HomeMy WebLinkAboutRP 85-01A; THE ALLEY BAR COCKTAIL LOUNGE; Redevelopment Permits (RP) (2)STEPHEN M. LHEUREUX
ATTORNEY AT LAW
2111 PALOMAR AIRPORT ROAD, SUITE 300
CARLSBAD. CALIFORNIA 92009-1432
TELEPHONE (619) 431-2788
FAX (619) 438-7888
August 20, 1993
Honorable Claude "Bud" Lewis
Mayor and Council Members
City of Carlsbad
1200 Carlsbad Village Drive
Carlsbad CA 92008
!<H AUG 2 3 1993 CiS
rily of Cirlsbad C~/
Re: Parking within the Redevelopment Area
Dear Mayor and Council Members:
On behalf of the Village Faire merchants, I wish to bring to your attention
what appears to be an inequitable application of your parking ordinance within
the Redevelopment Area. I am specifically referring to the recent approval by
the Design Review Board of a Minor Redevelopment Permit to allow an
expansion of The Alley without requiring them to provide for additional off-site
parking. This decision was made despite the recommendation to the contrary by
your staff, and your recent decision involving Fish House Vera Cruz.
Not only was this action patently unfair to the other businesses within the
immediate area who have being required to provide off-site parking, but it
directly contravenes your own parking ordinances.
The Village Faire merchants are troubled by the fact that this business,
which is basically a restaurant, has been allowed to expand its restaurant use
while not being required to provide additional parking. You certainly would not
allow this to occur at the Village Fair, or at Fish House Vera Cruz, or at any of
the other restaurants in town, so why should this business be afforded
preferential treatment?
The rationale used by the Board in approving the requested parking waiver
sets a very bad precedent, and will undoubtedly be cited by other businesses as
justification as to why they to should not have to provide off-site parking. I
understand that a food type of business is seeking to open on Grand Avenue in
the space formerly occupied by Richard's Art Frames and A World of Travel.
Will they also be given a waiver, or will they be required to participate in a
parking district as was required of Fish House Vera Cruz? This is an important
August 20, 1993
Page 2
issue, as it puts those businesses that have been required to pay for off-site
parking at a competitive economic disadvantage with those that are not required
to do so. For example, each month the tenants at the Village Faire are paying as
part of their common area expenses, approximately IOC a square foot of leasable
area just for off-site parking.
In light of the parking conditions that are being placed on some business
by not others, it would appear that a double standard is being developed as it
applies to off-site parking. Based on the rationale articulated at the hearing, it
appears that the Design Review Board has now started to grant exceptions to the
parking ordinance without your direct approval or direction, and if not stopped,
will only lead to problems and discontent within the Redevelopment Area.
It is therefore requested that the Council take steps to immediately see that
any deviation from the requirement of providing on or off-site parking within the
Redevelopment Area be made only by the Council. Additionally, Staff should be
given explicit direction to give completion of the parking inventory a highest
priority. Finally, it would appear that it is necessary for the Council to make it
crystal clear to both the Staff and the Design Review Board that further
"exemptions" to the parking ordinance, such as the one given to The Alley, will
not be tolerated.
Additionally, it is believed that The Alley has expanded its restaurant
operations beyond that as represented to the Design Review Board. If this is
true, then the rationale used to approve the project, dubious as it was, becomes
even more seriously flawed. Therefore, close and careful monitoring by the
Code enforcement department would certainly be warranted.
Very truly y^
Stephen M. L'Heureux
SML/kkb
c. All Village Faire merchants
Fish House Vera Cruz
Carlsbad City Manager
Director of Housing and Redevelopment
Community Development Director
January 6, 199^
TO: DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
FROM: HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
SUBJECT: RP 85-1(A)- "THE ALLEY" - Request to amend and extend a
minor redevelopment permit to allow a bar/cocktail
lounge with revised hours of operation and live
entertainment, including piano and dance floor, located
at 421 Grand Avenue in the Village Redevelopment Area.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Design Review Board APPROVE Resolution
Nos. 202 and 203 granting exemptions from the number of off
street parking spaces and proximity to another liquor dispensing
operation. In addition, APPROVE Resolution No. 204 approving
amendments to, and extension of, RP 85-1 with conditions to ALLOW
a bar/cocktail lounge with revised hours of operation and live
entertainment, including piano and dancing, at an existing 1200
square foot establishment located at 421 Grand Avenue in the
Village Redevelopment Area.
