SR 05-28-2019 6A
City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: May 28, 2019
Agenda Item: 6.A
1 of 23
To: Mayor and City Council
From: David Martin, Director, City Planning
Subject: Appeal (19ENT-0032) of the Planning Commission's Approval of Conditional
Use Permit 15ENT-0230 at 401 Montana Avenue, Requesting Revised
Conditions for the Rainbow Garden
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City Council hold a public hearing, receive public comment,
and approve Conditional Use Permit 15ENT -0230 and Fence Height Modification
18ENT-0342 per the attached findings and conditions.
Executive Summary
Under Santa Monica’s Municipal Code, the City Council acts as an appeal body for land
use permitting decisions by the City’s Planning Commission. The Council will hold a de
novo hearing on an appeal of the Planning Commission’s approval of Conditional Use
Permit (15ENT-0230) and a Fence Height Modification (18ENT-0342) to develop a
garden learning center (school) on the subject property located at 401 Montana Avenue
in the R3 (Residential Multiple Unit) Zoning District. The applications were filed on April
16, 2015, and November 6, 2018, respectively, by Sherman and Tau Ma, (Aesop
Montana). The proposed project would demolish an existing vacant 18-unit apartment
building on a 16,125 square-foot property, replacing it with a new 2,284 square-foot
open-plan classroom building and large garden to include vegetable beds, fruit trees, a
chicken coop, a garden shed and other features, which together form a non-profit facility
that is planned to be open to pre-school and school groups to learn about gardening,
food preparation, nutrition and other related topics. On January 16, 2019 (Attachment
A), the Planning Commission approved these applications, adopting the draft conditions
of approval with some modifications to allow more special events and adjust the
definition and process for them; require a loading plan for special events and a 4th
Street loading zone request subject to City approval; add requirements for chicken coop
2 of 23
design; and provide direction to ARB regarding transparency into the garden to connect
with the community (Attachment B).
On January 30, 2019, the Planning Commission’s decision was appealed by an
appellant group (Anne Burkley, Diane Fresco, Nancy Varat, Nancy Coleman, Patricia
Taylor and Jan Feldman). The appeal points (Attachment C) relate to operating
conditions that they maintain will not adequately control activity to protect the
neighborhood; the opaque fence/hedge proposed along 4th Street; and impacts related
to parking and special events.
As a de novo hearing, the Council may consider all aspects of the application as well as
matters raised in the appeal. This report includes project description and analysis, the
Planning Commission’s action, and the points of appeal together with staff responses
and recommendations. This report concludes with a recommendation to approve the
Conditional Use Permit and Fence Height Modification with some adjustments to the
conditions of approval as requested in the appeal, and to adopt the Draft Statement of
Official Action provided in Attachment D.
Background
Existing Conditions and Setting
The following table provides a brief summary of the project location. Additional
information regarding the project’s compliance with applicable municipal regulations and
the General Plan is available in Attachment A.
Zoning District R3
Land Use Element Designation Residential Multiple Unit
Parcel Area (SF)/Dimensions 16,125 | 150x107.50
Existing On-Site Improvements Multi-family apartment building (currently vacant)
Rent Control Status Ellis Act process completed. All units are vacant.
Adjacent Zoning Districts &
Land Uses
Corner lot; single-family residential use with rear accessory
dwelling unit above garage across alley (northwest); 2-4 story
medium density multi-family uses on other sides.
Historic Resources Inventory Not listed on the HRI
3 of 23
Site Location Map:
Demolition Permit Review
The proposed project includes demolition of existing structures that are over 40 years of
age. The subject property is not listed in the City’s Historic Resources Inventory (HRI).
A demolition application was filed on October 31, 2017. On December 11, 2017, the
City’s Landmarks Commission reviewed the demolition permit. No application for a
Landmark, Historic District, or Structure of Merit was filed within the 75-day waiting
period. The property has been removed from the rental market through an Ellis
application filed in November 2014 and is vacant.
Project Description
This Conditional Use Permit (CUP) application would allow a school use on this R3-
zoned residential property. The subject site is a 150’ x107.50’ corner parcel (16,250
square feet) located on the northeast corner of Montana Avenue and 4 th Street. The
parcel is bordered by two streets and an alley, with single-unit and multi-unit residential
uses on all sides.
