Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007-57 - Newport Beach Brewing CompanyRESOLUTION NO. 2007 -57 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MODIFYING THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL OF USE PERMIT NO. 3485 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2920 NEWPORT BOULEVARD (PA2006 -177). WHEREAS, on September 27, 1993, the City approved Use Permit No. 3485 subject to findings and conditions of approval authorizing a restaurant/brewpub with a Type 23 Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) license to operate at 2920 Newport Boulevard within the Cannery Village area subject to findings and twenty -nine (29) conditions of approval. A Type 23 license allows a small beer manufacturer (brewpub or micro - brewery) where a brewpub is typically a small brewery with a restaurant. The restaurant and brewpub began operations in 1994 using the business name of Newport Beach Brewing Company referred to hereto as "NBBC" after the issuance of Coastal Development Permit (CDP) No. 5 -93 -137 issued by the California Coastal Commission (CCC). WHEREAS, the NBBC represented to the City that the primary use would be a restaurant and that the brewery and alcohol sales would be secondary to the primary use. This fact is supported by the administrative record from the hearings conducted by the City in 1993. Condition No. 10 was imposed requiring the operation of the brewery and the service of alcoholic beverages to be ancillary to the primary food service operation of the restaurant. WHEREAS, on September 27, 1993, the City Council rescinded its March 8, 1993 approval to allow the purchase and use of in -lieu parking spaces within the Cannery Village municipal parking lot prior to 5:00 PM in association with Use Permit No. 3485. WHEREAS, in 1999, the NBBC requested and received approval of an amendment to Use Permit No. 3485. The amendment allowed the restaurant and brewpub to operate with a Type 75 ABC license and the amendment was subject to findings and additional and revised conditions of approval (twenty -nine [29] in total). A Type 75 license authorizes the sale of beer, wine and distilled sprits at a bona fide eating place plus the brewing of beer. WHEREAS, the NBBC represented to the City that the primary use would be a restaurant and that the brewery and alcohol sales would compliment and be secondary to the primary use. This fact is supported by the administrative record from the proceedings conducted in 1999. Condition No. 9 was imposed requiring the operation of the brewery and the service of alcoholic beverages to be ancillary to the primary food service operation of the restaurant. Condition No. 10 was imposed that provides, "The approval of this use permit is for a restaurant/brewpub and shall not be construed as the approval of a bar, cocktail lounge, or other use serving alcoholic beverages during hours not corresponding to regular meal service hours (food products sold or served incidentally to the sale or service of alcoholic beverages shall not be deemed as constituting regular meal service) nor as the approval of a cabaret, nightclub, or other use with the principal purpose of providing live entertainment and/or dancing." Additionally, the closing hour on Friday and Saturday nights was changed from 2:00 AM to 1:00 AM. WHEREAS, in January of 2006, the City received a complaint from The Cannery Village Concerned, a local group of residents, property owners and business owners, alleging that the Newport Beach Brewing Company was violating the conditions of Use Permit No. 3485. Alleged violations included, among other things: operating a bar rather than a restaurant in violation of Condition No. 10; alcohol sales in excess of food sales in violation of Condition No. 9; opening the entire dining area on weekends before 5PM in violation of Coastal Development Permit No. 5 -93 -137, trash in the parking lot in violation of Standard Condition E; failure of the establishment to curb unruly patron behavior outside the establishment in violation of Standard Condition D; and inadequate training of the owner and employees in responsible methods and skills for serving and selling alcoholic beverages in accordance with Standard Condition F. Neighbors contend that patrons create noise, fight, cause property damage, urinate, defecate, and fornicate during the late evening and early morning hours on and in the vicinity of the project site and that the operator was unable or unwilling to discourage or correct these objectionable conditions. Based upon the complaints received, Use Permit No. 3485 was referred to the Planning Commission on May 4, 2006, for review. WHEREAS, on May 4, 2006, the Planning Commission discussed the operation, took input from the neighborhood and directed an official review of the Use Permit. At the May 4, 2006, meeting, testimony was given to the Planning Commission supporting the following facts: a) Jerry Kolbly, General Manager, NBBC represented that the establishment's emphasis was on being a restaurant. He also noted that the