'3 LAW OFFICES OF R ® ~ A LR ~ ® P Hpr ?0'00 1?.54 No .014 P.02 R ~ 1333 04EAN A17ENUE SANTA M6NICA, CA 80401 FAX; 310 394 4294 To: The Honorable Planning Commission I support the continued operation of the Fair Market at 2225 4"' Street in Santa Monica. The market provides a great service and convenience to our neighborhood, especially to our residents who do not drive. Please approve the conditional use permit. Sincerely, ~ ~ 1~~ ~ ~~ Address Zsvo ~(~ t1" S~- ~~„~r~~~,,;rh fin- ~~5- 227 ~s~~ ~~~ ~ ~~~,.~~, s e ~~°-~-- ~~; Z ~ , ~~- ~S ~. 222 ~' S'-f- . 9.. ~°~ ~~' ~ ~ , ~~°~ ~ ~ ~ ^ ~~ yo ~ ~ ~~ e`\ o .. a: ~~ f'l42 ~1~/ - ~~ `~ ~l~~n~, Gil Name n~~,t ~~~ U\ Sohn ~~~ ~s r~ Grey, 1~~Gn,A~-h~ Address 1 Z izo ~-~ ~ ~~, Srt,~. 2~~ .~ r`- ~~ . -~~`Z5 ~ ~ i ~ -{{ ~~ ~J ~~~ ~-~ ~ - USA ~{ ,C~4 9 aa~/ Sc~l '~~~cl~G .~~. ~ ~~S.h,.('~;. ~10~{0~ l2~ i ~ ~~ S ~-- ~l/h Ci/f-(~( (~ y U S ~ ~- ~ ' 2~o Z ~`~-i. S"T .S./h fwd ~/ ~ ~ ~ _ a~~y s~ ~ sip d~a y, ~~= ; 143 i' Name ~~'~ ~~~~ - ~-: r~~ ~a~e~-~ C~~~ 1~ ~ -~Q~~i/, ` ,.~ 6 ~ ~ ~ ,~ .a` f; _~ Address ~/~ /7~u~ ~~ `~ ~~ ~~~C ~Si ~~f14 ~G ACS zz~ ~ ~~ts~-~w`~ ~ ~c~9aa~ ~~3 ~-y ~ ~- ~ ~ ~ ~0 4~~ ~ ~ N"~ ~=t1~~ z4-~,~ - ~~,~ ~ o ~ c I ~ y~S~'.`~ S ,~a,1., ,S l~t~ r'o y~r 2~ i7 Wit`' Str~~~ S h'! Gl~ ~~ ~~l( (~-~t S~~ «b`~ . C S~~ ,~^.~-; ~~ g4ry~ c r+ ~(cF ~~ (:P4:1 ~- AFC', C Name 2Z ~ ~ ~k(„ ~3-. ~f 6~ ~~i C1~~~ ~/ Address ~~ ~~~~r N~ `20~~NG_ rc ~(b~ P~.~,t~fi~, S~"~"~ SM 9~Yc~S ~(~~ ~~5~ Z3~ ~~~.~~ ~~,. i'~~-~~ 1. 5'T 5,~i~ C~ TG'Y~~~ ~aa ~.t.,,~-,~ ~v~ ~ ~~- ~ 9oyc~ r c' S Z G yci S~ Sf S~ ~oc~ d ;2 0 ~ ~7 ~- sue' ~~ ~~ t.I ~ ;- ~.~11 ~~~` ~ icy S ~~~ ~o~of 2~Z ~ ~, e.~ S.l ~ 3 S vt~ ~ c~ ~! oSJ 2 ~ ~_~ ~c--~i C rte. ~' ~ ~ .S, /1 ~ u ~ ~ s' ~IQ r~Ct> l+`~~ CaAtiiTF4 h`lC i~t' ~ ('g Cle ~iC.i ~= ws ( Sy ~ LJ ~i~~~7 ~~~~~~ ~~~'-(~-(C~l ~~1~ 5 ~ ~-~ Name ~~ ,, ~nw(~7~A,v~i ~~ t ~~~ _~ ,~ ~~ -y~q ~4.~ r~tis C~'v~ //l^ / ~~ J l~ l~`~ M c.- 2 O,J Address 2--. ,~ ~ ' 2~ Z ~ ~~~ /j^''-~~ ~" #d ,Stir j c ~! ~ 3 ~-~ r i `-~` 8~- ~ ~ ~' ~, q~ o s 2 d~' G~ Y7-f- ST ~~ S - ~ ~ Z~~ g~_ ZeZs ~ 5j ~ ZpS ~" ~ wL Ci~ 9-aY~- J O 3 Vic,-~„~, ~ S'+ ''~ r df ~r~`l~(1.11 9 0 `! i" 230 l3ie~/« ~% yev~f 3~ ~~~~~~ f~ ~~~ds r :~~ G i 4 6 LHIu OF'J R. PFRF;•Y. PHONE: 310 394 9831 Apri120, 2000. r~l_ : i n-:~ =~ ~-a2s~a 12~~4 No .014 P.ft~ FAX; 310 394 4294 To: The Honorable Planning Commission I support the continued operation of the Fair Market at 2225 4'" Street in Santa Monica. The market provides a great service and convenience to our neighborhood, especially to our residents who do not drive. Please approve the conditional use permit. Sincerely, Name ~, z O~„~ ~ ~`= , `ZL~b S~k Sf ~ /~~ 2z2_ G u Hfl f' ~I;i'(l;] ~~ yam- ~-- ~ ~ ~Q3 ~ st. ~.r><, cry , ~e~~~ sou ' ~~~ ~.