HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-20-2012 ph1 slo brew use permit appealcouncil.• j i agenOa nepont
C I T Y O F S A N L U I S O B I S P O
FROM :
Derek Johnson, Community Development Directo r
Prepared By :
Marcus Carloni, Assistant Planne r
SUBJECT : CONTINUED HEARING ON THE APPEAL OF THE PLANNIN G
COMMISSION'S APPROVAL OF A NIGHT CLUB (SLO BREWING
COMPANY) RELOCATION IN THE HISTORIC DOWNTOWN COMMERCIA L
(C-D-H) ZONE (A 57-12).
RECOMMENDATIO N
Adopt a resolution (Attachment 1), denying the appeal of the Planning Commission's action t o
approve the project and granting final approval of a Night Club Use Permit allowing the relocatio n
of SLO Brewing Company within the Historic Downtown Commercial zone, based on findings an d
subject to conditions .
SITE DATA
Hamish Marshall : San Lui s
Downtown Managemen t
Carol Florence : Oasis Associates ,
Inc .
C-D-H (Historic Downtow n
Commercial )
General Retai l
^'10,800 square fee t
Categorically Exempt fro m
environmental review under :
Section 15301 :Existing Facilitie s
Section 15331 :Historical Resourc e
Section 15332 In-Fill Developmen t
REPORT IN BRIE F
The applicant, San Luis Downtown Management, is requesting to allow operation of a first floo r
restaurant/bar/brewery, second floor auditorium event space (nightclub), and rooftop pati o
(restaurant/lounge) at the subject property as the new location for the existing SLO Brewin g
Company, currently located at 1119 Garden Street.
PHI-1
Meeting Dam11/20/1 2
Item Number PH 1
•Applicant
Representativ e
Zonin g
General Pla n
Site Are a
Environmenta l
Statu s
•
Council Agenda Report Appeal of SLO Brewing Co . Relocation (A 57-12 : 736 738 Higuera Street )
November 20, 2012 Page 2
The Planning Commission approved the project on July 11, 2012 wit h
the addition of five conditions of approval . The project was appealed on / July 11, 201 2
July 20, 2012 by Save Our Downtown, citing concerns with the number \ P .C. Approval /i
of alcohol outlets in the downtown and the proposed creek-walk queue .
-
The City Council considered the appeal of the Planning Commission's ,
approval on September 25, 2012 . After considerable public testimon y
the City Council provided direction to the applicant to revise the project
July 20, 201 2
(five directional items). After the City Council hearing, the Cultural
S .O.D Appea l
Heritage Committee conceptually reviewed the project on October 22 ,
2012 and provided four directional items to the applicant and staff .
Since that time, staff has been working with the applicant to addres s
Council's direction, which is discussed in detail in the evaluation section September 25, 201 2
below. Significant progress has been made towards compliance with
Council Continuance
Council direction, and two options are discussed in this report related t o
Council's direction to remove the rooftop use from the project .r -----------
October 22, 201 2
CHC Conceptual Revie w
The following provides background on the project's advisory body review as well as an evaluatio n
of the project's response to Council's direction .
BACKGROUN D
Planning Commission Revie w
The Planning Commission (PC) unanimously approved the project on July 11, 2012 based on
findings and subject to conditions of approval . The Planning Commission added five conditions o f
approval related to hours of operation, creek-side lighting, bus parking location, and steel staircas e
noise mitigation .
Appea l
On July 20, 2012, Save Our Downtown (SOD) filed an appeal . Reasons for the appeal include the
following ; 1) concerns regarding the number of alcohol-outlets in the downtown and their impact s
on neighboring uses, 2) use of the creek-side patron queue rather than focusing patrons to the
Higuera Street entrance, 3) required parking for the new use, and 4) creek-side lighting levels . The
The first option allows for a redesigned roof level patio of reduced siz e
and capacity (see discussion under Council Direction #5 below). Th e
second option allows Council to approve the project absent the roo f
level patio if concerns remain regarding compatibility with neighboring
uses (alternative #1, Alternatives section). Staff recommends the optio n
inclusive of the roof level patio due to a significant reduction in roo f
level capacity (49 maximum persons, previously 145) and a redesigne d
roof level patio, conditioned to ensure that the roof level functions as a n
extension of the restaurant rather than as a rooftop nightclub .
PH1-2
Council Agenda Report Appeal of SLO Brewing Co . Relocation (A 57-12 : 736 738 Higuera Street )
November 20, 2012 Page 3
•September 25, 2012 staff report (Attachment 10) addressed all of the appellants concerns an d
provided recommended modifications to the conditions of approval for the Use Permit .
City Council Revie w
On September 25, 2012, the City Council continued the project with direction to the applicant fo r
project revisions . The final action gave direction to : 1) reduce the capacity of the project ; 2) relocat e
the patron queue to Higuera Street ; 3) review hours of operation ; 4) review first floor operations ;
and 5) remove the rooftop use . The action also included the review of additional items discussed a t
the hearing, which included :a)review conditions applied to the Creeky Tiki Use Permit especiall y
coordination with Mission Plaza events ; b) review alcohol service stop-time during second floo r
live entertainment, c) lighting effects on the creek,d)parking, and e) consider incorporation o f
exterior (creek-side) staircase inside the building .
Cultural Heritage Committee Revie w
On October 22, 2012, the project received conceptual review from the Cultural Heritage Committe e
(Attachment 11, CHC Minutes). Most notably, the CHC discussed the removal of the second floo r
wood structures, which would be replaced with the proposed steel staircase . The CHC felt that ther e
was not sufficient information to make a determination as to the historic significance of thes e
structures, and requested the applicant to provide a historic background report . Provided the woo d
• buildings are not deemed significant, the CHC considered the proposed steel staircase and wa s
concerned with the size of the staircase and its potential to affect the historic integrity of th e
building . The CHC asked the applicant to consider redesigning the staircase to be more compatibl e
with the scale and design of the historic building . As an option, the CHC noted a two-story exterio r
staircase may be appropriate along with an internal staircase to the roof level patio, provided th e
roof level patio is allowed to remain (see Council Direction #5 below).
Upon completion of the historic background report and final review of the project by the CHC, th e
floor plans and rear elevation of the building may be subject to change in order to meet prope r
occupant load and exiting requirements of the California Building Code . Modifications to the floo r
plan and occupant loads will substantially comply with plans reviewed by the City Council or wil l
require a modification to this Use Permit (Condition #2).
Ultimately, the CHC provided the following direction on the project ; 1) provide histori c
background information from a qualified historian on the wood portions of the building at the rea r
of the site, 2) maintain any existing historic building features on the exterior of the building an d
adapt use to fit these features, 3) maintain skylights in existing locations, and 4) coordinate fron t
facade features with historic building features and use historically-appropriate materials .
PH1-3
•
Council Agenda Report Appeal of SLO Brewing Co . Relocation (A 57-12 : 736 738 Higuera Street )
November 20, 2012 Page 4
EVALUATIO N
At the September 25, 2012 City Council hearing, the Council provided direction to the applicant a s
discussed above . Response to Council direction is evaluated and discussed in the followin g
sections :
Council Direction #1 :Reduce the capacity of the project .
The applicant has revised the floor plans in order to reduce the overall capacity of the projec t
from the previous submittal . The applicant proposes dual occupant loads for the first leve l
restaurant/bar/brewery (see discussion under Council direction #4 below); 191 maximu m
persons during normal operation and 338 maximum persons during late night operation .
Averaging the dual occupancies for the first floor and adding the proposed occupant load o f
the second and roof levels yields an average total capacity reduction of 26% (277 persons )
from the previous submittal (see occupancy tables below).
The first floor now provides for a reduced size restaurant/bar/brewery (191 normal/338 lat e
night maximum persons, previously 257/476), an expanded kitchen and brewery, a redesigne d
storefront system with a sliding glass panel-door system providing access to Higuera Stree t
outdoor dining and a ticket booth along Higuera Street . The second floor now provides for a
reduced size auditorium (473 maximum persons, previously 600) with booth seating, a bar ,
and an enlarged stage and green room . The applicant proposes a reduced capacity (4 9
maximum persons, previously 145) rooftop patio as discussed under Council direction #5
below. The applicant has responded to Council direction to reduce the capacity of th e
building . The proposed capacity is a 26% reduction from the previous submittal, and th e
average capacity increase, as compared to the existing (1119 Garden Street) location, is 22%.
Normal Operation (Maximum Persons)1
*Represents Auditorium Capacity only . Entire second floor capacity is 500 maximum persons .
The tables provide an occupancy analysis comparing the new proposal with the occupancy of the first proposal an d
the existing SLO Brewing Company location (1119 Garden). The last two columns of each table (% reduction and %
increase over existing) provide two figures; percent change and number ofpersons change in parenthesis . E .g. -26 %
means a 26 percent reduction in occupancy from the first submittal and (-66) provides the number of person s
reduced from the first submittal .
PH1-4
(1119 Garden)(736/738 Higuera)(736/738 Higuera) (New vs .
Total Capacity
(New vs. Existing)
•
•
•
Council Agenda Report Appeal of SLO Brewing Co .Relocation (A 57-12 : 736 738 Higuera Street )
November 20, 2012 Page 5
•
Late Night Operation (Maximum Persons)l *
(1119 Garden)(736/738 Higuera)(736/738 Higuera)(New vs.1st (New vs .Existing)
Auditorium Space 457 600 473 -21% (-127)4% (16 )
Total Capacity 741 1221 860 -30% (-361)16% (119)
*Concentrated Use proposes increased occupancy due to replacing some of the restaurant tables/chairs with tall bar tables,
typically during late night operation . See Attachment 6, sheet 9 .
**Represents Auditorium Capacity only . Entire second floor capacity is 500 maximum persons .
Council Direction #2 :Relocate the patron queue to Higuera Street .
Public Works and Planning staff have reviewed relocating the patron queue to Higuera Stree t
rather than solely at the rear (creek-side) of the building . The reduced capacity of the projec t
results in a maximum patron queue length
of approximately 350 feet (assuming a two
person wide line and an event sold out to
maximum capacity) as compared to th e
first proposal's 450 foot long line .
•Staff review determined the mo s
appropriate queue route is along Higuera
Street toward Chorro Street rather tha n
Higuera Street to Broad Street, due t o
narrow sidewalk width along Broad Street .
A 350 foot long queue along the Higuera
Street sidewalk is pictured at right .
Higuera Street has many recessed storefronts which would allow for concentrated persons (i .e .
a line greater than two persons wide); shortening the overall length of the queue when thos e
businesses are closed . Conditions of approval (#22)ensure the patron queue does not bloc k
entry/exit of operating businesses, and maintains a minimum six foot wide clear path of trave l
along the Higuera Street sidewalk . Conditions of approval (#25)allow the patron queue to us e
the creek-side pedestrian bridge to access the rear entrance to the second floor durin g
Farmers' Market or other downtown events, which may conflict with a patron queue along th e
Higuera Street sidewalk .
Council Direction#3 :Review hours of operation .
The Planning Commission (July 11 th hearing) approved general operation hours of 11 :00 a .m.
to 2 :00 a.m . Monday through Friday, and 9 :00 a.m . to 2 :00 a.m . Saturday and Sunday . Th e
Planning Commission also approved special event (Graduation, St . Patrick's Day, Cinco de
Mayo) hours of 6 :00 a .m. to 1 :00 a .m . After the Planning Commission's approval of the
PH1-5
Council Agenda Report Appeal of SLO Brewing Co . Relocation (A 57-12 : 736 738 Higuera Street )
November 20, 2012 Page 6
project the applicant requested earlier opening hours (7 :00 a .m . daily) to provide breakfas t
service at the restaurant .
The City Council (September 25 th hearing) expressed concern regarding modified hours o f
operation for special events as approved by the Planning Commission . The applicant ha s
withdrawn the request to allow earlier operating hours (6 :00 a.m. opening) for special event s
(Winter/Spring graduation, St . Patrick's Day, Cinco de Mayo). Staff recommended condition s
of approval (#7) allow hours of operation as shown below . Condition #7 also allows for th e
possibility of earlier operating hours for events at the second level auditorium, subject to th e
review and written approval of the Community Development and Police Departments . The
intent of this condition is to allow earlier use of the auditorium for entertainment event s
without a patron queue (i .e . children's concerts, weddings, movie showings).
Monday-Sunda y
Outdoor Hours of operation 9 :00 am to 11 :00 p m
Council Direction #4 :Review first floor operations .
The applicant proposes maintaining a dual occupant load for the first leve l
restaurant/bar/brewery . The proposed dual occupancy figures are provided in the occupancy
tables of Council Direction #1 (above) and represented graphically in Attachment 6, sheet 9 .
Normal operation occupancy at the first level restaurant/bar/brewery consists of fixed an d
loose tables/chairs with bar seating and a billiards lounge . Maximum normal operatio n
(restaurant) occupancy at the first level of the building will be 191 persons ; a 26% (66 person )
decrease in occupancy from the previous submittal .
Late night (concentrated use) occupancy increases due to the removal of some of th e
restaurant's loose tables/chairs and providing tall bar-style tables . Maximum late nigh t
operation (concentrated use) occupancy will be 338 persons ; a 29% (138 person) decrease i n
occupancy from the previous submittal . Staff is supportive of the proposed dual occupan t
load. Building and Fire Department have analyzed the dual occupancy load and determine d
that it complies with the requirements of the California Building Code .
Council Direction #5 :remove the rooftop use .
At the September 25 th hearing, the Council noted concerns with noise, occupancy, an d
primary use of the proposed roof level patio as a bar, and directed removal of the rooftop use .
The applicant has significantly redesigned the project and made substantial reductions i n
occupancy in addition to relocating the queuing of patrons from Mission Plaza to Higuer a
Street .
•
•
•
PH1-6
Council Agenda Report Appeal of SLO Brewing Co . Relocation (A 57-12 : 736 738 Higuera Street )
November 20, 2012 Page 7
The substantial reductions in occupancy and relocated patron queue have largely changed th e
focus of activity from the rear to the front of the building . Additionally, the use of the spac e
has changed from a nightclub to a restaurant . The substantially redesigned patio is discusse d
below in detail . Staffs assessment is that the substantial redesign to the project wit h
significant occupancy reductions, queuing locations, and change in rooftop use addresse s
concerns about the proposed roof level patio impacts to Mission Plaza and neighboring areas .
The applicant's Sound Level Assessment provides an analysis of noise generated by use of th e
roof level patio (Attachment 7, Addendum). Sound level contours are based on patron voice s
with recorded background music, 145 people on the roof level patio, and 50 people queued o n
the subject property compared to no activity on the roof level patio or subject propert y
(Attachment 7 Addendum, Figure 5). Figure 5 of Attachment 7 Addendum shows a on e
decibel increase above ambient noise level at the creek-walk and no change to ambient nois e
level in Mission Plaza ; in compliance with the City's Noise Ordinance .
In response to Council's concerns regarding roof level noise, the applicant provided a roofto p
architectural tensioning system (Attachment 6, sheet 8) which will further reduce emitte d
noise . Additionally, the applicant has redesigned the proposed roof level patio to function as a
restaurant/lounge (similar to that of the new Granada Hotel on Mono Street), eliminated th e
concentrated use (i .e . bar) occupancy, and has reduced the size of the roof level patio to 98 0
square feet (previously 1,099 square feet). The applicant has agreed to a maximum occupan t
load of 49 persons (previously 145 persons).
If Council supports the redesigned roof level patio option, the conditions of approva l
(Attachments 1 and 2) have been modified to address roof level patio concerns as follows :
1.A maximum occupant load of 49 persons (#3),
2.The roof level patio closes no later than 11 :00 p .m. nightly (#7), and
3.Prohibits ambient level entertainment (recorded or performed music) at all time s
to discourage patron conversation levels of an increased volume (#8).
Staff's assessment is that the redesigned roof level patio option, with modified conditions an d
change in use, addresses Council's basis for the direction to remove the rooftop use . The roo f
level patio option, as redesigned, presents an opportunity for a dining experience an d
panoramic perspective currently unavailable in the downtown. If Council continues to hav e
concerns in light of modifications to the project, an alternative action (Alternative #1) i s
included to approve the project without the redesigned roof level patio and staff has prepared a
resolution for approval of the project absent the roof level patio (Attachments 3 and 4). Shoul d
Council utilize Alternative #1 to remove the roof level patio, the plans will be modifie d
accordingly and the project would proceed through the Architectural Review process .
Discussion Item a):review conditions applied to the Creeky Tiki Use Permit especiall y
coordination with Mission Plaza events .
•
The Creeky Tiki Use Permit requires consultation with the Mission Plaza Events Coordinato r
to ensure there are no conflicts between outdoor entertainment and events at Mission Plaza
PH1-7
•
•
Council Agenda Report Appeal of SLO Brewing Co . Relocation (A 57-12 : 736 738 Higuera Street )
November 20, 2012
Page 8
and Old Mission Church . Additionally, the Use Permit establishes outdoor hours of operatio n
as follows : 11 :00 a .m. to 10 :00 p .m . daily, with summer hours (June, July, August, an d
September) on Friday and Saturday nights until 11 :00 p .m . The Use Permit also establishe s
noise thresholds and hours of operation for outdoor entertainment .
Conditions of approval (#28) require the applicant to provide a monthly entertainmen t
schedule to, and regularly consult with, the Mission Plaza Events Coordinator . Also ,
conditions of approval (#8) prohibit live or ambient level entertainment (recorded o r
performed music) in outdoor areas . Staff is recommending outdoor opening hours of 9 :00 a .m .
to allow breakfast service in outdoor areas (roof level patio, creek-side dining, Higuera Stree t
dining), and 11 :00 p .m . closing of outdoor areas as recommended by the Plannin g
Commission . The outdoor areas will operate as an extension of the restaurant and staff i s
recommending closing hours (11 :00 p .m .) consistent with neighboring restaurants' outdoo r
dining (i .e . Novo and Luna Red).
Discussion Item b):review alcohol service stop-lime during second floor live entertainment .
The City Council discussed the consideration of an alcohol service stop-time for events at th e
second floor auditorium (e .g . discontinue alcohol service one hour before end of last event).
Upon staff review of the business's proposed operation and floor plan of the building ,
requiring an alcohol service stop-time appears either infeasible and/or unlikely to accomplis h
the apparent objective of reducing alcohol consumption . If alcohol service were to stop at th e
second floor auditorium at a specified time prior to end of the last event, a patron would stil l
have the ability to obtain alcohol via the first floor restaurant's bar, either during or upo n
conclusion of the last event . Thus, an earlier upstairs alcohol service end time could have th e
unintended consequence of significantly increasing circulation between the first and secon d
floors or concentrating occupant loads on the first floor, and significantly altering th e
operator's plan of the business .
Additionally, the end time of the last event varies (e .g . 10 :00 p .m . to 1 :00 a .m.), yet th e
auditorium may remain open until 2 :00 a .m. for general operations ; allowing event attendee s
to remain in the auditorium after an event . This means a live event may end between 10 :0 0
p .m . and 1 :00 a .m ., but the second floor auditorium may remain open as a nightclub until 2 :0 0
a .m . This allows patrons to remain in the second floor auditorium upon completion of a n
entertainment event . Allowing event patrons to remain in the auditorium after an event an d
exit the space in a leisurely manner lessens the impact to the Higuera Street sidewalk of a
high-volume post-event release of patrons .
Discussion Item c):lighting effects on the cree k
Recommended conditions of approval (#26) require the applicant to provide an evaluation o f
creek-side lighting levels on the subject property and the length of the patron queue over the
pedestrian bridge . The City Council expressed concern regarding additional on-site lighting i n
this area and the potential effect on the creek habitat .
•
•
•
PH1-8
Council Agenda Report Appeal of SLO Brewing Co . Relocation (A 57-12 : 736 738 Higuera Street )
November 20,2012 Page 9
•Chapter 17 .23 .030 of the City's Municipal Code requires the applicant to submit a lightin g
plan including illuminating device descriptions and photometric plans showing lighting level s
emanating from any new light source . Conditions of approval (#26) ensure plans submitted fo r
review by the Architectural Review Commission include a lighting plan for the creek-sid e
patio and ensure creek-side lighting levels are to the satisfaction of the City Biologist, Polic e
Department, and Community Development Department .
Discussion Item d):parkin g
The project site is contained within the Downtown Commercial (C-D) zoning category .
Within the C-D zone, the parking requirements for various land uses are described in Sectio n
17 .16 .060 .G of the Zoning Regulations and are significantly reduced from the requirements i n
other zones . hi summary, the parking rates for hotels and residential uses are 50% of th e
requirements in other zones, assembly-type uses such as restaurants/bars/nightclubs an d
theaters are one space for every 350 square feet of gross floor area, and all other uses, such a s
retail and office, are one space for every 500 square feet of gross floor area .
The reduced parking rates in the C-D zone are intended to provide flexibility in meetin g
parking requirements and rely on the majority of parking being provided within consolidate d
facilities, such as public parking structures (General Plan L .U .E . Policy 4 .10). Additionally ,
the parking rates were intended to be a tool to help focus development in the downtown an d
•
position fees that are not an unreasonable barrier to changes in use which have greater parkin g
demands .
In the C-D zone, required parking does not necessarily need to be provided on the project site .
Section 17 .16 .060 .G7 of the City's Municipal Code allows applicants for projects in the C-D
zone to pay in-lieu fees to meet required parking requirements . This payment of in-lieu fees i s
based on the concept of having consolidated parking facilities in the downtown (L .U .E . Policy
4 .10) with the collected fees going to a City parking fund to pay for the on-going maintenanc e
costs of existing parking facilities and the construction of new parking structures .
Consolidated parking helps to keep the downtown more pedestrian-oriented, relying on driver s
making the decision to keep their vehicle in a single location and walking to multiple location s
or businesses, rather than driving between nearby points .
The parking in-lieu fees were calculated in accordance with Chapter 4 .30 Parking In-Lie u
Fees of the City's Municipal Code [City Council Ordinance No . 1101 (1987) and 142 2
(2002)]. Parking was calculated based on the change in use from retail (1 parking spac e
required per 500 square feet of gross floor area) to restaurant/bar/nightclub (1 parking spac e
required per 350 square feet of gross floor area) utilizing the gross floor area of each floor .
The buildings change in use amounts to approximately 12 .5 parking spaces with no overal l
increase in floor area due to removal of a 1,713 square foot mezzanine .
The change in occupancy in-lieu fee is $4,582 per space which amounts to approximatel y
•
$57,000 . Section 17 .16 .060 .H of the Municipal Code provides the City discretion to requir e
additional parking if the facts support it and findings are made to request additional spaces .
PH1-9
Council Agenda Report Appeal of SLO Brewing Co . Relocation (A 57-12 : 736 738 Higuera Street )
November 20, 2012 Page 1 0
Staffs assessment is that Chapter 4 .30 anticipated this type of change in use and provided a
formula for determining the appropriate in-lieu fee .
Discussion Item e):consider incorporation of exterior (creek-side) staircase inside th e
building .
The applicant team reviewed the possibility of removing the proposed exterior steel staircas e
(at the rear of the building) from the project and incorporating the staircase interior to th e
building . The applicant has indicated incorporating the entire staircase interior to the buildin g
is infeasible due to a significant reduction of usable interior space and significant structura l
changes to the building . Modifying the staircase circulation was identified by the Council a s
an approach for the applicant to consider in limiting occupancy of the building ,
As provided under Council Direction #1 (above), the applicant has significantly limited th e
capacity of the project . Additionally, as provided under Cultural Heritage Committee revie w
above, the CHC has requested additional historic background information in consideration o f
removing the second floor wood structures . If the CHC deems the structures significant, th e
applicant will need to incorporate the wood structures and existing wood staircase into th e
project .
Use Permit Resolution Summar y
Conditions of approval for the Use Permit ensure the use is consistent with the City's adopte d
General Plan and performance standards found in the City's Municipal Code . Conditions includ e
the mandatory closing of windows and doors during entertainment to reduce noise and crow d
impacts on adjacent businesses and residences (#13 & 14), the requirement for maintenance of a
video recording system (#33), ensuring on-going security/safety training (#19 & #20) for new staf f
personnel and the proper maintenance and clean-up of the site and its surroundings (#21).
Condition #18 requires a manager to be present and available for contact by a City representativ e
and/or adjacent property owners/tenants during events to minimize the need for police response t o
minor issues . Conditions of approval provide consistency with adopted City policy to manag e
alcohol outlets and reduce the number of alcohol-associated incidents/impacts on police resource s
to promote a safer downtown environment .
Condition #36 requires an automatic review hearing one year from date of occupancy to monitor
and report on the compliance with the conditions of approval and compatibility with the project sit e
and uses in the vicinity . The one-year review will be an opportunity to determine if any condition s
need to be modified, added or deleted, or if the Use Permit needs to be revoked based on th e
operational characteristics of the business .
CONCURRENCE S
The project has been reviewed by the Police, Building, Fire, Utilities, Public Works, an d
Transportation departments . Conditions suggested by these departments have been incorporated int o
PH1-10
•
•
•
•
•
•
Council Agenda Report Appeal of SLO Brewing Co . Relocation (A 57-12 : 736 738 Higuera Street )
November 20, 2012 Page 1 1
the resolution and these departments concur with the recommendation, including conditions o f
approval to mitigate and address operational concerns and potential conflicts with the downtow n
neighbors .
CONCLUSION
The project has responded to Council direction to reduce the overall capacity (an average 26 %
reduction in occupancy from the previous project), relocate the patron queue to Higuera Street, an d
eliminate special event hours of operation . Although Council directed the applicant to remove th e
rooftop use in light of concerns regarding noise and concentrated occupancy (145 persons) due to
use of the space as a bar, the applicant has redesigned the proposed roof level patio to function a s
an extension of the restaurant with a maximum occupant load of 49 persons . Staff has provide d
conditions of approval supporting the option of a roof level patio (Attachments 1 and 2). If Counci l
continues to have concerns in light of the redesigned roof level patio, staff has provided a n
alternative (alternative #1) to approve the project absent the roof level patio and has prepared a n
alternative resolution (Attachments 3 and 4).
Consistent with Council direction, staff has applied conditions of approval similar to the Creek y
Tiki Use Permit, ensured lighting levels will not significantly impact the creek habitat, and ensure d
parking requirements are consistent with City policy . Conditions of approval address potentia l
impacts (circulation, noise, security, etc .) and ensure the project is compatible with neighborin g
uses and consistent with the General Plan and applicable City policy .
Additionally, the proposed project will facilitate the development of Garden Street Ter races,a
major downtown redevelopment project, and will facilitate the full seismic retrofit of the subjec t
location and the 1119 Garden Street location .
Staff is recommending denial of the appeal, upholding the Planning Commission's approval of th e
project . If the appeal is denied, the applicant must submit design plans that will be reviewed by th e
CHC and ARC . Following the approval of planning permits, building permits and any othe r
encroachment permits would need to be obtained .
FISCAL IMPAC T
When the General Plan was prepared, it was accompanied by a fiscal impact analysis, which foun d
that overall the General Plan was fiscally balanced . Accordingly, since the proposed project i s
consistent with the General Plan, it has a neutral fiscal impact .
ALTERNATIVES
1 . Approve the project with removal of the roof level patio (Attachments 3 and 4). An actio n
approving the project with removal of the roof level patio should include findings of conflic t
with neighboring downtown uses and will need to be based on evidence in the record presente d
by the City Council supporting this conclusion .
PHI-11
Council Agenda Report Appeal of SLO Brewing Co . Relocation (A 57-12 : 736 738 Higuera Street )
November 20, 2012 Page 1 2
2.Continue the item . An action to continue the item should include a detailed list of additiona l
information or project modifications required . This is not recommended as the City Counci l
provided direction to the applicant to make significant modifications to the project .
3.Direct staff to return to the City Council with the necessary findings to uphold the appeal an d
deny the project with prejudice 2 .If the Council takes this alternative, the applicant would b e
precluded from submitting a substantially similar application for a one year period .
Staff does not recommend this alternative . No evidence has been provided to support th e
appeal points . Public safety and land use compatibility issues have been addressed throug h
design measures and extensive conditions of approval .
4.Direct staff to return to the City Council with the necessary findings to uphold the appeal an d
deny the project without prejudice . If the Council chooses this alternative, the applicant coul d
submit a similar application for consideration within a one year period .
Staff does not recommend this alternative . No evidence has been provided to support th e
appeal points . Public safety and land use compatibility issues have been addressed throug h
design measures and extensive conditions of approval . An action to deny the project withou t
prejudice should include a list of additional information or project modifications .
ATTACHMENT S
1.Draft Resolutio n
2.Legislative Draft Resolution (indicates changes from September 25 th Resolution)
3.Draft Resolution absent roof level pati o
4.Legislative Draft Resolution absent roof level patio (indicates modified roof level pati o
conditions and changes from September 25 th Resolution )
5.Applicant response to Council directio n
6.Project Plans (revised October 19, 2012 )
7.Sound Level Assessment (May 8, 2012) &Addendum (August 9, 2012 )
8.July 11, 2012 P .C . Staff Report (without attachments) & Minute s
9.Appeal Documentation :Save Our Downtown &Municipal Code Ch .17 .66 Appeal s
10.September 25, 2012 Council Agenda Report &Minutes
11.October 22, 2012 Draft CHC Minute s
12.Public Correspondence as of November 1, 201 2
DISTRIBUTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL :
11" x 17" colored plan s
\\chstore4\Team\Council Agenda Reports\ 2012\ 2012-11-20\SLO Brew Use Pennit Appeal-con's from 9-25 mtg (Johnson-Carton)\E-Council Agend a
Report_SLO Brew_second hearing.docx
2 City of San Luis Obispo Zoning Regulations Chapter 17 .64 Repeat Applications . Section 17 .64 .010 .A: When an
application made pursuant to these regulations has been denied, no new application which is substantially the same shal l
be filed within one year of the date of the previous denial unless the Planning Commission, for good cause, shall gran t
permission to do so, or the Council or Planning Commission shall initiate such application .
•
•
•
PH1-12
Attachment 1
RESOLUTION NO .
(2012 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO DENYING AN
APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S ACTION TO APPROVE THE PROJECT ,
MODIFYING THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S APPROVAL, AND GRANTING FINAL
APPROVAL OF A NIGHT CLUB USE PERMIT ALLOWING THE RELOCATION OF SL O
BREWING COMPANY INTO THE MASTER LIST CARRISA BUILDING AS
REPRESENTED IN COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT AND ATTACHMENTS DATE D
NOVEMBER 20, 2012 (736/738 HIGUERA STREET, A 57-12 )
WHEREAS,the Planning Commission, on July 11, 2012, approved a Night Club Use Permi t
to allow relocation of SLO Brewing Company in the Historic Downtown Commercial zone ; an d
WHEREAS,David Brodie, on behalf of Save Our Downtown, filed an appeal of the Plannin g
Commission's action on July 20, 2012 ; and
WHEREAS,the City Council, on September 25, 2012, conducted a public hearing for the
purpose of considering the appeal of the Planning Commission's action and continued the hearing wit h
direction to the applicant for project revisions ; and
WHEREAS,the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public hearing in th e
Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, on November 20, 2012 ,
for the purpose of considering revised plans for the final approval ; an d
WHEREAS,the City Council has duly considered all evidence, including the record of th e
Planning Commission hearing and action, testimony of interested parties, and the evaluation an d
recommendations by staff, presented at said hearing .
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED,by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo a s
follows :
SECTION 1 .Findings .Based upon all the evidence, the City Council makes the following
findings :
1.As conditioned, the use will not harm the general health, safety, and welfare of people living o r
working in the vicinity because conditions on the Use Permit approval will minimize nois e
impacts, as well as impacts to police resources and the community .
2.The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan, which designates the project site a s
Downtown Commercial (C-D). The City General Plan Land Use Element Policy 4 .3 ,
Entertainment and Cultural Facilities, states that "...Entertainment facilities, such as nightclub s
and private theaters, should be in the downtown ..."
3.
The proposed project is consistent with General Plan policy to locate, at the street level ,
•
restaurants, stores, and other uses benefiting from and contributing to pedestrian traffic (LU E
4 .16 .1).
PH1-1 3
•
•
Resolution No . (2012 Series )
Page 2
Attachment 1
•
4.The proposed use is consistent with Land Use Element Society and Economy goal #24 ; to serve
as the County's hub for entertainment and cultural services .
5.
The property owner has agreed to conditions of approval that place restrictions on the use of th e
property to insure that nuisances and significant burdens on police resources do not occur .
6.As conditioned, the proposed use is compatible with the project site and with existing an d
potential uses in the vicinity which include retail shops, offices, restaurants, and bars . Conditions
of approval have been adopted to minimize potential disturbances and criminal activities .
Section 2 .Environmental Review .Categorically exempt under the following : Section 1530 1
(Existing Facilities) of the CEQA Guidelines because the project proposes the relocation of a busines s
into an existing building with no overall increase in floor area of that existing building, Section 1533 1
(Historical Resource Restoration/Rehabilitation) because modifications to the building will b e
consistent with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties, an d
Section 15332 (In-Fill Development Projects) because the project is within City limits, consistent wit h
applicable City policy, surrounded by urban uses, and on a project site less than 5 acres in size serve d
by required utilities and public services .
Section 3 .Action .The City Council hereby denies the appeal of the Planning Commission's
action to approve the project and grants final approval of a Night Club Use Permit allowing th e
relocation of SLO Brewing Company within the Historic Downtown Commercial zone, wit h
incorporation of the following conditions :
Conditions :
1.Prior to establishment of the use, a building plan check submittal that is in full confonnance wit h
submitted project plans and the following conditions of approval shall be submitted for revie w
and approval of the Community Development Department .
2.All improvements to the building shall be done in compliance with the Secretary of the Interior's
Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties and shall be reviewed by the Cultural Heritag e
Committee .
3.Plans submitted for a building permit shall substantially comply with occupant loads provided i n
revised plans dated October 19, 2012 and approved by the City Council (November 20, 201 2
hearing), or the project will require modification to this Use Permit .
4.The roof level patio shall not exceed a maximum occupant load of 49 persons .
5.Prior to release of occupancy, the applicant shall pay applicable parking in-lieu fees for th e
change in use from retail to restaurant/bar/nightclub, a difference of approximately 12 parking
spaces .
PH1-14
•
•
Resolution No . (2012 Series)
Attachment 1
•
Page 3
6.The applicant shall provide a minimum of ten short-term bicycle parking spaces on-site .
7.Entertainment shall be located only in the areas specified on floor plans stamped with
Community Development Department approval .
8.Live entertainment, above the level that is compliant with the City's definition of ambien t
entertainment, shall be confined to the second level auditorium as shown on project plans an d
entertainment events shall not be performed outside the hours of 6 :00 p .m. to 1 :00 a .m .A
modification to event hours of operation (second level auditorium) to allow earlier operation o f
small scale events with no patron queue may be allowed subject to the review and writte n
approval of the Community Development and Police Departments . General business hours fo r
use of the space that does not include live entertainment shall be limited to 7 :00 a .m . to 2 :00 a .m .
Monday through Sunday with all outdoor hours of operation limited to 9 :00 a .m . to 11 :00 p .m .
9.Live or ambient entertainment shall not be allowed in any outdoor areas (i .e . Higuera Street
dining, creek-side dining, roof level patio).
10.The proposed use shall operate in conformance with the City Noise Ordinance (M .C . Chapte r
9 .12, Noise Control) to maintain compatibility with the nearby residences and businesses . Th e
•
project shall operate within the noise levels established by the applicant's submitted sound leve l
assessment .
11.The applicant is responsible at all times for verifying the legal age of patrons prior to entry, fo r
monitoring patrons' on site alcohol consumption, and for declining to serve alcohol to patron s
who demonstrate signs of intoxication or impairment associated with alcohol consumption, base d
on training that is to be provided to all staff.
12.No individual under 21 years of age, or without proper identification, shall be served or sol d
alcohol .
13.The applicant shall not permit its patrons to leave the licensed premises with any alcoholi c
beverage or to consume alcoholic beverages on any property adjacent to the licensed premise s
under the control of the licensee(s).
14.The applicant shall make reasonable efforts to minimize the potential for adverse noise and crow d
impacts on adjacent establishments and nearby residences, including, but not limited to, ensurin g
that all windows and doors are closed during any entertainment.
15.The proposed sliding panel door system along Higuera Street shall be closed no later than 10 :0 0
p .m . nightly.
•
16 . Prior to release of occupancy, the applicant shall upgrade and finalize the security plan to reflec t
operation at the 736/738 Higuera Street location . This shall include a site plan/floor plan detailin g
PH1-15
Resolution No . (2012 Series)
Page 4
Attachment 1
•
the locations and duties of security personnel and shall include the proposed patron routes an d
note regular maintenance/patrol of these routes, to the satisfaction of the Communit y
Development Director and Police Department . This plan shall be reviewed and commented upo n
by the Police Department on an annual basis .
17.The security plan shall include a detailed explanation of how maximum occupant load limits wil l
be maintained .
18.The security plan shall provide that "no person will be prevented from using the emergency exi t
stairway that passes by the `Green Room' in the event of an emergency," and that "no ac t
utilizing pyrotechnics or live fire will be permitted ."
19.To address complaints and minimize the need for police response to minor issues, an owner o r
manager shall be on premises at all times when entertainment is performed, and shall be availabl e
to be contacted by a City representative and/or adjacent property owner or tenant . The applican t
shall provide and regularly update contact information to the City's Police, Fire, and Communit y
Development departments and adjacent property owners and tenants .
20.All employees shall attend ABC LEAD Training or equivalent training .
21.The applicant shall be responsible for on-going security/safety training to accommodate change s
in personnel .
22.The site shall be maintained in a neat and orderly manner at all times . The applicant shall b e
responsible for daily cleanup maintenance of the front and back patio areas, the areas of patro n
queuing, and any waste associated with the business in Mission Plaza .
23.The applicant shall manage/patrol outdoor crowds and queuing as a result of this use . An orderly
line of patrons awaiting entry that does not block public access on, or use of, the sidewalk o r
street shall be maintained . The primary queuing area shall be from the Higuera Stree t
entrance/ticket counter easterly up Higuera Street towards Chorro Street . Queuing at this locatio n
shall be located against the building facades and away from the curb line and adjoining parkin g
lane . The queue delineation shall generally maintain a 6' clear area for public pedestrian passage .
This required clear area may be reduced to not less than 4' where sidewalk furniture, trees, o r
other obstructions will not reasonably allow for a 6' clear path . The queue shall not bloc k
entry/exit of operating businesses and shall have the appropriate gaps to allow pedestrians to
circulate across the line unobstructed .
24.The applicant shall improve the public curb, gutter, sidewalk, and tree well in the area of the mai n
entry/ticket sales window to accommodate the queue and provide for accessible passage by th e
general public . The improvements shall include but are not limited to the removal an d
replacement of displaced curb, gutter, and/or sidewalk, protection of utility vaults, tree roo t
pruning, and the installation of a tree grate to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department .
PH1-16
•
•
•
•
Resolution No . (2012 Series)
Attachment 1
Page 5
25.Improvements located within the public right-of-way or easement areas shall be shown on th e
building plan submittal for reference . A separate encroachment permit will be required from th e
Public Works Department for any work or construction staging located within the public right-of -
way or public easement areas .
26.Unless otherwise approved by the City, an alternate queue commencing from the creek-sid e
entry/exit and extending across the pedestrian bridge shall be used when the event schedule migh t
conflict with Farmers Market . Use of the pedestrian bridge route as a patron queue may b e
allowed to avoid conflict with other downtown events (e .g . permitted parades or assemblies ,
permitted work within the Higuera Street right-of-way, or other potentially conflicting event a s
identified by the City of San Luis Obispo or the applicant) subject to approval of the City . This
alternate route shall be managed so that the patrons will be tightly aligned in a single file lin e
along the east/southeastern creek-side guard rail and the eastern-most side of the pedestria n
bridge . This orderly patron line shall have the appropriate gaps to allow pedestrians to circulat e
across the line unobstructed .
27.Plans submitted for a building permit shall show and note the patron queue across the pedestrian
bridge . The patron route shall be upgraded as necessary to remove any obstructions or uneve n
pavement, to the satisfaction of City Building Division and Public Works Department . Pathway
upgrades shall include an evaluation of creek-side lighting levels, including the length of th e
pedestrian bridge patron route, and may require an upgrade to path lighting . A lighting plan fo r
the creek-side patio shall be provided with plans submitted for review by the Architectura l
Review Commission . Creek-side lighting levels shall be to the satisfaction of the City Biologist ,
Police Department and Community Development Department .
28.Construction work related to any proposed path upgrades shall be coordinated with any Cit y
Capital Improvement Project, or permitted private project in the respective work areas . Prior to
preparation of building permit documents, an on-site review will be conducted with th e
Community Development Director, or other City representative, to establish the precise scope o f
work for any proposed path upgrades .
29.The proposed use shall not conflict with events scheduled in Mission Plaza or Old Missio n
Church . The applicant shall provide a monthly entertainment schedule and regularly consult wit h
the Mission Plaza Events Coordinator to determine the potential for such conflicts .
30.Post-event patrons shall be directed to exit the second level auditorium through the Higuer a
Street exit . This shall be a requirement of the security plan and shall be noted on securit y
site/floor plans .
31.The applicant shall provide a transparent sound barrier surround (e .g . laminated glass) atop the 42
inch high guard (shown on attachment 6, sheet 5) of the proposed roof level patio . Thi s
transparent surround shall be recessed (inward) from the outermost edge of the 42 inch high
guard so that it is not visible from the patio below .
PH 1-17
Resolution No . (2012 Series)
Page 6
Attachment 1
•
32.Tour buses, vans, trailers, and other support vehicles shall load/unload equipment and supplies a t
approved parking locations . The proposed parking areas shall be approved by the City's Parkin g
Division. The applicant will be responsible for posting of any required "no parking" signage in
accordance with City standards . The applicant shall pay for any displaced parking spaces/meter s
in accordance with the current standards where applicable . Post 9 :00 p .m . bus loading/unloading ,
utilizing the pedestrian bridge route, shall not occur along Monterey Street, nor along Broa d
Street north of Monterey Street .
33.Tour buses, vans, other support vehicles shall be switched off (no idling or generators running )
while parked .
34.The applicant shall maintain and operate a video recording system that records activity at al l
entrances and exits during all business hours . The video shall be of a quality suitable for late r
identification of customers and staff. It will be recorded in a manner that may be retrieved an d
provided to police immediately upon demand . Video data shall be retained for a minimum of 7 2
hours or as otherwise required by law .
35.Business shall be conducted in a manner that will not violate any provisions of the Californi a
Alcoholic Beverage Control Act, prohibiting the sale of alcohol to minors (§25658), maintainin g
the public health, morals, convenience, and safety (§25601); and taking reasonable steps t o
correct any objectionable conditions on the premises and immediately adjacent to the premise s
(§24200).
36.The maximum posted occupant load for each space shall not be exceeded at any time . This permi t
is strictly limited to allow only the occupant load for the premises as approved by the City of Sa n
Luis Obispo Fire Department . Occupant loads approved by the City of San Luis Obispo Fir e
Department shall be posted at all times .
37.This Use Permit shall be reviewed by the City Council one year from date of occupancy . The City
Council shall have the ability to modify, delete, add conditions, or revoke the Use Permit t o
minimize adverse impacts to adjacent businesses and residences based on documents o r
testimony evidencing such impacts arising from or related to the operation of the permitted use .
38.This Use Permit shall be reviewed at a public Planning Commission hearing if the City receive s
substantiated written complaints from any citizen, Code Enforcement Officer, or Police
Department employee, which includes information and/or evidence supporting a conclusion that a
violation of this Use Permit, or of City ordinances or regulations applicable to the property or th e
operation of the business, has occurred . At the time of the Use Permit review, to insure on-goin g
compatibility of the uses on the project site, conditions of approval may be added, deleted, o r
modified, or the Use Permit may be revoked .
39.Upon a significant change to the business, as identified in the applicant's project description an d
security plan, the Use Permit shall be reviewed by the Community Development Director fo r
PH1-18
•
Resolution No . (2012 Series)
Attachment 1
•
compliance with conditions of approval, or to determine whether a modification or revocation o f
the Use Permit is necessary .
40 . The applicant shall provide a noise analysis for the proposed metal staircase . The analysis shal l
include noise mitigation measures to ensure the staircase will comply with the City's Nois e
Ordinance .
Code Requirement s
The following code requirements are included for informational purposes only . They serve to give th e
applicant a general idea of other City requirements that will apply to the project . This is not intended
to be an exhaustive list as other requirements may be identified during the plan check process .
Utilities Departmen t
1.The applicant shall submit a plan that delineates the location of the property's existing an d
proposed water meter(s), water services, and sewer laterals to the points of connection at the Cit y
water and sewer mains .
2.
If the property's existing sewer lateral is proposed to be reused, submittal of a video inspection
•
will be required for review and approval of the Utilities Department during the Building Permi t
Review process . If a new lateral is proposed, the existing lateral must be abandoned per Cit y
standards .
3.Provisions shall be made for grease interceptors and FOG (fats, oils, and grease) storage withi n
the project's solid waste enclosure . These types of facilities shall also provide an area inside t o
wash floor mats, equipment, and trash cans . The wash area shall be drained to the sanitary sewer .
Building Departmen t
1.
Exterior exit stairways shall be separated from the interior of the building as required by Section
1022 .1 . Openings shall be limited to those necessary for egress from normally occupied spaces .
CBC 1026 .6 Therefore, the existing creek side window openings along the proposed exterior exi t
stairway shall be separated from the interior of the building in conformance with Section 707 .
2.
Means of egress doors shall meet the requirements of CBC 1005 .1, 1008 .1, 1009 .5, 1116B and
1133B .2 .4 .3 .
3.
Provide an accessible route of travel connecting all elements and spaces including elevate d
Fermenting Area on First Floor and Sound Booth on Second Floor . CBC 1103B .1 .
Fire Departmen t
1 .
Building to be provided with fire sprinklers installed per NFPA 13 Standards .
PH1-1 9
Page 7
•
Resolution No . (2012 Series )
Page 8
Attachment 1
•
2.Provide a standpipe in the stairwell with outlets on each floor level and on roof .
3.All exit doors shall be equipped with panic hardware and no other lock or latch .
4.The Exterior exit stairway shall be separated from the interior of the building with a minimum 1 -
hour rated construction . Openings shall be limited to those necessary for egress from normall y
occupied spaces . Windows are not permitted along the exterior stairway .
Upon motion of , seconded by
and on the following vote :
AYES :
NOES :
ABSENT :
The foregoing resolution was adopted this day of 2012 .
Mayor Jan Mar x
ATTEST :
Maeve Kennedy Grimes
Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM :
J . Christine Dietric k
J . Christine Dietric k
J . Christine Dietric k
City Attorne y
T :\Council Agenda Reports\2012\2012-11-20\SLO Brew Use Permit Appeal-con't from 9-25 mtg (Johnson -
Carloni)\Attachments\Attachment 1_Resolution .docx
PH 1-20
•
•
Attachment 2
RESOLUTION NO .(2012 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO DENYING
AN APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S ACTION TO APPROVE TH E
PROJECT, MODIFYING THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S APPROVAL, AN D
GRANTING FINAL APPROVAL OF A NIGHT CLUB USE PERMIT ALLOWING TH E
RELOCATION OF SLO BREWING COMPANY INTO THE MASTER LIST CARRIS A
BUILDING AS REPRESENTED IN COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT AND ATTACHMENT S
DATED NOVEMBER 20,2012 (736/738 HIGUERA STREET, A 57-12 )
WHEREAS,the Planning Commission, on July 11, 2012, approved a Night Club Us e
Permit to allow relocation of SLO Brewing Company in the Historic Downtown Commercial zone ;
and
WHEREAS,David Brodie, on behalf of Save Our Downtown, filed an appeal of th e
Planning Commission's action on July 20, 2012 ; and
WHEREAS,the City Council, on September 25, 2012, conducted a public hearing for th e
purpose of considering the appeal of the Planning Commission's action and continued the hearin g
with direction to the applicant for project revisions ; an d
WHEREAS,the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public hearing i n
•
the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, on November 20 ,
2012, for the purpose of considering revised plans for the final approval ; an d
WHEREAS,the City Council has duly considered all evidence, including the record of th e
Planning Commission hearing and action, testimony of interested parties, and the evaluation an d
recommendations by staff, presented at said hearing .
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED,by the Council of the City of San Luis Obisp o
as follows :
SECTION 1 .Findings .Based upon all the evidence, the City Council makes the followin g
findings :
1.As conditioned, the use will not harm the general health, safety, and welfare of people livin g
or working in the vicinity because conditions on the Use Permit approval will minimize nois e
impacts, as well as impacts to police resources and the community .
2.The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan, which designates the project site a s
Downtown Commercial (C-D). The City General Plan Land Use Element Policy 4 .3 ,
Entertainment and Cultural Facilities, states that "...Entertainment facilities, such as
nightclubs and private theaters, should be in the downtown ..."
PH1-2 1
•
•
Resolution No . (2012 Series )
Page 2
Attachment 2
•
3.The proposed project is consistent with General Plan policy to locate, at the street level ,
restaurants, stores, and other uses benefiting from and contributing to pedestrian traffic (LUE
4 .16 .1).
4.The proposed use is consistent with Land Use Element Society and Economy goal #24 ; to
serve as the County's hub for entertainment and cultural services .
5.
The property owner has agreed to conditions of approval that place restrictions on the use o f
the property to insure that nuisances and significant burdens on police resources do not occur .
6.As conditioned, the proposed use is compatible with the project site and with existing an d
potential uses in the vicinity which include retail shops, offices, restaurants, and bars .
Conditions of approval have been adopted to minimize potential disturbances and criminal
activities .
Section 2 .Environmental Review .