kitchen is opened during the hours of alcohol service with the late night menu (pizzas and appetizers) from 10:00 PM to closing. In addition, Mr. Kolbly noted that "service from 11:00 pm and 1 am is about 90% alcohol (55% liquor and 45% beer and wine) and 10% food. (See, Planning Commission Minutes dated May 4, 2006). Operation of the brewery and the service of alcoholic beverages shall be ancillary to the primary food service operation of the restaurant pursuant to Condition #9 and this testimony would support a finding of a violation. Condition #10 prohibits a bar and based upon these representations, staff believes that the limited menu after 10:00 PM and relationship between the sale of alcohol to food violated both Condition Nos. 9 and 10. b) Jerry Kolbly also testified that his staff had received certified alcohol training in 1999, but due to staff turnover, the training had since lapsed. (See, Planning Commission Minutes dated August 17, 2006). No record of completion of a certified alcohol sales training course is in evidence required pursuant to Condition F. Failure to properly train the owners and staff who serve alcohol in accordance with Condition F would constitute a violation of the condition. On September 6, 2006, the majority of NBBC staff successfully complete the State Department of Alcohol Control Board administered License Education on Alcohol and Drugs (L.E.A.D.) training program. If this course had been completed by all staff members, NBBC would have been in compliance with Condition F that requires training of owners, staff and employees on responsible alcohol sales. They may have previously been in violation of this condition, if there were employees serving and /or selling alcoholic beverages who had not undergone a certified training program. All employees have since received the LEAD training and the NBBC is believed to be in compliance with Condition F. c) Bruce Low, a 29th Street resident, testified for a group of concerned citizens, noting that: i) They do not wish to close the Brewery as it brings value to the neighborhood provided it is operated in accordance with the conditions of approval. ii) There is a discrepancy between the Use Permit conditions and the condition of the Coastal Development Permit related to the size of the dining room on the weekends. iii) The Brewery turns into an obtrusive bar operation after 10:30 PM and they have bouncers, what restaurant has bouncers? iv) The operators have made strides but the more serious issues still remain nuisances to the neighborhood as outlined in the January 2006. d) Joe Reese, 30th Street resident, testified that patrons have to show their identification to get into the establishment. It is not a restaurant, not with bouncers and serving only appetizers after 10:00 p.m. This operation between 10:00 PM and 1:00 AM is nothing more than a bar. This area is out of control and he is disturbed by the noise in the early mornings. e) Drew Wetherhault, 30th Street resident, testified that he supported the prior speakers and he stated that the restaurants and bars need to comply with their use permits. f) Carrie Stade, 29th Street resident, testified she has been awakened with noise and victimized by patrons. g) Stephanie Rosanelli, resident of Cannery Village, noted the noise at night and that she cannot leave her windows open. She too has had her home vandalized by tagging. h) Christine Andros, 30th Street resident, testified the challenges are the noise and patron activities (nuisances) in the parking lot. This establishment operates as a bar. She has spoken to the bar operator on several occasions to inform him of disturbances in his parking lot. i) Tony Shepherdson, 31st Street resident, testified his agreement with previous speakers and stated any help would be welcomed. j) Kevin Weeda, the owner of a business located in the area, testified his agreement with the previous speakers and asked that this item be brought back for formal review. k) The net public area of the establishment is no more than 1500 square feet Monday through Friday before 5:00 PM and the net public area exceeds 1500 square feet before 5:00 PM on Saturday and Sunday in violation of Special Condition No. of Coastal Development Permit No. 5 -93 -137. 1) The site was found to be generally free of litter and not in violation of Standard Condition E. At the conclusion of the discussion, the Planning Commission determined that there was sufficient information to indicate that the use was operating in violation of the conditions of approval and in a manner that may have been detrimental to the reasonable peace and quiet of the neighborhood. The Commission also found that there was sufficient information to consider potentially modifying the conditions of approval to alleviate the problems reported by neighbors. The Commission requested and the Planning Director determined pursuant to Section 20.96.040 of the Municipal Code that a review of Use Permit No. 3485 was required. WHEREAS, On August 17, 2006, the Planning Commission held a public hearing regarding the