1 - City of Laguna Beach

Transcription

CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
STAFF REPORT
AGENDA ITEM:
No. 1
TO:
PLANNING COMMISSION
CASE:
Conditional Use Permit 08- 16
APPLICANT:
Emporio Optic
LOCATION:
263 Forest Avenue
APN: 641-25 1-03
ENVIRONMENTAL
STATUS:
PREPARED BY:
DATE: 6/25/08
Categorically Exempt, Class 1
Martina Speare, Planning Technician
(949) 464-6629
REQUESTED ACTION: The applicant requests an amendment to Condition No. 16 of
Conditional Use Permit 04-02.
BACKGROUND: In 1998, an application was submitted for Conditional Use Permit 98-03 to
allow a retail store selling designer frames, prescription lenses and sunglasses and a lens
manufacturing service. Conditional Use Permit 98-03 was denied by the Planning Commission
on January 28, 1998, based on the incremental and cumulative effect of similar uses. The
1/28/98 Planning Commission Staff Report and Minutes are attached in Exhibit B. The decision
by the Planning Commission was appealed to the City Council and the City Council upheld the
appeal and overturned the Planning Commission denial. The City Council approval resolution
required among other things that 60% of the merchandise be designed, manufactured and
distributed only at the project site; 40% of the merchandise to be from sources that are exclusive
to the applicant, and verification of sales records should be provided. Additional conditions
required onsite lens manufacturing equipment and weekend hours. City Council Resolution
98.019 approving Conditional Use Permit 98-03 is attached in Exhibit C.
On January 28, 2004, the Planning Commission considered a request to amend several
conditions of approval of Resolution 98.019 (No.'s 10, 11 12, and 13) relating to exclusivity of
the eyewear, display of sunglasses or tinted lenses and onsite lens manufacturing. After hearing
public testimony, the Commission voted to modify the resolution and included conditions that
required: 1) At least 60% of the eyewear merchandise display at the Laguna Beach location shall
be designed, produced and distributed by the applicant. (The condition that 40% of the
merchandise be obtained by sources specific to the applicant); 2) Specified that a maximum of
20% of the displayed eyewear merchandise may be sunglasses, defined as eyewear which has
UV coating andlor is polarized and limited window display to no more than 20% sunglasses, as
defined above; 3) Added a requirement that the applicant install and maintain all onsite lens
manufacturing equipment that is necessary to provide same day service for a majority of
prescription lenses and allowed the applicant to send out for prescription services; and 4)
Conditional Use Permit 08-16
June 25,2008
Page 2
Modified the hours of operation. The 1/28/04 Planning Commission Staff Report and Minutes
are attached in Exhibit D.
On February 4, 2004, an appeal was filed by the applicant regarding the Planning Commission
requirement to install and maintain all onsite lens manufacturing equipment to provide same day
service for prescription lenses. The applicant stated that many prescription glasses require a
week or longer to produce due to coating and tinting processes. The applicant requested and the
City Council agreed to uphold the appeal and modify the condition at its March 16, 2004
meeting. The amended condition required the applicant to maintain all equipment onsite to
produce many prescriptions on the same day for emergencies or if requested by the patient.
Resolution 04.022 is attached in Exhibit E and is the current approval resolution the business is
operating under.
STAFF ANALYSIS: Condition No. 16 of Conditional Use Permit 04-02 (Resolution 04-022)
requires the following: "A maximum of 20% of all displayed eyewear may be sunglasses,
defined as eyewear which has UV coating and/or is polarized. Window display shall contain no
more than 20% sunglasses, as defined above."
The applicant has proposed three different options to amend Condition No. 16 of Resolution
04.002;
1. '%int 16 of Conditional Use Permit No. 04-02 shall be stricken in its entirety, and
Emporio Optic may display sunglasses and eyeglasses in conformity with its boutique
atmosphere. "
2. "A maximum of 70% of all displayed eyewear may be sunglasses, defined as eyewear
compromised of frames having darkly colored lenses wherein the dark coloring
substantially covers the entire lens. Window displays shall contain no more than 70%
sunglasses, as defined above. "
3. ' A minimum of 10% of displayed eyewear must be prescription eyeglass frames. A
maximum of 30% of displayed eyewear may be mainstream fashion sunglasses. A
maximum of 20% of displayed eyewear may be sport-oriented sunglasses. A
maximum of 50% of displayed eyewear may be classis/luxury mainstream fashion
sunglasses. Window displays shall contain the same percentages as above. "
The original application was approved as a retail store selling designer frames, prescription
lenses and sunglasses, including a lens manufacturing service. The intent of the store was to
provide prescription glasses and a small amount of ready-to-wear glasses. The subject business
was never approved as a "sunglass store" as stated on page 2 of the applicant's addendum under
the heading "Eyewear in Laguna Beach" Sunglass sales was ancillary to the business and limited
to 20% of the merchandise displayed.
Retail uses that contribute to the diversity and character of the downtown are allowed in the
CBD-2 Downtown Commercial Zoning District subject to approval of a Conditional Use Permit.
All of the proposed amendment options would change the use to a sunglass shop selling ancillary
June 25,2008
Page 3
optical lenses. Currently there are 39 shops that carry sunglasses in the downtown, of the 39
shops, nine carry sunglasses that cost over $100 (See chart below and attached survey).
Table I . I Sunglasses Price Ranges
The applicant is proposing to carry higher-end or mainstream sunglasses. Currently, 20.5 1% of
the shops selling sunglasses sell sunglasses in the same category. Furthermore, four other
downtown businesses operate primarily as optical stores, which carry a large selection of highend sunglasses. Allowing an increase in the amount of sunglasses sold would change the use to a
sunglass store which creates an incremental effect of similar uses that would be detrimental to
the character of the downtown.
There are only three shops within the downtown that offer prescription eyeglasses; however,
none offer onsite manufacturing. Remaining an optical store with a focus on prescription glasses
would continue to contribute to the diversity and character of the downtown.
Staff cannot make the findings that the proposed amendments would maintain a balanced mix of
uses within the downtown. Additionally, the increase of sunglasses sales would further
deteriorate the diversity of uses in the downtown.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Planning Commission deny Conditional Use
Permit 08- 16 subject to the findings outlined in the attached resolution.
ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A: Application
Exhibit B: 1/28/98 PC Staff Report and Minutes
Exhibit C: 2/24/98 CC Agenda Bill, Minutes and Resolution
Exhibit D: 1/28/04 PC Staff Report and Minutes
Exhibit E: 3116/04 CC Agenda Bill, Minutes and Resolution
Exhibit F: Survey of stores selling sunglasses
Resolution
CITY OP LAI3UNA BEACH
COND~TIONALUSE PERMIT APPLlCATlON
1
;prj gltaguna 3es;k
zofiin~Division
A ~ ~ T ~1S9S
( .
a
Fairdawn, Irvine, C A 9 2 4 1 4
,Tcle@bne 9 4 9 - 4 6 4 - 3 9 3 3
App]imf Emporio Optic
~
d 2 d6 3 Forest
~
~
Ave.,
~
~ Laguna Reach,,,
CA 9 2 6 5 1
PROPERTY mORhZATToN:,
Location
2 6 3 Forest .Avenue
Ass6sor Parcel ?4mbcf 6 4 1 2 5 1 0 3
PIU 9 5 6
.
Emporio-Optic Eyeglass Shop
Duild;ng/Suire sqrn Footage n /a ( contact 'ow~ a r
Ill. , PROPOSED USE:
Suite
C m ~ e v i o u Use
s
Briefly describe the s ~ i f i us+)
c
Parking Spaces Provided none
,
proposed. Incl\lde infom~ttion about proposed lnerchandise and senices, menu items, p r o m
business hours, etc.
Sale of-prescriptioneyewear and sungl~sses. lmporio Optic respectfully requests
an amendment to Point 1 6 of 'ConditionalUse. 'behit
04-02. The proposed amendment
.
and reasoning is set forth in'accompanling Addendum NO. 1
.
Similnr Businesses Owned OT 0pmte.d by the Applicant:
N.
JUSTI%ICATJ.QN:
1. Is this site npproptiolr for thc proposed use in terms of size parking, s~o%c,trash, etc.?
n/a
2.
Docs this site hove adequate strm ncccss and on-site parki
to handle b e traffic
generated by the proposed use?
n /a
3. Is the proposed use cornpan'blewith tlhe sumomding lmd u&? Explain.
Yes.
Please see accompanying Addendum.
4. Is the proposed use consistent with the goals and policies of :he Dowtltclwn Specific Plan rind the City's Genml Plm? Explain.
Yes.
Please see accompanying Addmdum.
I hueby c ~ r l i l yhat
all of me above informarion ~ o n i n c din #is applicadon is, to the b a of my linowlcdgc and belief, true an
a
A
1
hap* 25.0.5:Ch of the lagma Beach Municipal code..
'
ADDENDUM NO. 1
Emporio Optic respectfully submits the proposed amendment below to point 16 of
Conditional Use Permit 04-02, which modifies conditional use permit 98-03.
Emporio Optic respects the city of Laguna Beach's efforts to strive to ensure
differentiation of services that keep the downtown area unique. Moreover, it is important
to ensure that there is not an oversaturation a particular service. Like the City, Emporio
Optic has an interest in servicing the needs of both tourists and residents in a unique way.
Consequently, Emporio Optic believes it is important to understand the industry,
the representation of similar businesses within the city, and how Emporio Optic offers an
unique boutique atmosphere to the tourists and residents of Laguna Beach.
Industry Perspective
The eyeglass industry is made up of several categories of eyeglasses, only a
portion of which are sunglasses. Industry data indicates that the major growth within the
eyewear market rests in sunglasses generally, and particularly fashion sunglasses.
Consequently, a further understanding of the sunglass category is significant, especially
where it has caused the confusion leading to the plea to amend the use permit at issue.
From a functional point of view, eyewear is compromised of a innumerous frames
with particular lens types, including:
Prescription Eyeglasses (eyeglasses having an individual prescription);
Countertop Reading Glasses (eyeglasses having a non-prescription
magnifying lens for reading); and
Plano Eyeglasses (eyeglasses not incorporating a corrective prescription).'
All of these types of lenses could fall within the meaning of the definition of
"sunglasses," as that term is defined in point 16 of the use permit. All of these glasses
can have lenses with UV protection andtor polarization, which can be characteristics of
any eyeglass lens.
Each of lens type can also be differentiated by the various color or tints on the
lenses. The following are characteristic of the types of coverings on any given lens,
which affects the visual darkness of the lenses.
Uniform Density Lenses ("a lens whose luminous transmittance" - the
amount of light transmitted through the lens - "does not vary significantly
over the area of the lens ");
' See ANSI 287.1 - 2003. section 4.
Gradient Density Lenses ("a lens whose luminous transnzittalzce varies
siglzificantly across the lens ");
Polarized Lenses ( " a lens whose lumirzous tralzsl~zitralzcevaries with the
amount and orientatiorz of the polarizatiolz in the incident light"); and
Photochromic Lenses ("a lens wlzose luminous tralzsmittalzce or color, or
both, depends olz the recent exposure lzistory of the lens", or "which darkens
when exposed to, and faces when removed front, ultraviolet radiation andor
sunlight ").2
Typically, however, eyeglasses are not characterized by these technical features.
The current use of technical language within Point 16 of Conditional Use Permit 04-02
causes confusion and ambiguity in attempting to apply these characteristics to the many
types of eyewear carried within Emporio Optic.
Instead, eyeglasses are better viewed by their market segment. As a market
segment, eyeglasses are viewed on their styling/consumer demand and their price point.
The market segment is represented by a myriad of brand names, which attract particular
customers based on their styling appeal and price point. The sunglass category can
generally be differentiated by "lifestyle" and "price" segments. Within the lifestyle
segment there are sport, mainstream fashion, and classic/luxury/jewel styles. Any retail
business markets to some cross section of lifestyle and price point, as illustrated more
fully below.
Evewear In Laguna Beach
The City of Laguna Beach has optical stores and two sunglass stores. The
primary focus of optical stores is to meet the needs of the each optometrist's customers.
The sunglass stores, such as Sunglass Gallery and Emporio Optic, cater to the residents
and tourists of Laguna Beach. The following represents the current market segments
served by stores other than Emporio Optic, excluding locations that sell rack glasses.
See ANSI 280.3 - 2003, section 3.5, and ANSI 287.1 - 2003, section 4.
Dr. Cler & Dr. Cook
Price
$400 +
$200-$400
*Nike
*Adidas
$100-$200
*Fendi
*Escada
*Silhouette
*Ray Ban
(Sun and
h)
Sport
Tech
*Jimmy Choo
(Sun and Rx)
*Prada
*Paul Smith
*Armani (Sun
and Rx)
*Gucci
* Dior
*Fish & Click
*O & X
*Maui
Jim (Sun
only)
*Nine West
Sport
Fashion
Sport
Classic
Sport Street Mainstream Progressive
Fashion
Luxury
Fashion
Leisure Chic
Mainstream/ProgressiveFashion Classic/Luxury Jeweled
SUNGLASS GALLERY
Price
$400 +
*Maui
Jim
"Persol
$200$400
$100$200
*Oakley
*Salt
*Dior
*Gucci
*Tom Ford
*Bvlgari
*Juicy
*Cavalli
*Marc Jacobs
*D&G
*Michael Korsn
*Burberry
*Coach
*Fendi
*Ray Ban
*Vogue
*Ralph Lauren
Sport
Tech
Sport
Fashion Leisure Chic
Fashion
Fashion
S ort
Classic
Luxury
1
As is seen from the petitions submitted with this application, none of the optical
stores in Laguna Beach object to Emporio Optic's petition to amend the conditional use
permit. In fact, they all favor the amendment. Therefore, it is meaningful to understand
how Emporio Optic serves a different market and customer than other stores.
