Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1988-12-21; Design Review Board; MinutesMeeting of: DESIGN REVIEW BOARD (Regular Meeting) Time of Meeting: 5:OO p.m. Date of Meeting: December 21, 1988 Place of Meeting: City Council Chambers CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Hall called the Meeting to order at 5:OO p.m. ROLL CALL: Present: Chairman Hall, Board Members McCoy, McFadden, Rombotis and Schramm. Absent: None. Staff Present: Chris Salomone, Housing & Redevelopment Director Ron Ball, Assistant City Attorney Lance Schulte, Planning Department PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE was led by Chairman Hall. DESIGN REVIEW BOARD PROCEDURES: Chairman Hall read the Procedures as a transparency was used to show them for the audience. PUBLIC COMMENT: There were no requests to address the Board. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1. RP 87-11(A)/CDP 88-1 VILLAGE FAIRE. Board Members McCoy and Rombotis stated they would abstain from the discussion and voting on this item, as they own property within 300 feet of this property. Assistant City Attorney Ron Ball stated that three Members of the Design Review Board constituted a quorum, and he would not recommend Members abstaining if that resulted in reducing the Board to below quorum. If there is a material economic effect due to the owning of property by a Board Member within 300 feet of the property under review by the Board, the procedure has been to abstain from the discussion and voting on that project. Mr. Ball referred to a memorandum dated December 6, 1988, he had written to the Board Members, calling attention to the section on administrative regulations. Board Members McCoy and Rombotis left the room for the discussion of Item #I - Village Faire. In answer to query, Mr. Ball stated that since only three Members were in attendance, a majority of the voting Members would constitute affirmative action. Chris Salomone, Director of Housing and Redevelopment, gave the staff report as contained in the packet, using a transparency to show the site. Mr. Salomone stated the 3,600 square foot restaurant was no increase in square footage to the building, and no change to the parking lot across Grand, except that lot has been defined and striped to indicate the number of spaces it will accommodate. There were two plans for that Lot, Plan A and Plan B, and the recommendation of this Board and the Redevelopment Commission was Plan A. MINUTES December 21,1988 DESIGN REVIEW BOARD Page 2 PUBLIC HEARINGS: (Continued) Plan A produced 90 spaces, with a result of an excess over the requirements contained on the original permit and this restaurant. It was thought that if there were extra spaces, the City might use that for open public parking, and those are the extra spaces on the proposal here tonight. The proposal is to park the 3,600 square foot restaurant at one to 100 square feet. The parking on the original project was a compromise of one to 250 square feet. The food uses were limited to 2,000 square feet for each one. Mr. Salomone explained how the 250 square foot compromise was reached, giving credit for increased landscaping of the nine spaces at the Carlsbad Blvd. side of the property. A transparency was used to show the increased parking available and soon to be available in the Redevelopment Area; showing a net of 111 new spaces right away; an 80- space reciprocal parking agreement with the Union Church and the re-arrangement of the Garfield parking lot. Mr. Salomone indicated he is working on the acquisition of additional sites. Mr. Salomone stated that the 90 space parking lot across Grand Avenue meets the ordinance, and the three additional spaces should be included in this project and not used for public parking. He concluded, stating that staff recommended approval. Member McFadden stated that on this patio area it was supposed to be for take-out, and now there is a patio area, are we into that again, with tables and all of that, or what are we doing. Chris Salomone replied that they were in to that, as there is not square footage in the common area of this entire center counted for restaurant use. The 2,000 square feet shops would be using that, and this use would be using that space also, and it was not counted. Member McFadden inquired whether there would be service at the tables or self-service in that patio, and Chris Salomone said that would be addressed tonight. Member McFadden stated that the parking requirements move into a different dimension when you make more restaurant footage out there, as we know to our sorrow on other projects. Chairman Hall inquired whether the City was involved in the Grand Avenue parking lot, and Mr. Salomone answered that the City would become involved in taking over the lot in the event of a default by Village Faire. Member Schramm inquired about the length of the lease, and Chris Salomone stated it was 49 years. Mrs. Schramm asked whether, if Ralph and Eddie's had changes in their use, that would involve that lot, and Mr. Salomone stated it probably was something to be dealt with later, in case Ralph and Eddie's changed their use. Redevelopment permit and their parking is provided adjacent to their building and in the railroad right-of- way. They do have a MEMBERS MINUTES -. December 21, 1988 DESIGN REVIEW BOARD Page 3 PUBLIC HEARINGS: (Continued) Member McFadden asked whether that right-of -way was not part of the public parking, and Mr. Salomone said absolutely not. Chairman Hall opened the Public Hearing at 5:19 p.m., and issued the invitation to