Categorically exempt under the
following : Section 15301 (Existing Facilities) of the CEQA Guidelines because the project propose s
the relocation of a business into an existing building with no overall increase in floor area of tha t
existing building, Section 15331 (Historical Resource Restoration/Rehabilitation) becaus e
modifications to the building will be consistent with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for th e
Treatment of Historic Properties, and Section 15332 (In-Fill Development Projects) because th e
project is within City limits, consistent with applicable City policy, surrounded by urban uses, an d
on a project site less than 5 acres in size served by required utilities and public services .
Section 3 .Action .The City Council hereby denies the appeal of the Planning Commission's
action to approve the project and grants final approval of a Night Club Use Permit allowing th e
relocation of SLO Brewing Company within the Historic Downtown Commercial zone, wit h
incorporation of the following conditions :
Conditions :
1 . Prior to establishment of the use, a building plan check submittal that is in full conformanc e
with submitted project plans and the following conditions of approval shall be submitted fo r
review and approval of the Community Development Department .
All improvements to the building shall be done in compliance with the Secretary of th e
Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties and shall be reviewed by th e
Cultural Heritage Committee .
PH1-22
•
•
Resolution No . (2012 Series)
Attachment 2
Page 3
3.Plans submitted for a building permit shall substantially comply with occupant loads provide d
in revised plans dated October 19, 2012 and approved by the City Council (November 20 ,
2012 hearing), or the project will require modification to this Use Permit .
4.
The roof level patio shall not exceed a maximum occupant load of 49 persons .
5.Prior to release of occupancy, the applicant shall pay applicable parking in-lieu fees for th e
change in use from retail to restaurant/bar/nightclub, a difference of approximately 12 parkin g
spaces .
6.
The applicant shall provide a minimum of ten short-term bicycle parking spaces on-site .
7.
Entertainment shall be located only in the areas specified on floor plans stamped wit h
Community Development Department approval .
8.Live entertainment, above the level that is compliant with the City's definition of ambien t
entertainment, shall be confined to the second level auditorium as shown on project plans an d
entertainment events shall not be performed outside the hours of 6 :00 p .m. to 1 :00 a .m.A
modification to event hours of operation (second level auditorium) to allow earlier operatio n
of small scale events with no patron queue may be allowed subject to the review and writte n
•approval of the Community Development and Police Departments .General business hours fo r
use of the space that does not include live entertainment shall be limited to 7 :00 a.m . to 2 :00
a.m . Monday through Sunday with all outdoor hours of operation limited to 9 :00 a .m . to 11 :00
p .m .
9.
Live or ambient entertainment shall not be allowed in any outdoor areas (i .e . Higuera Stree t
dining, creek-side dining, roof level patio).
10.The proposed use shall operate in conformance with the City Noise Ordinance (M .C . Chapter
9 .12, Noise Control) to maintain compatibility with the nearby residences and businesses .Th e
project shall operate within the noise levels established by the applicant's submitted soun d
level assessment .
11.The applicant is responsible at all times for verifying the legal age of patrons prior to entry, fo r
monitoring patrons' on site alcohol consumption, and for declining to serve alcohol to patron s
who demonstrate signs of intoxication or impairment associated with alcohol consumption ,
based on training that is to be provided to all staff.
12.No individual under 21 years of age, or without proper identification, shall be served or sol d
alcohol .
•
•
PH1-23
Resolution No . (2012 Series)
Page 4
Attachment 2
•
13 . The applicant shall not permit its patrons to leave the licensed premises with any alcoholi c
beverage or to consume alcoholic beverages on any property adjacent to the licensed premise s
under the control of the licensee(s).
14.The applicant shall make reasonable efforts to minimize the potential for adverse noise an d
crowd impacts on adjacent establishments and nearby residences, including, but not limited to ,
ensuring that all windows and doors are closed during any entertainment .
15.The proposed sliding panel door system along Higuera Street shall be closed no later tha n
10 :00 p .m . nightly .
16.Prior to release of occupancy, the applicant shall upgrade and finalize the security plan t o
reflect operation at the 736/738 Higuera Street location . This shall include a site plan/floo r
plan detailing the locations and duties of security personnel and shall include the propose d
patron routes andnote regular maintenance/patrol o f
these routes,to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director and Polic e
Department . This plan shall be reviewed and commented upon by the Police Department on a n
annual basis .
17.The security plan shall include a detailed explanation of how maximum occupant load limit s
will be maintained .
18.The security plan shall provide that "no person will be prevented from using the emergenc y
exit stairway that passes by the `Green Room' in the event of an emergency," and that "no ac t
utilizing pyrotechnics or live fire will be permitted ."
19.To address complaints and minimize the need for police response to minor issues, an owner o r
manager shall be on premises at all times when entertainment is performed, and shall b e
available to be contacted by a City representative and/or adjacent property owner or tenant .
The applicant shall provide and regularly update contact information to the City's Police, Fire ,
and Community Development departments and adjacent property owners and tenants .
20.All employees shall attend ABC LEAD Training or equivalent training .
21.The applicant shall be responsible for on-going security/safety training to accommodat e
changes in personnel .
PH 1-24
•
•
Resolution No . (2012 Series)
Attachment 2
Page 5
22.The site shall be maintained in a neat and orderly manner at all times . The applicant shall b e
responsible for daily cleanup maintenance of the front and back patio areas, the areas of patro n
queuing along routes Aand B, and any waste associated with the business in Mission Plaza .
23.The applicant shall manage/patrol outdoor crowds and queuing as a result of this use . An
orderly line of patrons awaiting entry that does not block public access on, or use of, th e
sidewalk or street shall be maintained .The primary queuing area shall be from the Higuer a
Street entrance/ticket counter easterly up Higuera Street towards Chorro Street . Queuing at
this location shall be located against the building facades and away from the curb line an d
adjoining parking lane . The queue delineation shall generally maintain a 6' clear area fo r
public pedestrian passage . This required clear area may be reduced to not less than 4' wher e
sidewalk furniture, trees, or other obstructions will not reasonably allow for a 6' clear path .
The queue shall not block entry/exit of operating businesses and shall have the appropriate
gaps to allow pedestrians to circulate across the line unobstructed .
24.The applicant shall improve the public curb, gutter, sidewalk, and tree well in . the area of th e
main entry/ticket sales window to accommodate the queue and provide for accessible passag e
by the general public . The improvements shall include but are not limited to the removal an d
replacement of displaced curb, gutter, and/or sidewalk, protection of utility vaults, tree roo t
pruning. and the installation of a tree grate to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department .
• 25 .Improvements located within the public right-of-way or easement areas shall be shown on th e
building plan submittal for reference . A separate encroachment permit will be required fro m
the Public Works Department for anywork or construction staging located within the publi c
right-of-way or public easement areas .
26.Unless otherwise approved by the City, an alternate queue commencing from the creek-sid e
entry/exit and extending across the pedestrian bridge shall be used when the event schedul e
might conflict with Farmers Market . Use of the pedestrian bridge route as a patron queue may
be allowed to avoid conflict with other downtown events (e .g . permitted parades o r
assemblies, permitted work within the Higuera Street right-of-way, or other potentiall y
conflicting event as identified by the City of San Luis Obispo or the applicant) subject t o
approval of the City .
side ofWarden Bridge .Route Bpatrons This alternate route shall be managed so that th e
patrons will betightly aligned in a single file line along the east/southeastem creek-side guar d
rail and the eastern-most side of the pedestrian bridge . This orderly patron line shall have th e
appropriate gaps to allow pedestrians to circulate across the line unobstructed .
27.Plans submitted for a building permit shall show and note the patron queue ifg across th e
pedestrian bridge at* as (Routes Aand B).The patron routes shall be upgraded as necessary t o
•
remove any obstructions or uneven pavement, to the satisfaction of City Building Division an d
•
PH 1-25
Resolution No . (2012 Series )
Page 6
Attachment 2
•
Public Works Department . Pathway upgrades shall include an evaluation of creek-side lighting
levels, including the length of the pedestrian bridge patron route, and may require an upgrade
to path lighting . A lighting plan for the creek-side patio shall be provided with plans submitte d
for review by the Architectural Review Commission . Creek-side lighting levels shall be to the
satisfaction of the fo r revi ew and approval by the City Biologist,Police Departmentand
Community Development Department .
28.Construction work related to any proposed path upgrades shall be coordinated with th e
upcoming any City Capital Improvement Projec t
or permitted private project in the respective work areas .Prio r
to preparation of building permit documents, an on-site review will be conducted with th e
Community Development Director, or other City representative, to establish the precise scop e
of work for any proposed path upgrades .
29.The proposed use shall not conflict with events scheduled in Mission Plaza or Old Missio n
Church . The applicant shall provide a monthly entertainment schedule and regularly consul t
with the Mission Plaza Events Coordinator to determine the potential for such conflicts .
30.Post-event patrons shall be directed to exit the second level auditorium through the Higuera
Street exit. This shall be a requirement of the security plan and shall be noted on securit y
site/floor plans .
31.The applicant shall provide a transparent sound barrier surround (e .g. laminated glass) atop th e
42 inch high guard (shown on attachment 6, sheet 5) of the proposed roof level patio . Thi s
transparent surround shall be recessed (inward) from the outermost edge of the 42 inch hig h
guard so that it is not visible from the patio below .
32.Tour buses, vans, trailers, and other support vehicles shall load/unload equipment and supplie s
at approved parking locations . The proposed parking areas shall be approved by the City's
Parking Division . The applicant will be responsible for posting of any required "no parking "
signage in accordance with City standards . The applicant shall pay for any displaced parkin g
spaces/meters in accordance with the current standards where applicable . Post 9 :00 p .m . bu s
loading/unloading, utilizing routes A & B-the pedestrian bridge route,shall not occur alon g
Monterey Street, nor along Broad Street north of Monterey Street .
33.Tour buses, vans, other support vehicles shall be switched off (no idling or generators running )
while parked .
34.The applicant shall maintain and operate a video recording system that records activity at al l
entrances and exits during all business hours . The video shall be of a quality suitable for late r
identification of customers and staff It will be recorded in a manner that may be retrieved an d
provided to police immediately upon demand . Video data shall be retained for a minimum o f
72 hours or as otherwise required by law .
PH 1-26
•
•
Resolution No . (2012 Series)
Attachment 2
Page 7
35.Business shall be conducted in a manner that will not violate any provisions of the Californi a
Alcoholic Beverage Control Act, prohibiting the sale of alcohol to minors 025658),
maintaining the public health, morals, convenience, and safety 025601); and takin g
reasonable steps to correct any objectionable conditions on the premises and immediatel y
adjacent to the premises 024200).
36.The maximum posted occupant load for each space shall not be exceeded at any time .Thi s
permit is strictly limited to allow only the occupant load for the premises as approved by th e
City of San Luis Obispo Fire Department . Occupant loads approved by the City of San Lui s
Obispo Fire Department shall be posted at all times .
37.This Use Permit shall be reviewed by the
.. _
: -City Council one year fro m
date of occupancy . The . -City Council shall have the ability to modify ,
delete, add conditions,or revoke the Use Permit to minimize adverse impacts to adjacen t
businesses and residences based on documents or testimony evidencing such impacts arisin g
from or related to the operation of the permitted use .
38.This Use Permit shall be reviewed at a public Planning Commission hearing if the Cit y
receives substantiated written complaints from any citizen, Code Enforcement Officer, o r
Police Department employee, which includes information and/or evidence supporting a
• conclusion that a violation of this Use Permit, or of City ordinances or regulations applicabl e
to the property or the operation of the business, has occurred . At the time of the Use Permi t
review, to insure on-going compatibility of the uses on the project site, conditions of approva l
may be added, deleted, or modified,or the Use Permit may be revoked .
39.Upon a significant change to the business, as identified in the applicant's project descriptio n
and security plan, the Use Permit shall be reviewed by the Community Development Directo r
for compliance with conditions of approval, or to determine whether a modification o r
revocation of the Use Permit is necessary .
apply .
40.The applicant shall provide a noise analysis for the proposed metal staircase . The analysi s
shall include noise mitigation measures to ensure the staircase will comply with the City's
Noise Ordinance .
•
ute aholdharmless and indemnification agreement to the satisfactio n
PH 1-27
Resolution No .
Page 8
(2012 Series)Attachment 2
•
Code Requirement s
The following code requirements are included for informational purposes only . They serve to giv e
the applicant a general idea of other City requirements that will apply to the project . This is no t
intended to be an exhaustive list as other requirements may be identified during the plan chec k
process .
Utilities Departmen t
1.The applicant shall submit a plan that delineates the location of the property's existing an d
proposed water meter(s), water services, and sewer laterals to the points of connection at the
City water and sewer mains .
2.If the property's existing sewer lateral is proposed to be reused, submittal of a video inspectio n
will be required for review and approval of the Utilities Department during the Buildin g
Permit Review process . If a new lateral is proposed, the existing lateral must be abandoned pe r
City standards .
3.Provisions shall be made for grease interceptors and FOG (fats, oils, and grease) storage
within the project's solid waste enclosure . These types of facilities shall also provide an are a
inside to wash floor mats, equipment, and trash cans . The wash area shall be drained to the
sanitary sewer .
Building Departmen t
1.Exterior exit stairways shall be separated from the interior of the building as required b y
Section 1022 .1 . Openings shall be limited to those necessary for egress from normall y
occupied spaces . CBC 1026 .6 Therefore, the existing creek side window openings along th e
proposed exterior exit stairway shall be separated from the interior of the building i n
conformance with Section 707 .
2.
Means of egress doors shall meet the requirements of CBC 1005 .1, 1008 .1, 1009 .5, 1116B an d
1133B .2 .4 .3 .
3.
Provide an accessible route of travel connecting all elements and spaces including elevate d
Fermenting Area on First Floor and Sound Booth on Second Floor . CBC 1103B .1 .
Fire Department
PH1-28
•
Resolution No . (2012 Series)
Attachment 2
• Page 9
1.Building to be provided with fire sprinklers installed per NFPA 13 Standards .
2.Provide a standpipe in the stairwell with outlets on each floor level and on roof .
3.All exit doors shall be equipped with panic hardware and no other lock or latch .
4.The Exterior exit stairway shall be separated from the interior of the building with a minimu m
1-hour rated construction . Openings shall be limited to those necessary for egress fro m
normally occupied spaces . Windows are not permitted along the exterior stairway .
Upon motion of , seconded by
and on the following vote :
AYES :
NOES :
•
ABSENT :
The foregoing resolution was adopted this day of 2012 .
Mayor Jan Marx
ATTEST :
Maeve Kennedy Grimes
Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM :
J . Christine Dietric k
•
J . Christine Dietrick
PH 1-29
Resolution No . (2012 Series)
Attachment 2
Page 1 0
City Attorney
T :\Council Agenda Reports \2012\2012-11-20\SLO Brew Use Permit Appeal-can't from 9-25 mtg (Johnson -
Carloni)\Attachments\Attachment 2_Legislative Draft Resolution .docx
•
•
PH1-30
Attachment 3
•
•
•
RESOLUTION NO .(2012 Series )
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO DENYING A N
APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S ACTION TO APPROVE THE PROJECT ,
MODIFYING THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S APPROVAL, AND GRANTING FINA L
APPROVAL OF A NIGHT CLUB USE PERMIT ALLOWING THE RELOCATION OF SL O
BREWING COMPANY INTO THE MASTER LIST CARRISA BUILDING A S
REPRESENTED IN COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT AND ATTACHMENTS DATE D
NOVEMBER 20, 2012,ABSENT THE ROOF LEVEL PATI O
(736/738 HIGUERA STREET, A 57-12 )
WHEREAS,the Planning Commission, on July 11, 2012, approved a Night Club Use Permi t
to allow relocation of SLO Brewing Company in the Historic Downtown Commercial zone ; and
WHEREAS,David Brodie, on behalf of Save Our Downtown, filed an appeal of the Plannin g
Commission's action on July 20, 2012 ; an d
WHEREAS,the City Council, on September 25, 2012, conducted a public hearing for th e
purpose of considering the appeal of the Planning Commission's action and continued the hearing wit h
direction to the applicant for project revisions ; and
WHEREAS,the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public hearing in th e
Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, on November 20, 2012 ,
for the purpose of considering revised plans for the final approval ; and
WHEREAS,the City Council has duly considered all evidence, including the record of th e
Planning Commission hearing and action, testimony of interested parties, and the evaluation an d
recommendations by staff, presented at said hearing .
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED,by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo a s
follows :
SECTION 1 .Findings .Based upon all the evidence, the City Council makes the following
findings :
1.As conditioned, the use will not harm the general health, safety, and welfare of people living o r
working in the vicinity because conditions on the Use Permit approval will minimize nois e
impacts, as well as impacts to police resources and the community .
2.The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan, which designates the project site a s
Downtown Commercial (C-D). The City General Plan Land Use Element Policy 4 .3 ,
Entertainment and Cultural Facilities, states that "...Entertainment facilities, such as nightclub s
and private theaters, should be in the downtown ..."
PH1-31
Resolution No . (2012 Series )
Page 2
Attachment 3
•
3.The proposed project is consistent with General Plan policy to locate, at the street level ,
restaurants, stores, and other uses benefiting from and contributing to pedestrian traffic (LU E
4 .16 .1).
4.The proposed use is consistent with Land Use Element Society and Economy goal #24 ; to serv e
as the County's hub for entertainment and cultural services .
5.
The property owner has agreed to conditions of approval that place restrictions on the use of th e
property to insure that nuisances and significant burdens on police resources do not occur .
6.
The proposed roof level patio is inconsistent with neighboring downtown uses due to significan t
issues regarding occupant load and noise .
7.As conditioned, the proposed use is compatible with the project site and with existing an d
potential uses in the vicinity which include retail shops, offices, restaurants, and bars . Condition s
of approval have been adopted to minimize potential disturbances and criminal activities .
Section 2 .Environmental Review .Categorically exempt under the following : Section 1530 1
(Existing Facilities) of the CEQA Guidelines because the project proposes the relocation of a busines s
into an existing building with no overall increase in floor area of that existing building, Section 1533 1
(Historical Resource Restoration/Rehabilitation) because modifications to the building will b e
consistent with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties, and
Section 15332 (In-Fill Development Projects) because the project is within City limits, consistent wit h
applicable City policy, surrounded by urban uses, and on a project site less than 5 acres in size serve d
by required utilities and public services .
Section 3 .Action .The City Council hereby denies the appeal of the Planning Commission's
action to approve the project and grants final approval of a Night Club Use Permit allowing th e
relocation of SLO Brewing Company within the Historic Downtown Commercial zone, wit h
incorporation of the following conditions :
Conditions :
1.Prior to establishment of the use, a building plan check submittal that is in full conformance wit h
submitted project plans and the following conditions of approval shall be submitted for revie w
and approval of the Community Development Department .
2.All improvements to the building shall be done in compliance with the Secretary of the Interior's
Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties and shall be reviewed by the Cultural Heritag e
Committee .
3.
The proposed roof level patio shall be removed from the project .
PH 1-32
•
•
•
•
Resolution No . (2012 Series)
Attachment 3
Page 3
4.Plans submitted for a building permit shall substantially comply with occupant loads provided i n
revised plans dated October 19, 2012 and approved by the City Council (November 20, 201 2
hearing), or the project will require modification to this Use Permit .
5.Prior to release of occupancy, the applicant shall pay applicable parking in-lieu fees for th e
change in use from retail to restaurant/bar/nightclub, a difference of approximately 12 parkin g
spaces .
6.
The applicant shall provide a minimum of ten short-term bicycle parking spaces on-site .
7.
Entertainment shall be located only in the areas specified on floor plans stamped with
Community Development Department approval .
8.Live entertainment, above the level that is compliant with the City's definition of ambien t
entertainment, shall be confined to the second level auditorium as shown on project plans an d
entertainment events shall not be performed outside the hours of 6 :00 p .m . to 1 :00 a.m .A
modification to event hours of operation (second level auditorium) to allow earlier operation o f
small scale events with no patron queue may be allowed subject to the review and writte n
approval of the Community Development and Police Departments . General business hours fo r
use of the space that does not include live entertainment shall be limited to 7 :00 a .m . to 2 :00 a .m .
Monday through Sunday with all outdoor hours of operation limited to 9 :00 a.m . to 11 :00 p .m .
9.
Live or ambient entertainment shall not be allowed in any outdoor areas (i .e. Higuera Street
dining, creek-side dining).
10.The proposed use shall operate in conformance with the City Noise Ordinance (M .C . Chapte r
9 .12, Noise Control) to maintain compatibility with the nearby residences and businesses . The
project shall operate within the noise levels established by the applicant's submitted sound level
assessment .
11.The applicant is responsible at all times for verifying the legal age of patrons prior to entry, fo r
monitoring patrons' on site alcohol consumption, and for declining to serve alcohol to patron s
who demonstrate signs of intoxication or impairment associated with alcohol consumption, base d
on training that is to be provided to all staff .
12.No individual under 21 years of age, or without proper identification, shall be sewed or sol d
alcohol .
13.The applicant shall not permit its patrons to leave the licensed premises with any alcoholi c
beverage or to consume alcoholic beverages on any property adjacent to the licensed premise s
under the control of the licensee(s).
PH 1-33
Resolution No . (2012 Series )
Page 4
Attachment 3
•
14.The applicant shall make reasonable efforts to minimize the potential for adverse noise and crow d
impacts on adjacent establishments and nearby residences, including, but not limited to, ensurin g
that all windows and doors are closed during any entertainment .
15.The proposed sliding panel door system along Higuera Street shall be closed no later than 10 :00
p .m . nightly.
16.Prior to release of occupancy, the applicant shall upgrade and finalize the security plan to reflec t
operation at the 736/738 Higuera Street location . This shall include a site plan/floor plan detailin g
the locations and duties of security personnel and shall include the proposed patron routes an d
note regular maintenance/patrol of these routes, to the satisfaction of the Communit y
Development Director and Police Department . This plan shall be reviewed and commented upo n
by the Police Department on an annual basis .
17.The security plan shall include a detailed explanation of how maximum occupant load limits wil l
be maintained .
18.The security plan shall provide that "no person will be prevented from using the emergency exi t
stairway that passes by the `Green Room' in the event of an emergency," and that "no ac t
utilizing pyrotechnics or live fire will be permitted ."
19.To address complaints and minimize the need for police response to minor issues, an owner o r
manager shall be on premises at all times when entertainment is performed, and shall be availabl e
to be contacted by a City representative and/or adjacent property owner or tenant . The applican t
shall provide and regularly update contact information to the City's Police, Fire, and Communit y
Development departments and adjacent property owners and tenants .
20.All employees shall attend ABC LEAD Training or equivalent training .
21.The applicant shall be responsible for on-going security/safety training to accommodate change s
in personnel .
22.The site shall be maintained in a neat and orderly manner at all times . The applicant shall b e
responsible for daily cleanup maintenance of the front and back patio areas, the areas of patro n
queuing, and any waste associated with the business in Mission Plaza .
23.The applicant shall manage/patrol outdoor crowds and queuing as a result of this use . An orderl y
line of patrons awaiting entry that does not block public access on, or use of, the sidewalk o r
street shall be maintained . The primary queuing area shall be from the Higuera Stree t
entrance/ticket counter easterly up Higuera Street towards Chorro Street . Queuing at this locatio n
shall be located against the building facades and away from the curb line and adjoining parkin g
lane . The queue delineation shall generally maintain a 6' clear area for public pedestrian passage .
This required clear area may be reduced to not less than 4' where sidewalk furniture, trees, o r
other obstructions will not reasonably allow for a 6' clear path . The queue shall not bloc k
PH1-34
•
•
•
•
Resolution No . (2012 Series)
Attachment 3
Page 5
entry/exit of operating businesses and shall have the appropriate gaps to allow pedestrians to
circulate across the line unobstructed .
24.The applicant shall improve the public curb, gutter, sidewalk, and tree well in the area of the mai n
entry/ticket sales window to accommodate the queue and provide for accessible passage by th e
general public . The improvements shall include but are not limited to the removal an d
replacement of displaced curb, gutter, and/or sidewalk, protection of utility vaults, tree roo t
pruning, and the installation of a tree grate to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department .
25.Improvements located within the public right-of-way or easement areas shall be shown on th e
building plan submittal for reference . A separate encroachment permit will be required from th e
Public Works Department for any work or construction staging located within the public right-of -
way or public easement areas .
26.Unless otherwise approved by the City, an alternate queue commencing from the creek-sid e
entry/exit and extending across the pedestrian bridge shall be used when the event schedule migh t
conflict with Farmers Market . Use of the pedestrian bridge route as a patron queue may b e
allowed to avoid conflict with other downtown events (e .g . permitted parades or assemblies ,
permitted work within the Higuera Street right-of-way, or other potentially conflicting event a s
identified by the City of San Luis Obispo or the applicant) subject to approval of the City . Thi s
alternate route shall be managed so that the patrons will be tightly aligned in a single file lin e
along the east/southeastem creek-side guard rail and the eastern-most side of the pedestria n
bridge . This orderly patron line shall have the appropriate gaps to allow pedestrians to circulat e
across the line unobstructed .
27.Plans submitted for a building permit shall show and note the patron queue across the pedestria n
bridge . The patron route shall be upgraded as necessary to remove any obstructions or uneve n
pavement, to the satisfaction of City Building Division and Public Works Department . Pathway
upgrades shall include an evaluation of creek-side lighting levels, including the length of th e
pedestrian bridge patron route, and may require an upgrade to path lighting . A lighting plan for
the creek-side patio shall be provided with plans submitted for review by the Architectura l
Review Commission . Creek-side lighting levels shall be to the satisfaction of the City Biologist ,
Police Department and Community Development Department .
28.Construction work related to any proposed path upgrades shall be coordinated with any Cit y
Capital Improvement Project, or permitted private project in the respective work areas . Prior t o
preparation of building permit documents, an on-site review will be conducted with th e
Community Development Director, or other City representative, to establish the precise scope o f
work for any proposed path upgrades .
29.The proposed use shall not conflict with events scheduled in Mission Plaza or Old Missio n
Church . The applicant shall provide a monthly entertainment schedule and regularly consult wit h
the Mission Plaza Events Coordinator to determine the potential for such conflicts .
PH1-35
Resolution No . (2012 Series )
Page 6
Attachment 3
•
30.Post-event patrons shall be directed to exit the second level auditorium through the Higuer a
Street exit . This shall be a requirement of the security plan and shall be noted on securit y
site/floor plans .
31.Tour buses, vans, trailers, and other support vehicles shall load/unload equipment and supplies a t
approved parking locations . The proposed parking areas shall be approved by the City's Parkin g
Division . The applicant will be responsible for posting of any required "no parking" signage in
accordance with City standards . The applicant shall pay for any displaced parking spaces/meter s
in accordance with the current standards where applicable . Post 9 :00 p .m . bus loading/unloading ,
utilizing the pedestrian bridge route, shall not occur along Monterey Street, nor along Broa d
Street north of Monterey Street .
32.Tour buses, vans, other support vehicles shall be switched off (no idling or generators running )
while parked .
33.The applicant shall maintain and operate a video recording system that records activity at al l
entrances and exits during all business hours . The video shall be of a quality suitable for late r
identification of customers and staff . It will be recorded in a manner that may be retrieved an d
provided to police immediately upon demand . Video data shall be retained for a minimum of 7 2
hours or as otherwise required by law .
34.Business shall be conducted in a manner that will not violate any provisions of the Californi a
Alcoholic Beverage Control Act, prohibiting the sale of alcohol to minors (§25658), maintainin g
the public health, morals, convenience, and safety (§25601); and taking reasonable steps t o
correct any objectionable conditions on the premises and immediately adjacent to the premise s
(§24200).
35.The maximum posted occupant load for each space shall not be exceeded at any time . This permi t
is strictly limited to allow only the occupant load for the premises as approved by the City of Sa n
Luis Obispo Fire Department . Occupant loads approved by the City of San Luis Obispo Fir e
Department shall be posted at all times .
36.This Use Permit shall be reviewed by the City Council one year from date of occupancy . The City
Council shall have the ability to modify, delete, add conditions, or revoke the Use Permit t o
minimize adverse impacts to adjacent businesses and residences based on documents or
testimony evidencing such impacts arising from or related to the operation of the permitted use .
37.This Use Permit shall be reviewed at a public Planning Commission hearing if the City receive s
substantiated written complaints from any citizen, Code Enforcement Officer, or Polic e
Department employee, which includes information and/or evidence supporting a conclusion that a
violation of this Use Permit, or of City ordinances or regulations applicable to the property or th e
operation of the business, has occurred . At the time of the Use Permit review, to insure on-goin g
compatibility of the uses on the project site, conditions of approval may be added, deleted, o r
modified, or the Use Permit may be revoked .
PH 1-36
•
Resolution No . (2012 Series)
Attachment 3
• Page 7
38.Upon a significant change to the business, as identified in the applicant's project description an d
security plan, the Use Permit shall be reviewed by the Community Development Director fo r
compliance with conditions of approval, or to determine whether a modification or revocation o f
the Use Permit is necessary .
39.The applicant shall provide a noise analysis for the proposed metal staircase . The analysis shal l
include noise mitigation measures to ensure the staircase will comply with the City's Nois e
Ordinance .
Code Requirement s
The following code requirements are included for informational purposes only . They serve to give th e
applicant a general idea of other City requirements that will apply to the project . This is not intended
to be an exhaustive list as other requirements may be identified during the plan check process .
Utilities Departmen t
1.
The applicant shall submit a plan that delineates the location of the property's existing an d
proposed water meter(s), water services, and sewer laterals to the points of connection at the Cit y
•
water and sewer mains .
2.If the property's existing sewer lateral is proposed to be reused, submittal of a video inspectio n
will be required for review and approval of the Utilities Department during the Building Permi t
Review process . If a new lateral is proposed, the existing lateral must be abandoned per Cit y
standards .
3.Provisions shall be made for grease interceptors and FOG (fats, oils, and grease) storage within
the project's solid waste enclosure . These types of facilities shall also provide an area inside t o
wash floor mats, equipment, and trash cans . The wash area shall be drained to the sanitary sewer .
Building Departmen t
1.Exterior exit stairways shall be separated from the interior of the building as required by Sectio n
1022 .1 . Openings shall be limited to those necessary for egress from normally occupied spaces .
CBC 1026 .6 Therefore, the existing creek side window openings along the proposed exterior exi t
stairway shall be separated from the interior of the building in conformance with Section 707 .
2.
Means of egress doors shall meet the requirements of CBC 1005 .1, 1008 .1, 1009 .5, 1116B and
1133B .2 .4 .3 .
3.
Provide an accessible route of travel connecting all elements and spaces including elevate d
•
Fermenting Area on First Floor and Sound Booth on Second Floor . CBC 1103B .1 .
PH 1-37
Resolution No . (2012 Series)
Attachment 3
Page 8
•
Fire Department
1.Building to be provided with fire sprinklers installed per NFPA 13 Standards .
2.Provide a standpipe in the stairwell with outlets on each floor level and on roof .
3.All exit doors shall be equipped with panic hardware and no other lock or latch .
The Exterior exit stairway shall be separated from the interior of the building with a minimum 1 -
hour rated construction . Openings shall be limited to those necessary for egress from normall y
occupied spaces . Windows are not permitted along the exterior stairway .
Upon motion of , seconded by
and on the following vote :
AYES :
NOES :
ABSENT :
The foregoing resolution was adopted this day of 2012 .•
ATTEST :
Mayor Jan Mar x
Maeve Kennedy Grimes
Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM :
J . Christine Dietric k
J . Christine Dietric k
City Attorney
T :\Council
Agenda
Reports\2012\2012-11-20\SLO Brew
Use
Permit
Appeal-con't from
9-25 mtg
(Johnson-
Carloni)\Attachments\ Attachment 3_Draft Resolution_absent roof docx
PH 1-3 8
Attachment 4
•
•
RESOLUTION NO .
(2012 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO DENYING A N
APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S ACTION TO APPROVE THE PROJECT ,
MODIFYING THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S APPROVAL, AND GRANTING FINA L
APPROVAL OF A NIGHT CLUB USE PERMIT ALLOWING THE RELOCATION OF SL O
BREWING COMPANY INTO THE MASTER LIST CARRISA BUILDING A S
REPRESENTED IN COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT AND ATTACHMENTS DATE D
NOVEMBER 20, 2012, ABSENT THE ROOF LEVEL PATI O
(736/738 HIGUERA STREET, A 57-12 )
WHEREAS,the Planning Commission, on July 11, 2012, approved a Night Club Use Permi t
to allow relocation of SLO Brewing Company in the Historic Downtown Commercial zone ; and
WHEREAS,David Brodie, on behalf of Save Our Downtown, filed an appeal of the Plannin g
Commission's action on July 20, 2012 ; and
WHEREAS,the City Council, on September 25, 2012, conducted a public hearing for the
purpose of considering the appeal of the Planning Commission's action and continued the hearing with
direction to the applicant for project revisions ; and
WHEREAS,the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public hearing in th e
Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, on November 20, 2012 ,
for the purpose of considering revised plans for the final approval ; and
WHEREAS,the City Council has duly considered all evidence, including the record of th e
Planning Commission hearing and action, testimony of interested parties, and the evaluation an d
recommendations by staff, presented at said hearing .
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED,by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo a s
follows :
SECTION 1 .Findings .Based upon all the evidence, the City Council makes the followin g
findings :
1.As conditioned, the use will not harm the general health, safety, and welfare of people living o r
working in the vicinity because conditions on the Use Permit approval will minimize nois e
impacts, as well as impacts to police resources and the community .
2.The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan, which designates the project site a s
Downtown Commercial (C-D). The City General Plan Land Use Element Policy 4 .3 ,
Entertainment and Cultural Facilities, states that "...Entertainment facilities, such as nightclub s
and private theaters, should be in the downtown ..."
PH 1-39
Resolution No . (2012 Series )
Page 2
Attachment 4
•
3.The proposed project is consistent with General Plan policy to locate, at the street level ,
restaurants, stores, and other uses benefiting from and contributing to pedestrian traffic (LU E
4 .16 .1).
4.The proposed use is consistent with Land Use Element Society and Economy goal #24 ; to serv e
as the County's hub for entertainment and cultural services .
5.
The property owner has agreed to conditions of approval that place restrictions on the use of th e
property to insure that nuisances and significant burdens on police resources do not occur .
6.
The proposed roof level patio is inconsistent with neighboring downtown uses due to significan t
issues regarding occupant load and noise .
7.As conditioned, the proposed use is compatible with the project site and with existing an d
potential uses in the vicinity which include retail shops, offices, restaurants, and bars . Condition s
of approval have been adopted to minimize potential disturbances and criminal activities .
Section 2 .Environmental Review .Categorically exempt under the following : Section 1530 1
(Existing Facilities) of the CEQA Guidelines because the project proposes the relocation of a busines s
into an existing building with no overall increase in floor area of that existing building, Section 1533 1
(Historical Resource Restoration/Rehabilitation) because modifications to the building will b e
consistent with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties, an d
Section 15332 (In-Fill Development Projects) because the project is within City limits, consistent wit h
applicable City policy, surrounded by urban uses, and on a project site less than 5 acres in size serve d
by required utilities and public services .
Section 3 .Action .The City Council hereby denies the appeal of the Planning Commission's
action to approve the project and grants final approval of a Night Club Use Permit allowing th e
relocation of SLO Brewing Company within the Historic Downtown Commercial zone, wit h
incorporation of the following conditions :
Conditions :
1.Prior to establishment of the use, a building plan check submittal that is in full conformance wit h
submitted project plans and the following conditions of approval shall be submitted for revie w
and approval of the Community Development Department .
2.
All improvements to the building shall be done in compliance with the Secretary of the Interior's
Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties and shall be reviewed by the Cultural Heritag e
Committee .
3.
The proposed roof level patio shall be removed from the project .
PH1-40
•
•
•
Resolution No . (2012 Series)
Attachment 4
Page 3
4.Plans submitted for a building permit shall substantially comply with occupant loads provided i n
revised plans dated October 19, 2012 and approved by the City Council (November 20, 201 2
hearing), or the project will require modification to this Use Permit .
T
5.Prior to release of occupancy, the applicant shall pay applicable parking in-lieu fees for th e
change in use from retail to restaurant/bar/nightclub, a difference of approximately 12 parkin g
spaces .
6.
The applicant shall provide a minimum of ten short-term bicycle parking spaces on-site .
7.Entertainment shall be located only in the areas specified on floor plans stamped wit h
Community Development Department approval .
8.Live entertainment, above the level that is compliant with the City's definition of ambien t
entertainment, shall be confined to the second level auditorium as shown on project plans an d
entertainment events shall not be performed outside the hours of 6 :00 p .m . to 1 :00 a.m .A
modification to event hours of operation (second level auditorium) to allow earlier operation o f
small scale events with no patron queue may be allowed subject to the review and writte n
approval of the Community Development and Police Departments . General business hours fo r
use of the space that does not include live entertainment shall be limited to 7 :00 a.m . to 2 :00 a .m .
Monday through Sunday with all outdoor hours of operation limited to 9 :00 a .m . to 11 :00 p .m.
9.
Live or ambient entertainment shall not be allowed in any outdoor areas (i .e . Higuera Stree t
dining, creek-side dining,ro tie).
10.The proposed use shall operate in conformance with the City Noise Ordinance (M .C . Chapter
9 .12, Noise Control) to maintain compatibility with the nearby residences and businesses . The
project shall operate within the noise levels established by the applicant's submitted sound leve l
assessment .
11.The applicant is responsible at all times for verifying the legal age of patrons prior to entry, fo r
monitoring patrons' on site alcohol consumption, and for declining to serve alcohol to patron s
who demonstrate signs of intoxication or impairment associated with alcohol consumption, base d
on training that is to be provided to all staff .
12.No individual under 21 years of age, or without proper identification, shall be served or sol d
alcohol .
13.The applicant shall not permit its patrons to leave the licensed premises with any alcoholi c
beverage or to consume alcoholic beverages on any property adjacent to the licensed premise s
under the control of the licensee(s).
PH1-41
Resolution No . (2012 Series )
Page 4
Attachment 4
•
14.The applicant shall make reasonable efforts to minimize the potential for adverse noise and crow d
impacts on adjacent establishments and nearby residences, including, but not limited to, ensurin g
that all windows and doors are closed during any entertainment .
15.The proposed sliding panel door system along Higuera Street shall be closed no later than 10 :0 0
p .m . nightly .
16.Prior to release of occupancy, the applicant shall upgrade and finalize the security plan to reflec t
operation at the 736/738 Higuera Street location . This shall include a site plan/floor plan detailin g
the locations and duties of security personnel and shall include the proposed patron routes an d
note regular maintenance/patrol of these routes, to the satisfaction of the Communit y
Development Director and Police Department . This plan shall be reviewed and commented upo n
by the Police Department on an annual basis .
17.The security plan shall include a detailed explanation of how maximum occupant load limits wil l
be maintained .
18.The security plan shall provide that "no person will be prevented from using the emergency exi t
stairway that passes by the `Green Room' in the event of an emergency," and that "no ac t
utilizing pyrotechnics or live fire will be permitted ."
19.To address complaints and minimize the need for police response to minor issues, an owner o r
manager shall be on premises at all times when entertainment is performed, and shall be availabl e
to be contacted by a City representative and/or adjacent property owner or tenant . The applicant
shall provide and regularly update contact information to the City's Police, Fire, and Communit y
Development departments and adjacent property owners and tenants .
20.All employees shall attend ABC LEAD Training or equivalent training .
21.The applicant shall be responsible for on-going security/safety training to accommodate change s
in personnel .
22.The site shall be maintained in a neat and orderly manner at all times . The applicant shall b e
responsible for daily cleanup maintenance of the front and back patio areas, the areas of patro n
queuing, and any waste associated with the business in Mission Plaza .
23.The applicant shall manage/patrol outdoor crowds and queuing as a result of this use . An orderl y
line of patrons awaiting entry that does not block public access on, or use of, the sidewalk o r
street shall be maintained . The primary queuing area shall be from the Higuera Stree t
entrance/ticket counter easterly up Higuera Street towards Chorro Street . Queuing at this locatio n
shall be located against the building facades and away from the curb line and adjoining parkin g
lane . The queue delineation shall generally maintain a 6'clear area for public pedestrian passage .
This required clear area may be reduced to not less than 4' where sidewalk furniture, trees, o r
other obstructions will not reasonably allow for a 6'clear path . The queue shall not bloc k
PH1-42
•
•
•
•
Resolution No . (2012 Series)
Attachment 4
Page 5
entry/exit of operating businesses and shall have the appropriate gaps to allow pedestrians t o
circulate across the line unobstructed .
24.The applicant shall improve the public curb, gutter, sidewalk, and tree well in the area of the mai n
entry/ticket sales window to accommodate the queue and provide for accessible passage by th e
general public . The improvements shall include but are not limited to the removal an d
replacement of displaced curb, gutter, and/or sidewalk, protection of utility vaults, tree roo t
pruning, and the installation of a tree grate to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department .
25.Improvements located within the public right-of-way or easement areas shall be shown on th e
building plan submittal for reference . A separate encroachment permit will be required from th e
Public Works Department for any work or construction staging located within the public right-of -
way or public easement areas .
26.Unless otherwise approved by the City, an alternate queue commencing from the creek-sid e
entry/exit and extending across the pedestrian bridge shall be used when the event schedule migh t
conflict with Farmers Market . Use of the pedestrian bridge route as a patron queue may b e
allowed to avoid conflict with other downtown events (e .g . permitted parades or assemblies ,
permitted work within the Higuera Street right-of-way, or other potentially conflicting event a s
identified by the City of San Luis Obispo or the applicant) subject to approval of the City . This
alternate route shall be managed so that the patrons will be tightly aligned in a single file lin e
along the east/southeastern creek-side guard rail and the eastern-most side of the pedestria n
bridge . This orderly patron line shall have the appropriate gaps to allow pedestrians to circulat e
across the line unobstructed .
27.Plans submitted for a building permit shall show and note the patron queue across the pedestrian
bridge . The patron route shall be upgraded as necessary to remove any obstructions or uneve n
pavement, to the satisfaction of City Building Division and Public Works Department . Pathway
upgrades shall include an evaluation of creek-side lighting levels, including the length of th e
pedestrian bridge patron route, and may require an upgrade to path lighting . A lighting plan fo r
the creek-side patio shall be provided with plans submitted for review by the Architectura l
Review Commission . Creek-side lighting levels shall be to the satisfaction of the City Biologist ,
Police Department and Community Development Department .
28.Construction work related to any proposed path upgrades shall be coordinated with any Cit y
Capital Improvement Project, or permitted private project in the respective work areas . Prior to
preparation of building permit documents, an on-site review will be conducted with th e
Community Development Director, or other City representative, to establish the precise scope o f
work for any proposed path upgrades .
29.The proposed use shall not conflict with events scheduled in Mission Plaza or Old Missio n
Church. The applicant shall provide a monthly entertainment schedule and regularly consult wit h
the Mission Plaza Events Coordinator to determine the potential for such conflicts .
PH1-43
Resolution No . (2012 Series )
Page 6
Attachment 4
•
30 . Post-event patrons shall be directed to exit the second level auditorium through the Higuer a
Street exit . This shall be a requirement of the security plan and shall be noted on security
site/floor plans .
31.Tour buses, vans, trailers, and other support vehicles shall load/unload equipment and supplies a t
approved parking locations . The proposed parking areas shall be approved by the City's Parkin g
Division . The applicant will be responsible for posting of any required "no parking" signage i n
accordance with City standards . The applicant shall pay for any displaced parking spaces/meter s
in accordance with the current standards where applicable . Post 9 :00 p .m . bus loading/unloading ,
utilizing the pedestrian bridge route, shall not occur along Monterey Street, nor along Broa d
Street north of Monterey Street .
32.Tour buses, vans, other support vehicles shall be switched off (no idling or generators running )
while parked .
33.The applicant shall maintain and operate a video recording system that records activity at al l
entrances and exits during all business hours . The video shall be of a quality suitable for late r
identification of customers and staff It will be recorded in a manner that may be retrieved an d
provided to police immediately upon demand . Video data shall be retained for a minimum of 7 2
hours or as otherwise required by law .
34.Business shall be conducted in a manner that will not violate any provisions of the Californi a
Alcoholic Beverage Control Act, prohibiting the sale of alcohol to minors (§25658), maintainin g
the public health, morals, convenience, and safety (§25601); and taking reasonable steps to
correct any objectionable conditions on the premises and immediately adjacent to the premise s
(§24200).
35.The maximum posted occupant load for each space shall not be exceeded at any time . This permit
is strictly limited to allow only the occupant load for the premises as approved by the City of Sa n
Luis Obispo Fire Department . Occupant loads approved by the City of San Luis Obispo Fir e
Department shall be posted at all times .
36.This Use Permit shall be reviewed by the City Council one year from date of occupancy . The City
Council shall have the ability to modify, delete, add conditions, or revoke the Use Permit t o
minimize adverse impacts to adjacent businesses and residences based on documents o r
testimony evidencing such impacts arising from or related to the operation of the permitted use .
37.This Use Permit shall be reviewed at a public Planning Commission hearing if the City receive s
substantiated written complaints from any citizen, Code Enforcement Officer, or Polic e
PH1-44
•
Resolution No . (2012 Series)
Attachment 4
Department employee, which includes information and/or evidence supporting a conclusion that a
violation of this Use Permit, or of City ordinances or regulations applicable to the property or th e
operation of the business, has occurred . At the time of the Use Permit review, to insure on-going
compatibility of the uses on the project site, conditions of approval may be added, deleted, o r
modified, or the Use Permit may be revoked .
38.Upon a significant change to the business, as identified in the applicant's project description an d
security plan, the Use Permit shall be reviewed by the Community Development Director fo r
compliance with conditions of approval, or to determine whether a modification or revocation o f
the Use Permit is necessary .
39.The applicant shall provide a noise analysis for the proposed metal staircase . The analysis shal l
include noise mitigation measures to ensure the staircase will comply with the City's Nois e
Ordinance .
Code Requirement s
The following code requirements are included for informational purposes only . They serve to give the
applicant a general idea of other City requirements that will apply to the project . This is not intende d
to be an exhaustive list as other requirements may be identified during the plan check process .
Utilities Departmen t
1.The applicant shall submit a plan that delineates the location of the property's existing an d
proposed water meter(s), water services, and sewer laterals to the points of connection at the Cit y
water and sewer mains .
2.If the property's existing sewer lateral is proposed to be reused, submittal of a video inspection
will be required for review and approval of the Utilities Department during the Building Permi t
Review process . If a new lateral is proposed, the existing lateral must be abandoned per Cit y
standards .
3.Provisions shall be made for grease interceptors and FOG (fats, oils, and grease) storage withi n
the project's solid waste enclosure . These types of facilities shall also provide an area inside t o
wash floor mats, equipment, and trash cans . The wash area shall be drained to the sanitary sewer .
Building Departmen t
1.Exterior exit stairways shall be separated from the interior of the building as required by Section
1022 .1 . Openings shall be limited to those necessary for egress from normally occupied spaces .
CBC 1026 .6 Therefore, the existing creek side window openings along the proposed exterior exi t
stairway shall be separated from the interior of the building in conformance with Section 707 .
2.
Means of egress doors shall meet the requirements of CBC 1005 .1, 1008 .1, 1009 .5, 1116B and
•
1133B .2 .4 .3 .
PH1-4 5
•
•
Page 7
Resolution No . (2012 Series)
Page 8
Attachment 4
•
3 .
Provide an accessible route of travel connecting all elements and spaces including elevate d
Fermenting Area on First Floor and Sound Booth on Second Floor . CBC 1103B .1 .
Fire Department
1.Building to be provided with fire sprinklers installed per NFPA 13 Standards .
2.Provide a standpipe in the stairwell with outlets on each floor level and on roof .
3.All exit doors shall be equipped with panic hardware and no other lock or latch .
4.The Exterior exit stairway shall be separated from the interior of the building with a minimum 1 -
hour rated construction . Openings shall be limited to those necessary for egress from normall y
occupied spaces . Windows are not permitted along the exterior stairway .
Upon motion of , seconded by
and on the following vote :
AYES :
NOES :
ABSENT :
The foregoing resolution was adopted this day of 2012 .
Mayor Jan Marx
ATTEST :
Maeve Kennedy Grime s
Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM :
J . Christine Dietric k
J . Christine Dietric k
City Attorney
T :\Council Agenda Reports\2012\2012-11-20\SLO Brew Use Permit Appeal-con't from 9-25 mtg (Johnson -
Carloni)\Attachments\ Attachment 4_Legislative Draft Resolution_absent roof docx
PH1-46
•
•
•LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE + PLANNIN G
15 October 201 2
Messrs . Derek Johnson, Community Development Director .
Doug Davidson, Deputy Director
Marcus Carloni, Planning Associat e
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISP O
919 Palm Stree t
San Luis Obispo, CA 9340 1
RE : SLO BREW — 736/738 HIGUERA STREET, DOWNTOWN SAN LUIS OBISPO — A57-1 2
APPLICANT'S RESPONSE TO 25 SEPTEMBER 2012 CITY COUNCIL DIRECTION
Attachment 5
OASIS ASSOCIATE S
Gentlemen,
After much deliberation and thoughtful consideration, we are respectfully submitting th e
following response to the City Council direction provided during the September 250 6 appeal
hearing. On behalf of our clients and Team SLO Brew, we appreciate staff's continued efforts t o
bring this project to fruition . Although the unanimous Planning Commission approval wa s
appealed, we remain bolstered by the outpouring of support and steadfast in our desire an d
excitement to maintain SLO Brew's unique position in the Downtown Core . While not having the
benefit of the meeting minutes, we nonetheless feel that we captured the essence of the Counci l
comments as-follows : The Council comments are in bold italics with the corresponding response .
