HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-20-2018 Item 13 Appeal of Planning Commission decision regarding business hours of Escape Room use
Meeting Date: 3/20/2018
FROM: Michael Codron, Community Development Director
Prepared By: Kyle Van Leeuwen. Planning Technician
SUBJECT: REVIEW OF AN APPEAL (FILED BY THE APPLICANT, BCR
DEVELOPMENTS) OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION’S DECISION TO
APPROVE A NEW ESCAPE ROOM BUSINESS, A COMMERCIAL
RECREATION FACILITY-INDOOR USE, WITH A CONDITION LIMITING
HOURS OF OPERATION TO 8:00 P.M. SUNDAY THROUGH THURSDAY,
AND 10:00 P.M. FRIDAY AND SATURDAY.
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a Resolution (Attachment A) denying the appeal and upholding the Planning
Commission’s approval of a Use Permit, with a categorical exemption from environmental
review.
SITE DATA
Applicant BCR Developments
Property Owner Javad Sani, Sarfar Properties LLC
Appeal Date January 2, 2018
General Plan General Retail
Zoning Downtown Commercial (C-D-MU)
Mixed Use Overlay
Site Area ~1,900 square feet
Environmental
Status
Categorically exempt from
environmental review under CEQA
Guidelines section 15301 (Existing
Facilities)
Background
On, August 31, 2017, the applicant, BCR Developments, requested an Administrative Use
Permit for an “escape room”1 business in the tenant space located at 583 Marsh Street. This type
of business is classified as a commercial recreation facility-indoor use. The Zoning Regulations
Section 17.22 (Table 9) allows for this use within the Downtown Commercial (C-D) zone with
the approval of an Administrative Use Permit. This tenant space is also located within a mixed-
use development. Zoning Regulations section 17.08.072 (Mixed Use Projects) requires a
Director’s approval when a commercial component of a mixed-use project will operate outside
1 An escape room game is one in which a group of participants (typically 4 to 10) have a limited amount
of time (usually one hour) to solve a series of puzzles of various types that provide clues leading the
solution of a final puzzle for “unlocking” the door of the room.
Packet Page 151
13
the hours of 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., to ensure that the commercial use will not negatively impact
the residential uses. The applicant’s original request was for operating hours until 10:00 p.m.,
Sunday through Thursday, and 11:30 p.m. on Friday and Saturday. On October 9, 2017, the
Administrative Hearing Officer approved the Administrative Use Permit to establish the use
(Attachment B).
Leading up to the hearing, the City received correspondence from four residents of the
development expressing concerns regarding the proposed business, with three residents in
attendance at the hearing that voiced their concerns. These concerns primarily centered on noise
the business would create and the hours of operation. To ensure compatibility between the
business and residential uses at this location, the Use Permit included a condition limiting the
hours of operation to between 8:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m., Sunday through Thursday, and between
8:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m., Friday and Saturday. This condition was intended to address potential
noise impacts to the existing residents living above and adjacent to the commercial tenant space.
The Use Permit also included a condition requiring review by the Hearing Officer six months
from the date of occupancy of the business to evaluate the effectiveness of the conditions of the
Use Permit and determine if any changes are necessary.
Appeal Filed
On October 19, 2017, the property owner filed an appeal of the Administrative Hearing Officer’s
decision to approve the Use Permit (Attachment C). The intent of the appeal is to address
Condition No. 3, which limits the hours of operation, and Condition No. 6 that requires a review
of the permit after six months of occupancy of the business. The appellant asserted that these
conditions added too much uncertainty and risk to the project.
On December 20, 2017, the Planning Commission, on a 5-1 vote (Commissioner Malak voting
against), denied in part and upheld in part the appeal of the Administrative Hearing Officer’s
decision. The Planning Commission (PC) maintained the hours of operation that were approved
by the Administrative Hearing Officer, but eliminated the condition requiring review by the
Hearing Officer six months after the date of occupancy of the business (Attachment D). Three
residents of the mixed-use development spoke at the hearing, and three sent in official
correspondence, to express their concerns about possible extension of the hours of operation.
On January 2, 2018, the applicant, BCR Developments, appealed the PC’s decision. The
appellants request is to allow hours of operation of 8:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. Sunday through
Thursday, and 8:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m., Friday and Saturday. This would be one hour per day
more than the PC resolution allows (Attachment E). The Council is being asked to review the PC
approved Use Permit in consideration of the applicant’s appeal and provide a final determination
on the project.
DISCUSSION
Applicant Appeal
The appeal form filed by the applicant identifies the intent of the appeal is to specifically address
Condition #2, which limits the hours of operation of the business (Attachment E).
Packet Page 152
13
Condition #2 states, “business hours shall be between 8:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. Sunday through
Thursday, and between 8:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. Friday and Saturday.” The reason for the
appeal as stated by the applicant has two specific points: 1) Due to the nature of the business, the
condition requires that the last escape room sessions commence at 7:00 p.m. and 9:00 p.m.
respectively, to comply with the approved hours of operation because each session lasts
approximately one hour; and 2) The approved hours of operation of the business are too
restrictive and will render the business economically unviable.
The appeal is specifically requesting that the City Council approve hours of operation of 8:00
a.m. to 9:00 p.m., Sunday through Thursday, and 8:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m., Friday and Saturday.
