The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About08/04/2009, B2 - APPEAL OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR'S DECISION TO DENY A CERTIFICATE OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE council °ft August 4,2009 j agenda RepoRt CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FROM: Deborah Linden, Chief of Police John Mandeville, Community Development Director SUBJECT: APPEAL OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR'S DECISION TO DENY A CERTIFICATE OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE OR NECESSITY FOR AN ALCOHOL LICENSE AT 328 MARSH STREET (MISSION CHEVRON) RECOMMENDATION Adopt a resolution denying the appeal and upholding the Community Development Director's decision to deny the issuance of a certificate of public convenience or necessity (PCN) for the transfer of a Type 20 alcohol license to Mission Station, Inc., for the property located at 328 Marsh Street, San Luis Obispo. REPORT-IN-BRIEF In early May 2009, the owners of an approved project to demolish and rebuild the gasoline station at 328 Marsh Street (Attachment 1 — Vicinity Map) and add a convenience store applied to the State to transfer a beer and wine alcohol license from a business in Morro Bay to Mission Chevron. 328 Marsh is located in an "over-concentrated census tract" (the downtown area) and there is a county-wide moratorium on beer and wine licenses due to over-concentration of this type of license by the Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC). Therefore, the transfer of a license from another city to this property requires the City of San Luis Obispo find that the addition of the alcohol license meets the public convenience or necessity. Staff reviewed the application and was unable to make such a finding due to concerns about the impact to public safety, increasing the density of alcohol outlets in an already over-concentrated area, consistency with existing Zoning regulations regarding concurrent sales of gasoline and alcohol, and consistency with prior actions, including one involving the same property in 2004. On July 6, 2009, the business owners, Mission Station, Inc., filed an appeal of staff s decision. DISCUSSION Background On April 6, 2009, the City Architectural Review Commission (ARC) approved plans to demolish the existing service station (now closed) located at 328 Marsh Street and replace it with a new fueling station and convenience store, Mission Chevron. The property is located at the intersection of Higuera and Marsh Streets just east of US 101. The business is owned by Mission Station, Inc. and the principals of the corporation are Rob Tachovsky and Ricky Fleischer. The property is owned by Lisa Crehan, Trustee of the First Amended Crehan Family Trust. The fueling station had been previously owned by Chevron. Mission Station, Inc. intends to execute a franchise agreement with Chevron to continue to sell Chevron gasoline. The plans submitted to 3a-- 1 Mission Chevron Appeal 8-4-09 Page 2 the ARC did not include the proposed sale of alcohol from the business (nor were they required to do so). For approximately 50 years, the property operated as a Chevron gas station until its closure in October 2008. In 2004, Chevron submitted plans to renovate the.station and add a convenience store to include the sale of beer and wine, requiring a Type 20 (off-sale beer and wine) alcohol license. In order for Chevron to transfer a Type 20 alcohol license from outside the City to the property, the City was required to find that the addition of the alcohol license met the public convenience or necessity (PCN). Since the business is located in a census tract that is already classified by the State as being over-concentrated with alcohol licenses, and the City in general had an over-concentration of Type 20 alcohol licenses, the PCN was denied. According to the new business owners, Chevron decided not to proceed with the renovation project after the denial of a PCN certificate. Chevron continued to operate the gas station until 2008 until they closed the station in October 2008 rather than extending their lease on the property. Mission Station, Inc. assumed ownership of the business and submitted plans for the redevelopment of the property as a gasoline station with a convenience store. After receiving ARC approval in April 2009 to renovate the property, Mission Station, Inc. submitted an application to the California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) to transfer a Type 20 alcohol license from a business in Morro Bay to 328 Marsh in order to sell beer and wine from the proposed convenience store. Concurrent sales of gasoline and alcohol in the City require an Administrative Use Permit; however, an applicant must secure an alcohol license prior to applying for an Administrative Use Permit, which falls under the responsibility of the Community Development Department. In addition, the alcohol license transfer required a PCN certificate from the City due to the moratorium by the ABC. Staff from the Police, Community Development, and City Attorney Departments reviewed the application for the alcohol license transfer and determined that the standard of public convenience or necessity would not be met by the issuance of the alcohol license. Deputy Community Development Director Doug Davidson notified ABC of this determination via a letter dated May 15, 2009 (Attachment 2). The applicants subsequently requested a meeting with staff to discuss the denial of the PCN. This meeting took place on June 16, 2009, during which the applicants requested that staff reconsider the decision not to issue the PCN certificate and presented staff with additional information about the business and reasons. for their request to sell beer and wine. Upon considering the applicants' additional information, staff did not find any basis to reverse the existing decision. On June 25, 2009, Community Development Director John Mandeville sent a letter to the applicants reaffirming staff's decision not to issue a PCN certificate, and explaining the appeal process (Attachment 3).. Although the letter was authored by the Community Development Director, the decision to deny the PCN was made jointly by the Community Development Director and the Police Chief. On July 6, 2009, the applicants filed an application to appeal the decision of the Community Development Director to the City Council (Appeal Document — Attachment 4). b01 Mission Chevron Appeal 8-4-09 Page 3 Pertinent Regulations 1. Alcohol License Regulations The California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) regulates the issuance of alcohol licenses as required by various sections of the California Business and Professions Code. License types are generally classified as either off-sale (retail sale with no on-site consumption) or on-sale (on-site consumption, such as bars and restaurants), as well as various manufacturing licenses. Off-site licenses include: Type 20 Off-sale beer and wine Type 21 Off-sale general (all types of alcohol) The applicants for Mission Station, Inc. have applied to ABC to transfer a Type 20 license from a business in Morro Bay to Mission Chevron located at 523 Marsh Street. The Business and Professions Code (B&P) outlines requirements for the issuance of a new alcohol license, or the premise-to-premise transfer of an existing license, when the applicant premises are located in a census tract that is deemed over-concentrated with retail alcohol licenses (Business and Professions Code section 23958.4). The code defines over-concentration (referred to'in the code as "undue concentration") for off-sale retail licenses (Types 20 and 21) as follows: As to off-sale retail license applications, the ratio of off-sale retail licenses to population in the census tract or census division in which the applicant premises are located exceeds the ratio of off-sale retail licenses to population in the county in which the applicant premises are located. When an applicant is seeking a new or transferred alcohol license for premises located in an over-concentrated census tract, the law requires that the local governing body (or its designated subordinate officer or body) be provided 90 days to determine whether or not' the "public convenience or necessity would be served by the issuance" of the license (B&P section 23958.4(b)(2)). The determination of what factors constitute public convenience or necessity is left up to each local jurisdiction. 2. Existing Moratorium In 2005, ABC distributed a list of counties and cities subject to a moratorium on the issuance of Type 20 off-sale beer and wine licenses, pursuant to B&P Code section 23817.5, which requires a moratorium on cities and counties where the ratio of Type 20 licenses exceeds one for each 2,500 inhabitants. All of San Luis Obispo County, including all cities in the County, is subject to the moratorium due to the over-concentration of off-sale beer and wine licenses. Under the moratorium, no new Type 20 licenses will be issued in the City. The moratorium will be reassessed in 2010. As of June 2009, there were 34 Type 20 (off=sale beer and wine) licenses in the City of San Luis Obispo. This constitutes a rate of approximately one per 1294 inhabitants, about twice the number of Type 20 licenses that triggers the moratorium. Ba -3 Mission Chevron Appeal 8-4-09 Page 4 In addition to the Type 20 moratorium, the Mission Chevron property is located in census tract 111.01 which encompasses the downtown area. This census tract has been determined to be over- concentrated for off-sale and on-sale licenses, requiring a PCN for the transfer of any alcohol license from outside this census tract. The only situation which would not require a PCN would be the transfer of an existing license within the same census tract, since such a transfer would not increase(add to the over-concentration) of alcohol licenses already existing in the area. 3. Zoning Regulations Current City zoning regulations permit the concurrent sales of motor fuel and beer or wine at a service station, subject to the approval of an Administrative Use. Permit and other conditions regulating the sale of alcohol. The applicant would normally apply for an Administrative Use Permit after ABC issues an alcohol license to the business. Municipal Code Section 17.08.040.J.2 of the zoning regulations (Attachment 5) outlines the findings the Hearing Officer must make to grant approval of a Use Permit: J. In order to grant approval of a Use Permit, the Hearing Officer must make the following findings in addition to findings contained in Section 17.58.040: 1. The establishment of concurrent sales of motor fuel and beer or wine is consistent with the provisions of the Business and Professions Code Section 23790.5. Z The sale of beer or wine at this location does not jeopardize the public health, safety or welfare, e.g., will not result in an over concentration of businesses selling or serving alcoholic beverages within the vicinity. (bold emphasis added) 3. The sale of beer or wine at a service station