HomeMy WebLinkAbout20191205_PC_MinutesPlanning Commission M inutes
December 5 , 2019
Deputy Community Development Director Campbell explained that in updating the Zoning Code in 2010 , the
Council limited the scope of modification permits to no more than 10 percent of the standard . The applicants could
not achieve their objectives through a modification permit because the rel ief sought exceeds 10 percent of the
standard leading to the subject variance application. Amending the Zoning Code to include regulat ions to
implement the stringline policy is an item on staff's work plan. The unique circumstances in this case include the
steep topography, the regulations , and the interior wall. Denying the variance request could result in the applicant
selling the home to someone who would demolish the existing structure and build a home with a la rge basem e nt.
In answer to Commissioner Ellmore's questions , Deputy Community Development Director Campbell stated the
project is an extensive remodel with an addition . The appearance of the proposed home will be completely different
from the existing structure .
Assistant Planner Westmoreland reported Condition of Approval No. 12 , regarding construction noise , should state
" ... on Saturdays , Sundays or Holidays ."
In response to Commissioner Rosene's inquiry, Deputy Community Development Director Campbell clarified that
the Council revised the modification permit process in 2010. The applicants cannot utilize a modification permit
because of the amount of relief they are seeking .
Steve Prough , a neighbor, expressed his support for the project.
Chair Koetting closed the public hearing .
Motion made by Secretary Lowrey and seconded by Chair Koetting to approve staff's recommendation with
the revision of Condition of Approval No. 12 .
AYES: Koetting , Weigand, Lowrey , Ellmore , Kleiman , Rosene
NOES:
RECUSED:
ABSENT: Klaustermeier
Commissioner Kleiman departed the meeting at approx imately 7 :12 p.m .
ITEM NO. 3 MALIBU FARM EXPANSION (PA2019-057)
Site Location: 3416, 3420, and 3424 Via Oporto
Summary:
A minor use pe rmit to expand an ex isting food service , eating and drinking establishment with a Type 47
(On -Sale General for Bona Fide Public Eating Place ) Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) license. The
existing restaurant is located at 3420 Via Oporto and includes indoor and outdoor areas . The existing
624 -square-foot, take-out-only ice cream and coffee shop (to remain) is located at 3416 Via Oporto . The
proposed ex pansion would convert the existing Malibu Farm retail store at 3424 Via Oporto into additional
restaurant space . No late hours (after 11 p.m .) are proposed . If approved , this Minor Use Perm it would
supersede Use Permit No . UP2017-026.
Recommended Action :
1. Condu ct a public hea ring ;
2. Find this project exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section
15301 under Class 1 (Existing Facilities) of the CEQA Guidelines because it ha s no potential to have
a significant effect on th e environment;
3. Adopt Resolution No . PC2019 -038 approving Minor Use Permit No . UP2019-022 and rescinding
Use Permit No . UP20 17 -026 .
4 of 7
Planning Commission Minutes
December 5 , 2019
Assistant Planner Westmoreland reported the Planning Commission approved a minor use permit for the
existing restaurant in 2017. In 2018 , a conditional use permit addressed parking for Lido Marina Village and
allocated the maximum square footage for restaurant uses in Lido Marina Village. If the Planning Commission
approves the project, 115 square feet of net public area will remain for restaurant uses within Lido Marina
Village. The applicant proposes to expand the existing restaurant and add a small back-of-house area to the
former Malibu Farm retail space . The applicant does not propose to operate the business after 11 p.m . The
2018 conditional use permit for parking at Lido Marina Village includes a condition of approval requiring a
minimum of 6 feet for public access along the waterfront but 10 feet is the ideal. Assistant Planner
Westmoreland described an improvement within the existing public walkway easement to provide a gated
landing area for an ADA-accessible gangway that redirects the public. Staff does not recommend approval of
the proposed patio area because it would allow for less than 10 feet of access, the ideal standard, and could
further impede public access in the presence of the gated landing area .
Commissioners disclosed no ex parte communications.
In answer to Vice Chair Weigand's inquiry, Assistant Planner Westmoreland advised that the gangway provides
access to different uses within the existing waterfront marina .
Chair Koetting opened the public hearing.
John Stockwell , business owner, remarked that the patio is important to the restaurant because people like to sit
outside. The distance between the proposed patio and the rail ing is only 5 feet, and pedestrians have to walk
around it. He proposed constructing a patio 10 feet away from the ADA-accessible gangway. The railing is a
sidewalk obstruction with or without the proposed patio .
In reply to Vice Chair Weigand's inquiries , Assistant Planner Westmoreland clarified that the condition of
approval states the public walkway along the waterfront should be 10 feet wide. The proposed patio would
provide a 6-foot accessway to the accessible gangway and encroach into the sidewalk. The restaurant has
an existing patio . Police Civilian Inspector Wendy Joe stated the Police Department's only interest in the
project pertains to alcohol licensing and use. Deputy Community Development Director Campbell suggested
staff could structure the conditions so that the Planning Commission could approve the project with the
proposed patio and the applicant could submit modifications to the patio for ministerial review and the Director's
approval.
In answer to Chair Koetting's question , Assistant Planner Westmoreland indicated an engineer familiar with
accessibility requirements would have to determine if the landing could be relocated .
