EXHIBIT 12-I

 

DRAFT

FINDINGS OF APPROVAL

 

CONSIDER REQUEST FOR VARIANCE FROM DISTRICT RULE 20,

PERMITS REQUIRED,  FOR A CHANGE OF USE FROM A DELI (GROUP II) USE TO A RESTAURANT (GROUP III) USE 484 WASHINGTON STREET, MONTEREY

(APN: 001-692-011)

 

MARCH 17, 2014

 

1.     FINDING:        Mr. Uwe Grobecker is requesting a variance from District Rule 20, Permits Required, to allow continued operation of 484 Washington St., Monterey, as a Group II (deli) use. In requesting a variance, the appellant cites the following reasons the Board should allow him (and future tenants) to continue the existing business operations:

·         The appellant states the District’s regulations are unclear regarding limitations on Group II food service;

·         There was no notice of violation (or inspection) until after the business had been in operation for more than 15 years;

·         There has been no change to the number of fixtures or equipment that would increase water use once the business opened in 1997;

·         The appellant believes it is unlikely that a Group II use at this site would exceed the water use capacity due to the small size of the lease space.

        EVIDENCE:    Application for Variance attached as Exhibit A.

2.     FINDING:        The business (formerly Santa Lucia Marketplace, now Santa Lucia Café) was established with a Water Permit in 1997 for 2,272 square-feet of Group II (deli) use.

EVIDENCE:    Water Permit 15856 signed by the appellant on file at the District office.

3.     FINDING:        The appellant’s description of current food service practices includes: beverages served in glassware; hot food, liquid food (e.g. pasta and soups), and food with high moisture content (e.g. salads with dressings) served on china; cold foods served on disposable plates or in baskets; pizza served on a paper-wrapped paddle; silverware utensils are provided, and there is table service. Take out foods are all provided in disposable packaging.

 

        EVIDENCE:    Email from Uwe Grobecker to David Stoldt dated March 6, 2014, and testimony received during MPWMD Public Hearing Item 21 on February 13, 2014.

4.     FINDING:         Neither the District’s rules, nor any internal process memo or directive specifies that a Group II Non-Residential water use must use all disposable serving items (i.e., plates, utensils, cups, etc.) and may not provide full table service.

EVIDENCE:    No such documents exist.

5.     FINDING:        The District was not contacted to conduct a final inspection until January 2014. At that time, staff documented compliance with Regulation XIV, and noted that food was served on china and from glasses, that reusable utensils were in use and that cold food was served in paper lined baskets.

 

EVIDENCE:    January 30, 2014, MPWMD inspection report on file at the District office.

6.     FINDING:        Water use at 484 Washington Street, Monterey, appears to be below the projected Water Use Capacity.

EVIDENCE:    California American Water Company water consumption records.

7.     FINDING:        The current business practices of the Group II tenant are not consistent with a full-service restaurant.

EVIDENCE:    The documented use of paper and disposable plates for cold dishes and for pizza. This practice is documented on the January 30, 2014, MPWMD inspection report.

8.     FINDING:        Continued exercise of the established food service practices will not result in water use above the Water Use Capacity as determined by MPWMD Table 2: Non-Residential Water Use Factors if the Site is subject to Conditions that require an amended Water Permit for the Group II space if water consumption exceeds the Water Use Capacity.

        EVIDENCE:      Enforcement of the Notice and Deed Restriction Regarding Limitation on Use of Water on a Property required as a Condition of Approval to ensure the intent and purposes of the MPWMD Rules and Regulations are met and not defeated by granting this Variance.

9.     FINDING:        Without a variance, the appellant must change business practices and stop using china and silverware and cease full table service. Alternatively, the appellant may obtain a Water Permit to continue these practices, but will be required to reduce the number of seats by half (from 46 to 23).

        EVIDENCE:    Discussion section of staff report for Application for Appeal presented as MPWMD Public Hearing Item 21 on February 13, 2014.

10.   FINDING:        A denial of a Variance (and requirement to secure a Water Permit for restaurant use) would be a “tremendous loss to the value of this small business and devastating to our family.”

                                    EVIDENCE: Application for Variance.

11.   FINDING:        District Rule 90 enables the Board to exercise its discretion by granting a Variance in select circumstances.

        EVIDENCE:    District Rule 90.

 

12.   FINDING:        The Board finds that Special Circumstances exist in this particular case, and that practical difficulties or Undue Hardship would result from the strict interpretation and enforcement of any such standard, and (c) that the granting of such a variance does not tend to defeat the purposes of these Rules and Regulations.

        EVIDENCE:    The above stated facts.

13.   FINDING:         The granting of a variance does not tend to defeat the purposes of the District’s Rules and Regulations by (1) allowing a Group II deli use to operate as a Group III restaurant because current operating practices appear to have aspects of both, or by (2) improperly accounting for the City of Monterey’s water Allocation because it appears that actual water use is below the Water Use Capacity.

        EVIDENCE:    The above stated facts.

 

 

 

U:\staff\Boardpacket\2014\20140317\PublicHrngs\12\item12_exh12i.docx