Emporio Optic's Business
Emporio Optic is a boutique eyeglass store that has been doing business at this
location on 263 Forest Avenue in Laguna Beach since September 1998. Since
commencing business at this location in Laguna Beach, Emporio Optic has sold both
prescription and sunglass eyewear. Emporio Optic displays both prescription frame and
sunglass frames at its location. Emporio Optic also has prescription lens cutting tools at
the back of its location to fill prescription lenses for customers.
The Laguna Beach Emporio Optic store takes on a true boutique approach in its
design to reflect the ambiance of its location. The current store design utilizes an eclectic
array of materials, from slate and concrete to green granite and used brick to mahogany
and antique rosewood fixtures. The overall environment that is created is a modem,
inviting feel. The store also strives to contribute to the lifestyle and feel of Laguna Beach
such as by displaying artwork of local artists and retailers, helping to promote and
maintain the ambiance of Laguna Beach.
Emporio Optic is owned by The Optical Shop of Aspen ("OSA"), which has
every intention of operating Emporio Optic as a boutique eyeglass store rather than in
conformity with OSA's general business pattern. Due to the unique resident and tourist
needs in Laguna Beach, the collection and sale of eyewear at this location differs from
OSA's general business. Generally, the Optical Shop of Aspen is a high-end optical
retailer of luxury fashion eyewear and sunglasses, whose stores tend to be situated in the
most upscale and exclusive markets in the country. Revenue mix consists of 60% frame
sales and 40% lab/lens/accessories. Within the frame category, 75% of sales are from the
sunglass segment, whereas 25% arise from the prescription eyewear segment. The
product lines focus on high-end fashion, as illustrated below. At the Laguna Beach
Emporio Optic, however, 85% of sales arise from the sunglass segment and 15% arises
from prescription eyewear.
As is clearly evident from the chart below , sales at the Laguna Beach Emporio
Optic reflect more of the high-end lines than other store locations in Laguna Beach.
Distinct from all other retailers in Laguna Beach, Emporio Optic carries the following
lines: Persol, Blinde, Mosley Tribes, Dita, Chanel, Caviari Cazal, Christian Roth, Prada,
Chloe, Versace, Ic Berlin, Kieselstein-Cord, Cartier, Gold & Wood, Retro Specs, Lunor,
Alain Mikli, Bellinger, Lindberg, Robert Marc, Paul Smith, Face a Face, Tiffany, Oliver
Peoples, Kawasaki, 2.5, Infinity, Rainbow, and Chrome Hearts.
This represents almost 30 lines of glasses that are not carried by other stores in
Laguna Beach. The store is also priced on the higher price-point scale than other stores
in town. Ten of the lines carried by Emporio Optic are priced at more than $400, which
price point others stores in town do not address. Accordingly, Emporio Optic believes
that it represents an unique, boutique store in Laguna Beach to cater more to the luxury,
high-end consumers.
EMPORIO OPTIC LAGUNA BEACH
Price
Cartier
KieselsteinCord
I
1
Chrome
Hearts
Cartier
Gold &Wood
Kieselstein-Cord
Retro Specs
Alain Mikli
Bellinger
Maui
Jim
Persol
Readers
REM
Scojo
Maui Jim
Persol
Maui Jim
Persol
Oakley
Ray Ban
Von
Zipper
Revo
SPY
Smith
Oakley
Blinde
Mosley
Tribes
Dita
Chanel
Gucci
Dior
Tom Ford
Bvlgari
Marc Jacobs
CaviarICazal
Lindberg
Robert Marc
Paul Smith
Face a Face
Tiffany
Oliver Peoples
Kawasaki
2.5
Infinity
Rainbow
Swissflex
Christian Roth
Prada
Roberto
Cavalli
Chloe
Dolce &
Gabbana
Versace
I
I
!
Classic
Sport Sport
Fashion
Luxury
Tech Fashion Leisure Chic
Fashion
Readers
Sport
MainstreamlProgressive Fashion ClassidLuxury Jeweled
I
I
I
Pending Citation
Recently, a complaint was made against Emporio Optic alleging that it was not in
compliance with Point 16 of its Conditional Use Permit No. 04-02. Point 16 reads: "A
maximum of '20%' of all displayed eyewear may be sunglasses, defined as eyewear
which has UV coating andlor is polarized. Window display shall contain no more than
20% sunglasses, as defined above."
The first issue with this limitation is the vague nature of the definition of
sunglasses. As illustrated by the industry perspective presented above, the term
"sunglasses" is vague. This misunderstanding led to confusion as to the application of
this term to the business of Emporio Optic.
I
The second concern with the display limitation of Point 16 is that it does not
comport with the commercial realities of Emporio Optic's business. In addition to the
growth of the sunglass category industry-wide, after years of business in Laguna Beach,
the 20 percent limitation does not allow Emporio Optic to conduct business as it could to
best serve the desires of its customers. As expressed above, between 75-85% of Emporio
Optic's actual sales fall within the broad, traditional definition of sunglasses. Emporio
Optic believes that its business presents a unique boutique option to customers looking
for high-end fashion glasses. To subsist as a business, Emporio Optic needs to continue
to sell this volume of sunglasses, which is integrally linked to the display of products.
Accordingly, Emporio Optic requests an amendment to its Conditional Use
Permit. Any of the alternate amendments set forth below will allow for clarity and
simplicity in configuring designs, while also allowing Emporio Optic to more effectively
conduct business by satisfying the needs of residents and tourists in its shop.
Proposed Amendment:
Emporio Optic proposes one of the following alternatives to amend Point 16 of
Condition Use Permit 04-02, which modified Condition Use Permit 98-03.
Proposed Amendment No. 1: Point 16 of Conditional Use Permit No. 04-02 shall
be stricken in its entirety, and Emporio Optic may display sunglasses and eyeglasses in
conformity with its boutique atmosphere.
Proposed Amendment No. 2: A maximum of 70% of all displayed eyewear may
be sunglasses, defined as eyewear comprised of frames having darkly colored lenses
wherein the .lark coloring substantially covers the entire lens. Window displays shall
contain no more than 70% sunglasses, as defined above.
Proposed Amendment No. 3: A minimum of 10% of displayed eyewear must be
prescription eyeglass frames. A maximum of 30% of displayed eyewear may be
mainstream fashion sunglasses. A maximum of 20% of displayed eyewear may be sportoriented sunglasses. A maximum of 50% of displayed eyewear may be classic/luxury
mainstream fashion sunglasses. Window displays shall contain the same percentages as
above.
STAFF REPORT
AGENDA ITEM:
No. 2
TO:
PLANNING COMMISSION
CASE:
APPLICANT:
Larry Sands
LOCATION:
263 Forest Avenue
DATE: 1/28/98
ENVIRONMENTAL
STATUS:
Categorically Exempt, class' 1
PREPARED BY:
Kathryn Lottes, Principal Planner
REQUESTED ACTION: The applicant requests approval to establish nod operate a retail use
that includes sales of eyeglass w e s , prescription lenses and sunglasses; also, a l a
manufacturing service will be provided onsite with same &y service for most prescriptions.
Extended business horn are proposed as follows: 10 AM to 9 PM Monday through Saturday and
1 1AM to 5 PM on Sunday.
'
BACKGROUND: The proposed site is located within the CBD-2 Downtown Commercial
Zoning District of the Downtown Specific Plan. Parking is legal, nonwnforming.
STAFF ANALYSIS: Retail uses that contribute to the diversity and character of the downtown
are allowed in the CBD-2Zoning District, subject to a conditional use permit. In the downtown
area, there are a number of optical shops and also, a number of retail stores that include ancillary
sales of sunglasses (see Exhibit C). Furthermore, on May 14, 1997, the Planning Commission
denied a request for an optical shop based on the incremental and cumulative effect of similar
uses that would be detrimental to the City. There has been no change in the number or location
of stores carrying eyewear since that decision.
Although the proposed use includes an onsite lab service that is unique to the downtown and
resident-serving, the primary use appears to be the sale of eyewear, including sunglasses.
Therefore, the addition of another eyewear shop represents an incremental effect of similar uses
that would be detrimental to the downtown.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff fecommends that the P l e g Commission deny Conditional
Use P d t 98-03subject to the findings outlined in the attached resolution.
itional Use Permit 98-03
January 28,1998
Page 2
ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A: Application
Exhibit B: Location MapISite Plan
Exhibit C:. Downtown Businesses with Optical Sales
Resolution
c
.a
FLACUNA BEACH
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPJXATION
See reverse side for fliing ihsi mctiom
1. PROPERTY
rn PROPOSED USE
Briefly describe tbe speelflc u ~ s ( s )proposed. hclude infomation about proposed merchandise and services, menu
e*
posed use coosheat with the goals and policies of the Downtown Specific Plan a
4.
1hereby certify that all ofthe above information contained in his Appplication is, lo the best d my knoddge and
belief, tnre andncorroctly represeatedand tbrt Ihave read and understand Chapter 25.05.030 of tbh Laguna Beach
Municipal Code.
--
Owner's Sfgnaturn,if other tbao Applicmt.
Byron and Ann Barker
811 Wendt Terrace
Laguna Beach, CA 92651
8
I ~LANNINODM6YIN
CITY OF LAGUNA W C A
h
January 27, 1998
VIA FACSIMlLE AND MAIL
Planning Commission
City of Laguna Beach
505 Forest Avenue
Laguna Beach, CA 9265 1
.
_
_
I
)
.
-
Re:
Emporio.Optics
Conditional Use Permit: 263 Forest Avenue
- -
.
.
--
To the ~ e m d e r of
s the City Planning commission:
n a for over 25 years, this letter is to express our support for
As residents of ~ a ~ u Beach
the Conditional Use Permit that has been requested by Emporio Optics for the location of an
optical shop at 263 Forest Avenue in Laguna Beach.
Emporio Optics is a store that provides high quality service and products, will reputably
serve the residents of Laguna Beach and will be an integral part of the city business. At the
proposed location, Emporio Optics will provide an extensive line of optical fiarnes and service
that is currently not available in Laguna Beach. As a part of its unique service, the store will be
open seven (7) days a week, evenings, and will offer the availability of eyeware within one hour
and prescription lens within 24 hours.
..
. .
-
The high quality merchandise and services offered by Ernporio Optics will be mutually
beneficial to the businesses, as well as residents of Laguna Beach. We ask that the members of
the-Planning-~mmission-suppo~-the-appl~tion-otl-Empono-Opti-fr-a-nditional-UsePermit.
Very truly yours,
--
Byron ~ark;
.
.
Kyle Butterwick
Director of Community Development
City Hall
550 Forrest Avenue
Laguna Beach, CA 92651
Re: C. U.P. 98-03 263 Forrest Avenue
Dear Mr. Butterwick
What I will offer at 263 Forrest Avenue is much more than "retail sales of evewear". Anyone
could do that. I will be offering thefollowing:
I. High end, highfashion eyewear not presently found in Laguna Beach.
2. 1 hour to 24 hour Optical service on lenses. This is not presently ofered in Laguna
Beach.
3. Convenient weekend and evening hours, including Sundays. Currently, this is not
ofered in Laguna Beach.
1do not examine eyes, 1strictlyfill prescriptiom and duplicate lenses. Requestsfor eye
examinations would be referred to local doctors.
Yours Truly,
515firtmoor
Laguna Beach
a.
l(43 F $ ~ r s 3d
~ w
01 6
JAN. 1 4 ' 9 8
..
..
(WED) 1 1 : 5 3
COhlh4UNICATION No:41
PACE. 3
BHB
lT
l B
.
-
..
-
.
JAN. 14 ' 98' (WED)
1 1 :5 3
COMMUNI CAT LOtj #o :4 1
PAGE. 4
DOWNTOWN BUSINESSES WITH PRIMARY OPTICAL SALES
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Drs. Cler and Cook
Dr. Harrison Laguna Eyes
Dr. Hartley - Laguna Visions
Eye to Eye Boutique
Sunglasses Gallery
-
265 Laguna Avenue
540 South Coast Highway
330 Park Avenue
384 Forest Avenue
205 Ocean Avenue
DOWNTOWN BUSINESSES WITH ANCILLARY SUNGLASSES SALES
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Boardriders Club
Bushard's Pharmacy
Chiemsee USA
Hobie Sports
McCalla Pharmacy
255 Forest Avenue
244 Forest Avenue
225 Forest Avenue
294 Forest Avenue
292 Forest Avenue
RECORDING REQUESTED BY
AND WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO:
CITY CLERK
505 FOREST AVENUE
LAGUNA BEACH, CA E651
THIS SPACE RESERVED FOR RECORDING
RESOLUTION NO. 98-03
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH
DENYING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 98-03
WHEREAS, an application has been filed by the prospective tenant of property located at
263 Forest Avenue requesting a Conditional Use Permit in accordance with the provisions of
Municipal Code Section 25.05.030 to establish a use that includes the retail sale of designer
frames, prescription lenses and sunglasses, as well as an ancillary lens manufacturing service;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Laguna Beach, acting in accordance
with the provisions of Municipal Code Section 25.05.030, conducted a legally noticed public
hearing regarding this proposal on January 28, 1998;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission carefully considered the oral and documentary
evidence and arguments presented at the hearing; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has made the following findings:
1. The granting of a Conditional Use Permit will contribute to an incremental and cumulative
effect of similar uses which would be detrimental to the City in that the use does not contribute to
the diversity of uses in the downtown area.