This additional hour would allow for the final escape room session to begin at 8:00 p.m., Sunday
through Thursday, and 10:00 p.m., Friday and Saturday.
Appeal Evaluation
1. Land Use Element Goals & Policies
Goals and policies in the General Plan Land Use Element state th at the Downtown should be the
location of entertainment facilities, including nighttime entertainment (Goal 27, Policies 4.1, 4.3,
4.8). Land Use Element policies for the Downtown also call for residential uses to be
interspersed with commercial projects and incorporated into new large projects (Policies 4.2,
4.2.1).
2. Noise Thresholds & Hours of Operation
Noise Element
The Noise Element of the General Plan sets noise exposure standards for noise-sensitive land
uses, and performance standards for new commercial and industrial uses. Residences are
considered a noise-sensitive land use and have specific thresholds for exposure. For reference,
the maximum hourly noise exposure for a residence is 50 decibels between the hours of 7:00
a.m. and 10:00 p.m. (day) and 45 decibels from 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. (night).
Zoning Regulations
The Zoning Regulations (Section 17.08.072) states “A mixed-use project proposing a
commercial component that will operate outside of the hours from 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. shall
require the Director's approval to ensure that the commercial use will not negatively impact the
residential uses within the project.” The requirement that a “commercial use will not negatively
impact the residential uses” sets a strict standard for any use that may create impacts after 6:00
p.m. when located within a mixed-use development. This is especially true within the Downtown
area where Land Use Element policies encourage both nighttime entertainment uses, and
residential uses interspersed in new development.
Packet Page 153
13
3. Analysis
Hours of operation were carefully considered by both the Hearing Officer and the Planning
Commission in their respective reviews and actions on the project. Given the General Plan noise
thresholds, Zoning Regulations language on hours of operation for mixed-use projects, and
correspondence and testimony given by the residents of the project site, both the Hearing Officer
and Planning Commission determined the following hours for the proposed business was
appropriate:
Friday and Saturday: Allowing hours of operation to extend until 10:00 p.m., Friday
and Saturday, is consistent with the decibel threshold change in the General Plan (10:00
pm).
Sunday through Thursday: In considering the appropriate hours of operation Sunday
through Thursday, a limit of 8:00 p.m. was established as the middle ground between the
allowed hours per the Zoning Regulations (6:00 p.m.) and the decibel threshold change in
the General Plan (10:00 p.m.).
The Planning Commission also informed the applicant that they would be able to apply for a
modification to the Use Permit once they demonstrate the business fits well with the neighbors
and does not have a negative impact on residential uses.
It should be noted that the applicant provided the CC&Rs for the com mercial tenant space as
additional information included with their appeal documentation to the Planning Commission in
support of later hours for the business. The CC&Rs for the commercial units prohibit businesses
from operating between the hours of 11:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. However, the CC&Rs for the
residential component of the development only contain a broad acknowledgement that increased
noise, traffic, and other disturbances at all hours are expected when living in a downtown mixed-
use project. The residential CC&Rs do not include language acknowledging specific hours of
operation allowed in the commercial component. While the CC&Rs are legally binding in
connection to the property, they are a civil agreement and do not take precedent over City
ordinances and regulations and are not enforced by the City.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The project is categorically exempt under Class 1, Existing Facilities; Section 15301 of the
CEQA Guidelines, because the project consists of the permitting and minor alterations of an
existing private structure.
FISCAL IMPACT
When the General Plan was prepared, it was accompanied by a fiscal impact analysis, which
found that overall the General Plan was fiscally balanced. Accordingly, since the proposed
project is consistent with the General Plan, it has a neutral fiscal impact. There is no fiscal
impact associated with the approval of this project.
Packet Page 154
13
ALTERNATIVES
1. Uphold the appeal. The Council can uphold the appeal and approve the project with hours of
operation between 8 a.m. and 9 p.m., Sunday through Thursday, and between 8 a.m. and 11
p.m., Friday and Saturday.
2. Uphold the appeal in part, approving the project with modifications. The Council can
approve the project with modifications as appropriate, based on findings of consistency with
applicable policies and regulations.
Attachments:
a - Draft Resolution
b - Administrative Hearing Agenda Report
c - Appeal of Hearing Officer's Decision
d - Planning Commission Resolution
e - Appeal of Planning Commission Decision
f - Planning Commission Minutes
g - Project Description & Site Plan
Packet Page 155
13
R ______
RESOLUTION NO. _____ (2018 SERIES)
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS
OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, DENYING AN APPEAL OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION’S DECISION TO APPROVE A USE PERMIT FOR AN
ESCAPE ROOM BUSINESS, CLASSIFIED AS A COMMERCIAL
RECREATION FACILITY – INDOOR, WITH A CONDITION LIMITING
HOURS OF OPERATION, IN THE DOWNTOWN COMMERCIAL ZONE
WITH A MIXED USE OVERLAY, AS REPRESENTED IN THE STAFF
REPORT AND ATTACHMENTS DATED MARCH 20, 2018 (583 MARCH
STREET APPL-1324-2018)
WHEREAS, on October 9, 2017, the Administrative Hearing Officer of the City of San
Luis Obispo approved an Administrative Use Permit at a public hearing in the Council Hearing
Room of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, pursuant to a proceeding
instituted under USE-1024-2017, BCR Developments, applicant; and
WHEREAS, On October 19, 2017, Javad Sani, as the owner of the subject property, filed
an appeal of the Administrative Hearing Officer’s action; and
WHEREAS, on December 20, 2017, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis
Obispo adopted Resolution PC-1013-17, denying in part and upholding in part an appeal of the
Administrative Hearing Officer’s decision at a public hearing in the Council Chamber of City Hall,
990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, pursuant to a proceeding instituted under APPL-
1135-2017, Javad Sani, appellant; and
WHEREAS, On January 2, 2018, BCR Developments, the applicant, filed an appeal of
the Planning Commission’s action; and
WHEREAS, On March 20, 2018, the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo
conducted a public hearing in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis
Obispo, California, pursuant to a proceeding instituted under the appeal of the Planning
Commission’s decision APPL-1324-2018, BCR Developments, applicant/appellant; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo has duly considered all
evidence, including the testimony of the applicant, interested parties, and evaluation and
recommendations by staff, presented at said hearing, and
WHEREAS, notices of said public hearings were made at the time and in the manner
required by law; and
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:
Packet Page 156
13
Resolution No. _____ (2018 Series) Page 2
R ______
1. As conditioned, the use will not harm the general health, safety, and welfare of people
living or working in the vicinity because the use will be entirely inside an existing building
and will meet all code requirements.