alleged violations of and potential modifications to the conditions of approval of Use Permit No. 3485. The hearing was noticed in accordance with Chapter 20.92 of the Municipal Code and the operator of the Newport Beach Brewing Company was also mailed a notice of the hearing. The following facts were considered by the Planning Commission: a) A Code and Water Quality Enforcement Officer conducted a site visit on February 10, 2006. It was a Friday night, and the officer noted that there was in fact a line to get into NBBC and the officer noted that some individuals were screaming at each other and a high noise level was being emitted from the premises. This would constitute a violation of the nuisance provision in Condition D. (Planning Commission Minutes dated August 17, 2006). b) At the Planning Commission Meeting, Mr. Kolbly, the General Manager of NBBC, acknowledged that the line to get into the establishment could reach up to thirty people. Additionally, John Dale, a patron of NBBC noted that the establishment "does a great job with security at the door." (See, Planning Commission Minutes dated August 17, 2006). c) At the Planning Commission meeting, Jill Markowitz, owner of a property near NBBC contended that individuals were urinating in public (she did not specify that the individuals came directly from NBBC). She also complained that, in general, there were loud noises coming from the establishment and the parking lot. (Planning Commission Minutes dated August 17, 2006). The noises /disturbances would be in violation of the nuisance provision in Condition D. d) Billy Steed testified that the establishment is nice until after 9:00 p.m. when it can get out of control. Noise, public urination and fights coming out of the bar disturb the peace. (See, Planning Commission Minutes dated August 17, 2006). The noises /disturbances would be in violation of the nuisance provision in Condition D. e) Joe Reese testified at the meeting that he had visited NBBC after 9:00 PM on August 5, 2005 to see how the NBBC operated. He testified that the security guard at the door said that after 9:00 PM the restaurant becomes a bar and that no one under 21 is allowed in or they would lose their liquor license. The restaurant had patrons standing and loud music was playing. We sat at a table and asked the waiter for food who told us the kitchen was closed and the only thing to order was drinks. There were no chips, pretzels or popcorn being served. There were three security guards inside the restaurant and another one was outside. It was obvious that this was acting as a bar, not a restaurant. Conversely, there was testimony given by Zach Stevens, a NBBC employee, on duty that night noting that waiters are told to push food even past 11:00 PM to increase sales and that the kitchen was open as evidenced by the sale of a %2 chicken salad at midnight. (Planning Commission Minutes dated August 17, 2006). Closing the kitchen thereby eliminating food sales with the continued sales of alcohol would constitute a violation of Condition #9 as the sale of alcohol would exceed that of food and a violation of Condition #10 by operating a prohibited bar. f) Robby Hogan, a manager in charge of the kitchen at the establishment, testified that he was on duty the night of August 5, 2005 and the kitchen was open and is always open until the establishment closes (Planning Commission Minutes dated August 17, 2006). g) Roberta Aley, resident, testified that she frequents the brewery and that she always has been able to get food after 12:00 PM and that she has not seen any of these problems after 12:00 PM that have been portrayed by previous speakers. (Planning Commission Minutes dated August 17, 2006). At the conclusion of the hearing, the Planning Commission directed staff to set Use Permit No. 3485 for possible modification and /or revocation given that the NBBC had not addressed issues of nuisance and strict compliance with all conditions of approval. WHEREAS, on or about August 21, 2006, Newport Beach Police informed planning staff that the owners, staff and employees had successfully completed the L.E.A.D. training classes administered by the State Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control as required by Condition F. A violation of Condition F had occurred prior to successful completion of the training curriculum. WHEREAS, Condition #6 of Use Permit No. 3485 states: "The net public area of the restaurant/brewpub, which is devoted to daytime use Monday through Friday (prior to 5:00 PM.) shall be limited to 1,500 square feet. The balance of the net public area shall be physically closed off to the public by a fixed barrier and shall not be used until after 5:00 PM daily." WHEREAS, Special Condition #1 of Coastal Development Permit (CDP) No. 5- 93 -137 states: "Prior to the issuance of a coastal development permit, the applicant shall execute a deed restriction, in a form and content acceptable to the Executive Director, which shall provided no more than 1,500 square feet of service area for the subject restaurant/brewpub shall be