NOW, THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED that Conditional Use P d t 98-03 is hereby
denied.
January 28,1998
Page 2
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the above decision was rendered on January
28, 1998 and is subject to California Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.6 as adopted by
Municipal Code Section 1.06.010, including the time limits for seeking judicial review of the
decision.
ADOPTED this 28th day of January, 1998.
AYES:
Commissioner(s)
NOES:
Commissioner(s)
ABSENT:
Commissioner(s)
ATTEST:
Chairperson, Planning Commission
L a p Beach, California
DirectorICommunity Development
Laguna Beach, California
Vote: Kinsman 1 Vail 1 Chapman Y_ Grossman Y_ Pearson _Y
2.
Conditional Use Permit 98-03 to allow retail sales of eyewear at 263 Forest Avenue.
Cheryl Kinsman excused herself from hearing the project because of a possible conflict
of interest because she owned property within the noticing area.
Kyle Butterwick summarized the staff report.
Public Testimony in Support of the Project: Larry Sands, the applicant, said that he
provided more than one-day or one-hour service as well as after hours emergency
services. The caliber of the frames he cames is different than those found anywhere else
in Laguna Beach. He would offer good service and eyewear that would be unique to the
town. Everything is very nature oriented. He doesn't examine eyes and would refer such
business to local optometrists or ophthalmologists. He would display between 3,000 and
4,000 fiarnes.
In reply to Commissioner Pearson's question, Mr. Sands said that only 10% of the glasses
would be sunglasses and he would have someone on site at all times to grind lenses.
Commissioner Vail wanted to know what was the market need or niche projected for this
eyeglass store. Mr. Sands said that 80% of the glasses would be prescription. Even
though the sales would be mainly for prescription use, he wanted to locate on Forest
Avenue because he felt a lot of business would come from tourists walking by.
In response to Commissioner Pearson's question as to whether his store target the
residents or tourists, Mr. Sands said that it would be good for the residents.
Commissioner Grossman said that since the zone for the location is a balanced mix
between tourists and residents, how would it be good for tourists. Mr. Sands felt that his
business would attract both tourists and residents alike.
Commissioner Chapman wanted to know if the applicant would agree to limit the
percentage of sunglasses to be sold. The applicant said that since his sunglasses are
approximately $500 per pair, it would not be a problem to satisfy such a condition. He
prefers to be in the optician business rather than sunglasses and he felt his use would be
unique. In reply to Commissioner Chapman's question as to what would make it unique,
he replied that the price point is expensive and the service level is not readily available in
Laguna Beach.
Lucille Begin, a resident of Laguna Beach, said that because of her work hours, she
would like to have an optical store open on evenings and weekends to purchase eye
glasses. She said the other local places don't grind the lenses in as short a period of time
that the applicant would. She felt that tourists would generate a lot of business.
/
Bill Barton, with OSA the distributor for the applicant's eyewear, said the quality of the
does is fill prescriptions and
applicant's eyewear is better. He said all that -the applicant
-- - _ _ _
i'
c
PC Minutes
2
..i
;<
f? 9 1-
-
-
January 28, 1998
make glasses. He said it is a unique optical operation in the United States and they have
stores in other tourist areas, such as Scottsdale and Aspen. He said they would offer a
level of quality not currently available in Laguna Beach.
Public Testimony in Opposition to the Project: Dr. Michael Cook, an optometrist
located in town, said that a dispensing optician can only conduct business based on a
current prescription from an optometrist or ophthalmologist. He said emergency service
was not called for often. He was opposed to the application because he felt there were
already too many optical stores in town and that statistically, only one doctor is needed
for every 7,000 people. He said there are currently five offices in town that do lens
grinding. He felt the applicant would really be selling to tourists and he would be taking
business fiom the other merchants. He said tourists don't come fiom out of town to get
prescription eyewear. In response to Commissioner Pearson's question, Dr. Cook said
that in addition to his office, Dr. Harrison's office is open seven days a week.
Dr. Bill Harrison said that Laguna Beach currently has more optometrists and
ophthalmologists than the area needs. He said his current location is open seven days a
week except in the winter; they have night hours available if a customer wishes to make
an appointment. He said his office offers a full range of service and repair as do the other
optician stores. He carries 1,500 frames that include a wide variety of price ranges and
that the applicant's eyewear line is available to any of the local stores who wish to sell it.
He noted that all optical eyewear could be made into sunglasses. He said that the
Downtown Specific Plan supports ownerloperated businesses and urged the Commission
to deny the application.
Dr. Hartick, a local optician, said there are enough eyewear stores already in town and
any additional eyewear stores would force an existing store out of business. He said his
business would be impacted the most by a new sunglass store, because that's all that he
sells. He urged the Commission to be careful in making its decision.
Dave Claire testified on behalf of Marty Kawecki, a local optical merchant who was
unavailable for the meeting. Mr. Claire said the merchant provides lab service.
Rebuttal: The applicant stated that he wasn't aware that European Optical was also
located in the downtown of Laguna Beach, but didn't feel it was relevant to the proposed
downtown location. He said he presently lives in Laguna Beach and would work at the
Laguna location. He said that all lenses have to meet certain standards and his would be
to the same specifications as the other stores.
Commissioners' Comments: Commissioner Grossman stated that the tradeoff between
diversity and stifling competition was difficult, but he was not in favor of the application
at this location. He said the Downtown Specific Plan's intent is for diversity and felt the
applicant's intent was to cater to tourists.
Commissioner Pearson was not opposed to competition, but agreed with Commissioner
Grossman that the applicant was trylng to establish a retail 'store that y ~ u l dappeal
i
PC Minutes
?
.-.fin
Januarv 28.1 998
-,
b'f
primarily to tourists. She felt the applicant would be better served on a street other than
Forest Avenue.
1
Commissioner Chapman felt there would be a redundancy with other eyewear currently
available. He said the applicant's merchandise would have a higher price point line and
fashion, but it was not uniquely different enough from the others. He felt it would
conflict with the Downtown Specific Plan, with respect to variety for that type of use on
Forest Avenue.
1
1
Commissioner Vail was impressed with the quality of the applicant's eyewear, but was
concerned about the location of the proposal. He was opposed to the application because
once the use was approved for that location there wouldn't be any control in the future of
similar uses in that location.
..
Motion
e Permit 98-03 based on the use
. . Second NG Action Deny Conditional ITS
contnbuhng to an incremental and cumulative effect of similar uses detrimental to the
downtown in that the use does not contribute to the diversity of uses in the downtown.
Motion carried 4-0.
-
Vote: Kinsman Abstain Vail 1 Chapman 1 Grossman Y Pearson Y
3.
Treasure Island Destination Resort Community Local Coastal Program (LCP) and
Environmental Impact Report at 30801 Coast Highway.
Height Limits (Condition #9) - Staff Report: John Montgomery summarized the staff
report for height limits and noted that a list of the conceptually agreed upon heights by
the Planning Commission at the January 21, 1998 meeting was attached to the Agenda
for this meeting. He said the proposed modifications to section 11.3 of the LCP would
also apply to the balance of the provisions in that section also. He stated that Moms
Skenderian, the single-family residential architect for the project, was available to answer
questions about the staking that was done since the last meeting and that some of the
Commissioners had been to the site to see the staking.
Commissioner Grossman sought clarification from staff as to the height limitation of 36
feet measured from Coast Highway and the limit from finished grade. He noted that the
centerline of Coast Highway is higher than the property all along the property. Mr.
Montgomery said the height restriction would basically follow two axes, one down Coast
Highway and the other down towards the beach. The height limit would be the
combination of the two. Commissioner Grossman wanted to be sure that it was the more
restrictive of the two.
In response to Commissioner Vail's question, Mr. Montgomery said that there weren't
any heights on the conceptual development plan that were above 36 feet.
Morris Skenderian, one of the project architects, said that n~..portionof the hotel's design
extends higher than 36 feet above Coast Highway.
PC Minutes
January 28,1998
AGENDA BILL
No.
Meeting Date:
SUBJECT:
5
2/24/98
APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION DENIAL .OF CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT 98-03 TO ALLOW RETAIL SALES OF EYEWEAR AT 263 FOREST
AVENUE
-
SUMMARY OF THE MATTER: The applicant is proposing to establish a retail eyewear shop at 263
Forest Avenue that will include the sale of eyeglass frames, prescription lenses and sunglasses. The
applicant also plans to include a lens manufacturing lab in the store and will provide same day service for
most prescriptions. The project site is located in the CBD-2 Downtown Commercial Zoning District of
the Downtown Specific Plan.
The applicant'stated that his proposed eyewear store was distinctive because it would offer high end, high
fashion eyewear not presently found in Laguna Beach; also, the store would offer same day optical
service on lenses and it would maintain weekend and evening hours.
At its meeting on January 28, 1998, the Planning Commission denied the Conditional Use Permit on a 4-0
vote. The Commission felt that the applicant was establishing a store that would appeal primarily to
tourists and that the merchandise was not significantly different from what was already available. A
survey conducted by staff shows that there are five downtown businesses with primary optical sales and
an additional five businesses with ancillary sunglasses sales. The Commission based its denial on a
finding that the use would contribute to an incremental and cumulative effect of similar uses that would
be detrimental to the City. Approximately eight months ago, the Commission also denied a request for an
optical shop at another location on Forest Avenue based on a similar finding.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended by the Planning Commission that the City Council:
Adopt the attached Resolution which denies the appeal and sustains the denial of Conditional Use Permit
98-03 at 263 Forest Avenue.
Appropriations Requested: $
Submitted by:
Fund:
Coordinated with:
Attachments: PC staff report 1/28/98; PC Minutes
1/28/98; Resolution
Approved:
City Manager
No*
Meeting Date:
/3/17/98
9
CONSENT
SUBJECT:
RESOLUTION OF APPROVAL FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 98-03 TO
ALLOW RETAIL SALES OF EYEWEAR AT 263 FOREST AVENUE
SUMMARY OF THE MATTER:
At its meeting on February 24, 1998, the City Council voted to overturn the Planning Commission denial
and approve Conditional Use Permit 98-03 to allow an optical shop with a lens-manufacturing lab, subject
to certain conditions. These conditions included a requirement to design, manufacture and distribute 60%
of the merchandise at the one location with the remaining 40% to be from exclusive sources; the applicant
must maintain records to verifL compliance. In addition, onsite lens manufacturing equipment must be
provided and the business must operate with evening and weekend hours.
The City Council requested the City Attorney to draft a resolution of approval to be presented on the
Consent Calendar at a later meeting.
In the attached resolution, a condition has been added that limits the display of sunglasses to 20% of the
displayed merchandise. This condition will ensure that the business does not evolve into a retail store that
primarily sells sunglasses.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the City Council:
Adopt the attached Resolution to uphold the appeal and overturn the denial of Conditional Use Permit 9803 at 263 Forest Avenue.
Submitted by:
Fund:
Coordinated with:
Attachments: Resolution
1
Approved:
City Manager
Commission and Chamber of Commerce to 1) consider whether some or all of the two
hour meters in the downtown area should be extended to three or more hours for
residents, 2 ) consider whether some meters might be extended up to three hours for those
paying to park, and 3) report back to the Council by June 1998.
I
I
I
PUBLIC HEARINGS
'
*******************
m
&
'
A
L
L
-0O
W
RETAIL
SALES OF EYEWEAR AT 263 FOREST AVENUE 0VERTURNF.n: CITY
ATTORNEY TO PREPARE A RESOJ ,UTION CONDITIONING APPROVAL ON 60%
OF MER CHANDISE BEING DESIGNEiD. MA.NUFACTUREJ3 AND DISTlUBUTEQ
,
WAT
~
L
Q
REcoms
C
TO.
BE MAINTAINEn TO VERIFY CONDITIONS. ON-SITE LENS-G
EOUIPMENT. WEEKEND HOURS AND APPROPRIATE COMMISSlON
CONDITIONS INCLUnED (43)
Councilmember Blackburn stated that she was abstaining from this appeal because her
family is closely involved with the sunglasses industry.
Community Development Director Butterwick reported that the Planning Commission
had denied this application based on the finding that the use would contribute to an
incremental and cumulative effect of similar uses that would be detrimental to the City.
They felt that the applicant was establishing a store that would appeal primarily to
tourists and that the merchandise was not si,pificantly different from what was already
available.
Public Testimony
Rich Words, attorney representing the applicant, said that there is a meaningful
distinction from what his client was merchandising and what was now available in town.
60% of the eyewear sold at this location would be designed, manufactured and distributed
by his client and 95% of what they well is not sold in town or in South Orange County. It
is both a resident and visitor serving business. He said his client was willing to have
restrictions placed on the Conditional Use Permit (CUP).
