P R E S E N T A T I O N O N Z O N I N G O P T I O N S R E S E A R C HC I T Y C O U N C I L H E A R I N G – S E P T E M B E R 2 1 , 2 0 1 5

MASSAGE MORATORIUM

BACKGROUND

• Moratorium enacted January 5, 2015 for 45 days.

• Extended on February 17, 2015 until December 2015

• Council directed the staff to: • a) Review the State law to determine the potential

allowances and limits for local regulation; • b) Study potential zoning tools; and • c) Research zoning considered in other California cities.• d) Return before December 2015 if able to complete

research

BACKGROUND

• Since February 2015, staff researched potential zoning options and what selected other CA communities are doing in terms of zoning.

• Purpose of this meeting:• Present Council the results of staff’s initial research.

• Inform Council of staff’s intent to return on October 5th meeting to recommend termination of the moratorium.

COMPARISON OF CITIES

• Reviewed 5 other cities (San Gabriel, Palo Alto, San Mateo, Redwood City & Huntington Beach).

• Comparison Cities selected:• Known to have recently updated their regulations and

seriously considered zoning options.

• Similar demographics to San Rafael.

COMPARISON OF CITIES

• Findings• Very few communities have modified their Zoning

Ordinances due to impact to legitimate operations.

• Most communities that considered it, concluded that zoning is a means to address land use compatibility, not specific business practices or operators.

• Most enforcement programs are starting to work well with renewed attention and enforcement practices.

COMPARISON OF CITIES

• San Gabriel is notable since they adopted Use Permit requirement• Adopted a Use Permit requirement in March 2015.

• Use Permit requirement discouraged all massage uses, legitimate as well as those performing illegal activities

• Considered spacing requirements, but too difficult to implement/impacts to legitimate establishments

COMPARISON OF CITIES

• Conclusions• Zoning does not provide a better tool than enforcement

of Massage Ordinance to regulate whether a business conduct illegal activities.

• Zoning meant to regulate land use, not specific business practices.

• Zoning tools would add burdensome process with side-effect of discouraging all massage uses.

• Workload impacts to Planning with additional Use Permits.

CONSIDERATION OF ZONING OPTIONS

• Studied 6 zoning options for San Rafael1. Status Quo2. Require Use Permit3. Spacing/Separation requirements 4. Modify Zoning district land use tables to limit or

prohibit massage establishments in certain districts

5. Consider exemption from zoning for Sole Providers

6. Combination of options above

CONSIDERATION OF ZONING OPTIONS

• Option #1 - Status Quo• Advantages• Would continue the current zoning schemes. • Proven that enforcement are effective in addressing

massage establishments that undertake illicit activities.

• Disadvantages • May not completely address neighborhood or business

concerns and there still remains a potential for proliferation.

CONSIDERATION OF ZONING OPTIONS

• Option #2 - Require Use Permit • Advantages• Allows for review of spacing and concentration • Allow for additional regulation and oversight.

• Disadvantages • Additional regulation and oversight would be geared

towards land use matters and would not address the illicit activities.

• Place significant burdens of cost and time for all massage establishments.

• Additional staff workload/impact other Planning Division duties

CONSIDERATION OF ZONING OPTIONS

• Option #3 – Spacing/Separation Requirements • Advantages • Spacing requirements could be imposed to require

separation between uses. • Reduce the number of establishments within close

proximity

• Disadvantages • Difficult to implement• Difficult to deal with multi tenant buildings• High level of opposition from legitimate operators• Additional staff workload to maintain data and review

separation

CONSIDERATION OF ZONING OPTIONS

• Option #4 - Modify land use tables to limit or prohibit in certain zoning districts • Advantages • Reduce areas City where which new massage could

operate

• Disadvantages • Would concentrate into certain areas of city, • Would place them in less visible areas• Would not distinguish between legitimate or illicit• Some staffing implications to prepare amendments

CONSIDERATION OF ZONING OPTIONS

• Option #5 - Consider exemption for Sole Providers• Advantages • Simplify process and requirements for sole providers• This can be a layer added to any option

• Disadvantages • Could lead to more businesses forming as sole

providers.• May face opposition from non-sole providers

CONSIDERATION OF ZONING OPTIONS

• Option #6 - Combination of options above • Advantages • Provide more local control in certain areas• Could revoke Use Permit is issues arise

• Disadvantages • Additional processing time and cost for operators• Use Permit requirements would evaluate land use

matters, not bad business operations /people. • Duplicative process• Impact Planning Division staff to process Use Permits

RECOMMENDATION

• Moratorium was good opportunity to evaluate what tools may be available to better address issues• Research shown that Zoning tools do not provide a clear

way to better address the issue.

• Issues we face are not land use, but bad business practices or operators.

• Staff recommended solution is to not seek Zoning amendments, but continue enforcement of current Massage Ordinance to regulate business practices.

COUNCIL OPTIONS

• Plan is to return on October 5th meeting with Urgency Ordinance to terminate Moratorium.

• Aside from staff recommendation, Council has other options:1. Direct staff to return to the Council prior to the current

expiration date (December 31, 2015) with additional information, research or analysis

2. Direct staff to return with a revised Ordinance extending the temporary moratorium for 1-additional year past the current expiration date of December 31, 2015.

QUESTIONS

STATUS OF ON-GOING ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM

• Implementation of City’s Massage Ordinance and enforcement was re-initiated in summer 2013.

• Responsibility moved from Police Dept to Community Development.

• Hired contractor to run program under Interim Code Enforcement manger direction.

• Program set up from summer to winter 2013

• Registration and inspection started winter 2013 to current

STATUS OF ON-GOING ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM

• Results to Date • Performed 978 inspections• Observed 618 violations• Issued 218 citations in the amount of $134,564

($127,094 of which has been collected). • Revoked certificate/closed 3 establishments • Obtained one suspension of a massage establishment• City action and enforcement has resulted in the closure

of a total of 14 massage establishments (including the 3 revocations).