Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Commissioners Radnich and Sturm are not

I think. Good evening. We'll bring this meeting to order. Um and we'll start. Um I call this meeting to order. I'd like to do roll call. Um Commissioner uh Deorgio, present. Commissioner Mason, present. Vice Chair Deming,

present. Chair Leange present. Uh, Commissioner Radnich and um, Sturm are both excused. Um, if anyone would like to, I'd like to adopt the the agenda. So, if anyone could propose a motion on that. So, move. All in favor? I. All oppose. Motion carries. Um, do we have any public comments that are not on tonight's agenda to staff? I will check the online audience. One moment. Okay.

Uh, I've been logged out. I'll log back in and we'll let you know so we can return to that in one moment. I'll keep going. Um consent calendar. We do have one item on the consent calendar. Does anyone have anything they want to discuss on that? Otherwise, I will entertain a motion to adopt the consent calendar. I move that we adopt the consent calendar. Second. Uh okay. Roll call vote. All in favor? I. All opposed. Motion carries. We have no continued public hearing. uh we have new public hearing. So with that, I will turn over to staff for the staff report, please.

So before we start the public hearing, I'm going to ask uh the control room if there are any audience members who would like to speak on items not on tonight's agenda because very good. So okay, no public comment. No public comment. Okay, so with that, turn over to staff, please.

Thank you. Good evening, commissioners. My name is Madison Church. I am a planning technician with the city and tonight I will be presenting a change of conditions application at 960 Moraga Road to extend the business hours at Rev Beastro. The restaurant currently operates from 5:00 p.m. until 8:30 p.m. The owner of the business is requesting to operate from 8:00 a.m. until 8:30 p.m. and be open on Mondays. As shown on screen, the project site is located in Lafayette's downtown. The general plan designation is downtown core and the site is located within the downtown specific plans plaza district which is distinguished by the yellow layer on the map. The property is in the retail business zoning district. This land use designation prioritizes commercial vitality and encourages a variety of businesses. Rev Beastro is one of four tenant spaces within the building. Before I begin, I would like to provide some background on why we're here today. A shared parking request to reduce the total number of parking spaces for a proposed restaurant to share 24 on-site parking spaces was approved by the planning commission in 1999. To mitigate parking demand for the spaces provided, the request was approved on the condition that the restaurant in space A, where Rev Beastro is currently located, shall be limited to hours after 5:30 p.m. on weekdays and Saturdays. Second condition exists stating that any change that may increase the parking requirements like a change of tenant, hours of operation, or use must be approved by the planning commission

demonstrating compliance with Lafayette's parking ordinance. Later in 2021, the planning commission approved a change of conditions to the shared parking agreement um to modify the opening hours of Rev Beastro from 5:30 to 5:00 p.m. In this application being heard tonight, the owner of Repro is requesting to operate their business from 8:00 a.m. to 8:30 p.m. and be open on Mondays. The owner does not intend to offer regular lunch or breakfast service. Earlier operating hours would be reserved for occasional private events. There are no physical changes to the building or site proposed. Staff reviewed the hours of operation of other businesses in the shopping center to better understand potential parking demand. Existing and proposed hours of operation for each business are shown on the screen above. Rev is the only business that is provot proposing modified hours at this time. The varied and complimentary operating hours among the four businesses combined with the limited eventbased schedule proposed by Rev Beastro creates a staggered parking demand. There is minimal overlap during peak hours and no single use is likely to place excessive strain on available parking. The dinner service for Rev remains unchanged and has historically functioned without issue under the shared parking agreement. Of the four businesses, only Rev Beastro has hours of operation that are restricted by a city approval. As discussed in the staff report, the California legislature passed Assembly

Bill 2097 in 2022, which prohibits local jurisdictions from imposing minimum off-street parking requirements on commercial and residential developments within 1 half mile of major public transit. The project site at 960 Maraga Road is less than a half mile from the Lafayette BART station. Additionally, a public parking lot is located just south of the site which provides additional parking options for the business. Staff sent the proposal to outside referral agencies for comments. No comments were received by a majority of the agencies. There was a letter of support that was provided from the Lafayette Chamber of Commerce. The project was noticed to property owners within 300 feet of the parcel and notices were posted at least 10 days prior to this meeting and no comments have been received by staff. Staff found the project to be categorically exempt from SQA pursuant to section 15301 existing facilities. Based on staff's analysis and the resolution that finds the project conforms with the required findings to approve a variance, staff recommends the planning commission find the project exempt from SQA and adopt PC resolution 202508 approving the application removing any prior conditions of approval. Just to clarify, this would mean that any sort of conditions that were associated with the shared parking request or the prior conditions of approval um for the change of conditions application would be removed and no

restrictions would be placed on the property. That concludes the presentation. Thank you and I'm happy to answer any questions. Questions for staff? Commissioner Mason, uh, just to clarify, so uh, if they want to expand the hours of operation, they would not need to come back through the city if the resolution is approved as is. That is correct.