2. The proposed use is consistent with Land Use Element Goal #27 for the City to serve as
the County’s hub for entertainment and cultural services, and Land Use Element policies
(4.1, 4.3, and 4.8) that call for the Downtown to be the location of entertainment facilities
including nighttime entertainment.
3. The proposed use is consistent with the Zoning Regulations, Chapter 17.42, which states
that the C-D zone is intended to provide for a wide range of retail sales, services, and
entertainment uses.
4. As conditioned, the proposed use will not negatively impact the residential uses in the
development because the business will have operating hours of 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m.,
Sunday through Thursday, and 8:00 to 10:00 p.m. Friday and Saturday.
SECTION 2. Environmental Review. The project is categorically exempt under Class 1,
Existing Facilities; Section 15301 of the CEQA Guidelines, because the project consists of the
permitting and minor alterations of an existing private structure.
SECTION 3. Action. The City Council does hereby grant final approval to the project
with incorporation of the following conditions.
Planning Division
1. A building plan check submittal for tenant improvements that incorporates the following
conditions of approval, shall be submitted for review and approval of the Community
Development Department. A separate, full-size sheet shall be included in working
drawings submitted for a building permit that lists all conditions of project approval.
Reference shall be made in the margin of listed items as to where in plans requirements are
addressed.
2. Business hours shall be between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m. Sunday through Thursday, and between
8 a.m. and 10 p.m. Friday and Saturday.
3. The security door that exits into the residential entryway shall be removed or permanently
secured to ensure that access by customers or employees to the residential corridor is not
possible.
Indemnification
4. The Owner/Applicant shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City or its agents or
officers and employees from any claim, action or proceeding against the City or its agents,
officers or employees, to attack, set aside, void, or annul, in whole or in part, the City's
Packet Page 157
13
Resolution No. _____ (2018 Series) Page 3
R ______
approval of this project. In the event that the City fails to promptly notify the
Owner/Applicant of any such claim, action or proceeding, or that the City fails to cooperate
fully in the defense of said claim, this condition shall thereafter be of no further force or
effect.
Upon motion of _______________________, seconded by _______________________,
and on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
The foregoing resolution was adopted this _____ day of _____________________ 2018.
____________________________________
Mayor Heidi Harmon
ATTEST:
____________________________________
Carrie Gallagher
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_____________________________________
J. Christine Dietrick
City Attorney
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City
of San Luis Obispo, California, this ______ day of ______________, _________.
____________________________________
Carrie Gallagher
City Clerk
Packet Page 158
13
ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING AGENDA REPORT
SUBJECT: Review of an Administrative Use Permit to operate an escape room, a physical adventure
game in which players solve a series of puzzles using clues, hints and strategy to complete the
objectives at hand, in the C-D-MU zone. This project includes a request to allow hours of operation
until 10 p.m. Sunday through Thursday, and 11:30 p.m. on Friday and Saturday, where a commercial
component of a mixed-use development is limited to the hours of 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. daily, with a
categorical exemption from environmental review.
PROJECT ADDRESS: 583 Marsh Street BY: Kyle Van Leeuwen, Planning Technician
Phone Number: (805) 781-7091
E-mail: kvanleeuwen@slocity.org
FILE NUMBER: USE-1024-2017 FROM: Tyler Corey, Principal Planner
RECOMMENDATION
Approve the Administrative Use Permit to operate an escape room, a commercial recreation facility
use, in the C-D-MU zone, based on findings and subject to conditions.
SITE DATA
SUMMARY
The applicant, BCR Developments, has applied for an Administrative Use Permit requesting approval
of an “escape room” business in the tenant space located at 583 Marsh Street. An escape room is a
physical adventure game in which players solve a series of puzzles using clues, hints and strategy to
complete the objectives with a set time limit. This type of business is classified as a commercial
recreation facility-indoor use. Zoning Regulations section 17.22 (Table 9) allows for a commercial
recreation facility-indoor use within the C-D zone with the approval of an Administrative Use Permit.