II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND
The Design Review Board considered and approved a minor
redevelopment permit on February 14, 1985 for a change in use of
property located at 421 Grand Avenue from retail/commercial to a
restaurant (Dick's Place) with beer, wine, and liquor.
When originally considered by the Design Review Board, the
members were concerned about the restaurant becoming an
undesirable bar (or cocktail lounge). Therefore, they approved
the original permit with the condition that no video games, pool
tables or live entertainment be allowed within the establishment.
Also, the hours of operation for the restaurant were limited to
11:00am to 11:00pm on weekdays and 11:00am to 1:00am on weekends
and holidays.
Since the building in which the noted business is located has no
on-site parking, the issue of parking was also an original
concern to the Design Review Board. The building was approved for
retail uses which have a parking requirement of 1 space per 300
square feet of gross floor space. A restaurant has a parking
requirement of 1 space per 100 square feet of gross floor space.
In an effort to revitalize the Village Redevelopment Area, the
Board agreed to allow the restaurant based on the fact that there
was adequate public parking within 3 00 feet of the business.
As stated previously, the original redevelopment permit approved
a restaurant use at the noted location. Since the time of the
original approval, the restaurant has been converted to a
cocktail lounge, known as "The Alley". This cocktail lounge has
been operating at the noted location with approved business and
liquor licenses for nearly 8 years without incident. The owners
provide food service to the bar patrons from adjoining
restaurants, specifically the Caldo Pomodoro and Deveney's Cafe;
however, this does not meet the definition of "bona fide eating
establishment" (restaurant) as outlined with Section 21.04.056 of
the Carlsbad Municipal Code. Due to the conversion from
restaurant to bar, the current use of the property at the noted
location is "non-conforming" for the purposes of code
enforcement.
Based on the fact that the current redevelopment permit for the
noted property stipulates the use to be a "restaurant" and not a
"bar/cocktail lounge", the operators of "The Alley" have
requested an amendment to, and extension of, the permit to allow
their existing bar use to continue with appropriate approval from
the Design Review Board. In addition, they would like the
conditions of approval to be amended to allow live entertainment
(piano bar), dancing and extended hours of operation as follows:
6:00am to 2:00am, Monday through Sunday, including all holidays.
The operators of "The Alley" would also like to eventually expand
their facility to include approximately 600 square feet of
additional space which would primarily be used for a dance floor
(if approved). The application for an expansion of the cocktail
lounge will need to be processed according to standard planning
procedures and is not set for review by the Board at this time.
However, the operators would like to obtain some initial feedback
from the Design Review Board as to the issues the members believe
need to be addressed as part of the expansion application. For
example, the operators would like to know if parking will be an
issue for the Board.
III. VILLAGE DESIGN MANUAL AND REDEVELOPMENT PLAN CONSISTENCY
The use is consistent with the Village Design Manual and
Redevelopment Plan for the Village Redevelopment Area. The noted
business is located within Subarea 1 of the Village Redevelopment
Area. The uses allowed in this area are the same as those allowed
within the C-1, C-2 and R-P zones as indicated in the Carlsbad
Municipal Code. Although not permitted by right, bars or cocktail
lounges are allowed, within the C-2 zone, through the conditional
use permit (or redevelopment permit) process.
The Design Review Board has the authority to approve the proposed
use if the business operator meets applicable code provisions as
outlined within Section 21.28.015. The existing business meets
all code provisions for a bar/ cocktail lounge except for the
following two conditions:
1. Parking shall be provided at the rate of not less than one
space per fifty square feet of gross floor area;
2. No licensed liquor dispensing operation shall be located
within five hundred feet of any other licensed liquor
dispensing operation not meeting the definition of a bona
fide eating establishment.
Since there continues to be adequate public parking within 300
feet of the business, staff finds that the existing parking is
satisfactory. The use has not been intensified in such a manner
as to require additional parking.