-~ i~~~~4 ~~. ~ ~e%,~5~~. ~~~~ ~~~ ~r~ rye-~ Address L4W OFFICES OF ® aS A ~ ~ ® P ~ ~ ~ Y 1333 OCEAN AVENUE SANTA MONICA, CA 904Qi Name Address v/ //~~/ ~ x ` ~~~~~ ~~~ S~~r~ v°C /G~l~L~ ~ 7?/~C ~,n~• ~ o~ I ~ ~U ST ~~ CA1~'iZi tLtrn tCt4 z-~--l ~ `~- ~~' ~ ~ G/~// 7 ~ I r S'S'<Z S'c~ios `~rf fir ~~~~r;-~~-Q~S~r,~ l~/~Z 111 ./ ~~f- ~ ~ /M 'YIILI ~~~ ~~~ i~t~~ /1 /`~ / IGLG ~Cn Z l <' ~~ Name ~ `~V ,o : ~ ~ .~-1 N fJCt Q ~l o N. l ~ v~ ~ J ~ ~ ~ ~,4vc Si ~' ~F< ~~'IG~y'7`U ~~;~- LA6uL~t ~eovs~ ~t opt /,~5-~ y K~ ~D~~ ~ay~ti.t~G~r~ -~ ~r ~1p~•r~ l~Qy~a(~ ~l~4xl~c/ ~~Pa-1h~y~l~ ~~ ~~~~.- r A) Address ~~9 ~ 5 ~~- 932 ~l~s .501 B~-~ ST ~' ~ _22s' ~ _~V~ ~~ b ~ ~S, ~ .(tea 3~ ~ X035 ~~f~ Sf ~3~C ~~ ~~1n~i~C ~~~`v ~zzg ~ f/i s ~-- ~~ 6PY S1. ~~ S' ~ Cla ~e~~~~ 2~z~ 3'd ~T" ~ 9 S 1~I C~ G©4e~5 ~ 3i~ ~ 3~ yoj ~S ~07 ~~ ~-1-. ~.3 5 /~,{ hiDUic~i~q 9ayus ~~ ~ ~~ 2 ~ t 3 vg7 ~T'---~~~la _~~ ~_ ~'~' 90 ~/o ~ :~~ ~ 14n kZr-1-/-~ SZoai~ Q 3 a 8 ~aL ~~ c J ~'• ~ :1 Co.r~}-n t~(1,oryra ~ C ~ OS Gig 0~~®07 `oZ s~ ~ ""``'~~ 4,~~-~- z~ c-> ~~ ~~~w~~~ ~~~~{-~ s~ ~ ~ c;~ ~~~as e Address Fm0 n ~~ {-~~'ni5l~ Zoe ~`"er~a ~~4ro~ ~ ~Z ~~~ ~ ~~~t N~ ~ r ~t (~ K~~~Nttl~w 22~Z 4~~57 ~. M Lff- 9o~Y~~ 1665. flPv,~~ tea-., c~ -~l - j'~ ~~-~~S rYl CA 80405 2911 ~-)j~5~ `~Uj}~(7 C,~ ~~yc~s so i ~~ ~ ~ ctst ~~ to ~~~~ ,_} _, barb ~p ~ ~~, ~trq -gnyaS~ Zo;o ~~~ ,~ ~20`~ ~ay~f x`20 /'~ ~ /3-a. ~ 3v y ~ f, ,r =~~~ # i~C l,~i//rte ~.~ Name Pauu~-su~4r1' ~~~ ~oh -I~C(~t JL ~~ ~~ ~~~~ ;~ Address 5~F5 ~A^/Noh[pgvE #kco 3M 9c~-toS ~~ ~«~ ~1~~~ ~ s~ ~~~d~ ai t a 3~~ S~ . ~~3~ ~~b -8z ~ 8 2222 C/~ s-~. 5'oYoS'~ -' ~ o o p ~Z6 S ova--.L. ~'` ~ ~~ S~ ~. ~~ d 'D. ~~ ~~ `t °'`E°S~ 2So2 .S~Sr ~(o~-~a~ ~~a- Y`~^ ~ ~ ~~~~ S~ ~~~~ ~f-w1 ~~'1b~ BYE °~otit0~ ~) 1, ~1 rr F ~ f ~,, : : i 5 t Name G~~w ~~~ y~~ A 2 ~~~~~ ~B°~-?~~ ~~ ~ k~Ja~"cc~rc~ne.t~ ~~~ ~~~, ~~r~/~kr~ a~a~~ Address 3as ~~y s~ ~2~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~ S~~ ~yo~' ~d~s 2i2° y~ ~r= .~21 ~oyos- ~ ~- 7 ~L~uQ ~~ 6h~~ ~ ~ S~~ ~~~~ SUU1 . L1_ ZG3 ~ %~~~~ ~~ ~(~"s~. ~zz ~~ ga~os- Gib ~,oc~~~~ ~_~w~ c~ 9oYo~ ~r ~oo~ ~~~ St ~/~ 6~~ ~ ~~ ~- ~~ ~~ :~ ~ ~ ~ 5 -7~. S ~ Name ~'~J}S /Y~Cc~vy' KQ~FIn y Kern p Cj~1A,1~_f ~Mi sc~N ~ ,~i - ~ ~c~~~~s~~ Address ~~~ R~~~~ ~~~ ~ ~ SM C~ ~~~- Z'r{/(1 V{~Ri'n 5-t-. S F~VI G~ 9p ~F~S 2 7"~ ~'G~~.2 ~~ .~u~ ~C SM C,~} 9o~a~ ~-6 33 ~ ~ Sv~-t ~4~.;5 2D~S ~r~/ ~~i~~ S/Y 90 ~D~ 2q i, ~ wLZ. c~-S-r ~ lr~ ~ ~ ~w~~Q2oS ~~ Q-~`(h~~l~ ~toc{c~S H 7 n ter' ~t~1~~~f si`~ - 2~20 cl~ s~ ~ZD ~Vl zZ33 ~~~f~ s~ ~~( ~ D~(a~ /~3G~ Soc<S~ t~-~i~~s °,~z7-v 8: v (~uAc~aa 1~;~-T~ ; l~vz~ ~,~~,,~ V M ~~ ~~~/~ ~~~ 26?.