Ashley Ranuio came before the Ceres City Council last week to tell them their decision to deny her Truck Stop Grub Hub and Outdoor Music Venue project was “truly unjust.”

She asked the council to reconsider their decision to favor an appeal filed by Andy Sanchez who has opened Ceres’ first grub hub style venue on Service Road.

Instead of reconsidering, the council proceeded to vote 4-0 to make the approval of Sanchez’s approval final. That is expected to trigger a lawsuit against the city.

On July 21 the Ceres Planning Commission voted 3-1 to approve Ranuio’s conditional use permit application to build a mobile food court at 1379 E. Whitmore Avenue. Sanchez, who has invested approximately $2 million to open Ceres’ first grub hub on Service Road, filed an appeal. The City Council sided with Sanchez even though city planning staff recommended denying Sanchez’s appeal.

Ranuio said she and husband Vito are the owners of the Truck Stop Food Park projects and wanted confirmation that councilmembers received a late letter from their attorney. 

“Have you guys had time to go over it and are there different considerations regarding the letter that you guys received?” Ranuio asked.

“We received it but I have a full time job so I have not reviewed it,” curtly Councilwoman Rosalinda Vierra answered.

Ranuio continued: “Well, based upon you guys’ findings and the reasons why you guys approved the appeal, if you would do your due diligence and look at the Planning Commission notes and meetings and findings, you would see that all of your guys’ concerns have been addressed and negated. So I urge you to take a dive in that and do the work on your end as far as looking into it. I know you guys have other jobs, full time jobs, but if you can spare some time to look at that, you would see that your decision is truly unjust.”

Ceres resident John Warren expressed confusion as to why the Community Development Department staff initially said Ranuio proposed a “really a great project” and that noise wouldn’t be a problem and “then when I looked at all the reasons why the council took the action it did were direct conflict what the city had already presented.

“All of a sudden what the city said before was now not good now. And to me, that’s quite a conflict.”

While Warren supported the council’s denial of the project – saying it wasn’t a good place for it – he wondered if the city’s contradictions could lead to a lawsuit.

Councilwoman Cerina Otero said she needs time to review the attorney’s letter.

“I think it’s only fair that we do take some time and continue this matter so we can see from their side as well or hear from their side as well,” said Otero.

City Attorney Nubia Goldstein reminded the council that it has unfinished business related to their Sept. 8 nod to the appeal which dooms the project.

Because the Sept. 8 agenda didn’t come with a resolution documenting the reversal of the commission’s approval, Goldstein brought forth a resolution that encapsulated the council’s decision and “thought process in denying the project.”

In her staff report, Goldstein said the project is being denied for the following reasons:

• Inadequate on-site parking and the resulting overflow of parking onto nearby streets would create unsafe traffic conditions;

• Increased traffic;

• The on-site consumption of alcohol would result in detrimental impacts to public health and safety due to increases to possible alcohol-related disturbances and impaired driving.

• Noise, including amplified music, which would adversely affect the quiet of the nearby residences.

• The proposed use being inconsistent with the character of the surrounding neighborhood.

When the item was before the Planning Commission in August, Kelsey George, the city’s new contract planner, said any amplified music could impact those living south on Whitmore Avenue but that music levels would be up to 64 decibels at the property line. She said the noise level would not exceed the existing ambient noise level – mostly from traffic – of 72 to 75 decibels. Music would not be permitted past 10 p.m., the same time as the end of grub hub activity.

Goldstein said the council also has the option to review the proponent’s letter and could continue the item at a special meeting for further discussion to “further evaluate some of the concerns that have been raised by the applicant.”

She also recommended continuing the matter “so that we can further vet it (the letter) and have, frankly, a discussion with counsel about prospective litigation in a different setting to give you additional time to think about it.”

Vice Mayor Daniel Martinez suggested Ranuio’s attorney should have presented the points in their letter weeks ago and not at the last minute. His motion to approve the appeal was supported by Mayor Javier Lopez, Vierra and Otero. Councilman James Casey recused himself because his business is located nearby.

Ranuio’s three-acre project was drawn to include parking for 68, a seating area, game area, live performance area, commissary, truck washing station and restrooms.