1 .Reduce the Nightclub Capacity.The reduction in capacity necessarily required revisions t o
all three levels of the proposed project . (See Sheets 1 - 5, Cuningham Group, 15 Octobe r
2012 + Occupancy Calculations )
First Level —In an attempt to ,enlarge . and highlight the microbrewery, the first level ha s
undergone substantial modifications . The rearrangement of the first level components ,
including the elimination of the third exit, resulted in the following modifications . Wit h
the reconfiguration, the dual occupancy will be maintained, albeit at a reduced density :
,Second Level The previously submitted project anticipated an occupancy load of 67 0
maximum persons on the second level, based upon the conceptual floor plan layout . We
have revisited this layout and consequently modified the relationship of the followin g
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 805 .541.4509 p 805.546.0525 1 .www .oasisartt n ^7rflIY
CP 019415•RLA 27.8 .CLAPS 907 -
•Enlarged microbrewery and addition of tasting bar ;
•Relocated the bar from mid-room to the front of the microbrewery ;
Enlarged. kitchen with pizza oven and display area ;
.
•Relocated- men's/women's restrooms ; and a
•Redesigned building entry with ticket booth (outdoor dining . remains).
3427 Miguelito Court
Attachment 5
OASIS ASSOCIATES, INC .
15 October201 2
SLO Brew A57-I 2
Page 2 of 3
components, accordingly, with the .sesultant decrease in the second level occupancy loa d
to 500 maximum persons .
•Decreased the auditorium area .-
•Introduced V.I .P . seating in booths .
•Relocated the bar .
• Rearranged the Green Room and relationship to the stage .
-
•Relocated the office function .
• Relocated the men's/women's restroom ;'and
-
•Eliminated the third exit, based upon the occupancy load decrease .
Third Level – The third level patio area has been redesigned for solely restaurant use, wit h
fixed seating, and no concentrated use . With this revision, the occupancy load is limited t o
49 maximum-persons . While the current design allows for compliance with the nois e
threshold levels, the applicaht will be designing and constructing an architectural tension
structure above the patio to further mitigate for any off-site noise impact s'.
2.Modify Hours of Operation.The applicant is willing to forgo the originally approve d
special events (St . Patrick's Day, Chaco -de Mayo, and winter/spring graduation – CO A
no .34) and related hours of operation (6 a .m. to 1 a .m .). We offer the following operatin g
hours :
General Business Hours – 7 a .m . to 2 a.m.,Monday through Sunday (COA no . 5)
Creekside Patio – Closure at 11 :00 p.m . (no amplified music at this location )
Roof Top Patio - Closure at 11 :00 p.m . (COA no.12 )
3.Relocate Queue.The applicant is willing to relocate the queue froth creek side to Higuer a
Street, with the exception on Thursday night to accommodate Farmer's Market activities .
As we . originally . coordinated with and accepted direction from the Police Departmen t
("PD "), we suggest that a condition be added to reflect the PD's ability to again return-the -
queue to creek side, as required . (Modify COA nos . 15, 22, 24, accordingly .)
4.}Communication Protocol.The applicant accepts an added condition of approval tha t
requires SLO Brew to provide their monthly entertainment schedule to the Mission Plaz a
Events Coordinator in order to minimize conflicts Between events scheduled in Missio n
Plaza or Old Mission Church .
Tree Replacement.The applicant accepts an added condition of approval that requires a
3 :1 tree replacement for the removal of the existing walnut tree .
Attachment 5
6.One-Year Review.The applicant accepts a modified condition that requires a one-yea r
review by the City Council, as opposed to the Planning Commission . (COA no . 31 .)
7.Acoustical Threshold Levels.The applicant continues to accept the previously require d
noise-related conditions of approval – nos . 6, 11, 12, 13, 14 and 23 .
8.Creek Protection.To protect the creek from light pollution, the applicant accepts an adde d
condition of approval that would require preparation of a creek side lighting plan to b e
reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director .
Thank you in advance for your time and consideration of the aforementioned information . W e
look forward to our October 22 nd hearing before the Cultural -Heritage Committee, an d
maintaining the November 20th City Council hearing .,Please,contact me should you have any
questions regarding our submission or if you require any, additional information .
Attachments :
(3) Sets 11" x 17" – Sheets 1 – 5, Cuningham Grou p
(3)'8 %2"x 11" – Occupancy Calculation s
c : H: Marshall & T . Newman/SLDM LL C
B . Ridley/bracket architecture office
J . Watts/Cuningham Grou p
12 .000 5
Respectfully,
O
OCIATES, INC .
•
C.M . orence, AICP Agent
SAN LUIS DOWNTOWN MANAGEMENT LL C
OASIS ASSOCIATES, INC .
15 October 201 2
SLO Brew –A57-1 2
Page 3 of 3
•
Sheet Inde x
Site Plan 1
Conceptual Landscape Plan 2
Higuera Street Elevation 3
Higuera Street Perspective 4
Creek Side Elevation 5
Creek Side Perspective 6
1st Floor Re urant Perspective 7
Roof Top P Perspective 8
,--'-'~'th Occunancv Calc's . __ _9
v
br a
•
east corner of .C,
hlgnetw garde n
I
1.uneeloWned masontntitth.0U.RMI.le be retrofitted
2.publIniglOwalk 4ndlOtpr6onientdIo terhal n
3...0ndnorond iWillks remain.
4.OniiedtilIO latatal to OtIt iandttind structure
5.In) fire riser nt.intetloi i
6.gas,water,andelectrical meters to remain
7.parking space Mates and lane markings to remain
B. amsslblt path. oI Oav$
9.multi-lonh.bla4k wdWt tree 0 .10 reond,surrounding
10.pedestrian access O■vttnnnl.
11.in)oxierior staircase attestiand 00,00 god
1n).utd.w .onin patio, stshet IIWIWiolvs provisional paliohbc a
12I nearest fire hydrantsia. ibulldlngiaccenl llghtifttuo 'tenon bur by Winona, Op . 01410 dhovn In 414vations .
t5. area tight tlxlutb 1,600 let 011116. building twin .by euwatsns:
ow corner 01
I .Wora4broad
1.enhanced paving, typica l
2.landscape pots, typical of 1 0
3.light bollards, typical of 6
4.tables and Chairs for patio dinin g
S . "i3uropa" allan-block retaining wall, to match othe r
along creek trai l
6.new 42" height gaurdrai l
7.new landscapin g
8.screen wall/fence
9.existing tree(s) to remain, typ .
10, existing .stairs to remain
11 . existing landscaping to remai n
•••
"...,.y,.,e
I First Floor Plan • Dining
! First Floor Plan • Standing
SEEM D
.L.NIES WIINN T O
.LNE
1st floor exit requirement s(2) exits
61" total exit component width
OCCUPANCY CALCULATIO N
OUTDOORSPACE AREA, sf OCCUPANCY OL FACTO!
Dining, Higuera 234 A-2 1 5
Dining, Creekside 434 A-2 1 5
TOTAL
INDOOR, RESTAURANT CONFIGURATIO N
SPACE AREA, 51 OCCUPANCY OL FACTO!
BarMhChenlElc.2,084 A-2 200
Lounge 420 A-2 1 5
ae Assembly, Dining 1,780 A-2 1 5
Reskooms 500 B 0
SUBTOTAL
BENCHICOUNTER LENGTH, It OCCUPANCY OL FACTO !
_ Main Bar 68 A-2 2ft
SUBTOTAL
TOTA L
1st floor exit requirement s
(2) exit s
61" total exit component width
OCCUPANCY CALCULATIO N
OUTDOO R
SPACE AREA, sf OCCUPANCY OL FACTO I
Dining, Higuera 234 A-2 1 5
Dining, Creekside 434 A-2 1 5
TOTAL
INDOOR, LATE NIGHT CONFIGURATIO N
SPACE AREA, sf OCCUPANCY 0L FACT0 1
Bar%itchen/Etc .2,084 A-2 20 0
Lounge 420 A-2 1 5
Assembly, Dining 675 A-2 1 5Assembly, Standing 1,105 A-2 5
Reslrcams 500 B 0
03 Second Floor Plan
04 Third Floor Roo
•
fl INioIlliiu!mIohi!ua InnllnnnIMI=111 lnll nn
II."
~ERry °m~x1rc
OF r
O O
MA MOTH?r E.CO.ONENI V.
2nd floor exit requirements
(2) exit s150" total exit stair width
100" total exit component widt h
OCCUPANCY CALCULATIO N
AUDITORIU M
SPACE AREA, sf OCCUPANCY OL FA(
Auditorium 2,205 A-1 5
VIP Booth 480 A-1 1 5
Bar 350 B 200
Green Room 408 B 50
Stage 700 B 50
Office 198 B 100
Storage/Janitor 206 B 30 0
Restrooms 500 B 0
TOTAL
3rd floor exit requirements
(2) exits15" total exit stair widt h
10" total exit component widt h
OCCUPANCY CALCULATIO N
ROOF DEC K
SPACE AREA,s f
Assembly Dining 72 0
Bar 16 0
Reslrooms 100
OCCUPANCY OLFA'
A-3 1 5
.
20 0
0
TOTA L
Attachment 7
•
Sound Level Assessmen t
and Room Acoustic s
of the propose d
SLO Brew on Higuera Stree t
736 Higuera Street
San Luis Obispo, C A
•
•
requested b y
Oasis Associates, Inc .
3427 Miguelito Ct
San Luis Obispo,CA 9340 1
May 8, 2012
PH1-6 1
45dB .co m
David Lord, PH .D .
Acoustics Consulting
P .O .Box 140 6
San Luis Obisp o
CA 93406-140 6
tel .805 .704 .804 6
email : dl 45db .com
Attachment 7
Table of Content s
1 .0 Description and Criteria 3
2 .0 Existing Sound Levels 3
3 .0 Sound Level Contours 4
4 .0 Sound Levels from Operations 4
5 .0 Room Acoustics 4
6 .0 Discussion and Conclusion 4
7 .0 REFERENCES 1 1
8 .0 APPENDIX I : Notes, Definitions 1 2
9 .0 APPENDIX II : Measurements and Modeling Methods 1 3
10 .0 Qualifications of Preparer 1 5
List of Figures
Figure 1 . Baseline Sound Level Survey 5
Figure 2 . Morning low sound levels 6
Figure 3 . Setup activity, Monterey Street, Mission Plaza 7
Figure 4 . Sound Level Contours 8
Figure 5 . Second Floor Room Acoustics 9
Figure 6 . Room Acoustics : The Floor 10
•
•
•
SLO Brew on Higuera
page 2 5/8/12 /
PH1-62
•
•
Attachment 7
Sound Level Assessmen t
and Room Acoustic s
of the propose d
SLO Brew on Higuera Stree t
736 Higuera Stree t
San Luis Obispo, C A
1 .0 Description and Criteri a
This is a report on the acoustical characteristics of the proposed SLO Brew on Higuer a
Street project . The purpose of this report is threefold :
(a)to measure and assess the existing ambient sound levels in the vicinity of 73 6
Higuera Street in order to establish a baseline upon which activities and operations of th e
proposed use, including amplified music can be overlaid and compared, an d
(b)to project and predict the sound levels and community impacts from operations an d
activities around and within the proposed use of SLO Brew on Higuera Street, an d
(c)to describe in concept the room acoustics, acoustical separation and isolation o f
sounds generated within the proposed structure at 736 Higuera Street .
2 .0 Existing Sound Level s
A site visit was made during the night of Friday, April 27,2012 at 11 :45 pm to 12 :4 5
am in the early morning of Saturday, April 28,in order to establish baseline sound level condi-
tions in the immediate area . Results from the sound level measurements are shown in "Figure 1 .
Baseline Sound Level Survey" on page 5 .Continuous sound level measurements were mad e
along a path from Higuera Street to Broad Street to Monterey Street and Mission Plaza as well a s
the pedestrian area along San Luis Creek.
The sound level instrument, measurement technique, and standards used are more full y
described in the Appendix to this report . Wind speed data during this study was taken on site an d
correlated with data from the San Luis Obispo Airport weather station, located approximatel y
three miles south of the site . Throughout the measurement period, wind speed was less than 1 0
m .p .h .
Moderate traffic on Higuera Street and light traffic on surrounding streets, consisting o f
automobiles and motorcycles are clearly audible . The traffic flows at about 10 to 20 m .p .h .
SLO Brew on Higuera
page 3 5/8/1 2
PH 1-6 3
•
Attachment 7
3 .0 Sound Level Contour s
The sound level contours shown in "Figure 1 . Baseline Sound Level Survey" on pag e
5 as well as in figures following, are generated from measured data by the "Noise Contou r
Modeling" technique discussed in "9 .0 APPENDIX II : Measurements and Modeling Methods "
on page 13 . Sound level contours from automobile and pedestrian traffic, as well as enter-
tainment, amplified music sources is shown . The attenuation and propagation of sound i s
affected by topography, including the existing building heights and volumes, and by daily traffi c
volume for each of the transportation sources . Sound levels are shown as Equivalent Soun d
Levels (LEQ one-hour) in dBA, across the entire area, with contour lines drawn for each decibe l
difference .
4 .0 Sound Levels from Operation s
The sound levels for various scenarios are shown for one-hour periods "Figure 2 .
Morning low sound levels" on page 6 and "Figure 3 . Setup activity, Monterey Street, Missio n
Plaza" on page 7, and "Figure 4 . Sound Level Contours" on page 8 .
5 .0 Room Acoustic s
Strategies for acoustically separating noisy areas from quiet spaces and for reducin g
sound transmission to the outside are shown in "Figure 5 . Second Floor Room Acoustics" o n
page 9 and in "Figure 6 . Room Acoustics : The Floor" on page 10 . Several techniques ar e
described that will reduce the impact of unwanted sound on areas within the SLO Brew Buildin g
as well as outside the building .
6 .0 Discussion and Conclusion .
Acoustical simulation results show that the sounds from normal operations and activitie s
at SLO Brew on Higuera will not have a significant impact on sensitive receptors, that is, th e
sound level will be raised by one dB or less . Ordinary listeners are unable to distinguish a on e
decibel change in sound level . The sounds from SLO Brew on Higuera will not have a signif-
icant impact on the ambient sound level in the surrounding community .
David Lord, May 8, 201 2
for 45dB .com
!mod iet-Y)'C>
SLO Brew on Higuera
page 4 5/8/1 2
PH1-64
•
•
•
•
Attachment 7
Figure 1 . Baseline Sound Level Surve y
Survey with sound level measurements made during a typical active night, Friday Apri l
27 to Saturday morning April 28 from 11 :30 pm to 12 :30 am . The walking path for the surve y
is shown as a blue dashed line . Sound level measurements were continuously monitored alon g
the route, and based on those measurements, sound level contours for the surrounding area wer e
generated by acoustical simulation . Sound levels are shown as LEQ one-hour, dBA . Sounds ar e
mainly from street transportation, pedestrians on public sidewalks and walkways, and stationar y
amplified music sounds from establishments along Higuera Street .
> n o
>40.0
F"r'+':>45.0
>50.0> n o
>60.0
S >65.0
70.0
>75.0
>60.0
•
•
SLO Brew on Higuera
page 5 5/8/1 2
PH 1-65
Attachment 7
Figure 2 . Morning low sound level s
Sound levels were measured and acoustically modeled for 9 am, Sunday morning, Apri l
29, 2012 . Sound sources were from very light street traffic . There was no commercial activit y
and few people about . Sound levels are shown as LEQ one hour, dBA .
,35 0
>40.0
>45.0
50.0
>55.0
®>80 0S>65.0
S > 70.0
•
SLO Brew on Higuera
page 6 5/8/1 2
PH 1-66
•
Attachment 7
Figure 3 . Setup activity, Monterey Street, Mission Plaz a
Site plan, showing two possible routes for equipment setup activities of groups preparin g
for performances at SLO Brew on Higuera :
Route A is for bus unloading when there is no other activity at Mission Plaza .
Route B is for bus unloading when there is other activity at Mission Plaz a
The equipment setup originates from a truck and/or band bus parked on Monterey Street .
In this acoustical model, equipment setup occurs during a time of moderate traffic and stree t
noise, between 5 pm and 7pm . The potential noise impact from equipment setup on nearby
potential sensitive residential receptors is less than one dB above normal community soun d
levels at that time of day and location . One dB is normally not a perceptible difference, an d
therefore the impact is less than significant .
SLO Brew on Higuera page 7 5/8/1 2
/> 35.0
>40.0
45.0
11M.>50 .0
>55.0
>60,0la/>65 .0
M >70.0
> 75.0
•
•
PH 1-67
Attachment 7
Figure 4 . Sound Level Contour s
The rooftop patio area (shown in elevation below) will have background recorded music ,
no DeeJay and no live performance . Sound level contours are shown for SLO Brew roofto p
patio music, LEQ one hour, dBA . Potential impact on nearby potential sensitive receptors is les s
than one dB, and therefore not significant .
SLO Brew on Higuera
page 8 5/8/1 2
PH 1-68
•
•
•
Attachment 7
Figure 5 . Second Floor Room Acoustic s
This figure illustrates the concept for acoustically isolating the interior amplified musi c
and entertainment on the second floor of SLO Brew . The stage and audience area are acousti-
cally isolated from the exterior of the building as well as isolated from the downstairs and fro m
the upstairs (roof) of the SLO Brew building .
The design goal is for a minimum of audible sound transmission through the floor, ceilin g
and walls to the exterior and to other parts of the building . The space is independently air condi-
tioned with an acoustically designed air handling system . The performance space will hav e
sound absorption materials (rigid fiberglass panels) to reduce sound reflections and echoes .
Existing windows will be replaced with acoustically designed glazing for maximu m
reduction of sound transmission to the exterior . Entry and exit areas will be "air-locked" to
reduce sound transmission .
Wall and ceiling construction will incorporate acoustically engineered gypsum board ,
such as Quiet Rock, to reduce sound transmission and to de-couple the sound sources within th e
room from adjacent areas .
SLO Brew on Higuera
page 9 5/8/1 2
PH 1-69
Attachment 7
Figure 6 . Room Acoustics : The Floo r
The second floor space is acoustically isolated from the first floor restaurant area b y
construction of Gyperete mass floor to dampen vibration . The acoustical objective is fo r
minimum audible sound and vibration transmission through the floor to the quiet restauran t
interior on the first floor . Each space is independently air conditioned with acoustically isolate d
air handling systems .
The floor will be a Kinetics floating lightweight concrete system which will de-couple th e
second floor performance space from the quiet restaurant area on the ground floor . The compre-
hensive construction solution will result in an overall sound reduction of 50 to 70 dB . Sounds i n
the second floor space will be inaudible in the outdoor areas surrounding the SLO Brew building .
SLO Brew on Higuera
page 10 5/8/1 2
PH 1-70
Attachment 7
7 .0 REFERENCE S
1 . American National Standards Institute, Inc . 2004 .ANSI 1994 American National Standar d
Acoustical Terminology .ANSI S .1 .-1994, (R2004) , New York, NY.
2 . American Society for Testing and Materials . 2004 .ASTME 1014 - 84 (Reapproved 2000)
Standard Guide for Measurement of Outdoor A-Weighted Sound Levels .
3 . Berglund, Birgitta, World Health Organization . 1999 .Guidelines for Community Nois e
chapter 4, Guideline Values .
4 . Bolt, Beranek and Newman . 1973 .Fundamentals and Abatement of Highway Traffic Noise ,
Report No . PB-222-703 . Prepared for Federal Highway Administration .
5.California Department of Finance . 2007 .California Strategic Growth Plan .
6 . California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). 1982 .Caltrans Transportatio n
Laboratory Manual .
7 . . 1998 .Caltrans Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol For New Highway Construction an d
Highway Reconstruction Projects .
8 . . 2006 .California Transportation Plan 2025,chapter 6 .
9 . California Resources Agency . 2007 .Title 14 . California Code of Regulations Chapter 3 .
•
Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act Article 5 .
Preliminary Review of Projects and Conduct of Initial Study Sections, 15060 to 15065 .
10.County of Santa Barbara ..County of Santa Barbara General Plan, Noise Element .
11 . County of Santa Barbara Environmental Thresholds and Guidelines Manual Published Ma y
1992, revised October 2006 . Planning and Development Departmen t
12 . Federal Highway Administration . 2006 .FHWA Roadway Construction Noise Model User's
Guide Final Report.FHWA-HEP-05-054 DOT-VNTSC-FHWA-05-01 .
13.Harris, Cyril .M ., editor . 1979 Handbook of Noise Control.
•
SLO Brew on Higuera
page 11
5/8/1 2
PH1-7 1
•
Attachment 7
8.0 APPENDIX I : Notes, Definition s
TERM DEFINITIO N
Ambient Noise Level The composite of noise from all sources near and far . The normal or existing level
of environmental noise or sound at a given location . The ambient level is typicall y
defined by the LEQ level over one hour or the LDN over 24 hours .
Background Noise Level The underlying, ever-present lower level noise that remains in the absence of intrusiv e
or intermittent sounds . Distant sources, such as traffic, typically make up th e
background . The background level is generally defined by the L90 percentile nois e
level, which is exceeded 90 percent of the time .
Sound Level, dB
Sound Level . Ten times the common logarithm of the ratio of the square of the
measured A-weighted sound pressure to the square of the standard reference pressure of
20 micropascals, SLOW time response, in accordance with ANSI S1 .4-1971 (R1976 )
Unit : decibels(dB).
dBA or dB(A):
A-weighted sound level . The ear does not respond equally to all frequencies, bu t
is less sensitive at low and high frequencies than it is at medium or speech rang e
frequencies . Thus, to obtain a single number representing the sound level of a noise
containing a wide range of frequencies in a manner representative of the ear's response ,
it is necessary to reduce the effects of the low and high frequencies with respect to th e
medium frequencies . The resultant sound level is said to be A-weighted, and the unit s
are dBA . The A-weighted sound level is also called the noise level .
Equivalent Sound Level Because sound levels can vary markedly in intensity over a short period of time ,
LEQ
some method for describing either the average character of the sound or the statis-
tical behavior of the variations must be utilized . Most commonly, one describe s
ambient sounds in terms of an average level that has the same acoustical energy a s
the summation of all the time-varying events . This energy-equivalent sound/nois e
descriptor is called LEQ . In this report, both a 15 minute and an hourly period is used .
Percentile Sound Level The noise level exceeded during n percent of the measurement period, where n is a
(Ln)
number between 0 and 100 (e.g ., L90, exceeded 90 percent of the time, L10, exceede d
ten percent of the time .)
Subjective Loudness
In addition to precision measurement of sound level changes, there is a subjectiv e
Changes .
characteristic which describes how most people respond to sound :
•A change in sound level of 3 dBA is barely perceptible by most listeners .
•A change in level of 6 dBA is clearly perceptible .
•A change of 10 dBA is perceived by most people as being twice (or half)as loud.
Time weighting Different, internationally recognized, meter damping characteristics are availabl e
on sound level measuring instruments : Slow (S), Fast (F) and Impulse (I). In this
community sound level measurement, the Fast (F) response time is used .
SLO Brew on Higuera
page
12
5/8/1 2
PH 1-72
•
•
•
Attachment 7
9 .0 APPENDIX II : Measurements and Modeling Method s
•
Wind Measuremen t
Sound level measurements become less reliable when average wind speed is greater than 1 1
m.p .h. at the measurement site . Therefore, wind speed and direction are measured periodicall y
at the measurement site and the results are correlated with wind data from a nearby establishe d
weather station .
Wind speed and direction throughout the measurement period are taken from data from San Lui s
Obispo Airport weather station located approximately three miles south of the site .
Sound Level Meter s
Precision of Sound Level Meters . The American National Standards Institute (ANSI) specifie s
several types of sound level meters according to their precision . Types 1,2, and 3 are referre d
to as "precision," "general-purpose," and "survey" meters, respectively . Most measurement s
carefully taken with a type 1 sound level meter will have an error not exceeding 1 dB . The
corresponding error for a type 2 sound level meter is about 2 dB . The sound level meter used fo r
measurements shown in this report are Larson-Davis Laboratories Model 824 . This meter meet s
all requirements of ANSI sl .4, IEC 651 for Type 1 accuracy and include the following features :
110 dB dynamic range for error free measurements . Measures FAST, SLOW, Unweighte d
PEAK, Weighted PEAK, Impulse, Leq, LDOD, LOSHA, Dose, Time Weighted Average, SEL ,
Lmax, Lmin, LDN . Time history sampling periods from 32 samples per second up to one sampl e
•
every 255 seconds .
Field calibration of the meter is accomplished before and after all field measurements with a n
external calibrator. Laboratory calibration of the all instruments is performed at least biannuall y
and accuracy can be traced to the U .S . National Institute of Science and Technology standard .
The Type 1 Sound Level Meter is factory calibrated as three separate components ; the bod y
of the meter itself plus the preamplifier and the microphone, each of which has a Certificate of
Calibration and Conformance . When calibrated, the instrument is certified as meeting factor y
specifications ; Normal elapsed time between factory calibrations should not exceed two years .
Sound Level Measurement Metho d
The protocol for conducting sound level measurements is prescribed in detail by the America n
Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) in their E 1014 publication and the Cal Trans Traffi c
Noise Analysis Protocol . The procedures and standards in those documents are met or exceede d
for sound level measurements shown in this report . The standards ofASTM E 1014 ar e
exceeded by using Type 1 sound level meters for all measurements in this report instead of th e
less accurate Type 2 meters . Therefore, the precision of the measurements in this report is likel y
to be better than +/- 2 dB as stated in ASTM E1014 .
Wind speed and direction, temperature profiles, relative humidity, and sky conditions ca n
cause changes in noise measurement results at normal receiver distances from a noise source .
SLO Brew on Higuera
page
13
5/8/1 2
PH 1-73
•
Attachment 7
Information concerning these effects is made part of the documentation accompanying the noise
•
measurement data . Without it, there is no baseline against which subsequent measurements can
be compared . The prevailing wind direction is expressed in degrees clockwise from the nort h
direction . Wind, air temperature, and humidity observations are made at the average heigh t
above the ground that noise is traveling between the source and the receiver . The minimu m
height should is at least 1 .5 meter, or 5 feet, above the ground . In addition to the wind, temper-
ature and humidity observations, and sky conditions are also documented .
Meteorological conditions can affect noise measurements in two ways : they can affect th e
measurement instruments directly, or they can affect the actual noise levels . Wind speeds of 5
meters per second, or 11 miles per hour, create a wind noise of about 45 dBA on a typical ¼"
microphone with windscreen . This means that measurements of noise below 55 dBA will b e
contaminated under these conditions . Extreme hot or cold temperatures and humidity can als o
affect the operation of noise measurement instruments . High humidity or rapid changes i n
temperature can cause droplets of moisture to form on the microphone diaphragm, creating a
popping noise . This can contaminate the noise measurement . Rain, or wet pavement will chang e
tire-pavement noise characteristics, altering traffic noise both in level and frequency. Change s
in wind speed and direction relative to the location of the noise source and receiver can caus e
changes in the magnitude and direction of wind shear . This can result in refraction effects tha t
can redirect sound energy away from or toward a receiver and change overall noise levels .
For normal noise measurements, meteorological conditions are restricted as follows : If wind
speeds, regardless of direction, are greater than 5 meters per second, or 11 miles per hour,
•
those measurements are not included in the noise analysis . For research or special studies thi s
criterion is often lower, depending on the objectives of the study. Temperatures and humidit y
are within the operational ranges specified for the equipment used . [reference : Caltrans Traffi c
Noise Analysis Protocol For New Highway Construction and Highway Reconstruction Projects ,
October, 1998 ]
Noise Contour Modelin g
Noise contours incorporating the measured sound level values were generated using CADNA/A ,
an acoustical modeling program that incorporates the TNM 2 .5 algorithms, and which wa s
developed to predict hourly Leq values for free-flowing traffic conditions . This compute r
modeling tool, made by Datakustik GmbH, is an internationally accepted acoustical modelin g
software program, used by many acoustics and noise control professional offices in the U .S . and
abroad . The software has been validated by comparison with actual values in many differen t
settings . The program has a high level of reliability and follows methods specified by th e
International Standards Organization in their ISO 9613-2 standard, "Acoustics —Attenuatio n
of sound during propagation outdoors, Part 2 : General Method of Calculation ." The standard
states that, "this part of ISO 9613 specifies an engineering method for calculating the attenu-
ation of sound during propagation outdoors in order to predict the levels of environmenta l
noise at a distance from a variety of sources . The method predicts the equivalent continuous
A-weighted sound pressure level ... under meteorological conditions favorable to propagatio n
from sources of known sound emissions . These conditions are for downwind propagation ...
SLO Brew on Higuera
page
14
5/8/1 2
PH 1-74
Attachment 7
under a well-developed moderate ground-based temperature inversion, such as commonly occur s
•
at night."
The computer modeling software takes into account source sound power levels, surface reflectio n
and absorption, atmospheric absorption, geometric divergence, meteorological conditions, walls ,
barriers, berms, and terrain variations . The CADNA/A software uses a grid of receivers coverin g
the project site .
10 .0 Qualifications of Prepare r
David Lord, Ph.D ., Principal Consultan t
For more than 20 years, David Lord has worked with architects, engineers, buildin g
contractors and public agencies to assess and solve problems in acoustics, noise and vibration .
Dr. Lord is recognized as an acoustical consultant by several municipal and county plannin g
departments and has provided acoustical consulting services for projects located in the followin g
counties in California : San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara, Orange, San Bernardino, Ventura an d
Los Angeles . David Lord is approved by the Department of Defense as an acoustical consultan t
at Vandenberg Air Force Base and at the Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Port Hueneme .
Community Noise Assessmen t
Projects have ranged in scale and complexity from residential to commercial and insti-
tutional developments . All noise assessments rigorously follow Caltrans and ASTM standar d
procedures, while adhering to local planning standards and noise ordinances and the Unifor m
Building Code . Recent projects include : Environmental Impact Report noise chapter for a
Metrolink station in Orange County ; noise assessment for an automobile service center, a retai l
food market, a community theater, a water treatment plant, various wineries, a boutique hotel ,
a remote, 600 acre religious retreat site, an annual rodeo and tractor pull event, a metal salvage
yard, etc . Residential neighbor-noise assessments range from animal noise to motorcycle noise ,
to stationary mechanical noise issues .
Room Acoustic s
Consulting projects undertaken in room acoustics have ranged in scale from 50- t o
600-seat spaces, such as church sanctuaries, restaurants and nightclubs . Consultation begin s
preferably with the architect early in design and continues through construction and occupancy .
Music sources are evaluated and matched to the shape, the volume and the absorptivity o f
the space, using energy/time/frequency analysis tools . Recent projects include the Katsuy a
Restaurant at Hollywood and Vine ; the Vina Robles Winery Refectory, and the United Methodis t
Church, San Luis Obispo .
Instrumentatio n
Sound and vibration measurements are made with multiple, state-of-the-art, data-logging ,
integrating, Type I instruments and a real time analyzer . Long-term total sound monitoring i s
SLO Brew on Higuera
page 15
5/8/1 2
PH 1-7 5
•
Attachment 7
conducted with high-resolution digital sound recorders . Sound transmission and reverberation
•
studies are made with a real-time analyzer following ASTM procedures . Each instrument i s
factory calibrated annually to meet U .S . National Institute of Standards and Technology require-
ments and has a current Certificate of Calibration and Conformance .
Recent Projects in California .Partial list; References provided on request .
1 . Bradley Square, Santa Maria, California ; Housing Development 120 units . Transportatio n
noise assessment, mitigation recommendations, noise-resistant construction design .
2 . Por La Mar Nursery commercial horticulture development, worker housing, Santa Barbara /
Goleta, California . Transportation noise assessment, noise resistant housing design .
3 . Fess Parker Wine Center, Lompoc California, with Pults & Associates, Architects . CEQA
Environmental Impact Assessment for Noise, City of Lompoc .
4 . San Ysidro Ranch, Montecito, with Mechanical Engineering Consultants, Santa Barbara .
Total sound level monitoring, recording, assessment and mitigation design .
5 . State Street, City of Santa Barbara, consultant to several entertainment establishments fo r
entertainment noise mitigation and conflict resolution .
6 . Environmental Impact Report, Noise Impact Assessment for Enos Ranchos and Mahone y
Ranch General Plan Amendment/Zone Change/Specific Plan Amendment/Annexation ,
Santa Maria, CA, with Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC )
7 . Environmental Impact Report, Noise Impact Assessment, including rail noise issues, fo r
Westgate Metrolink Station, Placentia, CA, with Crawford, Multari and Clark Associates .
8 . QAD Inc ., Summerland, CA . Chiller installation noise assessment and mitigation desig n
evaluation to meet County of Santa Barbara noise standards .
Academic Qualifications
David Lord is a Professor of Architecture, Emeritus, at California Polytechnic Stat e
University, San Luis Obispo, where he developed the curriculum and taught community nois e
and acoustical engineering subjects .
David Lord holds the Master of Architecture degree from the University of California ,
Berkeley, with a specialization in architectural acoustics . David Lord earned the Ph .D . degre e
from the University of London, Bartlett School of Architecture .
Membership s
David Lord is a member of the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Ai r
Conditioning Engineers, the Acoustical Society of America, the American Institute of Physics ,
the Institute of Noise Control Engineering, and the Audio Engineering Society .
SLO Brew on Higuera
page 16 5/8/1 2
PH1-76
•
•
Attachment 7
•
Sound Level Assessmen t
Addendu m
SLO Brew on Higuera Stree t
736 Higuera Stree t
San Luis Obispo, C A
•
requested b y
Oasis Associates, Inc .
3427 Miguelito C t
San Luis Obispo,CA 9340 1
August 9, 201 2
45dB .co m
David Lord, PH .D .
Acoustics Consulting
P .O .Box 140 6
San Luis Obisp o
CA 93406-140 6
tel .805 .704 .804 6
email : dl 45db .co m
•
Attachment 7
Sound Level Assessment Addendu m
SLO Brew on Higuera Street
736 Higuera Stree t
San Luis Obispo, C A
1 .0 Description and Criteri a
This is an addendum to the original Sound Level Assessment report dated May 8, 2012 .
The addendum study examines foot traffic sound levels from the creekside walk, patron s
queued for entrance, patrons ascending the proposed exterior stair, and patrons at the thir d
floor rooftop patio at the proposed SLO Brew on Higuera Street project . The stair treads are
constructed of concrete, high mass and non-reverberant . There is a solid laminated glass wal l
constructed along the north side of the rooftop patio, with a height of 6 feet above finish floo r
level, which produces an approximate noise level reduction of ten decibels .
The addendum study assumes the same time frame as the original baseline sound leve l
survey, from 11 :30 pm to 12 :30 am .
Three acoustical conditions are examined with simulation software :
(a)No patrons in rooftop patio area, as if there were no project . Ambient sound level s
only are illustrated . This includes foot traffic on creekside walk (see figures for mor e
detail).
(b)Patrons at rooftop patio, voices only, no recorded background music . Includes foo t
traffic on creekside walk, patrons queued for entrance at SLO Brew, and a number of
patrons on proposed exterior stair (see figures for more detail).
(c)Patrons at rooftop patio, voices plus recorded background music . Includes foot traffi c
on creekside walk, patrons queued on SLO Brew property and a number of patrons on th e
proposed exterior stair (see figures for more detail).
2 .0 Discussion and Conclusion .
Acoustical simulation results show that the sounds from normal operations and activitie s
associated with queueing, ascending the exterior stair, and occupying the rooftop patio at SL O
Brew on Higuera does not have an impact at distant sensitive residential receptors . Sound leve l
attenuation descends to ambient sound levels within 100 to 200 feet . Therefore, specific sound s
from the roof patio and exterior stair will not be audible at 200 feet distance or more, because a t
that distance, patio sound levels do not rise above ambient sound levels .
•
•
David Lord, August 9, 201 2
for 45dB .co m
SLO Brew on Higuera Addendum
page 2 8/9/1 2
PH1-78
•
Attachment 7
Figure I .Baseline Sound Surve y
Excerpt of previous baseline sound survey taken from the original May 8, 2012 study .
No patrons present on rooftop patio or on the exterior stair, nor queuing on SLO Brew property .
Sound is shown emanating from creekside walk with 30 people walking and talking past thi s
venue . Sound levels are Leq one hour = dBA .
•
•
SLO Brew on Higuera Addendum
page 3 8/9/1 2
PH 1-79
Attachment 7
Figure 2 . Baseline Sound Leve l
Acoustic simulation of baseline sound level showing ambient sounds only, similar to th e
overall baseline sound survey in Figure 1 with more detail and more measurement points in th e
exterior stair and rooftop patio . This is the "no project" assumption, with no patrons presen t
on rooftop patio or on the exterior stair and no patrons queuing on SLO Brew property . Soun d
is shown emanating from creekside walk with 30 people walking and talking past this venue .
Sound levels are Leq one hour = dBA .
Creekside Wal k
Exterior Stai r
Rooftop Pati o
gao .°.g g u
tagMattt
•
•
•
SLO Brew on Higuera Addendum page 4 8/9/1 2
PH 1-80
•
Attachment 7
Figure 3 . Sound Levels, Voices-Onl y
Rooftop patio, voices-only sound levels . No background recorded music . Assumption s
are : 145 people on rooftop patio, 20 people on the exterior stair, 30 people queued on SLO Bre w
property and 30 people walking along the creekside . Sound levels are Leq one hour = dB A
Creekside Wal k
Queuing Area an d
Exterior Stai r
Rooftop Pati o
•
v v v v v v v v v v
octet'', a o oaaaaaaaaaaC9 W[a 07 CO mmm CO
•SLO Brew on Higuera Addendum page 5 8/9/1 2
PH1-81
Attachment 7
Figure 4 . Sound Levels, Voices plus Recorded Music
•
Rooftop Patio, voices plus background recorded music sound levels . Assumptions are :
Five small speakers, 145 people on rooftop patio, 20 people on exterior stair, 30 people queue d
on SLO Brew property and 30 people walking along creekside . Sound levels are Leq one hour =
dBA .
Creekside Wal k
Queuing Area an d
Exterior Stai r
Rooftop Pati o
SLO Brew on Higuera Addendum
page 6 8/9/1 2
PH 1-82
Attachment 7
Figure 5 . Distance Study
Sound attenuation at a distance from rooftop patio, toward Monterey Street . On the left
below are sound level contours from rooftop patio voices and music, queuing on SLO Bre w
property and patrons on exterior stair, as before . On the right below are ambient sound leve l
contours for "no project" with no rooftop activity contribution . Sound level at Monterey Stree t
remains unchanged . Sound levels are Leq one hour = dBA .
111111 1a3 8 3 8 Sb u`"-!
~'°m gg aga a
•
•SLO Brew on Higuera Addendum page 7
8/9/1 2
PH 1-83
Attachment 8
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISP O
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT
ITEM #2
MEETING DATE : July 11,201 2
BY : Marcus Carloni, Planning Technician (781-7176 )
FROM : Doug Davidson, Deputy Director of Community Development Departmen t
FILE NUMBER : A 57-1 2
PROJECT ADDRESS :736/738 Higuera Stree t
SUBJECT :Review of a night club (SLO Bre ng Company) relocation in the Histori c
Downtown Commercial (C-D-H) zone .
RECOMMENDATIO N
Adopt attached resolution recommending approval of the Use Permit .
SITE DATA
Hamish Marshall : San Lui s
Downtown Managemen t
Carol Florence : Oasis Associates ,
Inc .
C-D-H (Historic Downtow n
Commercial )
General Retai l
-10,800 square fee t
Exempt from environmenta l
review under Class 1 (Sectio n
15301), Existing Facilities, of th e
CEQA Guidelines .
BACKGROUN D
The applicant, San Luis Downtown Management, is requesting to allow operation of a Nigh t
Club and restaurant at the subject property as the new location for the existing SLO Brewin g
Company, currently located at 1119 Garden Street .
A Use Permit is required for a night club facility providing dancing and entertainment . Th e
Zoning Regulations definition of a night club includes live or recorded music and/or dancing ,
comedy, disc jockeys, etc ., which may also serve alcoholic beverages for on-site consumption .
PH1-84
Applican t
Representativ e
Zonin g
General Pla n
Site Area
Environmenta l
Status
•
•
A 57-1 2
736/738 Higuer a
Page 2
Attachment 8
The definition does not include ambient music, which is defined separately as incidental acousti c
or recorded music .
At the discretion of the Community Development Director, an Administrative Use Permit may b e
referred to the Planning Commission (MC 17 .58 .030 .A3). The Community Developmen t
Director has referred this review to the Planning Commission given the scope of the propose d
night club venue and potential associated impacts to the neighborhood .
ALCOHOL OUTLET REVIE W
For the past two years, staff has been collecting information and developing strategies to reduc e
public safety problems and negative impacts associated with alcohol outlets . In October 2009 ,
staff presented a study to the Council that correlated police-related incidents with alcohol outlets ,
along with several recommendations to improve public safety . The City Council directed staff t o
explore a range of strategies, enhance local regulations, and engage a wide variety o f
stakeholders . On November 16, 2010, staff provided an update to the Council on progress mad e
in exploring these strategies and initiated a Nightlife Public Safety Assessment ("Assessment").
This Assessment was presented to the Council in November, 2011 . Council direction was t o
bring forth amendments to the Zoning Regulations to reduce public safety problems associate d
with alcohol outlets . Amendments reviewed by the Planning Commission on April 25, 2012 an d
Council on May 15, 2012 resulted in the following changes to the Zoning Ordinance :
1.
Revised zoning definition of restaurant and convenience stor e
2.
New Restaurant zoning definition (late hour alcohol service) and liquor stor e
3.
Use Permit requirement for late hour alcohol service restaurants and liquor store s
4.
Deemed Approved Ordinance for existing alcohol outlet s
The Ordinance Amendments were continued by the Council to define the role of the Downtow n
Association in the Deemed Approved violation and hearing process . The Ordinanc e
Amendments were approved by the City Council on June 19, 2012 . The second reading is Jul y
10, 2012 and the new Ordinance becomes effective on August 10, 2012 .
The Assessment brought together a wide variety of stakeholders to identify issues and impacts
associated with alcohol outlets from different perspectives . Approximately 60 representative s
from various businesses and organizations participated in the process, which included a two-hou r
orientation session and four separate "roundtable" discussions organized by perspective —
Community, Hospitality, Safety and Development .
The final Nightlife Assessment report was presented to Council on November 15, 2011 . As a
follow-up to the Assessment report and stakeholder engagement process, several of the bar ,
nightclub, and restaurant owners/operators formed the Safe Night Life Association (formerly th e
Restaurant and Bar Owners Association).
•
The Safe Night Life Association's (SNL) input into formation of the alcohol outlet Ordinanc e
•
•
PH 1-85
A 57-1 2
736/738 Higuera
Page 3
Attachment 8
•
Amendments and its defined role as a peer review committee in the Deemed Approve d
Ordinance are positive outcomes of this two-year process . The SNL is a sanctione d
subcommittee of the Downtown Association and has (or is) working to implement its own new
following programs to address alcohol-related problems :
1.SLO Safe Ride .A late-night transportation service to take downtown patrons to thei r
neighborhoods .
2.Downtown Clean-Up .A downtown clean-up service to keep the downtown clea n
after late-night use .
3.ABC LEAD (Licensee Education on Alcohol and Drugs) Training .An educationa l
program for employees put on by the ABC that provides practical information o n
responsible serving practices .
4."One 86-All 86" Plan .An information sharing plan to bar patrons who have bee n
ejected from one downtown bar from all downtown bars .
5.Patron Responsibility .A marketing program focused on personal responsibility an d
safety for patrons .
Although it is still too early to draw conclusions about SNL's impact on downtown alcoho l
problems, the Police Department has some recent statistics that show a relative decrease i n
downtown alcohol-related incidents .
2010-2011*2011-2012**Reduction
•c0
co Urinating 63 55 13 %
0
0 Alcohol in Public 115 50 57 %
L-
cu
E
z Assault Misdemeanor 33 28 15%
*09/01/2010 through 02/28/201 1
**09/01/2011 through 02/28/201 2
The group did have a noticeable impact on St . Patrick's Day as the alcohol-related incidents wer e
substantially down from last year . While the inclement weather certainly contributed to reduce d
problems, active outreach to the community is also believed to have contributed to reduce d
alcohol related issues . SNL took the lead on installing portable public restrooms which greatl y
reduced public urination in the downtown.
SITE DESCRIPTIO N
The subject property is located along Higuera Street (Attachment 1, Vicinity Map) in the Histori c
Downtown Commercial (C-D-H) zone . The property is bounded by Downtown Commercia l
zoning on all sides . The property backs up to San Luis Obispo Creek with Mission San Lui s
Obispo and residences beyond to the north and northwest . The property is adjacent to retail ,
restaurant, and bar/tavern and night club uses, with some downtown upper level residences .
PH 1-86
•
A 57-1 2
736/738 Higuera
Page 4
Attachment 8
• The site contains the 15,000 square foot two story Carrisa building which currently includes tw o
retail storefronts on the ground floor with offices on the second floor . The Carrisa Building, built
in 1905, is a Master List Historic Resource . The proposed improvements will possibly requir e
review by the Cultural Heritage Committee, and will require review by the Architectural Revie w
Commission .
PROJECT DESCRIPTIO N
In association with the recently approved Garden Street Terraces project, the applicant plans t o
relocate the existing SLO Brewing Company business to the subject location . Externa l
improvements along Higuera Street include a new rounded storefront system with counter seatin g
and tables and chairs, and addition of a metal awning . Improvements at the rear of the buildin g
(creek-side) include removal of the existing upper level offices and associated wood beams, an d
removal of the wood stair to be replaced with an external steel staircase leading to a roof leve l
patio . Improvements also include a new leveled walking surface, patio dining, and removal of th e
existing 36 inch diameter Black Walnut tree . The proposed floor plan will include a first level
(street level) restaurant/bar and brewery, with outdoor dining along Higuera Street and at th e
back of the building along San Luis Obispo Creek . The first floor will also include space fo r
ambient 'live entertainment . The second level will include offices and an approximately 3,00 0
square foot concert venue/auditorium with an approximate occupant load of 600 persons . Th e
auditorium will also include a bar, and a moveable partition to enclose the space fo r
• performances with a smaller crowd . The applicant proposes construction of a roof level pati o
atop the back (creek side) of the building at approximately 1,000 square feet . The patio will
include customer seating and a bar . The applicant proposes ambient level recorded music for th e
rooftop patio . The Building and Fire Departments are working with the applicant to establis h
proper exiting of the roof level patio .
The applicant proposes to maintain SLO Brewing Company's current hours of operation whic h
are as follows :
Monday - Friday Saturday - Sunda y
Concert Hours (second level)
4pm to la m
*Winter/Spring graduation, St . Patrick's Day, Cinco de Mayo
This request to relocate the night club use to the Carrisa building will help meet unreinforce d
masonry (URM) strengthening objectives . The Carrisa building met Level A strengthenin g
requirements in 1995 . Level A strengthening provides 75% better safety by connecting the roo f
and floor assemblies to the walls of the building . Additionally, the parapets are braced whic h
reduces the hazard to the public right-of-way . Although the complete strengthening of th e
Zoning Regulations Chapter 17 .100 . Ambient Entertainment . Acoustic or recorded music, or live readings o f
•
books or poetry, which is clearly incidental, that allows for normal conversation levels, and for which no cove r
fee or ticket is required .
PH 1-87
A 57-1 2
736/738 Higuera
Page 5
Attachment 8
•
Carissa building was due July 1,2012,the building owners have been collaborating with th e
Chief Building Official and have made progress by submitting this request for relocation of th e
night club that is currently approved at 1119 Garden Street . The property owners have propose d
a coordinated effort to help facilitate and propel the Garden Street Terraces project forward . An
approval to allow the night club to relocate to the Cart-isa building will result in reduced number s
of patrons at 1119 Garden Street . It may also facilitate strengthening of 1119 Garden Street prio r
to 2015 .
CIRCULATIO N
The first level of the building will be accessed from its main entrance along Higuera Street an d
its secondary entrance at the rear of the building along the creek .
The second level will have three points of access ; an internal staircase from Higuera Street, an
internal elevator from the first floor, and the proposed external staircase at the creek-sid e
entrance to the building . When the second level auditorium is scheduled for use as a concer t
venue or other event with high patron volume, the applicant proposes use of the building's creek -
side entrance as the main entrance ; queuing patrons along the creek-side pedestrian easement a s
shown in Attachment 4, Circulation Plan . The creek-side queuing of patrons was a City Polic e
Department recommendation to the applicant during the preliminary planning phase of th e
project . The applicant also proposes parking of the band's buses along Monterey Street, adjacen t
to the History Center, and using the routes shown in Attachment 4 for loading and unloading o f
band equipment . Attachment 4 illustrates the two proposed routes for queuing of concert patrons ;
Route A uses the Mission Plaza's Warden Bridge when an event is not taking place at Missio n
Plaza, and route B uses the pedestrian bridge subject to Mission Plaza event activity .
The roof level patio,like the second level, will have three points of access ; an internal staircas e
from Higuera Street (not shown on project plans ; shown on recently updated plans ; will b e
provided at the hearing), an internal elevator from the first and second floors, and an externa l
staircase at the creek-side entrance to the building .
Staff Evaluation :Staff concerns with regard to circulation include the following ; 1 )
effect on nearby residents/businesses and police resources of a high volume of concer t
patrons exiting the building during late night hours, and 2)effect on nearby residents of
post-concert bus loading during late night hours .
1) Post-concert-exiting patrons will likely exit the building through the same route used
to enter the building . As discussed above, concert patrons will use the creek-sid e
entrance to the building to access the second level auditorium . The late night, high -
volume, post-concert release of patrons through this creek-side exit, which channel s
patrons to Monterey Street and/or Mission Plaza, may disturb adjacent businesses an d
especially nearby residents . Staff recommended conditions of approval require
security staff to exit post-concert patrons to Higuera Street ; the Police Department i s
supportive of this exiting route . Recommended conditions also require upgrades along
•
•
PH 1-88
A 57-1 2
736/738 Higuera
Page 6
Attachment 8
•the creek-side patron routes (Routes A and B, Attachment 4) as necessary to remov e
any obstructions/uneven pavement, to the satisfaction of the Building and Publi c
Works Departments .