~~ ~{`~ ~-N~~-tl~ty~~c-r~- ~jv~GS s?C`~1 ~ ~L J T -~-1-~7 ZC ~~~Ytfii Y1~ ~~n ~ P,~~A _ ~o ~v~ ~l Ya rr`~c S`-~- y antc, i`~.o~-v~~ti ~ o yo.s- Z~~ 02~~ ~T~~*[~ ~GO~ ~ SM ~ a~vS~ ~~ ~ ~, ~ioyc~ ~~J Gv ter, ~1-~~- _~M rc~~ Name Address It~,t u 0~2U~~r•~ ~~, #-~03 C~ ~ ~9 ~,2 3 3 s ~- Via--, ~ ~ ~~s ~ ~f~'s. ~r c~ ~~~os n ~~ ~ r7 q o nn 2 ~ 1 ~ S~~ ~`~ 9oYo~ ill ~ TU~~ ~; . S ~,. ~'o ~~; P~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~~Pi~ ~(S cS? ~ ~ a ~- ~ d~~- ~ ~ of ~~s~~~~y ,~~~ S ~ `~~d-ao^ o'z 7 f z ~~f~~~~~o~~~ ~71~ ~ ~, ~ ,-- ~~ S~ .~~ ~1~~~~ ~G~~ ~~.-- ~ ~ _ ,- _ e , ~ rr...,,i,~ F.3az. s~ t y y ~~,~ 5~~ s ~s~.~~ ~~~:~p~! ~~D Jatl~tJ Name a- a- a ,~ ~~ ~ ~~~~ ~ ~~ 9 Address I ~~.o ~ tk ~-. ~~-~ ~~ a~ c~ ~~~~ 2~zh ~~ S~. l~ t ~ cog- qo~o S „~ ~a„•~ ,, Z,~ Lo `f~ si- ~l 4-,~ MD~C/~ 90 ~-o~ ~14D ~~~ .~Z ~ f~ • , ~~ ~~-1Q5" 2~tr~ ~~ S~ ~5 S~~ ~ ~o~m5' ~~ ,~ ~= S 1'i, Ckl c1~45 ,r---7 ZzlS ~` =r.~ ~~~o `~aS 2z1~ ~ ~~r ~~~~' ~ M ~~~ ~~-. i5 3 P~~ 4~ ~v ~ ~ ~~~~ Name Address ~-~' ~ (~ ~ ail ~ ~~ ~- 1 ~ ~,, ~ ~~~ o ~ P 1 ~ ~~ ~4~ ~ Srv~ c~- ~c~-tas' ~zL>~ ~~ ~, )ay ~-~ ,,,fist (,D~ ~ a c ~ a ~ os S 9~ s ~ ~~ ~~ ~~=~ kT ~ ~_~l1~ ~- I~$-'f"ia./ ~ ~ Zq'~il) Yll~r C ) r_, Y ~3D`i SM ~~ ~ ~(6s P~~ ~ ~j ~-~ ~ ~ ~ s-E-- ~` ~~'2 ~ alo~os 2~2~ ~~ ~~ s~~ ~~~~~ ~~~; ~ i56 Zb-~"~11~ ~ ,,v~ A o ~Govn~,~~ ~~~~~~~ Name ~J/C `_ f [ l t"~%~c~, ~ c` L~ ~~~ ANN ~o ~A-y~~s~ n6~~~~n 5~~.~. l T~A7E~ '~ ,~I, ~a~ Address 8~ ~,4 ~~~ ~l~sT. ~~~ 3 i S~ N r"I i S+ c.~ X02 ~ s~ ~ 2~~ ntii lls ~~ ~~. z~f ~~~- 2~/ E~ ~- ~ < <e ~~~ ~ y~~ P~ ~~ ~~~ ~~~~ `-( z~ Ashlu.~1 Avs S_ M ~°y~s ~- ZI ro ~ ~t s~_ '~i5 s..~r . ~o ~a~ ~Zc ~ ~t~' ~ - # ~ S S _ t7t _ ~~ ttc~s' ~z ~~ ~~~ S~ ~ l~ ~ F-~ ~ o ~a~ f~~ ~~5"7 To'. The Honorable Pla:tnin~ Commis t I support the continuzd operation o2 the Fair Market at 222 4`" Street in Santa A~tonica. The market provides a convenient and nzczssary service for our neighborhood, especially for otu- residents ~~•ho do not drive. Please allo~~~ the market to continue its operation in our neighborhood. Thalik you, Name Address I walked/drovz here today ~-~~ ~ ~ ~ u ~ ,~ }. SI ~ i.~ ~~~~R1~. it ,~ lc~ mac. ~hG lA.'~ ~~:_~ 1. !'-F: ~ ~ _- ~-TLl ~-~t: ,. , if ;~,~~..;i t~~ .t.- G F r3 !x~;,r 'i , ~~ ( ~ ~; y~, ~„ ~ . I., .. ~~~ ( r l lO ~': n `/ , ~,'% y.. is ~ ; ~ ~ = J' ~ 6 `~;~ ~;!. y rte", / !-l,n~r~ , ~. __._ ~ f' f fir,, 1_!~~ '-~5^ ~ ~ %` I 9 : i L ,iv~~~+ u'~-.. tu'~~ .-~~~~,. I? ~, _, ~~~ (!I58 ~. r ~y''~'L ~/'' R/l,! ~.fi-~~; ~. ~--°~~~'-+_ ~l ~ ~ L'.~-~.,, ti'\.:.` "~.. 1 ~..3 Vii. ~ i"- !~1 '~ Ire , ` '"~',~ l ._ r 1 ~ ,._. S `--. CII hXi+~ L~i~r,~3.