HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report 4.A 02/06/2017DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Agenda Item #4.A
February 6, 2017
Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council through City Manager
Heather Hines, Planning Manager
Discussion and Possible Direction Regarding the Da Vinci Coffee Cart
Relocation.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council consider the options below and provide direction to staff
on next steps regarding the Da Vinci Coffee Cart relocation.
BACKGROUND
Da Vinci Coffee Cart has been located at 1385 Petaluma Boulevard North in front of the former
Mr. Magoos restaurant for more than 20 years and under the current ownership for the last 17
years. There is no formal construction or curbing associated with the existing drive -thru
operation. Instead, the coffee cart operation sets up each day with cones and signage to direct
the drive thru operation and coffee is served to patrons without leaving their car. According to
the business owners, there is also walk up patronage from surrounding businesses.
The business owners have received a 30 -day notice from the property owner to relocate and have
been exploring options for an appropriate location to continue to operate the business without
significant change to the existing business model and preferably within the same general location
to continue to serve existing customers. However, due to the City's prohibition on creation of
new drive -thrus (more detailed discussion about regulatory restrictions is outlined below), the
business owners have been unable to relocate their business.
In response, the City Council recently received dozens of public comment letters supporting the
existing Da Vinci Coffee Cart, asking for the Council's assistance in approving a solution to
allow the local business to relocate. At their January 23rd meeting, the City Council requested
that the item.be placed on to the agenda for the February 6th meeting, and directed staff to
develop options for Council consideration.
DISCUSSION
In response to Council direction, staff considered a variety of approaches and worked
collaboratively with the business owner to consider viable options for relocating Da Vinci Coffee
Cart. This effort included discussion of possible modifications to existing business operations,
General Plan policy, and/or zoning regulations. These items are discussed in greater detail
below.
Option 1: Modify Business Operations
The simplest approach to relocate the existing coffee cart business would-be to eliminate the
drive -thru facility. Without the drive -thru component, a coffee shop is a permitted use in most
commercial and mixed use zoning districts and there is ample opportunity to relocate. Staff
discussed this approach with the business owner on multiple occasions, even exploring the
possibility of barista service to parked cars as a substitute for the current drive -thru operation.
The business owner voiced concern about changing the existing business model which has been
successful at Da Vinci's current location. Although this approach would eliminate conflict with
both the General Plan policy and the applicable zoning regulations, the business owner has
indicated that it does not provide viable opportunity to relocate the existing business that has
been located at 1385 Petaluma Boulevard North due to the opinion that the drive -thru facility is
essential to the business model.
Option 2: Modify General Plan
Policy 4 -P -12 of the Petaluma General Plan 2025 states:
"Prohibit new drive -thru food and service facilities with the exception of
vehicle serving businesses, such as car wash and oil /lube, and limit
expansion of the drive -thru components of existing facilities which
increase idling vehicles.
• Discretionary approvals for such facilities shall include provisions
which decrease or eliminate idling vehicles, to the extent feasible
and practical."
Under this policy no new drive -thru development has been approved with the exception of
automobile serving business. The clear prohibition within the policy does not provide for
flexibility or exceptions on a case by case basis other than those uses that are vehicle serving or
expansion of existing drive -thru components.
Policy 4 -P -12 is located within Chapter 4 (Natural Environment) of the General Plan, under
subsection 4.2: Air Quality. The policy specifically falls under overarching General Plan Goal 4-
G-3: Air Quality which states:
"Improve air quality and meet all Federal and State ambient air quality
standards and goals by reducing the generation of air pollutants from
stationary and mobile sources."
Modification of this policy in an effort to accommodate relocation of the Da Vinci coffee cart
would necessitate not only careful scrutiny of potential impacts to the General Plan vision but
also to the General Plan EIR. Based on the frequency of inquiries about drive -thin businesses,
2
staff believes that greater flexibility within Policy 4 -P -12 would facilitate new and expanded
businesses of this nature.
Option 3: Modem Implementing Zoning Ordinance
Drive -thrus are not explicitly addressed in the City's Implementing Zoning Ordinance in terms
of criteria for review. Instead, given the prohibition in General Plan Policy 4 -P -12, any existing
drive -thru facility is considered a non - conforming use and governed by IZO Section 22.030(A),
which states that a non - conforming use cannot be enlarged, extended, or moved.
Applied to the current non - conforming Da Vinci coffee cart drive -thru, this section does not
allow the non - conforming use to be relocated to a new site. Although relocation is not allowed
under current adopted code language, a Zoning Text Amendment to add an exception to this
section would facilitate relocation of the existing Da Vinci business without creating a
significant deviation from existing regulations or General Plan policy.
For example, a Zoning Text Amendment to create subsection 22.030(A)(1) could accommodate
relocation of this business and state:
"Notwithstanding Section 22.030(A), an existing drive -thru non-
conforming use utilizing a non - permanent structure that is an ancillary use
on its parcel may be relocated to another parcel subject to approval of a
Conditional Use Permit by the Planning Commission in accordance with
Section 24.030 so long as the use is otherwise a permitted use on the site
and there is no intensification of the drive -thru component of the use. The
use at the new location shall remain a non - conforming use."
By requiring a Conditional Use Permit, the City retains discretion to review each exception on a
case by case basis, and ensure that no unintended impacts (neighborhood compatibility, roadway
safety) are created by the relocation. Additionally, the language is tailored to allow relocation of
a very specific category of existing drive -thru facilities and does not allow for the creation of a
"new" drive -thru in conflict with existing General Plan policy. Finally, this tailored approach
limits abandonment of existing physical drive -thru facilities such as relocation of an existing fast
food restaurant and the associated difficulties of re- tenanting such an empty facility without
reuse of the drive thru.
The Zoning Text Amendment appears to be the best approach to allow Da Vinci to relocate their
existing operation without initiating a potential overhaul of existing General Plan policy or
allowing an exception to current policy that encourages relocation of existing, and creation of
new, drive -thru facilities in the City.
As the City Council was advised on January 23`d, and reiterated to the business owner, this type
of process requires review and recommendation by the Planning Commission, introduction of an
ordinance by the City Council, subsequent approval by the City Council, and an effective date
30 -days after the second reading. The Conditional Use Permit review could be processed
concurrently to avoid duplication of public hearings or additional review time. Processing time
is likely to be 90 to 120 days.
3
FINANCIAL IMPACT
Cost Recovery deposit associated with the processing of a Conditional Use Permit and Zoning
Text Amendment is $11,499.50. Both the general processing timeline and associated costs have
been discussed with the potential applicant for this item.
Also of note, processing and subsequent issuance of a Conditional Use Permit, as would be
required under the recommended Zoning Text Amendment, requires a parcel specific location.
At this time the applicant has not secured a specific location for relocation of the business.
2