The proposed project
would include a new 2,284
square-foot learning center
with rooftop garden, a 107
Montana Avenue 4t
h
St
re
et
4 of 23
square-foot tool shed, and a ground-level garden of approximately 10,000 square feet.
The “Rainbow Garden” is proposed as an informal educational facility serving pre-
school and school-aged children. The proposed site plan includes seven parking
spaces and a screened resource recovery and recycling area accessed from the rear
alley. Four bike racks are also provided adjacent to the vehicle parking. Long-term bike
parking and a loading space are not required as the proposed development contains
less than 2,500 square feet.
A front yard fence height modification has also been requested in order to allow a 48”
high fence along Montana Avenue and the front 20’ of 4th Street, 6” higher than the 42-
inches allowed by right. Along the street side yard portion of 4th Street, the proposed
framed wire mesh fence and hedge are eight feet in height.
As detailed in this staff report and in the draft Stat ement of Official Action (Attachment
D), staff believes that all of the required findings for the conditional use permit and fence
modification can be made in the affirmative for the proposed project with the inclusion of
specific operational conditions as recommended.
Planning Commission Action
On January 16, 2019, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this request.
Following staff’s presentation, the applicant provided testimony and 17 members of the
public addressed the Commission. Speakers were generally supportive of the
applicants’ plan to provide this experiential educational amenity for the benefit of the
wider community and particularly to enhance education for young children. Some
speakers expressed general support for the proposal but had concerns about whether
the draft conditions of approval would sufficiently avoid potential impacts on the
neighborhood. Draft conditions limited the hours of operation in a manner consistent
with recent childcare centers in residential neighborhood s and restricted special events,
allowing meetings of the non-profit board and up to 12 Small Special Events (up to 15
people) and two Large Special Events (more than 15 people) per year. Staff
recommended requiring the applicants to submit a request for a Large Special Event for
City staff approval at least 45 days in advance in a manner similar to the TUP process,
5 of 23
but less formalized. In addition, at least one week in advance of a Large Special Event,
the applicants would be required to provide notice of the event to all residents within a
300-foot radius of the property.
In its decision to approve with six commissioners in favor and one abstention, the
Planning Commission revised some conditions of approval. Specifically, the
Commission increased the number of allowable special events at the property
(Condition #5). The Commission redefined the small event/large event boundary at up
to 20/21+ participants and increased the maximum number of smaller events from 12
per year to one per week (52 annually) and large events from two to 12 per year. The
Commission also removed the recommendation to require staff approval for special
events, instead requiring 45-day advance notification to the City. In doing so, the
Commission also eliminated the requirement to provide notice to the nearby neighbors
in advance of such events.
The Planning Commission’s conditions of approval require Mobility Division approval of
parking and loading plans for visitors to the garden and for use during both small and
large special events. Plans would specifically prohibit parking locations in front of
residential properties (Condition #12).
The Planning Commission expressed confidence that the use would be operated in a
manner that would not be detrimental to neighboring uses. W hile allowable special
events were expanded, the Commission utilized Zoning Code section 9.41.080.B to
require a compliance review, establishing a timeline for that process to take place two
years following issuance of a certificate of occupancy (Condition #14). The Planning
Commission stated that the compliance review would allow permit conditions to be
modified in the event that impacts were found to result from the learning center’s
operations.
In its recommendation for consideration by the Architectural Review Board, the Planning
Commission added consideration of the building design to create visibility of the rooftop
garden from the street. The draft condition regarding keeping of animals on the
6 of 23
premises was extended to address maintaining clean chicken coops in a manner that
promotes healthy conditions and a quiet environment.
Entitlement Summary
The following summarizes the purposes for the requested entitlements in this
application (statutory findings for all permits are included in Attachment D):
Conditional Use Permit (CUP): Pursuant to the findings contained in SMMC Section
9.41.060, a CUP may be approved to allow a use that is generally consistent with the
purposes of the Zoning District where it is proposed but requires special consideration
to ensure that it can be designed, located, and operated in a manner that will not
interfere with the use and enjoyment of surrounding properties. School uses are
conditionally permitted in the R3 Zoning District.
Fence Modification: Pursuant to SMMC Section 9.43.080, the Code allows requests for
fences that exceed the 42” maximum height in the front yards through the modification
process. The Planning Commission approved the applicants’ request for a 48” fence,
equivalent to the front yard fence height a llowed for child care facilities to enclose their
play areas. This fence modification was not cited in the appeal.