2) The applicant proposes to park the band's buses along Monterey Street, adjacent t o
the History Center, for loading/unloading of band equipment ; utilizing routes A and B
(Attachment 4) to access the subject location . To address the potential noise impact s
on nearby residents due to late night loading/unloading of band equipment, staff
recommended conditions of approval require bus engines and related generators to b e
switched off while equipment and personnel are loaded/unloaded . Staff recommende d
conditions require the bus parking locations be approved by the City's Parkin g
Division, as is the current operation at the 1119 Garden Street location . However,
post-9 p .m . bus loading/unloading shall not occur in the area along Monterey Stree t
marked "tour bus parking" which is adjacent to residences .
NOIS E
The applicant recognizes the potential for adverse noise effects on neighboring businesses an d
residents and has thus provided a sound level assessment (Attachment 5) performed by Mr .
David Lord of 45dB .com . The applicant proposes "acoustic isolation" of the second leve l
auditorium space from the exterior of the building as well as from the first level and roof level .
This will be accomplished through the use of an acoustically designed air handling system, rigi d
• fiberglass panels/acoustically engineered gypsum board, acoustically designed window glazing,
and "air-locking" of second level entry and exit areas . The applicant also proposes a Gyperet e
mass floor to dampen vibration between the first and second levels . The applicant's sound leve l
assessment performed by Mr . David Lord establishes an overall sound reduction of 50 to 70 d B
and states the second floor space will be inaudible in the outdoor areas surrounding the subjec t
location .
The sound level assessment provides an analysis of noise generated by the roof level pati o
(Attachment 5, Figure 4). Sound level contours are based on the proposed recorded music leve l
(assuming 80 dB) and when compared to Figure 1 of Attachment 5 (Baseline Sound Leve l
Survey) is shown to have less than a one dB impact on neighboring uses . Staff has concerns wit h
potential roof level noise creation, as discussed below .
Staff Evaluation :Staff concerns with noise produced by the proposed business includ e
the following ; 1) late night noise from bar operation on the first level, 2) musical event s
and associated patrons at the second level auditorium, and 3) conversation/music levels a t
the roof level patio .
1) To address noise concerns with proposed late-night bar operation on the first level o f
the building, staff recommended conditions of approval require all doors an d
windows to be closed during entertainment and ensure recorded music and liv e
•
performances are clearly incidental allowing for normal conversation levels ,
consistent with the City's definition of ambient entertainment .
PH 1-89
A 57-1 2
736/738 Higuer a
Page 7
Attachment 8
•
2)As proposed by the applicant and Mr . David Lord, sound attenuating measures for th e
second level auditorium will mitigate sound to a level that will be inaudible in th e
outdoor areas surrounding the subject location . Staff recommended conditions of
approval address the potential noise impact of patrons leaving the second leve l
auditorium upon conclusion of an event, as discussed in the Circulation Staff
Evaluation above .
3)The sound level assessment for the roof level patio assumes 80 dB of noise from a
recorded music source . As shown in Figure 4 (Attachment 5), noise from this sourc e
will lower to approximately 70 dB as is reaches the property lines . The noise contours
were based on recorded music rather than human voices which may have the ability t o
travel sound farther than indicated in the sound level assessment . This noise ma y
affect nearby uses including nearby single-family residences along Monterey Street .
Staff has received project concerns from the Monterey and Palm Street resident s
based on operation of existing businesses with outdoor entertainment/amplifie d
music . Staff recommended conditions of approval require a transparent sound bathe r
atop the 42 inch high guard (shown on project plans, sheet 4). Inclusion of this soun d
barrier will lower the noise level by approximately 10 dB, making noise from thi s
source no higher than the ambient noise levels shown in Figure 1 of Attachment 5 .
Additionally, the Police Department is recommending closing of the roof level pati o
to patrons no later than 12 am (midnight).
SECURIT Y
The applicant's security plan section of the submitted project description (Attachment 6 )
discusses SLO Brewing Company's security management which includes a professional Manage r
and/or owner on premises during all hours of operation, two front doormen and one bac k
doorman on duty during all entertainment events, and two stage-side security personnel a s
needed . The applicant proposes cooperation with, and attendance of, San Luis Obispo Polic e
Department (S .L .O .P .D .) and Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control (A .B .C .) trainin g
programs .
Staff Evaluation :Staff conditions of approval require an orderly line of patrons awaitin g
entry to the building that does not block public access on, or use of, the walkways, to b e
patrolled and maintained by security personnel . Conditions also include daily cleanup o f
pedestrian routes and cleanup of any waste associated with the business in Mission Plaza .
Conditions also require the security plan be updated and formalized to reflect operation a t
the 736/738 Higuera location including a floor plan detailing location and duties o f
security personnel and security maintenance of patron lines, to the satisfaction of th e
Police Department ..
USE PERMIT RESOLUTION SUMMAR Y
Recommended conditions of approval for the Use Permit, in addition to those mentioned unde r
staff evaluations above, include ensuring the use is consistent with the applicant's submitte d
PH1-90
•
•
A 57-1 2
736/738 Higuer a
Page 8
Attachment 8
•
•
project description and security plan . Conditions such as the mandatory closing of windows an d
doors during events reduce noise and crowd impacts on adjacent establishments and residences .
Also included are requirements for maintaining a video recording system and ensuring on-goin g
security/safety training to accommodate staff changes . Staff has included conditions requiring a
manager be present and available for contact by a City representative and/or adjacent propert y
owners/tenants during events to minimize the need for police response to minor issues .
Staff recommended conditions of approval provide consistency with City Council direction t o
enhance alcohol outlet regulation ; aimed at reducing the number of alcohol-associated incident s
and police responses, and promoting a safer downtown environment . Conditions have also bee n
added to ensure proper maintenance and clean-up of the site and its surroundings .
Additionally, staff is recommending an automatic review hearing one year from date of approva l
to ensure compliance with conditions of approval and compatibility with the project site and use s
in the vicinity. The one-year review will be an opportunity to determine if any conditions need t o
be modified based on the operational characteristics of the night club .
The Police Department has reviewed the application and has no objections if conditions ar e
adopted to mitigate and address operational concerns and potential conflicts with the downtow n
neighbors .
CONCLUSIO N
Staff has evaluated the project's potential impacts and has included newly created conditions o f
approval and enhanced existing City standard Night Club Use Permit conditions to address thes e
impacts, and to be consistent with City Council direction for regulation of alcohol outlets . Staff
evaluation of the proposed use and recommended conditions of approval provide compatibilit y
with the project site and with existing and potential uses in the vicinity .
Additionally, the proposed project will facilitate the development of Garden Street Terraces,a
major downtown redevelopment project, and will facilitate the full seismic retrofit of the subjec t
location and the 1119 Garden Street location.
ALTERNATIVE S
1.Continue the item . An action to continue the item should include a detailed list of additiona l
information or project modifications required .
2.Deny the project. Action denying the application should include the basis for denial .
ATTACHMENT S
Attachment 1 : Vicinity map
Attachment 5 : Sound Level Assessment
Attachment 2 : Applicant project description
Attachment 6 : Security Plan
•
Attachment 3 : Project Plans
Attachment 7 : Resolutio n
Attachment 4 : Circulation Plan
PH 1-91
Attachment 8
SAN LUIS OBISP O
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTE S
July 11, 201 2
CALL TO ORDER/PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANC E
ROLL CALL : Commissioners John Fowler, Airlin Singewald, Michael Multari, Chuc k
Stevenson, John Larson, Vice-Chair Eric Meyer, and Chairperso n
Michael Draz e
Absent :Non e
Staff: Deputy Community Development Directors Doug Davidson and Ki m
Murry, Housing Programs Manager Tyler Corey, Planning Technicia n
Marcus Carloni, Interim Assistant City Attorney Rob Schultz, an d
Recording Secretary Tammy Ston e
ACCEPTANCE OF THE AGENDA :
The agenda was accepted as presented .
MINUTES :
Minutes of June 27, 2012, were approved as amended .
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS :
David Brodie expressed concern regarding night club and bar/tavern land uses in th e
Downtown Area .
There were no further comments made from the public .
PUBLIC HEARINGS :.
1 .1600 Bishop Street .GPC 71-12 : General Plan conformity review of a propose d
residential care facility use on County-owned property (Sunny Acres); C/OS-40 an d
R1 zone ; County of San Luis Obispo, applicant . (Tyler Corey)
Tyler Corey, Housing Programs Manager, presented the staff report, recommending th e
Planning Commission determine, and report to the City Council, that the propose d
surplus and sale of the Sunny Acres building and surrounding property for a residentia l
care facility use is in conformance with the General Plan .
Commr. Fowler asked whether the property was on the City's Master List of Histori c
Resources.
Staff responded that the property was on the City's Master List of Historic Resources .
PH1-92
•
Attachment 8
Planning Commission Minute s
July 11, 201 2
Page 2
PUBLIC COMMENTS :
Jill Bolster-White, Executive Director of Transitions Mental Health, commente d
regarding the project and funding .
There were no further comments made from the public .
COMMISSION COMMENTS :
Commr . Larson supported the use and development proposal .
Commr . Singewald commented regarding the proposal's consistency with General Pla n
Conservation and Open Space and Housing Elements policies and programs .
Vice-Chairperson Meyer supported the residential care facility use proposed for th ebuilding and site .
Comm Multari agreed the project conformed to the General Plan .
Commr . Stevenson commented that one of the major goals of the County was t opreserve the building .
Vice-Chairperson Meyer requested the community be invited to view the building whe n
the residential care facility opens .
There were no further comments made from the Commission .
On motion by Commr . Multari, seconded by Commr . Stevenson, to determine an d
report to the City Council, that the proposed surplus and sale of the Sunnv Acre s
building and surrounding property for a residential care facility use is in conformancewith the General Plan .
AYES :Comrnrs . Multari, Stevenson, Fowler, Singewald, Meyer, Draze, an d
Larso n
NOES :Non e
RECUSED :Non e
ABSENT :Non e
The motion passed on a 7 :0 vote .
2 .736 Hiquera Street .A 57-12 : Review of a night club (SLO Brew) relocation in th eC-D-H zone ; San Luis Downtown Management, applicant . (Marcus Carloni )
Chairperson Draze commented regarding an ex-parte communication with the applican ton Item #2 .
Vice-Chairperson Meyer advised that he spoke with the applicant and many of th eneighbors regarding Item #2 .
PH 1-93
Attachment 8
Planning Commission Minute s
July 11, 201 2
Page 3
Marcus Carloni, Planning Technician, presented the staff report, recommendin gadoption of a resolution recommending approval of the Use Permit based on finding sand subject to conditions which he outlined .
Chairperson Draze questioned if the project would be subject to the new regulations if itwas approved .
Doug Davidson, Deputy Director, responded that the enhanced standards condition sdeveloped while preparing the new regulations would apply and many of them ar eattached to this project . The SLO Brewing project would have been subject to a us epermit with or without the new regulations — the level of review did not change for bar sor nightclubs .
Commr. Multari requested information from staff regarding the calculation of parking .
Marcus Carloni, Planning Technician, explained the parking in-lieu fee calculation base don the change in use from retail to restaurant/bar/night club .
Vice-Chairperson Meyer questioned Captain Chris Staley regarding the owners of th eproperty and the issuance of citations .
Chris Staley, Police Captain, reported a close relationship with the business owners an d
Commr. Fowler questioned the capacity of the auditorium at the subject location i ncomparison with the current location . He asked about a referral to the Cultural Heritag eCommittee.
Marcus Carloni, Planning Technician, believed the change in use at the auditorium wasapproximately 100 persons . Marcus Carloni also stated the project would likely requir ereview by the Cultural Heritage Committee .
PUBLIC COMMENTS :
Carol Florence, applicant representative, provided information in support of the projec tand accepts all the conditions of approval as recommended .
Hamish Marshall, applicant, supported the project and staffs recommendation .
Mary Pagel, San Luis Obispo, had concerns regarding the noise level, circulation an dhours of operation . She gave an example of the Conditional Use Permit of a nearbybusiness (Creeky Tiki) and suggested that those conditions be incorporated in thi sproject. Ms . Pagel also had noise concerns regarding the proposed steel staircase .
Dave Hannings, San Luis Obispo, had concerns regarding noise (bus engines), an d
entrance/exit to the building . He expressed concerns about the scale of the project i n
the Downtown Area .
PH 1-94
•
noted that SLO Brewing Company is not a problem location for the Police Department .•
Attachment 8
Planning Commission Minute s
July 11, 201 2
Page 4
David Brodie, San Luis Obispo, expressed concern about the scale of the project .Kathy Main, San Luis Obispo, questions why all businesses, not just SLO Brewing Co .,are not responsible for cleanup along the creek, and questioned bus parking location sand special event hours of operation .
Rodney Sigelsky, San Luis Obispo Business Owner, spoke in support of the project .
Monty Sheller, SLO Brewing Co . General Manager, supported the project .
Greg Mengas, San Luis Obispo, acknowledged the "tolerance" required to live in th edowntown, and expressed concern regarding the potential noise associated wit hproposed business .
There were no further comments made from the public .
COMMISSION COMMENTS :
Vice-Chairperson Meyer commented regarding the Mission Plaza area and questione dstaff regarding the patron queue . He suggested the hours of operation be reviewed i nsix months, rather than one year, due to potential noise issues .
Commr. Stevenson asked about the steel stairway regarding the noise and how it couldbe mitigated .
David Lord, applicant representative and acoustics consultant, provided informatio nregarding the potential noise mitigations for the steel stairway .
Commr. Fowler expressed concern about the size of the project and how it impacts th eproblem of crime in the downtown Area . He was happy to see the crime event number sdecreasing within the last year. He would like the Cultural Heritage Committee (CHC )to review the exterior changes to the project .
Commr. Multari stated the Downtown Area should be looked at comprehensively . H eagreed with bringing more activity to the San Luis Creek area . He expressed concernabout the late-night outdoor activities and bus operation in the area .
Commr. Larson stated he supported the project .
Commr. Singewald questioned the process of receiving and reviewing noise complaint sof the business .
Vice-Chairperson Meyer suggested corrections to the lighting, paving, hours o foperation, and to include cancelling the conditional use permit at the existing facilit yupon the applicants moving into the new space .
• Chairperson Draze commented regarding the noise level . He suggested that th eautomatic one year Use Permit review period start from the date of occupancy, rathe rthan the date of approval . He also recommended the CHC review the item .
PH 1-95
Attachment 8
Planning Commission Minute s
July 11, 201 2
Page 5
Hamish Marshall, provided information regarding the location of rooms in the project .
He commented regarding his intentions about the Conditional Use Permit .
Vice-Chairperson Meyer requested additional changes to lighting conditions be adde d
to the Motion .
There were no further comments made from the Commission .
On motion by Commr . Multari, seconded by Commr . Fowler,adoption of the attached
resolution recommending approval of the Use Permit based on findings and subject t o
conditions in addition to the following amendments :
Item# 12 : The roof level patio be closed at 11 :00 p .m . nightl y
-Item #23 : Change the wording from post-concert to post event patrons .
Item #26 : Bus parking change to post 9 p .m . bus loading/unloading shall no t
occur along Monterey Street, nor along Broad Street north of Montere y
Street.
-Item # 31 : Changed from date of approval to date of occupancy .
-Item# 34 : No outdoor areas to be open prior to 9 :00 am .
Item# 35 : Provide a noise analysis of the proposed steel stairway an d
recommend noise mitigation measures to comply with the City's Nois e
Ordinance .
AYES :Commrs . Multari,.Fowler, Singewald, Vice-Chairperson Meyer ,
Chairperson Draze, Commr . Stevenso n
NOES :Non e
RECUSED :None
ABSENT:None
The motion passed on a 7:0 vote .
On motion by Commr . Multari, seconded by Commr . Larson for staff to agendize a
future study session to review noise standards in the Downtown .
AYES :Commrs . Multari, Larson, Fowler, Singewald, Vice-Chairperson Meyer ,
Chairperson Draze, Commr . Stevenso n
NOES :Non e
RECUSED :Non e
ABSENT :Non e
The motion passed on a 7 :0 vote .
COMMENT AND DISCUSSION :
3 . Staff
a . Doug Davidson provided the agenda forecast to the Commission . The July 25t h
meeting has been cancelled .
PH 1-96
•
•
•
Attachment 8
Planning Commission Minute s
July 11, 201 2
Page 6
4 . Commissio n
Chairperson Draze will not be present at the August 8, 2012 meeting .
ADJOURNMENT :The meeting was adjourned at 8 :37 p .m .
Respectfully submitted by ,
Tammy Ston e
Recording Secretar y
Approved by the ; fanning Commission on August 22, 2012 .
rvising Administrative Assistant
PH 1-97
Attachment 9
city ofsan tins o5ispo
Date Received
RECEIVE D
JUL 2 0 201 2
SW CITY r LE
Filing Fee : $261 .00*
Paid X
WA
'REFER TO SECTION 4
APPEAL TO THE CITY COUNCI L
SECTION 1. APPELLANT INFORMATIO N
3A~Jti OUR Zb LLL.OW CACCDper®CACP!0
Name Mailing Address and Zip Cod e
Phone Fa x
13AV W j 'WflVWi 5173 C,1#oRR?l S . k.aRepresentative's Name Mailing Address and Zip C e
SECTION 2 . SUBJECT OF APPEA L
1 .
2 .
3.
In accordance with the procedures set forth in Title 1,Chapter 1 .20 of the San Luis ObispoMunicipal Code (copy attached),I hereby appeal the decision of the:
P1.A lINCt cot4M155j04 N(Name of Officer, Committee or Commission decision being appealed)
The da the decision being appealed was rendered :_e
The application or project was entitled 73' 1-11G( )FR A ST. — K.k1kF V.l FAT'
SLn SRi 3vcJ REuy-A-tIn1(iN C,–n–R Zot '
4.
5.
I discussed the matter with the following City staff member:
ARG.-t s cARj,,nNlr ,on 13 Th~~(Staff Member's Name and Department)(Date)
Has this matter been the subject of a previous appeal?If so, when was it heard and by whom:
SECTION
Explai nappeal.
necessary.
3. REASON FOR APPEA L
specifically what actionis you are appealing and ray you believe the Council shoul d
Include what evidence you have that supports your appeal .You may attach additional
consider yourpages,if -
This form continues on the other side.
Page 1 of 3
Attachment 9
Reason for Appeal continued
Pc-'t
•
This item is hereby calendared for
cc: City Attorne yCity Manage rDepartment HeadAdvisory Body Chairperso n•Advisory Body Liaiso nCity Clerk (original )
8/09
PH 1-9 9
Page 2 of 3
1 Attachment 9
APPEAL : Resolution #PC-XXXX-1 2
Save Our Downtown has the purpose to attempt to preserv e
the historic character, look and beauty of the inner core o f
San Luis Obispo . We are, therefore, appealing the use permi t
approval by the San Luis Obispo Planning Commission fo r
the re-location of a significantly larger SLO Brew to the
Carrisa Building at 736/ 738 Higuera Street .
Our concerns are listed as follows in response to th e
Resolution No . PC-XXXX-12 . However, we have othe r
concerns not defined in that document which we would lik e
to mention at the very beginning :
Save Our Downtown is concerned about maintaining th e
'quality of life' that currently exists in downtown San Lui s
Obispo . In that regard, we are concerned about th e
continuing deterioration of our Downtown's family-friendl y
aiance resulting from the current approval of too man y
alcohol-related use-permits . We are also concerned that ou r
Downtown will lose its standing as a viable retail center b y
increasing the geographical footprint of alcohol-relate d
uses ...uses that cater almost exdusively to college students .
Finally, the Council's emphasis on increasing workforc e
housing in the Downtown core is in direct conflict with thi s
proliferation of alcohol outlets, especially those that wil l
generate noise and attract large crowds of young inebriate d
people into the quieter parts of our City (i .e . the Missio n
Plaza and along San Luis Creek).
Our concerns are as follows :
* The San Luis Creek Walk area should not becom e
the overflow area for alcohol-related, anti-social activities .
* The San Luis Creek area is not suited to nighttim e
activities and there are already in place adequate polic e
surveillance of anti-social activities along Higuera Street .
•
Attachment 9
We are recommending that all nightclub activities b e
focused onto Higuera Street .
With reference to Resolution #PC-XXXX-12 we wish to cite
the following profound objections to staff's conditions fo r
approval . We recommend that these staff recommendation s
and conditions be modified as follows :
Section 1 .Findings ..
#3.The findings only refer to impacts at the 'street level '
(i .e ., Higuera Street). There is no reference whatsoever t o
impacts on the San Luis Creek Walk . Pedestrian impacts o n
Mission Plaza and the Creek Walk are not addressed here .
#4.The San Luis Police Department – not the developer's
security guards - will necessarily be involved in addressin g
the increased proliferation of assaults and sex offenses that
will take place within the creek area as a result of this ne w
use . These activities are likely to occur within the Creek are a
as a result of poor lighting and significant vegetativ e
obstruction to police surveillance . (However, we are no t
suggesting that the Creekside be fully-lighted, as if it were
an empty parking lot). These concerns are partiall y
addressed in the conditions but only after this facility is full y
permitted and operational and we find this unacceptable .
#5.As conditioned, the proposed use is NOT compatibl e
with retail even if potential disturbances and crimina l
activities are minimized . We question the nightclub usag e
associated with the 600-seat auditorium between the hour s
of 6 :00 P .M . and 1 :00 A .M .
Already, retail proprietors are complaining about th e
difficulty of maintaining late business hours in the presenc e
of bars and alcohol outlets . How could this new alcohol -
Attachment 9
related activity possibly enhance prospects for more neede d
retail development in the downtown ?
Section 3 .Action.
#2 . There should be in-lieu parking fees assessed for th e
600-seat auditorium in addition to the in-lieu fees fo r
parking related to the change from retail to restaurant .
#22 .The City should not approve routes A, over th e
Warden Bridge, and B, over the Pedestrian Bridge ,
accommodating queuing onto Mission Plaza and along th e
Creek Walk . Queuing should only be on Higuera Street a s
this street is already adequately policed and lighted .
#24 .The planning, funding and installation of improve d
lighting in the Mission Plaza and Creek Walk area shoul d
take place before the 600-seat auditorium is operational an d
not afterwards .
#31 . This is typical "ad hoc" planning . The City know s
that assaults and sex offences will likely occur within th e
Creek Walk area and because of this, the City places al l
responsibility on the developer . Only after these assaults an d
sex offences occur will the City then determine if this is a n
incompatible use . But the question needs to be asked : Is the
City truly absolved of all responsibility? Moreover, "a d
hoc" planning appears to be the only default option as ther e
is no coherent San Luis Creek Master Plan to follow .
•
S
•
•
•
Attachment 9
city of san lu g s ornsp o
duty 2012
zonmq nequlation s
Chapter 17 .66 : Appeal s
Sections :
17 .66 .010 Standing to appeal .
17 .66 .020 Time limits .
17 .66 .030 Course of appeals .
17 .66 .040 Content of appeals .
17 .66 .050 Hearings and notice .
17 .66 .010 Standing to appeal .
Any person may appeal a decision of any official body, except that administrative decision s
requiring no discretionary judgment, as provided in Chapter 1 .20, may not be appealed .
(Ord . 941 - 1 (part), 1982 : prior code - 9204 .8(A))
17 .66 .020 Time limits .
Appeals must be filed within 10 calendar days of the rendering of a decision which is bein g
appealed . If the tenth day is a Saturday, Sunday or holiday, the appeal period shall exten d
to the next business day . (Ord . 941 - 1 (part), 1982 : prior code - 9204 .8(B))
17 .66 .030 Course of appeals .
A.Decisions of the Director shall be appealed to the Planning Commission . Such appeal s
shall be filed with the Director .
B.Decisions of the Planning Commission shall be appealed to the Council . Such appeal s
shall be filed with the City Clerk . (Ord . 941 - 1 (part), 1982 : prior code - 9204 .8(C))
17 .66 .040 Content of appeals .
The appeal shall concern a specific action and shall state the grounds for appeal . (Ord . 94 1
- 1 (part), 1982 : prior code - 9204 .8(D))
17 .66 .050 Hearings and notice .
A.Action on appeals shall be considered at the same type of hearing and after the sam e
notice that is required for the original decision .
B.Once an appeal has been filed, it shall be scheduled for the earliest available meeting ,
considering public notice requirements, unless the appellant agrees to a later date .
(Ord . 941 - 1 (part), 1982 : prior code - 9204 .8(E))
paw-103
Attachment 1 0
council .aqenOa nepont
C I T Y O F S A N L U I S O B I S P O
FROM :
Derek Johnson, Community Development Directo r
Prepared By :
Marcus Carloni, Assistant Planne r
SUBJECT :APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S APPROVAL OF A NIGH T
CLUB (SLO BREWING COMPANY) RELOCATION IN THE HISTORI C
DOWNTOWN COMMERCIAL (C-D-H) ZONE .(A 57-12).
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the resolution (Attachment 12), denying the appeal, and upholding the Plannin g
Commission's action to approve the nightclub relocation within the Downtown Commercial zone ,
based on findings, and subject to conditions .
SITE DATA
REPORT-IN-BRIE F
San Luis Downtown Management is requesting the approval of a Use Permit to operate a nightclu b
and restaurant/bar at 736/738 Higuera Street as the new location for the existing SLO Brewin g
Company, currently located at 1119 Garden Street .
736/738 Higuera contains the 15,000 square foot two-story Master List Carissa Building (c .1905 )
which currently accommodates two ground floor retail storefronts with offices on the second floor .
The floor plan would be modified to accommodate a first level restaurant/brewery with outdoo r
dining along Higuera Street (not within the public right-of-way) and along San Luis Obispo Creek .
The second floor would contain an auditorium (event space) and offices . The roof of the buildin g
would contain a new 1,099 square foot roof-top patio, oriented toward the creek . A timely appea l
of the Planning Commission's approval was filed by Save Our Downtown (SOD) July 20, 2012 .
Hamish Marshall : San Lui s
Downtown Managemen t
Carol Florence : Oasis Associates ,
Inc .
C-D-H (Historic Downtow n
Commercial )
General Retai l
-10,800 square fee t
Exempt from environmenta l
review under Class 1 (Sectio n
15301), Existing Facilities, of th e
CEQA Guidelines .
Applican t
Representativ e
Zoning
General Pla n
Site Area
Environmenta l
Status
Meeting Date Sept. 25,201 2
tern Number
PH1
•
•
PH1-104
Attachment 1 0
Planning Commission Revie w
The Planning Commission (PC) unanimously approved the project on July 11, 2012 based on
findings and subject to conditions (Attachment 9, Planning Commission Resolution). The Plannin g
Commission supported the conclusions in the staff report regarding noise, circulation, and securit y
concerns . Planning Commission modifications to the proposed conditions included ; 1) closing the
roof level patio at 11 :00 p .m . (condition #12) and ensuring outdoor areas (i .e . outdoor dining an d
roof patio) do not open before 9 :00 a .m . during special event hours (condition #34), 2) evaluation o f
creek-side lighting levels and upgrades to path lighting (including the length of the queue )
(condition #24), 3) prohibiting post 9 :00 p .m . tour bus parking on Monterey Street or Broad Stree t
north of Monterey Street (condition #26), and 4) requiring a noise analysis with mitigations for th e
proposed steel staircase at the rear of the building to reduce any noise impacts to City acceptabl e
standards (condition #35).
Appeal
On July 20, 2012, Save Our Downtown (SOD) filed an appeal . Reasons for the appeal include the
following ; 1) concerns regarding the number of alcohol-outlets in the downtown and their impact s
on neighboring uses, 2) use of the creek-side patron queue rather than focusing patrons to th e
Higuera Street entrance, 3) required parking for the new use, and 4) creek-side lighting levels .
Municipal Code Section 17 .66 is included as Attachment 8 and provides the process for appealin g
Planning Commission decisions, which are scheduled for a public hearing before the City Council .
•DISCUSSION
Project Descriptio n
The applicant proposes to relocate the existing SLO Brewing Company business to the subjec t
location in association with the recently approved Garden Street Terraces project . External
improvements along Higuera Street include a new rounded storefront system with counter seating
and tables and chairs, and addition of a metal awning . Improvements at the rear of the building
(creek-side) include removal of the existing upper level offices and associated wood beams, an d
removal of the wood stair to be replaced with an external staircase leading to a roof level patio . Sit e
development also includes removal of the existing 36 inch diameter Black Walnut tree (the City
Arborist has inspected the tree and has authorized its removal subject to final review by th e
Architectural Review Commission); patio dining, and upgrades to the creek-side patio area ; the re-
leveling of pavers (on-site and the length of the patron queue) and an evaluation of, and possibl e
upgrade to, creek-side lighting (on-site and potentially the length of the queue).
The proposed floor plan will include a first level (street level) restaurant/bar and brewery, wit h
outdoor dining along Higuera Street and at the back of the building along San Luis Obispo Creek .
The first floor will also include space for ambient 'live entertainment . The second level will includ e
offices and an approximately 3,000 square foot concert venue/auditorium . The auditorium will als o
include a bar, and a moveable partition to enclose the space for performances with a smaller crowd .
• Zoning Regulations Chapter 17 .100 . Ambient Entertainment. Acoustic or recorded music, or live readings of books
or poetry, which is clearly incidental, that allows for normal conversation levels, and for which no cover fee or ticke t
is required .
PH1-10 5
•
Attachment 1 0
The applicant proposes construction of a rooflevel patio atop the back (creek side) of the buildin g
at approximately 1,000 square feet . The patio will include customer seating and a bar . The applicant
proposes ambient level recorded music for the rooftop patio .
Occupant load at the subject location, as compared to the current SLO Brewing Company locatio n
is as shown below .
Unconcentrated Tables/Chairs-Normal Operatio n
(Max Persons)
•
Concentrated Use (Max Persons)*
476 68 %
145
•
Roof Pati o
*Concentrated Use proposes increased occupancy due to replacing some of the restauran t
tables/chairs with tall bar tables, typically during late night operation . See Attachment 3 ,
page 3
The applicant proposes to maintain hours of operation which are as shown below . The Planning
Commission approved general operation hours of 11 :00 a .m . to 2 :00 a .m . Monday through Friday ,
and 9 :00 a .m . to 2 :00 a .m . Saturday and Sunday . After the Planning Commission's approval of th e
project the applicant expressed interest in earlier opening hours (7 :00 a .m . daily) to provid e
breakfast service at the restaurant . Staff is supportive of this request, reflected through modificatio n
of condition #5 .
Monday-Sunda y
*Roof level patio will close no later than 11 :00 p .m.
**Winter/Spring graduation, St . Patrick's Day, Cinco de May o
***Outdoor areas cannot open before 9 :00 a.m . during special event hours
This request to relocate the nightclub use to the Carrisa building will help the property owners mee t
their unreinforced masonry (URM) strengthening obligations . The Carrisa building met Level A
strengthening requirements in 1995 . Level A strengthening provides 75% better safety b y
connecting the roof and floor assemblies to the walls of the building . Additionally, the parapets ar e
PH1-106
•
Attachment 1 0
•braced which reduces the hazard to the public right-of-way . Although the complete strengthenin g
of the Carissa building was due July 1, 2012, the building owners have been collaborating with th e
Chief Building Official and have made progress by submitting this request for relocation of th e
nightclub that is currently approved at 1119 Garden Street . The property owners have proposed a
coordinated effort to help facilitate and propel the Garden Street Terraces project forward . Th e
relocation will facilitate full URM upgrades to the Carissa building and the 1119 Garden Stree t
building. It may also facilitate strengthening of 1119 Garden Street prior to the January 2015 du e
date .
Circulatio n
The project proposes to allow pedestrian access from both sides of the building, facing San Lui s
Obispo Creek and Higuera Street . The first level of the building will be accessed from its mai n
entrance along Higuera Street and its secondary entrance at the rear of the building along the creek .
The second level will have three points of access ; an internal staircase from Higuera Street, a n
internal elevator from the first floor, and the proposed external staircase at the creek-side entranc e
to the building. When the second level auditorium is scheduled for use as a concert venue or othe r
event with high patron volume, the applicant proposes use of the building's creek-side entrance a s
the main entrance ; queuing patrons along the creek-side pedestrian easement as shown i n
Attachment 4 . The creek-side queuing of patrons was recommended by the City's Polic e
• Department to the applicant during the preliminary planning phase of the project, to mitigate patro n
queuing along Higuera Street . The applicant also proposes to use the routes shown in Attachment 4
for loading and unloading of band equipment . Attachment 4 illustrates the two proposed pedestria n
routes for queuing of concert patrons and loading/unloading of equipment ; route A uses Missio n
Plaza's Warden Bridge when an event is not taking place at Mission Plaza, and route B uses th e
pedestrian bridge subject to Mission Plaza event activities .
The City currently has a funded Capital Improvement Plan project for maintenance to the Warden
Bridge . The project includes smoothing/re-leveling of the existing surface, new code-compliant
guard rails, and a new handrail along the west portion of the bridge . The project is scheduled t o
begin January of 2013 and will take approximately one month to complete . The maintenance project
will be completed prior to the proposed relocation of SLO Brewing Company .
With approval of the use and associated increased foot-traffic over the Warden Bridge, the Cit y
consulted with its insurance authority, the California Joint Powers Insurance Authority (CJPIA), to
identify and address potential liability concerns arising from access to the proposed concert venu e
being taken across the Warden Bridge . Due to the intensification of use and the proposed queuin g
on the bridge, the CJPIA has recommended that the City should condition approval of the permit on
an indemnification provision to mitigate against any liability that could be alleged against the Cit y
as a result of the project's use of the bridge . This recommended condition has been added to th e
resolution as condition #36 .
• The roof level patio,like the second level, will have three points of access ; an internal staircas e
from Higuera Street, an internal elevator from the first and second floors, and an external staircas e
at the creek-side entrance to the building .
PH 1-107
Attachment 1 0
Staff Evaluation :Circulation issues with potential impacts to surrounding areas include th e
following ; 1) effect on nearby residents/businesses and police resources of a high volume of
concert patrons exiting the building during late night hours, and 2) effect on nearby resident s
of post-concert bus loading during late night hours .
1)Conditions of approval (#23) require security staff to exit post-concert patrons throug h
the building's second level Higuera Street entrance/exit (rather than through th e
building's creek-side entrance/exit); the Police Department is supportive of the propose d
route . Conditions (#24 & #25) also require upgrades along the creek-side patron route s
(Routes A and B, Attachment 4), as necessary, to upgrade lighting and remove an y
obstructions/uneven pavement, to the satisfaction of the Community Development an d
Public Works Departments .
2)The applicant proposes utilizing routes A and B (Attachment 4, Circulation Plan) t o
load/unload equipment to/from the subject location . To address the potential nois e
impacts on nearby residents due to late night loading/unloading of band equipment ,
conditions of approval (#27) require bus engines and related generators to be switche d
off while equipment and personnel are loaded/unloaded . Conditions (#26) require bu s
parking locations for loading/unloading of equipment be approved by the City's Parkin g
Division. Additionally, as conditioned by the Planning Commission (#26), post 9 :0 0
p .m . bus loading/unloading shall not occur along Monterey Street or along Broad Stree t
north of Monterey Street.
Nois e
A sound level assessment (Attachment 5) was prepared to address the potential for adverse nois e
effects on neighboring businesses and residents . The report recommends the "acoustic isolation" o f
the second level auditorium space from the exterior of the building as well as from the first and roo f
levels . This will be accomplished through the use of an acoustically designed air handling system,
rigid fiberglass panels/acoustically engineered gypsum board, acoustically designed windo w
glazing, and "air-locking" of second level entry and exit areas . The applicant also proposes a
PH1-108
•
•
•
Attachment 1 0
• Gyperete mass floor to dampen vibration between the first and second levels . The sound leve l
assessment establishes an overall sound reduction of 50 to 70 dB and states the second floor spac e
will be inaudible in the outdoor areas surrounding the subject location . With these incorporate d
mitigation measures the second floor auditorium will comply with the City's Noise Ordinance .
The sound level assessment provides an analysis of noise generated by the roof level pati o
(Attachment 5, Figure 4 and Attachment 5 Addendum). Sound level contours are based on patro n
voices with recorded background music (Attachment 5 Addendum, Figure 3 & 4) assuming a n
approximate 80 dB noise source . The applicant recognizes the potential for adverse noise effects o n
neighboring uses and has agreed to provide a transparent sound barrier (above head height) atop th e
42 inch high bather (Attachment 3, sheet 4) to help mitigate sound . The transparent sound bathe r
will be recessed from the edge of the building so that it does not interfere with the architectura l
elements of the building . Comparing Figure 4 to Figures 1 and 2 of Attachment 5 Addendu m
indicates sound levels emanating from the roof top patio to be no higher than current ambient nois e
level .
Staff Evaluation :Potential noise issues associated with the proposed use include th e
following ; 1) late night noise from bar operation on the first level, 2) musical events an d
associated patrons at the second level auditorium, and 3) conversation/music levels at th e
roof level patio .
• 1) To address noise concerns with proposed late-night bar operation on the first level of th e
building, conditions of approval (#11 & #14) require all doors and windows to be close d
during entertainment and ensure recorded music and live performances are clearl y
incidental allowing for normal conversation levels, consistent with the City's definition
of ambient entertainment .
2)As proposed by the applicant and noise consultant, sound attenuating measures for th e
second level auditorium will mitigate sound to a level that will be inaudible in th e
outdoor areas surrounding the subject location . Conditions of approval (#23) address th e
potential noise impact of patrons leaving the second level auditorium upon conclusion o f
an event .
3)Noise from the roof level patio may affect nearby uses including nearby single-famil y
residences along Monterey Street . Monterey and Palm Street residents have expresse d
concerns about additional noise generators and this project . Conditions of approval (#13)
require a transparent sound bather atop the 42 inch high guard (shown on Attachment 3 ,
sheet 4). Inclusion of this sound bather will lower the noise level by approximately 1 0
dB, making noise from this source no higher than existing ambient noise levels shown i n
Figure 1 of Attachment 5 and Figures 1 and 2 of Attachment 5 Addendum . As shown in
the applicant's sound level assessment (Attachment 5), the roof level patio will compl y
with the City's Noise Ordinance . Additionally, the roof level patio is conditioned (#12 )
to close no later than 11 :00 p .m . nightly .
Security
•
The applicant's security plan (Attachment 6) includes a professional Manager and/or owner o n
premises during all hours of operation, two front doormen and one back doorman on duty during al l
PH1-109
Attachment 1 0
entertainment events, and two stage-side security personnel as needed . The applicant proposes
cooperation with, and attendance of, San Luis Obispo Police Department (S .L .O .P .D .) and
Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control (A .B .C .) training programs .
Staff Evaluation :Conditions of approval (#22)require an orderly line of patrons awaitin g
entry to the building that does not block public access on, or use of, the walkways, to b e
patrolled and maintained by security personnel . Conditions also include (#21)daily cleanup
of pedestrian routes and cleanup of any trash associated with the business in Mission Plaza .
Conditions (#15) also require the security plan be updated and formalized to reflec t
operation at the 736/738 Higuera location including a floor plan detailing location and dutie s
of security personnel and security maintenance of patron lines, to the satisfaction of th e
Police Department .
Use Permit Resolution Summar y
Conditions of approval for the Use Permit ensure the use is consistent with the City's adopte d
General Plan and performance standards found in the City's Municipal Code . Conditions (#14 )
include the mandatory closing of windows and doors during entertainment to reduce noise an d
crowd impacts on adjacent businesses and residences, the requirement for maintenance of a vide o
recording system (#28),ensuring on-going security/safety training (#19 & #20)for new staff
personnel and the proper maintenance and clean-up of the site and its surroundings (#21).
Conditions (#18)also require a manager be present and available for contact by a Cit y
representative and/or adjacent property owners/tenants during events to minimize the need fo r
police response to minor issues . Conditions of approval provide consistency with adopted Cit y
policy to manage alcohol outlets and reduce the number of alcohol-associated incidents/impacts o n
police resources to promote a safer downtown environment .
Conditions (#31)also require an automatic review hearing one year from date of occupancy t o
monitor and report on the compliance with the conditions of approval and compatibility with th e
project site and uses in the vicinity . The one-year review will be an opportunity to determine if an y
conditions need to be modified, added or deleted based on the operational characteristics of th e
business .
Use Permit Modification s
Since approval of the Use Permit by the Planning Commission, staff has continued to review th e
conditions of approval and recommends the following modifications should the City Council deny
the appeal and approve the project . The recommended modifications are shown i n
strikethrough/underline format in the attached resolution (Attachment 12), and the following is a
summary of staff recommended modifications :
Condition #5 : Modified to allow earlier 7 :00 a .m . opening of the business to allow
breakfast service for the restaurant . Outdoor areas shall not open prior t o
9 :00 a .m. during approved special events, per condition #34 .
Condition #22 : Clarification language added to ensure management of outdoor crowds .
PH1-110
•
•
•
Attachment 1 0
Condition #25 : Clarification language added to provide the applicant with clear direction fo r
path upgrades .
Condition #36 : Added indemnification provision based on discussion and recommendation s
by the California Joint Powers Insurance Authority .
Conditions #4, 5, 7, 8, 10, 14, 15, 18, 26, 31, 32, & 34 : Language added for clarificatio n
Appeal
On July 20, 2012, Save Our Downtown (SOD) filed an appeal (Attachment 8) of the Plannin g
Commission's decision to approve SLO Brewing Company's relocation . The reasons for appeal
include the following ; 1) concerns regarding the number of alcohol outlets in the downtown an d
their impacts on neighboring uses, 2) use of the creek-side patron queue rather than focusin g
patrons to the Higuera Street entrance, 3) required additional parking for the new use and creek-sid e
lighting . The appeal issues as stated in the letter and staff responses are provided below :
1 . "Save Our Downtown is concerned about maintaining the `quality of life' that currentl y
exists in downtown San Luis Obispo . In that regard, we are concerned about the continuin g
deterioration of our Downtown's family-friendly ambiance resulting from the curren t
• approval of too many alcohol-related use-permits . We are also concerned that ou r
Downtown will lose its standing as a viable retail center by increasing the geographica l
footprint of alcohol-related uses ...uses that cater almost exclusively to college students .
Finally, the Council's emphasis on increasing workforce housing in the Downtown core is i n
direct conflict with this proliferation of alcohol outlets, especially those that will generat e
noise and attract large crowds of young inebriated people into the quieter parts of our Cit y
(i .e . the Mission Plaza and along San Luis Creek)."
Staff Response 1 :SLO Brewing Company's proposed relocation to the existin g
establishment will likely result in an expiration of the Night Club Use Permit at the 111 9
Garden Street location2 . The applicant indicated intentions to discontinue the nightclu b
use at the 1119 Garden Street location at the July 11, 2012 Planning Commission hearin g
to facilitate a restaurant (with accessory bar) associated with the proposed hotel for th e
approved Garden Street Terraces project, with unreinforced masonry (URM) upgrades t o
take place at the 1119 Garden Street location upon approval of SLO Brewing Company's
relocation . The applicant additionally indicated that the construction of the Garden Stree t
Terraces project and related URM improvements to the existing SLO Brewing Compan y
building would take in excess of one year, expiring the existing Use Permit pursuant t o
section 17 .58 .030 .0 1 of the City's Municipal Code 2 .
As noted in staff response 5 below, the applicant's plan to reverse the floor plan (a s
compared to SLO Brewing Company's current 1119 Garden Street location) and includ e
•2 City of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code Chapter 17 .58 Use Permits . Section 17 .58 .030 .C1 : When a use that wa s
allowed by approval of a Use Permit ceases operation for one year or such other time period as specified in th e
conditions of approval, then reinstatement of that use will be allowed only with approval of a new Use Permit .
PH1-11 1
•
Attachment 1 0
a ground floor restaurant with outdoor dining provides a pedestrian oriented ground floo r
environment and compatibility among neighboring uses . The second floor auditoriu m
contains space for live entertainment events, such as concerts . However, the applicant
plans use of this space as a banquet hall for weddings, community gatherings, movi e
screenings, and other events consistent with Land Use Element Society and Econom y
goal #24 3 : to serve as the County's hub for entertainment and cultural services .
Additionally, the City is updating the Land Use and Circulation Elements of the Genera l
Plan. The policy evaluation of uses in the downtown including alcohol outlets is in th e
scope of work for this update process .
2."The San Luis Creek Walk area should not become the overflow area for alcohol-related ,
anti-social activities . The San Luis Creek area is not suited to nighttime activities and ther e
are already in place adequate police surveillance of anti-social activities along Higuer a
Street . We are recommending that all nightclub activities be focused onto Higuera Street ."
"The City should not approve routes A, over the Warden Bridge, and B, over the Pedestria n
Bridge, accommodating queuing onto Mission Plaza and along the Creek Walk . Queuin g
should only be on Higuera Street as this street is already adequately policed and lighted ."
Staff Response 2 :The applicant proposes revitalizing the creek-side portion of th e
subject property through the use of outdoor dining associated with the restaurant . Thi s
will include upgrades to creek-side patio lighting within the subject property and a n
evaluation, and possible upgrade, of creek-side lighting along the length of the patro n
queue .
As discussed in the Circulation and Security sections above, the applicant proposes use o f
two pre-event patron queuing routes (Attachment 4), for events of high patron volume at
the second level auditorium. This creek-side queue will access the second leve l
auditorium via the rear stair entrance . Utilizing the rear entrance to the building for event s
at the second level is a recommendation of the Police Department to avoid lines o f
patrons along Higuera Street . This also provides compatibility with neighborin g
businesses by not obscuring a building's entrance with a patron line or invitin g
vandalism . Staff recommended conditions of approval (#23) require security staff to exi t
post-concert patrons to Higuera Street to avoid the creek-side routes becoming post -
concert overflow ; supported by the Police Department .
3."The findings (finding #3) only refer to impacts at the `street level' (i .e ., Higuera Street).
There is no reference whatsoever to impacts on the San Luis Creek Walk . Pedestrian
impacts on Mission Plaza and the Creek Walk are not addressed here ."
Staff Response 3 :The proposed project will revitalize the creek-side by providing creek -
side dining, pathway re-leveling, and additional lighting . The patron routes (Attachmen t
3 City of San Luis Obispo General Plan : Land Use Element . Community's Goals, Society and Economy : San Lui s
Obispo should serve as the County's hub for : county and state government ; education ; transportation ; visitor
information; entertainment ; cultural, professional, medical, and social services ; community organizations ; retail trade .
PH1-112
•
•
•
•
•
•
Attachment 1 0
4) provide a creative entrance to the building for pre-concert queuing of event patrons ;
alleviating queued lines along Higuera Street, which could obscure a building's entrance .
Staff recommended conditions of approval (#22) require specific placement of queue d
lines to be regularly patrolled by security personnel .
4 . "The San Luis Police Department — not the developer's security guards — will necessarily b e
involved in addressing the increased proliferation of assaults and sex offenses that will tak e
place within the creek area as a result of this new use . These activities are likely to occu r
within the Creek area as a result of poor lighting and significant vegetative obstruction t o
police surveillance . (However, we are not suggesting that the Creekside be fully-lighted, a s
if it were an empty parking lot). These concerns are partially addressed in the conditions bu t
only after this facility is fully permitted and operational and we find this unacceptable ."
Staff Response 4 :The Police Department does not consider SLO Brewing Company t o
be a problem location and has indicated a close working relationship with the applicant a t
the current SLO Brewing Company location (1119 Garden Street) that will continue a t
the subject location . For the past two years, staff has been collecting information an d
developing strategies to reduce public safety problems and negative impacts associate d
with alcohol outlets . This effort culminated in new Zoning Regulations, enhance d
standard conditions, and the Deemed Approved Ordinance which were approved b y
Council on July 10, 2012, and became effective August 10, 2012 . The ordinances wil l
have a positive effect on downtown alcohol problems and the process yielded the creatio n
of the Safe Night Life Association (SNL), a group comprised of downtown bar ,
nightclub, and restaurant owners/operators . Although it is still too early to dra w
conclusions about the impact of the ordinance and the SNL on downtown alcoho l
problems, the Police Department has recent statistics showing a relative decrease i n
downtown alcohol-related incidents .
2010-2011*2011-2012**Reductio n
arm'p-m .,aJ .'
Urinating 63 55 13 %
Alcohol in Public 115 50 57 %
Assault Misdemeanor 33 28 15%
*09/01/2010 through 02/28/201 1
*4 09/01/2011 through 02/28/201 2
Conditions 7-10, 15, 16, 18-20, 22-24, 28 and 29 are security related conditions .
Specifically, condition #15 requires a security plan including a site plan/floor pla n
detailing the locations and duties of security personnel and noting regula r
maintenance/patrol of the patron queue to be approved by the Police Department an d
Community Development Director prior to release of occupancy . This condition als o
requires a security plan and site/floor plan to be submitted for annual review an d
approval of the Police Department . Condition #24 requires an evaluation of creek-sid e
PH1-11 3
Attachment 1 0
lighting levels including on-site lighting and lighting for the length of the creek-sid e
patron queue . This information will be included with plans submitted for a buildin g
permit and will likely require an upgrade to path lighting upon review by th e
Community Development Department . These upgrades will be constructed prior t o
release of occupancy (before the business is operational).
5."As conditioned, the proposed use is NOT compatible with retail even if potentia l
disturbances and criminal activities are minimized . We question the nightclub usage
associated with the 600-seat auditorium between the hours of 6 :00 P .M . and 1 :00 A .M .
Already, retail proprietors are complaining about the difficulty of maintaining late busines s
hours in the presence of bars and alcohol outlets . How could this new alcohol-relate d
activity possibly enhance prospects for more needed retail development in the downtown?"
Staff Response 5 :The proposed project is the relocation of an existing alcohol outlet an d
does not result in a new alcohol license in the downtown . The current SLO Brewin g
Company location (1119 Garden Street) includes a first level auditorium and second leve l
restaurant, while SLO Brewing Company's relocation to the subject location reverses thi s
floor plan and provides a restaurant with outdoor dining along Higuera Street at the stree t
level and a second level auditorium (and roof level patio). Reversing the floor plan to
position a restaurant with outdoor dining at the street level provides pedestrian oriente d
ground floor environment and compatibility among neighboring uses, consistent wit h
Land Use Element police 4 .16 .1 . Also, nightclub activities are interior to the building's
second level auditorium where noise will be inaudible from outdoor areas surrounding th e
subject location (see Figures 5 and 6 of Attachment 5, Sound Level Assessment).