open before 5:OOPM. This document shall run with the land, binding all successors and assigns, and shall be recorded free of prior liens." On January 19, 1994, the property owner recorded a deed restriction pursuant to Special Condition #1 that restricts the use of the property in accordance with Special Condition #1. WHEREAS, on Sunday October 8, 2006, Newport Beach Police Detectives visited the NBBC, arriving at about 12:30 PM. They noted that the restaurant was completely open with patrons occupying tables in all areas with no sections being closed off. NBBC has admitted during the various public hearings that the NBBC does not limit the size of the dining room on weekends before 5:00 PM. WHEREAS, on January 4, 2007, the Planning Commission held a noticed public hearing on the possible modification of conditions and /or revocation of Use Permit No. 3485. Testimony and a staff report, including a report prepared by the Newport Beach Police Department, were considered by the Planning Commission: a) The Newport Beach Police Department investigation did not reveal any violations of conditions or a significant law enforcement issue with the operation of the NBBC. The Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control was contacted and they reported that the Department did conduct an investigation that was closed due to a lack of evidence of a violation of license conditions. b) All NBBC had successfully completed the L.E.A.D. training classes administered by the State Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control abating past violation of Condition F. c) The NBBC staff voluntarily offered the following physical and operational changes for consideration as amended conditions of approval: i) Construction of a trash enclosure cover. ii) Relocation the entrance from the parking lot side of the building to the Newport Boulevard entrance when a line of patrons forms to enter the establishment. iii) Discontinuation of the removal of condiments and menus from the tables. iv) Discontinuation of the late night bar menu while keeping the kitchen open at all times with a full menu. v) Installation of signs requesting that patrons be respectful of the neighborhood. vi) Initiation of regular security sweeps of the parking lot. vii) Maintenance of a security presence at least '' /z hour after closing. viii)Implementation of a recycling collection program that minimizes noise generation. ix) Scheduling building /business maintenance. (waste disposal, deliveries, etc.) activities during hours less objectionable to nearby residents. d) Jerry Kolbly, General Manager of the Newport Beach Brewing Company, testified that the queue line location change has worked well. Instituting the full menu in the late evening and early morning has been advantageous from a business perspective. The LEAD training program has been a valuable experience they have undertaken. Every brewpub cards after 10:00 PM in order to protect their licenses and other restaurants do the same. The Brewing Company maintains a higher percentage of food sales than alcohol sales and have since day one. e) Drew Wetherhault, a local resident, testified that there is a parking problem before 5:00 PM on the weekends. He also indicated his belief that the establishment operates as a bar after 9:00 PM due to high alcohol sales. He noted his desire to see a reduction in the hours of operation on Friday and Saturday having them shut down at 11:00 PM like other restaurants to address nuisances. He also noted that the neighborhood is impacted by after hours activities in the parking lots south of the Brewery and not all of them are attributable to the Brewing Company's patrons. f) Joe Reese, local resident, testified that it is his belief that there is no doubt that the use was intended to be a restaurant and not a bar as alcohol was conditioned to be ancillary to food service. The Brewing Company has security guards at the doors and bouncers inside, it is a bar atmosphere. Every weekend he is awakened by people leaving the drinking establishments. g) Billy Staid, local resident, testified that in spite of the recent operational changes instituted by the Brewing Company, there are still problems with the operation principally with patron activity in the parking lot. He asked if the entrance could be moved to the Newport Boulevard side of the building during the week after 9:00 PM. h) Stephanie Rosanelli, local resident, testified that noise is a problem and suggested that a restaurant would be a better business value. At the conclusion of the public hearing, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 1709 amending Use Permit No. 3485 by modifying the conditions of approval to clarify the meaning of the conditions principally recognizing that a brewpub was originally authorized and that there was no violation of Condition No. 10 and to include the physical and operational changes offered by the NBBC. WHEREAS, the grounds for the modification or revocation of a use permit are established by Condition K of the Use Permit No. 3485, Section 20.89.060.0 and Section 20.96.040 of the Municipal Code, which provide: a) Condition K states that, "The Planning Commission may add to or modify conditions of approval to this use permit upon a determination that this use permit causes injury, or is detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort, or general welfare of the community." b) Section 20.89.060(C) provides that, "The Planning Commission, or the Planning Director, as the case may be, may revoke a use permit for an alcoholic beverage outlet upon making one or more of the following findings: 1. That the permit was issued on the basis of erroneous or misleading information or misrepresentation. 