HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Resolution 15208 (Use Permit Revocation for Nightclub at 842 Fourth Street)RESOLUTION NO. 15208
RESOLUTION OF THE SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL DENYING AN APPEAL (AP23-001)
AND AFFIRMING THE PLANNING COMMISSION’S MARCH 28, 2023 ACTION TO REVOKE
THE USE PERMIT (UP05-01) ALLOWING THE RE-ESTABLISHMENT OF LIVE
ENTERTAINMENT AND A COCKTAIL LOUNGE AS PART OF A NEW
RESTAURANT/SUPPER CLUB LOCATED AT 842 4TH STREET
(APN 011-224-14)
WHEREAS, on January 10, 2006, the San Rafael Planning Commission held a duly-
noticed public hearing and adopted Planning Commission Resolution No. 06-02 approving a
Use Permit (UP05-01) allowing the re-establishment of live entertainment and a cocktail lounge
as part of a new restaurant/supper club located 842 4th Street; and
WHEREAS, Evolution Nightclub & Restaurant, LLC (dba George’s Nightclub) took over
business operations in September of 2013; and
WHEREAS, the Use Permit includes several conditions of approval and requires that
George’s Nightclub continually comply with the conditions of approval; and
WHEREAS, a Use Permit may be revoked for the permit holder’s failure to comply with
the conditions of approval; and
WHEREAS, a Use Permit may also be revoked if the permit holder operates their
business in such a way as to constitute a public nuisance; and
WHEREAS, the Community Development Department became aware that George’s
Nightclub failed to comply with the conditions of its Use Permit and operated its business in
such a way that constituted a public nuisance; and
WHEREAS, on September 8, 2021 the City sent a notice of noncompliance via standard
mail to Ms. Esly Figueroa, the operator of George’s Nightclub, notifying her of the various
violations of the conditions of the Use Permit for George’s Nightclub and giving the opportunity
to correct such violations; and
WHEREAS, Ms. Figueroa did not correct the violations of the conditions of the Use
Permit and operated George’s Nightclub in a way that was detrimental to the public health,
safety, and welfare; and
WHEREAS, on February 27, 2023, the City sent a letter to both Ms. Figueroa and the
property owner via certified mail notifying them that a revocation hearing had been set for March
28, 2023; and
WHEREAS, on March 28, 2023, the San Rafael Planning Commission held a duly
noticed public hearing on the proposed revocation of Use Permit 05-01, accepting all oral and
written public testimony and the written report of the Community Development Department staff;
and
WHEREAS, on March 28, 2023, the Commission adopted Resolution No. 23-001
revoking the Use Permit (UP05-01); and
WHEREAS, on April 5, 2023, the City received a timely appeal of the Planning
Commission Action filed by Esly Figueroa; and
- 2 -
WHEREAS, on May 1, 2023, the City of San Rafael City Council held a duly noticed
public hearing to review and consider the appeal (AP23-001), accepting all oral and written
public testimony and the written report by the Community Development Department Planning
staff and closed said hearing on that date; and
WHEREAS, the custodian of documents which constitute the record of proceedings
upon which this decision is based is the Community Development Department; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds and determines that the Appeal (AP23-001) cannot
be supported for the following reasons.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of San Rafael
hereby denies the Appeal (AP23-001) and affirms the Planning Commission’s action to revoke
the Use Permit (UP05-01) based on the following findings:
A. Findings for Denial of Appeal (AP23-001)
Appeal Point 1 – Inadequate Spanish Interpretation
Whether the Spanish interpretation services provided during the Planning Commission
hearing were “inadequate, “improper and incomplete.”
The City of San Rafael City Council has reviewed, considered and agrees with the staff
response to this appeal point presented in the Agenda Report to the City Council dated May 1,
2023, that the interpretation provided during the Planning Commission hearing was adequate.
Appeal Point 2 – Missing Commissioners, Inadequate Review, & Discrepancies
Whether the Planning Commission appropriately reviewed the documents, whether there
were discrepancies between the documents and what was presented during the public
meeting by City staff, and whether there was quorum and a proper vote to revoke the Use
Permit.
The City of San Rafael City Council has reviewed, considered and agrees with the staff
response to this appeal point presented in the Agenda Report to the City Council dated May 1,
2023, that the Planning Commission appropriately reviewed the documents, that there were not
discrepancies between the documents and what was presented during the public hearing, and
that there was a quorum and proper vote to revoke the Use Permit.
