CCMIN040505 - Laserfiche WebLink

Mr. Brozosky assumed the conditional use permit could be amended to be a non-conditional use. The conditional use permit could be amended again later on without having to wait for the entire one-year period. Mr. Roush said Council could indicate that certain uses would still be in effect, but if Council removed certain uses and the tenant wanted to retain those uses, the tenant would have to reapply for a modification of the use permit which could occur during the one-year period. He noted that the revocation of a use permit triggers the one-year limitation. Mr. Fialho wanted to make it clear that the revocation relates to the sale of alcohol past 10 p.m. To revoke a conditional use permit in this regard, Council would still have the ability to attract a business that may not be a bar, such as a restaurant or retail business. Mr. Brozosky asked if a restaurant that serves alcohol is required to have a conditional use permit? Mr. Iserson said a restaurant is only required to have a use permit if it is selling alcohol after 10 p.m. Ms. McGovern wanted to know the process for reviewing conditional use permits when there have been repeated offenses. When approved, she believed a conditional use permit provided the community with the ability to say if this business does not meet the standards, the conditional permit could be revoked. The repeated problems at the Union Jack Pub continued for a long period of time and the use permit was never revoked. She wanted to know what steps are currently in place that allows the City the ability to review the conditional use permit if the Police Department receives an excessive amount of calls per year or there are complaints by the neighboring property owners and businesses, or there are lewd acts in public. Mr. Iserson said there are no set criteria and each case is reviewed and considered on a case- by-case basis. Staff tries to work with businesses to resolve the problems without having to cause someone to go out of business. Staff has asked the tenant and/or the property owner to cooperate and to understand the complaints and issues, which in most cases, staff is successful in achieving some level of balance and compromise that enables the business to continue to operate. In this situation, the problems continued too long. Staff worked with the tenant and the issues were somewhat resolved and then resurfaced. Ms. McGovern wondered if Council needed to review its process and decide if there seemed to be a pattern with a business, that the City would be required to notice the business and the property owner apprising them of the issues. She asked the Police Department to inform Council every year in its annual report if there are businesses in that year's time that are consistently causing disruption either to the neighboring property owners and businesses, or to the public. Tim Neal, Police Chief, noted that when these types of problems arise, staff has tried to handle these in alternate administrative ways, which is the revocation or restriction of the conditional use permit. In the case of the Union Jack Pub and other alcohol serving establishments, the first steps are to increase patrol activity and enforcement. The Police Department usually involves the ABC in enforcement action, as was the case with the Union Jack Pub as they were in violation of their liquor license. He did not disagree with Ms. McGovern that the metered approach in the last two instances has not been effective. He concurred with staff's report and the actions of the Planning Commission. The conditions that the Planning Commission imposed are traditional sanctions that are applied to problem bare in the community. The Union Jack Pub has not been a good neighbor and for the past Pleasanton City Council 11 04/05/05 Minutes