2. That the terms or conditions of approval of the permit have been violated or that other laws or regulations have been violated. 3. The establishment for which the permit was issued is being operated in an illegal or disorderly manner. 4. Noise from the establishment for which the permit was issued violates the Community Noise Control Ordinance (Chapter 10.26 of the Municipal Code). 5. The business or establishment for which the permit was issued has had or is having an adverse impact on the health, safety or welfare of the neighborhood or the general public. 6. There is a violation of or failure to maintain a valid ABC license. 7. The business or establishment fails to fully comply with all the rules, regulations and orders of the California State Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control." c) Section 20.96.040 of the Municipal Code provides that, "The Planning Director has the duty to schedule a discretionary permit for a noticed public hearing to consider its possible revocation provided there are reasonable grounds to do so. The body conducting the hearing shall revoke the permit upon making one or more of the following findings: 1. That the permit was issued on the basis of erroneous or misleading information or misrepresentation; 2. That the terms or conditions of approval of the permit have been violated or that other laws or regulations have been violated. 3. That there has been a discontinuance of the exercise or the entitlement granted by the permit for 180 consecutive days." WHEREAS, decisions of the Planning Commission under Section 20.89.060 may be appealed to the City Council pursuant to Section 20.89.070 and decisions of the Planning Commission under Section 20.96.040 may be appealed to the City Council pursuant to Section 20.96.040(H) and Chapter 20.95 of the Municipal Code. WHEREAS, on January 12, 2007, The Cannery Village Concerned filed an appeal of the Planning Commission's action in accordance with Chapter 20.95 (Appeals) of the Municipal Code. WHEREAS, on March 27, 2007, the City Council held a public hearing on the appeal and the possible modification of conditions and /or revocation of Use Permit No. 3485; however, the hearing was not properly noticed in accordance with the Municipal Code. The following information was presented and considered by the City Council: a) Bruce Low, local resident and representative of The Cannery Village Concerned, testified to his belief that the NBBC was violating Conditions #9 and #10 as evidenced by the high alcohol sales admitted by the NBBC. He also testified to his belief that the Condition #6 was not properly modified in September of 1993 to be consistent with Coastal Commission conditions. b) Kevin Weeda, a resident and business owner operating a business on 30th Street, said the group of concerned residents did not want to drive away the business, merely have the applicant comply with the use permit. Most problems occur late at night and he believed the business should be limited to an 11:00 PM closing. c) Jerry Kolbly, co- owner, Newport Beach Brewing Company, spoke about his establishment and the fact that it had maintained the same social atmosphere for the past 12 years. He has attempted to work with adjacent neighbors and staff to resolve the issues. There is a security guard stationed at the rear door and patrons enter and exit only via Newport Boulevard on Friday and Saturday nights after 10:00 PM as a way to address resident concerns. He testified that the quarterly sales of food are 52 % and 48% alcohol. He indicated that in the past, the kitchen was closed and that he has now opened the kitchen during all hours to boost food sales. He also testified that there has been no significant operational change in the business since it first opened. Mr. Kolbly confirmed his earlier statements to the Planning Commission that nearly 90% of sales past 11:00 PM are alcohol; however, it was a guess and it may be approximately 80 %; clearly more than food. d) Billy Steed, Cannery Loft owner, adjacent to the Brewery, said he has observed all types of nuisances in the Brewery parking lot and his belief that the NBBC has offered no solutions and it ignores complaints. e) Stephanie Roselli, Cannery Village resident, testified to the NBBC's parking lot being noisy. f) Joe Reese testified that he believed the intent of the 1993 and 1999 use permit approvals were clear in that this