Bill Barton, applicant, said he was particular in the locations chosen for their business.
He felt that Laguna Beach was appropriate because of the art and gallery influence as he
sold original designs in eyewear. H e said his business is a fashion business. The other
lines will be exclusive to their operation. He agreed that they would sell 100% products
that were not represented in Laguna Beach.
Dr. Michael Cook was concerned that the store would not cany exclusive designs. He
had contacted the editors of eyewear fashion magazines and they had informed him that
there was not the market for that. He said that tourists do not purchase eyewear on
vacation and that the City had enough facilities to serve the local population. All of the
t
February 24, 1998
. .
--
-
r.
City Council Minutes
I
existing facilities provided lab work. He believed it would end up as a non-prescription
eyewear shop. He said most of what they were offering was not unique.
Astrid Stepman, European Optical Shop, said the applicant had two stores that were
close, one at Fashion Island. Her business has contracts with some of the same eyewear
lines that the applicant wants to represent and there would not be a way to confirm the
business was exclusive. She was concemed that the business would not be able to make
it.
Dr. Bill Harrison, Optometrist, said this store would be similar to a factory outlet. He felt
those type of businesses had ruined Solvang. He encouraged owner-occupied businesses.
A resident expressed concern with the Downtown Specific Plan and said that an optical
store cannot survive without a doctor. The result would be a fashion sunglasses shop and
there are too many of this type of store in the area. He said that quality lenses could not
be made in one hour.
Rich Words said this would be unique in the downtown area. He -said those opposed did
not design their eyewear and the lines this store carried would not be sold at existing local
stores. He said that this is not a chain store, there are eight stores and this would be the
second emporium store. All of the stores are successful and it is not a factory outlet. He
said there will be designs that are unique to the Laguna Beach store and his client will
comply with any conditions placed on the CUP.
Lucille Begin said that her client was under time constraints and must give the property
owner final notification.
Councilmember Comments
Mayor Pro Tern Baglin felt a competitive business environment was healthy but he also
was concemed with the Downtown Specific Plan and wanted to encourage diversity. He
said a CUP with conditions based on percentages was unenforceable. He agreed with a
condition that 60% of the frames meet all three criteria of being designed, produced and
distributed at the Laguna Beach location.
Mayor Dicterow favored structuring the CUP to be sure that the store would be unique.
He understood the positions taken by other eyewear businesses. He believed in a free
market system.
Councilmember Peterson favored the CUP with conditions of at least 50% of the product
being designed, produced and distributed at the store location. He said that anyone who
would take over that location in the future would have to agree to the same conditions.
1
Councilmember Freeman favored a condition requiring 100% original product at the
store. He said that a 60%-40% split was impossible to enforce and a condition should be
more constraining.
February 24, 1998
1
11
Moved by Mayor Pro Tern Baglin, seconded by Councilmember Peterson and camed
3/1/1 to overturn the denial and ask the City Attorney to draft a resolution to be presented
on the Consent Calendar that conditions the approval on 60% of the sales merchandise
being designed, manufactured and distributed in this location, 40% of the sales
merchandise is to be from sources exclusive to the applicant and not available to other
retailers in town, maintenance of records to verify the conditioned sales records, on-site
lens manufacturing equipment, weekend hours and appropriate Commission conditions.
ROT ,L CALL
6.
AYES:
Peterson, Baglin, Dicterow
NOES:
Freeman
ABSTAINING:
Blackburn
RESOLUTION N0.98-011 APPROVING HEFUTAGE TREE APPLICATION FOR
THREE EUCALYPTUS TREES AT 675 BLUEBIRD CANYON DRIVE (67)
.
Community Development Director Butterwick reported Council was to consider an
application to place three Eucalyptus trees on the Heritage Tree list. Staff determined the
trees met the criteria of the ordinance and qualified at Heritage Trees. He said trees on
the list could not be removed or substantially altered with out a permit from the Director
of Community Development. An application to trim a Heritage Tree may be made by the
property owner or any other member of the community. He said the City does not
photograph trees as part of the application process but photos submitted with the
application are retained in the property file. He did not know if these trees blocked
existing ocean views.
I
Public Testimonv
Dave Cormell was concerned that a public notice concerning this application was not sent
to the neighboring property owners. He felt a heritage tree should have special
significance.
Frank Visca requested this application be tabled and a moratorium be placed on listing
Heritage Trees until the Heritage Tree Ordinance is resolved. He said standards are
vague and Heritage Trees should not be alien vegetation. He said they are tall trees and
block views. He was concerned with how the regular maintenance of the trees would be
monitored. He said the trees were not listed on the Candidate Heritage Tree list and are
not worthwhile candidates.
Dr. Atherton said trees have significance to neighborhoods.
I:-;..,-.
. . . . .
.
.
. .......
\k.-:,.>
February 24,1998
.. . ,-.---.-.
. . . . . r.- -.
. . .. . . . . . . . . . . . .
....
I .
,..w.;;,- .
%
..
-
,.
!
. . .
.
.
. . . L.
.
. ,
,
'.:,
,
?---a
.. : .-,--, ..:
,'\. !
ULL;
I
CITY CLERK
CITY OF%AGT;TNA BEACH- 505 FOREST AVENUE
LAGUNA BEACH, CA 92651
-
RESOLUTION NO. 98.019
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAGUNA
BEACH, CALIFORNIA, TO UPHOLD THE APPEAL AND OVERTURN
THE DENTAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 98-03.
WHEREAS, an application was filed by the owner of property located at 263 Forest
Avenue requesting Conditional Use Permit 98-03 to establish a use that includes the retail
sale of designer fiames, prescription lenses and sunglasses, and a lens manufactwing service
in accordance with the provisions of the Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, on January 28, 1998, the Planning Commission conducted a legally
noticed public hearing and, after reviewing all documents and testimony, voted to deny
Conditional Use Permit 98-03; and
WHEREAS, an appeal of the Planning Commission denial was filed by the applicant;
and
.-'-..
1
WHEREAS, on February 24, 1998, the City Council conducted a legally noticed'
public hearing and considered all of the evidence and arguments presented in support of and
in opposition to the application; and
1
WHEREAS, the City Council has made the following findings:
1. The site for the proposed use is adequate in size to accommodate said use and parking is
legal, nonconforming with no intensification of use proposed.
I
The site for the proposed use has access to streets and highways adequate in width and
pavement type to carry the quantity and kind of traffic generated by the proposed use in
that no additional traffic will be generated and existing conditions are adequate.
The proposed use will have no substantial adverse effect upon abutting property in that
the operation of the use has been conditioned to mitigate any such effect.
The proposed use is consistent with the objectives and policies of the City's General Plan
in that the use supplements the present diversity of land use within the Zoning District.
The Conditions stated in the decision are deemed necessary to protect the public health,
safety and general welfare in that provisions have been included to ensure continued land
use compatibility.
The proposed use is compatible with surrounding uses and is consistent with the intent
and purpose established for the Zoning District in that the use contributes to the range of
resident-and visitor-serving businesses in the downtown area.
The proposed use does not conflict with the City's goals to establish and maintain a
balanced mix of uses that serves the needs of both local and non-local populations in that
the use offers merchandise to both residents and visitors.
The granting of the Conditional Use Permit will not produce an incremental or
cumulative effect of similar uses which would be detrimental to the City in that the use is
a specialized optical shop with an on-site lens manufacturing service and merchandise not
available in other optical shops, which contributes to the diversity of uses in the
downtown area.
The proposed use will not generate excessive litter or further impact circulation patterns
in the downtown area in that the use will not generate significant additional trafic nor
will it utilize a significant amount of paper products.
-2-.
030
10. The use will contribute to the unique character of Laguna Beach and the qualities that
provide the community a sense of identity in that the optical shop will provide optical
merchandise and services that are not currently found in the downtown.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH
does RESOLVE and ORDER as follows:
SECTION l.. Conditional Use Permit 98-03 is hereby granted to allow an optical
shop that includes retail sales of designer frames, prescription lenses and sunglasses, and a
lens manufacturing service.
SECTION 2. The following conditions are set forth to protect the health, safety and
welfare of the community and to assure the intent and purpose of the regulations:
1. The Conditional Use Permit shall be subject to review if written complaints are received,
and shall be subject to administrative review one (1) year after issuance of the certificate
of use to determine if the approved conditions of approval are in compliance. These
reviews may result in a formal noticed public hearing before the Planning Commission.
After the public hearing on the matter, the Planning Commission may require immediate
condition compliance, amend the conditions of approval or proceed with revocation oi
the Conditional Use Permit as specified in Municipal Code Section 25.05.075.
2. It is understood that the conditions of approval apply herein to any future owners
01
lessees operating under this Conditional Use Permit. This means in legal terms that the
conditions of approval for the Conditional Use Permit shall be and hereby are obligations
of and binding upon the applicant and hisher heirs, successors, assigns, agents and
representatives. The conditions shall constitute a covenant running with and binding the
land in accordance with the provisions of California Civil Code Section 1468. Failure to
comply with such conditions, and each of them, and any other related federal, state and
local regulations may be grounds for revocation of the Conditional Use Permit, in
addition to other remedies that may be available to the City.
3. This Conditional Use Permit shall not become effective until any required Design Review
Board review and approval has been obtained.
4. The business or use shall not open, inaugurate or commence until after the City has
issued a Certificate of Use and Occupancy; and such Certificate shall not be issued until
after the City staff has verified compliance with all applicable conditions of approval.
5. If the use authorized under this Resolution and Conditional Use Permit is abandoned or
terminated for any reason for a period of at least one year, the Conditional Use Permit
shall automatically expire and become void.
6. No additions, enlargements or modifications of uses or structures upon property for
which this Conditional Use Permit has been granted shall be allowed except pursuant to a
subsequent Conditional Use Permit or Variance as might otherwise be required or granted
pursuant to the terms of Title 25 of the City of Laguna Beach Municipal Code.
7. The sale of tee-shirts, bathing suits, jewelry and ivory of any kind shall be prohibited.
8. Outdoor display or outside seating of any kind shall be prohibited, unless approved as an
amendment to the Conditional Use Permit. Application for such an amendment may only
be accepted for processing, if outdoor display andlor outside seating are permitted uses(s)
in the applicable zoning district.
9. A City business license shall be obtained prior to the operation of any business use
permitted by this Conditional Use Permit.
10. At least 60% of the eyewear merchandise displayed at the Laguna Beach location shall be
designed, produced and distributed by the applicant; the remaining 40% of the eyewear
merchandise shall be obtained from sources exclusive to the applicant and shall not be
available to other retailers in town. The applicant shall maintain business records
sufficient to verify that the store is being operated in compliance with these requirements.
Such records shall be available to city staff in conjunction with the annual administrative
review of the Conditional Use Permit.
11. A maximum of 20% of the displayed eyewear merchandise may be sunglasses.
12. The applicant shall install and maintain all onsite lens manufacturing equipment that is
necessary to provide same day service for prescription lenses.
I
13. Business hours shall include evening and weekend hours and shall be maintained fiom
10 A.M. to 9 P.M. Monday through Saturday, and from 1lA.M. to 5 P.M. on Sunday.
ADOPTED this 17th day of March, 1998.
cf/ steven M. Dicterow, Mayor
ATTEST:
city Clerk
0
I, VEFWA L. ROLLINGER, City Clerk of the City of Laguna Beach, California, do
hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 98.019 was duly adopted at a Regular
Meeting of the City Council of said City held on March 17, 1998 by the following vote:
AYES:
COUNCILMEMBER(S): Peterson, Baglin, Dicterow
NOES:
COUNCILMEMBER(S): None
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
COUNCILMEMBER(S): Blackburn, Freeman
City Clerk of the City of ~ a g & aBeach, CA
II
I
STAFF REPORT
AGENDA ITEM:
No. 4
TO:
PLANNING COMMISSION
CASE:
APPLICANT:
Emporio OpticILarry Sands
LOCATION:
263 Forest Avenue
ENVIRONMENTAL
STATUS:
Categorically Exempt, Class 1
PREPARED BY:
Kathryn Lottes, Principal Planner
DATE: 1/28/04
REQUESTED ACTION: The applicant requests an amendment to previously approved
Conditional Use Permit 98-03; as proposed, Conditions of Approval #lo, #11, #12 and #13
would be modified or eliminated.
BACKGROUND: The business is located within the CBD-2 Downtown Commercial Zoning
District of the Downtown Specific Plan.
Conditional Use Permit 98-03 was initially denied by the Planning Commission on January 28,
1998 based on concerns about an incremental and cumulative effect of similar uses. The
Planning Commission decision was appealed to the City Council on February 24, 1998; City
Council upheld the appeal and overturned the denial by the Commission. The City Council
approved CUP 98-03 provided that several conditions be placed on the proposed use. These
conditions included: 1) 60% of the sales merchandise to be designed, manufactured, and
distributed at 263 Forest Avenue; 2) 40% of the sales m'erchandise to be from sources exclusive
to the applicant and not available to other retailers in town; 3) applicant to maintain records that
verify the conditioned sales record; 4) applicant to install and maintain onsite lens manufacturing
equipment; 5) hours to include evening and weekend hours; and 6) other appropriate Planning
Commission conditions.