Discussion
Proposed Learning Garden Use
As stated in the applicant’s detailed project description (Attachment C), inspiration for
this project came from the Alice Waters’ Edible Schoolyard project, which has coexisted
for 20 years with a Berkeley, CA, public school. In this case, the garden is not proposed
to be co-located with a school and instead would be available to serve groups coming
from nearby childcare and pre-school facilities as well as classes of school-aged
children. The application describes the Rainbow Garden as:
A non-profit teaching facility and garden for the education of young school
children in the growing of organic fruits and vegetables, and the benefits of
7 of 23
cooking and eating local seasonal produce. The Rainbow Garden will
employ a teacher who will initially provide lessons to visiting local
students, preschool aged to 3rd grade. The lessons will relate to organic
gardening, such as vermicomposting, digging, seeding, growing and
maintaining plants, and harvesting the produce. The curriculum also
includes using the produce to teach the students how to create healthy,
delicious meals from food grown in the garden… Curriculu m can include:
an ABC Garden and incorporating 26 flowers and plants beginning with
each letter of the alphabet; a Scratch and Sniff Garden to discuss the
scents and senses; a Rainbow Garden to incorporate colors and develop
art projects.
The applicants plan to hire a teacher/garden specialist who will develop a curriculum for
the garden learning center and work with visiting classes from nearby schools and pre -
schools. Generally, they expect to initially hold classes during typical school days and
hours, Monday-Friday, hosting one class at a time, although multiple, smaller classes
may be combined at times as well. The applicants expect the concept to develop over
time, so the number of groups per day may start out small and grow as interest
increases. The applicants have also requested flexibility in order to be able to add
programming on the weekends as well. These classes, which may be in conjunction
with a school or generated by the Rainbow Garden itself, could provide further
educational opportunities to the community. As further discussed in this report, staff has
proposed conditions that would limit the hours of operation and total number of children.
The school use may also include open houses for parents and families to see what their
children have been learning. The learning garden staff may also hold teacher training to
support the program they offer the students. These are both customary school activities
and, as discussed more fully in this report, would be allowed as part of the learning
center’s program. As a non-profit, the applicants also expect to use the site for some
other activities. These non-educational activities (special events) are considered to be
additional to the school use and are proposed to be permitted as special events with
limitations.
8 of 23
Some of the planned garden features include an arrangement of raised planter beds, an
underground cistern for water capture and irrigation use, a chicken coop, a tool shed
and a metal ring structure painted in rainbow colors. Plan renderings also indicate a
row of fruit trees in the front yard setback area. A rooftop garden would be accessed by
an exterior staircase.
Project Analysis
The proposed garden learning center is a unique school use that will offer opportunities
for local childcare centers and school classes to enrich their educational programs with
experiential learning about organic gardening, nutrition and healthy eating. The garden
may be used for family education through open houses related to the lessons being
taught to students. The Rainbow Garden’s focus on sustainable food education
supports the City of Santa Monica’s Sustainable City policies and programs aimed at
encouraging the community to adopt more sustainable lifestyles.
The proposed site plan orients site access and the learning center structure toward the
rear of the property,
with the building
located near the
north property line
that abuts an alley
(Montana Place).
The building stands
between the surface
parking accessed
from the alley and the
garden. The garden,
in which much of the
learning activity will
also take place, occupies the largest portion of the property. A roof garden provides
additional growing area that may be accessed by participants and staff. Surrounding the
Proposed Site Plan
9 of 23
garden and facing the surrounding street, the applicant proposes privacy screening with
landscaping up to the property lines.
An entrance gate on 4th Street leads to the building, with a second entrance from the
rear parking area, where bike parking is also located. The subje ct property is a highly
visible corner, and the now-vacant residential building is L-shaped, opening toward the
corner to provide a landscaped viewpoint from the street. The proposed use provides a
low scale building with substantial planting areas.
Building and Landscaping Design/Architectural Concept
The proposed one-story building is designed as a large central learning space with
metal siding, aluminum-framed glass doors, and metal railings and mesh screening. It is
proposed as a quiet backdrop to the garden with a light material palette. A signature
feature is the system of sliding glass doors that open toward the garden to create a
large opening that merges the indoor and outdoor spaces together. The rear elevation
includes primary and secondary entrance doors and a bank of windows that break up
the surface of the box. The 4th Street elevation has one large window that provides light
into the entry area. The rest of the wall is not articulated. As proposed, this wall would
not be generally visible from the street due to an 8’ high perimeter wall or fence.