In response to Commissioner Ellmore's queries , Mr. Stockwell advised that the proposed patio can
accommodate eight seats, and the edge of the patio would be 10 feet 5 inches away from the landing. The
patio does not receive direct sunlight because it's on the north side of the building , and umbrellas probably
would not be needed for shade.
In answer to Vice Chair Weigand's questions, Deputy Community Development Director Campbell related that
a retractable awning or umbrellas over the patio could be feasible . Previously , the Planning Commission
included a condition of approval indicating an ideal sidewalk would be 10 feet wide. A minimum width of 6 feet
is acceptable to staff.
Mr. Stockwell expressed concern regarding Conditions of Approval Nos . 2 and 6. Kristofer Golder, DJM
Capital , requested Condition of Approval No. 2 to be deleted because the applicant wants to retain the outdoor
patio; he requested Condition of Approval No . 3 should be modified to state maintenance of a 6-foot pedestrian
easement clear of any obstructions; Condition of Approval No. 6 should be deleted because it states only the
existing patio shall be permitted ; and a condition of approval may be added to require reconfiguring or removing
the existing ADA railings at the gangway to maintain clearance on the boardwalk .
Chair Koetting suggested the Planning Commission continue the item so that staff and the applicant can
resolve issues with the conditions of approval and the ADA-accessible gangway. He expressed concern about
insufficient parking to support an expansion of the restaurant.
5 of 7
Planning Commission Minutes
December 5 , 2019
Motion made by Chair Koetting and seconded by Commissioner Ellmore to continue the item .
In reply to Vice Chair Weigand's inquiries , Assistant Planner Westmoreland reported the expansion falls within
the allowable square footage allocated to restaurant uses under the parking study and the conditional use
permit for parking . The condition requires the boardwalk to be a minimum of 6 feet wide and ideally 10 feet
wide. With the proposed patio , the boardwalk will be 6 feet wide .
Vice Chair Weigand preferred to allow ministerial review and approval of any changes rather than to continue
the item . Deputy Community Development Director Campbell advised that staff could likely work with the
applicant and return the item to the Commission on January 9, 2020 . If the gated gangway landing could be
relocated , staff would support the proposed patio .
Commissioner Rosene could approve the project with ministerial review of modifications to the landing.
Community Development Director Seimone Jurjis indicated that the holiday closure would delay resolution of
the issues beyond the next few weeks.
Jim Mosher related that the building faces east, and the proposed patio would receive the morning sun .
Condition of Approval No . 57 refers to a 60-day time period but does not state the action that begins the 60-
day period .
Assistant Planner Westmoreland recommended Condition of Approval No . 57 state "within 60 days of
approval."
Chair Koetting closed the public hearing.
Chair Koetting and Commissioner Ellmore withdrew the motion.
Secretary Lowrey could agree to continuing the item or approving the project with ministerial review but did not
wish to delay the project unduly.
Based on Mr. Golder's confirmation that construction plans have not been submitted , Chair Koetting
commented that construction could not begin for several months. He proposed any motion require resolution
of the ADA-accessible gangway prior to allowing the applicant to implement the outdoor patio.
Deputy Community Development Director Campbell recommended the Planning Commission: (1) replace
Condition of Approval No . 2 with "the proposed 132-square-foot outdoor patio may be permitted provided the
existing dock railing impediment within the 6-foot easement is removed or relocated to the satisfaction of the
Director;" (2) delete the second and third sentences from Condition of Approval No . 3 ; and (3) delete the
second and third sentences from Condition of Approval No . 6 .
In answer to Commissioner Ellmore's query , Mr. Golder advised that an awning that does not impede the
boardwalk could be installed over the proposed patio . Condition of Approval No . 10 may be modified to state
"the use of umbrellas for shade purposes shall be permitted. Any other type of outdoor covering shall be
subject to review and approval by the Community Development Director."
Motion made by Vice Chair Weigand and seconded by Commissioner Rosene to adopt Resolution No .
PC2019-038 approving Minor Use Permit No. UP2019-022 and rescinding Use Permit No . UP2017-026 with
the stated revisions to Conditions of Approval Nos . 2 , 3 , 6 , 10 , and 57 .
6 of 7
AYES:
NOES:
RECUSED:
ABSENT:
Koetting , Weigand , Lowrey , Ellmore , Rosene
Klaustermeier, Kleiman
Planning Commission Minutes
December 5 , 2019
VII. STAFF AND COMMISSIONER ITEMS
ITEM NO. 4
None
ITEM NO. 5
MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION
REPORT BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR OR REQUEST FOR MATTERS
WHICH A PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBER WOULD LIKE PLACED ON A FUTURE
AGENDA.
Community Development Director Jurjis appreciated Commissioners' service during 2019. The next meeting will
be January 9 , 2020 . The Council has requested that staff prepare an action plan to address the Regional Housing
Needs Allocation (RHNA) for the City , and staff will present an action plan to the Council on January 14 , 2020 .
Listen and Learn workshops are scheduled for Districts 1 and 4, next week.
ITEM NO. 6 REQUESTS FOR EXCUSED ABSENCES
None
VIII. ADJOURNMENT -7 :55 p.m .
The agenda for the December 5, 2019, Planning Commission meeting was posted on Friday, November
22, 2019, at 3:00 p.m. in the Chambers binder, on the digital display board located inside the vestibule
of the Council Chambers at 100 Civic Center Drive, and on the City's website on Friday, November 22,
2019, at 1 :05 p.m .
7 of 7