{,t~~'k~-i ~~ To: The Honorable Plannin ,mmission I suppot2 the continued operation of the Fair Marker at 22~~ 4"' Street in Santa Monica. The market provides a convenient and necessary service for our neighborhood, especially for otu residents ~a~ho do not dri~~e. Please allow the market to continue its operation in our neighborhood. Thant; you, Name Address ve here today I L~ c~rt~ y i59 < 'v wet i~V"Lr~.a7.? fnd To'. The Honorablz Platmin~ Commi_ n I suppon the continued operation oT the Fair Market at 2225 4`" Street in Santa Aaonica. The market provides a convenient and neczssary servicz for our neighborhood, especially for our residents ~ti~ho do not drivz. Please allow the market to continue-its operation in our neighborhood. Thank you, Name t~ ~`~' ~ v : ~ fit,-'~c± Address 7y ~f°~~c,=1 I !walked drove here today ~' L~ ha $~ j fl ~f'('('~ ~i j~{TI`C ~-`LK~ `-.ZC'"i~/'S (~{~ 1 ~'l~ i ~.-!~F ~r ~`` {~ 1 _ i ( to l~7 G''..~ 67u°~rC~l C~("" ~~'U 2 ~l {'~- ~_ G~ L ~.Jc;~l k~-~, ~~G.%,5~if, f2:f~?<f.zc~cl `1 ~~ //=c'!cs>E/I S~'L~G~-~jGi.~ fi ~:`-t ~~~ _ .: ,H~ , ~ s t z LAW OFFICES OF R ® S dQ R' O ~. E R 312 PICO BOULEVARD SANTA MONICA, CA 90405 PHONE: 310 394 9831 FAX: 310 394 4294 June 20, 2000 To: The Honorable Planning Commission I support the continued operation of the Fair Market at 2225 4`h Street in Santa Monica. The market provides a convenient and necessary service for our neighborhood, especially for our residents who do not drive. Please allow the market to continue its operation in our neighborhood. Thank you, Name Address I walked/drove here today r f j ~ 1~C~~l~ii'e? l~rz I~iSsCn '~'` j~ ~~~ ~' ~ S; ~~ ~f /I`F'U~ l(,~i ~L~ ~"~ic V Iti''> ~=LC3 .~ ~ •-/ C.L'1 "ti./N=FL,%Ce 1 ~ jAj )/~ r'~ ~ j /q 'Il,% J } ~;' 1~~ ia3 Ill,/ ~l ~ i~9 F L ' y _ ~ ~./ ~, ~/ '' / / / ,~/-fit%~` ,,;L , 1 , , ~ -~-1''Z- l ~ -~ ~ r`~) ^ / F~; ; L_1 / . ~_ ~. / ~ ~ ~ /} ~ i~ y r'..-» .-~ _ /1 l ~: _ `_. -~ s n i ~'.i. L',' c1 A ~: r~ i /ir..s .._ ~ l I 1 ~,, l ri "~, To: The Honorable Plaimir ommission I support the continued operation of the Fair Market at 2225 4'~ Street in Santa Monica. The markzt provides a convenient and necessary szrvice for our neighborhood, especially for our residents who do not drive. Please allow the market to continue its operation in our neighborhood. Thank you, J ~ NT~CC ,~ - , U-- r- l r i , i' ;; I ~, t ~- ~} j ~ y' ;.p. ~ ~' ~ ~'°.' t, o .~~'f v,~~+~i?~? ~^-i~~ "1~~~$.`'?Y i./t cif r, , , «~. .. .. ~ ice' ~~ T ._._I1._J; J..____ 1 i ~ ~. ~ --Y ,rte x.~~.~f~' ~~ c: • ?'Z, -~``~~ ) €:~ I53 To: The Honorable Platutin ,mmission I suppon the cortinuzd operation of the Fair Market at 22~ 4'h Strzet in Santa Monica. The markeTprovidzs a convenient and necessary szrvicz for our neighborhood, especially for ottr residents who do not drive. Please allow the market to continue its operation in our neighborhood. Thank you, Name _ _ ?.ddress I walkzd(drovz here today '~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~G~t ~ 7~ ,t ~ -, ~; , ' 3 t~ ,- Y w ~ ~. tC~ ~ ~~~~ L r r~ --vi l 1 =-- ~ G /~ `~ /ate C ~~ U~U ~, ~~~ ~~ 5~ 1~,,Jos_" ~~ l (~ ~ ~ Lt r, l l~ k ct C~~iC C~_f i~'~ .S X4'1 F ~~~-c~c~~C(.t~ L ~ '~~ .LZ' ~~..