STAFF ANALYSIS: The applicant is requesting to modify or eliminate the following
Conditions of Approval that currently apply to the use under the approved Conditional Use
Permit (98-03):
#I 0. At least 60% o f the evewear merchandise displayed at the Laauna Beach location shall be
designed, prodzrced and distribtrted bv the applicant: the remainin* 40% o f the evewear
mercharldise sllall be obtuined from sources exclusive to the applicant and shall not be
January 28,2004
Page 2
available to other retailers in town. The applicant shall maintain business records suficient to
veri_flthat the store is being operated in compliance with these requirements. Such records shall
be available to city staff in conjunction with the annual administrative review of the Conditional
Use Permit.
The applicant requests that the bolded, underlined wording either be modified or eliminated. The
applicant is particularly concerned that the 40% requirement is not feasible. Emporio Optic
seeks out hard-to-find vendors and eyewear that is not found at other locations in town, but there
are no prohibitions against that same vendor selling to other retailers in town or against other
retailers fiom seeking out the same vendors.
The 40% requirement is extremely difficult to enforce and staff agrees with the request to
eliminate that provision. However, staff believes the 60% requirement should be retained in
order to ensure that the "look and feel" of the store remain distinctive from other eyewear stores
in Laguna Beach.
#11. A maximum o f 20% o f the disvlaved evewear merchandise ma-vbe sunalasses.
The applicant states that their merchandise includes clear glasses, tinted lenses and sunglasses,
and further, that fashion tints comprise a large part of their business. Because it is difficult to
separate tinted eyeglasses h m sunglasses, the applicant requests to either change the percentage
allowed for sunglasses (that would include tinted eyewear), redefine sunglasses and tinted
glasses, or eliminate the condition. It appears that approximately 60% of the merchandise
displayed in the store is sunglass wear.
Due to the original concern about the incremental and cumulative effect of another sunglass store
in the downtown, staff does not recommend modification of the 20% limit on sunglasses.
Although one optical sales store has recently moved out of the downtown, a recent survey shows
that approximately 10 shops offer sunglasses as ancillary merchandise.
#12. The avplicant shall install and maintain all onsite lens manufacturina euuiument that LV
necessarv to provide same dqv service for prescri~tionlenses.
The applicant says that they can provide the same day service for single prescription lenses, but
that if a pair of glasses is ordered with special coatings, it will have to be done offsite. The
applicant states that they have two licensed opticians onsite who can cut and tint lenses. The
applicant would like the condition to require same day service for emergency replacement for
most prescription lenses.
One of the primary restrictions on the use, as approved by the City Council in 1998, was that the
business was required to have onsite lens manufacturing. This restriction was seen as
appropriate since the applicant represented the proposed use as an optical shop rather than a
sunglass shop. To maintain the diversity of uses in the downtown, staff does not recommend
alteration of Condition #12.
a
January 28,2004
Page 3
#13. Business hours shall include evening and weekend hours and shall be maintained fiom 10
A.M. to 9 P.M. Mondav through Saturdav, and fiom I 1 A.M. to 5 P.M.on Sundav.
The applicant would like to stay open later on Sunday and has proposed the following hours: 10
A.M. to 9 P.M. Sunday through Thursday, and 10 A.M. through 10 P.M. Friday and Saturday.
Staff supports the suggested change in hours of operation.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve
Conditional Use Permit 04-02, as modified, subject to the conditions in the attached resolution.
ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A:
Exhibit B:
Exhibit C:
Exhibit C:
Exhibit D:
Resolution
Application
1/28/98 PC Minutes (re: CUP 98-03)
2/24/98 CC Minutes (re: CUP 98-03)
Location MapISite Plan
Survey of Downtown Eyewear
'
I CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION
CUPNumber
I.
11.
Emporio Optid Lany Sands
Address
26 Lagunita
Aliso Vieio, CA 92656
Telephone
949-376-9 187
Lamna Beach, CA 92651
PROPERTY INFORMATION:
Lot 7 & 8 Block H Rogers Addition
Suite
641-25103
Assessor Parcel Number
Retail eyewearAens production
BuildinglSuite Square Footage
m.
949-83 1-9441
Telephone
Location-
Current/Previous.Use
q8a
DATE: 01-05-04
PROPERTY OWNERIAPPLICANT INFORMATION:
Legal Owner Abby Hall/.
Address
263 Forest ~ v e . 7
28 County Walk Dr.
Applicant
-
B+O+
See reverse sidefor filing instructions
1350
Parking Spaces Provided
civ _parkin?
PROPOSED USE: See attached letter
Briefly describe the specific use(s) proposed. Include information about proposed merchandise and services, menu items, proposed
business hours, etc.
Hi& end prescription eyewear and sunwear, lens m a n u f a d a emergency service. Amended hours: see
attached letter
-
-
---
-
-
Similar Businesses Owned or Operated by the Applicant:
w.
JUSTIFICATION:
1.
Is this site appropriate for the proposed use in terms of size, parking, storage, trash, etc?
Store s i n is adequate, parking provided, ample storwe available. and trash cans behind store
-
2.
-
Does this site have adequate street access and on-site parking to handle the traffic generated by the proposed use?
3. Is the proposed use compatible with the surrounding land uses? Explain.
lens service,
There are no surroundinp:uses that provide our combinations of services. including: ememncy
high-end and luxury lines, keep weekend hours, and carry frames desimed and m a n u f a d bv the owner.
4.
!
L
V.
Is the proposed use consistent with the goals and policies of the Downtown Specific Plan and the City's Geocral Plan? Explair
This is a unique and beautifully designed high-end optical shop. It brings a service to Lamma Beach that
compIiments the other businesses. We have licensed opticians serving;customers and makin?their lenses.
Over 50% of our business is for local residents.
AFFIDAVIT:
I hereby certify that all of the above information contained in this application is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, true and
correctly represented and that I bye read and understand Chapter 25.05.030 of the Laguna Beach Municipal Code.
.)
037
A -,&&&5 1/5/04
-
PROPERTY OWNER'SIGN
January 5,2004
Community Development Planning Division
505 Forest Avenue
Laguna Beach, California 92651
Re: Amending the Conditional Use Permit for Emporio Optic, 263 Forest Avenue
Dear Planning Division:
The purpose of this request is to modify and update portions of Section 2 of our
Conditional Use Permit (C.U.P.) approved February 24,1998. Technology in eyeglass
wear has changed dramatically in the past few years. "Frame-less" lenses, thin titanium
frames, and a wide variety of W and tint coatings are now more available to the general
public. This same technology has brought with it a new complexity in stocking and
displaying our merchandise as well as affecting the time required to prepare lenses to the
customer's specifications.
We are requesting the Planning Commission consider the following changes to our
C.U.P.
Section 2. item 10: "At least 60% of the eyewear merchandise displaved at the L a m a
Beach location shall be designed. uroduced and distributed bv the auulicant: the
remaining 40% shall be obtained from sources exclusive to the applicant and shall not be.
available to other retailers in town. The auulicant.. .."
The difficulty with the underlined phrase is defining "source". Ha "source" is a major
national or international manufacturer that carries several lines of frames it is not
reasonable to expect that only one store in the city should be able to carry their products.
If, on the other hand, a store owner selects a new line of h e s that no one else is
carrying, should that then preclude any other store h m carrying the same line?
Emporio Optic is very particular about the frame selection and quality of lines we present
in our store. Because of our reputation in the industry as the leader of high end fashion
eyewear, every vendor in the industry wants to represent their eyewear in ~ ustore.
r Our
stores are always the first to receive a new eyewear line and then the competition will
shop us out and seek out our new vendors. We have no legal control of the vendor selling
to other retailers. For example, Oakley may be carried in multiple locations in town but
you will only receive the vast selection of Oakley at one location and that is at Emporio
Optic; you will only find the exclusive, one of a kind $15,000 build out designed and paid
for by Oakley at one location in town, Emporio Optic; you will only find one location
listed on Oakley's website, Emporio Optic; this is exclusivity.
EXHIBIT D
Emporio Optic
January 5,2004
Attachment to Conditional Use Permit Application
+id
Nwlot plan or floor plans are being submitted since no structure or floor plans are being
amended. The original plans as approved in our prior CUP are in existence. Please refer
to our prior file for this information. C e y l ~ j "~ T T # U ~ O )
The plot plan drawings will not be changing fiom the original drawings. The displays
will be incorporating a greater number of sunglasses then the past. However, there will be
a greater percentage of ophthalmic displayed than sun. Ophthalmic should be defined as
including tinted or clear lenses.
We apologize that we cannot give you a specific drawing of exactly where each of our
eyeglass lines will be placed in our store as we do move them around fiom time to time
due to seasonal retail marketing.
Chanel is also carried in multiple locations in town. Emporio Optic was the first location
to have it and we also have the largest selection in town. Chanel also did a $5,000
national ad paid for in full for one location in Laguna, Emporio Optic. This was not
available to other retailers in town, this is exclusivity.
We are the leaders and the other retailers follow what'we do. That is life. That is
competition. We sell the most beautiful eyewear in the world and we' pride ourselves on
that.
We believe the condition was put on our C.U.P. because the Planning Commission was
concerned about too many sunglass stores. After five years in business we have a track
record that will show our primary business is in high quality, original frames. Virtually
all of the lenses have a combination of tinting or coatings to meet the customer's
specifications.
If the current underlined wording is to remain the Planning Commission will need to
determine which store has acquired a particular product line first to determine who will
be allowed to cany it. Our preference would be to simply remove the wording and allow
any store to carry what they believe their customers want to purchase.
Section 2, item 11: "A maximum of 20% of the displayed evewear merchandise ma$ be
sunalasses." Technology has changed the eyewear industry over five years to great
heights. Fashion has also played a huge factor in today's market. Today it is cool and hip
to wear glasses. At Emporio Optic we do not just sell clear glasses or sunglasses, this
would limit our business and not allow us to sell in other categories to the customer.
Fashion tints are a huge part of our business today. Our clients want glasses for evening
events, daytime looks, movie premieres, etc. Tints are a wardrobe and makeup addition,
we do not sell them to block the sun. Emporio Optic is a fashion house, we need to
evolve as the trends do. In order to sell the wide variety of tints and treatments in today's
market, we must display them properly to better communicate to our customers.
Over $77,000 has been spent on designing and building our display cases. Many of the
" h e - l e s s " lenses and lightweight frames do not display well when they are colorless.
They also do not carry the same appeal to the purchaser.
The City's Zoning Code Enforcement Officer seems to have a difficulty in differentiating
between tinted glasses and sunglasses. Based upon the above, we would ask that you
change the percentage, re-define sunglasses and tinted glasses, or remove the condition.
.
Section 2, item 12: "The applicant shall install and maintain all onsite lens
manufacturine:equipment that is necessary to provide same dav service
- --for ~rescri~tion
lenses." We do meet this condition, however the Zoning Code Enforcement Officer has
determined that the condition must apply to ALL frames and lenses sold. When we have
a customer who has lost or broken their glasses we can replace single prescription lenses
the same day. If the request for tinting and coating then more time is requires. This is
simply part of the complexity in creating the modem pair of eyeglasses. We ask that you
consider "same day emergency service for most prescription lenses."
Section 2. item 13: "E3usiness hours shall include eveninn and weekend hours and shall
be maintained fiom 10 A.M. to 9 P.M.Monday through Saturday, and fiom 11 A.M. d&
P.M. on Sundav." While this i s exactly what we had put in ourariginal application, it &&
probably naive of us to think that it meant that on a warm Sunday afternoon we would
have to lock our door and turn customers away because we were not permitted to remain
open an hour longer. We also failed to include Hospitality Night, special Christmas
hours, and that summer and winter shopping are very d i f f m t , unless we have an Indian
summer, heavy rains, etc. etc.
Attached is a schedule for "normal" store hours. We request, however, that there be some
flexibility built in. If there is a convention at the Surf & Sand or the Montage, do you
want us to close up on schedule, or stay open on a balmy evening with lots of potential
customers with money to spend walking around downtown waiting for their reservation
at Five Feet?
In conclusion, we opened our location in fall 1998 and our business has increased over
100% in troubled economic times. We enjoy being a part of the Laguna Beach
community and look forward to increasing to the growth of the city.
We will be calling each of you to invite you to our store to see the issues first hand and to
answer any questions you may have. In the meantime, if you have any questions please
feel fi-ee to contact Lany at 949-290-4603 or Michelle at 949-290-4606.
' ~ e d s
C 'ef Executive Officer
Michelle Arena
General Manager
-
\
Emporio Optic
Normal Hours of Operation
September through March
Sunday through Thursday
Friday and Saturday
1Oam - 6pm
loam - 9pm
April through August
Sunday through Thursday
Friday and Saturday
1Oam - 7pm
loam- lOpm
Some Exceptions:
Summer hours may be continued through Labor Day weekend.
Early spring "Indian Summer" weather may require longer days.
Easter week may require an extension of hours on weekdays depending on weather and
crowds.
Special events that may require extending evening hours, e.g. First T h u ~ d a ~ ,
Hospitality Night (for Santa Claus), special events or conventions.