is otherwise allowed within the same zoning district at this location and the sale of beer or wine concurrent with motor fuel would not result in the expansion of a non-conforming use. (Prior Code Ord. 1124—1 Ex. A (part), 1988; Ord. 1446(2004 Series) updated) Section J2 above creates a standard for the issuance or denial of an Administrative Use Permit based on the over-concentration of alcohol outlets in the vicinity and recognizes that such over- concentration jeopardizes the public health, safety or welfare of those in the area. The proximity of-other alcohol outlets to a business seeking an alcohol license, and the concentration of alcohol licenses in the vicinity (indicated by census tract), are key factors used by staff when determining whether or not to issue a PCN certificate for an alcohol license. These factors are consistent with the language in the zoning regulation quoted above, and would likely lead to the denial of an Administrative Use Permit if the sale of alcohol from a gas station would result in the over- concentration of alcohol outlets in the area, or add to a census tract which is already over- concentrated. Prior Prohibition From 1982 to 2004; the sale of alcoholic beverages from gasoline stations was prohibited under the City municipal code, as recorded by Ordinance No. 915 (1982 series) enacted on January 5, 1982. Staff attempted to research the findings that supported the passage of the ordinance; however, the agenda reports for that year are missing from the City's archives. In 1988, Council again considered the concurrent sale of alcohol and gasoline in light of a change in State law that preempted local ordinances in this area. The 1988 Council decided to maintain the prohibition, believing the State's new legislation was potentially invalid. The reasons cited for maintaining Mission Chevron Appeal 5-4-09 Page 5 the prohibition were to reduce the potential for drunk driving and incidents of crime at convenience stores selling alcohol. The 1988 staff report linked increased availability and convenience of obtaining alcohol with increased health and safety problems, especially in communities such as San Luis Obispo with high percentages of college age residents. In late 2003, Council directed staff to revise the Municipal Code so it was consistent with State law regarding concurrent sales of alcohol and gasoline. This action was the result of the Costco project which included a service station adjacent to the warehouse store. On February 17, 2004, Council approved changes to the Municipal Code and zoning regulations to allow concurrent sales of alcohol and gasoline subject to certain limitations and conditions. Until this time, the City had a strict prohibition against the sale of any type of alcohol from gasoline stations, even those with convenience stores. Basis of Denial of PCN Certificate for Mission Chevron The following are the primary reasons staff from the Police and Community Development Department agreed why a finding of public convenience or necessity could not be made with regard to Mission Station, Inc.'s application to transfer a Type 20 (off sale beer and wine) license from a business outside the City to Mission Chevron, located at 328 Marsh Street: 1. Over-concentration and Public Safety Problems in the Downtown: The Mission Chevron property is located in census tract 111.01 which encompasses the downtown area. This census tract is considered by the State as being over-concentrated with alcohol outlets. In general, over-concentration leads to increased public safety and public health problems, hence the reason State regulations defer to local authorities in deciding whether or not to add licenses to an over-concentrated area. In San Luis Obispo, the over-concentration of alcohol outlets in the downtown results in significant public safety challenges for our community, including high rates of alcohol-related crimes such as drunk driving, public intoxication, vandalism, fights, assaults, and urinating in public. The transfer of alcohol licenses is generally allowed within the same census tract since - such transfers do not result in any net increase to the number of licenses. Allowing a license to be transferred into the downtown from another census tract increases the net number of licenses and with it,the public safety problems that accompany alcohol outlets. Staff has consistently resisted increasing the number of licenses in already over- concentrated census tracts. In fact, Chevron's request in 2004 for a PCN certificate for an alcohol license for 328 Marsh was denied on this basis. 2. Type 20 Moratorium: The City, and all of San Luis Obispo County, is under a State mandated moratorium for Type 20 alcohol licenses, meaning the State will not issue any new Type 20 licenses anywhere in the County. The City has 34 Type 20 licenses, twice the number that triggers the moratorium. In addition, there are 24 Type 21 licenses (off- sale general license) in the City where patrons may purchase beer, wine and all types of alcohol. These figures indicate that there is no shortage of opportunities for residents and visitors to purchase off-sale beer and wine in our City. The Type 20 moratorium is meant to "hold the line" on these types of licenses in an attempt to mitigate problems associated with alcohol sales. Z ')—5 Mission Chevron Appeal 8-4-09 Page 6 3. Proximity of Off-sale Outlets: There are currently thirteen off-sale alcohol outlets (Type 20 and 21) in the census tract that includes the downtown, and additional outlets in neighboring census tracts. At least four retailers within a half-mile of Mission Chevron sell a variety of beer and wine, including: a. Sandy's Liquor—586 Higuera(03 miles) b. 7-11 —692 Marsh(0.4 miles) c. Circle K— 158 Higuera(0.3 miles) d. Smart & Final—277 Higuera(0.1 miles) All of these outlets have their own dedicated parking lots, making it quick and convenient for patrons to make purchases. There are also other retailers in the downtown that hold off-sale liquor licenses and a few that specialize in wine sales. Staff believes there are abundant retailers in the close vicinity of Mission Chevron where patrons can purchase beer and wine in a convenient manner and that a compelling need for another alcohol outlet in this same area does not exist. 4. Consistency with City Zoning regulations and prior Council Direction: For many years, Council enacted and upheld a prohibition against the concurrent sale of gasoline and alcohol due to the public safety concerns such sales present. Even when the ordinance was changed in 2004 to allow such sales, the subsequent Zoning regulations adopted by Council state that adding to the over-concentration of alcohol outlets in the vicinity is a basis for denial of a City Use Permit. Council has also provided staff with clear direction to continue to make efforts to curb underage and excessive alcohol consumption and to mitigate the public safety impacts of crimes and behaviors related to alcohol use and abuse in the City. Staff's decision regarding the issuance of a PCN certificate to Mission Station, Inc. is consistent with this policy direction, especially given the location in the downtown and as a"gateway"property,to the City. 5. Public Safety Concerns at the Establishment: The Police Department experiences greater public safety problems at convenience stores that sell alcohol than at those that don't, including alcohol consumption on and near the premises, underage sales to minors, and loitering and disturbances by transients. These problems would be especially visible at the Mission Chevron location, considered a "gateway" to the City. In addition, staff remains concerned that the convenient sales of alcohol to motorists may exacerbate already high rates of drunk driving incidents and collisions in San Luis Obispo, especially where off- sale establishments are in close proximity to on-sale outlets. For these reasons, staff has determined that an additional outlet for beer and wine sales at this location does not serve the public convenience or necessity. Staff Response to Appealants' Issues On pages three and four of its appeal document, Mission Station, Inc. outlines five reasons for appeal (Appeal document — Attachment 4). It should be noted that in the appeal document, the numbering of the list ends at six; however, the list skips the number five. The following is staff's response to each of the five points (using the same numbering as in the appeal document): ,Bc�_4C.) Mission Chevron Appeal 8-4-09 Page 7 1. "Weakness" of Tyne 20 alcohol license and "negligible effect on the business and residential community." Staff does not agree with the applicants' assessment of the impact of outlets with Type 20 licenses on the community. The Police Department routinely receives complaints of public drinking and drunkenness and disorderly behavior at or near retail outlets that hold Type 20 licenses, especially convenience stores. This type of behavior intimidates other patrons and nearby businesses, and causes disturbances to residences, especially at night. In addition, beer is frequently the "drink of choice" for college-age residents and visitors. The applicant has proposed a series of security measures to help mitigate these impacts; however staff believes the problems will likely occur even with these measures, especially when patrons purchase only alcohol and not gasoline at the station. 2. Selling alcohol along with gasoline is necessary for the profitabilfty of the gas station.. The business model for Mission Chevron as submitted by the applicants is for a gasoline station and convenience store. If a Type 20 alcohol license is granted, the applicants estimate annual gross profits will be $850,000. Without the license, this estimate is $780,000, approximately 8% less. There exist other gasoline stations in the City that remain viable without the sale of alcohol. Staff is not able to verify the applicants' analysis of the impact of the sale of alcohol on the profitability of the business. However, the applicants' financial analysis did not address the impact of gasoline purchase and sale prices, the potential profitability of combining the convenience store with other business opportunities (such as hot food sales), or the potential security, liability, and licensing costs associated with selling alcohol. In addition, the analysis did not contain the costs to the community associated with the public safety impact of alcohol sales. 