This tenant space is also located within a mixed-use development. Zoning Regulations section
17.08.072 (Mixed Use Projects) requires a Director’s approval when a commercial component of a
mixed-use project will operate outside the hours of 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., to ensure that the
Applicant BCR Developments
Complete Date September 15, 2017
General Plan General Retail
Zoning Downtown Commercial, Mixed Use
overlay (C-D-MU)
Commercial Area ~1,900 square feet
Environmental
Status
Categorically exempt from
environmental review under CEQA
Guidelines section 15301 (Existing
Facilities)
Meeting Date: October 9, 2017
Item Number: 1
Packet Page 159
13
USE-1024-2017
583 Marsh Street
Page 2
commercial use will not negatively impact the residential uses. The applicant is requesting operating
hours that would go until 10 p.m. Sunday through Thursday, and 11:30 p.m. on Friday and Saturday.
1.0 PROJECT INFORMATION
1.1 Site Information/Setting
The project site is a mixed-use development with commercial tenant spaces on the ground floor
fronting Marsh Street. The residential units of the site are located on the upper floors and behind
the commercial spaces. The tenant space proposed for the escape room is approximately 1,900
square feet, and is currently vacant. The other three commercial tenant spaces in the structure are
occupied by a furniture store, hair salon, and an additional vacant tenant space. The development
also includes 12 residential units, of which one unit is located directly above the proposed use.
This area along Marsh Street is comprised entirely of Downtown Commercial (C-D) zoning, with
High-Density Residential (R-4) zoning on the opposite side of the block facing Pacific Street.
1.2 Project Description
The applicant has proposed to establish an “Escape Room” in an existing commercial tenant space
in the Downtown Commercial (C-D) zone. This type of use, a commercial recreation facility-
indoor, is allowed in this zone with the approval of an Administrative Use Permit (Zoning
Regulations, Table 9). The new business proposes hours of operation of Noon to 10 p.m., Monday
through Thursday, 11 a.m. to 11:30 p.m. Friday and Saturday, and 11 a.m. to 10 p.m. on Sunday.
The business offers interactive experiences for groups of 2-10 people. These groups will enter one
of the four themed rooms in the facility and work together to solve large, multi -faceted puzzles.
The puzzles require communication and critical thinking skills to advance through the game, and
groups have one hour to solve the challenges and “escape” the room. The business does not
physically lock participants in the room. The facility would typically have three employees on
site at any given time.
2.0 PROJECT ANALYSIS
2.1 Consistency with General Plan and Zoning Regulations
Commercial Recreation Facility-Indoor Use: An Administrative Use Permit is required, per Table
9 of the Zoning Regulations, for a commercial recreation facility-indoor use to operate in the C-
D zone. This specific type of indoor recreation facility, which provides a unique entertainment
experience, is consistent with a number of goals and policies found in the Land Use Element of
the General Plan. These goals and policies call for San Luis Obispo to be the County’s hub for
entertainment (Community Goal #27), and more specifically for entertainment facilities to be
located in the downtown area (Policy #4.1, 4.3, & 4.8). The use at this location is also consistent
with Zoning Regulations, Chapter 17.42, which establishes that the C-D zone is intended to
provide for a wide range of retail sales, services, and entertainment uses.
Hours of Operation: The applicant proposal includes hours of operation for the business that
would extend into the evening, past 6:00 p.m. Per section 17.08.072 of the Zoning Regulations,
“A mixed-use project proposing a commercial component that will operate outside of the hours
from 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. shall require the Director's approval to ensure that the commercial
Packet Page 160
13
USE-1024-2017
583 Marsh Street
Page 3
use will not negatively impact the residential uses within the project.” Staff finds that the potential
negative impact to surrounding residents created by the use are properly addressed with the
inclusion of specific conditions of approval. These conditions include limiting the hours of
operation to 10 p.m. daily for the business and requires staff to monitor customers for compliance
with noise restrictions. This is consistent with the City’s noise exposure limits as stated in the
Municipal Code for commercial zones, which require lower noise levels starting at 10 p.m.
3.0 ATTACHMENTS
1. Applicant Submitted Documents
4.0 ACTION
The Administrative Hearing Officer does hereby approve the Administrative Use Permit (USE-1024-
2017), to establish an “escape room”, a commercial recreation facility-indoor use, in the C-D-MU
zone, with hours of operation not to exceed 10 p.m. daily, based on findings and subject to conditions
of approval.
Findings
1. The use will not harm the general health, safety, and welfare of people living or working in
the vicinity because the use will be entirely inside an existing building and will meet all code
requirements.
2. The proposed commercial recreation facility is consistent with the policies of the General
Plan, which calls for entertainment facilities to be in the downtown area.
3. The proposed use is consistent with the Zoning Regulations, Chapter 17.42, which states that
the C-D zone is intended to provide for a wide range of retail sales, services, and entertainment
uses.
4. As conditioned, the proposed use will not negatively impact the residential uses in the
development because the business is required to close at 10:00 p.m. daily and noise levels
created by the use during business hours will be within allowable limits as described in the
Municipal Code.
5. The project is categorically exempt from environmental review because the project consists
of the permitting and minor alterations of an existing private structure. (Class 1, Section
15301, Existing Facilities, CEQA Guidelines).
Conditions
Please note the project conditions of approval do not include mandatory code requirements. Code
compliance will be verified during the plan check process, which may include additional requirements
applicable to your project.