DOWNTOWN BUSINESSES WITH PRIMARY OPTICAL SALES
1. Drs. Cler and Cook
2. Dr. Hartley - Laguna Visions
3. Eye to Eye Boutique
4. Sunglasses Gallery
265 Laguna Avenue
330 Park Avenue
384 Forest Avenue
205 Ocean Avenue
DOWNTOWN BUSINESSES WITH ANCILLARY SUNGLASSES SALES
1. Boardriders Club
Bushard's Pharmacy
Hobie Sports
Fresh Produce
Things & Carats
Sutton Place (Peppertree Lane)
7. lvee Boutique
8. Chantel Beauty
9. Big Dog
10. Ropage
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
255 Forest Avenue
244 Forest Avenue
292-294 Forest Avenue
240 Forest Avenue
Park Avenue/South Coast Highway
244 Coast Highway
222 Ocean Avenue
435 Ocean Avenue
ClTY OF LAGUNA BEACH
ClTY CLERK
505 FOREST AVENUE
LAGUNA BEACH, CA 92651
OF THE ClTY OF LAGUNA BEACH
APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 04-02
(AMENDING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 98-03)
WHEREAS, an application has been filed by the tenant of property located at 263 Forest
Avenue requesting a Conditional Use Permit to amend CUP 98-03 in accordance with the
provisions of Municipal Code Section 25.05.030 for retail sales of designer frames, prescription
lenses and sunglasses, and a lens manufacturing service in accordance with provisions of the
Municipal Code ;
hearing regarding this proposal on January 28,2004;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission carefblly considered the oral and documentary
evidence and arguments presented at the hearing;
WHEREAS, the proposed project is exempt h m the provisions of the California
Environmental Quality Act; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has made the following findings:
1. The site is adequate to accommodate the use without adverse impact on abutting property or on
January 28,2004
Page 2
parking or traffic circulation in the downtown area in that parking is legal, nonconforming with no
intensification of use proposed.
2. The proposed use will maintain a balanced mix of uses that serves the needs of both local and
non-local populations in that the use offers merchandise to both residents and visitors.
3. The granting of the Conditional Use Permit will not produce an incremental effect of similar
uses that would be detrimental to the City in that the use is a specialized optical shop with an onsite
lens manufacturing service and merchandise not available in other optical shops and contniutes to
the diversity of uses in the central business area.
4. The proposed use is consistent with the intent and purpose of the District, in which it is
located, and the goals and policies of the Downtown Specific Plan and the City's General Plan in
that the optical shop will provide optical merchandise and services that are otherwise not
available in the downtown.
5. The Conditions stated in the decision are necessary to protect the public health, safety and
general welfare to assure continued land-use compatibility.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that Conditional Use Permit 04-02 is hereby
granted to the following extent:
Approval for retail sale of designer frames, prescription lenses and sunglasses, and a lens
manufacturing service.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the following condition(s) are set forth to protect the
health, safety and welfare of the community and to assure the intent and purpose of the regulations:
1. The Conditional Use Pennit shall be subject to review if written complaints are received, and
January 28,2004
Page 3
shall be subject to administrative review one (1) year after issuance of the certificate of use to
determine if the approved conditions of approval are in compliance. These reviews may result in a
formal noticed public hearing before the Planning Commission. After the public hearing on the
matter, the Planning Commission may require immediate condition compliance, amend the
conditions of approval or proceed with revocation of the Conditional Use Permit as specified in
Municipal Code Section 25.05.075.
2. It is understood that the conditions of approval apply herein to any future owners or lessees
operating under this Conditional Use Permit. This means in legal terms that the conditions of
approval for the Conditional Use Permit shall be and hereby are obligations of and binding upon the
applicant and histher heirs, successors, assigns, agents and representatives. The conditions shall
constitute a covenant running with and binding the land in accordance with the provisions of
-
California Civil Code Section 1468. Failure to comply with such conditions, and each of them, and
any other related federal, state and local regulations may be grounds for revocation of the
Conditional Use Permit, in addition to other remedies that may be available to the City.
approval by the Planning Commission has been obtained.
4. This Conditional Use Pennit shall lapse and automatically become void two years following the
effective date unless: a) the privileges authorized are established, or b) a building permit is issued
and construction is begun and diligently pursued to completion; or c) an extension of time is granted
pursuant to Municipal Code Section 25.05.030 (I).
5. In the absence of specific provisions or conditions herein to the contrary, the application and all
January 28,2004
Page 4
plans or exhibits attached to the application are relied upon, incorporated and made a part of this
resolution. It is required that such plans or exhibits be complied with and implemented in a
consistent manner with the approved use and other conditions of approval. Such plans and exhibits
for which this Conditional Use Permit has been granted shall not be changed or amended except
pursuant to a subsequent Conditional Use Permit or Variance as might otherwise be required or
granted pursuant to the terms of Title 25 of thecity of Laguna Beach Municipal Code.
6. The business or use shall not open, inaugurate or commence untiI after the City has issued a
Certificate of Use and Occupancy; and such Certificate shall not be issued until after City staff has
verified compliance with all applicable conditions of approval.
7. If the use authorized under this Resolution and Conditional Use Pennit is abandoned or
terminated for any reason for a period of at least one year, the Conditional Use Permit shall
automatically expire and become void.
8. No additions or enlargements of structures upon property for which this Conditional Use Permit
has been granted shall be allowed except pursuant to a subsequent Conditional Use Pennit or
Variance as might otherwise be required or granted pursuant to the terms of Title 25 of the City of
Laguna Beach Municipal Code.
amendment to this Conditional Use P m i t . Application for such an amendment may only be
accepted for processing, if outdoor display and/or outside seating are permitted use(s) in the
applicable zoning district.
*
January 28,2004
Page 5
11. A City business license shall be obtained prior to the operation of any business use permitted by
this Conditional Use Permit.
12. No proposed change or modification to the specifically permitted use of retail sales of design
frames, prescription lenses and sunglasses, and lens manufacturing service shall be allowed except
pursuant to a subsequent or amended Conditional Use Permit granted pursuant to the terms of Title
25 of the City of Laguna Beach Municipal Code.
13. The applicant shall not allow, act, cause or permit any lessee, agent, employee, exhibitor or
concessionaire any "prohibited discharge" (as defined in Municipal Code Section 16.01.020) into
the City's stom water drainage system.
14. At least 60% of the eyewear merchandise displayed at the Laguna Beach location shall be
designed, produced and distributed by the applicant.
15. A maximum of 20% of the displayed eyewear may be sunglasses.
16. The applicant shall install and maintain all onsite lens manufacturing equipment that is
necessary to provide same day service for prescription lenses.
17. The hours of operation shall be limited to 10 AM through 9 PM Sunday through Thursday, and
10 AM through 10 PM Friday and Saturday.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the above decision was rendered on January
28,2004.
ADOPTED this 28th day of January, 2004.
AYES:
Cornmissioner(s)
NOES:
Commissioner(s)
January 28,2004
Page 6
ABSENT:
Cornmissioner(s)
AT-TEST:
Chairperson, Planning Commission
City of Laguna Beach, California
Director/Comunity Development
4.
Conditional Use Permit 04-02 to amend conditions of approval for a retail eyewear store at
263 Forest Avenue. As proposed, Conditions #lo, 11,12 and 13 of the previously approved
Conditional Use Permit 98-03, relating to exclusivity of the eyewear, display of sunglasses or
tinted lenses, and onsite lens manufacturing, are requested to be modified or eliminated.
John Montgomery summarized the staff report.
Public Testimony in Support of the Project: Lany Sands, owner of Emporio Optic and
resident of Laguna Beach, said that his store is an optical dispensary that is governed by the
medical board for filling prescriptions for eyeglasses. He said they are not a sunglass shop, but
sell prescription sunglasses; very few are non-prescription sunglasses. He is asking to change
the Conditional Use Permit to allow more flexibility than the percentage of sunglasses listed in
the conditions. He said they make glasses, tints and dark sunglasses for people who have had
laser surgery and that everythmg is manufactured by him and exclusive to the store. He said that
some of his exclusive items have ultimately appeared in other stores. They only carry about five
lines.
1
In response to Commissioner Johnson Mr. Sands stated that 60% of the exclusive eyewear are
fiarnes that he designs and the other 40% are exclusive lines that are not designed by him. He
said there are only two licensed opticians in the downtown.
Commissioner Dietrich confirmed that all of the tinted lenses could be made into prescription
lenses as well. Mr. Sands stated that every one is a prescription fi-ame that could have a
prescription put in.
Commissioner Johnson confirmed that every fi-ame that is designed could be made into
prescription lenses.
Commissioner Grossman confirmed that 60% of the fi-ames are designed by the store owner and
they are also produced and distributed by him. Commissioner Grossman wanted to lcnow the
difference between the definition of tinted glasses and sunglasses. would be that sunglasses are
polarized. Mr. Sands stated that a possible distinction would be if the customer can see at night
through the glasses. Sunglasses would have a W coat andlor be polarized to give 100%
protection; most fashion tints do not. Commissioner Grossman wanted to know the applicant's
rationale in increasing the percentage of sunglasses. Mr. Sands said that he has an obligation to
tell people who get prescription glasses that sunglasses are also available.
In response to Commissioner Zur Schmiede, Mr. Sands stated that any customer could come into
the store without a prescription and purchase sunglasses and tinted glasses and that he keeps a
stock of tinted lenses. He could also make up a pair in another color in one hour if the customer
wanted them.
Roger Toniero was in support of the applicant's request. The lasik surgery for his eyes failed
and he is now required to wear glasses. He has become vain about getting fashionable glasses,
including tinted fashion glasses that he would not consider to be sunglasses. He illustrated the
range of products provided by the applicant that he uses. He is a resident in town and also has a
business in town. He believes in supporting the community.
PC Minutes
3
January 28,2004
Peter Freeman, resident in town, was in support of the application. He is a customer of the shop
and is pleased with the selection of optical lenses in sunglasses form as well as reading and
visual glasses.
Diane Debilsen, who has a gallery in town, thinks the store is beautiful and she was in support of
the application.
Michele Arena, who works at the applicant's store, distributed letters in support of the
application, including two fiom eyeglass stores that are now in support of the applicant. She
reviewed the applicant's request to change the percentage of sunglasses and other issues as
outlined by Mr. Sands.
Matt Winters, who works at the store, stated that he takes care of the ophthalmic prescriptions.
He said that the difference between tinted glasses and sunglasses is very hard to describe. They
offer services to fill prescriptions and he takes it very seriously. In response to Commissioner
Grossman's question to define the difference between tinted glasses and sunglasses, Mr. Winters
stated that it would be based on what the prescription is written for.
Commissioner Johnson clarified that a customer doesn't need a prescription to purchase
sunglasses.
Vicki Davis, CPA for the applicant's store, stated that over 75% of the lenses sales are
prescription; 50% of the sales are to residents or nearby communities. The applicant has been in
business for five years and the sales have increased 100%. She said that that he supports the
community in numerous ways.
Mark Thompson stated that he is a resident and has been a customer since the applicant opened
for business; he has filled all of his prescription needs at the applicant's store and has purchased
and uses different types of lenses fi-om the applicant.
Public Testimony in Opposition to the Project: Ajrharjib Bagga said that he is a resident in
Laguna Beach and has a sunglass store in town. He distributed a letter to the Planning
Commission stating his objection to the proposal. He doesn't think the applicant's lines are
exclusive and that the definition of sunglasses is wrong. The difference between eyeglasses and
sunglasses is that eyeglasses are specifically designed for a prescription fkom an eye doctor.
Eyeglasses are nontaxable and prescription sunglasses can be nontaxable. Any glasses with tint
that are considered sunglasses, and are ready to wear, are all taxable. He said that eyeglasses
fiarnes have a designer logo in the kame and that any glasses with tint are considered sunglasses.
He distributed a list that itemized the lines that he carries that are the same as applicant's lines.
He thinks that the applicant should carry 80% eyeglasses fi-ames. He said that the applicant does
not have a manufacturing lab and can only cut the lenses to the point of "edging" and would have
to special order the lenses fiom a manufacturing lab. He said that the lightly tinted glasses would
not work for people who have had lasik surgery, in contrast to what the applicant stated, because
the eyes are very sensitive after such surgery. He said that the applicant started displaying more
sunglasses than eyeglasses fiom the first day that they opened business. He noted that the
applicant has over 500 sunglasses and only 250 eyeglass fiames displayed; they have 80%
sunglasses and it should be the other way around. The applicant is also selling watches. He
b Minutes
urged the Planning Commission to make the applicant comply with the original Conditional Use
Permit.
Brett Blackburn said that he works for the Sunglass Gallery. He thinks that the applicant is
trying to blur the line of the difference between sunglasses and eyeglasses. He said that
sunglasses are ready to wear off the shelf, and a lot of the applicant's merchandise is ready to
wear.
Peter Wall said that he works for the Sunglass Gallery and he thinks that the applicant should
follow through with what they were originally approved to sell. He urged the Planning
Commission to deny the application.
Rebuttal: Lany Sands stated that technology has changed where prescriptions can be stocked
and finished in the store for the customer. He said that the light tints are obviously not
sunglasses, and the very dark glasses are sunglasses.
Commissioners' Comments: Commissioner Zur Schmiede thought that the issue to be decided
is what constitutes sunglasses, because the original Conditional Use Permit was in place to
control the sale of sunglasses and the ready to wear aspect of the merchandise. He had no
problem with a limit of the sale of sunglasses. He thought that if they were allowed a maximum
of 20% of non-prescription eyewear, it would be easy to determine.