3. The impact of denyiniz an alcohol license on the profitability of the business may cause the applicants to withdraw their application for development of the station. Whether or not to issue a PCN certificate based on the applicants' information regarding the potential profitability of the business is a policy decision for Council. However, staff is concerned that the development of the business appears to be conditioned on the issuance of an alcohol license. The public safety and health impacts of alcohol outlets are long-lasting and difficult to mitigate once a license is issued, as evidenced by the significant amount of police resources needed to respond to alcohol-related problems in the City. This is especially true in the downtown and residential neighborhoods with large percentages of student residents. One of the most effective methods a community can use to reduce alcohol-related problems is to limit alcohol availability, which is accomplished through policy and regulation. Granting an alcohol license to a business just to increase the potential profits for the business owners sets a precedent that causes staff concem.over future applications for existing or new businesses that also would like to increase their profits. The trade-offs to public health and safety should be carefully considered. The applicants have an alternative not mentioned in their appeal to Council: purchasing an existing Type 20 license from a business in the same census tract. The law allows the transfer of alcohol licenses within the same census tract without the need for a PCN certificate since such a transfer does not increase the net number of alcohol licenses in the _7 Mission Chevron Appeal 8-4-09 Page 8 census tract. Staff discussed this alternative with the applicants during the meeting on June 16, 2009. The applicants indicated they had unsuccessfully attempted to purchase a Type 20 license from one business in the downtown. The applicants could develop the Mission Chevron property as proposed to the ARC, and purchase an existing Type 20 license within the census tract when one comes available. Absent a transfer of an existing license within the same census tract, it is unlikely under existing Zoning regulations that findings could be made to support the issuance of a Use Permit to sell alcohol, given the location of the business in an over-concentrated census tract. 5. The applicants are investing approximately one million dollars to redevelop a "gateway" property to the City and the "City wishes to stop them"because of the over-concentration of alcohol licenses. Staff does not wish to stop the proposed development project for Mission Chevron, as approved by the Architectural Review Commission. Staffs role was to determine whether or not the application for an alcohol license met the standard of public convenience or necessity, and staff was not able to make this finding. Staff is not qualified to determine the impact of an alcohol license on the viability of the business, nor is it appropriate for staff to weigh business profitability against other factors in making the PCN determination. This weighting is most appropriately done by Council within its policy discretion. 6. The over-concentration of alcohol licenses is beneficial to tourism and the wine industry in San Luis Obispo and outlets associated with this industry generate few public problems. Staff recognizes the positive economic impact of the wine industry on the Central Coast. However, the overall over-concentration of Type 20 licenses is driven by many types of businesses and staff does not believe it can be attributed just to the wine industry as the applicant seems to imply. In addition, the wine industry in general presents unique and sometimes significant public safety challenges, especially with regard to winery tasting rooms and impaired driving. State and local police officials are conducting special enforcement programs aimed at wine tasting outlets due to the high incidents of drunk driving and underage drinking associated with them. That being said, the applicant is not proposing a business model directly related to the wine industry (other than being able to sell wine along with beer). The applicant is proposing a gasoline station with a convenience store; which, in the Police Department's experience, will likely generate public safety problems if alcohol is sold. Conclusion Based on the reasons outlined in this report, staff determined that a finding of public convenience or necessity could not be made with regard to the proposed transfer of a Type 20 alcohol license from another city to Mission Chevron at 328 Marsh Street. This determination was consistent with City Zoning regulations, prior and current Council direction, and prior staff decisions for this same property and other similarly situated properties. The information presented by the applicants during a meeting with staff did not support a reversal of this decision. The applicants' primary basis for appeal seems to hinge on the purported impact to the profitability of the business should an alcohol license not be granted. This argument does not take into account the �a4 r-. Mission Chevron Appeal 8-4-09 Page 9 various gasoline stations in the City that remain viable without alcohol licenses, nor does the applicant address the existing option of purchasing a license from a business within the census tract at some point in the future. CONCURRENCES The Police Department took the lead role in reviewing the request for the PCN because of the primary public safety concerns and the Department's working relationship with ABC. The Community Development Department and City Attorney's office gave input into this report and concur with the recommendation. FISCAL IMPACT There are no direct costs associated with this action. Should Council make a finding of public convenience or necessity, which would allow an alcohol license at Mission Chevron, staff would anticipate an increase in police calls at that location. ALTERNATIVES 1. Grant the appeal and direct staff to prepare PCN findings. Should Council wish to make findings of public convenience or necessity to allow the transfer of the alcohol license to Mission Chevron, the appropriate action would be to: a. Articulate the basis for the findings so staff can prepare the appropriate resolution; b. Continue the item and direct staff to work with the applicant to appropriately condition the PCN and alcohol license to address public safety concerns and ensure consistency with Zoning regulations; c. Direct staff to return to Council in a timely manner with a resolution granting the appeal and making appropriate findings of public convenience or necessity. 2. Continue the review. Council could continue the appeal if more information is needed and direct staff and applicants accordingly. ATTACHMENTS 1. Vicinity Map 2. Letter to ABC from CDD Deputy Director Davidson dated May 15, 2009. 3. Letter to Rob Tachovsky (Mission Station, Inc.) from CDD Director John Mandeville dated June 25, 2009. 4. Appeal from Mission Station, Inc. dated July 6, 2009. 5. Municipal Code section 17.08.040 (zoning regulations) regarding concurrent sales of motor fuel and alcoholic beverages. 6. Draft resolution denying the appeal and upholding the decision of the Community Development Director to deny the issuance of a certificate of public convenience or necessity for this project. T:\Council Agenda ReportsTolice CAR\2009\Mission Chevron Appeal 8-4-09.DOC 1� 1 ATTACHMENT 2 91� NI C� � ty of esti tuis omspc) owl Community Development Department•919 Palm Street,San Luis Obispo,CA 93401.3218 ZVIay 15,2009 Depattrnent of Alcoholic Beverage Control 3220 S.Higuera St Suite 233 San Luis Obispo,CA 93401 Attention: Rhonda Whittington Subject: Alcoholic Beverage License Transfer—328 Marsh St. Dear Rhonda The CRY of San Luis Obispo has determined that the standard of public convenience or necessity would not be met by issuance of the alcoholic beverage license application.for 328 Marsh Street. Thus,we=unable to issue the PCN letter for the Type 20 license transfer. The site is located in an overconcentrated tract whereby licenses could be ttansfeared within the same tract;but not brought in from outside as is the current request. Furthermore,this decision is consistent with the City's previous determination on a license transfer at this location. In 2004,the applicants withdrew their administrative use Permit application when they discovered that a license could not be transferred from outside the tract- Please ractPlease call me at 781-7177 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Dong Da&��AICD Deputy Director,Development Review oc: Applicant: Mission Station,lite. 3940-7 Broad St. #325 San Luis Obispo,CA 93401 Deborah Linden,Police Chief The City of San Luis Obispo Is ootrmdUd to Include the disabled In all of Its se © Telecommunications Device for the Deaf •programs,and activities. feos)�elaato. FXHI)3R# GE��OF j U ATTACHMENT 3 .jun-26-09 08:04A City of SLO—CD Dept. BOB 781 7173 P.O1 Ci Y Of SAn lois oBispo Community Development Department•919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo CA 83401-3218 •&(2s Jun 20U9 �t111� 25-) 20C Rvb Tachovsky Mission Station,rnc: 3940-7 liroad Strcc:t#325 San Luis Obispo,CA 9340J SnbJeN: Akoholic]e.erage License Tramper-328 Marsh St, Dear Rob: The City of San Luis Obispo has dcicxmined would rtor he met that the standard nrpublie cvnnmience or necessity by issuanc of the alcoholic heverage 110(mc application for 32R Marsh St=.. Thus, we are unable to issue the PCN ldttx for[he'1'ype 20 license transfer. This determination was confirmed at the mcKing on June*16th with you, your ttttrnl, and representatives Gum the Thu site is Looted City's Community Mwlopment and Police Departments,as well as the City Atlnmry's o!1'ic, in an overconccntratcd tract whereby licenses could bo transferred within the same tract, but not brought in from outside as Is the eurruat request. The City staff sues no compelling reason to waiver from this long standing policy regarding ovetocmtxntrated tracts Purthermorti, this decision LS conedstcnt with the City's previous detcrminatien on a Beans% trartsfcr at this location. In 2004, the applicant% willuhvw their administrative use permk application when they diumvered that a license could not be tranarerrod from outside the tract. According to City Municipal Codc acction 1.20,this autism may be appealed to the City council. Appeals mad be in writing, accompanied by a $100 check made out to the City or San Luis Obispo,and rtxvjvW within 10 days nrthc date of this letter. ShuWaly, � l Mandeville,AiC'P 'Community l)avclopmmrt Director W: l*XTWnment of Alcoholic Fjowmage Control .3220 S. Rigucra St, Suite 233 San Luis Obispo,CA 93401 Attention: Rhonda Whittington Jonathan Lowell, City Attorney Shelly Stimwyck,Assismru City Manager Nbnmh tandem,Police Chief The May d San Luis Ob[Sp0 is cmmnated to Include the eisabled in an of tts servacas,programa a t9teCe"Vt=k2diona DeWc&for ons tear(W)781-7410. nd adw�aes. EXHMIT_PAGE OF Filing Fee: $100.00 ATTACHMENT 4 Paid 60 ®E eE wA_ I� �` 1f ELS C'cy of TEMtTO$E=ON4 JUL*06 1009 San LUIS OBISpo SLO CITY CLERK APPEAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL SECTION 1. APPELUMnyADm"770N Mission Station, Inc., 3940-7 Broad Street#325, SLO, CA 93401 Name Mailing Address and Zip Code (805) 544-5600 1805) 544-7700 �jFi-ggde com Phone Fax j John W Frk*s Ogden & Fricks LLP 656 Santa Rosa Street2nd FI SLO CA 93401 Represent&ffWs Name Mailing Address and Zip Code —Attomey (805) 5aa59n0 (g05) 544-77nn Title Phone Fax SEC7ION2 SUBJECT OFAPPM 1. In accordance with the procedures set forth In Title 1, Chapter 120 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code(copy attached), I hereby appeal the decision of the: John Mandeville AI Pommunity Development Director (Name of Officer.Committee or Commission decision being appealed). . .. 