Although "The Alley" bar is, in fact, within five hundred feet of
another licensed liquor dispensing operation (Ralph & Eddie's)
not meeting the definition of a bona fide eating establishment,
the Housing and Redevelopment Department and the Police
Department have received no complaints regarding the existing bar
and find that an exemption from the above condition (#2) is
acceptable in this situation.
Staff finds that with the above two exemptions "The Alley" bar
complies with all applicable code provisions within the Village
Design Manual and Carlsbad Municipal Code. The Village Design
Manual allows the Board to grant an exemption in the number of
required parking spaces whenever it finds that there is
sufficient public parking within a reasonable distance as
provided by the City or other governmental agency or when the
subject property is within a parking district and the Board
believes that sufficient parking will be provided within a
reasonable time by the City or other public agency.
The proposed use is currently located within 300 feet of four
public parking lots. Also, as part of the new Master Plan for the
Village Redevelopment Area, the building in which this use is
located will most likely be included in a parking district to
provide additional public parking in the area. Fortunately, this
use is also located within 300 feet of the proposed Transit
Center which will provide additional public parking within two
years.
Per CMC Section 21.35.130 and the Village Redevelopment Plan, the
Board is authorized to grant exceptions/exemptions from the
limits, restrictions, and controls established for the Village
Redevelopment Area, for minor redevelopment projects, whenever it
finds that:
1) The application of certain provisions would result in
practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships which would
make development inconsistent with the general purpose and
intent of the Carlsbad Village Redevelopment Plan.
The building in which the proposed project is located has
been built from property line to property line. The entire
building would need to be demolished and rebuilt in order to
provide the reguired parking; this action is both
impractical and would create an unnecessary financial
hardship for the property owner. The overall goal of the
Village Redevelopment Project is to create a pleasant,
attractive, accessible environment for living, shopping,
recreation, civic, cultural and service functions. The
proposed project is consistent with this goal.
2) There are exceptional circumstances or conditions unigue to
the property or the proposed development which do not
generally apply to other properties or developments which
have the same standards, restrictions and controls.
The noted property is unique in that it is historically
significant and the City would not want to encourage the
demolition of the building for the purposes of providing on-
site parking. Therefore, it is necessary for the City to
allow exceptions to the noted standards in order to ensure
that the building is preserved as well as remains functional
on a long term basis. The building is the original Los Diego
Hotel built in 1925 by Roy and Idella Chase. In 1985, the
building was restored to its original character.
3) The granting of an exemption will not be injurious or
materially detrimental to the public welfare, other
properties or improvements in the project area.
The bar has been in operation for approximately 8 years
without incident. Staff is not aware of any complaints from
surrounding property owners regarding operations of the
bar/cocktail lounge. The bar is, and will be, operated in a
manner which prohibits any activity which might be injurious
or materially detrimental to the piiblic welfare, other
properties or improvements in the Village.
4) The granting of an exemption will not contradict the
standards established in the Village Design Manual.
The proposed use is consistent with the Village Design
Manual. Uses allowed within this area are those which are
allowed by the C-2, C-1 and R-P zones. Bars/cocktail lounges
are allowed within the C-2 zone through the redevelopment
permit process. The Village Design Manual reguires that
adequate provisions for off street parking be provided when
any building or structure is erected, enlarged or
intensified in use. However, the Design Manual also
encourages innovative methods of providing off street
parking. Since the building is not being enlarged and the
use is not being intensified at this time, the granting of
the noted exemptions will not contradict the standards
established within the Village Design Manual.
In granting exceptions/exemptions, the Board may impose such
conditions as necessary to protect the public health, safety and
welfare.
Since the Board has the authority to do so, staff recommends that
the Design Review Board approve Resolution No. 202 to exempt the
proposed use from the off street parking requirement and
Resolution No. 203 to exempt the project from the requirement
stipulating the proximity (greater than 500 ft.) to another
liquor dispensing operation with the findings and conditions
noted therein.
IV. GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY
The project is consistent with the goals and objectives of the
various elements of the General Plan because it assists in the
City•s/Redevelopment Agency's effort to create a strong
pedestrian orientation and foster a community concept. The noted
use creates an opportunity for persons to meet and socialize in <
casual environment which is beneficial to the continued
revitalization of the Redevelopment Area. Due to its location,
the project attracts pedestrian traffic which is encouraged in
both the General Plan and the Village Design Manual.