establishment was to be a restaurant and not a bar. He was personally carded and denied food after 10:00 PM one evening in 2005 and he has observed individuals standing around drinking after 10:00 PM with no food service. He expressed his belief that this indicates that the NBBC is a bar and not a restaurant in violation of conditions. He asked for enforcement of the use permit. g) Kristen Andros testified that it is her belief that the use operates as a restaurant until 11:00 p.m. and thereafter it operates as a bar as evidenced by a queuing line and carding. h) There was conflicting testimony as to whether the nuisance incidents within the NBBC parking lot are attributable to patrons of the NBBC. The Council acted to modify the conditions of approval; however, the action was not implemented with the adoption of a written resolution in the light of the fact that inadequate notice of the hearing was provided. WHEREAS, on July 10, 2007, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing regarding the potential modification or revocation of Use Permit No. 3485. The hearing was noticed as a "de novo" hearing and the subject, time, place and date of the hearing included in the notice. The notice was published, mailed and posted a minimum of 10 days in advance of the hearing in accordance with the applicable requirements of the Municipal Code. Evidence both written and oral was presented to and considered by the City Council. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, as follows: Section 1. The Recitals above are hereby declared to be true, accurate, and correct Section 2. The City Council hereby finds that the Administrative Record which was considered by the City Council in adopting this Resolution consists, without limitation, of all documents, correspondence, testimony, photographs, and other information presented or provided to the Planning Director, Planning Commission, City Council and City including, without limitation, testimony received at City Council and Planning Commission meetings, staff reports, agendas, notices, meeting minutes, police reports, correspondence, and all other information provided to the City and retained in the files of the City, its staff and attorneys, and such is hereby incorporated by reference into the Administrative Record and is available upon request ( "Administrative Record "). Section 3. The City Council finds that notice of this hearing was provided in conformance with California law and the Municipal Code of the City of Newport Beach. .Section 4. The City Council finds that pursuant to Condition K of the Use Permit No. 3485, Section 20.89.060.0 and Section 20.96.040 of the Municipal Code, the Administrative Record, the findings stated above, that sufficient grounds exist to modify and add to the conditions of approval for Use Permit No. 3485. Section 5. The City Council of the City of Newport Beach does hereby approve an amendment and modification of Use Permit No. 3485 as set forth in as Exhibit "A". Section 6. This resolution shall take effect immediately upon adoption. Passed and adopted by the City Council of Newport Beach at a regular meeting held on the August 14, 2007 by the following vote to wit: AYES, COUNCIL MEMBERS Henn, Curry, Selich, Daigle, Gardner NOES, COUNCIL MEMBERS Mayor Rosansky ABSENT, COUNCIL ATTEST: In L�r[ f 1111110110] 1 was] 4:4 V Exhibit A Use Permit No. 3485 CONDITIONS: 1. The proposed development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved site plan, floor plan and elevations, except as noted below. 2. That a covenant or other suitable, legally binding agreement shall be recorded against the off -site parking lot assuring that all of the requirements of Section 20.63.080 (1) of the Municipal Code, will be met by the current and future property owners. Said covenant or agreement may include provisions for its future termination at such time as the development on the building site is removed or at such time as the floor area devoted to the restaurant/brewpub reverts back to a base FAR use. 3. The applicant shall provide a minimum of one parking space for each 50 square feet of net public area before 5:00 p.m. and one parking space for each 40 square feet of net public area after 5:00 p.m. in conjunction with the restaurant/brewpub. 4. An amended off -site parking agreement approved by the City Council shall be maintained, guaranteeing that a minimum of 41 parking spaces shall be provided on property located on Lots 18 -21 and portions of Lots 17 and 22, Block 230, Lancaster's Addition, for the duration of the existing and proposed uses located on Parcel 1, Parcel Map 92 -40 (Resubdivision No. 527). 5. The property owner shall pay for 29 in -lieu parking spaces in the Cannery Village Municipal Parking Lot on an annual basis for the nighttime operation (after 5:00 p.m.) of the restaurant/brewpub use as agreed upon by the Sales Agreement between the City of Newport Beach and the property owner. 