2. The date the decision being appealedwas rendered: June 25. 269 3. The application or project was entitled Request for Public Conveniences and Nemec i_% '= Lefter(ABC License Type 20) at 328 Marsh Street 4. 1 discussed the mattr with the following City staff member: Christine Dietrich et al on June 16-2009 (Staff Member's Name and Depfterig (Des) 6. HafVs this matter been the subject of a previous appeal? If so,when was It heard and by whore: o. SEC770NI RE48ONFIORAPPEOLL Explain specificMIly what ac dWs you are appealing and mut yi you believe the Council should consider your appeal- Include wtiat you have that supports your appeal. You may attach ndd►tlortaf pVw, ff neaassaq. This form andnum on the offierslde. a-l3 Page 1 of 9 i IF ' r521a � , 1 s =� - � v9 o'l�c•o 6 o a-1 - �•, 1 e - lo- n to6{ r �.. •;� -. ti - r��. �� , v v � .. 4 c re o•�,,,�M3^'F^'i:t�S•{h.G 1 , nrom mm nal apDellant's efforts to utilize a Tyge 20 figuor license from outside-Census Tract 11 i.ol for off-salL[Leer and wine at arm Hant's service station. ' 4tl N a° t •^:110 •o Tt os✓ i :�.- �.>^- 1 -at'if-�j + "E^<�'J� �- V.cv.. RE. ,L }� C s_. C k. t n e [t'l�E r-`C.p�J„I� I4 ^N' 6 t E e•...lCr �.Q �° °r - f It G ♦C t-: 1 C 4 Y' 4 .�tS �- � ` ♦ Y�y+yN N' > „'.F>�n� G�-,i,�'[��Y; ;t��,-�;� ',;,,� }s^� ms b c _ fe ' tllj12`L-^• t1°�'1 C ( � je�t:iZ u 1�f 1 ,v�..l� .r � �, � ✓ t ,• .�• j �CtLf��1.'t,^4`i Yr+"'3'yn��r,S �yp iin��'y✓�} �� a^- '� 'FG l.+:b. , d�-.�I .�"'�7i9"•`n�'ei l'�Z'�C lJ h$�4R :• ��p. fl r-. S Y <rt...J`�t'r+>L`C7.��r +T ri D •CPp L+tom+! »+<fte e r n t.tG 'l�[o-ti':F r� �� ,o ��a�t flf�� o o ��(! r` r'�i Yet p1�2��s t�'y^C�� n•N' - o e`� �'`o�{''{�,�7gIIr•c�� rte e�iChl r� 'r y '�('9ir r`t,�•� •• '� y`'+�a .� �' �. �>.-1p•4, ��'-'=. ��)'S'-'��.I-"`��"��'s'�yi�?'��:,�`-.`+�7 rrt u' tiQ'�-..'-.,14,E-+.1.��. C.c J� •'.yr��}'I�.,•1E t1'� I f E iil T-#U,frP1.Fi.:�E1�t�I�L e`�• „t°li!-r .✓,F11.6a o�� ';16o 6 Ct "!ol?1 }l Ieu oEfai 1 RLIZ MIR c `ry �frlF av- t ! e"- •'!1°� i co-fo C E i IsKoUr = T la Cc E v)� cY- Fc � ]A V. .. fistf; J �� lr J 1 ogrifIt � ,�//r l,jjl . a: : F"'� GY t tlh i '"c� �` ,:✓`Tx .a>leave:R wyr £ '4v�"< Y. r��; ry,•�r •F ;�5,<T, ✓, l! r F �+ y -r�.:a. s .tp°+h�tt'a�+Y `',�•;,ney � ,. z 'M' v^ � 6'{n' i- 3 EZ' y ayt' wy�'S1,1e3 fNr61'i•i"•�+�' fir h $�•-�.. ,� �.+KI�., •i � T r` � JE 1 �'1 .�CY.=.°Ar" �7 e SRI e �F r y."• t-P <2 err.,'� CY..R� •SCP �.i y �-a..,•�� -,-✓��,-4 >� lr .��f<r.3,.._,pr � I{ c OE \Y e�� pl- c fo` c 1�1.a �- ti C�1 <"1�'f +rtE.{.• ve-.. P � 1° Q e��v IG act e if lja'�`' -f-� 1E c l'7 e o a < in r .ci le 1Fuc i']'Y - �`-e alp.r�.� 1X. ti fr"r7 y'f'L�' c:.�.>yy a'Y ar ,w �.?'�4x • �•�t'tr�1 f Y f -"> '11.a •hvl + '!- ..+. � - fnh , r�y � jkvi Cr•r` -�'+> M °i-`t-� "t <�n+S r ->< Z aT' I e t+7�.er+4 ts.C'.. i, I �•-.y.�u [- U _ryl.��tJ.rEY L� .r f4 t i� vi1!>i.�� r �` �r=7x r S NJ w '"Yf'iJ ` ltr fl r� jh r ..+:t s• Q 1i+�<4^r}t R� ;2+ri µ� fi.^?t(�a`-7]'y S r�''-� J 2 '•¢ .5 j, r 1 S r\a f Y 1;r < <..-+ +i l t .12y tv'C{�Y-`lam � Ti aL .x t .. i •�.! r 1 a J+ r �+ rr.A � e T.... f + -17f r 'Lr.�. �s •�t�"e + 1(.' .� f rJf Cr IC 1'�YF ,17� IN! t �finC�}'Ir'.to •..`7.. j]v y.r``}''�,�it . a '� yt-✓ Y i .+ �'! rtf.' ��ta r ;Ii ��'lfl li'1.- •7_'�y�t .5.v /C�.� L . r 4 C rI< � n z �i, H �., f .l• r h { � '*'f ` t(>_� I Y r 1 / s ,sr r r 1�'q yJ^ •] T j •�•(} r y r�Y vyni;^:i'\ r'Jn ,.-JJi L.�'�?.,t•f I.. �F /S ,�(i CA�FI.fI�° <h L`i�llf �FCft3 C oh}j''rT:�j/�+F(,�tf, F af�N.111. 4t_ Icr.t?ar 4r, y J J lit [,}✓ 1Y a,n • �\ F `� c 1 , u • \•` '�'. 3�) �' ✓ l'"•<", Irl✓ 3 r J t <• �•�Ir Sf h 1 �s�7,Y_' ��` � �+C1•�`t R.�. >' +. ,.,5 Hcy.\t .,'1 'i.�•�yaT' {}:•' r-tM 1\� � > .>v{' l l 1T i ,y> �+1 Y 2.h - '1 s(-' 1�✓r .4/,nll /y? t[°i�T r. 1 � T f ♦! �wS�Y/l b}2`yam` � + ` >-•�" b -. >� .\ ✓T?•'l°. T-+ -YL^ti Ci`� -i l /•. ,� L +ny j _. J r4y L.yS iy✓Y i•�,<°r t-Z'.� fE r�J�c��tiC1[Y}ib{CS Lt��c 4��SIi�(fi /`, " J � i•. s K:�r'�°t<�[�. 9f� ✓7' i �e .r <� y'�-]T-+._1i r--1 < Y.�"3 /�� `t !1 r r ��Cl ��l ��`�4 Y �rar CF�`S Y.;✓ - I S+:L �I Y]IL'3'i ,�C�i�l�l�},r �r t +> �,sj tf�tv�a" ''L 1]yJi,�cS,]�N �}i. v � r-• -, t .a;r r.i�� l.� h�� •-t-e3 �+ 1,�`-Z r t�1 -=x-k 4 I' J 'ilk i•`1\'11 fl y� 11 •]4=•+ � l"vT:�'.f�� ;��f!��.I.(L��I.I i� a f .h�`(� t} i ff}} � }�.'r Tt// YJ♦'•M1'tr 7�'N'�i w J 1\_�'<•-< t �5.rlt {• -Y3]CLTFi•]iG-"'1-4 ..ri.. V-�. J. �'^�,°• ��r�1rICF t• S ��'�14^.j1,�p�}�,ytt L'f�"ti'rti•h]•Y'� ']f- f ATTACHMENT 4 OGDEN & FRICKS LLP 656 Santa Rosa Street , Second Floor San Luis Obispo , California 93401 Phone : 805 . 544 . 5600 Fax : 805 . 544 . 7700 www. ogdenfricks . com July 6, 2009 By Personal Delivery File No. 6953-02 Honorable City Council Members City of San Luis 015ispo 919 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 Re: 328 Marsh Street,San Luis Obispo, CA Gentlepersons: This office represents appellant Mission Station,Inc., its principals Robert Tachovsky and Ricky Fleischer, and the owner of the above property, Lisa Crehan, Trustee of the First Amended Crehan Family Trust, Mission Station is a prospective long-term ground lease tenant at the now-vacant property located at the corner of Higuera and Marsh Streets in San Luis Obispo. Given its proximity to the main on-ramps and off-ramps for Highway 101 into the downtown corridor, the subject property must be considered the primary gateway to Downtown. The purpose of this letter is to act as an executive summary for the appeal and should be read in conjunction with the Report submitted to City Staff on June 16, 2009. Nature of Appeal Mission Station desires to extensively refurbish the existing gas station so that it is top- of-the-line both aesthetically and functionally,remove the existing mechanic's bays, and install a new convenience store at the property. As part of its development and application process, Mission Station has negotiated to acquire a Type 20(off-sale beer and wine) liquor license from a business located in Morro Bay. Because Type 20 licenses are apparently overconcentrated within the project's census tract(111.01),2 the Alcoholic Beverage Commission(ABC)-issued a request to the City's Community Development Department for a public convenience and necessity(PCN) letter to allow the license to be transferred into Census Tract 111.01. After a meeting attended by the principals of Mission Station,the property owner, the undersigned, Mr. Davidson of Community Development,Police Chief Linden,and Assistant City Attorney Christine Dietrich held on June 16,2009,in a.letter dated June 25,2009,John Mandeville, Community Development Director,informed Mission Station that he had determined,in his discretion(and after consultation with the City attendees of the meeting),that the City could not issue a PCN letter to allow the ABC to transfer the Morro Bay license into Census Tract 111.01 s 1 Said report is attached hereto as Exhibit A. Z According to Chief Linden at the meeting held on June 16,all(or virtually all)areas within the County of San Luis Obispo have an overconcentration of liquor licenses. s The City's June 25,2009 letter declining to issue a PCN request is attached hereto as Exhibit B. , I ATTACHMENT 4 Honorable Council Members —2— July 6, 2009 This appeal asks the City Council to overturn the discretionary decision of the Community Development Director not to issue a PCN letter to the ABC, thereby allowing Mission Station to sell beer and wine pursuant to certain conditions. Indeed, this appeal seeks to have the City Council decide on new policy whereby City staff would be instructed to balance the potential negative impact associated with an added liquor license in an overconcentrated census tract (as conditioned)with the overall economic benefit of the project as part of its analysis in deciding whether to issue a PCN letter. Presently, City staff(per stated policy) do not take economics into account and did not do so in deciding not to issue a PCN letter in favor of Mission Station. Given the perilous economic times facing the country, generally,and the City, specifically, Mission Station suggests that a less-rigid approach is necessary to continue the economic vitality of the City's downtown, especially where, as here, the highest and best use of the Property, coincides with its historic use over the past 70+years, i.e. a service station,now with a convenience store. Of course,while the current economy begs for the City's policy change, even if we were in better economic times,the City must incorporate economics as a consideration point otherwise the City may well find itself shutting out certain necessary services, like gas stations, as those stations are now driven by an economic model that remains the same regardless of the economy, a model which requires multiple profit centers and, necessarily,sale of beer and wine at convenience stores. History of Property and Appellant Mission Station As indicated above, the subject property is currently owned by Lisa Crehan. Her maternal grandfather acquired the property on January 18, 1898° While records from the turn of the century are sparse, it is clear that the property has been used as a gas station for at least the past 70 years. (See Ex. A,photo on p. 1.) For at least the last 50 of those years,the property has been the site of a Chevron station owned and operated by Chevron corporate(i.e. not a franchisee). In 2003, Ms. Crehan and Chevron entered into a lease extension that allowed Chevron to have 4 additional 5-year options that were intended to keep Chevron in place until December 2024. Once it had secured the right to lease the property for a lengthy period of time, Chevron sought ARC approval to refurbish the station, eliminate the mechanic's bays, and install a convenience store selling beer and wine for off-site consumption. As is admitted in Exhibit B, the City refused to issue a PCN letter for the Chevron project in 2004 because it sought to import an out-of-City license. As a consequence of the City's denial of the PCN letter, Chevron determined the renovation project to be economically infeasible.s Thus, instead of refurbishing its existing station in the absence of a Type 20 license,Chevron continued to operate the station for 3 years and then notified Ms. Crehan that it would not exercise any the three(3)remaining 5-year options and would be vacating the property as of December 31, 2009. In October 2008, opting not to renovate existing petroleum dispensers,Chevron closed the station's operations and j fenced the property. As of now,the City's "gateway" property has been fenced off and vacant for the past 9 months. Mission Station,Inc., a corporation with Robert Tachovsky and Ricky Fleischer as principals,was formed in 2008 to redevelop,own,and operate a Chevron franchise at the property. Both principals have long ties to San Luis Obispo County: (i) Mr. Tachovsky owns a SA copy of the original grant deed is attached hereto as Exhibit C. It is worth noting that Chevron corporate is willing to issue written acknowledgement that they have no objection to a license being issued to Mission Station subsequent to their denial i � ATIACHMENT4 Honorable Council Members —3 — July 6, 2009 majority interest in three Chevron stations in San Luis Obispo County'and (ii)Mr. Fleischer is a long-time local banker,most recently as the Chief Operating Officer and Credit Administrator of Founders Community Bank. Mission Station has been working on this project since August 2008 and has expended more than$100,000 of its own funds in development costs. Both have invested locally due to their love of the Central Coast and San Luis Obispo. Basis for Appeal 1. The Type 20 ABC license(off-sale beer and wine) is one of the "weakest" liquor licenses available and has a negligible negative effect on the business and residential community. Indeed, as shown in Exhibit A.many of the Type 20 license holders within the site's census tract illustrate this minimal impact on the community: (i) the Cal Poly Downtown store(anapparel store also selling a few bottles of Cal Poly-produced wine), (ii) Muzio's Grocery(a sandwich shop that sells a handful of fine wines and cheeses),(iii)Monterey Street Wine Co. (a boutique wine retailer), and(iv)Central Coast Wines(same). As such, in balancing the negative impacts of issuing the PCN letter,with the positive economic impacts,the type of license sold has the least effect on societal issues (especially with the conditions offered as identified below). 