10 of 23
While typically a project is defined by its primary structure with landscaping as a
secondary element, in this case, it is the garden that dominates the site plan. Although
the landscape plan for the garden and perimeter landscaping have not yet been fully
developed, the application describes a concept that includes raised planters along with
a composting center, a chicken coop (in compliance with SMMC 4.04.090) and a tool
shed. The rendering below shows the view from Montana with open fencing and a
planted wall set back behind the front yard limits with a row of stone fruit trees in
between.
A special project condition advises the Architectural Review Board to consider the
integration of the building and garden as a complete concept. The proposed condition
asks the ARB to pay particular attention to ensure a pedestrian -friendly presence along
both street elevations and transparency of the garden and rooftop garden features.
Rendering of Front Elevation as seen from Montana Avenue
Proposed front and rear building elevations
11 of 23
Parking & Access
Vehicle Parking
Surface parking for the use is provided with access from the alley (Montana Place). A
parking summary based on SMMC 9.28.060 is provided in Table 2 below:
The unusual nature of this project called for interpretation of the Zoning Code’s parking
requirements because typically school parking is calculated based on a traditional
Use Vehicle Parking Requirement Provided
Cultural Facility
1 space/300 sf
1,963 + 100 = 2063
sf (measure by
interior dimensions)
X 1/300
= 6.9 = 7
spaces
2 ADA Accessible
5 Standard Size
Bike Racks → 7 parking spaces
Proposed 4th Street elevation from rear corner
12 of 23
layout with classrooms. In contrast, this non-traditional school facility has only one
classroom but does not operate as a one-room schoolhouse with a typical morning-
afternoon drop-off/pick-up pattern. Rather, the anticipated travel pattern involves groups
of children arriving and leaving throughout the day, each accompanied by their own
teacher(s) and chaperones. Looking at this operational paradigm, pursuant to SMMC
Section 9.28.060, the Director concluded that the proposed project will operate in a
similar manner to a cultural institution that receives school groups on field trips, and
typically other visitors either by reservation or on an open basis (note: the Rainbow
Garden will not be open to the public on a drop-in basis). Based on this interpretation,
seven parking spaces were required as calculated above. Loading spaces were not
required per SMMC 9.28.080.E.2(a) because the building has less than 2,500 square
feet. This parking requirement should be sufficient for the typical operational needs of
the facility, which is expected to have two employees present at any given time on a
typical day. The Planning Commission added a condition for the applicant to request
use of two spaces on 4th Street adjacent to the property for loading during operational
hours of the garden. This request is currently being processed.
Bicycle Parking
Code requirements specify that a minimum of four short -term bicycle parking spaces be
provided for this use. Long-term bike parking is not required because the project has
less than 2,500 square feet. The project meets the bicycle parking requirement as
detailed in Table 3 below:
Use Bicycle Parking Requirement Provided
Commercial
2063 square feet
Long-term
None required for
<2500 sf
Short-term: 1 space per
4,000 sf; minimum 4
spaces.
0
4 spaces
0
4 spaces
As shown above, the proposed number of bicycle parking spaces complies with the
minimum requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. Short-term bicycle parking is proposed
to be located next to the vehicle parking area with access from the alley near an
13 of 23
entrance into the facility. The final design, number, and location of short -term bicycle
parking spaces will be reviewed by the City’s Mobility Division for compliance with
Zoning Code requirements as part of the plan check process prior to the issuance of
building permits.
Alley Access
The proposed use is expected to have a small number of employees, as discussed
above. Those that drive to the site and park on the premises will likely have one trip to
the site daily. In addition, school and pre-school groups will arrive and depart at
different times throughout the day, unloading children and adult chaperones and
teachers when they arrive and loading them back in at the end of their class. The alley,
known as Montana Place, is used for access by a large number of residential and
commercial properties on Montana and Palisades Avenues between 4th and 7th Streets,
so proper design and considerate use that does not block the alley are important factors
in ensuring that the proposed use is compatible with the surrounding area.