Furthermore, staff performed an analysis of adjacent downtown businesses hours o f
operation to ensure an offset of hours between business closing times and liv e
entertainment at the proposed second level auditorium (Attachment 7, Adjacent Busines s
Hours of Operation Table). The analysis indicates the average closing times of adjacen t
businesses to be 6 :00 p .m . Staff recommended conditions of approval (#5) prohibi t
second level events before 6 :00 p .m. to offset with the average 6 :00 p .m . closing times o f
neighboring uses . Also, as discussed in staff responses 2 and 3 above, queuing of pre -
concert patrons at the back entrance to the building provides compatibility wit h
neighboring businesses by not obscuring a building's entrance with a patron line . A s
conditioned, the proposed use is compatible with existing and potential uses in th e
vicinity.
6."There should be in-lieu parking fees assessed for the 600-seat auditorium in addition to th e
in-lieu fees for parking related to the change from retail to restaurant ."
Staff Response 6 :The parking in-lieu fees were calculated in accordance with Chapte r
4 .30 Parking In-Lieu Fees of the City's Municipal Code [City Council Ordinance No .
1101 (1987) and 1422 (2002)]. Parking was calculated based on the change in use fro m
retail (1 parking space required per 500 square feet of gross floor area) t o
restaurant/bar/nightclub (1 parking space required per 350 square feet of gross floo r
area) utilizing the gross floor area of each floor . The buildings change in use amounts t o
PH1-114
•
•
•
•
•
•
Attachment 1 0
approximately 12 .5 parking spaces with no overall increase in floor area due to remova l
of a 1,713 square foot mezzanine . The change in occupancy in-lieu fee is $4,582 pe r
space which amounts to approximately $57,000 .
7."The planning, funding and installation of improved lighting in the Mission Plaza and Cree k
Walk area should take place before the 600-seat auditorium is operational and no t
afterwards ."
Staff Response 7 : The project, as conditioned by staff and approved by the Plannin g
Commission, is required to provide an evaluation and possible upgrade of creek-sid e
lighting levels including the length of the patron routes, to be provided for review an d
approval by the Police and Community Development Departments . The conditio n
requires this information be included with plans submitted for a building permit . A s
conditioned, upgrades to creek-side lighting will take place prior to release o f
occupancy by the Community Development Department .
8."This is typical "ad hoc" planning . The city knows that assaults and sex offences will likel y
occur within the Creek Walk area and because of this, the City places all responsibility o n
the developer. Only after these assaults and sex offences occur will the City then determin e
if this is an incompatible use . But the question needs to be asked : Is the City truly absolve d
of all responsibility? Moreover, "ad hoc" planning appears to be the only default option a s
there is no coherent San Luis Creek Master Plan to follow ."
Staff Response 8 :As stated in staff response 4 above, over the past two years staff ha s
been collecting information and developing strategies to reduce public safety problem s
and negative impacts associated with alcohol outlets . Consistent with Council directio n
staff has increased regulation of alcohol outlets through adoption of the Deeme d
Approved Ordinance and enhanced conditions of approval . Also, Police Departmen t
statistics have shown an overall decrease in downtown alcohol-related incidents ,
provided under staff response 4 above . Additionally, condition #36 requires that SL O
Brewing Company indemnify the City against any claims resulting from injury with us e
of the proposed patron queuing routes .
In addition to the Deemed Approved Ordinance and enhanced conditions of approva l
for alcohol outlets, the Land Use and Circulation Element update includes the polic y
evaluation of uses in the downtown, including alcohol outlets as part of the scope o f
work.
CONCURRENCE S
The project has been reviewed by the Police, Building, Fire, Public Works, and Transportatio n
departments . Their conditions have been incorporated into the resolution and these department s
have no objection to the project if incorporated conditions of approval are adopted to mitigate an d
address operational concerns and potential conflicts with the downtown neighbors .
CONCLUSION
PH1-115
Attachment 1 0
Staff has evaluated the project's potential impacts and has included newly created conditions o f
approval and enhanced existing City standard Night Club Use Permit conditions to address thes e
impacts, and to be consistent with City Council direction for regulation of alcohol outlets .
Conditions of approval address potential impacts (circulation, noise, security, etc .) and ensure th e
project is compatible with neighboring uses and consistent with the General Plan .
Additionally, the proposed project will facilitate the development of Garden Street Terraces,a
major downtown redevelopment project, and will facilitate the full seismic retrofit of the subjec t
location and the 1119 Garden Street location .
The Planning Commission, at its July 11, 2012 hearing, evaluated the project and voted to
unanimously approve the project, subject to findings and conditions . Staff is recommending denia l
of the appeal, upholding the Planning Commission's approval of the project . If the appeal is
denied, the applicant must submit design plans that will be reviewed by the ARC and CHC .
Following the approval of planning permits, building permits and any other encroachment permit s
would need to be obtained .
FISCAL IMPAC T
When the General Plan was prepared, it was accompanied by a fiscal impact analysis, which foun d
that overall the General Plan was fiscally balanced . Accordingly, since the proposed project i s
consistent with the General Plan, it has a neutral fiscal impact .
ALTERNATIVE S
1.Continue the item . An action to continue the item should include a detailed list of additiona l
information or project modifications required .
2.Direct staff to return to the City Council with the necessary findings to deny the project wit h
prejudice 4 .If the Council takes this alternative, the applicant would be precluded fro m
submitting a substantially similar application for a one year period .
Staff does not recommend this alternative . No evidence has been provided to support th e
appeal points . Public safety and land use compatibility issues have been addressed throug h
design measures and extensive conditions of approval . In a unanimous vote, the Planning
Commission found the project, as conditioned, in compliance with the General Plan .
3.Direct staff to return to the City Council with the necessary findings to deny the project withou t
prejudice . If the Council chooses this alternative, the applicant could submit a simila r
application for consideration within a one year period .
Staff does not recommend this alternative . No evidence has been provided to support th e
° City of San Luis Obispo Zoning Regulations Chapter 17 .64 Repeat Applications . Section 17 .64 .010 .A : When an
application made pursuant to these regulations has been denied, no new application which is substantially the same shal l
be filed within one year of the date of the previous denial unless the Planning Commission, for good cause, shall gran t
permission to do so, or the Council or Planning Commission shall initiate such application .
PH1-116
•
•
•
•
•
•
Attachment 1 0
appeal points . Public safety and land use compatibility issues have been addressed throug h
design measures and extensive conditions of approval . In a unanimous vote, the Plannin g
Commission found the project, as conditioned, in compliance with the General Plan . An
action to deny the project without prejudice should include a list of additional information o r
project modification s
ATTACHMENT S
1.Vicinity Map
2.Applicant Project Descriptio n
3.Project Plans (revised August 29, 2012 )
4.Circulation Plan
5.Sound Level Assessment (May 8, 2012) &Addendum (August 9, 2012 )
6.Security Pla n
7.Adjacent Business Hours of Operation Tabl e
8.Appeal Documentation :Save Our Downtown &Municipal Code Ch .17 .66 Appeal s
9.July 11, 2012 P .C . Resolutio n
10.July 11 ., 2012 P .C . Staff Report (without attachments) & Minute s
11.Public Correspondence as of 9/16/201 2
12.Draft Resolutio n
DISTRIBUTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL :
11" x 17" colored plan s
T :\Council Agenda Reports\ 2012\ 2012-09-25\SLO Brew Permit Appeal (Johnson-Carloni)\E-Council Agenda Report_SLO Brew .doc x
PH1-117
VICINITY MAP File No . 57-12 N
•
Attachment 1 0
I .INTRODUCTIO N
Since 1988, SLO Brewing Company has provided a unique entertainment establishment i n
downtown San Luis Obispo . In addition to the brewery and restaurant, its live music venue ha s
provided an opportunity for multi-generations to enjoy a diversity of some of the best talent that th e
music world has to offer . With the approval of the Garden Street Terraces project, coupled with a
desire to enlarge and enhance the live music venue, San Luis Downtown Management LLC propose s
to relocate its operations to 736 & 738 Higuera Street .
IL PROJECT DESCRIPTION
SLO Brew is currently located in the historic Union Hardware and Plumbing Compan y
building at 1119 Garden Street . The brewery, restaurant, bar, and music venue will be relocated t o
736/738 Higuera Street, along with its current license to sell alcoholic beverages . (See Appendix B —
Alcohol Beverage License) 736/738 Higuera Street, known as the Carissa Building, is on the City's
Master List of Historic Resources and reflects the early renaissance revival period . Unfortunately, du e
to previous tenant modifications, the ground floor exterior and interior no longer retain their origina l
historic integrity . (See Appendix A — Historic Resource Inventory) The subject property is zone d
Downtown Commercial, which allows for restaurants, night clubs, private meetings and publi c
assembly . This new location will provide for a larger restaurant, enhanced brewery, coffee bar, a n
enlarged music venue, accommodating a larger stage and additional seating, and opportunities for
community meetings/banquets . The existing creek side patio and new roof top patio will provide fo r
outside dining opportunities .
•
SLO Brew @ 736/738 Higuera Stree t
Oasis Associates, Inc .
Conditional Use Permi t
16 May 201 2
•
1 of 6
PH1-119
Attachment 1 0
A . ProjectApplican t
SAN LUIS DOWNTOWN MANAGEMENT, LL C
c/o Hamish Marshal l
895 Aerovista Place, Suite 10 0
San Luis Obispo, CA 9340 1
Phone (805) 544-7343
hamish@westpacusa .co m
C . Project Architec t
BRACKET ARCHITECTURE OFFIC E
c/o Bryan Ridley
PO Box 181 0
San Luis Obispo, CA 9340 6
Phone (805) 704-053 5
bryanridleydesign@gmail .com
B .Applicant's Agen t
OASIS ASSOCIATES, INC .
c/o C .M . Florence, AIC P
3427 Miguelito Court
San Luis Obispo, CA 9340 1
Phone (805) 541-450 9
cmfna oasisassoc .co m
D . Project Structural Enginee r
SMITH STRUCTURAL GROU P
c/o Mike Smit h
805 Aerovista Place, Suite 20 4
San Luis Obispo, CA 9340 1
Phone (805) 544-917 3
mike@,smithstructural .com
•
•
E . Acoustical Consultan t
45 DB .COM ACOUSTICS CONSULTIN G
c/o David Lord, Ph . D .
P .O . Box 140 6
San Luis Obispo, CA 9340 6
Phone (805) 704-8046
dl@45dB .co m
F.Architectural Design - Exterio r
Along Higuera Street th e
historically significant features o f
the Carissa Building's facade ,
estimated to be built in 1905, wil l
be retained . These include :
cornices with large brackets ;
intermediate modillions and a
dental band . A decorative
scalloped eave is located above th e
parapet . There are several doubl e
hung windows on the second stor y
with darker color simple brick
band surrounds . On the creek side
elevation, all windows, doors an d
decorative features will be retaine d
or replaced in like-kind .
•
Conditional Use Permi t
16 May 201 2
2 of 6
PH1-12 0
SLO Brew @ 736/738 Higuera Stree t
Oasis Associates, Inc .
Attachment 1 0
The Higuera Street firs t
floor storefronts hav e
deeply recessed entrance s
with large storefron t
windows . While modifie d
and modernized ove r
time, the storefronts ar e
not considered an histori c
feature . The deep recesse s
will be preserved to allo w
for outdoor seating an d
dining, while new counter s
will be integrated into the
storefronts . The storefront s
will retain the traditiona l
downtown aesthetic of
large areas of glazing ove r
a decorative bulkhead o f
contrasting material .
At the creek side of the building, the non-contributing wood stair and existing rooms will b e
• removed to allow more of the original brick work to be exposed . A 50 square foot creek side pati o
will accommodate outside seating and dining . To comply with ingress and egress code requirement s
from the second floor entertainment venue, a staircase will be constructed, extending to the new thir d
floor (roof) patio . The stair will be fashioned of steel to ensure a lean and strong profile, minimizin g
concealment of the original brick facade . In addition, a new elevator will be installed to service bot h
the second floor and roof deck patio . Height at the tip top of the elevator will be 47 feet . The more
dominant architectural feature will be the proposed exterior stair . The stair will be "capped" with a
roof that will bring its height t o
approximately 43 feet .
A new roof top patio i s
proposed that will feature adequat e
room for approximately 4 8
occupants, and includes restroo m
facilities, a small storage area, and
access via the aforementioned stai r
and elevator. A minimum 42-inch
high guardrail, offset four feet fro m
the existing exterior brick wall,
will surround the occupied portio n
•
SLO Brew @ 736/738 Higuera Street
Oasis Associates, Inc .Conditional Use Permi t
16 May 201 2
•
3 of 6
PH1-121
Attachment 1 0
of the third floor patio and be constructed of cement plaster, glass, or solid metal finish compatibl e
with the Higuera Street elevation.
All vegetation on the site wil l
remain except for a 50-foot high ,
approximately 36-inch diamete r
disfigured black walnut tree
located at the rear of the building .
This tree poses a safety concer n
with its low lying decaye d
branches . There is evidence o f
hollowed out portions on its trun k
where branches have already
either been removed or possibl y
fallen. (See Site Plan, Bracke t
Architecture Office, May 08 ,
2012 )
G .Architectural Design - Interio r
The following describes the improvements to the interior of the existing building t o
accommodate the new use . (See Sheets 2 - 4,Bracket Architecture Office, May 08, 2012)In additio n
to these enhancements, the building will be seismically retrofitted pursuant to the City's Unreinforce d
Masonry Building Hazard Mitigation Program . (See Sheets S1 .0 — S5 .0 & S6-1 — S6-5, Lampman &
Smith, December 17,2008).The following lists the proposed improvements to the interior of th e
building per floor .
1 .Ground Floo r
•Stage are a
•Dining and lounge area, including bar (3,330 SF )
•Brewer y
•Kitche n
•Men's/Women's HC restroom s
•Elevator
•Stairs (2 total) to second story (interior )
•Outside Patio (50 SF )
2 .Second Floo r
•Auditorium with moveable partition (3,000 SF )
•Stage (800 SF)
•Offices (3 total including conference )
•Green room
•
•
SLO Brew @ 736/738 Higuera Stree t
Oasis Associates, Inc .
4 of 6
Conditional Use Permit
16 May 201 2
PH1-122
Attachment 1 0
•Storage
•Men's/Womens HC restroom s
•Elevator
•Stairs (exterior )
3 .Rooftop Patio
•Patio (720 SF )
•Elevator
•Men's/Womens HC restroom s
•Stairs (exterior )
•Small storage close t
H.Hours of Operation and Employee Informatio n
SLO Brew proposes to maintain their current hours of operation at the new location as follows .
1.General Hours
11 :00am — 2 :00am (M-F)
9 :00am — 2 :00am (Sat & Sun )
2.Live MusicVenu e
4 :00pm — 1 :00a m
3.SpecialEvent s
6 :00am — 1 :00am (winter & spring graduation, St . Patrick's Day, & Cinco de Mayo )
9 :00am — 2 :00am (Sat & Sun )
•SLO Brew currently employees fifty four (54) staff — six (6) employees during the less busy time s
throughout the day, and up to twenty (20) employees during peak times .
I .VehicleandPedestrian Circulatio n
Given its location and proposed uses, both vehicle and pedestrian circulation are ke y
components of the project . Based upon the historic circulation patterns of the existing SLO Brew, the
applicant has analyzed their current operations, applied these to the Higuera Street location and i s
proposing the most efficient and safe routes .
Tour buses are typically used by the band to carry both its members and equipment . There are
(5) five parking spaces available for temporary tour bus parking located on Monterey Street in front o f
the San Luis Obispo History Museum . The Applicant proposes to utilize these spaces for loading an d
unloading of equipment on a temporary basis . This is not unlike the current tour bus parking on
Garden Street that allows for short-term parking and payment for parking meters . Once unloaded, th e
tour bus will drive to one of the parking lots owned by the applicant and return to the temporar y
parking spaces at the end of the event . Tour buses will be required to shut off engines and relate d
generators while parked in these spaces .
The Applicant has identified two alternative service routes for the equipment to be moved int o
SLO Brew : 1) to accommodate activities that may simultaneously be taking place in Mission Plaz a
•
SLO Brew @ 736/738 Higuera Street
Conditional Use Permi t
Oasis Associates, Inc .
16 May 201 2
5 of 6
PH1-123
Attachment 1 0
and; 2) when no activities are occurring in Mission Plaza. (See Appendix E — Circulation Plan )
With regards to SLO Brew customers attending the live music events, there will be no genera l
admission accessed from the Higuera Street entry . Only VIP customers will utilize the Higuera Stree t
entrance. The general public will have a designated queuing area located at the creek side entrance t o
avoid conflicts with other businesses located on Higuera Street . This queuing area starts at the rea r
entrance of the building and will wrap around the vehicular bridge toward Mission Plaza . Based upon
historic data, the applicant has estimated the reasonable worst case length of the queue .
J.SecurityPla n
Safety and security are major components of the operation of SLO Brew.SLO Brew's curren t
security management plan includes the following topics : management training plan ; employee and
security resource placement ; crowd control and security measures ; provision for overflow customers ;
how staff members will be identified ; and where personnel will be located/circulate . This security
management plan also provides information regarding I .D . check and doorman duties, after-hour s
crowd management, and other internal policies related to security, noise and related issues . (Se e
Appendix F — Security Management Plan )
K.Acoustics
External noise level reduction and internal acoustics have been analyzed in a technica l
memorandum prepared by David Lord, Ph .D . (See Appendix G — Sound Level Assessment and Roo m
Acoustics). A noise assessment was conducted to determine the ambient sound levels on Higuera
Street and surrounds to establish the threshold of the current conditions . Once the baseline wa s
determined, the memo predicts the potential impacts on the surrounding neighborhood from th e
proposed activities . Sound level reduction mitigation measures are then proposed, if required, for both
external and internal applications . The report concludes that even with the proposed uses, sound
levels will not significantly affect the surrounding neighborhood .
The first floor, which includes the restaurant, brewery and bar, has been designed to allow fo r
background music to be played at a level to allow patrons to carry on a conversation without shouting,
but will be barely audible to a passer-by on the sidewalk or street . The second floor, which include s
the live music events, is acoustically isolated from other floors and the exterior. Multiple measure s
will be employed to absorb sound (e .g ., consideration of materials, HVAC design, replacement of th e
existing windows to double pane windows, etc .) The rooftop patio will not be a live music venue to
avoid high levels of sound disturbance to the neighboring properties .
The report concludes that sounds from normal operations and activities at SLO Brew will b e
rarely perceptible in the surrounding community, i .e., the sounds from SLO Brew will not contribut e
significantly to existing community noise levels in this district of the City . To ensure compliance with
the City's Noise Ordinance, prior to occupancy, a noise evaluation shall be conducted .
SLO Brew @ 736/738 Higuera Street
Conditional Use Permit
Oasis Associates, Inc .
16 May 201 2
6 of 6
PH1-124
•
•
•
E---A-E_L-1
S 36' 55 '45 "ES 36' 53 '35 "E 119 .9 1 '(DEED )
)fitted
1
1 . enhanced paving at building entr y
•2 .landscape pots, typical o 0
3 . light bollards, typical of
dining banquette
BENCH/•NTE R
Main Ba rBrewery Ba rDining Banquett e
chairs stacked and stored i n
during late night operatio n
el patio may also be used afte r
for storage
72" exit stair widt h
48" exit component width
1st floor exit requ i
(2) exit s
96" total exit com r
OCCUPANCY CALCU I
f111TT1/1flfl
Auditoriu m
Ba r
Green Roo m
Stag e
Office s
Storage/Janito r
Restroom s
60" exit stair widt h
36" exit component width
3rd floor exit req u
(2) exit s
44" total exit stai r
29" total exit comr
decorative element s
intellectual gray SW704 5
cement plaster, steel canop y
urbane bronze SW704 8
bulkhea d
6"x18" til e
aluminum storefron t
bronze anodize d
existing bric k
"sand"
creekside elevatio n
1/8" = 1'-0"
Attachment 1 0
LEGEN D
Proposed site for SW Brew (73 6
fliguera Street)
Mission Plaza
Jim's Camera
Vehicular
Route A : Bus unloading route whe n
there IS NO activity at Mission Plaza
Route B : Bus unloading route whe n
there IS aetiviy at Mission Plaz a
Temporary band bus parkin g
Pedestria n
Potential general public queuin g
"1'Iig ile l'ti Si .
5[J
Coverings
Kirk world
OASI SASSOCIATE S
Py=
t to
mi e
••PHI•
Attachment 1 0
•Sound Level Assessmen t
and Room Acoustic s
of the proposed
SLO Brew on Higuera Stree t
736 Higuera Street
San Luis Obispo, C A
•
•
requested by
Oasis Associates, Inc .
3427 Miguelito C t
San Luis Obispo,CA 9340 1
May 8, 201 2
45dB .corn
David Lord, PH .D .
Acoustics Consulting
P .O .Box 140 6
San Luis Obisp o
CA 93406-140 6
tel .805 .704 .804 6
email : dl 45db .com
Attachment 1 0
Table of Content s
1 .0 Description and Criteria 3
2 .0 Existing Sound Levels 3
3 .0 Sound Level Contours 4
4 .0 Sound Levels from Operations 4
5 .0 Room Acoustics 4
6 .0 Discussion and Conclusion 4
7 .0 REFERENCES 1 1
8 .0 APPENDIX I : Notes, Definitions 1 2
9 .0 APPENDIX II : Measurements and Modeling Methods 1 3
10 .0 Qualifications of Preparer 1 5
List of Figure s
Figure 1 . Baseline Sound Level Survey 5
Figure 2 . Morning low sound levels 6
Figure 3 . Setup activity, Monterey Street, Mission Plaza 7
Figure 4 . Sound Level Contours 8
Figure 5 . Second Floor Room Acoustics 9
Figure 6 . Room Acoustics : The Floor 10
•
•
•
SLO Brew on Higuera
page 2 5/8/12/
PH1-132
Attachment 1 0
Sound Level Assessmen t
and Room Acoustic s
of the propose d
SLO Brew on Higuera Stree t
736 Higuera Stree t
San Luis Obispo, C A
1 .0 Description and Criteri a
This is a report on the acoustical characteristics of the proposed SLO Brew on Higuer a
Street project . The purpose of this report is threefold :
(a) to measure and assess the existing ambient sound levels in the vicinity of 73 6
Higuera Street in order to establish a baseline upon which activities and operations of th e
proposed use, including amplified music can be overlaid and compared, an d
•
(b) to project and predict the sound levels and community impacts from operations an d
activities around and within the proposed use of SLO Brew on Higuera Street, an d
(c) to describe in concept the room acoustics, acoustical separation and isolation o f
sounds generated within the proposed structure at 736 Higuera Street .
2 .0 Existing Sound Level s
A site visit was made during the night of Friday, April 27, 2012 at 11 :45 pm to 12 :45
am in the early morning of Saturday, April 28, in order to establish baseline sound level condi-
tions in the immediate area . Results from the sound level measurements are shown in "Figure 1 .
Baseline Sound Level Survey" on page 5 . Continuous sound level measurements were mad e
along a path from Higuera Street to Broad Street to Monterey Street and Mission Plaza as well a s
the pedestrian area along San Luis Creek .
The sound level instrument, measurement technique, and standards used are more full y
described in the Appendix to this report . Wind speed data during this study was taken on site an d
correlated with data from the San Luis Obispo Airport weather station, located approximatel y
three miles south of the site . Throughout the measurement period, wind speed was less than 1 0
m .p .h.
Moderate traffic on Higuera Street and light traffic on surrounding streets, consisting o f
automobiles and motorcycles are clearly audible . The traffic flows at about 10 to 20 m .p .h .
SLO Brew on Higuera
page 3
5/8/1 2
•
•
PH 1-133
Attachment 1 0
3 .0 Sound Level Contour s
The sound level contours shown in "Figure 1 . Baseline Sound Level Survey" on pag e
5 as well as in figures following, are generated from measured data by the "Noise Contou r
Modeling" technique discussed in "9 .0 APPENDIX II : Measurements and Modeling Methods "
on page 13 . Sound level contours from automobile and pedestrian traffic, as well as enter-
tainment, amplified music sources is shown . The attenuation and propagation of sound i s
affected by topography, including the existing building heights and volumes, and by daily traffi c
volume for each of the transportation sources . Sound levels are shown as Equivalent Soun d
Levels (LEQ one-hour) in dBA, across the entire area, with contour lines drawn for each decibe l
difference .
4 .0 Sound Levels from Operation s
The sound levels for various scenarios are shown for one-hour periods "Figure 2 .
Morning low sound levels" on page 6 and "Figure 3 . Setup activity, Monterey Street, Missio n
Plaza" on page 7, and "Figure 4 . Sound Level Contours" on page 8 .
5 .0 Room Acoustic s
Strategies for acoustically separating noisy areas from quiet spaces and for reducin g
sound transmission to the outside are shown in "Figure 5 . Second Floor Room Acoustics" o n
page 9 and in "Figure 6 . Room Acoustics : The Floor" on page 10 . Several techniques ar e
described that will reduce the impact of unwanted sound on areas within the SLO Brew Buildin g
as well as outside the building .
6 .0 Discussion and Conclusion .
Acoustical simulation results show that the sounds from normal operations and activitie s
at SLO Brew on Higuera will not have a significant impact on sensitive receptors, that is, th e
sound level will be raised by one dB or less . Ordinary listeners are unable to distinguish a on e
decibel change in sound level . The sounds from SLO Brew on Higuera will not have a signif-
icant impact on the ambient sound level in the surrounding community .
David Lord, May 8, 201 2
for 45dB .co m
SLO Brew on Higuera
page 4 5/8/1 2
PH1-134
•
•
•
•
Attachment 1 0
Figure 1 . Baseline Sound Level Surve y
Survey with sound level measurements made during a typical active night, Friday Apri l
27 to Saturday morning April 28 from 11 :30 pm to 12 :30 am . The walking path for the survey
is shown as a blue dashed line . Sound level measurements were continuously monitored alon g
the route, and based on those measurements, sound level contours for the surrounding area wer e
generated by acoustical simulation . Sound levels are shown as LEQ one-hour, dBA . Sounds ar e
mainly from street transportation, pedestrians on public sidewalks and walkways, and stationar y
amplified music sounds from establishments along Higuera Street .
>35
>40.0
7—45.0
1E11 > sa .
> 55.0
> 60.0
>es.0
S >70.0
•> 75.0
♦>80.0
SLO Brew on Higuera
page 5 5/8/1 2
PH 1-135
Attachment 1 0
Figure 2 . Morning low sound level s
Sound levels were measured and acoustically modeled for 9 am, Sunday morning, Apri l
29, 2012 . Sound sources were from very light street traffic . There was no commercial activit y
and few people about . Sound levels are shown as LEQ one hour, dBA .
SLO Brew on Higuera
page 6 5/8/1 2
PH1-136
•
•
Attachment 1 0
Figure 3 . Setup activity, Monterey Street, Mission Plaza
Site plan, showing two possible routes for equipment setup activities of groups preparin g
for performances at SLO Brew on Higuera :
Route A is for bus unloading when there is no other activity at Mission Plaza .
Route B is for bus unloading when there is other activity at Mission Plaz a
The equipment setup originates from a truck and/or band bus parked on Monterey Street .
In this acoustical model, equipment setup occurs during a time of moderate traffic and stree t
noise, between 5 pm and 7pm . The potential noise impact from equipment setup on nearb y
potential sensitive residential receptors is less than one dB above normal community soun d
levels at that time of day and location . One dB is normally not a perceptible difference, an d
therefore the impact is less than significant .
SLO Brew on Higuera
page 7 5/8/1 2
•
PH1-137
Attachment 1 0
Figure 4 . Sound Level Contour s
The rooftop patio area (shown in elevation below) will have background recorded music ,
no DeeJay and no live performance . Sound level contours are shown for SLO Brew roofto p
patio music, LEQ one hour, dBA . Potential impact on nearby potential sensitive receptors is les s
than one dB, and therefore not significant .
SLO Brew on Higuera
page
8
5/8/12
•
PH1-138
•
•
Attachment 1 0
Figure 5 . Second Floor Room Acoustics
This figure illustrates the concept for acoustically isolating the interior amplified musi c
and entertainment on the second floor of SLO Brew . The stage and audience area are acousti-
cally isolated from the exterior of the building as well as isolated from the downstairs and fro m
the upstairs (roof) of the SLO Brew building .
The design goal is for a minimum of audible sound transmission through the floor, ceilin g
and walls to the exterior and to other parts of the building . The space is independently air condi-
tioned with an acoustically designed air handling system . The performance space will hav e
sound absorption materials (rigid fiberglass panels) to reduce sound reflections and echoes .
Existing windows will be replaced with acoustically designed glazing for maximu m
reduction of sound transmission to the exterior . Entry and exit areas will be "air-locked" t o
reduce sound transmission .
Wall and ceiling construction will incorporate acoustically engineered gypsum board ,
such as Quiet Rock, to reduce sound transmission and to de-couple the sound sources within th e
room from adjacent areas .
SLO Brew on Higuera
page 9
5/8/1 2
PH1-139
Attachment 1 0
Figure 6 . Room Acoustics : The Floo r
The second floor space is acoustically isolated from the first floor restaurant area b y
construction of Gyperete mass floor to dampen vibration . The acoustical objective is fo r
minimum audible sound and vibration transmission through the floor to the quiet restauran t
interior on the first floor . Each space is independently air conditioned with acoustically isolate d
air handling systems .
The floor will be a Kinetics floating lightweight concrete system which will de-couple th e
second floor performance space from the quiet restaurant area on the ground floor . The compre-
hensive construction solution will result in an overall sound reduction of 50 to 70 dB . Sounds i n
the second floor space will be inaudible in the outdoor areas surrounding the SLO Brew building .
SLO Brew on Higuera
page
10
5/8/1 2
PH1-140
•
•
Attachment 1 0
•
7.0 REFERENCE S
1 . American National Standards Institute, Inc . 2004 .ANSI 1994 American National Standar d
Acoustical Terminology .ANSI S .1 .-1994, (R2004) , New York, NY.
2 . American Society for Testing and Materials . 2004 .ASTME 1014 - 84 (Reapproved 2000)
Standard Guide for Measurement of Outdoor A-Weighted Sound Levels .
3 . Berglund, Birgitta, World Health Organization . 1999 .Guidelines for Community Nois e
chapter 4, Guideline Values .
4 . Bolt, Beranek and Newman . 1973 .Fundamentals and Abatement of Highway Traffic Noise ,
Report No . PB-222-703 . Prepared for Federal Highway Administration .
5.California Department of Finance . 2007 .California Strategic Growth Plan .
6 . California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). 1982 .Caltrans Transportatio n
Laboratory Manual .
7 .
. 1998 .Caltrans Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol For New Highway Construction an d
Highway Reconstruction Projects .
8 . . 2006 .California Transportation Plan 2025,chapter 6 .
• 9 . California Resources Agency . 2007 .Title 14. California Code of Regulations Chapter 3 .
Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act Article 5 .
Preliminary Review of Projects and Conduct of Initial Study Sections, 15060 to 15065 .
10.County of Santa Barbara ..County of Santa Barbara General Plan, Noise Element .
11 . County of Santa Barbara Environmental Thresholds and Guidelines Manual Published Ma y
1992, revised October 2006 . Planning and Development Department
12 . Federal Highway Administration. 2006 .FHWA Roadway Construction Noise Model User's
Guide Final Report.FHWA-HEP-05-054 DOT-VNTSC-FHWA-05-01 .
13.Harris, Cyril .M ., editor. 1979 Handbook of Noise Control .
SLO Brew on Higuera page
11
5/8/1 2
•
PH1-141
Attachment 1 0
8.0 APPENDIX I : Notes, Definition s
TERM DEFINITION
Ambient Noise Level The composite of noise from all sources near and far . The normal or existing level
of environmental noise or sound at a given location . The ambient level is typicall y
defined by the LEQ level over one hour or the LDN over 24 hours .
Background Noise Level The underlying, ever-present lower level noise that remains in the absence of intrusive
or intermittent sounds. Distant sources, such as traffic, typically make up th e
background . The background level is generally defined by the L90 percentile noise
level, which is exceeded 90 percent of the time .
Sound Level, dB
Sound Level . Ten times the common logarithm of the ratio of the square of the
measured A-weighted sound pressure to the square of the standard reference pressure o f
20 micropascals, SLOW time response, in accordance with ANSI S1 .4-1971 (R1976 )
Unit : decibels(dB).
dBA or dB(A):
A-weighted sound level . The ear does not respond equally to all frequencies, but
is less sensitive at low and high frequencies than it is at medium or speech rang e
frequencies . Thus, to obtain a single number representing the sound level of a nois e
containing a wide range of frequencies in a manner representative of the ear's response ,
it is necessary to reduce the effects of the low and high frequencies with respect to th e
medium frequencies. The resultant sound level is said to be A-weighted, and the unit s
are dBA . The A-weighted sound level is also called the noise level .
Equivalent Sound Level Because sound levels can vary markedly in intensity over a short period of time ,
LEQ
some method for describing either the average character of the sound or the statis-
tical behavior of the variations must be utilized . Most commonly, one describe s
ambient sounds in terms of an average level that has the same acoustical energy a s
the summation of all the time-varying events . This energy-equivalent sound/nois e
descriptor is called LEQ . In this report, both a 15 minute and an hourly period is used .
Percentile Sound Level The noise level exceeded during n percent of the measurement period, where n is a
(Ln)
number between 0 and 100 (e .g ., L90, exceeded 90 percent of the time, LI 0, exceede d
ten percent of the time.)
Subjective Loudness
In addition to precision measurement of sound level changes, there is a subjectiv e
Changes .
characteristic which describes how most people respond to sound :
•A change in sound level of 3 dBA is barely perceptible by most listeners .
•A change in level of 6 dBA is clearly perceptible .
•A change of 10 dBA is perceived by most people as being twice (or half)as loud .
Time weighting Different, internationally recognized, meter damping characteristics are availabl e
on sound level measuring instruments : Slow (S), Fast (F) and Impulse (I). In this
community sound level measurement, the Fast (F) response time is used .
SLO Brew on Higuera
page
12
5/8/1 2
PH1-142
•
•
•
Attachment 1 0
•9 .0 APPENDIX II : Measurements and Modeling Method s
Wind Measuremen t
Sound level measurements become less reliable when average wind speed is greater than 1 1
m .p .h . at the measurement site . Therefore, wind speed and direction are measured periodicall y
at the measurement site and the results are correlated with wind data from a nearby establishe d
weather station .
Wind speed and direction throughout the measurement period are taken from data from San Lui s
Obispo Airport weather station located approximately three miles south of the site .
Sound Level Meter s
Precision of Sound Level Meters . The American National Standards Institute (ANSI) specifie s
several types of sound level meters according to their precision . Types 1,2, and 3 are referre d
to as "precision,""general-purpose,"and "survey" meters, respectively . Most measurement s
carefully taken with a type 1 sound level meter will have an error not exceeding 1 dB . Th e
corresponding error for a type 2 sound level meter is about 2 dB . The sound level meter used fo r
measurements shown in this report are Larson-Davis Laboratories Model 824 . This meter meet s
all requirements of ANSI s l .4, IEC 651 for Type 1 accuracy and include the following features :
110 dB dynamic range for error free measurements . Measures FAST, SLOW, Unweighte d
PEAK, Weighted PEAK, Impulse, Leq, LDOD, LOSHA, Dose, Time Weighted Average, SEL ,
•Lmax, Lmin, LDN . Time history sampling periods from 32 samples per second up to one sampl e
every 255 seconds .
Field calibration of the meter is accomplished before and after all field measurements with a n
external calibrator . Laboratory calibration of the all instruments is performed at least biannuall y
and accuracy can be traced to the U .S . National Institute of Science and Technology standard .
The Type 1 Sound Level Meter is factory calibrated as three separate components ; the body
of the meter itself plus the preamplifier and the microphone, each of which has a Certificate o f
Calibration and Conformance . When calibrated, the instrument is certified as meeting factor y
specifications ; Normal elapsed time between factory calibrations should not exceed two years .
Sound Level Measurement Metho d
The protocol for conducting sound level measurements is prescribed in detail by the America n
Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) in their E 1014 publication and the Cal Trans Traffi c
Noise Analysis Protocol. The procedures and standards in those documents are met or exceede d
for sound level measurements shown in this report . The standards ofASTM E 1014 ar e
exceeded by using Type 1 sound level meters for all measurements in this report instead of th e
less accurate Type 2 meters . Therefore, the precision of the measurements in this report is likel y
to be better than +/- 2 dB as stated in ASTM El 014 .
Wind speed and direction, temperature profiles, relative humidity, and sky conditions ca n
•cause changes in noise measurement results at normal receiver distances from a noise source .
SLO Brew on Higuera
page 13 5/8/1 2
PH 1-143
Attachment 1 0
Information concerning these effects is made part of the documentation accompanying the noise
•
measurement data . Without it, there is no baseline against which subsequent measurements ca n
be compared . The prevailing wind direction is expressed in degrees clockwise from the nort h
direction . Wind, air temperature, and humidity observations are made at the average heigh t
above the ground that noise is traveling between the source and the receiver . The minimu m
height should is at least 1 .5 meter, or 5 feet, above the ground . In addition to the wind, temper-
ature and humidity observations, and sky conditions are also documented .
Meteorological conditions can affect noise measurements in two ways : they can affect th e
measurement instruments directly, or they can affect the actual noise levels . Wind speeds of 5
meters per second, or 11 miles per hour, create a wind noise of about 45 dBA on a typical '/2 "
microphone with windscreen . This means that measurements of noise below 55 dBA will b e
contaminated under these conditions . Extreme hot or cold temperatures and humidity can als o
affect the operation of noise measurement instruments . High humidity or rapid changes i n
temperature can cause droplets of moisture to form on the microphone diaphragm, creating a
popping noise . This can contaminate the noise measurement . Rain, or wet pavement will chang e
tire-pavement noise characteristics, altering traffic noise both in level and frequency . Change s
in wind speed and direction relative to the location of the noise source and receiver can caus e
changes in the magnitude and direction of wind shear . This can result in refraction effects tha t
can redirect sound energy away from or toward a receiver and change overall noise levels .
For normal noise measurements, meteorological conditions are restricted as follows : If wind
speeds, regardless of direction, are greater than 5 meters per second, or 11 miles per hour,
•
those measurements are not included in the noise analysis . For research or special studies thi s
criterion is often lower, depending on the objectives of the study . Temperatures and humidit y
are within the operational ranges specified for the equipment used . [reference : Caltrans Traffi c
Noise Analysis Protocol For New Highway Construction and Highway Reconstruction Projects ,
October, 1998 ]
Noise Contour Modelin g
Noise contours incorporating the measured sound level values were generated using CADNA/A ,
an acoustical modeling program that incorporates the TNM 2 .5 algorithms, and which was
developed to predict hourly Leq values for free-flowing traffic conditions . This computer
modeling tool, made by Datakustik GmbH, is an internationally accepted acoustical modelin g
software program, used by many acoustics and noise control professional offices in the U .S . and
abroad . The software has been validated by comparison with actual values in many differen t
settings . The program has a high level of reliability and follows methods specified by the
International Standards Organization in their ISO 9613-2 standard, "Acoustics —Attenuatio n
of sound during propagation outdoors, Part 2 : General Method of Calculation ." The standard
states that, "this part of ISO 9613 specifies an engineering method for calculating the attenu-
ation of sound during propagation outdoors in order to predict the levels of environmenta l
noise at a distance from a variety of sources . The method predicts the equivalent continuou s
A-weighted sound pressure level ... under meteorological conditions favorable to propagatio n
from sources of known sound emissions . These conditions are for downwind propagation ...
SLO Brew on Higuera
page 14 5/8/1 2
PH1-144
•
Attachment 1 0
•under a well-developed moderate ground-based temperature inversion, such as commonly occur s
at night."
The computer modeling software takes into account source sound power levels, surface reflectio n
and absorption, atmospheric absorption, geometric divergence, meteorological conditions, walls ,
barriers, berms, and terrain variations . The CADNA/A software uses a grid of receivers coverin g
the project site .
10 .0 Qualifications of Prepare r
David Lord, Ph .D ., Principal Consultan t
For more than 20 years, David Lord has worked with architects, engineers, buildin g
contractors and public agencies to assess and solve problems in acoustics, noise and vibration .
Dr. Lord is recognized as an acoustical consultant by several municipal and county plannin g
departments and has provided acoustical consulting services for projects located in the followin g
counties in California : San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara, Orange, San Bernardino, Ventura an d
Los Angeles . David Lord is approved by the Department of Defense as an acoustical consultan t
at Vandenberg Air Force Base and at the Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Port Hueneme .
Community Noise Assessmen t
•Projects have ranged in scale and complexity from residential to commercial and insti-
tutional developments . All noise assessments rigorously follow Caltrans and ASTM standar d
procedures, while adhering to local planning standards and noise ordinances and the Unifor m
Building Code . Recent projects include : Environmental Impact Report noise chapter for a
Metrolink station in Orange County ; noise assessment for an automobile service center, a retai l
food market, a community theater, a water treatment plant, various wineries, a boutique hotel ,
a remote, 600 acre religious retreat site, an annual rodeo and tractor pull event, a metal salvag e
yard, etc . Residential neighbor-noise assessments range from animal noise to motorcycle noise ,
to stationary mechanical noise issues .
Room Acoustic s
Consulting projects undertaken in room acoustics have ranged in scale from 50- t o
600-seat spaces, such as church sanctuaries, restaurants and nightclubs . Consultation begin s
preferably with the architect early in design and continues through construction and occupancy .
Music sources are evaluated and matched to the shape, the volume and the absorptivity o f
the space, using energy/time/frequency analysis tools . Recent projects include the Katsuy a
Restaurant at Hollywood and Vine ; the Vina Robles Winery Refectory, and the United Methodis t
Church, San Luis Obispo .
Instrumentatio n
•Sound and vibration measurements are made with multiple, state-of-the-art, data-logging ,
integrating, Type I instruments and a real time analyzer . Long-term total sound monitoring i s
SLO Brew on Higuera
page 15 5/8/1 2
PH 1-145
Attachment 1 0
conducted with high-resolution digital sound recorders . Sound transmission and reverberation
•
studies are made with a real-time analyzer following ASTM procedures . Each instrument i s
factory calibrated annually to meet U .S . National Institute of Standards and Technology require-
ments and has a current Certificate of Calibration and Conformance .
Recent Projects in California . Partial list ; References provided on request .
1 . Bradley Square, Santa Maria, California ; Housing Development 120 units . Transportatio n
noise assessment, mitigation recommendations, noise-resistant construction design .
2 . Por La Mar Nursery commercial horticulture development, worker housing, Santa Barbara /
Goleta, California . Transportation noise assessment, noise resistant housing design .
3 . Fess Parker Wine Center, Lompoc California, with Putts & Associates, Architects . CEQ A
Environmental Impact Assessment for Noise, City of Lompoc .
4 . San Ysidro Ranch, Montecito, with Mechanical Engineering Consultants, Santa Barbara .
Total sound level monitoring, recording, assessment and mitigation design .
5 . State Street, City of Santa Barbara, consultant to several entertainment establishments fo r
entertainment noise mitigation and conflict resolution .
6 . Environmental Impact Report, Noise Impact Assessment for Enos Ranchos and Mahone y
Ranch General Plan Amendment/Zone Change/Specific Plan Amendment/Annexation ,
Santa Maria, CA, with Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC )
7 . Environmental Impact Report, Noise Impact Assessment, including rail noise issues, fo r
Westgate Metrolink Station, Placentia, CA, with Crawford, Multari and Clark Associates .
8 . QAD Inc ., Summerland, CA . Chiller installation noise assessment and mitigation desig n
evaluation to meet County of Santa Barbara noise standards .
Academic Qualification s
David Lord is a Professor of Architecture, Emeritus, at California Polytechnic Stat e
University, San Luis Obispo, where he developed the curriculum and taught community nois e
and acoustical engineering subjects .
David Lord holds the Master of Architecture degree from the University of California ,
Berkeley, with a specialization in architectural acoustics . David Lord earned the Ph .D . degre e
from the University of London, Bartlett School of Architecture .
Membership s
David Lord is a member of the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Ai r
Conditioning Engineers, the Acoustical Society of America, the American Institute of Physics ,
the Institute of Noise Control Engineering, and the Audio Engineering Society .
SLO Brew on Higuera
page 16 5/8/1 2
PH1-146
•
•
Attachment 1 0
•Sound Level Assessmen t
Addendu m
SLO Brew on Higuera Street
736 Higuera Stree t
San Luis Obispo, CA
•
requested b y
Oasis Associates, Inc .
3427 Miguelito C t
San Luis Obispo, CA 9340 1
August 9, 201 2
45dB .co m
David Lord, PH .D .
Acoustics Consulting
P .O .Box 140 6
San Luis Obisp o
CA 93406-140 6
tel .805 .704 .804 6
email : dl 45db .co m•
Attachment 1 0
Sound Level Assessment Addendu m
SLO Brew on Higuera Stree t
736 Higuera Stree t
San Luis Obispo, C A
1 .0 Description and Criteri a
This is an addendum to the original Sound Level Assessment report dated May 8, 2012 .
The addendum study examines foot traffic sound levels from the creekside walk, patron s
queued for entrance, patrons ascending the proposed exterior stair, and patrons at the thir d
floor rooftop patio at the proposed SLO Brew on Higuera Street project . The stair treads are
constructed of concrete, high mass and non-reverberant . There is a solid laminated glass wal l
constructed along the north side of the rooftop patio, with a height of 6 feet above finish floo r
level, which produces an approximate noise level reduction of ten decibels .
The addendum study assumes the same time frame as the original baseline sound leve l
survey, from 11 :30 pm to 12 :30 am .
Three acoustical conditions are examined with simulation software :
(a)No patrons in rooftop patio area, as if there were no project . Ambient sound level s
only are illustrated . This includes foot traffic on creekside walk (see figures for mor e
detail).
(b)Patrons at rooftop patio, voices only, no recorded background music . Includes foo t
traffic on creekside walk, patrons queued for entrance at SLO Brew, and a number o f
patrons on proposed exterior stair (see figures for more detail).
(c)Patrons at rooftop patio, voices plus recorded background music . Includes foot traffi c
on creekside walk, patrons queued on SLO Brew property and a number of patrons on th e
proposed exterior stair (see figures for more detail).
2 .0 Discussion and Conclusion .
Acoustical simulation results show that the sounds from normal operations and activitie s
associated with queueing, ascending the exterior stair, and occupying the rooftop patio at SL O
Brew on Higuera does not have an impact at distant sensitive residential receptors . Sound leve l
attenuation descends to ambient sound levels within 100 to 200 feet . Therefore, specific sound s
from the roof patio and exterior stair will not be audible at 200 feet distance or more, because a t
that distance, patio sound levels do not rise above ambient sound levels .
•
•
David Lord, August 9, 201 2
for 45dB .com
SIAd ~131-ke,u
•
SLO Brew on Higuera Addendum
page 2
8/9/1 2
PH1-148
•
Attachment 1 0
Figure 1 . Baseline Sound Surve y
Excerpt of previous baseline sound survey taken from the original May 8, 2012 study .
No patrons present on rooftop patio or on the exterior stair, nor queuing on SLO Brew property .
Sound is shown emanating from creekside walk with 30 people walking and talking past thi s
venue . Sound levels are Leq one hour = dBA .
Creekside Wal k
Exterior Stair
propose d
rooftop pati o
•
•
SLO Brew on Higuera Addendum
page 3
8/9/1 2
PH1-149
Attachment 1 0
Figure 2 . Baseline Sound Leve l
Acoustic simulation of baseline sound level showing ambient sounds only, similar to th e
overall baseline sound survey in Figure 1 with more detail and more measurement points in th e
exterior stair and rooftop patio . This is the "no project" assumption, with no patrons presen t
on rooftop patio or on the exterior stair and no patrons queuing on SLO Brew property . Sound
is shown emanating from creekside walk with 30 people walking and talking past this venue .
Sound levels are Leq one hour = dBA .
Creekside Wal k
Exterior Stai r
Rooftop Pati o
SLO Brew on Higuera Addendum
page 4 8/9/1 2
aaa&aRa6•°
aaaaaaaaaa
•
•
PH 1-150
•
Attachment 1 0
Figure 3 . Sound Levels, Voices-Onl y
Rooftop patio, voices-only sound levels . No background recorded music . Assumption s
are : 145 people on rooftop patio, 20 people on the exterior stair, 30 people queued on SLO Bre w
property and 30 people walking along the creekside . Sound levels are Leq one hour = dB A
Creekside Wal k
Queuing Area an d
Exterior Stai r
Rooftop Pati o
•
V V V V V V V V V V
O -at O W OIwl10NO Nb b b b b a 0 b b b
ID w co co ww to mw m
SLO Brew on Higuera Addendum
page 5 8/9/1 2
PH 1-151
Attachment 1 0
Figure 4 . Sound Levels, Voices plus Recorded Musi c
Rooftop Patio, voices plus background recorded music sound levels . Assumptions are :
Five small speakers, 145 people on rooftop patio, 20 people on exterior stair, 30 people queue d
on SLO Brew property and 30 people walking along creekside . Sound levels are Leq one hour =
dBA .
SLO Brew on Higuera Addendum
page 6 8/9/12
•
Creekside Wal k
Queuing Area an d
Exterior Stai r
Rooftop Patio
•
.
000000
PH1-152
•
•
Attachment 1 0
Figure 5 . Distance Stud y
Sound attenuation at a distance from rooftop patio, toward Monterey Street . On the left
below are sound level contours from rooftop patio voices and music, queuing on SLO Bre w
property and patrons on exterior stair, as before . On the right below are ambient sound leve l
contours for "no project" with no rooftop activity contribution . Sound level at Monterey Stree t
remains unchanged . Sound levels are Leq one hour = dBA .