2. Virtually every gas station that hopes to maintain long term viability now has at least 2 profit centers (i.e. fuel pumps,convenience store, car wash) and nearly all new gas stations have at least 3 profit centers. A major profit center for any gas station is the convenience store--almost all of which sell beer and wine for offsite consumption. Indeed, customers expect to be able to buy beer and wine at a gas station with a convenience store and the absence of those products may hamper the site's gasoline sales as customers wishing to do one-stop shopping learn of the store's limitations. As shown in Exhibit A,the economic impact of the City's denial of the PCN,will have a significant impact on the profitability and, realistically, the feasibility of a gas station. 3. Here,Messrs.Tachovsky and Fleischer have elected to proceed with only two profit centers and have agreed not to even seek permits necessary to include a third profit center (i.e. car wash). However, by refusing to allow a full-service convenience store to be built,the City is hobbling the economic viability of their project by diminishing,to a significant degree, the convenience store as a profit center. This problem is so significant that Messrs. Tachovsky and Fleischer may withdraw their application, as did Chevron, in search of more-understanding cities and development officials. Since the property is suitable almost exclusively fora service station and its size prevents more than 2 profit centers-- and the lack of a liquor license will materially hinder one or both of the profit centers-- refusal to issue a PCN letter may well make the property's redevelopment infeasible and leave it vacant for a significant period. Obviously, having its gateway property vacant will have a serious negative impact on the City and the remainder of its Downtown,not to mention Mrs. Crehan and her family. 5. In an economic downturn of historic proportions,Messrs. Tachovsky and Fleischer are interested in investing$1 million(approx.)into redeveloping a"gateway"parcel to this community. In so doing, experienced and successful service station owners will revitalize an a Mr.Tachovsky's Chevron stations are located(a)at the intersection of Hwy 101 and 46 West in Paso Robles,(b)adjacent to the outlets and Hwy 101 in Pismo Beach,and(c)and Niblick Road in Paso Robles. All three stations are well-run,clean,and well-maintained, n j i ATTACHMEW4 Honorable Council Members —4— July 6, 2009 existing use of that property that is beneficial to the City and its sales tax base. In response, the City wishes to stop them because of a purported overconcentration of the liquor license that has the Ieast impact on the community. 6. Chief Linden pointed out that all of San Luis Obispo County is overconcentrated with liquor licenses. While at first glance that may be alarming, scratching beneath the surface shows that this is not surprising or necessarily a bad thing. San Luis Obispo County,including the City, derives a.significant amount of its business revenues and taxes on tourism. Tourism,in this County, is basest largely on two things: (i)the County's beaches and, at least as importantly, (ii) its vineyards. Vineyards, with tasting rooms,require liquor licenses. Vineyards, and the tourists they attract so well, also generate spinoff industries that require liquor licenses. San Luis Obispo, and the rest of the County,have more restaurants per capita than most communities to meet the demand of its residents and the influx of tourists that the City enjoys throughout the year. Similarly, the presence of vineyards also encourages wine boutiques like the 4 businesses identified in No. 1 above--which 4 businesses represent half of the 8 issued Type 20 licenses in Census Tract 111.01. Bakersfield,and even Los Angeles,do not have such a high percentage of boutique wine outlets,though this City does, yet those outlets generate little if any public disturbance complaints and related alcohol offenses. Proposed Conditions Mission Station intends,as have all of Mr. Tachovsky's other service stations,to be a good corporate citizen in the City. After the police informed Mission Station that it was concerned about nearby transients loitering at the station and purchasing alcohol, and additional opportunities for younger(possibly underage) drinkers to obtain alcohol,Mission Station offered to condition its sales by: 1. Not selling any beer singles (i.e. less than 6-packs),including 40-ounce products; 2. Not selling kegs of any size; 3. Installing additional security cameras to assist in deterring crime and/or identifying criminals; 4. Installing a police sub-station at the property and/or providing a desk and telephone for officers'use only at the property. i i i j i I I i � R�RCHMENT 4 Honorable Council Members —5 — July 6,2009 Conclusion Mission Station and the property owner,Mrs. Crehan, respectfully request that the City instruct Staff to balance the economic interests of the City and community in determining whether to issue a PCN letter and, in this case, direct City staff to issue the PCN letter on behalf of Mission Station. Very truly yours John W.Fric s JWF/lsf Enclosures i Mission Station, Inc. 328 Marsh Street, San Luis Obispo d.M x+•37 M.�` '�^`v �# '�� ' 4•"x�'f i�it�a E 'aa ?.. an Meeting with City of San Luis Obispo Officials June 16, 2009 3:00 pm C3a-a-o X§IfiiFA-FAGC1 CFL' ATTACHMENT 4 I. Introduction to Site / Project A. Location /History of Site B. Proposed Site Improvements C. Project Status 1. Landlord - Ground Lease 2. Chevron- Branding/Sale of Improvements 3. Lender-Approval Status 4. ARC / Planning Department 5. ABC/ City of San Luis Obispo- PCN Letter II. Gas Station / Convenience Store Economics A. Profit Centers B. Subject Site 1. Two Profit Center.Location 2. Impact on Appraisal/ Financing III. ABC License / Census Tract Analysis A. City of SLO Census Tract Comparison by License Type B. Key Census Tract Comparisons C. Census Tract 111.01 1. Business Concentration 2. Residential Concentration 3. Type 20 License Review IV. Mitigation of Potential Impact A. Transient Population B. Other Key Factors V. Summary/ Conclusions i BC -_D_ 2 EXF1Mi&PAG1:a \' J ATTACHMENT 4 I. Introduction to Site/Project A. Location/History of Site. The subject site is accessed from Highway 101 by exiting Marsh Street (north or south bound), and has served as the "Gateway to Downtown San Luis Obispo" for decades. The subject property has been owned by the Crehan family since the 1890's, and for at least the last 70 years has been operated as a gas station. For at Ieast 50 of those years, the property has been the site of a corporate owned and operated service station. Late last year, Chevron U.SA,Inc. informed Ms. Crehan (current owner) that it would not exercise any of its remaining options to renew its lease and, instead, walk away from the site and all of its improvements. The site's operating activities were shut down in October of 2008,and it has been fenced since that time. Their decision to vacate the site is now believed to have been, at least in part, due to many of the same economic factors currently influencing Mission Station,Inc. B. Proposed Site Improvements The subject site currently consists of an outdated gas station/service bay facility with a small convenience store area next to the service bays. The following summarizes the key improvements the principals of Mission Station Inc. (Rob Tachovskyand Ricky Fleischer) intend to make to the site: - demolish the existing service bay/convenience store building and build a new state of the art convenience store facility (approximately 70' x 30'; equal to the existing building size) - replace the existing dispensers and related equipment with up to date equipment - update and expand the current landscaping - re-coat the parking lot (and increase the number of parking spaces,with dedicated parldng in front of the store,due to repositioning of the C-store footprint) - add the option of diesel fuel to patrons - add the option of beer and wine sales to patrons C. Project Status 1. Landlord-Ground Lease The landlord (Ms. Crehan) and Mission Station, Inc. have executed a Letter of Intent that outlines the key points of a long term ground lease. The execution of a formal lease agreement is pending the final issues facing MSI. y� 3 EXHIBlTf7 PAGE&F I� \- ATTACHMENT 4 2. Chevron-Branding/Sale of Improvements MSI has executed a Letter of Intent with Chevron U.S.A., Inc.that outlines the key points of a branding agreement and bill of sale for the existing improvements. The execution of the formal agreements is pending the final issues facing MSI. 3. Lender-Approval Status MSI has received conditional approval for financing subject to a recent appraisal setting forth the estimated value of the project once completed. Said value is predicated on various factors, the most significant of which are gross profits from gas and convenience store sales (further analysis/discussion to follow). 