\ ~.'t.4~ ~~~~ 6 :tip 1..164 T'o: The Honorable plannir ~mmission I support the continued operation of the Fair Market at 2225 4'~ Street in Santa Monica. The market provides a convenient and necessary service for our neighborhood; especially for otu residents who do not drive. Please allow the market to continue its operation in our neighborhood. Thant you, ~ '~~\ Name _ Address ~ w~ alked/drove here today J' ~ j r ~~ ~ ~d~ j I ~i ~~•~ ~~ L-t~~ , n~ rti'1, , ; ~ , l~ . ~ _ .~ Vf~ r_ ~Y SZ.C ~1~~1 \7 C jam'}- ~?~ _`° ~v._` + j. .~-. _ -, "`~ {'165 To: The Honorable Pla~min: „nmission I support the continued operation ofthe Fair Market at 2225 4" Street in Santa Monica. The market provides aconvenient and necessary service for our neighborhood, especially for otu residents who do not drive. Please allow the market to continue its operation in our neighborhood. Tha.~ you >~-~~:r u,~iC'C ~) G.. ~z rv ~ ~-~ ~r0 ~- ~ ~t rr~ i Lz ~ I I~-~ h l ~/.. ., ~'t=~~~~ ! °' ~~; ~ ;~~~~~I~c~' x-11 `~ j t, b i~; ; t Liji~~ y ~'~~~~ Q_ <u .~ t F ~, ~, , To: The Honorable Plannin, ~mmission l_ ~ I support the continuzd operation of the Fair Market at 2225 4'h Street in San[a Monica. The market provides a convenient and necessary service for our neighborhood, especially for ottr residents ~F ho do not drive. Please allow the market to continue its operation in our neighborhood. Thank you, Name Address I wajkzt~drove here today C. ~~ t s ~-~r~ ~ I~~t ~-- ~ lkr. S ~C,-~~. ~~ ~~~ ~~'~~ ~ti~~ ~~ i ~'~i fir,. - °~ ~''= „~( ~ ti 11~,11~.: i ~J~1k- G~ ~ c- ~ `~' ~~~' _ i° ~' (: 16 i _- ,y t~ z.~~ ~ J r LiG~~k y ~. To: The Honorable Plannin, ~,nrnission I support the continued operation of the Fair Market at 2225 nth Srreet in Santa Monica. The market provides a con;~enient and necessary service for our neighborhood, especially for our residents who do not drive. Please allow the market to continue its operation in our neighborhood. Thant you, Name _ Address I walked drove here today ~ ~ -}- ~9 a ,'t.~7-.3^.:LL' ~2~~ L%f~-~f ~'.~i C~ ~~ ~(~.Y~-2-~ f,JyLt~ ~/ / Fl LPL ~ ,~,~~' ~~ ~ rte" ~~ ~u-l~ (~-~ k `~, To: The Honorable Plannin, ,mmission I support thz continued operation of the Fair Market at 22?5 4'" Streit in Santa Monica. The mazket provides a com~enient and neczssarv service for our neighborhood, especially for our residents who do not drivz. Phase allow the markzt to continue its operation in our neighborhood. Thank you, ---`.-_ Name Addrzss '~ wall.~drove hire today ~~~4' K~~i/~ i ~ ~-~7`~Sl ~~a -tilt"c 5 ~;~4~ Cl.~~~~> ~~~ ~ ~~ ~~~ '~~ ~ / 1h J~i Y~} ~~ ~C 1, rr ~Cf C+ 7~ C ~~c't!L' L~~ 1~~:1 ~. _ ~~ l r c- L ~ ;,. ~~~ _r, ~~ , t l~ ~,~,>>.t. ~_ vf'7'c_ : il:/ .tv! f"/t•~ k l ,i ~ v!