Appeal Point 3 – July 2021 Shooting Weaponized to Slander the Venue
Whether George’s Nightclub was wrongly associated with a shooting and double
homicide that occurred in July 2021 and whether the Planning Commission focused too
heavily on that event in making its decision to revoke the Use Permit.
The City of San Rafael City Council has reviewed, considered and agrees with the staff
response to this appeal point presented in the Agenda Report to the City Council dated May 1,
2023, that George’s Nightclub was not wrongfully associated with a shooting and double
homicide in 2021, and that the Planning Commission gave appropriate weight to this event in
making its decision to revoke the Use Permit.
- 3 -
Appeal Point 4 – Wrongful Accusation of Reselling Food
Whether the Appellant’s venue was wrongfully accused of reselling food to a City staff
member who conducted an undercover site visit.
The City of San Rafael City Council has reviewed, considered and agrees with the staff
response to this appeal point presented in the Agenda Report to the City Council dated May 1,
2023, that George’s Nightclub was not wrongfully accused of reselling food to a City staff
member who conducted an undercover site visit.
Appeal Point 5 – Wrongful Accusation of Inoperable Kitchen/No Menu/No Permit
Whether Appellant had an operating kitchen, a menu, and a food preparation license.
The City of San Rafael City Council has reviewed, considered and agrees with the staff
response to this appeal point presented in the Agenda Report to the City Council dated May 1,
2023, that George’s Nightclub did not have an operating kitchen, a menu, or a valid food
preparation license.
Appeal Point 6 – Holding a Valid Business License
Whether Appellant had a valid business license and whether she was prevented from
renewing her business license.
The City of San Rafael City Council has reviewed, considered and agrees with the staff
response to this appeal point presented in the Agenda Report to the City Council dated May 1,
2023, that George’s Nightclub did not have a valid business license and that its operator was
not prevented from renewing the business license.
Appeal Point 7 – No Communication to Modify the Use Permit
Whether the Planning Commission was informed that it had the option to modify, rather
than revoke the Use Permit.
The City of San Rafael City Council has reviewed, considered and agrees with the staff
response to this appeal point presented in the Agenda Report to the City Council dated May 1,
2023, that the Planning Commission was informed that it had the option to modify, rather than
revoke the Use Permit, and that the Planning Commission exercised appropriate discretion in
choosing to revoke rather than modify the Use Permit.
Appeal Point 8 – City Staff and Police Department Bias
Whether the Police Department or the Planning Commission was biased against
George’s Nightclub.
The City of San Rafael City Council has reviewed, considered and agrees with the staff
response to this appeal point presented in the Agenda Report to the City Council dated May 1,
2023, that neither the Police Department, its officers, or the Planning Commission was biased
against George’s Nightclub.
Appeal Point 9 – Business is not Detrimental to the Community
Whether George’s Nightclub is operated in such a way that it is detrimental to the public
health, safety, or welfare.
- 4 -
The City of San Rafael City Council has reviewed, considered and agrees with the staff
response to this appeal point presented in the Agenda Report to the City Council dated May 1,
2023, that George’s Nightclub is operated in such a way that it is detrimental to the public
health, safety, and welfare of the community, and therefore a public nuisance.
B. Findings for Revocation of Use Permit (UP05-01)
1. George’s Nightclub has repeatedly violated the conditions of approval contained within its
Conditional Use Permit.
2. George’s Nightclub is a strain on police department resources, and has repeatedly conducted
its business in a way that is detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, and is materially
injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity or to the general welfare of the city;
therefore, George’s Nightclub operates as a public nuisance in contravention of San Rafael
Municipal Code Section 14.22.080.B.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council makes the following findings of fact
related to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA):
C. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Findings
The revocation of the Use Permit is categorically exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section 15321
of the CEQA Guidelines (“Enforcement Actions by Regulatory Agencies”).
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City of San Rafael City Council does hereby
deny the Appeal (AP23-001) and affirms the Planning Commission’s March 28, 2023 action
revoking the Use Permit (UP05-01).
I, Lindsay Lara, Clerk of the City of San Rafael, hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was
duly and regularly introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of said City
held on Monday, the 1st day of May, 2023, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Bushey, Hill, Llorens Gulati & Mayor Kate
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Kertz
Lindsay Lara, City Clerk