CITY OF PISMO BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT November 13, 2018 Honorable Chair and Planning Commission City of Pismo Beach California RECOMMENDATION: 1) Approve the revocation of Coastal Development Permit and Architectural Review Permit P18-000049 which permitted the demolition of 350 squarefeet of floor area, an addition of 225 square feet of outdoor dining, and an exterior renovation. The project is located at 853 Shell Beach Road (APN 010-371-032) within the Shell Beach (H) Planning Area (Commercial District) and C-1 (Retail Commercial, 1983 Code) Zoning District. The project is located inside the Coastal Zone and is appealable to the Coastal Commission. APPLICANTS: Playa Dulce, LLC 853 Shell Beach Road Pismo Beach, CA 93449 Permit Number P18-000049 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Continued review from October 9, 2018 of Staff request for revocation of Coastal Development Permit and Architectural Review Permit P18-000049 that allowed for the demolition of 350 square-feet of floor area, an addition of 225 square feet of outdoor dining, and an exterior renovation to the existing restaurant building. The project is located at 853 Shell Beach Road (APN 010-371-032) within the Shell Beach (H) Planning Area (Commercial District) and C-1 (Retail Commercial, 1983 Code) Zoning District. The project is located inside the Coastal Zone and is appealable to the Coastal Commission. The recommended revocation is due to the unpermitted demolition of the entire structure on September 18, 2018. On October 9, 2018 the Planning Commission continued the item to allow time for the applicant to discuss with the City next steps for the project in respect to required parking, original material reuse, Alex sign reuse, public art, and a contribution toward a historic preservation program. Page 1 of 26
Permit options for future development of the Alex Bar-B-Q site was on the City Council agenda for November 6, 2018. However, the item was pulled from the agenda and no action was taken. PROJECT DESCRIPTION & APPLICATIONS Per Municipal Code 17.121.180, revocation of permits may be approved by the Planning Commission if any of the conditions or terms of such permits are violated. On May 4, 2015, Building Permit B14-000439 was issued for an interior remodel, which included demolition of interior areas only. Under this permit, the contractor was working on interior demolition. On August 13, 2018, a building permit application (B18-000356) was submitted for the 350 square-foot demolition, interior revisions, and the exterior renovation for project P18-000049. This permit was in review and not issued as of September 18, 2018. Existing Structure in 2015 photo STAFF ANALYSIS On June 12, 2018, the Planning Commission approved Coastal Development permit and Architectural Review Permit P18-000049 to allow the demolition of 350 square-feet along the front wall of the existing building in order to create 225 square-feet of new outdoor dining area and to accommodate an exterior renovation (Exhibit 6). On September 18, 2018, the terms of the approved Coastal Development Permit were violated by demolishing approximately 3,500 square feet, which was the entire main structure. The 400 square-foot detached shed and the chimney structure are the only remaining structures on site. Page 2 of 27
A citation for work without permits was issued by the City on September 25, 2018. An Emergency Coastal Development permit to remove the destruction debris was approved by the Community Development Director on October 1, 2018 and the required Building Permit for the debris removal was approved on October 3, 2018. By November 2, 2018, debris has been removed from the site and a list of salvaged materials is included as Exhibit 3. Notably, site photos from the destruction day and of the resulting debris pile show no stucco present. This indicates that the stucco and decorative tile were removed prior to the structural emergency. There were no decorative tiles salvaged for reuse on the project entrance as was indicated during the approval hearing. March 2015 September 18, 2018 Page 3 of 27
The stucco removal also incurred the loss of a local Landon mural that was located on the front porch. This mural would have been removed with the approved project, however, Staff was unaware of its presence during the permit evaluation. Site photos without construction fencing were used for site context and these photos had a banner on the wall which covered the mural, so it was overlooked and not considered as a site feature at the time. April 2016 view of mural on porch March 2015 mural covered with banner The Planning Commission has the authority to revoke permits if the terms of the permit are violated. The violation was the removal of the structure without Coastal Development permits or building permits. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Revocation of the Coastal Development permit will negate the accepted Categorical Exemption No. 2018-010 for the project which was based on the approved minor alteration of the existing structure and negligible expansion of use. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION A notice of public hearing was posted at City Hall, on the City s website, at the project site and mailed to all property owners within 300 of the project site by November 2, 2018. The notice was published in the newspaper on November 3, 2018. The meeting agenda and staff report were posted at City Hall and on the City s website on November 9, 2018 in accordance with Government Code Section 54954.2. At the time of the report publication, one comment letter supporting the revocation was received by staff (Exhibit 5). RECOMMENDATION Adopt the attached resolution (Exhibit 2) approving revocation of Permit P18-000049 and negating Categorical Exemption No. 2018-010. ALTERNATIVES 1. Do not adopt a resolution revoking the permit. 2. Provide direction to Staff. Page 4 of 27
Attachments: Exhibit 1 Vicinity Map Exhibit 2 Resolution Exhibit 3 Salvaged Materials Exhibit 4 Planning Commission Minutes; October 9, 2018 Exhibit 5 - Letters Exhibit 6 - Resolution No. PC-R-2018-020 approved June 12, 2018 Prepared by: Aileen Nygaard, Associate Planner Meeting Date: November 13, 2018 Community Development Director Approval: Jeff Winklepleck, AICP Page 5 of 27