SLO Brew on Higuera Addendum
page 7 8/9/1 2
Illtl 1t ll
VY V4V VYY.Y
pCp,,O 8O
S p3p ba 8t.t ''
ID@ a a&&
ote y s ebbbbbbbbbe-eiBalaalak
PH1-153
0 Brewing Company Attachment 1 0
Conditio l Use Permit for Modification o usines s
Conditional Use Permit 16-0 1
July 7, 2003
Security
The SLO Brewing Co . has proven to the community at large and to the S .L .O .P.D . in particular, ou r
ability to handle security concerns effectively, We have had a concise security plan in operation for four years .
Security plan for Modification of our existing business is as follows :
•We have a professional Manager and/or owner on premises during all hours of operation.
3 Two front doormen and one back doorman are on duty during all entertainment events .
3 Minimum of one Manager and a downstairs Bar Manage r
•Bathrooms as required by occupancy .
3 Security cameras are installed at front door area and in back stairwel l
3 Lighting has be installed in alley as well as a security camer a
3 On some occasions we will have 2 doormen placed at stage area for added securit y
3 Manager will rove periodically the outside buildin g
3 Manager carries a cell phone for instant access to S .L.O.P .D
•21 and older at all time in downstairs entertainment are a
3 If 18 and older show a secured area will be designated for 21 and older drinking area.
3 All doormen are equipped with walkie-talkies direct to the Manager
Job Description and. Duties of our Doorme n
A . Duties
1 . Insure all patrons have legal I .D.
a.All I .D .'s must have been issued by a governmental agency, valid a t
time of presentation, and have photo or perfect written description .
b.Birth certificates are not valid I .D.
c, Questionable out of state I .D .'s are to be checked against driver license book .
d.Adulterated, fraudulent and counterfeit I .D .'s are to be confiscated or hande d
over to the authorities .
e.Expired LD'S are not legal.
f.If secondary I .D. the patron will be refused entrance .
2 . Collect door fees for entertainmen t
a.All door fees are property of the entertainment .
b.No refunds .
c.Only patrons on the guest list of the band or Brewery will not be charged .
d.Patrons wishing to see if their friends are here or to use restrooms must deposi t
their I.D . with doormen and retrieve it promptly .
3 . Security
a. Obviously intoxicated patrons are not allowed entrance .
PH1-154
•
•
•
b.Summon the eager on duty if there is a problei
immediate promity of the Brewery .
c.No one is allowed to enter through the rear exit.
SECURITY/CROWD CONTROL POLIC Y
We consider this issue to be of major importance to the community and to the continue dsuccess of our operations . Therefore we have instituted the following measures to maintai n
behavioral patterns consistent with community standards :
1.Consult with S .L.O .P.D . for guidance from time to time2.Consult with local ABC officials for adequate standard s
3.Consult and support local alcohol and drug prevention from time to time
Our internal policy,as outlined, consists of the following:
1 . The use of internal security on busy night s
A.Maintaining legal limit of patrons on premis e
B.Should we have lines,have people stationed on the outside to control behavior o n
the sidewalk
•C . Same security people to check legal status (id check )
2 . Refusal to serve or allow on premise any intoxicated peopl e
3 . Offer taxi or car pool service to patrons as a means to reduce the number of drivers on
the road4. Final measure before disorder —call the police
It is our position to take a strong leadership role and take responsibility for the well being
of our patrons . To maintain the character and dignity of our community through prudent
business practices.
EMPLOYEE TRAINING PROGRAM
In co-operation with the S .L O .PD and ABC and Wayne Hansen (of alcohol services)all
employees of the SLO Brewing Company will undergo regular security briefings .
The police department has offered to periodically spend time to teach our employees acourse on facility security,. including:
ide theAl i(g?r1 the
•
1.How to recognize a false I .D .
2.How to recognize and handle intoxicated patrons
Behavioral identification techniques PH 1-155
Diplomatic control of den behavior Attachment 1 05.Procedural methods reg mg
6.Crowd contro l
7.Proper use of police backup
8.Exercising our right to refuse servic e
9.Proper use of in-house alarm syste m
10.Use of Madd and Sadd taxi service
11 .Design of lighting and sound system to properly discourage rowdy behavio r
Management will supplement these seminars on security, with regular reviews at least onc e
per with (or as frequently as required .).
MI employees having contact with the public will be required to attend these meetings .
•
•
Attachment 1 0
•Summary :After a survey was conducted of Downtown retail businesses which surround th e
Proposed SLO Brew Project (736/738 Higuera), the average closing time was determined to b e
6 :00 P .M .
Address
778 lHigu e
Su
Business
8 :00 5 :00
Monday-Thursday AM P M
Open Close
•
PH1-157
Attachment 1 0
Friday
8 :0 0
AM
12 :0 0
PM •
PH1-15 8
Mission Mall :
Roxagnes Birkenstock
Sunday-Wednesday, Friday-Saturday ;
Thursday;.
Saturda y
Sunda y
Sunday-Saturda y
Monday-Wednesday, Frida y
Thursday :
Sanda y
Monday-Wednesday, Friday -
Saturda y
Monday Saturday
Sunday>
Sunday
•
Attachment 1 0
10 :00 8 :0 0
Monday-Saturday AM P M
11 :00 7 :0 0
Sunday AM PM
Attachment 1 0
PH1-160
•
•
741Higuera My Pillow Pets
Monday- W e d n esd ay, F i iday-Sa t ur da y
Thurssday
P M
$:3 0
P M
10 :00
A M
10 :00
AM
6 :0 0
P M
5 :0 0
P M
A Heart's Desires
6 :00
PM
5 :3 0
PM
9 :30 5 :3 0
Monday-Wednesday AM P M
9 :30 5 :0 0
Thursday AM P M
10 :00 5 :0 0
Saturday AM PM
Monday-Friday
Christy Keeling Attorney
Friday
9 :0 0
A M
9 :0 0
AM
5 :0 0
P M
12 :0 0
P M
>io D'owntown Association
5-00
P M
2:0 0
P M
9 :3 0
A M
9 :0 0
AM
5 :0 0
P M
4 :0 0
P MM,onday-Friday
nice Nenadaltnsurance
Attachment 1 0
•
•
•
11 :00 6 :0 0
Sunday AM P M
10 :00 7 :0 0
Monday-Wednesday AM P M
10 :00 9 :0 0
Thursday AM P M
10 :00 8 :0 0
Friday-Saturday AM P M
0:00 '
A M
10 :0 0
AM
110 .
6 :0 0
PM
9 :0 0
PM
5 :0 0
P M
781 Higuera Revolve
10 :3 0
Monday-Saturday A M
10 :3 0
Thursday A M
12 :0 0
Sunday P M
Media Recruiters
Monday-Friday
799 Higuera Fanny Wrappers
11 :00
Monday-Wednesday A M
11 :00
Thursday A M
11 :0 0
Friday-Saturday A M
11 :00
Sunday AM
6 :00
P M
9 :00
P M
7 :0 0
P M
6 :0 0
P M
6 :0 5
P MAvgClosing Time
PH 1-161
Attachment 1 0
Below are the closing times of Bars, Restaurants, and Nightclubs in the Downtown are a
surrounding the proposed SLO Brew project .
725 Higuera MoTa v
778 Higuera
Suite A ednesday,Friday ' 9:00AM 7:00 PM
Thursday'; 9:00'AM 9:00 PM
Saturday- 10:00 AM 8:00 PM
Sunday , ,10 :00 AM 7 00 PM
782 Higuer a
778 Higuera
Frog and Peach
Friday
Saturday Thursday
Monday-Thursda y
Fr+day-Saturday
Sunday
11 :00 A M
11A0AM
11:00 A M
12 :00 P M
11:00A M
11:00 A M
10 :00AM
10 :00 RM
7 :00 PM
2 :00 A M
10 :00 PM .
12 :00 AM ,
12:00 AM
728 Higuer a
726 Higuera'
•
Sunday-Wednesda y
Thursday-Saturda y
Sunday
11 :00 A M
11 :30 A M
10 :00 AM
2 :00 A M
2 :00 A M
2 :00 A M
Monday
Tuesday-Frida
y Saturday-Sunday
6 :00 P M
4 :00 P M
2 :00 PM
2 :00 AM,:.
2 :00 AM
2 :00 AM
•
717 Higuera Buffalo Pub
Sunday-Saturda y
Sunday-Saturda y
Saturday-Sunda y
Monday-Frida y
Sunday-Wednesda y
Thursday-Saturda y
Monday-Wednesda y
Thursday-Saturda y
Sunda y
11 :00 AM 2 :00 A M
11 :00 AM 9 ;00 PM
9 :00 AM 10 :00 P M
10 :30 AM 10 :30 P M
11 :00 AM 9 .00 PM `
11 :00 AM 1 :00A M
11 :00 AM 11 :30 P M
11 :00 AM 2 :00 A M
9 :30 AM 12 :00 AM
690 Higuera Vieni Va i
1040 Broad Creekside Brew
•
PH1-16 2
Attachment 1 0
Date Received
RECEIVE D
JUL 2 0 201 2
Filing Fee : $261 .00*
Paid X
N/A
`REFER TO SECTION 4Cityof
san Luis osispo
APPEAL TO THE CITY COUNCI L
•
SECT ION 1 . APPELLANT INFORMATION
ottg tk-AtLll erOv4(Name
Q,coDper&CaC F D[3 .
Mailing Address and Zip Cod e
Phone
t)M)U)BRnDr-riRepresentative's Name
ser .~y~S05 44 flq .OTitlePhone Fa x
Fa x
S73 C o R0 5 La ..d, o fMailing Address and Zip Co e
•
•
SECTION 2. SUBJECT OF APPEA L
1 .In accordance with the procedures set forth in Title 1, Chapter 1 .20 of the San Luis Obisp oMunicipal Code (copy attached),I hereby appeal the decision of the :
PI-,AMA IN q CO1#14\15S(Name of Officer, Committee a Commission decision being appealed )
2 .The daje the decision being appealed was rendered :1(D-1 1 I J
3 . Theappfic tionor project was entitled :73 f,44Gt1ER A St -Raney"CT
St.n Bfzl3vUl REtr)CA-flnt~IN `fI-FPS C,-n-14 Z.014-i
4.I discussed the matter with the following City staff membe r
!ARm S C.ARi .n on 13 Y )~~(Staff Member's Name and Department)(Date)
5.Has this matter been the subject of a previous appeal?If so, when was it heard and by whom:TA O
SECTION 3 . REASON FOR APPEA L
Explain specifically what action/s you are appealing and why you believe the Council should consider yourappeal. Include what evidence you have that supports your appeal .You may attach addffional pages,ifnecessary. This form continues on the other side.
Page I of 3
Attachment 1 0
Reason for Appeal continue d
Ptflc
This item is hereby calendared for
co: City Attorne y
City Manager
Department Head
Advisory Body Chairperso n
Advisory Body Liaison
City Clerk (original)Page 2 of 3
8109
PH1-164
•
Attachment 1 0
APPEAL : Resolution #PC-XXXX-1 2
Save Our Downtown has the purpose to attempt to preserv e
the historic character, look and beauty of the inner core o f
San Luis Obispo . We are, therefore, appealing the use permi t
approval by the San Luis Obispo Planning Commission for
the re-location of a significantly larger SLO Brew to th e
Carrisa Building at 736/ 738 Higuera Street .
Our concerns are listed as follows in response to th e
Resolution No . PC-XXXX-12 . However, we have othe r
concerns not defined in that document which we would lik e
to mention at the very beginning :
Save Our Downtown is concerned about maintaining th e
'quality of life' that currently exists in downtown San Lui s
Obispo . In that regard, we are concerned about th e
continuing deterioration of our Downtown's family-friendl y
affiance resulting from the current approval of too man y
alcohol-related use-permits . We are also concerned that ou r
Downtown will lose its standing as a viable retail center b y
increasing the geographical footprint of alcohol-relate d
uses ...uses that cater almost exclusively to college students .
Finally, the Council's emphasis on increasing workforc e
housing in the Downtown core is in direct conflict with thi s
proliferation of alcohol outlets, especially those that wil l
generate noise and attract large crowds of young inebriate d
people into the quieter parts of our City (i .e . the Missio n
Plaza and along San Luis Creek).
Our concerns are as follows :
* The San Luis Creek Walk area should not becom e
the overflow area for alcohol-related, anti-social activities .
* The San Luis Creek area is not suited to nighttim eactivities and there are already in place adequate polic e
surveillance of anti-social activities along Higuera Street .
PH1-165
Attachment 1 0
We are recommending that all nightdub activities b e
focused onto Higuera Street .
With reference to Resolution #PC-XX00(-12 we wish to cit e
the following profound objections to staff's conditions fo r
approval . We recommend that these staff recommendation s
and conditions be modified as follows :
Section 1 .Findings .
#3.The findings only refer to impacts at the 'street level '
(i .e ., Higuera Street). There is no reference whatsoever t o
impacts on the San Luis Creek Walk . Pedestrian impacts o n
Mission Plaza and the Creek Walk are not addressed here .
#4.The San Luis Police Department – not the developer's
security guards - will necessarily be involved in addressin g
the increased proliferation of assaults and sex offenses tha t
will take place within the creek area as a result of this ne w
use . These activities are likely to occur within the Creek are a
as a result of poor lighting and significant vegetativ e
obstruction to police surveillance . (However, we are no t
suggesting that the Creekside be fully-lighted, as if it wer e
an empty parking lot). These concerns are partiall y
addressed in the conditions but only after this facility is full y
permitted and operational and we find this unacceptable .
#5.As conditioned, the proposed use is NOT compatibl e
with retail even if potential disturbances and crimina l
activities are minimized . We question the nightclub usag e
associated with the 600-seat auditorium between the hour s
of 6 :00 P .M . and 1 :00 A .M .
Already, retail proprietors are complaining about th e
difficulty of maintaining late business hours in the presenc e
of bars and alcohol outlets . How could this new alcohol -
PH1-166
•
S
•
Attachment 1 0
related activity possibly enhance prospects for more neede d
retail development in the downtown?
Section 3 .Action .
#2 . There should be in-lieu parking fees assessed for the
600-seat auditorium in addition to the in-lieu fees fo r
parking related to the change from retail to restaurant .
#22 .The City should not approve routes A, over th e
Warden Bridge, and B, over the Pedestrian Bridge ,
accommodating queuing onto Mission Plaza and along th e
Creek Walk . Queuing should only be on Higuera Street a s
this street is already adequately policed and lighted .
#24 .The planning, funding and installation of improve d
lighting in the Mission Plaza and Creek Walk area shoul d
take place before the 600-seat auditorium is operational an d
not afterwards .
#31 . This is typical "ad hoc" planning . The City know s
that assaults and sex offences will likely occur within th e
Creek Walk area and because of this, the City places all
responsibility on the developer . Only after these assaults an d
sex offences occur will the City then determine if this is a n
incompatible use . But the question needs to be asked : Is the
City truly absolved of all responsibility? Moreover, "a d
hoc" planning appears to be the only default option as ther e
is no coherent San Luis Creek Master Plan to follow .
PH1-167
Attachment 1 0
city of san Luis OBlsp o
Juty 2012 zonmQ aequtations
•
Chapter 17 .66 : Appeal s
Sections :
17 .66 .010 Standing to appeal .
17 .66 .020 Time limits .
17 .66 .030 Course of appeals .
17 .66 .040 Content of appeals .
17 .66 .050 Hearings and notice .
17 .66 .010 Standing to appeal .
Any person may appeal a decision of any official body, except that administrative decision s
requiring no discretionary judgment, as provided in Chapter 1 .20, may not be appealed .
(Ord . 941 - 1 (part), 1982 : prior code - 9204 .8(A))
17 .66 .020 Time limits .
Appeals must be filed within 10 calendar days of the rendering of a decision which is bein g
appealed . If the tenth day is a Saturday, Sunday or holiday, the appeal period shall exten d
to the next business day. (Ord . 941 - 1 (part), 1982 : prior code - 9204 .8(B))
17 .66 .030 Course of appeals .•
A.Decisions of the Director shall be appealed to the Planning Commission . Such appeals
shall be filed with the Director .
B.Decisions of the Planning Commission shall be appealed to the Council . Such appeals
shall be filed with the City Clerk . (Ord . 941 - 1 (part), 1982 : prior code - 9204 .8(C))
17 .66 .040 Content of appeals .
The appeal shall concern a specific action and shall state the grounds for appeal . (Ord . 94 1
- 1 (part), 1982 : prior code - 9204 .8(D))
17 .66 .050 Hearings and notice .
A.Action on appeals shall be considered at the same type of hearing and after the sam e
notice that is required for the original decision .
B.Once an appeal has been filed, it shall be scheduled for the earliest available meeting ,
considering public notice requirements, unless the appellant agrees to a later date .
(Ord . 941 - 1 (part), 1982 : prior code - 9204 .8(E))
pa ,f-168
Attachment 1 0
RESOLUTION NO . PC-XXXX-1 2
A RESOLUTION OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSIO N
APPROVING A NIGHT CLUB USE PERMIT TO ALLOW RELOCATION OF SL O
BREWING COMPANY IN THE HISTORIC DOWNTOWN COMMERCIAL ZON E
(736/738 HIGUERA STREET, A 57-12 )
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a publi c
hearing in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, on Jul y
11, 2012, for the purpose of considering application #A 57-12 ; an d
WHEREAS, notices of said public hearing were made at the time and in the manne r
required by law ; an d
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has duly considered all evidence, including th e
testimony of the applicant, interested parties, and the evaluation and recommendations by staff,
presented at said hearing .
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Sa n
•
Luis Obispo as follows :
Section 1 .Findings .Based upon all the evidence, the Commission makes the followin g
findings :
1.As conditioned, the use will not harm the general health, safety, and welfare of people livin g
or working in the vicinity because conditions on the Use Permit approval will minimize nois e
impacts as well as impacts to police resources and the community .
2.The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan, which designates the project site a s
Downtown Commercial (C-D). The City General Plan Land Use Element Policy 4 .3 ,
Entertainment and Cultural Facilities, states that "...Entertainment facilities, such as
nightclubs and private theaters, should be in the downtown ..."
3.The proposed project is consistent with General Plan policy to locate, at the street level ,
restaurants, stores, and other uses benefiting from and contributing to pedestrian traffic (LUE
4 .16 .1).
4.The property owner has agreed to conditions of approval that place restrictions on their use o f
the property to insure that nuisances and significant burdens on police resources do not occur .
5.As conditioned, the proposed use is compatible with the project site and with existing an d
potential uses in the vicinity which include retail shops, restaurants, and bars . Conditions o f
approval have been adopted to minimize potential disturbances and criminal activities .
PH 1-16 9
•
Attachment 1 0
Section 2 .Environmental Review .Categorically exempt under Class 1, Existing Facilities ,
Section 15301 of the CEQA Guidelines because the project proposes the relocation of a busines s
into an existing building with no overall increase in floor area .
Section 3 .Action .The Planning Commission does hereby approve Use Permit #A 57-1 2
subject to the following conditions :
1.Prior to establishment of the use, a building plan check submittal that is in full conformanc e
with submitted project plans and the following conditions of approval shall be submitted fo r
review and approval of the Community Development Department .
2.
Prior to release of occupancy, the applicant shall pay applicable parking in-lieu fees for th e
change in use from retail to restaurant, a difference of approximately 12 parking spaces .
3.
The applicant shall provide a minimum of ten short-term bicycle parking spaces on-site .
4.Entertainment shall be located in the area specified on floor plans stamped with Communit y
Development Department approval .
5.Live entertainment, above the level that is compliant with the City's definition of ambient ,
shall be confined to the second level auditorium as shown on project plans and entertainmen t
events shall not be performed outside the hours of 6 p .m . to 1 a .m . General hours for use o f
the space that does not include live entertainment shall be as proposed by the applicant ; 11 am
to 2 am Monday through Friday, and 9 am to 2 am Saturday and Sunday .
6.The proposed use shall operate in conformance with the City Noise Ordinance (M .C . Chapter
9 .12, Noise Control) to maintain compatibility with the nearby residences and businesses .
7.
The applicant is responsible at all times for knowing the legal age, state of sobriety, an d
general state of all patrons .
8.
The applicant shall ensure that no intoxicated patron is furnished with alcohol .
9.
No individual under 21 years of age, or without proper identification, shall be served or sol d
alcohol .
10.No alcoholic beverages shall be consumed on any property adjacent to the licensed premise s
under the control of the licensee(s).
11.First level and roof level music/entertainment, recorded or performed, shall be clearly
incidental allowing for normal conversation levels, and shall be consistent with the City's
definition of ambient entertainment .
12.The roof level patio shall be open to patrons no later than 11 pm nightly .
PH1-170
•
•
Attachment 1 0
13.The applicant shall provide a transparent sound barrier surround (e .g . laminated glass) atop th e
42 inch high guard (shown on project plans, sheet 4) of the proposed roof level patio . This
transparent surround shall be recessed (inward) from the outermost edge of the 42 inch hig h
guard so that it is not visible from the patio below .
14.The applicant shall make reasonable efforts to minimize the potential for adverse noise an d
crowd impacts on adjacent establishments and nearby residences, including, but not limited to ,
ensuring that all windows and doors are closed during entertainment .
15.Prior to release of occupancy, the applicant shall upgrade and formalize the security plan t o
reflect operation at the 736/738 Higuera Street location . This shall include a site plan/floo r
plan detailing the locations and duties of security personnel and shall note maintenance/patro l
of patron lines including routes A and B, to the satisfaction of the Community Developmen t
Director and Police Department . This plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Polic e
Department on an annual basis .
16.The security plan shall include a detailed section explaining how maximum occupant loa d
limits will be maintained.
• 17 . The security plan shall note "no person will be prevented from using the emergency exi t
stairway that passes by the `Green Room' in the event of an emergency," and that "no ac t
utilizing pyrotechnics or live fire will be permitted ."
18.To address complaints and minimize the need for police response to minor issues, an owner o r
manager shall be on premises at all times when entertainment is performed, and shall be
available to be contacted by a City representative and/or adjacent property owner or tenant .
19.All employees shall attend ABC LEAD Training or equivalent training .
20.The applicant shall be responsible for on-going security/safety training to accommodat e
changes in personnel .
21.The site shall be maintained in a neat and orderly manner at all times . The applicant shall b e
responsible for daily cleanup maintenance of the front and back patio areas, the areas of patro n
queuing along routes A and B, and any waste associated with the business in Mission Plaza .
22.The applicant shall be responsible for managing/patrolling outdoor crowds and queuing as a
result of this use . An orderly line of patrons awaiting entry that does not block public acces s
on, or use of, the sidewalk or street shall be maintained . Queued patrons awaiting creek-sid e
entry to the second level auditorium shall follow routes A and B (Attachment 4). Route A
patrons shall be tightly aligned along the north/northwestern creek-side wall/railing of th e
pedestrian easement and the western-most side of Warden Bridge . Route B patrons shall b e
tightly aligned along the east/southeastem creek-side guard rail and the eastern-most side o f
the pedestrian bridge . These orderly patron lines shall have the appropriate gaps to allo w
pedestrians to circulate across the lines unobstructed .
PH1-17 1
•
Attachment 1 0
23.Post-event patrons shall be directed to exit the second level auditorium through the Higuera
Street exit . This shall be noted in the security plan and on security floor/site plans .
24.Plans submitted for a building permit shall show and note the patron queuing areas (Routes A
and B). The patron route (Routes A and B) shall be upgraded as necessary to remove any
obstructions or uneven pavement, to the satisfaction of City Building Division and Publi c
Works Department . Pathway upgrades shall include an evaluation of creek-side lighting level s
including the length of the patron routes, and may require an upgrade to path lighting .A
lighting plan for the creek-side patio shall be provided for review and approval by the Polic e
and Community Development Departments .
25.Construction work related to any proposed path upgrades shall be coordinated with th e
upcoming City Capital Improvement Project to upgrade the patron route from Mission Plaz a
over the Warden Bridge .
26.Tour buses, vans, trailers, and other support vehicles shall load/unload equipment and supplie s
at approved parking locations . The proposed parking areas shall be approved by the City's
Parking Division . The applicant will be responsible for posting of any required "no parking "
signage in accordance with City standards . The applicant shall pay for any displaced parkin g
spaces/meters in accordance with the current standards where applicable . Post-9 p .m . bus
loading/unloading shall not occur along Monterey Street, nor along Broad Street north o f
Monterey Street .
27.Tour buses, vans, other support vehicles shall be switched off (no idling or generator s
running) while parked .
28.The applicant shall maintain and operate a video recording system that records activity at al l
entrances and exits during all business hours . The video shall be of a quality suitable for late r
identification of customers and staff . It will be recorded in a manner that may be retrieved an d
provided to police immediately upon demand . Video data shall be retained for a minimum o f
72 hours .
29.Business shall be conducted in a manner that will not violate any provisions of the Californi a
Alcoholic Beverage Control Act, providing against the sale of alcohol to minors (§25658 )
maintaining the public health, morals, convenience, and safety (§25601); and takin g
reasonable steps to correct any objectionable conditions on the premises and immediatel y
adjacent to the premises (§24200).
30.This permit is strictly limited to allow only the occupant load for the premises as approved b y
the City of San Luis Obispo Fire Department . Occupant loads approved by the City of Sa n
Luis Obispo Fire Department shall be posted at all times .
31.This Use Permit shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission one year from date o f
occupancy . The Planning Commission shall have the ability to modify, delete, or ad d
PH1-172
•
•
Attachment 1 0
•
conditions that are necessary to minimize operational impacts to adjacent businesses an d
residences .
32.This Use Permit shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission if any warranted complaints
about noise, litter, traffic problems, disturbances, damage to property, injuries to persons ,
failure to cooperate with peace officers under circumstances related to the operation of thi s
business, or incidents involving significant physical altercations or threats to public safety, o r
reasonable written complaint is received from any citizen, code enforcement officer, or fro m
the Police Department or upon receipt of evidence that the use is not in compliance wit h
conditions of approval and the Municipal Code . At the time of the Use Permit review, t o
insure on-going compatibility between uses on the project site, conditions of approval may b e
added, deleted, or modified .
33.Upon a significant change to the business, as identified in the applicant's project descriptio n
and security plan, the Use Permit shall be reviewed by the Community Development Directo r
for compliance with conditions of approval, or to determine whether a modification to the Us e
Permit is necessary .
34.Special event hours of 6 am to 1 am are approved for winter/spring graduation, St . Patrick's
Day, and Cinco de Mayo . Outdoor areas shall not open prior to 9 am .
35.The applicant shall provide a noise analysis for the proposed metal staircase . The analysi s
shall include noise mitigation measures to comply with the City's Noise Ordinance .
Code Requirement s
The following code requirements are included for informational purposes only . They serve to giv e
the applicant a general idea of other City requirements that will apply to the project . This is not
intended to be an exhaustive list as other requirements may be identified during the plan chec k
process .
Utilities Departmen t
1.The applicant shall submit a plan that delineates the location of the property's existing an d
proposed water meter(s), water services, and sewer laterals to the points of connection at th e
City water and sewer mains .
2.If the property's existing sewer lateral is proposed to be reused, submittal of a vide o
inspection will be required for review and approval of the Utilities Department during th e
Building Permit Review process . If a new lateral is proposed, the existing lateral must b e
abandoned per City standards .
3.
Provisions shall be made for grease interceptors and FOG (fats, oils, and grease) storag e
within the project's solid waste enclosure . These types of facilities shall also provide an area
PH1-17 3
•
Attachment 1 0
inside to wash floor mats, equipment, and trash cans . The wash area shall be drained to th e
sanitary sewer .
Building Departmen t
4.Group A assembly occupancies that have an occupancy load greater than 300 shall b e
provided with a Main Exit with sufficient width to accommodate not less than one-half of th e
occupant load . The Main Exit shall front on at least one street not less than 20 feet in widt h
that adjoins a street or an unoccupied space . CBC 1027 .1, 1028 .2
5.Provide one-hour fire-resistance construction at existing Second Floor openings withi n
exterior walls where fire separation distance is less than three feet to adjacent buildings o r
property lines . Openings are not permitted . CBC Table 705 .8
6.
Provide as accessible route of travel connecting all elements and spaces including elevate d
Stage area on Second Floor . CBC 1103B .1, 1104B .3 .1 0
7.Provide Minimum Plumbing Facilities Calculation on Plan . 2010 CPC Chapter 4, Table A an d
Table 4-1 Provide plumbing facilities for permanent employee for assembly places .
8.
Structural Occupancy Category III, public assembly with an occupancy load greater than 300 .
CBC Table 1604 .5
9.Provide existing building's seismic base shear capacity and percentage of change calculatio n
relative to increased value due to the change of Occupancy Classification and the new Roo f
Deck and other load increase . Alterations to existing structures are permitted to be mad e
without requiring the structure complying with Section 1613 provided alterations do no t
increase the seismic force in any existing structural element by more than 10% cumulative .
10.All construction shall be in conformance with :
2010 California Building Code (CBC) based on 2009 IB C
2010 California Electrical Code (CEC) based on 2008 NE C
2010 California Mechanical Code (CMC) based on 2009 UM C
2010 California Plumbing Code (CPC) based on 2009 UP C
2010 California Fire Code (CFC) based on 2009 IF C
2010 California Green Building Code (CGBC )
2010 California Energy Cod e
2010 California Reference Standard s
Fire Departmen t
11.Construction Type and Occupancy : Please indicate CBC Construction type for this building .
Please indicate if the structure on the roof will be considered a third story . Note : three stor y
assembly buildings are not permitted in non-fire-rated buildings .
PH1-174
•
•
Attachment 1 0
12.Please calculate each assembly room for its maximized use . As this is intended to be a nigh t
club and a stage is included on the first floor, and there may be concentrated use on the 3r d
floor please provide occupant loads using both the 15 square feet per person for dining and 5
square feet per person for concentrated use .
13.Provide third exit from first floor if concentrated use occupant load exceeds 299 persons .
14.Provide third exit from second floor auditorium room . (The third stairway is only accessibl e
from the main exit access from the auditorium).
15.The doorways to and from the exit stairways shall not reduce the required exit width for stairs .
16.Provide a second stairway from the roof as the occupant load is 30 or more .
On motion by
, seconded by
, and on the following
roll call vote :
AYES :
• NOES :
REFRAIN :
ABSENT :
The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this 11 m day of July, 2012 .
Doug Davidson, Secretar y
Planning Commissio n
•
PH 1-175
Attachment 1 0
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISP O
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT •ITEM #2
MEETING DATE :July 11,201 2
BY :Marcus Carloni, Planning Technician (781-7176)
FROM : Doug Davidson, Deputy Director of Community Development Departmen t
FILE NUMBER :A 57-1 2
PROJECT ADDRESS :736/738 Higuera Street
SUBJECT :Review of a night club (SLO Brewing Company) relocation in the Histori c
Downtown Commercial (C-D-H) zone .
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt attached resolution recommending approval of the Use Permit .
SITE DAT A
BACKGROUN D
The applicant, San Luis Downtown Management, is requesting to allow operation of a Nigh t
Club and restaurant at the subject property as the new location for the existing SLO Brewin g
Company, currently located at 1119 Garden Street .
A Use Permit is required for a night club facility providing dancing and entertainment . The
Zoning Regulations definition of a night club includes live or recorded music and/or dancing ,
comedy, disc jockeys, etc ., which may also serve alcoholic beverages for on-site consumption .
Hamish Marshall : San Lui s
Downtown Managemen t
Carol Florence : Oasis Associates ,
Inc .
C-D-H (Historic Downtow n
Commercial )
General Retai l
10,800 square feet
Exempt from environmenta l
review under Class 1 (Sectio n
15301), Existing Facilities, of th e
CEQA Guidelines .
Applicant
Representativ e
Zoning
General Pla n
Site Area
Environmenta l
Status
•
PH1-176
Attachment 1 0
•
The definition does not include ambient music, which is defined separately as incidental acousti c
or recorded music .
At the discretion of the Community Development Director, an Administrative Use Permit may b e
referred to the Planning Commission (MC 17 .58 .030 .A3). The Community Developmen t
Director has referred this review to the Planning Commission given the scope of the propose d
night club venue and potential associated impacts to the neighborhood .
ALCOHOL OUTLET REVIEW
For the past two years, staff has been collecting information and developing strategies to reduc e
public safety problems and negative impacts associated with alcohol outlets . In October 2009 ,
staff presented a study to the Council that correlated police-related incidents with alcohol outlets ,
along with several recommendations to improve public safety . The City Council directed staff t o
explore a range of strategies, enhance local regulations, and engage a wide variety o f
stakeholders . On November 16, 2010, staff provided an update to the Council on progress mad e
in exploring these strategies and initiated a Nightlife Public Safety Assessment ("Assessment").
This Assessment was presented to the Council in November, 2011 . Council direction was t o
bring forth amendments to the Zoning Regulations to reduce public safety problems associate d
with alcohol outlets . Amendments reviewed by the Planning Commission on April 25, 2012 and
•
Council on May 15, 2012 resulted in the following changes to the Zoning Ordinance :
1.
Revised zoning definition of restaurant and convenience stor e
2.
New Restaurant zoning definition (late hour alcohol service) and liquor stor e
3.
Use Permit requirement for late hour alcohol service restaurants and liquor store s
4.
Deemed Approved Ordinance for existing alcohol outlet s
The Ordinance Amendments were continued by the Council to define the role of the Downtow n
Association in the Deemed Approved violation and hearing process . The Ordinanc e
Amendments were approved by the City Council on June 19, 2012 . The second reading is Jul y
10, 2012 and the new Ordinance becomes effective on August 10, 2012 .
The Assessment brought together a wide variety of stakeholders to identify issues and impact s
associated with alcohol outlets from different perspectives . Approximately 60 representative s
from various businesses and organizations participated in the process, which included a two-hou r
orientation session and four separate "roundtable" discussions organized by perspective —
Community, Hospitality, Safety and Development.
The final Nightlife Assessment report was presented to Council on November 15, 2011 . As a
follow-up to the Assessment report and stakeholder engagement process, several of the bar ,
nightclub, and restaurant owners/operators formed the Safe Night Life Association (formerly th e
Restaurant and Bar Owners Association).
The Safe Night Life Association's (SNL) input into formation of the alcohol outlet Ordinanc e
PH1-177
Attachment 1 0
Amendments and its defined role as a peer review committee in the Deemed Approve d
Ordinance are positive outcomes of this two-year process . The SNL is a sanctione d
subcommittee of the Downtown Association and has (or is) working to implement its own ne w
following programs to address alcohol-related problems :
1.SLO Safe Ride .A late-night transportation service to take downtown patrons to thei r
neighborhoods .
2.Downtown Clean-Up .A downtown clean-up service to keep the downtown clea n
after late-night use .
3.ABC LEAD (Licensee Education on Alcohol and Drugs) Training.An educational
program for employees put on by the ABC that provides practical information on
responsible serving practices .
4."One 86-All 86" Plan .An information sharing plan to bar patrons who have bee n
ejected from one downtown bar from all downtown bars .
5.Patron Responsibility .A marketing program focused on personal responsibility an d
safety for patrons .
Although it is still too early to draw conclusions about SNL's impact on downtown alcoho l
problems, the Police Department has some recent statistics that show a relative decrease i n
downtown alcohol-related incidents .
•
2010-2011* 2011-2012**Reduction
•
z Assault Misdemeanor
33 28 15 %
*09/01/2010 through 02/28/201 1
**09/01/2011 through 02/28/201 2
The group did have a noticeable impact on St . Patrick's Day as the alcohol-related incidents wer e
substantially down from last year . While the inclement weather certainly contributed to reduce d
problems, active outreach to the community is also believed to have contributed to reduce d
alcohol related issues . SNL took the lead on installing portable public restrooms which greatl y
reduced public urination in the downtown .
SITE DESCRIPTIO N
The subject property is located along Higuera Street (Attachment 1, Vicinity Map) in the Histori c
Downtown Commercial (C-D-H) zone . The property is bounded by Downtown Commercial
zoning on all sides . The property backs up to San Luis Obispo Creek with Mission San Lui s
Obispo and residences beyond to the north and northwest . The property is adjacent to retail ,
restaurant, and bar/tavern and night club uses, with some downtown upper level residences .
PH1-178
Attachment 1 0
The site contains the 15,000 square foot two story Carrisa building which currently includes tw o
retail storefronts on the ground floor with offices on the second floor . The Carrisa Building, buil t
in 1905,is a Master List Historic Resource . The proposed improvements will possibly requir e
review by the Cultural Heritage Committee, and will require review by the Architectural Revie w
Commission .
PROJECT DESCRIPTIO N
In association with the recently approved Garden Street Terraces project, the applicant plans t o
relocate the existing SLO Brewing Company business to the subject location . External
improvements along Higuera Street include a new rounded storefront system with counter seatin g
and tables and chairs, and addition of a metal awning . Improvements at the rear of the buildin g
(creek-side) include removal of the existing upper level offices and associated wood beams, an d
removal of the wood stair to be replaced with an external steel staircase leading to a roof leve l
patio . Improvements also include a new leveled walking surface, patio dining, and removal of th e
existing 36 inch diameter Black Walnut tree . The proposed floor plan will include a first level
(street level) restaurant/bar and brewery, with outdoor dining along Higuera Street and at th e
back of the building along San Luis Obispo Creek . The first floor will also include space fo r
ambient 'live entertainment . The second level will include offices and an approximately 3,00 0
• square foot concert venue/auditorium with an approximate occupant load of 600 persons . The
auditorium will also include a bar, and a moveable partition to enclose the space for
performances with a smaller crowd . The applicant proposes construction of a roof level pati o
atop the back (creek side) of the building at approximately 1,000 square feet . The patio wil l
include customer seating and a bar . The applicant proposes ambient level recorded music for th e
rooftop patio . The Building and Fire Departments are working with the applicant to establis h
proper exiting of the roof level patio .
The applicant proposes to maintain SLO Brewing Company's current hours of operation whic h
are as follows :
Monday - Friday
Saturday - Sunday
Concert Hours (second level)
4pm to la m
*Winter/Spring graduation, St . Patrick's Day, Cinco de Mayo
This request to relocate the night club use to the Carrisa building will help meet unreinforce d
masonry (URM) strengthening objectives . The Carrisa building met Level A strengthenin g
requirements in 1995 .Level A strengthening provides 75%better safety by connecting the roo f
and floor assemblies to the walls of the building . Additionally, the parapets are braced whic h
reduces the hazard to the public right-of-way . Although the complete strengthening of th e
Zoning Regulations Chapter 17 .100 . Ambient Entertainment . Acoustic or recorded music, or live readings o f
books or poetry, which is clearly incidental, that allows for normal conversation levels, and for which no cove r
fee or ticket is required .
•
PH1-179
Attachment 10
•
Carissa building was due July 1, 2012, the building owners have been collaborating with th e
Chief Building Official and have made progress by submitting this request for relocation of th e
night club that is currently approved at 1119 Garden Street . The property owners have propose d
a coordinated effort to help facilitate and propel the Garden Street Terraces project forward . An
approval to allow the night club to relocate to the Carrisa building will result in reduced numbers
of patrons at 1119 Garden Street . It may also facilitate strengthening of 1119 Garden Street prio r
to 2015 .
CIRCULATIO N
The first level of the building will be accessed from its main entrance along Higuera Street an d
its secondary entrance at the rear of the building along the creek .
The second level will have three points of access ; an internal staircase from Higuera Street, an
internal elevator from the first floor, and the proposed external staircase at the creek-sid e
entrance to the building . When the second level auditorium is scheduled for use as a concer t
venue or other event with high patron volume, the applicant proposes use of the building's creek -
side entrance as the main entrance ; queuing patrons along the creek-side pedestrian easement a s
shown in Attachment 4, Circulation Plan . The creek-side queuing of patrons was a City Polic e
Department recommendation to the applicant during the preliminary planning phase of th e
project. The applicant also proposes parking of the band's buses along Monterey Street, adjacent
•
to the History Center, and using the routes shown in Attachment 4 for loading and unloading o f
band equipment . Attachment 4 illustrates the two proposed routes for queuing of concert patrons ;
Route A uses the Mission Plaza's Warden Bridge when an event is not taking place at Missio n
Plaza, and route B uses the pedestrian bridge subject to Mission Plaza event activity .
The roof level patio,like the second level, will have three points of access ; an internal staircas e
from Higuera Street (not shown on project plans ; shown on recently updated plans ; will b e
provided at the hearing), an internal elevator from the first and second floors, and an externa l
staircase at the creek-side entrance to the building .
Staff Evaluation :Staff concerns with regard to circulation include the following ; 1 )
effect on nearby residents/businesses and police resources of a high volume of concer t
patrons exiting the building during late night hours, and 2) effect on nearby residents o f
post-concert bus loading during late night hours .
1) Post-concert-exiting patrons will likely exit the building through the same route use d
to enter the building . As discussed above, concert patrons will use the creek-sid e
entrance to the building to access the second level auditorium . The late night, high -
volume, post-concert release of patrons through this creek-side exit, which channel s
patrons to Monterey Street and/or Mission Plaza, may disturb adjacent businesses an d
especially nearby residents . Staff recommended conditions of approval requir e
security staff to exit post-concert patrons to Higuera Street ; the Police Department i s
supportive of this exiting route . Recommended conditions also require upgrades alon g
PH1-180
Attachment 1 0
the creek-side patron routes (Routes A and B, Attachment 4) as necessary to remov e
any obstructions/uneven pavement, to the satisfaction of the Building and Publi c
Works Departments .
2) The applicant proposes to park the band's buses along Monterey Street, adjacent t o
the History Center, for loading/unloading of band equipment ; utilizing routes A and B
(Attachment 4) to access the subject location . To address the potential noise impact s
on nearby residents due to late night loading/unloading of band equipment, staf f
recommended conditions of approval require bus engines and related generators to b e
switched off while equipment and personnel are loaded/unloaded . Staff recommended
conditions require the bus parking locations be approved by the City's Parkin g
Division, as is the current operation at the 1119 Garden Street location . However,
post-9 p .m . bus loading/unloading shall not occur in the area along Monterey Stree t
marked "tour bus parking" which is adjacent to residences .
NOIS E
The applicant recognizes the potential for adverse noise effects on neighboring businesses an d
residents and has thus provided a sound level assessment (Attachment 5) performed by Mr .
David Lord of 45dB .com . The applicant proposes "acoustic isolation" of the second leve l
auditorium space from the exterior of the building as well as from the first level and roof level .
• This will be accomplished through the use of an acoustically designed air handling system, rigi d
fiberglass panels/acoustically engineered gypsum board, acoustically designed window glazing ,
and "air-locking" of second level entry and exit areas . The applicant also proposes a Gyperet e
mass floor to dampen vibration between the first and second levels . The applicant's sound leve l
assessment performed by Mr . David Lord establishes an overall sound reduction of 50 to 70 d B
and states the second floor space will be inaudible in the outdoor areas surrounding the subjec t
location .
The sound level assessment provides an analysis of noise generated by the roof level pati o
(Attachment 5, Figure 4). Sound level contours are based on the proposed recorded music leve l
(assuming 80 dB) and when compared to Figure 1 of Attachment 5 (Baseline Sound Leve l
Survey) is shown to have less than a one dB impact on neighboring uses . Staff has concerns with
potential roof level noise creation, as discussed below .
Staff Evaluation :Staff concerns with noise produced by the proposed business includ e
the following ; 1) late night noise from bar operation on the first level, 2) musical event s
and associated patrons at the second level auditorium, and 3) conversation/music levels a t
the roof level patio .
1) To address noise concerns with proposed late-night bar operation on the first level o f
the building, staff recommended conditions of approval require all doors an d
windows to be closed during entertainment and ensure recorded music and liv e
performances are clearly incidental allowing for normal conversation levels ,
consistent with the City's definition of ambient entertainment .
•
PH1-181
Attachment 1 0
2)As proposed by the applicant and Mr . David Lord, sound attenuating measures for th e
second level auditorium will mitigate sound to a level that will be inaudible in th e
outdoor areas surrounding the subject location . Staff recommended conditions o f
approval address the potential noise impact of patrons leaving the second level
auditorium upon conclusion of an event, as discussed in the Circulation Staff
Evaluation above .
3)The sound level assessment for the roof level patio assumes 80 dB of noise from a
recorded music source . As shown in Figure 4 (Attachment 5), noise from this sourc e
will lower to approximately 70 dB as is reaches the property lines . The noise contours
were based on recorded music rather than human voices which may have the ability t o
travel sound farther than indicated in the sound level assessment . This noise may
affect nearby uses including nearby single-family residences along Monterey Street .
Staff has received project concerns from the Monterey and Palm Street resident s
based on operation of existing businesses with outdoor entertainment/amplifie d
music . Staff recommended conditions of approval require a transparent sound bathe r
atop the 42 inch high guard (shown on project plans, sheet 4). Inclusion of this sound
barrier will lower the noise level by approximately 10 dB, making noise from thi s
source no higher than the ambient noise levels shown in Figure 1 of Attachment 5 .
Additionally, the Police Department is recommending closing of the roof level pati o
to patrons no later than 12 am (midnight).
SECURIT Y
The applicant's security plan section of the submitted project description (Attachment 6 )
discusses SLO Brewing Company's security management which includes a professional Manage r
and/or owner on premises during all hours of operation, two front doormen and one bac k
doorman on duty during all entertainment events, and two stage-side security personnel a s
needed . The applicant proposes cooperation with, and attendance of, San Luis Obispo Polic e
Department (S .L .O .P .D .) and Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control (A .B .C .) trainin g
programs .
Staff Evaluation :Staff conditions of approval require an orderly line of patrons awaitin g
entry to the building that does not block public access on, or use of, the walkways, to b e
patrolled and maintained by security personnel . Conditions also include daily cleanup o f
pedestrian routes and cleanup of any waste associated with the business in Mission Plaza .
Conditions also require the security plan be updated and formalized to reflect operation a t
the 736/738 Higuera location including a floor plan detailing location and duties o f
security personnel and security maintenance of patron lines, to the satisfaction of th e
Police Department ..
USE PERMIT RESOLUTION SUMMAR Y
Recommended conditions of approval for the Use Permit, in addition to those mentioned unde r
staff evaluations above, include ensuring the use is consistent with the applicant's submitte d
PH1-182
•
•
•
•
Attachment 1 0
project description and security plan . Conditions such as the mandatory closing of windows an d
doors during events reduce noise and crowd impacts on adjacent establishments and residences .
Also included are requirements for maintaining a video recording system and ensuring on-goin g
security/safety training to accommodate staff changes . Staff has included conditions requiring a
manager be present and available for contact by a City representative and/or adjacent propert y
owners/tenants during events to minimize the need for police response to minor issues .
Staff recommended conditions of approval provide consistency with City Council direction t o
enhance alcohol outlet regulation ; aimed at reducing the number of alcohol-associated incident s
and police responses, and promoting a safer downtown environment . Conditions have also bee n
added to ensure proper maintenance and clean-up of the site and its surroundings .
Additionally, staff is recommending an automatic review hearing one year from date of approva l
to ensure compliance with conditions of approval and compatibility with the project site and use s
in the vicinity. The one-year review will be an opportunity to determine if any conditions need t o
be modified based on the operational characteristics of the night club .
The Police Department has reviewed the application and has no objections if conditions ar e
adopted to mitigate and address operational concerns and potential conflicts with the downtow n
neighbors .
CONCLUSIO N
Staff has evaluated the project's potential impacts and has included newly created conditions o f
approval and enhanced existing City standard Night Club Use Permit conditions to address thes e
impacts, and to be consistent with City Council direction for regulation of alcohol outlets . Staff
evaluation of the proposed use and recommended conditions of approval provide compatibilit y
with the project site and with existing and potential uses in the vicinity .
Additionally, the proposed project will facilitate the development of Garden Street Terraces,a
major downtown redevelopment project, and will facilitate the full seismic retrofit of the subjec t
location and the 1119 Garden Street location .
ALTERNATIVE S
1.Continue the item . An action to continue the item should include a detailed list of additiona l
information or project modifications required .
2.Deny the project. Action denying the application should include the basis for denial .
ATTACHMENT S
Attachment 1 : Vicinity map
Attachment 5 : Sound Level Assessmen t
Attachment 2 : Applicant project description
Attachment 6 : Security Pla n
Attachment 3 : Project Plans
Attachment 7 : Resolution
Attachment 4 : Circulation Plan
PH1-183
Attachment 1 0
SAN LUIS OBISP O
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTE S
July 11, 201 2
CALL TO ORDER/PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANC E
ROLL CALL : Commissioners John Fowler, Airlin Singewald, Michael Multari, Chuc k
Stevenson, John :Larson, Vice-Chair Eric Meyer, and Chairperso n
Michael Draze
Absent :None
Staff: Deputy Community . Development Directors Doug Davidson and Ki m
Murry, Housing Programs Manager Tyler Corey, Planning Technicia n
Marcus Carloni, Interim Assistant City Attorney Rob Schultz, an d
Recording Secretary Tammy Ston e
ACCEPTANCE OF THE AGENDA :
The agenda was accepted as presented .
MINUTES :
Minutes of June 27, 2012, were approved as amended .
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS :
David Brodie expressed concern regarding night club and bar/tavern land uses in th e
Downtown Area .
There were no further comments made from the public .
PUBLIC HEARINGS :
1 .1600 Bishop Street .GPC 71-12 : General Plan conformity review of a propose d
residential care facility use on County-owned property (Sunny Acres); C/OS-40 and
RI zone ; County of San Luis Obispo, applicant . (Tyler Corey )
Tyler Corey, Housing Programs Manager, presented the staff report, recommending th e
Planning Commission determine, and report to the City Council, that the propose d
surplus and sale of the Sunny Acres building and surrounding property for a residentia l
care facility use is in conformance with the General Plan .
Commr. Fowler asked whether the property was on the City's Master List of Histori c
Resources .
Staff responded that the property was on the City's Master List of Historic Resources .