speak. Steve Densham, 3965 Monroe, General Partner in Village Faire, stated that 13 or 14 months ago Chairman Hall had thought they would have the problem, but it was really not a problem. When the permit was issued in November of 1987, the Planning Department felt this particular area should not form a barricade, so the area was opened up and intended to be an area for people to stroll through and sit down, eat, or sit and read and congregate. area and it has actually not changed. That was the anticipated use of this Mr. Densham stated that a quality operator of a food and beverage restaurant had not come along, and the partners felt in order to control what happened in that area, they would operate the restaurant themselves. Mr. Densham stated there would be open fireplaces and places to sit in the common area, and some parts of it would be waiter/waitress attended, which was always the intention of everybody. would be a soutehwest motif, with quality food and beverages. The inside of the restaurant Mr. Densham stated he pays rent monthly to Mrs. Christiansen for the parking lot, and the Village Faire pays all the expense for the lease and the upkeep and maintenance. This is a private lot and will remain that way. Member Schramm asked for the name of the owner of the parking lot, and Mr. Densham said it was Mrs. Christiansen and was a 49-year lease. interest in the lot, only in the ability to take over the lot for public parking, should the Village Faire default in their lease. The City has an Member McFadden asked how much square footage of that patio would be in these tables, and Mr. Densham said that had not been determined, but would be minimal, as this Board had a standard of not more than 10 or 15 percent of the inside service. This would be a scattered type of arrangement and would not constitute a large part of the service or economic success or failure of the restaurant. He reiterated this was not changing from the original thought of that of passing through, congregating, with people to be served or be able to bring in items to eat. Chairman Hall inquired whether there were other food uses available other than this one, and Mr. Densham said there was no food use at this time, but they were negotiating with a fudge shop and yogurt shop, which would be retail; also a possible health bar, fruit basket type of store. Since no ong else wished to s eak on this matter, the Public Hearing was closed at !:28 p.m. MEMBERS r MINUTES December 21, 1988 DESIGN REVIEW BOARD Page 4 PUBLIC HEARINGS: (Continued) Member Schramm stated she had reviewd all the material on this project although she was not on this Board when it was originally approved. At that time, the applicant was given credit for one to 250 square feet, which was a reduction in parking, with 2,000 square feet the limit if they wanted to have a restaurant. appreciated seeing the transparency showing the areas to incorporate parking for the downtown area. Mrs. Schramm recommended leaving the requirement at 2,000 square feet for a restaurant for one year and then review the project at that time after other permanent parking has been provided. She stated she Member McFadden asked leave the restaurant at 2,000 square feet, and Member Schramm said, yes, and bring it back in a year to determine whether parking can be enlarged at that point. used in that area, and that concerned Mrs. Schramm. More leased parking is being Member McFadden stated if a condition was added that there would be no table service in that area; that people must go to the window to get the food and/or drinks, she would approve this. When the project was before the Board originally, Mrs. McFadden voted for the condition of nothing more than 2,000 square feet for a restaurant. At that time, she said she felt if they could work out the parking to meet the standard, which they have now done, that it could be worked out. is now proposed, with that outdoor area to be self- service by customers, and no table service, she stated she could support the request. As it Chairman Hall concurred with Member McFadden that there be no outside service for a certain period of time-- possibly a year, to see how the concept worked. If, at that time, the parking was not overly tight and they wanted outside table service, he could support that. Chairman Hall said he did not have a problem with the leased parking arrangement, and thought it would probably work out better as Mr. Densham has it arranged than with the City as a middleman. Design Review Board (one motion) RESOLUTION NO. 130, COMPLIANCE/NEGATIVE A 69,000 SQUARE FOO adopted the following Resolutions: RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A PRIOR DECLARATION TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF SPECIALTY RETAIL SHOP. RESOLUTION NO. 131, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A REDEVELOPMENT PERM1 RESrAURANT IN A SPECIALTY RETAIL SHOPPING CENTER AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF GRAND AVENUE AND WASHINGTON STREET; with the added condition that there is to be no direct table service for patio eating. TO ADD A 3,600 SQUARE FOOT RESOLUTION NO. 132, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FOR AN APPROVED SPECIALTY RETIL RESTAURANT; with the added condition that there is to be no direct table service for patio eating. SHOPPING CENTER (RP 87-11) TO INCLUDE A 3,600 SQUARE FOOT Board Members McCoy and Rombotis returned to the dais. Hall McCoy McFadden Rombot is Sc h r amm MINUTES December 21, 1988 DESIGN REVIEW BOARD Page 5 PUBLIC HEARINGS: (Continued 1 2. RP/CUP 