4. Architectural Review Committee/Planning Department ARC approved the final revisions to the proposed site plan in April of 2009,and expressed their appreciation of the effort made to improve not only the appearance of the site,but its functionality(primarily parking)at our expense (not required under original ARC approval), and indicated their strong desire for MSI to move quickly to update the site (due to its status as the entrance to downtown). The plans are in final plan check with the Planning Department,with any revisions expected to be completed within a few weeks. S. ABC/City of San Luis Obispo-Public Convenience&Necessity Letter A letter dated May 15, 2009 was issued by the City of San Luis Obispo to ABC declining the application of MSI to bring in an existing Type 20 license from outside the subject Census Tract due to it being an overconcentrated tract. II. Gas Station/Convenience Store Economics A. Profit Centers Gas/C-Store developers and/or investors would typically like to see three profit Centers,which include gasoline, convenience store, and automated car wash sales. While it will vary by location, a reasonable breakdown of gross profit percentages from these centers for this example would be as follows: Gasoline 50% C-Store 35% Car Wash 15% a 3 �� 4 �nG—pAcAort b ATTACHMENT 4 In the case of a three profit centers,it would not be unusual for gross profit to be around $1,000,000. A further breakdown, to include beer and wine gross profits,would be as follows: Gasoline 50% C-Store 28% Beer/Wine 7% (20%of C-Store GP) Car Wash 15% B. Subject Site 1. Two Profit Center Location The subject site has only two profit centers,and as such is already operating at only 85% of Gross Profit (using the above example) that would be expected from a current developer/investor. With the elimination of beer and wine sales that percentage drops to 78%. GP w/3 Profit Centers $1,000,000 GP w/2 Profit Centers 850,000 GP w/2 PC's&No Beer&Wine 780,000 To make the investment necessary to maximize the potential of this site, a prudent investor would have to see something that offsets the physical limitations of the site. In the case of this site it location,which provides for limited direct competition (another gas station in the immediate vicinity), and high traffic volume related to Highway 101 access and Downtown SLO. While these factors serve to mitigate the absence of a third profit center (even with a beer and wine license), they do not overcome it. The final and deciding factor for MSI was a desire that two local businessmen have to invest in Downtown San Luis Obispo (in lieu of other areas in or outside of the County). The absence of a beer and wine license,and the additional drain on potential gross profit, is simply more than even a local investor should have to face. 2. Impact on Appraisal/Financing The current loan approval is based on an appraisal of the subject property as if completed in accordance with the current plans and specifications. The final process in determining said value is a Discounted Cash Flow of EBrrDA (calculates present value of earnings before interest, taxes,depreciation and amortization over a specific term). In appraising this type of property, the appraiser presumes that resources typically available to operators are present within the respective community. The absence of beer and wine profits is not typical, and as such brought the subject value and corresponding loan approval into question B �- 5GG EXHWI PAGE J OFL ATTACHMENT 4 III. ABC License/Census Tract Analysis A. City of SLO Census Tract Comparison by License Type The following data was compiled in an attempt to gain a better understanding of the current ABC license concentrations that currently exist within the City. Since our request for a PCN letter is being denied based on census tract parameters,said tracts were the basis for comparison. ABC License Comparisons by Census Tract* * Data obtained from ABC website license query system DescriptIon CkvToui ct 111.03 %of Total On sate 147 61 4150% Off sale 67 12 1791% Type 20 43 8 18.60% Type 20 w/Gas 8 0 n/a Census Tract 111.01(subject tract)hrcludes the subject property at 328 Morsh street and all other Downtown SGO businesses Description c1tvToul CT11S.02 of Tota On sale DU 13 8.84% Off Sale 67 12 1791% Type 20 43 8 18,60% Type 20 w/Gas 8 1 12.50% The Incicalon of Census Tract IIS02 was made as a point of comparison to the subject tract with regard to potential concentrations and lew Hype after ices available Description 0tvTotal CT 112 %of Toil On Sale 147 20 13.61% Off Sale 67 10 14.43% Type 20 43 5 LL63% Type 20 w/Gas 8 2 25.00% The Inclusion of Census Tract 112 was made as a pow of comparison to the subject trod with regard to potentia/concwtnWons and leue!/type ofservices available Description Clty Total CT 115.02?L112 %of Total On Sale 147 33 22.45% Off Sale 67 22 32.84% Type 20 43 13 30.23% Type 20 w/Gas 8 3 3750% The hxlusion of Census Tract ZISa2 and 112 on a combined basis was made as o point of Comparison to the subject tract wkb regard to patemla/caruernanfans and levet type of services ovalhrble PROPOSED CHANGE DescrI Conon City Total cr 11 of Total On Sale 147 61 41.50% Off Sale 68 13 19.22% 7ype 20 44 9 20AS% Type 20 w/Gas 9 1 11.51% The proposed changes representnomhtd increases to percentages that closely mbrortotals already preseniin otherceraus tracts a a-as 6 EXHIBIT PAGE10FR ATTACHMENT 4 The proposed changes result in a nominal percentage increase to the totals, while remaining similar to other census tracts within the city. Current On-Sale 116 123.02 108 109.01 115.02 4% 0% 1% 9% �� 109.02 110 1%% 125.01 ,x 6% 1% t 114 �w 0% 1 113 111-01 8% 42% 112 14% 11103 4% 11L02 10% Current Off-Sale Proposed Off-Sale 108 116 123.02 2% 109.01 123.02 108 109.01 116 19 2% 0% 4% 2% 0% 109.02 4% , 109.02 18%02 f�> 1104% 15..062 _- 1104% gra ?�' 8% 9% tij-u.a „ 111-1 19% 125.01 6" _�.^` In 115.01 " '�a` 0% 'V 0% /�/f U4 tsx• 114.J 0% 0% 113 11102 113 9% 112 11103 13% 9% 112 11103 11102 25% 6% 15% 6% 13% Current Type 20 Proposed Type 20 116 123.02 108 109.01 7% 2% 0% 109.02 116 123.02 108 LD1 7% 2% 2 5% -� 1 109.02 125.02y� 110 „ .a s% 38% u% 115.02ti'x ”: u0 titvi ' 18% ,s�,lry+ �. 11% 115.01 0% Cux-r t .01 11101 1 % 114 18% 11101 a% 111.02 114 zo% S% 14% 113 11L02 Zu uL03 5% 112 14% 12% s% il% 11103 s% The above graphs point out the only clear overconcentration within the city; on-sale licenses within the downtown census tract ga,ac 7 ACHMENT 4 B. Key Census Tract Comparisons In analyzing the above data it became evident that 5 census tracts comprised the most significant ABC license concentrations. The following graphs demonstrate the relationship between said tracts for Off-Sale, Type 20, and Type 20 with gasoline sales. Proposed Off-Sale Proposed Type 20 no 115.02 12% 110 115.02 za% _ 2a% 15% I 26% 112 112 20% ss% 111.01 28% 111.02 a% 111.02 18% Proposed Type 20 W/Gas 115.02 17% . L 110 s 11L01 17% 112 33% M.02 17% The 5 tracts are all similar,with no clear overconcentration present. C. Census Tract 111.01 1. Business Concentration With the inclusion of Downtown San Luis Obispo in the subject census tract, a clear concentration of business activity is present within the census tract As the single most concentrated area of retail activity in the county, it seems logical that this tract would have higher number of ABC licenses. However, the only clear overconcentration when comparing P,a a�- 8 XHIB iThPACe b GF1 ATTACHMENT 4 census tracts is found in the On-Sale licenses, for which the subject tract holds 41.50% of the city total. By comparison it has not led to a high concentration of off-sale licenses,and does not currently hold one of eight gas stations that provide beer and wine sales. 2. Residential Concentration The map below depicts residential concentrations by census tract for the most recent census. 7 .1 c \ Morro B., Chorro RsVr ,y�\ I r .? �o Av.r 1 `� -tel' ^` Y �• a. TM-P002. Persons per Square Mile: 2000 li Universe: Total population Data Set: Census 2000 Summary File 1 (SF 1) 100-Percent Data San Luis Obispo city, California by Census Tract Data Classes Persons/Sc Rile 60 - 9T 805 - 997 1282 - 169A 3&13 - 3013 5618 - 8569 Features /✓9ejor L-c. S:rcc: S:ream/Waccr body S:ream/Wri-cr bogy 13g c)-g 9 • • . '� ATTA H C MENT 4 Census tract 111.01 contains the highest range of residents per square mile, while census tract 112, which has two gas stations with beer and wine licenses,has the second lowest range of persons per square mile a'` t 127 109.01 J. " 112 0 • Q - 111.Q 110 113 111.03 '.•: 115.02 .. +V. 116 c Once again,based on the level of residential activity in the subject census tract, it would seem logical that a higher level of ABC licenses would be present 3. Type 20 License Review The Type 20 license is the "weakest" alcohol license as it does not allow for liquor sales, or consumption of alcohol on-site which eliminates the risk present with on-sale licenses, whereby patrons will have alcohol in their system when they drive away. The current holders of Type 20 licenses within the subject tract areas follows: Cal Poly Downtown: Apparel store selling a few bottles of Cal-Poly labeled wine Muzio's Grocery: Sandwich shop selling a handful of fine wines and cheeses 9.;L aq 10 EXHMI'I _PAGE t{{OpgJg ATTACHMENT 4 Monterey St Wine: Boutique Wine retailer Central Coast Wines:Boutique Wine retailer with on site tasting room (on and off sale in same location) SL Oriental Market: Specialty market outside of downtown corridor with limited alcohol sales Circle IG Similar provider with regard to convenience store (outside of downtown corridor) 7-Eleven(2): Similar provider with regard to convenience store with one of two locations in the main downtown corridor There is not a.single location within the census tract that provides the level of "convenience" that our location would provide (one stop gas and convenience store with excellent parking, ingress, and egress). As such, it seems clear that this location will greatly enhance convenience and provide what most communities would consider a common necessity for its residents and visitors. IV. Mitigation of Potential Negative Impact A Transient Population The availability of alcohol to the transient population is not unique to San Luis Obispo; what is unique are the city's climate, location, perceived prosperity of its residents,and social welfare efforts. While private property and business owners should not be held directly responsible for managing issues related to said population, MSI is aware of the benefits controlling such an issue can provide and is willing to play a role. Some efforts for consideration are as follows: 1. No single beer sales (6 pack minimum) 2. Posting of attractive signs at key entry points asking patrons not to donate to panhandlers as a portion of store profits are donated to local homeless shelter(and they would be) 3. Allow for police substation(parking,phone,desk,etc)on site 4. Enhanced surveillance equipment to monitor the site and surrounding area 24 hours a day;key camera locations/angles to fully identify vehicles (including license plates) and individuals. The Pismo Beach police department can attest to the assistance Mr. Tachovsky's surveillance equipment at the Five Cities Chevron has played in solving a specific crime(crime was committed off site;perpetrator stopped to use facility). f3�-3o 11 EX1RBr1,R1,A(iL- i l� od ATTACHOT4 B. Other Key Factors 1. Preservation of a site use that has significant historical roots in the community; continuing the ownership Iegacy currently in place. 