Packet Page 161
13
USE-1024-2017
583 Marsh Street
Page 4
Planning Division
1. The Owner/Applicant shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City or its agents or
officers and employees from any claim, action or proceeding against the City or its agents,
officers or employees, to attack, set aside, void, or annul, in whole or in part, the City's
approval of this project. In the event that the City fails to promptly notify the Owner/Applicant
of any such claim, action or proceeding, or that the City fails to cooperate fully in the defense
of said claim, this condition shall thereafter be of no further force or effect.
2. A building plan check submittal for tenant improvements that incorporates the following
conditions of approval, shall be submitted for review and approval of the Community
Development Department. A separate, full-size sheet shall be included in working drawings
submitted for a building permit that lists all conditions of project approval. Reference shall
be made in the margin of listed items as to where in plans requirements are addressed.
3. Business hours shall be between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m. Sunday through Thursday, and between 8
a.m. and 10 p.m. Friday and Saturday.
4. To further reduce the likelihood of noise negatively impacting surrounding residential units,
customers entering and exiting the business shall be monitored by staff for compliance with
noise restrictions.
5. The security door that exits into the residential entryway shall be removed or permanently
secured to ensure that access by customers or employees to the residential corridor is not
possible.
6. The use permit shall be reviewed by the Hearing Officer six months from the date of
occupancy. At the review hearing, the Hearing Officer may add, delete, or modify conditions
of approval
7. This Use Permit shall be reviewed by the Administrative Hearing Officer if the City receives
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, regulations or Police Department
resources (calls for service) applicable to the property or the 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, modified, or the Use Permit may
be revoked.
Packet Page 162
13
USE-1024-2017
583 Marsh Street
Page 5
Approve
Approve as modified
Deny
Continue to: ______________________ to allow __________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
Continue indefinitely to allow: _________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________
Hearing Officer
Packet Page 163
13
Packet Page 164
13
Packet Page 165
13
Packet Page 166
13
Packet Page 167
13
Packet Page 168
13
Packet Page 169
13
Packet Page 170
13
Packet Page 171
13
Packet Page 172
13
Packet Page 173
13
Packet Page 174
13
City of San Luis Obispo, Council Agenda, City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo
Planning Commission
Minutes
Wednesday, December 20, 2017
Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission
CALL TO ORDER
A Regular Meeting of the San Luis Obispo Planning Commission was called to order on
Wednesday, December 20, 2017 at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber, located at 990 Palm Street,
San Luis Obispo, California, by Chair Stevenson.
ROLL CALL
Commissioners
Present: Commissioners Kim Bisheff, Hemalata Dandekar, Ronald Malak, Nicholas
Ostebur, Vice-Chair John Fowler and Chair Charles Stevenson.
Commissioners None
Absent:
City Staff
Present: Community Development Deputy Director Davidson, Assistant City
Attorney Jon Ansolabehere, Principal Planner Tyler Corey, Associate
Planner Kyle Bell; Planning Technician Kyle Van Leeuwen, Assistant
Planner Walter Oetzell; Recording Secretary Teresa Purrington.
Pledge of Allegiance
Chair Stevenson led the Pledge of Allegiance.
Chair Stevenson requested to reorder the agenda to hear Item 5 Part A and B after Item 2. By
consensus, the Planning Commission reordered the agenda as requested.
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA
None
Packet Page 175
13
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
December 20, 2017
Page 2 of 7
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
1. Minutes of the Regular Planning Commission Meetings of September 27, 2017, October 11,
2017 and October 25, 2017
ACTION: MOTION BY COMMISSIONER DANDEKAR, SECOND BY VICE CHAIR
FOWLER, CARRIED 6-0 to approve the minutes of September 27, 2017, as presented
MOTION BY COMMISSIONER MALAK, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER DANDEKAR,
CARRIED 6-0 to approve the minutes of October 11, 2017 as presented.
MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BISHEFF, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MALAK,
CARRIED 5-0-1 (Vice Chair Fowler abstained due to conflict of interest) to approve the minutes
of October 25, 2017, as presented.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
2. 600 Perkins; Review of a tentative parcel map to create two lots, with a requested exception
to the minimum lot size requirements, including a Negative Declaration of environmental
review; Case #: SBDV-0626-2017, R-2-S zone; Neils Grether, applicant.
Associate Planner Kyle Bell presented the staff report and responded to Commission inquiries.
Applicant Neil Grether, summarized the project.
Mike Stanton, Project Engineer, provided information regarding the engineering for the project.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Elaine Cormier
Alex McClure
--End of Public Comment--
ACTION: MOTION BY COMMISSIONER MALAK, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
DANDEKAR to approve the recommendation to adopt a Resolution entitled:
“A RESOLUTION OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING
COMMISSION APPROVING A TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP TO
CREATE TWO LOTS, WITH A REQUESTED EXCEPTION TO THE
MINIMUM LOT SIZE REQUIREMENTS (SLO 17-0013), INCLUDING A
NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW, AS
REPRESENTED IN THE STAFF REPORT AND ATTACHMENTS
DATED NOVEMBER 15, 2017
(600 PERKINS, SBDV-0626-2017, EID-0628-2017)”
Packet Page 176
13
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
December 20, 2017
Page 3 of 7
Motion passed 6-0-0-0- on the following roll call vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS BISHEFF, DANDEKAR, MALAK, OSTEBUR, VICE-
CHAIR FOWLER AND CHAIR STEVENSON
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: NONE
MOTION CARRIED.