V. PARKING ANALYSIS
The issue of primary concern with most projects in the downtown
area is parking. As stated previously, the building in which this
project is located provides no on-site parking. However, there
are four public parking lots (with a total of approximately 82
spaces) within 300 feet of the business. Therefore, when the
concern about parking was initially raised with approval of the
restaurant (Dick's Place), the Design Review Board agreed to
accept staff's recommendation to approve the project.
The current parking requirement for restaurants is one space per
100 square feet of gross floor space. The parking requirement for
bars/cocktail lounges is 1 space per 50 square feet of gross
floor space. Therefore, the bar has a related on-site parking
requirement of 24 spaces. The previous restaurant use was granted
a public parking credit of 12 spaces. The bar requires a public
parking lot credit of 24 spaces. Since the bar has been operating
for nearly eight years without incident or complaints regarding
parking problems, staff believes that there is adeguate parking
in the area to meet existing parking needs/requirements for this
business. Also, the high peak time for the bar is evenings after
6:00pm. Due to the fact that a majority of the other businesses
in the area close by 6:00pm, the public parking lots are much
more accessible to patrons of the bar and there is minimal impact
on the public parking lots during the day.
Since the proposed use will not intensify the uses in such a
manner as to require additional parking at this time, the
existing parking is satisfactory under the provisions of the
Carlsbad Municipal Code Title 21.
VI. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Since the project involves no expansion or alteration of the
exterior of the structure, the Planning Director has determined
that the project is exempt from environmental review as stated in
Section 15303 of the California Environmental Quality Act.
VII. CONCLUSION
Staff, the Master Plan Advisory Committee and Cannon Design
Group, the Consultant for the Master Plan, are all supportive of
activities which encourage establishment of a "night life"
(6:00pm to 12:OOpm)/evening entertainment within the Village. The
live entertainment approval requested by the current bar owners
is consistent with the encouraged activities supported by the
Master Plan Advisory Committee.
Since staff is not aware of any problems created by the existing
use and/or activities within "The Alley" business establishment,
we can support the owners request for an amendment to, and
extension of, minor redevelopment permit 85-1 at this time to
allow the continued use of a bar/cocktail lounge within the
existing 1200 square foot retail suite at 421 Grand Avenue with
live entertainment and dancing. Staff would like to note that the
amendment to the noted permit, if approved by Design Review
Board, does not allow the expansion of the bar/cocktail lounge,
beyond its current size, without further review and approval by
the Design Review Board. To expand the use, the owners will be
required to submit a separate redevelopment permit application
and participate in the normal project approval process.
For minor projects defined in Section 21.35.080, the Design
Review Board shall consider the evidence and by resolution
approve, conditionally approve or deny the project. Such
determination shall be made in accordance with the Municipal
Code, the General Plan and the Carlsbad Village Area
Redevelopment Plan and the Village Design Manual. With the two
exceptions/exemptions noted previously, the proposed project
meets all applicable standards/codes as outlined within the
Carlsbad Municipal Code, Village Design Manual and Village
Redevelopment Plan. Therefore, staff recommends approval of
Resolution Nos. 202, 203 and 204 approving appropriate
exceptions/exemptions, amendments and the extension of RP 85-1
for the continued use of property located at 421 Grand Avenue for
the purpose of operating a bar/cocktail lounge ("The Alley").