6. The net public area of the restaurant/brewpub, which is devoted to daytime use prior to 5:00 p.m. shall be limited to 1,500 square feet daily. The balance of the net public area shall be physically closed off to the public by a fixed barrier and shall not be used until after 5:00 p.m. daily. 7. The hours of operation for the restaurant/brewpub shall be limited to the hours between 6:00 a.m. and 11:00 p.m. Sunday through Thursday and between 6:00 a.m. and 1:00 a.m. on Friday and Saturday. 8. All employees shall park either in the privately owned off -site parking area or in one of the municipal parking lots in the area. 9. The operation of the brewery and the service of alcoholic beverages shall be ancillary to the food service operation of the restaurant (e.g. the brewery and the service of alcoholic beverages may not be conducted without the concurrent operation of the restaurant during all hours the use is open for business). The quarterly gross sales of alcoholic beverages shall not exceed the gross sales of food during the same period. The operator shall at all times maintain records which reflect separately the total gross sales of food and the total gross sales of alcoholic beverages. Additionally, the records shall indicate the percentages or unit volumes of food, beer and other alcoholic beverages sold by the hour from after 9:00 PM to closing on Thursday, Friday and Saturday nights. Said records shall be kept no less frequently that on a quarterly basis and shall be submitted to the Planning Director within 15 days of the end of the calendar quarter. 10. The principal use authorized by this Use Permit is a restaurant/brewpub. The accessory operation of a bar is permitted provided that the kitchen remains open for the service of meals and that a full menu is provided. This Use Permit shall not be construed as the approval of a bar, cocktail lounge, or other use with the principal purpose of serving alcoholic beverages during hours not corresponding to regular meal service hours nor as the approval of a cabaret, nightclub, or other use with the principal purpose of providing live entertainment and /or dancing. The kitchen of the restaurant/brewpub shall be in operation to serve meals at all times that the business is open. A full meal menu (including the service of those meals ordered) shall be made available. Menus and condiments shall be available at the tables at all times. 11. No outdoor loudspeakers or paging system shall be permitted in conjunction with the proposed location. 12. A washout area for refuse containers shall be provided in such a way as to allow direct drainage into the sewer system and not into the Bay or storm drains, unless otherwise approved by the Building Department. 13. Kitchen exhaust fans shall be designed to control smoke and odor to the satisfaction of the Building Department. 14. All mechanical equipment and trash areas shall be screened from surrounding public streets and alleys and adjoining properties. The existing trash enclosure shall be covered and the doors or gates to the enclosure shall be modified to be self - closing and self- locking for security. 15. Deleted 16. Should prerecorded music be played within the restaurant facility, such music shall be confined to the interior of the building, and all doors and windows shall be kept closed while such music is played. 17. A special events permit is required for any event or promotional activity outside the normal operational characteristics of this restaurant business that would attract large crowds, involve the sale of alcoholic beverages, include any form of on -site media broadcast, or any other activities as specified in the Newport Beach Municipal Code to require such permits. 18. Should this business be sold or otherwise come under different ownership, any future owners or assignees shall be notified of the conditions of this approval by either the current business owner, property owner or the leasing company. 19. The parking lot entrance to the building shall not be used as an entrance or exit (except in the case of an emergency) after 9:00 PM daily. If a line to enter the building occurs prior to 9:00 PM, the door shall be closed immediately and not used as an entrance or exit thereafter and the line shall be relocated to the Newport Boulevard entrance. 20. The operator shall discourage loitering on site at all times the establishment is open or employees or owners are present. 21. The operator shall conspicuously post and maintain signs indicating to patrons to be courteous to residential neighbors while outside the establishment. 22. The applicant shall prepare a detailed security operations and property maintenance plan within 45 days of approval of this amendment to the Use Permit. The plan shall be subject to the review and approval of the Police Department and Planning Department. The plan shall include a full -time security guard to be posted in the parking lot owned by the Brewing Company after 9:00 p.m. and through one half hour following closing on Wednesday through Saturday night, and Sunday through Tuesday night if the night falls on a holiday, or when a large crowd is anticipated due to a sports event or other promotional event at the Brewery. The property maintenance portion of the plan shall address activities including, and not limited to, trash pickup, recycling disposal and pickup, grease trap cleaning, cooking oil recycling, brewery servicing, deliveries, cleaning or general building maintenance. 