The parking area has been designed to comply with Mobility standards that require five
feet of back-up space for safer maneuvering to the alley. The parking lot is also inset
from the corner of 4th Street to avoid potential conflicts with cars entering into the alley.
Although the Rainbow Garden staff may not be present every time a visitor arrives at
the parking lot, Condition #12 makes the garden management responsible to ensure
that drivers of visiting groups are aware of and comply with parking and loading
procedures as approved by the City.
Conditions of Approval
The Planning Commission adopted conditions of approval (Attachment B) to address
potential impacts as discussed above in order to facilitate the non-profit’s purpose in
providing an amenity to the community while ensuring that neighbors experience the
use as an asset that blends into and enhances the neighborhood.
To mitigate noise, the proposed use is designed with a buffer (an eight-foot wall)
separating it from the apartment building immediately to the east. Other surrounding
14 of 23
single- and multi-unit residential uses are separated from the learning center by streets
or an alley, providing some additional buffer from the use. The conditions approved by
Planning Commission allow school activity from 8:00 am on weekdays and 9:00 am on
weekends, in both cases ending by 6:00 pm. A maximum of 40 children may be present
at any given time.
The parking design complies with City mobility standards that require on -site
maneuvering area and clear visibility to avoid conflicts with alley traffic. The site plan
includes adequate on-site area for resource recovery/recycling so that receptacles are
not placed in the alley on collection days. In addition to direction to the ARB as
discussed above, some of the key conditions of approval include:
• Restriction of the property to the educational use as proposed, including defining
the activities that are considered to be a customary component of the school use
(Condition #2);
• Limitation to a maximum of 40 children on the premises at one time (Condition
#3);
• Hours of operation limited to 8:00 am - 6:00 pm on weekdays, which is generally
consistent with childcare uses allowed in residential areas, and from 9:00 am –
6:00 pm on weekends (Condition #4);
• A condition regarding Special Events (Condition #5; see additional discussion
below);
• Compliance with the Municipal Code in regard to noise and keeping of any
animals on the site (Conditions #6 and #7);
• Conditions to reduce potential noise through prohibiting outdoor bells or amplified
sound and prohibiting outdoor cleaning using loud equipment between 7:00 pm
and 8:00 am (conditions #8 and #9);
• Identification of an on-site contact person to handle any issues that may arise
(Condition #10;
15 of 23
• Submittal of a plan for approval by the Mobility Division outlining the applicant’s
procedures for ensuring that visiting groups and people attending special events
park and/or load on-site in a safe manner that avoids inconveniencing neighbors.
Instructions for parking and loading must be provided accordingly as part of the
materials given to groups in preparation for their visits (Condition #12).
Special Events
A special event is any activity other than the primary school use as discussed above,
whether it happens during regular operation hours or outside of operational hours. The
Planning Commission’s approval defined Small Special Events as those with up to 20
participants, while Large Special Events are anything larger. Special events may take
place during or after regular hours of operation; however, these events must conclude
by 10:00 pm Sundays through Thursdays, with use of the outdoor area prohibited after
9:00 pm. On Fridays and Saturdays, events must conclude by 11:00 pm, with use of
the outdoor area prohibited after 10:00 p.m.
The Planning Commission required the applicant to provide the City with a notice 45
days prior to the date of any Large Special Event. The Commission removed a staff
recommendation to notify neighbors about Large Special Events as part of the motion to
allow more events. While it is not required to notify the City about small events, the
condition requires the Rainbow Garden to maintain a log of these events and provide it
to City staff upon request.
Fence Height Modification
The Planning Commission approved a modification for a 4-foot high (48”) fence in the
front yard setback area, 6” higher than allowed by Code. The additional height was
requested by the applicants to meet standards typically required by the State for pre-
schools because they expect to host may pre-school groups in the garden (although this
will not be a State-licensed childcare facility). The proposed fence is designed of grey,
steel-framed, metal mesh along the front length, switching to a wall in the corner on
which an identification sign is proposed. The additional 6” does not significantly change
16 of 23
the perceived character of the garden’s openness from the pedestrian viewpoint on
Montana Avenue and the front yard setback area on 4th Street.
The surrounding properties on Montana Avenue and 4th Street generally have open
front yards with some low-scale landscaping. The adjacent apartment building (415
Montana Avenue) has a 6-foot high hedge and wall that exceeds the Code in the front
yard setback area. A Fence/Wall/Hedge registration was submitted for the property on
November 15, 2007 for the 6-foot high wall that surrounds a front yard swimming pool.