Item 5 A and B heard at this time. See Item 5 below for direction provided.
RECESS: The Commission recessed at 7:36 p.m. and reconvened at 7:41 p.m. with all
Commissioners present.
3. 583 Marsh St. Review of an appeal of the Administrative Hearing Officer’s decision to
approve a use permit for an “Escape Room” business, a commercial recreation facility – indoor
use, with conditions limiting hours of operation and requiring a review of the use permit six
months after occupancy of the business, in the Downtown Commercial zone with a Mixed-Use
overlay. Case #: USE-1024-2017; C-D-MU zone, Javad Sani, applicant.
Planning Technician Kyle Van Leeuwen presented the staff report and responded to Commission
inquiries.
Applicant Brian Lacertosa, summarized the project and explained the request for expanded hours.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Robert Spector
Cinda Fox
Sabastian Ponce
Barry Jones
John Hans
--End of Public Comment--
ACTION: MOTION BY VICE CHAIR FOWLER, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
OSTERBUR TO approve the recommendation to adopt a Resolution entitled:
Packet Page 177
13
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
December 20, 2017
Page 4 of 7
“A RESOLUTION OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING
COMMISSION DENYING AN APPEAL OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE
HEARING OFFICER’S DECISION TO APPROVE A USE PERMIT FOR
AN ESCAPE ROOM BUSINESS, CLASSIFIED AS A COMMERCIAL
RECREATION FACILITY – INDOOR, WITH CONDITIONS LIMITING
HOURS OF OPERATION AND REQUIRING A REVIEW OF THE USE
PERMIT SIX MONTHS AFTER OCCUPANCY OF THE BUSINESS, IN
THE DOWNTOWN COMMERCIAL ZONE WITH A MIXED-USE
OVERLAY, AS REPRESENTED IN THE STAFF REPORT AND
ATTACHMENTS DATED DECEMBER 20, 2017
(583 MARCH STREET APPL-1135-2017)”
With the elimination of Planning Condition #5.
Motion passed 5-1-0 on the following roll call vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS BISHEFF, DANDEKAR, OSTEBUR, VICE-CHAIR
FOWLER AND CHAIR STEVENSON
NOES: COMMISSIONER MALAK
ABSENT: NONE
4. 1460 Calle Joaquin; Consideration of an amendment to the City’s Zoning Map to designate
property at 1460 Calle Joaquin to be within a Tourist Commercial (C-T) Zone; construction of
a new two-story commercial building; an exception to the Creek Setback requirement to allow
six (6) uncovered parking spaces within the setback; and a Mitigated Negative Declaration of
environmental review. Case # RZ-0015-2017 & EID-0016-2017; No Zone (C-T Zone
proposed); AuzCo Development, LLC, applicant
Assistant Planner Walter Oetzell, presented the staff report and responded to Commission
inquiries.
Applicant Representative, George Garcia, provided an overview of the project.
PUBLIC COMMENT
None
--End of Public Comment--
RECESS: The Commission recessed at 9:39 p.m. and reconvened at 9:53 p.m. with all
Commissioners present.
Packet Page 178
13
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
December 20, 2017
Page 5 of 7
ACTION: MOTION BY COMMISSIONER MALAK, SECOND BY VICE CHAIR FOWLER,
based on the record and the testimony presented, including the visual simulations, the PC hereby
recommends that the City Council amend the Zoning Map to designate the subject property as
being within a Tourist Commercial (C-T) Zone, consistent with its General Plan designation, but
not adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration, based on potential significant environmental
impacts to aesthetics, specifically, blocking of views of Irish Hills and the scenic corridor, and
further recommends that the City Council not approve the creek exception. Motion passed 5-1-0
on the following roll call vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS DANDEKAR, MALAK, OSTEBUR, VICE-CHAIR
FOWLER AND CHAIR STEVENSON
NOES: COMMISSIONERS BISHEFF
ABSENT: NONE
BUSINESS ITEM
5. Zoning Regulations Update. The Zoning Regulations Update is focused on implementing
the policies and programs of the Land Use and Circulation Elements (LUCE). This will be a
standing item on the Planning Commission agenda from June 14, 2017 through completion of
the Update of the Zoning Regulations, tentatively scheduled for completion in March
2018. This will be an opportunity for staff to update the Commission on the status of the
Zoning Regulations Update and for the Commission to listen to ongoing public testimony and
discuss any such updates as they come forward. As a standing item, sometimes there will be
nothing to report; other times staff will give a brief update with limited discussion; and at
certain points, such as review of the Land Use Table, Parking Requirements, and the
Reformatted Outline, there will be more substantive discussion on the item. When materials
are associated with the Update, as with the White Papers associated with the Update, such
information will be made available to the public and Commission prior to the meeting.
Specific Items for Consideration are:
1. Draft White Paper: Case Studies in Local Adult-Use and Medical Marijuana
Regulations
2. Alcohol Outlet Regulations Effectiveness Update (to inform implementation of Land
Use Element 4.32)
Deputy Community Development Director Doug Davidson, and Associate Planner Kyle Bell,
presented the staff report and responded to Commission inquiries.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Jody Belsher
Lisa Guy
Vivian Soul
Packet Page 179
13
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
December 20, 2017
Page 6 of 7
Gail Ryff
Mila Vujovich-LaBarre
John Belsher
Sean Donahue
--End of Public Comment--
The following discussions/questions were provided:
Local Adult Use and Medical Marijuana Regulations:
• Like to know what the State has done regarding regulatory control and what’s coming up
in the future to help better understand the issue.