/ .~ '{t ~ L, ~~ / ~J / ~ ~% ~ ~ To: The Honorablz Plalmir., ,mmission 3 I suppor[ the continued operation of the Fair Market at 2?5 4i° Street in San[a Monica: The marke[ providzs a convenient and necessary service for our neighborhood, especially Ior ottr residents who do not drive. Please allow the market [o continue its operation in our neighborhood. Thank you, Name Address '~y ~ .~~ %~ here today /s~ z =~ ~j~ ,- ~7~tJ~11C ~~;Nt~U~~ ~2~2~} 5 +~_ (/" S i fin! ~ i ;; To: Thz Honorablz Plannin mmission --~ { j ~ I support the continued operation of the Fair Market at 3225 4'h Street in Santa Monica. The ~ I ~ market provides a convenient and necessary service for our neighborhood, especially for ottr residents who do not drive. Please allow the market to continue its operation in our ~~- neighborhood. Thant: you, \~ - - `~'-121, ~' 1` rv ~~ e.~,~./ r ii,~>>-~ .- e ( ~ r y f t: ,- i ~: L'f"A.~--(~ r ~~ '~'` t `~ i iii.- S'... ~'^ ~ ~~~~ ~ i, ~~ ~ f~~ ~ / ~ 1 ~ :/ /~~j~~t av,.Tt .~~~~~ ,''~ ~ ;>-`~.~ ~'~i,J~ l f~~~r~' ~7 I`',~' r~~t %'~~ l~~ ~ l _ / ~j ;' h/ _ r^- r ~ To: The Honorable Pla:u:i~ .,mmission I support the continued operation of the Fair ivlarket at 2225 4`~ Street in Santa Monica. The market provides a convenient and necessary service for our neighborhood, especially for our residents who do not drive. Please allow the market to continue its operation in Dur neighborhood. Thank you, Nazne Address ~Jo1fWs~N iG 3 k3~ a ,~ ~~~- I walked drove here today ~ I9, G; l7 j rZ v~_ !~ _.~. ~ AZ.r«:~ c~L~1 ~~ ~~l !'~~q~ 1~ ~~ . ~. ~, t ~% 1 ~ ~ Lir.. V 1 ,vt i~ t ~ To: The Honorable Planni: ~mmission I support the continued operation of the Fair Market at 2225 4'h Street in Santa Monica. The market provides a convenient and necessary service for our neighborhood, especially for our residents who do not drive. Please allow the market to continue its operation in our neighborhood. Thant: you, N~T1e _ Address I walked/drove here today ~~ IL~i~~~°'~~ 1~iv`tl`~Sv-1~ vt~~`~K ~yn~i~tq VV6 ~f=3K~k9 ~1V}=1~--~-!,~~k~ _ L ~ S L- ~ Z t /~ ,/~ _ ~ ~ -' ' ' i l ' ~ - : T _ i ~ ( 7 ( I ~ J A,. %~a y%:' ~ l~s L' d i nit .+ ~ ~.- i .a ~..~e_.V~' jj ~p l r/ `-~ s ~ ~ L.~ 7 ~1 ~~ " ~i~~. ~~~' iii: <l,Y f.' ~ 1 1 .. ~~ ~~~~~ ~ e J '~ mss:; ~ ~ ~~1 a.,~ i p To: The Honorable Plannic ~mmission I supporC the continued operation of the Fair Market at 2325 4'h Street in Santa Monica. The market provides a convenient and necessary service for our neighborhood, especially for our residents who do not drive. Please a11ow the market to continue its operation in our neighborhood. Thant you, N2IIle Addre SS (wal kerb/rirnve f1Pi'P tnriav Celt"f, r i ~%! C='lac."t ; l G_~ 5-g-.