As this is the only adjacent property on Montana, the Planning Commission found that
the modification is compatible with the established street character.
Beyond the front yard, the 4th Street frontage is considered to be the street side yard,
and a maximum of eight feet in height is allowed for side yard fences, walls and hedges.
The modification is not applicable to this portion of the fence. When reviewing the
project design, the draft conditions request that the ARB consider the fence materials as
a component of the overall building and landscape design proposal and review the
relationship between the project and pedestrians on both street frontages.
Zoning Code Compliance/ Land Use and Circulation Element (LUCE) Consistency
The proposed project is located in the R3 (Multi-Unit Residential) District, which
establishes property development standards that govern height, lot coverage, and
setbacks of the proposed building. The Planning Commission staff report (Attachment
A) provided a detailed review of applicable development standards for the proposed
project, concluding that the project is consistent with the General Plan and complies
with the Zoning Code.
Appeal Summary
On January 30, 2019, an appeal was filed by a group (listed above), representing
themselves as the “401 Montana Appeal Group.” The appeal did not specifically contest
the approval of the use, but rather took exception to some of the conditions of approval.
The appeal letter asks to be received as “both an appeal of certain conditions while at
17 of 23
the same time, a letter of support for the Rainbow Garden.”
The appeal includes six requests for revised conditions that the appellants state “will
better align the goals of the Rainbow Garden with the surrounding neighborhood.” The
Appeal statement (Attachment C) provides further explanation of the reasons for
appealing these conditions. The following states and responds to each of these six
points.
a. 8' FENCE AND TREES AT FRONT OF PROPERTY
We request that the CUP clearly state the 8’ side fence remain transparent and the
front façade not be obscured by trees.
Response: Although the 8’ fence is allowed by Code in the side yard setback, the
Architectural Review Board’s (ARB) design review may specify design and materials for
the fence to ensure that the development complies with the criteria set forth in SMMC
9.55.140. Those criteria confirm that buildings and structures are expressive of good
taste and design, are not of inferior quality, and are compatible with surrounding
developments in the general area.
Condition #1 of the Statement of Official Action provides direction to the ARB, including
the following:
a. Attention should be paid to the interaction of the use with both street
elevations. In particular, the 4th Street (street side yard) elevation should
have a pedestrian-friendly visual presence that balances security needs
with a sense of integration into the neighborhood.
This direction to ARB incorporates the concern expressed by the appellants, employing
a performance-based approach, rather than directive. Some level of transparency is
needed to achieve a sense of integration into the neighborhood. The appellants are
requesting more specific direction regarding the fence as part of the CUP, rather than
leaving it for the ARB’s design review decision.
18 of 23
Staff considers this aspect of the project as a design review matter. It is therefore
recommended to maintain the existing condition language and leave the burden of proof
on the applicant to design accordingly and allow the ARB to make this decision. Staff
also notes that at an informal preliminary design review discussion held by the ARB on
April 15, 2019, Board members were generally supportive of the proposed design but
did express concern about the renderings of 4th Street showing tall, thick hedges that
prevented the general public from experiencing the garden. They stated that they
hoped the applicants would return with a design that improved the connection between
street activity and the garden.
b. WEEKENDS:
We request the Rainbow Garden be closed on weekends, except for Special Events.
Staff does not believe that it is necessary to add this restriction. If approved, the school
use that would be permitted is made compatible with the neighborhood through
compliance with the conditions of this permit, including limits on hours of operation that
begin one hour later (9:00am) on weekends. It is further controlled by the special
events policy, which the appellants have asked Council to reconsider and revise.
Based on these parameters, staff has concluded that an additional restriction on
weekend use would potentially unnecessarily restrict the use and would not contribute
to its compatibility with the neighborhood.
c. HOLIDAYS:
We request the Rainbow Garden be closed on all legal holidays.
The Rainbow Garden’s proposed operational model is based on school groups coming
to the garden during their regular school hours. Both public and private schools are
closed on legal holidays. Although staff’s recommended conditions did not specify
closure on legal holidays, staff assumed that the garden would not be used on those
days. However, the current CUP conditions are silent so the garden could potentially be
open on holidays. Staff recommends adding this condition to assure the surrounding