• Highlight state regulations regarding this issue.
• Have we seen any expressed interest in cultivation, manufacturing and testing or is this
all about retail?
• Can the city regulate the type of goods sold? For example, candy and soda
• Is there other data we can obtain from other cities that allow the sale of cannabis?
• Concerned how we will decouple the physical and social impacts when we are trying to
determine size and location from schools and that we are reviewing this in a silo. Will
struggle with this when we don’t have all the information.
• Suggest that if there is time on the schedule in January for another study session to get
answers to some of the questions asked tonight.
• Is the State of California looking to form a bank to handle the money that other banks
won’t, since the money can’t be deposited in a federal bank.
• What sorts of facilities are we talking about and where they can be located. What are the
consequences on the street for enforcement. Feel very uneducated on this, would like to
hear from the Police Chief.
Alcohol licensing
Would like to hear from Chief Cantrell regarding experience in the downtown and incidents of
alcohol related crime which are significant.
Item 5 C through E were heard at this time.
3. Table 9 (Uses Allowed by Zone) Follow-up Discussion
4. Tentative Schedule for Zoning Regulations Update
5. Director Action and Use Permit Requirements
Doug Davidson, Deputy Director presented the staff report and responded to Commission
inquiries.
PUBLIC COMMENT
None
Packet Page 180
13
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
December 20, 2017
Page 7 of 7
--End of Public Comment--
NO ACTION: Commissioners discussed and provided general direction.
COMMENT AND DISCUSSION
6. Agenda Forecast – Deputy Community Development Director Doug Davidson provided an
update of upcoming projects.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 10:10 p.m. The next Regular meeting of the Planning Commission
is scheduled for Wednesday, January 10, 2018 at 6:00 p.m., in the location, 990 Palm Street, San
Luis Obispo, California.
APPROVED BY THE ADVISORY BODY NAME: 01/10/2018
Packet Page 181
13
AH1 - 5Packet Page 182
13
AH1 - 6Packet Page 183
13
AH1 - 7Packet Page 184
13
AH1 - 8 Packet Page 18513
AH1 - 9Packet Page 186
13
RECE VI ED
MAR 14 2018
Newspaper of the Central Coa5t
3825 South Higuera • Post Office Box 112 - San Luis Obispo, California 93406-0112 - (805) 781-7800
In The Superior Court of The State of California
In and for the County of San Luis Obispo
CITY of
AD #3561563
WO WRI'als,o po
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
SAN LUIS OBISPO CITY'COUNCIL
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
The San Luis Obispo City Council invites
all interested persons to attend a public
hearing on Tuesday, March 20, 2018, at
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
6:00 p.m. in the City Hall Council Cham -
ber, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo,
ss.
California, relative to the following:
County of San Luis Obispo
REVIEW PF AN APPEAL_ (NLEP BY
THE APPLICANT BCH pEVE�ILOP-
MEMS] O THS PLANN(Nr, CO__MO MIS -
I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the
19IQN TO APPROVE, A NEW
MAN'S 1EC^
Coun aforesaid I am over the a e of ei hteen and not
g g
M
ESCAPE RPOHV15fNESS A. CO0 M6M-
CIAL RECi4E EON FACII-gy INDINDODR
interested in the above entitled matter; I am now, and at
usE,__WITH A PON�LrtQN LIMITING
all times embraced in the publication herein mentioned
HOURS,AF �PERAT��:04 P.fN.
SUNDAY THROUGH THURSDAY, AND
was, the principal clerk of the printers and publishers of
10:00 P.M. FRIDAY AND SATURDAY.
THE TRIBUNE, a newspaper of general Circulation,
A public hearing to adopt a resolution deny -
printed and published daily at the City of San Luis
Ing an appeal and upholding the Planning
Commission's approval of a Use Permit,
Obispo in the above named county and state; that notice
with a categorical exemption from environ -
at which the annexed clippings is a true copy, was
mental review.
published in the above-named newspaper and not in any
For more information, you are invited to
supplement thereof — on the following dates to wit;;
contact Kyle Van Leeuwen-of the City's
Community Development Department at,
MARCH 10, 2018 that said news a er was dui and
p p Y
(805) 761-7091 or by email at kvanlee
uslocs,o�
regularly ascertained and established a newspaper of
general circulation by Decree entered in the Superior
The City Council may also discuss other
hearings or business items before or after
Court of San Luis Obispo County, State of California, on
the Items tided above. If you challengethe
the
propos ed project In court, you mayy bhe
June 9, 1952, Case #19139 under the Government Code
ed to ralsing Only those issues you or
of the State of California.
Someone else ralsed at the public hearing
described in this notice, or in written corre-
spondence delivered to the City Council at,
I certify (or declare) under the penalty of perjury that the
or prior to, the public hearing.
foregoing is true and correct.
Reports for this meeting will be available
for review in the City Clerk's Office and on.
line at vn-nv.sl001ty am an Wednesday,
March 14, 2018. Please Call the City cter-
H
k's Office at (805) 781-7100 for more Infor-
(Sighiture of Principal Clerk)
Mallon.'17he City COUncll meeling will be
DATE: MARCH 10, 2018
televised five on Charter Cable Channel
2fl and live streaming on www.slocity.org.
