The Altadena Town Council rejected a conditional use permit for an Indian restaurant and banquet hall Tuesday night, following a lengthy hearing that included 44 people speaking against it, according to one tally.
The council followed the Land Use Committee’s recommendation and turned down the permit, saying that owner Nirmal Kumar was conducting a bait-and-switch, agreeing to abide by certain conditions while also changing the intended use of the property. The building is currently under construction at the corner of Altadena Drive and Washington Boulevard.
The council voted unanimously to send a letter to the Regional Planning Commission, recommending denying the permit. After being heard before the commission, the CUP request goes to the board of supervisors.
According to councilmember Amy Cienfuegos, who is also on the Land Use Committee, Kumar agreed to the original conditions of the permit when it was just for a restaurant with some retail space – no live music, no alcohol after 11 PM. Cienfuegos said that he later requested to change the CUP because the property was getting rid of the retail space and adding a banquet hall.
“I do not believe he has the best interests at heart for the community,” Cienfuegos said.
Councilman Brent Musson said that the original plans, when it was just a restaurant with retail space, included a kitchen and bathrooms that were larger than standard for a restaurant, but suited for a banquet hall. “We didn’t know he would come back with a banquet hall plan.”
Kumar’s original CUP request was in 2012, according to Ken Roberts, who was on the land use committee at the time. He modified the request in 2013 to include sale of alcohol and live entertainment connected to a banquet hall, and the committee recommended denying the revised permit in July.
Almost 60 people spoke on the issue during the meeting, according to a tally kept by Councilmember Sylvia Vega: 44 against, and 14 for. (The council actually ran out of speaker request cards during the meeting). Many of those speaking against it were neighbors who feared loud music, late hours, and problems related to alcohol use in the neighborhood. Many expressed concern that the sheriff would be constantly called to handle problems at the site.
Kumar responded angrily that the project was “unlikely to succeed because the councilwoman from the area opposes it,” and claimed “prejudice” was behind the opposition.
UPDATE 8/24: Council chair Diane Marcussen wrote us:
It appears as if some Altadenans think that the ATC vote on Tuesday will hurt Dr. Kumar’s ability to open the restaurant. It will not.
It’s important to note that the CUP which the Regional Planning Commission approved early last year, which allows liquor to be served in the restaurant, remains in place. The fact that the ATC will recommend denial of the current CUP will not affect the previous approval of the original CUP.
I have Lived in the same House for 40years in the neighborhood Putting A hall would be Very hard on the neighbors because it is very quiet there And with allen and that hall constantly having the police there and problems i understand Why every one Including Mysdelf are against ti. the neighborhood has changed in the last 15 years so there is No need to make it worse i hope that They listern as Dr kumar is not a Honest person a restaurant would be much more benifical in that area
I feel for anyone that attempts to open a business in or around the Altadena area. The Altadena Town Council approaches business in such an adversarially fashion. It’s hard to understand why such a negative reaction to a business owner? If you were unhappy with the changes the business owner wanted to make to the Conditional Use Permit; was there no attempt to negotiate the modification? Did we really need to draw lines and create an adversarially environment, which all occurs in a public setting? And with which the result is to hammer on a business owner who is legitimately attempting to bring jobs to the community. I don’t understand. **sigh**
Wednesday, August 21, 2013 at 01:18 PM
Does this mean we lose the Indian restaurant or just the event hall??? Please tell me the TC only voted against the event hall!. Or was it all or nothing? Story doesn’t make this clear. If the Town Council votes down a restaurant in our dining-out-deprived community (at the corner of Altadena Drive and Washington Blvd, in the middle of a business district) — then no one should ever complain again about the lack of commercial vibrancy here, or question why no one wants to invest in Altadena.
Speculating that the police would be there “constantly” is ridiculous. Based on what? I guess anyone can post a you-tube . . .
Dr. Kumar’s purpose was not to create jobs; it is to make money for himself. It became adversarial because the good Dr. kept pushing at the rules using the tactic that the building is already built and his poorly thought out business plan didn’t work so Altadena has got to change the rules for him and the heck with the neighbors quality of life. I live in Altadena 1 bl fro the proposed nightclub. and will be greatly effected by noise, littering, potential scuffles/fights by people who have drunk too much (security is on the parking lot only…if folks move out of the lot, security is no help.parking), traffic, loitering etc. of a Banquet Hall/Night Club (tho he tries to call the addition just an expansion of a restaurant). A restaurant is one thing and he has his CUP for that….it is only the changes he seeks that are in question; changes that, by LA Co definition, say IS a night\club what ever term he and his lawyer try to use. The Town Council acted appropriately on behalf of the community!
I felt it was very inappropriate for him to bring in several folks who DON’T LIVE IN ALTADENA to speak for him.
In fairness, it should be noted that a number of people – including some who do live in the neighborhood – commented in favor of the restaurant/banquet hall proposal.
Sure lets leave the urban blight that has sat on that corner for years…It’s a commercial district…….
Blight is right! That seems to be the rallying cry of some residents who buy or reside in homes RIGHT NEXT TO commercial districts and then successfully block any positive development for our community because they fear thy might be inconvenienced by it. They try to convince us that dire things will happen —rapes, drugs, constant police action, if we get a new restaurant or banquet facility. And the worst part is our own town council goes along with this unlikely and negative narrative.
Dr. Kumar’s original CUP stands as I understand it from attending the ATC meeting.
He can open the restaurant as originally planned and approved which means no live music or dancing and the size is as first requested. All that was denied was his request to turn it into a Banquet Hall/Night Club with live music and dancing AND 180 additional patrons overwhelming the area. He still has the option as he requested in his original CUP of using the additional space as retail space. It is ONLY the changes of live music, dancing, size and starting an establishment that, in LA CO code, qualifies as a night club, no longer a restaurant. None of the local neighbors are against a restaurant but we are against a nightclub.
I’m still confused — though relieved the restaurant wasn’t denied. Isn’t a banquet hall a place rented out by private parties to hold weddings, birthdays, barmitzvahs, Quinceneros, etc. ? Yes, they have music and dancing (these are good things, in my mind!), but it isn’t like Rock Club/bar or night club, which is public. Only invited people come to private parties, so there is in-built crowd control We don’t have many banquet facilities in Altadena. I can think of two, the Country Club and Davies Hall, both of which are much larger than anything I’ve seen at Altadena Drive and Washington.
Anyone who can clarify would be most appreciated.