EXHIBITS;
1 - Design Review Board Resolution No. 202
2 - Design Review Board Resolution No. 203
3 - Design Review Board Resolution No. 204
4 - Request from Ms. Windy Sparks Paris for amendment to RP 85-1
5 - Location Map with Public Parking Lot Identification
6 - Site Plan
EXHIBIT 4
10-30-92
ppslg" Review Bofit-cl
Ralley Moble*Chalttnan
Dear Board Members:
Amr^nd Permit ^85-1
potentlnl flhd tl.l9 Is " ^^l"?' „y „atto..a dt the Alley,
1 irtve made d Cli^.„„h"V bdt lb Is d hlscfe
U 1. not Just ahotl-er "ft",^^ ^tlng ^ d';, M -"eet
«l,ere people teel """ff^tf^! L "^is, tUHtilhg bH Ihfe fcedch,
Allen 1 feel ^riX^^hS'Al^:M': jHri^C.^^Lt-
1 Imve worked t,er, Imrd k° ? '''Lu wf.Ub sl.oiiMHg ill H'^
Me e..tat,llsl,ment ^JJ/^"^ o J helfel.SStlhg tesldUr-
r:^:^^: .i^t^::.riir. ..d ;.e t..i. .etviee
I l,nve n-ride The Allej d ^P^^^^J^J^^^ttihg dhd the "eas,
talnraent. ^dt^ons enjoy the ^^''^.Tf^/atttdct^ ^eot^le M,o
H ,tenlng" .n«slt we Pt^'id^; jf ^ {///te "a.-d v/ht to enjo,
|,n,P lust come from dinner or thte theater. a ^g^uests
. coJtorlable night ot f «^«"tertalhment ""^'^^Jj
a dance fl"";;' , bodtd to dUow me to give tny cUst-I am appealliig to tne """"^ , • ^yg^j. ^nd d
„„er.. what the, wan . f,^^^M/fu^? " fledse dlloW,
cnl-aret llcel.se would alloW ^^ri d hic" L dbUshweHt iH which
^^%^]^ra"n :Lring^:i1rU.?^l«.eh't'^d^d1dncl„g. Than. yo.
Sincerely,
Call (Windy) Tarls
L<XATIONMAP EXHIBITS
PUEi
o
>
at
"THE ALLEY" I RP85-1(A)
EXHIBIT 6
"THE ALLEY"
RP85x^\
r "THE: ALUOW '
I
f
4
I trt
i
9'/a/e 9'fue/
December 24, 1992
TO: Senior Management Analyst Fountain
FROM: City Attorney
STAFF REPORT FOR "THE ALLEY"/RP 85-1(A)
Please add findings to the resolution which are required by CMC
Section 21.35.130 for an exemption to the standards in the Village
Design Manual. These findings should also be discussed in the
staff report with a reference to CMC Section 21.35.130 as the
authority for the exemption. The facts and the findings must
support both exemptions which are being approved, i.e. the parking
exemption and the exemption for the proximity to another liquor
dispensing operation. If you have any questions or comments,
please let me know.
Page 2 of the staff report states that if the applicants return
with a request for an expansion, staff will recommend that the
operators "share the lease costs of public parking spaces if they
are going to receive parking credit for them." The City Attorney
does not recommend that the City lease public parking spaces. I
know that this was done for Fish House Vera Cruz, but the City
Attorney does not think it should be continued as a policy.
Instead, he recommends that a parking survey be done to factually
determine if there is excess public parking for which business may
receive credit. He does not recommend that they actually lease
space in the public parking lots to receive this credit. It would
be better to delete this reference from the staff report and
address the issue at the time the new application is considered.
KAREN J. HIRATA
Deputy City Attorney
rmh
c: Community Development Director
Housing and Redevelopment Director
December 22, 1992
TO:
FROM I
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY, KAREN HIRATA
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT, BOB WOJCIK
PLANNING DEPARTNENT, GARY WAYNE
FIRE DEPARTMENT, MIKE SMITH
BUIIJ)ING DEPARTMT!WT^ PAT THgT.T.V
CpeGCE DEPARTMENT. JODEE SASWA^
WATER DISTRICT, BOB COATES
HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, DEBBIE FOUNTAIN
REQUEST FOR AMENDMENT TO MINOR REDEVELOPMENT PERMIT 85-1
Housing and Redevelopment Department Staff received a request
from the operators of "The Alley", 421 Grand Avenue, to amend
their existing minor redevelopment permit (85-1) to allow their
bar/cocktail lounge to continue to exist with live entertainment
and dancing and with appropriate approval from the Design Review
Board. The operators ultimate goal is to receive approval to
expand their business. However, at this time, they simply wish to
"clean up" the existing permit to allow them tp operate with the
appropriate approval- .
Attached is a report prepared by Housing and Redevelopment
Department staff for review by the Design Review Board on January
6, 1993. Please review the report and let me know if you have any
comments or conditions which should be incorporated into the
resolution approving the project. Your comments are needed by
December 30, 1992.