Um, does that bind uh future tenants of that space or is it just strictly limited? I mean, what I was thinking about is somebody you know, Roundup wants some competition and they want to have a bar that's open till 2 in the morning. And that's what I was thinking. So, the approval for the change of conditions would run with the land. Um, but the property would still be required to meet all of Lafayette's other zoning and land use requirements. So, something like a bar, you would have to look at whether that's allowed under the the general plan and the zoning.

Thank you. Vice Chair,

I apologize if I missed it when I was running through. Um, what was the sort of logic and reasoning initially for this restriction? Um, it seems like, you know, I've been to the restaurant, but the area is like very nice little small like essentially are we just make sure we're not like any, you know, hidden things we're going to trip up down the road because we now allow it. It's, you know, the schoolhouse is next to it. Was there any like logic reasoning behind it we should be aware of? At the time that the shared parking request was approved, um the whoever was proposing to establish that business in that location could not meet the parking ordinance required that was in place by the city. So they said, "We will approve your shared parking request to share the 24 parking spaces if you limit your hours of operation." so they could mitigate any sort of increased parking demand.

So just to expand on on what Miss Church said, the parking ordinance envisions and previously did as well that uses may not have the same peak demand. So the other businesses um in this example we would look at the cumulative demand of all of the uses in the building or suite um and they would need to provide that the property owner would need to provide that parking. But if there is a morning use, a breakfast place and an evening use, a dinner place, those two have off they do not have simultaneous peak demands. And so they could share the same parking resource. And that that was what the circumstance was and the basis for the the restriction to evening hours because the the other uses would have lower or no parking demand. um that late in the day.

Okay. And based on current tenant you and the current tenants also don't have that though is just was did the did the did those current essentially the lots that the current tenants sit on now did they have the restrictions that have been removed? Do we know or it just only this plot that had the restriction running on it? the latter the the other uses were established earlier and thus when the last essentially the last space

came in with a with a high demand use like a restaurant. If it had been a lower demand use, it might have pencileled. But and then what is the scenario? If we approve this, suddenly all the lots fill up all the time. If essentially it creates a problem, what's the resolution? I don't know if I have a qu an answer for the that specific question. Um, I do know though that under the current state law when this project was received, um, AB2097 ex doesn't allow local jurisdictions to enforce parking requirements under their code if the site is located within a half mile of BART. Um,

so if it was done today, this restaurant was being built on the plot, would the restriction ever would existed in the first place essentially? That's my understanding. Yes,

correct. So, no use residential or commercial moving forward. Um, no project. The city cannot impose any parking requirements on it. It's entirely optional and up to the developer. So, it is theoretically possible to have no parking provided, which would uh create a a challenge to find parking, which is externalized. Then the city hears about the lack of parking all the time. And just so you know, well, no, I'll I'll report under planning managers update uh on a parking study.

Any other clarifying questions for some uh just one for me. Uh when Commissioner Mason asked, I I want to make sure I understood it right. Uh I thought you said or you asked or you confirmed that the hours could change in the future. I mean, if if that's true, why do we have hours in the resolution? Why don't we just say there are no hour requirements? They do what they want. We we know the parking requirements gone, but the hours seem to be in the resolution. So, why are we doing that if they don't really have to abide by that?

That's a good question, and I wonder if that could potentially be modified to be more clear with what the solution is. Um, but I will say the application was submitted for a request to modify the hours. So, staff received that request and analyzed the project like so. Um, it's just staff's recommendation that we remove prior conditions of approval.

Okay. So, uh, I I think I'll probably ask the applicant to talk a little bit about that, but if we if if if we were to ask to change the hours, would staff and expand them, just to be clear, not not contract them. Would staff still be in support of this? When you're saying that the the planning commission would like to expand like if we said let's instead of saying 8:30 and not Sunday, we said 10 and Sunday's okay, too. Would would staff still support this? Yes.

