HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC RES 11-78RESOLUTION NO. 11-78
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA DENYING CODE AMENDMENT
2011-05, A REQUEST TO AMEND SECTIONS 9232a1.(a},
9271dd(1} AND 9297 TO ALLOW OFF-SITE SALES OF
ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES BUSINESSES WITH MORE
THAN 12,000 SQUARE FEET AS OUTRIGHT PERMITTED
USES IN THE RETAIL COMMERCIAL (C-1} ZONING
DISTRICT, REQUIRE APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE
PERMITS FOR BUSINESSES WITH LESS THAN 12,000
SQUARE FEET GROSS FLOOR AREA WHERE THE
ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES SALES AREA IS MORE THAN
TEN (10} PERCENT OF THE GROSS FLOOR AREA AND
SUBJECT TO DISTANCE REQUIREMENTS FROM
SENSITIVE USES, AND TO AMEND THE CONVENIENCE
STORE DEFINITION BY LOWERING THE SIZE OF
ESTABLISHMENTS TO 12,000 SQUARE FEET
The City Council does hereby resolve as follows:
I. The City Council finds and determines as follows:
A. That a proper application for Code Amendment 2011-05 was filed by Brian Fish
and Jennifer Chavez, of Luce Forward Hamilton & Scripps, on behalf of
Walgreen Co., to request amendment to Sections 9232x1.{a}, 9271dd{1}, and
9297 to allow off-site sales of alcoholic beverages businesses with more than
12,000 square feet as outright permitted uses in the Retail Commercial (G-1}
zoning district; require approval of conditional use permits for businesses with
less than 12,000 square feet grass floor area and where the alcoholic beverages
sales area is more than ten {10} percent of the gross floor area and subject to
distance requirements to sensitive uses; and, amend the definition of
„Convenience Store" as any establishments under twelve thousand {12,000)
square feet in size where food, beverage, magazine and auto related items, are
combination thereof, are sold for off-site consump#ion.
B. That on November 16, 1992, the City Council adopted Ordinance Na. 1101
establishing that super markets and other large retail stares with a minimum
15,000 square feet of gross floor area shat! not be required to obtain approval of
a conditional use permit in order to sell alcoholic beverages far off-site
consumption. The ordinance was focused an supermarkets, grocery stores, and
other large retail stores.
C. That a public hearing was duly called, noticed, and held far said application on
October 11, 2011, by the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission
Resolution 11-78
Page 1 of 4
adopted Resolution No. 4184, recommending that the City Council deny Code
Amendment 2011-05.
D. That a public hearing was duly called, noticed, and held for said application on
November 1, 2011 by the City Council. The City Council continued the item to
December 6, 2011, at the request of the applicant.
E. That Pursuant to Tustin City Code Section 9295f, the Planning Commission
conducted a public hearing on October 11, 2011. The Planning Commission's
minutes and Resolution are attached as Attachment E to the City Council
Agenda Report dated November 1, 2011 and December 6, 2011. The Agenda
Report and its Attachments A through E constitute and include a list of persons
who testified and/or reported at the hearing, a summary of the facts and findings,
copies of data andlor documentary evidence submitted in connection with the
proposed amendment. The Planning Commission found that a decision to deny
this request may be supported by the following findings:
The City has a history of regulating alcoholic
community concerns related to sales of oleo
closely looked at various alcoholic beverage
addressed concerns and potential negative
regulations.
beverage sales
nolic beverages
sales issues an~
impacts with
in response to
The City has
a~ has primarily
some form of
2. Over the years the Gity adopted Ordinance Nos. 912, 920, 981, 1101, 1161,
1230, and 1237 far regulating alcoholic sales establishments.
3. The impact of the proposed code amendment would apply city-wide and while
the applicant states that only one {1) additional existing use would qualify for
the CUP exemption for alcoholic beverage sales, a larger number of future
businesses and tenant spaces may be eligible to sell alcoholic beverages
without approval of Conditional Use Permits. Therefore, the actual impact of
the proposed code amendment is potentially greater than what can currently
be analyzed and foreseen.
4. The current exemption of 15,000 square feet threshold are typical of
supermarkets or groceries stores and adequately addresses the original
concern in that supermarkets are grocery stores typically are larger in square
footage and are businesses where one would be able to shop for a variety of
consumable goods and tha# it is naturally within the scope of the business to
sell alcoholic beverages as a small portion of their inventory.
5. That the proposed Code Amendment would increase the number of
businesses eligible for exemptions throughout the City and may over sa#urate
certain areas in the City with alcoholic licenses.
Resolution 11-78
Page 2 of 4
6. That there is an adequate number of alcoholic sale establishments in the
vicinity of the proposed project to serve the public convenience and necessity;
therefore, the proposed project would not further the public convenience and
necessity.
7. That the Police Department analyzed various alcohol related crimes occurred
within the vicinity of the proposed project site and citywide and concluded that
lowering the building square footage threshold for alcoholic beverages
establishments would increase the number of outright permitted alcoholic
sales establishments and thereby increase the likelihood of addi#ional alcohol
related crimes in the City.
8. That the Redevelopment Agency reviewed the proposed code amendment in
reference to its goals and objectives far the City and concluded that the
proposed amendment could have far reaching implications on the number of
establishments that sell alcohol and such increases could contribute a
continuance of depreciated values, impaired investments and economic
maladjustmen# within the Project Areas, in conflict with the Redevelopment
Agency objectives.
D. That this project is exempt pursuant to Section 15270 of the California
Environmental Quality Act.
II. The City Council hereby concurs with the Planning Commission's
recommendation and denies Code Amendment 2011-05, a request to amend
Sections 9232a1.{a), 9271dd(1), and 9297 to allow off-site sales of alcoholic
beverages businesses wi#h more than 12,000 square feet as outright permitted
uses in the Retail Commercial {C-1 } zoning district; require approval of
conditional use permits for businesses wi#h less than 12,000 square feet gross
floor area and where the alcoholic beverages sales area is more than ten {10)
percent of the gross floor area and subject to distance requirements to sensitive
uses; and, amend the definition of "Convenience Store" as any establishments
under twelve thousand {12,000) square feet in size where food, beverage,
magazine and auto related items, or combination thereof, are sold far ofF-site
consumption.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Tustin, at a regular
meeting an the 6t~' day of December, 2011. ___,
Resolution 11-7$
Page 3 of 4
ATTEST:
PAMELA STOKER,
City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE } SS
CITY OF TUSTIN )
I, Pamela Stoker, City Clerk and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of the City of Tustin,
California, do hereby certify that the whole number of the members of the City Council
of the City of Tustin is five; that the above and foregoing Resolution No. 11-78 was duly
passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin City Council, held on the 6t" day
of December, 2011, by the following vote:
COUNCILMEMBER AYES:
COUNCILMEMBER NOES:
COUNCILMEMBER ABSTAINED:
COUNCILMEMBER ABSENT:
PAMELA STOKER,
City Clerk
Amante, Nielsen, Gomez, Murray (4)
None (~)
None (0
Gavello (1
Resolution 11-78
Page 4 of 4