88-6/CDP 88-6 KENTUCKY FRIED CHICKEN DRIVE THROUGH. Chris Salomone gave the staff report, using a transparency to show the site and drawings to show the project. He stated staff's concern with the lack of pedestrian orientation with the drive-through, which does not meet the desire of the Design Manual. Mr. Salomone stated there is congestion with the other drive-throughs in the downtown area and staff felt this would cause more congestion in the same area. Also, more open space amenities should be provided. Engineering Department also had a mild concern with the congestion onsite. The The handicapped parking space is located where the people using that would have to cross the drive-through traffic pattern. Mr. Salomone stated the Planning Department had a concern with the added 65 square feet of space in the restaurant for the drive-through window, which would require another parking space. There is no way to provide that space. Mr. Salomone said the reason for the recommendation for denial was that the project does not meet the standards for pedestrian-oriented businesses and open space amenities that the Design Manual encourages in the Village area; also, because of the Engineering and traffic problems onsite. Mr. Salomone added this was not a strong denial, and there have been no complaints or problems with the firm through the years they have occupied that corner. The Coastal Permit request is also recommended for denial. Chairman Hall commented about the distance between the entrance and the self-serve, and suggested a safety crosswalk type of exit that would align with the parking spaces. Chairman Hall opened the Public Hearing at and issued the invitation to speak. 5:39 p.m., games Lantry, 964 - 5th Avenue, San Diego, addressed the Board, describing the project and stating that the object of the request was to increase the efficiency of the restaurant and solve some of the problems with the parking at peak times. landscaping and retaining the outdoor plaza dining area. He said they would be adding Mr. Lantry stated the Planning Department had issued a Negative Declaration, so there would be no negative impact on traffic--either pedestrian or automobile. He further stated they felt they had adequate parking. MINUTES December 21, 1988 DESIGN REVIEW BOARD Page 6 PUBLIC HEARINGS: (Continued) Mr. Lantry addressed the additional space concern, stating the pop-out window for the drive-through would add 64 square feet of floor area, but that did not mean actual floor space for the restaurant. He volunteered to replace the pop-out window with a flush window, if the Board desired. Mr. Lantry stated they felt they had followed the Redevelopment Area goals and added they intended to landscape the front area to invite pedestrians to use the outside tables. Mr. Lantry stated this drive-through window will not impact pedestrian traffic in the area and they felt this was pedestrian oriented, as that is one objective of their company. pedestrians on Elm Avenue and so many of the businesses on Elm do cater to automobiles. This update was planned to meet changing conditions, and the drive-through window would allow them to have a convenient service for their customers. He said they felt they served the Since no one else wished to speak on this matter, the public testimony was closed at 5:47 p.m. Board discussion determined without the pop-out window, the congestion could be worse, as traffic would have a problem pulling up to the window. Board Member Rombotis stated he did not oppose the drive- through, but felt this should be returned to the applicant for re-working. Board Member Schramm concurred with returning this to the applicant. also asked for a better trash collection situation, as the present one is awkward. She Board Member McFadden agreed with the other two Members, and added she would like the Elm Street access to be a right turn in or out, and with narrowing the driveway, more parking spaces would be gained. Mrs. McFadden inquired whether there was a policy about opening up to the alley, and staff indicated there was none. She asked for that to be explored, as it would help the traffic circulation to open this up to the alley. Chairman Hall agreed with the Board Members, and added he felt the window should remain a pop-out, and he had no problem with the drive-through. safety zone or striping to the entrance from the parking lot so the exit from the drive-through would be defined as to the walkway. lot of the problems. He asked for a He agreed the alley might solve a Member McCoy asked for the pop-out window to be clarified. Chris Salomone explained that is floor space and generates the need for another parking space, but staff could look at that again. He said that parking is the issue, because if the parking standards are not met, the Coastal Permit would have to be amended. Design Review Board continued this matter to the 3anuary 18, 1989, meeting. Hall McCoy McF adde n Rombot is Schramm X X X X X . .- MINUTES December 21, 1988 DESIGN REVIEW BOARD Page 7 DEPARTMENTAL : 3. RP 88-5/CDP 88-5 HALVERSON FAMILY TRUST. Design Review Board continued this item to the January 18, 1989, meeting. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Minutes of the Regular Meeting held November 16, 1988, were approved as presented. AD30URMENT: By proper motion, the Meeting of December 21, 1988, was adjourned at 5:57 p.m. Respectfully submitted, CHRIS SALOMONE Housing and Redevelopment Director Harriett Babbitt Minutes Clerk Hall McCoy McFadden Rombot is Schramm Hall McCoy McFadden Rombot is Sc h r amm h \ P