-t* 1~:3 -~ ~ 5 1 °~ (~' ~('~GL qY, ,, ~ ~ ~ i ' r , ,- ,r , ~ _, ~ ~ ,~-r ~ t r . ,~ I~(~1!4(~j ~il~ ~ r ~-~ {i J/' ' ,(/ ~ ~ j ~' '6'~ L~^~L . f ~ j _ ~ 1 /) Y1 I t 1~ ~ .~ ~ L~~~ 'n i ~-~ Lam. ~-~~~~~~. ~~>~ ~~t ( L ~s / ~: ~r ~~ ^~ ~?~(J C~ ~t . ~-- ~ N~F ~ !hi b r,~ l~,L ~ jK "~ ln. ~~ ~; ~~% ~~` g`~)~~-a, tr/~ ~ To: The Honorable Plannir. ~mmission I support the continued operation of the Fair Market at 2225 4"' Street in Santa Monica. The market provides a convenient and necessary service for our neighborhood, especially for our residents who do not drive. Please allow the market to continue its operation in our neighborhood. Thank you, Name Address I walked/drove here today ,~ ~ i tJc'-~ ~ >r ~ 2~t2~ U ~~. ~-- /~ ~ Y t ~~L~ ~ Nt' SLi1+Ji~ t`l 1) ~,~ ~ ,-- r r'' (,'u 1} To: The Honorable Plaimii ommission I support the continued operation of the Fair Market at 2225 4'" S[reet in Santa Monica. The mazket provides a convenient and necessary service for our neighborhood, especially for our residents who do not drive. Please allow the market to continue its operation in our neighborhood. Thank you, Name Address I walked./drove here today ~; ~ ,~~'~~~ i ~ '~ ~, -+-- _ n, f ,~.> v L. v ~ ., }y v f ~~ „. , __ _ d _pg s.~ ~. / r _~ ..~, I f, ~~~1 1~ ~'4 . , ( ~ y_+, ~~ ~ ` Li ~ ~ 1 l (~ it s ~ ~~~at ;~ ~-, ~,~,~.+.5 ii `"I fa ~:. fit. ~ ~ ~{_~~' Y".°,~ ~^ E F,~ _~~ r` ,~~~~c~ ~~ ll ~ ~ s ~ 1.~ I,J~L~<.f; /~ . n~ LLB %J `3 ~v~ ~n~, ~,~_ s ~ ~ ~ c~~~az~~-~ To: The Honorable Planni; ,,mmission I support the continued operation of the Fair Mai=xet at 2225 4`~ Street in Santa Monica. The market provides a com~enient and necessary service for our neighborhood, especially for our residents who do not drive. Please allo~m~ the market to continue its operation in our neighborhood. Thank you, Name arirlrPC~ r,,,nn,~a~,_..,,,,,~__._a _ '1 n .t i c' 1a _l i r-~_J' ~~r ~_ ~-~ fv ~. , {~ ! .i'.~ J-~C~.~ :.~ J -,~ ,. c~ ~,. ~! ( ('~, \L i 1 G wit% !,'~ ~~.'!'' '1 ~~ ~~-~- i ~i-s.~ 1 L~Ci w~(_G I ~ fem. r' L- ~~ ~ '~ ~ ~ -I ~~ ~ ~. ~. \ ~'~~ i } ~ i ~ .~ ~; ->`=-- i, ,rte,>: „ . Tc The Honorable Planni~ ~mmission I support the continued operation of the Fair Market ai 2225 4'~ Street in Santa Monica. The market provides a convenient and necessary service for our neighborhood, especially for our residents v,°ho do not drive. Please allow the market to continue its operation in our neighborhood. Thank you, Name Address I walked/drove here today ;a,'~~W :~; -°-` i L J t ! l / n . + ` jt ~ ~r i , . '~ -~ - i, f "~• '.. ~ / ~ ~ y .y' 1 ~ ~ ~ f ~ l F ~ ~ ~ ( ,~ a ~ -~ a _} ~', ¢ L lF t; ,i ~l'.l.L }~-'t-- yy t~,e G~l..7 l.t. yr i'~'4~ °F}-/:~ _ /'_r':! e~ ri >` i~ v- a:-~ ,,.mac N ~: ~ ~.r"v !~ h ~ pp ? f ~'- ~, ii V., i .