AD COST: $171.68
Carrie Gallagher, CMC
City Clerk
City of San Luis Obispo
March 10, 2018 3561563
3/21/2018
1
583 Marsh Street
APPL-1324-2018
REVIEW OF AN APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION’S
DECISION TO APPROVE A NEW ESCAPE ROOM BUSINESS,
LIMITING HOURS OF OPERATION TO 8:00 P.M. SUNDAY
THROUGH THURSDAY, AND 10:00 P.M. FRIDAY AND
SATURDAY.
March 20, 2018
Appellant: BRC Developments, LLC
Recommendation
2
Adopt a Resolution denying the appeal and upholding the
Planning Commission’s approval of the Use Permit.
Staff Presentation - Item #13
3/21/2018
2
3
4
Staff Presentation - Item #13
3/21/2018
3
Background
Administrative Hearing – October 9, 2017
Approved Use Permit
Set hours: 8 am to 8 pm, Sun – Thurs
8 am to 10 pm, Fri & Sat
Included a condition requiring a six-month review
Appeal Filed by Property Owner – October 20, 2107
5
Background
Planning Commission Hearing – December 20, 2017
Denied in part and upheld in part the appeal
Maintained hours of operation as approved by the
Hearing Officer
Removed condition requiring six-moth review
Appeal Filed by Business Owner – January 2, 2018
6
Staff Presentation - Item #13
3/21/2018
4
Appeal – January 2, 2018
The appeal’s intent is to address Condition #2 of the
PC’s resolution, limiting the hours of operation.
The appellant is requesting the hours of operation be
extended one hour.
7
Appeal – January 2, 2018
PC approved hours:
8 am to 8 pm, Sun – Thurs
8 am to 10 pm, Fri & Sat
Appellant Requested hours:
8 am to 9 pm, Sun – Thurs
8 am to 11 pm, Fri & Sat
8
Staff Presentation - Item #13
3/21/2018
5
Evaluation
Land Use Element Goals & Policies
The Downtown should be the location of
entertainment facilities, including nighttime
entertainment
Residential uses to be interspersed with
commercial projects and incorporated into new
large projects
9
Evaluation
Noise Thresholds
Residences are considered a noise-sensitive land
use and have specific thresholds for exposure
Noise limit thresholds become stricter at 10 pm
10
Staff Presentation - Item #13
3/21/2018
6
Evaluation
Zoning Regulations
A mixed-use project proposing a commercial
component that will operate outside of the hours
from 8 am to 6 pm shall require approval to
ensure that the commercial use will not negatively
impact the residential uses within the project
11
Evaluation
Correspondence and Testimony
Both the Hearing Officer and PC received
correspondence and heard testimony from
residents of the development expressing
concerns primarily centered on the noise the
business would create and the hours of
operation.
12
Staff Presentation - Item #13
3/21/2018
7
Evaluation
Both Hearing Officer and PC determined appropriate hours
to be:
Friday and Saturday: limit of 10 pm, consistent with
the change in decibel threshold in the General Plan
(10 pm) for noise sensitive land uses (residences)
Sunday through Thursday: limit of 8:00 pm, middle
ground between allowed hours per the Zoning
Regulations (6 pm) and the decibel threshold change
in the General Plan (10 pm)
13
Recommendation
14
Adopt a Resolution denying the appeal and upholding the
Planning Commission’s approval of a Use Permit.
Staff Presentation - Item #13
3/21/2018
8
Additional Information
16
The tenant space is constructed of concrete on four sides.
This type of construction material is known for its sound
attenuation properties.
Interior noise attenuation measures were included for the
entire development as conditions of approval (ARC 36-
06), which included specific requirements for units that
face Marsh Street
Staff Presentation - Item #13
3/21/2018
9
Appeal Evaluation - Hours of Operation
17
Land Use Element Goals & Policies
Policy 4.8: Downtown as Focal Point:
The Downtown should remain the focus for nighttime
entertainment, cultural events and related activities. It
should be a pleasant and safe place at all times.
4.2.1. C. Dwellings should be interspersed with
commercial uses (Downtown).
4.2.1. D. All new, large commercial projects should
include residential uses (Downtown).
Appeal Evaluation - Hours of Operation
18
Zoning Regulations
7.08.072: A mixed-use project proposing a commercial
component that will operate outside of the hours from 8:00
a.m. to 6:00 p.m. shall require the Director's approval to
ensure that the commercial use will not negatively impact
the residential uses within the project.
Staff Presentation - Item #13
TO:
Brian Lacertosa
BCR Developments
15418 Mooney Ave
Bakersfield, CA 93314
INVOICE NUMBER
INVOICE DATE
i
INVOICE DUE DATE
INVOICE STATUS
INVOICE DESCRIPTION
00011752
01/02/2018 1
l i
02/01/2018
Paid In Full
NONE
REFERENCE NUMBER
DESCR%IPTION
TOTAL
APPL-1324-2018
Tier 1 Appeal - Applicant
IT Surcharge
$1,516.75
$40.25
SUB TOTAL
$1,557.00
TOTAL j $1,557.00
January 08, 201-4--1 Page 1 of 1