Thanks for your help!1 If you have any questions, please contact
my office at extension 2935.
DEBBIE FOUNTAIN
c: Housing and Redevelopment Director
-rue U^-r THO ^"^^f^-,^
[ CRIME PREVENTION
NOVEMBER 4, 1992
TO: HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT
SENIOR MANAGEMENT ANALYST DEBBIE FOUNTAIN
FROM: City Attorney
REQUEST FOR AMENDMENT TO RP 85-1 TO ALLOW PIANO BMt AND DANCING AT
"THE ALLEY"
Thank you for sending me the draft staff report and resolution for
the above-referenced amendment. I have the following comments:
1) It is not legal to have a permit that is extinguished upon
transfer of the property. Permits "run with the land" under
the law. Therefore, the language in the staff report and in
the resolution which states that the approval is "not
automatically extended to any new owners of the establishment"
should be deleted.
2) There must be facts to support each finding. There are little
or no facts to support the findings in the resolution. The
staff report should state that the project is consistent with
the goals and objectives of the Village Area Redevelopment
Plan and the Village Design Manual and the goals and
objectives of the General Plan, and state why this is true.
The staff report should also include facts to support Finding
No. 3 which states that the project is compatible with
surrounding land uses. If there are no facts presented to the
Design Review Board to support a finding, the finding is
invalid.
3) The first sentence in the staff report states that the Design
Review Board is "conditionally approving an amendment". This
has a different legal meaning than "approving an amendment
with conditions." The Design Review Board does not have the
power to conditionally approve an amendment. It can only
approve an amendment with conditions.
If you have any questions or comments please let me know.
KAREN J. HIRATA
Deputy City Attorney
afd
c: Housing & Redevelopment Director
Community Development Director
November 3, 1992
TO: DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY, KIOIBN HIRATA
SENIOR PLANNER, ROBERT GREEN
FROM: SENIOR MANAGEMENT ANALYST, DEBBIE FOUNTAIN
REQUEST FOR T^ENDMENT TO RP 85-1 TO ALLOW PIANO BAR AND DANCING
AT EXISTING DRINKING ESTABLISHMENT, "THE ALLEY"
The owners of "The Alley" drinking establishment located at 421
Grand Avenue have requested an amendment to their existing
redevelopment permit to allow a piano bar and dancing. Live
entertainment is currently prohibited as a condition of the
original redevelopment permit approved in February, 1985.
Attached is a draft report for the Design Review Board to
consider the noted request from "The Alley" owners. Please review
the attached report and forward your comments to my office by
November 10, 1992. I would like to schedule this item for the
Design Review Board meeting of November 18, 1992 if there are no
major issues with the report or staff's recommendation.
Thanks for your assistance in this matter. If you have any
questions, please contact me at extension 2935.
THANKS!
Debbie Fountain
C: Housing and Redevelopment Director
Community Development Director
\ V \ \ WWW
LJLbLi
W.
I
.i|fl«liHM»l*
1^
Citv of Carlsbad
Community Development
September 17, 1992
The Alley
421 Grand Avenue
Carlsbad, CA 92008
Dear Sirs:
A stop work notice was posted on September 16, 1992 at 421 Grand Avenue. The construction
activity, which involves converting a retail/office facility to a bar, requires a number of city
approvals.
This intensification of the use will require the approval of the Redevelopment Department. The
contact person in that department would be Debbie Fountain. Should you receive an approval
from that agency, you will then need to submit three sets of building, electrical, mechanical and
plumbing plans to Development Processing Services for complete plan check. The intensi-
fication of the occupant load may require many code related items that your original use did not.
There is also a relatively new walk in cold case constructed in the alley on the west side which
will require permitting or removal. In the meantime, do not continue with construction.
You should also note that prior to submittal for plan check you will be required to amend the
existing Redevelopment Permit. Please make sure that the proposed amendments are consistent
with the existing conditions of approval. Should you have any questions regarding the Building
plan check process, you may contact Pat Kelley at 438-1161 x4503. All questions related to the
amended Redevelopment Permit should be directed to Debbie Fountain at 434-2935.