PH1-184
Attachment 1 0
Planning Commission Minute s
July 11, 201 2
Page 2
PUBLIC COMMENTS :
Jill Bolster-White, Executive Director of Transitions Mental Health, commente dregarding the project and funding .
There were no further comments made from the public .
COMMISSION COMMENTS :
Commr . Larson supported the use and development proposal .
Commr . Singewald commented regarding the proposal's consistency with General Pla nConservation and Open Space and Housing Elements policies and programs .
Vice-Chairperson Meyer supported the residential care facility use proposed for th ebuilding and site .
Commr. Multari agreed the project conformed to the General Plan .
Commr. Stevenson commented that one of the major goals of the County was t opreserve the building .
Vice-Chairperson Meyer requested the community be invited to view the building whe nthe residential care facility opens .
There were no further comments made from the Commission .
On motion by Commr. Multari, seconded by Commr . Stevenson, to determine an dreport to the City Council, that the proposed surplus and sale of the Sunny Acre sbuildinq and surroundinq property for a residential care facility use is in conformancewith the General Plan .
AYES :Commrs . Multari, Stevenson, Fowler, Singewald, Meyer, Draze, an dLarson
NOES :Non e
RECUSED :Non e
ABSENT :Non e
The motion passed on a 7 :0 vote .
2 .736 Hiquera Street .A 57-12 : Review of a night club (SLO Brew) relocation in th eC-D-H zone ; San Luis Downtown Management, applicant . (Marcus Carloni )
Chairperson Draze commented regarding an ex-parte communication with the applican ton Item #2 .
Vice-Chairperson Meyer advised that he spoke with the applicant and many of th eneighbors regarding Item #2 .
PH1-185
Attachment 1 0
Planning Commission Minute s
July 11, 201 2
'Page 3
Marcus Carloni, Planning Technician, presented the staff report, recommendin g
adoption of a resolution recommending approval of the Use Permit based on finding s
and subject to conditions which he outlined .
Chairperson Draze questioned if the project would be subject to the new regulations if i twas approved .
Doug Davidson, Deputy Director, responded that the enhanced standards condition s
developed while preparing the new regulations would apply and many of them ar e
attached to this project . The SLO Brewing project would have been subject to a us e
permit with or without the new regulations – the level of review did not change for bar s
or nightclubs .
Commr. Multari requested information from staff regarding the calculation of parking .
Marcus Carloni, Planning Technician, explained the parking in-lieu fee calculation base d
on the change in use from retail to restaurant/bar/night club .
Vice-Chairperson Meyer questioned Captain Chris Staley regarding the owners of th e
property and the issuance of citations .
Chris Staley, Police Captain, reported a close relationship with the business owners an d
noted that SLO Brewing Company is not a problem location for the Police Department .
Commr. Fowler questioned the capacity of the auditorium at the subject location i n
comparison with the current location . He asked about a referral to the Cultural Heritag e
Committee .
Marcus Carloni, Planning Technician, believed the change in use at the auditorium wa s
approximately 100 persons . Marcus Carloni also stated the project would likely requir e
review by the Cultural Heritage Committee .
PUBLIC COMMENTS :
Carol Florence, applicant representative, provided information in support of the project
and accepts all the conditions of approval as recommended .
Hamish Marshall, applicant, supported the project and staff's recommendation .
Mary Pagel, San Luis Obispo, had concerns regarding the noise level, circulation an d
hours of operation . She gave an example of the Conditional Use Permit of a nearb y
business (Creeky Tiki) and suggested that those conditions be incorporated in thi s
project . Ms . Pagel also had noise concerns regarding the proposed steel staircase .
Dave Hannings, San Luis Obispo, had concerns regarding noise (bus engines), an d
entrance/exit to the building . He expressed concerns about the scale of the project i n
the Downtown Area .
•
•
PH1-186
Attachment 1 0
Planning Commission Minute s
July 11, 201 2
Page 4
David Brodie, San Luis Obispo, expressed concern about the scale of the project .
Kathy Main, San Luis Obispo, questions why all businesses, not just SLO Brewing Co .,
are not responsible for cleanup along the creek, and questioned bus parking location s
and special event hours of operation .
Rodney Sigelsky, San Luis Obispo Business Owner, spoke in support of the project .
Monty Sheller, SLO Brewing Co . General Manager, supported the project .
Greg Mengas, San Luis Obispo, acknowledged the "tolerance" required to live in th e
downtown, and expressed concern regarding the potential noise associated wit h
proposed business .
There were no further comments made from the public .
COMMISSION COMMENTS :
Vice-Chairperson Meyer commented regarding the Mission Plaza area and questione d
staff regarding the patron queue . He suggested the hours of operation be reviewed i n
six months, rather than one year, due to potential noise issues .
Commr . Stevenson asked about the steel stairway regarding the noise and how it coul d
be mitigated .
David Lord, applicant representative and acoustics consultant, provided informatio n
regarding the potential noise mitigations for the steel stairway .
Commr. Fowler expressed concern about the size of the project and how it impacts th e
problem of crime in the downtown Area . He was happy to see the crime event number s
decreasing within the last year . He would like the Cultural Heritage Committee (CHC )
to review the exterior changes to the project .
Commr. Multari stated the Downtown Area should be looked at comprehensively . He
agreed with bringing more activity to the San Luis Creek area . He expressed concer n
about the late-night outdoor activities and bus operation in the area .
Commr. Larson stated he supported the project .
Commr. Singewald questioned the process of receiving and reviewing noise complaint s
of the business .
Vice-Chairperson Meyer suggested corrections to the lighting, paving, hours o f
operation, and to include cancelling the conditional use permit at the existing facilit y
upon the applicants moving into the new space .
Chairperson Draze commented regarding the noise level . He suggested that th e
automatic one year Use Permit review period start from the date of occupancy, rathe rthan the date of approval . He also recommended the CHC review the item .
PH1-187
Attachment 1 0
Planning Commission Minute s
July 11, 201 2
Page 5
Hamish Marshall, provided information regarding the location of rooms in the project.
He commented regarding his intentions about the Conditional Use Permit .
Vice-Chairperson Meyer requested additional changes to lighting conditions be adde d
to the Motion .
There were no further comments made from the Commission .
On motion by Commr . Multari, seconded by Commr . Fowler,adoption of the attache d
resolution recommending approval of the Use Permit based on findings and subject t o
conditions in addition to the following amendments :
-ltem# 12 : The roof level patio be closed at 11 :00 p .m . nightl y
-Item #23 : Change the wording from post-concert to post event patrons .
Item #26 : Bus parking change to post 9 p .m . bus loading/unloading shall no t
occur along Monterey Street, nor along Broad Street north of Montere y
Street .
- Item # 31 : Changed from date of approval to date of occupancy .
- ltem# 34 : No outdoor areas to be open prior to 9 :00 am .
- Item# 35 : Provide a noise analysis of the proposed steel stairway an d
recommend noise mitigation measures to comply with the City's Nois e
Ordinance .
AYES :Commrs . Multari,.Fowler, Singewald, Vice-Chairperson Meyer ,
Chairperson Draze, Commr. Stevenso n
NOES :Non e
RECUSED : Non e
ABSENT :Non e
The motion passed on a 7 :0 vote .
On motion by Commr . Multari, seconded by Commr . Larson for staff to agendize a
future study session to review noise standards in the Downtown .
AYES :Commrs . Multari, Larson, Fowler, Singewald, Vice-Chairperson Meyer ,
Chairperson Draze, Commr. Stevenso n
NOES :Non e
RECUSED :Non e
ABSENT : Non e
The motion passed on a 7 :0 vote .
COMMENT AND DISCUSSION :
3 . Staff
a . Doug Davidson provided the agenda forecast to the Commission . The July 25th
meeting has been cancelled .
•
•
PH1-188
Attachment 1 0
Planning Commission Minute s
July 11, 201 2
Page 6
4 .Commissio n
Chairperson Draze will not be present at the August 8, 2012 meeting .
ADJOURNMENT :The meeting was adjourned at 8 :37 p .m .
Respectfully submitted by ,
Tammy Ston e
Recording Secretar y
Approved by the p fanning Commission on August 22, 2012 .
etz
rvising Administrative Assistant
PH1-189
Attachment 1 0
Carloni, Marcu s
Subject :FW : SLO Brew's Applicatio n
Honorable Member of the City Council :
On Sept . 4, 2012, you will be considering SLO Brew's request for a variance to expand their business in its ne w
location beside San Luis Creek . A walk along this creek has long been a sanctuary for those who cherish th e
quieter, gentler side of San Luis Obispo . Already there is a drum group whose loud, throbbing beat reverberate s
along the creek, shattering the evening's tranquility . At the same time as SLO Brew's request comes before you ,
Save Downtown is trying to generate support for doing just that . (Although I stand with them on their cause,I
am not a member . Also, my husband and are not WCTUers . We thoroughly enjoy our glass of wine and th e
occasional Martini .)
As I've watched this town grow over my thirty-eight years as a homeowner, I've seen quality businesses—
Meridian and Porch, Home & Garden—and restaurants—Sebastian's and Corner View —to name but a few ,
fold up their tents and move on, to be replaced by a plethora of hamburger eateries and bars . Make no doubt
about it, business is booming, but the character of downtown is changing .
Downtown is at a crossroad . I believe the time has come for a realistic appraisal of the bar situation downtown ,
and so I urge the following—a professional study of towns of comparable size and demographics in California ,
detailing the number of restaurants and/or bars serving alcoholic beverages, especially including towns with a
small, concentrated downtown area . Unless this is done and you have had lime to assess the results, you will b e
casting a vote on the SLO Brew application based on staff or Planning Commission recommendations, not o n
hard facts . The Council and the people deserve no less .
Thank you for your consideration—and for your dedicated service . It would be encouraging to hear back fro m
you .
Barbara Kraus Fran k
Former Planing Commissione r
2725 Augusta Stree t
San Luis Obispo 9340 1
544 .7930
t PH1-190
•
Attachment 1 0
Murry, Ki m
*Subject :SLO BREWAttachments:Carrisa Building .do c
Original MessageFrom: Marx, Ja nSent: Friday, September 14, 2012 8 :21 P MTo: Grimes, Maev eCc: Codron, Michae lSubject: FW :
Please consider this agenda correspondence for 9/25 .Thanks ,Ja n
Jan Howell Mar xMayor of San Luis Obisp o(805) 781-7120 or (805) 541-271 6
From : Dixie Cliff [dixiecliff@att .net]Sent : Friday, September 14, 2012 2 :58 P MTo: Marx, Jan ; Carpenter, Dan ; Smith, Kathy ; Ashbaugh, John ; Carter, AndrewSubject:
*hanks for your attention to my concerns . Dixie Cliff
i
PH1-191
Attachment 1 0
The creek cleaning this weekend brought to mind how the San Luis Creek would b e
affected if the city approves SLO Brew's request for a 600 seat auditorium in the histori c
Carrisa Building overlooking our beloved creek and Mission Plaza . SLO Brew intends t o
invite famous name bands to attract busloads of concert attendees . The queuing will wend
through Mission Plaza, across the creek on the bridges to the nightclub's rear entrance .
The crowd, now well inebriated, may then adjourn to the rooftop restaurant/bar . Wh o
knows what items patrons may toss down in the creek? After concert goers return to th e
buses over the creek and through the plaza I can visualize the trampled turf; accumulate d
trash and worst of all garbage and unknown amounts of human excrement contributed b y
drunks polluting our precious creek, the backbone of our historic down town . I feel sorry
for the downtown retailers who have to deal with the mess left at their store fronts every
morning because of the collection of bars located in the center of downtown . We mus t
support our precious natural resources and struggling downtown businesses, many o f
whom are on the verge of collapse .
Dixie Cliff
SLO
•
•
PHI-192
Attachment 1 0
David W . Hanning s
The Latimer-Hayes Adob e
642 Monterey Stree t
San Luis Obispo, CA 9340 1
13 July, 2012
Andrew Carte r
Council Membe r
City of San Luis Obispo
Dear Andrew,
Something happened at the SLO Planning Commission meeting on 11 January that has left m e
troubled . Their second item of business was the relocation of SLO Brew to 736 Higuera Street . As i t
turns out this is not only a relocation, but also a SO% increase in the floor size of the business . None of
the neighbors were informed of this hearing, some of us found out by chance, and if it had not been fo r
•a fluke, this would have been handled by the city staff without a hearing .
Many of us living dose by are interested in this because we already have problems in front o f
our homes with late night noise, misbehavior by patrons of downtown entertainment venues, and th e
parking with engines running of the band busses . This project increases the size of this 9000 square
foot venue to 14,000 square feet, and while they are planning to do a nice job with the face of th e
building, the increased scale seems out of proportion with the mix of uses and the city goals fo r
downtown .
I am particularly concerned about the noise that will be created by the 1000 square foot outsid e
deck on the fourth level of the back of the building . This has a capacity for hundreds of people whos e
noise will carry over the treetops and surrounding buildings directly to the neighbors . The Nova ground
level deck can get quite noise now, but this one would be much worse . Voices carry great distances a t
night.
Another concern is the people lining up for the concerts . In the present location the capacity fo r
concerts is 500 people who line up down Garden Alley, and urinate there freely . The new capacity wil l
be 600 people who will be lined up along the creek in a less public, and more sensitive space . Who i s
going to police this? And then what crowd problems will be created by the 600 patrons exiting th e
concerts late at night ?
My third concern is the bus parking for the bands . Presently there is bus parking for touris t
busses in front of my neighbor's house . The rules are posted on the sign, and it says that the engine s
PHI-193
Attachment 1 0
will not run past 9PM . The band busses park there and they run their engines until one or two in th e
morning . They are not terribly loud, but the low rumble is very annoying, carries, and makes slee p
difficult.
For decades the city has sought to maintain a balance downtown between various use s
including entertainment, businesses, tourism, and people living there . This project seems out of scal e
with this balance . The conditions put on this approval of policing the busses, the noise, and the crowd s
outside of this venue are really beyond the ability of this business to enforce . We do not need another
hamburger joint downtown either. This project could well tip the balance to turning downtown over t o
the student crowd .
I understand that we can appeal this decision to the City Council for a fee of $260 . I understan d
that you want to avoid frivolous appeals, but since this hearing had no publicity, and the result will hav e
such an effect on our downtown, I ask that you look into this .
Best Regard s
David W. Hannings
541-019 6
adobe642@yahoo .com
•
•
PH1-194
•
•
Attachment 1 0
20 August 201 2
To :
Mayor Jan Man and Council member s
From :
Deborah Cash, Executive Director
San Luis Obispo Downtown Associatio n
Re :
Relocation of SLO Brewing Company to Higuera Stree t
The Downtown Association Board of Directors wishes to reaffirm its support of th e
proposed move of SLO Brewing Company from Garden Street to Higuera Street that wa s
approved by the Planning Commission last month and was subsequently appealed to th e
City Council .
The Downtown Association board, after receiving a presentation from the developer an d
holding discussion on the issue, unanimously agreed the proposed use will not onl y
provide for an enhanced environment, particularly along the creek walk, but will also b e
subject to conditions and reviews as a safeguard to help ensure a positive and beneficia l
project.
Further, certain points in the appeal do not appear to be substantiated including :
•"this proliferation of alcohol outlets ..."
This is an existing use moving to a new location and not a new outlet .
•"The San Luis Creek Walk area should not become the overflow area for alcohol -
related, anti social activities ..."
The Creek Walk area currently provides a dark and secluded gathering place fo r
persons wishing to engage in activities that are less than desirable . The
Downtown Foresters, on a recent Saturday clean up of the area, recovered man y
empty alcohol containers, a hypodermic syringe and pills along with trash ,
clothing and other abandoned articles . On the contrary, having a nicely designe d
and decorated creek walk would discourage anti social behaviors and increase th e
ambiance of the area . The proposed lighting element of the project—th e
documentation of which has been provided to the City staff—will be an integra l
part of the improvements regarding appropriate environmental design and a
positive impact on crime, in accordance with CPTED concepts .
•Section 1 Finding #4 states that SLO PD will be involved in addressing th e
"increased proliferation of assaults and sex offenses that will take place as a resul t
of this new use ."
Data supplied by PD for the Downtown area indicates the numbers have gon e
down and don't support the argument that this use will increase these crimes . In
fact, by discouraging the `under-the-cover-of-darkness' activities that do occu r
there, it is likely to be safer .
•Finding #5 "the proposed use is NOT compatible with retail ."
PH1-195
Attachment 1 0
The Downtown Association believes that by adopting a "Hospitality Zone "
approach, which is one of its major goals, that all of Downtown will have th e
opportunity to coexist well into the evening hours with safety and cleanlines s
programs in place to encourage people to come down not only for the bars but fo r
all kinds of activities including shopping . An example would be the Gas Lamp
District in San Diego where many retailers maintain late night hours in the mids t
of a busy dining and entertainment district .
Section 3 Action #22 : The City should not approve routes A, over the Warden
Bridge and B over the pedestrian bridge for queuing which should be allowe d
only on Higuera Street .
This contradicts #5 in that by managing the queue along the creekwalk, retai l
store fronts are less likely to be blocked or experience problems .
Further, the project owner/developer, Hamish Marshall, is one of the foundin g
members of the Safe Night Life Committee and helped craft the missio n
statement, goals and tasks the committee has undertaken . He has demonstrate d
that he is interested in developing a safe and viable entertainment district for th e
overall health of Downtown .
The Board of Directors asks that you deny the appeal and allow this project t o
move forward .
Cc :
Katie Lichtig, City Manage r
Michael Draze, SLO Planning Commissio n
Doug Davidson, Depty Director, Community Developmen t
Robert Horch, Downtown Champio n
Carol Florence, Oasis Associates
•
•
PH1-196
Attachment 1 0
Carloni, Marcu s
Subject :
FW : The Relocation of SLO Brew to 736 Higuera Street
From :Elizabeth Thyne [ethyne@sbcglobal .net]
Sent : Tuesday, July 17, 2012 12 :03 P M
To :Marx, Jan; Carpenter, Dan ; Carter, Andrew ; Smith, Kathy ; Ashbaugh, Joh n
Subject:The Relocation of SLO Brew to 736 Higuera Stree t
Dear Mayor Man and Members of the City Council :
After being informed of the projected move of SLO Brew from Garden Street to 736 Higuera Street and the
Resolution of the San Luis Obispo Planning Commission approving a night club use permit to allow thi s
relocation, Save Our Downtown, an ad hoc group of citizens concerned with the quality of life in Downtow n
San Luis Obispo, wishes to make our opposition known to the project as currently described .
Therefore, we ask that the City Council provide an additional review of this project after the final Architectur e
Review Committee, and other advisory body reviews .
Save Our Downtown is particularly worried by the scale of the project, its impact on its neighbors, the nois e
levels from live performances which will affect the entire neighborhood and its impact on San Luis Creek . The
sense of calm and serenity that the Creek provides to the people of San Luis Obispo is something that shoul d
not be tampered with nor impacted by the entry of perhaps hundreds of people crossing the bridges over th e
reek and/or lining up along the Creek way waiting for admittance to another nightclub . The Creek is a n
enity to all people and access to it should not be threatened by overdevelopment and encroaching private us e
of what is now open for strolling and general enjoyment of the area.
Another question that arises is the fact that The Carissa Building, built in 1905, is a Master List Histori c
Resource . Is it possible that the projected changes to the building can be done without destroying what make s
this building historical? For example, if the outside rear wood staircase has to be removed and replaced with a n
external steel staircase leading to the roof level patio, doesn't this have an impact on the historicity of th e
overall building?
The overall scope of the project - encompassing ground floor indoor and outdoor dining ; a second floor concert
venue/auditorium accommodating up to 600 persons, plus bar ; plus a roof level patio atop the creek side of th e
building to include customer seating and another bar, plus ambient level recorded music - seems to b e
overwhelming .
We believe this project needs the input of the City Council and again urge an additional review by the Counci l
after it has gone through hearings of the City's Advisory Bodies .
Thank you .
Elizabeth C . Thyne
Chair, Pm Ter n
have Our Downtown
PH1-197
Attachment 1 0
Goodwin, Heathe r
From :Grimes, Maeve
Sent :Tuesday, September 04, 2012 11 :31 AM
To:Goodwin, Heathe r
Subject:SLO Brew correspondenc e
Attachments :Slo Brew Correspondence .docx
Attached please find correspondence regarding SLO Brew for the September 25 th meeting .
.7vtaeve .7Cennedy Grime s
City Cler k
City of San Luis Obisp o
990 Palm Stree t
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-324 9
(805) 781-710 2
Information from ESET Endpoint Antivirus, version of virus signature database 7445 (20120904 )
The message was checked by ESET Endpoint Antivirus .
http ://www .eset.com •
t
PH1-198
•
•
Attachment 1 0
From : Garden Street Goldsmiths [gsgoldsmiths@gmail .com ]
Sent:Saturday, September 01, 2012 8 :18 AM
To : Marx, Jan ;dcarpen@slocitv .orq;Carter, Andrew ; Smith, Kathy ; Ashbaugh, Joh n
Subject :SLO Brewing Co .
Honorable council members ,
We have been part of the Downtown since 1974 and have seen the city go through many changes . When w e
came to Garden Street, Hanna Hardware was still in the building now occupied by SLO Brew .
The original application for a microbrewery on Garden Street was for an UPSTAIRS only resturant an d
brewery with two retail spaces downstairs and a player piano for entertainment . The design was never intende d
to house what is there now . We supported the original application and welcomed our new neighbor . Thing s
changed, the rules were modified, and SLO Brew morphed into a rowdy alcohol and entertainmen t
establishment that was very hard to have as a neighbor . The situation worsened and we found that we wer e
considering leaving the downtown, or at least the street . SLO Brews ownership and management changed an d
they started working on being the best neigbor they could and it became tolerable again to be accross the stree t
from them . The venue that SLO Brew has become is known for bringing in interesting (and sometimes good )
music and entertainment and many large crowds . It is still difficult to be accross the street from and makes i t
basically impossible to expand our business hours to include regular evening hours . The venue seems to b e
run the best that it can be but it is still too large and is incompatible with the small more intimate scale o f
Garden Street .
We are opposed to the expansion of alcohol, entertainment, and resturants within the downtown . When you
have several of these places in a row it affects the retail and business enviroment in a negative way as they ten d
to focus on the nightime and are not active during the daytime. It seems that the council is supporting thi s
direction by actions like enforceing parking meters on Sundays but leaving them free in the evenings . At thi s
point we have more business's that are not active during the day than the town can afford and we should no t
add to them . It is also hard on the retail business's to have to clean up the mess from the previous night s
activities and repair the property damage caused by the impaired customers as they leave the downtown .
That being said the current application to relocate SLO Brew to Higuera street is one of the best prepared an d
thought out plans that we have seen in a long time . The scale of the Higuera Street location is much mor e
appropriate to the activity level of this venue than the current location . The new facility is being specificall y
designed to handle the activity that is proposed and is baised upon the things learned from the current location .
The real question to be looked at is if the type of venue that SLO Brew has become is appropriate in th e
downtown core or should be outside the downtown . We support the approval of the application with th e
comments that this should be the last alcohol, entertainment facility allowed within the core for at least th e
next 15 years .
Respectively submitted ,
Richard Stephen s
Laurel Stephen s
Amanda Stephen s
Garden Street Goldsmiths & Estate Jewelr y
Trust and Expertise since 197 4
805-543-818 6
1114 & 1118 Garden Stree t
San Luis Obispo, CA 9340 1-3 509
PH1-199
Attachment 1 0
Murry, Ki m
Subject :
FW : SLO BREW appea l
Attachments :
SLO carrisa building .docx
Forwarded message
From : "Carter, Andrew"<ancarter(&,,slocity .org>
Date : Sun, Sep 16, 2012 8 :15 p m
Subject : SLO BREW appea l
To : "Grimes, Maeve"<mgrimesAslocity .org>
Cc : "Lichtig, Katie"<ldichtig(2i slocity .org>,"Johnson, Derek"<djohnsonAslocity .org >
For public fil e
Andrew Carter
Council Membe r
City of San Luis Obisp o
From :Sandra Lakeman [sandralakeman@gmail .com]
Sent :Sunday, September 16, 2012 1 :19 P M
To :Jan Marx; Smith, Kathy ; Carpenter, Dan ; Carter, Andrew; Ashbaugh, Joh n
Subject :SLO BREW appea l
Sandra Davis Lakema n
Emeritus Professor of Architecture
California Polytechnic State Universit y
San Luis Obispo, CA p340 7
mailing address :
1677 Foreman Court
San Luis Obispo, CA 9340 5
805 541 322 3
www .sandralakeman.com
•
•
PH 1-200
Attachment 1 0
•HUGE change for Downtown behind our Backs???
A proposal by developer Hamish Marshall to move SL O
Brew to Higuera Street was recently unanimously passed b y
the Planning Commission and has been appealed by 'Sav e
Our Downtown', a concerned volunteer citizens' group tha t
has paid to have this issue brought forward to the attentio n
of SLO citizens and possible action by the City Council .
If the City Council approves Hamish Marshall's request t o
move SLO Brew to the Carrisa Building on Higuera Stree t
this 600-person auditorium and nightclub will exceed th e
scale of 'The Graduate'. There are already too many bars i n
this area of Higuera and it seems apparent that the ba r
•owners Hamish Marshall and Ash Management, owner of
seven downtown bars, have no interest in maintaining a
decent family-oriented downtown .
Most concerning is that Hamish Marshall is planning thre e
floors of bars, one opening onto Higuera Street, one with a
600-seat auditorium/nightclub on the second floor, and a n
open-air bar on the third floor that will overlook and likel y
overwhelm the fine, outdoor dining of Novo Restaurant . Th e
Carrisa building has the largest building facade on Higuer a
and it backs onto our beloved creek walk and Mission Plaza ,
the heart of our downtown .
SLO Brew intends to hire famous musical groups who arriv e
in large buses along with busloads of concert attendees ,
parking them near the Mission, lining people up in Missio n
Plaza . No car parking is planned . The queuing is then to
PH 1-201
Attachment 1 0
proceed from Mission Plaza across two creek bridges to th e
rear entrance of the nightclub and the exiting is in reverse at
1 A .M . in the early morning . It would certainly increase th e
need for more Policing in that area .
These commercial enterprises are only financially oriente d
and have absolutely no concern for the affect they will hav e
on the downtown and the creek which attract visitors an d
residents, where a touch of nature thrives, people enjo y
meandering, ducks raise their young, and children love t o
play .
Up until now, the creek and Mission Plaza have been a quie t
refuge from the hustle and bustle of life, a place for family -
friendly gatherings and cultural events . If this commercial
undertaking is allowed to happen, these will soon be a thin g
of the past if our appeal is not upheld by the City Council o n
September 25 th .
Mission Plaza, the forecourt for the Catholic Church is a
religious plaza and due to SLO not having a public plaza, i t
has become the town's public square . It should, however, b e
used selectively and not for blatant commercial enterprises .
If you are concerned about the future of our downtown, fo r
ourselves, our children and our visitors, please make plan s
to attend this meeting and bring your like-minded friends o n
September 25, 2012 at 6 :00 PM at City Hall .
PH 1-202
•
Attachment 1 0
Carloni, Marcu s
•ubject :
FW : Relocation of SLO Bre w
From :Carter, Andre w
Sent:Tuesday, July 17, 2012 4 :46 PM
To : Schroeder, Sheryl )
Cc: Lichtig, Katie ; Johnson, Dere k
Subject:FW : Relocation of SLO Bre w
Agenda correspondence
Andrew Carter
Council Member
City of San Luis Obisp o
From :Sandra Lakeman [sandralakeman@gmail .com ]
Sent:Tuesday, July 17, 2012 2 :15 PM
To : Marx, Jan ; Carpenter, Dan ; Smith, Kathy ; Ashbaugh, John ; Carter, Andrew
Subject :Relocation of SLO Bre w
Dear Mayor Jan Marx and the City Council Members :
*request that the City Council review the proposal for re-locating the SW Brew from Garden Street to a ne w
location on Higuera Street in the very large 1905 Carrisa Building.
Particularly, due to the potential negative impact along the sensitive and very special creekside location and
Mission Plaza area, it is particularly alarming. Additionally, th e
City's desire to encourage residential units in the downtown is significant and would be jeopardized .
Thanking you for your consideration, David A . Brodi e
Sandra Davis Lakema n
Emeritus Professor of Architecture
California Polytechnic State Universit y
San Luis Obispo, CA p340 7
mailing address :
1677 Foreman Court
San Luis Obispo, CA 9340 5
p5 541 322 3
Pw w.sandralakeman .corn
PH 1-203
Attachment 1 0
Carloni, Marcus
Subject:
FW : SLO BREW relocation in the Center of Historic Downtow n
From :Carter, Andre w
Sent :Tuesday, July 17, 2012 4 :45 P M
To : Schroeder, Sheryl l
Cc : Lichtig, Katie ; Johnson, Dere k
Subject:FW : SLO BREW relocation in the Center of Historic Downtow n
Agenda correspondence
Andrew Carter
Council Member
City of San Luis Obisp o
From :Sandra Lakeman [sandralakeman@gmail .com j
Sent :Tuesday, July 17, 2012 2 :47 P M
To : Marx, Jan ; Carpenter, Dan ; Smith, Kathy ; Ashbaugh, John ; Carter, Andrew
Subject :SW BREW relocation in the Center of Historic Downtow n
Dear Mayor Jan Marx and City Council Members :
Dining friday night at Novo, one of the only refined outdoor dining places downtown, my friends and I realized,•
that with the friday night music from Mission Plaza,that anymore such sounds would make Novo rather a n
uncomfortable dining experience . With the relocation of SLO Brew right above Novo, this would ruin its '
atmosphere .
We also discussed the responsibility of City Leaders to take into consideration, the guidance of young people i n
their entertainment selections . Providing an enormous drinking establishment right in the middle of downtow n
does not seem to be in the best interests of our young college people . In that respect, it seems deleterious t o
encourage more drinking establishments in the center of our historic downtown and in such a large facility tha t
may nearly equal the size of "the Graduate". This then brings to question, the proper parking needs that thi s
facility will require, not only for the patrons in inebriated states, but also for the trucks that will be deliverin g
the musical groups hired to entertain in this location . It seems inappropriate to give over the best part of ou r
downtown to the college students at the expense of the established citizens of the town . It this proposal goes
through, it appears to me that these citizens will have no interest in being in downtown and will seek other
towns around us for their entertainment .
Please choose to bring this issue before the Council in the most timely fashion .
Sandra Davis Lakema n
Emeritus Professor of Architectur e
California Polytechnic State Universit y
San Luis Obispo, CA p340 7
mailing address :
1677 Foreman Court
PH 1-204
Attachment 1 0
San Luis Obispo, CA 9340 5
~$OS 541 322 3
w
.s
sandra
t
ralakeman,co m
•
2
PH 1-205
Attachment 1 0
sari Luis osispo
Filing Fee: $261 .00*
Paid X\/
NIA
`REFER TO SECTION 4
Date Received
RECEIVE D
JUL 2 0 2012
APPEAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL
SECTION 2. SUBJECT OF APPEA L
1 .
2 .
3.
4.
5.
In accordance with the procedures set forth in Title 1,Chapter 1 .20 of the San Luis Obisp oMunicipal Code (copy attached),I hereby appeal the decision of the :
PIAn11Nq COMMIsjS
t~1(Name of Officer, Committee or Commission decision being appealed )
The da a the decision being appealed was rendered :19
j-t 1 I y,
The application or project was entitled :73 C 14 1GL )SR tic ST. — F..E&JYFtfJ ft
rit-C7 SREVIf R C A ltl~f~MI –I-)–14 Z..Oqe/
t ~on 13 .-Il']1'
I discussed matter with the following City staff member.
M
the
AR.CtIS C.P,R1 1(Staff Member's Name and Department)(Date)
Has this matter been the subject of a previous appeal? If so, when was it heard and by whom :
N O
SECTION
Explainappeal.necessary.
3.REASON FOR APPEA L
specifically what actions you are appealing an d
Include what evidence you have that supports whir yo uyour appeal .believe the Council should consider your
You may attach additional pages,if
This form continues on the other side .
Page 1 of 3
P H 1-20 6
SECTION 1 . APPELLANT INFORMAT70N II
~.i OUR TbWr.11O\Nt £1CC er@ COCQO • r?d o
Name Mailing Address and Zip Code
Phone Fax
1)~))t tw 27S C 10 R2~ S . L O ,~rRepresentative's Name Mailing Address and Zip Co e
cec".f~E)"CA#2 505 .5 CY1DTitlePhone Fax
Attachment 1 0
Reason for Appeal continue d
S Pc-T4CD
This Item is hereby calendared for
cc : City Attorne y
City Manager
Department Head
Advisory Body Chairperso n
Advisory Body Liaison
City Cleric (original)
Page 2 of 3
8/09
PHI-207
Attachment 1 0
APPEAL : Resolution #PC-XXXX-1 2
Save Our Downtown has the purpose to attempt to preserv e
the historic character, look and beauty of the inner core o f
San Luis Obispo . We are, therefore, appealing the use permi t
approval by the San Luis Obispo Planning Commission fo r
the re-location of a significantly larger SLO Brew to the
Carrisa Building at 736/ 738 Higuera Street .
Our concerns are listed as follows in response to the
Resolution No . PC-XXXX-12 . However, we have othe r
concerns not defined in that document which we would lik e
to mention at the very beginning :
Save Our Downtown is concerned about maintaining th e
'quality of life' that currently exists in downtown San Lui s
Obispo . In that regard, we are concerned about th e
continuing deterioration of our Downtown's family-friendl y
ari fiance resulting from the current approval of too man y
alcohol-related use-permits . We are also concerned that ou r
Downtown will lose its standing as a viable retail center b y
increasing the geographical footprint of alcohol-relate d
uses ...uses that cater almost exclusively to college students .
Finally, the Council's emphasis on increasing workforce
housing in the Downtown core is in direct conflict with thi s
proliferation of alcohol outlets, especially those that wil l
generate noise and attract large crowds of young inebriate d
people into the quieter parts of our City (i .e . the Mission
Plaza and along San Luis Creek).
Our concerns are as follows :
* The San Luis Creek Walk area should not becom e
the overflow area for alcohol-related, anti-social activities .
* The San Luis Creek area is not suited to nighttim e
activities and there are already in place adequate polic e
surveillance of anti-social activities along Higuera Street .
•
PH 1-208
•
Attachment 1 0
We are recommending that all nightclub activities b e
focused onto Higuera Street .
With reference to Resolution #PC-XXXX-12 we wish to cite
the following profound objections to staff's conditions fo r
approval . We recommend that these staff recommendations
and conditions be modified as follows :
Section 1 .Findings .
#3.The findings only refer to impacts at the 'street level '
(i .e ., Higuera Street). There is no reference whatsoever t o
impacts on the San Luis Creek Walk . Pedestrian impacts o n
Mission Plaza and the Creek Walk are not addressed here .
#4.The San Luis Police Department -- not the developer's
security guards - will necessarily be involved in addressin g
the increased proliferation of assaults and sex offenses tha t
will take place within the creek area as a result of this ne w
use . These activities are likely to occur within the Creek are a
as a result of poor lighting and significant vegetativ e
obstruction to police surveillance . (However, we are not
suggesting that the Creekside be fully-lighted, as if it wer e
an empty parking lot). These concerns are partiall y
addressed in the conditions but only after this facility is full y
permitted and operational and we find this unacceptable .
#5.As conditioned, the proposed use is NOT compatibl e
with retail even if potential disturbances and crimina l
activities are minimized . We question the nightclub usag e
associated with the 600-seat auditorium between the hour s
of 6 :00 P .M . and 1 :00 A .M .
Already, retail proprietors are complaining about the
difficulty of maintaining late business hours in the presenc e
of bars and alcohol outlets . How could this new alcohol -
PH 1-209
Attachment 1 0
related activity possibly enhance prospects for more neede d
retail development in the downtown ?
Section 3 .Action .
#2 . There should be in-lieu parking fees assessed for th e
600-seat auditorium in addition to the in-lieu fees fo r
parking related to the change from retail to restaurant .
#22 .The City should not approve routes A, over th e
Warden Bridge, and B, over the Pedestrian Bridge,
accommodating queuing onto Mission Plaza and along th e
Creek Walk . Queuing should only be on Higuera Street a s
this street is already adequately policed and lighted .
#24 .The planning, funding and installation of improve d
lighting in the Mission Plaza and Creek Walk area shoul d
take place before the 600-seat auditorium is operational an d
not afterwards .
#31 . This is typical "ad hoc" planning . The City know s
that assaults and sex offences will likely occur within th e
Creek Walk area and because of this, the City places al l
responsibility on the developer . Only after these assaults an d
sex offences occur will the City then determine if this is a n
incompatible use . But the question needs to be asked : Is th e
City truly absolved of all responsibility? Moreover, "a d
hoc" planning appears to be the only default option as ther e
is no coherent San Luis Creek Master Plan to follow .
PHI-210
•
S
Attachment 1 O
Murry, Ki m
*Subject :FW : Rallying The Troops !
Forwarded message
From : "Carter, Andrew"<ancarter(a,slocity .org>
Date : Sun, Sep 16, 2012 8 :14 pm
Subject : Rallying The Troops !
To : "Grimes, Maeve"<mgrimesAslocity .org>
Cc : "Lichtig, Katie"<klichtig cr,slocity .org>,"Johnson, Derek"<djohnson@slocity .org>
For public file .
Andrew Carte rCouncil Member
City of San Luis Obisp o
From :Steynberg Gallery [sgallery@charter .net]Sent:Sunday, September 16, 2012 7 :49 A MTo:'Dan Carpenter'; 'Jan Marx'; Marx, Jan ; Ashbaugh, John ; Carter, Andrew; Smith, KathySubject:FW : Rallying The Troops !
Wear Council Members —
Regarding the relocation of SLO Brew :
We are concerned about the relocation of SLO Brew to the Carrissa Building on Higuera Street . The Carrissa Buidling is located o n
probably the most important block in Downtown SLO because it backs onto San Luis Creek . The Creek and the Mission are th e
"golden eggs" of the City . To knowingly approve the relocation of a business, such as this, that would severely intrude on th e
specialness of the Creek and the sanctity of the Mission and its Plaza would be criminal .
We all know that a business of the nature of SLO Brew at this huge scale would guarantee behavior before, and definitely after .
concerts that would pollute the major part of the special focus of this section of the Downtown . I recommend that you rescind an y
approvals for the relocation of SLO Brew .
Sincerely ,
Peter J. Steynberg
PH1-211
Attachment 1 0
RESOLUTION NO .
(2012 Series )
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO DENYIN G
AN APPEAL AND UPHOLDING THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S ACTION TO
APPROVE A NIGHT CLUB USE PERMIT ALLOWING THE RELOCATION OF SL O
BREWING COMPANY WITHIN THE HISTORIC DOWNTOWN COMMERCIAL ZON E
(736/738 HIGUERA STREET, A 57-12 )
WHEREAS,the Planning Commission, on July 11,2012,approved a Night Club Us e
Permit to allow relocation of SLO Brewing Company in the Historic Downtown Commercial zone ;
and
WHEREAS,David Brodie, on behalf of Save Our Downtown, filed an appeal of th e
Planning Commission's action on July 20,2012 ;and
WHEREAS,the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public hearing i n
the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, on September 4 ,
2012,for the purpose of considering the appeal of the Planning Commission's action ; an d
WHEREAS,the Council has duly considered all evidence, including the record of th e
Planning Commission hearing and action, testimony of interested parties, and the evaluation an d
recommendations by staff, presented at said hearing .
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED,by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo
as follows :
SECTION 1 .Findings .Based upon all the evidence, the City Council makes the followin g
findings :
1 . As conditioned, the use will not harm the general health, safety, and welfare of people living
or working in the vicinity because conditions on the Use Permit approval will minimize nois e
impacts, as well as impacts to police resources and the community .
The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan, which designates the project site a s
Downtown Commercial (C-D). The City General Plan Land Use Element Policy 4 .3 ,
Entertainment and Cultural Facilities, states that "...Entertainment facilities, such a s
nightclubs and private theaters, should be in the downtown ..."
3.The proposed project is consistent with General Plan policy to locate, at the street level ,
restaurants, stores, and other uses benefiting from and contributing to pedestrian traffic (LUE
4 .16 .1).
4.The proposed use is consistent with Land Use Element Society and Economy goal #24 ;t o
serve as the County's hub for entertainment and cultural services .
5.
The property owner has agreed to conditions of approval that place restrictions on the use o f
the property to insure that nuisances and significant burdens on police resources do not occur .
•
•
PH1-212
•
Attachment 1 0
6 . As conditioned, the proposed use is compatible with the project site and with existing an d
potential uses in the vicinity which include retail shops, offices, restaurants, and bars .
Conditions of approval have been adopted to minimize potential disturbances and crimina l
activities .
Section 2 .Environmental Review .Categorically exempt under Class 1, Existing Facilities ,
Section 15301 of the CEQA Guidelines because the project proposes the relocation of a busines s
into an existing building with no overall increase in floor area .
Section 3 .Action.The City Council hereby denies the appeal and upholds the Plannin g
Commission's action to grant final approval of the Night Club Use Permit, with incorporation of th e
following conditions :
Conditions :
1.Prior to establishment of the use, a building plan check submittal that is in full conformanc e
with submitted project plans and the following conditions of approval shall be submitted fo r
review and approval of the Community Development Department .
2.Prior to release of occupancy, the applicant shall pay applicable parking in-lieu fees for th e
change in use from retail to restaurant/bar/nightclub, a difference of approximately 12 parkin g
spaces .
3.
The applicant shall provide a minimum of ten short-term bicycle parking spaces on-site .
4.
Entertainment shall be located only in the areas specified on floor plans stamped wit h
Community Development Department approval .
5.Live entertainment, above the level that is compliant with the City's definition of ambien t
entertainment,shall be confined to the second level auditorium as shown on project plans an d
entertainment events shall not be performed outside the hours of 6 p .m. to 1 a .m . Genera l
business hours for use of the space that does not include live entertainment shall be limited as
and Sunday 7 am to 2 am Monday through Sunday .
6.The proposed use shall operate in conformance with the City Noise Ordinance (M .C . Chapte r
9 .12, Noise Control) to maintain compatibility with the nearby residences and businesses .
7i The applicant is responsible at all times for knowing-verifying the legal age, state ofsobriety,
of patrons prior to entry, for monitoring patrons' on site alcoho l
consumption, and for declining to serve alcohol to patrons who demonstrate signs o f
intoxication or impairment associated with alcohol consumption, based on training that is t o
be provided to all staff.
PH1-213
Attachment 10
•
9.No individual under 21 years of age, or without proper identification, shall be served or sol d
alcohol .
10.The applicant shall not permit its patrons to leave the licensed premises with any alcoholi c
beverage or to consume Ne alcoholic beverages than beconsumed on any property adjacent t o
the licensed premises under the control of the licensee(s).
11.First level and roof level music/entertainment, recorded or performed, shall be clearly
incidental, allowing for normal conversation levels, and shall be consistent with the City's
definition of ambient entertainment .
12.The roof level patio shall be open to the public no later than 11 pm nightly .
13.The applicant shall provide a transparent sound barrier surround (e .g . laminated glass) atop th e
42 inch high guard (shown on project plans, sheet 4) of the proposed roof level patio . Thi s
transparent surround shall be recessed (inward) from the outermost edge of the 42 inch hig h
guard so that it is not visible from the patio below .
14.The applicant shall make reasonable efforts to minimize the potential for adverse noise an d
crowd impacts on adjacent establishments and nearby residences, including, but not limited to ,
ensuring that all windows and doors are closed during any entertainment .
15.Prior to release of occupancy, the applicant shall upgrade and formalize finalize the securit y
plan to reflect operation at the 736/738 Higuera Street location . This shall include a sit e
plan/floor plan detailing the locations and duties of security personnel and shall not e
maintenance/patrol of patron lines including routes A and B, to the satisfaction of th e
Community Development Director and Police Department . This plan shall be reviewed an d
commented upon by the Police Department on an annual basis .
16.The security plan shall include a detailed explanation of how maximum occupant load limit s
will be maintained .
17.The security plan shall provide that "no person will be prevented from using the emergenc y
exit stairway that passes by the `Green Room' in the event of an emergency," and that "no ac t
utilizing pyrotechnics or live fire will be permitted ."
18.To address complaints and minimize the need for police response to minor issues, an owner o r
manager shall be on premises at all times when entertainment is performed, and shall b e
available to be contacted by a City representative and/or adjacent property owner or tenant .
The applicant shall provide and regularly update contact information to the City's Polic e
Department, Chief Building Official and adjacent property owners and tenants .
19.All employees shall attend ABC LEAD Training or equivalent training .
PH1-214
•
Attachment 1 0
20.The applicant shall be responsible for on-going security/safety training to accommodat e
changes in personnel .
21.The site shall be maintained in a neat and orderly manner at all times . The applicant shall b e
responsible for daily cleanup maintenance of the front and back patio areas, the areas of patro n
queuing along routes A and B, and any waste associated with the business in Mission Plaza .
22.The applicant shall beresponsible for manage ing/patrolling outdoor crowds and queuing as a
result of this use . An orderly line of patrons awaiting entry that does not block public acces s
on, or use of, the sidewalk or street shall be maintained . Queued patrons awaiting creek-sid e
entry to the second level auditorium shall follow routes A and B (Attachment 4). Route A
patrons shall be tightly aligned along the north/northwestern creek-side wall/railing of th e
pedestrian easement and the western-most side of Warden Bridge . Route B patrons shall b e
tightly aligned along the east/southeastern creek-side guard rail and the eastern-most side o f
the pedestrian bridge . These orderly patron lines shall have the appropriate gaps to allo w
pedestrians to circulate across the lines unobstructed .
23.Post-event patrons shall be directed to exit the second level auditorium through the Higuer a
•
Street exit . This shall be a requirement of the security plan and shall be noted on securit y
floor/site plans .
24.Plans submitted for a building permit shall show and note the patron queuing areas (Routes A
and B). The patron route (Routes A and B) shall be upgraded as necessary to remove an y
obstructions or uneven pavement, to the satisfaction of City Building Division and Publi c
Works Department . Pathway upgrades shall include an evaluation of creek-side lighting levels ,
including the length of the patron routes, and may require an upgrade to path lighting .A
lighting plan for the creek-side patio shall be provided for review and approval by the Polic e
and Community Development Departments .
25.Construction work related to any proposed path upgrades shall be coordinated with th e
upcoming City Capital Improvement Project to upgrade the patron route from Mission Plaz a
over the Warden Bridge .Prior to preparation of documents, an on-site review will b e
conducted with the Community Development Director, or other City representative, to
establish the precise scope of work for any proposed path upgrades .
26.Tour buses, vans, trailers, and other support vehicles shall load/unload equipment and supplie s
at approved parking locations . The proposed parking areas shall be approved by the City's
Parking Division . The applicant will be responsible for posting of any required "no parking "
signage in accordance with City standards . The applicant shall pay for any displaced parkin g
spaces/meters in accordance with the current standards where applicable . Post 9 :00 p .m . bu s
loading/unloading, utilizing routes A & B,shall not occur along Monterey Street, nor alon g
Broad Street north of Monterey Street.
PH1-21 5
•
Attachment 1 0
27.Tour buses, vans, other support vehicles shall be switched off (no idling or generators running )
while parked.
28.The applicant shall maintain and operate a video recording system that records activity at al l
entrances and exits during all business hours . The video shall be of a quality suitable for late r
identification of customers and staff. It will be recorded in a manner that may be retrieved an d
provided to police immediately upon demand . Video data shall be retained for a minimum o f
72 hours or as otherwise required by law .
29.Business shall be conducted in a manner that will not violate any provisions of the Californi a
Alcoholic Beverage Control Act, prohibiting the sale of alcohol to minors (§25658),
maintaining the public health, morals, convenience, and safety (§25601); and takin g
reasonable steps to correct any objectionable conditions on the premises and immediatel y
adjacent to the premises (§24200).
30.This permit is strictly limited to allow only the occupant load for the premises as approved b y
the City of San Luis Obispo Fire Department . Occupant loads approved by the City of San
Luis Obispo Fire Department shall be posted at all times .
31.This Use Permit shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission one year from date o f
occupancy. The Planning Commission shall have the ability to modify, delete, or ad d
conditions that are necessary to minimize adverse impacts to adjacent businesses and
residences based on documents or testimony evidencing such impacts arising from or relate d
to the operation of the permitted use .
This Use Permit shall be reviewed at a public Plannin g
Commission hearing if the City receives substantiated written complaints from any citizen .
Code Enforcement Officer, or Police Department employee, which includes informatio n
and/or evidence supporting a conclusion that a violation of this Use Permit, or of Cit y
ordinances or regulations applicable to the property or the operation of the business, ha s
occurred . At the time of the Use Permit review, to insure on-going compatibility of the uses o n
the project site, conditions of approval may be added, deleted, or modified .
33 . Upon a significant change to the business, as identified in the applicant's project descriptio n
and security plan, the Use Permit shall be reviewed by the Community Development Directo r
for compliance with conditions of approval, or to determine whether a modification to the Us e
Permit is necessary .
PH1-216
•
•
Attachment 1 0
34.Special event hours of 6 am to 1 am are approved for winter/spring graduation day,St .
Patrick's Day, and Cinco de Mayo . Outdoor areas shall not open prior to 9 am and all other
restrictions and conditions of this permit regarding limitations of use of specified areas shal l
apply .
35.The applicant shall provide a noise analysis for the proposed metal staircase . The analysi s
shall include noise mitigation measures to ensure the staircase will comply with the City's
Noise Ordinance .
36.The applicant shall execute ahold harmless and indemnification agreement to the satisfactio n
of the City Attorney for any claims or liability asserted against the City arising from or relatin g
to the applicant's use of the proposed patron queuing routes over Warden Bridge, includin g
injury toanypatron, agent, or employee of the permitted property or business, or to any thir d
party arising from or relating to such use by the applicant, its patrons, agents or employees .