Commissioner Grossman thought that the issue was the display of eyewear.
Commissioner Zur Schmiede had no problem with the display being a wide range. He thought
that the concern should be what percentage of sales is ready to wear sunglasses. He had no
problem with the requested hours of operation. Regarding an exclusivity percentage, he agreed
with the applicant's comment about procuring an exclusive line and then it is carried elsewhere
and is no longer exclusive. Regarding Condition #16, he agreed with the applicant's proposal.
He thought that the applicant should have the capacity to do some of the fabrication on the
premises, but had no problem with some of the work being sent out.
Commissioner Johnson agreed that, if a simple grinding of the lenses were required, the
applicant should do it on the premises in an hour, but more complex prescriptions would be more
difficult and would need to be sent out.
Commissioner Grossman thought that Condition #16 should state that "a 'majority' of the
prescription lenses shall be manufactured on site." After further discussion regarding Condition
#16, the Commissioners were in agreement with Commissioner Grossman.
Commissioner Dietrich agreed that there should be some kind of distinction between sunglasses
and tinted eyeglasses. She thought that tinted glasses are mostly prescription lenses.
I
Commissioner Grossman thought that the prescription lenses could be any percent and that they
could &lany amount of the sunglasses, but there should be a limit on what is being dimlaved.
He didn't think it mattered how many sunglasses they sell as long as it doesn't look like a
sunglasses store.
January 28,2004
Minutes
.
rYUiar7 r
Commissioner Johnson agreed that the display window shows all sunglasses and she wanted a
condition in the Conditional Use Permit that would limit the amount of sunglasses being
displayed.
Commissioner Zur Schmiede said that he had no problem with limiting the display of sunglasses
to 20%, but he thought the Council wanted to be sure that the optical store was only selling a
small percentage of sunglasses. He thought that Condition #15 should state that a maximum of
20% of eyewear sold may be sunglasses.
Commissioner Grossman would define sunglasses and limit the display of sunglasses to 20%.
He thought it should be clear that it is an optical store and not a sunglasses store and that the
Commission needs to define the difference.
Commissioner Dietrich agreed that there should be a distinction between sunglasses and
eyeglasses.
After discussion, a majority of the Commission was in agreement that sunglasses would be
defined as UV coated and/or polarized and to revise Condition #16 to state "a majority of the
prescription lenses" and Condition #15 to state "a maximum of 20% of displayed eyewear.. ."
Commissioner Johnson wanted an additional condition that the window display shall reflect
Conditions #14 and #15.
Second JJJ Action Approve Conditional Use Permit 04-02. subject to conditions
Motion
as amended bv the Commission. Motion carried 3-1.
Vote: Zur Schmiede N Grossman Y Chapman Absent Dietrich Y Johnson Y
-
5.
General Plan Amendment 03-02 - An update of the Noise Element of the General Plan that
includes an inventory of existing noise sources, projections of future noise levels, and goals,
policies and implementation actions for controlling noise within the City.
Ann Larson summarized the staff report. She noted that Vince Mestre, with Mestre, Greve
Associates, would be making a presentation regarding the role of the Noise Element, the Noise
Ordinance, preemption and local noise control.
Questions of Staff: In response to Commission Grossman, Vince Mestre stated that the usual
inconsistencies with the Noise Ordinance, after revising the Noise Element, would be with other
Elements of the General Plan and not the Noise Element. He said that the differences between a
noise element and a noise ordinance is that an element is part of a general plan used to guide land
use decisions and set overall goals for the city, while an ordinance sets noise limits for citywide
application, which applies to noise sources that are not preempted by federal or state regulations.
With respect to general plan requirements, he noted that each agency is required to prepare a
long-term general plan. A noise element shall identify and appraise noise problems in the
community, and shall analyze and quantify current and projected noise levels for sample sources
such as: 1) highways; 2) primary arterials and major local streets; 3) passenger and fieight online railroads; and 4) military installations. Preemption issues would be when federal regulations
tnunp state and local regulations. He noted that aircraft are under the control of the federal
PC Minutes
January 2
AGENDA BILL
No.
Meeting Date:
SUBJECT:
c2-&L
3/16/04
APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT 04-02 TO AMEND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR A RETAIL
EYEWEAR STORE AT 263 FOREST AVENUE
SUMMARY OF THE MATTER: In 1998, a Conditional Use Permit 98-03 to allow retail sales of
eyewear was approved by the City Council. The Council required 60% of the merchandise to be
designed, manufactured and distributed only at the project site, 40% of the merchandise to be from
sources that are exclusive to the applicant, and verification of sales records. Additional conditions
required onsite lens manufacturing equipment and weekend hours.
On January 28,2004, the Planning Commission considered a request fi-om the applicant to amend several
conditions of approval. After the public testimony, the Commission decided to modify the conditions.
The modifications, as indicated by either a strikethrough or by underlining, read as follows:
#14. At least 60% of the eyewear merchandise display at the Laguna Beach location shall be designed,
..
0
produced and distributed by the applicant.
..
..
(Condition #10 under Conditional Use Permit 98-
03)
#15. A maximum of 20% of the displayed eyewear merchandise may be sunglasses, defined as evewear
which has UV coating andlor is ~olarizei3;-.-windowdisday shall contain no more than 20% sundasses,
as defined above. (Condition #11 under conditional Use Permit 98-03).
#16. The applicant shall install and maintain all onsite lens manufacturing equipment that is necessary to
provide same day service for a maioritv of prescription lenses. (Condition #12 under Conditional Use
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the City Council:
Adopt the Resolution denying the appeal and upholding the Planning Commission approval of
Fund:
Attachments: Appeal; 1/28/04 PC Minutes;
1/28/04 PC Staff Report; 1/28/98 CC Minutes; Letters
from HariitBagga; Resolution
Approved:
-.
054
March 16,2004
Page 2
Permit 98-03).
. .
#17. The hours of operation shall
. + , <a D* . .
be limited to 10 A.M.
through 9 P.M. Sunday through Thursdav. and 10 A.M. through 10 P.M. Friday and Saturday. (Condition
#13 under Conditional Use Permit 98-03).
11 A
I
'&.
Lw
An appeal has been filed by the applicant regarding the modification of Condition #16. The applicant
states that many prescription glasses require a week or longer to produce due to coating and tinting
processes. The applicant suggests the following language for Condition #16.
#16. The applicant shall ii&dhd maintain all
. .
. .
equipment onsite-&&&
to produce many prescri~tions
in the same dav for emergencies or if requested bv the patient.
Condition #16 was discussed at length by the Planning Commission. The Commission felt that the
applicant should be able to fabricate lens onsite, but should also be able to send out the more complex
lens work. In fact, the original approval for the eyewear store included specific direction fiom Council to
require onsite lens manufacturing. The modification requested by the applicant is very broad and not
consistent with the intent of the Planning Commission approval.
The attachments include letters fiom Harjit Bagga, owner of the Sunglass Gallery, who opposes
22.
GRANTED APPEAL OF APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 04-02 TO
AMEND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR A RETAIL EYEWEAR STORE AT 263
FOREST AVENUE WITH MODIFIED CONDITIONS (43)
Mayor Kinsman recused herself due to conflict of interest.
Director of Community Development Montgomery said that the Council approved a CUP on
appeal in 1998 to allow retail sale of eyewear and placed several conditions on the
approval. In January 2004 the owner of the store applied to amend four of the conditions.
The Planning Commission amended all of the conditions proposed to be amended, but the
applicant appealed Condition #16 whch specified that he install and maintain all onsite
lens manufacturing equipment necessary to provide same day service for (a majority of)
prescription lenses. The applicant was concerned because the condition included a same
day turnaround and prescription glasses may now take a week or more because of coating
and tinting processes that take place off site. Montgomery said there was strong
opposition fi-om sunglass stores in the downtown.
Public Testimony: Larry Sands, applicant, said he operated a prescription pharmacy that
was licensed by the state medical board and he employed licensed opticians. He protested
that his establishment was not a sunglass shop. Sands said that 68% of prescription
glasses used to be produced on site, but with changes in technology and the development
of thinner, high index prescription lenses, less than 37% can now be produced on site
with the same equipment. Whereas once a prescription lens could be produced in about
an hour, it can now take four days to a week. He noted that Lens Crafiers, which once
advertised one-hour service, now takes up to three weeks. Sands said he was asking for
the amendment to conditions because so much had changed in the past five years. He
asked that the word majority be stricken from Condition #16.
Councilmember Dicterow commented that he imagined one reason the Planning
Commission wanted same day service was to insure the glasses were produced on site.
He asked what had changed. Sands said that the lenses could still be made on site, but he
had to send some glasses out for coatings and it took longer than a day.
Peter Freeman said it was not possible to produce his high index, anti-reflective coated,
progressive lens glasses on a same day turnaround. He noted that it takes about a week at
Emporio Optic, but it can take two to three weeks at Lens Grafters. He said that simple
sunglasses could be produced in a matter of hours without the coatings. He supported the
appeal.
Jerry Thornhill explained how technology had made the process more complex.
Keith Wisbalm said the applicant provided a good quality product and good sewice. He
wanted to shop locally.
Scott Sanders, attorney representing the owner of Sunglass Gallery, said his client filed an
objection in October that the applicant was not adhering to the CUP conditions, and code
enforcement had found four violations. Sanders maintained that it was not possible to make a
living selling prescription glasses on Forest Avenue. He said that 40% of the merchandise
was supposed to be exclusive, yet three other stores sell virtually the same stock.
Brad Charlton said the applicant was presenting h s store as an optical establishment, but
it was actually a sunglass store.
March 16,
Peter Wall said that at the Planning Commission meeting, the applicant was given more
time to make his case than the opposition. He also said his remarks had been
misrepresented in the record. He charged that the applicant was receiving positive
reinforcement for negative behavior. He asked that the CUP be denied altogether.
Harjit Bagga said that the intention of Emporio Optic five years ago was just to get into
the City. He noted that the applicant also had an optical shop in Newport Beach. Bagga
did not think the stock had been checked. He thought the 98-03 conditions should apply.
Amanda Prader said the issue was not so much about the optical end as it was about
noncompliance with the CUP which stated that a certain percentage was to be sunglasses
and a certain percentage optical. She said the sunglasses were wall-to-wall, whereas the
only optical glasses were the ones at the counter. She felt that the competition was unfair
and damaging to Sunglass Gallery.
Brett Blackburn said the issue was not how fast Emporio Optic could make glasses but
that they cany sunglasses almost exclusively.
Rebuttal: Sands said he agreed with the Planning Commission action except for the
word majority in Condition #16, as it was impossible for him to know what prescriptions
they would fill each week. He said the mix of merchandise was the same as in all his
stores. He distinguished between fashion tints and sunglasses.
Councilmember Comments: Councilmember Iseman said she had spent the better part
of an hour in the store before she was aware of the controversy. She saw a very
substantial selection of glasses that were not sunglasses and she did not feel she was in a
sunglass store. She said the patrons she observed were interested in trying on frames for
prescription lenses, not looking for sunglasses. She agreed that with the contemporary
standards for eyeglasses, much of the work could not be done on site. She supported the
applicant's suggestion.
Councilmember Dicterow largely agreed. He did not think the matter of competition was
relevant and in fact, he thought competition should be promoted. He said that what the
Council was trying to achieve in 1998 was a sense of uniqueness and add to the diversity
of the downtown area. He wanted to keep the requirement for same day service for single
prescription lenses in Condition 16, because he thought the applicant should do as much
manufacturing on site as possible. He could support the other conditions. His concern
was in monitoring and enforcement of the 60% of merchandise that was supposed to be
unique to the store.
Sands said the store was primarily an outlet for his own product. He could only be
exclusive with new products as long as someone else did not order it.
In response to Councilmember Baglin, Montgomery said the Code Enforcement Officer
found it very difficult to walk into a store and determine whether 60% of eyewear
displayed was designed, produced and distributed by the applicant.
Councilmember Iseman suggested that since the applicant realized his business was
dependent on being special, he would find it to his benefit to maintain his exclusive
eyewear.
The Council discussed the conditions of approval. Councilmember Baglin suggested
support for Conditions 14, 15, and 17 as approved by the Planning Commission,
ii
modification of 16 using the applicant's wording and monitoring so that everyone felt
comfortable that the conditions were being adhered to.
Moved by Councilmember Baghn, seconded by Councilmember Dicterow and camed
unanimously 410 to adopt Resolution No.04.022 entitled, "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, SUSTAINTNG THE
APPEAL AND MODIFYING THE PLANNING COMMLSSION APPROVAL OF
CONDITIONAL USE P E R h a 04-02 WHICH MODIFlES CONDITIONAL USE PERMlT
98-03."
There being no finther business, Mayor Kinsman adjourned the meeting Tuesday, March 16,
2004, at 11:24 p.m. to Tuesday, March 23, 2004, at 6:00 p.m. at City Hall, 505 Forest Avenue,
Laguna Beach, California.