EXHIBIT 1 VICINITY MAP Project Property Page 6 of 27
EXHIBIT 2 RESOLUTION NO. PC-R-2018- REVOCATION OF PROJECT NO. P18-000049 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PISMO BEACH REVOKING A COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW PERMIT FOR THE DEMOLITION OF 350 SQUARE FEET, 225 SQUARE FEET OF NEW OUTDOOR DINING AND AN EXTERIOR RENOVATION LOCATED AT 853 SHELL BEACH ROAD; APN 010-371-032 WHEREAS, Mitch Woolpert, Playa Dulce, the "Applicant" submitted an application to the City of Pismo Beach for a Coastal Development Permit and Architectural Review Permit for the demolition of 350 square feet, 225 square feet of new outdoor dining area, and an exterior renovation; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission approved Coastal Development Permit No. P18-000049 on June 12, 2018; and WHEREAS, the entire structure at the project site was demolished on September 18, 2018 without authorization, and WHEREAS, on October 9, 2018 the Planning Commission continued the item to a date uncertain approximately six weeks in the future; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly-noticed public hearing on November 13, 2018 at which all interested persons were given the opportunity to be heard; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission determines that the terms of the permit were violated by the demolition of 3,500 square feet of structure; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has determined that the minor alteration exemption under CEQA was also violated and rendered invalid. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Pismo Beach, California as follows: A. FINDINGS FOR THE REVOCATION OF THE COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW PERMIT: 1. The demolition of 3,500 square feet of structure performed was not permitted by a building permit and was not permitted by Coastal Development Permit P18-000049. The Planning Commission does hereby revoke the Coastal Development Permit and Architectural Review Permit. UPON MOTION of Commissioner seconded by Commissioner the foregoing Resolution is hereby Page 7 of 27
approved and adopted the 13th day of November, 2018, by the following roll call vote, to wit: AYES: Commissioners: NOES: Commissioners: ABSTAIN: Commissioners: ABSENT: Commissioners: APPROVED: Doreen Curtze, Chair ATTEST: Elsa Perez, CMC Administrative Secretary Page 8 of 27
EXHIBIT 3 SALVAGE MATERIALS Page 9 of 27
From: Mitchell Woolpert Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2018 3:27 PM To: Aileen Nygaard <ANygaard@PismoBeach.org> Subject: Re: 853 Shell Beach Road Aileen, This is the complete list. During the demolition most of the lumber on the main level and anything below it was destroyed, thus the small pieces that we could use for a featured historical wall. As we have discussed the tile is destroyed and gone. The wood flooring is not salvageable. See attached photos for your records. Regards, Mitchell Woolpert Compass Health Inc. Page 10 of 27
EXHIBIT 4 Page 11 of 27
Page 12 of 27
Page 13 of 27
EXHIBIT 5 LETTERS T. Gary & Karen Mork 326 Santa Fe Ave. Pismo Beach, CA 93449-1951 825-556-0668 togamo@charter.net November 6, 2018 To: the Pismo Beach Planning Commission CC: Adam Werner; Terren Collins; Doreen Curtze ; Stacy Inmana; Kari Bhana RE: 853 Shell Beach Rd., Pismo Beach, CA (A.K.A. Alex s Restaurant/Bar) Hello Commissioners, To avoid any confusion, when we speak of the Village, we are referring to the 18 streets from Cliff Ave. to Vista Del Mar Ave. With that said, whatever the circumstances were that brought us to this point are no longer of concern. It is what it is. However, in order to move forward, we do have concerns. First, how is it possible for a developer to demolish an entire building leaving only the fireplace and chimney and still claim the project is a remodel? We understand that to go through the process again for a new construction permit will take much more time and effort on the part of the developer, yet is that not one of the most important procedures to ensure that this project meets with current Pismo Beach building codes and standards? Second. After watching the previous meeting regarding this project, a commissioner or two stated that the commission did not have the power to tell a developer what they can or cannot build on a sight was perplexing. Over the years, on numerous occasions, the Planning Commission has denied/rejected potential projects for a variety of reasons. Just because a developer may present a vailed threat to build an office building instead is shameful. This is a bulling tactic on the part of the developer and not acceptable behavior from a potential business owner. To date, our Village has 7 working properties which are either deli s or restaurants. There is an additional empty multi-use property (1667 Shell Beach Rd.) restaurant on ground floor and apartments above which has been ready for use for a few years now with no takers. That would be #8. With the re-do of Speedy Burger and the Cape Cod, that would be 10. Not to forget Ventana Grill and Willow before you enter the Village. Also, DePalo s, Kanpai Shui, Marisol, Spy Glass, and Lido Page 14 of 27
delis/restaurants as you leave the Village. New total 17 eaters within about 3-mile strip of road. So, do we really need to make it 18? Third, and this may be the most important of all. Is it really a good idea to allow this project to continue as a re-model? We see this as a very slippery slop you are on. This would most certainly send the wrong message to potential developers about how things are done in Pismo Beach. Here in our Village, we do want re-development. Yes, we do have neglected properties which need much help, but we would like to keep our neighborhood a neighborhood. And we do not want developers coming in believing they can sidestep the regulations and not pay their fair share. Thank you for taking the time to read our thoughts. Sincerely, T. Gary & Karen Mork Page 15 of 27
EXHIBIT 6 Page 16 of 27
Page 17 of 27
Page 18 of 27
Page 19 of 27
Page 20 of 27
Page 21 of 27
Page 22 of 27
Page 23 of 27
Page 24 of 27
Page 25 of 27
Page 26 of 27