EXHIBIT
21-G
DRAFT
FINDINGS
OF DENIAL
CONSIDER APPEAL OF GENERAL
MANAGER’S DECISION TO REQUIRE A WATER PERMIT FOR A CHANGE OF USE FROM A DELI
(GROUP II) USE TO A RESTAURANT (GROUP III) USE PURSUANT TO DISTRICT RULE 20, PERMITS
REQUIRED – 484 WASHINGTON STREET, MONTEREY (APN: 001-692-011)
1.
FINDING: Mr.
Uwe Grobecker (appellant)
is appealing a decision of the General Manager that a Water Permit is required
as the result of a Change of Use from a deli (Group II Commercial use) to a
Restaurant (Group III) use at Santa Lucia Market, 484 Washington Street,
Monterey. The appellant’s request for
appeal is shown as (Exhibit 21-C).
EVIDENCE: On October 24, 2013, the District notified the appellant that the property was not in compliance with Water Permit No. 15856 (Exhibit 21-A)and that an amendment is required to permit the Change of Use at 484 Washington Street, Monterey (Exhibit 21-B). An appeal of that determination was received on November 19, 2013.
2. FINDING: Rule 70, Appeals (Exhibit 21-D), specifies that an appeal must reference the provision of the Rules and Regulations which has been violated. The question before the Board is whether the General Manager made a decision in error.
EVIDENCE: Rule 70 of the MPWMD Rules and Regulations.
3.
FINDING: This enforcement action to require a
Water Permit for a Change in Use is consistent with Rule 20, Permits Required.
EVIDENCE: Rule 20 of the MPWMD Rules and Regulations.
4. FINDING: District Rule 70, Appeals, provides a setting whereby a wrongful decision by staff can be reconsidered. At the public hearing, the appellant and/or Applicant and other Persons may present evidence concerning the appeal. The Board may deny, approve or continue any appeal.
EVIDENCE:
The appellant has not provided
evidence that staff made an error by noticing a Water Permit violation at Santa
Lucia Market.
5. FINDING: Granting the appeal would defeat the purposes of the MPWMD Rules and Regulations.
EVIDENCE: MPWMD Rule 20, Permits Required, states: “A Water Permit is required for every Change in Use, including any Change of Use and any expansion of a Non-Residential use to a more intensive use as shown on Table 2 (Rule 24).”
6. FINDING: Under District rules, the Change of Use from a Group II (deli) use as permitted by Water Permit No. 15856 to a full service restaurant (Group III) is a Change of Use and results in an Intensification of Use.
EVIDENCE: MPWMD Rule 20 and MPWMD Rule 24, Table 2 (Exhibit 21-F).
7. FINDING: Santa Lucia Market is currently operating as a full-service restaurant.
EVIDENCE: MPWMD’s Inspection Report dated January 30, 2014 as (Exhibit 21-E).
8. FINDING: A Commercial Water Release Form/Water Permit Application was submitted to the District by the appellant on February 11, 1997 (Exhibit 21-A). This document identified the proposed project as “deli/retail food.” The appellant unconditionally accepted the terms of the Water Permit issued February 11, 1997. Both documents were signed by the appellant and clearly identify the proposed use as deli/retail.
EVIDENCE: Commercial Water Release Form/Water Permit Application and
Water Permit No. 15856 dated February 11, 1997.
9. FINDING: Mr. Uwe Grobecker has not provided evidence to support a determination that an error was made by staff in noticing a Water Permit violation at the Santa Lucia Market at 484 Washington, Monterey or that he was not notified of the need for a revised Water Permit if the use changed from a deli to a full-service restaurant.
EVIDENCE: The above stated facts and the staff report from the February 13, 2014 Board meeting.
U:\staff\Boardpacket\2014\20140213\PubHrngs\21\item21_exh21g.docx