City Clerk
Approved April 6,2003
Cheryl Kinsman, Mayor
March 16. 2004
Recorded in Official Records, Orange County
Tom Daly, Clerk-Recorder
Y
l llllll~l~\~\llll~ll~~~lllllll\~\l~ll~
llY11lYNO FEE
2004000386941 01:22pm 05/04/04
CITY CLERK
505 FOREST AVENUE
LAGUNA BEACH, CA 9265 1
107 23 ~ 2 8
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
I
TW SPACE RESERVED FOR RECORDING
RESOLUTION NO. 04.022
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAGUNA
BEACH, CALIFORNIA SUSTAINING THE APPEAL AND MODIFYING
THE PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT 04-02 WHICH MODIFIES CONDITIONAL USE PEFWIT 98-03.
g<!
lJ
I
in
WHEREAS, an application was filed by the tenant of property located at 263 Forest
Avenue requesting a Conditional Use Permit to amend Conditional Use Permit 98-03
accordance with the provisions of Municipal Code Section 25.05.030, which allows the retail
sale of designer fi-arnes, prescription lenses and sunglasses, and a lens manufacturing service;
and
WHEREAS, on January 28, 2004, the Planning Commission conducted a legally
I
I
I
I
I
noticed public hearing and, after reviewing all documents and testimony, voted to approve
Conditional Use Permit 04-02, subject to conditions; and
I
WHEREAS, on March 16,2004, the City Council conducted a legally noticed public
hearing of the appeal of the Planning Commission approval of January 28,2004; and
.
- .
I
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Laguna Beach considered 'all of the
evidence and arguments presented in support of and in opposition to the application;
WHEREAS, the proposed project is exempt fi-om the provisions of the California
I
Environmental ~ u a i t Act
y it1 accordance with Section 1530 1; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has made the following findings:
I
-
Cbnditional Use Permit 04-02
March 16,'2004
Page 2
11
2
11
4
1.
The site is adequate to accommodate the use without adverse impact on' abutting property
or on parking or traffic circulation in the downtown area in that parlung is legal,
a
I(
nonconforming with no intensification of use proposed.
5
2. The proposed use will maintain a balanced mix of uses that serves the needs of both local'
6
7
and non-local populations in that the use offers merchandise to both residents and visitors.
8
3.
91 1
10
The granting of the Conditional Use Permit will not produce an incremental effect of
similar uses that would be detrimental to the City in that the use is a specialized optical shop
1
with an onsite lens manufacturing service and merchandise is not available in other optical
11
12
131
shops and the use contributes to the diversity of uses in the central business area.
I1
141
15
11
4. The proposed use is consistent with the intent and purpose of the District, in which it is
located, and the goals and policies of the Downtown Specific Plan and the City's General
Plan in that the optical shop will provide optical merchandise and services that are otherwise
141
not available in the downtown.
l7
5. The Conditions stated in the decision are necessary to protect the public health, safety and
11
II
I
18
general welfare to assure continued land-use compatibility.
19
201
221
23)
24
1
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH
does RESOLVE and ORDER that Conditional Use Permit 04-02 is hereby granted to the
(
following extent:
1
Approval for retail sale of designer fiames, prescription lenses and sunglasses, and a lens
11
manufacturing service.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the following condition(s) are set forth to protect
271
(
I
281 1
the health, safety and welfare of the community and to assure the intent and purpose of the
regulations :
I
I
I
I
March 16,'2004
Page 3
1. The Conditional Use Permit shall be subject to review if written complaints are received,
and shall be subject to administrative review one (1) year after issuance of the certificate of
use to determine if the approved conditions of approval are in compliance. These reviews
may result in a formal noticed public hearing before the Planning Cbmmission. After the'
public hearing on the matter, the Planning Commission may require immediate condition
compliance, amend theconditions of approval or proceed with revocation of the Conditional
Use Permit as specified in Municipal Code Section 25.05.075.
2. It is understood that the conditions of approval apply herein to any future owners or lessees
operating under this Conditional Use Permit. This means in legal terms that the conditions of
approval for the Conditional Use Permit shall be and hereby are obligations of and binding
upon the applicant and hisfher heirs, successors, assigns, agents and representatives. The
conditions shall constitute a covenant running with and binding the land in accordance with the
provisions of California Civil Code Section 1468. Failure to comply with such conditions,
and each of them, and any other related federal, state and local regulations may be grounds
for revocation of the Conditional Use Permit, in addition to other remedies that may be
available to the City.
approval by the Planning Commission has been obtained.
4.
This Conditional Use Permit shall lapse and automatically become void two years
following the effective date unless: a) the privileges authorized are established; or b) a
building permit is issued and construction is begun and diligently pursued to completion; or c)
an extension of time is granted pursuant to Municipal Code Section 25.05.030 (I).
I
March 16,2004
Page 4
5. This Conditional Use Permit shall not become effective until the owner of the subject
property has signed an affidavit in the form attached to this Resolution, whereby the property
owner acknowledges and consents to the imposition of the conditions set forth in this
Resolution, and agrees that such conditions shall constitute restrictions running with the land
I
I
and shall be binding upon the property owner and their heirs, successors and assigns. If the
applicant is different than the owner o'f the subject property, then this Conditional Use Permit
I
I
shall also not become effective until the applicant has signed an affidavit in the form attached
I
to this Resolution, whereby the applicant acknowledges and consents to the imposition of the
conditions set forth in this Resolution, and agrees that such conditions shall be binding upon
I
I
the applicant and their heirs, successors and assigns.
6. In the absence of specific provisions or conditions herein to the contrary, the application
and all plans or exhibits attached to the application are relied upon, incorporated and made a
I
I
part of this resolution. It is required that such plans or exhibits be complied with and
implemented in a consistent manner with the approved use and other conditions of approval.
Such plans and exhibits for which this Conditional Use Pennit has been granted shall not be
changed or amended except pursuant to a subsequent Conditional Use Permit or Variance ai
might otherwise be required or granted pursuant to the terms of Title 25 of the City of Laguna
I
Beach Municipal Code.
7. The business or use shall not open, inaugurate or commence until after the City has issued
a Certificate of Use and Occupancy; and such Certificate shall not be issued until after City
staff has verified compliance with all applicable conditions of approval.
I
March 16,2004
Page 5
8. If the use authorized under this Resolution .and.Conditional Use Permit is abandoned or
terminated for any reason for a period of at least one year, the Conditional Use Permit shall
automatically expire and become void.
9. No additions or enlargements of structures upon property for which this Conditional Use
Permit has been granted shall be allowed except pursuant to a subsequent Conditional Use
Permit or Variance as might otherwise be required or granted pursuant to the terms of Title 25
of the City of Laguna Beach Municipal Code.
amendment to this Conditional Use Permit. Application for such an amendment may only be
accepted for processing, if outdoor display and/or outside seating are permitted use(s) in the
applicable zoning district.
12. A City business license shall be obtained prior to the operation of any business use
permitted by this Conditional Use Permit,
13. No proposed change or modification to the specifically permitted use of retail sales ol
design frames, prescription lenses and sunglasses, and lens manufacturing service shall be
allowed except pursuant to a subsequent or amended Conditional Use Permit granted pursuanl
to the terms of Title 25 of the City of Laguna Beach Municipal Code.
14. The applicant shall not allow, act, cause or permit any lessee, agent, employee, exhibit01
or concessionaire any "prohibited discharge" (as defined in Municipal Code Sectio~
16.01.020) into the City's storm water drainage system.
15. At least 60% of the eyewear merchandise displayed at the Laguna Beach location shall bc
designed, produced and distributed by the applicant.
Conditional ~ss'Permit04-02
March 16,2004
Page 6
16. A maximum of 20% of all displayed eyewear may be sunglasses, defined as eyewear
which has W coating andlor is polarized. Window display shall contain no more than 20%
sunglasses, as defined above.
17. The applicant shall maintain all equipment on-site to produce many prescriptions on the
*
same day for emergencies or if requested by the patient.
18. The hours of operation shall be limited to 10 AM through 9 PM Sunday through
Thursday, and 10 AM through 10 PM Friday and Saturday.
1
c
ADOPTED this 16" day of March, 2004.
Cheryl
ATTEST:
nsman, Mayor
I, VERNA L. ROLLMGER, City Clerk of the City of Laguna Beach, California, do
hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 04.022 was duly adopted at a Regular
Meeting of the City Council of said City held on March 16,2004 by the following vote:
AYES:
COUNCILMEMBER(S): Dicterow, Baglin, Iseman, Pearson
NOES
ABSENT
COUNCILME
City Clerk of the City of Laguna Be&
CA
Survey of Shops Carrying Sunglasses
Shop
1 Sunglasses
Sunnlass Hut
l ~ e n e and
s Women's
Stores selling
Hobie
Menes and Women's
more than 100 Cook and Cler
Menes and Women's
pairs of high
Dr. Harrison
Menes and Women's
end sunglasses Eye to Eye Boutique Menes and Women's
Toes on the Nose
Menes and Women's
Boardriders
Menes and Women's
Anciliary
Coast Hardware
Menes and Women's
Sunglasses Sales Laguna Toys
Menes, Women's, Kids
Lanuna T-shirt
Menes and Women's
Village Mart
Menes and Women's
Suttons Place
Women's
Satisfy my Soul
Menes and Women's
Things and Carats
Menes and Women's
l~aaunaBooks
l ~ e n e and
s Women's
Bubbles
Menes and Women's
Mobil Mart
Menes and Women's
Bambini
Kids
Main Beach Outlet
Women's
Chantel
Menes and Women's
l~uchards
l ~ e n e and
s Women's
Women's
Diane's
Laguna Drug
Menes and Women's
Laguna Beach Wear Menes and Women's
Soul to Sole
Menes and Women's
l ~ i o l e t sFashions
Iwomen's
I ~ e n e and
s Women's
Whole Foods
Two Fifty Four
Women's
Menes and Women's
Laguna Village
Women's
Havoc Design
Women's
Muse
Giorgio
Women's
Laura Downing
Women's
Envy
Women's
Chicos
Women's
ILF
Iwomen's
women's
Laguna Supply
Maxeline
Iwomen's
I
Eyeglasses
I
I
1
1
I
I
I
1
I
1
Price Range Number Carried
$25-12001> 200 airs
$15-200 > 200 pairs
All Prices > 200 pairs
$15-175 150-200 c airs
$25-200 100-150 pairs
$5-$15 10-25 pairs
$7.99-12.99 100-150 pairs
$9.99 25-50 airs
$9.99 50-100 pairs
$10.00 10-25 pairs
$10.00 50-100 pairs
$10 -20 100-150 airs
510-520125-50 airs
$10.99 100-150 pairs
$10.99 25-50 pairs
$12.00 1-10 pairs
$12.99 10-25 pairs
$12.99 > 200 airs
512-$151> 200 airs
$15-22 50-100 pairs
$15-25 100-150 pairs
$14.00 25-50 pairs
$14.00 50-100 w airs
$15.001 10-25 w airs
$17.991 1-10 airs
$18.00 25-50 pairs
$18.99 100-150 pairs
$19.99 25-50 pairs
$20.00 25-50 airs
$25-50 25-50 pairs
$22.00 25-50 pairs
$28-$50 25-50 pairs
$28.00 25-50 airs
$45.001 10-25 w airs
$100-250110-25 pairs
5150-22511-10 w airs
I
I
I
I
I
I
OF THE CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH
DENYING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 08-16
AT 263 FOREST AVENUE
WHEREAS, an application has been filed by the existing tenant of property located at 263
Forest Avenue requesting a Conditional Use Permit in accordance with the provisions of Municipal
Code Section 25.05.030 to amend condition No. 16 of Resolution 04.022 that approved a retail
store specializing in the sale of designer frames, prescription lenses and sunglasses, and a lens
manufacturing service; and
hearing regarding this proposal on June 25,2008; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission carefully considered the oral and documentary
evidence and arguments presented at the hearing; and
WHEREAS, the proposed project is exempt from the provisions of the California
Environmental Quality Act in accordance with Class 1, Existing Facilities; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has made the following Conditional Use Permit
findings:
1. The proposed application to amend Conditional Use Permit 04-02 to allow the increased sale
and display of sunglasses would be detrimental to the City in that there is a sufficient number of
establishments offering sunglasses for sale within the Downtown Specific Plan area that
accommodate the need of residents and visitors.
2. The proposed amendment proposes sunglass sales and display that is not consistent with the
intent and purpose of the CBD-2, Downtown Commercial Zoning District, and the goals and
067
June 25,2008
Page 2
policies of the Downtown Specific Plan and the City's General Plan in that this amendment does
not contribute to the diversity of merchandise and uses within the Downtown which is
detrimental to the village character.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that Conditional Use Permit 08-16 is hereby
denied.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the above decision was rendered on June 25,
2008.
ADOPTED this 25th day of June, 2008.
AYES:
Commissioner(s)
NOES:
Commissioner(s)
ABSENT:
Commissioner(s)
ATTEST:
Bob Chapman, Chairperson
Planning Commission
- -
John Montgomery, Director
Community Development

1 - City of Laguna Beach

Transcription

Similar documents

NO. 3 - City of Laguna Beach

Burglar Alarm Permit Form - Palm Beach County Sheriff`s Office

beach lawn and garden, inc. george leitz

MixoLoGy - VisionMonday.com

The 7 th Annual Orchard Beach Car Show

Invitation

Laguna Dance Festival announces September season

About the Scholarships: General Information

Concierge Concierge - Bespoke Concierge Magazine