23. Deliveries and exterior property maintenance activities shall not be conducted between 8PM and 8AM daily. 24. The use shall maintain a Type 23 or a Type 75 license to sell alcoholic beverages from the State Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control. No other license type shall be permitted without review and approval by the Planning Commission. 25. Live entertainment and dancing shall be prohibited without an amendment to this Use Permit and a Live Entertainment Permit and /or a Cafe Dance permit issued by the City Manager's Office. 27. This use permit shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission at a noticed public hearing no later than July 31, 2008, to assess any nuisance issues and to determine whether the use operates within what was represented to the City when the use permit was originally granted in 1993 and when the use permit was amended in 1999. The Planning Director may schedule additional reviews of this permit if there is a determination that the use directly causes or is contributing to conditions found to be detrimental to the community (this provision shall not be construed to diminish the City's ability to enforce this Use Permit or any aspect of the Municipal Code). STANDARD CITY REQUIREMENTS: A. The project is subject to all applicable City ordinances, policies, and standards, unless specifically waived or modified by the conditions of approval. B. Signs and displays shall not obstruct the sales counter, cash register, seller and customer from view from the exterior. C: Loitering, open container, and other signs specified by the Alcoholic Beverage Control Act shall be posted as required by the ABC. D. The applicant shall take reasonable steps to discourage and correct objectionable conditions that constitute a nuisance in parking areas, sidewalks, alleys and areas surrounding the alcoholic beverage outlet and adjacent properties must be taken during business hours if directly related to the patrons of the subject alcoholic beverage outlet. E. The exterior of the alcoholic beverage outlet shall be maintained free of litter and graffiti at all times. The owner or operator shall provide for daily removal of trash, litter debris and graffiti from the premises and on all abutting sidewalks within 20 feet of the premises. F. All owners, managers and employees serving and /or selling alcoholic beverages shall undergo and successfully complete a certified training program in responsible methods and skills for serving and selling alcoholic beverages. To qualify to meet the requirements of this section a certified program must meet the standards of the California Coordinating Council on Responsible Beverage Service or other certifying /licensing body, which the State may designate. The operator shall provide proof of completion for all owners, managers and employees within 30 days of the approval of this amendment and new employees shall successfully complete the training within 30 days of initially starting work. G. The project shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 14.30 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code for commercial kitchen grease disposal. H. All signs shall conform to the provisions of Chapter 20.67 of the Municipal Code. I. This Use Permit for an alcoholic beverage outlet granted in accordance with the terms of this chapter shall expire within 12 months from the date of approval unless a license has been issued or transferred by the California State Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control prior to the expiration date. J. Coastal Commission approval shall be obtained prior to issuance of any building permits. K. The Planning Commission may add to or modify conditions of approval to this Use Permit upon a determination that this Use Permit causes injury, or is detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort, or general welfare of the community. STATE OF CALIFORNIA } COUNTY OF ORANGE } ss: CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH } I, LaVonne M. Harkless, City Clerk of the City of Newport Beach, California, do hereby certify that the whole number of members of the City Council is seven; that the foregoing resolution, being Resolution No. 2007 -57 was duly and regularly introduced before and adopted by the City Council of said City at a regular meeting of said Council, duly and regularly held on the 14th day of August 2007, and that the same was so passed and adopted by the following vote, to wit: Ayes: Henn, Curry, Selich, Daigle, Gardner Noes: Mayor Rosansky Absent: Webb Abstain: None IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto subscribed my name and affixed the official seal of said City this 15th day of August 2007. & wo-4� City Clerk Newport Beach, California (Seal)