4 - 23 W. Main Stret - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

PAGE 2 MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL SUBJECT: 23 W. MAIN ST.; FILE# U-09-025 Feb~•ua~ y I8, 2010 ~ ~ BACKGROUND: The property is located at 23 W. Main Street, on the south side of Main Street just west of the Highway 17 bridge. The applicant is requesting a CUP for a personal service business (salon) in the downtown (C-2 zone). The subject space was previously occupied by a nail salon for the last 23 years. The property owrier purchased the property with the intention of rehabbing the structure from damage sustained during the 1989 earthquake. The construction necessitated the removal of all the existing tenants including the nail salon. Due to the length of the construction, the existing non-conformirig personal service use expired. The application was reviewed by the Planning Commission on January 27, 2010. The CUP was approved with a modification to reduce the permitted number of stations from twelve to seven. DISCUSSION: A. Project Sununary The applicant is requesting a CUP for a personal service business, specifically a full service salon that would include hair, nails, and skin care. The salon would occupy approximately 1,250 sq. ft., with an additional 200 sq. ft. of shared building space. It has come to staffs attention that the previous personal service business only leased 1,000 sq. ft., of the building. Through the building permit process, the interior walls were relocated, and 200 sq. ft. that was previously included in a separate suite (23 B) is now included in the tenant space. This does not impact the required parking for the site as a whole, or the traffic impact of the proposed use. Please see Attachment 4, for additional information regarding the proposed project. B. Planning Commission The Planning Commission considered the CUP Application on January 27, 2010. The Commission voted 5-1 to approve the CUP Application with a reduction in the number of permitted stations from twelve to seven (Attaclunent 3). Several Planning Commissioners were concerned about over-concentration of salons in the downtown, and the different type of parking and traffic impacts a hair salon would impose in comparison to the .previous nail salon. The reduction in the number of stations was a compromise reached•by the Planning Commission after the close of the public hearing. The Planning Commission did not confer with the applicant on this modification. C. Appeal An appeal of the Planning Corrunission decision was received on February 4, 2010 (Attaclunent 1). The basis for the applicant's appeal is that the Planning Commission's modification of the permitted number of stations is not in keeping with the number of