Code Requirement s
The following code requirements are included for informational purposes only . They serve to giv e
• the applicant a general idea of other City requirements that will apply to the project . This is no t
intended to be an exhaustive list as other requirements may be identified during the plan chec k
process.
Utilities Departmen t
1.The applicant shall submit a plan that delineates the location of the property's existing an d
proposed water meter(s), water services, and sewer laterals to the points of connection at th e
City water and sewer mains .
2.If the property's existing sewer lateral is proposed to be reused, submittal of a video inspectio n
will be required for review and approval of the Utilities Department during the Building
Permit Review process . If a new lateral is proposed, the existing lateral must be abandoned pe r
City standards .
3.Provisions shall be made for grease interceptors and FOG (fats, oils, and grease) storag e
within the project's solid waste enclosure . These types of facilities shall also provide an are a
inside to wash floor mats, equipment, and trash cans . The wash area shall be drained to th e
sanitary sewer .
Building Departmen t
1.The minimum cor ridor width shall not be less than 44". CBC 1008 .2
2.The open-space under the proposed exterior stair shall not be used for any purpose . CB C
1009 .6 .3 Exception
•
PH1-217
Attachment 1 0
Fire Departmen t
1.Building to be provided with fire sprinklers installed per NFPA 13 Standards .
2.Provide a standpipe in the stairwell with outlets on each floor level and on roof .
3.All exit doors shall be equipped with panic hardware and no other lock or latch .
Upon motion of , seconded by
and on the following vote :
AYES :
NOES :
ABSENT :
The foregoing resolution was adopted this day of 2012 .
Mayor Jan Man
ATTEST :
Maeve Kennedy Grime s
Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM :
J . Christine Dietric k
J . Christine Dietrick
J . Christine Dietric k
City Attorne y
T :\Council Agenda Reports\2012\2012-09-25\SLO Brew Permit Appeal (Johnson-Carloni)\Attachments\Attachment 12 ,
Resolution .docx
PH1-218
•
•
Attachment 1 0
•
Page intentionally lef t
blank .
PH1-219
Attachment 10
•
MINUTE S
SPECIAL MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCI L
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 25, 2012 - 6 :00 P .M .
COUNCIL CHAMBER, 990 PALM STREE T
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNI A
ROLL CALL :
Council Members
Present:Council Members John Ashbaugh, Andrew Carter and Kathy Smith, Vic e
Mayor Dan Carpenter, and Mayor Jan Mar x
City Staff
Present :Katie Lichtig, City Manager, Christine Dietrick, City Attorney, Michae l
Codron, Assistant City Manager, and Maeve Kennedy Grimes, City Clerk ,
were present at Roll Call . Other staff members presented reports o r
responded to questions as indicated in the minutes .
CLOSED SESSION REPOR T
ACTION :City Attorney Dietrick reported there was no public comment or reportabl e
action on the Closed Session matter held on September 24 th and September 25th . It
was agreed to adjourn the Closed Session at 5 :35pm September 25th and continu e
discussions following the adjournment of the evening meeting .
CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS Pursuant to Government Code § 54957 .6
Agency Negotiators :Rick Bolanos, Monica Irons, Katie Lichtig, Michae l
Codron, Christine Dietrick, Greg Zocher, Charle s
Bourbea u
Employee Organizations :San Luis Obispo Police Officers' Association (POA )
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANC E
The Pledge was led by Council Member Smith .
PUBLIC COMMEN T
Mayor Marx announced that Item C2 was previously noticed as having been remove d
from the Consent Agenda due to a legal notice publication error and will appear on th e
PH 1-220
•
Attachment 1 0
City Council Meeting Minutes Page 2Tuesday, September 25, 201 2
•October 2, 2012 Agenda for consideration . Members of the public who were in th eaudience wishing to speak on this matter were encouraged to speak during the publi ccomment portion of the Agenda .
Jeff Eidelman,San Luis Obispo, spoke regarding noise issues . He appreciated th eassistance and support he has received from the Police Department in the last te nyears due to late night noise in his neighborhood .
Linda Groover,San Luis Obispo, would like the Council to revisit building heights in ou r
city .
John Sherry,San Luis Obispo, opposed Week of Welcome (WOW) and felt it should b e
discontinued . Permanent residents are moving and transient students populate the city ;the City Council should be worried about this shift in population .
Claudia Anderson,San Luis Obispo, grew up on Slack and Longview ; the neighborhoo dand the City have changed . The increased noise is overwhelming . WOW should bediscontinued.
Carolyn Smith,San Luis Obispo, spoke on behalf of Residents for Qualit yNeighborhoods. WOW has been hijacked by loud and drunken students . Statisticsfrom the police and emergency rooms should be reviewed so that a resolution can b e•reached to break this cycle .
Sharon Whitney,San Luis Obispo, thanked the Council for trying solutions that shoul dhave worked to resolve noise issues . WOW culture has to be stopped . There shoul dbe more collaboration with Cal Poly to reform WOW and emphasize proper communit y
values .
Suzanne Lord,San Luis Obispo, stated the disturbances begin about 9 :00pm an d
continue into the early morning . WOW should be reduced ; Cal Poly should provid e
activities on campus and provide additional security .
Steve Barasch,San Luis Obispo, stated his objection to the current City Fee Structure.Council Member Ashbaugh asked when the next review period will be held . Communit yDevelopment Director Johnson indicated building fees were reviewed late last year an dplanning fees will be on the Council Agenda in spring 2013 .
Council Member Carter requested that the Police and Fire agencies bring forwardstatistics regarding WOW week .
--end of public comments —
CONSENT AGENDA
PH1-221
Attachment 1 0
City Council Meeting Minutes Page 3
Tuesday, September 25, 201 2
No one spoke at this time .
--end of public comments---
ACTION :Motionby Council MemberCarter I CouncilMember Ashbaugh t o
approve the Consent Calendar Items Cl thru C3 noting the amendment to the minutes .
Item C2 was previously noticed as having been removed from the Consent Agenda du e
to a legal notice publication error and will appear on the October 2, 2012 Agenda fo r
consideration .
Roll Call Vote : 5-0. Motion Carried .
Cl .MINUTES OF TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 4, 2012 .(CODRON/KENNED Y
GRIMES )
RECOMMENDATION :Waive oral reading and approve as presented with the followin g
changes : on page C1-8, one sentence was removed from the next to the las t
paragraph which was duplicative in nature . On page C1-10 the first sentence wa s
reworded for clarity .
C3 .RESOLUTION SUPPORTING CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMEN T
RESTRICTING CORPORATE SPENDING IN THE ELECTORAL PROCESS .
(CODRON/RICHARDSON )
RECOMMENDATION :Adopt Resolution No .10395 (2012)a resolution supporting a
Constitutional Amendment or legislative actions restricting corporate spending in th e
electoral process and ensuring that only human beings, not corporations, hav e
constitutionally protected rights of free speech .
PUBLIC HEARINGS ITEM S
PHI .APPEALOFTHE PLANNINGCOMMISSION'S APPROVAL OF ANIGHT
CLUB(SLOBREWINGCOMPANY)RELOCATIONINTHEHISTORI C
DOWNTOWN COMMERCIAL (C-D-H) ZONE . (A 57-12).(JOHNSON/CARLONI )
Council Member Carpenter recused himself on this issue because he owns commercia l
property within the vicinity of the property at issue . He left the dais at 6 :30pm .
Mayor Marx asked members of the Council to disclose any ex parte communications i n
regard to the public hearing .
PH 1-222
•
•
Attachment 1 0
City Council Meeting Minutes Page 4Tuesday, September 25, 201 2
•Council Member Smith disclosed a meeting with project owner/developer, Hamis hMarshall and Carol Florence,Oasis Associates, informal discussions with Barbar aWolpurt, Jack Pearl, and Dennis Johanson, Jim's Campus Camera .
Mayor Marx disclosed a meeting with project owner/developer, Hamish Marshall an d
Carol Florence,Oasis Associates .
Council Member Ashbaugh disclosed he had a meeting with Hamish Marshall and Caro lFlorence as well as a meeting with members of Save Our Downtown .
Council Member Carter disclosed a meeting with Hamish Marshall and Caro l
Florence, Oasis Associates .
Community Development Director Johnson, and Assistant Planner Carloni,presented th e
report and responded to Council questions . Capt . Staley PD answered additiona l
questions .
Appellant was represented by Elisabeth Abrahams and Sandra Lakeman, who rea d
statements prepared by Save Our Downtown Association . Elisabeth Abrahams read a
letter prepared by David Brodie . Sandra Lakeman read a letter prepared by Ala n
Cooper .
•Applicantwas represented by Carol Florence,Oasis Associates who presented her repor t
and responded to Council questions . Todd Newman spoke regarding the developmen t
process .
Mayor Marx opened the public hearing .
Joel Peterson,representing Austin Hope Winery and Hope Family Wines supporting th e
development . The letter was read by Brian Goodly .
Susan Pvburn,San Luis Obispo objects to this development ,
Bill Hales,San Luis Obispo, owns the building and business next door to the ne w
business and supports the development .
Dan Melton,San Luis Obispo County resident and SLO Veg business owner ; supportsthe development .
Joseph Abrahams,San Luis Obispo, objects to this development on Higuera Street, th esize of the crowds and the meaning of this business are a concern . Move it elsewher eelse and prosper.
Elisabeth Abrahams,San Luis Obispo, 25,000 residents/business were surveyed . Theywere asked if they wanted more or less bars/nightclubs 59154% want to see less . Thi sproject would increase bar patronage . She objects to the project .
Rodney Ceqelski,marketing business owner . Proud of this development concept an dsupports the project .
PH 1-223
Attachment 1 0
City Council Meeting Minutes Page 5
Tuesday, September 25, 201 2
Andrea Miller,San Luis Obispo, owner of Spikes, past president of Downtow n
Association, Chair of Safe Nightlife Committee, supports the project .
Pepper Daniels,American General Media, supports the project .
Dave Hanninqs,lives in a downtown adobe on Monterey . Downtown is a delicat e
balance ; the scale of this project is too big . Locate it someone else .
Jennifer Wilkinson lives in San Luis Obispo County, supports the project .
Mike Kafka,resident of San Luis Obispo, customer of SLO Brew, supports the project .
Dominic Tartaqlia,President of Downtown Association, supports the project .
Monte Schaller,General Manager of SLO Brew, supports the project . He used to live i n
the project property and would like to see the property developed .
James M . Duenow,San Luis Obispo, spoke in opposition to the development ; it's too
big for downtown .
Russ Brown,San Luis Obispo resident, spoke in opposition to the development . Hi s
concerns included parking, and whether the project meets the letter of the law . H e
stated the best predictor of future behavior is past behavior .
John Nquyen,eight year employee of SLO Brew ; supports the project .
Todd Newman,Cayucos, spoke in support of the project . 11 :00pm — 1 :30am the Ca l
Poly demographic .
Aaron Gomez,family owns the retail shop next door, Gold Concept, and supports th e
project .
Jim Ruddel,lives in Morro Bay and owns a business in Cayucus . He supports th e
project .
Warren Flaschen,SLO Brew has been positive for the community ; he supports th e
development .
John Spears,San Luis Obispo County, General Manager of Garden Street Inn . H e
supports the development .
Elizabeth Thyne,San Luis Obispo resident, opposes the project due to the queuing vi a
Mission Plaza and the creek bridges .
Tim Reed,San Luis Obispo resident, touring professional, talent buyer for SLO Brew ;
supports the development .
Sara McEre,San Luis Obispo, this development should not be in this location ; lack of
parking will affect the neighborhoods . Why does the development have to be so big ?
Ben Kulzek,San Luis Obispo, supports the development . Neighbors to the projec t
support i t
Linda Groover,San Luis Obispo, does not support this project . Too great an impact o n
Mission Creek . What are the categorical exceptions? We need an environmenta l
impact report .
P H 1-224
•
•
Attachment 1 0
City Council Meeting Minutes Page 6Tuesday, September 25, 201 2
•Sandra Lakeman,San Luis Obispo, If Save our Downtown had not paid for this appeal ,the citizens of San Luis Obispo would not have heard about this project . The Graduat erequires parking, but SLO Brew does not .
Brett Butterfield,San Luis Obispo, owner of Creeky Tiki . Looks forward to the help t oclean up and light the creek area . He supports the project .
Robert Kinports,San Luis Obispo County, supports Hamish Marshall and supports th erelocation of SLO Brew . This is an opportunity for special events .
Dixie Cliff,San Luis Obispo, I love living downtown, but have growing concern over th eincrease in bars, empty store fronts, and Mission Creek . Objects to the project .
Kirstin Sherritt,San Luis Obispo, business owner of The Secret Garden, neighbor t oSLO Brew, has a few concerns . Her business faces the creek . Concerned about th equeuing right in front of her business and she wasn't contacted . She thinks thereshould be an EIR .
Nicholas Bilich,San Luis Obispo, feels SLO Brew has been undervalued ; SLO Brew i sa great music venue and he supports the project .
Dan Curcio,local musician and has played at SLO Brew . He has worked security a tSLO Brew events . He supports the project .
•Pierre Rademaker,speaking on behalf of the Downtown Association, in support of th eproject. Cited the "Rise of the Creative Class" by Richard Fish .
Don Hedrick,San Luis Obispo, asked questions regarding the differences betwee nrequirements for The Graduate and SLO Brew .
Michelle Tasseff,San Luis Obispo, Code Enforcement Officer in Santa Maria, you ca nnot turn the City into a museum .
Courtney Kienow,San Luis Obispo, representing the Chamber of Commerce ; wants t osee a balance between the various component s
Brett Cross,San Luis Obispo resident, believes the ABC feels there is a over -concentration of alcoholic licenses . Is this project approriate for the neighborhoods a tthis time? How will you deal with the conditions of use? Use of the Plaza is the wron gspace.
Carl Dudley,San Luis Obispo, vast majority of the students are respectful and spen dmoney in our City . It would be nice to have another venue in the City. The Cree ktransient issue will be addressed by this project .
Mike White,owner of Boo Boo Records, supports the SLO Brew project . As the primar yticket agent for SLO Brew, it will help our business . The demographics of the ticke tbuyers is diverse .
Derek Senn,San Luis Obispo, moonlights as a musician and is a patron of SLO Brew .He supports the project .
Dan Ennis,Cayucus, enjoys coming to SLO Brew and supports the project .
PH 1-225
i
Attachment 1 0
City Council Meeting Minutes Page 7
Tuesday, September 25, 201 2
Shay Ennis,Atascadero, as a new mom, SLO Brew is important for the development o f
her family .
Rob Rossi,San Luis Obispo, supports the SLO Brew project . If you live downtown, yo u
are prepared to enjoy the sounds of downtown . The Mission Creek need s
redevelopment . There are encampments under the buildings at the creek . I think th e
queuing in front on Higuera would be a plus, but do not object to use of the bridges .
Sandra Rowley,feels patrons of bars do not do retail shopping ; parts of downtown have
become dirty and smelly . A bar on every single floor is a business and a bar that will sel l
a lot of alcohol . Thinks there should be further study regarding the conditions of the
project . Objects to 6 :00am alcohol service .
Ramina Anne Bacchus,San Luis Obispo, is glad to hear the positive support for SL O
Brew . I think this project should be mindful of the safety of the creek, parking, and th e
safety of the patrons . Postpone decision until the issues are resolved and Fish an d
Game have been consulted .
Kevin Rice,San Luis Obispo, supports the SLO Brew application . Understand some o f
the concerns ; Creek safety should be addressed . A vibrant downtown includes everyone .
—end of public comments
Mayor Marx closed the public hearing . Mayor Marx informed the audience that due t o
Council Member Carpenter's recusal on this matter, if the vote of the remaining fou r
members was tied, the appeal would in effect be denied and the project would g o
forward .
Council discussion ensued during which Council Members each stated their opinion s
and concerns regarding the project ,
Council Member Ashbaugh's comments included the issue of excess number of alcoho l
outlets in the downtown ; a need for improved lighting and enhancement of the the cree k
area ; queuing on the bridge ; the scale of the project and the three story staircase on th e
back of the building .
Council Member Carter spoke in support of the appeal, based on his concern s
regarding CEQA categorical exemptions ; absolving the project of environment review ;
the impact of another entertainment venue on the specific location ; the calculations fo r
the parking allowance ; and the need to study the impacts of the project .
Mayor Marx asked Staff to address the issue of the CEQA findings and environmenta l
analysis .Community Development Director Johnson and City Attorney Dietric k
responded to the Council .
Council Member Smith asserted her concerns that an influx of outside influences ca n
change the dynamics of San Luis Obispo and affect our neighborhoods ; parking wil l
affect the neighborhood ; safety issues regarding queuing on the bridges in Missio n
PH 1-226
•
•
Attachment 1 0
City Council Meeting Minutes Page 8Tuesday, September 25, 201 2
•Plaza ; and the desire of many members of the community to limit the number of bars i nthe downtown .
Mayor Marx stated she felt Council should deny the appeal, but put a lot mor econditions on the project and continue the matter so that staff can develop thos econditions and see if we can find our way to making a project that the entire communit ycan get behind . She agreed with other Council Members, that if the project were th esame size or capacity, the relocation would not have raised the same problems . Sh estated she has a problem with rooftop use . She concluded by stating that she did notthink she could find categorical exemptions .
Mayor Marx read from her list of ideas for suggestions to be added conditions :
•Same capacity as Garden Stree t
•Get rid of rooftop us e•Same conditions on SLO Brew that are in place for Creeky Tiki (especially th e
related to the effects on Mission Plaz a
•No 6 :00 am opening on special occasion s•Alcohol service stopped one hour before the end of the show
•Containment of noise by sound abatemen t
•Tree replacemen t•Shielding the creek with a railing ; make sure lighting does not affect the cree k
and the fish .
•Queuing on Higuera would be fine and not create the intensified liability and ris kon the bridges and the Plaza ; not create the kind of situation where people woul dreturn to the Plaza to congregate after closing .•The project should be required to coordinate with the Events Coordinator fo rMission Plaza .
•Indemnification on the bridge use if the queuing remains on the bridg e
•One year review to come back to City Council rather than the Plannin gCommission•The Creek is not in pristine condition at the moment because of crimina lbehavior; therefore, the lighting would be an improvement .
•We need to strictly hold them to the sound level s•ARC can look at scale and CHC can look at historical use .
Council Member Ashbauqh liked the direction of Mayor Marx's conditions and asked t osee if the date of November 20 th was possible for a vote on this matter . Assistant Cit yManager Codron said there was time on that Council Agenda . Mayor Marx asked i fCouncil had the authority to change the scope of the project . City Attorney Dietric kprovided a response .
Motion :Council Member Ashbauqh / Council Member Smith that Council deny th eappeal, the project be approved, and direct that staff come back with amende dconditions, including the following :•Capacity for the auditorium of no greater than 55 0
•
PH 1-227
Attachment 1 0
City Council Meeting Minutes Page 9Tuesday, September 25, 201 2
•Elimination of the rooftop patio •
•Explore possible removal of the exterior rear stairs and incorporating them int othe interior of the buildin g
Queuing for the concert events, both ingress and egress, from Higuera Stree t(except during Thursday night Farmers Market )•Operational issues of amplified music, tree replacement, operational hours an dother elements can be addressed in the recommendation s
City Attorney Dietrick spoke to Council regarding categorical exemptions for existin g
buildings .Council Member Carter asked for clarification regarding Council's capacity t o
determine the use of the building and the numbers of patrons allowed on the premises .City Attorney Dietrick responded .
Mayor Marx commented that she felt three Council Members had stated that if th eproject was the same scale as the current SLO Brew, it would be approved . Further ,she fell that Council needed more input from staff .Council Member Carter stated that
concentrated use at Garden Street is currently 741 ; he could go as far as 900 on th e
project, but the project was currently at 1026 .Council Member Smith wanted to makesure the motion included removal of the special 6 :00 am event permits with alcoho lservice time and that there be no alcohol at the 7 :00 am alcohol service .Mayor Mar xwanted to make sure the motion included the same hours and conditional use sregarding amplified music and contact with Mission Plaza coordinator as Creeky TiKi .
Amended Motion : Council Member Ashbaugh amended his motion to continue the ite mand direct staff to return with a list of conditions as listed and discussed by Council .
After a discussion regarding reduction in occupancy numbers,Council Member Smit h
withdrew her second .The Motion failed for lack of a second .
ACTION : Council Member Carter / Council Member Smith motion to continue th eitem and direct staff to work with applicant and come back with a proposal for reduce dcapacity in consideration of the conditions discussed, such as queuing, hours of
operation, first floor operations, and elimination of rooftop use, along with othe r
conditions discussed by Council during deliberation .
Roll Call Vote : 4-1-0 . Motion Carried (Vice Mayor Carpenter recused )
Council Member Ashbauqh stated for the record that he was voting in favor of th e
motion, but not necessarily to hold this business to the same capacity that it has righ t
now . Negotiations need to take place and he is withholding judgment on the final set o f
conditions and capacity .
PH 1-228
•
Attachment 1 0
City Council Meeting Minutes Page 1 0Tuesday, September 25, 201 2
•COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS AND COMMUNICATION S
This item was continued to the next Regular Meeting set for October 2, 2012 .
-------------
There being no further business to come before the City Council,Mayor Marx adjournedthe meeting at 11 :13 p .m . and returned to Closed Session at 11 :25 pm .
CLOSED SESSION REPOR T
ACTION : City Attorney Dietrick reported there was no reportable action on the Close dSession Topic . The session ended at 11 :40 pm .
•APPROVED BY COUNCIL : 10/16/12
PH 1-22 9
Maeve Ke U'-dy Gr iCity Clerk
Attachment 1 1
DRAF T
SAN LUIS OBISP O
CULTURAL HERITAGE COMMITTEE MINUTE S
October 22, 201 2
ROLL CALL :
Present :Committee Members Thom Brajkovich, Jaime Hill, Patti Taylor, Vice-Chai r
Bob Pavlik, and Chairperson Enrica Costell o
Absent :Committee Members Hemalata Dandekar and Buzz Kalkowski
Staff :Senior Planner Phil Dunsmore and Recording Secretary Dawn Rudde r
ACCEPTANCE OF THE AGENDA :
The agenda was accepted as presented .
MINUTES :
Minutes of September 24, 2012, were approved as amended .
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS :
Barry Price, Principal of Applied Earthworks of San Luis Obispo, presented to staff a
copy of the recently-published book from the archeological society of A Glimpse o f
Victorian Life of San Luis Obispo .
There were no further comments made from the public .
PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS :
1 .736 Higuera Street .ARC 57-12 ; Conceptual review of a remodel to the Master Lis t
Carrisa building as part of the proposed SLO Brewing Company relocation project ;
C-D-H zone ; San Luis Downtown Management, applicant .(Marcus Carloni)
Phil Dunsmore, Senior Planner, presented the staff report, recommending th e
Committee continue the item to a date uncertain, in order to provide direction to th e
applicant and staff on the proposed rehabilitation of the Master List Carrisa building .
Carol Florence, applicant representative, presented the proposed concept for change s
to the interior/exterior of the building that were revised after the staff report wa s
published . This revision included modifications to the Higuera Street elevation as wel l
as modification to the floor plans on all levels of the building . Ms . Florence made a
request that this be the final plan presented to the Committee for review .
The Committee members had a discussion on how to differentiate the ne w
improvements and historical preservation of the building .
•
•
PH 1-230
Draft CHC Minute s
October 22, 201 2
Page 2
PUBLIC COMMENTS :•
Attachment 1 1
Elizabeth Thyne, San Luis Obispo, was concerned by the design concept since sh e
understood that the City Council had asked that the rooftop dining area be remove d
from the project and the presentation does not indicate their removal .
Elisabeth Abrahams, San Luis Obispo, disapproved of the concept because the roofto p
dining area was not approved and the staircase on the outside of the building was to b e
considered inside the building .
There were no further comments made from the public .
COMMITTEE COMMENTS :
Committee members questioned the applicants about the exterior additions and th e
scale and size of the exterior staircase .
Ms . Florence indicated the rooftop occupancy area was reduced substantially and wil l
be resubmitted to City Council .
Hamish Marshall, owner of SLO Brewing Company, in response to Ms . Abraham s
• public comment indicated there was a study done reconstructing the staircase interior t o
the building and concluded that it would significantly reduce the amount of usabl e
interior space .
Committee Member Hill noted her disappointment that the revised concept was no t
provided in advance of the hearing . She cannot support the changes at this time .
Committee Members Taylor and Costello concurred with Committee Member Hill .
Committee Member Brajkovich noted his support for the concept for the front fa ad e
but noted his concern about the rear of the building and in particular the removal of th e
wood-clad features . He noted that the addition of the 43-foot wall and metal staircase i s
massive and ignores the historical character of the building .
Committee Member Hill indicated the storefront is missing a connection from the first
and second floors and that the proposed materials need to be period correct while bein g
cohesive .
Committee Member Pavlik would rather see restoration of the building instead o f
reconstruction . He noted that there may need to be some refinements to the land us eto fit the historic building and that significant exterior changes should not occur to ahistoric building to fit a new land use .
Committee members noted insufficient information was available to support removal o fthe second floor wood buildings, and historic background information from a historia nwould be necessary . It was also noted that the materials for the cement plaster safet ybarrier associated with the rooftop patio should be modified to a material that i s
PH 1-231
Draft CHC Minute s
October 22, 201 2
Page 3
Attachment 11
•historically compatible or period specific . Committee members also discussed explorin g
an exterior staircase that reached the second floor may be acceptable but the staircas e
to the rooftop area should be interior to the building or built into the existing wood-cla d
features at the rear of the building .
There were no further comments made from the Committee .
On motion by Committee Member Pavlik, seconded by Committee Member Taylor, t o
continue the item to a date uncertain with Committee direction for staff and the applican t
on the proposed rehabilitation of the Carrisa building . The following direction was give n
to the applicants :
1.Provide historic background information from a qualified historian on the woo d
portions of the building at the rear of the site .
2.Maintain anv existing historic building features on the exterior of the building and
adapt use to fit these features .
3.Maintain skylights in existing locations .
4.Coordinate front fa ade features with historic building features and us e
historically-appropriate materials .
Committee Member Hill requested that the new additions be reconstructed with age -
appropriate historical material .
AYES :Committee Members Taylor, Brajkovich, Pavlik, Costello, and Hil l
NOES :Non e
RECUSED :Non e
ABSENT :Committee Members Dandekar and Kalkowsk i
The motion passed on a 5 :0 vote .
COMMENT AND DISCUSSION :
2 .Staff
a.Phil Dunsmore discussed the advisory bodys goal-setting process as part o f
the 2013-2015 Financial Plan with direction from the Committee .
b.Phil Dunsmore presented an agenda forecast for the upcoming meeting .
3 .Committee
ADJOURNMENT :The meeting was adjourned at 7 :21 p .m .
Respectfully submitted by ,
Dawn Rudde r
Recording Secretary
•
PH 1-232
S Attachment 1 2
Agenda Correspondenc e
S
PH 1-233
RECEIVE D
SEP 2 7 2012
SLO CITY CLER K
Goodwin, Heathe r
From :
Grimes, Maev e
Sent:
Thursday, September 27,2012 1 :44 P M
To :
Goodwin, Heathe r
Subject:
Agenda Correspondence for 11/20/1 2
Mtaeve .?Cennecfy Grime s
City Clerk
City of San Luis Obispo
990 Palm Stree t
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249
(805)781-7102
From :Marx, Ja n
Sent :Thursday, September 27,2012 9 :22 A M
To : 'Brett Cross'
Cc: Lichtig, Katie ; Grimes, Maev e
Subject :RE : Undue Concentration of License s
Agenda correspondence for November 20,2012 .
Best,
Ja n
From :Brett Cross fmailto :brettcrosseyahoo .com l
Sent :Wednesday, September 26,2012 5 :35 P M
To : Ashbaugh, John ; Marx, Jan ; Carter, Andrew ; Smith, Kathy ; Lichtig, Kati e
Subject :Undue Concentration of License s
Could staff include evaluation of these pertinent sections from the California Department of Alcoholic Beverag e
Control or others . Starting with Section 23958 including 23958 .4 .Undue concentration ; public convenience o r
necessity with regard to the SLO Brewing Use Permit Application . Additionally it is unclear if the Alcohol Licenses fo r
the current Garden St . location are being transferred to the new location including the Nightclub License or only the Bre w
License is being transferred to the new location (per the applicant's testimony).
Sincerely ,
Brett Cros s
1217 Mariners Cov e
San Luis Obisp o
Here is part of the section -
23958 . Investigation ;denial.Upon receipt of an application for a license or for a transfer of a license and the applicable fee ,
the department shall make a thorough investigation to determine whether the applicant and the premises for which a license i s
applied qualify for a license and whether the provisions of this division have been complied with, and shall investigate al l
matters connected therewith which may affect the public welfare and morals . The department shall deny an application for a
license or for a transfer of a license if either the applicant or the premises for which a license is applied do not qualify for a
license under this division .
1
PH 1-234
•
•
The department further shall deny an application for a license if issuance of that license would tend to create a la w
enforcement problem, or if issuance would result in or add to an undue concentration of licenses, except as provided i n
ction 23958 .4 .
istory.—Added by Stets. 1980, Ch. 1194, in effect January I,1983 . Scats. 1982, Ch . 1189, in effect January 1, 1983, substituted 9984" for "1983". Amended by Scats . 1994, Ch .
630, in effect January I,1995, amended to reference Section 23958 .4.
Police problem considerations.—Evidence that State Board of Equalization in passing on application for "on-sale" beer and wine license acted on police report that operation of places i n
such location increased police problems or criminal conditions, which was not denied at hearing,justified denial of licenses .Parente v.State Board ofEqualization (1934), 1 Cal . App.2d 238 ,
36 Pac . 2d 437 .
Moral turpitude defined .—Criminal acts involving intentional dishonesty for the purpose of personal gain involve moral turpitude .In is Hallinan,48 Cal . 2d 52.
Fingerprinting requirement reasonable,—Requirement that a licensee's spouse,if working or to work on the premises, be fingerprinted as required by the department's Rule 57 i s
constitutional.Siben v.Department ofAlcoholic Beverage Control,169 Cal .App.2d 563 .
Private agreements not binding on department—An alleged agreement between parties not to protest issuance of a license is not binding on the department since the Constitution ha s
designated the department as the agency charged with the duty of investigating applications for licenses, and such investigations must be made with a view to the protection of public welfar e
and morals.Schaub Z Inc., v.Department ofAlcoholic Beverage Comm". 153 Cal. App.2d 858 .
Residential areas.—Finding that premises are in a residential area upon conflicting evidence constitutes good cause for denial of a license . Evidence that a traffic hazard would be created b y
parked cars at a premises also constitutes "good cause" for denial of a license . Marlin v. Alcoholic Beverage Control Appeals Board and Richards, 52 Cal . 2d 238, 340 Pac.2d 1 .
Automatic denial of application .—The purpose of California Administrative Code, Title 4, Section 66, authorizing automatic denial by the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control of an
application for licensing where an application has been denied within one year, is to permit the department to protect against having to devote resources to handling unreasonably earl y
applications, and the exception provided by the section for granting such an application where the reasons for the original denial no longer exist, permits, but does not require, the exercise of
discretion to conside r
23958 .4 .Undue concentration ; public convenience or necessity .(a) For purposes of Section 23958, "undu e
concentration" means the case in which the applicant premises for an original or premises-to-premises transfer of any
retail license are located in an area where any of the following conditions exist :
(1) The applicant premises are located in a crime reporting district that has a 20 percent greater number of reporte d
crimes, as defined in subdivision (c), than the average number of reported crimes as determined from all crime reportin g
districts within the jurisdiction of the local law enforcement agency .Alcoholic Beverage Control Act 87
2
PH 1-235
(2)As to on-sale retail license applications, the ratio of on-sale retail licenses to population in the census tract or censu s
division in which the applicant premises are located exceeds the ratio of on-sale retail licenses to population in the count y
in which the applicant premises are located .
(3)As to off-sale retail license applications, the ratio of off-sale retail licenses to population in the census tract o r
census division in which the applicant premises are located exceeds the ratio of off-sale retail licenses to population in th e
county in which the applicant premises are located .
Information from ESET Endpoint Antivirus, version of virus signature database 7523 (20120927 )
The message was checked by ESET Endpoint Antivirus .
http://www.eset .com
Information from ESET Endpoint Antivirus, version of virus signature database 7524 (20120927 )
The message was checked by ESET Endpoint Antivirus .
http ://www .eset .com
•
3 PH 1-236
Goodwin, Heather
•om:
Sent :
To:
Subject:
Grimes, Maev e
Wednesday, September 26, 2012 8 :08 A M
Goodwin, Heathe r
FW: Model Alcohol Ordinance .
RECEIVED
Gcp 9R2912
SLO CITY CLER K
Nlaeve .7Cennedy Grime s
City Cler k
City of San Luis Obisp o
990 Palm Stree t
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-324 9
(805) 781-7102
AGENDA
CORRESPONDENC E
Date ./as//z-Item #P/7 /
From :Marx, Ja n
Sent :Wednesday, September 26, 2012 7 :10 A M
To : Grimes, Maev e
Cc: Lichtig, Katie
Subject:RE : Model Alcohol Ordinance .
agenda correspondence .
en Howell Marx
Mayor of San Luis Obisp o(805) 781-7120 or (805) 541-2716
From : Brett Cross [brettcross@yahoo .com]
Sent :Tuesday, September 25, 2012 4 :38 P M
To : Marx, Jan ; Carpenter, Dan ; Andrew Carter ; Ashbaugh, John ; Smith, Kathy
Cc-RQN-of SLO ; -Carolyn-Smith ;;-Frank Kassak
Subject :Model Alcohol Ordinance.
I suggest you take a look at many of the model conditions and add them to the conditional us e
permit for the SLO Brewing project especially this section .
B . Modification, Discontinuation or Revocation
Notwithstanding any provision of the City Code to the contrary, for any conditiona l
use permit granted in accordance with the provisions of this Ordinance or any deemed approve d
use subject to this Ordinance, the Planning Commission may require the modification ,
discontinuance, or revocation of any such conditional use permit or deemed approved use i n
ccordance with the procedures set forth in Section,if the Planning Commission determines tha t
e use as operated or maintained constitutes a public nuisance . Such determination shall b e
made if the Planning Commission determines that any of the following conditions, all of whic hare hereby declared a public nuisance, exist :
t
PH 1-237
1 . Any condition which has caused or resulted in repeated activities which are harmful to th e
health, peace or safety of persons residing or working in the surrounding area, including, but no t
limited to, disturbances of the peace, illegal drug activity, public drunkenness, drinking i n
public, harassment of passerby, gambling, prostitution, sale of stolen goods, public urination ,
theft, assaults, batteries, acts of vandalism, loitering, excessive littering, illegal parking ,
excessive loud noises (especially in the late night or early morning hours), traffic violations o r
traffic safety based upon last drink statistics, curfew violations, lewd conduct, or polic e
detention and arrests ; o r
Sincerely ,
Brett Cros s
http ://socrates .berkeley .edu/–pbd/pdfs/modelcup .pdf
Information from ESET Endpoint Antivirus, version of virus signature database 7518 (20120926 )
The message was checked by ESET Endpoint Antivirus .
http ://www.eset .c m
Information from ESET Endpoint Antivirus, version of virus signature database 7519 (20120926 )
The message was checked by ESET Endpoint Antivirus .
http ://www.eset .com
•
•
2
PH 1-238
Goodwin, Heathe r
atom:
Johnson, Derek
RECEIVE D
Sent
Thursday, October 11, 2012 6 :41 PM
OCT 1 2 201 2
To :
Carloni, Marcus ; Goodwin, Heathe r
Subject:
FW: In Support of SLO Brew i SW CITY CLERK .
FY I
From :Ashbaugh, Joh n
Sent:Thursday, October 11, 2012 1 :59 P M
To :Jeff Minnery
Cc :Johnson, Derek; Davidson, Doug ; Lichtig, Kati e
Subject :RE : In Support of SLO Brew
Thanks for your input, Jeff . We have asked that the project be scaled back to some degree, but I for one am convince d
that the new location will ultimately be a great addition to our downtown . While I cannot make any commitment s
before seeing the next set of conditions recommended by staff, I am very hopeful that we will be able to reach a
resolution that satisfies all parties .I'm acing this to staff to make sure that they place you on the distribution list in orde r
to get notice of the next hearing at the Council .
Thanks again ,
JA
rom :Jeff Minnery fmailto :ieffminnerv@)vahoo .com l
Sent:Thursday, October 11, 2012 1 :28 P M
To : Marx, Jan ; Carpenter, Dan ; Ashbaugh, John ; Smith, Kathy ; Carter, Andrew
Subject :In Support of SLO Bre w
Dear City Counsel -
I am a resident of SLO, a local attorney, and a musician . I want to express my support of SLO Brew in thei r
efforts to move into the new location and to increase the size and capacity of their facility . While I understand
the concerns of certain residents, I know that Todd and Korie Newman are very able to run SLO Brew in a
manner that will mitigate any such concerns . In fact, I think SLO Brew will benefit that part of downtown,
including the creek area in the back . And from personal experience, I can tell you that concerns related t o
college students are unfounded . That is an issue wholly unrelated to SLO Brew's operation regardless o f
location .
In addition, increasing the capacity of SLO Brew to 600 will have a marked impact on the quality of the talen t
that SLO can attract . This benefits the community both socially and economically (I believe close to 40% o f
attendees at current SLO Brew concerts come from outside SLO County already). These patrons stay in ou r
hotels, eat in our restaurants, and shop downtown .
Please approve the plan as approved by the Planning Commission (or as close as possible). We cannot los e
SLO Brew as a venue in our town .
est Regards ,
Jeff Minner y
Wilding Lane
PH 1-23 9
1
San Luis Obispo, CA
•
2 PH 1-240
RECEIVE D
SEP 28 2012
SLO CITY CLER K
Goodwin, Heathe r
eom :Lichtig, Kati e
Sent:Thursday, September 27, 2012 9 :16 PM
To :'Miles Brown '
Cc :Grimes, Maeve ; Goodwin, Heather, Johnson, Dere k
Subject:RE : SLO Brew Expansio n
Miles -
I have asked the city clerk to distribute your letter to the city council (blind copied) and enter it into the public record .
Thank you for sharing your opinion .
BCC :C C
Katie E . Lichti g
Sent with Handhel d
Original Message----
From : Miles Brown lmailto :mbrown(crlpvhspanthers .org j
nt : Thursday, September 27, 2012 02 :17 PM Pacific Standard Tim e
.Lichtig, Kati e
Subject :SLO Brew Expansio n
To whom it may concern : I am writing to advocate for SLO Brew to move forward with their move and expansion .
I have lived in San Luis Obispo for 22 years and plan on staying for the rest of my life . My son was born here and my wif e
and I have developed deep roots in the community . I am also a musician and music fan . As such, I believe SLO Brew--
being one of the few venues in town--should continue to thrive and bring music, both local and international, to th e
central coast . The economic and cultural benefits to our community far outweigh any negative concerns . I'm sure yo u
are aware that in order for a community to prosper, it must have a diverse range of opportunities for the arts to b e
brought to its citizens .
Thank you for taking the time to consider my request . If this email has not reached the appropriate office, pleas e
forward to any and all persons who are involved with this issue .
Sincerely ,
Miles Brown, San Luis Obispo county voter
PH 1-24 1
1
Goodwin, Heather
RECEIVE D
SEP28201 2
From :Grimes, Maev e
Sent :Thursday, September 27, 2012 5 :30 P M
To :Goodwin, Heathe r
Subject:FW : SLO Brewing Compan y
Thanks for putting this in the Agenda Correspondence file .
9vtaeve xennedy Grimes
City Cler k
City of San Luis Obispo
990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249
(805) 781-710 2
From :Marx, Ja n
Sent :Thursday, September 27, 2012 2 :38 PM
To :'hayesbass@hotmail .com'; Carter, Andrew ; Smith, Kathy ; Ashbaugh, Joh n
Cc: Grimes, Maeve ; Lichtig, Katie
Subject :RE : SLO Brewing Company
Thank you for your input on this important issue and your concern for the city . Due to the Brown Act, council canno t
discuss this issue via email, since it will be coming up on our agenda November 20 th . By this email, I request that the city
clerk post your message as agenda correspondence for that meeting .
All the best,
Jan Marx
Mayo r
From :Patrick Hayes fmailto :hayesbass@hotmail .com j
Sent :Thursday, September 27, 2012 2 :25 P M
To:Marx, Jan ; Carter, Andrew; Smith, Kathy ; Ashbaugh, Joh n
Subject:SLO Brewing Compan y
City Council Members and Mayor Marx,
I have been following the news about the possible relocation and expansion of SLO Brew with quite a bit of interest .
I've been happy to see that things have been moving forward thus far I am concerned after reading in today's Tribun e
that may be changing . I want to give you a bit of background on myself first . I have lived and worked in San Luis Obispo
for the past 17 years, since my family moved here while I was in high school . I am currently raising two children (10 an d
2) in a home just a few blocks from downtown and I am also a musician .
I am very sensitive to the impact a move like this will have on other businesses and the overall character of ou r
downtown but I feel it ultimately will benefit all parties if they are allowed to move forward unhindered . Much like the
excellent PAC at Cal Poly I see a larger SLO Brew as having the possibility of being a cornerstone for our city's cultura l
and artistic endeavors . In their current location I feel that SLO Brew has done an excellent job of bringing high qualit y
shows to San Luis Obispo as well as offering a safe environment for both the Cal Poly students in our town as well a s
older locals like myself . I have never felt unsafe at SLO Brew or the surrounding area and I do not expect that woul d
change if they were to move . I would also like you to reconsider the rooftop dining as it sounds like it would be a uniqu e
experience to dine there with my kids after a day of playing in the creek .
I appreciate your time on this matter . Thank ,you for the work you are doing . Again I ask that you please allow SL O
1 PH 1-24 2
SLO CITY CLERK
•
•
Brew to move forward with their plans with minimal interference, I would hate to not have them around for any length o f
time .
*lank You,
Patrick Hayes
Information from ESET Endpoint Antivirus, version of virus signature database 7524 (20120927 )
The message was checked by ESET Endpoint Antivirus .
http ://www .eset .co m
Information from ESET Endpoint Antivirus, version of virus signature database 7524 (20120927 )
The message was checked by ESET Endpoint Antivirus .
http ://www .eset .co m
•
PH 1-24 3
2
Goodwin, Heathe r
From :Grimes, Maev e
Sent Monday, October 01, 2012 7 :59 A M
To :Goodwin, Heathe r
Subject FW: City Council thank you lette r
Attachments:SLO- SOD letterCity Council .doc x
5L0 BREW Agenda Correspondenc e
3v(aeve 9Cennedy Grime s
City Clerk
City of San Luis Obisp o
990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249
(805) 781-710 2
From :Marx, Ja n
Sent:Monday, October 01, 2012 7 :33 A M
To :Sandra Lakeman ; Allan Cooper ; Carter, Andrew ; Ashbaugh, John ; Smith, Kathy ; Carpenter, Dan ; Dixie Cliff; Diane
Brown ; Elizabeth Thyne ; Steynberg Gallery; Bob Banner ;abrahamst fix .net ;Diane Duenow; Ramina Bacchu s
Cc: Lichtig, Katie ; Grimes, Maeve ; Johnson, Dere k
Subject:RE : City Council thank you lette r
Thank you for this correspondence . I am including city staff in this response,so your thoughts may become part of th e
public record for the November 20 meeting .
All the best,
Jan Howell Marx
Mayor of San Luis Obisp o
(805) 781-7120 or (805) 541-271 6
From :Sandra Lakeman [sandralakeman@gmail .com ]
Sent :Sunday, September 30, 2012 1 :24 P M
To :Allan Cooper ; Marx,Jan ;Carter, Andrew ; Ashbaugh, John ; Smith,Kathy;Carpenter,Dan ; Dixie Cliff;Diane Brown ;
Elizabeth Thyne ; Steynberg Gallery; Bob Banner ;abrahams@fix.net;Diane Duenow ; Ramina Bacchu s
Subject :city Council thank you lette r
Sandra Davis Lakema n
Emeritus Professor of Architectur e
California Polytechnic State Universit y
San Luis Obispo, CA p340 7
mailing address :
1677 Foreman Court
San Luis Obispo, CA 93405
1 PH 1-24 4
RECEIVE D
OCT 0 1 201 2
SLO CITY CLERK
•
805 541 322 3
www.sandralakeman .co m
•
Information from ESET Endpoint Antivirus, version of virus signature database 7534 (20121001 )
The message was checked by ESET Endpoint Antivirus .
http ://www .eset.com
Information from ESET Endpoint Antivirus, version of virus signature database 7534 (20121001 )
The message was checked by ESET Endpoint Antivirus .
http ://www.eset .com
PH 1-24 5
2
Letter to the Editor 29 September 201 2
The members of Save Our Downtown wish to publicly thank all o f
the City Council members, Jan Man, Kathy Smith, Andrew Carter ,
and John Ashbaugh, for their intelligent, practical and measure d
responses to the SOD Appeal of the SLO Brew relocation an d
expansion into the Carrisa Building at 736/738 Higuera, San Lui s
Obispo .
In particular, for the analysis of Councilman Andrew Carter an d
acceptance of the Appeal and reading from the Resolution ,
Attachment 12, Page 2, Section 2 .Environmental Review :
This section states that an EIR is not required when the project
proposes the relocation of a business into an existing building wit h
no overall increase in floor area . However, since there will be a 4,00 0
square feet gain as well as frontage and patio dining on the creek, i t
will be necessary to have a proper EIR . It is an expansion not onl y
relocation. The patron capacity is also an expansion from 743 patron s
during concentrated use at the existing SLO Brew as compared to
1,221 patrons during maximum usage at the new location, an increas e
of nearly 500 .
Councilwoman Kathy Smith is commended for her statement s
regarding the "magnet syndrome" that defines the riots that followe d
Poly Royal and Mardi Gras, closing them down, when out-of-
towners overran those events . Smith stated that the expansion woul d
be "destined to create downtown issues ."
Jan Marx and John Ashbaugh's well considered and very credibl e
listing of conditions that should be changed by the applicant, addres s
the heart of the possible problems in this proposal and should b e
supported by all council members at the November 20 City Counci l
meeting .
CONDITIONS :
1.An Environmental Impact Report is required .
2.A New Use permit is required by CEQA .
•
PH 1-246
•
3.No Roof terrace dining or bar due to noise proliferatio n
vertically and horizontally .
4.No queuing through the Mission Plaza or San Luis Cree k
except for Thursday night Market .
5.The queuing will be along Higuera Street and around th e
corner up Broad to Monterey .
6.No alcohol to be served in Breakfast hours .
7.Opening hours to be later than 6 a.m .
8.The capacity to be similar to existing SLO Brew of 743 patron s
during concentrated operation, not 1221 patrons in the new
location as proposed .
9.The exterior stairway should be located inside the existin g
building footprint for safety .
10.In lieu parking issue to be reviewed .
11.The same amplified music conditions that have been set fo r
Creeky Tiki and Frog and Peach .
12.Applicant must hold noise emanating from the SLO Brew
structure to agreed acoustic levels .
13.The low Bass sounds must be contained within the structure .
14.The alcohol is to be stopped an hour before the last show .
15.The Creek, fish and wildlife are to be protected from the Pati o
Lighting .
16.Concerned Liability and Indemnification of the Warden Bridg e
and the Pedestrian Bridge from Mission Plaza .
17.Reduced hours of operation .
18.There may be additional conditions following November 20 ,
2012, the next City Council meeting regarding this issue .
Although there were many supporters for the move of SLO Brew t o
Higuera, it was apparent that most of them have vested interests a s
employees and musicians . However, we were pleased to hear th e
employees and renters of SLO Brew/Hamish Marshall and Tod d
Newman speak so positively of them and that establishment . We al l
look forward to the new SLO Brew and its great addition to our SL O
downtown in a manner that will be a positive addition, not a
negative detraction .
PH 1-247
Sandra Davis Lakema n
Save Our Downtown
29 September 2012
•
PH 1-248
RECEIVE D
nC.T 11201Z
CITY CLERK
Goodwin, Heathe r
ro JoJohnson,Dere k
Sent:Thursday, October 11, 2012 1 :35 P M
To :Davidson, Doug ; Carloni, Marcu s
Cc :Goodwin, Heather; Codron, Michae l
Subject:FW: Support for SLO Bre w
FYI
_
From :Ashbaugh, John
_..__~
Sent:Thursday, October 11, 2012 1 :28 PM
To : Wyatt Lun d
Cc : Johnson, Derek; Lichtig, Katie
Subject:RE : Support for SLO Bre w
Thanks for writing, Wyatt . We're working very hard with the applicants, through our staff, to see that the next Counci l
meeting on this subject goes more smoothly, and with a successful result for all concerned . I'll make sure that you ar e
placed on the email list to receive updates on this project .
From :Wyatt Lund fmaitto :wyatt Iundehotmail .comj
Sent :Thursday, October 11, 2012 11 :33 AM
To : Carter, Andrew ; Smith, Kathy ; Ashbaugh, Joh nSubject:Support for SLO Brew
Hello Council members !
My name is Wyatt Lund . I've lived in SLO county my entire life, graduated from Cal Poly, and for the last ten years I'v e
been making a living teaching, playing and recording music . I feel its my duty to voice my opinion about the re-locatio n
of SLO Brewing Company from Garden Street to the larger location on Higuera Street .
I know there is a lot of red tape, a lot of details I'm not aware of, but I would love to see SLO Brew continue to brin g
music to SLO after construction begins on Garden Street . I realize there are many issues that arise with live music ,
alcohol sales, parking, etc, but I believe the owners and staff at SLO Brew have created a unique venue that has been a
staple in many musicians' careers for decades, and it would be a shame to have SLO lose such a great outlet fo r
contemporary music . I'd do anything to help it continue !
Thanks so much for your time .
Sincerely,
Wyatt Lund
PH 1-24 9
1
Page intentionally lef t
blank .
PH 1-250