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WHEREAS, on September 27, 1993, the City Council rescinded its March 8,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)