2. As local and experienced owners (both principals in this endeavor live with their families in SLO County; Mr. Tachovsky currently owns and operates three Chevron sites within SLO county, and Mr. Fleischer is a former executive officer at two locally owned San Luis Obispo Banks) we will provide enhanced oversight of our facilities and activities, and be _accessible to police and other city officials year round. 3. Under normal economic conditions the subject site could attain gross revenues in excess of$6,000,000,providing significant support to the tax base necessary to continue key city services. All of the money being invested in this project (including loan funds) will be from local sources, and serve to expand the local economy. 4. Based on input from local residents and city officials our pending plans are held in an extremely positive light. The entrance to Downtown SLO has been unattractive and run down for many years, and the prospect of upgrading the site to today's standards has many excited. 5. The economic climate is not likely to improve significantly for some time, with commercial activity poised to struggle for years to come (tenants unable to pay current rents, much less increased rents that would justify increased value and investment). In light of this, MSI is prepared to invest over$1,000,000 (not including land cost) to bring this property up to date,and provide a new"first impression"for Downtown SLO. 6. Once again, there is not a single location within the census tract that provides the level of"convenience"that our location would provide (one stop gas and convenience store with excellent parking, ingress, and egress). As such, it seems clear that this location will greatly enhance convenience and provide what most communities would consider a common necessity for its residents and visitors. V. Summary/Conclusions It is the sincere hope of MSI that the above information adequately outlines the many reasons we feel the issuance of a PCN letter will be a "net gain"to the City of San Luis Obispo,its residents,and visitors. In an attempt to briefly summarize some key points,the following questions seem appropriate: - Does the current proposal provide a level of convenience not currently present within the census tract? - If not, would that level of convenience extend to Highway 101 travelers I via the ease of access provided by the Marsh Street on and off ramp? 8a-3i 12 EXHIBITS PAGI 114FR ATTACHMENT 4 As the census tract comprised of the highest concentration of business and residential activity, is it reasonable to expect that a level and type of service available in other census tracts would be available in the subject tract? Based on the current uses of Type 20 Iicenses within the subject census tract, and the levels present in other key tracts, is it reasonable to consider the tract overconcentrated? Should the improvement of said "Gateway" to Downtown SLO be considered a key goal for the City of San Luis Obispo? Does the absence of a beer and wine license negatively impact the economic feasibility (for MSI or any other investor) of an up to date gas station and convenience store facility(at current cost structures)? Do the mitigating factors provided above serve to offset any potential negative impact an additional Type 20 license in said tract my create? In working through this analysis and attempting to objectively answer the above questions, MSI is even more resolved in its position that what is being requested of the City is far outweighed by the benefits it will receive. We welcome any additional comments or questions, and hope to receive the support this project warrants. 13a 3a 13 EXHIBITAPAGB_6(}p�O ATTACHMEW4 ATTACHMENTS Sa-33 y� 14 EXHIBIT t7 PAGEACF I I ; ATTACHMENT 4 N r. a� o® s s� e a s c r o cm 1 ' 1 � I I� \ c { 1, r . I }'' S 0 3 � m m m O M„ vA m rd a 'a a m z I c r E F Q X0000000 YA i1 I' ATTT4 Q� al:ji a LLJ 6 8 p yAj � a q{ 9@a @@l Ya :M g ' 19 $ § Eg° e1C !@ Ws :t>a� Llcia ' fH �g �� e � f �� @4@ � �ffif �d �fH6E � � � G�� @® @ � � � —►� �� t� _ Ep 4-9 i i cu a 6@3°aR�1 e Qoj E it �• '\ - -- i R c \ = p a , EXMITAYAG &OFL I -) ATTACHMENT 4 lugs 'Spo 1� 127.02 109.01 r i 112ilto • •' • Q � �a r .110 113:x' 111.03 115.02 116 gc 3� EMIB'Fr PAGLo_Ur1 ATTACHMENT 4 91 Cl � ty Of SAn luis oaspo Community Development Department a 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 934013218 "May 15,2009 Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control 3220 S.Higuera St. Suite 233 San Luis Obispo,CA 93401 Attention: Rhonda Whittington Subject: Alcoholic Beverage License Transfer—328 Marsh St. Dear Rhonda: The City of San Luis Obispo has determined that the standard of public convenience or necessity would not be met by issuance of the alcoholic beverage license application for 328 Marsh Street. Thus,we are unable to issue the PCN letter for the Type 20 license transfer. The site is located in an ovaooncent ated tract whereby licenses could be transferred within the same tract;but not brought in from outside as is the current request. Furthermore,this decision is consistent with the City's previous determination an a license ttansferat this location. In 2004,the applicants withdrew their administrative use permit application when they discovered that a license could not be transferred from outside the tract. Please call me at 781-7177 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Dong Davidson,AICA Deputy Director,Development Review cc: Applicant: Mission Station,Inc_ 3940-7 Broad St. #f325 San Luis Obispo,CA 93401 Deborah Linden,Police Chief t The City of San Luis Obispo Is eonatdued to Wude the disabled In an of as sevloes,programs and activities. 8a-3:7- l. Telecommunications Device for the Deaf(OW 781-7410. QQ }� EXHIBITEPAGE Ij OF U ATTACHMENT 4 Jun-26-09 08:04A City cf SLO—CD Dept. BOB 781 7173 P.Ol (` C4 of San lois oBispo .fit pCommunity Development Department•919 Palm Stroet,San Luis Obispo,CA 93401-3218 V i Ulu ,2009) �To4a- 25� 200l Rob Tachovsky Mission Station, Inc. 3940-7 broad Strm-t#325 San Luis Obispo,CA 93401 Sub)ect: Alcoholic Beverage License Trander-328 Marsh St. Dear Rob: "'he City of San i.uir,Obigw has dcUmirined that the standard ofpublic convenience or necessity would not he met by isauanc ,of the alcoholic beverage license application for 32R Marsh Sircct. lyzus, we am, unable to issue the PCN MuT, for the Type 20 license transrw. This determination was confirmed at t1w me-ling on June*16th with you, your team, and representatives Crum the City's Community Mwlopment and police DepartmLnts,as well as the City Attomcy's olTxcc. The situ is lovated in an overconcenlratcd tract whereby licenses could be ti-msterred within the same tinct, but not brought in from outside as 3s the cummi, roquest. The lily stuff 9=3 no compelling reason to trtivcr froze this long standing policy regarding overconmmttmted tracts. Nrher'tnoru, this decision Ls comisuant with the City's previous determination cm a license transfer at this location. To 2004, the applicants wit1uhm their administrative use permit application when they discovered that a 1 iecnse could not be transferrod from outside tltc tract. Acooniing to City Municipal Cudc suction 1.20,this aulion may be appealed to the City Council. Appeals must be in writing, accompanied by a $100 check made out to the City of San Luis Obispo,and m"v ivW within 10 days of the date of this letter. SinvereJy, 4� 044 jJldhn Mandeville,AI('p "Community DOvc lopment Director cc: I)c:piniment of AlrnhoNe Bg;varage Control .3220 S. Higuern St. Suite 233 San Luis Obispo.CA 93401 Attention: Rbonda Whittington Jonathan i Alwel1,City Attorney Shelly Stanwyck,Assistant City Manager Deborah Undca.Police Chief 8�-38 The Crty d gar t.u6 Obispo 15 comm tted to Include the disabled In alt O1 Its 891"Vlc9s,programa end activities. TaIOCOfMt=k:Wkms DaWm ror Um Deal(lip$)7@1.7410. EXHIBIT-ZPAGE� I GF ATTACHMENT 4•�� s T'410 3abadure Made this.......eighteenth........_ ... .,. ..day of January.......... d. D. f898._, Qt WUR rhA 6ndm= .Ran In&..-amore ....duly t nr�aq AT}A PYi RtIgg_I,nA ar the IAWR ret the rtgtar• rAT1PorniA , daSr;g-bwslness_ia..Sha-Ci,Ley_.oZ-.-3an._Lvis-DA1spo,Cauntg-o��&�i•-,Luis— � Obispo,•-State-.mf.-aellfornia the par4r.__of the first part, and d&mes-I3,--S�pg•_o-x-_the-said-GoazzitY--oS'-.Ssa1..,IaL1s--IIbis3x�rStete--oR.-._..___ ae�arTki:�- the I. party-of the secondpart,� E i Wih[tSSeth: Y'hat the said Party-_of the first pan,for and in consideration of the i j sumof-TBH.{lO.,Go; _Dollars, KN.c S ateSul•Honey of the United States of s3meriea, 1o.1t._....._in hand paid by the said panY__..of the second part,the receipt whereof is hereby aelnowledged has—,granted, bargained and sold, conveyed and em%rmed, and by these presents do_q grant,bargain and se11, convey and =firm, unto the said part:7- _of the second part, and to hih ezrs and assigns Forever, all tha-t..... ..certain 101_,Piete__orparael__ of land situate, lying and being in the —County o} and bounded and particularly described as follows,to wit: ' � r!n $t.�he—jloint_..nP_.3ntPra Pci�o^ nP LT,n Tln.•tT, 1 jn,p i . OF Marsh Street kith the East line of Archer street, and running � . tastree earth ^esteriy on sT fl'�1ae eP 7croirsr'sLxeet-fdrty=seven---.._.._... Pmt to the south east lig of Higet�e�ti theses follomdngr the south east line of Rigueaa street northerly 60 Peet to the . awe-o�-�s#d•-atree3;--theaoa••oart t�a-aeid-�-ire--og-ti#gat�-•- _ �?,�' Streot 1d. 30 flegs. 45 min, E. 150 3 10 est to a oint;thence in eau ea�swer Y�� irec't3on-3n'-a�Y-reef-lia'e'143-♦-6f2'cT"pe�C-t3�— ` ^^� � �POiIIt--OL`�-aiYJ:•t71.1 i na of T1ATcl� CLwP._af Ai�:tlwn4_2fl� A�•1 n fAPt_•_ � "i Inorth east from the north easterly corner of ]'arsh and Archer � -� '� ?stYaets';"then_�a-S:-••T33--dul,'a•-..9_y�.�y_.� �_.._..- .., +larsh.._Streat_-,20�_9�1,0,-,.fggt._Lq.._thg.._pgiy}t...gp.,begi.nriTla•,.and�b�ei� ( *� ` �a fractional part oi' Block No. 120 of Fteed�a k Co. add3� redo o i Lkg•-e .a A ni v.,. � e.. T'' /�yJ 3^�""�^�'-0�-�,,h® t�,'&4it L'7{Ol7,II-- ( 6` --YTCyryi P�,•Y-.Mf-�„S"-YMi'Qn/. A T+ the Beckett Nursery tract. Raference being made to the official maP o a y -LUIS --re Partinulp'P description, O 4 fl r i 90get4ee with all and singular the tenements,hereditaments and appurtenances thereunto belonging, or in anywise appertaining, and the reversion and reversions, remainder and remainders, rents, issues and proflts thereof to rjaut anb tO :40lb all and singular the said premises, together with,the _ aPPurtenances, unto the said party-of the second part, and and assigns forever,_. � 3n ulitficss WbirtofT the said part y...._..of the first part ha e hereunto a ,- �c & y it'--,, "nd..-and seal_.., the day and'yearftrst above written. SiFO,Scdtb onb Othutteb in fly Pau=of Egga — x core._namsx..r.ew-new.-a.ecunexnaus ivy sacnmsoaorr.