~ E ~ ,s ~ ~ •J _. , _ _~; ~ ~r ~~n ~ ~c~1-- f,,L_~~-CJ ~~~1 ~'~- ~''_ ~ t r ~ -r . , r>> , . _ To: The Honorable Pla~min, ~mmission I support the continued operation of the Fair Market at 2225 4`~ Street in Santa Monica. The mazkzt provides a com~eniznt and necessary service for our neighborhood, especially for ottr residents who do not drive. Please allow the market to continue its operation in our neighborhood. Thank you, Name Add;ess ~walked,dTOVe here today i ^n ~~Ct"~t . ~ ~ - ~ GD j,, ,<-~"~,, -~ ~ .y, i? ~~ ~°' rte`-`i/c','o,ir5 " i., -' u- 'I 1 j rte., ~~-,~ ~;-,< <xyi7S` 7r~ 4,L ,? I 3 /,~' ,°~; ~~ ~- ~~ -i~ I I °~ :5 c'-_-'-._ +~ ~~GFt ~;. , ~~ J~(L~J C°= <<~~~+.I Div ~- ~~, ~ ®p ~~++ LAN! OFFICES OF CC g~ f~ ® ~7 A ~ ~ ® P G R R l~ 312 PICO BOULEVARD SANTA MONICA, CA 90405 PHONE: 310 394 9831 FAX 310 394 4294 June 20, 2000 To: The Honorable Planning Commission I support 4he continued operation of the Fair Market at 2225 4`h Street in Santa Monica. The market provides a convenient and necessary service for our neighborhood, especially for our residents who do not drive. Please allow the market to continue its operation in our neighborhood. Thank you, Name Address I walked/drove here today ~~ ~i , r -~a , ~~,~'!7~ ~?~~Jbt?r~ ","~~ n/' ~<<~~, ~fil~ ~~ ~ ~Cr~ ~'c4C> {,ti:`~?lkc~~`f cllt~tllf2~fLGN~~e ~ ti~~`~L.. ~~~>~ ~2~ ~~f~t `7~#~ ~~~C~ ~c~/os G~~~t"~'C~ ~~ ~ ir~ ~`,i~l~ ~t"1~(} ~~ ~! GG~' ~r~ ~P. Z'za; Ctrs; >{ ~-~ ~~i;~~ 1~'4..Z7`~ ~.!c~fFC'C°~ {; ~~ ., r-. ~. ~ p., ,±:i t~~i S U U ATTACHMENT G Photographs of Site and Surrounding Properties Electronic version of attachment is not available for review. Document is available for review at the City Clerk's Office. 69 ~~ ~ a o ~~ w L~~.l~ Cfa~e vu..u. .. a~... n.».._ ,. ~ vx ~ RAG a ~~IA .UIL'ii~ ATTACHMENT H Plot Plan & Floor Plans Electronic version of attachment is not available for review. Document is available for review at the City Clerk's Office. 70 NORTH I i 4(a .'i 4 I -STORY -"' 9 RESIDENCE `~ - ' ~ ~ 3~_)~ .:: lGu-=.12.3 p ROOT EL EVAP.OU=9i.l~ ~ ~ d m Z ~~.0' - '. -i2-~ IP IP IP a.25 3 ' S T '1 {~ ~~ CONDGV~IN:UM sa ROOF ELEV~Ti-iH _ 114.3' ul ~ V ~ ._ IP ~ N ~ _~Z I--- - ; o o - -----I ~ I~~- Ft? 25.5' j A ~ ~ ~ r- az.'~s' I { 1- 5 T04Y" ~ 6 6 31.0 :;'UR` 3106 HEIGHT= IS.Z' 2?. Cc3 I 'I ROOF ELEVATION = 92 4 j I I TEL. 3: ~-- __ N ~-ST~I}. RESIOEt:' ELGG NE1GN KOOF ELEVATI• - - R N 41 12 07 W EpOTH bse i z ~. zs 39.9ra' i~---- w,M 32.05'J~ 7. 90'~ w.1A. Sp N ~~ Q VOLTAGE a ~P.F ~_-___ I ---' 5.2' ~-- PAR < ; r.t G "~ 7.2' '^+ A~ FOURT!--4 ~'. CC:N CR ET.E C'a0.8 ~ ~~\ r~ ~. ~ , ~, 3~ ~. F-- Ct? n.l°" uQuoa 21 2°' _ 9 °~°, LIQUOR ~ 31.1°' LIQUOR 6.i°, i~ 29.0° G lU LIQUOR 116.D° 16.0°~ 35.~~° I 33.0°~ D O -- 4.50, 4.9°, ~.2°~ ---__.---_~I 9 0°~ - 36.j° a.5° 0 16.2° ~ 8 0° 6.0°