Okay. All right. Thank you. So now, uh, if the applicant would please, if you want, you're welcome to, um, come on up, please, and tell us your name, please. And we know your name, but tell us anyways.

So, my name is Laura Magoo. I'm the owner of Rev Beastro. So, thank you for sitting here and Madison for all the work she's done. So if I can just clarify um I read the report today. What we had asked is that the opening restrictions be removed. So the closure on Sunday is personally our choice. We actually have no hours restrictions on Sundays on that space. Um so and then Mondays also were closed. Um but the restrictions are for um Monday through Saturday the opening time of 5:00 p.m. And so um it's and then we stop seating at 8:30, but then people are there until 11:00 at night. So it's it's um it's the restriction of opening hours that we're we're requesting. Um and then just a little bit of background. Um so when we took over the space, it was our intention to open a dinner only restaurant. Um, we opened it for work life balance. As ironic as that may seem to open a restaurant, it worked for us um, nine years ago. Um, and just over the last nine years, the costs associated with operating a restaurant um, have grown exponentially. Um, the restaurant really can't support itself with um, those few hours. Uh, we do have a family and don't want to be open on Sundays. That's um some comments that we've heard. Well, why don't you just open on Sundays and Mondays? That's um that's just not what we want to do for our business. Uh we do get a lot of inquiries for lunches, um whether it be birthday parties, wedding showers, uh funerals, um and then even um meetings like um affinity meetings with the chamber. I'm a board member of the chamber. They're always looking for space. and we have this beautiful award-winning garden that sits open and vacant. So, um with the recent

installation of meters, um our lot is now used by neighboring businesses. There's no restriction on who can park there. Um and so we just took all of that into account and um with the change in the law decided that um we would like to be able to have private parties. We don't have a desire to open for lunch. Um several reasons for that. Um the kitchen is extremely small. There's there's really not the storage, food storage to support um opening for five days a week lunch. It just if someone can do it, great. I we we can't. Um and then just from a staffing model and our own business model, um it's just it's not something we want. you also have a preschool next door and um so the thought of having daily lunch with kids screaming all the time, you know, um it might not work as well either. Um but just to have the flexibility. Um we estimate that by just doing um a couple events a week um maybe you know there around the holidays maybe a little bit more than that um and then in other times maybe slower um at least a 10% increase in revenue which which is quite a bit and a and a big game changer. So um and we feel that that's a conservative estimate too. Um, but we know the business is there because we get the inquiries without even publicizing publicizing it. So, um, thank you for your consideration. I'll answer questions if you have questions, but that's

No, thank you. Does anyone up here have questions for ask? Um, and I appreciate you what you said about Sundays and I my comment was around you have a beautiful garden and if if you wanted the flexibility to allow somebody to have an event there on a Sunday catered by somebody else, that's what I was getting at is would you want that flexibility?

Um, we I don't think our insurance would allow us to offer it as a space with outside catering. Um we we do do events on Sundays occasionally. Actually, we're um getting installed as a cavo, which is an official champagne savoring sabering site. Um that'll happen on Sunday the 7th. Um we do we'll do um have private events once in a while or special events um on Sundays. It's just it's a day we just like to protect. And so special events aren't counted then. Maybe staff can clarify that special events on a Sunday are okay.

We we don't have any restrictions on our Sunday hours as it is. Ah, I see. I see. Yeah, we're just closed, but not because Okay. That's I wasn't I wasn't clear on that. Thank you. Yeah. Um uh what I was going to say, but I think it's moot because it's your own decision is it's it's always nice to have the opportunity. you might decide to sub lease in the future and it's a more value with a greater operating time frame. Not that you would ever need to do that, but it sounds like that's not I do want to clarify that with staff though that we our lease doesn't allow for a sub lease like

I know it doesn't now, but I mean why let this control it because you could change your lease, you know, but that's what I want to clarify with staff. As far as I'm concerned, I think you should have the hours that you could as any restaurant on any day. Whether you choose to operate or not, it's up to you as the operator or the owner. But I don't think there should be a city control over it. That's my personal opinion. So, I'm going to ask staff that when we're done. But, um, does anyone else have questions? Yeah. Uh, thank you for clarifying your intent. I have, uh, I support this. I have no problems with you opening early. My sole concern was, you know, loud, drunken parties at 2 in the morning, right adjacent to, you know, residential neighborhood. So that's why I was more concerned about

pushing the hours. At at this time, we don't have any restrictions on closing hours except for what our liquor license allows. So, it's my understanding that this application would has nothing to do with closing hours. It's only opening hours. Um, so we're we're under the ordinances of noise being in the neighborhood. Um, our liquor license, we have a cut off time. Um, we want to go home. Um, but I don't I don't know. Um, I don't know that it would be added or changed by this. It's only the opening hours.