MARTIN 0REN?9^
Community Development Director
MO:rs
c: Housing and Redevelopment Director
Principal Building Inspector
Debbie Fountain, Redevelopment
Fire Marshal
2075 Las Palmas Drive • Carlsbad, California 92009-1576 • (619)438-1161 ^
September 16, 1992
TO: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
FROM; SENIOR MANAGEMENT ANALYST, DEBBIE FOUNTAIN
EXPANSION OF "THB ALLEY" - CORNER OF STATE STREET AND GRAND
AVENUE
Staff has researched the issue of the expansion of "The Alley"
and presents the following information for your review and
further direction.
On September 4, 1992, Tom Betz contacted the Housing and
Redevelopment Office and spoke to me about the ability for "The
Alley" to expand into the space previously occupied by "Retail
World" as of October 1, 1992. The additional space is
approximately 600 sq.feet in total size. Tom stated that he met
with Kathy Graham and "a couple of planners" about a year or so
ago when "The Alley" wanted to expand their business. They were
told at that time that they could expand because the bottom floor
of the Betz building was approved for restaurant. Although I was
unable to find anything within the files which stated that the
bottom floor was approved for restaurant, I was aware that Kathy
told Tom it would be OK to expand the business. So, I assumed
that it would be OK for "The Alley" to expand at this time. I was
not aware that "The Alley" was simply a bar nor that their
expansion would be a problem.
Following your direction on September 14th, I contacted Tom Betz
and told him that "The Alley" would not be allowed to expand
without approval from the Design Review Board. He, needless to
say, was not very pleased because he had already entered into a
lease agreement with the owners of the establishment and they had
begun some preliminary work on the expansion.
I met with Tom and the bar owners this morning and discussed
their proposed plans. Attached is a copy of the rough sketch of
their expansion plans.' The total square footage of the expanded
bar would be 2 000 sq. ft. (which includes approx. 200 sq.ft of
storage/restroom space and 300 sq. ft of office). They do not
have facilities for preparing food. However, they do have an
agreement with Delvaney's to provide breakfast, lunch and dinner
to their patrons upon request. Also, Caldo de Pomedero provides
pizzas to patrons upon request.
I spoke with Brian Hunter about this issue. He said that he and
Chris approved the first expansion of the "The Alley" without
going to Design Review Board because they were trying to be as
flexible as possible and wanted to encourage the continuation of
successful, good business establishments in the Village. He and
Chris felt that approval of "The Alley" expansion was consistent
with the original redevelopment permit issued for the
rehabilitated building. This action is being held "over our head"
somewhat because Tom and the owners are not sure why it was OK
then but not now.
Both Brian and Patty Cratty said they spoke with the owners of
"The Alley" and told them that they needed to provide food
service. However, this condition/action was not recorded in any
written form. Therefore, it is difficult to confirm. The owners
did say that they installed kitchen facilities at one time.
However, there was not much demand for food items and they could
not justify the expense. So, they removed the facilities and
entered into food service agreements with surrounding
restaurants.
If we determine that it is now necessary, a minor redevelopment
permit would be all that is required per the current code for
expansion because the proposed structural changes are less than
$50,000. The ordinance requires that a bar be approved via a
Conditional Use Permit (CUP). The redevelopment permit serves as
the CUP in the Village Area.
Tom Betz and "The Alley" owners have requested/pleaded that I
find out if there is any way that they could expand without
having to go to the Design Review Board (DRB). The delay in
getting the item to DRB will have a significant financial impact
on both the business and the property owner.
If we determine that the expansion does need to go before the
DRB, Tom and "The Alley" owners would like some indication as to
whether or not staff will support the permit. Also, they would
like to know whether additional parking will be required. The
parking ordinance does not have a separate parking requirement
for "bars/taverns". Are they parked at restaurant ratio (1:100)?
If so and we agree that the bottom floor was approved for
restaurant, it appears that parking would not be an issue because
"technically" there would be no intensification of use.
Tom Betz and "The Alley" owners have requested a reconsideration
of the requirement to submit an application for a redevelopment
permit. Please let me or Evan know what we should do.
Thanks,
DEBBIE FOUNTAIN