�ornm.o..m � F Aftachment-sit'y of san lues ostspo � ,lune 2008 zonmq nerjutations 17.08.040 Concurrent sales of motor fuel and alcoholic beverages. Concurrent sales of motor fuel and alcoholic beverages at a service station other than beer or wine are prohibited. The concurrent sales of motor fuel and beer or wine at a service station shall be subject to the approval of an Administrative Use Permit and the following: A._ There shall be no sales of beer or wine for on-site consumption; e e B. Beer or wine may be sold only in conjunction with selling groceries and other sundries and convenience items; C. There shall be no advertisement or display of. beer or wine visible from off the �J premises; D. No beer or wine shall be displayed within 5 feet of the cash register or front door; E. No advertisement of beer or wine shall be displayed atmotor fuel islands and no self-illuminating advertising for beer or wine shall be located on buildings or windows; F. No sales of beer or wine shall be made from a drive-in window; G. No display or sales of beer or wine shall be made from an ice tub. H. Employees on duty.between the hours of 10 p.m. and 2 a.m. who sell beer or wine shall be at least 21 years of age. I. For purposes of this section, "concurrent sales of motor fuel and beer or wine".shall mean the ability to purchase motor fuel and beer or wine at the same time or at the same place. More specifically, a service station that permits a customer to pay for motor fuel and beer or wine: 1) at the same location, or 2) utilizing a single financial transaction, is engaging in concurrent sales of motor fuel and beer or wine and shall be subject to this ordinance. J. In order to grant approval of a Use Permit, the Hearing Officer must make the following findings in addition to findings contained in Section 17.58.040: 1. The establishment of concurrent sales of motor fuel and beer or wine is p consistent with the provisions of the Business and Professions Code Section e 23790.5. 2. The sale of beer or wine at this location does not jeopardize the public health, safety or welfare, e.g., will not result in an over concentration of businesses selling or serving alcoholic beverages within the vicinity. 3. The sale of beer or wine at a service station is otherwise allowed within the same zoning district at this location and the sale of beer or wine concurrent with motor fuel would not result in the expansion of a non-conforming.use. (Prior Code Ord. '1124— 1 Ex.A(part), 1988; Ord. 1446(2004 Series)updated) 17.08.050 Ve ding ma Ines. 'a A. A ve ding chi e" is de 'ce ch -spenses pr uct or s is , either r sale P for ree, nd w h ' acti to entire by recei r of t pro ct se pace 9 Attachmentb RESOLUTION NO. (2009 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO DENYING AN APPEAL OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR'S DECISION TO DENY A CERTIFICATE OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE OR NECESSITY FOR AN ALCOHOL LICENSE AT 328 MARSH STREET (MISSION CHEVRON) WHEREAS, the Community Development Director, on June 25, 2009, declined to make a finding that the public convenience or necessity would be met by the transfer of a Type 20 alcohol license from a business outside the City to the proposed Mission Chevron project located at 328 Marsh Street, San Luis Obispo; and WHEREAS, Mission Station, Inc., with principals Robert Tachovsky and Ricky Fleischer, filed an appeal of the Community Development Director's action on July 6, 2009; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public hearing in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, on August 4, 2009, for the purpose of considering an appeal of the Community Development Director's action; and WHEREAS, the Council has duly considered all evidence, including documents submitted by the appellants, testimony of interested parties, and the evaluation and 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 following findings: 1. The transfer of an alcohol license from outside the City to 328 Marsh Street would add to the over-concentration of alcohol outlets in the downtown area and increase associated public safety and health problems at and in the vicinity of the property. 2. Sufficient and convenient outlets for the sale of beer and wine already exist in close proximity to 328 Marsh Street, which meets the public convenience. 3. The transfer of the license to 328 Marsh Street would be in conflict with existing Zoning regulations regarding the concurrent sale of alcohol and gasoline. 4. Not increasing the number of licenses in over-concentrated areas is consistent with Council direction regarding the necessity to curb the public safety and health problems associated with alcohol use, especially underage and high-risk drinking. R � -* Resolution No. (2009 Series) Auachm en% Page 2 SECTION 2. Action. The City Council does hereby deny the appeal of the Community Development Director's action, thereby upholding the City's denial of a certificate of public convenience and necessity as required by law for the transfer of an alcohol license to 328 Marsh Street, Mission Chevron. Upon motion of seconded by , and on the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this 4`h day of August 2009. Mayor David F. Romero ATTEST: Elaina Cano City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Christine Dietrick Assistant City Attorney ' From: Ricky Fleischer (mailto:rafleischer@att.net] Sent- Mon 8/3/2009 4:33 PM To: Romero, Dave; Settle, Allen; Ashbaugh, John; Carter, Andrew;janmarx@slocity.org Cc: LISA CREHAN; cabgrapes@aol.com Subject: August 4, 2009 appeal by Mission Station, Inc. (Business Item #2) Esteemed Members of the San Luis Obispo City Council, I have attached a letter from the property owner at 328 Marsh Street, which is the location of our proposed re-development for which we are seeking assistance on a ruling. While we are working on a brief presentation for tomorrow night, I wanted to share this letter with you as soon as I could, as it presents a historical perspective only the owner could appropriately provide. I wanted to thank those of you for which my partner and/or I have been able to meet in person for your time, and request that all of you contact me with any questions or comments you may have in this regard to me at 748-6699 (I will keep my phone close as I know we are running short on time). I know our time to present is limited tomorrow night, and I am seeking every opportunity to explain our position on this matter. I have reviewed the staffs recommendation, and while we hope that our presentation included in your material provides insight to our position, we look forward to our chance to respond to said concerns in brief tomorrow night. My partner, Rob Tachovsky, and I sincerely appreciate your time and consideration in this matter, and hope to become a long term product and service provider (and taxpayer) in your great city. Ricky Fleischer Mission Station, Inc. 805-748-6699 C'COUNCIL Lei CDD DIR am mc'eC'1`FIN DIR atm'n4e C�J'�IRE CHIEF 1TaRNEY Z'PWDip RED FILEL3cLERIvCRIG MEETING AGENDA Q 0EPT EA99 ©'POLICE CHF r� C rPEC DIR DATE ITEM # F3o-S CDfiIL DIR CeHR 9 -- _. 1R f17pliouNE CVUuUL Gty m6p el-&R C il August 3,2009 San Luis Obispo City Council 990 Palm St San Luis Obispo,CA 93401-3249 Esteemed Members of the San Luis Obispo City Council The Crehan family has owned the property in question since the tum of last century,when our mother's grandfather(our great-grandfather),James Henry, bought it in 1898. (For ten dollars,if you can believe it.) Originally,a blacksmith's operation,where hay was also sold,the property kept up with the times and became a gas station,when there were now more cars on the road than horses. As the City grew,and grew in importance,Chevron Corporation wanted to lease the property'and upgrade both it and the gas station upon it. On August 1st,1936,James Henry's daughter,our grandmother,Collice Henry Portnoff,shook hands.with the Chevron man,thinking that Chevron looked like a company that was doing pretty well for itself and might make a pretty good tenant. From that day up until 2008--a,period of seventy-two years--Chevron has occupied our family's lot The relationship was obviously stable and satisfactory to both parties,and,i would add, to the City,and only ended when Chevron wanted to upgrade their enterprise by adding a mini-mart,which would'sell wine and beer. Turned down by the City,and deciding against continuing to lease space that perforce would remain an old-model enterprise, Chevron pulled up stakes and left And now the property is effectively abandoned and certainly untenanted (except by weeds)for the first time since 1898. Since the Crehan family loves San Luis, not only because of the City itself, but because of our friends who live there and the historical and familial 'ties that bind,'we've felt sad every time we've been up there recently to see not only what our property has become, but how that,sitting as it does on a key entrance into the City,it impacts on the City negatively. Though we may know the truth is otherwise,the first impression of San Luis is that it is'down at heel,'not thriving. The family itself would love to make improvements on our property, not only for our own sake and sense of pride, but also on behalf of what we think of as our'roots'city. But,quite honestly,we currently lack the means to do so.. So any improvements to the property will depend on these worthy gentlemen before you. We like them. We like the intelligence and energy they are putting into the plans they have for our property,and we think they'll do our great-grandfatherproud. Like him,they can see a good opportunity when it presents itself,and are willing to work hard to make the.most of it Back in 1898,if you rode by lames Henry's property,he'd not only shoe your horse and feed it hay, but he might play the violin for you. Maybe he wasn't the official greeter for the City, but he was still a first-rate ambassador for it. You entered it or left it predisposed to thinking ovell of San Luis. From what we have,seen of the plans the gentlemen before you have shown us,their gas station will not only be a clean,well.- lighted space, but state-of-the-art,a profit source for the City,and a good advertisement for the City itself. We wish them the best of luck,for themselves, for us,and for the City of San Luis Obispo, and hope you look kindly on their proposal. Thank you very much.for your time in listening to our letter. Sincerely, Lisa Crehan,Owner&Family.Representative Crehan Letter(2) i I This may be of interest for tonight's appeal. This is a tally I prepared from an Off-Sale list which Deb Linden provided me. Type 21 Licenses (Beer/wine/liquor) Grocery Stores 9 Liquor Stores 10 Includes Madonna Inn Drug store 5 Total Type 21 24 Type 20 Licenses(Beer/wine) Gas Station C-Store 10 C-Store(no gas) 6 Includes Quality Suites Market/Deli 6 Wine(no storefront) 8 Wine(with storefront) 4 Total Type 20 34 Type 20—Wine, not in City limits =9 Andrew Carter Council Member City of San Luis Obispo -#ARP eepy �l1 iL 2TOUNCIL ff-CDD DIR RED FILE aeAe c«!MC-7 E11FIN DIR 13"A@R6a55rc1qnisz CfFIRE CHIEF MEETING AGENDA q1 TTORNEY [5-pw DIR E3 CLERK/ORIG 2 POLICE CHF DA 'Y 0 ITEM # o DFFT HEADS 13 REC DIR E UTIL DIR 17-HR DIR NGZJ 1'hJ�S �LOG[dIL°IL Cary l�162 ClE2