Do you have something? Okay. Thank you very much. Oh, wait. Hold on. Let's see. Do we have let's see um any clarifi? Okay, we're going to open up to public comments and then if there are any you you will have an opportunity to respond. Oh. Oh, I did want to ask you one thing. Did you have a chance to ask your neighbors in the center like for feedback? Just curious. Was there any like the Indian food or any of them? Do they We've talked about it before and they expressed kind of silly. Yeah. that they don't have restrictions. So they're they didn't have a problem. I'm just curious more that like some

No, once the meters were installed, we had a lot of issues prior to the meters being installed with um employees of various businesses parking in our lots. Um collectively, we made a choice not to tow anyone. Um, our lot was filled by 10:00 a.m. every day, over half filled, um, with people that we knew were employees of various businesses. Um, and so, um, one of the tenants along with the owner of the property, um, decided to have meters installed. And once that happens, um, almost every day at lunchtime, you drive by and our lot's pretty empty.

Okay. All right. Great. Thank you very much. Thank you. Um, so we will now open it up to public comments and I'll look to staff to see if we have any public commenters and I will look to my colleague in the booth. Uh, and he's shaking his head. No, we have no public comments online or in the room.

Okay, we will close public comments. Um, you're welcome to respond to the public comments, but there weren't any, so I'll assume you're not. Um, and then I'll I'll Does anyone have anything? Otherwise, I'll entertain a motion. Or before we do that, I I did just can I clarify with staff? So, we're just changing the opening time to 8 a.m. Is that correct?

That is correct that the applicant is requesting to change the opening time to 8 a.m. and staff recommends that that is approved, but also removing prior conditions that would restrict the property. the about the parking, right? Okay. But then, um I just want to make sure. So, okay, I'm not gonna fight. It sounds good. Um anyone discussion? Otherwise, I'll entertain a motion.

All right. I make a motion. I um move that we find the project categorically exempt from SQA pursuant to section 1530 301 and adopt planning commission resolution 2025-08 approving the application removing prior conditions of approval. Do I have a second? Second. All in favor?

I I oppose. None. Okay. Motion carries and 14-day appeal period. Thank you. So, we're all set. Thank you very much. All right. So, now we're on to other business. Arc volunteer for this. Is that next next Friday? Is that next Friday? Yeah, next Friday. I'm a I'm available.

Thank you. Uh commissioners report. I don't think we have any commissioners who are on any subcommittees. Planning director's report. Um the kind of it related to the item uh before you this evening, parking in the downtown. There is currently a downtown parking study underway headed by um transportation program manager uh Patrick Golier. He received a grant from the Metropolitan Transportation Commission to undertake the study and it's been ongoing for uh several months with data gathering and analyses and um tomorrow we're having an in internal visioning um meeting and so I just wanted to let you know that that effort if you are have not been previously aware of it through the outreach efforts and survey and um is ongoing and Um, I think that that should conclude and and the the results of that study should be released by the end of the year.

Great.

It's come up a couple times in that study. Are they specifically going to like call out or get data on employees in Lafayette businesses parking? Because it's come up a couple times now in my meetings about kind of tangentally to the point. Is that something specifically they're looking at? Uh yes um that they are attempting to understand the the various cohorts of demand. Employee parking is well known and there was uh there were at least two um open houses uh for lack of a better word. um one just kind of the general public and one directed specifically to business owners in town. And I know that there's been dialogue between um the the working group and the chamber and so that there yes that it's a well-known need. Um, I don't know that there'll be any magic bullets or or a panacea, but uh it's a it is certainly identified as a needing a cohort.

Yeah, someone is in retail. Employee parking is really important. Customer parking is really important. Um, all right. I think did did you have any more from planning director? Nothing additional at the time. All right. I'm gonna take a little liberty as the chair and wish my oldest daughter good luck as she starts college tomorrow. And with that, we are ajourned. I second. All right. That's great news.